Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Clinton, like many who’ve studied the health-care bills, has problems with them. But to steal an Obama line, don’t let the perfect stand in the way of the good. We can either get a toe in the reform door now and fix things as we go along - like we fixed every piece of major legislation ever passed. Or we can “go back to the drawing board,” as Brown says, which means: Forget about it.

Whether the special election in Taxachusetts for Ted Kennedy’s vacant seat is about broader issues or simply political math for healthcare reform the piece above from the Boston Herald touts the liberal spin and perhaps unknowingly makes an argument against it.

Conceding the ability to produce a ‘perfect’ bill right now but fixing it later is how we get into problems with entitlements. Three quarters of the budget in recent years and probably longer is spending on entitlements. Social security, Medicare and Medicaid are unsustainable. This is what the liberal agenda has given us since FDR.

It’s natural that citizens who did not voluntarily contribute to these programs through payroll deductions expect to receive the benefits after a lifetime of paying for them. There in lies the rub. The liberal agenda is patient. They try to convince the public their agenda is in the public interest. Over time the cost goes up and the benefits go down but the government gets bigger and the political power is secure. Too bad the same cannot be said for your future or that of your children.

‘Like we fixed every major piece of legislation ever passed.’ Does it really seem to you right now that anyone EVER fixed entitlements? Touching the third rail of politics causes political suicide. So all POLS can muster is ignoring the problems all together or continuing to raise taxes and reduce benefits to pay for programs that are simply not feasible.

Martha Coakley would tow the party line abusing majority status to heap more liabilities on American taxpayers in the name of reform. At least Scott Brown offers a chance to correct the problems and pursue reasoned solutions to critical issues. We cannot continue to spend money we don’t have. That is part of what caused the issues we face now…. spending what we don’t have.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The critical issue these days when discussing political parties should be national security as without effective defense every other debate is moot. The GOP fall from grace preceding two election cycles of defeat merely allowed the continuation of flawed governance. The only difference is party blue rather than party red.

Michael Leiter is a Bush appointee. Obama did not replace him. Leiter is in the news due to the Flight 253 terror plot. There are conflicting reports between at least three sources, the NY Post, the NY Daily News and US News & World Report. The conflict is whether Leiter was on vacation before the event and declined to return or that he left the day after the botched national security that allowed the botched terror plot.

from the NY Post….

The White House acknowledged Thursday that Michael Leiter, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, had taken six days annual leave after the Dec. 25 attempted plane bombing but said he remained intimately involved in the U.S.’s response to the thwarted terror attack.

It was reported Thursday that government sources were upset that Leiter had gone on a ski trip following Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempt to destroy a Detroit-bound plane.

“People have been grumbling that he didn’t let a little terrorism interrupt his vacation,” one of the sources is reported to have told the newspaper.

from USN&WR…

Terror Chief Michael Leiter Wasn’t Vacationing Through Attack

Only later did he head out of town. “Only after explicit consultations with both the White House and the Director of National Intelligence and considering the current threat environment did Director Leiter take six days of annual leave after the event, which again did not affect in any way his ability to remain engaged with all elements of the United States Government,” he said.

The piece above critcizes the NY Daily News for reporting Leiter was on vacation and declined to return to work after the Flight 253 incident on Dec 25th. But Alex Kingbury at USN&WR misses the point.

The stumbling US national security ‘team’ seriously botched this one. Liberals in Congress criticize conservatives for holding up a critical confirmation of Obama’s nominee to head TSA. Napolitano’s no help. So having the head of another national security ‘resource’ take to the slopes AFTER a security breach is equally disturbing. Not like they fixed what’s wrong before he left.

At the very least this supports Senator Jim DeMint’s ‘holding up’ the confirmation of Erroll Southers as the head of the Transportation Security Administration. These national security vacancies require very special people to lead the effort. One could say there are vacancies in leadership roles that are filled not to mention other positions throughout government.

Nearly a decade after 9/11 everyone should be able to expect better than this from US national security. Among other things Bush bashers love to draw comparisons. Any criticism expressed toward the current administration is met with rebuttals concerning the Bush years. The point those arguments fail to recognize is 9/11 publicly exposed national security vulnerabilities and placed the topic front and center. Much was corrected by the Bush adminisstration and not without excessive opposition from the left. Now that the left is once again in the majority in Washington they are not allowed a pass to make earlier mistakes over again.

US national security failures started with Clinton and ended with Bush. Let’s not have a do over.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Every now and then an article appears that begs for commentary. Not by the author but what the author writes. This one comes from WaPo and focuses on an old label, the glass ceiling, and electing a woman president.

