State of the Union, Supreme Court Decision, Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia

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?]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/01/ozone-antarctica The hole in the Earth's ozone layer has shielded Antarctica from the worst effects of global warming until now, according to the most comprehensive review to date of the state of the Antarctic climate. But scientists warned that as the hole closes up in the next few decades, temperatures on the continent could rise by around 3C on average, with melting ice contributing to a global sea-level increases of up to 1.4m. [Haven't we been frightened in the past by our enlarging Ozone hole, to the end that sprays with CFC gasses were banned for our protection?]

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.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama Need For Teleprompters, Global Warming Lies, and Deficit Spending

Does anyone want to see what an "empty suit" looks like? If so, take a gander at the following website. It shows our President speaking to a group of 6th grade students. His suit is so empty that even in this venue, he must use teleprompters! And he is consistently described as an eloquent speaker! http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//100119/480/9131bc77c7534185bdbf267bb4ab8497/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an example of how the White House is cutting expenses because we are in a recession. In addition to spending $447 for lunch while staying in a hotel, here is another way Michelle is dealing with unemployment: hiring more government workers....
Total Personal Staff members for First Ladies paid by taxpayers:

Mamie Eisenhower: One-- paid for personally out of President's salary.
Jackie Kennedy: One
Roseline Carter: One
Barbara Bush: One
Hilary Clinton: Three
Laura Bush: One
Michele Obama: Twenty-two
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington - A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday indicates that 7o% of Americans believe that the Democrats' loss of their 60 seat supermajority in the Senate is a positive move for the country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=519048 Politics: During last year's presidential campaign, Democrats blasted "sweetheart deals" for companies like Halliburton and vowed to end no-bid contracts. Now the Democrats' political donors are reaping them. Monday, Fox News found that Checchi & Company Consulting was awarded a $24,673,427 no-bid contract for "rule of law stabilization services" inside Afghanistan. And by coincidence, its president, Vincent Checchi, donated $8,350 to Obama's campaign, according to opensecrets.org.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you still wondering if mankind is the cause of global warming? Are you questioning whether the "scientists" are giving us valid information regarding the warming? http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=519049 An Investors' Business Daily Editorial notes: With so much of the science behind climate change coming under attack, especially among scientists, it's been a harsh winter for the global warming crowd. In the last week, it was revealed that U.S. researchers working for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are excluding temperature data from cold regions for a database used by the U.N. in its global warming scare campaign.

The NASA agency uses data from "sites in relatively warmer places, including more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea — which has a warming effect on winter weather."

In a paper published on the Science and Public Policy Institute Web site, D'Aleo and Smith say the "NOAA ... systematically eliminated 75% of the world's stations with a clear bias toward removing higher-latitude, high-altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be cooler.

Then, just last weekend, we find that same 2007 IPCC report included another phony claim: that "the rapidly rising costs" of natural disasters since the 1970s is linked to global warming.

British newspapers reported Sunday that that assertion was neither peer-reviewed nor published in a scientific paper when the IPCC report was issued. When the paper that the claim was based on was published in 2008, its authors said:

"We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe losses."

Now the IPCC says it is "reassessing the evidence."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim Garaghty of National Review Online opines about the Ohio speechmaking of Obama: I thought he was defensive, prickly, almost indignant that he's found himself in the tough spot that he's in.

He began by talking about how much he didn't like being in Washington, and apparently said something about the job being stifling. Sir, you spent two years trying to get this job.

One of his rallying cries is, "This is not about me!" Yes, Mr. President, but it's about the decisions you make and the policies you're trying to enact. I realize he's using it to justify a new tax on banks, but I think "we want our money back" is a dangerous chant for a man who so steadily expands government spending. [I will add that if it isn't about "him", then maybe he should stop referring to himself over one hundred times in one speech, as has been his habit] http://www.breitbart.tv/132-the-number-of-times-obama-refers-to-himself-in-one-speech/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This from the Washington Examiner: Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke's confirmation vote by the Senate for a second four-year term has been delayed, pending receipt by the committee of documents concerning the Fed's role in the massive bailouts of the U.S. financial industry in 2008 during the economic meltdown. Three Republican senators - all members of the Senate Banking Committee - are pushing for release of all documents concerning the Fed's role in the bailouts. [Thank you, voters of Massachusetts, for giving the Republicans more courage!]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commenting on Obama's proposed freeze on spending on a very small part of the budget, CBO Directory Douglas Elmendorf had this to say: ''U.S. fiscal policy is on an unsustainable path to an extent that cannot be solved by minor tinkering,''

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the NYT: Advocates of more aggressive steps to address the national debt failed Tuesday in their effort to create a bipartisan commission to press for tax increases and spending cuts, but President Obama now plans to establish a similar panel by executive order in his State of the Union address on Wednesday. The proposal for a commission died when its supporters could not muster enough votes in the Senate. [The panel Obama will now form will not be accountable to the Congress....]

