President Obama

[Y. Shulamith]

Because Johnathon Pollard was spying....it doesn't matter for who. He's lucky. There were a couple (literally) executed for the same offense. Now he's got Bubba to keep him warm at night and maybe the next spy will think twice, or three times. And don't tell me that in either case they did it out of human concern....all were in it for the money. By the way, they were all libs and democrats. Let me give you my lecture about the "copperheads" and why I thought the Obama/Lincoln love fest the MSM was putting out was so funny some time.


Let us not ever allow truth to obfuscate the emotional toll that this takes upon Jews and Israel. Spying on behalf of Israel is something of a higher order and Jonathan Pollard is a man who did no harm to the USA and helped to protect Israel, for money or not, is not the question....his spying put the USA in no danger and was of import for Israel.

If we cannot stand by our compadres, regardless of what the technicalities of their travesties were, how can we count on the USA to go to bat for the hapless Israeli spy?

With friends like that, who needs enemies. Free Jonathan Pollard!!!!
:D

[Y. Shulamith]

So, yer bringing the wine then? Good. Our dear Moshe won't come without I hear. One can disagree but still be civilized, don't you think?

A glass of Mogen David for all *to our respective healths*...

[takeo]

Democrats have always been deemed "weak" by the sharks abroad. They are always tested, and more often than not, like Carter and LBJ they fail.


Further Russian action in Georgia
Possible Russian driven cessation/civil war in Ukraine and Moldova
Agitation of Armenia/Azerbaijan by combined Russian/Iranian mechanizations.
Further expansion of aggressive anti US socialism in Latin America, funded by Russia supported by Iran and China.
Emboldening of Chinese foreign policy in the sea of Japan and elsewhere
Full on infiltration of Iraq by Iran, and then with the US pullout, all out civil war that will claim millions of lives.
Another war with Israel, possibly involving Syria and Iran.
Testing and possibly using Nuclear ordinance by Iran
collapse of NATO


This is just foreign policy, internally the economics will be pretty bad too, just on trends and socialism is no fix for any of it. Obama will racialise the internal debate to a great extent as well.

And what did Bush accomplish?

1) Russia invaded Georgia, cut energy supplies to Ukraine. Nothing Bush could do about it. The US lost all influence in the former Soviet-Central-Asia and had to close its bases in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. Russia became more anti-American than ever, cold war is back. It supports now, like in the old times, anti-American regimes all over the world. This is largely the result of the US ignoring Russian interests systematically, installing rockets near its border, etc.

2) Bush-administration openly offended his European allies in 2003, because they refused to go along in his Iraq-madness. This disrupted transatlantic cooperationmore than ever before during history. Relations were at an all-time low. During his second term, as a result of catastrophic war in Iraq and economic decline in the US, he reversed his failed policy and once again increased cooperation with Europe. Still some consequences stay on. Most people in Europe, even on the right, are now convinced it is unwise to rely too much on the US. And very few European politicians openly dared to support Bush during the last years. According to polls, a majority of Europeans think of the US as one of the greatest dangers to worldpeace. That certainly wasn't the case 10 years ago...




3) "Further expansion of aggressive anti US socialism in Latin America, funded by Russia supported by Iran and China."
It didn't happen under any democratic administration, but during the last 8 years. Most of the region became leftist. (Ecuador, Brazil, Nicaragua, Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, etc.) One of the reasons was an aggressive interventionist US-policy. For example the US was the only country in the world to support the failed military coup in Venezuela.

4) China's sphere of influence rapidly expanded, not only in Asia but equally in Africa, during the last 8 years. Most Chinese, as Russians, are convinced that the US wants to damage them.


5) His Iraq-policy was a complete mess, which costed many billions of dollars but didn't achieve anything except islamisation of Iraq. It also seriously damaged credibility and image of the US worldwide, perhaps even more than the Vietnam-war in the 70's. No American president has ever been as impopular worldwide as G. W. Bush. In Europe callign someone "Bush" will be taken as an insult, akin to calling someone "Hitler" or "Saddam". Us lost all its "soft power".
By alienating the entire muslim world as a result of his unilateral support for Israel and his Iraq-policy, US lost a lot of influence in this region as well.

6) There was no progress whatsoever in the peace-proces during 8 years. Bush did nothing to revive the peace-proces.

7) As a result of US-invasion of Iraq, Iran got a new ally in the region and seriously extended its influence. Since the Iraq-failure, threats to Iran are just empty words, as everyone knows a second invasion in the Middle East is impossible.

8) The war in Afghanistan is going nowhere. One of the reasons is the Bush-administration taking resources and troops to conduct an unnecessary war in Iraq instead of Afghanistan.

9) Because of Guantanamo and other incidents, the US can no longer claim it is the representative and big defender of human rights, freedom and democracy. As I said the US lost all its "soft power". (and it was exactlt that "soft power", not any military intervention, which helped to end communism in Eastern Europe)



etcetera etcetera

I think Bush did a good job, the US has never lost as much influence in a short time as during the last 8 years. It seems this is going to change. Obama is very popular worldwide, and he has the necessary goodwill and conviction force to change things. Since he has a celebrity status in Europe he can achieve a lot Bush could never achieve concerning European cooperation in different matters, such as Afghanistan. Already relations with Russia have been restored just yesterday. The moment Obama got elected Russia decided to rethink its decision to place nuclear rockets in Kaliningrad or Belarus, pointed towards the West.
I think things are going to change in Cuba as well. Obama is very popular there, on the contrary to Bush, and if he proposes to end the embargo in return for some liberalisations, this might seriously undermine the regime there. If they refuse, it will only make them more impopular and isolated in Cuba and worldwide, if they accept, it will be much more difficult to controll Cuban society.

[maven]

Here is the more important question:
are ye coming to the party still?:scratch:Any drugs? :unsure:

[maven]

And what did Bush accomplish?

5) His Iraq-policy was a complete mess, which costed many billions of dollars but didn't achieve anything except islamisation of Iraq. It also seriously damaged credibility and image of the US worldwide, perhaps even more than the Vietnam-war in the 70's. No American president has ever been as impopular worldwide as G. W. Bush. In Europe callign someone "Bush" will be taken as an insult, akin to calling someone "Hitler" or "Saddam". Us lost all its "soft power".
By alienating the entire muslim world as a result of his unilateral support for Israel and his Iraq-policy, US lost a lot of influence in this region as well.

6) There was no progress whatsoever in the peace-proces during 8 years. Bush did nothing to revive the peace-proces.

7) As a result of US-invasion of Iraq, Iran got a new ally in the region and seriously extended its influence. Since the Iraq-failure, threats to Iran are just empty words, as everyone knows a second invasion in the Middle East is impossible.

8) The war in Afghanistan is going nowhere. One of the reasons is the Bush-administration taking resources and troops to conduct an unnecessary war in Iraq instead of Afghanistan.

.Lots of baloney there methinks. But Iraq is a success, a major defeat for Islamism. Afghanistan was a necessity. Israel dragged on the peace process not Bush, and once Hamas took over Gaza it was over anyway....unless three brave souls went in and destroyed Hamas power in Gaza in order to facilitate the PA taking it back. Unfortunatly three brave souls were not available.

"Alienating the Muslim world!" Is the pope a Catholic? Who cares about credibility? when did the US ever have credability with Europe and S. America? Che Guavara had credability, Karl Marx had credibility, Noam Chumpsky had credability, the Marx brothers had credibility.

Those lefty, commie bozos have never respected the US.

As to the rise of Iran under the mullocrats there is an old Chinese saying I just invented that goes "In a polluted pond the scum eventually rises to the surface."

Pass me the disenfectant gun.

[Madeline]

Any drugs? :unsure:

:cool: What I don't know....

[Madeline]

May I ask esp. our British members to comment on this?


Victims Of Socialism

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, March 06, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Deadly Rationing: The gatekeeper for Great Britain's national health care system is denying cancer patients drugs that would extend their lives. Why? Because the medication is considered too expensive.

Read More: Health Care | Europe & Central Asia

What's a life worth? Apparently not much in Great Britain.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the government agency that decides which treatments the National Health Service will pay for, has effectively banned Lapatinib, a drug that was shown to slow the progression of breast cancer, and Sutent, which is the only medicine that can prolong the lives of some stomach cancer patients.

Banning beneficial drugs due to cost is nothing new in Britain. NICE, which has to be one of history's most ironic acronyms, forbade the use of Tarceva, a lung cancer drug proven to extend patients' lives, and Abatacept, even though it's one of the only drugs that has been shown in clinical testing to improve severe rheumatoid arthritis.

Once again, we have to ask: Do we really want to use the British system as the model for a U.S. health care regime?

Promises of an effective, cost-effective health care system operated by the federal government are cruel fabrications. The British system shows that the state makes a mess of health care. So does the Canadian plan, which is plagued with unhealthy and often deadly waiting times for treatment.

The Swedish government system is no better. It also refuses to provide some expensive medication and, inhumanely, refuses to let patients buy the drugs themselves. Why? According to a Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons article, bureaucrats believe doing so "would set a bad precedent and lead to unequal access to medicine."more....
healthcare (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=321237613527130)

[maven]

May I ask esp. our British members to comment on this?


Victims Of Socialism

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, March 06, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Deadly Rationing: The gatekeeper for Great Britain's national health care system is denying cancer patients drugs that would extend their lives. Why? Because the medication is considered too expensive.

Read More: Health Care | Europe & Central Asia

What's a life worth? Apparently not much in Great Britain.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the government agency that decides which treatments the National Health Service will pay for, has effectively banned Lapatinib, a drug that was shown to slow the progression of breast cancer, and Sutent, which is the only medicine that can prolong the lives of some stomach cancer patients.

Banning beneficial drugs due to cost is nothing new in Britain. NICE, which has to be one of history's most ironic acronyms, forbade the use of Tarceva, a lung cancer drug proven to extend patients' lives, and Abatacept, even though it's one of the only drugs that has been shown in clinical testing to improve severe rheumatoid arthritis.

Once again, we have to ask: Do we really want to use the British system as the model for a U.S. health care regime?

Promises of an effective, cost-effective health care system operated by the federal government are cruel fabrications. The British system shows that the state makes a mess of health care. So does the Canadian plan, which is plagued with unhealthy and often deadly waiting times for treatment.

The Swedish government system is no better. It also refuses to provide some expensive medication and, inhumanely, refuses to let patients buy the drugs themselves. Why? According to a Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons article, bureaucrats believe doing so "would set a bad precedent and lead to unequal access to medicine."more....
healthcare (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=321237613527130)It's paid for out of taxpayers money in hard times and some of these new drugs cost the earth. At least you can get a lot of free healthcare in the UK. If you are poor in the US you would get very little. Im no socialist but I would hardly call a high level of free healthcare, albeit with some exceptions when it comes to highly expensive pioneering treatments victimhood.

[Madeline]

It's paid for out of taxpayers money in hard times and some of these new drugs cost the earth. At least you can get a lot of free healthcare in the UK. If you are poor in the US you would get very little. Im no socialist but I would hardly call a high level of free healthcare, albeit with some exceptions when it comes to highly expensive pioneering treatments victimhood.

So its mostly extremely costly and controversial medicine that is in question?

[maven]

So its mostly extremely costly and controversial medicine that is in question?Only the rarest, most expensive drugs or treatment involved. Usually when the person is going to die anyway but wants to remain long enough to see that last episode of 'Shneigbours'. :unsure:

[Y. Shulamith]

Weak like FDR? Weak like Truman who decided to use the A-bomb? Not all Dems are weak and not all Repubs are not.

Raygun turned yellow and got out of Lebanon after the Marines got bombed so fast that your head would spin AND he gave the idea to OBL that Americans, what with Viet Nam and the goings on in Lebanon were YELLOW. That's how OBL got his ideas of what weaklings the USA were; not anything that the DEMS did. Our fate was sealed with the Lebanon bombing of the Marines.

[bararallu]

Weak like FDR? Weak like Truman who decided to use the A-bomb? Not all Dems are weak and not all Repubs are not.


Truman does not equal FDR by no means. FDR's weakness is one reason that Eastern Europe was preyed upon by the Soviets. Stalin easily sensed that FDR didn't have the heart (nor the head) to stand against soviet aggression (unlike Truman later) and took full advantage of the situation. FDR further delayed US entry into the War in Europe, even though Churchill made an excellent case that the US would be involved anyway. If the Americans entered the war with the Brits and the French on German invasion of Poland, there would be no Holocaust. Germany would have been pretty much wiped out. It's understandable that FDR would have to possibly sacrifice his political career to enter the war at an early stage, but he was not a brave man either.

[Madeline]

Truman does not equal FDR by no means. FDR's weakness is one reason that Eastern Europe was preyed upon by the Soviets. Stalin easily sensed that FDR didn't have the heart (nor the head) to stand against soviet aggression (unlike Truman later) and took full advantage of the situation. FDR further delayed US entry into the War in Europe, even though Churchill made an excellent case that the US would be involved anyway. If the Americans entered the war with the Brits and the French on German invasion of Poland, there would be no Holocaust. Germany would have been pretty much wiped out. It's understandable that FDR would have to possibly sacrifice his political career to enter the war at an early stage, but he was not a brave man either.

Wonderful analysis. I often state that if the US had entered WWII sooner, millions would be alive today...but then, thousands and thousands more would still be alive as well if Papa Bush would have finished the job when he should have.
And yes,:stick:different subject, I guess, so I clonk myself on the head.

[Y. Shulamith]

Truman does not equal FDR by no means. FDR's weakness is one reason that Eastern Europe was preyed upon by the Soviets. Stalin easily sensed that FDR didn't have the heart (nor the head) to stand against soviet aggression (unlike Truman later) and took full advantage of the situation. FDR further delayed US entry into the War in Europe, even though Churchill made an excellent case that the US would be involved anyway. If the Americans entered the war with the Brits and the French on German invasion of Poland, there would be no Holocaust. Germany would have been pretty much wiped out. It's understandable that FDR would have to possibly sacrifice his political career to enter the war at an early stage, but he was not a brave man either.

"IF".....if my aunt had testicles, she'd be my uncle.....

[Yala]

I would never ally myself with losers and dregs of society that the Repubs have come to prepresent and lie with the lowest forms of bigots, zealots and morons.


By posting the above, plus the disgusting things you say about all Muslims, you just prove the point...that you are a bigot. You are also a Democratic zealot, excusing the worst mistakes and crimes the Democrats are making. In your short tenure you have also managed to alienate most of the forum. Mazel tov.

I'm not trying to convert you, I'm just pointing out that the mainstream left is becoming more and more anti-Israel by the minute. Deny it all you want. I really don't care.


You don't speak for American Jews anymore than Limtard does.

And are you the voice of a typical American Jew??? You, who bashes Muslims and Republicans day and night? Don't make me laugh. You are a senior citizen who still thinks the Democratic party was what it was in the 70's. You are clearly stuck in the past and highly delusional.

Besides, I never claimed to be a spokesperson for Jews or claimed I was representative of "American Jews." That would be... delusional. My function on this forum is to defend Israel from the leftists who come here to spread lies about Israel and to preach to Jews.


The majority of Jews take the view that Limtard is nothing more than a low-grade moron bigot.

I don't give a crap about Rush and I don't listen to his show. I said so earlier in numerous posts. You are the only one obsessing over him and that's b/c you blindly follow Obama's agenda and that is to paint Rush as the leader of the Republicans. It's been in every paper and everyone knows about the plan hatched by Carville and Rahmbo. He is no more the head of the Republican party then Keith Olbermann is the head of the Democratic party.

[Madeline]

By posting the above, plus the disgusting things you say about all Muslims, you just prove the point...that you are a bigot. You are also a Democratic zealot, excusing the worst mistakes and crimes the Democrats are making. In your short tenure you have also managed to alienate most of the forum. Mazel tov.

I'm not trying to convert you, I'm just pointing out that the mainstream left is becoming more and more anti-Israel by the minute. Deny it all you want. I really don't care.



And are you the voice of a typical American Jew??? You, who bashes Muslims and Republicans day and night? Don't make me laugh. You are a senior citizen who still thinks the Democratic party was what it was in the 70's. You are clearly stuck in the past and highly delusional.

Besides, I never claimed to be a spokesperson for Jews or claimed I was representative of "American Jews." That would be... delusional. My function on this forum is to defend Israel from the leftists who come here to spread lies about Israel and to preach to Jews.



I don't give a crap about Rush and I don't listen to his show. I said so earlier in numerous posts. You are the only one obsessing over him and that's b/c you blindly follow Obama's agenda and that is to paint Rush as the leader of the Republicans. It's been in every paper and everyone knows about the plan hatched by Carville and Rahmbo. He is no more the head of the Republican party then Keith Olbermann is the head of the Democratic party.

:clap:
Love your avatar

[Steven]

[QUOTE=Yala;295342]By posting the above, plus the disgusting things you say about all Muslims, you just prove the point...that you are a bigot. QUOTE]

Did you see that there are 35 Islamic terrorist camps in the USA?

Did you see all the anti-Israel protests across the West?

Do you see the hatred towards Jews that the MSA is preaching across our college campuses?

Please show me where the "moderate" Muslims are protesting against them.

Islam is the most bigoted ideology on the planet, it clearly preaches hatred towards Jews.

Are black people who speak out against the KKK bigots?

Muslim immigration is destroying Europe and the same thing has started here. Either we end all Muslim immigration or we will lose.

[Y. Shulamith]

By posting the above, plus the disgusting things you say about all Muslims, you just prove the point...that you are a bigot. You are also a Democratic zealot, excusing the worst mistakes and crimes the Democrats are making. In your short tenure you have also managed to alienate most of the forum. Mazel tov.

I'm not trying to convert you, I'm just pointing out that the mainstream left is becoming more and more anti-Israel by the minute. Deny it all you want. I really don't care.



And are you the voice of a typical American Jew??? You, who bashes Muslims and Republicans day and night? Don't make me laugh. You are a senior citizen who still thinks the Democratic party was what it was in the 70's. You are clearly stuck in the past and highly delusional.

Besides, I never claimed to be a spokesperson for Jews or claimed I was representative of "American Jews." That would be... delusional. My function on this forum is to defend Israel from the leftists who come here to spread lies about Israel and to preach to Jews.



I don't give a crap about Rush and I don't listen to his show. I said so earlier in numerous posts. You are the only one obsessing over him and that's b/c you blindly follow Obama's agenda and that is to paint Rush as the leader of the Republicans. It's been in every paper and everyone knows about the plan hatched by Carville and Rahmbo. He is no more the head of the Republican party then Keith Olbermann is the head of the Democratic party.


:lol: Limtard is the mouthpiece of the Republican party......they even made Michael Steele apologize regarding his comments about Limtard.:lol:

Ya'll are the lunatic fringe of the right....scared, frightened and hopelessly paranoid about what the Democrats will or will not do on behalf of Israel, although nothing much that the Republicans have done and especially NOT done, has been a big help to Israel; making them sit tight while Saddam Hussein's SCUD missiles rained down on them was a real friendly howdeedoo for Israeli's.

Your memories are even more selective than you claim that mine are. No, the Dems aren't a stagnant party, and aren't the same as they were in the 1970's; only the Republicans claim that they are conservative party, yet they spend like drunken sailors and lie through their respective teeth to get votes, but have only their own perverted agenda to attend to.

Israel wanted to return fire and wanted to fight back yet Bushtard I made them sit there like idiots while SCUDS rained down everywhere in Israel and you are all trying to telll me that the Republicans are FRIENDS??? I think you all have screws loose...with friends like Bushtard I, who the eff needs enemies???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scud

[Yala]

[QUOTE=Yala;295342]By posting the above, plus the disgusting things you say about all Muslims, you just prove the point...that you are a bigot. QUOTE]

Did you see that there are 35 Islamic terrorist camps in the USA?