This post avoids or ignores the introduction which focuses on trash talking during the 2008 presidential primary. For good reason, it should be avoided and ignored always even when it first appears.

Here’s an excerpt that seems to miss its own point.

Clinton erred strategically early on, ceding college campuses — including college women — to Obama. She also struggled with whether to portray her campaign as “historic,” debating the idea of a speech on gender for months. Focused on proving her toughness, she missed out on key endorsements from women, including Oprah Winfrey and Caroline Kennedy. Only when women began to see her as under siege during the New Hampshire primary campaign did Clinton begin to pick up steam among the constituency that would rally to her side for the rest of the primaries. But it was too late.

Let’s see. Hillary Rodham Clinton ‘missed out on key endorsements from women, including Oprah Winfrey and Caroline Kennedy’ as the result of trying to prove her toughness? How about the obvious choice for O-prah’s vote was O-bama? The Dems elite would anoint the Messiah as they did Kerry/Edwards the previous election. And Caroline would not endorse HRC on a ‘toughness’ issue? Uh huh. Right. Sure. NOT!

In a primary election one needs to convince the electorate and a major party one can WIN. This is after all politics. And if you believe gender is the sole reason a woman has not yet been elected president think again. Any time a candidate must overcome a serious obstacle to the public’s evaluation of their electability other attributes must render that negative meaningless.

Is gender an obstacle to winning elections? Sure. Can it be overcome? Sure, Golda Meir in 1969, Indira Ghandi in 1966, Margaret Thatcher in 1979 all beat the gender issue and one could say under considerably more challenging venues than in the USA. The list goes on and a link listing such things is available here

If women do not vote for women how is that a gender issue? But certainly the question is raised if a man does not vote for a female candidate. Hey, I’m a man. I voted for Sarah Palin even in light of her major obstacle, John McCain.

So drop the glass ceiling argument.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

As President Obama campaigns on behalf of liberal candidates in current elections and has school children singing his praises thanks to questionable encouragement from their teachers one has to wonder how voters view his performance thus far. Indeed, Obama’s honeymoon with the American people lasted less than six months. So Mr Obama, how are all those government interventions working for you? You know, government motors, government healthcare, government pay czars and your nanny state agenda?

VPOTUS Joe Biden was tapped to shore up Barack Obama’s lack of foreign affairs experience during the 2008 Presidential campaign. Apparently most people dismissed any concerns about Obama’s lack of experience in other areas. A community organizer-in-chief was what the majority of American voters selected. The new President tapped his former rival for President as his Secretary of State. So how is Hillary Clinton doing in the minds of voters?

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 27 percent of voters think Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be doing a better job as president, while 49 percent say she would be performing about the same. That’s about 70 percent that say a hypothetical ‘President Hillary’ would be doing as well or better than President Barack Obama.

Obama’s honeymoon is over and according to the poll above about half the voters think Hillary or Barack would be doing about the same as president. Barack Obama has done nothing to inspire confidence resulting in the honeymoon being over and half the voters think Hillary would be doing about the same. So how’s Hillary doing as Secretary of State? Forget that most of the year she was promoting human rights as her central focus. What about the Middle East?

Secretary Clinton came to Marrakech for the sixth Forum for the Future, which joins civil society groups and the private sector with foreign ministers from the Group of Eight leading industrialized nations and the Middle East to talk about democracy and resolving conflict in the region.

What was the result of these discussions?

Palestinian leaders are voicing frustration after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised Israel for making what she said are unprecedented concessions in efforts to restart peace negotiations. Israeli leaders are keeping up their calls for the Palestinians to drop all preconditions.

Palestinian leaders on Sunday stuck to their demands that Israel stop all settlement activity before any resumption of peace talks that have been stalled since December.

Clinton praises Israel for doing their part and the Palestinians register a complaint.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Arab foreign ministers in Morocco to discuss Israel’s offer to limit the expansion of Jewish settlements. Clinton says Israel should reciprocate positive Palestinian moves to improve security.

Clinton reverses her earlier praise of Israel in response to Palestinian objections.

Well then, how’s it going on the issue of Iran and their pursuit of nuclear weapons?

Iranian officials say they want technical experts to review the U.N.-backed plan for sending Iran’s uranium abroad for enrichment.

All the rhetoric from various nations including the US over Iran’s nuclear program has produced zero results except that Iran is still stalling and being allowed to get away with it. And the answer from the US……

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says there will be no changes to an international offer to end the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program by having its low-grade uranium processed and enriched abroad.

That’s reassuring.(NOT) Given the impotent international response to date and Clinton’s caving on statements made about the Middle East peace process more of the same is anticipated.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

What the hell is Newt Gingrich thinking? For one who decided to either allow his persona to demonstrate what conservative values are or parlayed that perception to be used for political advantage another decision by the former Speaker of the House and focal point of the once proud and subsequently abandoned ‘contract with America’ has produced another obvious contradiction.

He supports Scazzafava (beans) for the NY (23)???

Gingrich is apparently willing to overlook Scozzafava’s support for same-sex marriage and abortion rights.

“The Republican Revolution in 1994 started very much like what we see today,” Gingrich said in his statement. “Like then, our country is reeling from misguided liberal policies, high taxes and out-of-control spending. This special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District could be the first election of the new Republican Revolution, but we need the momentum to get it started.”

That is simply a politically motivated assessment. If you support a candidate based on a belief that they have the best chance to win while ignoring their rejection of conservative and traditional American values the culture of corruption is what you endorse. An absolutely appalling decision by someone whom this blog has always viewed as suspect although few if any posts have expressed that position. Sometimes it is reasonable to withhold comment until more evidence is gathered. The apparent revelation of the Gingrich departure from conservative principle demands notice and commentary.as well as strong support for a candidate previously analyzed as a wild card based on lack of relevant data.

At this point supporting a currently unknown quantity like Mr Hoffman is an easy decision. Scozzafava’s candidacy is also reported to have triggered a deep divide among House Republicans, with some of the most conservative members refusing to support her campaign. And with good reason ‘the most conservative members’ distance themselves from such an alliance.

The most prominent GOP endorser of radical leftist NY-23 congressional candidate Dede Scozzafava is openly musing about running for president in 2012.
No, thanks:

Check the link above to support this blog’s position that Newt Gingrich has left the conservative reservation on this and possibly other issues.

Support and advance conservative principles or withdraw from the GOP. That is this blog’s recommendation for politicians who are registered Republicans.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Republican Nationl Committee vs. Conservatives

Doug Hoffman Sarah Palin: Palins Hoffman Endorsement: (video)

While the recent decision by the Nobel committee to award the 2009 peace prize to President Obama focused more attention on the US leader no more will be said about it in this post. US diplomatic strategy, success or failure, foreign policy and the role of the US State Dept and White House will be. All the talk about rebuilding America’s image, hope and change, a nuclear free world and ends to conflict needs a reality check. How are things going so far?

Not necessarily in order of importance what is on most peoples’ minds these days in terms of international relations or foreign affairs? From the US perspective the countries of note would include Russia, China, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, North Korea and Iran. Of course the perennial favorites not yet mentioned would be any country in the Middle East. Israel and its neighbors are still without solutions. Russia and China are still vying for top dog honors with the US on the world stage. Upstarts Iran and North Korea at the very least want a seat at the cool kids table. So nothing much has changed.

Here’s a brief recap of events in US diplomatic strategy with a ‘new’ President and Secretary of State.

Still no progress in Palestinian/Israeli peace talks

NECN/ABC) - President Barack Obama’s Mideast envoy, George Mitchell, left the region Sunday after failing again to get Israelis and Palestinians back to the bargaining table. The breakdown of peace talks is taking a toll on Obama’s prestige among Palestinians.

President Obama’s Middle East peace envoy on another trip to the region - more meetings - more handshakes with Israelis and Palestinians - but still no progress, no movement in the peace process.

Not a surprise to see a headline expressing failure in Middle East diplomacy no matter who is involved.

What about Iran?

Putin Says Iran Sanctions Talk Premature

By VOA News
14 October 2009

Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin says it is premature to discuss sanctions against Iran for its controversial nuclear program.

And the view from the US Secretary of State…..

“I believe if sanctions become necessary, we will have support from Russia,” Clinton told ABC television in an interview on Wednesday.

This is merely a continuation of the impotent international community’s response to Iran’s nuclear weapons program that was essentially confirmed again with yet another lie exposed with admission of the previously hidden enrichment facility already known to the Obama Administration. And no one will visit the plant until later this month. Like that will solve anything.

Which makes this next sham almost laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.

Obama to Preside at UN Security Council

By Margaret Besheer
The United Nations

The United States has taken over the rotating presidency of the 15-member United Nations Security Council for the month of September. U.S. President Barack Obama and other top U.S. political figures will be at the world body this month to highlight issues of importance to the United States.

