Thursday, June 4, 2009

Remarks of President Barack Obama
A New Beginning
Cairo, Egypt
June 4, 2009

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt’s advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world – tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” That is what I will try to do – to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words – within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores – that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations – to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.

That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together.

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.

In Ankara, I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America’s goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

That’s why we’re partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America’s commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths – more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: “I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be.”

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq’s sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq’s democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers – for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel’s founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them – and all of us – to live up to our responsibilities.

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America’s founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It’s a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel’s legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.

The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran’s leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.

I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments – provided they govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah’s Interfaith dialogue and Turkey’s leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action – whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.

The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights.

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now let me be clear: issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.

I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations – including my own – this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities – those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.

This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.

On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.

On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek – a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God’s children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many – Muslim and non-Muslim – who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn’t worth the effort – that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country – you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort – a sustained effort – to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples – a belief that isn’t new; that isn’t black or white or brown; that isn’t Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It’s a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It’s a faith in other people, and it’s what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us, “O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.”

The Talmud tells us: “The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.”

The Holy Bible tells us, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God’s vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God’s peace be upon you.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009


image toon - bbro legal = Oby re Sotomayor = typical white people

Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor: You Read, You Decide

.
The fundamental issue at stake in the Sotomayor discussion or nomination is not her background or her gender but an issue that has implications far beyond this judge and this nomination: Is judicial impartiality no longer a quality we can and should demand from our Supreme Court Justices?

The job of a justice is to enforce the law, not the rule of empathy. And we understand that when a judge substitutes his or her personal experiences for the law, the law becomes what he or she wants it to be, not what the people, through their elected representatives, have decided it should be.

The "Court of Appeals is Where Policy Is Made"

Is Judge Sotomayor Being Quoted Out of Context? You Read, You Decide:

"All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with Court of Appeals experience. Because it is - Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know, and I know, that this is on tape, and I should never say that. Because we don't 'make law,' I know. [laughter] Okay, I know. I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it. I'm, you know. [laughter] Having said that, the Court of Appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating."
"Our Gender and National Origins May and Will Make a Difference in Our Judging"

Here are some more quotes:

"I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that."

"Whether born from experience or inherent psychological or cultural differences...our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging."

"Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases....I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Again, you read, you decide. Read Judge Sotomayor's speech in full here.

When a judge disregards the rule of law and applies a different standard to certain groups - or, as the President would say, shows "empathy" - he or she violates this central American principle.

One Group's "Empathy" is Another Group's Injustice.

Ask
Frank Ricci.

President Obama nominated a radical liberal activist to a lifetime tenure on our highest court, who will cast aside the rule of law in favor of the narrow, divisive politics of race and gender identity labeled 'empathy'.

Please take the time to tell your senators how you'd like them to vote re: her confirmation.



"OPPOSE SOTOMAYOR CONFIRMATION"


YOUR SenatorS: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

or: Speed Message them with your personal distribution list...
and as always, pass it on...
.

.
image bbro legal = sotomayor yells activism into lady justice's ear

Back On Planet Earth

.
Now the President is discovering what so many presidents have discovered before him: Saying something in a campaign is much easier than actually getting it done.

There is always an unexpected twist. Who would have predicted that a Congress clammering to close the place down, would block the president from doing just that?

And for good reason: It has suddenly dawned on everyone that there are some pretty bad dudes down there, and no one wants them in their neighborhood... [snip]

On Planet Campaign, all things are possible. On Planet Earth, it is never quite that easy, and it always costs more.

READ MORE


Poll: Americans Oppose Closing Gitmo, Prison Made U.S. Safer

Another in a series of polls finding Americans are firmly to the right of the views of the current Administration was released Monday.

In this study, respondents overwhelmingly opposed the closing of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay because -- wait for it! -- they believe the facility has strengthened national security.

"By more than 2-1, those surveyed say Guantanamo shouldn't be closed. By more than 3-1, they oppose moving some of the accused terrorists housed there to prisons in their own states. [...]"

Not what the Obama administration, the Democrat leadership, and their media minions have been claiming for months, is it?

READ MORE

NBC Skips Islamic Conversion of Shooter, Trip to Yemen


Tuesday's "Today" show completely ignored two facts about a man who murdered a soldier at an Army recruiting station in Arkansas: He had just converted to Islam and was being investigated by the FBI for a trip to Yemen.

Instead, NBC's Ann Curry, in anchor briefs throughout the show, vaguely explained that Abdulhakim Muhammad was "upset with the military."

Both ABC and CBS mentioned the conversion and the Yemen trip.

READ MORE

[meanwhile]

image toon - 1st lbrty gwot msm bias tea - T stands for terrorists

Islamic Speakers Bureau Backed By Radical Profs

.
A California nonprofit dedicated to "teaching about Islam & Muslims" at U.S. high schools and college campuses features a board of advisors that is stacked with some of the most controversial activist professors in the field of Middle Eastern studies today.

The board of Islamic Networks Group (ING) is a veritable Who's Who of Islamist apologists and activists. Leading the list is John Esposito, the founding director of the Saudi-funded Center for Muslim Christian Understanding at Georgetown University. He famously stated that the suicide-bombing Hamas organization engages in "honey, cheese-making, and home-based clothing manufacture."

Hamza Yusuf Hanson, who is not a scholar but sits on the ING board, publicly declared his own extremism at an ISNA convention. In 1991, he reportedly delivered a speech titled "Jihad is the Only Way" to the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), which is an arm of the radical organization Jamaat-i-Islami in Pakistan.