Did you see all the anti-Israel protests across the West?

Do you see the hatred towards Jews that the MSA is preaching across our college campuses?

Please show me where the "moderate" Muslims are protesting against them.

Islam is the most bigoted ideology on the planet, it clearly preaches hatred towards Jews.

Are black people who speak out against the KKK bigots?

Muslim immigration is destroying Europe and the same thing has started here. Either we end all Muslim immigration or we will lose.

Steven you are a broken record. Yes most terrorists are Muslim, but not all Muslims are terrorists.

I think we need to end all immigration period until we get our economy fixed. We also need to seal off our borders. I also agree that letting in all these jihadists from Arab countries will destroy America like it is doing to Europe.

[Yala]

:lol: Limtard is the mouthpiece of the Republican party......they even made Michael Steele apologize regarding his comments about Limtard.:lol:

Ya'll are the lunatic fringe of the right....scared, frightened and hopelessly paranoid about what the Democrats will or will not do on behalf of Israel, although nothing much that the Republicans have done and especially NOT done, has been a big help to Israel; making them sit tight while Saddam Hussein's SCUD missiles rained down on them was a real friendly howdeedoo for Israeli's.

Your memories are even more selective than you claim that mine are. No, the Dems aren't a stagnant party, and aren't the same as they were in the 1970's; only the Republicans claim that they are conservative party, yet they spend like drunken sailors and lie through their respective teeth to get votes, but have only their own perverted agenda to attend to.

Israel wanted to return fire and wanted to fight back yet Bushtard I made them sit there like idiots while SCUDS rained down everywhere in Israel and you are all trying to telll me that the Republicans are FRIENDS??? I think you all have screws loose...with friends like Bushtard I, who the eff needs enemies???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scud

I don't think you have read a thing I've written on this forum or have poor reading comprehension. Neither party are friends of Israel, but clearly one party is more hostile to Israel than the other. Both will sell Israel out on a dime and you can take that to the bank. John McCain was/is a true friend to Israel though.

[Y. Shulamith]

I don't think you have read a thing I've written on this forum or have poor reading comprehension. Neither party are friends of Israel, but clearly one party is more hostile to Israel than the other. Both will sell Israel out on a dime and you can take that to the bank. John McCain was/is a true friend to Israel though.


Yeah, he came back from Viet Nam and the first thing he did was dump his wife who'd been almost rendered a cripple without legs in an auto accident and then married $$$ his current wife.

With McCain's record for fidelity and loyality, I wouldn't toss McCain as far as I could throw him either. The Jews are on their own, as they have been all through the millenia. Everyone of their "so called" friends are suspect of having ulterior motives and their own perverted, hidden agenda.

[Yala]

Limtard is the mouthpiece of the Republican party

Very original Y Shulamith:lol:. You have no mind of your own, you're beyond helpless:

Politico: (a left-wing political blog) Rush Job: Inside Dems' Limbaugh plan (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19596.html)

"Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House."

[Y. Shulamith]

I don't think you have read a thing I've written on this forum or have poor reading comprehension. Neither party are friends of Israel, but clearly one party is more hostile to Israel than the other. Both will sell Israel out on a dime and you can take that to the bank. John McCain was/is a true friend to Israel though.



Very original Y Shulamith:

Politico: (a left-wing political blog) Rush Job: Inside Dems' Limbaugh plan (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19596.html)


Well, if Limtard is gold, then he is gold. I see him as turdhuckster and wish that he'd shut his big ugly effing mouth but if the Repubs want that big Oxycontin'd huckster as their mouthpiece, it is up to them to do as they wish....everything he is and says and is about is diametrically opposed to everything that I stand for, and as a voter, everything I would be a part of.

[takeo]

maven


Lots of baloney there methinks. But Iraq is a success, a major defeat for Islamism.

:rofl:

There wasn't any islamism in Iraq in 2003. Now Iraq is run by islamist friends of Iran and Al-quaida is still around, despite the surge, killing Iraqi civilians every day.


Afghanistan was a necessity.

but completely mismanaged by the Bush-administration.


Israel dragged on the peace process not Bush, and once Hamas took over Gaza it was over anyway....

It was over when Clinton retired. The US has always been the main force behind peace talks. Without the US, there wouldn't have been any camp David-agreements, nor Oslo.




unless three brave souls went in and destroyed Hamas power in Gaza in order to facilitate the PA taking it back. Unfortunatly three brave souls were not available.

Bush demanded that Fatah organised free elections, which everybody knew Hamas would win. First Fatah refused, but later gave in to American pressure.




"Alienating the Muslim world!" Is the pope a Catholic? Who cares about credibility? when did the US ever have credability with Europe and S. America?

certainly a lot more in the 90's than today.


Che Guavara had credability, Karl Marx had credibility, Noam Chumpsky had credability, the Marx brothers had credibility.

depends.



Those lefty, commie bozos have never respected the US.

some people respected the US in Europe, actually many people did. UNTILL G. W. Bush made a complete mess.




As to the rise of Iran under the mullocrats there is an old Chinese saying I just invented that goes "In a polluted pond the scum eventually rises to the surface."

Pass me the disenfectant gun.

A gun might not be the ideal answer to every problem. Of course for a Texan that was difficult to comprehend.

[Y. Shulamith]

Very original Y Shulamith:lol:. You have no mind of your own, you're beyond helpless:

Politico: (a left-wing political blog) Rush Job: Inside Dems' Limbaugh plan (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19596.html)

"Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House."

I am very original.....I've always considered Limtard a bottom feeder and not from just yesterday.

[Yala]

The Jews are on their own, as they have been all through the millenia. Everyone of their "so called" friends are suspect of having ulterior motives and their own perverted, hidden agenda.

Some have ulterior motives, true, and we are on our own, but I still don't understand why we should support the openly hostile party over the other.

[Yala]

Well, if Limtard is gold, then he is gold. I see him as turdhuckster and wish that he'd shut his big ugly effing mouth but if the Repubs want that big Oxycontin'd huckster as their mouthpiece, it is up to them to do as they wish....everything he is and says and is about is diametrically opposed to everything that I stand for, and as a voter, everything I would be a part of.

We don't care about Rush, I don't know why you keep bringing him up. Wait a minute...yes, I do.

[Steven]

[QUOTE=Steven;295350]

Steven you are a broken record. Yes most terrorists are Muslim, but not all Muslims are terrorists.

And you are a broken record by having the same conversation with Takeo over and over again. :p Not all Germans were Nazis but that did matter not did it? Terrorism is only part of the problem as stealth jihad is slowly changing the world to suit Islam. Temple Mount is a perfect example of that. They do not have to kill us to take over.

I think we need to end all immigration period until we get our economy fixed. We also need to seal off our borders. I also agree that letting in all these jihadists from Arab countries will destroy America like it is doing to Europe.

I agree with you 100%. Can you imagine the flood illegals that we will get once Obama gives national health care? It is IMPOSSIBLE for our country to afford.

[Steven]

I am very original.....I've always considered Limtard a bottom feeder and not from just yesterday.

If he is such a bottom feeder, then why is Obama so threatened by him?

[Yala]

If he is such a bottom feeder, then why is Obama so threatened by him?

Not just Obama, but all the Democrats. He is the loudest voice talking about Obama. The media is too smitten with BHO and refuses to be objective or even mildly critical.

Why do you think the Democrats are trying to push through this "fairness doctrine," the most anti-democratic bill of our time? They are extremely scared of talk radio in general b/c it doesn't goose step after Obama, and they are trying to take it down anyway they can. They would never be able to deal with the flack that Bush got from the media.

[Steven]

Not just Obama, but all the Democrats. He is the loudest voice talking about Obama. The media is too smitten with BHO and refuses to be objective or even mildly critical.

Why do you think the Democrats are trying to push through this "fairness doctrine," the most anti-democratic bill of our time? They are extremely scared of talk radio in general b/c it doesn't goose step after Obama, and they are trying to take it down anyway they can. They would never be able to deal with the flack that Bush got from the media.

Nope they are a bunch of weaklings that do not play fair. It was fine when Bush was getting bashed for 8 years, but now that Obama is in charge he wants no criticism at all. The man is like a dictator.

This behavior is being seen on forums also. Do you remember those links that I send you a couple of months ago to that forum with the Islamic propagandists? There was nonstop Bush bashing there, I was threatened with violence, people were laughing as soldiers died, and wishes of Bush to die. All of that was OK.
Now that Obama is in charge they do not want an criticize of him, they have banned all the conservative posters.

I just read that a school in Nevada has the children facing a picture of Obama instead of the flag during the pledge now!!

[Y. Shulamith]

If he is such a bottom feeder, then why is Obama so threatened by him?

Not threatened but disgusted.....just as Jews are disgusted with the likes of "Lord Ahmed" so are the sensibilties of Obama towards Limtard......you want to let the bigots know that they are known about and disgusting and you don't want them to think that they are "getting away with something"...

[Madeline]

If he is such a bottom feeder, then why is Obama so threatened by him?

Did you notice that those who accuse us of following Rush are the same who follow Obama like sheep to the slaughter...without questions. Pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

[Y. Shulamith]

Did you notice that those who accuse us of following Rush are the same who follow Obama like sheep to the slaughter...without questions. Pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

At first, I didn't like Obama one bit....it wasn't until I got to know what he was about that I thought that he'd make a good President, despite the terrible legacy that was going to left to him to him to deal with. I've always seen McCain as both unstable and a spent cartridge.

As things are now, I am glad that he is President even more. He just might be able to bring peace to the middle east, after I'd lost all hope of it ever happening in my lifetime, at all.

[Y. Shulamith]

Nope they are a bunch of weaklings that do not play fair. It was fine when Bush was getting bashed for 8 years, but now that Obama is in charge he wants no criticism at all. The man is like a dictator.

This behavior is being seen on forums also. Do you remember those links that I send you a couple of months ago to that forum with the Islamic propagandists? There was nonstop Bush bashing there, I was threatened with violence, people were laughing as soldiers died, and wishes of Bush to die. All of that was OK.
Now that Obama is in charge they do not want an criticize of him, they have banned all the conservative posters.

I just read that a school in Nevada has the children facing a picture of Obama instead of the flag during the pledge now!!

Bush is responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi's. He should be tried in a war crimes trial at the Hague and he should take Cheney and Rove and Rummy with him.

[Steven]

Not threatened but disgusted.....just as Jews are disgusted with the likes of "Lord Ahmed" so are the sensibilties of Obama towards Limtard......you want to let the bigots know that they are known about and disgusting and you don't want them to think that they are "getting away with something"...

BS, don't act like the daily KOS ass kissing Demcrats all of a sudden have morals. They are afraid of him because he exposes his Commie agenda.

[Tonto]

Frankly, Limbaugh is a smarter man than Obama ever thought to be or thinks he is. The dem libtards have been spinning hell out of what he Rush) said, and that's sufficient for the dem Obama worshipers. They don't have to think when the libtard elites tell them what to think. That's what spinmeisters are for. The libs are still in a breathless tizzy every time "The One" speaks, and the MSM shows it......so retarded!

[Steven]

Bush is responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi's. He should be tried in a war crimes trial at the Hague and he should take Cheney and Rove and Rummy with him.

Then Obama and Biden should be locked up as well. They are sending more troops to Afghanistan and not pulling them out of Iraq. At least try and make some sense.

[Steven]

Did you notice that those who accuse us of following Rush are the same who follow Obama like sheep to the slaughter...without questions. Pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

So true, they are mesmerized by him. So blinded that they cannot even begin to think things through.

[Reffo]

Bush is responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi's. He should be tried in a war crimes trial at the Hague and he should take Cheney and Rove and Rummy with him.I would say that the ex Baathists and their Al Quaida allies are responsible for those thousands of dead Iraqis.

I would also say that by getting rid of the Butcher of Baghdad, Saddam Hussein, Bush saved the lives of:

Thousands of political prisoners..
Thousands of Kurds..
Thousands of Shiites..
Thousands of lives in neighbouring countries against whom Saddam might have decided to wage war in the future (as he did against Iran, Kuwait and Israel)

Actually, change that from thousands to hundreds of thousands and maybe up to a million lives..

[Madeline]

Bush is responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi's. He should be tried in a war crimes trial at the Hague and he should take Cheney and Rove and Rummy with him.
Ha, you got the wrong Bush. If Papa Bush would have cleaned up when he should have, thousands of lives would have been spared...those who were put in the meatgrinder, or were WMD guinea pigs by/for Saddam. Baby Bush stopped this madness my dear, but guess you won't cry over those lives.

[Madeline]

At first, I didn't like Obama one bit....it wasn't until I got to know what he was about that I thought that he'd make a good President, despite the terrible legacy that was going to left to him to him to deal with. I've always seen McCain as both unstable and a spent cartridge.

As things are now, I am glad that he is President even more. He just might be able to bring peace to the middle east, after I'd lost all hope of it ever happening in my lifetime, at all.

We actually agree on McCain, couldn't stand the guy, but BHO is even worse.

Peace in the ME...wow, you really don't have a clue.

[Y. Shulamith]

Then Obama and Biden should be locked up as well. They are sending more troops to Afghanistan and not pulling them out of Iraq. At least try and make some sense.

Afganistan is WHERE the taliban hide out and where they get recruits and where they develop their devious plots to murder innocent Americans. Bush was a dope when he went into Iraq instead of Afganistan, from the get-go. He went to get Hussein because Hussein had a put out an assassination attempt on his dear old dad, Bush I. For no other reason, the Iraqi people had to be destroyed and dominated and then occupied by the USA and will be "good riddance" to the USA for evermore.....

I was disgusted with Bush putting a personal agenda on Hussein over the safety and needs of the American people. I don't much like the US taxpayers having to pay for his personal vendetta against Saddam.....it sucks, but there you have it. Halliburton and Blackwater are another disaster that befell the USA; outsourcing soldiers, who had/have better equipment than the forces of the USA and using tainted, cheap goods to give to our men overseas is/was a travety. No wonder Blackwater has to change their name; hoping no one remembers that they were Blackwater, their name is so
synonamous with their evil and destructive military operations, of which Abu Ghraib was just a part of. The USA was able to beat the Germans and the Japanese without having to toss out the Geneva Convention. Only a Bush (Mr. Mission Accomplished) could have made our credibility lower than whale shit while he was President of this country. History will tell the tale of what a coward he is and and was and what a stooge he will always be.

[Y. Shulamith]

Ha, you got the wrong Bush. If Papa Bush would have cleaned up when he should have, thousands of lives would have been spared...those who were put in the meatgrinder, or were WMD guinea pigs by/for Saddam. Baby Bush stopped this madness my dear, but guess you won't cry over those lives.

Bush did nothing but make our deficit tripled and destroyed a people in Iraq. There were no WMD's. More Iraqi's were killed by US forces than Saddam ever came one iota close to what Sadam ever did.

[Steven]

Bush did nothing but make our deficit tripled and destroyed a people in Iraq. There were no WMD's. More Iraqi's were killed by US forces than Saddam ever came one iota close to what Sadam ever did.

And Obama is making it better by spending more then ever.:scratch:

WMD were moved.
http://www.aina.org/news/20060523124643.htm

Did you forget about all the yellow cake uranium they found there?

[Tonto]

When my stepson was in Iraq, he said the way they could tell whether the execution victims were shia or sunni was by how the were murdered. Both were brutal, but if it was by gun or blade, it was dead sunni. If it was by power drill or power saw, it was dead shia. I think that when we pull out there will be a blood bath. Hopefully a core of sanity will be preserved by the trained and armed troops that the US forces have helped create. For that reason alone, it may have been worth it. Please don't start talking about ALL the American youngsters killed in Iraq and Afghanistan......that's BS. We kill more in peacetime training, drunk driving off post and bar fights than in this war, and the numbers back that up.


And I call BS again! More people in Iraq were killed by other Iraqis and foreign terrorists BY FAR than by US or coalition troops....that's a fact that libtards ignore!

[Steven]

We actually agree on McCain, couldn't stand the guy, but BHO is even worse.

Peace in the ME...wow, you really don't have a clue.


:rofl:

Obama the magician is going to hypnotize them all.

[Mosche]

Neither party are friends of Israel, but clearly one party is more hostile to Israel than the other. Both will sell Israel out on a dime and you can take that to the bank. John McCain was/is a true friend to Israel though.

Ditto!

[Steven]

Don't worry guys everything is going to be all right. Besides giving almost a billion dollars to the Hamas terrorists, he has now stated that he is going to reach out to the "moderate" Taliban members. With weak leaders like this, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Taliban are going to be ruling the planet before we know it.

We are going to kiss and make up with the Taliban terrorists. I guess because we wrong them. :scratch:

WASHINGTON � President Obama declared in an interview that the United States was not winning the war in Afghanistan and opened the door to a reconciliation process in which the American military would reach out to moderate elements of the Taliban, much as it did with Sunni militias in Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/politics/08obama.html

[Yala]

As things are now, I am glad that he is President even more. He just might be able to bring peace to the middle east, after I'd lost all hope of it ever happening in my lifetime, at all.

Oy vey. We have a real life brainwashed Obamaniac here.

[Madeline]

Don't worry guys everything is going to be all right. Besides giving almost a billion dollars to the Hamas terrorists, he has now stated that he is going to reach out to the "moderate" Taliban members. With weak leaders like this, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Taliban are going to be ruling the planet before we know it.

We are going to kiss and make up with the Taliban terrorists. I guess because we wrong them. :scratch:

WASHINGTON � President Obama declared in an interview that the United States was not winning the war in Afghanistan and opened the door to a reconciliation process in which the American military would reach out to moderate elements of the Taliban, much as it did with Sunni militias in Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/politics/08obama.html
Don't forget that he and Clinton want to improve relationships with Syria as well (FNC yesterday)

[Madeline]

I am sure y'all remember all the change BHO talked about, and the lack thereof on the Republican side....

change (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go7kd_BzrBY&feature=sdig&et=1236469199.79)

[Y. Shulamith]

Afganistan has never, ever been conquered. Carpet bombing these impenitrible mountains wouldn't even do it. The USA has no choice but to try to reach out to these enemies. There isn't anyway we'd win a conventional war, short of the A-bomb, which I don't think is prudent in these days and times.

[Steven]

Afganistan has never, ever been conquered. Carpet bombing these impenitrible mountains wouldn't even do it. The USA has no choice but to try to reach out to these enemies. There isn't anyway we'd win a conventional war, short of the A-bomb, which I don't think is prudent in these days and times.


Then like MED has said we should just leave. These people are not going to change.

[Y. Shulamith]

Gen. Petraeus seems to be quite capable of letting Obama know what he thinks the moves should be in Afganistan. He went to West Point and I didn't. They learn things like that there at ole West Point.

[Steven]

Gen. Petraeus seems to be quite capable of letting Obama know what he thinks the moves should be in Afganistan. He went to West Point and I didn't. They learn things like that there at ole West Point.

We will never win if our government does not come to terms that Islam itself is the problem. I remember reading an article awhile back which stated that the Pentagon said the war on terror would be over by 2008.:scratch:

Also none of this really matters if we do not deal with the issue here at home. Which our government is not doing and there is no shot of that happening with Obama in charge.

[Tonto]

Oy vey. We have a real life brainwashed Obamaniac here.

I, on the other hand, face Southwest so my backside is in the direction of Washington, DC and 'Bama's Crib (as the former White House has been renamed), so that I can pass wind in his (The One's) direction. This demonstrates the love and respect I have for the present Prez we now have there.:lol:

Y.S ain't gunna like the "anointed one" signing a bill to bring in more palestinian thugs, and paying their way. Hope the gov't sends them to the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale area.