Another rhetorical masterpiece expressing the desire for a nuclear free world without the substance to support such a notion. The exclamation point is provided by the appeasement strategy reminiscent of a similar process that helped usher in WWII.

And what was the defining achievement by press accounts for the SoS Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Hillary Clinton Helps Turkey, Armenia Open Border - ABC News

Clinton uses diplomatic muscle in Turkey-Armenia row | Politics …

Turkey, Armenia Agree to Ties; Clinton’s Skill Tested (Update1 …

The Daily Star - Politics - Clinton hails Turkey, Armenia steps …

Clinton Helps Save Historic Turkey, Armenia Accord - International …

A more accurate appraisal of Clinton’s participation may be the following…..

Clinton to Attend Turkey-Armenia Normalization Deal Signing

By David Gollust
State Department

The State Department said Thursday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will fly to Zurich to attend Saturday’s signing of accords to normalize relations between Turkey and Armenia.

A simple visit to the US State Dept website would bear this out. At least in terms of demonstrating that this State Dept is essentially no different from any other feeble attempt by heads of state to display their conviction to foreign relations or determination to improve conditions in the world. A visit to the website while producing this post featured the following items:

Positive Future for U.S.-Russian Relations

Finding Common Ground With Russia

Secretary Clinton Travels to Europe

U.S. Supports Peace in Northern Ireland

U.S. Supports Emergence of Afghan Government

U.S.-U.K. Advancing Shared Values

U.S.-Ireland Working Together

and travel puff pieces?

So much for the hope and change of a new administration in the US and statements expressed to suggest foreign policy would be successful.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

FDR signed his Social Security Act in 1935. In 1939 he made the following statements in a message to Congress.

The health of the people is a public concern; ill health is a major cause of suffering, economic loss, and dependency; good health is essential to the security and progress of the Nation.

Health needs were studied by the Committee on Economic Security which I appointed in 1934 and certain basic steps were taken by the Congress in the Social Security Act. It was recognized at that time that a comprehensive health program was required as an essential link in our national defenses against individual and social insecurity. Further study, however, seemed necessary at that time to determine ways and means of providing this protection most effectively.

Apparently FDR, the Congress, the federal government, etc.,etc., decided the time had come to provide government health care for the nation. FDR had a commission which recommended a grant program between the federal government and states to provide health care services. But Medicare and Medicaid were not established until 1965 under LBJ’s Great Society agenda. Let’s see, in the thirties a Democratic President determined we needed government provided health care. But nothing happened until the sixties. In the sixties, LBJ must have determined he solved the problem with Medicare and Medicaid. But in the nineties a third Democratic party President determined we still did not have a government provided health care program and had his wife spearhead his agenda on health care. That would be the Clintons. Nothing happened.

Now, a fourth Democratic party President, Barack Obama, has determined that we absolutely, positively need to provide government health care for everyone.

FDR established Social Security as we know it today. It is by most appraisals a system that cannot survive indefinitely. Medicare and Medicaid are similar in nature and feasibility. They probably cannot survive indefinitely either. Government funded, aka, taxpayer funded health care is not an effective means for solving health care issues. Yet in the thirties, sixties, nineties and now the new millennium we are regularly pitched that government health care is absolutely necessary. And none of the programs implemented to date have been effective. They are all fatally flawed. And yet again we are being expected to believe the government can solve the problem.

If after eighty years of fantasy that the government can, with taxpayer dollars, provide all the health care necessary for the nation in a cost effective and efficient manner has not been shown to be exactly that, a fantasy, then the American public deserves exactly what it gets from government funded health care…….nothing. Nothing but an ever increasing expense for ever diminishing results.

You are once again urged to contact your elected representative and reject the eighty year old fantasy that the government can provide health care for everyone. Hell, they cannot even get it done for those who are on the public health care dime now.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It didn’t take long for Bill Clinton to get back on the government payroll. Not to mention his failed attempt to become First Lady was foiled by his wife’s caving to Barack Obama. But hey, in 2012 or 2016 Hillary may try again. Many say all she needed was SoS cred to be a viable candidate. And since health care will still be a mess she can try that again too.

But the real point is that President Obama pretty much hired the former Clinton Administration anyhow so what’s the difference? Now the whole gang is back we can revisit the nineties. Throw in a little Jimmy Carter economics retro and we can have the seventies back as well. Oh boy, we have so much to look forward, er, look backward to..

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has named former U.S. President Bill Clinton as his special envoy to Haiti.

