Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Obama Continues To Lie About Earmarks

Hope and change has turned into outright deceit for the Obama administration. First, he had the audacity to claim that the pork laden stimulus bill 'didn't have a single earmark'; now, he is throwing his support behind ANOTHER $410,000,000,000.00 pet project pork-bill that will do nothing but run up the debt and inflation. In his first 100 days Obama has

  • Lied about not allow lobbyists into the White House, half of his cabinet are big money lobbyists.
  • Lied about the stimulus including tax cuts (oooh 13 dollars a week! THAT will fix things)
  • Lied about there being no earmarks in the stimulus.
  • More than doubled the deficit
  • Undone the widely supported welfare reform of 1994
  • Caused the stock market to dive every time he has made a speech
  • Presided over the worst 2 months the stock market has ever seen
Obama has simply been a colossal failure. He his indecisive, free-money-for-everyone-except-those-who-work-for-it has already almost guaranteed that your children will be worse off than you are. It is a disgrace, and a crying shame that the first African American president would be such a terrible leader that his incompetence would outshine the historic accomplishment.


Source for the 410B in new pork.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Obama Is Lying about Earmarks in the 'Stimulus' Bill

Obama has the gall to claim that there are no earmarks in the stimulus bill. This is an absolute boldfaced lie. So much for the new way of doing business in Washington. Its even more ironic that it is the Associated Press (a 'news' organization that was nearly openly campaigning for Obama in November) who is calling Obama out on his lies.

FACT CHECK: Obama has it both ways on pork

By CALVIN WOODWARD

WASHINGTON (AP) - At least Route 31 is a road to somewhere.

President Barack Obama had it both ways Monday when he promoted his stimulus plan in Indiana. He bragged about getting Congress to produce a package with no pork, yet boasted it will do good things for a Hoosier highway and a downtown overpass, just the kind of local projects lawmakers lard into big spending bills.

Obama's sales pitch on the enormous package he wants Congress to make law has sizzle as well as steak. He's projecting job creation numbers that may be impossible to verify and glossing over some ethical problems that bedeviled his team.

In recent years, the so-called Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska came to symbolize the worst excesses of congressional earmarks, a device that allows a member of Congress to add money for local projects in legislation, practically under the radar.

Nothing so bold, or specific, as that now-discarded bridge project is contained in the stimulus package. That's not to say the package steers clear of waste or parochial interests. Obama played to such interests Monday, speaking at one point as if he'd come to fill potholes.

A look at some of Obama's claims in Elkhart, Ind., in advance of a prime-time news conference called to make his case to the largest possible audience:

OBAMA: "I know that there are a lot of folks out there who've been saying, 'Oh, this is pork, and this is money that's going to be wasted,' and et cetera, et cetera. Understand, this bill does not have a single earmark in it, which is unprecedented for a bill of this size. ... There aren't individual pork projects that members of Congress are putting into this bill."

THE FACTS: There are no "earmarks," as they are usually defined, inserted by lawmakers in the bill. Still, some of the projects bear the prime characteristics of pork - tailored to benefit specific interests or to have thinly disguised links to local projects.

For example, the latest version contains $2 billion for a clean-coal power plant with specifications matching one in Mattoon, Ill., $10 million for urban canals, $2 billion for manufacturing advanced batteries for hybrid cars, and $255 million for a polar icebreaker and other "priority procurements" by the Coast Guard.

Obama told his Elkhart audience that Indiana will benefit from work on "roads like U.S. 31 here in Indiana that Hoosiers count on." He added: "And I know that a new overpass downtown would make a big difference for businesses and families right here in Elkhart."

U.S. 31 is a north-south highway serving South Bend, 15 miles from Elkhart in the northern part of the state.

OBAMA: "I've appointed hundreds of people, all of whom are outstanding Americans who are doing a great job. There are a couple who had problems before they came into my administration, in terms of their taxes. ... I made a mistake ... I don't want to send the signal that there are two sets of rules."

He added: "Everybody will acknowledge that we have set up the highest standard ever for lobbyists not working in the administration."

THE FACTS: Two of his appointees, former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle for secretary of health and human services and Nancy Killefer as his chief compliance officer, dropped out after reports they had not paid a portion of their taxes.

Obama previously acknowledged he "screwed up" in making it seem to Americans that there is one set of tax compliance rules for VIPs and another set for everyone else. Yet his choice for treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, hung in and achieved the post despite having belatedly paid $34,000 to the IRS, an agency Geithner now oversees.

That could leave the perception that there is one set of rules for Geithner and another set for everyone else.

On lobbyists, Obama has in fact established tough new rules barring them from working for his administration. But the ban is not absolute.

William J. Lynn III, tapped to be the No. 2 official at the Defense Department, recently lobbied for military contractor Raytheon. William Corr, chosen as deputy secretary at Health and Human Services, has lobbied as an anti-tobacco advocate. And Geithner's choice for chief of staff, Mark Patterson, is an ex-lobbyist from Goldman Sachs.

