READ BETWEEN THE LINES: What Obama was really saying at the 2012 White House Correspondents Dinner.


04.30.2012

What was once considered a great way to promote journalism education, the 2012 White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD) was turned into a joke on everyone, including Obama himself.

Jimmy Kimmel’s Introduction 

Jimmy Kimmel leaped to the stage  like  a joker juggling balls of fire and launching them at people in the audience for 24 long minutes.

Anybody who was anybody was knocked down in a form of deprecating humor, including Obama himself with Kimmel greeting Obama with “Shalom”  and continuing throughout his speech throwing one liners at Obama while encouraging him to legalize marijuana and urging people to not engage in a nuclear war with Iran and demoralizing Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netaynuhu.

In mostly bad humor, Jimmy Kimmel had a few good ones liners against Obama.  “Remember, when the Country rallied around in the hopes of a better tomorrow, that was hilarious. That was your best one yet.”  With Obama shaking his head up and down while mouthing the words, “I know.”  and ” There’s a term for someone like Barrack Obama, not 2 terms but…’  as well as his only insightful comment of the night where he states that America “use to march but now we occupy.”

Hot Mic Alert

During a slight pause in the momentum of the evening, Jay Carney (Obama’s Press Secretary) rushes up to the stage and speaks into the microphone asking for Obama’s microphone to be turned off because it was “hot” (aka live).

Another  momentary pause.  Obama recently had a hot mic on him when he spoke with the Russians saying that he needs more time to succumb to their demands since it is election season.

Obviously, that was an attempt to make a difficult situation during election season into a joke.  As the old saying goes, when in times of deflecting, laugh and point fingers. Obama does both exceptionally well.

“Nobody would notice.’ 

Tonight was no exception. Obama’s voice booms into the room before his physical arrival, singing off key and slamming celebrities attending the event with a dose of humility by bashing himself on his grayed hair with an alarming statement,  “Right now, Im like a 5 on a Just for Mens scale. I think I could go to 6 and nobody would notice.”

Oddly, this is a view that many people feel Obama acts on a Presidential day to day basis with concern to domestic and foreign affairs. Case in point- Obama’s Unconstitutional invasion into Libya without Congressional approval and violating the Wars Powers Act or slipping a government mandated health insurance clause in a 2000+ bill of Obamacare.

Obama’s jokes about his public perception.

After Obama finished making fun of himself (which, come to find out will be much needed as a forerunner to his speech)- he walks onto an American flag-less stage and proceeds to be 2 faced. Literally.  He openly and warmly greets the same people that, two minutes, he called out.   Almost everyone laughs, as if it is hilarious.

Obama then launches into the concerns with his public image and instead of correcting or even justifying his behavior, he openly mocks the concerns by “reintroducing himself to the American People” by playing upon his poor approval rating  and public perception.

Obama jokingly comments that people blame him for blaming too many of his problems on Former President Bush and then, in the next sentence, blames Former President Bush for initiating the slippery slope of blame.

The entire speech was a series of deliberate mixed matches in speech in a more than obvious display of showmanship and acting ability.

Obama’s ‘reintroducing’ himself to the White House correspondents (journalists). 

While Obama  was ‘reintroducing himself’ in attempts to erase a negative image with his Presidency, Obama forcefully yet flippantly claims that his mother was born in Kansas, his father was born in Kenya and that he was born in Hawaii.  Obama’s deceptive smile while speaking and literal wink– left most of the audience laughing as if Obama was a stand up comedian in a past life.

Of course, people stop finding the humor in things when it looks like they are being ganged up on so, eventually, Obama turned the knife on himself and showed pictures of himself 4 years ago with a winning smile and a halo angelic effect and then 4 years later as a gray hair ridden downcast man (in attempts at a sympathy vote) and then in another 4 years, his looks were compared to the actor,Morgan Freeman. Which, again, resulted in laughter.

Obama jokes about the excessive and needless spending of the GSA.

Then, Obama jokes that he is a glad that the WHCD was not ran by the GSA (General Services Administrators) who was known for a lavish $830,000 price tag billed at the taxpayers expense.  Wasteful spending is not a joke and is part of the reason why our Country is in the serious financial difficulties that we are currently facing.

Backhanded compliments 

Obama had a way of giving out backhanded compliments, showing his ability to twist words into genuine and warm sounding compliments.  For example, congratulating the Huffington Post for winning the Pulitzer…. for not having authentic news,  linking to other websites and having a ‘great’ business model.

Obama admits to eating dog meat

Then, in an incredibly grotesque response that even left Michelle Obama looking incredulous, Obama slams Sarah Palin asking “Whats the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull?” with the answer being, “that pit bulls taste delicious.. with a little soy sauce” which was an obvious attempt at humor at the admittance of Obama eating dog meat in the wilderness in attempts to take on the characteristics of the poor, forsaken dog, in Obama’s book, “Dreams of My Father”.

Then in a sense at another attempt at humor on a sickening subject of Obama eating the dog with his father and in attempts to laugh at himself (thus validating, all rumors that he really did eat a dog), Obama declares, “my step father always told me that it was a boy eat dog world out there!”

It wasn’t funny the first time and its definitely not funny the second time. Where is PETA’s outcry in this horrendous act of animal cruelty?

A dash of class warfare to add to the mix 

An Obama speech wouldn’t be complete without a dash of class warfare. Obama further cements Romney’s perception as a 1% thus engaging Obama in his class warfare tactics by mentioning that Romney would have bought the hotel where the dinner was being held as a ‘fixer upper’, then again when saying that due to Romney having 2 degrees from Harvard, he is classified a ‘snob’ and then again, when Obama stated that Romney went to see the newly released movie, the Hunger Games (where people brutally attack each other for corporate sponsorship) in to which Obama commented sarcastically, “I bet this was a change of pace for him” and that “I didnt see it, there was not enough class warfare (in it) for me.”

Which again, resulted in everybody rip roaring Obama-is-so-funny laughter that would pierce your heart if you heard it first hand.

Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

Afterward, Obama mock defended himself against a  false ‘Woof PAC’,  attacking Obama for mandating a dogs right to ride on the roof of  a car,  the ‘European dog socialism’, more government handouts, more government dependency, indoctrinating our children and the left wing social agenda::: all major concerns of the American People, Obama is laughing it off with a wave of his hands, a winning smile and a wink in the eye.

Literally. Obama was winking so much at the WHCD that you would think his contact lens was dry.  Obama’s leering smile and glimmer of mischief in his eye while he tells the American People exactly what he is going to do with his 2nd term while making it sound like a joke so that the White House Correspondents know how to spin it for Obama was sickening and an obvious front on the intelligence of American People.

Obama’s admittance of a “secret agenda” during his last term in office.

Laughingly, Obama states that the Republicans think that he is going to “unleash some secret agenda for the next 4 years” in to which he leans into the microphone and says very deeply, almost demonically, “you’re absolutely right” which resulted in more laughter from the audience. How is this funny? Isn’t anybody concerned with Obama’s admittance that he has a secret agenda? Remember, behind every joke there is at least an ounce in Truth.

Then Obama jokes that with his first term, he finished the war on Iraq and with his 2nd term, his war will be on Christmas.  Is there anybody taking Obama on a literal basis or are they charmed like a snake in a basket?

Hook, line and sinker.  

Will the people see through the fog and realize that Obama just admitted what his radical tendencies will look like in a 2nd term or will they take the bait- hook, line and sinker?

With all these jokes being flung about as if we were in a comedy club, one begs the question to be asked- “who is really the punchline?”

Watch the 2012 White House Correspondence Dinner and comment below as to your thoughts!

Copyright (c) 04.30.2012. All rights reserved.

Advertisements

Best idea yet! Newt Gingrich implements his own “Lean Six Sigma”, scales back 1/3 of employees.


Have you ever had to jump over a hurdle?  Have you ever jumped over a hurdle with 100 pound weights? Which jump was easier?

That is the current modus operandi of Newt Gingrich’s campaign as he implements his own ‘Lean Six Sigma’ project and, as a result, scales back 1/3 of his staffers over the last week.

