* 5/2/11--WASHINGTON – Osama bin Laden, the face of global terrorism and architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, was killed in a firefight with elite American forces Monday, then quickly buried at sea in a stunning finale to a furtive decade on the run. Long believed to be hiding in caves, bin Laden was tracked down in a costly, custom-built hideout not far from a Pakistani military academy. The stunning news of his death prompted relief and euphoria outside the White House and around the globe, yet also deepening fears of terrorist reprisals against the United States and its allies. "Justice has been done," President Barack Obama said late Sunday from the White House in an announcement that seemed sure to lift his own political standing. The military operation took mere minutes, and there were no U.S. casualties.
U.S. Blackhawk helicopters ferried about two dozen troops from Navy SEAL Team Six, a top military counter-terrorism unit, into the compound identified by the CIA as bin Laden's hideout — and back out again in less than 40 minutes. Bin Laden was shot in the head, officials said, after he and his bodyguards resisted the assault. Three adult males were also killed in the raid, including one of bin Laden's sons, whom officials did not name. One of bin Laden's sons, Hamza, is a senior member of al-Qaida. U.S. officials also said one woman was killed when she was used as a shield by a male combatant, and two other women were injured. The U.S. official who disclosed the burial at sea said it would have been difficult to find a country willing to accept the remains. Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial. "I heard a thundering sound, followed by heavy firing. Then firing suddenly stopped. Then more thundering, then a big blast," said Mohammad Haroon Rasheed, a resident of Abbottabad, Pakistan, after the choppers had swooped in and then out again.--AP
* 5/2/11--Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan by Navy SEALs on Sunday and his remains were discarded at sea. The raid was conducted with little input from Pakistan. Osama's death marks a long-awaited triumph for the United States, but it came much too late and at a very high price. Michael Scheuer, former CIA chief of the team hunting Osama bin Laden, confirmed with great disdain that SpecOps had not one but two opportunities to kill Osama before 9/11, however with Osama in their sights, Bill Clinton pulled the plug on both those operations. Consequently, the 9/11 jihadis settled into U.S. suburbs under Clinton's watch. The success of this mission elevates the danger of terrorist attack on the continental U.S. because al-Qa'ida must now assert its relevance in the absence of its leader. Announcing Osama's death, Barack Obama claimed that in the aftermath of 9/11, "no matter what God we prayed to ... we were united as one American family." Horse pucky. There were many instances of Muslims within the U.S. expressing elation over Osama's attack. Even Obama's "pastor" Jeremiah "GD America" Wright claimed, "White America got a wake-up call after 9/11. White America ... came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just disappeared as the great white West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns." Obama took full credit for the kill, saying, "Shortly after taking office, I [made] the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority." Apparently Obama is under the false impression that killing Osama was a low priority for the Bush administration. Killing Osama has been a top priority since Sept. 12, 2001. Perhaps he will now take full credit for everything else happening on his watch, and stop blaming Bush! Osama's death is a key victory in the world war against Islamists, albeit a small victory in the Long War against Muslim hatred. Next up, native son of New Mexico Anwar al-Awlaki, Osama's chief lieutenant, also hiding out in Pakistan. --Patriot Post Brief
* 5/2/11--"Who truly reviles America the hegemon? The world that Obama lived in and shaped him intellectually: the elite universities; his Hyde Park milieu (including his not-to-be-mentioned friends, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn); the church he attended for two decades, ringing with sermons more virulently anti-American than anything heard in today's full-throated uprising of the Arab Street. It is the liberal elites who revile the American colossus and devoutly wish to see it cut down to size. Leading from behind -- diminishing America's global standing and assertiveness -- is a reaction to their view of America, not the world's. Other presidents take anti-Americanism as a given, rather than evidence of American malignancy, believing -- as do most Americans -- in the rightness of our cause and the nobility of our intentions. Obama thinks anti-Americanism is a verdict on America's fitness for leadership. I would suggest that 'leading from behind' is a verdict on Obama's fitness for leadership. Leading from behind is not leading. It is abdicating. It is also an oxymoron. Yet a sympathetic journalist, channeling an Obama adviser, elevates it to a doctrine. The president is no doubt flattered. The rest of us are merely stunned." --columnist Charles Krauthammer. (From Patriot Post Brief)
* 5/2/11--Good job, Obama. You got bin Laden. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. The most unseemly thing about the entire killing of bin Laden is the pathetic scrabbling about for credit that we’re seeing on behalf of both Obama and his staff. From Obama’s statement last night: I directed Leon Panetta… I was briefed… I met repeatedly… I determined… at my direction… I, as Commander-in-Chief, As the Washington Post film critic, Stephen Hunter, writes: Any joy one might feel in the intelligence of our analysts and the bravery of our door kickers was significantly diminished by Obama’s malignant narcissism. The first part of the announcement, evoking 9/11, was vulgarly overwritten as per Obama’s view of himself as some kind of gifted orator. The adjective bloated compote was unworthy of the subject, banal and self-indulgent. Some of this bloviating has resulted in unintentional hilarity. Via Jake Tapper's Political Punch we get this: Sources tell ABC News that in March President Obama authorized the development of a plan for the U.S. to bomb Osama bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound with two B2 stealth bombers dropping a few dozen 2,000-pound JDAMs (Joint Direct Attack Munitions) on the compound. But when the president heard the compound would be reduced to rubble he chose not to pursue that option. One has to ask exactly what Obama thought would happen if any structure was hit by “a few dozen 2,000-pound JDAMs”? --redstate.com
* 5/2/11--The big news of the day is that Osama is dead as a result of the brave work of our Special Forces and intelligence teams, as well as the Bush administration policies of terrorists interrogations and targeted assassinations. Yes, the very policies that Obama so vociferously opposed for political benefit. President Obama is to be congratulated for disavowing his campaign pledge and continuing those George Bush policies that he had previously repudiated. The other big news of the day is that the Palestinian terrorists were the first to condemn the assassination, even before Al-Qaeda itself. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh denounced the murder of the “Arab holy warrior.” As the left goes agog with excitement over Obama’s victory in the war on terror, they might want to ponder about his broader foreign policy, which is not only insouciant to Islamic terror, but actively supportive of it. Just last week, the Obama-backed Palestinian Authority joined a unity government with Hamas in the anticipation of the formulation of a Palestinian terror state. Obama, along with his European counterparts, has launched a pertinacious campaign to support the Palestinians and promote statehood at all costs. Israel has incurred the brunt of those costs, however, we have also been adversely affected from the invariable advancement of Iranian control over the Middle East. So not only is Obama uncooperative of an Israeli strike (targeted assassination) on Hamas or Iran, he is actively enabling their consummate dream; Palestinian statehood and the destruction of Israel. So committed is he to create an Iranian-proxy terrorist state, that according to State Department officials, he is actively opposing efforts to bring down Syrian terrorist Bashar Assad. He views Assad as a stabilizing force and a strategic partner in the establishment of a terrorist state. In addition to his morally reprehensible policies towards the Palestinian terrorists, Obama has initiated a feckless war in Libya in support of Al-Qaeda backed rebels. Next door in Egypt, Obama undermined a long time ally, resulting in the impending ascension of power of the Muslim Brotherhood. There is no doubt that the death of Bin Ladin is a momentous event for all of us and a stunning moral blow to the terrorists. However, we must bear in mind that the killing in itself will not mitigate the capabilities of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist networks. It is quite evident that Bin Ladin was not running the show over the past few years. Furthermore, this victory did not result from a unique policy formulation and prosecution by Obama. It resulted from the sedulous commitment and unwavering courage of our intelligence officers and special operators. Contrast this to the aforementioned dyslexic foreign policy initiatives advocated and implemented by Obama. Those policy follies are a direct result of Obama’s personal ideological commitment to moral relativism and anti-colonialism. Additionally, they serve to augment the power of not one terrorist, but multitudes of terrorists and their supporters. If Obama is going to own the victory of the Bin Ladin assassination, he must bear the vices that are Syria, Iran, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Al-Qaeda in Libya. Today we celebrate the eradication of evil. Yet, we must not let the media and Obama’s allies distract us from the more consequential issues. I am not merely referring to Obama’s destruction of our economy; I am referring to the broader foreign policy issues and terrorist threats that are festering as a result of Obama’s morally perverse policies. If Obama desires GWOT victories that he can take personal credit for, he would expel Palestinian diplomats, abjure his pursuit of a Palestinian state, and eliminate our $500 million in foreign aid. He would recall his ambassador from Syria and implement full economic and military sanctions on Syria and Iran. He would fully support the opposition movements in those countries as well. He would reverse his policy of expending American money and might on enemy combatants in Libya. He would even accede to the targeted killing of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, and Hamas guru Ismail Haniyeh; offering them a proper Muslim burial to boot. Those would be anti-terror policies that he could own and accept accolades for in good faith. Don’t hold your breath waiting for Obama to extend his newfound neo-conservatism to those endeavors.--redstate.com
* 5/3/11--Well folks, after nearly 10 years we finally got him. On Sunday night, Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan by an elite team of Navy SEALS. He was shot in the head and in the chest. Reports about the raid show he may have used one of his wives as a human shield during the special operation and firefight. If true, Townhall Political Editor Guy Benson summed it up perfectly: “Sick, selfish, misogynistic, and craven to the bitter end. Given the opportunity to die a "glorious" martyr's death -- a fate to which he'd merrily condemned countless zealots through the years -- bin Laden was so terrified that he used his youngest wife to shield himself from our SEALS' bullets.” Bin Laden was hiding in plain sight for nearly five years just five minutes from Pakistan’s version of West Point, which means Pakistani officials have a lot of explaining to do. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari denies knowing anything about Bin Laden’s location or harboring the most wanted terrorist in the world. On top of Bin Laden’s hideaway in the “ally” country, the majority of high profile terrorist suspects have been caught in major Pakistani cities throughout the years. Pakistan was not informed of the covert operation to kill Bin Laden before the operation was carried out. The U.S. gives the country billions of dollars in aid per year. Rep. Allen West and Senator Marco Rubio have called for Pakistani officials to explain themselves and for re-evaluation of our relationship with the country. The key component to the success of the final take down of Bin Laden came from information obtained through harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding conducted in secret prisons overseas, meaning all the kicking and screaming from the Left about how interrogation techniques don’t work have been proven false on so many levels. The White House is still debating about whether to release photos of Bin Laden’s body after he was killed.--Townhall.com
