Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Websites and blogs I recommend
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(397)
-
▼
June
(25)
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, June 30, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, June 29, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, June 28, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, June 27, 2011
- Random Thoughts... the back end of June, 2011
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., June 25 & 26, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, June 24, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, June 23, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, June 22, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, June 21, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, June 20, 2011
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., June 18 &19, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, June 17, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, June 16, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, June 15, 2011
- A Midshipman at Annapolis Speaks Out
- RINOs on Parade
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, June 14, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, June 13, 2011
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., June 11 & 12, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, June 10, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, June 9, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, June 8, 2011
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, June 7, 2011
- Charleston Barkcation 2011
-
▼
June
(25)
About Me
- William R. Barker
- Pearl River, NY High School Class of '81; Northeastern University, Boston, MA Class of '87.
8 comments:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/15/white-house-says-libyan-conflict-too-limited-viola/
“U.S. operations [concerning Libya] do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve the presence of U.S. ground troops, U.S. casualties or a serious threat thereof,” the [Obama] administration said in a 32-page public report, which was sent to Congress along with a classified annex describing in more detail the rebels the U.S. is aiding.
(*SNORT*)
[The President also] said with the exception of a rescue mission in March, no American ground forces have been deployed to Libya.
* BUT... BUT... BUT... WHEN HE TOLD US THERE WOULD BE NO AMERICAN "BOOTS ON THE GROUND" HE DIDN'T QUALIFY THAT STATEMENT WITH "EXCEPT FOR... er... EXCEPTIONS."
(*SNORT*)
[Obama] acknowledged that U.S. unmanned aerial vehicles are striking targets in Libya, and a senior administration official briefing reporters said American warplanes are still flying sorties...
* "STRIKING TARGETS...???" "FLYING SORTIES...???" SOUNDS LIKE A WAR TO ME!
The 32-page report also gives a detailed look at spending on the conflict. Military spending totaled $715.9 million through June 3, of which more than half of that total is expended munitions. By Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year, that will have grown to $1.1 billion, with an additional $50 million spent on munitions over the final four months.
* $1.05 BILLION AMERICAN DOLLARS... WHEN WE'RE RUNNING MASSIVE DEFICITS... SPENT ON MUNITIONS EXPENDED ON AIRSTRIKES...??? AGAIN, FOLKS... SURE SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE INVOLVED IN A WAR TO ME!
The State Department has spent an additional $3.7 million, and the government has committed nearly $81 million more toward "humanitarian assistance."
* HMM... SINCE MANY OF THE REBELS ARE APPARENTLY AL-QAEDA... AND WE'RE ARMING THE REBELS...
(*HEADACHE*)
Administration officials said they are not contesting the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution...
* NO... NO... OF COURSE NOT! THEY'RE SIMPLY SAYING THAT SPENDING OVER A BILLION DOLLARS BLOWING THINGS UP AND KILLING PEOPLE ISN'T... er... WAR.
On Tuesday, [Speaker of the House John] Boehner wrote a letter to Mr. Obama saying if he doesn’t withdraw troops or get Congress‘ approval by Sunday, he could run afoul of the 1973 War Powers Resolution. Earlier this month, the House passed a resolution setting a Friday deadline for the administration to provide detailed information on the extent and goals of its Libyan operations.
The White House responded Wednesday with its report that said the U.S. was acting in accord with U.N. authority.
* FOLKS...?!?!
* NOW THE PRESIDENT SEEMS TO BE SAYING, "OH... IT'S NOT REALLY A WAR... BUT IF IT WERE A WAR... IT'S A U.N. SANCTIONED WAR."
* FOLKS... IF THERE WAS SANITY WITHIN CONGRESS THIS PRESIDENT WOULD BE IMPEACHED AND REMOVED FROM OFFICE.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-libya-20110616,0,4822164.story
* THE LEAD OP-ED OF TODAY'S LA TIMES
This week, House Speaker John A. Boehner wrote a letter to President Obama warning him that he would be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless Congress approved the U.S. mission in Libya by the weekend. The letter may have involved some partisan gamesmanship, but the speaker was right on both law and policy, and the president's response Wednesday was unsatisfactory.
* "UNSATISFACTORY...?" (OK - CONSIDERING THE SOURCE... I'LL TAKE IT!)
The War Powers Resolution, enacted over President Nixon's veto in 1973, says that the president must obtain congressional authorization for a military action within 60 days (extendable to 90) or withdraw U.S. forces. The law defines military action to include situations in which U.S. forces are introduced "into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation." The air raids in Libya clearly fall within that definition...
Obama shouldn't have left it to Congress to ensure that this operation is grounded in the rule of law. Three months into the Libya campaign, he should have had enough confidence in his policy to submit it to the House and Senate. Instead, he has sought refuge in legal obfuscations.