Lean Six Sigma is a  managerial concept of Lean and Six Sigma that results in the elimination of the 7 kinds of wastes (Defects, Overproduction, Transportation, Waiting, Inventory, Motion/Redundancy and Overprocessing) within goods and service at a rate of 3.4 defects per million opportunities.

Anybody familiar with Six Sigma, can vouch for it’s effectiveness.   Newt’s campaign team will now be leaner, stronger and more efficient than before as those 100 lbs weights were prohibiting him from jumping the hurdle.   Only the exceptional remain. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.

While there is the downfall of working with less, that’s not entirely a new concept to Gingrich’s campaign as his campaign has utilized fiscal responsibility in deciding to run a bare bones campaign and focus on big ideas.   While money is an issue as it is in every campaign- Gingrich’s campaign is equipped with creative thinkers who can use a little but get a lot in return. Look at South Carolina, North Florida, Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi.

What Gingrich lacks in money, he makes up for with creative thinking within his staff and hardcore dedication and support from his volunteers with many volunteers stepping up to do what the old staffers did- without pay. Many state that they are willing to volunteer because Newt is the “only experienced, conservative Choice” and that “it’s not about personal reward- it’s about doing what’s best for America”.

While political pundits are spinning one way, the reality- once again- is entirely different.  All terminations are unpleasant and unemployment is unfavorable but when you need the best, sometimes the rest have to fall away so you can rebuild your base to be more efficient and productive. That is exactly what Newt Gingrich is doing and this reorganization will propel Newt to the top of the pack by the Tampa Convention this August.

Copyright (c) March 28, 2012. All rights reserved.

Published in: on March 28, 2012 at 1:30 pm  Comments (9)  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Newt Gingrich- Strong and unwavering; marches towards the GOP Convention.


Newt on the taunting media and opponents 

As much as the establishment and opposing candidates are pushing for Newt to drop out and are determined to convince the People that Newt should quit, Newt remains absolute and is full throttle ahead to the Tampa, FL Convention.

When he was asked on CBS’s This Morning “under what circumstances” he would end his campaign before the convention, Gingrich responded: “Probably none.  I’ll be with you in Tampa. I have 176,000 donors at Newt.org. They want me to stay in the race.”

Later on Fox News’ Fox & Friends, Gingrich said voters in Illinois were telling him to stay in the race. “I think the people who are supporting me want to have sort of a Reagan-like visionary, a big ideas candidate,” he said.

But it’s not just Illinois, every state Newt stops at- he gets highly charged responses from people pleading with him to stay in the race.

Clear, Consistent, Conservative Choice

Denise Haywald, a Florida resident, agrees enthusiastically and explains why she is still involved in Newt’s campaign even though the Florida primary was  Jan 31, 2012.

“Newt is the clear, consistent, conservative choice. We need a strong conservative to balance out Obama’s socialistic spiral. In a time of economic peril, we cannot afford any more on the job training.  Newt is the only candidate who understands the nuts and bolts of the details of the Presidency and who has experience balancing the national budget for 4 straight years and bringing true entitlement reform.  The main objective is to beat Obama and Newt is, by far, the best debater, has the most  experience and the firmest backbone and voice needed to debate Obama.   Besides, Newt is the only candidate who has put Obama on the defensive and that position is long overdue.  No dispute, I stand with Newt!”

When will the media vet Santorum? 

When vetted to the same extent as Newt; the voters will see a number of concerning things (Discussed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX5YwME80cc and here: http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/9734-the-problems-with-rick-santorum.)  and his problem with women voters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-8zaEyvRno) that will make them rethink their reasons for siding with Santorum (especially since he is NOT the Anti-Romney candidate as he endorsed Mitt Romney and his ideas  in 2008: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu50Hb61jVQ and fall back on Newts’ experience in getting Conservative legislation passed. (A quality currently lacking in Congress).

Santorum himself and Democrats for Santorum are encouraging Democrats to vote for Santorum in the Open Primary States. 

Then there’s the whole issue of Santorum inviting Democrats via robocalls in Michigan and Ohio into the Republican Primary to vote for him knowing full well that they will vote for Obama in the general election.

