1) Senate repeals 'don't ask, don't tell'
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Saturday voted 65-31 to strike down the 17-year ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military and sent President Obama legislation to overturn the policy known as "don't ask, don't tell."
Obama was expected to sign the bill into law this week, although changes to military policy probably wouldn't take effect for at least several months. Under the bill, the president and his top military advisers must first certify that lifting the ban won't hurt troops' ability to fight. After that, the military would undergo a 60-day wait period.
…Washington Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both Democrats, voted for the bill. The eight Republicans who sided with Democrats are: Richard Burr, of North Carolina; Mark Kirk, of Illinois; Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska; George Voinovich, of Ohio; Scott Brown, of Massachusetts; John Ensign, of Nevada; and Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, of Maine.
Four senators did not vote.
The House passed an identical version of the bill, 250-175, last week.
…Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., led the opposition to repeal. Minutes before a crucial test vote, he acknowledged he couldn't stop the bill. He blamed elite liberals with no military experience for pushing their social agenda on troops during wartime.
"They will do what is asked of them," McCain said of service members. "But don't think there won't be a great cost."
Great cost indeed. What fools.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013713976_dontask19.html
1a) No Stand Alone Amendment on Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Sandy Rios on why repeal of DADT is a stupid idea
The Senate should reject any stand-alone amendment overturning the 1996 Congressional Law preventing homosexuals from serving in the military. Why?
• Because according to the much-touted Pentagon Survey, 67% of Marine Combat troops on the front lines…right now…have indicated it could interfere with unit effectiveness, readiness and cohesion. The Marine Corps Commandant, General James Amos, testified December 3rd before the Senate Armed Services Committee asking members NOT to change the policy and reporting that men in the field are saying “the potential exists for disruption to the successful execution of our current combat mission.”
• Because the same survey reports that 24% of our all-volunteer force have indicated they would leave the military early if the law were repealed. That is one half million fighting men and women potentially lost during a time of war.
• Because PFC Bradley Manning recently leaked the largest amount of classified information in history, putting fellow soldiers and his own country at risk because he was gay and angry with a former lover. As unpleasant as it is to ponder, that fact must be pondered before we open the floodgates to others whose sexual identity may define them more than the uniform they wear.
• Because a substantial number of the 3000 military chaplains who provide the spiritual strength to thousands of our men and women, giving them courage and determination to carry on, have serious objections. The Washington Post reported, “No group had such strong – or sharply divergent views…” One chaplain asked superiors what people of faith with problems of conscience on the issue should do if the policy were overturned. He was told by a high-ranking official in the presence of others that he should get out of the military(emphasis mine).
See: http://townhall.com/columnists/SandyRios/2010/12/15/no_stand_alone_amendment_on_dont_ask,_dont_tell
2) DeMint: Why I Oppose the Tax Deal (but it passed anyway; see next story)
Many of you have contacted me about the bipartisan tax deal reached between President Obama and Republican leaders. I've carefully reviewed the legislation and I wanted to explain to you why I cannot support it.
First, I do not want to see anyone's taxes go up and I have been fighting for years to permanently extend all the tax rates. I disagree with the President that we cannot afford to extend these rates for everyone. It's the people's money and we should not raise taxes on hardworking American families.
But this bill does much more than simply extend tax rates.
For starters, it includes approximately $200 billion in new deficit spending and stimulus gimmicks. That's a lot of money that will have to be borrowed from China and repaid by our children and grandchildren. If we're going to increase spending on new programs, we must reduce other spending to pay for it.
The bill also only extends rates for two years. We don't have a temporary economy so we shouldn't have temporary tax rates. Individuals and businesses make decisions looking at the long-term and we're not going to create jobs without giving people certainty as to what their taxes will be in future.
The bill also fails to extend all of the tax rates. It actually increases the death tax from its current rate of zero percent all the way up to 35 percent (emphasis mine). One economic study shows that this tax increase alone will kill over 800,000 jobs over the next ten years.
Stealing from the deceased and their surviving family is immoral (comment mine).