ING's reach is wide. Its web site lists more than a dozen affiliated organizations in North America. They reflect a broad network involved in Islamic outreach (da'wa), otherwise known as proselytizing.

ING also appears to have created a curriculum about Islam for grades 7 through 12. It also appears that the State of California, at least at one point, used ING curriculum. However, the ING links on the California Department of Education website are now dead.

It is now clear that some Middle Eastern Studies professors have ceased being observers of Islam and are now engaging in its propagation. Countless analysts have noted that Middle Eastern Studies professors substitute scholarship with apologia for radicalism. Still others openly agitate against the United States or Israel.

Elementary school, high school, or college administrators mulling a free visit from El-Genaidi's group should be forewarned about the academic engine that powers ING. ING's leading thinkers have a history of cavorting with apologists for radicalism-and the radicals themselves.

[Parents, do you know everything that your children are being 'taught'?]

READ MORE

Double Speak and the Economy

.
Authorities in the Obama administration keep contradicting themselves, insisting that the worst is over … and then add that the worst is yet to come:

“We are now in the cleanup phase,” Bair said in a speech in Washington. “But to be honest, there’s still more pain to go.”

This kind of non sequitur is the gold standard of double speak coming out of Washington to “explain” the current economic situation.

What are the facts?

The Commerce Department on April 30 said personal incomes fell in March for the fifth time in the past six months. The S&P/Case-Shiller Index of home prices in 20 major U.S. cities dropped in February, extending a decline that began in January 2007. The Labor Department May 8 reported employers shed 539,000 jobs in April, extending the decline to 5.7 million jobs since December 2007.

The FDIC insurance fund is down 64 percent from its peak at the start of the second quarter last year, reflecting the shutdown of 22 lenders from April through December. The agency voted 4-1 today to impose a fee of 5 cents per $100 of assets, excluding Tier 1 capital, backing away from a proposal of 20 cents per $100 of insured deposits. The FDIC estimates the fee will raise $5.6 billion, lifting the fund from its lowest level since 1994.

U.S. regulators conducted unprecedented stress tests on 19 of the biggest banks, concluding on May 7 that losses could reach $599.2 billion in the next two years under economic conditions that are worse than economists forecast.

Looks like the economy is getting better because it is getting worse. (Or is it getting worse because it is getting better?) Expect many more reports from the Obama administration confidently informing us that: worse is better and better is worse.

And expect most of the MSM to report the “good news” with straight faces...

READ MORE


image toon - mny msm fnn = Wall street bull does seem to be decaying slower

Lomborg's 'Climate-Industrial Complex'

.
Noted climate change critic Bjorn Lomborg has an article in today's Wall Street Journal that is a must read if you want to understand the forces of business and industry who are hard at work trying to profit off the global warming scare.

Referring to a similar business-government partnership during the cold war - the military-industrial complex - Lomborg dubs these "green" companies part of the "Climate-Industrial Complex" with none other than Al Gore leading the charge to making a buck off the climate change racket:

This phenomenon will be on display at the World Business Summit on Climate Change in Copenhagen this weekend. The organizers -- the Copenhagen Climate Council. The opening keynote address is to be delivered by Al Gore, who actually represents all three groups: He is a politician, a campaigner and the chair of a green private-equity firm invested in products that a climate-scared world would buy.

The world's largest wind-turbine manufacturer, Copenhagen Climate Council member Vestas, urges governments to invest heavily in the wind market. It sponsors CNN's "Climate in Peril" segment, increasing support for policies that would increase Vestas's earnings. A fellow council member, Mr. Gore's green investment firm Generation Investment Management, warns of a significant risk to the U.S. economy unless a price is quickly placed on carbon.

Even companies that are not heavily engaged in green business stand to gain. European energy companies made tens of billions of euros in the first years of the European Trading System when they received free carbon emission allocations.

This "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em," philosophy may produce profits but only makes it clearer that other businesses will suffer the consequences of such draconian government action. And who is surprised that Al Gore would be first in line with his hand out for government goodies?

Read Lomborg's entire piece for some good background on this phenomenon.

[Highly Recommended > ]

READ MORE

House Dems propose huge changes to drilling program

.
Under a House Democrat-crafted bill described as a “sweeping” reform of federal drilling rules, oil and natural-gas companies would pay more to drill on federal lands and have less time to access the resources.

The measure, crafted by House Natural Resources Democratic staff, raises the royalty fees oil and gas companies pay to drill on federal lands for the first time since the 1980s. It also shortens the duration of federal leases to access those federal resources from 10 years to five.

[Translation: they're making more difficult and more expensive to get the energy we all need. And this 'reduces our dependence on foreign oil' how?

It's never been about the environment or energy.]


READ MORE


image toon - engry = Gas price going back up

GENERIC DRUGS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE IN CANADA THAN IN THE UNITED STATES

.
Are there differences between the prices for prescription drugs that are most important to Canadian seniors (aged 60 and older) and their counterparts in the United States? According to the Fraser Institute, the answer is: Yes.

In 2007, Canadian seniors paid more than twice as much as their American counterparts paid for identical generic drugs. Why?

The high price of generic medicines in Canada is the result of various ill-conceived public policies that shield retail pharmacies and generic drug companies from competitive market forces.

[time and again, governments screw it up - so lets join them?]