* 5/4/11--Republicans, including some of his harshest critics, have been unstinting in their praise of President Obama over the military operation that found and killed Osama bin Laden. The administration "clearly deserves credit for the success of the operation," said former Vice President Dick Cheney. "It takes a lot of courage to make a decision like that," added Rudy Giuliani. "I admire him." Even Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have been singing the president's praises. But would the left have been so gracious had George W. Bush succeeded in eliminating Osama before leaving the White House? Consider House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. Sunday night, she called bin Laden's death "the most significant development in the fight against al Qaeda" and rightly hailed the president's team for its "leadership in achieving this major accomplishment." Back in 2006, though, when Bush was still president, it was a different story. "The damage that [Osama] has done . . . is done," she said. "And even to capture him now I don't think makes us any safer." In 2009, the left's favorite muckraker, Seymour Hersh, claimed that the Joint Special Operations Command -- the top-secret authority that includes the special-forces units that killed Osama -- was nothing more than Cheney's personal assassination squad. "It is an exclusive assassination ring . . . finding people on a list and executing them and leaving," he charged. "They reported directly to the Cheney office." Former Democratic Vice President Walter Mondale, speaking at the same event as Hersh, said Cheney's abuses of vice presidential power were "like a loaded pistol that you leave on the dining room table." What are the odds that there will be any outrage on the left about JSOC having "assassinated" Osama so effectively? Make no mistake -- that's exactly what happened. That much is particularly clear now that the White House has corrected its initial account and admitted that bin Laden was unarmed when he received two shots to the head. No American should have any problem with how Osama was killed -- just as no one should've ever given any credence to Hersh's outlandish charges about Cheney. President Obama, in fact, deserves credit for apparently not even considering taking bin Laden alive and holding him for trial. Osama died precisely the way he always deserved to. But had Bush and Cheney done the deed, we seriously doubt that would have mattered for a moment.--NY Post Editorial
* 5/4/11--NEW YORK, May 4 (Reuters) - The U.S. dollar fell to a fresh three-year low against major currencies on Wednesday after an industry report showed the pace of growth in the U.S. services sector unexpectedly eased in April. The U.S. dollar index, which measures the value of the greenback versus a basket of major currencies, fell as low as 72.696. The dollar also hit a session low versus the euro and extended declines against the yen after the data. The euro last traded at $1.4920 , up 0.6 percent, having risen as high as $1.4939 on Reuters data, a 17-month high. Against the yen, the dollar fell 0.4 percent to 80.57.
* 5/4/11--Well, well, well. This Administration never ceases to amaze when it comes to getting their stories straight. “We had multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation…clearly some of it came from detainees [and] they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of those detainees.” That’s our outgoing Central Intelligence Agency chief Leon Panetta speaking to NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams regarding the information obtained that led to the take down of Osama Bin Laden. When Williams asked Panetta if water-boarding was part of the “enhanced interrogation techniques,” Panetta said “that’s correct.” Let’s go back to the videotape shall we? Joe Biden on ‘Face the Nation’ in February of 2010, when asked about water-boarding by host Bob Schieffer, said: “Its not effective.” President Obama in a speech at the National Archives in May of 2009: "I categorically reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogation…"What's more, they undermine the rule of law. They alienate us in the world." Operation Neptune’s Spear was an unequivocal success on all fronts. I just wish the Administration could be honest and admit that the policies of the Bush administration are why we finally nailed Osama.--humanevents.com
* 5/4/11--WASHINGTON - George W. Bush won't be at Ground Zero with President Obama Thursday in part because he feels his team is getting short shrift in the decade-long manhunt for Osama Bin Laden.
"[Bush] viewed this as an Obama victory lap," a highly-placed source told the Daily News Wednesday. Bush's visit to the rubble after the 9/11 attacks was the emotional high point of his presidency, but associates say the invitation to return with his successor was a non-starter. "He doesn't feel personally snubbed and appreciates the invitation, but Obama's claiming all the credit and a lot of other people deserve some of it," the source added. "Obama gave no credit whatsoever to the intelligence infrastructure the Bush administration set up that is being hailed from the left and right as setting in motion the operation that got Bin Laden. It rubbed Bush the wrong way." Bush spokesman David Sherzer said Bush "appreciated the invite, but has chosen in his post-presidency to remain largely out of the spotlight."
Associates familiar with his thinking say Bush does not believe Obama or his handlers wanted to exploit his presence. But the tag-team idea "was for the benefit of Obama, and Obama withheld credit from people Bush believes deserved it," a source said. Asked about the matter at Thursday's White House briefing, spokesman Jay Carney said "this is a moment of unity for Americans and a moment to recall the unity that existed in this country in the wake of the attacks on 9/11. "We completely understand that he's not able to come, but…the invitation was made in that spirit," Carney added. Since leaving office in 2009 the 43rd president has stuck to a rigorous code of silence about criticizing Obama. After Obama telephoned him on Sunday evening with the word Bin Laden was dead, Bush issued a statement calling it "a momentous achievement." "I congratulated him and the men and women of our military and intelligence communities who devoted their lives to this mission," Bush added. In his remarks to the nation Sunday night Obama mentioned Bush in passing, noting that "I've made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam." The closest Obama came to praising his predecessor's efforts was indirect: "Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we've made great strides" in the war against Bin Laden's Al Qaeda terror network.--nydailynews.com
* 5/5/11--WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The number of Americans filing for jobless aid rose to an eight-month high last week and productivity growth slowed in the first quarter, clouding the outlook for an economy that is struggling to gain speed. While the surprise jump in initial claims for unemployment benefits was attributed to factors ranging from spring break layoffs to the introduction of an emergency benefits program, economists said it corroborated reports this week indicating a loss of momentum in job creation. New claims for state jobless benefits rose 43,000 to a seasonally adjusted 474,000, the highest since mid-August, the Labor Department said on Thursday. Economists had expected claims to fall to 410,000.
* 5/5/11--The Obama administration has floated a transportation authorization bill that would require the study and implementation of a plan to tax automobile drivers based on how many miles they drive. The plan is a part of the administration's Transportation Opportunities Act, an undated draft of which was obtained this week by Transportation Weekly. The White House, however, said the bill is only an early draft that was not formally circulated within the administration. “This is not an administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not taken into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.” News of the draft follows a March Congressional Budget Office report that supported the idea of taxing drivers based on miles driven. Among other things, CBO suggested that a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax could be tracked by installing electronic equipment on each car to determine how many miles were driven; payment could take place electronically at filling stations. The CBO report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who has proposed taxing cars by the mile as a way to increase federal highway revenues. Obama's proposal seems to follow up on that idea in section 2218 of the draft bill. That section would create, within the Federal Highway Administration, a Surface Transportation Revenue Alternatives Office. It would be tasked with creating a "study framework that defines the functionality of a mileage-based user fee system and other systems."--thehill.com
* 5/5/11--WASHINGTON/ABBOTTABAD (Reuters) – U.S. officials sought to keep a lid on growing scepticism over Washington's version of events around Osama bin Laden's death, insisting the al Qaeda leader was killed during a firefight in the compound in Pakistan where he was hiding. The White House has cited the "fog of war" as a reason for initial misinformation on whether bin Laden -- who was shot in the head -- was armed when U.S. Navy Seals raided his compound in the Pakistani town of Abbottabad early on Monday. Citing U.S. officials, NBC reported on Wednesday that four of the five people killed in the operation, including bin Laden, were unarmed and never fired a shot -- an account that differs from the administration's original assertions the commandos engaged in a prolonged firefight. The New York Times quoted administration officials as saying the only shots fired by those in the compound came at the start of the raid when bin Laden's courier fired from a guesthouse adjacent to the building where the al Qaeda leader was holed up. U.S. President Barack Obama resisted pressure from aides to release photographs of bin Laden's body, saying the images could incite violence and be used by militants as a propaganda tool.
* 5/5/11--President Obama’s “Death of Bin Laden” victory tour winds up in New York City today, with an appearance at Ground Zero. It’s amazing how completely his Administration has blown the aftermath of Operation Geronimo. Some media outlets have been frantically trying to manufacture polls that show Obama getting a huge approval-rating bounce, but it’s beginning to look like any gains in his approval rating will be minimal… and in any event, they won’t last very long. His behavior over the past few days demonstrates why. From the beginning, it was clear that Obama would blow the goodwill of America by demanding it too stridently. The incredible P.R. catastrophe of the confused, endlessly revised White House account of the bin Laden raid is a natural result of politicians scrambling to control the spotlight, instead of dutifully reporting an important military action to the American public. They confused the idea of shaping a political narrative with the notion of controlling history. In the process, they turned one of the most important missions ever undertaken by the Navy SEALs into a quantum event, in which our heroic soldiers took down a Schroedinger’s Cat who was either armed or unarmed, resisting or surrendering, protected by either a private army or a pack of lightly-armed goons, and either hiding or not hiding behind a woman who was either his wife or daughter, and is now either alive or dead. When the glow of bin Laden’s death has faded, all of the things we’ll actually judge Obama on in 2012—such as unemployment, which just got worse again—will still be there. As we are more stridently instructed to ignore them, we will be less inclined to do so. Obama will kill his poll “bounce” by looking far too eager to inflate and maintain it, while simultaneously looking confused and secretive about the event which produced the bounce. Humility, reverence for the men who actually pulled off the mission, and appreciation for the bold leadership of his predecessor would have made him look bigger. Instead, he is still the shrinking President, a dwindling figure who vanishes when his policies turn into disasters… and makes disasters out of the occasional good decision, by insisting that we formally certify them as great.--John Hayward, DailyEvents
* 5/6/11--Soon the Man of Steel will no longer be an American citizen. Through generations of readership and a number of movie and television portrayals, the familiar story of the ultimate alien from the planet Krypton always placed his roots in small-town America, where he learned traditional American values from the family that adopted him. Not even the darkest take on his story denied his embrace of American ideals -- until now. In an upcoming Action Comics edition, the superhero icon arrives in Iran amid a million protestors and endures a daylong barrage of physical and emotional threats, only to be accused by the Iranian government of committing an act of war on America's behalf. In response, Superman states, "'Truth, justice, and the American way' -- it's not enough anymore. The world's too small, too connected."