Finally, the bill now includes dozens of earmarks for special interests, including ethanol subsidies, tax breaks for film and television producers, give aways for Puerto Rican rum manufacturers, favors for auto racing track owners, and a hand out for businesses in American Samoa.
See: http://senateconservatives.com/site/post/449/demint-memo-on-tax-deal
2a) Obama Signs Tax Cut Bill, Partisan Debate Rages On
WASHINGTON -- As President Obama signed into law Friday the massive bipartisan tax package that delighted most Republicans but divided his own party, the debate over its implications raged on.
…Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., said Obama and lawmakers will face enormous election-year pressure in 2012 to extend the cuts again or make them permanent. Weiner said the Republicans turned out to be "better poker players" than Obama.
…The measure would extend existing tax cuts for families at every income level, renew jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed and enact a new one-year cut in Social Security taxes that would benefit nearly every worker who earns a wage.
The bill was passed just before midnight Thursday in a remarkable show of bipartisanship in the House, despite objections from some Democrats, who wanted to impose a higher estate tax than the one Obama agreed to. The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor -- the Democrats 139 and the Republicans 138.
…The extended tax cuts include lower rates for the rich, the middle class and the working poor, a $1,000-per-child tax credit, tax breaks for college students and lower taxes on capital gains and dividends. The bill also extends through 2011, a series of business tax breaks designed to encourage investment that expired at the end of 2009.
Workers' Social Security taxes would be cut by nearly a third, going from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, for 2011. A worker making $50,000 in wages would save $1,000; one making $100,000 would save $2,000.
See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/17/congress-passes-extend-tax-cuts-jobless-aid/
2b) Moody's Warns It May Cut US Rating if Tax-Cut Deal Becomes Law
Moody's warned Monday that it could move a step closer to cutting the U.S. Aaa rating if President Barack Obama's tax and unemployment benefit package becomes law.
The plan agreed to by Obama and Republican leaders last week could push up debt levels, increasing the likelihood of a negative outlook on the United States rating in the coming two years, the ratings agency said.
A negative outlook, if adopted, would make a rating cut more likely over the following 12-to-18 months.
See: http://www.moneynews.com/Headline/Moodys-Cut-US-Rating/2010/12/13/id/379784
3) GOP senator: Funding bill a 'Trojan horse' for healthcare reform (which is why it is so excellent that this did not pass. See next story).
A Republican senator criticized the continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government through next year as a vehicle for funding the healthcare reform law.
"Using the end-of-the-year spending bill as a Trojan horse to fund the new federal healthcare law is hardly the mandate from the November elections," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) in a statement Thursday.
The House passed the CR on Wednesday night by a narrow margin, bringing the government one step closer to being funded through Sept. 30.
However, Coburn said, the CR includes funding for a number of provisions in the reform law, and he urged other members who campaigned on defunding the healthcare reform measure to oppose the CR.
"It’s time for Congress to extend current tax rates, pass a clean spending bill — a ‘continuing resolution’ — without extraneous and vague healthcare provisions, and go home," he said.
3a) Senate leaders drops $1.3 trillion spending bill: BIG NEWS! BIG HAPPY NEWS!
WASHINGTON – After wrestling with — and finally abandoning — a 1,900-page catchall spending bill stuffed with more than $8 billion in home-state projects known as earmarks in Washington and pork in the rest of the country, Senate leaders turned Friday to devising a measure to keep the federal government running into early next year.
Nearly $1.3 trillion in unfinished budget work needed to keep the government running was packed into the spending measure, including $158 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid gave up on the bill Thursday after several Republicans who had been thinking of voting for it pulled back their support.
Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky had thrown his weight against the bill in recent days, saying it was "unbelievable" that Democrats would try to muscle through in the days before Christmas legislation that usually takes months to debate.
…The most likely course forward was a stopgap funding bill that would keep the government running at current levels into February. That would set up a huge challenge for President Barack Obama, Republicans taking over the House, and a more narrowly divided Senate that will still be under Democratic control.
