WH: Biden finds China one-child policy ‘repugnant’

WH: Biden finds China one-child policy ‘repugnant’

Follow on Twitter:@charliespiering

The White House today addressed Vice President Biden’s controversial comments concerning China’s one-child policy.

From a spokesman:

“The Obama Administration strongly opposes all aspects of China’s coercive birth limitation policies, including forced abortion and sterilization.”

The spokesman added that Biden found the policy ‘repugnant’ and was trying to point out to the Chinese that the one-child policy was economically unsustainable.

GOP presidential candidates Rick Perry and Mitt Romney together with Speaker of the House John Boehner previously issued statements criticizing the Vice-President remarks.

Jon Huntsman also released a statement prior to the Vice President’s remarks:

“As an adoptive father, whose daughter was abandoned by her parents in China, Gov. Huntsman is intimately familiar with the impact of China’s ‘one-child’ policy. As someone who is firmly pro-life, he feels the policy runs counter to the fundamental value of human life and is heartbroken by the destructive nature of the policy that has cost millions of lives.”

GOP critic calls Joe Biden’s $53 billion high-speed rail plan ‘insanity’

GOP critic calls Joe Biden’s $53 billion high-speed rail plan ‘insanity’

By Daniel B. Wood                    Daniel B. WoodTue Feb 8, 8:39 pm ET

Los Angeles – Vice President Joe Biden Tuesday proposed that the US government infuse $53 billion into a national high-speed rail network. The announcement was met immediately by deep skepticism from two House Republicans that could be crucial to the plan’s success, raising questions about whether it can clear Capitol Hill.

House Transportation Committee Chair Rep. John Mica (R) of Florida said previous administration grants to high-speed rail projects were a failure, producing “snail speed trains to nowhere.” He called Amtrak a “Soviet-style train system” and said it “hijacked” nearly all the administration’s rail projects.

Meanwhile, Railroads Subcommittee Chair Rep. Bill Shuster (R) of Pennsylvania said Mr. Biden’s plan was “insanity,” adding: “Rail projects that are not economically sound will not ‘win the future’ ” – coopting the slogan President Obama coined in his State of the Union address.

IN PICTURES: Developments in robotics

With Republicans controlling the House and dedicating themselves to deep budget cuts, any new spending proposed by the White House will face stiff scrutiny. But Congressman Shuster offers some hope of compromise. On Jan. 28 in Hartford, Conn., he proclaimed his support for expanding high-speed rail in the Northeast, backing a network that could stretch from Montreal to Washington, D.C.

“This is the most congested region in the country. High-speed rail here could be profitable,” he said.

Biden’s planAccording to the plan laid out Tuesday by Biden, the first step of the six-year plan would be to invest $8 billion to develop or improve three types of interconnected corridors:

Core express corridors would form the backbone of the national high-speed rail system, with electrified trains traveling on dedicated tracks at speeds of 125 to 250 m.p.h or higher.

Regional corridors would lay the foundation for future high-speed service, with trains traveling between 90 to 125 m.p.h.

Emerging corridors would provide travelers with access to the larger national high-speed network and travel at as much as 90 m.p.h.

To backers, the benefits of the plan are twofold. First, it would give a much-needed boost to America’s spending on infrastructure. And second, it would provide jobs for the economic recovery.

“If you look at the last 100 years, it has been large public-works projects which have pulled our nation out of every recession,” says Barry LePatner, author of “Too Big to Fall: America’s Failing Infrastructure and the Way Forward.”

Mr. LePatner notes that the building of the Erie Canal opened the Northeast in 1819, the transcontinental railroad connected the populated East to the developing West, and the interstate highway system built under Eisenhower “all opened up vast reservoirs of trade and economic investment.â€

He suggests that studies show $1 billion spent on infrastructure remediation produces between 18,000 and 34,000 jobs. “Twenty-five to 35 percent of that then comes back in taxes, and the other multiplies in geometric ratios as spending on food, clothing, shelter, and other goods,â€

Big projects, big delaysBut building high-speed rail is no easy process, says Leslie McCarthy, a high-speed rail expert at Villanova University’s College of Engineering. “Whether or not a bill would or should pass is the easiest part of all this,” she says. “The bigger part of the question is purchasing the land, getting right of ways, zoning issues, environmental impact assessments, laying dedicated tracks in a reasonable amount of time.”

She says the typical US highway project can be held up anywhere from three to five years at the low end to 12 to 20 years at the high end. “Legislators and the public aren’t aware of the number of federal, state, and local laws that agencies have to comply with that can’t be gotten around,” she adds.

