SEIU intimidates children; Schumer vs. free speech; Mosque to be built anyway; Reigning in the EPA

1) Yes, the Gulf Spill Is Obama's Katrina Where was the White House plan, and why has it been so slow to make decisions? As President Obama prepares to return to the Gulf Coast Friday, he is receiving increasing criticism for his handling of the oil spill. For good reason: Since the Deepwater Horizon rig blew up on April 20, a lethargic Team Obama has delayed or blown off key decisions requested by state and local governments and left British Petroleum in charge of developing a plan to cap the massive leak. Now the slow-moving oil spill threatens Mr. Obama's reputation, along with 40% of America's sensitive wetlands. Critics include some of his most ardent cheerleaders, who understand that 38 days without an administration solution is unacceptable. …Initially, Team Obama wanted to keep this problem away from the president (a natural instinct for any White House). It took Mr. Obama 12 days to show up in the region. Democrats criticized President George W. Bush for waiting four days after Katrina to go to New Orleans. …Take the containment strategy of barrier berms. These temporary sand islands block the flow of oil into fragile wetlands and marshes. Berm construction requires approval from the Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (Well there‘s one of the problems! Louisiana ought to be able to construct its own darn berms without permission from the Federal Government. - comment mine). Louisiana officials asked permission on May 11. They have yet to hear back. The feds are conducting a review as oil washes ashore. The federal government was even slower on the question of dispersants, chemicals used to break up the oil and hasten its evaporation from the surface of the water. On May 8, Louisiana sent a letter to BP and the EPA begging BP not to use dispersants below the surface of the water. Subsurface use of dispersants keeps oil slicks from forming. But when it doesn't come to the surface to evaporate, the oil lingers below, gets into underwater currents, and puts at risk fisheries that supply a third of America's seafood. On May 13, EPA overruled the state and permitted BP to use dispersants 4,000 feet below the surface. (“Overruled the state”???? What happened to state’s rights? - comment mine) Then, a week after BP released 55,000 gallons of dispersants below the surface, EPA did an about-face, ordering BP to stop using the dispersant and to "find a less-toxic" one. Louisiana officials found out about this imprecise guidance in the Washington Post. BP refused, EPA backed off, and Louisiana's concerns about their marine fisheries remain. See: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704717004575268752362770856.html 2) Chuck Schumer vs. Free Speech The 'Disclose' Act would make election law even more incomprehensible and subject to selective enforcement for political gain. As former commissioners on the Federal Election Commission with almost 75 years of combined experience, we believe that the bill proposed on April 30 by Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen to "blunt" the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC is unnecessary, partially duplicative of existing law, and severely burdensome to the right to engage in political speech and advocacy. Moreover, the Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections Act, or Disclose Act, abandons the longstanding policy of treating unions and businesses equally, suggesting partisan motives that undermine respect for campaign finance laws. …Those regulatory burdens often fall hardest not on large-scale players in the political world but on spontaneous grass-roots movements, upstart, low-budget campaigns, and unwitting volunteers. Violating the law by engaging in forbidden political speech can land you in a federal prison, a very un-American notion. The Disclose Act exacerbates many of these problems and is a blatant attempt by its sponsors to do indirectly, through excessively onerous regulatory requirements, what the Supreme Court told Congress it cannot do directly—restrict political speech. …Perhaps the most striking thing about the Disclose Act is that, while the Supreme Court overturned limits on spending by both corporations and unions, Disclose seeks to reimpose them only on corporations. …For example, while the Disclose Act prohibits any corporation with a federal contract of $50,000 or more from making independent expenditures or electioneering communications, no such prohibition applies to unions. This $50,000 trigger is so low it would exclude thousands of corporations from engaging in constitutionally protected political speech, the very core of the First Amendment. Yet public employee unions negotiate directly with the government for benefits many times the value of contracts that would trigger the corporate ban. See: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703460404575244772070710374.html 3) SEIU Thugs Show up on Families’ Doorsteps, Intimidate Children (headline mine) Last Sunday, on a peaceful, sun-crisp afternoon, our toddler finally napping upstairs, my front yard exploded with 500 screaming, placard-waving strangers on a mission to intimidate my neighbor, Greg Baer. Baer is deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), a senior executive based in Washington, D.C. And that -- in the minds of the organizers at the politically influential Service Employees International Union and a Chicago outfit called National Political Action -- makes his family fair game. Waving signs denouncing bank "greed," hordes of invaders poured out of 14 school buses, up Baer's steps, and onto his front porch. As bullhorns rattled with stories of debtor calls and foreclosed homes, Baer's teenage son Jack -- alone in the house -- locked himself in the bathroom. "When are they going to leave?" Jack pleaded when I called to check on him. Baer, on his way home from a Little League game, parked his car around the corner, called the police, and made a quick calculation to leave his younger son behind while he tried to rescue his increasingly distressed teen. He made his way through a din of barked demands and insults from the activists who proudly "outed" him, and slipped through his front door. "Excuse me," Baer told his accusers, "I need to get into the house. I have a child who is alone in there and frightened." Now this event would accurately be called a "protest" if it were taking place at, say, a bank or the U.S. Capitol. But when hundreds of loud and angry strangers are descending on your family, your children, and your home, a more apt description of this assemblage would be "mob." Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked-even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might "incite" these trespassers. …After Baer's house, the 14 buses left to descend on the nearby residence of Peter Scher, a government relations executive at JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500). …Targeting homes and families seems to put SEIU in the ranks of (now jailed) radical animal-rights activists and the Kansas anti-gay fundamentalists harassing the grieving parents of a dead 20-year-old soldier at his funeral (the Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on the latter). But that's not a conversation that SEIU officials want to have. When I asked Stephen Lerner, SEIU's point-person on Wall Street reform, about these tactics, he accused me of getting "emotional." Lerner was more comfortable sticking to his talking points: "Millions of people are losing their homes, and they have gone to the banks, which are turning a deaf ear." Okay, fine, then why not continue SEIU protests at bank offices and shareholder meetings-as the union has been doing for more than a year? Lerner insists, "People in powerful corporations seem to think they can insulate themselves from the damage they are doing." …Of course, HuffPost readers responding to the coverage assumed that Baer was an evil former Bush official. He's not. A lifelong Democrat, Baer worked for the Clinton Treasury Department, and his wife, Shirley Sagawa, author of the book The American Way to Change and a former adviser to Hillary Clinton, is a prominent national service advocate. In the 1990s, the Baers' former bosses, Bill and Hillary Clinton, denounced the "politics of personal destruction." Today politicians and their voters of all stripes grieve the ugly bitterness that permeates our policy debates. Now, with populist rage providing a useful cover, it appears we've crossed into a new era: The politics of personal intimidation. I heard one of the protestors on the local Sandy Rios radio show. She thinks she had a right to stay in her house even though she wasn’t paying her mortgage. Excuse me? See: http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/19/news/companies/SEIU_Bank_of_America_protest.fortune/index.htm 4) Sestak, Obama, and the Law With Rep. Joe Sestak’s (D-PA) defeat of Sen. Specter (D-PA) in the Democratic Senate primary, the controversy over the alleged job offer made to Sestak last year by someone in the Obama White House is once again heating up. After essentially ignoring this potentially serious violation of federal law for months, some members of the mainstream media are finally asking questions. Sestak was asked about it by David Gregory on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. Sestak used this job offer as a campaign issue to elicit support during his primary run, but now practically refuses to talk about it and won’t say which White House staffer made the offer. The public has a right to know exactly what happened, and whether a crime was committed. …However, what is illegal and not normal practice in Washington is to promise federal employment to an individual in exchange for future political activity. 18 U.S.C. § 600 prohibits public officials from using government-funded jobs or programs to advance their partisan political interests. The statute makes it unlawful for anyone to “directly or indirectly, promise[ ] any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit” to any person as a “consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party…in connection with any primary election” (emphasis added). As the OLC opinion says, § 600 “punishes those who promise federal employment or benefits as an enticement to or reward for future political activity, but does not prohibit rewards for past political activity.” Future political activity would arguably include dropping out of a contested primary in order to benefit the White House-endorsed candidate (here, Senator Specter). Thus, if we take Sestak at his word that he was offered a position in the Obama Administration if he quit the race against Specter, then whoever made that offer in the White House has committed a violation of the law. It does not matter that Sestak did not take up the offer – the statute prohibits making such an offer in the first place – there is no requirement even for a tentative agreement. Like the crime of solicitation, the crime happens once the words trip off the mouth of the person making the statement. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/26/sestak-obama-and-the-law/ 5) Obama to skip wreath laying at Arlington for Memorial Day; makes sure not to miss Paul McCartney Last year, Obama did his duty as Commander-in-Chief and paid his respects for the fallen at Arlington National Cemetery for Memorial Day. This year, he’s sending Joe Biden in his place, because he’s got more important things to do… like go to Chicago. ‘President Barack Obama plans to spend a long holiday weekend in Chicago. The White House says Obama and his family will travel to their hometown on Thursday and stay through the weekend. It will be their first trip back home since a visit for Valentine’s Day weekend in February 2009. On Monday, Obama is scheduled to participate in a Memorial Day ceremony at Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elwood, Ill. In Obama’s absence, Vice President Joe Biden will participate in the customary wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery outside Washington.’ As Doug Powers noted at Michelle’s blog, he won’t be missing a visit with Paul McCartney. Nice to see where his priorities lie. See: http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/05/25/obama-to-skip-wreath-laying-at-arlington-for-memorial-day-makes-sure-not-to-miss-paul-mccartney/ 6) Morning Bell: This Congress Has No Shame On February 4, 2010, pushing for passage of her pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) legislation, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said on the House floor: “When I became Speaker of the House, the very first day we passed legislation that made PAYGO the rule of the House. Today we will make it the law of the land. … So the time is long overdue for this to be taken for granted. The federal government will pay as it goes.” That was the promise. But here is the reality: in the three years that Speaker Pelosi has enforced her PAYGO rule, the House has violated it by nearly $1 trillion. And now with the U.S. Debt Clock officially passing the $13 trillion milestone Wednesday, the House is set to violate their own PAYGO law yet again, this time to the tune of around $150 billion. The legislation clocks-in at almost one-fifth the size of President Barack Obama’s original $862 billion failed economic stimulus, and the leftist majority in Congress has titled it “The American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act.” And it is a tax-hiking, spending-exploding, job-killing, deficit-hiking wonder. The Tax Hikes: The entire purpose of this bill was originally to extend some popular and well-established tax cuts that have been around for years but have to be re-approved every year. But being the big government lovers that they are, the left has crafted a bill that actually increases tax revenues by $57 billion over ten years. The biggest items are a job-killing tax on American corporations that compete overseas, a job-killing tax on innovation-creating venture capital partnerships, and a four-fold increase in the tax on oil production that ostensibly is supposed to go to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, but is instead being siphoned off to help pay for completely unrelated new domestic spending. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/27/morning-bell-this-congress-has-no-shame 7) Health Care Law 63% Favor Repeal of National Health Care Plan Support for repeal of the new national health care plan has jumped to its highest level ever. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of U.S. voters now favor repeal of the plan passed by congressional Democrats and signed into law by President Obama in March. Prior to today, weekly polling had shown support for repeal ranging from 54% to 58%. See: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/health_care_law 8) Poll Finds Americans Pessimistic, Dissatisfied with Washington Seven in ten Americans are dissatisfied with the way things are going in Washington, including 22 percent who say they are "angry" about the situation. Just 15 percent overall approve of the job being done by Congress. …The president's job approval rating has fallen to 47 percent, and, perhaps more crucially, Americans no longer say he shares their priorities for the country. See: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005953-503544.html 9) Disapproving of EPA’s CO2 Regulations Whatever prospects lie ahead for cap and trade legislation moving through the Senate might not matter if the Environmental Protection Agency continues forward on its path to regulate carbon dioxide. The EPA’s endangerment finding, which took place earlier this year, gives the agency the authority to use Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs). New restrictions on automobiles were the first step in what could eventually be a long, economically painful set of regulations imposed by unelected government bureaucrats (emphasis mine) – unless Congress steps up to the plate and stops them. Lisa Murkowski’s (R–AK) resolution of disapproval would do just that. As Heritage Senior Policy Analyst Ben Lieberman explains, “In order to provide a means of stopping unwarranted or ill-advised regulations, Congress and President Clinton enacted the Congressional Review Act in 1996. The statute allows Congress to pass, by simple majority and with limited debate time, a resolution of disapproval against any newly promulgated federal regulation it opposes, thus revoking the regulation. It is hard to imagine a more appropriate application of the Congressional Review Act than a disapproval against the EPA’s attempt to regulate energy use in the name of addressing global warming.” Why? Because the Clean Air Act was never intended to regulate carbon dioxide. As the Clean Air Act is currently written, the endangerment finding would require that the EPA regulate sources or establishments that emit 100 or 250 tons or more of a pollutant per year. This was seen as the best way to combat smog, soot, and other air pollutants – not CO2. This means that Schools, farms, restaurants, hospitals, apartment complexes, churches, and anything with a motor—from motor vehicles to lawnmowers, jet skis, and leaf blowers—could be subject to cost-increasing restrictions. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/24/disapproving-of-epa’s-co2-regulations 10) Despite Protests, Mosque Plan Near 9/11 Site Wins Key Vote Opponents called it an "insult," "demeaning" and a "house of evil," but the angry protests did not stop an advisory board from approving plans to build a mosque and Islamic center two blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. New York debates the construction of a Muslim mosque two blocks from 9/11 scene. In a heated, four hour meeting Tuesday night, Community Board 1, which represents the area of lower Manhattan that includes Ground Zero, voted 29-1 in favor of the proposal. There were 10 abstentions. See: http://abcnews.go.com/US/mosque-plan-clears-hurdle-protests/story?id=10747570 11) Obama's Grotesque Move to Join the "Alliance of Civilizations": "the dhimmitude syndrome" Obama plans to announce as early as this week that he will begin a formal relationship with the Alliance of Civilizations, the 5-year-old, UN-backed stealth jihad, Islamic supremacist organization. What's next? How long before Obama joins the bloc of 56 countries in the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference)? The Alliance of Civilizations is an arm of the OIC. Bat Ye'or, after hearing Obama's submission speech to Islam in Cairo last June, said this: "The president’s speech is similar to many such declarations by European leaders. The question it raises is how much the West is ready to forgo truth and its basic principles in its supplication for obtaining peace with Islam. Clearly, the full Islamization of the West is the quickest way to obtain it. Obama’s political program in connection with the Alliance of Civilizations conforms to an OIC strategy that has already been accepted by the EU. In history, this policy has a name: the dhimmitude syndrome" See: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/05/obamas-grotesque-move-to-join-the-alliance-of-civilizations-the-dhimmitude-syndrome.html 11a) The U.N.'s 'Alliance of Civilizations President Obama is expected to travel early next month to Istanbul, where he will attend a meeting of a United Nations-spawned outfit called the Alliance of Civilizations. Under that grand title, hundreds of worthies will gather to pursue various aspects of "engagement." Among those expected are Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, officials of Alliance co-sponsors Turkey and Spain and a former Portuguese president now heading the Alliance, Jorge Sampaio--and, though the Alliance this week would neither confirm nor deny, it's a good bet there will be representatives there from Iran. …Headquartered across the street from the U.N.'s main offices in New York, the Alliance might more appropriately be called a U.N.-approved Slush Fund for Advancing Iranian and Other Islamic Interests. Both high profile and hard to pin down, it is first and foremost an Iranian brain child, which came to the U.N. by way of an earlier venture pitched in 1998 by Iran's then-president Mohammad Khatami for a "Dialogue of Civilizations." See: http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/25/alliance-of-civilizations-opinions-columnists-obama-un.html Hal Lindsey’s comments on this: “The President may seem to be trying to make nice with Israel, but, at the same time, he has approved America's formal membership in the Alliance of Civilizations. This UN organization was founded in 2006 to bridge "the gaps between Muslim and Western civilizations." President Bush refused to join because he recognized that it would be used by hostile nations to bludgeon Israel. Sure enough, in the last four years the Alliance of Civilizations has promoted the idea that the main reason for the Muslim-Western rift is Israel, its settlement activity, and its very existence. Sounds like just the kind of organization President Obama would love. So, sign us up! Oh, that's right, he already has.” 12) US lifts sanctions against Russians linked to Iran The Obama administration on Friday removed sanctions against three Russian organizations the U.S. had previously accused of assisting Iran's effort to develop nuclear weapons. Penalties against a fourth Russian entity previously accused of illicit arms sales to Syria also were lifted. The timing of the decisions, published in Friday's Federal Register but not otherwise announced by the State Department, suggested the possibility of a link to U.S. efforts to win Russian support for a proposed new U.N. Security Council resolution expanding sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley denied that the decision to lift the sanctions was meant to win Russian support for additional Iran sanctions. He said, however, that it reflected the fact that "Russia has over time adapted its approach to Iran" and has shown restraint in certain arms deals with Tehran. "So we felt that as Russia shared our concern about Iran and was willing to support the kinds of arms restrictions that are in the draft (U.N.) resolution, we felt confident that we could remove these penalties while protecting our non-proliferation interests," Crowley said. While the U.S. did not lift the sanctions in exchange for Moscow's support in the U.N., the two actions "are connected in the sense that clearly the actions Russia has taken over time have demonstrated that they take the situation with Iran seriously," he added. I also saw this in the Federal Register, since I have to read it every day for my job. One of companies, Tula Instrument Design Bureau, lists Iran on its website as having “in service weapon systems” created by it (see: http://kbptula.ru/eng/kbp/ved.htm, scroll down to map). Furthermore, what Crowley is saying is that we lifted sanctions in exchange for…wait for it…NOTHING! See: http://wwww.examiner.com/a-2642056~US_lifts_sanctions_against_Russians_linked_to_Iran.html 12a) Red Flags on Iran In last minute deal making with Russia over sanctions on Iran, the US caved to Moscow objections over selling advanced air and cruise missile defenses to Tehran. This is a particularly disruptive retreat by Obama’s State Department, one that makes an Israeli military strike more, not less, likely. Meanwhile, Iran continues to play rope-a-dope. The speaker of Iran’s Parliament declared their deal with Brazil and Turkey was off if United Nations sanctions were on. His country would abandon plans to ship some nuclear fuel to Turkey and rethink cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency if the US insists on pushes new UN Security Council sanctions. The US needs a real policy to deal with Iran before its too late. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/24/red-flags-on-iran

Refusal to enforce immigration law; Obama has 12 social security numbers; Moscow to overthrow Georgia

I'm trying a bigger font size, today, folks. Let me know if you like it or hate it. 1) Top Official Says Feds May Not Process Illegals Referred From Arizona A top Department of Homeland Security official reportedly said his agency will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona authorities. John Morton, assistant secretary of homeland security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, made the comment during a meeting on Wednesday with the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, the newspaper reports. "I don't think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution," Morton told the newspaper. The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach, he said, and not a patchwork of state laws. THEN WHY DON’T YOU ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW, JOHN MORTON? The law, which criminalizes being in the state illegally and requires authorities to check suspects for immigration status, is not "good government," Morton said. …Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said ICE is not obligated to process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona authorities. "ICE has the legal discretion to accept or not to accept persons delivered to it by non-federal personnel," Napolitano said. "It also has the discretion to deport or not to deport persons delivered to it by any government agents, even its own." …Border apprehensions in Arizona, where roughly 500,000 illegal immigrants are estimated to be living, are up 6 percent since October, according to federal statistics. Roughly 6.5 million residents live in Arizona. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-AL, said it appeared the Obama administration is "nullifying existing law" and suggested Morton may not be the right person for his post if he fails to enforce federal immigration law (emphasis mine). …Sessions said the U.S. government has "systematically failed" to enforce federal immigration law and claimed Morton's statement is an indication that federal officials do not plan on working with Arizona authorities regarding its controversial law. See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/21/official-says-feds-process-illegals-referred-arizona/ 1a) 17 more states planning Ariz. 'illegal' crackdown In what is developing into a standoff between states and the federal government that could be bigger than gun control or even health care, 17 states have launched versions of Arizona's immigration law, even as federal officials say they may not bother to process illegal aliens caught by the states. William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, which has been trying to get officials to address the open southern border for years, warned the consequences could be dire. "Over the last couple days, Obama and the chief of ICE have refused to honor their oaths of office," he said. "Their constitutional requirement is to enforce existing laws. "They've told the American public to go eat cake," he said. …"Seventeen states are now filing versions of Arizona's SB 1070, which is designed to help local police enforce America's existing immigration laws," ALIPAC said in a report today. The report said numerous national and local polls indicate 60 to 81 percent of Americans support local police enforcing immigration laws. …Gheen said the states where some form of immigration crackdown is under development include Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas and Utah. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=156985 2) At West Point, Obama offers new security strategy …In a commencement speech to the graduating class at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, the president outlined his departure from what Bush had called a "distinctly American internationalism." Instead, Obama pledged to shape a new "international order" (emphasis mine) based on diplomacy and engagement. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/22/AR2010052201586.html 3) Stocks plunge to their lowest level in a year on bad economic news U.S. stocks suffered their worst one-day losses in more than a year on Thursday as unfavorable news about unemployment and the prospects of economic growth in this country piled onto deepening angst about the debt crisis in Europe. The Standard & Poor's 500-stock index, a broad measure of U.S. markets, fell 3.9 percent to its lowest level since February. All three major U.S. stock indicators are now down more than 10 percent from their recent peaks in April. That puts the market in correction territory, meaning stock values may be adjusting to offset an excessive run-up in prices. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/20/AR2010052005363.html 3a) Stocks plummet as Germany gets tough on financial speculators A German crackdown on financial speculators threw global markets into a tailspin Thursday, sparking the largest losses on Wall Street in a year, infuriating other European powers as they try to stabilize the ailing euro and raising questions about the ability of world leaders to coordinate their efforts at financial reform. The measures announced unilaterally in Berlin earlier this week took U.S. and European officials by surprise, and they run counter to the broad pledges of cooperation that leaders of the world's top economies said would guide their overhaul of financial regulation. Instead of shoring up confidence in Europe's ability to address an array of economic problems, the actions -- including an outright ban on some types of aggressive stock trading -- seemed to backfire and spotlight divisions in the euro zone. The fallout from Germany's actions hit Wall Street hard. Coupled with disappointing U.S. economic news, it forced the Dow Jones industrial average down 376 points, or 3.6 percent. Germany, angry over pressure to bankroll its spendthrift neighbors, intends on Friday to press the 15 other countries that use the euro to follow its lead in setting strict caps on budget deficits to maintain fiscal order in the region. But the proposal faces significant opposition. And the tensions are highlighting the squabbling over the region's handling of the debt crisis, further eroding investors' confidence in the currency. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/20/AR2010052005413.html 3b) The Message to the U.S. in Germany’s Ascension Germany has taken the clear lead as the European sovereign debt crisis unfolds. This is an obvious outcome because of Germany’s relatively tight rein on government deficits and its policies that have made it Europe’s toughest competitor. Germany’s clear ascension is both good news and bad for Europe, and a clear warning to the United States. The most recent sign of the European shift in power was Germany’s unilateral decision to ban “naked short selling”, which is a form of speculation whereby one bets that an asset price would go down (short selling), without first borrowing the stock (the naked part). This decision dismayed other European leaders because they were given no advance warning, let alone an opportunity to discuss the policy. Put plainly, Germany broke the standing rules of the cozy little club that is Europe. It must further dismay other European leaders because this decision may signal Germany’s intention to exercise its financial muscle and force some painful rewriting of other club rules. Germany has already hinted at this through references that greater central control (read: German control) needs to be exercised over fiscal policies of misbehaving countries. …The message for the United States could not be plainer. First and foremost, the markets will tolerate persistent and extraordinary deficit spending only so long, and when they lose patience the shift can be sudden, surprising, and painful (emphasis mine). The United States appears likely to experience this first hand. Under President Obama’s budget policies, the United States is building a bridge of trillion dollar deficits through the decade on route to our long-standing financial debacle known as entitlements. It is fantasy to believe the markets would tolerate this. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/20/the-message-to-the-u-s-in-germany’s-ascension 4) House Panel Rejects a Plan to Shift Detainees to Illinois WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee has dealt a blow to President Obama’s hopes to shutter the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, by unanimously approving legislation that would prohibit creating a detention center inside the United States. Finally someone has some sense… The administration had asked Congress to approve about $350 million to buy and renovate a nearly empty prison in Thomson, Ill. The White House plan was to empty Guantánamo and transfer its detainees to Illinois — including 48 who would be held without trial as wartime prisoners. But late Wednesday, the House committee unanimously approved a defense bill for 2011 that bans spending money to build or modify any facility inside the United States to house Guantánamo detainees, according to a summary of the bill. It says the committee wants to see “a thorough and comprehensive plan that outlines the merits, costs, and risks associated with utilizing such a facility. No such plan has been presented to date. The bill prohibits the use of any funds for this purpose.” See: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/us/politics/21gitmo.html 5) GOP wins House seat in Obama's home district HONOLULU – Republicans cited Rep.-elect Charles Djou's victory for a seat long out of their reach as evidence of steadily increasing election-year strength… "It is a significant win. It is the birthplace of the president of the United States," Republican Chairman Michael Steele said a few hours after Djou sealed his victory over Democrats Colleen Hanabusa and Ed Case. The two drew 59 percent of the vote between them in the winner-take-all contest. Djou became the first Republican in nearly 20 years to win a congressional seat from his state… …Djou will replace Neil Abercrombie, a 10-term Democrat who resigned to run for governor. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100523/ap_on_el_ho/us_hawaii_congress 6) The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues: Multiple social security numbers and missing records Researchers have discovered that Obama’s autobiographical books are little more than PR stunts, as they have little to do with the actual events of his life. The fact is we know less about President Obama than perhaps any other president in American history and much of this is due to actual efforts to hide his record. This should concern all Americans. …The president who campaigned for a more “open government” and “full disclosure” will not unseal his medical records, his school records, his birth records or his passport records. He will not release his Harvard records, his Columbia College records, or his Occidental College records—he will not even release his Columbia College thesis. All his legislative records from the Illinois State Senate are missing and he claims his scheduling records during those State Senate years are lost as well. In addition, no one can find his school records for the elite K-12 college prep school, Punahou School, he attended in Hawaii. …What’s more, there are questions about how he paid for his Harvard Law School education since, despite a claim by Michele Obama, no one has produced any evidence that he received student loans. The Obamas will not release any student loan details despite repeated requests from the Chicago Tribune. However, it appears that his Harvard education may have been paid for by a foreign source. Khalid Al-Mansour, an advisor to Saudi prince Al-Walid bin Talah, told Manhattan Borough president, Percy Sutton, that he was raising money for Obama’s Harvard tuition. Incidentally, Prince Tala is the largest donor to CAIR, a Muslim group declared by the U.S. Government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorist financing trial. At least three of CAIR’s leaders have been indicted for terrorist activities. Al-Mansour’s admission opens up speculation as to whether Muslim interests have assisted Obama’s career in the hope he would eventually be in a position someday to promote their interests. …Of all these marvels, the latest mystery and probably most perplexing is that of Obama’s social security number. It appears that Obama has multiple identities in terms of possessing numerous social security numbers. … …In Obama’s home state, Illinois, Sankey tracked down 16 different addresses for a Barack Obama or a Barack H. Obama, of which all are addresses he was known to have lived at. Two Social Security numbers appear for these addresses, one beginning with 042 and one starting 364. In California, where Obama attended Occidental College, there are six addresses listed for him, all within easy driving distance of the college. However, there are three Social Security numbers connected to these addresses, 537 and two others, each beginning with 999. …In Massachusetts – where Obama attended Harvard Law School – we find three addresses, all using the 042 Social Security number. After Obama was elected to the United States Senate in 2005, he moved into an apartment at 300 Massachusetts Ave NW; the Social Security number attached to that address is the 042 one. Yet, three years later, Obama used a different Social Security number for an address listed as: 713 Hart Senate Office Building. This was the address of his United States Senate office. This Social Security number began with 282 and was verified by the government in 2008. …Finally, the one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time. See: http://www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=3255 6a) More on this…Investigators: Obama uses Connecticut Soc. Sec. Number 3 experts insist White House answer new questions about documentation NEW YORK – Two private investigators working independently are asking why President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state. In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, yet Obama's earliest employment reportedly was in 1975 at a Baskin-Robbins ice-cream shop in Oahu, Hawaii. WND has copies of affidavits filed separately in a presidential eligibility lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia by Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels and Colorado private investigator John N. Sampson. The investigators believe Obama needs to explain why he is using a Social Security number reserved for Connecticut applicants that was issued at a date later than he is known to have held employment. See: http://www.thefoxnation.com/barack-obama/2010/05/13/investigators-obama-uses-ct-social-security-number 7) Texas board adopts new social studies curriculum AUSTIN, Texas – The Texas State Board of Education adopted a social studies and history curriculum Friday that amends or waters down the teaching of the civil rights movement, slavery, America's relationship with the U.N. and hundreds of other items. No, liberal members of the media; it raises to a new level the teaching of how this country was actually founded and teaches American exceptionalism - something you cannot stand. AND IT’S ABOUT TIME. …In final edits leading up to the vote, conservatives rejected language to modernize the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D. They also required that public school students in Texas evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty. McLeroy offered the amendment requiring students to evaluate efforts by global organizations including the U.N. to undermine U.S. sovereignty, saying they threatened individual liberty and freedom. YES, IT’S ABOUT TIME! During the monthslong process of creating the guidelines, conservatives successfully strengthened the requirements on teaching the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers and attempted to water down rationale for the separation of church and state. This article is SO SLANTED I don’t know how this passes for journalism. The “separation of church and state” as it’s currently practiced by progressives and liberals would make founders roll over in their graves. They NEVER intended freedom FROM religion, only freedom OF religion. The standards will refer to the U.S. government as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic," and students will be required to study the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard. FOOL! WE ARE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC! See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/ap_on_re_us/us_texas_schools_social_studies 8) Obama Cannot Ignore Chavez Terror Links Washington’s ability to manage multiple challenges continues to be tested in the Western Hemisphere, where Venezuela’s anti-American leader Hugo Chavez is working to destabilize the region and support international terrorist organizations. The Washington Post’s Juan Forero reported on May 20: Now, based on documents and witness testimony, Chávez is facing fresh accusations that his government has gone well beyond assisting the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC. Documents seized from two subversive groups, along with information provided by former Colombian guerrillas, suggest that Venezuela facilitated training sessions here between the FARC and ETA, a separatist group in Spain that uses assassinations and bombings in its effort to win independence for the northern Basque region. Spanish authorities and victims of the Basque terrorist group ETA view Chavez as a “sponsor of terrorism.” General Douglas Fraser of the U.S. Southern Command observed on April 28 that the relationship between the Chavez government and the FARC has been documented over a period of years. “It’s financial support,” stated Gen. Fraser, “it’s enabling their capacity from a logistics standpoint. My understanding is that that continues.” In a recent letter to Secretary of State Clinton, Republican Senators John Ensign (R-NV) and George LeMieux (R-FL) carefully reviewed the mounting evidence of Chavez’s terror links and called on the Obama Administration to conduct a thorough investigation and full disclosure of information and intelligence regarding Chavez’s terror ties. As the U.S. and Iran enter a new phase of confrontation over Iran’s quest for a nuclear weapon, Chavez vowed to continue the fight “against imperialism” [read the U.S.] alongside the Islamic Republic of Iran. Meanwhile Chavez faces mounting economic difficulties at home and a potential for genuine political opposition in the September 26 legislative elections. Domestic pressures could trigger further radicalization and violence as Chavez seeks to cling to power. It is time for the Obama Administration to follow the evidence and take the necessary step of placing Venezuela on the state sponsors of terrorism list. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/20/obama-cannot-ignore-chavez-terror-links 9) Moscow on fast track to overthrow Georgia Move comes after Obama administration shelves support for republic Russia rising…NOT GOOD… The Obama administration apparently is shelving its support for the former Soviet republic of Georgia, an action Russia appears to have interpreted as a green light to groom prominent Georgian opposition members to take over the democratically elected government – by force if necessary, according to a report in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin. Informed Georgian and U.S. sources who asked to remain anonymous have voiced concern the United States will not stand in the way of Russia extending control in neighboring Georgia after the Kremlin's recent successes in the election of a pro-Russian president in the Ukraine and the pro-Kremlin takeover in the Central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan. In an effort to recreate the former Soviet Union, Moscow has reasserted its influence in Central Asia and in most of the Caucasus, except for Georgia, whose president, Mikheil Saakashvili, defiantly has looked westward. That effort prompted the Georgian government to repudiate Moscow's influence as Tbilisi seeks to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. However, NATO – principally Germany and France – have reneged on a commitment made by former President George W. Bush to make Georgia a part of NATO. Now following the lead of the other NATO members, the Obama administration is not pushing for Georgian membership out of concern of upsetting Moscow. And sources believe Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin may be laying the groundwork to overthrow the Saakashvili government, which Moscow has declared a "terrorist regime." See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=156837

Obama close to treason; AZ to L.A.: Go ahead - make my day; Financial bill passes; Fresno tries to stifle speech

1) Bowing Again, to Mexico this Time Undeterred by the lack of success so far of the Obama Doctrine (apologize for America to foreign leaders, and if that doesn’t work, bow), President Obama today took the unprecedented step of publicly siding with Mexico against the state of Arizona (emphasis, and following comment, mine. People, do you understand the gravity of this???? To side with a foreign power against a state in your own country is treason). President Obama did this while standing next to the visiting President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, and while addressing Mexican journalists in the Rose Garden of the White House. President Obama repudiated Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law in this public act, and by doing so he waved away not just centuries of tradition that domestic disputes end at the water’s edge—that we’re all American, whatever our differences may be—but also common sense and, well, national decorum. Whatever the merits and demerits of the Arizona Law, President Obama had no business agreeing with a foreign leader against the elected government of Arizona and 70% of the people in that state who support the law. Specifically, the President said: “We also discussed the new law in Arizona, which is a misdirected effort — a misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system, and which has raised concerns in both our countries…. “And I want everyone, American and Mexican, to know my administration is taking a very close look at the Arizona law. We’re examining any implications, especially for civil rights. Because in the United States of America, no law-abiding person — be they an American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico — should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like.” We don’t know whether President Obama has read the law in question. We do know that two of his cabinet secretaries who have been very critical of the law, and who are directly concerned in this matter—Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano—have publicly admitted not having read the 17-page law. State Department Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs P.J. Crowley has also admitted to not having read the law. Has anyone in the Obama Administration read this law? See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/19/bowing-again-to-mexico-this-time More on this…RUSH: I know. I know he's there. I saw it. I saw the spectacle. I watched a little bit of it, Felipe Calderon's speech to a joint session of Congress beating up on the Arizona law, criticizing the Arizona law and blaming us for all the guns in Mexico. And the Democrats were standing up and applauding, giving him a standing ovation for this. This is unprecedented. We have never before had an ally come to the United States, make a speech before a joint session of Congress, rip our country, rip our states, and have the Democrat Party stand up and applaud (emphasis mine). …CALDERON: You will notice that the violence in Mexico started to grow a couple of hours before I took office in 2006. This coincides, at least, with the lifting of the assault weapons ban in 2004. I will ask Congress to help us, with respect, and to understand how important it is for us that you enforce current laws to stem the supply of these weapons to criminals and consider restating the assault weapons ban. This patently absurd! The assault weapons the drug thugs are using are already illegal in the US, even after the “assault weapons“ ban was lifted. RUSH: And the Democrats stood up. DEMOCRATS: (applauding) RUSH: There they are, standing up and applauding. Now, here he is blaming Bush. He's blaming all this stuff on his predator just as Obama does, and says he wants us to enforce current law. But, no, he doesn't want us to enforce current law. He doesn't want us to enforce the current federal immigration law. He doesn't want us to enforce Arizona's immigration law. But he wants us to enforce an assault weapons ban. So he comes here... Here's the bite with Felipe Calderon blasting the United States and lecturing Arizona to thunderous applause from Democrats, a standing O. CALDERON: I strongly disagree with your recently adopted law in Arizona. …RUSH: Uhhhh... Folks, I'm speechless. I'm angry and speechless. And this comment received a standing ovation. So we have the leader of Mexico coming here and parroting, copying the president of the United States and ripping our country to a standing ovation of the Democrat Party. What does he care about racial profiling? There is no racial profiling in the bill. This is just so purposely taken out of context. "I agree with the president who says the new law carries a great amount of risk." Whose "core values"? He comes here and disses our immigration law, blames the United States for all the guns in Mexico. …RUSH: Yeah. Who is he to preach to us? For crying out loud, they deport more illegal immigrants from Mexico than we do! How do they catch their illegal immigrants? Do they profile them? How the hell do they find out who's in their country illegally? Here's the next question from Blitzer: "So if people want to come from Guatemala or Honduras or El Salvador or Nicaragua, they want to just come into Mexico, can they just walk in?" CALDERON: No! They need to fulfill, uh, a form. They need to establish their right name. We analyze if they have not a criminal precedence. BLITZER: Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they suspect are illegal immigrants? CALDERON: Of course! Of course! BLITZER: If somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some other country in Central America through the southern border of Mexico and they wind up in Mexico, they can going get a job? CALDERON: No, no, no. BLITZER: They can work? CALDERON: If somebody do that without permissions, we send -- we send back them. Am I the only one who can see the irony and hypocrisy here? See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_052010/content/01125106.guest.html 1a) Mr. Obama, Please Read Arizona's Immigration Law Members of the Obama administration, who soundly condemned Arizona's new immigration law, are now admitted that they have never even read it. Could President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderón find themselves in the same boat based on comments they made today at their joint appearance on the White House lawn? Let’s review. The first person who had to admit he had never read the Arizona law Attorney General Eric Holder made his admission last week. On Monday, it was Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's turn. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley revealed that he, too, had not read the bill, despite commenting on it. Given how inaccurate these officials have been in their descriptions of the law, maybe members of President Obama’s team simply had no option but to plead ignorance. After all, how do you take a law that clearly states the following: "A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, or town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin,” and then claim that it is racist or could lead to racial profiling? Not only that but other parts of this very short law also include additional safeguards against racial profiling. For example, the law requires that the police may only ask for ID if they have “lawful contact” with “lawful stop, detention or arrest” and that authorities must have "reasonable suspicion" that a suspect is an illegal alien. See: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/05/19/john-lott-arizona-immigration-law-read-obama-calderon-holder-napolitano-crowley/ 1b) Arizona dares L.A. to carry out boycott, or Arizona tells L.A.: “Go ahead. Make my day.” The spat over Arizona's new immigration expanded Tuesday as a state official dared the city of Los Angeles to follow through on its new boycott by agreeing to give up the 25 percent of electricity that city gets from Arizona sources. In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce said a boycott war is bad for both sides, and said he would "be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements" to end the electricity flowing to Los Angeles. "I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands," Mr. Pierce said. "If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy." Los Angeles's city council voted overwhelmingly last week to adopt a boycott of Arizona businesses — at least in instances where the boycott wouldn't impose a significant economic cost to the city. This is the stuff that begins civil wars… See: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/18/arizona-dares-los-angeles-to-carry-out-boycott/ 2) Morning Bell: Dodd Bill is Just the Beginning of ‘Too Big to Fail’ …On Sunday, columnist Ross Douthat described the Dodd bill as just one example of "the real story of our time. From Washington to Athens, the economic crisis is producing consolidation rather than revolution, the entrenchment of authority rather than its diffusion, and the concentration of power in the hands of the same elite that presided over the disasters in the first place. ... If Robert Rubin’s mistakes helped create an out-of-control financial sector, then naturally you need Timothy Geithner and Lawrence Summers — Rubin’s protégés — to set things right. ... But their fixes tend to make the system even more complex and centralized, and more vulnerable to the next national-security surprise, the next natural disaster, the next economic crisis. Which is why, despite all the populist backlash and all the promises from Washington, this isn’t the end of the 'too big to fail' era. It’s the beginning." See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/20/morning-bell-dodd-bill-is-just-the-beginning-of-too-big-to-fail AND, today it passed: 2a) Senate passes massive Wall Street regulation bill …the Senate on Thursday passed the most far-reaching restraints on big banks since the Great Depression. In its broad sweep, the massive bill would touch Wall Street CEOs and first-time homebuyers, high-flying traders and small town lenders. The 59-39 vote…bill must now be reconciled with a House version that passed in December. A key House negotiator predicted the legislation would reach Obama's desk before the Fourth of July. …Four Republicans — Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa, Scott Brown of Massachusetts (yeah, he's reeeeally conservative), and Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine — broke ranks with their party to support it. Twice the Senate had to beat back efforts by Republicans to delay the bill before achieving final passage. "The decisions we've made will have an impact on the lives of Americans for decades to come," said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., who voted against the legislation. "Judgment will not be rendered by self-congratulatory press releases, but, rather, by the marketplace. And the marketplace does not give credit for good intentions." While Republicans succeeded in amending the bill, they still objected to its sweep, claiming it represented an expansion of government power that would have unintended consequences. …For all its breadth, the bill stopped short of taking on the nation's giant mortgage companies, the government-affiliated (translation, government-run - we make the laws but they don't apply to us) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Democrats feared that incorporating massive housing policy into the bill would have sunk it. The two companies lowered their standards for borrowers during the housing boom and now those high-risk loans are defaulting at a record pace, prompting a $145 billion government rescue. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/ap_on_bi_ge/us_financial_overhaul 3) 'Glenn Beck': GOP Lawmaker Wants Details on Fannie Mae's Cap-and-Trade Patents GLENN BECK, HOST: I'm talking about "Crime Inc." now — a story we've been talking about involving a group of government insiders who stand to make money off of cap-and-trade in a big way if legislation passes. One of the players, strangely, is this man: Franklin Raines. He was the former CEO of Fannie Mae. He left the company in 2004 after he knowingly inflated earnings by $9 billion. Why? So everybody could get their bonuses. Raines, when he was a CEO, he and a couple of other Fannie executives also did something very strange: Applied for patents on residential admissions trading programs. Now, why would Fannie Mae and Franklin Raines care about cap-and-trade? That's what my next guest wants to know. Representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah sits on the Committee of Oversight and Government Reform. He joins me now from Salt Lake City. Jason, you and Representative Issa filed for records to be produced, I think it was on Friday. Thank you for standing for this. Can you tell me why would Fannie own cap-and-trade technology? REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, R-UTAH: What I do know is there are billions upon billions of dollars at play and why would they use those resources in a cap-and-trade scheme that they would personally benefit from and what sort of money is trading hands when Franklin Raines then assigns that patent to Fannie and Freddie. It's just — this does not smell right. They have two patents out there. And we want to know about them. BECK: OK. There's the Fannie technology. We couldn't file a Freedom of Information Act request. CHAFFETZ: Yes. BECK: We can't do it. And it's awfully — it's great for Fannie. Can you — can you explain why we couldn't file that Freedom of Information Act? CHAFFETZ: Well, we've requested information, but because they are government-sponsored enterprise, the GSE, they fall outside the scope of a FOIA request, the Freedom of Information Act. And I think this is fundamentally wrong. In fact, you have Judicial Watch, one of the watchdog groups filing suit against Fannie and Freddie, wanting information about where all their campaign contributions went and what not. The Obama administration has come back now and actually argued in court in the last 60 days or so and said, no, no, no, you do not have the right to that information because they're not a full-fledged government entity — even though we're on the hook for literally hundreds of billions of dollars. …BECK: They've got — they've got, I think, four patents out. They all are around cap-and-trade, but this is residential. When you think of cap-and-trade, you think, "Oh, you know, OK, so Exxon has to pay some more money for cap-and-trade." No, no, no — this is your individual house, correct? CHAFFETZ: Yes. They even have a patent — there's another patent we found that actually puts a lock on your individual outlets — it's literally to have a pattern for this — to lock your individual outlet so that they can control the mechanism by which you lock that little outlet. It's unbelievable. See: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,593085,00.html 4) LEAD: Dow off nearly 400 points, hitting 3.5-month closing low+ New York stocks continued to fall Thursday with the Dow Jones index sliding to a 3.5-month closing low on growing concern over the U.S. economy sparked by downbeat weekly job data. The 30-issue Dow Jones Industrial Average, which fell 66.58 points Wednesday, lost an additional 376.36 points to 10,068.01, marking the lowest finish since February this year and the largest single-day point loss since February 2009. The Dow lost more than 550 points in the past three days and about 1,000 points since the beginning of May. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite Index, which dropped 18.89 points the previous day, fell another 94.36 points to 2,204.01. Selling was sparked in response to a Labor Department report showing that the number of claims for unemployment benefits increased by 25,000 to 471,000 last week, the highest in three months. The reading chilled investors who had expected a modest decrease, said market analysts. Also fueling selling was lingering concern over credit unrest in the eurozone area, the analysts said. See: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FQQV1O0&show_article=1 5) Loan demand to buy homes sinks to 13-year low (Reuters) - Demand for loans to buy U.S. homes shriveled to a 13-year low last week, following the expiration of federal tax credits, while near-record low mortgage rates stoked refinancing, the Mortgage Bankers Association said on Wednesday. See: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64I3PX20100519 6) National intelligence director resigning WASHINGTON – National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair said Thursday he is resigning, ending a tumultuous 16-month tenure marked by intelligence failures and turf wars among the country's spy agencies. Blair, a retired Navy admiral, is the third director of national intelligence, a position created in response public outrage over the failure to prevent the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. In a message to his work force, Blair said his last day would be May 28. …Word of Blair's resignation, first reported by ABC News, comes two days after a Senate report criticized his office and other intelligence agencies for new failings that allowed a would-be bomber to board a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day. The Senate Intelligence Committee found that the National Counterterrorism Center was in a position to connect intelligence that could have prevented the potentially deadly attack. As director of national intelligence, Blair oversaw the center. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_intelligence_director_resigns 7) ‘Community Group’ to Fresno Radio Station: Dump Conservative Hosts Who Are ‘Contribut(ing) to Actual Acts of Violence' There's a new speech sheriff in the town of Fresno, California, and they want to silence conservative talk radio. And they'll say or do whatever it takes to get it done. New "community group" Citizens for Civility & Accountability in Media (CCAM) is super-peeved at Fresno, California radio station KMJ for having the temerity to broadcast (on their two stations) conservative talk radio hosts to whom people want to listen. Because, you see, it's "hate speech" - according to CCAM. And therefore, KMJ should "alter their programming" (read: change their content by silencing conservatives) "in order to curtail practices that we believe to be damaging to our social fabric and to civility in public discourse." It would seem the residents of Fresno do not believe that Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and others on KMJ are "damaging to our social fabric and to civility in public discourse." But that could not matter less to CCAM. This local "community group" has organized a press conference for today at 11AM PT to publicly call on KMJ to dump these conservative hosts who according to them "(Have) been, and can be again, a contributor to actual acts of violence perpetrated by people urged on to extremism by the kind of programming that monopolizes KMJ's prime-time broadcast." See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2010/05/20/community-group-fresno-radio-station-dump-conservative-hosts-who-are-c 8) Phoenix Mayor Gordon Blames Lack of 'Fairness' Doctrine for Arizona Immigration Law's Passage Yet another liberal bemoans the unbridled free speech that resulted from President Ronald Reagan's 1987 call to no longer enforce the so-called "Fairness" Doctrine. This time it's Phoenix, Arizona Democratic Mayor Phil Gordon. (He is not the Phil Gordon who plays poker. The latter seeks to relieve you only of your money, not of your First Amendment rights.) Mayor Censor participated in a May 14 panel discussion put together by the George Soros-funded, John Podesta-run, Marxist Van Jones permanent job place-holding Center for American Progress entitled "When Federal Government Failure Leads to Local Upheaval-Arizona and Beyond." At which Mayor Censor designated the absence of the mis-named "Fairness" Doctrine and the free market radio choices made by the American people that resulted as in part contributing to the passage of Arizona law 1070, which calls on state law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws. "I think it goes back to the Reagan era when the fairness doctrine was dropped, and instead of requiring both sides of a debate to be aired, only one side was given the chance depending on who was providing that." Apparently, Mayor Censor failed to note the coverage of 1070 by the uber-liberal traditional media, with their 12-to-1 disparity in negatively reporting on the bill and law (emphasis mine). See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2010/05/18/phoenix-mayor-gordon-blames-lack-fairness-doctrine-az-immigration-laws 9) Woody Allen says President Obama should be granted dictatorial powers (seriously) Woody Allen has a strange take on the democracy that allowed him to become rich and famous. The "Scoop" director said it would be a cool idea for President Barack Obama to be dictator for for a few years. Why? So he could get things done without all the hassle of opposing views getting in the way. In an interview published by Spanish language newspaper La Vanguardia (that we translated), Allen says “I am pleased with Obama. I think he’s brilliant. The Republican Party should get out of his way and stop trying to hurt him.” But wait - there's more! The director said "it would be good…if he could be a dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly." See: http://entertainment.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/17/woody-allen-president-obama-dictator 10) Press Freedom, Sure. But No Questions. There was some rich irony at the White House today -- President Obama signed the Press Freedom Act, and then promptly refused to take any questions. The new law expands the State Department's annual human rights reports to include a description of press freedoms in each country. It seemed a good opportunity to showcase press freedom in this country. Recall that last Friday the president refused to take any questions after delivering his angry statement on the oil spill in the Rose Garden. And he has not held a prime-time White House news conference in many months, despite much pleading from pundits and members of the media. So after he signed the bill, and as the press "wranglers" began aggressively herding us out of the room, I asked if he still has confidence in BP. He ignored the question so I tried this: "In the interest of press freedom, would you take a couple questions on BP?" That did elicit a smile, and he told me I was free to ask questions. Someone else shouted, "Will you answer them?" He said he's not holding a press conference today as we were escorted out the door. See: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005146-503544.html 11) Iran and Turkey reach unexpected accord on enriched uranium Iran reached a surprise nuclear agreement with Brazil and Turkey on Monday, a deal that threatens to undermine the Obama administration's efforts to stem the Iranians' nuclear ambitions -- and, more broadly, the U.S. diplomatic strategy. The deal revives a concept first broached by the administration last year. Iran will send part of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium to Turkey for safekeeping, possibly within a month, in exchange for enough higher-enriched uranium to fuel a 42-year-old, U.S.-built research reactor that produces medical isotopes. Iran will not, however, halt its uranium enrichment or enter into substantive negotiations on its program. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/17/AR2010051700105.html 12) NKorea warns of war if punished for ship sinking SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea, accused of waging the deadliest attack on the South Korean military since the Korean War, flatly denied sinking a warship Thursday and warned that retaliation would mean "all-out war." Evidence presented Thursday to prove North Korea fired a torpedo that sank a South Korean ship was fabricated by Seoul, North Korean naval spokesman Col. Pak In Ho told broadcaster APTN in an exclusive interview in Pyongyang. He warned that any move to sanction or strike North Korea would be met with force. "If (South Korea) tries to deal any retaliation or punishment, or if they try sanctions or a strike on us .... we will answer to this with all-out war," he told APTN. An international team of civilian and military investigators declared earlier in Seoul that a North Korean submarine fired a homing torpedo at the Cheonan on March 26, ripping the 1,200-ton ship in two. Fifty-eight sailors were rescued, but 46 died — South Korea's worst military disaster since a truce ended the three-year Korean War in 1953. …North Korea is accused of waging a slew of attacks on South Korea over the years, including the 1987 downing of a South Korean airliner that killed all 115 people on board. It has never owned up to the attacks, and Seoul has never retaliated militarily. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_on_re_as/as_skorea_ship_sinks

Mosque at ground zero to open 9/11/11?; Obama to sue over AZ immigration law?; Obama to impose Palestinian State?