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101217/ap_on_bi_ge/us_congress_spending
4) EDITORIAL: Wave goodbye to Internet freedom
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is poised to add the Internet to its portfolio of regulated industries. The agency's chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced Wednesday that he circulated draft rules he says will "preserve the freedom and openness of the Internet." No statement could better reflect the gulf between the rhetoric and the reality of Obama administration policies.
With a straight face, Mr. Genachowski suggested that government red tape will increase the "freedom" of online services that have flourished because bureaucratic busybodies have been blocked from tinkering with the Web. Ordinarily, it would be appropriate at this point to supply an example from the proposed regulations illustrating the problem. Mr. Genachowski's draft document has over 550 footnotes and is stamped "non-public, for internal use only" to ensure nobody outside the agency sees it until the rules are approved in a scheduled Dec. 21 vote. So much for "openness."
…It's not clear why the FCC thinks it needs to intervene in a situation with obvious market solutions. Companies that impose draconian tolls or block services will lose customers. Existing laws already offer a number of protections against anti-competitive behavior, but it's not clear under what law Mr. Genachowski thinks he can stick his nose into the businesses that comprise the Internet. The FCC regulates broadcast television and radio because the government granted each station exclusive access to a slice of the airwaves. Likewise when Ma Bell accepted a monopoly deal from Uncle Sam, it came with regulatory strings attached.
No such rationale applies online, especially because bipartisan majorities in Congress have insisted on maintaining a hands-off policy. A federal appeals court confirmed this in April by striking down the FCC's last attempt in this arena. "That was sort of like the quarterback being sacked for a 20-yard loss," FCC Commissioner Robert M. McDowell told The Washington Times. "And now the team is about to run the exact same play. ... In order for the FCC to do this, it needs for Congress to give it explicit statutory authority to do so."
Freedom and openness should continue to be the governing principles of the Internet. That's why Mr. Genachowski's proposal should be rejected and Congress should make it even more clear that the FCC should stop trying to expand its regulatory empire.
See: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/2/wave-goodbye-to-internet-freedom/
4a) Van Jones: What I learned in the White House
VAN JONES: …and in airplanes, maybe going to Colorado or some place where you've got a lot of turbulence and you just hope that somebody in the cockpit knows what they're doing. I was in a cockpit for six months. I got a chance to see close up, very clearly, the amount of peril the country is in, the challenges that we're facing. I got a chance to learn that nobody in Washington D.C. has all the power that they want, including the president, and that there are informal systems of power that operate. And they operate along racial and other lines. And we have to be much more sophisticated now. See, we did everything right. We had six years of one party, authoritarian rule in this country from 2000-2006, and the people in this room did everything right.
GLENN: This is critical. Listen to this.
VAN JONES: We got 60 votes in the Senate, we got Speaker Pelosi, not some rightwing Democrat speaker Pelosi and
… VAN JONES: Barack Obama elected president. We did everything right. So standing flat footed January 2009, everything that we were taught to do we had done and been successful. And here we are less than 24 months later and most people feel like the hope bubble burst a long time ago.
GLENN: Here it is.
VAN JONES: Because there's other systems of power that we were not taking seriously, and they have to do with the media, they have to do with the racial discourse in the media. And that's the next frontier.
PAT: The media is the next frontier.
GLENN: No, no. No, the media, and do you have the Al Sharpton audio?
PAT: Yes.
GLENN: The media and the racial, what did he call it, the racial what of the media? Approach of the media or whatever. So in other words, what he's saying is the media is a problem, and the way race is used by the media is a problem. So that's the next frontier. To use race to shut down the media. Listen.
SHARPTON: We're going to Washington next week to meet with FCC. We're also going to unveil a petition that we're going to challenge members of congress and the Senate to sign onto and release on national action network's website who signs on, who doesn't or who ducks. Because it's very important
PAT: Listen to this.
SHARPTON: for federal officials to take a position not necessarily just on Limbaugh but on whether or not they agree that anything, whether you are doing it explicitly or implicitly, against people based on race or gender should be allowed on federally regulated airwaves.
