Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Websites and blogs I recommend
Blog Archive
-
▼
2014
(348)
-
▼
November
(33)
- NYT Scumbags Michael D. Shear and Julia Preston
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., Nov. 29 & 30, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, November 28, 2014
- Now Obama Incentivizes Hiring Illegals OVER Americ...
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, November 26, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, November 25, 2014
- Furguson, MO... November 24, 2014
- Monday Mutterings...
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., November 22 & 23, ...
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, November 21, 2014
- Patrick J. Buchanan Makes the Case for Armed Revolt
- Geraldo Rivera Outs Himself...
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, November 20, 2014
- Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) - American Idiot
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, November 19, 2014
- The AP (Once Again) Speaks with Forked Tongue
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, November 17, 2014
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., Nov. 15 & 16, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, November 14, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, November 13, 2014
- Veterans Day Newsbites: Tuesday, November 11, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, November 10, 2014
- The "I" Word - As In "Impeachment"
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., Nov. 8 & 9, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, November 7, 2014
- What Would It Take...?
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, November 6, 2014
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, November 5, 2014
- Coincidence? Sudden Competence? Certified Kosher.....
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, November 4, 2014
- Undermining the United States' System of Government
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, November 3, 2014
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., Nov. 1 & 2, 2014
-
▼
November
(33)
About Me
- William R. Barker
- Pearl River, NY High School Class of '81; Northeastern University, Boston, MA Class of '87.
23 comments:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/10/sharyl-attkisson-cbs-hid-benghazi-news-clip-to-hel/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson said in a Fox News appearance that her former CBS News bosses purposely hid a clip of President Obama refusing to call the Benghazi attacks an act of terrorism in order to help him get re-elected.
Mr. Obama told Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” the Sunday after the attack, “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved. But obviously, it was an attack on Americans.”
The clip didn’t air, though the transcript with that portion was sent to “CBS Evening News” staff, Ms. Attkisson told Fox.
Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, took Mr. Obama to task during a presidential debate for his failure to call the attack an act of terror for 14 days — a perfect, and missed, opportunity for CBS to air the clip, Ms. Attkisson said.
“That exchange, I believe, should have been pulled out immediately after the debate, which would have been very newsy at the time,” she said. “It was exclusive to CBS. It would have, it appears to me, proven Romney’s point against Obama. But that clip was kept secret.”
Ms. Attkisson said she was covering Benghazi at the time, yet no one at CBS advised her to use that clip from Mr. Obama as part of her coverage. Instead, she was directed to use other clips that showed Mr. Obama suggesting he had called the attack an act of terror from the very beginning, she said.
* DID ATTKISSON HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE THE CLIP OR NOT? I DON'T GET THIS "ADVISED" NONSENSE. REGARDLESS OF THE POSSIBLE REPERCUSSIONS, COULD SHE OR COULDN'T SHE HAVE GOT THE CLIP AIRED BEFORE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAD SHE REALLY WANTED TO?
“And it was only right before the election that somebody kind of leaked out the transcript to others of us at CBS and we were really shocked,” Ms. Attkisson said during the interview. “We felt that … something very unethical had been done.”
* AND YET YOU'RE OUTING THEM NOW... (DID YOU OUT THEM THEN...???)
Executives at CBS “skipped over it, passed it up, kept it secret throughout the whole time when it would have been relevant to the news,” she said.
“And I think that was because they were trying to defend the president and they thought that would be harmful to him.”
* DON'T GET ME WRONG, FOLKS. I HAVE NO DOUBT SHE'S RIGHT. HOWEVER... IT SEEMS TO ME THAT SHE COULD HAVE BEEN A BIT MORE... er... PROACTIVE.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/school-choice-backer-scott-sees-rise-in-black-support-in-florida/article/2555946
Florida Gov. Rick Scott did something Tuesday that Republicans rarely do in elections: He doubled his share of the African-American vote from the last time he ran, picking up 12% on Tuesday, according to exit polls.
Education reform advocates such as former D.C. Councilman Kevin Chavous are pointing to that as proof that black voters responded to Scott’s support for school choice and his willingness to take on teachers unions.
"That’s the reason why Rick Scott won that election," said Chavous, now executive counsel for the American Federation for Children, a pro-school choice group. "He really had no base of support in the African-American community but for this one issue."
Scott defeated Democratic candidate Charlie Crist, 48%-47%, in an election that saw higher African-American turnout than when he first won office in 2010.
That 61,000-vote increase is particularly noteworthy because it almost entirely accounts for Scott’s final margin of victory over Crist, which was about 66,000 votes.
* THANK... YOU... SANE... BLACK... FLORIDIANS...!!!
Educational choice is one area in which Republican and African-American opinion overlap. An August nationwide survey of 2,269 people by the group EducationNext, a project of Stanford University, found that a strong plurality of African-Americans, 47%, supports charter schools. (Only 29% oppose them.)
Scott has been on the forefront of the issue and had repeatedly clashed with teachers unions who see them as a threat to traditional public education, which is heavily unionized. Shortly after taking office in 2011 he expanded the state’s tax credit scholarship — or voucher — program, which gives state business a 100% tax credit for contributions to state-approved educational non-profit groups.
* I'M NOT A FAN OF THIS. ON PRINCIPLE! MY PRINCIPLE IS THAT TAXES SHOULD BE LEVIED TO FUND NECESSARY (NECESSARY) AND PROPER (PROPER) GOVERNMENTAL EXPENSES. PERIOD. THEY SHOULDN'T BE USED AS STICK OR CARROT TO MANIPULATE (REWARD OR PUNISH) AMERICANS BASED UPON HOW EACH OF US DECIDES TO USE HIS OR HER MONEY.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
The program serves an estimated 67,000 students, most of whom are black and Hispanic. Many of the schools involved in the program are run by or affiliated with black churches.
* AND I APPROVE OF THE PROGRAM! (BUT AGAIN... I DISAPPROVE OF THE TAX CREDIT.)
The same year Republican Scott signed legislation that created merit pay for teachers, ended tenure for new hires and required teachers to be evaluated.
(Scott has even suggested the state could benefit from a law that would turn public schools into private charter institutions if they performed poorly enough.)
* GOD BLESS HIM...!!!