In addition, there is also a campaign dubbed, ‘Operation Hilarity’ where Democrats are voting for Santorum in open primary states because they know that Obama will crush Santorum like a tin can in the debates. Watch an ad from ‘Democrats for Santorum”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9OXrnnmvdXg

United Against Romney

Let’s be real– it would  help Santorum if Newt stayed in the race (which he will despite all the questionable talk) because Romney’s wall street funded Super Pac will have to spend money aggressively, attacking both Newt and Santorum (their current modus operandi)  instead of just barreling Santorum with negative attack ads like Romney did to Newt during the Florida primary, where Romney spent $20 million in false, negative attack ads in efforts to blind the voters and knock Newt off message.

Newt agrees, “My view on that, is that the minute Romney has one opponent his Super PAC will drown that opponent in mud. That’s what happened to me in Iowa and Florida. It will eventually happen to Santorum and I think it is actually to our net advantage to keep Romney divided.”

Romney:  No negative ad is too costly! 

Meanwhile, Romney continues to spend money like he was printing it fresh off the press in attempts to cover his self proclaimed ‘progressive moderate’ record  (watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtCuLjq_v0E) and to mischaracterize Newt with millions of dollars in false and misleading political ads (in in attempts to have people vote for him as the Anti-Newt candidate) which makes one question if Romney would continue Obama’s title as a ‘big spender’.

Newt on why he remains determined and his thoughts on the cancellation of  the Georgia and Oregon Debate.

On a personal belief, Newt feels he has every need to stay in the race.  “There are a lot of things I don’t agree with Romney and Santorum on. I don’t have an obligation to automatically salute as a conservative somebody who is a progressive moderate and somebody who ran up $1.7 trillion in debt. ” says the Former Speaker of the House, “Besides, if all the candidates are afraid to debate me- how can we feel confident that they are capable of debating Obama?” asks Newt referring to the cancellation of the Georgia CNN debate and the recently cancelled Oregon PBS debate.

Just like the Energizer Bunny; Newt keeps going and going and…. 

And so Newt and his campaign marches on, much like President George Washington and his troops on Christmas Day in 1776 (Learn more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLUuiP5O7XA)  in pursuit of the Truth, Justice and to be a prime example of God’s Grace and Glory.

Time will tell who reigns as the ultimate victor but you can place your bets on Newt being a strong influence at the Tampa, FL Convention.

Copyright (c) March 16, 2012. All rights reserved.

Published in: on March 17, 2012 at 2:20 am  Comments (5)  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As predicted, Rick Santorum enters the 2012 Presidential race.


As predicted, Rick Santorum enters the 2012 Presidential race.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) began his presidential campaign Monday in Pennsylvania by highlighting the former  2 term senator’s working-class roots. relating to “average Americans” and decrying President Obama for “devaluing” the country’s culture while relating to his most heartfelt constituent base;

“Our American journey started here in Somerset County,” Santorum told the crowd. “My grandfather came to this county way back in 1927.”

Santorum said his grandfather left Italy despite living in a “beautiful, little idyllic town in the mountains, right down on a lake” out of concern over Benito Mussolini’s fascist regime.

Santorum commented this his grandfather was equipped with an idea of high quality living and was driven by the line of thought: “I will not stand for this,’ and so he left, and he came here …  and he started in the coal mines.”

Santorum seems to take after his grandfather in his continuing line of thought that Obama has;

“Not just devalued our moral currency but  he has also devalued our culture.”

With once again, the Santorum generation not standing for less than ideal living conditions.

Afterward, Rick Santorum’s 7 seven children joined them on the stage where Santorum astonishingly comments  outloud, “I am one blessed man!”

Yes, Santorum may be blessed but it is the American people who are blessed to have a Republican nominee who has an ability to  protect the santitcy of life and of God’s written marriage.

Copyright (c) June 6, 2011. All rights reserved.

Eye on 2012 predictions


I called Newt Gingrich jumping into the 2012 race as well  John Thune, Hayley Barbour and Mike Huckabee not running, then it dawned on me- I should create a blog on my 2012 predictions. 😀

Here are my newest 2012 predictions.

– Sarah Palin will NOT run for the Republican nomination.

– Jeb Bush will NOT run for the Republican nomination.

– Michele Bachmann will run for the Republican nomination.