While DC Comics denies Superman is going rogue and will continue to uphold American traditions as a citizen of the world, the timing of the move and the situation that writer David S. Goyer places him in both seem to paint the superhero as a victim of political correctness. Obviously, PC is the latest form of kryptonite smuggled in by evildoers, and eventually it could bring about the end of America's most well known superhero -- or at least his publisher.--Patriot Post Digest
* 5/6/11--The official White House account of Osama bin Laden's demise has seen more slapdash cosmetic surgery over the past week than your average "Real Housewives" reality-show star. President Obama's allies attribute the bungled "narrative" (their word, not mine) to the "Fog of War." But each passing day -- and each new set of hapless revisions -- shows that what really ails the administration is the Fog of Fog. Errors happen. Miscommunications happen. Confusing the name of which of bin Laden's myriad sons died (Hamza, not Khalid), for example, is no biggie. But the hourly revamping of key details of Sunday's raid suggests something far beyond the usual realm of situational uncertainty that accompanies any military operation. The Navy SEALs did their job spectacularly. The civilians tasked with letting the world know about the mission, however, have performed like amateur dinner theater actors in a tragi-comic production of "Rashomon-meets-The Blind Men and the Elephant-meets-Keystone Kops." Incapable of straightforward answers, Team Obama's clarity-challenged civilians have led nauseated news-watchers through more twists and turns than San Francisco's Lombard Street. Take your Dramamine, and let's review.
Take One: Bin Laden died in a bloody firefight.
On Sunday night, Obama dramatically told the world that "after a firefight," our brave men in uniform "killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body."
Embellishing the story the next morning, White House deputy national security adviser John Brennan said at his briefing that bin Laden "was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in. ... And whether or not he got off any rounds, I quite frankly don't know. ... It was a firefight. He, therefore, was killed in that firefight."
Take Two: Bin Laden did not engage in a firefight.
The day after Brennan disclosed such vivid details, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney walked them back Michael Jackson-style. Bin Laden, he said in version 2.0, "was not armed." Brennan had clearly implied that bin Laden "resisted" with arms. Carney amended the narrative by insisting that "resistance does not require a firearm." How exactly bin Laden resisted, Carney would not say.
It's been all downhill, uphill, K-turns and 180s ever since. Fasten your seatbelts:
Take Three: Bin Laden's wife died after her feckless husband used her as a human shield.
Take Four: Bin Laden's wife did not die, wasn't used as a human shield and was only shot in the leg. Someone else's wife was killed, somewhere else in the house.
Take Five: A transport helicopter experienced "mechanical failure" and was forced to make a hard landing during the mission.
Take Six: A top-secret helicopter clipped the bin Laden compound wall, crashed and was purposely exploded after the mission to prevent our enemies from learning more about it.
Take Seven: The bin Laden photos would be released to the world as proof positive of his death.
Take Eight: The bin Laden photos would not be released to the world because no one needs proof and it's more important to avoid offending peaceful Muslims who supposedly don't embrace bin Laden as a "true" Muslim in the first place.
Take Nine: Bin Laden's compound was a lavish mansion.
Take Ten: Bin Laden's compound was a glorified pigsty.
Take Eleven: Bin Laden's compound had absolutely no television, phone or computer access.
Take Twelve: Bin Laden's compound was stocked with hard drives, thumb drives, DVDs and computers galore.
Take Thirteen: Er, remember that statement about bin Laden being armed? And then not armed? Well, the new version is that he had an AK-47 "nearby."
Take Fourteen: A gung-ho Obama spearheaded the "gutsy" mission.
Take Fifteen: A reluctant Obama dithered for 16 hours before being persuaded by CIA Director Leon Panetta.
Take Sixteen: Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and close advisers watched the raid unfold in real time -- "minute by minute," according to Carney -- and a gripping insider photo was posted immediately by the White House on the Flickr picture-sharing website for all to see.
Take Seventeen: Er, they weren't really watching real-time video "minute by minute" because there was at least nearly a half-hour that they "didn't know just exactly what was going on," Panetta clarified. Or rather, un-clarified.
Take Eighteen: Stalwart Obama's order was to kill, not capture, bin Laden.
Take Nineteen: Sensitive Obama's order was to kill or capture -- and that's why the SEAL team gave him a chance to surrender, upon which he resisted with arms, or actually didn't resist with arms, but sort of resisted without arms, except there was an AK-47 nearby, sort of, or maybe not, thus making it possible to assert that while Decisive Obama did tell the SEALs to kill bin Laden and should claim all credit for doing so, Progressive Obama can also be absolved by bleeding hearts because of the painstakingly concocted post facto possibility that bin Laden somehow threatened our military -- telepathically or something -- before being taken out.
Take Twenty: "We've been as forthcoming with facts as we can be," said an irritated Carney on Wednesday.
And they wonder why Americans of all political stripes think they're blowing smoke. --Michelle Malkin (From Patriot Post Digest)
* 5/6/11--In the Wall Street Journal today, former attorney general Michael Mukasey writes:
Consider how the intelligence that led to bin Laden came to hand. It began with a disclosure from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), who broke like a dam under the pressure of harsh interrogation techniques that included waterboarding. He loosed a torrent of information — including eventually the nickname of a trusted courier of bin Laden. That regimen of harsh interrogation was used on KSM after another detainee, Abu Zubaydeh, was subjected to the same techniques. When he broke, he said that he and other members of al-Qaeda were obligated to resist only until they could no longer do so, at which point it became permissible for them to yield. “Do this for all the brothers,” he advised his interrogators. . . .The harsh techniques themselves were used selectively against only a small number of hard-core prisoners who successfully resisted other forms of interrogation, and then only with the explicit authorization of the director of the CIA. Of the thousands of unlawful combatants captured by the U.S., fewer than 100 were detained and questioned in the CIA program. Of those, fewer than one-third were subjected to any of these techniques. . . . President Obama ran for election on the promise to do away with these techniques even before he became aware, if he ever did, of what they were. Days after taking office, he directed that the CIA interrogation program be done away with entirely and that interrogation be limited to the techniques set forth in the Army Field Manual, a document designed for use by even the least experienced troops. It’s available on the Internet and used by terrorists as a training manual for resisting interrogation. In addition to eliminating the very techniques that allowed us to track down and kill bin Laden, Obama has permitted the Justice Department to reopen investigation of previously cleared CIA operatives. Muskaey explains: “ I say ‘reopening’ advisedly because those investigations had all been formally closed by the end of 2007, with detailed memoranda prepared by career Justice Department prosecutors explaining why no charges were warranted. Attorney General Eric Holder conceded that he had ordered the investigations reopened in September 2009 without reading those memoranda. The investigations have now dragged on for years with prosecutors chasing allegations down rabbit holes, with the CIA along with the rest of the intelligence community left demoralized.” This is scandalous. And on this point I disagree with Burlingame: there is absolutely nothing to prevent Obama from directing Holder to cease his inquisition. The inquest never should have begun. Closing it down is a matter of national security (we cannot impede and intimidate our intelligence agencies). Obama is responsible for his own Justice Department and is irresponsible, not to mention grossly ungrateful, in allowing the prosecution to continue.--Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post
* 5/9/11--In case you missed it, Jay Cost had a great piece on Friday on "the Food Stamp recovery", laying out the ways in which the currently-underway “recovery” is the weakest in memory. His bracing conclusion? [I]f the economic recovery does not begin to show substantial improvement, the likes of which we have not really seen in the last two years, and if the GOP nominates a reasonably acceptable alternative, this president is going to lose in 2012, and the final result will not be close. Nobody gets reelected with employment way down, real income way down, and 14 percent of his fellow citizens on food stamps. Nobody. Let’s add a couple of items that help explain why the economy may be looking up for managers of corporations large enough to collect government favor but not for most Americans. The good news?
1) CEO pay? Up 11% in 2010.
2) Individual income tax receipts? Up 25.9% from October to April, but not rising fast enough to keep up with federal spending increases. Of course, the growth of tax receipts is generally driven by the wealthiest Americans, who pay a vastly disproportionate percentage of all taxes.
The not-so-good news?
1) The housing market? Had its worst quarter since 2008. Home prices have now fallen 57 consecutive months. Unsurprisingly, like the “Cash for Clunkers” program, temporary tax credits were only able to temporarily slow the rate of decline, putting off the inevitable: “the improvements, spurred by federal programs that gave buyers up to $8,000 in tax credits, proved fleeting. Sales collapsed when the credits expired last summer, and prices in many markets have been falling ever since.” Like Keynesian solutions in general, temporary incentives are like a drug addiction, creating an economy that can only stay up by getting yet another hit.