The 3 million-member National Education Association and the 1.6 million-member American Federation of Teachers staunchly oppose such policies. The two unions have a joint state branch, the Florida Education Association, that filed suit along with the Florida School Boards Association in August to end the tax-credit program.
"It diverts state revenue for the purpose of creating an unregulated hodgepodge of private schools," FEA attorney Ron Meyer said when the suit was announced.
* NO. IT REWARDS CERTAIN BEHAVIOR - AS LIBERALS ARE PRONE TO MISUSE TAX POLICY FOR. ONLY THIS TIME THEY DON'T LIKE WHERE THE CHARITABLE DONATIONS ARE GOING. (AGAIN... FOLKS... I'D DO AWAY WITH ALL CHARITABLE TAX DEDUCTIONS. EITHER GIVE OR DON'T GIVE. THAT'S MY ATTITUDE.)
Scott responded that killing the voucher program was an "unconscionable" action that would "have terrible consequences on the lives of Florida's poorest children."
* NO DOUBT!
A prominent Florida figure in the civil rights movement, the Rev. H.K. Matthews, publicly urged Crist to denounce the lawsuit. Crist had supported the tax voucher program when he was the state’s Republican governor from 2007 to 2011. Now a Democrat seeking union support, he refused to defend it.
* CRIST... IS... A... SCUMBAG...
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://freebeacon.com/issues/feds-to-back-risky-home-loans-again/
Critics warn that government agencies are making the same mistakes that led to the economic downturn of 2008.
* DUH!
Federal agencies have made a series of recent moves that could precipitate another housing crisis similar to the one in 2008, experts say, again threatening the stability of the entire U.S. economy.
* DEMOCRATS HAVE MADE A SERIES OF RECENT MOVES... (AGENCY ACTIONS ARE EXECUTIVE BRANCH - OBAMA - ACTIONS.)
Housing regulators and other agencies have announced rulings and proposals in recent weeks that would lower credit and lending standards for home mortgages.
* YEP. (I'VE PROVIDED NEWSBITES...)
Sub-prime or low-quality mortgages that defaulted in 2008 — a majority of which were backed by the government housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — were a significant contributor to the economic downturn.
* CHEAP MONEY AND SPECULATION WAS THE MAIN PROBLEM.
Additionally, Fannie and Freddie currently hand over most of their earnings to the Treasury Department under changes made by the agency in 2012. That means that as home loans become more risky, the companies known as government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) would have no capital buffer to absorb losses. Taxpayers could again be called upon to rescue them in the event of another economic shock.
* YEP...
Treasury provided $188 billion during the 2008 crisis to save Fannie and Freddie, which were seized by the government and placed in “conservatorship” by the newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA). “When those two firms fail — as they will, especially when they don’t have any capital — the result will be the taxpayer will have to pick up the bill again,” said Peter Wallison, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and former general counsel of Treasury during the Ronald Reagan administration, in an interview. “The lessons of the financial crisis have not been learned,” he added.
* WHAT LESSONS? NO ONE WENT TO JAIL. BY AND LARGE THE CULPRITS ESCAPED WITH THEIR "WINNINGS." THIS IS SIMPLY A NEW CYCLE OF THOSE IN POWER DIRECTING WEALTH TO THEMSELVES BY VIRTUE OF THEIR GOVERNMENT CONNECTIONS... VIA THEIR POLITICAL CO-CONSPIRATORS.
FHFA Director Mel Watt said last month that Fannie and Freddie would soon begin to guarantee loans with down payments as low as 3%, though the final details of that plan have yet to be released.
* MEL WATT SHOULD BE STOOD UP AGAINST A WALL AND SHOT.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
The two companies operate by buying loans from lenders, selling those loans in mortgage-backed securities, and then guaranteeing payment to investors if the loans default. Fannie and Freddie purchased loans with little or no down payments before 2008, but had largely stopped doing so in recent years.
* BUT NOW...
(*SHRUG*)
Watt also expressed concerns that lenders had restricted loans to borrowers with lower incomes or credit scores out of concern that Fannie and Freddie would force them to buy back the loans if they defaulted. He outlined instances where lenders would not have to repurchase the loans, and encouraged them to loosen up lending standards.
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
On Friday, Watt sought to assuage concerns that lower down payments would result in more defaults. Borrowers will still need to have “compensating factors” such as strong credit records or lower debt-to-income (DTI) ratios, he said, and the loans will require a form of “credit enhancement” such as private mortgage insurance.
“There are creditworthy borrowers in today’s market who have the income to afford monthly mortgage payments but do not have the money to make a large down payment and pay closing costs,” he said in prepared remarks at the National Association of Realtors Conference & Expo. “Purchase guidelines that allow for 3% down payments will provide an opportunity for access to credit for some of these borrowers.”
* THIS IS NOTHING BUT AN INVITATION TO SPECULATION... TO AGAIN TRANSFORM MORTGAGE MARKETS INTO CASINOS.
* AGAIN... I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WATTS DEAD.
Wallison said he was skeptical that private mortgage insurance firms would accept mortgages with the low down payments, adding that the risk would eventually go back to Fannie and Freddie or the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). The loans could actually be more expensive with the addition of mortgage insurance premiums.
* DUH! (UNLESS YOU LET THE SPECULATORS WRITE OFF THE PREMIUMS... WHICH I WOULDN'T PUT PAST THESE BASTARDS!)
“The right conclusion would be to have a good solid down payment and good credit score and the borrower gets a much less expensive mortgage,” he said.
Six federal agencies, including the FHFA, also announced last month that while sellers of some asset-backed securities must retain at least five percent of the credit risk of the assets, other securities backed by “qualified residential mortgages” (QRMs) are exempt from the risk retention requirement. The new criteria for “prime” or traditional mortgages requires borrowers to document their debt and income and meet a DTI benchmark of 43% or less.
* SIX FEDERAL AGENCIES... NICE...
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
However, the new rule dropped the tougher credit and lending requirements of the initial proposal in April 2011 — which included a down payment of at least 20% and a DTI ratio of 36 percent or less.
* 20% DOWN PAYMENTS ONCE SERVED THIS COUNTRY WELL; THEY COULD DO SO AGAIN!
Wallison said the rule “completely destroyed” the risk retention goal of the Dodd-Frank Act that was supposed to make mortgage-backed securities less risky.
* DUH!
