Congress’ Approval Rating Drops To Just 35% – “It’s Mostly Iraq”
Friday May 11, 2007 11:16 AM
By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) – People think the Democratic-led Congress is doing just as dreary a job as President Bush, following four months of bitter political standoffs that have seen little progress on Iraq and a host of domestic issues.
The survey found only 35 percent approve of how Congress is handling its job, down 5 percentage points in a month.
40 years after the Six-Day War, which began on June 5, 1967, Jerusalem’s front-line Arab enemies–Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas–are planning a major assault on the Jewish state with the backing of Saudi Arabia and nuclearizing, non-Arab Iran. The latter foe, which has been ruled by a monstrous mullahocracy for nearly three decades, has the same ambitious war aim as the Lebanese and Palestinian terror-armies: Israel’s physical destruction. As such, Iran could become directly involved in the fighting, raining missiles down on Israeli cities and possibly attacking, via terrorist surrogates, with radiological dirty bombs … assuming, that is, that the Islamist regime has not already acquired nuclear warheads.
Not for nothing does Iran’s Hitler-admiring (but Holocaust-denying) monster-in-chief, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, promise his followers “a world without Zionism.” He is working overtime to make their horrific dream a reality.
In contrast with Iran, Syria’s objectives are more modest: the “liberation” of the Golan Heights and rubbling of Israel’s northern cities. The Baathist regime, which is increasingly menaced by an Islamist revival, seeks to erase the “stain of defeat” at the hands of Israeli forces–and earn the respect of the Muslim world by delivering death and destruction to the “little Satan” through massive missile attacks and use of chemical weapons.
Israeli Arabs are also likely to join the fighting: terror cells, including units linked to Al Qaeda, are believed to be planning a major uprising, or intifada, as well as waves of suicide bombings. Like Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas, Islamized Israeli Arabs sense an opportunity to change history.
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Fri, 2007-05-11 08:23
A quote from Walter Laqueur in The Chronicle Review, 11 May 2007
True, the achievements of the European welfare state had been remarkable. Americans can only dream about a 35-hour work week or five weeks of paid holidays a year. But the problem was that all those social-assistance programs were affordable only as long as substantial economic growth took place. […] Future historians may well be at a loss to understand why the sorry state of affairs was realized only late in the day, despite the fact that all the major trends — demography, the stalling of the movement toward European unity, and the crisis of the welfare state — had appeared well before the turn of the century.
The decline of the Roman Empire has been discussed for centuries, and it could be that the discussion about the decline of Europe will last as long. Decline often does not proceed as quickly as feared; there are usually retarding circumstances. But it is also true that, for better or worse, the pulse of history is beating quicker in our time than before.
[…] Surely decline offers challenges that ought to be taken up, even if there is no certainty of success. No one can say with any confidence what problems the powers that now appear to be in the ascendancy will face in the years to come. And even if Europe’s decline is now irreversible, there is no reason that it should become a collapse. There is, however, a precondition — something that has been postponed. The debate should be about which of Europe’s traditions and values can still be saved.
From the desk of Elaib Harvey on Fri, 2007-05-11 10:24
One of my regular rants about the European Parliament is that it is almost entirely unaccountable. Over 80% of the votes are by show of hands, thus there are no possible records as to how people vote. This in turn means that the electorate have no way of knowing what their MEP has done, and cannot judge them on their actions.
Remember what they vote on becomes law. And breach of laws created here in Brussels can be prosecuted with prison and/or fines. Therefore it would be nice to think that the votes are accurately counted.
Yesterday this happened,
“During voting on a report by Mr. Kaczmarek on EU partnership in the Horn of Africa, amendment No. 5 was declared ‘Rejected’ by the chairman Vidal-Quadras, having assessed the show of hands ‘for’ and ‘against’ the amendment.
The call for an electronic check revealed that it had actually been APPROVED by no less than 567 votes to 17 (with 18 abstentions).
He blamed the MEPs for ‘not holding their hands high enough’!
I close my case.”
