Home » 11:50 pm
Entries posted on “March, 2010”
A New York Times piece admits that the documents it pointed to last week did not say what they originally claimed it did about the current pope. Just as Fr. Raymond de Souza pointed out over the weekend on NRO . And so now Laurie Goodstein has been to rewrite and back. It’s hard to argue with the truth when you provide a link to it on your own site, as the Times did. Inconvenient truth. What happened in Milwaukee was criminal. It was horrendous. It was painful. It was wrong. It should have been punished. But the pope was not the problem in the case of Fr. Lawrence Murphy. And even the New York Times , evidently, knows it.
11:50 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Original post:
Pfizer Gave Docs $35 Million in Last Half of 2009
11:48 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Read more from the original source:
Deputy Not Indicted for Tasering 72-Year-Old Woman
11:42 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Politico notes that CNN has suffered a 40 percent decline in prime time viewers since 2009. And it speculates about how to “fix” CNN’s broken operation. Politico’s advice is based on the premise that CNN is losing out due to its “down-the-middle news strategy.” According to Politico, CNN should seriously consider abandoning that strategy and emulating Fox and MSNBC “with their ideological slants and big personalities.” There are at least two problems with Politico’s analysis. First, as the New York Times reports, MSNBC’s ratings are also down. Second, the claim that CNN plays it “down-the-middle” is subject to serious dispute. In my view, CNN’s problem is that it matter-of-factly presents the news from a liberal perspective. Viewers might watch an old-fashioned, matter-of-fact news cast on cable television, but only if they are confident that it actually is down-the-middle. Tone, in other words, should match content. Viewers might also watch left-liberal dogma if it is entertaining, although MSNBC’s use of this model is hardly a raging success. But at least its tone matches its content However, viewers clearly have no use for slanted news presented blandly. Thus, Anderson Cooper, who found it so amusing to talk about “tea-baggers,” finds himself losing at times to repeats of shows on MSNBC and HLN, according to the New York Times. And liberal Larry King, formerly CNN’s rock, has only a little more than one-fourth of Sean Hannity’s audience, is losing to Rachel Maddow, and is even threatened by a new host, Joy Behar ( a comedian) on HLN. I tend to view CNN’s U.S. broadcasts as a kind of loss leader for its international operation. Even so, this is getting to be ridiculous.
11:41 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
The New York Times reports on Judge Walker’s new decision in Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Obama with the following opening: A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the National Security Agency’s program of surveillance without warrants was illegal, rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the most disputed counterterrorism policies of former President George W. Bush. In a 45-page opinion, Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled that the government had violated a 1978 federal statute requiring court approval for domestic surveillance when it intercepted phone calls of Al Haramain, a now-defunct Islamic charity in Oregon, and of two lawyers representing it in 2004. Declaring that the plaintiffs had been “subjected to unlawful surveillance,” the judge said the government was liable to pay them damages. The ruling delivered a blow to the Bush administration’s claims that its surveillance program, which Mr. Bush secretly authorized shortly after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, was lawful. Under the program, the National Security Agency monitored Americans’ international e-mail messages and phone calls without court approval, even though the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, required warrants. I’ve seen some similar reports online, so I thought I would register a somewhat technical objection to this characterization of the opinion. The Obama Administration wasn’t arguing that the surveillance program was lawful. As a result, the decision doesn’t rule that the program was un lawful. Rather, the Obama Administration was just arguing that Judge Walker couldn’t reach the merits of the case because of the state secrets privilege. After Judge Walker rejected the state secrets privilege claim, the case was over: DOJ not having argued that warrantless monitoring was lawful, Walker had no choice but to grant relief to the plaintiffs on their claim. As I said, this is sort of a technical objection: It’s quite right that the plaintiffs prevailed in their legal claim that they were illegally subject to surveillance. And as I have written many times before, I happen to agree that the Bush Administration’s arguments were quite weak. But the opinion isn’t quite what the Times is reporting: The decision today wasn’t actually about the lawfulness of the warrantless surveillance program. To be fair, if you read on in the Times story, it later adds some caveats that recognize the problem. It states: Judge Walker did not directly address the legal arguments made by the Bush administration in defense of the N.S.A. program after The New York Times disclosed its existence in December 2005: that the president’s wartime powers enabled him to override the FISA statute. But lawyers for Al Haramain were quick to argue that the