1) Morning Bell: Congress’ Historic Decision to Ignore Its Basic Duty House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) once said that the “most basic responsibility of governing is to pass a budget.” Yesterday it became clear that Congress has decided to shirk that responsibility, as word broke that the House likely will not pass a budget resolution for the first time since the modern budget process was created in 1974. That’s earthshaking news, especially given the ballooning federal spending, which soared to an $82.69 billion deficit in April, a projected $1.5 trillion deficit in 2010, and even more deficits as far as the eye can see. Like any American’s household budget that tracks income and expenses, budget resolutions set a framework for Congress’ taxing and spending. But it’s a framework that the leadership in the House would rather do without. The news came from Rep. Hoyer himself, who said “It’s difficult to pass budgets in election years because they reflect what the [fiscal] status is.” In other words, with November looming on the horizon, the left doesn’t want their constituents to realize just how much Congress is spending and how high taxes will go (emphasis mine). …That leaves America in a lurch. Riedl explains that the failure to pass a budget resolution prevents Congress from capping discretionary spending for FY2011, and it’s an indication that Congress won’t find a way to limit runaway entitlement spending. It also means that other priorities, such as extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts will fall by the wayside, leading to steep tax hikes, all while America is in the midst of a recession. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/14/morning-bell-congress-historic-decision-to-ignore-its-basic-duty 2) Transcript: Holder on the Hot Seat Over Arizona Immigration Law The following is a partial transcript of the House Judiciary Committee hearing with Attorney General Eric Holder. This portion contains the exchange between Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, and Attorney General Eric Holder over whether Holder has read the Arizona immigration law: REP. TED POE: So Arizona, since the federal government fails to secure the border, desperately passed laws to protect its own people. The law is supported by 70 percent of the people in Arizona, 60 percent of all Americans and 50 percent of all Hispanics, according to The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll done just this week. And I understand that you may file a lawsuit against the law (emphasis mine. WHAT?!?!) It seems to me the administration ought to be enforcing border security and immigration laws and not challenge them and that the administration is on the wrong side of the American people. Have you read the Arizona law? ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER: I have not had a chance to -- I've glanced at it. I have not read it. …POE: Well, I've gone through it. And it's pretty simple. It takes the federal law and makes it -- enacts it in a state statute, although makes it much more refined in that it actually says in one of the sections that no state or subdivision may consider race, color, national origin in implementing the requirements of any subsection of this law. It seems to outlaw racial profiling in the law. I know there's been a lot of media hype about the -- the legislation. …POE: You have some concerns about the statute. And it's -- it's hard for me to understand how you would have concerns about something being unconstitutional if you hadn't even read the law. It seems like you wouldn't make a judgment about whether it violates civil rights statutes, whether it violates federal preemption concepts if you haven't read the law. So can you help me out there a little bit, how you can make a judgment call on -- on that, but you haven't read the law and determined whether it's constitutional or not? HOLDER: Well, what I've said is that I've not made up my mind. I've only made -- made the comments that I've made on the basis of things that I've been able to glean by reading newspaper accounts, obviously, television, talking to people who are on the review panel, on the review team looking at the law. But I've not reached any conclusions as yet with regard to -- I've just expressed concerns on the basis of what I've heard about the law. But I'm not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with the people who are doing the review, exactly what my position is. See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/14/transcript-holder-hot-seat-arizona-immigration-law/ 3) Mosque madness at Ground Zero A mosque rises over Ground Zero. And fed-up New Yorkers are crying, "No!" A chorus of critics -- from neighbors to those who lost loved ones on 9/11 to me -- feel as if they've received a swift kick in the teeth. Plans are under way for a Muslim house of worship, topped by a 13-story cultural center with a swimming pool, in a building damaged by the fuselage of a jet flown by extremists into the World Trade Center. The opening date shall live in infamy: Sept. 11, 2011 (emphasis mine). The 10th anniversary of the day a hole was punched in the city's heart. How the devil did this happen? Plans to bring what one critic calls a "monster mosque" to the site of the old Burlington Coat Factory building, at a cost expected to top $100 million, moved along for months without a peep. All of a sudden, even members of the community board that stupidly green-lighted the mosque this month are tearing their hair out. Paul Sipos, member of Community Board 1, said a mosque is a fine idea -- someplace else. "If the Japanese decided to open a cultural center across from Pearl Harbor, that would be insensitive," Sipos told me. "If the Germans opened a Bach choral society across from Auschwitz, even after all these years, that would be an insensitive setting. I have absolutely nothing against Islam. I just think: Why there?" (BECAUSE ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION OF PEACE! IT IS A DEMONIC RELIGION PREACHING DEATH TO INFIDELS, in the pages of their own scriptures… “And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah DESTROY them; how they are turned away!” (Sura 9, verse 30). “And KILL them (the unbelievers) wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.” (Sura 2, verse 191). “And when you journey in the earth, there is no blame on you if you shorten the prayer, if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you distress, surely the unbelievers are your open ENEMY.” (Sura 4, verse 101). “Surely We have prepared for the unbelievers chains and shackles and a burning fire.” (Sura 76, verse 4). “And whoever does not believe in Allah and His Apostle, then surely We have prepared burning fire for the unbelievers.” (Sura 48, verse 13). Do you need more evidence? See the next story…) …Board chair Julie Menin, blind-sided by the move, predicts "this will be overturned by the full board" later this month. But the damage is done. See: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/mosque_madness_at_ground_zero_OQ34EB0MWS0lXuAnQau5uL 4) Exhibit B: Islam is not a religion of peace: Horowitz schools radical Muslim student GLENN: Now listen to this from San Diego university, what is it, University of California San Diego with David Horowitz. Audio we played for you a couple of days ago. VOICE: My name is Jimena Imad Musa Ahmal Bahiri (ph) and I'm a student here at UCSD. I was reading your literature. I found that much more interesting than the talk. And I found some interesting things about the MSA, which is an organization that's very active on campus and it is hosting our annual Hitler Youth Week. You should come out to those events. PAT: Did you catch that, by the way, the first time around? That kind of slipped past me. They are hosting their annual Hitler Youth Week. The MSA, the Muslim student association. GLENN: I just took that as a — I just took that as a slam and making somebody who is — PAT: I did, too, but then I looked at his website, at David Horowitz's, and he's got a bunch of people in Muslim garb who are parading around the campus with God Bless Hitler on a sign (emphasis mine)… VOICE: If you could clarify the connection between the MSA and jihad terrorist networks. HOROWITZ: Will you condemn Hamas here and now? VOICE: I'm sorry. What? HOROWITZ: Will you condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, genocidal organization? VOICE: Are you asking me to put myself on a cross? HOROWITZ: So you won't? I actually have had this experience many times. You didn't read the pamphlet because the pamphlet gives chapter and verse. The main connection is that the MSA is part of the Muslim Brotherhood Network as revealed in the documents. VOICE: I don't think you understood what I meant by that. I meant if I say something, I'm sure that I will be arrested for reasons of Homeland Security. So if you could please just answer my question. HOROWITZ: If you condemn Hamas Homeland Security will arrest you? VOICE: If I support Hamas. Because your question forces me to condemn Hamas. If I support Hamas I look really bad. HOROWITZ: Well, if you don't condemn Hamas obviously you support it. Case closed. …HOROWITZ: Members of the Muslim Students Association sitting right in a rows there and throughout my hour talk I kept asking them, will you condemn Hezbollah and Hamas and none of them would. And then when the question period came, the president of the Muslim Students Association was the first person to ask questions and I said, you know, before you start, will you condemn Hezbollah. And he said, well, that question is too complicated for a yes/no answer. So I said, okay, I'll put it to you this way. I'm a Jew. The head of Hezbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn't have to hunt us down globally. For it or against it (emphasis mine)? VOICE: For it (emphasis mine). HOROWITZ: Thank you. GLENN: Stop. HOROWITZ: Thank you for coming and showing everybody what's here. GLENN:…We don't want to believe that there are those in our country that want to kill us. But by denying that they exist does not make them go away! See: http://media.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/40711/ 5) Boss: 1 of 3 arrested said he knew NY bomb suspect BOSTON – Three Pakistani men arrested in the widening investigation of the Times Square bomb include a Boston-area cab driver, a gas station attendant and a computer programmer in Maine who told his boss that he knew the primary suspect, Faisal Shahzad, but hadn't spoken to him in years. In Pakistan, authorities took into custody two other men on suspicion of helping to finance the failed plot. On Thursday, authorities following the money trail in the failed attack conducted raids in several places in the Northeast and arrested three men. The two men arrested in the Boston area were Pir Khan, 43, and Aftab Khan, a man in his 20s, law enforcement officials said. A third man, Mohamad Rahman, was arrested in Maine, according to one of the officials. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. Authorities said the three supplied funds to Shahzad but may not have known how the money would be used. They were arrested on immigration violations, not criminal charges. All three are in the custody of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said agency spokeswoman Kelly Nantel. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100514/ap_on_re_us/us_times_square_probe_suspects 5a) Official: Broker network tied to NY bomb suspect NEW YORK – Long before there was MoneyGram and Western Union, people in South Asian countries often used an informal network of brokers, called an "hawala," to transfer money over long distances when it was too inconvenient or dangerous to send cash by courier. Today, the centuries-old system still exists and is used to move billions of dollars annually in and out of countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Somalia — often to the chagrin of U.S. law enforcement. …Muslim immigrants for years have used informal money transfer networks known as hawalas to send cash to their families overseas. The system of wire transfers, couriers and overnight mail are cheaper and quicker than banks. But since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, authorities have worked to dismantle the system, fearing it allows terrorists to raise and launder money. …The networks operate like this: A person who wishes to send cash abroad visits a broker, who takes the money plus a fee of around 5 percent. The broker then contacts a counterpart in the country where the money is going and relays instructions on how much is being sent and to whom. Within a day or two, the recipient gets a cash delivery, typically in local currency. Usually, the two brokers don't need to actually exchange any money. Instead, they essentially work off of IOUs. Each one makes the needed payments out of his own pocket, then carries the other broker's debt until someone needs to move cash in the other direction. Occasionally, the two brokers will need to balance their books by making an actual cash transfer, if more money is needed one way than the other. For a U.S. immigrant of modest means, the system has great advantages. You don't need to have a bank account. There are no forms to fill out. It is faster and cheaper than using an official money transfer service. Plus, the whole system is built on trust. In the U.S., the brokers are often small businessmen who see themselves as performing a public service for their countrymen. For these reasons, U.S. authorities have had a difficult time shutting the networks down. Operating an unlicensed money remitter in the U.S. is a crime, but the State Department reports that only a fraction of the businesses performing such services have registered as required. Sounds a bit like illegal immigration…maybe we should just forget they are committing a crime and immediately establish these illegal networks as legitimate businesses! See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_times_square_money_network 6) Brazil’s Lula Runs Interference for Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions Brazil’s President Ignacio Lula da Silva will visit Tehran on May 15. International attention will focus on the visit because Iran has said it agrees “in principle” with working through Brazil and Turkey to broker a nuclear fuels exchange deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Despite this diplomatic camouflage, Iran’s central objective remains avoiding or watering down possible UN sanctions and sowing confusion among international players with a diplomacy of gestures and bluffs. It aims to buy more time at the expense of the U.S. and the West to develop a nuclear weapon. Many in Washington are reassessing their opinion of Brazil’s popular president and his commitment to responsible global leadership. While Lula enjoys the “international spotlight” and may have his sights set on the Nobel Peace prize, his working agenda aims to marginalize U.S. global leadership and open the door for further delays in confronting the threat posed by a nuclear-arming Iran. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/13/brazil’s-lula-runs-interference-for-iran’s-nuclear-ambitions 7) Obama threatens to 'impose' Palestinian state Warns White House can force solution 'Israelis won't appreciate' NEW YORK – If Israel and the Palestinians fail to reach an agreement to create a Palestinian state, the Obama administration will look into imposing a solution on the parties, a senior Palestinian Authority negotiator told WND. The negotiator, speaking by telephone from Ramallah, said the PA agreed to resume direct talks with Israel earlier this week only after a U.S. pledge to ensure against any new Jewish construction in eastern Jerusalem and the strategic West Bank. The PA negotiator told WND the Obama administration told the Palestinians if a deal is ultimately not reached with Israel the U.S. will consider imposing a solution "that the Israelis won't appreciate." Further, the PA negotiator said recent meetings between the Obama administration and the Palestinians revealed the White House is on board a Palestinian threat to unilaterally ask the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state outside of negotiations with Israel. The PA negotiator said the U.S. wanted for now to stress negotiations between the parties, but that if an agreement is not reached the U.S. would not veto a U.N. Security Council resolution to unilaterally create a Palestinian state. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=153913 8) New York AG accused of 'bullying' private employer Demand for 'cross-dressing rights' takes 'bedroom into workplace' New York's attorney general has been accused of "bullying" a private employer to acknowledge a "right" by workers to engage in cross-dressing in a move critics say "takes the bedroom into the workplace." According to the New York Daily News, an agreement forced by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo will require American Eagle Outfitters to allow men to dress as women and women to dress as men if they wish. The company confirmed that to avoid "further expense and the distraction of a prolonged argument," it agreed to the compromise. The new policy will also require the company to train workers in how to choose which pronoun to use – apparently "he" or "she" depending on what the person desires. The bill has been resurrected, with plans to start reviewing soon the language in the proposal, which critics already are calling the "Cross-Dressing Protection Act." H.R. 3017, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009, or ENDA, would make it unlawful for government agencies or businesses with more than 15 employees to refuse to hire or promote anyone based on "gender-related identity, appearance or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth." It's being promoted by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and others. The bill makes exceptions for the U.S. military, religious organizations and some businesses with non-profit 501(c) designations, but makes no provisions for business owners' consciences. A small construction company that wanted to maintain a Christian reputation, for example, could be sued if it refused to hire transvestites. …A statement released by FRC President Tony Perkins said, "Every American who believes in the right of employers to set dress and grooming standards for their employees should be alarmed by how this attorney general has used bullying tactics and litigation to impose cross-dressing policies on American Eagle Outfitters. "What's most alarming is that President Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress want to expand these bullying litigation tactics to all 50 states by enacting into federal law a cross-dressing protection act. If Congress approves President Obama's ENDA bill, employers in every state can expect to experience the same expensive, burdensome litigation that has been pursued," he said. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=153429 9) Evangelical leaders 'out on a limb' A Protestant renewal organization is questioning the decision of several prominent Christian leaders to sign on to a full-page ad calling for a path toward citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants. Last fall OneNewsNow reported that the National Association of Evangelicals passed a resolution calling for a path to citizenship for those who are in the country illegally but want to embrace the responsibility and privileges of citizenship. (If they wanted to embrace the responsibility and privileges of citizenship, they would have taken the path to become citizens! - comment mine) Now the NAE has released a full-page ad in Roll Call trying to rally support for comprehensive immigration reform that "establishes a path toward legal status and/or citizenship for those who qualify and who wish to become permanent residents." Other evangelical leaders like Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention and Matt Staver of Liberty Counsel have also signed the ad. In comments to The Associated Press, Land described Arizona's new controversial immigration law as "a symptom, not a solution," and Staver said it is time to "forge a national consensus" on the issue. Maybe we should form a “national consensus” on Biblical doctrine as well? Oh, I forgot. That’s what the apostate emergent Church is already doing. See: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=1010454

Obama attacks Internet free speech; Radical Kagan - no judicial experience; Medal for not fighting?