[Madeline]

Let's see how Y.S. explains this one

refugees (http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488)

[Y. Shulamith]

Let's see how Y.S. explains this one

refugees (http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488)

Both my sets of great-grandparents and their offspring were refugees from Eastern Europe. Refugees runs in my family......I guess.:rock::lol:

"No, you dont have, to live like a refugee"....somewhere, somebody must'a kicked you around some....maybe you were taken away, tied up and held for ransom..no you don't have to live like a refugee, don't have to live like a refugee......Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers...(Refugee).
:rock::rock:

[Madeline]

Both my sets of great-grandparents and their offspring were refugees from Eastern Europe. Refugees runs in my family......I guess.:rock::lol:

"No, you dont have, to live like a refugee"....somewhere, somebody must'a kicked you around some....maybe you were taken away, tied up and held for ransom..no you don't have to live like a refugee, don't have to live like a refugee......Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers...(Refugee).
:rock::rock:

Somehow I knew you would spin this one. Have you now shame to compare refugees from Europe to those?:stick:

[Y. Shulamith]

Somehow I knew you would spin this one. Have you now shame to compare refugees from Europe to those?:stick:

Hey, Eastern European Jews were scorned and despised when they first came offa the boat, and that's a fact. Even Jews who'd been here longer, didn't want to "know" their Eastern European brethren, and that's a disgrace to my way of thinking.

Who else would work in the sweatshops of Manhatten?

[takeo]

[QUOTE=Yala;295368]

I agree with you 100%. Can you imagine the flood illegals that we will get once Obama gives national health care? It is IMPOSSIBLE for our country to afford.

If Europe can afford it why not the US?

[Y. Shulamith]

Illegal aliens ALREADY get free care; it's called the Emergency Room!!!

[Tonto]

Any apeasement necessary to buy an illusion of incipient peace is accepable to a true liberal, although history demonstrates that the price is always too high and the peace is the peace of slavery and the grave. That truth is, of course, factual as opposed to emotional, and therefore invalid to liberals.

[Madeline]

Any apeasement necessary to buy an illusion of incipient peace is accepable to a true liberal, although history demonstrates that the price is always too high and the peace is the peace of slavery and the grave. That truth is, of course, factual as opposed to emotional, and therefore invalid to liberals.

:clap:

[Yala]

If Europe can afford it why not the US?

Why did you put my name on that? I didn't write that.

[Mosche]

If Europe can afford it why not the US?

I'm not convinced that Europe can afford it. England proper has a national debt exceeding $12 Trillion (more than the U.S.'s $10+ Trillion), Germany's debt exceeds $6 Trillion, and France has a $5+ Trillion debt. Unlike the U.S., the European debts are PRIMARILY linked to their healthcare expenditures--can you imagine what would happen in the U.S. if we absorbed that much additional debt in healthcare costs?

Since we are talking about what we can afford,I have to say that our so-called "stimulus package" is a trillion dollars in the wrong fiscal direction--as was Bush's $600 tax refund for all Americans, and his $700 Billion dollar giveaway in the fall. In my low brow opinion: One who owes money to another is a slave to the other!

Source: CIA World Fact Book, and figures were for 2007.

[Mosche]

Why did you put my name on that? I didn't write that.

Hi Yala,

Speaking on Takeo's behalf, I just tried to quote him, and the post said I was quoting Steven!? Not sure what happened--I went back and changed my post, since I caught it; but, I almost missed it myself.

Perhaps the moderators could give us a heads-up as to what we're doing wrong/differently.

[Y. Shulamith]

Something that I posted got misquoted, also....

[varian]

Any apeasement necessary to buy an illusion of incipient peace is accepable to a true liberal, although history demonstrates that the price is always too high and the peace is the peace of slavery and the grave. That truth is, of course, factual as opposed to emotional, and therefore invalid to liberals.

I'm not a 'W' fan, but there is something about the Corps (I'm ex Navy) that gets it right off!!! There is a difference between a big Semper Fi and just being polite. :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIHz5tevLAw&e

[Madeline]

I'm not a 'W' fan, but there is something about the Corps (I'm ex Navy) that gets it right off!!! There is a difference between a big Semper Fi and just being polite. :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIHz5tevLAw&e

You might find this one interesting as well. You can zoom in on individual faces.

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/homepagephoto/2009-02/hires_090227-M-7069A-004a.jpg

[Steven]

Originally Posted by takeo

If Europe can afford it why not the US?

Ummm...because we have NO money, because we are already being overrun by illegals and this will just attract more of them.

Do you actually know anything that is going on in the world, or are you just being blinded by your idiotic agenda?

[Steven]

I'm not convinced that Europe can afford it. England proper has a national debt exceeding $12 Trillion (more than the U.S.'s $10+ Trillion), Germany's debt exceeds $6 Trillion, and France has a $5+ Trillion debt. Unlike the U.S., the European debts are PRIMARILY linked to their healthcare expenditures--can you imagine what would happen in the U.S. if we absorbed that much additional debt in healthcare costs?

Since we are talking about what we can afford,I have to say that our so-called "stimulus package" is a trillion dollars in the wrong fiscal direction--as was Bush's $600 tax refund for all Americans, and his $700 Billion dollar giveaway in the fall. In my low brow opinion: One who owes money to another is a slave to the other!

Source: CIA World Fact Book, and figures were for 2007.

Thanks for showing some facts that this does not work.;)

[Mosche]

It really is amazing to me that dollars and cents are so difficult to comprehend! I would be very happy if the United States could afford to support every person in the entire WORLD, but the reality is that it can't. This is my primary issue with liberalism. The reality is that most people are nice; unfortunately, nice doesn't pay the bills! We could, as takeo suggests, make healthcare 100% free for every person in our country; but does that mean that the cost just disappears? Hardly! It just means that our tax dollars go to support the cost. That might be okay if we had the money to spend...BUT WE ARE BROKE!!!!

Since we are talking about wants: I would also love a new Volvo! Unfortunately/fortunately, I realize that life is full of trade-offs. I could buy a new Volvo, but I would be doomed to living in a box! Similarly, we can have universal healthcare if we want to consign our progeny to proverbial boxes.

[Yala]

Big praise to Obama for lifting the ban on stem cell research!

[Mosche]

Big praise to Obama for lifting the ban on stem cell research!

As a mathematician who works with several researchers in the Boston Metro area, I also have to applaud his lifting of the ban. I do fear, however, that the ban may have garnered so much PR that expectations are now set way too high--at least in the short term!

[Mediocrates]

http://www.newcriterion.com/blogs.cfm#Charles-Freeman-and-his-curious-defenders-5509

The controversy that has engulfed that now all-but-scuttled appointment of Charles Freeman to the post of National Intelligence Council leader is, I think, a bellwether moment for what today passes for “progressive� opinion. The fashionable charge, leveled by many leftish commentators (mainly in cyberspace), that group of hawkish Jewish pundits have got Israel on the brain and will sacrifice every other question of U.S. foreign policy to this monomaniacal subject appears now to be an acute form of projection. When it was disclosed, for instance, that Freeman, president to the Middle East Policy Council and a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, was the recipient of $1 million of Saudi largesse, and has been a rather outspoken apologist for the kingdom – he referred at one point to its King Abdullah as “Abdullah the Great�– the expected liberal response to this would have been a raised eyebrow. Why would the Obama administration, foe of torture and the erasures of civil liberties at home, be amenable to an analyst who has clearly not done much analysis abroad?

Saudi Arabia is founded on Wahhabist Islamic doctrine designed as a means of social control. Its media is state-run, its women are forced to take the veil, Jews from other countries are forbidden entry, and its homosexuals are executed in the capital in a place colloquially known as “Chop-Chop Square� (whose name tells you enough about the means of execution). The Saudi monarchy, despite its declared antipathy to Islamic fundamentalism, underwrites particularly toxic and anti-Semitic editions (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000%5C000%5C004%5C653wwewi.asp) of the Koran, many of which find their way into American prisons and international madrasas that graduate Islamic terrorists.

[Madeline]

Something leading up to today.


ACORN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU&feature=related)

bankaffirmativeaction (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64&NR=1)

[Tonto]

Something leading up to today.


ACORN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU&feature=related)

bankaffirmativeaction (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64&NR=1)

Absolutely. There were reasons that blacks qualified less often than whites.....try "Credit History" or Credit Rating....there might be your first clues. How about cash down payments.....used to be 20%.

[Y. Shulamith]

How about the Baacke decision regarding quotas and medical school applications/decisions.

[Y. Shulamith]

I can assure you that I believe that everyone, regardless of race, color or creed should be held to the exact same standards when regarding credit, college and post-graduate acceptances, banking, law and any and all institutions. There should be absolutely no difference in where the bar is set, for any group of people, color, gender.

Equal is equal.

Maybe we should go back to not counting women's paychecks for mortgages on women of child-bearing age. There aren't enough guarantees that after bearing children that any given woman will be able/want to work the same hours/same pay as she did before having a family. This isn't prejudice; it's a fact of life. Call me old fashioned, but I've seen it happen many a time.

[Tonto]

Yeah, right. I agree....problem is with Carter and Clinton, the banks were FORCED to consider some people as more equal than other people, especially with backup from ACORN, which was a strongarm crew much like the mafia or something.

[Y. Shulamith]

Yeah, right. I agree....problem is with Carter and Clinton, the banks were FORCED to consider some people as more equal than other people, especially with backup from ACORN, which was a strongarm crew much like the mafia or something.

I don't care who started it, but the bankers love to have as many people on a mortgage as possible.....the more $$$ the better.

They'd allow the family dog and underage kids income from selling girl scout cookies, if they (mortgage bankers) could get away with it!!:D;)

[Mediocrates]

I don't about where you live, but who do you think is going to build all these new roads and bridges?

Illegal aliens for the most part.

[Y. Shulamith]

I don't about where you live, but who do you think is going to build all these new roads and bridges?

Illegal aliens for the most part.


Indeed, and they will enjoy first class healthcare courtesy of the local emergency room.

[Brody15]

I don't about where you live, but who do you think is going to build all these new roads and bridges?

Illegal aliens for the most part.

Bingo. And the 15 thousand or so who were laid of at Microsoft, as just one example, will still have to fight to find a new job.

[Madeline]

Big praise to Obama for lifting the ban on stem cell research!

There seem to be new developments. Has anyone heard more about this?


Obama Signs Law Banning Federal Embryo Research Two Days After Signing Executive Order to OK It
Friday, March 13, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief


President Barack Obama (AP Photo)
(CNSNews.com) - On Wednesday, only two days after he lifted President Bush’s executive order banning federal funding of stem cell research that requires the destruction of human embryos, President Barack Obama signed a law that explicilty bans federal funding of any "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death."
stemcell (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44943)

[Tonto]

So, in essence he gave the OK for private enterprise, which will have a very lax federal oversight, or non-existant oversight, rather than assigning federal funds which would demand federal oversight. That might be the key, don't you think? Drug companies will jump on this and the federal government won't have to defend any directions that the research takes to the taxpayer, thereby delaying the research or cancelling it. Nice ploy.

[Y. Shulamith]

Why the GOP Should Shut Up

Six out of the top 10 Senate earmark hogs are Republicans.

By Timothy Noah

Posted Thursday, March 12, 2009, at 5:49 PM ET

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellSenate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., wants you to know that he voted against the $410 billion spending bill President Obama signed into law on March 11. His fellow Republicans "tried to cut the bill's cost. Our ideas would have saved billions of taxpayer dollars. Unfortunately, every one was turned aside." Well, not every one. According to this spreadsheet prepared by Taxpayers for Common Sense, the spending bill incorporates 53 ideas put forth by McConnell himself in the form of legislative earmarks. Far from lowering the spending bill's cost, they increased it by $76 million.

Compared with his fellow Republicans, McConnell is a relative piker. Here is a list of the Senate's 10 biggest earmark hogs, based on dollar amounts in the spending bill:

1. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.: $474 million
2. Roger Wicker, R-Miss.: $391 million
3. Mary Landrieu, D-La.: $332 million
4. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa: $292 million
5. David Vitter, R-La.: $249 million
6. Christopher Bond, R-Mo.: $248 million
7. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.: $235 million
8. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii: $225 million
9. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.: $219 million
10. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa: $199 million

No fewer than six out of these 10 senators are Republicans, including the two top earmark hogs, Cochran and Wicker. Cochran, Wicker, Bond, and Shelby at least had the decency to vote for the bill after they stuffed it with earmarks. Vitter and Grassley followed McConnell's hypocritical lead, inserting earmarks but then voting against the final bill, knowing it would pass anyway. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), who because of a legal dispute over election results doesn't even have a Senate seat and isn't likely to recover it in court, nonetheless managed to rank in the top third of earmark hogs with a haul of $109 million. His Democratic opponent and the likely victor, Al Franken, got none.

Remember this next time you hear Republicans piss and moan about Democrats' spendthrift ways.

[Madeline]

Dear Mr. Zakaria,

"Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." — from The First Amendment of the United States Constitution *

Freeman's comments on CNN proved the legitimate fears of the so-called Jewish Lobby, meaning Jews and pro-Israel people throughout America and elsewhere who, like Christians, Zoroastrians and Buddhists, have the right to express their concerns and to "petition" government in opposing his appointment. It is called the Right of Free Speech.

It is clear that Freeman is not merely unbiased or even handed, a requirement for the job he was forced out of -- no it was not at his option to leave -- but factually he has a long history as a Saudi friend and promoter who has a personal problem with America being Israel's friend and promoter.

I am happy to have played a role in convincing our representatives to have rejected his appointment.

Yours,




*REF: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/petition/overview.aspx
The above was sent to me by a Jewish friend.


Y.S. BTW, most people are on to those RINOS you mentioned, but you conveniently forgot to mention the complaints about them. My guess, they'll be out come next election.
Oh, and yes, one more thing, don't confuse RINOS with Conservatives...big difference. Who knows what the One promised them to act like a Dem;)

[Y. Shulamith]

It is what it is.

[Madeline]

It is what it is.

So short on words?
You should post the rest of the story then instead of taking something out of context, yes?

[Y. Shulamith]

All pols pig-out on earmarks. It benefits their constituencies. It's the American way. It hasn't changed in years and years and it may never change.

[NewsGuy]

All pols pig-out on earmarks. It benefits their constituencies. It's the American way. It hasn't changed in years and years and it may never change.

This isn't about a general critique of all politicians. It's about a president who was elected on a platform of "Change." Turns out, as you say, that there is no change at all. Obama simply lied to the American people.

He also ran on a platform of eliminating earmarks. Again -- a total lie.

This president is on a robbery spree, where he's basically mugging hard-working Americas at gunpoint. Meanwhile, all of his campaign promises are turning out to be complete lies.

[Mediocrates]

It's a stimulus package. By definition it's all earmarks.

[Tonto]

It's a stimulus package. By definition it's all earmarks.

Right, and it's a matter of who gets first "dibs" wins the big bucks. There was way too much pure pork added on though....greedy bastards! Trying to pay off the dopes who voted "Skinny" in.

[Madeline]

And here my dear friends does BHO and his Congress posse create a way to 'gather' our youth, create mandatory volunteers, and other fine things. While we are arguing about a few Reps getting some money, he is sneaking in this. Now, the wording isn't very clear, I suppose, and perhaps purposely so, but it seems to be paving the way for indoctrination. Little by little...remind you of someone?

Beginning
March 9, 2009

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--AMENDMENTS TO NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE ACT OF 1990

SEC. 1001. REFERENCES.

Subtitle A--Amendments to Subtitle A (General Provisions)

SEC. 1101. PURPOSES; SENSE OF CONGRESS.

`SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

SEC. 1102. DEFINITIONS.

Subtitle B--Amendments to Subtitle B (Learn and Serve America)

SEC. 1201. SCHOOL-BASED ALLOTMENTS.

`SEC. 111. ASSISTANCE TO STATES, TERRITORIES, AND INDIAN TRIBES.

`SEC. 112. ALLOTMENTS.

`SEC. 113. APPLICATIONS.

`SEC. 114. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS.

`SEC. 115. PARTICIPATION OF STUDENTS AND TEACHERS FROM PRIVATE SCHOOLS.

`SEC. 116. FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

`SEC. 117. LIMITATIONS ON USES OF FUNDS.

SEC. 1202. HIGHER EDUCATION PROVISIONS AND CAMPUSES OF SERVICE.

`SEC. 119. CAMPUSES OF SERVICE.

SEC. 1203. INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS AND RESEARCH.

`PART III--INNOVATIVE SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS AND RESEARCH

`SEC. 120. INNOVATIVE DEMONSTRATION SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS AND RESEARCH.

Subtitle C--Amendments to Subtitle C (National Service Trust Program)

SEC. 1301. PROHIBITION ON GRANTS TO FEDERAL AGENCIES; LIMITS ON CORPORATION COSTS.

SEC. 1302. REQUIRED AND ELIGIBLE NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAMS.

`SEC. 122. NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAMS ELIGIBLE FOR PROGRAM ASSISTANCE.

SEC. 1303. TYPES OF POSITIONS.

SEC. 1304. CONFORMING REPEAL RELATING TO TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

SEC. 1305. ASSISTANCE TO STATE COMMISSIONS; CHALLENGE GRANTS.

SEC. 1306. ALLOCATION OF ASSISTANCE TO STATES AND OTHER ELIGIBLE ENTITIES.

`SEC. 129. PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE AND APPROVED NATIONAL SERVICE POSITIONS.

SEC. 1307. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY.

`SEC. 129A. EDUCATION AWARDS ONLY PROGRAM.

SEC. 1308. STATE SELECTION OF PROGRAMS.

SEC. 1309. NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAM ASSISTANCE REQUIREMENTS.

SEC. 1310. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS.

SEC. 1311. DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS.

SEC. 1312. SELECTION OF NATIONAL SERVICE PARTICIPANTS.

SEC. 1313. TERMS OF SERVICE.

SEC. 1314. ADJUSTMENTS TO LIVING ALLOWANCE.

Subtitle D--Amendments to Subtitle D (National Service Trust and Provision of National Service Educational Awards)

SEC. 1401. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS IN THE NATIONAL SERVICE TRUST.

SEC. 1402. INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A NATIONAL SERVICE EDUCATIONAL AWARD FROM THE TRUST.

SEC. 1403. DETERMINATION OF THE AMOUNT OF NATIONAL SERVICE EDUCATIONAL AWARDS.

SEC. 1404. DISBURSEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AWARDS.

SEC. 1405. PROCESS OF APPROVAL OF NATIONAL SERVICE POSITIONS.

`SEC. 149. PROCESS OF APPROVAL OF NATIONAL SERVICE POSITIONS.

Subtitle E--Amendments to Subtitle E (National Civilian Community Corps)

SEC. 1501. PURPOSE.

`SEC. 151. PURPOSE.

SEC. 1502. PROGRAM COMPONENTS.

`SEC. 152. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL CIVILIAN COMMUNITY CORPS PROGRAM.';

SEC. 1503. ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS.

SEC. 1504. SUMMER NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAM.

SEC. 1505. TEAM LEADERS.

`SEC. 155. NATIONAL CIVILIAN COMMUNITY CORPS.';

SEC. 1506. TRAINING.

SEC. 1507. CONSULTATION WITH STATE COMMISSIONS.

SEC. 1508. AUTHORIZED BENEFITS FOR CORPS MEMBERS.

SEC. 1509. PERMANENT CADRE.

SEC. 1510. CONTRACT AND GRANT AUTHORITY.