ruling undermined the legal underpinnings of the war against terrorism. One of them, Jon Eisenberg, said Judge Walker’s ruling was an “implicit repudiation of the Bush-Cheney theory of executive power.” “Judge Walker is saying that FISA and federal statutes like it are not optional,” Mr. Eisenberg said. “The president, just like any other citizen of the United States, is bound by the law. Obeying Congressional legislation shouldn’t be optional with the president of the U.S.” I greatly appreciate the Times ’ acknowledgment that this is the lawyer’s spin. And I certainly recognize the practical difficulty of accurately characterizing a complicated and technical 45-page opinion within minutes after the opinion is released. At the same time, I think it’s pretty clear that the lawyer’s spin isn’t accurate here. DOJ wasn’t arguing that FISA was not binding. That was the Bush Administration’s position in the past, but not the position the Obama Administration was taking. Rather, the part about FISA not being “optional” is from a part of the opinion in which Judge Walker was contemplating how a strong states secrets privilege would weaken the Executive’s incentive to follow the FISA statute. If the government knows it can’t be sued for breaking the law, Walker reasoned, it can essentially treat the statute as optional. (See page 27 of the slip opinion). Judge Walker didn’t want to interpret the states secrets privilege in a way that would let an Executive branch do that, so he interpreted the privilege narrowly to help the civil lawsuit parts of FISA provide a stronger incentive to follow the law. Put another way, Judge Walker rejected a broad view of the states secrets privilege because he though it would not give the government enough of an incentive to follow the law. He did not reject the position that the Government was free to ignore the law, as that was not a position either side was arguing in the case. Copyright © 2010 This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only. The use of this feed on other websites breaches copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it makes the page you are viewing an infringement of the copyright. (Digital Fingerprint: )
11:36 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
This is a congressman grilling the CNO about future plans for stationing military personnel on the Island of Guam. The Congressman is deeply concerned with consequences of putting too many people on the island, because…well…you have to see for yourself. The money quote starts at 1:16 into the clip. www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg And there you go. These are our “leaders”. No doubt this is the same intellectual heft and clarity of thought they brought to health care reform. And will bring to Cap & Trade, Immigration Reform, etc. Think about that for a while.
11:31 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
The Politico pretends that there is a fix for CNN. There isn’t. In an attempt to breathe life into the corpse, Michael Calderone starts with a false premise: Jon Klein,…
11:28 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
See the original post:
Homes and Dreams Drown As Waters Rise in Northeast
11:15 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
You knew this was coming. Earlier this week several US corporations announced that Obamacare would cost their companies billions of dollars in new taxes. The democrats were so angry over this “leak” of information that they’ve already called for Congressional show trials … Now they’re blaming the GOP for playing politics with these corporate losses. The Wall Street Journal reported: So the wave of corporate writedowns—led by AT&T’s $1 billion—isn’t caused by ObamaCare after all. The White House claims CEOs are reducing the value of their companies and returns for shareholders merely out of political pique. A White House staffer told the American Spectator that “These are Republican CEOs who are trying to embarrass the President and Democrats in general. Where do you hear about this stuff? The Wall Street Journal editorial page and conservative Web sites. No one else picked up on this but you guys. It’s BS.” (We called the White House for elaboration but got no response.) In other words, CEOs who must abide by U.S. accounting laws under pain of SEC sanction, and who warned about such writedowns for months, are merely trying to ruin President Obama’s moment of glory. Sure. Presumably the White House is familiar with the Financial Standard Accounting Board’s 1990 statement No. 106, which requires businesses to immediately restate their earnings in light of their expected future retiree health liabilities. AT&T, Deere & Co., AK Steel, Prudential and Caterpillar, among others, are simply reporting the corporate costs of the Democratic decision to raise taxes on retiree drug benefits to finance ObamaCare. For those of you unaware of this worn out democratic tactic… It’s called deflection. The last thing they want is for Americans to know the truth about their devastating legislation. Michelle Malkin wrote more about the Congressional show trials. Related… Mark Levin: “ You lied , Mr. President.”
11:07 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
The piece we published today on the devastating effects of pornography has kept a steady stream of e-mails coming into my inbox. Some telling devastating tales. Some confessions. Some adamant defenses of pornography from frequent users. Some cries for help. Please feel free to keep them coming. I’ll report back here before too long. Good night for now.
