Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) tells Don Imus this morning he thought ht would have been a “good President.” In fact, he added, “a great President.”

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) tells Don Imus this morning he thought ht would have been a “good President.” In fact, he added, “a great President.” Transcript below:

DON IMUS: “I think you would have been a much better President than the guy we have now, don’t you agree with that?”

SEN. JOHN KERRY: “You’ve asked me that before. Every time I come on you try to get me to –”

IMUS: “–  I’m not trying to get you to do anything. I’m trying to get you to be honest.”

KERRY: “I’m always honest.”

IMUS: “Well, you would’ve been a much better President.”

KERRY: “I would have been a good President. Maybe even a great one. How about that?”

‘Obama’s Road to Nowhere’

‘Obama’s Road to Nowhere’

Rick Moran

The inestimable Mark Steyn writing at
NRO:

“I’m not concerned about a double-dip
recession,” Obama said last week. Nor would I be if I had government housing, a
car and driver, and a social secretary for the missus. But I wonder if it’s such
a smart idea to let one’s breezy insouciance out of the bag when you’re giving a
press conference. In May the U.S. economy added just 54,000 jobs. For the
purposes of comparison, that same month over 100,000 new immigrants arrived in
America.

So what kind of jobs were those
54,000? Economics professorships at the University of Berkeley? Non-executive
directorships at Goldman Sachs? That sort of thing? No, according to an analysis
by Morgan Stanley, half the new jobs created were at McDonald’s. That’s amazing.
Not the Mickey D supersized hiring spree, but the fact that there’s fellows at
Morgan Stanley making a bazillion dollars a year analyzing fluctuations in
minimal-skill fast-food service-job hiring trends. What a great country! For as
long as it lasts. Which is probably until some new regulatory agency starts
enforcing Michelle Obama’s dietary admonitions.

[...]

A couple of days later, Chet’s
announced it was closing after nine decades. “It was the economy and the smoking
ban that hurt us more than anything,” said the owner. But maybe he can retrain
and re-open it as a community-organizer grantwriting-application center. The
Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the median period of unemployment is now
nine months – the longest it’s been since they’ve been tracking the numbers.
Long-term unemployment is worse than in the Depression. Life goes slowly waiting
for a fast-food job to open up.

Indeed. Read the whole
thing.

 

President to Renew Muslim Outreach

President to Renew Muslim Outreach

By JAY SOLOMON                And CAROL E. LEE

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama is preparing a fresh outreach to the Muslim world in coming days, senior U.S. officials say, one that will ask those in the Middle East and beyond to reject Islamic militancy in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s death and embrace a new era of relations with the U.S.

MOHAMMED HUWAIS/Agence France-Presse/Getty ImagesProtesters in Yemen Tuesday continue demonstrations demanding the resignation of President Ali Abdullah Saleh.

USMIDEASTjp

USMIDEASTjp

Mr. Obama is preparing to deliver that message in a wide-ranging speech, perhaps as early as next week, these officials say. The president intends to argue that bin Laden’s death, paired with popular uprisings sweeping North Africa and the Middle East, signal that the time has come to an end when al Qaeda could claim to speak for Muslim aspirations.

“It’s an interesting coincidence of timing—that he is killed at the same time that you have a model emerging in the region of change that is completely the opposite of bin Laden’s model,” Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser at the White House, said in an interview.

Since January, popular uprisings have overthrown the longtime dictators of Tunisia and Egypt. They have shaken rulers in Libya, Bahrain, Syria, Yemen and Jordan, marking the greatest wave of political change the world has seen since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

But the push for democracy appears to have stalled in some countries. The street protests against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi have morphed into a civil war, with North Atlantic Treaty Organization backing the rebels. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Bahrain’s ruling Khalifa family have both met demonstrations with violence.

Bin Laden’s death gives Mr. Obama a chance to underscore the belief among many administration officials that the terror leader’s relevance had already begun to diminish during the so-called Arab Spring. Mr. Obama, who has made outreach to the Muslim world a cornerstone of his presidency, plans to describe the Islamic world as at a crossroads, said U.S. officials, making the case that bin Laden represented a failed approach of the past while populist movements brewing in the Middle East and North Africa represent the future.

