The Politico writes about the State of the Union address: In the history of the State of the Union has any President ever called out the Supreme Court by name, and egged on the Congress to jeer a Supreme Court decision, while the Justices were seated politely before him surrounded by hundreds Congressmen? [Just as shameful was the response by the Democrats: a standing ovation.] To call upon the Congress to countermand (somehow) by statute a constitutional decision, indeed a decision applying the First Amendment? [After saying, "With all due respect to the Separation of Powers", he once again demonstrated his disdain for our Constitution. Also he used the word "I" over 100 times, proving that he still thinks this is all about him, not the United States.]
Obama claimed that "the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign contributions -- to spend without limit in our elections." Obama added that he doesn't "think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities." ExposeObama.com adds: "However, the decision by the Supreme Court, which affirmed the right of advocacy groups, businesses and unions to spend independently on political speech, does not change existing federal law barring political contributions and expenditures by foreign nationals".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------President President Obama had the arrogance in his State of the Union speech to say, "I don't want an attitude!" Who does he think he is? A dictator? Will he further intimidate those who have "an attitude"? He talked about needing a Spending Freeze out of one side of his mouth while calling for Cap and Trade (a science with overwhelming evidence according to him), high speed rails, government health care and Stimulus 2 (cloaked in the new verbiage: a jobs bill), out of the other side of his mouth. And, yes, the spending freeze will only begin after another year of oversize spending by this Administration, and after the next election. How convenient... He wouldn't want Americans to be affected until after his cronies are safely in office, much the same as his ploy for the onset of health care reform. Meanwhile Chris Matthews of "I got a chill going up my leg" (over Obama) fame, last night actually said "I forgot for an hour that Barack Obama was black". I assume that means that most of the time that is the primary thing he is remembering. Nothing racist here, right?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From a NY Post Editorial: 'What frustrates the American people," President Obama declared Wednesday, "is a Washington where every day is Election Day," adding, "We can't wage a perpetual campaign." It was a welcome call to end the partisanship that has gripped the political process -- but a prescription rendered utterly meaningless when, just minutes after finishing the speech, Obama's permanent-campaign organization dispatched a mass e-mail soliciting, yes, campaign funds. [Really, can't we see that his Office of the Presidency has become one continual campaign, filled with his campaign-like speeches along with the requisite adoring crowds?]----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The western Antarctic peninsula has seen rapid ice loss as the world has warmed, but other parts of the continent have paradoxically been cooling, with a 10% increase in ice in the seas around the region in recent decades. Many climate change sceptics have used the Antarctic cooling as evidence against global warming.
Because the CFC gasses that caused the ozone hole have been banned, scientists expect the damage to repair itself within the next 50-60 years. By then the cooling effect will have faded out and Turner said the Antarctic would face the full effects of global warming. This means an increase in average air temperatures of around 3C and a reduction in sea ice by around a third.
[Does this mean that we will all be asked to spray with now-banned cfcs in order to save the planet?]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/ia_VHS_Great_Lakes.pdf Viral hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) virus is an extremely serious pathogen of fresh and saltwater fish, and is causing an emerging disease in the Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada. VHS has been found specifically in the waters of Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, and the St. Lawrence River. Due to its high mortality and severe economic consequences, VHS is classified as a reportable disease by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). In the past, VHS was thought to be a concern only for trout and a few other freshwater fish raised for commercial aquaculture in Europe. However, the recent outbreak in the Great Lakes region appears to be a new strain of the virus. This new strain is responsible for die-offs in the following species: muskellunge, smallmouth bass, northern pike, freshwater drum, gizzard shad, yellow perch, black crappie, bluegill, rock bass, white bass, redhorse sucker, bluntnose sucker, round goby, and walleye. How VHS was transferred to the Great Lakes or how long it has been in the ecosystem is not known.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The White House has asked the Justice Department to find a place other than NYC for the upcoming 9/11 trials. However, "President Obama is still committed to trying Mohammed and four other terrorist detainees in federal court," spokesman Bill Burton said Thursday. So - an exciting trial may be coming to your city....---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/01/impeach_eric_holder.html Ron Radosh (known for his work on the Cold War espionage) ...reviews the handling of the underpants bomber and reports in detail why historian Martin Sklar thinks Holder can and should be impeached. Sklar... argue[s] that the decision for a civilian trial disarms our country and objectively arms our enemies. Ignoring this outcome, he argues, is malfeasance of duty, "a betrayal of the public trust and a violation of the constitutional oath of office." Eric Holder also claimed that he had not discussed the decision with the President before announcing it publicly, and President Obama confirmed his account. Sklar argues that "this could be considered a serious malfeasance on the part of the President, a not minor breach of his oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, and a serious deficiency in a Commander-in-Chief, particularly in war time." Moreover, Holder is an executive officer appointed by and removable at the will of the President, and hence subject to Obama's authority. Legally, therefore, Sklar argues that if Obama does not countermand Holder's decision, or remove him from office, the decision for civilian trial is as much Obama's as Holder's.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment