Project Gunrunner sounds remarkably like Hollywood fiction. Another episode of this real life saga is the victim of a silly and melodramatic naming convention. But ‘fast and furious’ also has real life victims of the kind that cause the public to be furious over a continuous stream of government failures. The idea that the very guns government operatives allowed to be acquired by Mexican drug cartels may be responsible for the death of at least one US law enforcement officer amplifies the outrage.

Michelle Malkin
Project Gunrunner: Obama’s Stimulus-Funded Border Nightmare

First, some background. Like so many border programs run amok, Project Gunrunner was the spawn of Beltway bipartisanship. It was established in 2005 as a pilot project under the Bush administration and run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The intended goal of the program’s sting operations: stop illicit firearms trafficking along the Southwest border through close surveillance of undercover gun purchases and coordinated intervention with Mexico. The deadly result: federally sanctioned gunwalking of high-powered weapons from U.S. officials right into the hands of drug cartel killers.

Calling it Obama’s nightmare might be unfair given Malkin’s account that this ‘was the spawn of Beltway bipartisanship’ unless the project under the Bush administration was an entirely different animal than under the Obama administration.

Malkin also covers the story on her blog and the URL link is provided.

Senator Chuck Grassley has three press releases related to this story.

For Immediate Release
March 4, 2011

Ranking Member Grassley Asks State Department About Involvement with Operation Fast and Furious

Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking about the department’s involvement in Project Gunrunner/Operation Fast and Furious.

For Immediate Release
March 24, 2011

Grassley Presses for More Answers on Operation Fast and Furious, Allowing Guns to “Walk”

WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley continues to press the administration for answers about the policy that allowed guns to “walk” over the Mexican border. Grassley began questioning the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in January. His requests for information about the involvement of various agencies, including ATF, the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection have been stonewalled by the administration.

In the meantime Congressman Darrell Issa joined the fray.

Issa jumps into gunrunning scandal documents requests after State Dept. stonewalls Sen. Grassley

“It will be up to the Attorney General to say whether he knew or not,” Issa said. “Right now, the president’s word about what somebody else knew would not be acceptable. As much as we love the president, we can accept him at his word – he didn’t know. The Attorney General is going to have to say what he knew and when he knew it – and, if he didn’t know, who in his hierarchy did know and when did they know it?”

Issa gave Clinton until 5 p.m. on April 12 to provide the documents.

For Immediate Release
March 28, 2011

Grassley Concerned that ATF’S Risky Strategy of Letting Guns Walk May Have Been Used Beyond Fast and Furious

WASHINGTON – In a letter to the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Senator Chuck Grassley pressed for additional details about the bureau’s knowledge of the straw purchasers of the guns involved in the killing of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata.

All the while Big Sis and the toughest sheriff in America remain at odds over border security. My money’s on Sheriff Joe.

Agents patrolling America’s southern border are slamming Department of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano for giving the nation “a false sense of security,” after she claimed the border region is “better now than it ever has been.”

While Big Sis keeps her head in the sand Sheriff Joe’s strategy is the reason my money is on him.

Controversial Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio isn’t buying Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano’s claims that the U.S.-Mexico border is safer.

So Arpaio has announced the launch of one of the largest crime suppression sweeps in Arizona’s history, “Operation Desert Sky,” targeting drug-smugglers using desert corridors in his county.

The sweep will include the use of 30 aircraft patrolling for at least 30 days, armed posse members, drug-sniffing dogs, and SWAT teams equipped with M-16s.

Sheriff Joe, gotta love him. Big Sis should follow his lead but then that’s not the Obama way. If she/they can’t handle border security how can we expect them to handle the broader responsibilities of national security and defense?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

There is an aspect of accountability in politics and governing that receives inadequate attention. Most of the time the discussion focuses on items like transparency. Occasionally talk moves to issues like politicians actually reading legislation before voting on it. But what about those responsible for passing legislation that burdens the nation for years?

Social security is largely associated with FDR and the New Deal. Medicare and Medicaid are relics from the failed Great Society strategy of LBJ. Who do you suppose is responsible for establishing the Dept of Education or the EPA or many other taxpayer burdens generated in the past?

The burdens are still here. Those responsible are either long gone or at least no longer held responsible. So what about the fate of Obamacare and those responsible for its passage? Will anyone be held to account when the final analysis demonstrates it is another failure of those in government?