Wallison said he hopes a new Congress, now led by Republicans in both chambers, will take action to reduce government involvement in the housing market.
* GOOD LUCK...
As long as Fannie and Freddie dominate the purchasing of home loans, a coalition of realtors, homebuilders, low-income housing advocates, and lenders will push for lower lending standards that inject risk into the market, he argued.
* YEP.
“Once you turn it over to the government, all of the tendencies are to reduce underwriting standards until the result is a series of failures and defaults that caused the kind of problems we had in 2008,” he said.
* "PROBLEMS." UH-HUH. FOLKS... THOSE "PROBLEMS" LED TO US BASICALLY MOVING AWAY FROM CAPITALISM AND TOWARDS INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE CRONY-CAPITALIST STATE! (THUS THE RICH GETTING RICHER... THUS THE WALL STREET BOOM AND THE ONGOING MAIN STREET RECESSION!)
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://freebeacon.com/culture/liberal-compassion-on-trial/
Liberals enjoy pointing out that, unlike their "mean-spirited" and "heartless" conservative counterparts, they actually care about other people.
(*SNORT*)
The New York Times’ Paul Krugman, for one, writes that conservatives are “infected” with a “pathological mean-spiritedness” and want to “give you an extra kick” when you’re down on your luck.
President Barack Obama, on the other hand, says that “kindness covers all of my political beliefs.”
In "Pity Party: A Mean-Spirited Diatribe Against Liberal Compassion," William Voegeli takes a careful look at the principles of care and kindness that are at the heart of modern liberalism’s self-conception.
In a straightforward style, he picks apart the relationship between liberals and empathy.
Voegeli explains the dangers of liberals’ insistence on being on the “right side of history.” He gives examples of failed policies born out of the liberal need to feel like they are doing something for those with whom they empathize. One of the most persuasive examples Voegeli presents is the $180 billion Head Start program, the federally funded pre-school program designed to prepare children from impoverished families for elementary school.
Funding has grown for the program over the 50 years since its inception, largely because liberals praise its [supposed] success.
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
Unfortunately, the only known success the program has had is making liberals feel good about themselves.
Voegeli shows persuasively that Head Start has been an ineffective program, and that children who have gone through it end up no better than children in similar socio-economic situations that were without Head Start.
* EVERY EDUCATED PERSON KNOWS THIS... (OOPS... I USE THE WORD "EDUCATED" LITERALLY - NOT SIMPLY BASED UPON INFLATED CREDENTIALS.)
Obama himself admitted that until 2011, Head Start has never actually had its success demonstrated.
Voegeli explains that liberals do not care much about whether their programs work. They care that they are making an attempt to diminish suffering felt by less fortunate members of society, no matter whether the attempt actually helps.
(*NOD*)
* COM'ON, FOLKS, YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE! (NOT ALL LIBERALS OF COURSE... AND NOT TO SAY THAT CONSERVATIVES AREN'T OFTEN HYPOCRITICAL ON ISSUES SUCH AS FOREIGN POLICY, WHERE THEY'RE LIKELY TO SUPPORT SENDING SOMEONE ELSE'S KID TO FIGHT WHILE THEIR CHILD IS SAFE AND SOUND.)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
The liberal belief that it would be better to try and fail to alleviate suffering than to do nothing at all can be traced back at least to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. “If [a method] fails, admit it frankly and try another,” said Roosevelt in 1932. “But above all, try something.”
Roosevelt’s words are embodied by the modern liberal "do something" complex.
Following the horrific Newtown shooting, liberals demanded strident new gun laws, even as they conceded that those laws would have done nothing to prevent the horrific shootings in question.
Voegeli also discusses ObamaCare. He notes that liberal response to the botched implementation of its healthcare overhaul was principally concerned with how the failed roll-out might sour Americans on further liberal reforms. The New Republic’s Franklin Foer panicked that the ObamaCare disaster could erode “the public’s willingness to give liberalism another shot.”
* IT'S ALWAYS POLITICS TO THESE PEOPLE...
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
* SAME WITH REPUBLICANS? SURE... ALL TOO OFTEN... BUT NOT TO THE SAME DEGREE. THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT IS DOING IT'S BEST TO REFORM THE GOP. THE DEMOCRATS SIMPLY DOUBLE DOWN UPON BAD BEHAVIOR!
The arguments for ObamaCare's success are rooted in liberal compassion. Clearly, nobody is celebrating the horrendous ObamaCare exchanges or the $300 billion the law will add to the federal deficit.
* REMEMBER HOW WE WERE TOLD OBAMACARE WOULD S*A*V*E MONEY... L*O*W*E*R FEDERAL SPENDING...??? (ALL WHILE GIVING THE AVERAGE AMERICAN A $2,500 LOWER HEALTH INSURANCE BILL ON AVERAGE!)
* AGAIN... DEMOCRATS... LIBERALS... LEFTISTS... WILL LIE TO AN EXTENT EVEN FEW WITHIN THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT WOULD ATTEMPT WITH A STRAIGHT FACE!
(The celebration from liberals comes from noting that the percentage of uninsured individuals in impoverished minority populations has decreased, regardless of the much more negative bigger picture.)
The main takeaway from Voegeli’s not-so-mean-spirited diatribe is that liberal compassion is bunk.
If the concern for those with whom liberals empathize were real, it would be alarming to liberals that their welfare programs are not working. But an honest look by liberals at the effectiveness of the programs they favor would ruin their ability to feel like good people — and in the end, that’s what really matters.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/more-evidence-that-bls-jobs-numbers-are-fishy-working-age-population-up-6x-greater-than-labor-force-since-2012/?utm_source=wysija&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Mailing+List+Sunday+10+AM
All the parameters we have come to expect from the payroll report were exhibited for October, including “good” numbers all around.
Even the Household Survey jumped in October while the Labor Force grew slightly, so for one month volatility in the data was at least favorable.
None of that, of course, erases the problems that have been equally durable and visible since October 2012, now more than two full years of trend building. For all the talk of this robust labor market, people still seem curiously reticent to enter it.
* PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO READ...
Even with a few hundred thousand joining the labor force in October, over those 25 months since the great divergence began only 771k have joined the labor force out of 4.7 million new potential labor members.
* DO... THE... MATH...!!!