– Rick Perry will run for the Republican nomination.

– Jon Huntsman Jr will run for the Republican nomination and place his headquarters in Florida.

– Im torn on Lt Col Allen West, I pray he runs but it seems to be up to the people in his district as Lt Col Allen West stated that he would run if his constituents supported him.

Copyright (c) 05.18.11. All rights reserved.

Exclusive Video, Commentary and Solution on Syria Sanctions and the Importance of Diplomacy.


Reports of the Syrian government forces killing more than 400 people since mid-March with hundreds missing, 1700+ protesters being detained over the past week and cutting off telephone lines and water/electricity supplies to the general area conjoining with Bashar al-Assad’s tanks and machine gunned armed Syrian security forces entering the city of Dara’a in attempt to quell the protesters has sparked a concern from many human rights activists.

It is important to note that there has been massive fighting in Syria with Bashar al-Assad imposing violence on his people ever since Libya started rioting a couple months ago. This type of violence is nothing new to the Syrian People.

Which leads me to the question- If we were to pick a human rights violation and looking to help Israel and her people;  why would we not engage war with Syria who borders Israel?  Wouldnt that be in our best interest?

Apparently, 4 European countries think so as France, Britain, Germany and Portugal have circulated a draft media statement to the Security Council that would strongly condemn the violence against peaceful demonstrators. Although sanctions were not specifically mentioned.

Lebanon, the only Arab member of the council, has very strong ties to Syria and diplomats said it is likely to oppose a council statement as may Russia, also a friend of Syria.

Good ol’ undecided China’s U.N. Ambassador Li Baodong said “we want to get engaged with everybody and try to find a solution and to push for a political solution.”

Turkey, Iraq and Jordan (Syria’s neighboring countries) have been eerily silent on the matter.

We’ll talk about US actions at the end of this Commentary.

Some nations are wanting the US to get involved but is that really the best thing for the US at a time where the US is already committed to 3 full blown wars and an outstanding financial debt of $14.3 Trillion? Can we really afford yet another war?

The George W. Bush administration had, clearly, toughened relations in Syria — imposing new sanctions as Assad ran operations against U.S. troops in Iraq and was implicated in the murder of the Lebanese prime minister — so it will be a little more challenging to see how a non-violent shake up can play out but diplomacy and peace is possible and probable, if the US handles this correctly.

In responding to this crisis in Syria, the Obama administration is pulled by two conflicting currents.

First, Obama appears to be cautious like Syria- much like he was with Egypt- in the fear that the opposition leaders would be worse that the current situation and since the majority of Syria is terrorist based; that could prove to be detrimental to not only the US but also Israel.

(Note: The terrorist infiltration case also runs true in Libya where it is a known fact that Al Qaeda has infiltrated the leaders of the Libyan opposition and Obama has stated that he wants a regime change- so Obama’s foreign policy stance his, once again, inconsistent and much to be desired.)

May I caution the Obama administration about policing the World and encouraging regime changes when he has little information on the opposition parties (Libya anyone?) and little leverage to control events in a land very foreign to us.

Second,  there is resentment running amok as the violence escalates in the Syrian streets and the contradiction of US actions in Libya. The mentality that I predicted would form, “The US helped out the opposition in Libya- why will the US not help us?!” is indeed taking place.

It is a belief of many that Assad is no reformer. Rather, he is an ally of Iran, a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah. So the administration has another chance to “fight the good fight”.

Honestly? If the US was get involved in another war (I wish we wouldnt; we have enough problems and debt at home as it is) but if we were to get involved- I would RATHER get involved in Syria instead of Libya.

But, first above everything else, I would work on transitioning a new US Ambassador to Syria because; obviously, the current one is not doing a very good job.

We need to be EXTREMELY careful as Hezbollah could utilize  this opportunity to capitalize in Lebanon and work to consolidate its control and upset the status quo.

The fall of the Assads and the emergence of a more radicalized Sunni regime in Damascus could raise questions in Israel about the viability of the 1974 disengagement agreement on the Golan Heights, which has made the Syrian-Israeli border the quietest in the Middle East. A Sunni regime would also likely raise tensions with Iraq’s Shia-dominated government.

