Friday, April 30, 2010

Barker's Newsbites: Friday, April 30, 2010


Well, at least there was a happy ending!
Posted by at

7 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/95235-democrats-spark-alarm-with-call-for-national-id-card

A plan by Senate Democratic leaders to reform the nation’s immigration laws ran into strong opposition from civil liberties defenders before lawmakers even unveiled it Thursday.

Democratic leaders have proposed requiring every worker in the nation to carry a national identification card with biometric information, such as a fingerprint, within the next six years, according to a draft of the measure.

* WELL I CONSIDER MYSELF A DEFENDER OF CIVIL LIBERTIES AND THE IDEA OF A NATIONAL ID CARD DOESN'T EXACTLY FREAK ME OUT. (*SHRUG*)

* I'LL TELL YOU WHAT DOES FREAK ME OUT, HOWEVER, AND THAT'S THE FACT THAT IN OUR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IS HIGHLY VULNERABLE TO FRAUD. WHAT I DO WANT TO SEE IS ID REQUIRED TO VOTE. I'M TALKING SHOWING YOUR ID WHEN YOU REGISTER AND SHOWING YOUR ID EACH TIME YOU VOTE.

April 30, 2010 at 10:08 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704302304575214613784530750.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

* PEGGY NOONAN HAS A HELL OF A COLUMN TODAY...

We are at a remarkable moment.

We have an open, 2,000-mile border to our south, and the entity with the power to enforce the law and impose safety and order will not do it.

Wall Street collapsed, taking Main Street's money with it, and the government can't really figure out what to do about it because the government itself was deeply implicated in the crash, and both political parties are full of people whose political careers have been made possible by Wall Street contributions.

Meanwhile we pass huge laws, bills so comprehensive, omnibus and transformative that no one knows what's in them and no one - literally, no one - knows how exactly they will be executed or interpreted. Citizens search for new laws online, pore over them at night, and come away knowing no more than they did before they typed "dot-gov."

It is not that no one's in control. Washington is full of people who insist they're in control and who go to great lengths to display their power. It's that no one takes responsibility and authority. Washington daily delivers to the people two stark and utterly conflicting messages: "We control everything" and "You're on your own."

None of this happened overnight. It is, most recently, the result of two wars that were supposed to be cakewalks, Katrina, the crash, and the phenomenon of a federal government that seemed less and less competent attempting to do more and more by passing bigger and bigger laws. Add to this states on the verge of bankruptcy, the looming debt crisis of the federal government, the likelihood of ever-rising taxes. Shake it all together, and you have the makings of the big alienation.

Alienation is often followed by full-blown antagonism, and antagonism by breakage.

The American president has the power to control America's borders if he wants to, but George W. Bush and Barack Obama did not and do not want to, and for the same reason, and we all know what it is. The fastest-growing demographic in America is the Hispanic vote, and if either party cracks down on illegal immigration, it risks losing that vote for generations.

* SEE... THIS IS WHERE THE GROUP-THINK CROWD IS WRONG. AMERICANS OF HISPANIC ANCESTRY ARE NO MORE SUPPORTERS OF ILLEGALITY THAN ANY OTHER RACIAL/ETHNIC GROUP. TO BE FRANK, WHATEVER RACISM THERE IS ATTACHED TO THIS ISSUE, MOST OF IT IS ON THE "OPEN BORDERS" SIDE. (OK... TAKE OUT THE WORD "RACISM" AND REPLACE WITH "ETHNIC CHAUVINISM.")

But while the Democrats worry about the prospects of the Democrats and the Republicans about the well-being of the Republicans, who worries about America?

* I DO.

The American people fear they are losing their place and authority in the daily, unwinding drama of American history. They feel increasingly alienated from their government. And alienation, again, is often followed by deep animosity, and animosity by the breaking up of things.

If our leaders were farsighted not only for themselves but for the country, they would fix the border.

April 30, 2010 at 10:22 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20100429gd.html

In the movies, all the spacemen are Americans, but that's just because Hollywood makes the movies. In the real world, the United States is giving up on space...

Earlier this month, three Americans with a very special status - they have all commanded missions to the Moon - made their dismay public. In an open letter Neil Armstrong, the first human being to walk on the Moon, Jim Lovell, commander of Apollo 13, and Eugene Cernan, commander of Apollo 17, condemned President Barack Obama's plans for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as the beginning of a "long downhill slide to mediocrity" for the U.S.

The "Constellation" program that he scrapped had two goals. One was to replace the aging Shuttle fleet for delivering people and cargo to near-Earth orbits. The other was to give the U.S. the big rockets it would need to meet former U.S. President George W. Bush's target of establishing a permanent American base on the moon by 2020 where rockets would be assembled to explore the solar system. ... [I]it would have kept the U.S. in the game. ... [Instead] in the meantime, and presumably even for some years after Obama leaves office in 2016 (should he be re-elected in 2012), the U.S. will have no vehicle capable of putting astronauts into orbit. It will be able to buy passenger space on Russian rockets, or on the rapidly developing Chinese manned vehicles, or maybe by 2015 even on Indian rockets. But it will essentially be a hitch-hiker on other countries' space programs.

What is going on here is a charade, which is why normally taciturn astronauts - including the famously private Neil Armstrong - signed that open letter.