Worse, the labor force has been essentially unchanged since the snow stopped this year, which is decidedly not what should have taken place if the economy has finally shifted toward that elusive recovery.
As with all these labor statistics, there are the curious straight lines and divergences running through them. The Establishment Survey seems to have entered a permanent state of no volatility as if businesses in the U.S. are on some kind of lackluster autopilot.
Next to the labor force, the number of households offers another potential data point in confirmation of one or the other position. Until a big jump in September, household formation, which should be moving upward in a robust payroll environment, has largely been likewise flat and thus stands out against whatever payroll gains.
With nothing much changed in these factors and figures, it appears as if the 2012 slowdown is still in effect whatever of the Establishment Survey’s direct line to the up and right. Given the timing of all of this, there has been an extra layer of politics added to the narrative. On the one side is the established and dominant narrative of the economist class. To them, the payroll figure with the unemployment rate is established proof of recovery and the “right” direction. That just doesn’t match up with the election, pitting statistical figures (and only some of them) against a very real world outcome where even incumbent politicians noticed serious economic disenchantment.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
From the Washington Post:
“The exit polls show that candidates like Mark Pryor, Kay Hagan, Bruce Braley and Mark Udall lost by anywhere from large to truly massive margins among non-college whites and older voters. That’s also true of the overall national electorate. You should treat these exit polls with a grain of salt, but the pollsters I spoke to agree that this gets at a fundamental problem Democrats face…. “’We have a huge problem: People do not think the recovery has affected them, and this is particularly true of blue collar white voters,’ [Democratic pollster Celinda] Lake said. ‘What is the Democratic economic platform for guaranteeing a chance at prosperity for everyone? Voters can’t articulate it. In the absence of that, you vote for change.'"
[Then there's] the nature of stock prices. From those and mainstream economic commentary, there should be no need to “get this country going again” because they say it has been going for the better part of five years, if especially the past two.
* EXACTLY! EVEN THOSE WHO CAN'T ARTICULATE HOW THE STOCK MARKET IS RIGGED UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS RIGGED. AND THEY DON'T LIKE IT. AND THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT'S WALL STREET DEMOCRATS AS WELL AS WALL STREET REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE BETRAYED MAIN STREET AMERICANS!
Full-time employment is still 2.5 million short of the 2007 cycle peak, some 83 months and counting: That deficiency only adds to questions about statistical validity in even the lower but positive track of employment.
(When you add in the viewpoint of wages and income, which is all that really matters, after all, the idea of even the lower track pointing upward isn’t so compelling.)
Most people are well-acquainted with this intuitively if not fully apprised of all the figures and charts. The question is why economists are not...
(*PURSED LIPS*)
If the economy were growing as well as they claim, and “slack” were the reason for the lack of apparent income, then the Establishment Survey would indeed have seen 500k or 600k [job growth this past] year or two.
If businesses were at all optimistic about future prospects for revenue and fundamentally-driven profits, they would certainly take advantage of all this “cheap” labor sitting around “idle.”
If things are truly good and your largest input is at a historically cheap cost, you use it in overdrive – that is what took place in every single recovery period prior to 2000, indeed that is what a recovery actually is! Symmetry in all prior cycles was due to that very fact of economic reality in relation to recession.
* TRUE!
All of this leads me to suggest a few potential interpretations: either the economy is actually growing but is doing so almost exclusively via artificial factors, and thus moving far too slowly, or it isn’t really growing at all and the mainstream statistics are just not suited for such circumstances.
In the end, for most people it doesn’t really matter parsing the difference between those two as they amount almost to the same thing; though in many ways the former is actually worse since more artificial growth is an impediment to future expansion.
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2014/november/02/more-guns-plus-less-war-equals-real-security/
* BY RON PAUL:
[Recent] tragic shootings in Canada and Washington state are certain to lead to new calls for gun control. The media-generated fear over “lone wolf terrorists” will enable the gun control lobby to smear Second Amendment supporters as “pro-terrorist.” Marketing gun control as an anti-terrorist measure will also enable gun control supporters to ally with those who support any infringement on liberty done in the name of “homeland security.”
As with most infringements on liberty, gun control will not only make us less free, it will make us less safe.
Restricting the right of people to arm themselves leaves them with no effective defense against violent criminals - or a tyrannical government. Respecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the original and best homeland security policy.
Every year, thousands of Americans use firearms to stop violent criminals. One notable example occurred in September, when Oklahoman Mark Vaughan used a rifle to stop a knife-wielding co-worker who had already killed one person and wounded another.
Perhaps the best illustration of the dangers of gun control is federal regulations forbidding pilots from having guns in their cockpits. Ironically, this rule went into effect shortly before September 11, 2001. If pilots had the ability to carry guns on 9/11, the hijackers may well have been stopped from attacking the World Trade Center and Pentagon or persuaded to not even try.
It is no coincidence that states that pass “concealed carry” laws experience a drop in crime. Since passing concealed carry in Texas in 1995, murder in the state has declined by 52%. In comparison, the national murder rate declined by only 33%.
Shortly after 9/11, I introduced legislation allowing pilots to carry firearms in the cockpits. Congress eventually passed a bill allowing pilots to carry firearms if they obtain federal certification and obey federal regulations. Aside from the philosophical objection that no one should have to ask government permission before exercising a right, the rules and expensive approval process discourage many pilots from participating in the armed pilots program.
(It should not be surprising that the anti-gun Obama Administration wants to eliminate the armed pilots program.)
Both gun control and foreign interventionism disregard the wisdom of the country’s founders.
An interventionist foreign policy - [as does "gun control" - threatens our safety.
A hyper-interventionist foreign policy invites blowback from those who resent our government meddling in their countries while gun control leaves people defenseless against violent criminals.
Returning to a foreign policy of peace and free trade and repealing all federal infringements on the Second Amendment will help guarantee both liberty and security.
* AGREED!
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://nypost.com/2014/11/10/cuomo-had-a-secret-re-election-pact-with-republicans/
New York's most powerful Republican secretly worked for months to help Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo win re-election — in exchange for Cuomo’s promise not to aid Senate Democrats in their Long Island races, a top New York GOP leader has charged.
Former state Republican Party Executive Director Michael Lawler — who managed Rob Astorino’s ill-fated gubernatorial run against Cuomo — told The Post that he learned of the alleged bombshell deal between Senate GOP leader Dean Skelos and Cuomo just days ago, after suspecting for months that it existed.