READ MORE

CONCIERGE MEDICINE

.
Steven D. Knope is a local primary-care doctor in Phoenix, Arizona, who treats a small group of patients in exchange for an annual fee. Known as "concierge medicine," this practice is gaining popularity, particularly among older Americans with complex medical needs. The concept started in Seattle in 1996 with mostly wealthy patients and has since spread to people of more modest means.

  • Annual fees range from $500 to $15,000.
  • Doctors limit the number of patients they see and give them highly personalized attention, including detailed annual physicals, preventive care, same-day appointments and a promise to return their calls quickly, 24/7.
Although there is no precise count, Thomas W. LaGrelius, a Torrance, Calif., geriatrician and president of the Society for Innovative Medical Practice Design, a professional society for concierge physicians, estimates that as many as 5,000 doctors and one million patients are involved in concierge care.

[Offered as an example of the many-many creative ideas that will arise in our free market to address health care -- if left free.]

READ MORE


image toon - hcare = Oby = tax everyone until hcare is free

Olbermann Blames FNC & O’Reilly for Murder of Abortion Doctor Tiller


On Monday’s Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann placed blame on FNC host Bill O’Reilly for inciting the recent murder of Dr. George Tiller, widely known for performing late-term abortions in Kansas.

After showing a number of clips of O’Reilly and other FNC personalities attacking Tiller, Olbermann encouraged his viewers to request that businesses like restaurants that run FNC on their televisions change the channel because

"Fox News Channel will never restrain itself from incitement to murder and terrorism – not until its profits begin to decline, when its growth stops." ... "the goal here, to get this blindly irresponsible man and his ilk off the air," ... "we must again make the world safe for people condemned by the Fox News Channel."

READ MORE

NBC Suggests Bill O'Reilly Fueled Murder of Dr. George Tiller

.
NBC, frequently the object of Bill O'Reilly's scorn for its biased presentation of the news from the left, provided him with fresh evidence Monday evening as the NBC Nightly News, unlike the ABC and CBS newscasts, found it newsworthy in a story on the murder of Kansas doctor George Tiller to highlight Bill O'Reilly's critical remarks regarding the doctor.

Why?

READ MORE

Liberals Blame O'Reilly for Tiller Murder, Silent on Military Recruiter Shooting

.
While the far left is blaming Bill O’Reilly and the pro-life movement for the death of George Tiller, another shooting has left military recruiter William Long dead at the hands of an anti-military Muslim convert.

Mainstream liberals like Keith Olbermann and news sources like NBC have already blamed O'Reilly for Tiller's death, as have websites like Salon, the Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos.

Markos Moulitsas may have celebrated the deaths of Blackwater fighters and wished for a similar fate for Michelle Malkin, but nevermind that.

And Olbermann did call our troops fighting in Iraq "cold-blooded killers," but that obviously had nothing to do with the hate some on the left feel against the military.

To be sure, I'm not saying that Olbermann or Kos are somehow to blame for one lunatic's deranged actions, I am simply saying that those two lunatics are responsible for their own deranged comments. Saying that someone is responsible for murder based on their civic dissent is nothing more than first-degree fear mongering.

While Michelle Malkin, Allahpundit, Red State, and other conservative bloggers have denounced Tiller's murder, Keith Olbermann, Think Progress, the Huffington Post, haven't even mentioned William Long's murder at the recruiting center as of this writing.

[Is Code Pink to be 'held accountable' for the actions of the wacko in Little Rock? Sounds absurd, but there's a serious undertone in the campaign against Fox that should alarm all American.]

READ MORE

[Then there's this piece asking the question...


given his/their repeated flirtations with the idea.]
.

Call the Offices of Pelosi & Reid and Urge Them to Allow a Vote on the BFA

.
Media Research Center (MRC) President and NewsBusters.org Publisher Brent Bozell yesterday recorded a video thanking the MRC Grassroots Action Team - made up of more than 600,000 individual activists - for their signing nearly 400,000 Free Speech Alliance (FSA) petitions which were delivered yesterday to the offices of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Speaker Pelosi's number is (202) 225-4965,
Leader Reid's is (202) 224-3542.

We humbly suggest you say something along the lines of:

"Please tell (Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid) that the Broadcaster Freedom Act (HR 226 and S. 34) deserves an immediate stand-alone vote of the full (House or Senate)."

Be polite, be genteel. Be frequent. ;-)



READ MORE

Our Political Class Is the Problem, Not the Solution

.
Just when you thought our politicians could not sink any lower, along comes another batch of shocking revelations about their despicable conduct. The pathetic, grasping pettiness is as depressing as the spectacular abuses of allowances.

The entire political class across all three major parties appears to have the ethical standards of a swarm of sewer rats...

[Wait: three parties - oh; it's Britain, excuse - by the title and description I just assumed...]

READ MORE

77% See Politicians Unwillingness to Cut Government Spending as Bigger Problem Than Voter Resistance to Tax Hikes

.
For nearly four-out-of-five U.S. voters, the problem is not their unwillingness to pay taxes. It’s their elected representatives’ refusal to cut the size of government.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of voters say the bigger problem in the United States is the unwillingness of politicians to control government spending. Just 14% say the problem is that voters are unwilling to pay enough in taxes.

These findings parallel results in California just before voters there rejected several ballot initiatives aimed at raising taxes. After that vote on Tuesday, Governor Arnold Schwarzeneggersuggested the state might need federal financial help, but voters nationwide oppose any bailouts for California and other economically troubled states.

Just 28% of all voters say, generally speaking, that increases in government spending help the economy, down seven points from February. Fifty-three percent (53%) now believe spending increases hurt the economy, and seven percent (7%) say they have no impact.

Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Republicans and 61% of unaffiliated voters believe increased government spending hurts the economy. Democrats tend to hold the opposite view--49% of those in Barack Obama’s party think more government spending is good for the economy, while just 27% say it hurts.

READ MORE


image c-art - mny cali othr = NB Poll re CA tax revolt meaning

GOP Should Run Against the Power of the Center

By Michael Barone

Move to the center. That's the advice Republicans are getting from quarters friendly and otherwise. It seems to make a certain amount of sense. If opinion is arrayed along a single- dimension, left-to-right spectrum and clustered in the middle in a bell-curve pattern, then a party on the right needs only to move a few steps toward the center or just beyond to convert itself from minority to majority status.

But the world is a lot more complicated than that. Opinion is not arrayed on a single dimension, but flies all over the place in two or three or even four dimensions (which is to say it changes over time). New issues crop up, and old issues appear in a different light. Success in politics often comes not from readjusting one's stand to conform with current opinion, but in redefining what is at stake and reframing issues so that you have majorities on your side.

It's arguably good policy as well as good politics to run against this over-powerful center. Bailout favoritism and crony capitalism not only misallocate economic resources, they also sap faith in the fairness of our institutions. After World War II, Democrats wanted to retain wartime high taxes, pro-union labor laws, and wage and price controls -- all manipulatable for political benefit by political insiders. Republicans ran in 1946 on the theme of

"Had enough?"
and won big enough majorities to lower taxes, revise labor laws and abolish controls.

The 1946 Republicans didn't move to the center. They ran against the power of the center and permanently redefined where the center of the political spectrum was. That's a path today's Republicans might want to consider...

[Recommended > ]

READ MORE

MSNBC claims Palin got zero support for her idea, only it wasn't hers, and others supported it


Gov. Sarah Palin "got precisely zero support for her call for Alaska's Democratic Senator Mark Begich to resign because Ted Stevens' corruption conviction was overturned."
Rachel Maddow on Monday, April 6th, 2009 in an episode of her MSNBC show.

... But the idea was pushed by Randy Ruedrich, the state Republican chairman who first proposed it, and it was backed by conservative blogs. ConservativeHQ.com, for example, sent out an e-mail alert saying, "The people of Alaska, and all Americans, must rise up and demand that Mark Begich resign."

But Wev Shea, a former U.S. attorney now in private practice in Anchorage, did not specifically call on Begich to resign but he endorsed the idea of a special election and told the New York Times, "There’s a groundswell all over the state for a special election."

So Maddow left her viewers with two incorrect impressions -- that Palin had initiated the idea for Begich's resignation, and that no one else supported her. In fact, it wasn't Palin's idea, and she wasn't particularly wedded to it, and others supported it. We find Maddow's claim False.

[The fear, and so drumbeat, continues...]

READ MORE

When Words Don't Mean Anything
Victor Davis Hanson

Rather than an attempt to defend empirically Sotomayor's suggestion that Latinas are superior, in the judicial sense, to white men, we have been given a variety of postmodern contexts, constructing what she "really" meant: She was merely talking about the advantages of poverty that she thinks she has experienced that are not true of white men; she was only "joking"; she was making an intricate case for diversity, etc. — any explanation other than the natural one that was elaborated on later in her diatribe, namely that she believes the color and gender of a person impart wisdom or less than wisdom.

With the advent of Obamaworld, the centrist veneer sometimes rubs off the race/class/gender/religion talk and we see the fundamentalism in its essence — in the impromptu moments of the campaign it was Michelle's "mean country" and first-time pride in the U.S., Obama's "typical white person," Pennsylvania clingers, and original contorted defense of Reverend Wright, then there was Eric Holder's "cowards" outburst, and now Sotomayor's Latina tribalism.

In each case, once the race/class/gender animosity is revealed, there is a brief hesititation to see how well the media will come to the rescue and "contextualize" the remark, and when that fails there is the obligatory qualifier "maybe not the best way of putting it," "wrong word," "if I had to say it over, I'd . . ." The point being that, in the D.C. gotcha culture, these are never gotchas due to the race, gender, or class of the perpetrator.

I think the unifying explanation is that such wonderful people either simply are incapable of racialist remarks, or that the good that they otherwise stand for so overshadows the embarrassments as to make them not embarrassments at all.

READ MORE

Israel not without friends

It’s easy to be misled by elements of Western media and academia that seem to prefer terrorists and radical Islamists to Israel. The diplomatic balance sheet from Israel’s standpoint is quite good, pretty remarkably good, better than it has been for a very long time... [snip]

Countries with which Israel has great relations: Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, the United States, and also those of the European Union and Nato. Moreover, there is a long list of former Soviet Bloc states which understand the difference between a democratic state defending itself and a bunch of ideologically driven, dictatorship-worshipping terrorists. They include the new EU chair, the Czech Republic, and a dozen others, of which Azerbaijan, Georgia, Lithuania and Poland can stand as examples. And last but not least most of sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Friends can disagree; a lot of these actions are publicity stunts or attempts to show the countries in question have ‘balanced’ policies [or simple cowardice toward jihadists] Regarding what is important —— things like normal relations, trade (including military-related equipment), basic support, sanctions against extremist enemies —— these relationships deliver. In all these cases, then, Israel’s relations are quite good.

That’s a remarkable balance sheet whose positive elements should not be underrepresented.


READ MORE

.
Couric Advises Against 'Nastiness' -- In Speech That Mocked Rush, Palin, Rumsfeld, and Miss California
.