OBAMA: "The plan that we've put forward will save or create 3 million to 4 million jobs over the next two years."

THE FACTS: Job creation projections are uncertain even in stable times, and some of the economists relied on by Obama in making his forecast acknowledge a great deal of uncertainty in their numbers.

Beyond that, it's unlikely the nation will ever know how many jobs are saved as a result of the stimulus. While it's clear when jobs are abolished, there's no economic gauge that tracks job preservation.


Source

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Iran Says that Obama's Offer to Talk Shows Weakness

This should come as no surprise to anyone, expert perhaps to Messrs Obama, Reid, and Ms. Pelosi that Iran is seeing Obama's offer to negotiate with them as weakness. Obama apologists will probably approach this as 'Oh well, we tried. Give peace a chance', but the reality of the situation is much more dangerous. Iran's leaders, now emboldened by the perceived weak-kneed foreign policy of the new administration are much more likely to accelerate development of weapons of mass destruction and adopt a more aggressive foreign stance. It is also likely that Israel will not take kindly to this and will put a stop to any shenanigans if Obama is unwilling to, risking a regional war.

Thus, Islamo-fascists in the middle east emboldened by Obama's perceived weakness will seek to capitalize on the opportunity and will make attempts to attack Israel and Western nations. People are probably going to die because the Democrats think that appeasing evil will lead to peace. Sadly history has shown time and time again this is just not true. We can only hope that the number of lives sacrificed at the alter of liberalism will be small.


Iran says Obama's offer to talk shows US failure

US President Barack Obama's offer to talk to Iran shows that America's policy of "domination" has failed, the government spokesman said on Saturday.

"This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed," Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.

"Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change," he added.

After nearly three decades of severed ties, Obama said shortly after taking office this month that he is willing to extend a diplomatic hand to Tehran if the Islamic republic is ready to "unclench its fist".

In response, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched a fresh tirade against the United States, demanding an apology for its "crimes" against Iran and saying he expected "deep and fundamental" change from Obama.

Iranian politicians frequently refer to the US administration as the "global arrogance", "domineering power" and "Great Satan".

Tensions with the United States have soared over Iran's nuclear drive and Ahmadinejad's vitriolic verbal attacks against Washington's close regional ally Israel.

Former US president George W. Bush refused to hold talks with the Islamic republic -- which he dubbed part of an "axis of evil" -- unless it suspended uranium enrichment, and never took a military option to thwart Tehran's atomic drive off the table.

The new administration of Obama has also refused to rule out any options -- including military strikes -- to stop Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Iran denies any plans to build the bomb and insists its nuclear programme is solely aimed at peaceful ends.

Source

Friday, January 30, 2009

Obama's Stealthy Socialist Medicine Trick

Kim Strassel at the Wall Street Journal has an editorial today pointing out that provisions in the so-called stimulus bill is quietly (and without debate) instituting Obama's goal of socialist health care. The provisions, ignored by the main stream news and lost in the blizzard of new spending, are greatly expanding the role of the SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program) program. SCHIP was initially designed to help the working poor pay for health insurance for their children. After the Obama treatment, people making up to $65,000.00 a year are going to have YOU pay for their kid's health insurance.

The Democrats learned in the early 1990's that American's do not want European-style socialist health care. They know, however, the power that they will wield over the populace if they can push it through, and are determined to do just that if they have to lie cheat and steal to do it. With the press at best complicit, grassroots activism is the only thing standing between now and the day you wake up to find that your good health (and a large chunk of your money) is in the hands of politicians.


Democratic Stealth Care

With the nation preoccupied by the financial crisis, Democrats have been quietly working to nationalize health care.

By: KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL


Tom Daschle is still waiting to be confirmed as secretary of health and human services, not that he's in any rush. Democrats are already enacting his and Barack Obama's agenda of government-run health care -- entirely on the QT.

This was the real accomplishment of this week's House vote for the $819 billion "stimulus," and is the overriding theme of Congress's first month. With the nation occupied with the financial crisis, and with that crisis providing cover, Democrats have been passing provision after provision to nationalize health care.

If Democrats learned anything from the HillaryCare defeat, it was the danger of admitting to their wish to federalize the health market. Since returning to power, they've pursued a new strategy: to stealthily and incrementally expand government control. "What no one is paying attention to in the [stimulus]," says Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, "is that Democrats are making a big grab at the health-care sector."

It began one week after the swearing-in, when Nancy Pelosi whipped through a big expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. The Schip bill was Democrats' first stab at stealth expansion, unveiled in 2007, though vetoed by George W. Bush.
The Opinion Journal Widget

Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.

Initially designed for children of working-poor families, this new Super-Schip will be double in size, and even kids whose parents make $65,000 a year will be eligible. The program will also now cover pregnant women and automatically enroll their new arrivals. The Congressional Budget Office estimates 2.4 million individuals will drop their private coverage for the public program.