“Dean Skelos clearly was working against Rob’s campaign — he and the governor cut a deal,’’ seethed Lawler, a protégé of GOP Chairman Ed Cox.
The Nassau County-based Skelos and his aides “fight for nothing, stand for nothing except staying in power,’’ Lawler charged.
Lawler said he found out about the alleged Skelos-Cuomo arrangement from a top political aide to Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano, a Republican and Skelos ally who, in a serious setback to Astorino, endorsed Cuomo last month. “We heard rumblings that Mangano was going to [endorse Cuomo], and I reached out to his folks and was told ‘absolutely not,’ that Mangano would endorse Astorino, although he would then let Cuomo use a video of him praising the governor,’’ Lawler said.
“But after Mangano actually endorsed Cuomo in a video on TV, I called Mangano’s guy and said, ‘What the f–k?’ He said, ‘When this is over, give me a call.’
“So I called him a few days ago, and he said, ‘A deal was cut for Mangano to endorse Cuomo in exchange for Cuomo staying out of the Senate races on Long Island,’ ’’ Lawler continued. “I asked him, ‘Who cut the deal?’ And he said, ‘People higher than me.’
“I said, ‘Dean?’ And he responded, ‘That would be a pretty good guess.’ ”
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
Both GOP and Democratic sources had been speculating on the possibility for a while, noting that in the lead-up to last week’s election, Cuomo had been doing little to help his party win a majority in the Senate. If the governor made any appearance on behalf of a Democratic candidate on Long Island, it was a token in-and-out visit, with no follow-up and virtually no financial support, observers said.
The GOP rout of Long Island Senate seats included Jack Martins’ win over Adam Haber, Tom Croci over Adrienne Esposito and Kemp Hannon over Ethan Irwin.
Lawler said he and others in Astorino’s camp saw repeated additional evidence that Skelos — a key Cuomo political ally on such controversial measures as gay marriage and the anti-gun Safe Act — wanted the governor re-elected. “We asked Dean numerous times to hold press conferences with Rob in Nassau in reference to Cuomo’s Moreland Commission scandal, in reference to Rob’s tax, jobs and education plans, on Cuomo’s taking $37.5 million from Sandy victims for his Start-Up NY ads,’’ Lawler said. “And each time, Dean or his people either refused our request or they just didn’t respond,’’ Lawler said.
Skelos spokeswoman Kelly Cummings called Lawler’s charges “totally false,’’ insisting that “Skelos supported Astorino’’ and contending that Mangano’s decision to back Cuomo “was his own.”
A Cuomo spokesman also dismissed any deal between his boss and Skelos as a “delusion,” adding, “It’s wrong on the facts.”
But Lawler noted that ironically, Skelos would likely become leader of the new Republican-led Senate because Astorino’s presence at the top of the ticket helped three upstate GOP challengers defeat Democratic incumbents.
“The only reason Republicans will have a majority is because of Rob Astorino, who outperformed the governor in key areas including Monroe County and the Capital District, where we won,’’ Lawler said.
“Senate Republicans worked against Rob tactically, but if it wasn’t for Rob providing a strong top of the ticket in these areas, those same Senate Republicans would not have won the majority,’’ he said.
Lawler said he realized his explosive comments could cost him his future in New York politics but insisted he didn’t care.
“I’ve had enough of these f—ing people,’’ he said. “I’m happy to go on the record about all of this, and if that means I don’t get a job up in Albany, I’m happy with it.”
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-regular-marijuana-shrinks-brain-20141110-story.html
Experimental mice have been telling us this for years, but pot-smoking humans didn't want to believe it could happen to them: Compared with a person who never smoked marijuana, someone who uses marijuana regularly has, on average, less gray matter in his orbital frontal cortex, a region that is a key node in the brain's reward, motivation, decision-making and addictive behaviors network.
* AND IN COMPARISON TO PEOPLE WHO REGULARLY SMOKE CIGARETTES... AND WHO REGULARLY ENJOY... ADULT BEVERAGES? (HEY... EVEN THOUGH I'M ANTI-POT AND PRO-BOOZE... I'M STILL GONNA ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS!)
More ambiguously, in regular pot smokers, that region is better connected than it is in non-users: the flow of signal traffic is speedier to other parts of that motivation and decision-making network, including across the superhighway of "white matter" that connects the brain's hemispheres.
The researchers who conducted the study speculate that the orbital frontal cortex's greater level of "connectedness" - which is especially pronounced in people who started smoking pot early in life - may be the brain's way of compensating for the region's under-performing gray matter.
Whether these "complex neuroadaptive processes" reverse themselves when marijuana use stops is an important unanswered question, they added.
The new findings, reported Monday in the journal PNAS, confirm findings about chronic marijuana use from rodents. But scientific evidence in humans has been more mixed.
Even now, however, the authors of the study acknowledge that they cannot discern whether a pot smoker's smaller orbital frontal cortex is the cause or the result of chronic marijuana use.
* HUH...?!?! INTERESTING...!!!
A 2012 study found that subjects with a smaller orbital frontal cortex at age 12 were more likely to start using marijuana by age 16, suggesting that deficits in this crucial region may predispose one to substance-abuse behaviors.
* AGAIN... I'D LOVE TO SEE COMPARATIVE DATA - IN CONTEXT - REGARDING BOOZE... CIGARETTES... HELL, EVEN CAFFINE!
This study, conducted by researchers from the University of Texas' Center for Brain Health and the Albuquerque-based Mind Research Network, did not follow subjects over time, so it is at a disadvantage in showing cause and effect. Instead, it compared 48 "chronic" marijuana users (at least four times a week over the past six months) with 62 non-using control subjects who were matched for age and gender with the using group. Subjects were an average age of 28 to 30 years old.
Researchers noted that the IQ of the marijuana-using group was significantly lower than that of the non-using group - not a finding of the study, but an incidental factor that might be indirectly linked to marijuana use.
* AGAIN... VERY INTERESTING...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29997986
The Affordable Care Act is a huge overhaul of the US healthcare system, that aims to extend health insurance coverage to some of the estimated 15% of the US population who lacked it.