SEC. 1511. OTHER DEPARTMENTS.

SEC. 1512. ADVISORY BOARD.

SEC. 1513. EVALUATION.

SEC. 1514. REPEAL OF FUNDING LIMITATION.

SEC. 1515. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 1516. TERMINOLOGY.

`Subtitle E--National Civilian Community Corps';
Subtitle F--Amendments to Subtitle F (Administrative Provisions)
more (http://www.congress.org/congressorg/webreturn/?url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1388:)

[Madeline]

It's a stimulus package. By definition it's all earmarks.



No cost stimulus? It might just work. But then, coming from the Republican side, is must be bad, right?

Washington (CNSNews.com) - Five conservative Republicans – three from the House and two from the Senate -- have introduced a “common sense� economic stimulus package that includes energy proposals they say will boost the economy without adding to the national debt.

The “no-cost stimulus plan� calls for expanding offshore oil and gas production and leasing the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas producers, which in turn would generate new federal revenue.

“This is an energy plan involving both traditional and renewable energy that can create significant jobs, significant economic growth without costing the U.S taxpayer one cent and without having to borrow more money,� Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) said during a Capitol Hill news conference.

The plan also would allow commercial leasing of oil shale as long as there is a profitable interest, expedite the nuclear plant licensing process and prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from using the Clean Air Act as “ammo� to enforce carbon dioxide regulations.

more (http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44957)

[Tonto]

Welcome to the new socialist state. New drilling? Perish the thought! The fishies or the reindeer might be upset, and we can't have that! Besides, that would be beyond the CONTROL of the state. Spend! Spend! Spend!

[codedvirus]

http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/02/09/back_on_uncle_sams_plantation

Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation
by Star Parker

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."

Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

[Y. Shulamith]

The USA very nearly did become a socialist state during the Great Depression. Hoover hamstringed credit when there wasn't enough money in circulation, already. I promise you that bad times like a great depression will do more to further a socialist agenda then any stimulus package could possibly do.

It's a proven fact historically.

[Y. Shulamith]

Welcome to the new socialist state. New drilling? Perish the thought! The fishies or the reindeer might be upset, and we can't have that! Besides, that would be beyond the CONTROL of the state. Spend! Spend! Spend!

You are a true anal retentive.;)

[Tonto]

You are a true anal retentive.;)

Well, just blow that out yer gigi!:rock:

[Y. Shulamith]

Well, just blow that out yer gigi!:rock:

Don't be afraid to spend some of that wad of cashola that you are holding onto, Tonto!! :D

[Tonto]

Right, but I was lucky. I only lost about 1/3 of my investments through the Dimwitocrap generated housing market crash so I guess I should get out there and spend like the dem congress is. Maybe I'll buy a couple pigs. I keep hearing about all that "pork", so it might be a good investment eh? The democrap intent is to make us all broke and government dependant isn't it? That's where they get the biggest share of their constituency.

[Y. Shulamith]

Right, but I was lucky. I only lost about 1/3 of my investments through the Dimwitocrap generated housing market crash so I guess I should get out there and spend like the dem congress is. Maybe I'll buy a couple pigs. I keep hearing about all that "pork", so it might be a good investment eh? The democrap intent is to make us all broke and government dependant isn't it? That's where they get the biggest share of their constituency.

Yeah, I'd say you was real lucky....you didn't lose every dime you had and wind up selling apples on the street or jumping from a building....bang, dead, I noticed. If like you might have wound up doing if your Republican friend-o's had had their way and let you get ditched to nothingness. Nope, you are still dancing around with plenty of dough. Now that's progress, I'd say.....:D

[maven]

I'll tell you one thing, the world feels a more dangerous place since George W. Bush left office because Obama does'nt seem to have begun discussing foreign affairs yet.

With President Bush you knew exactly, and the enemy new exactly, where he stood.

Now it seems to me there is a total state of confusion with the Brits going off on their own and talking to Hiz'bollah, with Hillary talking about talking to the Iranians and the Syrians while the Iranians and the Syrians are working flat out to "defeat the American agenda" in the Middle East.

The whole thing seems like a mess. I just appeal to the US and the UK not to recognize any 'unity government' formed by the Pals if it includes Hamas. I cannot remember a time when US foreign policy was so indistinct, imprecise, unformed and in such a state of flux.

[Y. Shulamith]

I don't feel in the least bit of danger any more than I ever did....in fact, nothing has changed at all. The same people are fighting and the same people are making idiotic statements. Not a thing has changed.

Sure, I felt real safe when 9/11 occurred and that dimwit was reading "my pet goat" in Florida and then jetting around the USA to a safe hideout. I felt a hell of a lot unsafe then, I sure did. I felt real safe in that NORAD didn't even know what the hell it was doing and jets were scrambling like bumbling idiots, not knowing where or how to strike at anything. I felt real safe.

[maven]

Obama is a gaping hole in foreign policy. They are laughing at him in the Muslim world. Since he came to power the US has become to be seen as weak on the world stage.

No-one would be surprised if he sold Israel out.

[Y. Shulamith]

I don't know anyone in the Muslim world, be it laughing or otherwise. I don't have a crystal ball, so I cannot say what will happen in the future.

Lots of Muslims danced in the street on 9/11 and the Pallies gave out candy in celebration of 9/11. They laughed a-plenty then. Either you have amnesia or you have conveniently forgotten how much the Muslim community overseas really loathes the USA, no matter WHO is president. What part of the loathing for the USA don't you understand?

The Muslims and Pan-Arabs loathe the West, the USA, in particular, and would not mind a bit, if their leaders and their religion conquer us and regardless of who our leader might be, is of absolutely no consequence to them at all......they have nothing but loathing for us and our Western ways and ideology.

[Madeline]

Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarP...ams_plantation

Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation
by Star Parker

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.


That's a great read, CV. Something everyone should take to heart, no matter how deep their head is in the sand at the moment. Thank you.

[Brody15]

And here my dear friends does BHO and his Congress posse create a way to 'gather' our youth, create mandatory volunteers, and other fine things. While we are arguing about a few Reps getting some money, he is sneaking in this. Now, the wording isn't very clear, I suppose, and perhaps purposely so, but it seems to be paving the way for indoctrination. Little by little...remind you of someone?

Unfortunately.....yes. <sigh> It's a little Hitler-ish if you ask me.

[Madeline]

Unfortunately.....yes. <sigh> It's a little Hitler-ish if you ask me.

It's pretty darn scary, that's what it is. I read that before going to bed...yikes.
And yes, Y.S., I so want to be wrong on this.

[Y. Shulamith]

The Peace Corps was a little Kennedyesque...to say the least.

[Brody15]

It's pretty darn scary, that's what it is. I read that before going to bed...yikes.
And yes, Y.S., I so want to be wrong on this.

Here's an email a friend of mine sent to me. Scary. It doesn't prove anything, and doesn't mean Obama is Hitler, but.....modern liberalism, progressivism, humanism, scares me.

Sorry for the big post but it's needed to get the point across....



WHO AM I?



I was born in one country, raised in another.


My father was born in another country.


I was not his only child. He fathered several children with numerous women.


I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in me.


My mother died at an early age from cancer.


Later in life, questions arose over my real name.


My birth records were sketchy and no one was able to produce a legitimate, reliable birth certificate.


I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it was widely accepted in my country, but I practiced non-traditional beliefs and didn't follow Christianity, except in the public eye under scrutiny.


I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult, disguising myself as someone who really cared about them.


That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life, and I embarked on a new career.


I wrote a book about my struggles growing up. It was clear to those who read my memoirs that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.


I became active in local politics in my 30's, then with help behind the scenes, I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office in my 40s. They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything. That reinforced my conceit.


I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization. Yet I was a powerful speaker and citizens were drawn to me as though I were a magnet and they were small roofing tacks.


I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances. This bolstered my ego.


At first, my political campaign focused on my country's foreign policy. I was very critical of my country in the last war and seized every opportunity to bash my country..


But what launched my rise to national prominence was my views on the country's economy. I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better and how every poor person would be fed and housed for free.


I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess. It was the free market, banks and corporations. I decided to start making citizens hate them, and if they were envious of others who did well, the plan was clinched tight.


I called mine "A People's Campaign," and that sounded good to all people.


I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support.


I knew that, if I merely offered the people "hope," together we could change our country and the world. So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant, to include "persecuted minorities" like the Jews. My true views were not widely known, and I needed to keep them unknown, until after I became my nation's leader.


I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with.


I'm glad they didn't. Then I became the most powerful man in the world. And the world learned the truth.


Who am I?









/

/

/

/

/

ADOLF HITLER



WHO WERE YOU THINKING OF?

[Y. Shulamith]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22117627/

Ho Hum.....I'd much rather see the youth of our country caught up with Neo-Nazi political idealism and all sorts of such like things that curious adolescents everywhere, of all kinds, get involved in....while both parents who are working, have not clue about what their precious adolescents are doing, not to mention, making bombs out in the back yard, a.ka. Columbine et al. The devil makes work for idle hands, did that part of human nature change over the last few years gang?

Yup, wholesome Nazi fawning for the disenfranchised and disillusioned youth of the USA, is wholly preferable, after all, it's a free country!

[Y. Shulamith]

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.�

Hermann Goering

[Tonto]

Yeah, I'd say you was real lucky....you didn't lose every dime you had and wind up selling apples on the street or jumping from a building....bang, dead, I noticed. If like you might have wound up doing if your Republican friend-o's had had their way and let you get ditched to nothingness. Nope, you are still dancing around with plenty of dough. Now that's progress, I'd say.....:D

That made me chuckle anyway, but it ain't over. O is determined to spend every dime, or commit every dime we ever hope to have and to break the investment bunch. If he has time, he'll nationalize industry....then we're really finito!

[Brody15]

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.�

Hermann Goering

Yeah, but what if the leader is telling the truth?

[Madeline]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22117627/

Ho Hum.....I'd much rather see the youth of our country caught up with Neo-Nazi political idealism and all sorts of such like things that curious adolescents everywhere, of all kinds, get involved in....while both parents who are working, have not clue about what their precious adolescents are doing, not to mention, making bombs out in the back yard, a.ka. Columbine et al. The devil makes work for idle hands, did that part of human nature change over the last few years gang?

Yup, wholesome Nazi fawning for the disenfranchised and disillusioned youth of the USA, is wholly preferable, after all, it's a free country!

OK, someone has to say it...you can't be serious, can you?

[Y. Shulamith]

Yeah, but what if the leader is telling the truth?

The truth is the truth.....it's the lies that really get ya going in ways such like Iraq war.

[Y. Shulamith]

OK, someone has to say it...you can't be serious, can you?

Have you raised any offspring lately? If you did, then you'd know what is serious and what isn't and apparently, you don't.

[Brody15]

The truth is the truth.....it's the lies that really get ya going in ways such like Iraq war.

I knew you were going there with the Bush thing. Here's where it gets weird, I think the same mentality that blames Bush and Conservatives for being "bad people, and bad for the country, evil...etc". This mentality is also capable of demonizing the Jews as the source for all of Germany's problems circa the 1930's. It is the same mentality. Both ideas are based completely in fiction with hints of truth to make them believable. More proof that liberals are fascists! I'm just sayin' is all.

[Y. Shulamith]

Warmongers are fascists....neocons who have never been to war, while ordering others off to it with impunity, are idiots. The offspring of our elected officials aren't in the service. Who in hell are they to send other people's kids off to die in wars.

I say, bring back the draft; then you wouldn't see neocons so slap-happy to march kids off to war, especially if it were their own kids who were also doing the marching.

I know, Obama wasn't in the service, but neither have any recent Reublicans with the exception of Bush I. McCain served but was rendered unfit to serve due to his extreme war experiences. IMO.

Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and I'd take scholars to be leaders over soldiers, anyday.

Jews having nothing to do with conservative neo-cons. 78% of Jews right here in the USA voted for Obama. No one political party, except for Nazi Neo-cons are blaming Jews for anything. To say that Jews are being blamed for anything is paranoia.

Some people's opinions about the middle-east are anti-Jewish and/or anti-Zionist, but I haven't been to a book burning lately, nor have I seen synagogues burning.

There have been lots of arsons in Coatesville, Penna, but they, mostly are blacks, not Jews, for chrissakes.

If I suspected that there was a true uptick in anti-semitism here in the USA, in a real kind of way, not just the usual Nazi kids neo-con stuff, believe me, I would be the first to say something about it. It is in MY interest to keep my ear to the ground about such things. My life would be on the line, eventually, perhaps. I haven't seen or heard about any legislation something like the Nuremberg laws.

Please, if I am wrong, bring it any Nuremberg law type legislation to my attention for it would be of import to us all, and I am talking about true Nuremberg type law legislation.

[Madeline]

Warmongers are fascists....neocons who have never been to war, while ordering others off to it with impunity, are idiots. The offspring of our elected officials aren't in the service. Who in hell are they to send other people's kids off to die in wars.

I say, bring back the draft; then you wouldn't see neocons so slap-happy to march kids off to war, especially if it were their own kids who were also doing the marching.

I know, Obama wasn't in the service, but neither have any recent Reublicans with the exception of Bush I. McCain served but was rendered unfit to serve due to his extreme war experiences. IMO.

Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and I'd take scholars to be leaders over soldiers, anyday.

Jews having nothing to do with conservative neo-cons. 78% of Jews right here in the USA voted for Obama. No one political party, except for Nazi Neo-cons are blaming Jews for anything. To say that Jews are being blamed for anything is paranoia.

Some people's opinions about the middle-east are anti-Jewish and/or anti-Zionist, but I haven't been to a book burning lately, nor have I seen synagogues burning.

There have been lots of arsons in Coatesville, Penna, but they, mostly are blacks, not Jews, for chrissakes.

If I suspected that there was a true uptick in anti-semitism here in the USA, in a real kind of way, not just the usual Nazi kids neo-con stuff, believe me, I would be the first to say something about it. It is in MY interest to keep my ear to the ground about such things. My life would be on the line, eventually, perhaps. I haven't seen or heard about any legislation something like the Nuremberg laws.

Please, if I am wrong, bring it any Nuremberg law type legislation to my attention for it would be of import to us all, and I am talking about true Nuremberg type law legislation.
Oh my, I don't know what to say..:scratch: I don't think your line of thinking even warrants a response. I think you are just incoherently babbling.

[Brody15]

Warmongers are fascists....neocons who have never been to war, while ordering others off to it with impunity, are idiots. The offspring of our elected officials aren't in the service. Who in hell are they to send other people's kids off to die in wars.

I say, bring back the draft; then you wouldn't see neocons so slap-happy to march kids off to war, especially if it were their own kids who were also doing the marching.

I know, Obama wasn't in the service, but neither have any recent Reublicans with the exception of Bush I. McCain served but was rendered unfit to serve due to his extreme war experiences. IMO.

Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and I'd take scholars to be leaders over soldiers, anyday.

Jews having nothing to do with conservative neo-cons. 78% of Jews right here in the USA voted for Obama. No one political party, except for Nazi Neo-cons are blaming Jews for anything. To say that Jews are being blamed for anything is paranoia.

Some people's opinions about the middle-east are anti-Jewish and/or anti-Zionist, but I haven't been to a book burning lately, nor have I seen synagogues burning.

There have been lots of arsons in Coatesville, Penna, but they, mostly are blacks, not Jews, for chrissakes.

If I suspected that there was a true uptick in anti-semitism here in the USA, in a real kind of way, not just the usual Nazi kids neo-con stuff, believe me, I would be the first to say something about it. It is in MY interest to keep my ear to the ground about such things. My life would be on the line, eventually, perhaps. I haven't seen or heard about any legislation something like the Nuremberg laws.

Please, if I am wrong, bring it any Nuremberg law type legislation to my attention for it would be of import to us all, and I am talking about true Nuremberg type law legislation.

Oy vey! The left is always using intellect to create this false superiority uber alles! I'm pretty sure Hitler did the same thing.

[Madeline]

Oy vey! The left is always using intellect to create this false superiority uber alles! I'm pretty sure Hitler did the same thing.

I am still trying to find out what it means, if anything.

[bararallu]

Shulamith,

What, if I may ask, are your "red lines" (as we Israelis talk about them all the time) concerning the Obama administration and Israel- in terms of policy and imlementation. I have seen on this forum staunch Republicans bash the Bush administration concerning their red lines.

[NewsGuy]

Warmongers are fascists....neocons who have never been to war, while ordering others off to it with impunity, are idiots. The offspring of our elected officials aren't in the service. Who in hell are they to send other people's kids off to die in wars.
I would have to say that this is one of the silliest comments I've read on this forum in a while.

It's like saying who are the Leftist loons to order other people's offspring to pay off trillions in loans ordered by Leftists who have never held a position in the business world -- yet they order the business world around as they please?

[Yala]

Shulamith = ostrich. Don't bother.

BTW, McCain's kids are in the service so what she wrote isn't true either.

[codedvirus]

Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and I'd take scholars to be leaders over soldiers, anyday.

George W. Bush
Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Dick Cheney
B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science.

[Madeline]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Y. Shulamith
Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and I'd take scholars to be leaders over soldiers, anyday.
CV:
George W. Bush
Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Dick Cheney
B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science.



Y.S. I wonder, would you hide behind Bubba or a Marine when the wolf cries at the door? I know with whom I rather be...
BTW, it wasn't Rhodes Scholars liberating folks there in Europe.....
__________________

[Tonto]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Y. Shulamith
Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and I'd take scholars to be leaders over soldiers, anyday.
CV:
George W. Bush
Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Dick Cheney
B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science.



Y.S. I wonder, would you hide behind Bubba or a Marine when the wolf cries at the door? I know with whom I rather be...
BTW, it wasn't Rhodes Scholars liberating folks there in Europe.....
__________________

My uncle Emil was a Rhodes Scholar, and he invented the trigger for those A-bombs. He sold the patent to the US gov't for a dollar....and never saw the dollar. True story. So those guys aren't totally useless.... close though.

[Madeline]

My uncle Emil was a Rhodes Scholar, and he invented the trigger for those A-bombs. He sold the patent to the US gov't for a dollar....and never saw the dollar. True story. So those guys aren't totally useless.... close though.

Still, I rather be in a foxhole with a Marine or a crazy Apache as it were.;)

[Mediocrates]

My cousin invented the first practical application for liquid crystals.

[Y. Shulamith]

George Bush is/was an idiot who got us into the Iraq War...that's why our economic situation is as bad as it is....just like the 18% interest rate that we had to pay after the Viet Nam War. It wasn't Carter's fault that the economics were what they were during his presidency. He was a crummy President, but he inherited the bill for Viet Nam. Wars have to be paid for. Everyone who is so war happy should stop their damn complaining about their depleted nest eggs. Deal with it, you bought it, and now it has to be paid for.

And, there is stillAfganistan to deal with.

[Y. Shulamith]

My father-in-law is a die-hard Republican, that you cannot imagine and a very conservative man; even he said that "George Bush didn't have two brain cells to rub together". He also said that George Bush wasn't a conservative and spent like a drunken sailor.

[Mediocrates]

My uncle developed the process for synthetic diamonds. Yeah physical chemistry is a family vocation.

[Y. Shulamith]

George W. Bush
Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Dick Cheney
B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science.


Those two weren't Rhodes Scholars....one got into college because of his father's contacts and the other one is a war criminal.

[codedvirus]

George Bush is/was an idiot who got us into the Iraq War...that's why our economic situation is as bad as it is....just like the 18% interest rate that we had to pay after the Viet Nam War. It wasn't Carter's fault that the economics were what they were during his presidency. He was a crummy President, but he inherited the bill for Viet Nam. Wars have to be paid for. Everyone who is so war happy should stop their damn complaining about their depleted nest eggs. Deal with it, you bought it, and now it has to be paid for.