2) Jobs? Let’s put it this way. McDonald’s recently announced a one-day hiring program, which netted a million applications, of which 62,000 people were hired. That’s a 6.2% acceptance rate. Harvard College's acceptance rate for the class of 2015? 6.2%. In Barack Obama’s America, it’s officially now as difficult to get a job flipping hamburgers as it is to get into Harvard. In many ways, a weak recovery is an even more perilous time for a big-government guy like Obama than an economic crisis. Americans may be more willing to accept a large government footprint in the economy when they fear the bottom falling out. But they will nonetheless recognize that unleashing the vibrant power of an entrepreneurial economy is outside the competence of an Administration that thinks in terms of temporary props to ward off price shocks and business failures - essentially, the economic playbook of Nixon’s first term, which gave us the economy of the 1970s. Even people who call the fire department when their house is on fire know when to tell them to turn off the hoses because the house is all wet.--redstate.com
* 5/9/11--"The White House converted a picture-perfect military operation into a public-relations disaster that will be cited as what not to do and how not to do it in flackery textbooks for a hundred years. Days after the raid on Osama bin Laden's 'mansion' they still can't get the 'fact pattern,' in the language of the White House, even close to straight. Even that ubiquitous photograph of the president, the secretary of state and assorted minions bravely watching the operation in 'real time' looks now to have been a 'photo-op' taken after the fact. ... [T]he real offense of the Washington wimpery is pushing a weakling's canard against the military, asserting that the photograph [of Osama's dead body] can't be shown because it would make Muslim terrorists cross at us. But surely the Army and the Navy can take care of themselves; soldiers, sailors and Marines aren't Campfire Girls. Can anyone imagine FDR and his generals canceling D-Day because an invasion might infuriate the Germans? Or that a Muslim terrorist will now salute an American soldier in Afghanistan and put down his rifle and grenade launcher, telling him 'we really appreciate your president's keeping that ugly photograph to himself.' Americans come from Mars, so the witticism goes, and Europeans are from Venus. But that doesn't include this president and his bungling minions. They're weepy refugees from Pluto." --Washington Times editor emeritus Wesley Pruden (Patriot Post Brief)
* 5/9/11--"When it began to leak that America had finally found and killed Osama bin Laden, there was joy from sea to shining sea. ... But for most, it wasn't jubilation. It was the silent fist pump and a silent prayer of thanksgiving for the safety of our extraordinary military. ... Unfortunately, while the president spoke for the whole country in remembering the pain of 9/11, his remarks left a gaping hole. He made no generous bow to all the efforts of his predecessor George W. Bush, as well as his team. My one regret is that Bush 43 didn't get this scalp. He deserved it more than anyone. Instead, Obama played subtle and wholly undignified games. He underlined that Osama had 'avoided capture' under Bush and 'continued to operate' during his tenure. But 'I directed' CIA director Leon Panetta to make getting Osama the 'top priority' (as opposed to?), and 'I' gave the go-ahead to the final mission. ... Even in a Monday night 'bipartisan' event at the White House, Obama honored the 'military and counterterrorism professionals' and 'the members of Congress from both parties' who offered support to the mission ... but no credit for Bush. If the roles had been reversed, you know Bush would have been more generous. It's what Bushes do." --columnist L. Brent Bozell --Patriot Post Brief
* 5/9/11--"White House and congressional attacks on oil speculation do not alter the oil market's fundamental demand-and-supply reality. What would lower the long-term price of oil is for Congress to permit exploration for the estimated billions upon billions of barrels of oil off our Atlantic and Pacific Ocean shores, the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska, not to mention the estimated billions, possibly trillions, of barrels of shale oil in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and North Dakota. Some politicians pooh-pooh calls for drilling, saying it would take five or 10 years to recover the oil and won't solve today's problems. Nonsense! I guarantee you that if permits were granted to all of our oil sources, we would see a reduction in today's prices. Why? Put yourself in the place of an OPEC member knowing there's going to be a greater supply of U.S. oil in five or 10 years, which might drive oil prices to a permanent $20 or $30 per barrel. What will you want to do now while oil is $120 per barrel? You would want to sell. OPEC's collective efforts to sell more would put downward pressures on current oil prices. The White House, U.S. Congress and environmental wackos, by keeping our oil in the ground, are OPEC's staunchest ally. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we discovered OPEC reciprocity in the forms of political contributions to congressmen and charitable donations to environmental groups." --economist Walter E. Williams (From Patriot Post Brief)
* 5/10/11--RICHMOND, Va. – A three-judge federal appeals panel comprised of two Obama nominees and a Clinton nominee will hear arguments later this morning in two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the national health care law. The makeup of the U.S. Fourth Circuit of Appeals panel is crucial, because in lower court rulings so far, Democratic judges have upheld the law while Republican judges have declared it unconstitutional. The judges on the panel will be Obama nominees James A. Wynn, Jr and Andre M. Davis, who will sit on the panel along with Clinton nominee Diana Gribbon Motz.
According to the Fourth Circuit, the panel is chosen by "a computer program designed to achieve total random selection." In certain cases, the entire court will rehear a case, what's referred to as en banc, but only if a majority of all active judges in the circuit agree to it. While once seen as a very conservative court, the Fourth Circuit has become more liberal over time, especially in the past few years, because Obama has been able to name four judges to the court. In the first of the two suits, to be heard at 9:30 am, Liberty University will challenge the constitutionality of the law's mandate that forces individuals to purchase insurance or pay a fine as well the requirement that larger employers offer insurance. After 40 minutes of oral arguments, the judges will move to the next suit, in which the state of Virginia will challenge the individual mandate as a threat to state's rights and personal liberty. The Obama administration will seek to have the suits thrown out, arguing that the parties lack standing to sue, or dismissed on the grounds that the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress broad regulatory authority allowing them to require the purchase of health insurance. Given the importance of the issues at stake, the Obama administration has dispatched acting solicitor general Neal Kumar Katyal to argue both cases on its behalf. Matthew Staver will be arguing for Liberty University and state solicitor general E. Duncan Getchell, Jr. will be arguing for Virginia. At the lower court level, one federal judge dismissed the Liberty University lawsuit while another judge agreed with the state of Virginia that the health care law's individual mandate was unconstitutional. No matter what the outcome at the appeals court level, the losing parties are expected to challenge the ruling, and the issue is widely expected to be decided ultimately by the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 8th in Atlanta, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in separate lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the mandate, this one brought by 26 states led by Florida.--washingtonexaminer.com
* 5/11/11--WASHINGTON -- Virginia's challenge to President Obama's health-care laws got a cool reception yesterday from a US appeals court stacked with Obama-friendly judges. A three-judge panel in Richmond -- all appointed to the bench by Democrats, including two by Obama -- grilled lawyers for Virginia over why the state had any right to pick and choose which federal laws to obey. The sharp questions signaled that the judges would likely reject the Virginia law barring the ObamaCare mandate that all Americans buy health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty.--NY Post
* 5/11/11--Wow! The AP poll has Obama’s approval rating hitting 60 percent! And 53 percent say he deserves to be reelected! And on the economy, 52 percent approve of the way Obama’s handling it, and only 47 percent disapprove! He’s up 54–46 on approval of how he’s handling health care! On unemployment, 52 percent approval, 47 percent disapproval! 57 percent approval on handling Libya! Even on the deficit, he’s at 47 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval! It is a poll of adults, which isn’t surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, you don’t have to be a registered or likely voter to have an opinion on the president.
But then you get to the party ID: 46 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat, 29 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican, 4 percent identify as purely independent leaning towards neither party, and 20 percent answered, “I don’t know.” For contrast, the AP’s immediate preceding poll was 45 percent Democrat, 33 percent Republican; the likely-voter pool in October 2010 was 43 percent Democrat, 48 percent Republican. The poll’s total sample in October 2010 split 43 percent Democrat, 40 percent Republican. With a poll sample that has a 17-percentage-point margin in favor of the Democrats, is anyone surprised that these results look like a David Axelrod dream? (Interestingly, George W. Bush is at 50 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval, even in this sample wildly weighted in favor of the Democrats.)
UPDATE: Notice that in Gallup's polling, party ID remains pretty stable. In roughly 40 polls since mid-2009, Democrats and Republicans have both ranged in the 40s with leaners. During that time, the split has never been larger than 7 percentage points. Their most recent split, from late April, is 31 percent Republican, 36 percent Independent, and 32 percent Democrat; with leaners, it’s a 46-46 split. Of course, the OBL kill could have prompted more Americans to self-identify as Democrats. Some pollsters are okay with dramatic shifts in their party ID from poll to poll; they see respondents’ party self-identification as flexible, even fickle, changing from week to week and month to month. I am a skeptic of this notion, and before buying into dramatic changes in the party identification of the voting public, prefer to see the phenomenon confirmed through changes in behavior – i.e., voters changing their party registration.--nationalreview.com
* 5/11/11--President Obama laid out his plan for amnesty comprehensive immigration reform today in El Paso, Texas, saying illegal immigrants make good democrat voters immigrants are the way to expand the middle class, make America more competitive on a global level and said immigration reform is an economic imperative, which it is considering illegal immigration costs Arizona and California over $12 billion per year. The President did what was expected by lumping all immigrants together and failed to distinguish the difference between the two, in fact, Obama went out of his way to make sure Americans believed their was no difference as he referenced immigrants from different countries coming to America and seeing Lady Liberty. It was a reminder of a simple idea, as old as America itself. E pluribus, unum. Out of many, one. We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants - a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America's precepts. That's why millions of people, ancestors to most of us, braved hardship and great risk to come here - so they could be free to work and worship and live their lives in peace. The Asian immigrants who made their way to California's Angel Island. The Germans and Scandinavians who settled across the Midwest. The waves of the Irish, Italian, Polish, Russian, and Jewish immigrants who leaned against the railing to catch that first glimpse of the Statue of Liberty. And I think of the naturalization ceremonies we've held at the White House for members of the military, which have been so inspiring. President Obama said the fence was now "basically complete." This declaration is completely false. The fence along the southern border in total equals 670 miles. The entire southern border is 2000 miles long, which is nowhere near, "basically complete." On top of a meager border fence, the February 2011, Government Accountability Office report shows "1120 southwest border miles have not yet achieved operational control." Also, according to Sheriffs working and living on the U.S.-Mexico border, Obama's assertion that his administration has done it's part to enforce the border is laughable. "Well, over the past two years we have answered those concerns. Under Secretary Napolitano's leadership, we have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible. They wanted more agents on the border. Well, we now have more boots on the ground on the southwest border than at any time in our history. The Border Patrol has 20,000 agents more than twice as many as there were in 2004, a build up that began under President Bush and that we have continued. They wanted a fence. Well, that fence is now basically complete. So, we have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement."