Personally, I think that the US should deploy another communicator over to assist the US Ambassador to Syria because obviously; he’s not doing a very good job getting a message of “Peace and Prosperity” across.

We should not under any circumstances remove our ambassador from Syria. I realize that there was not an ambassador there before Obama placed him but now, since it has been established, revoking such a position could prove to backfire as we need as many “peaceful” eyes and ears near ground zero.

If that fails to work, THEN and ONLY then; should we place an asset freeze and travel restrictions on the Syrian president and close allies as we have exhausted all means of diplomacy.

After the asset freeze and travel restrictions are placed and if  Bashar al-Assad is continuing to use violence- then we should consider how else we can resolve the matter.

Regime change should only be pushed IF we know WHO we are supporting. We already made that mistake in Libya- let’s not support terrorists again. This would be especially dangerous as Syria borders Israel and would give terrorists direct access to wage war with the holy land.

I feel that diplomacy is possible within Syria but our current way of going about it is not working; let’s focus on reshaping our diplomacy efforts before we consider freezing assets and travel restrictions; especially use of force as that should be our last resort.

US-Syria communication is blocked and we must take steps to get the communication flowing in the right direction before the US gets forceful.

Perhaps the US can talk to the UN Human Rights Council and see what type of diplomatic measures are available within the UN.

NOTE TO OBAMA: Please get Congressional approval before invading Syria so we can comply with the US Constitution as well as join efforts with other nations so that we are not singled out.

Copyright (c) April 27, 2011. All rights reserved.

Where IS the President? 2011 stopgap and the lack of 2012 Budget Resolution and a Pres/VP to preside over it all.


House Republicans escalated pressure on President Obama to become directly involved in the budget debate on Capitol Hill, criticizing the White House for allowing a vacuum of leadership on the issue.

“Where is the president?” Majority Leader Eric Cantor asked in a press conference Wednesday morning, repeating the refrain 5 times in the 10-minute briefing.

Negotiations on a spending bill to fund the government through September have hit a wall in the 6 days since Obama dispatched Vice President Biden to meet with congressional leaders at the Capitol.

What I find outright offense and almost comical that Obama named Vice President Biden to lead the negotiations only days before he left for a 5 day trip to Finland, Moldova and Russia.

The Vice President is not even in the country; how can he be expected to provide leadership over the budget discussions?

What’s worse is that new White House press secretary (who I am starting to loathe more than Fmr. Press Sec Robert Gibbs) refused to identify who was negotiating for the administration in Biden’s absence.

You know what else is interesting?

The Federal Budget Process begins the First Monday in February of each year and should be concluded by October 1, in which the Presdient submits his proposal which serves as a “Starting Point” for Congress to consider.

In order to do so, the Budget Committees are required to present their Budget Resolution for consideration by April 1. Today is March 9th 2011. Less than a month away.

We have not decided on a budget for 2011, let alone are anywhere even near setting the resolution for 2012.

I will be participating in a teleconference call with Budget Committee Chair Representative Paul Ryan and FreedomWorks Chair, Dick Armey tonight and will be listening closely to how they view our 2011 budget (which  I think will be made up of majority stopgap/continuing resolutions), the lack of a 2012 budget resolution and to figure out who is really presiding over the Budget hearings.

Stay tuned to Heart of America for the latest and the greatest.

Copyright (c) March 9, 2011. All rights reserved.

Trials to resume in GITMO while Obama looks to move trials to US soil.


President Barack Obama’s decision to resume military trials for detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, will open the door for the prosecution there of several suspected 9/11 conspirators, including alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Obama’s order, which reverses his move two years ago to halt new trials, has reignited arguments over the legality of the military commissions.

Fierce congressional opposition to trying Mohammed and other Guantanamo detainees in the United States, which would essentially threaten the safety of Americans by bringing their terrorist to their front door,  left Obama with few options in which he defaulted on his campaign promise of closing down Guantanamo within a year of his coming into office.

Currently, a handful of detainees have been charged in connection with the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America, including Mohammed. However, the charges were dismissed following Obama’s decision to halt military commissions in January 2009.