Obama Quote, Brown Victory, Supreme Decision

“Don’t be afraid to see what you see.”
Ronald Reagan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Don't make any sudden moves. This was usually an effective tactic, because (white) people were satisfied as long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied; they were relieved -- such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn't seem angry all the time."
Do these words seem a little racist to you? Can you guess whose said themt? It comes from Barack Hussein Obama, in his book Dreams From My Father.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quip of the day, from columnist Charles Krauthammer on Friday's (January 22) Special Report with Bret Baier on FNC. Baier wondered: “Conservatives, pretty good week?” Krauthammer affirmed: You know, this is an amazing week. Massachusetts goes Republican, health care dies and the Supreme Court unshackles the First Amendment. It's the best week I've had since spring break in medical school -- and I don't even remember it [laughter from other panelists].

"And there was another item which you mentioned: Air America, the liberal talk show network went out of business -- which is a redundancy because nobody was listening anyway".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics writes: Obama was the smooth Constitutional Law professor from an elite university who projected a sense of knowledge, competence, and analytic pragmatism married to the lofty, eloquent rhetoric of hope. Put differently, candidate Obama was above running a populist campaign - which is why he struggled so mightily against Hillary Clinton with blue collar folks who cling to their God and guns.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Krauthammer: Obama said: "If Republicans want to campaign against what we've done by standing up for the status quo and for insurance companies over American families and businesses, that is a fight I want to have."

The bravado lasted three days. When Obama campaigned in Boston on Jan. 17 for Obamacare supporter Martha Coakley, not once did he mention the health care bill. When your candidate is sinking, you don't throw her a millstone.

After Coakley's defeat, Obama pretended that the real cause was a generalized anger and frustration "not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years."

Let's get this straight: The antipathy to George W. Bush is so enduring and powerful that ... it just elected a Republican senator in Massachusetts? Why, the man is omnipotent.

78 percent of Brown voters said their vote was intended to stop Obamacare. Only a quarter of all voters in the Rasmussen poll cited the economy as their top issue.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Politico: Congressional Democrats — stunned out of silence by Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts — say they’re done swallowing their anger with President Barack Obama and ready to go public with their gripes.

If the sentiment isn’t quite heads-must-roll, it’s getting there.

Hill Democrats are demanding that Obama’s brain trust — especially senior adviser David Axelrod and chief of staff Rahm Emanuel — shelve their grand legislative ambitions to focus on the economic issues that will determine the fates of shaky Democratic majorities in both houses.

“I haven’t seen Rahm Emanuel except on television. We used to see him a lot; I’d like him to come out from behind his desk and meet with the common folk,” added Pascrell. The following recent quote of Rahm Emanuel ought to give them second thoughts on that idea......

Rahm Emanuel commented on the Supreme Court decision on the First Amendment of our Constitution: he thinks it's highly overrated!!!! What a great appointment by our President, don't you think?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What the following quote by Barack Obama tells me is that this decision by the Supreme Court must really give the Republicans an advantage in the next election. I've always been disgusted by McCain Feingold and blamed McCain for being part of it.

"With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington–while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That’s why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less". Later in the week there is this: "But the Supreme Court’s ruling, which lifted some limits on corporate and union campaign spending, represents perhaps the gravest threat of all to Americans since it could mean the end of “common sense legislation” regarding healthcare or the environment, Obama said".

Commentary Magazine has these comments: This is as noxious a statement concerning the Supreme Court that has, in my memory, ever been issued by the White House. Let’s count the ways. First, the president — who tells us he is a serious constitutional scholar – offers not a single word of substantive criticism about the Court’s analysis. He treats the Court — as most liberals do, frankly — as a policymaking body. In this case, he doesn’t like the outcome and blasts away at the result, transparently using the Court to regain his populist footing with the public.

Second, what in the world is a bipartisan response to a First Amendment ruling? He’s going to amend the Constitution? He’s going to pack the Court? The lack of acknowledgment that this is a principle of constitutional law, one at the foundation of our democracy, is jaw-dropping. You’ll notice what is not in the president’s statement — “First Amendment’ or “Constitution.” There isn’t a legislative “fix” to the First Amendment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the Washington Post: Justice Stevens, in commenting on his dissent to the decision wrote of his conservative colleagues' "agenda" and said they had transformed a simple case about whether a conservative group's movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton violated McCain-Feingold into a constitutional quandary. "Essentially, five justices were unhappy with the limited nature of the case before us, so they changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The AP is reporting: U.S. investors overwhelmingly see President Barack Obama as anti-business and question his ability to manage a financial crisis, according to a Bloomberg survey. The global quarterly poll of investors and analysts who are Bloomberg subscribers finds that 77 percent of U.S. respondents believe Obama is too anti-business and four-out-of-five are only somewhat confident or not confident of his ability to handle a financial emergency.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------