10:52 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R., Minn.) hosted a town-hall meeting tonight . . . on Facebook — or, as Frances Martel calls it , “Sarah Palin’s home turf.” The 49-year-old, whom Chris Cillizza calls a “near certain 2012 presidential candidate,” looked like a man at ease with the medium — casual blue shirt, no tie, and a focused, relaxed mien, even when the streaming video sputtered. While the purpose of the online event was ostensibly to unveil seven new endorsements by his political action committee , it was also an overture by Pawlenty to the growing contingent of conservative activists who congregate and communicate on Facebook pages and Twitter feeds. Reaching out to that community is nothing new for the Minnesotan. In February, at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, he hosted a well-received happy hour with bloggers. Pawlenty opened tonight with a reprimand of the Obama agenda. “I sense the country is waking up to the facts,” he said, wagging his finger at various big-government takeovers. But all is not lost, he continued. With a wink at 2012, he cited a recent trip to Manchester, N.H., and the “passion and energy” he witnessed in local GOP ranks. Thoughts soon turned toward November, and Republicans’ chances of taking back Congress. Pawlenty predicted a “significant pickup” of House and Senate seats. To help that cause, he said his PAC will now rally behind seven new candidates, with more to be announced in coming weeks. The endorsements revealed this evening include two U.S. Senate candidates — Gov. John Hoeven in North Dakota and former congressman Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania — plus five U.S. House candidates. That list included two Pennsylvanians, Tim Burns (Pa.-12) and Pat Meehan (Pa.-7), as well as Charles Djou of Hawaii, Robert Dold of Illinois, and Sean Duffy of Wisconsin. Foreshadowing future support efforts, Pawlenty also spoke highly of GOP gubernatorial candidates like Pennsylvania’s Tom Corbett, Ohio’s John Kasich, and Oklahoma’s Mary Fallin. After 30 minutes of to-and-fro with participants, T-Paw tube clicked off. National Review Online caught up with the governor for some post-Facebook analysis, just before he hurried off to a Minnesota Wild hockey game. “We had a few technical issues, but it’s a new adventure,” Pawlenty says. “The spirit behind the town hall is to hear from people and to have people hear from you. We took that intent and setting and exponentially expanded it with technology. Now people can connect with a candidate or policy leader, and with each other, in a very convenient, easy, and user-friendly way. It’s a tremendous tool that unleashes the power of the people to be involved.” It also gives him the power to introduce lesser-known Republicans to a national audience. In that sense, he said the medium influenced tonight’s message, and which endorsements to announce. “Hoeven is someone I know personally,” Pawlenty says. “He’s my neighbor up by Minnesota. Toomey is someone who has the potential of being a transformative figure for the conservative movement in America. We did a fundraiser for him in Minneapolis. But it is our House race selections that are most important. These are all ‘young guns’ — mostly folks who aren’t well-known and lacking huge national followings and networks. We see them as people that can win, as candidates who have the capacity to be future conservative leaders. The established candidates already have a lot of help. This was to raise the young guns’ profiles.” Pawlenty adds that his web operation is just beginning, and that he has been an active user of social-networking tools for the last couple years. “I used to do more Twitter, but I have an active Facebook page for the PAC which I review on a daily basis,” he says. Nevertheless, despite his active online profile, don’t expect the governor to comment on your wall, since he says he does not hold a personal Facebook account, “mostly because of my schedule and the little time I’d have to maintain it.” “Social media is the future,” Pawlenty says, rushing to see the puck drop. “For generations younger than me, it is the main avenue of communication. Anyone who wants to reach out and help to grow a movement has to adapt and become adept with these tools.”