GLENN: Stop. It is not a coincidence.
See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/49154/
5) Restrained by the Constitution (Obamacare declared unconstitutional by VA judge)
On December 13, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson issued a decision on the Commonwealth of Virginia's challenge to the constitutionality of Obamacare's "minimal essential coverage provision," sparking a flurry of controversy and commentary by declaring that neither the Interstate Commerce nor the General Welfare clauses of the Constitution permits Congress to mandate that Americans purchase health insurance.
As a conservative, of course I am delighted with the decision. As an attorney, I am impressed by Judge Hudson's admirable exercise of judicial restraint in crafting his opinion.
Perhaps to the chagrin of some conservatives who would have relished an ideologically-driven, politically-charged decision (and despite the wild accusations among some on the far left that this decision signals the first step towards a judicial imposition of a "libertarian utopia"), Judge Hudson doesn't second guess or venture an opinion about the wisdom or merits of the legislation. His analysis is a constitutional one, not a political or sociological one, and the question he considered is simple: Does the Constitution confer on the Congress the power to penalize individuals for not purchasing a particular good or service in the marketplace?
See: http://townhall.com/columnists/KenConnor/2010/12/19/restrained_by_the_constitution
5a) More on this: Morning Bell: Another Victory on the Road to Repeal
…The White House and their leftist allies were quick to try and minimize this body blow to Obamacare, arguing that 14 previous court challenges have been dismissed by the courts. This desperate spin doesn’t even pass the laugh test. The 42-page decision is the first by a federal court this far along the litigation process and the first brought by a state (the case was filed by Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli). And soon Judge Roger Vinson of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida is expected to rule on an even larger challenge to Obamacare brought by 16 state attorneys general, four governors, two private citizens, and the National Federation of Independent Business.
…But whether or not courts will invalidate just Obamacare’s individual mandate is rapidly becoming irrelevant. Obamacare simply may not survive that long. It is already collapsing under its own financial and bureaucratic weight. Just last week, Congress voted to stop reductions in Medicare payments to doctors by raiding future revenues from Obamacare’s insurance subsidy program. The number of waivers the Obama Administration has to grant from Obamacare’s unworkable regulations grows each day. Doctors are telling pollsters they will leave the medical profession in droves if Obamacare is implemented as planned by 2014. And according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll Obamacare is now more unpopular than ever, with only 43 percent approving the law and 52 percent opposed.
Obamacare will be repealed. It is only a question of when.
See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/14/morning-bell-another-victory-on-the-road-to-repeal-2
5b) The Littlest Victims of Obamacare: SEIU drops health care coverage for children
It’s time for America’s youth to buckle up and take a rough ride on Reality Highway. For the past two years, President Obama has promised our children the moon, stars, rainbows, unicorns and universal health care for all. But the White House Santa’s cradle-to-grave entitlement mandates are a spectacularly predictable bust.
Don’t take it from me. Take it from Obamacare’s own biggest cheerleaders.
Late last month, the Service Employees International Union informed dues-paying members of its behemoth 1199 affiliate in New York that it was dropping its health care coverage for children. That’s right. A radical leftist union, not an evil Republican corporation, is abandoning the young ‘uns to cut costs.
See: http://michellemalkin.com/2010/12/01/the-littlest-victims-of-obamacare/
6) Bill Clinton Takes Over Presidential Press Conference
After a White House pow-wow Friday afternoon, President Obama and Bill Clinton joined forces for a rare, spontaneous press conference together. Though the goal was to bring attention to the tax deal—Clinton vowed his support for the plan—the former president got more than he bargained for when President Obama left him to fly solo at the podium.
Midway through a press conference to discuss the tax deal that would extend Bush tax cuts through the new year, President Obama made it clear that he had urgent matters to attend to and left Bill Clinton to preside over the press corps. The important business? A holiday party with the first lady Michelle, who he'd kept waiting for "over half an hour."