[HT:GC]


image photo - fnn - statue makes hoops basket

Tuesday, June 2, 2009


image toon 1st mny sclm = Oby = few more taxpayer billiion & GM should be fine

Just say no to Government Motors and Obamacars

.
Today's bankruptcy filing by GM will see the end of a once-great car company and the birth of a federal government-union partnership dressed up as a business.


Governments can do very few things well and almost nothing efficiently.

A government -run car company is not only very unnecessary, it's a deeply dismaying prospect. And not primarily because it won't make good cars at competitive prices, though almost certainly neither the new GM or the new Chrysler will do so. History tells us these ventures are highly unlikely to succeed.

The DNA of America is coded with private enterprise and individual risk-taking and reward.

The idea of the government owning businesses of any sort is not merely bad economics, it is terrible government. Buying a GM or a Chrysler is consenting to a massive leftward lurch in the American form of government, a "buying-into" a bought up company, and one gobbled up in a series of transactions which pummeled the private investor while protecting the pols and their union supporters.

Any American who values their traditions of free enterprise and political freedom will urge the federal government to disinvest itself from these companies immediately.

Buy Ford. Buy anything that isn't owned and operated by the federal government. You don't have to buy one that costs not just your cash, but also your commitment to free enterprise and all the benefits that flow from it.

READ MORE

The 31-Year-Old in Charge of Dismantling G.M.

.
WASHINGTON — It is not every 31-year-old who, in a first government job, finds himself dismantling General Motors and rewriting the rules of American capitalism.

But that, in short, is the job description for Brian Deese, a not-quite graduate of Yale Law School who had never set foot in an automotive assembly plant until he took on his nearly unseen role in remaking the American automotive industry..

READ MORE


image toon - 1st sclm mny bbro auto = USam ran Freddie Mac, SSN and Medicare - how hard

Little Green Cars

.
Instead of putting the failed car enterprise into bankruptcy six months ago -- where Carl Icahn or Wilbur Ross could have bought it -- the Bush administration chose Bailout Nation. Under Team Obama, that bailout has morphed into full-scale government ownership. Twenty billion dollars of TARP money is already waisted in GM, with another $50 billion on the way. And that number could easily double unless GM car sales miraculously climb back to 14 million this year. That's highly unlikely, with sales presently hovering around 9 million a year.

In other words, taxpayers are not going to get their money back.

And with CAFE mileage standards ratcheting up -- all while GM is going down -- Team Obama's green vision for the economy will soon be crystal clear. With President Obama in the driver's seat, we're going to get little green two-door cars that most folks won't want to buy.

Even worse, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger has made it plain that his powerful union won't let these cars be manufactured in low-cost non-union plants overseas. The result? Obama's little green cars are going to be unprofitable, as well. [That's ok, now that it's government owned, taxpayer subsidies will be no problem.]

But it's the bigger picture that has me most concerned. What does actually having a Government Motors say about the direction of the United States?

I won't lose my faith in this country's long-term future. But the issue of how much damage we sustain before returning to the policies of free-market economic growth is very much on my mind.

READ MORE


image toon - 1st auto engry grn = Oby says 1300$ green hit good for business

Coming toYour Garage: :Le Car

.
Finally, Americans can start moving forward—albeit in small, unsafe, state-mandated, subsidized pieces of junk. We all remember a time when we drove around in nearly any variety of automobile desired. Well, thank goodness we're getting past that kind of anarchy.

Rejoice, my fellow citizens, in the forthcoming automobile emissions and efficiency standards, even if they happen to add more than $1,000 to the cost of your average car...

READ MORE


image toon - grn engry sclm bbro auto = Oby floats down new CAFE standards from Budget mobile

Small Cars Kill

.
President Obama's push to force Americans into smaller cars ignores one big problem -- small cars are less safe than big cars.

Ignoring this fact will cost lives. Mr. Obama announced new miles-per-gallon regulations on May 19 that mandate that automobiles achieve 42 mpg by 2016...

READ MORE


image toon - bbro sclm auto engry grn = Oby mandates 32 inch waists for 40 mpg cars

9/11 families angered by US support for Saudis

.
Relatives of Sept. 11 victims say they're angry that the Justice Department is supporting the Saudi royal family's bid to be removed from a 9/11 lawsuit. The families of some victims have accused the royal family of financially backing terrorist groups that carried out the 2001 attacks.

The Justice Department filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday. It supports the Saudis' argument that the royal family as a sovereign state cannot be sued in a U.S. court. Bill Doyle's son was killed at the World Trade Center. He says the Obama administration's court filing undermines the nation's fight against terrorism...

READ MORE

Barack Obama is blind to his blunders over Islam

The new President's approach discourages change in Middle Eastern countries that need it most

For the past week or so, the Middle East has been abuzz with speculation about Barack Obama's “historic address to the Muslim world” to be delivered in Cairo on Thursday.

Obama is the first major Western leader, after Bonaparte, to address Islam as a single bloc, thus adopting the traditional Islamic narrative of dividing the world according to religious beliefs. This ignores the rich and conflict-ridden diversity of the 57 Muslim-majority nations and fosters the illusion, peddled by people such as Osama bin Laden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that Islam is one and indivisible and should, one day, unite under a caliphate.