Obama took credit for confiscating 64 percent more weapons than ever before. Well, that's what happens when the federal government sends thousands of guns into Mexico in the first place through Operation Fast and Furious under the Obama Justice Department and ATF, of course it becomes easier to confiscate more guns when you put more into an area to begin with. Obama also called again for the passing of the DREAM Act which failed in the Senate during the previous lame duck session. As a refresher, the DREAM Act if passed would allow children of illegal immigrants to gain citizenship if they go to college or join the military. Or as Obama put it, "Stop punishing children for their parents' mistakes." Obama asked both sides to avoid playing politics with the issue in order to get to the next election, which was ironic considering the odds of completing immigration reform in the short time remaining during his first term are slim, making his speech today look solely like a political move. That's one reason it's been so difficult to reform our broken immigration system. When an issue is this complex and raises such strong feelings, it's easier for politicians to defer the problem until after the next election. And there's always a next election. So we've seen a lot blame and politics and ugly rhetoric. We've seen good faith efforts - from leaders of both parties - fall prey to the usual Washington games. On another note, Obama asked the audience if he needed to build a moat on the border to make republicans happy. There is already a moat on the border Mr. President, it's called the Rio Grande. This was the first visit by Obama to the U.S.-Mexico border despite being invited numerous times by local officials in border states to do so.--Townhall.com
* 5/12/11--WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats want to keep the Dream Act alive. More than 30 Dems yesterday teamed up in a bid to resuscitate the previously defeated legislation that would grant citizenship to illegal immigrants who grew up in the United States if they go to college or join the military. The move came a day after President Obama called it "cruel" to deny citizenship to students who "love this country and know no other place as home." The choreographed push is the latest attempt to woo Hispanic voters, a key bloc in the 2012 presidential race.--NY Post
* 5/12/11--WASHINGTON -- A key Senate Democrat is floating a plan for a new millionaires tax to help lower federal deficits, moving the party further to the left as President Obama joined the budget battle yesterday. The tax scheme cooked up by Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, would slap a surtax of 3 percent on Americans earning more than $1 million a year, sources said. It is part of Senate Democrats' 2012 budget proposal that has not yet been released. Conrad says the budget will employ a deficit-fighting strategy with a 50-50 split of tax increases and spending cuts. Republicans insist tax increases are off the table in budget talks. Conrad's fellow Democrats also are expected to balk at proposed GOP cuts that include education, health and labor programs. As details of the millionaires tax leaked out on Capitol Hill, Obama huddled privately with Senate Democrats and tried to build a united front for the budget showdown with Republicans.--NY Post
* 5/12/11--Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill are scrambling this week to show their constituents back home that they care, that you care, about the price of gasoline. The consensus isn’t even close.
House Republicans are making a big splash passing two bills today to reverse President’s Obama’s crackdown on oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico after the Deepwater Horizon disaster last year. In a nutshell, more leases would be let, more permits permitted, and more oil would be drilled to bring down the $4 a gallon price of gas, Republicans are arguing. Few Democrats are agreeing with that economic theory, and are instead pursing their own brand of gasoline price justice by proposing billions of dollars in tax increases for domestic oil producers. Meanwhile, the Obama administration is floating an unofficial, draft only, if-you-really-hate-it-we-didn’t-really-mean-it proposal that would tax all drivers based on how many miles they drive. Republicans aren’t likely to support the Democrat’s tax measures, even though the Senate promises to use the billions of dollars it would reap to pay down the deficit. And the Senate isn’t exactly scrambling to follow the House action and get all of the oilrigs drilling again in the Gulf before Americans load up their cars this summer and take the kids on vacation. So while they care, that you care, about the price of gasoline, it doesn’t appear that this week they care enough to actually get something done about it.--Audrey Hudson, humanevents.com
* 5/12/11--House Republicans on Wednesday voted to cut bureaucratic red tape they say has slowed oil production in the Gulf to a trickle and is contributing to the high price of gasoline at the pumps. HR 1229 requires the Interior Department to act on oil drilling permits in a matter of weeks. It passed 263 to 163, with 28 Democrats siding with Republicans who voted unanimously for the measure. Last week the House approved a bill to accelerate offshore lease sales, and Thursday it is expected to pass another measure that lifts a moratorium on drilling in some parts of the Gulf. The Obama administration halted most offshore drilling after the Deepwater Horizon disaster last year. Only 10 of 50 projects have since been allowed to continue, Republicans say. “We can’t allow the administration to keep stonewalling the permitting process,” said Rep. Doug Lamborn (R.-Colo.). The Democrats’ strategy is to shift the focus of the debate to tax credits designed for oil companies, a policy they say “subsidizes” the industry. "Republicans want to cut medical care for grandma, but won’t touch the profits for oil companies," said Rep. Edward Markey (D.-Mass). “It’s oil above all, that’s what it’s really all about,” Markey said. Rep. Jeff Landry (R.-La.) said that if Democrats want to hurt oil company profits, they should help the supply meet the demand. “If they want to bring the profits down, they should vote for this bill because we will drive the profits down when we drive the price down,” Landry said. Citing a report by the Congressional Research Service issued in March, Landry said that eliminating tax breaks would make gas prices more expensive for consumers and likely increase U.S. dependence on foreign oil. “We are here today to bring relief to Americans at the pump and put the Gulf of Mexico back to work,” Landry said. Lamborn added, “I still haven’t heard how $4 billion in additional taxes for oil companies will translate to lower prices at the pump.” The Democrats will move their plan forward in the Senate beginning with a hearing Thursday before the Finance Committee. Specifically, Democrats want to eliminate a tax credit for domestic manufacturing, which they say will raise nearly $16 billion, and an exemption for payments made to foreign governments they say could raise nearly $10 billion in 10 years. Additionally, Democrats seek to raise nearly $12 billion by collecting taxes on royalty-free leases granted in the 1990s. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky.) called the strategy Carteresque. “They need to end an approach that hasn’t changed since the days of Jimmy Carter,” McConnell said in a floor speech Monday. “Just like Carter before them, today’s Democrats are using the crisis of the moment as an excuse to push their own vision of the future, with a windfall-profits tax on energy companies. And just like Carter before them, they have rightly been accused of bringing BB guns to a war,” McConnell said. Brian Johnson, senior tax adviser for the American Petroleum Institute, said at a press briefing Monday that raising taxes would only further raise gas prices. “They would not affect the global economics underpinning oil supply and demand, which explain today’s gasoline prices,” Johnson said. The oil industry is one of the highest taxed in the U.S., paying more than $86 million to the federal treasury in taxes and production fees every day. “The President was recently in Brazil promoting that country’s offshore oil development, and called on Saudi Arabia to increase oil production. While we support energy production everywhere, we cannot ignore what we can do in America," Johnson said. "We need to keep American companies investing in American workers and our economy.”--Audrey Hudson, humanevents.com
*5/12/11--CBS’s Mark Knoller, covering a town hall on the economy with the president this morning, reports: “President Obama blames high unemployment rate on ‘huge layoffs of government workers’ at federal, state and local levels.” This is completely wrong. Extremely and mind-bogglingly wrong. Epically wrong. First, let’s look at the numbers for private-sector employment. All figures come from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics:
Recent peak of private-sector employment, June 2007: 116,603,000.
Total private-sector employment in the month Obama became president, January 2009: 109,084,000.
Recent low of private-sector employment, January 2010: 104,933,000.
Total private-sector employment, April 2011: 108,862,000.
So note, we are about 8 million away from the most recent peak in private-sector employment. Now, let’s look at total government employment (at all levels) for those four months:
June 2007: 22,176,000.
January 2009: 22,471,000.
January 2010: 22,376,000.
April 2011: 22,594,000 (preliminary).
As you can see, in terms of total number of Americans employed in government, there has been no real discernible recession. In fact, the number has increased slightly. Now let’s look at the number of people employed in state government during these months:
June 2007: 4,918,000.
January 2009: 5,116,000.
January 2010: 5,053,000.
April 2011: 5,253,000 (preliminary).
Again, not only pretty stable, but slowly climbing. Now let’s look at employment in local government:
June 2007: 14,514,000.
January 2009: 14,583,000.
January 2010: 14,478,000.
April 2011: 14,492,000 (preliminary).
Again, the numbers are stable, and even indicate that local government employment is increasing, not decreasing. Obama is not even a little bit right. Will anyone call him out on this?
UPDATE: The full quote is here:
“The reason the unemployment rate is still as high as it is, in part, is because there have been huge layoffs of government workers at the federal level, at the state level, at the local level,” he said. “Teachers, police officers, firefighters, social workers– they have really taken it in the chin over the last several months. And so, what we’re trying to do is to see if we can stabilize the budget.”