Oh yeah. Forgive me; I’m the president (or is Bill Clinton?), but I have more important things to do than attend to being president. I have to attend a cocktail party with my wife.
7) DREAM Act Goes Down in Flames in Senate
An immigration bill that would blaze a trail to legal status for hundreds of thousands of undocumented students went down in flames in the Senate on Saturday, delivering a critical blow to Democrats and Hispanic activists.
Even though the House approved the DREAM Act last week, the Senate fell five votes short of the 60 needed Saturday to advance the bill past Republican opposition.
President Obama said in a statement it was "incredibly disappointing" that Senate Republicans blocked the bill.
The DREAM Act, which opponents have decried as a "nightmare," is now likely to languish for years with Republicans taking back control of the House and picking up an additional handful of seats in the Senate next month.
…"Now, the next Congress can start to put unemployed Americans back to work by eliminating the ability for illegal aliens to hold jobs and by reducing the number of unnecessary permanent foreign workers we currently bring in legally every month," said Roy Beck, president and founder of NumbersUSA.
…But opponents, led by Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., insisted that the legislation is "backdoor amnesty" that encourages more people to come to the country illegally or overstay their time-limited visas. They also argued it rewards law breakers (emphasis mine).
See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/18/senate-tries-pass-dream-act/
7a) Pelosi Equates DREAM Act To Founding Fathers Winning Independence
8) GAO: 'Unclear' If Airport Body Scanners Will Detect Underwear Bombs
Repeatedly over the past year the Government Accountability Office has told Congress it is unclear if the whole-body-image scanners the Transportation Security Administration is now deploying at airports across the country will detect the sort of underwear bomb that terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab used last Christmas when he attempted to blow up Northwest Flight 253 as it approached Detroit from Amsterdam.
Even though TSA has put these so-called Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) scanners through both laboratory and operational testing, Congress's own auditing agency says it "remains unclear" that they can actually do the primary job they are intended to do.
Steve Lord, the GAO's director of homeland security and justice issues, made this point most recently in written testimony presented last Thursday to the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety and Security.
"Furthermore, as noted in our March 2010 testimony," Lord wrote, "it remains unclear whether the AIT would have been able to detect the weapon used in the December 2009 incident based on the preliminary TSA information we have received."
9) The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush
The WikiLeaks de facto declassification of privileged material makes it case closed: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction -- and intended to restart his program once the heat was off.
See: http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2010/12/09/the_wikileaks_vindication_of_george_w_bush
10) U.S. to have Highest Corporate Tax Rate in the World
Most of the time being number one is good. But when it comes to having the highest tax rate in the world, it is much better for a country to be bringing up the rear.
Currently Japan holds the inauspicious distinction of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the world (39.5 percent). The United States is a close second, only a few tenths-of-percentage points behind.
Japan will soon fall from the top spot because it has finally recognized what the rest of the industrialized world realized over a decade ago: A low corporate income tax rate is vital for economic growth in the global marketplace. As such, Japan just announced it will reduce its corporate income tax rate by 5 percentage points down to around 35 percent. This remains far above the 25 percent average rate of other industrialized countries, but for them it is a start.
Japan’s reduction will leave the U.S. in the uncomfortable position of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the industrialized world. Hopefully Congress will finally see fit to lower the rate now that we will hold that disreputable title.
See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/15/u-s-to-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-in-the-world
11) Poland ‘Stripped of Illusions’ About Ties With U.S.
Documents published by WikiLeaks that offer an insight into Polish-U.S. relations have stripped Warsaw of illusions about its ties with Washington, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk told a press conference Tuesday.
“We have a serious problem — not with the image, as some countries do, and not reputation, like the U.S. does. It’s a problem of being stripped of illusions about the nature of relations between countries, including such close allies as Poland and the U.S.,” Mr. Tusk said.
Earlier in December, when WikiLeaks revealed the first documents involving Poland, Mr. Tusk said his first impression was that the U.S. had made decisions about Poland’s security “with mainly its relations with Russia in mind and not the objective security of NATO allies.”