Still, it's the "stimulus" that has proven the real gift horse -- a behemoth that has allowed Democrats to speed up the takeover of health care under cover of an economic crisis. They initially claimed, for instance, the "stimulus" would provide Medicaid money to states struggling to pay existing bills. What in fact it does is dramatically expand the number of Americans who qualify for Medicaid.

Under "stimulus," Medicaid is now on offer not to just poor Americans, but Americans who have lost their jobs. And not just Americans who have lost their jobs, but their spouses and their children. And not Americans who recently lost their jobs, but those who lost jobs, say, early last year. And not just Americans who already lost their jobs, but those who will lose their jobs up to 2011. The federal government is graciously footing the whole bill. The legislation also forbids states to apply income tests in most cases.

House Democrat Henry Waxman was so thrilled by this blowout, it was left to Republicans to remind him that the very banking millionaires he dragged to the Hill last year for a grilling would now qualify for government aid. His response? A GOP proposal to limit subsidies to Americans with incomes under $1 million was accepted during markup, but had disappeared by final passage. In this new health-care nirvana, even the rich are welcome. CBO estimates? An additional 1.2 million on the federal Medicaid dime in 2009.

The "stimulus" also hijacks Cobra, a program that lets the unemployed retain access to their former company health benefits -- usually for about 18 months. The new stimulus permits any former employee over the age of 55 to keep using Cobra right up until they qualify for Medicare at age 65. And here's the kicker: Whereas employees were previously responsible for paying their health premiums while on Cobra, now the feds will pay 65%. CBO estimates? Seven million Americans will have the feds mostly pay their insurance bills in 2009.

The bill even takes a whack at the private market. Under the guise of money for "health technology," the legislation makes the government the national coordinator for electronic health records, able to certify what platforms are acceptable. This is an attempt to squelch a growing private market that is competing to improve transparency and let consumers compare providers and costs. In liberal-world, only government should be publishing (and setting) health-care prices.

Add it up, and Democrats may move 10 million more Americans under the federal health umbrella -- in just four weeks! Good luck ever cutting off that money. Meanwhile, the Democratic majority is gearing up for a Medicare fight, where it may broach plans to lower the eligibility age to 55. Whatever costs accrue, they'll pay for by slashing the private Medicare Advantage option.

Mr. Obama will, of course, offer his health-care reform at some point. But he's clearly happy to get what he can, when he can. Despite talk of entitlement reform, he's voiced no disapproval of this vast new health-care grab. And don't forget he chose Mr. Daschle, who appreciates stealth himself. In his 2008 book outlining his health-care reform, he offers his party two pieces of political advice: Move fast, before there can be a public debate, and write as vague a bill as possible.

Guiding all of this is the left's hope that by the time America wakes up to what's happening, it'll be too late. Democrats might be on to something.

Source

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Attack of the Gaffs

So, apparently Mr. Obama tried to walk through a window at the White House this afternoon. How many times do you think you are going to see that on TV? My guess is a few to none. Every time George Bush stumbled it was the lead story on every major network and the lead Saturday Night Live skit.

Here's a link to the story...

Obama is Co-Opting Political Analyists

Politico is reporting that Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is holding daily conference calls with three prominent political analysts who appear regularly as 'independent' commentators for various news outlets' political coverage. The three willing accomplices, James Carville, Paul Begala, and George Stephanopoulos all have regular gigs on main stream news channels. James Carville is a frequent guest on CNN’s Situation Room, Paul Begala also appears regularly on CNN, and George Stephanopoulos is the hose of ABC's "This Week". None of these so-called independent analysts have disclosed the fact that they are receiving their daily talking points directly from the Obama administration.

One would like to think that the mass media would be outraged at this conflict of interest. However, I guess that conflict of interest rules only apply during Republican administrations. It wasn't too long ago that the New York Times got all twitterpaited when it found out that the Pentagon was holding special briefings for media analysts. I guess the moral is, a media that is beholden to the Democrats is no longer on the side of the people. You have to take everything with a grain (or a whole shaker) of salt these days.


Power, politics, gossip on daily call

The conversations don’t begin with hello. They don’t end with goodbye. Most often they pick up with a low, drawling voice uttering something between a sentence and a grunt.

“Wahzgoanawn?”

For those accustomed to hearing James Carville only when he is trying to enunciate more clearly for television, that translates to: "What's going on?"

So begins another morning in what may count as Washington’s longest-running conversation — a street-corner bull session between four old friends who suddenly find themselves standing once more at the busiest intersection of politics and media in Washington.

Carville calls White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

Emanuel calls ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos.

A bit later, CNN commentator Paul Begala, who is not quite the early bird that his friends are, will complete the circle with a rapid set of calls to all three.

Different versions of this round-robin chatter have been taking place, with few interruptions, every workday for nearly a generation.

“I refer to it as the 17-year-long conference call,” said Emanuel, who starts calling his friends at 6 a.m. “You can tap into it anytime you want.”

Everyone likes to deride the “conventional wisdom.” In fairness, though, the wisdom is not yet conventional at the moment it is hatched.