Again, completely false. There has not been a significant reduction — or even variation, really — in the size of the government workforce at the federal, state, and local level.--Jim Geraghty, nationalreview.com
* 5/13/11--The Massachusetts "universal health-care system" -- the model for ObamaCare -- is in big trouble after just five years. The latest bad news: a survey from the Massachusetts Medical Society of more than 800 doctors. The wait time for an appointment is now routinely over a month for primary-care doctors and specialists -- including gastroenterologists, cardiologists, orthopedists and even obstetricians.
Internists and family practitioners report being so overwhelmed -- too many patients, too much time pressure -- that more than half are closing their practices to new patients. More than half of primary-care docs in Massachusetts find themselves unable to work with Medicaid or Commonwealth Care (state-subsidized insurance), which both pay providers poorly. Yet ObamaCare will add 17 million people to Medicaid, while stuffing others into programs like Commonwealth Care. Who'll take care of these patients? Routine office visits will give way entirely to the routine emergency-room wait. The American College of Emergency Physicians has found that ER visits are on the rise in Massachusetts, in part due to physician shortages. So much for President Obama's insistance that his health reform would keep patients out of the ER. Dr. Alice Coombs, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, warns that "insurance coverage doesn't equal access to care." Real care involves a one-on-one interaction between a doctor and a patient. The most important healing moments occur during an extended visit when a doctor listens carefully. But this type of visit is on track to become extinct for all but the wealthy -- choked off by the expanded entitlements and regulations of ObamaCare. --Dr. Marc Siegel is an internist in New York, NY Post.
* 5/13/11--"It was a reminder of a simple idea, as old as America itself. E pluribus unum. Out of many, one. We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants." --Barack Obama in a speech about immigration reform. Memo to Barack: E pluribus unum does not refer to immigration. This is the same president who also mocked Republicans' insistence on border security. "All the stuff they asked for, we've done," Obama said. "Even though we've answered these concerns, I've got to say I suspect there are still going to be some who are trying to move the goal posts on us one more time. You know, they said we needed to triple the Border Patrol. Or now they're going to say we need to quadruple the Border Patrol. Or they'll want a higher fence. Maybe they'll need a moat. Maybe they want alligators in the moat. They'll never be satisfied." Of course, only about 5 percent of the border fence is even finished, much less "higher." The only thing Obama has done to reduce illegal immigration is to create high unemployment.--Patriot Post Digest
* 5/13/11--We told you it isn't over. Fannie Mae is asking for another bailout of $8.5 billion. The firm continues to lose money despite the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) and the economic recovery that the administration keeps telling us is on the way. Since the third quarter of 2008, Fannie Mae has received nearly $100 billion (including this request) from the taxpayers. Conservatives were raising concerns about the standards and evolving business practices of Fannie Mae a decade ago. They asked why basic underwriting standards that had worked for 50 years were being discontinued. Yet they were shouted down by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and former Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT), who, as chairmen of their chambers' respective banking and finance committees, lamented that merely asking such a question was tantamount to causing a financial crisis. Now, with the clarity of 20/20 hindsight, it's obvious that the concerns about the long-term stability of Fannie Mae and her sibling Freddie Mac were well founded but ultimately ignored as inconvenient by the Beltway establishment. The relaxation of lending standards was essentially affirmative action for home ownership with the money given to "borrowers with impaired or limited credit histories." A junior-grade credit analyst could tell Congress that lending money to those with no demonstrated ability to repay is negligent, bordering on criminal. Yet given that Congress sees no need to demonstrate an ability to repay its debts, is anybody really surprised? No, and Washington's answer is to throw more money at the problem. --Patriot Post Digest
* 5/13/11--The Obama administration approved 204 new waivers to Democrats' healthcare reform law over the past month, bringing the total to 1,372. The waivers are temporary and only apply to one provision of the law, which requires health plans to offer at least $750,000 worth of annual medical benefits before leaving patients to fend for themselves. Still, Republicans have assailed the waivers as a sign of both favoritism and of major problems with the law. "The fact that over 1,000 waivers have been granted is a tacit admission that the healthcare law is fundamentally flawed," Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said in March. Upton is one of three House committee chairmen who has used new oversight powers to investigate the annual limit waivers. Administration officials say the law allows the Health and Human Services Department to grant the waivers to avoid disrupting the insurance market before the law overhauls the insurance system in 2014. They say the waivers are granted through a transparent process. --theHill.com
* 5/15/11--The Obama administration will begin to tap federal retiree programs to help fund operations after the government lost its ability Monday to borrow more money from the public, adding urgency to efforts in Washington to fashion a compromise over the debt. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner has warned for months that the government would soon hit the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling — a legal limit on how much it can borrow. With that limit reached Monday, Geithner is undertaking special measures in an effort to postpone the day when he will no longer have enough funds to pay all of the government’s bills.
Geithner, who has already suspended a program that helps state and local government manage their finances, will begin to borrow from retirement funds for federal workers. The measure won’t have an impact on retirees because the Treasury is legally required to reimburse the program. The maneuver buys Geithner only a few months of time. If Congress does not vote by Aug. 2 to raise the debt limit, Geithner says the government is likely to default on some of its obligations, which he says would cause enormous economic harm and the suspension of government services, including the disbursal of Social Security funds. Many congressional Republicans, however, have been skeptical that breaching the Aug. 2 deadline would be as catastrophic as Geithner suggests. What’s more, Republican leaders are insisting that Congress cut spending by as much as the Obama administration wants to raise the debt limit, without any new taxes. Obama is proposing spending cuts and tax increases to rein in the debt. “Everything should be on the table, except raising taxes,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “Because raising taxes will hurt our economy and hurt our ability to create jobs in our country.”
The Obama administration has warned that it is dangerous to make a vote on raising the debt limit contingent on other proposals. But Boehner is demanding that Congress use the debt vote as a way to bring down government spending.--Washingtonpost.com
* 5/17/11--Of the 204 new Obamacare waivers President Barack Obama’s administration approved in April, 38 are for fancy eateries, hip nightclubs and decadent hotels in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s Northern California district. That’s in addition to the 27 new waivers for health care or drug companies and the 31 new union waivers Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services approved. Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers. Other common waiver recipients were labor union chapters, large corporations, financial firms and local governments. But Pelosi’s district’s waivers are the first major examples of luxurious, gourmet restaurants and hotels getting a year-long pass from Obamacare.--dailycaller.com
* 5/17/11--An extensive new study conducted by Timothy Conley from the University of Western Ontario, Canada Economics Department and Bill Dupor of Ohio State University Economics Department, shows the trillion dollar boondoggle known as the stimulus bill, which President Obama has credited over and over again for "saving and/or creating" thousands of jobs, actually killed 1 million private sector jobs. The study also shows that despite the entire idea of the stimulus creating "shovel ready," or construction/infrastructure jobs, infrastructure employment has drastically decreased despite stimulus spending. How’s that hope and change for ya’?--townhall.com
* 5/18/11-- "Boots on the ground"-that's what President Barack Obama says is protecting our southern border-20,000 border patrol agents, 40,000 boots on the ground. He said it last week during a speech in El Paso, Tex., and a new investigation by HUMAN EVENTS concurs. Well, the boots on the ground part anyway, because Border Patrol agents have to abandon their vehicles at makeshift Normandy-style fences constructed by our own Park Service on the U.S. side of the border. They are then forced to chase illegal aliens on foot so as not to disturb the fragile desert ecosystem. In one Arizona park, federal agents practically have to tiptoe through 40 acres to avoid disrupting a pond containing the endangered desert pupfish. It's part of the agreements made between Homeland Security and the Interior Departments on how best to protect the environment, frustrating lawmakers who say it should not trump border security. "Under Secretary Napolitano's leadership, we have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible," Obama said. He continued, "They wanted more agents on the border. Well, we now have more boots on the ground on the southwest border than at any time in our history." There are also more hooves on the ground. Border Patrol agents can mount a horse to give chase across the delicate territories, but the animals must consume weed-free-feed or their waste must be scooped up and disposed elsewhere to protect the fragile ecosystem against invasive weed species. Some Republican lawmakers have had enough of what they call "arbitrary regulations," and are pushing legislation in the House and Senate to put border patrol agents back in the drivers' seat.--humanevents.com
* 5/19/11--Reporting from Washington— Battle lines in federal debt talks sharpened markedly Thursday when the Senate's top Democrat rejected a proposal for $2 trillion in budget cuts as demanded by House Speaker John A. Boehner, saying any cuts must be accompanied by action on closing tax loopholes. "You can't do $2 trillion just in cuts," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in an interview in his Capitol office. "There has to be a mix of spending cuts, including defense. There has to be a more fair apportionment of tax policy in this country."Republicans have resisted using tax reform to rein in deficits as Congress and the White House try to break a stalemate over raising the nation's debt limit by Aug. 2 to avoid a first-ever federal default. Boehner's office reiterated Thursday that tax hikes would not be "on the table" in talks. Reid said negotiations are likely to drag until the 11th hour, a prospect certain to send shudders through the financial markets and fuel political debate.--latimes.com
* 5/20/11--WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama's endorsement of a longstanding Palestinian demand on the borders of their future state sets the stage for what could be a tense meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday. Netanyahu, who has had strained relations with Obama, headed for Washington saying the president's vision of a Palestinian state on the borders of 1967 -- as part of his vision for an elusive U.S.-brokered peace deal -- could leave Israel "indefensible." The White House talks had never been expected to yield any significant progress to revive long-stalled peace talks, but now that prospect seemed dimmer than ever. Obama, in a policy speech on Thursday on the "Arab spring" uprisings across the Middle East, laid down his clearest markers yet on the compromises Israel and the Palestinians must make for resolving their decades-old conflict. His position essentially embraces the Palestinian view that the state they seek in the West Bank and Gaza should largely be drawn along the lines that existed before the 1967 war in which Israel captured those territories and East Jerusalem. On the eve of Netanyahu's visit, it was seen as a message that Obama expects Israel to eventually make big concessions. "The viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of Israel's existence," Netanyahu said in a statement before flying to the United States for his talks with Obama. Obama's first outright declaration of his stance on the contested issue of borders could help ease doubts in the Arab world about his commitment to acting as an even-handed broker. But the Democratic president quickly came under fire from Republican critics, who accused him of betraying Israel, the closest U.S. ally in the region. Pushing Netanyahu risks alienating the Jewish state's base of support among the U.S. public and in Congress as Obama seeks re-election in 2012. "This approach undermines our special relationship with Israel and weakens our ally's ability to defend itself," said House Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor. While Obama also had tough words for the Palestinians, Israeli officials were especially taken aback by his blunt language, including criticism of "settlement activity" and its continued occupation of Arab lands. There was no word on whether Netanyahu, who heads a right-leaning, pro-settler coalition, had been forewarned.