Mr. Rhodes said timing of the speech remains in flux but Mr. Obama could deliver it before leaving on a five-day trip to Europe on May 23. The White House is already telegraphing the message of the coming speech to the Islamic world by placing American diplomats on Arab television and radio, according to U.S. officials.

The White House is still debating, however, whether Mr. Obama should lay out a concrete plan for revitalizing the stalled Arab-Israeli peace process.

Many Arab governments have been pressing Mr. Obama to publicly outline his own parameters for the creation of an independent Palestinian state as a way to exert more pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who visits Washington next week. These diplomats said the Mideast’s democratic surge is raising expectations among their own populations for an end to the decades-old Arab-Israeli conflict.

White House officials said they are still reassessing the monumental changes in the Middle East and whether an aggressive U.S. push to resume peace talks would likely be successful.

Last week, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas forged a unity government with the militant group Hamas, which the U.S. and European Union designate a terrorist group. Israeli officials have already cited Hamas’s role in the Palestinian Authority as the reason why Mr. Netanyahu is unlikely to unveil any major new overtures to the Palestinians during his Washington trip.

“We need to sort through these issues as we consider the next steps on a peace process,” Mr. Rhodes said. The May 20 Obama-Netanyahu meeting “is a chance for the U.S. and Israel to review the full range of issues, from Iran to the regional change to the peace process.”

Arab officials and Mideast peace advocates say there are major risks for the U.S. and Israel in delaying a return to talks.

Mr. Abbas is pressing the United Nations to recognize an independent Palestinian state during the September gathering of the General Assembly. He has specifically cited his frustration with the lack of progress in negotiations with Mr. Netanyahu, as well as the rising expectations among his own people as a result of the Arab Spring.

“There’s clearly a lot going on in the region, and there’s a case to be made and some are making it, that now is not the time,” said Jeremy Ben-Ami, founder of J-Street, a U.S. lobbying group that advocates Washington laying out its own peace plan, something Israel’s government opposes. “But we do believe that the only way to avoid U.N. action on a Palestinian state in a unilateral kind of way is for either the president or prime minister to put forward” a peace plan.

A number of lawmakers have cited Hamas’s new alliance with Mr. Abbas as reason for the White House to move slowly in restarting the peace process. Mr. Netanyahu is scheduled to address a joint session of Congress during his Washington visit as well the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the U.S.’s most powerful pro-Israel lobby.

Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s foreign minister, on Tuesday broke with Israel’s policy of keeping quiet on the regional turmoil, saying the international community’s response to repression of demonstrations in Syria, Lybia and Yemen has been “inconsistent” and “confusing.” In remarks delivered before Mr. Netanyahu’s scheduled White House visit, Mr. Lieberman added that the confusion sends a “damaging message to the people of the Middle East, and further erodes the path to peace, security and democracy for our region.”

Mr. Obama is also scheduled to meet Jordan’s King Abdullah II in Washington next week. The Arab monarch has been at the forefront of Mideast leaders calling for the U.S. to impose its own peace plan on the Israelis and Palestinians. Jordan’s population is 60% Palestinian, and the king has faced his own popular protests in recent months.

The ‘Good Work’ of Planned Parenthood

The ‘Good Work’ of Planned Parenthood

Jeannie
DeAngelis

 

Fresh off professing
his faith at the National Prayer Breakfast, Barack Obama is taking a stand for
the “good work” Planned Parenthood does.  Despite undercover exposés
of Planned Parenthood workers supporting everything from prostitution to
underage sex trafficking, the President of the United States believes the clinic
on the corner deserves American taxpayer support.

Much to Obama’s dismay,
the US House of Representatives recently voted to “completely de-fund Planned
Parenthood
,” which receives about 1/3 of its $1
billion
dollar annual budget from
government grants.

With the money of hard-working Americans, including
those morally opposed to abortion, at 820 locations across America Planned
Parenthood pays the salaries of clinic workers who are so committed to providing
confidential health
services
that they’re willing to overlook pimps exploiting underage
girls
in the sex trade.  Then, if a pubescent girl should happen to
conceive, Planned Parenthood is also willing to maintain secrecy and, if need
be, administer an abortion on a 13 year-old child.

In fairness, the “Good Workers” at Planned
Parenthood
, ever concerned for the well being of all their clientele, do
speak on behalf of teenage sex workers by cautioning undercover pimps that to
avoid infection after an abortion,
little girls should spend time healing before returning to work.