And, there is stillAfganistan to deal with.

:clap:

Bush gave a wrong message to the Terrorists. Terrorist attacks happen all over the world but we dont attack countries. There is not difference between a Third World country and a Superpower.

-----
You should watch House of Cards - CNBC.

CNBC Originals: House of Cards (91 mins.)
http://www.hulu.com/watch/59026/house-of-cards
--------

[Y. Shulamith]

:clap:

Bush gave a wrong message to the Terrorists. Terrorist attacks happen all over the world but we dont attack countries. There is not difference between a Third World country and a Superpower.

-----
You should watch House of Cards - CNBC.

CNBC Originals: House of Cards (91 mins.)
http://www.hulu.com/watch/59026/house-of-cards
--------

Indeed, there are/were worse terrorist nests in Africa and other M.E. countries....why pick on Iraq? Because it was the most expedient target or because we thought we could "set up housekeeping there" for the next one hundred years? We may never really know the reason for going into Iraq, indeed, if there was any reason other than Bush's vendetta against Hussein.

P.S. As for McCain's children being in the service, Biden's son is in Iraq, but 99% of all the pols in office DO NOT have any offspring in the service.

[codedvirus]

Indeed, there are/were worse terrorist nests in Africa and other M.E. countries....why pick on Iraq?

Isnt America the most powerful country in the world?

Pentagon says Chinese vessels harassed U.S. ship - CNN.com
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/09/us.navy.china/index.html

After 20 year

Chinese vessels destroy U.S. ships - CNN.com

[Tonto]

George Bush is/was an idiot who got us into the Iraq War...that's why our economic situation is as bad as it is....just like the 18% interest rate that we had to pay after the Viet Nam War. It wasn't Carter's fault that the economics were what they were during his presidency. He was a crummy President, but he inherited the bill for Viet Nam. Wars have to be paid for. Everyone who is so war happy should stop their damn complaining about their depleted nest eggs. Deal with it, you bought it, and now it has to be paid for.

And, there is stillAfganistan to deal with.

Actually, Bush was pretty slick to get into Iraq. Iraq on one side, Afghanistan on the other put Iran in a squeeze that made them hysterical and several steps closer to dissolution. (that is coming, by the way) Carter forced the interest rate to 18% so he could sign the "Fair housing Act" with a minimum opposition, not to pay for Vietnam (Bought the BS did you?) and is already down in history as one of the worse Presidents we ever had. It is the crisis brought on by the fair housing act and the teeth put into it by the Clinton administration that FORCED banks to make sub-prime questionable loans to unqualified people that brought us to our present money troubles. It was Barney Franks and his band of merry socialists in Congress that protected this scam and kept the Bush Whitehouse from initiating an oversight that would have detected the problem and stopped the mess. The whole thing was a Democrat/socialist plot. We're already having "Tea Parties".....you do remember from history what that first one was about right? "Taxation without Representation"? Sound familiar? Obama's last day.....1/20/2013. Thank God! (Only 1403 days to go)

[codedvirus]

Shulamith = ostrich. Don't bother.



Thanks ........:D

[Madeline]

Actually, Bush was pretty slick to get into Iraq. Iraq on one side, Afghanistan on the other put Iran in a squeeze that made them hysterical and several steps closer to dissolution. (that is coming, by the way) Carter forced the interest rate to 18% so he could sign the "Fair housing Act" with a minimum opposition, not to pay for Vietnam (Bought the BS did you?) and is already down in history as one of the worse Presidents we ever had. It is the crisis brought on by the fair housing act and the teeth put into it by the Clinton administration that FORCED banks to make sub-prime questionable loans to unqualified people that brought us to our present money troubles. It was Barney Franks and his band of merry socialists in Congress that protected this scam and kept the Bush Whitehouse from initiating an oversight that would have detected the problem and stopped the mess. The whole thing was a Democrat/socialist plot. We're already having "Tea Parties".....you do remember from history what that first one was about right? "Taxation without Representation"? Sound familiar? Obama's last day.....1/20/2013. Thank God! (Only 1403 days to go)

It takes one to know one, right? A brilliant mind, that is.
:clap:

[Mediocrates]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/130508

(IsraelNN.com) A U.S. State Department official was on hand this week for the inauguration of a new training base in Jericho for an emerging Palestinian Authority army. Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs David T. Johnson and Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad formally opened the Presidential Guard Training Center in Jericho.

The base is part of an American policy to strengthen the PA armed forces with American training and equipment, except for weapons, which are provided by Arab countries. The objective is to change an overstaffed and corrupt system to an orderly authority that can take over security in Judea and Samaria and prepare the PA to become an independent country.

However, the security forces that have been deployed in several PA-controlled Arab cities generally do not confront terrorists, leaving the IDF the task of rounding up wanted men. The United States has been careful to call the trainees “police officers� or "special forces" instead of an army.

Johnson praised the work of the Presidential Guard, considered the most capable soldiers in the PA force and which is responsible directly to PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas. The new army was instrumental in squashing Arab riots during Israel's recent Operation Cast Lead counterterrorist campaign in Gaza.

The training base has also served as a public works project for the PA, providing work for contractors and laborers the past 16 months, under the supervision of a United Nations agency. It includes sleeping and eating facilities, parade grounds and an obstacle course. Hamas has accused the forces of torture.

The Jericho center is capable of training up to 700 men at a time and is the first of several facilities planned for Arab security forces throughout Judea and Samaria. By the summer, 1,700 soldiers will have completed the training under the supervision of U.S. army General Keith Dayton.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/130501

IsraelNN.com) An unnamed former highly-placed U.S.intelligence official has broken silence and says that America may soon be abandoning Israel in favor of the Arabs. “This is just the beginning�, he said, "Israel could be about to lose the support of the United States."The source made these remarks in an exclusive interview with Douglas J. Hagmann (http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=25), the director of the Northeast Intelligence Network (https://homelandsecurityus.com/) (NIN), which is comprised of veteran licensed professional investigators, analysts, military affairs specialists and researchers. The group has combined their resources to provide accurate and well-sourced information via their website.

Hagmann appeared on Israel National Radio's Weekend Edition with host Tamar Yonah (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Radio/News.aspx/754).



When questioned about the possible abandonment of Israel by America, Hagmann told Yonah, "The Obama administration is no friend to Israel, is no friend to the Jews in America and is no friend to democracy or freedom in America. …Just by his very appointments, we can see him filling positions of power with people who are anti-Semitic, who want to see Israel essentially dissolved as a nation, if not by diplomacy, then certainly by war."

In his report, the unnamed intelligence source told Hagmann, “I have every reason to believe, based on what I’ve seen at my level of [security] clearance especially over the last several years, that Israel will soon be completely on their own… or worse.� He explained this would happen “when our administration provides more support to Arab countries [with] financial and military aid, undercutting Israel’s defense efforts all while pushing Israel to succumb to the pressure of unreasonable demands designed to end with their political annihilation as a nation.�

Haggman told Yonah that this official broke silence because he had already retired from his highly placed position, and because of his knowledge of the NIN's (Northeast Intelligence Network) position as pro-Israel and the way it valued the relationship between Israel and America. Another reason, he said, was his own perception of the Biblical aspect of this scenario developing.

The intelligence officer explained that the turnover of American policy towards Israel could occur through a manner that he dubbed 'malicious intelligence," which Haggman defined as information that is taken from its raw form. It then is morphed into something else to promote different interests, "where intelligence and politics meet and often collide,� he said. A method “that has been molded and massaged to advance the agendas of a select few,� he elaborated.

In the case of the relationship between America and Israel, he noted, malicious intelligence is being used (https://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2545) to turn over the U.S. to a more anti-Israel policy and forge ahead with a more pro-PA or pro-Islamist one. Hagmann told Yonah in the radio interview, "A perfect example of this is when there was a shooting in Seattle a couple of years ago at a Jewish center. The police were ordered by the city officials and by the Federal Government, basically, to not protect the synagogues and other Jewish centers in Seattle, but to have protection details [instead] at the mosques in Seattle."

U.S. administrations have apparently been following a policy of abandoning Israel for several years, according to Hagmann's report. His interview with the intelligence official cited "the 2005 surrender of Gush Katif to the Palestinian Authority as one critical example of the slow dismantlement of Israel as a viable nation. Despite critical intelligence outlining in every possible manner imaginable that this would be a disastrous move leading to the events we are seeing today [rocket and missile fire on Israel], it was done anyway," he stated.

In the report that Hagmann posted on the NIN (Northeast Intelligence Network) he cited one of his sources explaining, “Now you can see where intelligence and politics meet and often collide,… " the Obama administration is being purposely filled with people who are truly anti-Israel, either because of their own financial interests or a larger globalist agenda that does not include Israel, or for that matter, the United States as a sovereign nation.

"Whatever the reason, the anti-Israel, pro-Islamist policy makers will be appointed or have already infiltrated nearly all levels of the U.S. government. These are the people who place anti-Semitic references in school textbooks, promote revisionist history regarding Islam, 9/11, and are the same people who allow or even promote the Islamic agendas in all aspects of Western society, especially the restrictions on speech against Islam.

"With regard to the latter, note that the United Nations is quite involved in forcing the restriction of “hate speech� and the implementation of global standards, some that have already been adapted by European nations,� noted the source.

Hagmann reports that "the Middle East will be the site of 'the coming war,' and Israel will be at its epicenter. If we survive as a nation, the U.S. will not be on the side of righteousness in this war, instead turning our back to - or our guns against - our only true friend in the Middle East - Israel," he said.

[redcake]

Obama Corp passed in the House this week under the guise of The GIVE Act which will require mandatory volunteerism (read that twice) as a national service requirement. In uniform.

[Madeline]

Obama Corp passed in the House this week under the guise of The GIVE Act which will require mandatory volunteerism (read that twice) as a national service requirement. In uniform.
I am sure I posted the bill a couple of pages back...

[Tonto]

Obama Corp passed in the House this week under the guise of The GIVE Act which will require mandatory volunteerism (read that twice) as a national service requirement. In uniform.

Sound like Shitler youth to me.....do they get brown shirts with fancy insignia?

[Mediocrates]

Americorp's been around for quite a while. Bush started it I think.

[Y. Shulamith]

I am still more cautious and wary of everyday anti-semitism and Neo-nazism that appears everywhere all over the world...the kind of unorganized thuggery everywhere, and not the sort of events that are organized under the auspices of the government of the USA.

Everyday people like ourselves must always be vigiligent regarding these poxes on society.

[Yala]

Obama Corp passed in the House this week under the guise of The GIVE Act which will require mandatory volunteerism (read that twice) as a national service requirement. In uniform.

he can go to hell with this nonsense

[maven]

I find Obama the most charasmatic and attractive leader of my lifetime. I desperatly want him to succeed and pray that all my fears about his approach to the ME will prove unfounded.

[Yala]

I find Obama the most charasmatic and attractive leader of my lifetime.
:tdown:

[NewsGuy]

Obama is America's top snake-oil salesman.

[Tonto]

I find Obama the most charasmatic and attractive leader of my lifetime. I desperatly want him to succeed and pray that all my fears about his approach to the ME will prove unfounded.

I agree, he certainly is charismatic, but so was Kennedy and he was an idiot too. So many democrap leaders show up like that at first and then their true lameness manifests. Obama is demonstrating already how truly ill prepared he is for the job he's taken on, and he don't have Soros in the closet to coach him. My suggestion, buy a couple guns and plenty ammo, like the rest of us and wait it out. He already has the earmarks (pun intended) of a one termer. The dems in Congress already know it's over for them, that's why they're getting their licks in now as fast as they can.
Mr. Obama! Can you even say "Foreign Policy"????????

[bararallu]

IMHO Soros is more dangerous to Israel than Obama.

[redcake]

Americorp's been around for quite a while. Bush started it I think.

Here's the problem Medio. You're a smart guy, but you say stuff like this now, writing things off...and then six months from now you'll share our outrage anyway. What gives?

Americorps wasn't started under Bush. Clinton pumped a huge amount of money into it. The difference is a) it wasn't mandatory service as a requirement to get a Pell grant, and b) it wasn't funded with 6 BILLION dollars to purposely match the military, and nobody ever intended Head Start, or Job corp or any of the others to do the work of a national security force.

Madeline - I missed your post, but the bill has since passed so it's worth posting again. Thanks though. There's so much going on it's hard to follow sometimes.

[Tonto]

IMHO Soros is more dangerous to Israel than Obama.

And you can bet yer very best bippy that he ain't too far away from Obamalamadindong.:D

[Dorothy]

Watch carefully Obama's support of the European Union and Javier Solana in particular. Please note my comment at the thread headed Russian Circus. Solana and Obama are headed in the same direction regarding Israel and the Jews, in spite of the great support the Jewish community gave Obama in the election. Though awareness of what is happening is coming out of the Christian community rather than the Jewish one in this matter, it may simply be a case of there are more Christians than Jews and so the few Christians speaking out are reaching more than the few aware Jews are making their voices heard. More and more we are hearing of how isolated Israel is becoming in the international community.

[Madeline]

Does this man know what he is doing?


(AP) - Iran played down President Barack Obama's new video message to the Iranian people on Friday, saying it welcomed the overtures but warned that decades of mistrust can't easily be erased.

Obama released the video to coincide with the major Iranian festival of Nowruz, a 12-day holiday that marks the arrival of spring and the beginning of the new year in Iran. In the video, which has Farsi subtitles, Obama said the U.S. is prepared to end the strained relations if Tehran tones down its combative rhetoric.

But in the first government reaction to the video, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's press adviser said "minor changes will not end the differences" between Tehran and Washington.

"Obama has talked of change but has taken no practical measures to address America's past mistakes in Iran. If Mr. Obama takes concrete actions and makes fundamental changes in U.S. foreign policy toward other nations including Iran, the Iranian government and people will not turn their back on him," Ali Akbar Javanfekr told the Iranian state-run English-language Press TV satellite station.

It wasn't clear how many Iranians were able to see the video, which was not aired on state television in Iran on Friday. It was likely shown on Farsi-language TV stations beamed in from outside of the country, but many Iranians don't watch television in the first days of long Nowruz holiday that is normally filled with family gatherings or vacations away from home.

Iranians could see the video on the White House Web site, but other popular video sharing sites like YouTube are blocked in Iran.

Obama has repeatedly signaled a willingness to engage with Iran about its nuclear program and hostility toward Israel, a key U.S. ally. At his inauguration, the president said his administration would reach out to rival states, declaring "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

But Iranian leaders have been not been as eager. Ahmadinejad has said Iran would welcome talks with the U.S.�but only if there was mutual respect. Iranian officials say that means the U.S. needs to stop accusing Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons and supporting terrorism, charges Tehran has denied.

Iran and the United States broke off diplomatic relations after the 1979 Islamic revolution and the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by hard-line students.

On Friday, Javanfekr blamed the United States' "hostile policy toward Iran" for the tense ties between the two countries. He said Iranian's "will never forget" Washington's past actions including the U.S.-backed coup that toppled the elected government of Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh in 1953, its backing of Saddam Hussein during Iraq's war with Iran in the 1980s and the downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988 by a U.S. naval ship.

But in Europe, the EU's policy chief urged Iranian officials to accept Obama's oustretched hand.

"It's a very constructive message," Javier Solana said at an EU summit in Brussels. "I hope that will open a new chapter in relations with Tehran."

____

On the Net:

Obama video: http://www.whitehouse.gov/Nowruz
link (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D971PVM81&show_article=1)

[maven]

I pray Obama is just making sweet with Iran so it dies'nt look so bad when he has to bomb them, but I am not hopeful. :unsure:

[Mediocrates]

WASHINGTON � Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi cut short his visit to Washington after getting an extraordinarily cool reception from the new U.S. administration.


Last year, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi had no problem setting up meetings with top officials in the U.S. government. On his current trip to Washington, Ashkenazi sought to meet the administration of President Barack Obama, but most officials were unavailable.

A statement to WorldTribune.com by the Israel Defense Forces spokesman attempted to downplay the snubs.


Diplomatic sources said Ashkenazi failed to obtain access to any Cabinet member, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Israeli military chief, who sought to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat, was also unable meet his counterpart, Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

[On March 19, the Israel Defense Forces spokesman e-mailed the following statement to WorldTribune.com: "The schedule for the United States visit of the IDF Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, was preplanned according to requests made by American officials. Any meetings that were cancelled were substituted with telephone conference calls."] The IDF Internet site (http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/today/09/03/1701.htm) reported on March 17, that Ashkenazi cut short his trip to the United States in order to participate in a security cabinet meeting regarding the abducted soldier Gilad Shalit.

On March 12, Ashkenazi left for a five-day visit to the United States meant to lobby the Obama administration to abandon the planned U.S. dialogue with Iran. Ashkenazi, scheduled to meet with the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, was expected to have brought new Israeli intelligence on Iran's nuclear weapons and missile programs.

But the diplomatic sources said the administration made it clear that nobody in a policy-making position was available to sit with Ashkenazi. This included the president, Vice President Joseph Biden, Gates, National Intelligence director Dennis Blair or Mullen.

["With regards to a meeting with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, one was not scheduled between Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi and Adm. Mullen," according to the IDF statement. "Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi has met with Adm. Mullen five times in the past year."]
"The administration is sending a very clear message to Israel, and this is we want to talk about Palestine and not Iran," a diplomat who has been following U.S.-Israel relations said.

Ashkenazi has obtained a meeting with National Security Advisor James Jones. But the sources said the meeting would focus on U.S. demands for Israel to ease military restrictions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

"The Obama administration believes that Israel is as much or more of a problem as it is an ally, at least until Israel's disagreements with its neighbors are resolved," former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said.
Bolton envisioned that the White House would pressure Israel to legitimize Hamas and Hizbullah. At the same time, he said, Obama would continue to woo Iran.

Already, economic and diplomatic advisers to Obama have urged the president to launch a U.S. dialogue with Hamas. The US/Middle East Project, which includes such Obama supporters as former Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Sen. Chuck Hagel, was said to have elicited a promise from Obama to listen to any proposals made by Hamas.

"The main gist is that you need to push hard on the Palestinian peace process," former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft said. "Don't move it to the end of your agenda and say you have too much to do. And the U.S. needs to have a position, not just hold their coats while they sit down."

The Israeli chief of staff has also scheduled a session with Dennis Ross, the special adviser on Iran to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But the sources said Ross was not regarded as being in a policy-making role.

The diplomatic sources said the White House and the senior echelon of the Obama administration have refused a dialogue with Israel on the Iranian threat. They said Ms. Clinton, during her visit to Israel, was largely silent during briefings by Israeli intelligence on Iran's nuclear and missile programs.

During her visit, Ms. Clinton received written recommendations on U.S. policy toward Iran from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. The U.S. secretary said the recommendations would be relayed to the White House.
"The Israeli government and military have been alarmed by the rapid and dramatic reversal in the U.S. policy toward Iran," the source said. "This reversal took place without any consultation with Israel, Gulf Arab countries or even Congress."

The sources said Israel has sought a U.S. commitment to limit its dialogue with Iran. Israel has also urged Obama to make it clear that the military option against Iran's nuclear program exists.

But Obama and his top aides appear uninterested in hearing Israel's position. The sources said a key aim of Ashkenazi was to urge the administration to release weapons and systems long sought by Israel in the area of aerial refueling, air-to-ground weapons, sensors as well as the F-22 fighter-jet.

In 2008, under the Bush administration, Gates and then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice blocked U.S. requests for these military systems. The sources said Gates and Ms. Rice concluded that Israel could use this equipment for an air strike on Iran's nuclear weapons facilities.