* HOLD IT, HOLD IT, HOLD IT, HOLD IT...!!! THE PREMISE WHAT THAT EVERYONE - E*V*E*R*Y*O*N*E - WOULD BE COVERED. (NOT JUST "SOME.")
The White House expects 9.1 million people to be signed up for health insurance from government websites by March.
That goal is much lower than a prior estimate of 13 million by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.
* CALL IT FOUR MILLION PEOPLE... NOT COVERED... (AND THIS IS JUST WHAT THEY'RE ADMITTING!)
Last year's launch of the federally-run website was plagued by technical problems.
* INCOMPETENCE... MALFEASANCE...
Health Secretary Sylvia Burwell said the process would be a "positive experience" this year, but said something "will go wrong."
* A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE FOR WHO...??? CAN PEOPLE "SHOP" YET? GET ACCURATE PRICE QUOTES... ACCURATE COVERAGE GUARANTEES... PRIOR TO SIGNING ON THE DOTTED LINE AND SENDING THAT FIRST PAYMENT IN?
"We will have outages. We will have down time," Ms Burwell said, telling liberal think tank Center for American Progress she wanted to be transparent about her team's expectations.
* ARE THERE SET PARAMETERS WHEREAS EXCESSIVE DOWN TIME WILL RESULT IN FIRINGS? (I DOUBT IT!) (ANYONE NOT DOUBT IT...?!)
The enrolment period for 2015 begins on Saturday and will end in March.
The current number of people enrolled has been lowered due to more than 100,000 ineligible immigrants as well as people who stopped paying their insurance premiums, according to the Washington Post.
* SERIOUS QUESTION: DOES ANYONE DOUBT... ANYONE READING THIS... THAT OBAMA WOULD LIKE TO SEE INELIGIBLE IMMIGRANTS COVERED AND THAT HIS PEOPLE ARE LOOKING INTO HOW TO DO THIS AS YOU'RE READING THIS?
Ms Burwell said her agency expected about 83% of those who already have insurance through the sites would continue their coverage. They are included in the 9.1 million estimate.
* SO THEY'RE EXPECTING ANOTHER 17% DIVE IN THE NUMBERS!
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2014/11/10/senior-navy-intel-officer-removed-for-controversial-comments-on-china/18789539/
A senior Navy intelligence leader whose ... comments this year about Chinese bellicosity stirred an international controversy has been shelved in the wake of an investigation into his conduct, Navy Times has learned.
* WHAT DO I KEEP TELLING YOU FOLKS ABOUT OBAMA'S REVERSE "MILITARY COUP"...
(*SHRUG*)
Capt. James Fanell, the director of intelligence and information operations at U.S. Pacific Fleet, has been removed from that position by PACFLT boss Adm. Harry Harris and reassigned within the command, Navy officials confirmed.
Fanell warned during a February public appearance that a recent Chinese amphibious exercise led naval intelligence to assess that China's strategy was to be able to launch a "short, sharp war" with Japan, an unusually frank assessment about a closely watched region.
* AND GOD FORBID OUR GOVERNMENT IS "FRANK" WITH US...
(*SPITTING ON THE FLOOR*)
His comments, which ran counter to the Pentagon's talking points on building ties to the increasingly assertive Chinese navy, were picked up by media outlets from The New York Times and Reuters to London's Financial Times and Daily Telegraph.
* YEAH... YOU READ THAT RIGHT. IN PLAIN ENGLISH? THE PENTAGON IS APPARENTLY A SUB-CONTRACTOR FOR CHINESE PROPAGANDA!
* OUR MILITARY IS... (*PAUSE*) ...ON THEIR TEAM!
Top defense officials, including the 4-star head of the Army and the Pentagon spokesman, were forced to respond to his comment in the following days.
PACFLT did not disclose the relief, saying that Fanell was not a commanding officer and therefore was entitled to increased privacy.
"It is inappropriate to publicly discuss the internal reassignment of non-command triad personnel," PACFLT said in an Nov. 7 statement.
Fanell's relief is the latest turmoil in the Navy's intelligence community, and has raised questions about whether an intel officer was cashiered for publicly voicing a view that contradicted Pentagon public statements.
The reasons for Fanell's firing remain cloudy, but two sources said the relief stems from alleged mishandling of classified information and fostering a negative command climate. Capt. Darryn James, top spokesman for PACFLT, declined to say whether Fanell's relief was related to his controversial views, citing privacy concerns.
* FOLKS... HIS VIEWS AREN'T "CONTROVERSIAL." THE FACT THAT THE NAVY TIMES INSERTS THE WORD INTO THE STORY TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HOW MUCH PRESSURE THEY'RE UNDER TO TOE THE POLITICALLY CORRECT LINE!
Fanell, 52, declined an interview request for comment through a spokesman.
* AS IF THEY'D LET HIM SPEAK FRANKLY! (THAT'S WHY THEY CANNED HIS ASS IN THE FIRST PLACE!)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* OOPS... MAKE THAT "THREE-PARTER!" (Part 2 of 3)
* A BIT OF BACKGROUND:
Fanell leaped into the public spotlight earlier this year when the press picked up on remarks he made at the U.S. Naval Institute's WEST 2014 conference, saying naval intelligence believed that China was preparing for a possible war with Japan. "[We believe] the [People's Liberation Army] has been given the new task to be able to conduct a short, sharp war to destroy Japanese forces in the East China Sea following with what can only be expected [as] a seizure of the Senkakus or even southern Ryukyu [islands]," Fanell was quoted as saying.
Fanell has also stated that China is at the center of virtually every maritime territorial dispute in the Asia-Pacific and that the Chinese were engaging in a blatant land-grab of islands that would enhance their exclusive economic rights to fishing and natural resources. "I do not know how Chinese intentions could be more transparent," he said, adding that when Beijing described its activities as the "protection of maritime rights," this was really "a Chinese euphemism for the coerced seizure of coastal rights of China's neighbors," the Financial Times reported.
* FOLKS... ALL THIS IS TRUE... AND NONE OF IT IS "CLASSIFIED INTELLIGENCE." HELL... YOU CAN READ SUCH ANALYSIS IN MY FRIGGIN' BLOG EVERY SO OFTEN!
Fanell's views have supporters inside naval intelligence, and he has become a high-profile spokesman for a more alarmist view of the rise of China than those espoused by Navy senior leadership, an intelligence source who spoke to Navy Times said. Fanell's articles on China have been published by Hoover Digest, Naval Intelligence Professionals Quarterly and the U. S. Naval Institute's Proceedings.