The first Guantanamo trial likely to proceed under Obama’s new order would involve Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the alleged mastermind of the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole. Al-Nashiri, a Saudi of Yemeni descent, has been imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2006.

Defense officials have said that of around 170 detainees at Guantanamo, about 80 are expected to face trial by military commission.

More than two dozen detainees have been charged there, and so far six detainees have been convicted and sentenced. They include Ali Hamza al-Bahlul, Osama bin Laden’s media specialist, who told jurors he had volunteered to be the 20th Sept. 11 hijacker. He is serving a life sentence at Guantanamo.

Meanwhile, the first Guantanamo detainee tried in civilian court – in New York – was convicted in November on just one of more than 280 charges that he took part in the al-Qaida bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. That case ignited strident opposition to any further such trials.

Monday’s announcement also included a process for periodically reviewing the status of detainees held at the prison.

That’s an effort to resolve one of the central dilemmas at Guantanamo Bay: what to do when the government thinks a prisoner is too dangerous to be released but either can’t prove it in court or doesn’t want to reveal national security secrets in trying to prosecute him? The answer, the White House said, is that the U.S. will hold those men indefinitely, without charges, but will review their cases periodically.

While I am all for prosecuting terrorists in a timely manner– what happened to the law “innocent until proven guilty?” We cant just hold people indefinitely without any condemnation. Think of the slippery slope that could create!

However, I am in full support of keeping GITMO open as stated in my blogs, Keep GITMO open! and Block federal funds to move GITMO detainees to the US as long as the holdings and hearings are done in a respectful and quick manner.

On a side note,  it strikes me as odd that President Obama is reopening GITMO for trials yet in the same breath states that he is seeking to overturn a bill that was signed into law in January blocking federal funds that would move GITMO detainees to the US.

Proving to me once again, that in order to learn what is really going on- one must watch President Obama’s actions as his words tend to be the complete opposite of what he is actually doing.

Copyright (c) March 8, 2011. All rights reserved.

A preview of the 2011 budget freeze. Rating: D+.


President Obama will unveil a $3.7 trillion budget request this morning  which the administration estimates would reduce the deficit by $1.1 trillion over the next decade.

2/3 of that reduction would come from spending cuts through a 5-year freeze in discretionary spending first announced in Obama’s State of the Union address.

Tax increases are responsible for the other 1/3 of the reduction, including a cap on itemized reductions for wealthier taxpayers and the elimination of tax breaks for oil and gas companies.

The budget also includes calls for new spending that Obama says will ” help the U.S. compete in a global economy”. The budget proposes $148 billion in research and development investments and would make permanent a tax credit for research and development as well as launch a $50 billion in spending for transportation.

The budget includes no proposals to curb entitlement spending, which accounts for much of a growing budget deficit estimated at $1.645 trillion this year by the administration. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated a $1.5 trillion deficit for this year.

The budget comes as House Republicans prepared for a vote this week on a measure funding the government through the end of September that would reduce current spending by $61 billion compared to 2010 enacted levels.

The White House has argued that cutting spending too much this year could harm an economy struggling to rebound from the recession while the rest of America argues that NOT cutting spending could harm our current and future generations.

The White House assumes the deficit will drop by $500 billion in 2012 to $1.1 trillion because of the end of an extension of federal unemployment benefits and the end of a payroll tax deduction included in December’s tax deal. (Please note, none of which was under the hand of President Obama- he is simply letting them expire).

The budget also assumes that Congress and the president will allow taxes on families with income above $250,000 to expire, which would bring the deficit down to $768 billion. (Please note, none of which was under the hand of President Obama- he is simply letting them expire).

However, despite the efforts at spending reduction, the total national debt would still continue to grow from $14.5 billion in 2010 to $24.6 billion in 2012, the budget projects.

This would bring debt held by the public up to 77% of gross domestic product.

The new budget would reduce deficits by only a quarter of the amount proposed by the presidential debt commission in December. The president’s debt commission’s mix of spending cuts and tax increases reduced deficits by $4 trillion over 10 years. President Obama has thumbed his nose at their recommendation and is relying on his version that has less savings over 10 years.