"Ashkenazi sees this U.S. refusal as what has been undermining Israeli deterrence toward Iran and boosting the confidence of the Teheran regime," the source said. "The mullahs in regime have concluded that America has dropped the military option and won't allow such an option to Israel."

[Tonto]

Relax, only 1399 more days before "The One" leaves office.

[Y. Shulamith]

Relax, only 1399 more days before "The One" leaves office.

What, until I have a choice to vote for a Republican who no less than twenty-five or so years ago wouldn't even allow a Jew into their country clubs, so's I can vote for one of them? :tdown:

The way things look, I'll be sitting out the next election, like I was going to do, this election.

[NewsGuy]

WASHINGTON � Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi cut short his visit to Washington after getting an extraordinarily cool reception from the new U.S. administration.
[...]
But Obama and his top aides appear uninterested in hearing Israel's position.

Again -- compare Obama's campaign promises and his keen interest to come to Israel and meet with Israeli leaders to get the Jewish vote, with Obama's position now that he was elected.

78% of Jews voted for this Obama? What in the world were they thinking??

[NewsGuy]

What, until I have a choice to vote for a Republican who no less than twenty-five or so years ago wouldn't even allow a Jew into their country clubs, so's I can vote for one of them?
All country clubs are operated by anti-Semitic Republicans? That's pretty funny.

On the other hand, let's not forget about the fine Democratic Senator Byrd who was a member of the KKK. Or, the Blacks who are now the core of the Democratic party who went on violent rampages against the liberal Jews who fought for their civil rights. Or the other Democrats and Obama supporters like Louis Farrakhan and the Rev Wright, Jesse Jackson, or even Cynthia McKinney -- all notorious anti-Semites.

When it comes to outright anti-Semitism, there is no doubt that the Democratic party is far more contaminated with Jew-haters than the Republicans.

And of course, when it comes to plain old racism, Obama himself is at the forefront, with racist remarks on record about his white grandmother and white people in general. As much as it's unbelievable that any Jew would vote for Obama, it's just as unbelievable that any white person or any other person who is offended by racism would vote for him.

[Tonto]

What, until I have a choice to vote for a Republican who no less than twenty-five or so years ago wouldn't even allow a Jew into their country clubs, so's I can vote for one of them? :tdown:

The way things look, I'll be sitting out the next election, like I was going to do, this election.

Good. Any liberal that does that helps elect the next republican president. A grateful nation thanks your lazy ass.:clap: We can't afford this idiot (O=zero), much less another one.

[Y. Shulamith]

Good. Any liberal that does that helps elect the next republican president. A grateful nation thanks your lazy ass.:clap: We can't afford this idiot (O=zero), much less another one.

If all the Republicans can come up with are spent cartriges like McCain and morons like Palin, that's exactly what I will do.

I wouldn't vote for either of them, even in retrospect. Those two are losers.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

This country is so filled with left of center that the Republicans are dead in the water for the next 3 elections most probably, thanks to the stupidity of the candidates that they continually try to get elected.

[Y. Shulamith]

All country clubs are operated by anti-Semitic Republicans? That's pretty funny.

On the other hand, let's not forget about the fine Democratic Senator Byrd who was a member of the KKK. Or, the Blacks who are now the core of the Democratic party who went on violent rampages against the liberal Jews who fought for their civil rights. Or the other Democrats and Obama supporters like Louis Farrakhan and the Rev Wright, Jesse Jackson, or even Cynthia McKinney -- all notorious anti-Semites.

When it comes to outright anti-Semitism, there is no doubt that the Democratic party is far more contaminated with Jew-haters than the Republicans.

And of course, when it comes to plain old racism, Obama himself is at the forefront, with racist remarks on record about his white grandmother and white people in general. As much as it's unbelievable that any Jew would vote for Obama, it's just as unbelievable that any white person or any other person who is offended by racism would vote for him.

So, Republicans are old-money anti-semites and Democrats are noveau anti-semites, some choice.........pfffffffttttttttt!!!!!

Both parties stink to high heaven.

[Y. Shulamith]

Where exactly was Bush and his buddies when all the rotten mortages were being born and brought to life, during Bush's tenure?

That's another reason to jettison the Republicans, who got us squarely here where we are, in an economic meltdown of epic proportions. Republicans and their hands off on regulations and their greedy friends in high places, with Cheney and Halliburton together.

Blame that and the Iraq war for the goings on that we have today. All the seeds were sown in the last eight years.

[Tonto]

Where exactly was Bush and his buddies when all the rotten mortages were being born and brought to life, during Bush's tenure?

That's another reason to jettison the Republicans, who got us squarely here where we are, in an economic meltdown of epic proportions. Republicans and their hands off on regulations and their greedy friends in high places, with Cheney and Halliburton together.

Blame that and the Iraq war for the goings on that we have today. All the seeds were sown in the last eight years.

They were being told by Barney Frank and his minions that "everything was beautiful" and didn't NEED the oversight that the Bush administration was trying to instigate, and kept blocking investigations at every turn. Barney Franks and several others Dems in Congress should rightfully be in jail.
And while we're at it, Obama wouldn't make a decent zit on Sarah Palin's perfect butt. So far, all he has proved is how totally out of his depth and over matched by the job he BSed his way into. He can't even find a cabinet that is "felon free" . Half the dem party should be investigated for possible indictments. The fines alone could go a long way toward settling the national debt, and that would help solve O's problem about who to tax and how to keep his friends out of it. You liberals are a pitiful bunch, and stay off of Palin or expect both barrels on the next occasion. I'm trying to stay nice but you're starting to irk me about Sarah.

[redcake]

Shulamith - You voted for a man who is going to alienate Israel and feed it to the lions. He's doing exactly what he predicted he would do. Frankly, you can stomp your feet about Bush all you want and it means nothing. Obama is responsible for what Obama is doing....new policies, new actions, new ramifications. Are you grown up to accept that?

Obama has introduced new mistakes to the equation. These mistakes trump anything Bush or even Palin could ever have imagined doing. What mistakes? Oh, you know.... burning Israel and refusing them top level diplomacy. Spending more in 6 weeks than we spent in 8 and how about showing the world we're weak and that we elected a bumbling idiot. This is the part where you should worry about Obama's own actions. For example, nothing Bush did explains why Obama is giving billions towards an organization on the State Dept. terror watch list, at the same time we're prosecuting organizations who fundraised for them. Please answer these points directly, without hyperbole. Otherwise, let me help you out with the worse of two evils scenario you're still stuck on...because the election is over, you need to stop talking about it, and realize that 62 days into Obama's Presidency, it turns out he's already the worse of two evils, especially where Israel is concerned.

[Madeline]

So, Republicans are old-money anti-semites and Democrats are noveau anti-semites, some choice.........pfffffffttttttttt!!!!!

Both parties stink to high heaven.

:clap: Point for Y.
I am hoping they will come up with someone who has a tad of common sense. It would be a start.
What a choice, McCain or Obama, pfffffffftttttttttttt!!!!! You are right on that one.
I am so surprised that we don't have anyone else in a land as vast as ours.
But then, I also think that BHO only won the nomination by the color of his skin. What better rebuttal for the left than to call even constructive criticism racist. For Clinton to call on her gender wasn't good enough, esp. after the selection of Palin as VP. I guess the GOP has nominated BHO then, but that is just IMVHO.

[Y. Shulamith]

:clap: Point for Y.
I am hoping they will come up with someone who has a tad of common sense. It would be a start.
What a choice, McCain or Obama, pfffffffftttttttttttt!!!!! You are right on that one.
I am so surprised that we don't have anyone else in a land as vast as ours.
But then, I also think that BHO only won the nomination by the color of his skin. What better rebuttal for the left than to call even constructive criticism racist. For Clinton to call on her gender wasn't good enough, esp. after the selection of Palin as VP. I guess the GOP has nominated BHO then, but that is just IMVHO.

And, Maddy, I must say that I was so disgusted with BOTH Obama and McCain tickets. I reallly was so disgusted, I wasn't going to vote. On one hand, the USA has loads of domestic problems and on the other hand, the goings on in Israel and the rest of the world, the international debacles in Paki and Afgan are another problem.

It is hard to believe that this is the best that the USA has to offer, but there it is and there you have it. I still believe that Israel can better take care of itself, than we here in the USA are able to do anymore.

I am so disgusted with the mortgage cover up of the den of thieves and then rewarding the thievery that took it's place.

We were lied to by everyone in office, making the ills of the economy seem like they were "accidents of business" rather than the outright thievery that they were from the top of mortage companies to the underwriters and clerks, to the thieves on Wall Street who bought the damaged goods. Where did "due diligence" go? Apparently, the citizens of the USA were conned into thinking that giving out bailouts were the responsible things for citizens to do, but they/we actually got conned, on top of being conned in the first place.

I live on a street of solid citizens who raise their kids and live regular lives in regular split level homes on quarter-acre lots that were built in the 1950's. We all work hard and are getting raped and pillaged by the fat-cats of every political stripe and nature. We don't have fancy Lexus' or Beemers, but take pride in our homes and our community. There are millions of other citizens like us who are being pillaged no worse than the Vikings did to Northern Europe, only now it's being done by our own government and businesspeoples.

When there is nothing left to steal and the nation really goes down the tubes, I hope these rich bastards have a nice place to go in Europe or an Island in the South Pacific, because the USA will have nothing more to be stripped of and stolen from.

I hope Obama and his wife enjoy their "gardening" while Rome burns.

George Bush should have let the bums go out of business and, in retrospect, should never have allowed the precedent be set for the bailouts in the first place. I am against any and all further bailouts.

As for Israel, I have read that they are doing fairly better during this economic meltdown. I hope that the Israelis don't financially screw each other the way the businesses in the USA have done.

[Y. Shulamith]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/opinion/23krugman.html

Economics of Despair and Obama.

[Madeline]

TEAM OBAMA'S ANTI-ISRAEL TURN
By JOHN BOLTON
Mitchell: Sure to end up legitimizing Hamas.
Mitchell: Sure to end up legitimizing Hamas.

Last updated: 1:11 am
March 13, 2009
Posted: 1:05 am
March 13, 2009

THE Obama administration is increasingly fixed on resolving the "Arab-Is raeli dispute," seeing it as the key to peace and stability in the Middle East. This is bad news for Israel - and for America.

In its purest form, this theory holds that, once Israel and its neighbors come to terms, all other regional conflicts can be duly resolved: Iran's nuclear-weapons program, fanatical anti-Western terrorism, Islam's Sunni-Shiite schism, Arab-Persian ethnic tensions.

Some advocates believe substantively that the overwhelming bulk of other Middle Eastern grievances, wholly or partly, stem from Israel's founding and continued existence. Others see it in process terms - how to "sequence" dispute resolutions, so that Arab-Israeli progress facilitates progress elsewhere.

Pursuing this talisman has long characterized many European leaders and their soulmates on the American left. The Mideast "peace process" is thus the ultimate self-licking ice cream cone - its mere existence being its basic justification.

And now the Obama administration has made it US policy. This is evidenced by two key developments: the appointment of former Sen. George Mitchell as special envoy for the region, and Secretary of State Hillary's Clinton's recent insistence on a "two-state solution" sooner rather than later.

Naming Mitchell as a high-level, single-issue envoy - rather than keeping the portfolio under Secretary Clinton's personal control - separates Israel from the broader conduct of US diplomacy. Mitchell's role underlines both the issue's priority in the president's eyes and the implicit idea it can be solved in the foreseeable future.

Obama and Mitchell have every incentive to strike a Middle East deal - both to vindicate themselves and, in their minds, to create a basis for further "progress." But there are few visible incentives for any particular substantive outcome - which is very troubling for Israel, since Mitchell's mission essentially replicates in high-profile form exactly the approach the State Department has followed for decades.

When appointed, Mitchell said confidently: "Conflicts are created, conducted and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings." This is true, however, only if the conflict's substantive resolution is less important than the process point of "ending" it one way or another. Surrender, for example, is a guaranteed way to end conflict.

Here, Clinton's strident insistence on a "two-state solution" during her recent Mideast trip becomes important. She essentially argued predestination: the "inevitability" of moving toward two states is "inescapable," and "there is no time to waste." The political consequence is clear: Since the outcome is inevitable and time is short, there is no excuse for not making "progress." Delay is evidence of obstructionism and failure - something President Obama can't tolerate, for the sake of his policies and his political reputation.

In this very European view, failure on the Arab-Israeli front presages failure elsewhere. Accordingly, the Obama adminstration has created a negotiating dynamic that puts increasing pressure on Israel, Palestinians, Syria and others.

Almost invariably, Israel is the loser - because Israel is the party most dependent on the United States, most subject to US pressure and most susceptible to the inevitable chorus of received wisdom from Western diplomats, media and the intelligentsia demanding concessions. When pressure must be applied to make compromises, it's always easier to pressure the more reasonable side.

How will diplomatic pressure work to change Hamas or Hezbollah, where even military force has so far failed? If anything, one can predict coming pressure on Israel to acknowledge the legitimacy of these two terrorist groups, and to negotiate with them as equals (albeit perhaps under some artful camouflage). The pattern is so common that its reappearance in the Mitchell-led negotiations is what is really "inevitable" and "inescapable."

Why would America subject a close ally to this dynamic, playing with the security of an unvarying supporter in world affairs? For America, Israel's intelligence-sharing, military cooperation and significant bilateral economic ties, among many others, are important national-security assets that should not lightly be put at risk.

The only understandable answer is that the Obama administration believes that Israel is as much or more of a problem as it is an ally, at least until Israel's disagreements with its neighbors are resolved. Instead of seeing Israel as a national-security asset, the administration likely sees a relationship complicating its broader policy of diplomatic "outreach."

No one will say so publicly, but this is the root cause of Obama's "Arab-Israeli issues first" approach to the region.

This approach is exactly backward. All the other regional problems would still exist even if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad got his fondest wish and Israel disappeared from the map: Iran's nuclear-weapons program, its role as the world's central banker for terrorism, the Sunni-Shiite conflict within Islam, Sunni terrorist groups like al Qaeda and other regional ethnic, national and political animosities would continue as threats and risks for decades to come.

Instead, the US focus should be on Iran and the manifold threats it poses to Israel, to Arab states friendly to Washington and to the United States itself - but that is not to be.

President Obama argues that he will deal comprehensively with the entire region. Rhetoric is certainly his specialty, but in the Middle East rhetoric only lasts so long. Performance is the real measure - and the administration's performance to date points in only one direction: pressuring Israel while wooing Iran.

Others in the world - friend and foe alike - will draw their own conclusions.

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton is an American Enterprise Institute senior fellow.

[Madeline]

EXCERPT from the link below from a former FED member:

"...A bit of history is in order. Following World War I, the Harding-Coolidge-Mellon Republicans returned the country to tax normalcy by reducing Woodrow Wilson's 75 percent wartime tax to 25 percent -- thus triggering the roaring growth of the 1920s. Then came the Depression, spawned in large part by Herbert Hoover and FDR, who raised the top tax rate to 63 percent, 70 percent and finally 94 percent.

The Robert Taft Republican Congress elected in 1946 lowered those tax rates, but they later bounced back to 91 percent, where they held until JFK proposed sweeping tax reform in the 1960s. The top tax rate was reduced to 70 percent, igniting the 1960s boom -- until it was undone by the inflationary Fed and Nixon's de-linking of the dollar from gold. But President Reagan slashed the top tax rate all the way down to 28 percent. This launched a multi-decade boom, with the top rate not straying far from Reagan's vision..."
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/lkudlow/2009/lk_03211.shtml


The Weimar Watch -- worse than the cure....HYPER INFLATION! Just a note: John Crudele warned about this crisis years ago!

EXCERPT from the link below:

"....We all know what happens when a nuclear bomb goes off, but people younger than 60 may not recognize the Weimar image of Germans before WWII pushing wheelbarrows of currency to make ordinary purchases. Hyperinflation and the collapse of that country's currency led to the rise of the Nazi Party...."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03222009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_coming_inflation_crisis_160749.htm

[Madeline]

More Obama News. What a fine Diplomat he is.



Update: Israel's chief of staff cuts short trip after doors close in Obama's Washington
WASHINGTON � Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi cut short his visit to Washington after getting an extraordinarily cool reception from the new U.S. administration.....
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2009/ss_israel0219_03_16.asp

[maven]

John Bolton is shooting off at the mouth again, love the guy but he takes things to extremes. What does he propose? That Israel wait until all the regimes surrounding her have been overthrown by the very Islamists who are currently preparing in the UK and Dearborn Michigan to develop their Iranian/Al Quaida plan to use the excuse of a stalled peace process to further internationalise the dogmas of the Muslim Brotherhood and unite it's disparate armies like this large standing army of twenty-thousand grim-faced terrorists of fighting age in the video below marching in London?

"It is incumbent upon us to make Jihad in Gaza": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu9poxyQBmk

The Arab regimes need us as much as we need them in order for all of us to survive. The PLO and Hamas are are a bunch of hairdressers compared to the Western university educated terrorists in the clip above who know how to defeat us on many more levels than our dear old Walrus Bolton imagines.

If we don't make peace we will surely go down at the hands of the Islamists who are multiplying like flies in every Western nation and growing exponentially in every Muslim nation. If we make peace then we will be legit in the eyes of the world in a way we are not now and that gives us more right to fight and more right to international support to defend ourselves.

The shape the peace takes will guarantee our security. The 'peace wall' in Belfast is still dividing the communities even though they have completed their peace process, our wall will remain on an indefiniate basis. Israel will not have to open her territory to free passage by Pals in return for peace. If Israel's greatest leader and her own Winston Churchill Ariel Sharon thought it could be done then that's good enough for me. :unsure:

Hizb-Ut-Tahrir Faq: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir (Remember this is only one of the UK's Islamist groups.)

[Brody15]

Obama is America's top snake-oil salesman.


He only one-ups Al Gore because of his status as president!

[Brody15]

Sorry for the double post, but I was listening to Dennis Miller last night, he was talking about the Obama and Iran, and as he so eloquently put it "Obama, she's just not into you man." Meaning, Iran has no intentions to come to the table with the US, same policy they've had for 30 years.

[redcake]

So it seems many of the bloggers with critical reports on Obama's activities do not know who Alex Jones is, and think he's on their side.

I'm not shocked the neo-Nazi, 9/11 truther crowd would be playing both sides of the fence, but there's absolutely no excuse for embracing them. Fox News made a positive mention of Alex Jones the other day, and now checkout Gateway Pundits report on Obama Corp. While likening it to Hitler Youth, they link to Alex Jones website as a source, a man who has consistently called Israelis "Nazis".

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/03/house-passes-dear-leaders-hitler-youth.html#links

[Madeline]

So it seems many of the bloggers with critical reports on Obama's activities do not know who Alex Jones is, and think he's on their side.

I'm not shocked the neo-Nazi, 9/11 truther crowd would be playing both sides of the fence, but there's absolutely no excuse for embracing them. Fox News made a positive mention of Alex Jones the other day, and now checkout Gateway Pundits report on Obama Corp. While likening it to Hitler Youth, they link to Alex Jones website as a source, a man who has consistently called Israelis "Nazis".

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/03/house-passes-dear-leaders-hitler-youth.html#links

I must agree that many who seek to criticize BHO are taking sources like A.J and even the NYT serious when it fits a need, and I don't like it. And I am the first one to point it out. Yet, A.J is only one source. BHO himself confirms and gives credit to A.J. simply by being BHO....without teleprompter that is...his true colors are shining through. Only if you are blind or.........

[redcake]

That's ridiculous. Alex Jones isn't a source. Period.