Beyond those who voted for it and signed it into law there are others who should be recognized as enablers risking the future of all Americans with their cavalier approach to government and their agenda.

Where are the health care all-stars?

Wal-Mart Watch founder Andrew Grossman unveiled the Health Information Campaign with great fanfare last June. Tom Daschle and Ted Kennedy’s widow, Vicki, were expected to lead the effort. They’d have help from former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn. They’d have an office in Washington with 10 or 15 operatives backing the Affordable Care Act and those who supported it.

A stunningly absurd position was expressed by Grossman that many will remember from former Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She said you had to pass Obamacare to see what’s in it. Grossman’s statement is equally ridiculous.

“The law is in effect, and the best thing we can do now is explain it,” Grossman said then.

But asked this week about the Health Information Campaign, Grossman declined to talk on the record.

So you had Tom Daschle, whose family is essentially a lobbyist group, withdraw as an Obama nominee due to ‘tax problems’ like Geithner and ‘a host’ of other Obama cronies. You also had Ted Kennedy’s widow promoting Obamacare as Camelot’s last stand. And then you had Anita Dunn whose only serious claim to fame is liking Mao Tse Tung and starting a media war with Fox News. Reviewing Michelle Malkin’s book, ‘Culture of Corruption’ will assist you in keeping track of the Obamanation. Any further help from this blog in this post would require too much space. And there is no sense in trying to ‘reinvent the wheel’ as Malkin did a superb job with her book.

So I ask again. How do we hold those accountable for all the liberal entitlements crushing our nation’s economy? Or would it be consolation enough to dismantle the socialist boondoggle created to ‘tranform’ America to a nation dependent on government handouts based on out of control spending, taxes and debt?

You decide.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Rebuffed in their efforts to repeal the law, House Republicans are singling out several provisions for elimination, including a long-term care insurance program, an independent payment advisory board, a tax on medical device makers and a regulation that insurance brokers and agents fear pushes them out of the marketplace. A handful of Democrats have signed onto some of the bills, but it’s too early to tell whether any will see the light of day in the Senate.

Like most stories about Obamacare the one above is a mixture of good news and bad. Perhaps the reason for all the bad news is Obamacare is one giant flaw. But the report above offers some additional reminders about the good news.

A year after his victory, Obama has seen the healthcare fight spread from the chambers of Congress to the states, the regulatory process, the judiciary and the court of public opinion.

That’s not the sort of progress good legislation produces. It is more evidence of the earlier statement that Obamacare is one giant flaw. And here’s some more good news given the opening report excerpt. Some Democrats are leaning toward defunding or repeal.

On the one-year anniversary of the historic healthcare reform law, at least one Democratic congressman disagrees with his party’s prevalent opinion and believes the U.S. Supreme Court may well strike down the law’s individual mandate as unconstitutional.

Maybe they’re seeing the handwriting on the walls that this legislation is a flop and worse for them, an obstacle to re-election. After the ‘shellacking’ Dems took in the 2010 midterms they may be looking not so much for victory in 2012 but to stop the bleeding from their failed agenda.

The seemingly ever-increasing momentum for repeal – the public now favors repeal by 11 points in polls – is turning conventional wisdom on its head that massive new entitlements are cemented in place once they secure enactment.

The item above from The DC gives a nice review of Obamacare and the courts. Some say the SCOTUS will avoid ruling on Obamacare while of course others expect it to be rendered unconstitutional sooner than later.

Is there a better option than packaging Obamacare defunding with must pass legislation? Since the GOP controls the House and the Democrats control the Senate it seems unlikely.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Oh say can you see by the dawn’s early light that Obamacare at one year is nothing more than an extension of Mr Obama’s community organizing mindset? What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming was certainly not an endorsement of this bureaucratic nightmare called Obamacare. Placing the word ‘affordable’ in the legislation’s official title does not make it so.

For those of you who are offended by use of the term ‘Obamacare’ the following excerpt from Wikipedia is provided with one omission.

The nickname “Obamacare” has been characterized as pejorative, but continues to be widely used to refer to the legislation. Because of the number of “Obamacare” search engine queries, the Department of Health and Human Services purchased Google advertisements, triggered by the term, to direct people to the official HHS site…

After the three dots at the end of the Wiki excerpt the website’s information contends HHS ‘provides factual information about the law.’ That remains to be seen. But the term ‘Obamacare’ will continue to be used here so taxpayer money is not further wasted by HHS paying for Google ads based on the term. Okay, it really has nothing to do with that and some may find that amusing. After all, there is little about Obamacare that is amusing.