In fact, the very thing that makes the Northeast so attractive for high-speed rail – its population density – could also make it the most difficult place to build. “There is so much population in the Northeast corridor that I don’t know if there is even enough room for the dedicated tracks needed for high-speed rail,” says Professor McCarthy. “And if the distances you are going are not sufficient to make efficient use of the high speeds, what’s the point?”

Wise investment or money pit?Critics agree. Only two rail corridors in the world – France’s Paris to Lyon line and Japan’s Tokyo to Osaka line – cover their costs, says Ken Button, director of the Center for Transportation Policy at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

“Both of these are the perfect distance for high-speed rail, connect cities over flat terrain with huge populations that have great public transportation to get riders to the railway,” he says, dismissing French claims that other lines make money. He says they calculate costs in ways which ignore capital costs.

To supporters of high-speed rail expansion, however, US transportation must move beyond its reliance on oil. High-speed rail is the only form of intercity transportation that has a 45-year record of moving people without oil, says Anthony Perl, professor of political science at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada, and a fellow at the Post Carbon Institute.

“That’s why 30 countries around the world have done this and the US and Canada are just laggards,” he says. “If people want to get where they are going between cities they are going to need high-speed rail because flying and driving will only become more and more costly.”

Max Baucus on Obamacare’s hidden agenda – redistribution of wealth

Thursday, March 25, 2010
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 5:08 PM

Max Baucus is the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrat most responsible fo Obamacare’s final shape other than Nancy Pelosi.

In an unusual speech on the Senate floor moments ago, Max Baucus declares that the “healthcare bill” to be  “an income shift, it is a shift, a leveling to help lower income middle income Americans.”  Baucus continued, “[t]oo often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind.  Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America.  This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

Max Baucus on Obamacare’s hidden agenda – redistribution of wealth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY4Qbv7gPbo&feature=player_embedded

Baucus’ candor is appreciated, though the fact that he waited until the bill passed to announce the real agenda behind the massive tax hikes isn’t a profile in courage.  And the seniors on fixed income who are about to lose Medicare Advantage would laugh at Baucus’ pseudo-populism.

Posted in Abortion, American Fifth Column, B Hussein Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Biden, Bill Ayers, CNN traitors, defeat liberalism, Democrat Communist Party, Democrat corruption, Democrat george soros, democrat half truth, Democrat issues, democrat John McCain, democrat lies, democrat muslim, democrat polls, democrat scandals, Democrat Shadow Government, democrat socialists, democrat spying, DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION, Democratic Corruption, Democratic majority, democratic media, Democratic Party, Democratic socialism, Democratic Socialists of America, Democratic traitors, Democrats & The Left, Democrats and AARP, democrats and acorn, democrats and CNN, Democrats and drilling, Democrats and Earmarking, democrats and global Warming, democrats and illegal immigration, Democrats and labor unions, Democrats and Subprime mortgages, Democrats and talk radio, Democrats and taxes, Democrats and the media, Democrats being stupid, democrats cheating, democrats socialized medicine, Democrats' Nepotism, Dennis Kucinich, Dianne Feinstein, Earmarking, earmarks, Evangelical Left, Fifth Column, Fifth Column Left, get tough on liberal media, get tough on liberals, get tough with democrats, Harry Reid, Healthcare, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton Socialist, Hollywood liberals, Homeland Security, Hussein Obama, Impeach, In The News, Islam, islam fundamentalist, Islam sympathizers, Islamic immigration, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Murtha, Left wing churches, Left-wing, left-wing ideologues, Leftist Claptrap, leftist fund, Leftist parties, leftist universities, leftist wacko, leftists, leftwing billionaire George Soros, Max Baucus, Nancy Pelosi, National Debt, Nazi Pelosi, Obama, Obama Czars, Obama Jackboots, Obama-Pelosi-Reid, Obamacare, partial birth abortion, Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, Pelosi Land, Radical Politics, Rahm Emanuel, Saul Alinsky. Leave a Comment »

Joe Biden: ‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’

Joe Biden: ‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’
 Thursday, July 16, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer

 


Vice President Joe Biden (Photo by Penny Starr/CNSNews.com)
(CNSNews.com) – Vice President Joe Biden told people attending an AARP town hall meeting that unless the Democrat-supported health care plan becomes law the nation will go bankrupt and that the only way to avoid that fate is for the government to spend more money.
 