* YET WHAT DO YOU WANNA BET THAT WHEN THE TIME COMES... (*PAUSE*) (*SIGH*)... THE LA TIMES WILL ENDORSE OBAMA'S RE-ELECTION?
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/another_amnesty_LauPhaZnaURz3fUcpXAphK
On Tuesday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) introduced a bill (HR 2164) to require nationwide use of the E-Verify system...
While the Smith bill sounds good, in fact, it hobbles immigration enforcement.
Negotiated with the pro-amnesty US Chamber of Commerce, the bill would establish a fairly toothless E-Verify requirement while defanging the only government bodies that are serious about enforcing immigration law - the states.
The bill stabs Arizona in the back just after it won a victory in the US Supreme Court in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting on May 26.
With their ruling on Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting the high court upheld the 2007 Legal Arizona Workers Act, which lets the state suspend the business licenses of employers who knowingly hire unauthorized aliens and requires employers to use E-Verify.
The decision was a significant defeat for the Obama administration, which argued against the Arizona law in the high court, and for the Chamber of Commerce, which also opposed Arizona and has resisted immigration enforcement in the workplace.
It gives a green light to the rest of the states, allowing them, too, to revoke the business licenses of employers who hire unauthorized aliens.
Alabama enacted a law taking Arizona's approach on June 9, just two weeks after the Supreme Court decision.
Other states, like Missouri, Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia and Oklahoma, had already done so.
More would have followed in 2012.
But now, the Smith bill threatens to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Arizona law - along with every other state law on the subject - would be preempted under the bill.
Smith's bill would change federal law so that the states can no longer take any actions against employers who knowingly hire unauthorized aliens.
The federal government has been unwilling to aggressively enforce immigration laws in the workplace, and this bill would be no exception. There is zero likelihood that the Obama administration will go after employers who fail to use E-Verify or who knowingly help their employees circumvent the system.
There are other problems with Smith's bill, showing why the chamber was so willing to strike this deal. Notably, it grandfathers in almost all illegal aliens who are already employed here and stay in the same job. They won't be checked through E-Verify. Thus, the bill will help keep the current population of illegal aliens working, so that they are still here if a future amnesty (which the chamber supports) occurs.
Even worse, the bill would effectively allow agricultural workers to skip E-Verify. All an employer has to do is assert that the alien worked for him at some point in the past. This loophole alone would likely allow millions of illegal aliens to continue working here.
In sum, the bill is a bad bargain for any American who thinks our immigration laws should be enforced - selling out the states for little in return.
The Chamber knew exactly what it wanted.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2011-06-15-Bailouts-beget-more-bailouts_n.htm
Describing the auto bailout as successful demands profound gullibility or willful ignorance.
Sure, GM has experienced recent profits...
* THEY'RE PRESENTLY EXEMPT FROM PAYING CORPORATE INCOME TAXES...!!! EXEMPT...!!! FRIGG'N EXEMPT...!!!
...and Chrysler has repaid much of its debt to the Treasury.
* VIA TAKING OUT NEW LOANS...! (FOLKS... THEY PAID OFF ONE "CREDIT CARD" VIA OPENING A NEW "CREDIT CARD" ACCOUNT!
* OH... AND BTW... CHRYSLER IS NOW LARGELY AN ITALIAN AUTO COMPANY. (*SMIRK*)
Any verdict on the auto bailouts must take into account, among other things, the billions of dollars stolen from the company bondholders; the higher-risk premiums consequently built into U.S. corporate debt; the costs of denying Ford and the other more worthy automakers the spoils of competition; the costs of insulating irresponsible actors, such as the autoworkers' union, from the outcomes of an apolitical bankruptcy proceeding; the diminution of U.S. moral authority to counsel foreign governments against market interventions; and the lingering uncertainty about policy that pervades the business environment to this day.
* YEP. THAT PRETTY MUCH COVERS IT!
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/575514/201106151855/Deadly-Incompetence.aspx
"Operation Fast and Furious"
That's the code name for what the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives thought was a good idea: Put large numbers of semiautomatic weapons into the hands of Mexican gangsters, wait until they commit crimes, then track them.
Higher-ups at the ATF were warned repeatedly by their own agents that the plan was dangerous and unworkable. But the bosses ignored the warnings and even punished those who told them the obvious truth.
"Every time we questioned that order, there was punitive action," ATF agent John Dodson told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is holding hearings on the operation.
Dodson's tale is as predictable as it is tragic. The ATF lost track of as many as 1,800 of the semiautomatic weapons it put into circulation. Many of the weapons were used to commit crimes. And two of them were found at the murder scene of an ATF agent.
So who's responsible for this travesty?
Top ATF officials have denied knowing details of the program. But it's clear from emails gathered by the committee that ATF acting director Kenneth Melson knew what was going on and didn't stop it.