On the anniversary of President Barack Obama signing his prized health care overhaul legislation into law, The Daily Caller is providing a breakdown of what Obamacare provisions have already been instituted. The day Obamacare hit the books one year ago, 150 new regulations immediately went into effect. Since then, 125 more regulations have gone into effect.

You should carefully read the information provided by The Daily Caller. Most of the items describe instances where millions are being spent on more bureaucracies which amounts to nothing more than hiring more employees to be paid more salaries at the taxpayer’s expense. Many who voted for Barack Obama were expecting these handouts and now they will get them unless Congress has the skill and courage to defund and/or repeal this fiasco.

Here’s a typical example of the waste and abuse of taxpayer money from the same report at the Daily Caller. It is highlighted here to make that point.

Obamacare provides for a new 15-member Health Workforce Commission, a bureaucratic board that works to remove communication barriers between different levels of government. The board has already been created and all 15 members have been appointed.

Here’s an excerpt from a piece at Human Events dot com that echoes the concerns expressed about Obamacare on this blog.

There is little hope of a fully repealing ObamaCare without a change in administration, but it doesn’t bode well for any future attempts if even defunding a small part fails.  Having to defer continually to the Supreme Court for so many important decisions may explain why the latest Gallup poll has congressional ratings at 18%.  The public generally lacks confidence in their collective judgment and doubts whether they have the ability to deliver on promises.

Not passing the last CR without removing the $105 billion in automatic Obamacare funding is the latest example the GOP may lack the courage and skill necessary to achieve success against the liberals socialist agenda.

And then there’s Newt Gingrich.

Republicans should attach the full repeal of ObamaCare to the debt ceiling increase bill and pass it immediately..  While passing it, they should make clear that they would be willing to pass a clean debt ceiling increase if the White House and Senate Democrats agree to defund the implementation of ObamaCare through 2012 as part of a package of real spending reductions.

He might be dreaming or it may be more evidence of morphing since being speaker and now considering, again, a run for president in 2012. Many of those like Gingrich who are planning to run in 2012 would have a better chance if the GOP in Congress would stand on principle and deliver. Actual achievements during the 112th Congress would be rewarded by public support for curing what ails our nation. Without it there is no evidence of a glimmering light in the distance for 2012.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

“The Strike” Productions is a new production company established for the sole purpose of producing Ayn Rand’s epic novel, Atlas Shrugged.

Practical analysis is always a breath of fresh air. While conservatives in the 21st century are demonized as villains by 7th century dogma conveniently adopted by liberals and their twisted partnership with those who characterize their religion as one of peace common sense plays no role.

Justice Department Files Religious Discrimination Lawsuit Against Berkeley School District in Illinois

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department today announced it has filed a lawsuit against Berkeley School District, Berkeley, Ill., alleging that the school district violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by failing to reasonably accommodate the religious practices of Safoorah Khan, a Muslim teacher at McArthur Middle School.

Well, that sounds reasonable enough now doesn’t it? So does the following ‘common sense’ from someone with more of it than the Justice Dept and Eric Holder.

Khan’s departure to fulfill a religious obligation that she has a lifetime to satisfy left her students bereft at a critical time. Doesn’t Islam also forbid breaking a contract or leaving children in the lurch? Besides, Khan is 29. The next scheduled hajj that will fall during a school vacation will be in eight years. Khan will, God willing, be fully capable of making the trip then. But why accommodate your students and your employer when you can sue?

Anyone with a modicum of intelligence should be able to draw the proper conclusion without additional information. The fact that this teacher resigned to take a trip rather than postpone her plans and honor her obligation to her employer and students suggests it was her intention to sue from the beginning.

That Eric Holder and the Justice Dept decided to encourage her behavior with a lawsuit suggests a trend. Not unlike this same AG and Justice Dept’s decision not to properly address threats posed by the New Black Panther Party at polling places. And then there is the failure by the federal government to enforce immigration law and discourage illegal immigration. Rather than discharge their duty in this regard they oppose Arizona’s recently passed immigration law. Thus limiting the state’s ability to defend themselves when the fed will not. Apparently ‘to provide for the common defense’ is not a responsibility the Obamanation takes seriously.

Is it any wonder why our nation is in trouble?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Simmons added that parents of these days tend to let certain behavior slide.