The secretary-general said Tuesday he is confident that Mr. Clinton will bring energy, dynamism and focus to the task of mobilizing international support for Haiti’s economic recovery and reconstruction.

A statement issued through Mr. Clinton’s foundation quotes Mr. Ban as saying he had discussed the appointment with Haiti’s president, René Preval, and that the Haitian leader welcomed it on behalf of the Haitian government and people.

Mr. Clinton said it is an honor to accept the secretary-general’s invitation to become special envoy to Haiti. The two men visited Haiti in March to refocus international attention on restoring economic security to the Caribbean country, the poorest in the Western Hemisphere.

Haiti is struggling to recover from four successive storms last year that killed hundreds of people and wiped out about 15 percent of its economic output.

In April, Haiti received $324 million in new aid commitments from international donors for the next two years.

The Inter-American Development Bank announced the pledges after hosting a donors’ conference for Haiti in Washington. The bank said the money pledged includes $41 million in budget support for 2009.

As the U.N. special envoy to Haiti, Mr. Clinton will travel to that country several times within the next year. The post carries an annual salary of $1.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP, AP and Reuters.

crossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

Hillary Clinton and other pro-choice liberals carefully use the words ‘family planning’ to describe what they view as a right to have an abortion. More often it seems they prefer to call abortion by the words, women’s reproductive rights. The report from AFP states Hillary ‘defended the right to abortion worldwide’ and the Obama Administration’s approval to pay for it with taxpayer money.

“We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women’s health and reproductive health includes access to abortion, that I believe should be safe, legal and rare,” Clinton added.

You will notice that Clinton carefully words her response like most other pro-choice advocates who apparently feel the need to make killing babies sound better. Funny how the same liberals who have spat on returning US troops and called them baby killers have no such problem with those who really do kill babies.

First Clinton uses the phrase, ‘family planning’ and then the word women’s and reproductive both having the word health added to each phrase. Gee, family, planning, health, reproductive, all such natural sounding words when it comes to childbirth. But make sure you never speak about ending someone’s life or killing them by using abortion. No, no, no that would make it sound bad. Well it is bad. It is wrong and it is bad. It is not the way to solve any problem Clinton or those who agree with her on this topic can present. It is not about planning and it is not about planning reproduction. If it were sincerely about health then a proactive couple would have avoided the pregnancy.

Certainly when a woman becomes pregnant against her will such as in rape you can make the case she could do little or nothing about it. But even then there are other options. Stats indicate pregnancies from rape represent a tiny number of abortion requests compared to other reasons. The leading statistic for most women having an abortion in any given year indicates it is not their first one. Abortion is primarily used as contraception for dummies. Choices have consequences which the pro-choice crowd prefers to ignore.

Abortion solves nothing since the desire for them by some continues. It is the death penalty for babies who had no say in any of it. How many liberals are opposed to the death penalty for those convicted of a capital crime? Do those same liberals oppose abortion?

And the current President of the United States said he doesn’t want his daughters to be burdened with a baby for making a mistake. What does this say about his other statements suggesting people have to take responsibility for their actions? It is just another lie from Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton.

This was just a little warm up post for the coming week. The rather impractical key performance measure for Presidents will likely dominate political discussions for some time. President Obama’s first 100 days in office ends mid-week. The relative merits of this analysis are subject to debate. But it has become something of a ritual fair or not.

In advance of what will probably bring as much criticism of the President as praise and not serve any useful purpose it is what there is. So, kindly refrain from regarding those who oppose the current President’s agenda and actions as racists. Many describe Mr Obama as the first African-American President. Are you forgetting his mother was white? Simple math would suggest Mr Obama is as much black as he is white and the reverse is true. So if there is some discrimination going on it is forgetting his whiteness and focusing on his blackness. Perhaps as he said when asked if race was an issue after taking office that it only lasted about an hour and a half and we are fast approaching 100 days.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Back when Pelosi and crew tried to replace the State Dept against the wishes of President Bush liberals praised the action of defying US foreign policy in favor of ‘hangin’ with state sponsors of terrorism. President Obama and SoS Clinton continued that agenda in the first 100 days of the new Administration. So how’s that workin’ out so far?

Iranian President Causes Uproar with Anti-Israel Speech
By Edward Cody
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, April 20, 2009; 1:57 PM

PARIS, April 20 — In a defiant speech, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad argued before a United Nations anti-racism conference Monday that Israel is a “paragon of racism,” founded on what he called “the pretext of Jewish sufferings” during World War II.