Obama hasn't done anything to confirm the Alex Jones hypothesis which includes Jews running the world, and Israel creating 9/11 with Bush. There is no reason Conservative/Republican sites should be sending their readership to a hate site which targets Jews..... and it almost sounds like you're rationalizing that a smidgen. NY Times at their worst should never be compared to Alex Jones. It's not cute and it's not accurate.

[Madeline]

That's ridiculous. Alex Jones isn't a source. Period.

Obama hasn't done anything to confirm the Alex Jones hypothesis which includes Jews running the world, and Israel creating 9/11 with Bush. There is no reason Conservative/Republican sites should be sending their readership to a hate site which targets Jews..... and it almost sounds like you're rationalizing that a smidgen. NY Times at their worst should never be compared to Alex Jones. It's not cute and it's not accurate.
Sorry, but you have to get out more often. This is exactly what is happening in conservative circles, and it drives me crazy.

[redcake]

No idea what you're talking about.

[Madeline]

No idea what you're talking about.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. You were saying that Conservatives don't give credit to Alex Jones?

[redcake]

Huh?

I'm saying nobody in their right mind, of any political persuasion should be treating Alex Jones as anything but a conspiracy loon who spent 8 years promoting Judeophobic theories, alongside Rense.

To compare the NY Times with Alex Jones is dangerous because most people regard the NY Times an actual news source, biased and prone to propaganda as they may be. It certainly doesn't help when you're trying to explain to people why they should not be using Alex Jones as a resource, treating him as a legit opinion. It's that kind of stupidity that has David Duke, Chomsky, DailyKos, and Stormfront, all united when it's useful. Two months ago, no Conservative blogger with an education would have linked to Alex Jones unless they were mocking him. Jones lost his core base for being too nutty, and/or the revelation that he must be a Zionist mole because nobody could be that crazy....and now he's trying to revive himself under the common banner of Obamahate. Nobody should fall for it. You know the expression "even a fascist can be right once a day" ?

[Madeline]

Huh?

I'm saying nobody in their right mind, of any political persuasion should be treating Alex Jones as anything but a conspiracy loon who spent 8 years promoting Judeophobic theories, alongside Rense.

To compare the NY Times with Alex Jones is dangerous because most people regard the NY Times an actual news source, biased and prone to propaganda as they may be. It certainly doesn't help when you're trying to explain to people why they should not be using Alex Jones as a resource, treating him as a legit opinion. It's that kind of stupidity that has David Duke, Chomsky, DailyKos, and Stormfront, all united when it's useful. Two months ago, no Conservative blogger with an education would have linked to Alex Jones unless they were mocking him. Jones lost his core base for being too nutty, and/or the revelation that he must be a Zionist mole because nobody could be that crazy....and now he's trying to revive himself under the common banner of Obamahate. Nobody should fall for it. You know the expression "even a fascist can be right once a day" ?
First of all, I should clarify my position re: NYT. Many Conservatives see it as nothing but a biased news source indeed. What I find strange is the fact that if one questions the NYT's legitimacy, why then cite it as a source when it fits a certain agenda/point of view? It does not work both ways.

Many buy into the birth certificate debacle and the conspiracy theory that may, or may not be behind the BHO Presidency, and do use Jones,Berg,Taitz and others as sources, sadly. And yes, it diminished the credibility of those who are not duped by the administration for more legitimate reasons.

[redcake]

NY Times is an accredited newsource.

Alex Jones network of blogs, and short wave radio shows is not.

[Madeline]

Ok folks, this is a must read. It confirms what I stated many times before......

'I'm having a very good crisis,' says Soros as hedge fund managers make billions off recession



George Soros said the current economic crisis has been the culmination of his life's work

A hedge fund manager who predicted the global credit crunch has said the financial crisis has been 'stimulating' and the culmination of his life's work.

George Soros, who predicted the global financial crisis twice before, was one of the few people to anticipate and prepare for the current economic collapse.

Mr Soros said his prediction meant he was better able to brace his Quantum investment fund against the gloabal storm.

But other investors failed to take notice of his prediction and his decision to come out of retirement in 2007 to manage the fund made him $US2.9 billion.

And while the financial crisis continued to deepen across the globe, the 78-year-old still managed to make $1.1 billion last year.

'It is, in a way, the culminating point of my life’s work,' he told national newspaper The Australian.

Soros is one of 25, top hedge fund managers from across Wall Street who have defied the credit crunch crisis to reap a total of $11.6billion (£7.9bn) last year.

The managers made their profit by trading above the pain in the markets, according to Institutional Investor’s Alpha Magazine.

Former maths professor James H. Simons, who has made billions in hedge fund Renaissance Technologies, earned $2.5 billion running computer-driven trading strategies.

And John A. Paulson, who made his fortune by betting against the housing market, came in second earning $2 billion.
more (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1164771/Im-having-good-crisis-says-hedge-fund-manager-1billion-world-plunged-recession.html)

[bararallu]

NY Times is an accredited newsource.

Alex Jones network of blogs, and short wave radio shows is not.

Doesn't that make the NYT that more insidious and culpable...? where AJ is a lunatic and everyone, even some of his followers know that. The NYT subtly manipulates public opinion. During WW2 they looked the other way at the onset of the Holocaust; through Walter Duranty's hiding of Soviet atrocities, through subtle demonification of Israel and inversely giving it's detractors legitimacy. That as you know includes everyone from Arafat to Chomsky to Hamas. They make up stuff all the time too, and their retractions are pathetic esp since the damage is done.

[Y. Shulamith]

Alex Jones, on a quick perusal, just another right wing lunatic fringer....the kind of moron who gives the left wing lunatics at DU credibility.

If the likes of Alex Jones are part of your mantra, you've got loads more problems than believing false rhetortic from an anti-semite....you are in cahoots with a loathsome fearmonger, I am afeared.

[redcake]

Doesn't that make the NYT that more insidious and culpable...? where AJ is a lunatic and everyone, even some of his followers know that. The NYT subtly manipulates public opinion.

The point is to try and explain to the Anti-Obama crowd why it's not okay validate Alex Jones, especially when most of them would have laughed at the guy 2 months ago for his anti-Bush rhetoric. Propping Alex Jones up with comparisons to mainstream media is a bad idea.

If you want to start a different crusade against NY Times, fine... but let's not muddy up the issue for people who are already confused.

Shulamith - The correct answer is he's just a lunatic fringer. A few months ago he was the darling of the Left.

[bararallu]

The point is to try and explain to the Anti-Obama crowd why it's not okay validate Alex Jones, especially when most of them would have laughed at the guy 2 months ago for his anti-Bush rhetoric. Propping Alex Jones up with comparisons to mainstream media is a bad idea.

I understand your point. I'm just trying to demonstrate that the gravity well of lying for effect sucks in the NYT and much of the mainstream press just the same.

The critical difference, and that is where I would like to principally disagree, is that their reputation makes them a far more effective in propagating anti-Semitism 'lite' (= anti-Zionism) than the outright militant paleocon like Jones can ever hope to accomplish. For all his moronic bravado and hate rhetoric, he's a known nut. The NYT on the other hand, to many people, is an angel doing Gods work, all the news that's fit to print. Destroying their reputation, or at least weakening it (http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/11/the_new_york_times_and_the_jew.html), should be part of the pro Israel game plan IMHO.


If you want to start a different crusade against NY Times, fine... but let's not muddy up the issue for people who are already confused.

I hope I clarified my point, and I don't mean to confuse the situation. Alex Jones is a pure hate monger. To site him is tantamount to siting someone like Buchanan or Farakhan.

[redcake]

...but we're talking about people who *don't* know he's a nut, or don't seem to get what kind of nut (case and point the post above calling him a right winger).

The NY Times issue is a different one.

[Yala]

I am with Bararallu on this, although I do understand your point RC.

As far as the NY Times goes, Richard Cohen has been whitewashing Iran since his trip in January and has written several editorials insisting they are a very pragmatic regime. While he is insinuating that the mullahs in Tehran are moderate, he is continuously painting Netanyahu out to be the ultimate extremist.

[redcake]

So blogs should stop linking to the New York Times?
This whole side discussion just seems really off topic.

My original criticism was for established blogs linking to fringe sources on Obama sources with no care for their previous record. I know LGF has taken up the same argument with other blogs. Feel free to pick your own battles, but I do think we need to hold our favorites accountable for their bedfellows. Funny, how us Jews always get the brunt of it.

[Y. Shulamith]

The point is to try and explain to the Anti-Obama crowd why it's not okay validate Alex Jones, especially when most of them would have laughed at the guy 2 months ago for his anti-Bush rhetoric. Propping Alex Jones up with comparisons to mainstream media is a bad idea.

If you want to start a different crusade against NY Times, fine... but let's not muddy up the issue for people who are already confused.

Shulamith - The correct answer is he's just a lunatic fringer. A few months ago he was the darling of the Left.

I don't care whose darling is who at any given moment; like I said, the left is just a piece of semantics, no more or less than the right.

A nut case is a nut case regardless of who thinks he is a darling and when or when they cease to be somebody's darling. A nut case is a lunatic-fringer no matter whose holding court for the given nut case at any given time.

;)

[Mediocrates]

Syrian Reactions to Initial Contacts with Obama Administration: The U.S. has Capitulated to Syria and Iran; The Resistance, Not Obama, has Changed the World; By: O. Winter * Introduction
Since the beginning of the Obama administration there have been contacts between the U.S. and Syria, including a handshake between the two countries' foreign ministers at the March 2, 2009Sharm Al-Sheikh conference, [1] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn1) visits by several Congressional delegations to Syria, and a meeting between Syrian Ambassador to Washington 'Imad Mustafa and U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman. [2] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn2)
At the outset of the dialogue, both sides expressed cautious optimism regarding its chances of success. In an interview for the UAE daily Al-Khaleej, Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad said that despite the Obama administration's apparent good intentions, Syria was still waiting to hear clear and precise details about the new U.S. policy. [3] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn3) In an interview with the British Gaurdian, Assad said, "We have the impression that this administration will be different, and we have seen the signals. But we have to wait for the reality and the results." [4] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn4)
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, stated that it was too early to talk about "the ice melting" between Damascus and Washington, [5] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn5) and her deputy assistant, Jeffrey Feltman, said after his February 15, 2009 meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Mu'allem that the U.S. had not yet reached understandings with Syria about all of the outstanding issues. [6] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn6) A more optimistic message was conveyed by Senate Foreign Relations Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee) Chairman John Kerry and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman following their meeting with President Assad. Kerry stated that despite the disagreements, there is a chance for genuine cooperation between the two countries on various issues, while Berman expressed hope that the U.S. and Syria would turn over a new leaf in their relations. He added that the policy of isolating Syriahad proved to be ineffective, and that there is need for dialogue with it. [7] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn7)
According to the Arab press, the U.S. has presented Syria with a list of preconditions for improving relations between the two countries. At a press conference he held in Beirut before his arrival in Damascus, Kerry said that Syria must respect Lebanon's independence, advance a solution to the inter-Palestinian conflicts and the conflicts between Hizbullah and the other Lebanese factions, promote the implementation of U.N. Resolution 1701, and change its behavior towards Iraq. He added that the Obama administration expected to see action, not talk. [8] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn8) Senate Foreign Relations Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee) member Benjamin Cardin demanded that Syria stop sponsoring terror, called on it to change its policies regarding human rights and freedom of speech, and characterized its relations with Iran as "worrying." [9] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn9)
A senior U.S. State Department official told the Lebanese daily Al-Nahar that during Feltman's meeting with the Syrian ambassador to Washington, the former had brought up the issues of Syria's support of terrorism, its efforts to obtain nuclear weapons, its involvement in Lebanon, and the deterioration of the human rights situation in Syria. [10] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn10) The Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar reported that if Syria severed its ties with Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas, and other Palestinian factions that operate within its territory, the U.S. would be willing to play a role in Israeli-Syrian negotiations, to remove Syria from the list of states sponsoring terror, and to lift the sanctions currently imposed on it. [11] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn11)

Syrian Reactions to Renewal of Dialogue with U.S.: Syria has No Intention of Changing Its Policy and will Continue to be Part of Resistance camp; It is the U.S. that Must Change Its Policy
After the commencement of the U.S.-Syria dialogue, spokesmen of the Syrian regime and articles in the Syrian press expressed the following positions:
· Syria has no intention of changing its policy and will continue to be part of the resistance camp. The U.S. is the one that must change its policy by lifting the sanctions imposed on Syria, appointing an ambassador to Damascus, and launching a dialogue with the resistance forces.
· In starting a dialogue with Syria, the U.S. has capitulated to the resistance and acknowledged the importance of Syria and Iran.
· The advent of the Obama administration does not herald an improvement in the relations with Syria.
Following are excerpts from some of the statements and articles:

Assad's Political Advisor: "It is Time to Stop Telling Syria and Iran to Sever Their Relations with Hizbullah, Hamas, and the Other Resistance Organizations"
Most of the reports that have been published in the Syrian and Arab press to date indicate that Syria generally rejects the U.S. demands, and stresses that its policy has remained unchanged. In his meeting with Senator John Kerry, Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad called on the U.S. to relinquish the policy of dictates that has proven to be ineffective, stating that dialogue is the only way to identify the real problems and formulate a comprehensive vision for resolving them. [12] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn12) Assad's political and media advisor Buthaina Sha'ban said in a talk at London's Westminster University that improved relations with the U.S. would not be at the expense of Syria's relations with Iran, and added, "It is [also] time to stop telling Syria and Iran to sever their relations with Hizbullah, Hamas, and the other resistance organizations." [13] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn13) Knowledgeable sources in Damascus told the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar that Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Mu'allem had told U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman that Syria is determined to maintain its tight relations with Iran, and that it is the West that had to change its policy towards Syria. [14] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn14)
Articles in the Arab press likewise expressed reservations about the preconditions presented by the U.S. for improving its relations with Syria. Responding to the demands conveyed by Senator Benjamin Cardin, the editor of the Syrian daily Al-Watan, Wadhah 'Abd Rabbou, wrote: "If the two [U.S.] delegations that are coming [to Syria, i.e., the Berman and Kerry delegations] … have the same positions and the same demands [as Cardin], maybe they should spare themselves the tiring trip to Damascus, since they obviously won't find anyone in Syria who will listen to the American dictates." 'Abd Rabbou added: "The Syrians are now waiting for a change in the policy of the U.S., not in the policy of Syria." [15] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn15)
'Ali Jamalo, editor of the Syrian government-affiliated website Champress, wrote: "Cardin's demands are insolent, to use the mildest possible term… As for the statements made by Senator John Kerry in Beirut, they reflect a lack of understanding of the region and its ways." [16] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn16)
Syrian Ambassador to Washington 'Imad Mustafa likewise stressed that Syria's dialogue with the U.S. did not mean a change in its policy. In a talk he gave in Damascus, he said: "Syria's winning card is [the fact that] it has not moved from its positions despite all the pressures it has been facing… The [fundamental] principles of [its] policy towards Washington have never changed, [even] in the most difficult circumstances." Mustafa stressed that, despite the attempts of the Bush administration to bring about a change in its policy, Syria never "submitted to this blackmail." [17] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn17)
Al-Watan columnist Janblat Shikawi wrote in a similar vein: "During [the terms of] at least five American administrations, Syria chose to be part of the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance camp, and to build up its relations with Iran, in accordance with its strategic vision. These administrations have come and gone, while Syria has only become more and more resolute [in] its position." [18] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn18)

[Mediocrates]

However, other statements and reports indicate that Syria has shown some willingness to comply with the U.S. demands. In an interview for Al-Jazeera, Al-Mu'allem said that there were "some points of convergence" between the Syrian and U.S. positions regarding the security, stability, and unity of Iraq, and that Syria supports Obama's decision to withdraw from this country. [19] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn19) Al-Akhbar reported that, in his meeting with Feltman, Al-Mu'allem had expressed willingness to support the implementation of Resolution 1701, and had disclosed that Syria was forming a special team to demarcate its border with Lebanon. [20] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn20) The London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported, citing an American source, that during Kerry's visit to Damascus, Syria had expressed a willingness help settle the conflict between Fatah and Hamas and establish of a Palestinian unity government, and to promote the release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. [21] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn21) The Syrian government daily Al-Thawra quoted Syrian Ambassador to Washington 'Imad Mustafa as saying, "There is much common ground between Syria and the U.S. as to ending the war in Iraq, attaining peace , restoring the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, and establishing a Palestinian state. However, there are disagreements about the details, and about the methods and mechanisms of implementation." [22] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn22)

Former Syrian Minister: Three Scenarios for U.S.-Syria Cooperation
In a [I]Teshreen article, former Syrian information minister Mahdi Dahlallah reviewed the points of agreement and controversy between Syria and the U.S., and presented several scenarios for cooperation between them:
"Syria and Washington agree on three things: on terrorism, on peace, and on weapons of mass destruction. They disagree on three things: on terrorism, on peace, and on weapons of mass destruction...
"[As for] terrorism, Syria's position is that the most significant terrorism in the region is [perpetrated by] the state of Israel, whose barbarism and brutality are beyond anything that human history has ever known. Then there is the terrorism of the groups that engage in takfir [i.e., accuse others of heresy, such as Al-Qaeda]… The foundation of [Syria's] position is a total rejection of the deliberate confusion between resistance and terrorism. The U.S., on the other hand, regards the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance as the source of terrorism, and sees anyone who supports them as responsible for terrorism. This is a fundamental difference in the positions of the two countries. However, there is agreement regarding the designation of the takfir groups - especially Al-Qaeda and its offshoots - as terrorist [organizations]…
"[Regarding the issue of] peace, Syria's position is clear. [It is in favor of a] comprehensive peace based on the [U.N. resolutions]… The U.S. must play an active and meaningful role [in this process], since Israel will not accept peace willingly, only if coerced. Washington, on the other hand, thinks that the peace agreement must be bilateral, and that its only role should be that of an impartial mediator… Washington believes that pressure must be exerted on the Arabs, but that exerting pressure on Israel is almost unthinkable…
"[Last, as for] WMDs, Syria is cognizant of Israel's dangerous nuclear arsenal, while the U.S. sees [only] Iran's so-called nuclear program. This is the greatest point of disagreement between the two sides…
"There are three practical scenarios for cooperation [between Syria and the U.S.]:
"1. Placing the bilateral relations and cooperation above the regional issues. There is no doubt that a positive atmosphere in the bilateral relations [between the U.S. and Syria] would lead to greater understanding on the regional issues. The problem is that, so far, Washington [has insisted] on linking the bilateral relations with the regional issues. [23] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn23)
"2. Agreeing that Syria should mediate between Iran and the West…
"3. A change in the U.S. position vis-ÃÂ-vis the Arab-Israeli conflict (a remote possibility)." [24] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn24)