“[P]arenting is much more permissive today than in earlier generations, and not just when it comes to clothing,” Simmons told TheDC. “That said, parents allow their daughters to dress provocatively because there may not be much else for sale at the stores. Visit a store girls love, like Forever 21, and you’ll see what I mean. Is it really fair to place the blame entirely on mothers’ shoulders? These stores establish trends for girls. So if the popular or cool kids are wearing it, and your daughter tells you that she’ll be a loser if she doesn’t have it, it’s not easy for a parent to say no.”

That excerpt clearly explains the focus of this post. No, Simmons, the parents who let this slide let everything slide. And the last phrase in the excerpt is classic nonsense. It never was easy for a parent to say no. But that is one reason why a parent must possess more intelligence than that required for the act obligating them to raise a child.

Beyond sufficient intelligence a parent needs character, self-discipline, commitment, patience, understanding and the unwavering persistance to place their child or children’s successful growth to maturity as paramount.

And yes, I speak from personal experience. I was raised by parents with the attributes described for successful parenting and then some. My own experience in parenting was not a rerun of Ozzie and Harriet or Leave It to Beaver. But even after divorce in a family represented by two single parent households raising a child was not a failure.

So don’t tell me you need an ideal situation to raise an ideal child. What it does require, like most worthwhile endeavors, is a great deal of hard work and sacrifice. Something that seems to be the exception these days rather than the rule. And BTW, Simmons, no child in the example generally described ever felt like a loser for not dressing like a whore. To the contrary, their self-esteem exceeded that of the losers who did.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

No celebrations with parades featuring beloved champions or throngs of adoring fans to  commemorate the one year anniversary of the passage of a law known to most as Obamacare.

(from March 21st)
One year ago today, the then-Democratic House of Representatives openly disregarded the cool and deliberate sense of the people and rammed Obamacare down the American people’s throats. At the time, the Democrats claimed that their bill would become more popular once Americans found out what was in it (a process that, as Democrats explained, required passing it). A year later, polls show that Obamacare’s popularity has declined even further.

It is more likely there would be the celebration and parades for the ‘passing’ (as in death) of Obamacare rather than the passage (as in legislation).

In pressing his case for the overhaul, the President made several lofty promises—and assured Americans it would expand access to health care while improving quality and reducing costs.  The President vowed the law’s reforms would “take effect right away.”

So, after one year, is the President on track to deliver?  Not in the slightest.

The article referenced above features a long list of problems associated with Obamacare. What is sad is that there is a long list of articles featuring long lists of problems with Obamacare. Perhaps the most ridiculous aspect of the one year old law is many who supported its passage rank among the first to seek AND receive ‘waivers’ from complying with its mandate.

President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law on March 23, 2010.  In just the year since, the law known as ObamaCare has already severely crippled the nation’s economy and health care system.

As stated earlier, there are many lists of articles featuring many lists of the problems with Obamacare. The one above provides what amounts to a top ten list of this legislative nightmare brought to you by the Democratic Party in 2010.

Removing this fiasco from the struggling American economy will take some time. The efforts of liberals to oppose defunding or repealing Obamacare after forcing it on the public should be reason enough to remove more of them from office in 2012, including this pathetic legislation’s chief supporter, President Barack Obama.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The title of this post is the same as the title from the source of the story. It is true that this is an outrage. That is what encouraged this blog author to promote the story and hopefully public action to stop the funding. A subsequent reason to publish this story arose when trying to access the original item at Human Events dot com. After the page loaded an immediate notice replaced the story stating it was no longer available. Why? I don’t know but I can guess and so can you.

The story dated March 11, 2011 by Mike Piccione is a review of La Raza’s 501 (c) 3 tax form 990 and other publicly available documents from 2006 through 2008.

The bottom line is La Raza reports receiving nearly $12 million in government grants. They also report spending six figures on lobbying and another six figures to ‘grassroots’ recipients. Employees of LaRaza receive six figure salaries where the CEO, Janet Murguia, is paid $378,446.

For the uninformed, La Raza translates to English as ‘the race.’ And LaRaza supports illegal immigration and amnesty. One might also conclude they are the heart and soul of the reconquista (reconquest) movement to takeover part or all of the United States.