And in any given news cycle, it is quite likely that Washington’s prevailing political and media interpretation — at least on the Democratic side — is being hatched on these calls.

The process happens not by design but as the byproduct of pre-dawn badinage — a smart-set take on the world that gets amplified by the prominent platforms all of them hold and by the dozens of later calls and lunches and rants that they will carry on with others throughout the day.

In that sense, the morning calls — no single one of which usually lasts more than a few minutes — among this gang of four is the headwaters of at least one major tributary of Washington politics.

Under other circumstances, the morning calls between Emanuel, Carville, Stephanopoulos and Begala — pollster Stan Greenberg is another frequent member of the core group, a kind of “fifth Beatle” — might be a Society of Has-Beens, reliving ancient glories from the Little Rock “War Room.”

It was Emanuel’s ascension into Barack Obama’s inner circle — even as Carville and Begala remained closely linked with the defeated Clinton political machine — that saved the group from irrelevance.

The calls “are about what’s happening, what the implications are of what’s happening and what’s going on,” said Emanuel.

Mary Matalin, who as Carville’s wife has overheard probably thousands of the group’s calls, describes the conversation as more profane, more sports-centric versions of a knitting club.

“They talk like they are girls,” she said. “The conversations start in the middle and they end in the middle, and if they talk at night, they’ll start in the morning with no break in the flow.”

“To me, the first purpose is friendship,” said Matalin, “and the second purpose is information-sharing.”

According to Begala, the expectation of a daily call is so great that Emanuel will sometimes call him and shout impatiently, “I can’t talk right now!” and then hang up.

While the rapid succession of conversations creates the effect of a single conference call, that is not actually the case. Carville described himself as an antediluvian who does not do e-mail or own a BlackBerry and has been on only a few actual conference calls.

But he said he has come to rely on the calls as his daily fixture.

When one of the callers is traveling, he says, his reaction is, “Where’s my coffee, where’s my glasses ... Goddamn, where you been?”

Begala offers the most academic interpretation of the calls and their daily survey of political news.

Emanuel is the most likely to be talking policy, usually some program Democrats can use to score points in the daily partisan brawl with Republicans.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Fight the FOCA

This is a little off the usual topic, but I want to encourage all my readers to write their Senators and Representative to register their opposition to the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act". This act would be a disaster for human rights in the US, and would force organizations with moral objections to perform abortions, prevent the states from enacting any common sense restrictions on abortion (like parental notification requirements when minors seek abortions). This site has more information about the bill and what its effects would be.

This past Sunday, Parishes within the Camden Diocese gave out post cards for parishioners to send to their senators and representative explaining the horrible consequences of the act, and requesting that they vote no on the bill. I took the liberty of typing the letters into Microsoft Word format for anyone interested in writing their congresspersons.

Instructions:

Click on each link and select the 'Open With Microsoft Word' option, fill in your information, the name of your representative or senators, and then mail the letter to the address listed on the letter. Everyone can send 3 letters; one each to the two state senators, and one to your Representative

Senator Letter


Representative Letter

Monday, January 26, 2009

Is Obama Closer to the Blago Mess Than First Reported?

Obama and his friends in the media have been trying to keep the president safely separated from the Blagojevich mess. Unfortunately for Obama, the proposition that the US Senator from Illinois wouldn't have any contact with the Governor from his state doesn't pass the smell test. NBC is reporting that subpoenas from Hot Rod's case are starting to hit dangerously close to home for BHO.

The question is now, will Obama be slick enough to take a page from the Clinton handbook and force his aids and friends to fall on their swords for him, or will he have to take the heat himself?



OMG! They're goin' steady!


Top Obama Aides Subject of Blago Subpoenas



Sweeping federal subpoenas of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's administration include requests for records involving David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett, senior advisers to President Barack Obama.

Among 43 subpoenas released by the Blagojevich administration Friday, one from Dec. 8 seeks notes, calendars, correspondence and any other data that relate to Axelrod, Jarrett and 32 other people and organizations.

That was the day before the FBI arrested Blagojevich, a two-term Democrat, on charges that he tried to trade his appointment to replace Obama in the Senate for campaign contributions. Wiretapped conversations show Blagojevich thought Jarrett was interested in the seat and he wanted campaign money or a high-paying job in return, according to a sworn statement.

Obama's staff released a report in December that said his staff had no inappropriate contact with the governor's office about the Senate seat, nor was anyone aware of any dealmaking. Axelrod, a Chicago political strategist now in the White House, was not mentioned in the report.

Prosecutors have said Obama is not implicated in the case, and none of his advisers has been accused of wrongdoing. Aides to the president did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Others listed on the subpoena are people linked to the 76-page criminal complaint against Blagojevich, which does not identify anyone by name except the governor and his former chief of staff, John Harris, arrested the same day.