This came from Graham Booth, UKIP MEP for the South Western Counties who has been running a campaign to have every single voted electronically counted (What we call RCV – Roll Call Vote). When he wrote to the president of Parliament he was told that to count the votes would, first take too long, after all many members have flights to catch. Better still it was pointed out that they would also miss their lunches.
QUOTES ON ISLAM
The following quotes, over a period in excess of 200 years, well serve to define Islam, the religion of “peace and tolerance”.
(2002) By James Bissett, ex-Ambassador of
Albania. “It is common knowledge that
Saudi Arabia is the most extremist of the Muslim States. It finances the infamous Madrassas (schools) that preach a litany of hate and turn out thousands of fanatical Islamic zealots. It indirectly provides the funding and its’ citizens provide most of the fighters for Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda organization. It supports, financially and by other means, the Palestinian terrorists and other Muslim anti-Western groups throughout the world.”
(c. 1998) By M.J. Haipur. A religion, as a man, must be judged by the fruits of having existed; what has Islam given to our world, except genocide, slavery, and denigration of the human spirit?”
(2003) By Edourd T. Nelosni. “Islam is, to the body politic of the world, as a festering pus-filled carbuncle is to the backside of a human being.”
(1943) By C.S. Lewis. “If Christianity was something we were making up, of course we could make it easier. But it is not. We cannot compete, in simplicity with people who are inventing religions. How could we? We are dealing with Fact. Of course anyone can be simple if he has no facts to bother about.”
(c. 1790) By Alexis de Tocqueville. “I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world, and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion infinitely more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.”
(1991) By Julie Burchill, of
Britain’s newspaper, The Guardian, after the 9/11 terrorist .attacks. “The terrorist attacks were a tragedy for the people who died or were injured, and for their families and friends. For the rest of us, they were a wake-up call as to what type of lunatics we are dealing with. And sleepwalking our way back into ill-sorted, dewy-eyed people personal politics is the last thing we need to set us up for the fight ahead. Come on you liberals, don’t give me the morbid pleasure of saying, ‘I told you so’ again.”
(1908) By The Catholic Encyclopedia. “In matters political, Islam is a system of despotism at home and aggression abroad….The rights of non-Moslem subjects are of the vaguest and most limited kind, and a religious war is a sacred duty whenever there is a chance of success against the “Infidel”. Medieval and Modern Mohammedan, especially Turkish, persecutions of both Jews and Christians are perhaps the best illustration of this fanatical religious and political spirit.”
(1997) By Muammar Kaddafi (after meeting with Louis Farrakhan). “We are used to facing the
United States as a fortress from the outside. Now we are finding a breach to penetrate the country (the
U.S.) and confront it from within.”
(1997) By Louis Farrakhan (in
Harlem). “A decree of death has been passed on
America. The judgment of God has been rendered, and she must be destroyed.”
(c. 1903) By William Muir. “The sword of Muhammad and the Qur’an (Koran) are the most fatal enemies of civilization, truth, and liberty which the world has yet known.”
(2002) By Franklin Graham. “Islam is an evil and wicked religion.”
(1997) By David Pryce-Jones. “Democracy sometimes appears paralyzed by those who take advantage of its freedoms in order to abuse them for undemocratic ends.”
(2001) From Egypt’s second most influential newspaper, Al-Akhbar. “Our thanks go to the late Hitler, who wrought in advance, the vengeance of the Palestinians upon the most despicable villains on the face of the earth. However, we rebuke Hitler for the fact that the vengeance was insufficient.”
(2001) By C.O. Jones, after 9/11. “Evil exists, and the worst evil of all, is that practiced in the name of religion.”
(2001) By Al-Badr spokesman Mustaq Aksari, on CNN, September 19, 2001, eight days after 9/11. “Islam must rule the world and until Islam does rule the world we will continue to sacrifice our lives.”
(1937) By King ibn Saud. “Verily, the word of Allah teaches us, and we implicitly believe it, that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew, ensures him immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of Allah.”
(1982) By the Ayatollah Khomeini of
Iran. “We are not afraid of economic sanctions or military intervention. What we are afraid of is Western universities.”
(1985) By Sa’id Raja’i”-Khorassani, Iranian delegate to the U.N. “The very concept of human rights is a Judeo-Christian invention and inadmissible in Islam.”