Just thought you’d like to know.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Everyone is critical of government. This blog and its author are no exception. As the US Congress continues its recess maybe they will have time to read this. But if they don’t read the legislation they pass what are the odds they’ll read this? According to this site’s logs IPs belonging to the US government do visit regularly. It’s no surprise that most of those IP addresses belong to Congress. So, read on boys and girls.

The criticism of Congress on this blog is real simple. The GOP took control of the House of Representatives after last November’s midterm elections and have done little to impress. Rather than play the games they are playihg right now they should simply pursue the agenda of the voters who made it possible. Limit government, cut spending in a manner that would balance the budget and decrease the debt to historic lows as compared to GDP.

Most reasonable people know you cannot do that overnight. Most reasonable people do not expect that overnight. What reasonable people do expect, especially those responsible for the outcome of the midterms, is the House of Representatives to put forth legislation to that end.

As stated here before there are those who urge the House to package spending cuts with ‘must have legislation.’ Given the Dems still control the senate that puts the weight on them for failure to act. But instead the following poltical games are what we see.

GOP wants to overhaul the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

House Republicans are targeting the Wall Street reform law’s consumer protection bureau for major changes.

While that may be a fine goal for the GOP it is of little significance if you do not focus on the debt and deficits. Given the GOP’s timid response to date none other than Barney Frank may be right.

Barney Frank: Obama might not have stomach for fight over Elizabeth Warren

President Obama may not be willing to endure the ideological battle that would result from nominating Elizabeth Warren to head the new consumer protection agency, a top Democrat said Monday.

If Barney Frank is right that may explain the earlier report that the GOP wants changes in this new consumer money pit we don’t need. But that is small potatoes when compared to, you guessed it, the debt and deficit.

The economy and federal deficits are Americans’ most pressing concerns, a recently released Gallup poll found.

And yet the GOP feels all giddy about passing CRs and spending cuts. They have walked back any serious attempt to fix what is wrong with America’s money problems. The spending cuts to date have not even covered the interest expense for a matter of days much less the duration of the budget period.

A report like the one below may be responsible for strange opinions on the issue.

Cost of military campaign in Libya could wipe out GOP’s spending cuts

U.S. military operations in Libya could wipe out a significant chunk of the budget cuts won by congressional Republicans in recent weeks, defense analysts say.

It is indeed a scary thought that ‘defense analysts’ may have come up with this evaluation. As stated earlier, the spending cuts achieved this session have been dwarfed by interest payments on the money borrowed by the federal government. So what’s the point and why do Republcans pat themselves on the back for this failure?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Banning earmarks will not keep the government from wasting your money. Some senators, most notably Jim Inhofe (R-OK), suggest banning earmarks only provides the excutive branch with more opportunity to waste your money through bureaucrats. But banning earmarks was never viewed as a single action to end politicians wasting taxpayer money. It was merely a starting point.

The continuing effort by POLS to direct your money toward their pet projects is the reason for this post. Here’s a sample of that effort.

Keep the earmark requests coming, say some lawmakers to constituents

In letters and e-mails obtained by The Hill, lawmakers asked constituents for their earmark requests this year and said they will seek alternative means of funding them due to the prohibition on pet projects.

One congressman puts it this way.

In written responses to The Hill’s questions, Thompson said that he “firmly believe[s] that local communities, not Washington bureaucrats, are in the best position to identify projects that will enhance safety, create jobs and improve our quality of life.”

If Rep Mike Thompson (D-CA) is so concerned about states and local communities determining how taxpayer money is spent he should support the following idea. The mechanisms that control taxes and their control are backwards. While Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution grants Congress control over taxes and defines the purposes for the money limitations exist.

There does not seem to be a reason to deny states the ability to collect the tax and forward the federal government its share ‘to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…’

That could go a long way toward solving problems associated with the present tax system and its implementation and abuse. No doubt certain limitations would also have to be imposed on states to mitigate the natural tendency toward corruption when public money is involved. But that plague is with us at all levels for government right now. At least the idea floated here would be an attempt to correct these problems long ignored by POLS and their bureaucrats.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The President takes questions on Libya in Santiago, Chile, White House Photo, Lawrence Jackson, 3/21/11

With congress in recess it was announced in an earlier post that this week would feature President Obama as the focus of criticism. It came as no surprise when reviewing the day’s offerings that others have selected this option as well. The largest collection of articles critical of Obama was found at the American Thinker. Here’s a taste.