The comments, a hard-edged version of Ahmadinejad’s often-repeated anti-Zionist views, prompted several dozen European diplomats to walk out of the opening session of the week-long Geneva meeting, which the Obama administration and eight other Western nations already were boycotting.

Can’t we all just get along?  The United Nations strikes again. (or strikes out)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

North Korea and Iran know what most of us know. The impotent actions of the United Nations and each member nations’ special interest will never accomplish the original idea of being an effective forum for resolution in international affairs. It is merely for show and another venue for political fantasy. And the recent liberal thrust in US politics by virtue of the loss of conservative common sense, again through political stupidity, brings the failed policies of surrender and appeasement back to life in a similar fashion to that of Neville Chamberlain before WWII.

As is obvious to anyone with a functioning brain, North Korea confirms its understanding that absent an international community of nations as there should be in the UN they have no reason to abandon their stated pursuit of a nuclear weapons program.

A North Korean news announcer read a Foreign Ministry statement saying talks aimed at ending the North’s nuclear weapons are “not needed,” and that it will no longer participate.

The statement goes on to say the North will restart its main nuclear facility - which was disabled under a previous agreement - and reprocess stored nuclear fuel rods into material usable for boosting what it calls its “nuclear deterrent.” (read more)

And Iran as well, while using a slightly different approach, has chosen to stall the US surrender monkeys in Washington DC in pursuit of its nuclear ambitions.

The United States Monday said it welcomed a conciliatory Iranian statement about possible new talks with world powers on its nuclear program. But the State Department says it remains skeptical that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful.

A senior State Department official said no date has been set for a P-5 Plus 1 meeting with Iran and that despite the latest Iranian comments, he said he did not think one is imminent.

He said if a meeting is held, it would likely be at the so-called “political director” level and involve, on the U.S. side, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns and not Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (read more)

Enjoy the brief respite from political stupidity in the US after the US Navy and three Navy Seals once again demonstrated what is possible with strength through power. When threatened, neutralize the threat.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This is an example of HRC fixing America’s image in the world. Right.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

In early March 2009 Iran’s Khamenei expressed several points that would suggest the US and Iran will not likely find agreement with any proposed dialogue that could occur. There seems to be much posturing by both Iran and the White House. Obama and other Democrats have pushed for talks with Iran for a long time claiming the two countries can work out problems. Those in the US opposing such talks argue concessions or appeasement would be the only items in which Iran would be interested. And Iran continues to maintain their opposition to Israel and deny involvement in terrorism or pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Iran Denounces US During Gaza Meeting
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
04 March 2009

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in the opening speech at the conference that President Obama spoke of change during his campaign but supported Israel’s devastating three-week offensive against the Gaza Strip earlier this year.

He says that even the new American president, who came to office with the slogan of bringing change to the policies of the Bush administration, avows unconditional support for Israel’s security, which means defending state terrorism, injustice and oppression, as well as a 22-day long massacre of hundreds of Palestinian men, women and children. This, the Ayatollah said, is the same path of the Bush administration.

You may notice in the excerpt above that Khamenei conveniently omits attacks by Hamas, Hezbollah and others or describing them as terrorism. Yet clearly in the example he uses, the December 2009 retaliation by Israel from repeated rocket attacks by Hamas, was initiated by terrorists he refuses to acknowledge.

Khamenei called for a referendum of all those residents of historic Palestine, whom he termed “legitimate,” to determine the fate of the Holy Land.

He says that he is proposing a solution which is democratic in principle and which serves as a logical basis for everyone. All those who have a legitimate stake in the territory of Palestine, he says, including Muslims, Christians and Jews should choose the structure of their ruling system in a general referendum. He says that Palestinian exiles must also participate in the referendum.

Mr. Obama has said his administration is looking for opportunities to engage Iran to help reduce tensions between the two countries - particularly related to Iran’s nuclear program.

Khamenei’s comments Wednesday highlighted how difficult it will be for the Obama administration to improve relations given the deep disagreements on both sides on issues like Israel and Iran’s nuclear efforts.

And the Iranian leader insults the intelligence of anyone reading his words regarding a referendum. Even without doing a head count on those living in the areas mentioned, to add so-called Palestinian exiles would at the very least stack the deck with unverifiable votes reminiscent of ACORN and make this ‘referendum’ a self-fulfilling prophecy with a nearly unlimited quantity of phantom voters that are anti-Israel.

Syria Offers to Mediate With Iran
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
18 March 2009

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is proposing to mediate between the West and Iran, telling an Italian newspaper that he’s prepared to act as a go-between to improve relations that have been further strained over Iran’s nuclear program.