By adopting the key element of the Islamist narrative, that is to say the division of humanity into religious blocs, Mr Obama also intends to send a signal to the Middle East's nascent democratic forces that Washington is abandoning with a vengeance George W. Bush's “freedom agenda”... [snip]

In an address to university students in Cairo in 2005, Condoleezza Rice explained the “Bush doctrine” in these terms: “For 60 years, the United States pursued stability at the expense of democracy in the Middle East - and we achieved neither. Now we are taking a different course.”

That different course transformed the US from a supporter of the status quo to an active agent for change - including the use of force to remove two obnoxious regimes in Kabul and Baghdad. It also coerced traditional Arab states to adopt constitutions, hold elections, grant women the vote, ease pressure on the media, and allow greater space for debate and dissent.

Mr Obama has started scrapping that policy in the name of “political realism”, the currently fashionable phrase in Washington... [snip]

In trying to prove that he is not George Bush, Barack Obama has committed big mistakes on key issues of foreign policy. His Cairo address, and his “one-size-fits-all” Islam policy, is just the latest. It encourages Islamists and ruling despots, discourages the forces of reform and change and, ultimately, could produce greater resentment of the United States among peoples thirsting for freedom, human rights and decent governance.

[Recommended > ]

READ MORE


image toon - gwot - Oby's checkers v Iran's chess

Israel and Egypt Lose Faith in Obama

.
During his first four months in office, President Barack Obama has demonstrated remarkably little leadership on Iran. This has significantly undermined our position in the Middle East, where states have lost confidence in the Obama administration and - as a consequence - are formulating new, unilateral strategies in anticipation of continued Iranian uranium enrichment.

In this vein, Israel has issued the latest signal that it is serious about executing a preemptive strike on Iran - with or without U.S. support. Yesterday, it launched the biggest civilian defense drill in its history, with police, local authorities, emergency services, and civilians engaging in a series of exercises to plan for a variety of attack scenarios - including non-conventional missile strikes. The signal that Israel is trying to send to Iran - and the U.S. - is very obvious: “We are prepared for any counterstrike that might follow our own attack on Iranian nuclear sites, and therefore possess ample freedom of action for hitting Iran if we deem it necessary.”

Remember: the current Israeli government already has significant public support for attacking Iran - public support that remains quite strong even if the Obama administration maintains its opposition to such an attack.

Egypt is also planning for the likelihood that the administration won’t inhibit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. In a statement released on Sunday, a spokesperson for Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak announced that, “With regard to attempts to say Iran is a common danger, President Mubarak’s and Egypt’s priority is on the Palestinian issue.” Egypt’s strategic thinking is clear: if Iran is to become a nuclear state, its best option is to ensure that Israel is significantly weakened via the peace process, and thereby prevented from engaging Iran in armed (and perhaps nuclear) conflict.

Or, to put it another way, Egypt is shrewdly calculating that its interests are better protected with one regional power than with two - and it has noticed that the Obama administration is more eager to take a hard line with Israel than with Iran, despite Cairo’s own distaste for the latter.

Of course, if the Obama administration actually believes that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is more destabilizing than a nuclear Iran, it will embrace Cairo’s sudden priority on the peace process. However, it will then have to contend with the increasing possibility that a well-prepared and determined Israel will take matters vis-à-vis Tehran into its own hands.

For this reason, the Obama administration’s lack of resolve on Iran is paving the road towards utter disaster.

READ MORE

Israel to US: Stop favoring the Palestinians

.
Barak Ravid writing in Haaretz reports:

"We're disappointed," said one senior official. "All of the understandings reached during the Bush administration are worth nothing."

Another official said the U.S. administration is refusing every Israeli attempt to reach new agreements on settlement construction.

"The United States is taking a line of granting concessions to the Palestinians that is not fair toward Israel,"

The Israeli officials attributed the unyielding U.S. stance to the speech Obama will make in Cairo this Thursday, in which he is expected to deliver a message of reconciliation to the Arab and Muslim worlds.

Obama, the master straddler, has no place to hide on the Israeli-Palestinian question and he will find that he will get no favors from the Arabs simply for showing empathy toward the Palestinians by taking a hardline stance against the settlements.

READ MORE


image toon - gwot nsec = Terrorist + Oby = death to SOME Americans

Malaria, Politics and DDT

.
In 2006, after 25 years and 50 million preventable deaths, the World Health Organization reversed course and endorsed widespread use of the insecticide DDT to combat malaria.

But earlier this month, the U.N. agency quietly reverted to promoting less effective methods for attacking the disease.

The result is a victory for politics over public health, and millions of the world's poor will suffer as a result...

[The organization is a net liability - past time to cut our losses.]

READ MORE

Geithner tells China its dollar assets are safe

.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Monday reassured the Chinese government that its huge holdings of dollar assets are safe and reaffirmed his faith in a strong U.S. currency.

His answer drew loud laughter from his student audience, reflecting scepticism in China about the wisdom of a developing country accumulating a vast stockpile of foreign reserves instead of spending the money to raise living standards at home....

[Even students know better.]

READ MORE


image toon - china sclm lbrty - Chinese flab wallpapered over American

Tales of the new American nomenklatura

.
The new ruling elite of America consists of those favored by government power. You can forget about working your way up via honest hard work. The fruits will be confiscated, and given to those with political sway.

It is a situation familiar to residents of the former Soviet Union, where the term nomenklatura (members of a list) was applied to describe the plutocrats who ruled that society and lived lavishly without benefit of huge personal wealth.

The fate of UAW members versus bond holders in the wreckage of Chrysler Corporation is one illustration of the benefits of membership, even junior membership, in the nomenklatura.