1) Barack Obama’s Frightening Attack on Internet Free Speech Obama: “And meanwhile, you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — (laughter) – information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.” …No the message is much more nefarious than that. The President was complaining about the quick disbursement of information through media that he cannot yet control especially the internet. Each one of those technologies enables the user to connect to the internet in its own way. But fear not, his administration is working hard to control this medium, allowing him to control the way his progressive message is relayed to the public. As Congresswoman Michele Bachamnn told Sean Hannity: “So whether they’re attacking conservative talk radio, or conservative TV or whether it’s Internet sites, I mean, let’s face it, what’s the Obama administration doing? They’re advocating net neutrality which is essentially censorship of the Internet. This is the Obama administration advocating censorship of the Internet. Why? They want to silence the voices that are opposing them. Despite the fact that they continue to have much of the mainstream media still providing cover for all of these dramatic efforts that the Obama administration is taking. So they’re very specifically and pointedly going after voices that they see are effectively telling the truth about what the Obama administration is trying to do.” In January of this year, Glenn Greenwald at Salon noted Barack Obama’s new head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein had a very chilling plan for the net: Obama’s head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs where, among other things, he is responsible for “overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs.” In 2008, while at Harvard Law School, Sunstein co-wrote a truly pernicious paper proposing that the U.S. Government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites — as well as other activist groups — which advocate views that Sunstein deems “false conspiracy theories” about the Government. This would be designed to increase citizens’ faith in government officials and undermine the credibility of conspiracists. See: http://www.redstate.com/jeffdunetz/2010/05/11/barack-obambas-frightening-attack-on-internet-free-speech/ 1a) Glenn Beck: Obama's fairness doctrine -- net neutrality …PRESIDENT OBAMA: Meanwhile you are coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't always rank that high on the truth meter. With iPods and iPads and XBOX's and PlayStations, none of which I know how to work, information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. PAT: Emancipation? GLENN…Know that our government, our DOJ under…Holder, is arguing in the courts that you have no reasonable right of expectation of privacy in your e mail, privacy of location if you have a cell phone because they can triangulate you. Without a warrant they want to be able to read your e mail. Without a warrant (emphasis mine). This is the same group of people that today or over the weekend…Holder came out and said that he wants the Miranda rights also to go away for, you know, if you are involved in terrorism. Excuse me? If you are an American citizen? I don't think so. So Cass Sunstein is overseeing policies relating to privacy and information. He said that the government needs to employ teams of covert agents and pseudo — I'm quoting — independent advocates to cognitively infiltrate online groups and websites as well as other activist groups which advocate views that Sunstein deems, quote, as false conspiracy theories about the government, end quote. …May I quote (from Saul Alinsky): Lest we forget, at least an over the shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical, from all of our legends mythology and history, the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom. That radical was Lucifer, end quote. Saul Alinsky. I'm sorry. We're looking to the devil. We're looking to Lucifer as an example of at least he got his! We're looking and using as an example something that now under the Obama administration the Department of Education is telling students to read this book. In it Saul Alinsky holds out as an example of, hey, let's not forget the first radical was Lucifer! Wow. I said it about an hour ago. I've been reading a lot over and over and over again the Moses story. There's a lot to be learned there. The take away today for me is the simple step that Moses was told to do, put a snake on a stick and said, you want to live? Just look at the snake. People didn't do it for a myriad of reasons, one of which it was just too easy. What was the lesson? Please, dear God, don't dismiss it. The lesson was look to God to live. We are entering unbelievable times. Look to God to live (emphasis mine). See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/40456/ 2) Senate demands one-time audit of the Fed Senators demanded on Tuesday to be let in on what they called the most secretive, powerful federal agency in existence, voting overwhelmingly to force the Federal Reserve to undergo an audit of the loans and deals it made during the financial turmoil of the past several years. The 96-0 vote reflects the growing distrust of government -- fueled by both right-wing and left-wing activists who say they are challenging the Washington balance of power. It also showed the overwhelming frustration senators feel at having been stonewalled by Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke on key questions about the secretive activities. "The average American is beginning to wonder what goes on behind closed doors with the Fed," said Sen. Bernard Sanders, the Vermont independent who sponsored the so-called "audit the Fed" amendment, which passed as part of the ongoing debate on the Senate's financial regulation bill. Mr. Sanders said he first introduced a proposal forcing the Fed to disclose its activities after Mr. Bernanke last year refused at a Senate Budget Committee hearing to answer questions. …The House already has passed a broader proposal granting the comptroller general power to audit the Federal Reserve, which would mean more continuous scrutiny. Senators rejected going that far, voting 62-37 against that proposal on Tuesday. The two versions will have to be squared in an eventual House-Senate conference, but Mr. Sanders, who also backed the broader proposal, said even if Congress agrees only to the one-time audit, once voters get a look at the Fed's activities, he expects a growing call for more oversight. See: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/11/senate-demands-one-time-fed-audit/ 3) Kagan’s Past To Come “Out Of The Closet”? CBS News reported that President Obama’s new Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan will be the ”first openly gay justice,” pleasing much of Obama’s liberal base. But after complaints by an anonymous White House staffer that parts of the report were not public, the CBS reporter updated the post to say “I have to correct my text here to say that Kagan is apparently still closeted — odd, because her female partner is rather well known in Harvard circles.” The CBS report has now been pulled, after The Washington Post repeated the CBS report, and the White House denials, but criticized CBS policy, saying “most major news organizations have policies against ‘outing’ gays or reporting on the sex lives of public officials unless they are related to their public duties.” The sudden media blackout on the ‘taboo topic’ is ironic, since Kagan’s private sex life already has, and will directly impact her public Supreme Court decisions. Regardless, The Daily Caller confirms Kagan’s policy record reflects extremist sexual views in matters of law: “Kagan’s boldest foray into public life was, as dean of Harvard Law School, throwing the military off campus over its ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy on gay soldiers. Kagan called the policy, implemented by her former boss President Bill Clinton, ‘a profound wrong — a moral injustice of the first order.’ She pursued the matter all the way to the Supreme Court, where the justices unanimously slapped down her arguments, forcing Harvard to allow the military to return…. The Wall Street Journal reports Kagan has worked in elite legal and policy jobs but has never served as a judge!!!!! (emphasis mine), which an administration official confirmed Sunday. …LifeNews.com now reports Kagan is an ardent pro-abortion advocate who, at 50, would leave a pro-abortion legacy for Obama on the Supreme Court for decades to come. She would confirm the suspicion of many political observers that Obama decided to go with a radical left-wing nominee while Democrats control the Senate with a huge advantage that is expected to deteriorate after the November elections.“treated pro-life activists like violent criminals, creating a task force in the Department of Justice and a grand jury to investigate peaceful pro-lifers. This raises serious concerns that she shares the hostile view that religious beliefs are a form of ‘hate,’” Wright said. See: http://www.therepublicantemple.com/2010/05/10/kagans-past-to-come-out-of-the-closet/ 3a) Kagan Argued for Government 'Redistribution of Speech' (CNSNews.com) – Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan said the high court should be focused on ferreting out improper governmental motives when deciding First Amendment cases, arguing that the government’s reasons for restricting free speech were what mattered most and not necessarily the effect of those restrictions on speech. Kagan, the solicitor general of the United States under President Obama, expressed that idea in her 1996 article in the University of Chicago Law Review entitled, “Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine.” In her article, Kagan said that examination of the motives of government is the proper approach for the Supreme Court when looking at whether a law violates the First Amendment. While not denying that other concerns, such as the impact of a law, can be taken into account, Kagan argued that governmental motive is “the most important” factor. In doing so, Kagan constructed a complex framework that can be used by the Court to determine whether or not Congress has restricted First Amendment freedoms with improper intent. She defined improper intent as prohibiting or restricting speech merely because Congress or a public majority dislikes either the message or the messenger, or because the message or messenger may be harmful to elected officials or their political priorities. …Instead, the Supreme Court should focus on whether a speaker’s message is harming the public, argued Kagan in her article. While Kagan does not offer an exhaustive definition of ‘harm,’ she does offer examples of speech that may be regulated, such as incitement to violence, hate-speech, threatening or “fighting” words. …Kagan wrote. “This does not mean that the government may never subject particular ideas to disadvantage. The government indeed may do so, if acting upon neutral, harm-based reasons.” WOW. So much gobbledygook to justify violation of the First Amendment. See: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/65720 4) Side Effects: Get Ready to Lose Your Doctor Remember the White House’s insistence that, under Obamacare, you keep your insurance plan if you like it? We didn’t believe it then. Turns out we were right. CNN reports that AT&T, Verizon, John Deere and others may well drop the health care coverage they now offer their employees. Obamacare makes it much cheaper for these companies to dump their workers into the government-controlled health exchanges and pay a penalty for NOT insuring them. From CNN: "Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill’s critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government. That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama’s statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them." See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/10/side-effects-get-ready-to-lose-your-doctor 4a) Health overhaul law potentially costs $115B more WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's new health care law could potentially add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending over the next 10 years, congressional budget referees said Tuesday. If Congress approves all the additional spending called for in the legislation, it would push the ten-year cost of the overhaul above $1 trillion (emphasis mine) — an unofficial limit the Obama administration set early on. The Congressional Budget Office said the added spending includes $10 billion to $20 billion in administrative costs to federal agencies carrying out the law, as well as $34 billion for community health centers and $39 billion for Indian health care. The costs were not reflected in earlier estimates by the budget office, although Republican lawmakers strenuously argued that they should have been. Part of the reason is technical: the additional spending is not mandatory, leaving Congress with discretion to provide the funds in follow-on legislation — or not. See: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i0wB-o7OjZq7Bh5k_D542BO8fq_wD9FKR7V80 5) No-More-Bailouts Bill Springs a Leak: Fannie and Freddie Ask for More Supporters of Sen. Chris Dodd’s financial regulation bill say it will end financial bailouts. In fact, the Senate — anxious to reassure Americans on that fact — even added an amendment last week with a stated purpose “[t]o prohibit taxpayers from ever having to bail out the financial sector.” But someone forgot to tell the folks across town at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Freddie last week announced it had lost $8 billion in the first quarter of the year, and would be asking for another $10.6 in taxpayer help. And today, its twin Fannie announced a $11.5 billion loss, and asked for a further $8.4 billion in aid from taxpayers. That’s in addition to the nearly $145 billion in aid to Fannie and Freddie have already received. So did the two government-sponsored enterprises slip this bailout in under the wire before Congress stopped them? Not quite. In fact, the plan does nothing to reform either Fannie or Freddie. That apparently is not a priority. Sen. Mark Warner, in fact, said that a plan for reform of these out-of-control firms will have to wait until next year. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/10/no-more-bailouts-bill-springs-a-leak-fannie-and-freddie-ask-for-more 5a) Republican senators pressing to end federal control of Fannie, Freddie As the Senate resumed debate Monday on legislation to overhaul financial regulation, leading Republican lawmakers are pushing an amendment that would wind down the government-controlled (emphasis mine) mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The proposal by Sens. John McCain (Ariz.), Richard C. Shelby (Ala.) and Judd Gregg (N.H.) calls for the government to end its control of the companies within two years. Under the amendment, Fannie and Freddie would have to reduce the size of their mortgage portfolios and begin paying state and local sales taxes. Congressional aides say the amendment is unlikely to pass. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/10/AR2010051002850.html 6) Democrats poised to move measures with high price tags Congress faces a crush of votes on big-ticket items before the Memorial Day recess, setting up a debate on deficits less than six months before the November elections. Democratic leaders are looking in the next three weeks to send President Barack Obama a slew of measures that cost more than $200 billion, including a multiyear extension of unemployment benefits, an extension of expiring tax provisions and Medicare doctor payments totaling $180 billion and a $33 billion Afghanistan war supplemental bill. Because most of those costs won’t be paid for, Republicans plan to use those bills and the Democrats’ budget blueprint to highlight massive deficits ahead of the congressional midterm election. Republicans have recently been pointing to Greece’s dismal fiscal situation as a warning, claiming that the U.S. will be headed for a similar fate unless the deficits are curtailed. “Washington Democrats’ out-of-control spending spree is scaring the hell out of the American people,” said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). “It has to stop.” See: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/97089-democrats-poised-to-move-measures-with-high-price-tags 7) Obama administration looks into modifying Miranda law in the age of terrorism The Obama administration is considering changes to the laws requiring police to inform suspects of their rights, potentially pursuing an expansion of the "public safety exception" that allows officers to delay issuing Miranda warnings, officials said Sunday. Attorney General Eric Holder, in his first appearances on Sunday morning news shows as a cabinet secretary, said the Justice Department is examining "whether or not we have the necessary flexibility" to deal with terrorist suspects such as the Pakistani-born U.S. citizen who tried to detonate a car bomb in Times Square last weekend. "We're now dealing with international terrorism," Holder said on ABC's "This Week." "And if we are going to have a system that is capable of dealing in a public safety context with this new threat, I think we have to give serious consideration to at least modifying that public safety exception." So, it doesn’t harm public safety to treat enemy combatants as citizens - and try them in the very city they were successful at blowing up - but to withhold Miranda rights from US CITIZENS (as this man is), that secures public safety. What’s black is white; what’s white is black. This is completely upside down and backwards. This leaves the door open for say, Tea Party protesters, to be denied due process and the presumption of innocence because of the “public safety exception”. Mark Kirk had a better idea on Don Wade and Roma (WLS) this week: try them for treason. That way, US citizens will be treated as citizens and granted their constitutional right to a trial by a jury of peers, etc. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/09/AR2010050902062.html 8) Highland Park basketball team trip to Arizona scrapped Reveling in its first conference championship in 26 years, the Highland Park High School girls varsity basketball team has been selling cookies for months to raise funds for a tournament in Arizona. But those hoop dreams were dashed when players learned they couldn't go because of that state's new crackdown on illegal immigrants. Safety concerns partly fueled the decision, but the trip also "would not be aligned with our beliefs and values," said District 113 Assistant Superintendent Suzan Hebson. That explanation, though, smacks of political protest to parents upset by the decision. The news, which was broken to the team Monday by coach Jolie Bechtel, comes as critics of Arizona's controversial law call on professional athletes and others to boycott the state. UNBELIEVABLE! …District 113 Superintendent George Fornero declined comment, saying it "wasn't just my decision." He referred calls to Hebson. Hebson said Arizona is off-limits because of uncertainty about how the new law will be enforced. Signed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer last month, it makes it a crime to be in the country illegally and requires police to check suspects for immigration paperwork. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE POLICE TO CHECK SUSPECTS FOR PAPERWORK UNLESS THEY ARE STOPPED FOR A CRIME!!! See: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-05-12/news/ct-met-arizona-trip-canceled-20100512_1_basketball-court-brewer-last-month-immigration-paperwork More on this: George Fomero is lying. A parent of a Hightland Park student who was on WLS today said Fomero is the one who made the decision. The mayor said the same thing: …the mayor of Highland Park goes on the big 89 WLS Chicago, Don Wade and Roma, his name is Michael Belsky, Roma said, "Have you spoken with the assistant superintendent, Sue Hebson? Because she apparently is the one who made the decision, am I correct?" BELSKY: The school superintendent and the school board make these sorts of decisions. And, you know, one thing I want to just make clear and I think Rush Limbaugh has -- has kind of released the firestorm of e-mails on me, but in Illinois the school board is separately elected from the city counsel and so this has not been a city matter at all. …Roma then said, "They have student trips to China and we're seeing in the news last night that nine people died in a school attack in China. So I think there are lots of places where there is far more danger than Arizona, even if they competed in Chicago city itself, there are areas of Chicago that would be far more dangerous than going to an Arizona basketball tournament." BELSKY: You know, I mean I guess that -- again, it's their judgment and if they feel, you know, there's -- they go to areas in those countries where they are safe, and they perceive any sort of danger in Arizona, then that's -- that's their call. Bill’s comment: The courageous mayor of Highland Park is standing up for lawlessness while hiding behind the skirts of a girl’s basketball team. Right on, my dear husband! See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051310/content/01125106.guest.html 9) Medal for 'courageous restraint' plan get mixed review from troops A proposal to grant medals for "courageous restraint" to troops in Afghanistan who avoid deadly force at a risk to themselves has generated concern among U.S. soldiers and experts who worry it could embolden enemy fighters and confuse friendly forces. Lt. Col. Edward Sholtis, a spokesman for Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who commands NATO forces in Afghanistan, said that no final decision has been made on the award, which is the brainchild of British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter. "The idea is being reviewed at Headquarters ISAF," Sholtis said. "The idea is consistent with our approach. Our young men and women display remarkable courage every day, including situations where they refrain from using lethal force, even at risk to themselves, in order to prevent possible harm to civilians...That restraint is an act of discipline and courage not much different than those seen in combat actions." However, professor Jeffrey F. Addicott, a former senior legal adviser to the Green Berets and director of the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University School of Law in San Antonio, said "It's an absolutely outrageous proposal to our fighting men. "The implication of this award is that we do not engage in war fighting that is appropriate," Addicott said. "They're sending a chilling message to our troops that we are not complying with the law of armed conflict. It's a propaganda victory for our enemies." Another unbelievable OUTRAGE from our useless, pathetic, cowardly administration!! How much longer are we going to allow ivy league pacifists who hate this country to play commander-in-chief??!! Yes, let's just invite the illegals over the borders, while overseas we remind the enemy that all they have to do is dress like civilians and they can mow us down. God help us all. (Thanks Kim for comment, with an edit or two from me). See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/world/Medal-for-_courageous-restraint_-plan-get-mixed-review-from-troops-93007014.html 10) The Very Real Short-Range Missile Threat Obama is Ignoring …The system allows a weak nation to strike the land and sea targets of a superior force by placing cruise missiles into any type of 40 foot container. The video uses a ship, truck and train as examples of potential launching platforms. This means that once this weapon is sold, any of these transportation vehicles have to be seen as missile pads. …These vehicles can cross borders, making it more difficult to identify the perpetrator of an attack and impossible to predict where an attack might come from. The missiles might from a shipping vessel off the coast or a truck that crossed via the Mexican border. With a range of 220 kilometers, or about 136 miles, they can either be fired from a safe distance from the border or the distance can be minimized by getting close to the target by being hidden. This game-changing new threat is not new to conservatives, but the Obama administration has chosen to completely ignore it thus leaving our nation vulnerable to attack. …The most obvious option is to place short-range missiles and launchers on cargo vessels off the U.S. coast. And what could the U.S. possibly deploy to protect against such a weapon? The Airborne Laser. Problem is, since the Obama administration decided to ignore the threat from short-range missiles like the Club K, President Obama decided to kill the program. Heritage fellow James Carafano explains the consequences: “If Iran has one missile and nuclear weapon, it might have two. It could detonate one over New York in a low-altitude air burst that would kill up to a half-million and cripple Manhattan forever. Iran could fire a second at high altitude over the mid-Atlantic states, creating an electro-magnetic pulse that would take down a large portion of the national grid and plunge Washington, D.C., into permanent darkness. America would be crippled in a flash, with no obvious enemy at which to shoot back. An ABL could help neutralize this threat, and others. Advancing the technology alone will give the U.S. a dramatic advantage over potential adversaries. But if the administration has its way, we’ll see the ABL in the Smithsonian, rather than defending our coasts.” See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/11/video-the-very-real-short-range-missile-threat-obama-is-ignoring