How convenient that after Congressional Dems sponsored an appeasement tour of the Middle East in August 2007 and Obama has been calling for appeasement worldwide Syria decides to offer to be a mediator on the Iran nukes issue as well as improving foreign relations with the United States.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy urged Mr. Assad, during a conference in France last July, to use his influence to help resolve Iran’s nuclear standoff with the West.

President Assad noted that dialogue was the best means to end long-standing disputes with Tehran, arguing that any attempt to contain a country ends by strengthening it.

And it seems French President Sarkozy is hedging his bets. It may be fair to say his rise to power not unlike Obama’s was premised on change. Now that the honeymoon is long over two things stand out. Mention of him in the previous reference as inviting Syria to get involved and lately warming up to re-entering NATO. What’s that about? Go for appeasement and if that puts you at risk fall back on newly formed ties with NATO to do your fighting for you?

Iran Warms to Obama Appeal for Better Relations
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
20 March 2009

Iranian government TV carried a traditional New Year’s greeting from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad calling it the day of the “rebirth of love, friendship, and aspiration,” but it was President Obama’s message that captured many people’s attention.

First of all, ‘love, friendship and aspiration’ coming from Ahmedinejad is in direct opposition to his statements that Israel must be eliminated. And the Iranian President also had this to say.

“Mr. Obama has talked of change, but has taken no practical measures to redress America’s past mistakes in Iran,” he said. “If Mr. Obama takes a concrete action and makes fundamental changes to U.S. foreign policy towards other nations, including Iran, the Iranian government and people will not turn their back on him. Mr. Obama has referred to differences between Iran and the US. We believe that those differences stem from Washington’s hostile policy towards Iran. Minor changes will not end the differences.”

It is obvious anything short of appeasement and caving to Iranian intentions will not produce effective solutions or dissuade Iran from their current agenda. Where the author came up with the title suggesting Iran is ‘warming’ to the US is a puzzle.

US Looking for Reciprocal Iranian Gesture After Obama Message
By David Gollust
State Department
20 March 2009

The State Department said Friday U.S. officials are looking for a reciprocal gesture from Iran after President Barack Obama’s conciliatory holiday message to the Iranian people and government Thursday. Mr. Obama said in a broadcast for the Iranian new year holiday Nowruz that the United States wants “honest engagement” with Tehran based on mutual respect.

If the report above is true there is confirmation that Hillary Rodham Clinton does not have a clue or thinks you do not.

At a news briefing, State Department acting spokesman Robert Wood said that the crux of the President’s message was that despite the serious differences that have marred the relationship over time, the Obama administration is committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues with Tehran.

Senior Iranian leaders have not given any direct response but Wood signaled patience, saying the process is at an early stage.

“We’re at the beginning of this process,” he said. “The President has made it clear we’re going to engage diplomatically with Iran. We intend to do that. It will be up to the Iranians how they want to reciprocate.”

“But I also want to emphasize we still have some very difficult issues that divide us. And what the President has said is that we want to work with Iran on trying to deal with these differences. We’re willing to diplomatically engage. It’s really going to be up to Iran,” he added.

Wood said the problem issues in the relationship include Iranian threats toward Israel and other countries in the region and its nuclear program, which U.S. officials believe is weapons-related despite statements from Tehran that it is for peaceful purposes only.

If you cite all the problems with Iran and what they are trying to accomplish and yet claim to hold out hope for a few publicly expressed kind words to initiate some sort of reconciliation two things become apparent. Either you’re an idiot or much more is going on behind the scenes and as usual public rhetoric is for political purposes. Of course it is always possible both are right.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Dismisses Obama’s Appeal
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
21 March 2009
Speaking in the holy city of Mashhad Saturday, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the United States is using “the slogan of change,” but that he sees no real change in U.S. policy toward Iran.

Change in rhetoric alone is not enough, he said, and even then we haven’t seen much change in vocabulary. Change, he insists, must be authentic.

This part could be called ‘ gimme something.’ Obviously Obama blinked and now the Iranians are feeling superior. Could it be that during the Bush Administration Iran only talked tough as they had no other options to save face? Now that an American President is ‘asking’ to talk they have the upper hand in a discussion. So now what? Does Obama expect them to roll over and play nice or is the opposition correct, Obama’a agenda is full of appeasement?

PRESS RELEASE - Washington, D.C., March 23, 2009 - President Obama’s message to the Iranian people on the Nowruz holiday drew millions of viewers and listeners to the Voice of America (www.VOANews.com ), the largest international Persian-language broadcaster.