But it is at the upper reaches of the American nomenklatura, among office holders and senior bureaucrats, that we see how cushy life gets, even as the economy tanks. While the rest of us worry about having enough money to retire on or affording braces for our kids, the American nomenklatura are insulated from such mundane issues... [snip]

Taxpayers are being asked to do with less, because of the economic crisis. How about government's ostensible leaders actually leading -- by example?

READ MORE

Illinois Senate votes to raise state income tax

.
Springfield - The Illinois Senate late Saturday narrowly approved a 67-percent hike in the state income tax and imposed $1 billion in new sales taxes, dramatically reshaping the Statehouse’s budgetary stalemate.

No Republicans voted in support of the measure.

[During a time of recession. It matters who you vote for.]

READ MORE

145% Beer-Tax Hike

.
Washington - Drunk on power and dazed by ambition, members of Congress have stumbled upon a novel way to keep their spending binge rolling -- and leave American taxpayers with the hangover.

Under a Senate proposal, Congress would raise the federal excise tax on beer by 145 percent to more than $3 a case. Uncle Sam also would snatch an additional $7 on a case of wine -- a staggering increase of 233 percent ...

READ MORE

POLL: 18% Favor National/VAT Sales Tax, 68% Oppose

.
To raise additional money for the government, just 18% of Americans nationwide favor a national sales tax or VAT. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 68% oppose such a tax.

Democrats strongly support a national sales tax to provide universal health insurance coverage. Republicans are opposed by a three-to-one margin, and those not affiliated with either major party are opposed two-to-one.

A plurality of Americans would support a national sales tax if it meant getting rid of the federal income tax: 43% favor that trade-off, but 38% are opposed. Pluralities of Republicans and unaffiliateds like the idea, while a plurality of Democrats are against it.

Forty-eight percent (48%) say a national sales tax is fairer than an income tax while 26% hold the opposite view. The sales tax is viewed as fairer by 52% of Republicans, 49% of unaffiliateds and 44% of Democrats.

[BUT unless we unambiguously tell them not to, they'll move forward with it anyway.]

READ MORE


image toon - mny sclm = Oby's next book = spending too much?

Despite Obama's optimism, economic outlook remains grim

,

"Across America, recovery is under way,"

Vice President Joe Biden said in a statement accompanying a 28-page progress report.
However, Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, was more cautious in his "State of the Economy" review to the House Budget Committee last week.

"The economy will stop contracting and resume growing during the second half of this year," ... "but the hardships caused by the recession will persist for some time."

The CBO report found that through April only about $19 billion in stimulus funds has been spent.

In addition, Elmendorf predicted, unemployment is expected to peak at 10.5 percent in the second half of next year. Last month's rate was 8.9 percent, up from 8.1 percent in February, when the stimulus became law.

The number of unemployed increased by 1.26 million during the past two months to 13.7 million.

The administration's report Wednesday was nonetheless upbeat...

[And so the media coverage will be...]

READ MORE

The Geography of Carbon Emissions

.
No American city is among the top 50 cities in the world for air pollution according to the World Bank. (1) Another list, ‘The Top Ten of the Dirty Thirty,' compiled by the Blacksmith Institute of New York compared the toxicity of contamination, the likelihood of it getting into humans and the number of people affected. Places were bumped up in rank if children were impacted. [arbitrary bs, but] No US or European sites made the list.

Sites in China, India and Russia occupied six of the top ten spots. Some examples: at Linfen in Shanxi province-the heart of China's coal industry-industrial and automobile emissions put the health of 3 million people at risk. At Sukinda in the state of Orissa in India, 2.6 million people face the hazards of one of the world's opencast chromite mines. And in Dzerzhinsk, Russia, 300,000 people are exposed to toxic by-products from chemical weapons. (2)

Have you heard about this? Probably not. But there's more.

Another report states that seven of the world's ten most polluted cities are in China. Of the ten cities in the world with the highest levels of air pollution, three are in India. (3). There are more reports but by now you probably get the point. Note that no US city has been mentioned. Steven Hayward in discussing the Blacksmith report makes an observation that could well apply to all of these documents: "Not surprisingly the media and green campaigners in the United States completely overlooked this report." (4)... [snip]

"The combined carbon dioxide emissions from the 850 new coal-fired power plants that China and India are building between now and 2012 are five times the total [global!] savings of the Kyoto accords. So you can put in all those curly light bulbs and drive all the Priuses you want: India just ate that for breakfast and China will eat the next round of conservation for lunch." (7)

Although China receives the most attention, it is not the only Asian nation where this concern is present. India is also growing rapidly, and its major cities experience particulate levels often eight to ten times higher than the worst American cities. India is the fourth-most coal dependent country in the world and has enough reserves to last for the next 100 years. Carbon emissions in India are rising faster than nearly every other country on the planet. Between 1980 and 2006, India's carbon output increased by 341%, compared to 321% for China, 103% for Brazil 238% for Indonesia and 272% for Pakistan. (9)

Peter Huber sums this up quite well:

"Cut to the chase. We rich people can't stop the world's 5 billion poor people from burning the couple of trillion tons of cheap carbon that they have within easy reach. We can't even make any durable dent in global emissions-because emissions from the developing world are growing too fast, because the other 80 percent of humanity desperately needs cheap energy, and because we and they are now part of the same global economy. What we can do, if we're foolish enough, is let carbon worries send our jobs and industries to their shores, making them grow even faster, and their carbon emissions faster still." (6)

References...