“And folks look, AARP knows and the people with me here today know, the president knows, and I know, that the status quo is simply not acceptable,” Biden said at the event on Thursday in Alexandria, Va. “It’s totally unacceptable. And it’s completely unsustainable. Even if we wanted to keep it the way we have it now. It can’t do it financially.”
 
“We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,” Biden said.
 
“Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” Biden said. “The answer is yes, that’s what I’m telling you.” (Listen to Audio)
 
The event, sponsored by the AARP – which supports the Obama administration’s plan – was attended by mostly AARP members who were bussed in for the meeting.

 

 


Biden took time from answering questions to chat with a member of the audience, who were mostly members of the AARP. (Photo by Penny Starr/CNSNews.com.)
Biden told the group that the Obama health plan will not eliminate people’s ability to choose their health care insurance and that people who cannot afford insurance will be covered by the plan.
 
They’ll be a deal in there so there’s competition, so what you’ll have in there is you’ll have the ability to go in there and say, ‘Now look, this is the policy I want. This is the one,” Biden said.
 
“And those people who can’t afford to get in there, up to a certain income, we’re going to subsidize them, you get in there and we’ll help you pay for it,” Biden said.
 
After opening remarks by Biden and AARP CEO A. Barry Rand, the audience asked questions, which were fielded by Biden, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Nancy Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform

Top 10 Gaffes By Obama And Biden

Women 3, Biden 0

Women 3, Biden 0

Otis A. Glazebrook IV
For the third time in a row Vice Presidential Candidate Joe Biden’s thin skin and arrogance have been exposed by a woman.

 

The first time, Sarah Palin scored an historical gottcha in the vice presidential debate with just five words: “Say it ain’t so, Joe!” (Or six words if you use the Joe Biden method of counting words and letters.)

 

The second time, Orlando’s WFTV’s Barbara West flushed out Biden’s arrogance — and she flushed Joe Biden. See it here.
The third time Angela Russell of CBS, Channel 3, in Philadelphia, left poor Joe almost speechless. Here is the transcript from Newsbusters:

 

BIDEN: Whoa whoa, slow up here old buddy…you’re getting this mixed up here with all due respect. This is apples and oranges.
RUSSELL: Obama talks about spreading the wealth around and everyone does better that way…is that not kind of being a socialist… That’s what your accusers are saying here.
BIDEN: No, No, No
RUSSELL: And wouldn’t they just pass that on to the consumer?
BIDEN: Absolutely not…absolutely not.
RUSSELL: Well please explain that.
BIDEN: Absolutely not.

 

Does this seem like vice-presidential timber to you? 

Sources: Like Orlando, Biden Bans Philadelphia Station After Tough Interview

Biden Wrong About ACORN-Obama Connection

Biden Wrong About ACORN-Obama Connection

Sunday, October 26, 2008 9:28 PM

By: Lowell Ponte

 

Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden did not tell the truth Thursday when hit with tough questions about ACORN from a veteran journalist.

 

“Aren’t you embarrassed by the blatant attempt to register phony voters by ACORN, an organization that Barack Obama has been tied to in the past?” said Orlando, Fla., WFTV anchor Barbara West.

 

“I am not embarrassed by it,” Biden replied. “We are not tied to them. We have not paid them one single penny to register a single solitary voter . . . We register the voters ourselves, and so there is no relationship.”

 

A Newsmax Fact Check shows that Obama has had a long relationship with the group, and the Obama campaign did indeed pay an ACORN subsidiary more than $800,000. The radical Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is a multi-faced creature its founders spun off into about 100 separate legal entities.

 

In our Oct. 6 investigation, Newsmax reported that ACORN’s founders “created a shell game under which money acquired by one ACORN front group, Project Vote (run in Illinois in 1992 by Barack Obama), would be moved to other ACORN-controlled groups,” some openly political and others tax-exempt and prohibited from direct political activism.

 

[Editor’s Note: See “Obama and ACORN: You Can Run, But You Can’t Hide.”]

 

The New York Times, following Newsmax’s lead, reported on Oct. 22 “concerns about (ACORN’s) potentially improper use of charitable dollars for political purposes; money transfers among the affiliates; and potential conflicts created by employees working for multiple affiliates, among other things.”

 

Was Biden answering the question put to him honestly? As Newsmax reported, “leading up to the 2008 Ohio Democratic Primary, Obama’s campaign between Feb. 25 and March 17 paid Citizens Services Inc. (CSI), a subsidiary of ACORN, $832,598, apparently for get-out-the-vote activities.”