Mr. Tusk was referring to documents showing that U.S. President Barack Obama last year abandoned the George W. Bush-era missile defense project, with 10 interceptors in Polish territory, as Mr. Obama sought Russian support for sanctions against Iran.
Poland saw the U.S. presence on its soil as an extra security guarantee, beyond the mutual protection pledge under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, documents revealed Tuesday show.
Poland in 2009 requested the U.S. military footprint, after Mr. Obama scrapped the old missile shield project. In separate meetings with U.S. lawmakers and diplomats, three senior Polish officials, including now-president Bronislaw Komorowski, said they believed Russia could be a potential threat to Poland’s security in the future.
See: http://blogs.wsj.com/new-europe/2010/12/07/poland-stripped-of-illusions-about-ties-with-us/
12) Morning Bell: Release the START Negotiating Record
Yesterday, the Senate voted 66–32 to begin debate on the New START agreement with Russia. Only a simple majority (51) was required, but vote counters can use yesterday’s roll call as a benchmark for final ratification, which will need 67 votes to pass. With the seating of Senator Mark Kirk (R–IL), the White House needs nine Republicans to join the Senate’s 58 Democrats. They got those nine yesterday, including Senators Bob Bennett (UT), Scott Brown (MA), Susan Collins (ME), Lindsey Graham (SC), Dick Lugar (IN), John McCain (AZ), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Olympia Snowe (ME), and George Voinovich (OH).
But of those, according to The Hill, only Lugar, Collins, and Snowe have fully backed ratification. And at least two of those nine went on record in favor of letting the next Congress be the treaty’s judge. Early yesterday, McCain took to former Senator Fred Thompson’s nationally syndicated radio show where he called the treaty “a good idea” but also said he has “serious concerns about the missile defense part of it” and wanted to vote on it next year. Meanwhile, Bennett attended a press conference organized by Senator Jon Kyl (R–AZ) where he told reporters: “I would hope that we could reach accord, and I would hope that it would be next year.”
Kyl’s press conference was a major blow to the White House as a slew of potential yes votes lined up to announce they would not vote for the treaty this year, including the newly sworn-in Senator Kirk and Senators Lamar Alexander (R–TN), Kit Bond (R–MO), Saxby Chambliss (R–GA), Orrin Hatch (R–UT), Mike Johanns (R–NE), George Lemieux (R–FL), and John Thune (R–SD).
…But many questions also remain unanswered. Let’s start with just two: Where are the negotiating documents, and when will we be allowed to see them? These documents are crucial to resolving key ambiguities about the treaty, one of the biggest being the treaty’s effect on our nation’s right to implement new missile defense systems (emphasis mine).
See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/16/morning-bell-release-the-start-negotiating-record
13) State-‘Controlled’ Russian Company Set to Take Over Wyoming Uranium Mines
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the license transfer of two Wyoming mines to a Russian company, despite concerns over national security raised by local and national government officials including senior House Republicans.
From the Telegram:
Two uranium mines in Wyoming are on their way to control by a Russian company now that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved transferring the mines’ licenses.
The NRC last week approved the license transfer to a Russian company known as ARMZ which expects to obtain a controlling interest in Canadian-owned Uranium One by year’s end. Uranium One holds the licenses for a proposed uranium mine and an existing uranium mine in northeast Wyoming.
The approval comes despite concerns from local and national lawmakers. Both groups worry that Wyoming’s uranium could in theory go overseas and serve against U.S. interests.
“The administration must maintain rigorous oversight of this project and ensure this transaction does not undercut America’s national or energy security,” Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said through a spokeswoman Tuesday.
14) Glenn Beck: Pentagon believes civil unrest is a threat
GLENN: Now, I've never heard this before and I know we do training for, you know, a terrorist act or anything else, but I want you to listen to this audio from CNBC on what the government is doing and what the government is preparing for. Listen.
VOICE: more and more like an economic Cold War and it's not just a talking point at the Pentagon. They are planning for real economic threats to America. Eamon Javers has the latest on the war games that are playing out in some high councils around your parts. Eamon?