READ MORE

China pans US over climate demands

Beijing - A leading Chinese strategist on climate change has declared ''there will be a deal at Copenhagen'' to replace the Kyoto Protocol, but he has belittled the carbon-reduction proposals of the Obama Administration and the Rudd Government as inadequate.


''China is not at all impressed with Obama ... Obama's statements are certainly insufficient and his demands for developing countries are unrealistic.''

[I.e., they're going to play on his global vanity to get even more self-limiting constraints on US while they do virtually nothing.]

READ MORE


Climate Change Law Would Bolster U.S. Role at Global Warming Talks

The Obama administration today acknowledged that its ability to play a leading role at international climate change talks later this year will be dictated largely by how quickly Congress acts on global warming legislation.

"The president has been very clear that he wants to re-establish the United States as a leader on the issue of climate change,"
Carol Browner, the president's adviser on energy and climate change issues, told an energy conference ...

[Beautiful. He's going to enslave our children so he can be a big man at the podium come party time.]

READ MORE

The Affirmative-Action Aristocracy?

.
One wonders whether affirmative action and diversity preferences are any more predicated on past collective suffering? If so, why has the UC university system in the past tried to find insidious ways of limiting Asian "overrepresentation" (given ample bias against Chinese and Japanese), or why is a Barack Obama, of half-African ancestry, a beneficiary of efforts to offer recompense to those of the African-American experience?

No need to cite the obvious — a Travis Thornberry living in Bakersfield, part of the Oklahoma Diaspora, poor and without educated parents, is entitled to no affirmative-action execmptions, but perhaps an illegal alien who crossed the border yesterday does become a "minority" by the very loose association with the Mexican-American experience? So we use increasingly baffling circumstances to dictate who and who is not deserving of special consideration.

Seeking a racial identity in "diversity" has become like Marxism in the old Soviet Union — a doctrine that everyone praises, while privately realizing that it has devolved into a useful tool for careerist advancement...

[As usual with VDH, Recommended > ]

READ MORE

Healthcare groups detail cost-containment plans

.
The six interest groups that promised President Obama last month they would vastly reduce national healthcare spending put some meat on the skeleton of their plan Monday.

In a three-page follow-up letter to Obama and 25 pages of proposals, health insurers, physicians, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers and a labor union say - stop.

Anyone missing from the list? Oh yeah, consumers.]

READ MORE

The Crisis of the Disappearing Educated Male

.
Over the past couple of decades, the male-female ratio on campuses has been changing dramatically. Women outnumber men by a 4-3 ratio on college campuses. Men currently make up only 43 percent of college graduates. According to USA Today, "currently 135 women receive bachelor's degrees for every 100 men." That imbalance, according to figures from the U.S. Department of Education, "is expected to widen in the coming years."

In short, many today acknowledge that there is a crisis of the disappearing educated male.

The "2nd Conference on College Men" at the University of Pennsylvania featured sessions examining the implications of negative comments about men that are prevalent on college campuses and the sexist campus activism of participants in the nation's 500 college gender studies departments. The conference program, attended by about 100 professors and student affairs personnel, exposed some unpleasant facts: men are "underrepresented" in academic programs and campus leadership activities.

Some experts claim that the imbalance begins in the public schools, where recess and physical education are being cut. More active boys are at a disadvantage, they say, when there is no outlet for their energy and restlessness. In addition, Title IX programs have hurt men's athletics with the less profitable men's sports being cut (over 400 men's collegiate athletic teams have been cut since Title IX went into effect) in order to fund women's programs. According to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), "for every new women's athletic slot created between 1992 and 1997, 3.6 male athletes were dropped."

Is it any wonder that men are avoiding today's college campuses?

Hostility toward men and masculinity begins in daycare and increases each year thereafter. Sexual harassment training and policies have created an uncertain environment, if not a hostile one, where men have to watch their every word and action lest it be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Some experts criticize a campus "worldview that sees things only in terms of oppressors and the oppressed." Typically, the few campus men's studies programs are designed to push an anti-masculinity agenda.

The negative implications are enormous... [snip]

Actually, the solution is much simpler: create an environment starting in kindergarten that teaches children to respect masculine traits. To do otherwise is to discriminate against our sons and brothers.

[The guy's nuts - men are society's enemy, everybody knows that.]

READ MORE

400,000 Petition Pelosi, Reid for Vote on Broadcaster Freedom Act

.
Today the Media Research Center’s Free Speech Alliance (FSA) will deliver nearly 400,000 petitions – combined with thousands of calls and faxes - to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid urging them to allow a full, fair stand-alone floor vote on the Broadcaster Freedom Act (BFA).

"Free speech on the radio airwaves remains in peril so long as the FCC is just a 3-2 vote away from reinstating the mis-named 'Fairness' Doctrine," ... "remains a threat to free speech as long as elected officials like Pelosi and Reid... refuse to give the Broadcaster Freedom Act a vote."

The Free Speech Alliance (www.FreeSpeechAlliance.us) is made up of sixty-seven (67) organizations representing millions of Americans dedicated to defending free speech against a return of the Censorship Doctrine or any other assault on the First Amendment and talk radio. National talk show hosts Lars Larson and Rusty Humphries have also been heavily involved in the petition effort.



The full June 1 press release is posted below:

[And thanks to those of you who joined me in signing.]

READ MORE


"Hold stand-alone floor vote on the Broadcaster Freedom Act"


Senate-Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
House-Pelosi: http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
YOUR Senator: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
YOUR Congressman: https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml

or: Speed Message them with your personal distribution list...
and as always, pass it on...
.