By Monday, VOA sites had more than 134,000 views of the three-minute speech, which Obama delivered late last Thursday as Iranians prepared to celebrate Nowruz, the Persian new year. The video was posted on www.VOANews.com, www.VOANews.com/persian/, and VOA’s partner YouTube channels. VOA’s Persian News Network (PNN) also broadcast the message to Iran, a country with a restricted media, on satellite television and on shortwave radio.

Over the weekend, PNN received and broadcast e-mails from inside Iran, many of them praising Obama’s speech. In one, Arash said he was pleased with Obamas “message because he (Obama) actually recognizes the Islamic Republic of Iran.” The writer also said he hoped Iran’s leaders “will study Obama’s speech and make a good decision.”

In his remarks, Obama talked of a “new beginning,” saying he hoped Iran, the United States and other nations would form constructive ties. He also praised Iran’s “great and celebrated culture.”

VOA’s dissemination of the video was also cited by Fox News Network, the Times of London and the Guardian in the United Kingdom, among many other places.

Whatever happened to strength through power?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The only thing better than Senator Dodd admitting he is responsible for the AIG bonus fiasco is him blaming the Obama Administration for insisting on it. The added ‘bonus’ (pun intended) is liberals still claiming it is someone else’s fault.

US Sen Dodd Blames Administration For Changes To Executive Comp Rules

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The chairman of the Senate Banking Committee said it was the Obama administration who pushed for changes to executive compensation restrictions that may have allowed American International Group Inc. (AIG) to issue millions in bonuses that have set off a public outcry.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said an amendment to the economic stimulus legislation that he authored was not intended to protect the troubled insurer, and he denied knowing about the controversial bonus program until last week.

In a post earlier on this blog the public’s outrage and desire for their pound of flesh from AIG was suggested to be reasonable only if bonuses were somehow concocted after AIG knew public funding would be forthcoming and their was some sort of sinister arrangement between the bailout and the bonuses. It was a short wiat for the information and the news reports are coming fast and furious. So go ahead America, enjoy your pound of flesh courtesy of Senator Dodd and the Obama Administration.

4 Fannie Execs Each to Get $400K in Govt.-Okayed Bonuses

At least four Fannie Mae executives are slated to receive more than $400,000 in bonuses each this year as a result of the company’s government-approved retention program, The Post’s Zach Goldfarb reports.

Fannie Mae, which suffered $59 billion in losses last year, has requested $15 billion in taxpayer assistance, and has said it expects to need plenty more.

It just keeps on getting better. Not only is the news beginning to demonstrate what many have been saying for months, that Dodd, Frank and other liberals were neck deep in the subprime mess, but now more news on Fannie Mae execs are getting bonuses for causing billions more in losses at the tainted GSE. Not to be outdone by the GOP and their fall from grace, the liberals and their D party are already in flames since the 2006 midterms and last year’s Presidential election. Hillary Clinton has to be cackling herself to sleep at night wondering if her deals with Obama and becoming Secretary of Moscow Overcharge (remember her team’s language barrier?) will get her in the White House before 2012?

Here are two more great headlines and excerpts:
Dodd won’t take blame for AIG bonuses
Journal Inquirer -
Christopher J. Dodd is denying that he’s to blame for the $165 million in bonuses handed out to 418 employees of the taxpayer bailed-out American …

Let’s see. Dodd denies creating the ‘loophole’ for exec bonuses in taxpayer funded bailouts. Then…..

Dodd admits inserting loophole in stimulus for bonuses
Norwalk Advocate -
Christopher Dodd for the first time Wednesday acknowledged he was instrumental in creating legislation that cleared the way for disgraced executives at …

Which Dodd lie is the American public supposed to believe? It doesn’t matter. At this rate their will be plenty more of them by tomorrow.

Chris Dodd (D): Real Estate Scandals at Home and Abroad | KXNet …
KXMC - ?Mar 15, 2009?
Like his fearless leader, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd had a little help from his friends when it came to buying an expensive ten acre island property on …

Funny how much of what the loyal opposition was being criticized for when it comes to pointing out liberal ties to the subprime meltdown and other precursors to economic woes and the Democratic party’s socialist agenda is finally being echoed in the MSM. And in record time the libs are making good on their proclivity to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. That may be the only natural predator of socialist agendas in America. That the evil intentions of Democratic party politics cannot survive their own sinister plots.

Stay tuned their almost certainly has to be more entertainment provided by the party who brought us The New Deal in the days ahead including tomorrow.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com