[B]Syria's Demand for Fundamental Changes in U.S. Policy
While rejecting most of the U.S. demands regarding its own policy, Syria expects the Obama administration to introduce a series of changes in the U.S. policy vis-ÃÂ-vis Syria and the Middle East:
1.Lifting the sanctions imposed on Syria: A short while after Obama's election, Syrian Vice President Farouq Al-Shar' stated that an improvement in Syria-U.S. relations required the removal of Syria from the list of countries sponsoring terror, and the abolition of the December 2003 Syria Accountability Act, which imposes a series of sanctions on Syria as a country that sponsors terror and possesses non-conventional weapons. [25] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn25) As a matter of fact, the Syrian press recently reported that the U.S. has begun easing the sanctions, [26] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn26) though high-ranking U.S. officials denied this claim. [27] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn27) It should be noted that in a recent interview for Al-Thawra, Ambassador 'Imad Mustafa obfuscated the traditional Syrian demand for a complete lifting of the sanctions. He said that Syria refused to discuss the Syria Accountability Act with the Obama administration, since this could open it to blackmail, but added that the U.S. "knew what it had to do" in order to mend its relations with Syria. [28] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn28)
2. Appointing a U.S. Ambassador in Damascus: Syrian officials, including Assad's advisor Buthaina Sha'ban, expressed a hope that an improvement in the relations with the U.S. would lead to the appointment of a U.S. ambassador in Damascus. [29] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn29) Syria's Al-Watan even reported, citing diplomatic sources in Washington, that the U.S. meant to appoint an ambassador this summer. [30] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn30) 'Imad Mustafa, however, downplayed the importance of this decision, saying that the appointment of an ambassador in Damascus was an American, rather than Syrian, interest. [31] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn31)
3. Launching a U.S. Dialogue with Hamas and Hizbullah: Syria also demands that the U.S. change its attitude towards the resistance forces. Mustafa called on it "to negotiate with all forces, including Hamas and Hizbullah," in order to bring peace to the Middle East. [32] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn32) Teshreen editor Samira Al-Masalma wrote in an editorial that "If the U.S. wishes … to sponsor the peace process, it must be impeccably impartial and fair. To that end, it must declare that resistance is a legitimate right, and that terror and resistance are two different things." [33] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn33) Columnist 'Ali Nasrallah wrote in Al-Thawra that the U.S. could reach significant understandings with Syria if it recognized the peoples' right to resist occupation and Syria's right to receive back the Golan, upheld the Security Council resolutions, and refrained from interfering in the affairs of sovereign states. [34] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn34)

[Mediocrates]

The U.S. has Capitulated to Syria and Iran
Syrian regime spokesmen stressed the changes that have occurred in the U.S. policy towards Syria, in contrast to Syria's firm insistence on its traditional views. The Syrian press presented this as an American capitulation to Syria and Iran, and as an acknowledgement of their status.
Buthaina Sha'ban assessed that there is "a real change in the position of the American administration," [35] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn35) while Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Al-Miqdad stated, "The Obama administration has no choice but to negotiate with the forces in the region in an attempt to improve its image." [36] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn36) Ambassador Mustafa likewise stated that the visits of the U.S. delegations "might indicate a fundamental change in the U.S. position on the points of contention between the two countries." He added that the "social boycott" that Bush had placed upon the Syrian embassy in Washington had been lifted, and that for the first time in four years he had been invited to take part in an event organized by the U.S. administration for diplomatic staff. [37] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn37)

Former Syrian Minister: "We Can Not Believe that the [Obama] Administration Suddenly Discovered Moral Sentiments or Positions that Prompted the Turnaround [in Its Attitude]"
Articles in Teshreen stated that the resistance had forced the U.S. to change its policy in the region. Former Syrian information minister Mahdi Dahlallah wrote: "The most important factor that brought about the change is the Arab resistance camp, [comprising] Syria, the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance, and the Iraqi people, who refused [to accept] the occupation. Additional [factors] are the Iranian position, which refuses to accept the [American] hegemony, as well as the new Russian policy…
"Had Bush been able [to implement] his policy without meeting opposition from anyone, the new administration would have continued the same policy… The change introduced by Obama … does not stem from an [American] reassessment of its ideology … but from failure to achieve the goals that the U.S. was - and still is - pursuing… This means that it was not Obama that changed the world, but the resistance and the refusal [to accept] hegemony. [It also means that] persistence in this path is the best way to continue advancing towards a better [future]. Should the resistance lose momentum, Obama - and the Western leadership as a whole - will re-embrace the method of hegemony and dictates." [38] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn38)
Similar sentiments were expressed by Syrian Parliament Member Khaled Al-'Aboud: "We cannot believe that the [Obama] administration suddenly discovered moral sentiments or positions that prompted the turnaround [in its attitude towards Syria]. [This administration simply] realized that it can not promote the totality of its interests in the region without a relationship with the Syrians… The [Obama] administration was forced to take this course, and should be treated accordingly." [39] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn39)

[B]Damascus and Tehran Are No Longer Seen as Two Separate Players
Muhammad Sadeq Al-Husseini, secretary-general of the Iranian-Arab Dialogue Forum, wrote in [I]Teshreen that the U.S. will not be able to stop the decline of its status in the Middle East and the world, unless it recognizes the importance of Syria and Iran: "There has been a turnaround in America's [attitude], albeit a vague and hesitant one, and this strengthens our belief that the U.S. is declining on several levels - global and regional - and that [this deterioration] cannot be stopped without recognizing the importance of Damascus and Tehran!…
"This does not mean, of course, that the honeymoon between Damascus and Washington, or between Tehran and Washington, has begun, but it is [nevertheless] meaningful in two ways. First, the U.S. is weak and exhausted, and has been forced to submit to the important role of the two capitals [Damascus and Tehran] (as the Baker-Hamilton Commission advised it to do)… Second, Damascus and Tehran are no longer seen as two separate players that have problematic bilateral [relations] with the U.S. or the international community… [They are part of] a camp, or an alliance, that has wagered on the option of resistance and has exhibited strategic patience, wisdom. and intelligence for many lean years, and is [now] reaping [a bountiful] harvest." [40] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn40)

Lebanese Columnist Writing in Teshreen: Whoever Bets on the Resistance Withdrawing from Its Decisions - Ends Up Losing Again and Again
"Former Lebanese MP Nasser Qandil, who is close to the Syrian regime, also wrote in Teshreen about the gradual erosion in America's position vis-ÃÂ-vis Syria: "[The U.S.] has called for a change in Syria's position … so far, it is the U.S. itself that has changed its position twice. [First], it replaced its hegemonial plan with the plan [of calling on Syria] to change its conduct as a precondition for American openness towards it. [Then] it replaced the plan of dictating preconditions with [a policy] of unconditional dialogue. As for Syria - has it changed in any way? It is Washington, then, that changes its conduct, while Syria only adheres ever more resolutely to its decisions. Whoever bets on the resistance withdrawing from its decisions ends up losing again and again. [41] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn41)

[B]The Obama Administration Will Not Help Improve U.S.-Syrian Relations
Several articles in the Syrian press expressed doubt that the Obama administration would bring about an improvement in the U.S.-Syrian relations, and even contended that Obama's election ran counter to the interests of the Arabs.

Syrian MP: Obama Is Following in Bush's Footsteps
In a Teshreen article, Syrian MP Khaled Al-'Aboud wrote: "The U.S. insists on playing a role that, so far, has been too big for it. It has not yet grasped the facts or [acknowledged] the legitimate and unquestionable rights of the people of the region, and it is far from being able to contribute to the creation of a secure and stable region, endowed with peace and relations based on the understanding of the rights and interests of others."
Al-'Aboud proceeded to present evidence that the Obama administration follows in the footsteps of the previous U.S. administrations: "The U.S. continues to maintain [the March 14 Forces in Lebanon] as a major U.S. tool in the region, using it as a lever to promote the U.S.-Israeli project and to harm Syria… Nor is it loath to use the arrest warrant [against the Sudanese President 'Omar Al-Bashir] as a tool to apply pressure … and achieve its objectives in Africa… We can also see that it is seeking regional and Arab platforms from which to exert pressure on Iran without engaging in direct military conflict with it - which, [the U.S.] knows, would cost it dearly… A military conflict between the Arabs and Iran would weaken both sides, and at the same time ensure the interests of the U.S. and Israel." [42] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn42)

Article in a Syrian Government Daily: The U.S. Is the Enemy of All the Peoples on the Face of the Earth
Palestinian philosopher Dr. Ahmad Burqawi, of the Philosophy Department at Damascus University, argued in Al-Thawra that Obama's election ran counter to the Arab interests, since it would slow down the erosion of the U.S.'s power. He wrote: "Many columnists were jubilant when Obama prevailed over his Republican rival, whose name I have already forgotten, in the U.S. presidential [elections]. [So great was the enthusiasm] that it seemed as if, had the Arabs been able to vote, Obama would have won by an overwhelming 99 percent majority - as is usually the case here [among the Arabs] - but this time, [the results would have been] genuine.
"The ecstasy displayed by the Arab public as it followed Obama's victory on the [television] screens is understandable. Their hatred for Bush made them feel vengeful, [and they felt] as though Obama was taking revenge on Bush in their name… For myself, I hoped that the Republican candidate would win in a landslide, because I thought it in the Arabs' interests that the U.S. continue its idiotic policies in the world, which were leading it into crisis after crisis. We have no interest in a savior who will deliver the U.S. from the diplomatic, financial, and global crisis . In my opinion, the Arabs' delight at Obama's election reflects a naïve and simplistic outlook based on nothing more than vengefulness…
"Oh Arabs, instead of rejoicing at Obama's victory, think how we can force the U.S. to recognize our existence, our rights, and our humanity in Palestine, Iraq, and Sudan, and how to encourage it to take us into consideration as it plans the future of the region according to its own interests. Oh Arabs, the U.S., at this stage of its history, is, to some degree, the enemy of every nation on the face of the earth… Its policy is pitched against nature, against man, against the future, and against the Arab nation - its culture and its future. The U.S. is [the enemy] of our hopes." [43] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_edn43)

[I]*O. Winter is a research fellow at MEMRI

[Mediocrates]

[1] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref1) Al-Watan (Syria), March 3, 2009.
[2] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref2) A delegation headed by Congressman Adam Smith visited Syria in late January 2009. Three other Congress delegations, headed by Benjamin Cardin, John Kerry and Howard Berman, respectively, came to Syria in February 2009. Also, in early March 2009, Jeffrey Feltman and National Security Council member Daniel Shapiro met in Damascus with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Mu'allem. Al-Watan (Syria), February 1, 19, 22, 2009; Al-Thawra (Syria), February 27, March 8, 2009.
[3] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref3) Al-Khaleej (UAE), March 9, 2009.
[4] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref4) The Guardian (UK), February 17, 2009.
[5] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref5) Reuters, February 26, 2009.
[6] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref6) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), March 8, 2009.
[7] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref7) Al-Watan (Syria), February 22, 2009.
[8] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref8) Al-Hayat (London), February 19, 2009.
[9] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref9) Al-Watan (Syria), February 19, 2009.
[10] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref10) Al-Nahar (Lebanon), February 27, 2009.
[11] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref11) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), March 12, 2009.
[12] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref12) Al-Thawra (Syria), February 22, 2009.
[13] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref13) Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), March 19, 2009.
[14] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref14) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), march 12, 2009.
[15] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref15) Al-Watan (Syria), February 19, 2009.
[16] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref16) www.champress.net (http://www.champress.net/), February 21, 2009.
[17] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref17) Al-Watan (Syria), February 24, 2009.
[18] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref18) Al-Watan (Syria), February 19, 2009.
[19] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref19) Teshreen (Syria), February 22, 2009.
[20] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref20) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), March 12, 2009.
[21] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref21) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), March 4, 2009.
[22] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref22) Al-Thawra (Syria), February 24, 2009.
[23] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref23) Al-Mu'allem likewise called on the U.S. not to link its bilateral relations with Syria to the latter's positions on Middle East issues. Teshreen (Syria), March 22, 2009.
[24] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref24) Teshreen (Syria), March 4, 2009.
[25] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref25) Al-Safir (Lebanon), November 28, 2009.
[26] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref26) Many of these reports came after the U.S. Department of Commerce authorized to sell Syria spare parts for its Boeing 747 jets, which had been grounded for years during the Bush administration - a move that was characterized by Syrian Transport Minister Dr. Ya'roub Badr as a "positive signal" on the part of the U.S. Al-Ba'th (Syria), February 8, 2009.
[27] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref27) Al-Nahar (Lebanon), February 16, 2009.
[28] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref28) Al-Thawra (Syria), February 25, 2009.
[29] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref29) Al-Watan (Syria), February 17, 2009.
[30] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref30) Al-Watan (Syria), February 1, 2009.
[31] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref31) Al-Thawra (Syria), February 25, 2009.
[32] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref32) Al-Watan (Syria), February 24, 2009.
[33] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref33) Teshreen (Syria), February 21, 2009.
[34] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref34) Al-Thawra (Syria), March 10, 2009.
[35] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref35) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), March 13, 2009.
[36] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref36) Al-Watan (Syria), March 17, 2009.
[37] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref37) Al-Thawra (Syria), February 25, 2009.
[38] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref38) Teshreen (Syria), February 25, 2009.
[39] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref39) Teshreen (Syria), March 3, 2009.
[40] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref40) Teshreen (Syria), February 25, 2009.
[41] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref41) Teshreen (Syria), February 22, 2009.
[42] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref42) Teshreen (Syria), March 10, 2009.
[43] (http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA50609#_ednref43) Al-Thawra (Syria), March 3, 2009.

[Tonto]

I can think of a very simple 2 word "redneck" answer that would suit the Syria situation very well, it would echo Sryia's answer to the US overtures, just not so "wordy". (hint: Starts with F and don't rhyme with fire engine)

[Mediocrates]

I do feel like he's giving away the whole store at fire sale prices.

[Madeline]

By Walter Williams



Printer Friendly Version
Email this article

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Most of our nation's great problems, including our economic problems, have as their root decaying moral values. Whether we have the stomach to own up to it or not, we have become an immoral people left with little more than the pretense of morality. You say, "That's a pretty heavy charge, Williams. You'd better be prepared to back it up with evidence!" I'll try with a few questions for you to answer.


Do you believe that it is moral and just for one person to be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another? And, if that person does not peaceably submit to being so used, do you believe that there should be the initiation of some kind of force against him? Neither question is complex and can be answered by either a yes or no. For me the answer is no to both questions but I bet that your average college professor, politician or minister would not give a simple yes or no response. They would be evasive and probably say that it all depends.


In thinking about questions of morality, my initial premise is that I am my private property and you are your private property. That's simple. What's complex is what percentage of me belongs to someone else. If we accept the idea of self-ownership, then certain acts are readily revealed as moral or immoral. Acts such as rape and murder are immoral because they violate one's private property rights. Theft of the physical things that we own, such as cars, jewelry and money, also violates our ownership rights.


The reason why your college professor, politician or minister cannot give a simple yes or no answer to the question of whether one person should be used to serve the purposes of another is because they are sly enough to know that either answer would be troublesome for their agenda. A yes answer would put them firmly in the position of supporting some of mankind's most horrible injustices such as slavery. After all, what is slavery but the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another? A no answer would put them on the spot as well because that would mean they would have to come out against taking the earnings of one American to give to another in the forms of farm and business handouts, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and thousands of similar programs that account for more than two-thirds of the federal budget. There is neither moral justification nor constitutional authority for what amounts to legalized theft. This is not an argument against paying taxes. We all have a moral obligation to pay our share of the constitutionally mandated and enumerated functions of the federal government.


Unfortunately, there is no way out of our immoral quagmire. The reason is that now that the U.S. Congress has established the principle that one American has a right to live at the expense of another American, it no longer pays to be moral. People who choose to be moral and refuse congressional handouts will find themselves losers. They'll be paying higher and higher taxes to support increasing numbers of those paying lower and lower taxes. As it stands now, close to 50 percent of income earners have no federal income tax liability and as such, what do they care about rising income taxes? In other words, once legalized theft begins, it becomes too costly to remain moral and self-sufficient. You might as well join in the looting, including the current looting in the name of stimulating the economy.


I am all too afraid that a historian, a hundred years from now, will footnote America as a historical curiosity where people once enjoyed private property rights and limited government but it all returned to mankind's normal state of affairs � arbitrary abuse and control by the powerful elite.



http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams040109.php3

[Madeline]

Addressing the 'Mess We Inherited' Slogan

Posted by Bobby Eberle
April 3, 2009 at 7:08 am


Working late yesterday, the House and the Senate passed budgets which more or less follow Obama's plan. We are now on the verge of seeing the largest budget in the history of the country signed into law. All that's needed is for the House and Senate to iron out the differences and for Obama to sign the bill into law.

With passage, America will move one step closer to socialism, with taxes going up and freedoms going down. And what do we hear from the Democrats? The same tired line that they are doing this to fix the "mess they inherited" over the "past eight years." It's a line that plays well in the media and resonates with the American public. But, as usual, the phrase is not only misleading, it's just plain wrong.

First, a little perspective. For most of the Bush presidency, the country experienced economic growth. In the first quarter of 2002, the economy grew at 2.74 percent. In the third quarter of 2003, the growth stood at 7.49 percent. The first quarter of 2006 saw growth at 4.82 percent.

Then, at the end of 2007, we saw the effects of the housing mess starting to take hold. The fourth quarter of 2007 featured "growth" of -0.17 percent. There was a rebound in the next two quarters, and then everything went south. The last two quarters of 2008 had negative growth (recession) of -0.51 and -6.34 percent, respectively.

For real economic analysis of what happened, I recommend The Heritage Foundation and other similar web sites. However, from a logical perspective, I'd like to pass along a few Friday tidbits for thought.

First, Obama and the Democrats love to blame the economic collapse on Wall Street and those evil "derivative" traders. When someone is out of a job, it's easy to point the finger at "the rich guy," and the Democrats do this with precision. What Obama doesn't tell the American public is that trading on Wall Street is something that goes on everyday. The problem isn't that some people were trading... the problem is what was being traded. With lending institutions being forced by the government to make bad loans, it was only a matter of time before the trading of these "assets" would lead to problems. Is this a problem, Obama inherited? Yes. But it was a problem he inherited from the Democrats going back to the Clinton administration. Their push to put people into houses they couldn't afford is a major component of the mess we're in today.

Then, there are the "Bush" budgets. Yes, the budgets were too big. No doubt about it. The spending, spending, spending, and more spending are four reasons why Americans turned away from the Republican Party. They expected fiscal discipline and, in return, got more spending and more government programs.

As FOXNews.com reports, following the passage of the budget, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said, "It's going to take a lot of work to clean up the mess we inherited, and passing this budget is a critical step in the right direction."

First of all, there is the key piece of information that liberals love to forget, and that is that Democrats controlled the House and Senate for the last two of those "terrible eight years." Did they exercise fiscal discipline with their budgets? No. Second, and more to the point, during the first six years of the Bush presidency, did they put forward budgets that spent less? No.

There was always debate over any Bush budget, and in that debate, the Democrats always wanted to spend more. Had Bush relented and passed Democrat budgets instead of Republican ones, the "mess" that the current Democrats say they "inherited" would be even worse.

Now, Obama basically has the budget he wanted. We will soon see plans for massive health care spending, environmental taxing, and more and more. The deficits will reach new heights and the debt will be massive. The Democrats will say that it is necessary to "fix the mess we inherited," but in reality, they are spending, spending, spending, and taxing, taxing, taxing in order to advance a socialist agenda that will cost even more in the upcoming years.

Perhaps in 2010 or 2012 or 2016, Republicans can run on the message that we need to "fix the mess we inherited." But will it be fixable by then? I certainly hope so.

[NewsGuy]

Madeline,

Please don't paste entire articles. Instead, please just paste a few important paragraphs and add your own comments.

[maven]

I do feel like he's giving away the whole store at fire sale prices.He is certainly selling America's reputation cheap. In Europe he publicly condemned Abu Gharaib as though it had been a result of White House policy, he has said that the US used the nuclear bomb, he has condemned 'Operation Iraqi freedom' and so on. I don't think a President should be going around apolozing for the US. All he does is to cement anti-American feeling by confirming conspiracy theory and handing ammunition to the Islamists and the far left.