10:40 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
With an increasing attempt by the left to paint Tea Party protestors as racist loons, it becomes of great importance to identify those who purport to represent conservative values, but in reality are nothing more than radical individuals. As NewsBusters has previously reported, liberal Web sites – particularly Talking Points Memo (TPM) and the Huffington Post – have continually cited the Tea Party links of one Dale Robertson. Why? Because he further promotes the concept of the tea partier as racist. Robertson once demonstrated a level of racial ignorance that boggles the mind by being photographed with a sign reading “Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = N***ar”. But the reality is that Robertson has predominantly self-described links to the Tea Party movement, while legitimate factions of the movement have been trying to distance themselves from the man. His claims of influence within the Tea Party have turned out to be mildly embellished. Now, it turns out his web of tales is growing ever more tangled. Tommy Christopher of Mediaite recently interviewed Robertson, in which he claims that the sign that made him famous for the wrong reasons was simply a fake. As Mediaite reports: “The misspelled n-word appears to have been duct-taped over the original sign, which Robertson claims read ‘Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = Slave.’ He says he never taped anything over the original sign, nor did anyone else. He says the photo must be a fake.” This account is very different from an e-mail conversation (transcribed below) that I had with Mr. Robertson in early January. The question of accuracy was posed a couple of different ways, most notably because I had originally believed myself that the image had to be a fake. After all, I thought, nobody could be stupid enough to hold up a sign like that. However, in response to this question: “Is the picture doctored to make the sign say that, or is it accurate?” Robertson had this response: “It is easy to take the mob mentality and make accusations. This comment was taken from Webster Dictionary , from Ron Dellums a Liberal/Socialist Democrat. It means politically unrepresented . However, we are so interested in hating that we can’t see this is not referring to a person, but Americans in general. In particularly, myself.” As you can see, Robertson never mentions that the original sign had supposedly used the alternate word ‘slave.’ While it may very well have been below the taped over sign, he is clearly referring to the more offending phrase. In fact, he goes out of his way to defend use of the n-word by citing a dictionary reference. Not to mention, the question clearly asked if the photo was doctored or faked, and Robertson responds in full explanation mode. Had this image been faked, the response should flatly have been ‘yes, the image was altered’ or ‘no, that is not what the sign actually said’. He further acknowledges the presence of the word on the sign by explaining why it was misspelled: “The misspelling was intentional for the Educational Elite, who are vexed and gladly jump into the face of the less fortunate to proclaim we are idiots.” Why explain the misspelling at all if the photo was faked, and why have an explanation if someone else put the word there? As Robertson states early on, “First of all I’m an enemy of both Major political parties.” More accurately, he is an enemy of common sense. – Please join my page on Facebook .
10:40 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Jason Mattera is the guy you better get familiar with quickly if you haven’t already. Famous for ambushing Democratic congressmen and asking them straight forward questions that still make their heads explode, Jason has advanced conservative online guerilla journalism ably. And now he’s my counter-part at our sister publication, Human Events. Jason is going to be helping Tom Winter over at Human Events and largely overseeing HE’s online efforts. I’m adding him to our twitter feed here so you’ll be seeing him some on the front page too. Congrats and welcome, Jason!
10:16 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
President Obama got some good publicity today by purporting to open up offshore areas for oil exploration and development. But is his announcement really a step forward for our economy? The Institute for Energy Research doesn’t think so: This is a huge step backward for America’s energy security. Prior to today’s announcement, the vast majority of OCS areas were open for business. No longer. Today, while President Obama may have stated his support for increased energy development in the Eastern Gulf (which requires congressional action) and the Southern Atlantic (which he’ll study over the next year), he also announced that he would delay the development of the energy resources off Virginia’s coast and lock up vast resources off the Alaskan coast. Additionally, those who cheer the President’s newfound support for domestic energy resources should remember that the very same President’s FY 2011 budget proposal includes upwards of $36 billion in new oil and natural gas taxes, which will discourage domestic production, especially in areas like the Southern Atlantic that have little to no existing infrastructure. While today’s rhetoric made for a good news cycle, the policy is not a step forward, but a huge leap backward. Thomas Pyle, IER’s President, adds: Just as he did in his State of the Union Address, President Obama cited the imperative of offshore energy exploration. But words alone will do nothing to move this country’s energy policy forward in a meaningful way. It’s similar to his announcement on nuclear loan guarantees–the President talked a good game, then eliminated funding for the only nuclear waste repository in the nation. … In 2008, when Congress and then-President Bush retired the decades-old moratorium on the safe and environmentally sound practice of producing energy miles off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, the American people, and our economy, scored a huge victory. Unfortunately, what President Obama outlined today puts part of that moratorium back in place. Kicking the energy can further down the road is not a change in policy. Canada drills for oil in the North Atlantic. Cuba, Brazil, and Venezuela produce energy in the water to our South. The Russians do the same to our West. Yet, America, the most technologically advanced nation in the world, with the most stringent environmental policies on the books, remains the only nation that imposes burdensome regulations and endless streams of red tape on domestic production. Americans want to stop embargoing our own oil. The president’s plan expands that existing embargo, and Americans will pay the price. When you cut through the hoopla, here is what Obama’s announcement added up to: * Cancelled five lease sales off the Alaska coast that were planned over the next 2 years. One of the areas is estimated to hold up to 77 billion barrels of oil, or more than 3 times US reserves. * A study of the southern Atlantic OCS, with the findings due back next year….no leasing. * Delayed a planned lease sale off Virginia until at least 2012. UPDATE: Sarah Palin sees it the same way.