 

Money given to one arm of the ACORN octopus frequently is shared with other arms, and because ACORN’s loose bookkeeping blurs the distinction between political and non-political uses of this fungible money, Biden was at best misleading when he claimed, “We have not paid them one single penny to register a single solitary voter . . . We register the voters ourselves, and so there is no relationship.”

 

In fact, the Obama campaign paid an ACORN-run organization more than $800,000. In Federal Election Commission required filings, the Obama campaign reported that this money was paid for polling, advance work and event staging. After watchdog scrutiny called this claim into question, the Obama campaign revised its filing and acknowledged that CSI was paid for “get-out-the-vote” projects.

 

CSI Executive Vice President Jeff Robinson last August told Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporter David M. Brown that CSI is a “separate organization entirely” from ACORN. But as Brown reported, CSI has the same office address as ACORN’s national headquarters, ACORN itself described CSI in 2006 as its “campaign services entity.” Coincidentally, the widely identified “national deputy political director for campaigns and elections” for ACORN is Jeff Robinson.

 

“But in the past,” West responded to Biden in the interview, “Senator Obama was a community organizer for ACORN. He was an attorney for ACORN. And certainly in the Senate he has been a benefactor for ACORN.”

 

“How has (Obama) been a benefactor for ACORN?” replied Biden. “He was its organizer.”

 

According to the Obama-Biden official campaign Web site, fightthesmears.com, “Barack Obama never organized with ACORN” and “was never an ACORN community organizer.” But in this interview, Biden unequivocally affirms that Obama “was (ACORN’s) organizer.”

 

As to Barack Obama’s being ACORN’s benefactor, House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, documented on Oct. 16 that ACORN and its linked entities in recent years have been given $31 million in taxpayer dollars. From 2004 to 2006 just one tentacle, the ACORN Housing Corp., pocketed $7,329,323 in taxpayer money, fully 40 percent of the housing arm’s total budget.

 

Before that, Obama, as a member alongside former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers on the board of the Woods Fund for Chicago, funneled many grants to ACORN-run organizations. These not only enriched these radical entities, but also legitimized them in the eyes of other charitable foundations.

 

Was Biden answering truthfully about Barack Obama’s relationship with this radical organization ACORN?

 

 

  • The Obama campaign paid an ACORN front group more than $800,000 but revised its filing about this to say it was for “get-out-the-vote” projects, not “to register a single, solitary voter.” But ACORN entities that do register voters could easily have shared this large Obama payment, and those names, real or fake, on voter rolls could help elect Obama-Biden this November. 

     

     

  • Obama has long had a complex “relationship” with ACORN, but Biden cunningly said, “We are not tied to them . . . There is no relationship,” evasively using only the present tense to answer a reporter’s question that was explicitly about Obama’s past, not present. 

     

     

  • An official Obama-Biden website claims Obama “was never an ACORN community organizer,” but Biden now confirms that Obama “was (ACORN’s) organizer.” One of these two voices of the Obama-Biden campaign is lying. 

     

    West, an Emmy-winning anchor with 16 years experience at central Florida’s most popular station, WFTV, was the principal assistant to network anchor Peter Jennings at ABC News before that. Her questions to Biden were tough, but no tougher than those aimed daily at John McCain and Sarah Palin.

     

    But during this interview, Biden testily said, “I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” as if they were out of bounds. Following the interview, the Obama-Biden campaign canceled a scheduled WFTV interview with Biden’s wife, Jill.

     

    “Further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best, for the duration of the remaining days until the election,” Laura K. McGinnis, the Central Florida communications director for the Obama-Biden campaign, wrote to WFTV news director Bob Jordan.

     

    Political campaigns in general pick and choose the stations they like, Jordan told Orlando Sentinel media columnist Hal Boedeker, and stations often pose softball questions during satellite interviews.

     

    Several Democratic candidates during the primaries refused to appear or debate on Fox News Channel, preferring instead to go on liberal cable channel MSNBC both to boost its ratings and to avoid tough questions.

     

    “Mr. Biden didn’t like the questions,” said WFTV’s Jordan. “We choose not to ask softball questions

  • Biden Shuffled off to the sidelines after gaffe

    Biden Shuffled off to the sidelines after gaffe

    Rick Moran
    Two weeks before the election and the Democratic candidate for Vice President has no public events scheduled. None. Zero. Zilch.