Said Darrell Issa, chairman of the House committee: "ATF agents have shared chilling accounts of being ordered to stand down as criminals in Arizona walked away with guns headed for Mexican drug cartels."
The Justice Department has been subpoenaed by the committee to provide information about the errant program, but it has refused to cooperate.
Gun-control advocates try to demonize American gun owners by noting that two-thirds of Mexico's weapons come from north of the border. Now it turns out the U.S. government is the biggest gunrunner.
Thousands have died on both sides of the border as the drug war spreads. Deadly incompetence of the kind displayed by U.S. bureaucrats in Operation Fast and Furious must not go unpunished.
"Fast and Furious" has to be one of the dumbest operations ever carried out by a U.S. agency.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/166869-feinstein-wins-headline-senate-votes-to-kill-ethanol-tax-break-tariff-protection
* FILE UNDER: SOME GOOD NEWS!
The Senate voted 73-27 Thursday to kill a major tax break that benefits the ethanol industry...
(*ENTHUSIASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)
* NOW... LET'S SEE WHO THE 27 DIRTBAGS WERE...
* 14 REPUBLICANS: Blunt (R-MO), Chambliss (R-GA), Coats (R-IN), Cochran (R-MS), Grassley (R-IA), Hoeven (R-ND), Johanns (R-NE), Kirk (R-IL), Lugar (R-IN), Moran (R-KS), Portman (R-OH), Roberts (R-KS), Thune (R-SD), Wicker (R-MS)
* 13 DEMOCRATS: Brown (D-OH). Casey (D-PA), Conrad (D-ND), Durbin (D-IL), Franken (D-MN), Harkin (D-IA), Johnson (D-SD), Klobuchar (D-MN), Kohl (D-WI), Levin (D-MI), McCaskill (D-MO), Nelson (D-NE), Stabenow (D-MI)
Thirty-three Republicans and 38 Democrats supported the measure along with both of the chamber's Independents, who caucus with Democrats.
(*SINCERE CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)
* HEY... LET ME GIVE THE DEMS CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE! GOOD FOR THEM! NOTE HOWEVER...
[T]he White House...supported the ethanol tax credits.
(*SMIRK*)
Thursday’s vote was a turnaround from Tuesday, when just 40 senators voted for Coburn’s identical amendment, well shy of the 60 needed to advance it.
The Club for Growth lobbied in favor of the measure and said senators who voted for it deserved credit for ridding the tax code of "market-distorting tax credits and subsidies."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110616/ap_on_re_us/us_sept11_memorial
Visitors to the museum at the national 9/11 memorial could be required to pay an entrance fee of about $20, though victims' relatives will always be able to enter for free, the president and CEO of the memorial foundation said Thursday.
* FOLKS... YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS KIND OF SHIT UP.
Also...there will be no public restrooms for the millions of anticipated visitors to the memorial for the first year that it's open. The restrooms planned for the site are to be housed in the museum, which won't open until the 11th anniversary of the attacks.
(*SPLITTING HEADACHE*)
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/06/16/16greenwire-obama-admin-objects-to-alaska-oil-and-gas-deve-61926.html
[The White House turned thumbs down upon] a proposal from House Natural Resources Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) to expedite oil and gas leasing and energy infrastructure permitting in an Alaska reserve...
* OF COURSE THEY DID... (*SIGH*)
Republicans on the committee and witnesses including Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R), an Alaska resources commissioner and an oil and gas industry official said Hasting's "National Petroleum Reserve Alaska Access Act" would give companies a crucial timeline for drilling and infrastructure permits if they choose to pursue leases.
"We have a permitting problem, we don't have a leasing problem," Murkowski said, pointing to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' decision to deny a bridge proposal by ConocoPhillips to access its lease in NPR-A. The decision was remanded late last year by the agency's Pacific Division.
(*SNORT*) FOLKS... RE-READ THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH. THE OIL COMPANY CAN'T ACCESS THE LEASED OIL FIELD BECAUSE THE FEDS ARE DENYING THEM THE ABILITY TO BUILD A BRIDGE TO GET THEIR DRILLING EQUIPMENT IN THERE...!!!
"Producing oil and natural gas in the NPR-A is pointless if there's no way to get it out of there," said Hastings, fresh off a trip last week to NPR-A with Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell (R). "The real problem is the federal government's blocking and delaying of permits for necessary roads, bridges and pipelines needed to transport the energy out of the NPR-A."
* F--KING BASTARDS...!
Joe Balash, deputy commissioner for the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, said one company had plugged its well in NPR-A out of concerns that the permitting and development of pipelines would be too burdensome.
"The distance and regulatory gauntlet that has to be run to transport that oil resource ... is daunting," Balash said.
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION CONTINUES TO DO EVERYTHING WITHIN ITS POWER TO STOP OR AT THE VERY LEAST DELAY DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
Post a Comment