Apparently Republicans with a conscience felt it was time to stop acting
irresponsibly and discontinue being a party, through
funding
, to an organization unconcerned about illegal sex trafficking,
statutory rape, prostitution, and abortion.  Barack Obama
disagrees.

“Pro-life politicians have often gone after the abortion
provider, while pro-choice politicians like President Obama have rushed to [the]
defense” of an organization that claims to keep children safe despite failing to
report tragic incidents like the rape of an 11-year-old
girl
.

In a recent NBC12 interview, committed
Christian/Planned Parenthood supporter Barack Obama was asked whether the most
recent video by the conservative activist group LiveAction,
exposing a “clinical supervisor” counseling a pimp on how to provide
reproductive health services to 7th graders, “warranted a review of
Planned Parenthood’s funding?”

In the interview, when confronted with the
damning evidence against Planned Parenthood, the President deflected the impact
of the video sting.  In an effort to “move the country forward,” an “unyielding” Obama,
America’s most ardent abortion advocate, defended the organization by saying “I
think sometimes these issues get manufactured.”

Is Barack Obama willing
to risk children’s lives based on what he “thinks?”  Doesn’t “sometimes” mean
only sometimes accusations are manufactured?  What about the times they
are not?

During the interview, master of redirection, Barack skillfully
turned the focus to what he considers the real threat to America:  the
blogosphere.  Obama’s
response
to “allegedly damning
videotape proof of a Planned Parenthood supervisor vowing to cover up a crime
was: “They get a lot of attention in the blogosphere.”

Is the threat of
the malicious blogosphere that vital a concern?  Because evidently, children
infected with STDs, being sold into sex slavery, being raped and impregnated and
put under the knife in an abortion mill is not that big of a deal to Barack.

Focused like a laser and determined to not get “distracted with these
issues” Barack Obama is encouraging America to concentrate on more pressing
topics like saving jobs, including those of Planned Parenthood workers who may,
on occasion, employ a rogue worker who offers helpful advice to sex
traffickers.

Obama’s defense of Planned Parenthood reveals a mindset that
the President of the United States believes the organization should continue to
be funded even though, on more than one occasion, clinicians have been caught
doing the “good
work
” of assisting pimps in the exploitation of underage girls.


Author’s content: www.jeannie-ology.com

Obama’s budget proposal in La-La- Land

Obama’s budget proposal in La-La- Land

Rick
Moran

 

The marvel is that his administration says stuff like
this with a straight face. Politico’s Playbook:

-A senior administration official says the budget includes “$1.1
trillion in deficit reduction [over 10 years], with two-thirds of it from cuts.
By taking a responsible approach to get us to live within our means and invest
in the future, the budget will get us to a place by middle of the decade where
we are no longer adding to our debt as a share of the economy and the government
is paying for what it spends (‘primary balance’).”
N.Y. Times’ Jackie Calmes: “The budget
confirms that Mr. Obama is not taking the lead in embracing the kind of
far-reaching deficit-reduction plan recommended in December by a bipartisan
majority of his fiscal commission. It proposed saving $4 trillion over a
decade.”
WashPost’s Shailagh Murray and Lori
Montgomery: “Obama would reach his target in part by raising taxes, an idea that
Republicans refuse to consider. … The White House proposal … would barely
put a dent in deficits that congressional budget analysts say could approach $12
trillion through 2021.”

I have to say that the GOP is only marginally better in approaching our
titanic deficits. At least they refuse to raise taxes and have offered a serious
proposal to cut $100 billion right away from the budget. And there are
individuals here and there in the Republican party – Paul Ryan comes to mind -
who have a clear eyed view of what must be done to get us back to fiscal
sanity.
But it is depressing to contemplate that the meager, almost non-existent cuts
the president proposes is considered by the administration to be enough so that
the “government is paying for what it spends.” Only in the La-La Land of Obama
does trillions in deficits come close to government living within its means.
Hat Tip: Ed Lasky