    It couldn’t be because of what Biden said on Sunday in Seattle about Obama’s inexperience being tested by a deliberate crisis fomented by one of our enemies? Or was it that Biden warned Obama’s response would be so weak it was up to the good little liberals of Seattle to support him anyway?

    Bill Kristol
    dissects Biden’s inadvertent flash of honesty:

    So Biden expects a test of the kind Kennedy faced after his disastrous meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna in June, 1961, less than five months into Kennedy’s presidency. Biden’s presumably thinking of the Soviet-backed construction of the Berlin Wall a couple of months later. Kennedy did nothing, and was criticized for his weakness back home.

    So–leaving aside the merits of what Kennedy did or didn’t do in 1961–Biden is forecasting that Obama will have what seems to be a weak response to a provocation from, say, Iran or Russia, and he’s urging the liberals of Seattle and elsewhere to stand with Obama against the expected domestic criticism.

    In other words, Biden is forecasting inaction by Obama in the face of testing by a dictator. I suspect he’s right in this forecast. McCain might want to clarify this point. It’s not just that Obama’s own running mate expects an international crisis early in his presidency. t’s not just that Obama has a weak foreign policy record. It’s that Biden himself expects what will appear to be a weak response from Obama to testing by a dictator.

    It may be of interest to you that while the press has been castigating Sarah Palin for her lack of access to the press, Joe Biden has not had a press conference in a month.

    Just sayin…

    Archbishop scolds pro-choice Biden Valerie Richardson and Julia Duin

    Archbishop scolds pro-choice Biden

    Valerie Richardson and Julia Duin

    DENVER | Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. arrived at the Democratic National Convention on Monday amid rumblings over whether his pro-choice Catholicism would help or hurt the Democratic ticket.

    An Irish-Catholic from a working-class upbringing, Mr. Biden won the nod as presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama’s running mate in part because of his appeal to blue-collar Catholics, the same voters who swung during the primary for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

    Although he represents Delaware in the Senate, Mr. Biden grew up in Pennsylvania, a must-win state for Democrats in November.

    But the party’s hopes of winning the critical Catholic vote took a hit Sunday when Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver said Mr. Biden should avoid taking Communion as a result of his pro-choice stand on abortion.

    Archbishop Chaput, who was scheduled to lead a pro-life candlelight vigil Monday night here in front of Planned Parenthood, called Mr. Biden’s support for abortion rights “seriously wrong,” said archdiocese spokeswoman Jeanette De Melo.

    “I certainly presume his good will and integrity,” said the archbishop, “and I presume that his integrity will lead him to refrain from presenting himself for Communion if he supports a false ‘right’ to abortion.”

    The archbishop, who was not invited to speak at any convention events in what appeared to be a deliberate snub, told the Associated Press that he would like to speak privately with Mr. Biden.

    The debate underscored what has emerged as a central theme of this year’s convention: the tension between the Democratic Party’s renewed outreach to religious voters and its long-standing support for unfettered access to abortion.

    At a panel discussion Monday sponsored by Google on “The Shifting Faith Vote: What It Means for the Election,” panelists said that concerns over social issues, such as poverty, are moving some faith-based voters away from the Republican Party.

    At the same time, they haven’t aligned with the Democrats, primarily because of the abortion issue.

    “The push for the Democratic Party is to have a new position on abortion,” said Steve Waldman, editor of the religious Web site beliefnet.com. “When you look at Catholics and evangelicals, you see that they agree with 80 percent of what [Mr. Obama] says, but there’s this stumbling block with abortion.”

    Whether pro-choice Catholics should take Communion became a major issue in 2004 during Democrat John Kerry’s run for the presidency when more than a dozen bishops, including Archbishop Chaput, publicly asked the senator from Massachusetts not to present himself for the Eucharist.

    Their stance may have given a boost to President Bush, who increased his share of the Catholic vote from 47 percent in 2000 to 52 percent in 2004.

    Catholics, the nation’s largest religious voting bloc, represent 26 percent of the electorate. Alexia Kelley, executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, said that 11 percent of those this year are considered “swing voters,” more than in any recent election year.

    Catholic advocacy groups didn’t wait long before weighing in on the “wafer wars.” The conservative Catholic group Fidelis condemned the selection of Mr. Biden.

    “Now everywhere Biden campaigns, we’ll have this question of whether a pro-abortion Catholic can receive Communion. … Selecting a pro-abortion Catholic is a slap in the face to Catholic voters,” said Fidelis President Brian Burch.

    Julia Duin reported from Washington.