10:14 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Many millions of Americans regard the Democrats’ takeover of health care not just as bad public policy, but as illegitimate government action. This is partly, but not entirely, due to the chicanery through which the legislation was adopted. The conventional wisdom is that voters don’t care about process, but Obamacare, as Byron York notes, is an exception to the rule: A new Gallup poll shows that a majority of Americans believes Democrats abused their power by using procedural shortcuts and controversial parliamentary tactics to pass the new national health care makeover. … The poll asked, “Regardless of whether you favored or opposed the health care legislation Congress passed this past week, do you think the methods the Democratic leaders in Congress used to get enough votes to pass this legislation were an abuse of power or were an appropriate use of power by the party that controls the majority in Congress?” The results: 53 percent say the Democrats’ methods were an abuse of power, while 40 percent say they were appropriate. The basic message of polls across a wide variety of subjects is that the Democrats have lost independent voters. We see that again here: Breaking down the results by party, 86 percent of Republicans say the Democrats abused their power, while 58 percent of independents agree. Nineteen percent of Democrats say their own leaders abused their power…. Why do voters suddenly care about process? Maybe the conventional wisdom is wrong. More likely, I think, is that this indicates how closely most Americans have followed the Democrats’ attempt to take over health care.
10:02 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
At PJTV, Glenn Reynolds and Randy Barnett discuss the constitutionality of Obamacare’s individual mandate. A number of states, among others, are poised to litigate that issue. Do they have a chance? My instinct is to be highly skeptical. Our courts have justified pretty much anything the federal government has undertaken involving any kind of commercial transaction under the interstate commerce clause. In order to lose that battle, Congress has just about had to go out of its way to define legislation in a way that excludes interstate commerce, like regulating firearms within so many feet of a school. What this reflects is that we, as a society, have stopped taking seriously the idea that the federal government is a government of limited powers. In this respect, I think the courts have followed, rather than led. But maybe the tide is turning. The Tea Party movement is at heart a call for limited government and a restoration of the Constitution. With the unprecedented accumulation of federal power taking place in the Obama administration, there is a growing sense that a final battle over the proper role of our national government must be fought. So who knows? Maybe the case for limited government has a chance.
9:45 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
Quinnipiac University released a new poll on the Ohio Governor’s race that has caused a stir. It shows Governor Ted Strickland, Democrat, ahead of former Congressman John Kasich, Republican, while previous polling showed the reverse. The swing is large at first glance. Should Ohio Democrats be excited? Should Ohio Republicans panic? Let’s unpack this. First off, the poll itself. Strickland 43, Kasich 38, MoE 2.5. The pool was of registered voters. I come up with a 15% likelihood that Kasich is ahead. Small but not at all negligible. How does this compare with previous polls? PPP on the 23rd showed much the opposite: Strickland 37, Kasich 42, MoE 3.9%. Pool is listed as “Ohio voters,” which I’m taking to mean registered voters. Model result: 73% chance Kasich is ahead. Before that, on the 8th, Rasmussen polled likely voters and got Strickland 38, Kasich 49, MoE 4.5. Kasich gets an 88% likelihood of being ahead. This to me looks like it could be a legitimate shift, as it’s putting Strickland on the other side of the tipping point, but not giving him too large of a lead suddenly. Additionally, the PPP poll did show movement away from Kasich, which the Quinnipiac poll merely continues. But at the same time it is reading the opposite of the previous two polls in this race, so I’d like to see another poll before making any conclusions. If Kasich leads in the next poll, then we dismiss the PPP poll entirely as a statistical anomaly. If Strickland leads again, then we conclude that the last month has seen a steady slide away from Kasich, because the chance of two consecutive outliers is only 1/400, which is probably too small to take seriously. I would need to see a large body of data discrediting Quinnipiac’s methodology before preemptively dismissing the poll as wrong, though. Crossposted from Unlikely Voter
9:37 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