Cartoon of the Day: Man Bites Dog, Down is Up, Napolitano Protects Borders

Major scientific fraud uncovered

Major scientific fraud uncovered

Thomas Lifson

An influential study linking childhood vaccines to autism has been exposed as a fraud, funded by lawyers hoping to sue vaccine makers. CNN reports:
A now-retracted British study that linked autism to childhood vaccines was an “elaborate fraud” that has done long-lasting damage to public health, a leading medical publication reported Wednesday.
An investigation published by the British medical journal BMJ concludes the study’s author, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, misrepresented or altered the medical histories of all 12 of the patients whose cases formed the basis of the 1998 study — and that there was “no doubt” Wakefield was responsible.
“It’s one thing to have a bad study, a study full of error, and for the authors then to admit that they made errors,” Fiona Godlee, BMJ’s editor-in-chief, told CNN. “But in this case, we have a very different picture of what seems to be a deliberate attempt to create an impression that there was a link by falsifying the data.”
Britain stripped Wakefield of his medical license in May. “Meanwhile, the damage to public health continues, fueled by unbalanced media reporting and an ineffective response from government, researchers, journals and the medical profession,” BMJ states in an editorial accompanying the work.
Many parents were panicked into foregoing childhood vaccinations as a resylt of this fraud. One example of the consequences:
In the United States, more cases of measles were reported in 2008 than in any other year since 1997, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. More than 90% of those infected had not been vaccinated or their vaccination status was unknown, the CDC reported.
The author Wakefield was paid by law firms which planned to sue vaccine makers.
According to BMJ, Wakefield received more than 435,000 pounds ($674,000) from the lawyers.
The sad truth is that science, one of the crowning achievements of western civilization, is seriously endangered because of fraud. This study is the tip of the iceberg. Global warming research, explicitly designed to find certain outcomes (“hide the decline”)  comes to mind.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/major_scientific_fraud_uncover.html at January 06, 2011 – 09:23:18 AM CST

The FCC’s Threat to Internet Freedom

The FCC’s Threat to Internet Freedom

‘Net neutrality’ sounds nice, but the
Web is working fine now. The new rules will inhibit investment, deter
innovation and create a billable-hours bonanza for lawyers.

Tomorrow morning the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will mark the winter solstice by taking
an unprecedented step to expand government’s reach into the Internet by
attempting to regulate its inner workings. In doing so, the agency will
circumvent Congress and disregard a recent court ruling.

How did the FCC get here?

For years, proponents of so-called
“net neutrality” have been calling for strong regulation of broadband
“on-ramps” to the Internet, like those provided by your local cable
or phone companies. Rules are needed, the argument goes, to ensure that the
Internet remains open and free, and to discourage broadband providers from
thwarting consumer demand. That sounds good if you say it fast.

David Klein

Nothing is broken that needs fixing,
however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off
from a government research project in the early 1990s. Its nature as a diffuse
and dynamic global network of networks defies top-down authority. Ample laws to
protect consumers already exist. Furthermore, the Obama Justice Department and
the European Commission both decided this year that net-neutrality regulation
was unnecessary and might deter investment in next-generation Internet
technology and infrastructure.

Analysts and broadband
companies of all sizes have told the FCC that new rules are likely to have the
perverse effect of inhibiting capital investment, deterring innovation, raising
operating costs, and ultimately increasing consumer prices. Others maintain
that the new rules will kill jobs. By moving forward with Internet rules
anyway, the FCC is not living up to its promise of being “data
driven” in its pursuit of mandates—i.e., listening to the needs of the
market.

It wasn’t long ago that
bipartisan and international consensus centered on insulating the Internet from
regulation. This policy was a bright hallmark of the Clinton administration,
which oversaw the Internet’s privatization. Over time, however, the call for
more Internet regulation became imbedded into a 2008 presidential campaign
promise by then-Sen. Barack Obama. So here we are.

Last year, FCC Chairman
Julius Genachowski started to fulfill this promise by proposing rules using a
legal theory from an earlier commission decision (from which I had dissented in
2008) that was under court review. So confident were they in their case, FCC
lawyers told the federal court of appeals in Washington, D.C., that their
theory gave the agency the authority to regulate broadband rates, even though
Congress has never given the FCC the power to regulate the Internet. FCC
leaders seemed caught off guard by the extent of the court’s April 6 rebuke of
the commission’s regulatory overreach.