They include first lady Patricia Blagojevich and her former employer, River Realty; former Blagojevich aides Lon Monk, John Wyma, Christopher Kelly and Doug Scofield; his brother and campaign manager Robert Blagojevich; Chicago Tribune owner Sam Zell; and Tom Balanoff, Illinois director of the Service Employees International Union.

The federal complaint charges Blagojevich with trying to pressure the Tribune into firing unfriendly editorial writers and seeking a six-figure job with an activist group affiliated with SEIU. Prosecutors say he also discussed a better job for his wife.

Dec. 11 subpoenas to the Capital Development Board and Transportation Department requested contract-bidding documents and other information on 22 engineering firms and individuals. They include a company whose president hosted a Nov. 10 fundraiser for Blagojevich that brought in $60,000 as prosecutors claim the governor sought to cash in on Illinois Tollway construction.

The Illinois House impeached Blagojevich earlier this month. A Senate trial over his ouster starts Monday, and Blagojevich said Friday that he will not participate because he believes the process is unfair.

The 43 subpoenas released Friday under the Freedom of Information Act, plus seven previously disclosed, cut a wide swath through the beleaguered administration, demanding everything from complex hiring records to Patricia Blagojevich's appointment calendar.

Blagojevich acknowledged in fall 2005 that his office and several cabinet agencies had received subpoenas seeking hiring records, but then he stopped talking about them.

The Better Government Association, a Chicago-based public watchdog group, fought a two-year lawsuit over release of the subpoenas, which it won late last month when Blagojevich's office turned over five subpoenas BGA sought under FOIA.

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into Blagojevich hiring practices was reported as early as 2005 and a Fitzgerald letter was released in June 2006 that indicated he had witnesses to "endemic hiring fraud."

But the investigation appears to have heated up again in 2007.

Since February 2007, 22 federal subpoenas have arrived at the governor's office. They include requests to four state agencies for contract information involving Ali Ata. Ata is the one-time Illinois Finance Authority director who testified last spring in federal court that Blagojevich was present when he turned over a $25,000 check to Blagojevich fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko, then asked Rezko if he had discussed a state job with Ata.

Rezko was convicted in the case of 16 counts of fraud, aiding bribery and money laundering in trying to get Blagojevich campaign contributions from companies seeking state business. Ata's allegation that he bought his job is part of the federal complaint filed last month.

The government also has demanded information on Blagojevich appointments to boards and commissions and documents that show "favors, official action or any other benefit" promised to people who were potential donors and records related to anyone who contributed $25,000 or more to his campaign.

Other subpoenas requested all appointment calendars kept by the governor and first lady, paychecks issued to the governor, and air travel records for Blagojevich and his bodyguards. The governor has been criticized for his frequent use of state aircraft for daily round trips between his Chicago home and Springfield's state Capitol.

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/blagojevich-subpoena-012309.html

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Once A Terrorist, Always A Terrorist

Looks like at least two of the the prisoners already released from Guantanamo have returned to their lives of jihad. So much for the Democrat line parroted by the American Press that these are just poor misunderstood souls.

Prediction: the first time that an ex-Guantanamo inmate kills an American, Obama apologists and the New York Times will react by saying, "He was a nice, peace loving guy, but George Bush MADE him into a terrorist by torturing him and denying his due process rights."

In terrorist circles I guarantee this is playing out as "The US doesn't have any balls, now we can strike with impunity!" instead of "Wow, that Obama is a swell chap, gives people due process and all that, maybe we should play nice from now on!"


Two ex-Guantanamo inmates appear in Al-Qaeda video

WASHINGTON (AFP) — Two men released from the US "war on terror" prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba have appeared in a video posted on a jihadist website, the SITE monitoring service reported.

One of the two former inmates, a Saudi man identified as Abu Sufyan al-Azdi al-Shahri, or prisoner number 372, has been elevated to the senior ranks of Al-Qaeda in Yemen, a US counter-terrorism official told AFP.

Three other men appear in the video, including Abu al-Hareth Muhammad al-Oufi, identified as an Al-Qaeda field commander. SITE later said he was prisoner No. 333.

A Pentagon spokesman, Commander Jeffrey Gordon, on Saturday declined to confirm the SITE information.

"We remain concerned about ex-Guantanamo detainees who have re-affiliated with terrorist organizations after their departure," said Gordon.

"We will continue to work with the international community to mitigate the threat they pose," he said.

On the video, al-Shihri is seen sitting with three other men before a flag of the Islamic State of Iraq, the front for Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

"By Allah, imprisonment only increased our persistence in our principles for which we went out, did jihad for, and were imprisoned for," al-Shihri was quoted as saying.

Al-Shiri was transferred from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia in 2007, the US counter-terrorism official said.

The other men in the video are identified as Commander Abu Baseer al-Wahayshi and Abu Hureira Qasm al-Rimi (also known as Abu Hureira al-Sana'ani).

The Defense Department has said as many as 61 former Guantanamo detainees -- about 11 percent of 520 detainees transferred from the detention center and released -- are believed to have returned to the fight.