(1899) By Winston Churchill. “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries. Besides the fanatical frenzy which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is a fateful fatalistic apathy.”
By Ed Lasky
The 2008 election may see a vast number of new Hispanic voters streaming to the polls and voting Democrat, thanks to behind the scenes maneuvers by the Democrats’ biggest sugar daddy of all. The outlines of the plan became clear yesterday when putting together stories in 2 of America’s leading business publications.
The Wall Street Journal ran a front-page story on May10th regarding Univision’s campaign to spur millions of Hispanic residents to become U.S. citizens. Univision is, by far, the largest Spanish-language broadcasting network in America. The Journal article pointed out the momentous electoral consequences of this development: since Hispanics tend to vote Democratic an increasingly large number of them with a right to vote will favor the Democratic party in 2008. This is particularly so since so many Spanish-speaking residents are concentrated in states rich in electoral votes. This unprecedented effort on the part of Univision could very likely swing the Presidential election to the Democratic Party.
What the Journal missed in its otherwise fine coverage is that a major investor in Univision is Haim Saban, a billionaire who is the largest single donor to the Democratic Party. At one time, Terry McAuliffe, head of the Democratic National Committee said that “Haim Saban saved the Democratic Party.” Among his donations: $7 million for the construction of a new Democratic National Committee headquarters building in Washington, D.C., complete with advanced electronic media capabilities.
More significantly, he is an extremely close friend of the Clintons. An article in the current edition of Fortune magazine states that Saban is now “turning his energies to Hillary Clinton” and quotes Bill Clinton:
“I think he likes her better than he likes me,” jokes Bill Clinton. But as he talks about Saban’s support of Senator Clinton, the former President turns serious. “It is something that” – he pauses – “I can hardly talk about it because it really makes me emotional, ’cause he has genuinely come to love and respect her.”
Saban admits that Hillary has qualities that “you want in a leader. Nobody touches her. She’s really the most qualified candidate.” The Fortune magazine article points out that Saban, like all donors, is limited to giving $2,300 to a candidate’s primary run and another $2,300 for a presidential run, but also recognizes he can tap his network of friends in the entertainment community and elsewhere to offer support for Hillary Clinton’s presidential run. There is already strife in the entertainment community among those supporting Hillary Clinton and those supporting Barack Obama. However, this fight might as well be over with Hillary declared the winner. Hollywood money may help Barack Obama but it does not have the valuable potential of having friends in high places.
What the Fortune article misses* is the powerful support Saban can offer via his influence at Univision. While other investors may have put up more money than he did (other investors each put up about $1 billion of capital for the deal, Saban invested $300 million of his own money) none of these investment firms have the operational experience, contacts, and track record that Saban has in the entertainment field (he made billions wheeling and dealing in entertainment properties, from the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers to cable channels). Saban is clearly be the man in control of Univision.
Saban is a major donor of the Democratic Party and a devoted supporter of Hillary Clinton for President. Once he assumed control of Univision, the network embarked on an unprecedented effort to register Hispanics as American citizens with a goal of increasing their voting power-which could prove the deciding factor in the 2008 Presidential election. Hispanics are trending Democratic. How will the network cover the 2008 campaigns? Which candidates will the network focus on? Assuming that many of the viewers of the network may only understand Spanish, will their viewing of Univision give them only one source of news and opinion regarding the candidates in 2008? Will the Saban-Clinton team be willing to wield Univision’s power to help her in the drive to the Presidency?
Hillary and Bill Clinton have developed a network of wealthy donors with both deep pockets and deep reservoirs of media savvy. Last year, I wrote of the wealthy business backers underwriting the leftist Huffington Post, demonstrating that when it comes to acquiring and using business expertise, the stereotype of the GOP as the party of business os misleading at best.
* An odd coincidence: the Wall Street Journal completely missed the Saban-Hillary connection when it reported on Univision’s citizenship drive. Fortune Magazine, in turn, covered the Haim Saban-Clinton connection but completely missed the Univision voting drive campaign and its implications for the Democratic Party, and for Hillary Clinton in particular.
Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.