EAMON JAVERS: Hey, Tyler, well, you're right. Ever since the crash of 2008 the defense intelligence establishment has really been paying a lot of attention to global markets and how they can serve as a threat to U.S. national security interests. At one upcoming seminar next month they’re taking a look at a lot of the issues that might be really familiar to CNBC viewers. Take a look at some of the Pentagon's key concerns here. They are looking at the use of sovereign wealth funds to manipulate markets and currencies. They are looking at nation state economic collapse, sovereign default, a nation state instability, and they are also worried about U.S. allies' budgets, deficits, and national security infrastructures. And in the Army they are having a very interesting year long exercise called Unified Quest 2011. And in that war gaming series, they are looking at the implications of large scale economic breakdown inside the United States that would force the Army to keep, quote, domestic order among civil unrest and force the Army to deal with fragmented global power and drastically lower budgets, this according to the trade publication insidedefense.com.
See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/48957/
15) Calif. regulators OK major greenhouse gas rules: The left coast strikes again…
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Hoping other states will follow suit, California regulators overwhelmingly approved the nation's most extensive system giving owners of power plants, refineries and other major polluters financial incentives to emit fewer greenhouse gases.
The Air Resources Board voted 9-1 Thursday to pass the key piece of California's 2006 climate law — called AB32.
"We're inventing this," said Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the state's air quality board. "There is still going to be quite a bit of action needed before it becomes operational."
Officials said they hope that other states will follow the lead of the world's eighth largest economy. State officials also are discussing plans to link the new system with similar ones under way or being planned in Canada, Europe and Asia.
“Link”? “…with similar ones being planned in Canada, Europe, and Asia”? Uh, California, that would constitute a treaty. Maybe you haven’t read the Constitution in awhile, but you are not authorized to negotiate treaties.
…Some businesses that would fall under the new rules say the system could dampen California's already flagging economy, complicate lawmakers' efforts to close a $28.1 billion revenue shortfall and lead to an increase in the price of electricity.
Do ya’ think??
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101217/ap_on_bi_ge/us_california_greenhouse_gases
16) Class Action Lawsuit Targets McDonald's Use of Toys to Market to Children…and the Left Coast strikes again and again!
WASHINGTON—A mother of two from Sacramento, Calif., says that McDonald’s uses toys as bait to induce her kids to clamor to go to McDonald’s and to develop a preference for nutritionally poor Happy Meals. With the help of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, today the mom, Monet Parham, is filing a class action lawsuit aimed at stopping McDonald’s use of toys to market directly to young children. The suit will be filed in California Superior Court in San Francisco shortly after the court opens for business Wednesday morning.
Yep; don’t expect Monet Parham to be a parent. She has to make everyone else’s children suffer because she hasn’t learned how to be one.
See: http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012151.html
17) Michelle Obama on Deciding What Kids Eat: ‘We Can’t Just Leave it Up to The Parents'
(CNSNews.com) - Speaking at Monday's signing ceremony for the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act”-- a law that will subsidize and regulate what children eat before school, at lunch, after school, and during summer vacations in federally funded school-based feeding programs -- First Lady Michelle Obama said of deciding what American children should eat: “We can’t just leave it up to the parents."
See: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michelle-obama-45-billion-child-nutritio
18) NY Schools’ ‘Human Rights’ Curriculum Features Van Jones
Last Friday, December 10, over 1,000 New York students took part in the inaugural webcast of the “Speak Truth to Power” curriculum distributed by the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice & Human Rights and New York State United Teachers.
The web event originated from a classroom at Chestnut Ridge Middle School, a school with a student population that recently scored below-average on statewide tests, according to the New York Times. It is extremely difficult to see how lessons focusing on corporate “greed,” landmine awareness, Chinese labor camps and abolishing the death penalty will do anything to raise student test scores in math, reading and science.
According to a NYSUT blog, the curriculum “introduces general human rights issues” and “urges students to become personally involved in the protection of human rights.”