The latest case highlights the risk the new US administration faces as it moves to empty Guantanamo of its remaining 245 prisoners and close the controversial detention camp within a year.


Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hZfIcWnHqBz4kQR90lC_pXaHeW4Q

Saturday, January 24, 2009

The Vatican is Not Happy With Obama's First Days in Office

The US Media may think that Obama can walk on water, but representatives of the Vicar of Christ beg to differ, accusing him of arrogance in lifting the ban on federal funding of international abortion programs.


Vatican official accuses Obama of 'arrogance'

A senior Vatican official on Saturday attacked US President Barack Obama for "arrogance" for overturning a ban on state funding for family-planning groups that carry out or facilitate abortions overseas.

It is "the arrogance of someone who believes they are right, in signing a decree which will open the door to abortion and thus to the destruction of human life," Archbishop Rino Fisichella was quoted as saying by the Corriere della Sera daily.

Fisichella is president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, one of a number of so-called pontifical academies which are formed by or under the direction of the Holy See.

"What is important is to know how to listen... without locking oneself into ideological visions with the arrogance of a person who, having the power, thinks they can decide on life and death," he added.

Obama signed the executive order cancelling the eight-year-old restrictions on Friday, the third full day of his presidency.

The so-called "global gag rule" cut off US funding to overseas family planning clinics which provide any abortion services whatsoever, from the operation itself to counselling, referrals or post-abortion services.

"If this is one of the first acts of President Obama, with all due respect, it seems to me that the path towards disappointment will have been very short," Fisichella said.

"I do not believe that those who voted for him took into consideration ethical themes, which were astutely left aside during the election debate. The majority of the American population does not take the same position as the president and his team," he added.

The order won Obama praise from Democratic lawmakers, family planning and women's rights groups but drew angry condemnation from pro-life organisations and Republicans.

More than 250 health and human rights organisations from around the world sent Obama a letter, thanking him for ending a policy "which has contributed to the deaths and injuries of countless women and girls."

Source: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.ae20b64499f4af8b4c9bf8793c4ba754.341&show_article=1

Obama Seeks to Control GOP Strategy

The New York post is reporting that Obama has told GOP leaders that if they want to get things done, they should stop listening to Rush Limbaugh. As appeasing as much of the GOP in congress has been to the Democrats lately I'm certain that there are a few RINO's that are going to follow the anointed one's command verbatim, but I really hope they realize that letting your adversary set your strategy is not a long-term plan for success.

Part of me thinks that this is the first salvo in trying to push through the fairness doctrine. E.g. "The GOP are listening too much to right-wing radio, so they are opposing our enlightened projects. Therefore, we need to effectively outlaw talk radio via the fairness doctrine 'for the good of the country'."

PREZ ZINGS GOP FOE IN A $TIMULATING TALK

By CHARLES HURT, BUREAU CHIEF


WASHINGTON -- President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts.

"There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats," the official said. "We shouldn't let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done."

That wasn't Obama's only jab at Republicans today.

In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting.

"I will trump you on that."

Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers.

"We are experiencing an unprecedented economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly," Obama said during the meeting.

Republicans say the $825 billion price tag is too big a burden for a nation crippled by debt and that it doesn't do enough to stimulate the economy by cutting taxes.

"You know, I'm concerned about the size of the package. And I'm concerned about some of the spending that's in there, [about] ... how you can spend hundreds of millions on contraceptives," House GOP Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) later said.

"How does that stimulate the economy?"

But White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs countered: "There was a lot of agreement in that room about the notion that we're facing an economic crisis unlike we've seen in quite some time ... that we must act quickly to stimulate the economy, create jobs, put money back in people's pockets."

Gibbs disagreed with those who called the meeting window dressing.

"The president is certainly going to listen to any ideas," he said.

"He will also go to Capitol Hill the beginning of next week to talk to Republican caucuses and solicit their input and their ideas."

Source: http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timulating_talk_151572.htm

Friday, January 23, 2009

Obama Following in Chicago Tradition of Pay-to-Play

Politico is reporting that the White House press corps is getting visibly frustrated over lack of access to the goings-on during President Obama's first days in office. That frustration was not shared by people who made fat multi-million dollar donations to Obama's inauguration, because they don't seem to have any trouble getting near the president. I guess the Chicago tradition of pay-to-play has made its mark on Mr. Obama, even though he claimed to be above it all.

Media frustration spills into briefing
By: Michael Calderone 1/22/09 6:52 PM EST


A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.

Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.

He also asked new press secretary Robert Gibbs why ABC, which paid millions to host the DC Neighborhood Ball, was granted the only inauguration day interview with President Obama – a move he equated to “pay to play.”

“We have a tradition here of covering the president,” said Plante, who is covering his fourth administration.

Gibbs defended the White House’s moves, insisting aides acted in a “way that was upfront and transparent” in allowing the standard pool into the swearing-in. And Obama himself seemed mindful of making a good impression, paying a surprise visit to the White House pressroom a few hours after the briefing.