In May, the FCC leadership
floated the idea of deeming complex and dynamic Internet services equivalent to
old-fashioned monopoly phone services, thereby triggering price-and-terms
regulations that originated in the 1880s. The announcement produced what has
become a rare event in Washington: A large, bipartisan majority of Congress
agreeing on something. More than 300 members of Congress, including 86
Democrats, contacted the FCC to implore it to stop pursuing Internet regulation
and to defer to Capitol Hill.

Facing a powerful
congressional backlash, the FCC temporarily changed tack and convened
negotiations over the summer with a select group of industry representatives
and proponents of Internet regulation. Curiously, the commission abruptly
dissolved the talks after Google and Verizon, former Internet-policy rivals,
announced their own side agreement for a legislative blueprint. Yes, the effort
to reach consensus was derailed by . . . consensus.

After a long August silence, it
appeared that the FCC would defer to Congress after all. Agency officials began
working with House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman on a
draft bill codifying network management rules. No Republican members endorsed
the measure. Later, proponents abandoned the congressional effort to regulate
the Net.

More on Technology

Still feeling quixotic
pressure to fight an imaginary problem, the FCC leadership this fall pushed a
small group of hand-picked industry players toward a “choice” between
a bad option (broad regulation already struck down in April by the D.C. federal
appeals court) or a worse option (phone monopoly-style regulation).
Experiencing more coercion than consensus or compromise, a smaller industry
group on Dec. 1 gave qualified support for the bad option. The FCC’s action
will spark a billable-hours bonanza as lawyers litigate the meaning of
“reasonable” network management for years to come. How’s that for
regulatory certainty?

To date, the FCC hasn’t
ruled out increasing its power further by using the phone monopoly laws,
directly or indirectly regulating rates someday, or expanding its reach deeper
into mobile broadband services. The most expansive regulatory regimes
frequently started out modest and innocuous before incrementally growing into
heavy-handed behemoths.

On this winter solstice, we
will witness jaw-dropping interventionist chutzpah as the FCC bypasses branches
of our government in the dogged pursuit of needless and harmful regulation. The
darkest day of the year may end up marking the beginning of a long winter’s
night for Internet freedom.

Mr. McDowell is a Republican commissioner of the Federal
Communications Commission.

Democrats Give Up on Four of Obama’s Pro-Abortion Judges

Democrats Give Up on Four of Obama’s Pro-Abortion Judges

December 21st, 2010

Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com

Democrats have officially given up on seeking votes for four  pro-abortion judicial nominees President Barack Obama put forward for  lower court positions.

In  exchange, they received an agreement from Republicans to allow  votes  on more than 19 noncontroversial nominees that have not earned   opposition from pro-life groups.

Included the four is the highest nominee, Goodwin Liu,  a law school  dean at University of California Berkeley nominated for  the 9th U.S.  Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco but whose  liberal and  pro-abortion views left him with strong Republican  opposition.

In addition to Liu, district court nominees Edward  Chen, Louis Butler  and John McConnell will not receive votes. Liu, Chen  and Butler are  judicial activists who are supportive of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court  decision responsible for 52 million abortions. Obama  nominated Edward  Chen for the Northern District of California and Louis  Butler for the  Western District of Wisconsin.

Read more.

ObamaCare: FDA to Cut Off 17,000 Women from Lifesaving Drug

ObamaCare: FDA to Cut Off 17,000 Women from Lifesaving Drug

December 9th, 2010

RedState.com

Obama’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is due to take up the case   of Avastin, a cancer drug that successfully treats some 17,000 women   annually. With a coming December 17 decision, the FDA seems poised to   take this drug away from these patients quite despite the fact that   their doctors find the drug effective.

The most dangerous period of time in Washington D.C. is that time we   call the lame duck session (I call it the zombie congress; dead men   walking). It is that time when those elected officials that are about to   be ingloriously shipped off home for the last time due to losing   election results make a mad scramble to grab for as much as they can   get.

In the case of regulatory agencies like the FDA the lame duck session   is not treated in exactly the same manner, but it is sure that when   congress is about to have its majority party change over with the   president’s party on the losing side of the switch, regulatory agencies   often try to push through favored policies before the new congress is   seated and before that new congress is in a position to put any pressure   on those agencies to prevent them from pushing the president’s agenda.

Read more.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56 other followers