While the budget does not propose long-term reforms to Medicare and Social Security, it does propose paying for a two-year extension of the so-called Medicare “doc fix” by new cost-control measures that would generate supposedly $62 billion in savings.

Congress regularly blocks the reduction in payments to doctors under Medicare reform and the cost of doing so has not been offset, adding to the deficit.

The budget request is the first salvo in the fight over 2012 spending. The Republican House is expected to produce its own budget resolution by April 2011. That resolution has to be agreed to by the Senate in order to become the official guide to spending in 2012, but is not signed by the president.

The 2012 battle is beginning even as Democrats and Republicans are still trying to sort out appropriations spending for 2011, which is authorized under a continuing resolution that runs out March 4, less than 3 weeks away.  I cannot stress the importance of, at the very least, passing a Defense Appropriation. You can read more about my plea by clicking here: https://theheartofamerica.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/pentagondefense-appropriations-bill-needs-to-be-passed-asap/

The House Republican spending proposal for fiscal year 2011, released on Friday, points at the fights Obama is likely to encounter with his budget request.

Besides the research and development spending, Obama would maintain Pell Grants for college students at their current levels and invest in high-speed rail so that 80 percent of the U.S. population would have access in 25 years. Two subjects, which surprisingly, I agree with him.

To me, it appears that Obama is simply freezing spending (aside of a few minor cuts)  and then adding on top of it then raising taxes to compensate the majority of the cost. This is not what the American public wants. We want a spending cut, not a spending freeze.

While I applaud Obama’s new “initiatives”, I rate the 2011 budget a D+ because I feel like he has intentionally mislead the people by indiciating that he is “reducing” the budget by $400 billion over the next decade by not enacting “proposed” spending and for not taking serious strides in reducing wasteful programs (such as welfare and medicaid/medicaid).

Here are the outlines of his budget in a bullet list view:

Innovation

  • $148 billion for R&D overall; robust investment in biomedical research at NIH ($32 billion, a $740 million increase over 2010 enacted level, post-transfers); more than doubles energy efficiency research, development, and deployment funds; and continues our efforts to double investments in key basic research. (Details to follow once full budget is released).
  • Elimination of 12 tax breaks to oil, gas, and coal companies will raise $46 billion over 10 years to help pay for programs to reach these goals. (Details to follow once full budget is released).
  • Simplifies, expands, and makes permanent R&D tax credit.
  • Establishes 20 new Economic Growth Zones, hard-hit areas that will receive expanded tax incentives to spur investment and employment. (Details to follow once full budget is released).

Educate

  • Maintains maximum Pell Grant award, helping 9 million students afford college.
  • Eliminating year-round Pell and graduate student in-school loan subsidy.
  • Consolidates 38 K-12 programs into 11 that emphasize competition and evidence of what works, while also eliminating 13 education programs outright. (Details to follow once full budget is released).
  • Expands the Race to the Top concept to early childhood education, school districts, university funding, and job training. (Details to follow once full budget is released).
  • Prepares 100,000 new science, technology, engineering, and math teachers.

Defense

  • Cuts $78 billion from the Pentagon’s spending plan over the next five years
  • Overall defense spending for 2012 is more than 5 percent below the 2011 request.

Healthcare

  • Pays for the first two-years of the “doc fix” (Details to follow once full budget is released).

Tax Changes

  • Limiting the rate for the Alternative Minimum Tax for 3 years at which high-income earners can itemize tax deductions. (Details to follow once full budget is released).
  • Lowers the corporate tax rate (Details to follow once full budget is released).

More Freezes

  • Civilian Worker Pay Freeze (Details to follow once full budget is released).

Pay for Success (Please note)

  • Encourages new “pay for success”  bonds in areas where government programs have too often failed. (Details to follow once full budget is released).

Perhaps my rating of the 2011 budget will increase once the budget is released in full this morning but with my understanding of the proposed budget and analysis of Obama’s habit of tax increases for “innovation” with complete ignorance on cutting spending, I doubt it.

Keep an eye to The Heart of America for commentary on Obama’s released 2011 budget, coming soon.

Copyright (c) February 14, 2011. All rights reserved.

Allen West’s CPAC speech.


Published in: on February 13, 2011 at 9:14 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,