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... OUR MILITARY LEADERSHIP CANNOT BE TRUSTED. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. JUST AS CORPORATE AMERICA AND GOVERNMENTAL AMERICA HAVE SOLD OUT TO THE CHINESE, SO TOO DO HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICERS WANT A PIECE OF THE PIE... THE PAY-OFF. (CONSULTANT CONTRACTS... BOARD MEMBERSHIPS... EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS... ACCESS TO IPO's AND OTHER "MARKET" REWARDS...)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)
Rear Adm. John Kirby told reporters that Fanell's comments were his to express and that they weren't reflective of the organization's stance on China.
* REAR ADM. JOHN KIRBY SHOULD BE SACKED.
"What I can tell you about what [Defense] Secretary [Chuck] Hagel believes is that we all continue to believe that the peaceful, prosperous rise of China is a good thing for the region, for the world," he said.
* GOD HELP US, FRIENDS... IT'S CHAMBERLAIN AND APPEASEMENT ALL OVER AGAIN! (MARK MY WORDS, THIS WILL NOT END WELL.)
Coverage of the comments, which broke in early 2014, came at an awkward time, coinciding with Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno's trip to Beijing in February, when he was asked by a reporter to respond to Fanell's analysis.
"I've seen no indications of that at all," he said, according to a Reuters report, referring to Fanell's analysis that China was preparing for war with Japan.
* LIKE KIRBY, ODIERNO SHOULD BE SACKED. BUT THIS IS THE AGE OF OBAMA! INSTEAD HE'S JUST BECOME MORE - RATHER THAN LESS - POPULAR WITH HIS POLITICAL MASTERS!
The comments also ran contrary to the messaging from Adm. Jon Greenert, who has made engagement with China one of the hallmarks of his time as chief of naval operations.
(*SIGH*)
Later in 2014, Greenert stated that talking openly of war with China — and a Chinese war with Japan would almost certainly trigger a war with the U.S. — was unnecessarily antagonistic.
* HOW'BOUT... TRUE?
"If you talk about it openly, you cross the line and unnecessarily antagonize," Greenert said at a forum in Newport, Rhode Island. "You probably have a sense about how much we trade with that country. It's astounding."
* YES. CLEARLY THEY'VE ALREADY BEATEN THE CRAP OUT OF US IN A MULTI-DECADE "TRADE WAR" - A WAR ON AMERICAN LABOR... WITH WALL STREET AND THE POLITICANS ON THE SIDE OF THE CHINESE.
Fanell is a California native and nearly 29-year career intelligence officer commissioned in 1986. He was responsible for damage assessments for Pacific Fleet during operations Desert Storm and Desert Shield. He served as a China maritime watch officer at Joint Intelligence Center Pacific in 1991, and served on board the carriers Kitty Hawk, Carl Vinson, as well as the amphibious command ship Blue Ridge.
He has been reassigned as an aid to Rear Adm. Randy Crites, head of the maritime headquarters at PACFLT.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eea501ba-6528-11e4-91b1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3IjKNQs5n
Second-term U.S. presidents traditionally seek solace on the global stage. Barack Obama is no exception. Following last week’s drubbing in the U.S. midterm elections, he lands in China on Monday for a summit with Xi Jinping. He is unlikely to find Beijing more pliable than Washington DC. As time goes on, it becomes ever harder to separate his domestic weakness from his global standing. Even the tone is spreading. “U.S. society has grown tired of [Obama’s] banality,” China’s semi-official Global Times said last week.
* ISN'T IT AMAZING...
* NO DOUBT THE MAN OR WOMAN WHO DISSED OBAMA WILL BE CELEBRATED - NOT CHIDED... CERTAINLY NOT TRANSFERRED. YET AS YOU JUST READ IN THE PREVIOUS NEWSBITE, IN OBAMA'S AMERICA THINGS ARE... DIFFERENT.
(*SMIRK*)
Mr. Xi is too polite to put it like that. Yet there is no mistaking which of the two is on the way up. In his first year in office, Mr. Obama offered Beijing a “G2” partnership to tackle the world’s big problems. China spurned him. Mr. Obama then unveiled his “pivot to Asia." China saw it as U.S. containment and reacted accordingly. China's defense spending today is almost double in real terms what it was when Mr. Obama first visited China in 2009.
* HOW SAFE DO YOU FEEL WITH OBAMA AS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, FOLKS? AND AGAIN REFERRING TO THE PREVIOUS NEWSBITE... HOW SAFE DO YOU FEEL WITH AN AMERICAN MILITARY COMMAND STRUCTURE APPARENTLY INHABITED BY GENERALS AND ADMIRALS WHO CONFUSE OUR ADVERSARY AND POTENTIAL ENEMY WITH A FRIEND AND ALLY?
With the exception of North Korea, China’s neighbors are clamoring for a stronger U.S. presence in the region.
* THEY SHOULD BE CAREFUL WHAT THEY WISH FOR! I COULD SEE OBAMA ORDERING OUR MILITARY TO ASSIST (RATHER THAN RESIST) CHINESE AGGRESSION!
As the quip goes, Mr. Xi talks like Deng Xiaoping – who opened China to the world – but acts like Mao Zedong, the imperial strongman. Countries that were once wary of military ties with the U.S., such as Vietnam, India and the Philippines, are now openly courting it. Mr. Obama’s pivot means 60 per cent of America’s military resources will be deployed in the Pacific – against the old 50:50 split with the Atlantic.
* AGAIN... REFERRING TO THE PREVIOUS NEWSBITE AND OTHERS BEFORE IT ON THIS TOPIC... OBAMA AND OBAMA'S GENERALS AND ADMIRALS SEEM MORE LIKELY TO KOW-TOW TO CHINA THAN PROTECT WEAKER NATIONS AGAINST HER.
China-watchers say Mr Xi’s ebullience since he took power has been spurred by the view that Mr. Obama has only a limited window in office. After that, Hillary Clinton, or a Republican, will take over. Either would be tougher on the world stage than Mr. Obama. Even if that is wrong, Mr. Xi has shown Mr. Obama little respect since their first summit in California last year.