* 5/23/11--"Nearly two weeks ago, Fatah, the U.S.-backed Palestinian National Liberation Movement, signed an agreement to form a unity government with Hamas, a U.S.-listed foreign terror organization. ... Hamas's own foreign minister has stated that Hamas 'believe[s] that negotiations with the Israeli enemy are in vain.' The Hamas Charter calls for Islam to 'abolish' Israel and for Muslims to 'fight the Jews and kill them.' It further proclaims, 'There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except jihad.' ... Where would U.S. dollars go in this new unity government? Hamas isn't hiding their intentions for these funds. In touting the new unity government, Hamas foreign minister Mahmoud al-Zahhar announced, 'We believe in armed struggle, in addition to responsible governing, as well as making the government's resources available to the resistance,' i.e. terrorism. ... Israel has already cut off tax funds that it routinely collects for the Palestinian Authority. The United States should follow this example, suspend all funds to the Palestinians until Fatah withdraws from the agreement, and make it clear that if the agreement is honored, there will be no more U.S. dollars for the Palestinian Authority. The fact that we even have to debate this question is absurd." --Jordan Sekulow, Director of policy and international operation for American Center for Law and Justice (From Patriot Post Brief)
* 5/23/11--The White House has named Jesse Lee to a new position within its communications department titled Director of Progressive Media & Online Response. According to The Huffington Post, Lee will essentially be responsible for building up Obama’s online presence as he prepares for his reelection bid, and squashing any negative stories:
The post is a new one for this White House. Rapid response has usually been outsourced to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), if not done on an ad-hoc basis by administration officials. And it signals that the White House will be adopting a more aggressive defense of the president and his policies as his re-election campaign gears up. If you’re going to post something online about Obama that isn’t true, Lee is going to be the one to handle you. Considering that Lee’s first tweet about his new position included a picture of The Terminator, we suggest you watch what you say OR BE DESTROYED. Okay that was a little dramatic, but you get the idea.--mediabistro.com
* 5/23/11--"All of our ruling-class institutions -- academia, courts, government, media and entertainment industries -- are teeming with closed-minded, hard-Left ideologues who seek to 'fundamentally transform America.' Consider that, according to the nonpartisan Pew Research Center, self-identified liberals outweigh their conservative counterparts in the mainstream media by a 5-1 margin. Likewise, a 1999 North American Academic Study Survey (NAASS) of students, faculty and administrators in colleges and universities throughout the United States determined that five times as many college faculty members vote Democratic as Republican. ... Still, liberals -- or 'progressives,' as they prefer to be called -- persist in laboring under an embarrassing misconception: They honestly believe they remain the nonconformists. It's precious. In fact, today's liberals are nothing of the sort. They compliantly conform -- like little windup, patchouli-daubed lemmings -- to a carnival-prize caricature of what they imagine nonconformity to look like. You know, the usual stuff: neo-Marxism, environmentalist activism, sexual relativism, big-government nanny statism, an actions-without-consequences rendering of reproductive rights, and other such populist nonsense. Simply put, today's progressive nonconformist conforms." --columnist J. Matt Barber
---"For what is meant by saying that a government ought to educate the people? Why should they be educated? What is the education for? Clearly, to fit the people for social life -- to make them good citizens. And who is to say what are good citizens? The government: there is no other judge. And who is to say how these good citizens may be made? The government: there is no other judge. Hence the proposition is convertible into this -- a government ought to mold children into good citizens, using its own discretion in settling what a good citizen is and how the child may be molded into one." --British author, economist and philosopher Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) (From Patriot Post Brief)
* 5/24/11-- One could almost hear the collective gasps and subsequent excuses among Republicans from Buffalo, New York to Washington DC when the news came Tuesday night that Republican Jane Corwin was edged out in the nationally-watched special House election in New York’s 26th District. In losing to liberal Democrat Kathy Hochul by a margin of about 47% to 43%, State Asssemblywoman Corwin lost the Buffalo-area district that had been firmly in Republican hands since the late Jack Kemp won his first term in Congress there back in 1970....But there were other reasons for the tightness of the race beside from the attacks on the Ryan plan. "Democrats will crow that that the Ryan Medicare plan put NY-26 in play, but as Tip O'Neil pointed out, 'All politics is local.',” said historian and author David Pietrusza, who knows all things New York, “This race was a perfect storm of three local situations. First, the well-funded Jack Davis pseudo-Tea Party challenge. Two, Kathy Hochul remained remarkably personally popular. Third, and most critical, was the Corwin's camps remarkably inept attempt at videotaping Jack Davis. There was no need to paint him as eccentric.” Pietrusza was referring to the candidacy of multimillionaire Jack Davis on the “Tea Party,” who got about 8% of the vote that many believe would otherwise gone to Corwin. Because of his ballot designation and outsider status, Davis, a Democrat who was actually the Democratic candidate in the 26th in ’06, was taking votes of conservative independents from Republican Corwin. As polls showed the race tightening, local tea party groups strongly denounced Davis and the 527 known as American Crossroads ran $350,000 in TV spots to attack the so-called “Tea Party” nominee. At one point in the campaign, Corwin’s chief of staff in the legislature followed Davis. After an obvious (and successful)attempt to incite the 78-year-old contender, Davis told the staffer: “Do you want [to get] punched out?” The incident was widely condemned in the press and there were calls in the local press for Corwin to fire her top aide, who is on the state payroll. In the end, the “Stop Ryan” blitz and the Davis renegade candidacy proved more potent than Corwin’s far-superior cash resources. Along with the efforts of American Crossroads and the National Republican Congressional Committee (which spent an estimated $500,000 on TV ads), the businesswoman-candidate herself pumped more than $1.6 million of her own wealth into the campaign in its closing days. For Republicans nationally, the results from NY-26 bring anticipation that future attacks will be grounded in “Medi-scare” and focused on the Ryan plan. Perhaps the best post-script on this race is the title of a timeless novel by H.G. Welles: The Shape of Things to Come.--humanevents.com
* 5/24/11--It has been 755 days since the U.S. Senate has passed a budget and it looks like the days will continue to tick on by as budget negotiations continue to break down. Republicans are getting fed up and wrote Majority Leader Harry Reid a letter this week expressing their frustrations, calling out irresponsible budget requests and reminded him of the message voters sent to Washington during the November 2010 election cycle. There are less than six months until the end of the fiscal year, time is rapidly running out for a budget to be passed. I don’t recommend holding your breath.--townhall.com
* 5/24/11--The latest use of taxpayer dollars to shove Obama propaganda down your throat, on your dime comes with the White House moving staffer Jesse Lee from the White House New Media Department into a position of "rapid media response," with a goal of squashing, or cleaning up negative stories about President Obama on the internet. Previously, this position was funded through the Democratic National Committee, but now taxpayers will foot the bill to keep Obama’s name in a positive light. With Obama's record during his first term, Lee has his work cut out for him.--townhall.com
* 5/24/11--Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on Tuesday delivered a speech to a combined session of Congress where he schooled our President, members of Congress and the world in what Rush Limbaugh characterized as lessons in "commitment... confidence... statecraft and leadership." Rush said, "This was an epic, epic speech." Netanyahu's speech followed several contentious days between him and President Obama after Obama called for Israel to retreat to its 1967 borders as the starting point for Middle East peace negotiations with Palestine. Netanyahu was interrupted by applause over 50 times by members in attendance where he, in no uncertain terms, declared that Jerusalem will never be divided again, referring to the call by Obama to retreat to the 1967 borders. Obama's proposal put Israel in a precarious position to re-establish indefensible borders. American citizens are also expressing their support for Israel, with more than 80,000 signing Grasfire's petition in less than a week.--Grassroots Action Alert
* 5/25/11--The Justice Department has given the go-ahead to prosecute John Edwards for violating campaign laws, as part of his frantic efforts to hide his mistress and illegitimate child. The decision comes after years of investigation by a federal grand jury. According to the ABC News affiliate in Edwards’ native North Carolina, Edwards “now knows that federal prosecutors intend to indict him,” and is “deciding how to proceed now that the Justice Department has given the green light for him to face criminal charges.” Who’s John Edwards? I would understand if you don’t quite remember him, since the media lost interest in him after he became a chew toy for federal prosecutors. He used to be all over newspapers and TV. He’s a fabulously rich trial lawyer and former Senator from North Carolina, who ran for President in 2008, and was John Kerry’s running mate in 2004. Who’s John Kerry? Never mind, we’ll have to cover that in another column. Edwards was noted for an incredibly arrogant and sanctimonious class-warfare theme about “two Americas,” in which he would be the champion of struggling, working-class America B, even though he raked in millions as a slippery trial lawyer and dwelled in a gigantic mansion located squarely in America A. Also living in that mansion was his cancer-stricken wife, Elizabeth, a noble soul who passed away last December. Edwards liked to make frequent trips into America B to visit his mistress, Rielle Hunter, who ostensibly worked for his campaign, producing campaign videos. She also produced an illegitimate child, which Edwards was desperate to hide during his presidential bid. To this end, he shoveled a million dollars of campaign money at Hunter and campaign aide Andrew Young, who pretended to be the father of Hunter’s child. Democrats just love to spend other peoples’ money, don’t they? Even a guy whose net worth was better than $50 million at the time still wouldn’t pay for his own cover-up. It’s ironic that this might be what puts him behind bars, or at least on the wrong end of a humiliating plea agreement that blows away the last few ashes of his reputation… especially since absolutely no one in the media was even slightly interested in his extramarital affair, except for the National Enquirer. Andrew Young eventually grew tired of being a fall guy for Edwards, cashed in with a gossipy book, and testified before the grand jury. The Democrat Party found other people to be its class-warfare standard bearers. John Edwards faces indictment for betraying campaign finance laws to cover up the betrayal of his wife. I suspect he will cut a deal with prosecutors, since a high-profile trial would force him back into the media spotlight one last time, and nobody wants that.--humanevents.com
* 5/25/11--"If nothing else, last week made it abundantly clear where Democrats stand on today's most pressing issues, and the picture isn't pretty. In case you missed it, the Democrats floated a plan for a millionaire surtax in an attempt to, as the Hill put it, 'force Republicans to accept other tax increases.' They tried to hike taxes on oil companies by more than $2 billion a year, because the industry is currently making big profits; and mounted a nationwide campaign to scare seniors away from Rep. Paul Ryan's Medicare reform -- including a new ad that depicts Ryan tossing a senior citizen off a cliff. Detect a theme there? On issue after issue, Republicans are putting forward serious, sober and often politically risky solutions to the nation's most pressing problems, while Democrats play class-warfare games and stoke the public's fear. To cope with the nation's gargantuan debt, for example, the GOP issued a budget plan that focuses -- correctly -- on reining in the government's runaway spending. The only thing Democrats want to talk about is how all our problems can be solved if we just raise taxes on the 'the rich.'" --Investor's Business Daily.