It’s been a bumpy 24 hours for Gibbs and company, as members of the White House press corps have publicly expressed frustration with an administration promising openness and transparency.

At the same time, some members of the Obama administration’s press team have signaled that they plan to shake up some of the old traditions of White House coverage, some of the longest-standing – and most jealously guarded – in town.

In recent weeks, New York Times editors complained that its White House team hadn’t gotten a sit-down with Obama during the transition, breaking an unofficial tradition whereby recent president-elects have free-wheeling exchanges with the Gray Lady before the inauguration.
In the case of the second swearing-in, however, it seemed to give reporters a chance to lay down an early marker on questioning whether Obama would live up to one of his key campaign pledges, at least when it comes to the media.

“It is ironic, the same day that the president is talking about transparency, we were not let in,” CNN’s Ed Henry said on the air Wednesday night after news of the second swearing-in broke.

Henry’s main gripe was that television reporters weren’t permitted to cover a historic moment, when Obama once again raised his right hand and took the oath before Justice John Roberts. The only images came from White House photographer Pete Souza.

Three wire services — The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse – refused to move those images, in protest of the White House’s handling of the event.

The wire services’ photographers were also denied access to photograph Obama sitting in the Oval Office on the first day, and similarly refused to move the White House approved photos.

Michael Oreskes, the AP’s managing editor for U.S. news, told his own news outlet that “we are not distributing what are, in effect, visual press releases.”

Later, in a statement to Politico, Oreskes said that the AP believes “access for news photographers has been a time-honored tradition at the White House through many administrations and needs to be continued.”

“We are working diligently with the White House staff to ensure this access,” he added.

Jennifer Loven, the AP’s White House correspondent and president of the White House Correspondents' Association, said she and the group's board "are addressing this aggressively with the White House—our strong objections to both the issue of them releasing photo handouts from events that the press should be able to cover, and the issue of how the pool was structured last night."

Providing access is probably the easiest ways to appease the White House press corps, which feeds on it. So by not allowing the three wire services in the Oval Office for day one—a ritual that typically yields flattering shots of a new president writing at his desk or chatting with aides—the press team picked a fight that could have been avoided.

But those weren’t the only issues of access to come up in Thursday’s roughly 50-minute briefing.

Before Gibbs took the podium, reporters were given a background briefing under an agreement to only attribute information to “senior administration officials”—a policy some news organizations object to as a matter of policy.

But when Gibbs let slip the name of one briefer, Greg Craig, a couple times, The Wall Street Journal’s Jonathan Weisman asked, “Are we allowed to repeat that name?”

During the earliest days of the Clinton administration, such abrupt changes in the traditional press access were often met with harsh criticism from the briefing room pack, most notably, the blocking off of access to the office of then press secretary George Stephanopoulos.

Former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers, who succeeded Stephanopoulos, said in PBS’s “The Clinton Years” that the move “made the press very angry because they lost access to a part of the building that they had had access to.”

“And it didn't serve us,” she continued. “And it was stupid and didn't last very long. I can't remember when the decision was made and the door was finally reopened but it was a complete waste of energy. It alienated people for no purpose. It served nothing. It served no one. And it was a rookie, rookie mistake.”

Myers said Thursday that the Obama team’s decision to bar widespread access to the re-do of the oath wasn’t in the same category as shutting access to the press office, but wouldn’t help in relations with the media.

“I think not letting video, that’s a bit of a rookie mistake,” Myers said, adding that “when you can, it’s better to err on the side of inclusiveness with the press.”

On balance however, she said of Obama’s press team, “I think generally speaking they’re doing very well so far,” said Myers.

There have been a handful of rocky moments so far. Some press staffers found their name cards misspelled on Wednesday and phone lines weren’t properly hooked up. Reporters trying to reach the press staff got emails bounced back.

Also, press aides informed reporters that the doors of the lower press office will be locked until 8:30 am, an inconvenience for those on the early shift. Following a USA Today blog item, there was confusion about whether the Whitehouse.gov site would regularly publish pool reports since there was a “pool report” link on the site. And in the hours before Gibbs’ briefing, the northwest gate of the White House started running out of temporary passes.

Now, given the expected learning curve, most of these wrinkles should be ironed out in time. But on broader issues of access, it remains to be seen if the Obama press team is making rookie mistakes, or simply asserting a new protocol, not bound to past traditions that White House reporters have grown accustomed to. While the press corps balks at changes in access, these rules aren’t written in stone. It may chafe veterans of the briefing room, but it’s the administration’s prerogative on such matters.

Of course, the media landscape has changed significantly over the 16 years, and getting one’s message across through establishment media isn’t the only option for the new administration.

The Obama campaign proved that one could skirt around the mainstream media at times, whether by blasting out text messages to millions of supporters (the Biden pick), or leaking to select news outlets and blogs as a means of getting out the day’s talking points out.

But even if the press team is keeping reporters and photographers at bay, perhaps the President will draw them a bit closer.