New York parents and taxpayers ought to be very concerned that their public schools think this curriculum is an appropriate use of time. Students may end up with an increased awareness of global problems, but if they don’t graduate with basic academic skills, what can they possibly do about such issues?
This is another case of public schools using class time to indoctrinate students with a radical, leftist political agenda. No curriculum that promotes the views of Van Jones should be allowed to pollute the minds of school kids.
19) SKorea military maneuvers scuttled by bad weather
YEONPYEONG ISLAND, South Korea – Military maneuvers planned by South Korean troops did not take place Saturday because of bad weather on a border island shelled by North Korea last month, but the U.N. Security Council scheduled an emergency meeting at Russia's request amid concerns over rising tensions on the divided peninsula.
The North warned Friday that it would strike even harder than before if the South went ahead with planned one-day firing drills it says it will conduct sometime between Saturday and Tuesday. Four people died last month in the North's attack on Yeonpyeong Island near the tense sea border.
The U.S. supports South Korea, saying the country has a right to conduct such a military exercise. However, Russia's Foreign Ministry expressed its "extreme concern" Friday over the drills and urged South Korea to cancel it to prevent a further escalation of tensions.
The U.N. Security Council scheduled emergency closed-door consultations on North Korea for 11 a.m. (1600 GMT) Sunday at Russia's request, said Mark Kornblau, spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. The United States holds the council's rotating presidency this month.
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101218/ap_on_re_as/as_koreas_clash
20) Willow Creek Substitutes Leftism for Christianity
Pastor Bill Hybels at Willow Creek is doing a three week series entitled “His Name Shall Be Called” (focusing on Isaiah 9:6: “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”). During the course of the message he gave on Sunday, December 5 (See: http://www.willowcreek.org/home1.aspx, click on “Watch Messages” and then click on “He Shall be Called“), he discussed each name given in the Isaiah passage. When he got to “Prince of Peace”, he made the following comments:
“…Did you ever wonder what Defense spending costs our economy? I was playing around with numbers this week because I was under-challenged at work… I took the defense spending of the top 10 countries in the world, added it all up, and if we just took the Defense spending, top ten countries for one year, just twelve months, gang… it comes ups to something like 1.5 trillion dollars. What could be done with 1.5 trillion dollars to make our world a better place?…We could feed every starving person on the planet for just 20 billion…indefinitely. In addition to that…now we’re talking about 1.5 trillion dollars available if we would just stop the Defense spending of all the ten countries for one year, we could quite possibly clothe every naked person, house and educate every needy person on planet earth. A lot of diseases could be eliminated. AIDS probably could be eliminated. Cancer research could be accelerated. There’s just almost unlimited things that could happen if we could just get people to stop fighting and spending their money on military defense stuff for just one year, you see. War is insane…and it’s insanely expensive. It restricts us from having the resources to do the kinds of things that would make this world a better place. So when Isaiah says “someone is coming and one of His names is Prince of Peace”, every sane person should yearn for the day of his arrival. And when Jesus did come…he said “Blessed are the peacemakers…” Jesus knew all about the insanity of war…”Jesus said, “Love your enemies.” Could you just say those words with me?…I’ve got a better plan than spilling blood all over the place. Love your enemies; pray for those who do you wrong…when someone decides to follow Jesus and really surrender their life to Jesus… Jesus begins to turn us into peacemakers; our taste for blood sours a little bit…Can you imagine what could happen if on this Christmas day…every world leader would come to his or her senses and say, “Look no more war; we’re done. We’ll still have our differences, but we’re done with wars. We’ll settle our differences over negotiating tables instead of spilling the blood of our sons and daughters…Isaiah says, “The greatest hope of a day like that ever happening is in a person named Jesus Christ…Every day 20,000 people commit themselves to Jesus Christ… and they become peacemakers, that day gets a little bit closer.”
…God must have been insane in The Old Testament then (e.g., Deuteronomy, Judges, Kings, etc.)? Oh, and perhaps in The New as well:
Revelation 19:11-15: “Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God (emphases mine).
No comments:
Post a Comment