Editor's Note: House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) released a second video titled, "Path to Prosperity (Episode 2)" in which he lays out the case for Medicare's problems and how to fix it.
--Patriot Post Chronicle
* 5/26/11--Media reports in recent weeks say that Senate Democrats are considering a 3% surtax on income over $1 million to raise federal revenues. This would come on top of the higher income tax rates that President Obama has already proposed through the cancellation of the Bush era tax-rate reductions. If the Democrats' millionaire surtax were to happen—and were added to other tax increases already enacted last year and other leading tax hike ideas on the table this year—this could leave the U.S. with a combined federal and state top tax rate on earnings of 62%. That's more than double the highest federal marginal rate of 28% when President Reagan left office in 1989. Welcome back to the 1970s.--wsj.com
* 5/26/11--New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly climbed to 424,000 last week from a revised 414,000 in the prior week, pointing to a painfully slow improvement in the nation's job markets.
The Labor Department on Thursday revised the prior week's claims number up from an originally reported 409,000. Economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast that claims last week would decline to 400,000, rather than rise. The four-week moving average of unemployment claims, considered a better measure of trends since it smoothes out weekly variations, eased slightly to 438,500 from a revised 440,250. Last week marked the seventh straight week in which claims topped the 400,000 level, indicating that payroll growth is soft and may continue to be so for some time. A department official said there were no exceptional factors to account for the rise in last week's claims.--cnbc.com
* 5/26/11--Sales of homes in some stage of foreclosure declined in the first three months of the year, but they still accounted for 28 percent of all home sales — a share nearly six times higher than what it would be in a healthy housing market. Foreclosure sales, which include homes purchased after they received a notice of default or were repossessed by lenders, hit the highest share of overall sales in a year during the first quarter, foreclosure listing firm RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday. "It's an astronomically high number," said Rick Sharga, a senior vice president at RealtyTrac. "In a normal market, you're looking at the percentage of homes sold in foreclosure to be below 5 percent."--AP
* 5/26/11--The budget proposal released by the White House back in February didn’t win a single vote in the Senate on Wednesday— the final tally was 0-97. Senate Republicans pushed for the vote as a counterpoint to the defeat of Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget plan. POLITICO’s David Rogers reports: “The vote on the president’s plan turned into a rout, with neither Republicans nor Democrats voting in favor of taking it up. At one level, the 97-0 vote showed how out-of-date the February requests can seem after so much has changed in the spending debate already this year. But for Democrats, it also proved a convenient way to mask their substantial internal differences over how to proceed” on addressing the government’s fiscal problems.--politico.com
* 5/27/11--Back in 2009 and 2010, the chattering class labeled the Republican Party "unserious." It was the Party of No. It had no plans to fix the healthcare crisis. It had no plans to fix the economic crisis. It had nothing. The chattering class held firm in the conviction that voters would reject the Republican Party because it was unserious and lacked any sort of plan. But the GOP did have a plan. The Democrats and their friends in the media just chose to ignore the plan. Famously, when President Obama went to Congress to pitch his healthcare plan, he said the Republicans had no plan. Each time he did so, the GOP held its plan in the air. The tables are now turned. The Democrats have not submitted a budget in 757 days. They have no plan to do so. They unanimously voted against Barack Obama's budget plan. They have no plan to fix Medicare or restructure entitlements. Nothing. It is now the Democrats who are unserious. At least back in 2009, the GOP really did have a plan. There is also a word of caution for the GOP. They won in 2010, perceived as standing in opposition to major change in the healthcare system. The Democrats said the public just didn't understand, needed to be educated, or that the Democrats just "got the message wrong." That's what the GOP is now saying in the face of united Democrat opposition. The Republican Party better be careful not to make the same mistakes the Democrats did in selling, or rather failing to sell, health care changes to the American people.--humanevents.com
* 5/27/11--The Senate voted 72-23 Thursday to extend three key Patriot Act provisions that were due to sunset Friday. The House followed suit with just hours to spare, by a vote of 250-153. The president then used a robo-pen to "sign" the legislation, without actually being present. Seriously. Why? He's roughing it at the French resort of Deauville. The provisions, which now sunset on June 1, 2015, include the power to set roving wiretaps, seek tangible information on suspects' business or library records, and engage in secret surveillance of non-American suspects not known to be tied to any terrorist group. What is perhaps most interesting is how hard the administration is pushing for renewal. Democrats used to oppose the law vehemently just because George W. Bush backed it. Now that Obama's in the White House, all of the sudden he finds it useful, even if he can't be bothered to attend the signing. This and the prison at Guantanamo Bay, unlimited detention of enemy combatants, military commissions to try them, drone attacks against terrorists (even in Pakistan) and "democracy" in the Middle East -- it's almost like a third Bush term.--Patriot Post Digest
* 5/30/11--PRINCETON, NJ -- U.S. military veterans and those currently on active military duty are less likely to approve of President Obama's job performance than are Americans of comparable ages who are not in the military.--gallup.com
* 5/31/11--Can you imagine David Cameron enjoying a round of golf on Remembrance Sunday? It would be inconceivable for the British Prime Minister to do so, and not just because of the usually dire weather at that time of the year. Above all, it would be viewed as an act of extremely bad taste on a day when the nation remembers and mourns her war dead. I can’t imagine the PM even considering it, and I’m sure his advisers would be horrified at the idea. And if the prime minister ever did play golf on such a sacrosanct day he would be given a massive drubbing by the British press, and it would never be repeated. Contrast this with President Obama’s decision to play golf yesterday, Memorial Day, for the 70th time during his 28-month long presidency. For tens of millions of Americans, Memorial Day is a time for remembrance of the huge sacrifices made by servicemen and women on the battlefield. The president did pay his respects in the morning, laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery, but later in the day traveled to Fort Belvoir to play golf. The story has not been reported so far in a single US newspaper, but was made public by veteran White House correspondent Keith Koffler on his blog. Here's Koffler's report:
The business of memorializing our war dead done, President Obama headed out to the Fort Belvoir golf course today, finding his way onto the links for the ninth weekend in a row. Obama earlier today laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and met with families of those killed in battle. But he emerged from the day’s solemnity to go golfing for the 12th time this year and the 70th time of his presidency. The decision to golf on Memorial Day invites comparison with President George W. Bush, who gave up the game early in his presidency and said he did it out of respect for the families of those killed in Iraq. Does it matter if the president chooses to play golf on Memorial Day, and for the second time in his presidency (he did so as well in 2009)? I think it does, and it displays extraordinarily bad judgment, not only by Obama himself but also by his advisers. His chief of staff for example should have firmly cautioned against it. President Obama is not just any American but Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. The United States is currently engaged in a major war in Afghanistan with over 100,000 troops on the ground, and more than 1,500 have already laid down their lives for their country. The least the president can do on Memorial Day is spend the whole day with veterans and servicemen’s families while acknowledging their sacrifice. As Koffler points out above, President George W. Bush stopped playing golf out of respect for the families of Iraq War dead. This demonstrated not only good judgment but humility and respect for the men and women who keep America safe. It is little wonder that, as Gallup reveals in a new poll, US military personnel and veterans give Barack Obama lower marks for his job performance than members of the general public. The president’s actions smack of poor taste, as well a lack of empathy and support for the US military, hardly the kind of leadership the White House should be projecting at a time of war.--AFP
* 5/31/11--U.S. single-family home prices dropped in March, dipping below their 2009 low, as the housing market remained bogged down by inventory and weak demand, a closely watched survey said Tuesday. --cnbc.com
No comments:
Post a Comment