So for the next decade, at least, the U.S. will be an also-ran in space, while the new space powers forge rapidly ahead. And even if some subsequent administration should decide it wants to get back in the race, it will find it almost impossible to catch up. Which is why the first man on Mars will probably be Chinese or Indian, not American.

April 30, 2010 at 2:21 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20100430a1.html

Russia has considered states on its periphery as part of its sphere of influence. Frequently, however, those neighbors have had ideas of their own and their domestic politics have been defined by the struggle between pro- and anti-Russian factions. This fight was played out most recently in Ukraine, where the election of Viktor Yanukovych earlier this year signaled the resurgence of pro-Moscow forces in the country.

While Yanukovych is no less nationalist than his rivals, his sympathies lie more with Moscow than did those of his predecessor, Viktor Yushchenko. Indeed, Yushchenko's pro-Western inclinations created considerable tension with Moscow. He sought Ukraine's membership in NATO and the European Union, halted the formation of a consortium with Russia that would have modernized Ukraine's gas pipeline network, and had pledged to to expel the Russian fleet from its Black Sea base in Sevastopol in 2017, when its current lease expires.

Yanukovych's election this year offered a chance to transform the bilateral relationship; Moscow responded with alacrity. Last week, the two governments agreed to a deal that will extend the Black Sea lease to 2042 in exchange for a steep cut in the price of the natural gas Russia sells to Ukraine.

Plainly, Russia benefits from the deals. The extension of the Black Sea lease continues Moscow's presence in southern Europe. ... Rejuvenation of the pipeline project puts Moscow firmly at the heart of Europe's energy policy. The Ukrainian network is the second-largest in Europe and serves as a transit route for Russian gas supplies to its largest market. This deal helps consolidate Russia's position as an economic power in Europe.

Of course, Ukraine benefits as well. Russia's agreement to waive export duties on the natural gas it sells to Ukraine will cut the price of natural gas by about 30%, saving Ukraine an estimated $1.5 billion in 2010 and some $10 billion over the life of the contract.

April 30, 2010 at 2:21 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/30/obamas-payoff-to-brazilian-cotton-growers/#top10block

As a candidate for president, Barack Obama talked a lot about "fair trade."

President Obama's interpretation of fair trade is shaking out, and it entails paying hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars every year to subsidize the Brazilian cotton industry.

Sending big bucks to Latin American competitors probably isn't what most Americans consider fair.

The genesis of this example of stupid government rests with a Brazilian protest against farm support and export-credit guarantees that U.S. cotton growers get from Washington. Brazil won its case last year before the World Trade Organization, which ruled that U.S. cotton subsidies violate international trade agreements. Rather than cutting subsidies to American cotton growers, Mr. Obama's solution was to buy off the Brazilians to drop their case. The bribe came in the form of an annual payment of $147.3 million that the United States will send to Brazil to prop up its cotton producers.

(*MASSIVE FRIGG'N HEADACHE*)

Mr. Obama likes to denigrate his opponents for slavishly representing special interests over national interests. ... When it comes to paying off special interests, Mr. Obama is in a league of his own, especially now that he's putting our grandchildren in further debt to pay off cotton planters in the Amazon.

* AND IF THIS IS THE FIRST TIME YOU'RE LEARNING OF THIS, WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU ABOUT THE MEDIA YOU OTHERWISE "RELY" UPON...???

April 30, 2010 at 10:55 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/29/AR2010042903665.html

The United States might be about to lose an opportunity for success in Iraq by tolerating a highly sectarian, politicized move to overturn Iraq's election results.

Iraq's electoral system, like our own, allows candidates to challenge results, and courts have granted some candidates' requests for recounts. ... Until those recounts are concluded, Iraq's Independent High Electoral Commission cannot certify the March election results. Without certified results, there is no Council of Representatives seated that could elect a president, who would then ask the leader of the largest political bloc to form a government.

* TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN IRAQ AND WHY THE AUTHORS OF THE PIECE ARE WORRIED... CLICK THE LINK AND READ THE PIECE.

April 30, 2010 at 10:55 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=531837

Faced with losing Congress, the Democrats want to make Puerto Rico a state whether the people want it or not. The Democrats would get two new senators, new congressmen and a campaign issue.

Throw in voting representation for D.C., amnesty for illegals and voting for felons, all items on the Democrats' agenda, and in their cookbook you have a recipe for Democratic majorities as far as the eye can see. It's a plan to retain control at all costs and counteract a Tea Party movement that threatens to throw their big-government liberalism on the ash heap of political history.

Puerto Rican statehood [is] something native Puerto Ricans have rejected in the last three self-determination elections.

A scheduled Thursday vote in the House of Representatives on HR 2499, dubbed the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, was designed to rig the game in favor of Puerto Rican statehood...

* FOLLOW THE LINK, READ THE FULL PIECE, AND THE HOWS AND WHY WILL BE EXPLAINED.

At least half of Puerto Ricans do not speak English.

Puerto Rico's median income is nearly a third lower [then our U.S. median income]. [This] would [obviously] create new spending demands to bring Puerto Rico's economic status up to the mainland's level.

The Democrats are also pushing amnesty for illegals and putting them on the "path to citizenship" to quickly add a massive new voting constituency likely to vote their way.

Another bill, HR 3335, would give convicted felons no longer incarcerated the right to vote.

April 30, 2010 at 10:56 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)