After Obama signed an executive order Thursday morning to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay within a year, “press office staffers began to shoo the pool out the door, and the camera lights were dimmed,” wrote Scripps Howard’s Bartholomew Sullivan in a pool report.

However, Obama stopped the reporter from being ushered out, saying, “there are three of these.” The lights came back on.

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17833.html

White House Transparancy: Clear as Mud

The Washington Times is reporting that Obama's new era of openness and transparency is getting off to a rocky start...

Obama press aide gets bashed in debut
By: Joseph Curl

The White House press operation got off to a fumbling and stumbling start Thursday, with the day's opening briefers insisting on being identified only as "senior administration officials," followed swiftly by the new president's spokesman accidently outing one of the secret aides less than two minutes into his first White House briefing.

Although President Obama swept into office pledging transparency and a new air of openness, the press hammered spokesman Robert Gibbs for nearly an hour over a slate of perceived secretive slights that have piled up quickly for the new administration. It wasn't pretty.

"Why did the administration believe it was important for the American people not to know the name of the two senior administration officials who briefed us this morning on Guantanamo?" one reporter asked in the packed and steaming hot briefing room just off the White House West Wing.

"I hope that you all found the exercise that we did this morning helpful," Mr. Gibbs offered helpfully.


"Do you know," the reporter followed, "that you've used ... one of those senior officials' first names several times in this briefing?" A very long pause ensued.

"I do," the spokesman said, his cornflower-colored tie suddenly looking a bit too tight. "Are we allowed to repeat that name?" Mr. Gibbs answered by citing as precedent of Brazilian soccer stars being known only by a single name - sure to one day be a classic White House non-answer.

Then it got uglier.

"How is it transparent," another reporter asked, "when you control the only image of the re-swearing - there's nobody in there but four print reporters, there's no stills, there's no television? And the only recording that comes out, as I understand it, is one that a reporter made, not one that the White House supplied."

"Let me take your questions separately there," Mr. Gibbs began. "Well, we'd have had to get a big room," he finally posited with a smile.

"You could have had more than four in the pool," one reporter said. "Could have had a pool!" shouted another. "The whole pool!" spat a third. "We have a tradition here of covering the president!" yelled a fourth.

And so it went at the first official White House briefing of the new Obama administration - a fiery back and forth dispelling the notion that journalists would go easy on the guy that many reports show it went easy on during the marathon primary and general election campaigns.

Halfway through the interrogation, a reporter asked succinctly: "Is the honeymoon over already?"

A smiling Mr. Gibbs answered with sublime brevity: "I should ask you that."

The warmish winter day began with heated objections from the White House press corps. Before a "background briefing" to help reporters understand Mr. Obama's complex executive order on the detention of enemy combatants in Guantanamo Bay, junior press aide Josh Earnest said "for your stories, they should be attributed to 'senior administration officials.' "

When an objection came from Jennifer Loven of the Associated Press, president of the White House Correspondents' Association, Mr. Earnest said earnestly: "It's not necessarily a precedent-setting decision, but it's a decision that we think will work best."

That set the mood for Mr. Gibbs' debut. After a session over the secret briefers, reporters moved to the debacle of the second swearing-in ceremony Mr. Obama undertook in the Oval Office on Wednesday evening. During a barrage of questions, the press secretary said eight times that the second oath of office was decided upon only out of "an abundance of caution," leaving the phrase alone only after reporters cackled at its last utterance.

Still, throughout the day's session, Mr. Gibbs was in control - affable, smiling often, answering questions in a slow, measured, slightly Southern drawl, joking with reporters who had covered Mr. Obama on the campaign trail. But he made clear who he works for: Over and over, he began his answers with "the president believes" and at least once said, "I just want to reiterate what the president said throughout the campaign and the transition."

On the creation of a new White House panel to recommend action on Guantanamo, he said: "I don't want to get ahead of the recommendations." In answer to one specific question, he said: "I don't have anything specifically." Asked the bottom line on another topic, he said it's "an ongoing discussion, ongoing planning process." When a reporter used the word "if" in a question, the new spokesman dismissed the query as "hypothetical," just as all four Bush spokesman had done before him.

And like many of his predecessors, he had his oddly unintelligible moments. Asked whether Mr. Obama should "lead by example," Mr. Gibbs said: "We'll check on that."

On more pointed questions, such as whether Osama bin Laden would be aggressively interrogated if captured, Mr. Gibbs dodged altogether: "Let me get some guidance from [White House Counsel] Greg [Craig] and members of the [National Security Council]."

"Is it fair for me then to conclude that it is an open question?" the reporter asked.

"No, it's fair for you to conclude that I want to make sure I don't make a mistake," Mr. Gibbs said to laughter.

With that, he was off. But he had a parting idea for the heaving throng of reporters. "We should sell tickets and have the money go to the deficit or something," he said before heading for the door, shouting over his shoulder, "See you tomorrow."

Source: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/23/obama-spokesmans-debut-marked-by-discord/