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