Mr. Obama warned his Chinese counterpart to stop the cyber attacks on the Pentagon and other targets.
China’s cyber-incursions increased.
Earlier this year, the White House indicted five Chinese nationals for cyber-espionage, including a senior military officer.
None are likely to be brought to trial. (It was the kind of empty gesture Beijing has come to expect of Mr Obama.)
Since Mr. Obama took office, China has invested heavily in expanding its “area of denial” to deter the U.S. from coming to the defense of other claimants in the South China Sea.
* BEYOND THIS...
China is close to joining the U.S. and Russia to become a triad nuclear power with the ability to launch warheads from submarines as well as from air and land.
It is investing billions in “hypersonic” ballistic missiles and other future tools of warfare.
(Once a symbol of impregnability, America’s fleet of aircraft carriers look increasingly archaic.)
I am and have been VERY concerned with what has been happening with the military. I believe I saw more nuclear commanders fired last week as well. Something is up.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/11/10/obama-gum-chewing-riles-some-chinese/18801757/
Ahead of an economic summit in Beijing, billed as the biggest international event in the Chinese capital since the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, authorities demanded that residents brush up their typically brusque manners. The Communist Party launched a six-month campaign to make Beijingers behave in a more civilized fashion to welcome the world.
Turns out the rude one, in the eyes of some Chinese Internet users, was the most prominent guest.
* BARACK... HUSSEIN... OBAMA...
(*SIGH*)
* THIS MORON CAN'T EVEN DO PR RIGHT!
Live television coverage on China's top state-run channel Monday night showed the leaders of the 21 Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) member states arriving in iconic socialist limousines, along red-lit avenues, at the Water Cube, the Olympic swimming venue.
Obama eschewed the Red Flag limousine service that ferried other leaders one by one from a nearby building to a banquet, cultural show and fireworks at the aquatic venue.
* SO HE PISSED OFF NOT ONLY THE CHINESE... BUT THE CITIZENS (AND LEADERS) OF THE OTHER 20 ASIA PACIFIC ECONOMIC COOPERATION MEMBER STATES AS WELL!
* WHAT... AN... ASSHOLE...!!!
* OH! WAIT! IT GETS "BETTER"...
Obama emerged from his car chewing gum...
* FOLKS... YA CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP!
President Obama IS a well-known user of Nicorette, the smoking-cessation gum. But the Chinese, accustomed to the highly formal standards of their stiff party leadership, quickly characterized the leader of the world's most powerful nation as an impolite "idler," or careless "rapper."
* GOOD JOB, OBAMA!
"We made this meeting so luxurious, with singing and dancing, but see Obama, stepping out of his car chewing gum like an idler," wrote Yin Hong, a professor of journalism at Beijing's Tsinghua University, on the Twitter-like Sina Weibo micro-blog service.
* SERIOUSLY, FOLKS...
Just had a thought, William. Wasn't there a China spying scandal during Clinton's terms? And weren't there grumblings about Clinton compromising our national security? Maybe I'm remembering wrong but there seems to be a "thing" with Democrats and China
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/31e95c5e-68b8-11e4-af00-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3IjKNQs5n
When Vladimir Putin met China’s president Xi Jinping, a memorandum of understanding for a second massive gas supply deal caught most of the attention.
For the Russian president, the deal may be less appealing for its commercial benefits than its ability to advance the larger goal of cementing ties with its eastern neighbor.
According to Russian officials and security analysts, Moscow’s worst stand-off with the west since the end of the cold war has convinced Mr Putin’s government that it must moor its security interests to China because the Euro-Atlantic security architecture is broken beyond repair.
* THANK... YOU... BARACK... HUSSEIN... OBAMA...
* AND THANK YOU, HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON! BANG UP JOB YOU DID! (YOU TOO JOHN KERRY!)
(*SPITTING ON THE GROUND*)
“Co-operation between Russia and China is extremely important to keep the peace in the framework of international law, making it more stable,” Mr Putin told his Chinese counterpart, just two weeks after he accused the U.S. of destabilizing the world by frequently violating international law.
* NOT "THE U.S." NOPE... OBAMA CLAIMS HE AND HE ALONE CONTROLS FOREIGN POLICY... OWN IT MR. PRESIDENT!
Russia’s updated military doctrine is expected to target Nato and the U.S. more clearly as the Ukraine crisis has frayed Moscow’s relations with the western alliance. The current doctrine lists only Nato expansion, foreign troop deployments in neighboring states, destabilization in certain countries and deployment of missile defense systems as “external military dangers”.
People familiar with the document said Nato and the U.S. would be openly designated as threats or adversaries in the document’s new version, due to be published next month.
* GREAT! ALL HAIL OBAMA THE PEACEMAKER! AIN'T THE WORLD IN A PEACHY STATE SINCE OBAMA TOOK OVER AS "LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD?"
(*TEMPTED TO PISS ON THE RUG*) (*REFRAINING*)
Russian diplomats and analysts also said Moscow hoped to build the Shanghai Co-operation Organization, founded by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tadjikistan in 1996, into a more meaningful security alliance.
* THE OBAMA INHERITANCE!
In a speech last month that left western observers bewildered for its rabid anti-Americanism and its lack of proposals for a positive agenda, Mr. Putin bemoaned what he described as the destruction of the mechanisms that used to govern international security affairs. “Sadly, there is no guarantee and no certainty that the current system of global and regional security is able to protect us from upheavals. This system has become seriously weakened, fragmented and deformed,” Mr Putin said.
He accused the U.S. of creating a world order in which brute force could become the only means for resolving conflicts.
* REMEMBER HOW THE LEFT USED TO CRITICIZE GEORGE W. BUSH...???
(*SILENCE*)
@ Michelle
Yep. Good memory. Basically Clinton gave missile technology to the Chinese which allowed them to build state of the art ICBM guidance systems.
What the Clinton/Gore administration didn't outright GIVE China (against the advice of the government bodies charged with "recommending" what can be shared/exported and what can't be), the Chinese stole via both governmental and corporate espionage.
Just google "Clinton + China fundraising scandals"
Clinton SOLD our secrets to the likes of China... just as he SOLD pardons to the likes of Marc Rich.
Clinton was a disgrace... and once again... it was GEORGE W. BUSH who "rescued" Clinton... who "rehabilitated" Clinton's reputation.
Post a Comment