How to reconcile the optics of president Obama on his latest trip to Brazil?  Being feted on the tarmac in Rio De Janeiro and later joining the dignitaries reviewing a Brazilian military parade, all while a new war has been started in Libya, our Asian ally lies in ruins, and federal government insolvency threatens our republic.  This juxtaposition can only be seen through the lens of a self-imposed exile.

Obama is being chased by his own incompetence, forced to face it, unable to stare it down.  Privately he must admit he is over his head and no one — not in the legislature, in the labor unions,  in the deep pockets of  George Soros nor the salons of liberal media apologists and sympathetic academics — can save his doomed presidency.

Ouch! I recommend this one. But there is a lot more. Here’s the rest of the list.

* Obama in Exile – Geoffrey P. Hunt

* Obama, The Accidental President – Victor Volsky

* The Big Obama Defeat the Media Ignored – J.R. Dunn

* Do We Need Obama’s Leadership – Jack Kerwick

* The Deadbeat Administration – Sibyl West

And of course there is even more but these are just dated today. Happy reading.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Congress is in recess leaving the White House to fend for itself. Even with a new ‘communications’ guy and the same old ‘Joe’ as VPOTUS Barack Obama will find it difficult to redirect media focus on his latest controversy – Libya.

Confusion in Libya Assault Plan: NATO, Obama, UN Asking ‘Who’s in Charge?’

Confusion reigned Monday among U.N. and NATO nations about who’s in charge of the multi-country attack against Libya, even as an international coalition continued air strikes against Moammar Gadhafi’s forces.

Other reports indicate President Obama expects the ‘coalition’ to take over the effort allowing the US to exit. Seems a bit premature since no one seems to be in charge. And then there’s all the criticism.

Obama’s Libya Policy Takes Hits From All Points on Political Spectrum

U.S. involvement in the U.N. resolution endorsing a no-fly zone over Libya and the subsequent U.S.-led attacks against Moammar Gadhafi’s regime have sparked criticism of President Barack Obama’s policies from all across the political spectrum, from Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who wanted the action weeks ago, to left-wing activist Ralph Nader, who says Obama should be impeached.

Sure, there’s a pair you want weighing in on the issue. McCain, who completely botched his 2008 presidential run and Ralph Nader who appears to be gearing up for another attempt to stay relevant in 2012. We’ve all heard too much from McCain but here’s more from Nader.

“Why don’t we say what’s on the minds of many legal experts; that the Obama administration is committing war crimes and if Bush should have been impeached, Obama should be impeached,” Nader said in an interview with the anti-war Democracy Now! organization.

Before he was president Barack Obama was lined up with these guys against Bush 43. Now that all that has changed the One is getting it from another big mouth.

Michael Moore rips Obama over Libya

Anti-war filmmaker Michael Moore tore into President Obama for taking military action in Libya on Saturday.

You can follow the link to read Moore’s twittering but as you might expect it reads like the rants of someone wearing a tin foil hat.

Just as McCain, Nader and Moore are irrelevant two more wastes of time could be heard courtesy of Fox Business.

“He has a philosophy, and many people do, that the United States should act only multilaterally,” Kissinger said on “Lou Dobbs Tonight.” “When you have that view, it’s understandable that you would go to the [U.N.] Security Council to get your approval.

Yup, Henry Kissinger and Lou Dobbs, that’s where you want to go for opinions. For those who claim Fox leans to the right you may want to let that remain an open question. Rather than remain the ratings leader by providing conservative views they now risk killing that by trying to be all things to all people.

So what does Mr Obama have to say about all this?

President Obama defended the administration’s engagement in Libya on Monday, saying it is “very easy to square our military actions and our stated policies” on Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s regime.

The linked article provides quotes from others giving more information than President Obama’s sound bite. Given his performance to date it would appear President Obama is intent on creating obstacles to any interest he may have in re-election come 2012.

The intelligence community isn’t helping themselves either. You may recall the beating they took in the press after the Iraq ‘mission.’ Now the WMD question is back in the news and it certainly remains a question. One thing the intel guys may have learned from the Iraq war is leave some options when making a statement.

So far, counterterrorism officials in the United States and Europe believe there is not a high probability that Gadhafi will return to terrorism in the near future because he is focused on maintaining control of Libya during attacks from Western coalition forces, the Journal observed.

One American official called the likelihood “low,” but added: “That being said, a madman’s a madman.”