We still don’t know for sure what demands President Obama presented to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu last week in Washington, but based on reports that have “trickled in,” the Jerusalem Post offers a plausible compilation. According to the JPost, the demands include: stopping Jewish construction in east Jerusalem for four months, not proceeding with plans to build in the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood, stopping the demolition of Arab homes in east Jerusalem and opening a Palestinian commercial office there. The US president has also reportedly demanded that Israel agree to talk about the core issues of the conflict – borders, settlements, Jerusalem and refugees – during proximity talks, as well as to release Palestinian security prisoners so as to bolster PA President Mahmoud Abbas, to turn over parts of the West Bank in Areas B and C, currently under joint Israel-Palestinian or complete Israel security control, to the PA, and to lift the blockade of the Gaza Strip. Thus, it appears that the U.S. president not only wants to dictate to Israel the conditions under which it can build apartments in Jewish neighborhoods in its capital city, but also the terms under which it can protect its security. For example, Obama demands that Israel release terrorists in order to bolster the PA President. But why should Israel bolster a man whose popularity, in Obama’s view, depends on taking credit for freeing anti-Israeli terrorists? And why should Israel defer to any American on such matters as which parts of the West Bank can safely be turned over to the enemy and whether it is time to lift a blockade on a territory that has been a constant source of attacks on Israel? It is the fundamental right of every sovereign country to decide for itself how to protect the security of its citizens. Netanyahu should have rejected Obama’s attempt to usurp that right on the spot. And he should realize that peace negotiations are a bad idea as long as they are overseen by an American president who believes he can dictate to Israel. Having delivered his noxious set of demands, Obama is now attempting, at least in public, to dial down the heat. Thus, he has characterized the current dispute as a “disagreement among friends about how to move forward.” This is brazenly disingenuous even by Obama’s standards. Friends don’t disgaree with friends by presenting them with demands nor, if they did, would they present the demands while attempting to embarrass and humiliate the “friend.” Obama also declared that “It’s not just on the Israeli side, I’ve been very clear that the Palestinians have to take steps.” But has Obama presented concrete demands to the PA that it make tangible concessions to Israel? If so, I have not heard about them. Obama concluded that “my commitment, my personal commitment, to Israel’s security is unwavering,” Let’s judge this claim by Obama’s standards. He has demanded that Netanyahu not just express his commitment to the “peace process,” but also that he take concrete steps to prove his good faith. Israel should similarly demand that Obama demonstrate his alleged commitment to Israel’s security with concrete steps — steps relating to Iran, for example. But these equitable considerations are irrelevant right now. All that matters for the moment is whether Israel will capitulate to Obama. The Jerusalem Post reports that Washington and Jerusalem may be close to an accommodation. The accommodation might consist of Israel saving face by agreeing privately, rather than in public, to a housing freeze in Jerusalem. The White House would then pressure the Palestinians and the Arab league to return to negotiations and to take “confidence-building measures” toward Israel. As I have said , this sort of approach may tempt Netanyahu on the theory that the Palestinians and the Arab League will fail to step up, and Obama will take away the lesson that it is Israel’s adversaries who are unreasonable. Unfortunately, Obama’s takeaway is more likely to be that he can bully Netanyahu at will.
9:28 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
Nothing in this world is certain, except death and taxes. And war. At least according to Victor Davis Hanson. In VDH’s first 2010 appearance on Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson , he shares the thesis of his latest book with us, which is that war is the father of us all. The issues discussed are varied. Everything from the American style of war and its ineffectiveness in Iraq, George W. Bush’s missed opportunity to gain leftist support, and why Obama gets away with continuing Bush’s military strategy. Check out this video below for highlights, or watch the full episode here .
9:19 pm | Posted in Conservative Bloggers News Feed | Read More »
It won’t come as a shock to too many people, but Pelosi and company, along with the Obama administration approving grant requests, are funneling money into Democratic districts and over twice the rate of the Republican districts.
From the National Review Online, comes details of this latest abuse of power by the Democrats:
Second: On average, Democratic [...]
9:05 pm | Posted in All Whoppers, Congress, Featured Articles, General, Newly Added Stories | Read More »