And then there’s the UN. The headline below would suggest for once the impotent international organization has taken a stand on the situation in Libya. But…

UN Rejects Emergency Meeting Sought by Libya
The U.N. Security Council on Monday rejected a Libyan request for an emergency meeting to halt what it called “military aggression” by France and the United States, but the council will get a briefing on Libya Thursday from the secretary-general.

There it is. The word ‘but’ stands ready to allow the UN to change its mind almost daily.

Two more reports will conclude this lengthy post. They emphasize the tentative nature of intervention in Libya and likely outcomes whether intended or not.

International forces continued air strikes against Libya on Monday, moving to expand the UN-approved no-fly zone after turning back government troops near the eastern rebel strong of Benghazi, the U.S. commander in the region said.

If the UN withdraws approval this may all be a colossal failure that would have ended badly with or without outside intervention.

Coalition forces bombarded Libya for a third straight night Monday, targeting the air defenses and forces of Libyan ruler Moammar Gadhafi, stopping his advances and handing some momentum back to the rebels, who were on the verge of defeat just last week.

There are rebels with undisclosed intentions or an equal chance of being a force for good or bad. That is what is given largely for the excuse to defend democracy in current uprisings around the planet. Unfortunately there are more questions than answers.

Is it too much to expect that for our part, the United States and those selected to lead could have answered some of the questions before engaging in military action? Knowing more about the ‘rebels’ for instance would have been a good place to start. For all the criticism of military actions past and present it seems the government has learned little from it.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

BTW, one of the few upsides in this saga so far is that Putin and Medvedev disagree on the topic. But word is Russia is doing great with oil right now.

Congress is in recess. Beyond the damage already caused by the Obama administration and its liberal agenda and the woefully inadequate opposition from the GOP no legislation will pass for a while. But that won’t stop Obama from stepping in it.

Acting alone while Congress was away on recess, solely at the command of the United Nations and without constitutional authority, Barack Obama dropped over $70 million worth of Tomahawk missiles on Libya — a dictatorial maneuver to force a regime change in a foreign land.

So what’s the irony?

On the eighth anniversary of the day President George W. Bush ordered U.S. troops into Iraq in 2003, with the full support of the U.S. Congress and majority support from the U.N. Security Council, Barack Obama launched a Tomahawk missile assault on the sovereign nation of Libya with no majority support in the U.N. and without even consulting Congress.

To support the effort to focus on President Obama while Congress wastes more taxpayer dollars by failing to implement real spending cuts here’s a take on the President from Nowhere’s trip to Brazil and the ‘First Family.’

Ordering a major military strike is a daunting task for any American president. Doing it between diplomatic and economic meetings in a foreign capital over 4,000 miles from Washington is even more complex.

President Barack Obama faced that situation Saturday as he juggled the pageantry and substance attendant to his first South American visit with urgent phone calls and top-level national security consultations about a pending joint aerial assault against Libya.

About that trip to Brazil some pictures presented with the Politico story should cause some interesting conversations in the residence.

First the arrival of the FF in Brazil provides a picture suitable for the days of Life magazine and chronicles of American life or a slice of Americana from Norman Rockwell.

Ah, but there is a picture presented to the public sure to incite some typical chatter between husband and wife like that which Barack eluded to if he didn’t sign the foodie legislation promoted by Michelle that made the rest of us crazy. He said he would be sleeping on the couch if he didn’t sign it. I guess the ‘bowing’ trend has been suspended for South American heads of state.

In this third of four pics do you suppose President Obama was practicing his pose for a quiet response to Michele’s impending inquiry (more like inquisition)?

And then there are the after photos of the presidential witnesses catching round one of the trip’s aftermath between the ‘first’ couple.

Of course this is all just speculation from a blogger not unfamiliar with spousal spats over unfortunate circumstances. Unlike the President, I no longer have to concern myself with such risks. There is a God.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

I’m a big fan of Senator Jim DeMint. That does not mean I agree with everything he says. But it would be fair to say I can count on one hand those things about which we would disagree. What is more important is that Senator DeMint is conservative and consistent in his approach. He is one of the few voices you can depend on in Washington.

The video presented here is well worth your time to view it. About those disagreements, a few things mentioned in the video bother me a little. But one needs to take it in context. Senator DeMint has a tough job. He is of course disliked by liberals which would include all the Democrats. And he is not appreciated by ‘establishment’ Republicans.

The importance of the video and Senator DeMint’s message cannot be overstated. It is a message that bears repeating at every opportunity.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com