“Here comes the orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason.” –Benjamin Franklin
One man at the UN gets it — Netanyahu drew the red line for Iran’s nuclear program
After two weeks of steady denials that recent strikes on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the U.S. embassy in Cairo, Egypt, were terrorist attacks — along with blaming a YouTube clip for violence and unrest in all of the Muslim world — this week opened with another smooth move from Team Hope-n-Change.
Kicking off his latest oratorical mini-seminar this week at the UN General Assembly, Barack Obama belted out a 30-minute paean to free speech and tolerance. He also grudgingly reserved only two paragraphs near the end of his screed to address what should have been his main point, the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Although two weeks late-to-need, the speech was nonetheless underwhelming when it finally arrived.
While the majority of his remarks were supposed to be devoted to advocacy for free speech and mutual respect between differing religions and worldviews, Obama undermined his own case by once again rejecting the individual free speech rights of the producer of the 14-minute YouTube clip, “The Innocence of Muslims.” He declared that the “crude and disgusting” video had “sparked outrage” among Muslims for its disparaging remarks about Mohammed. (As a side note, the man responsible for the video, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was arrested Thursday because unsupervised Internet activity allegedly violates his parole from a previous conviction.)
At once alienating the U.S. government from this particular individual’s right to free speech, Obama apparently saw no irony in affirming a commitment to that constitutional right for Americans. He must have been thinking in terms of “collective rights” — the only kind statists allow — so this oversight is somewhat understandable. It’s also interesting to note that just the day before this denunciation, Obama told the leftist gaggle on “The View” that “the best way to marginalize that kind of speech is to ignore it.” Obviously, he thinks the best way to “ignore” such a video is to denounce it in six different languages at the UN General Assembly.
Of course, immediately after stating that the U.S. Constitution protects free speech, he went on to make this pathetic addition: “I know that not all countries in this body share this particular understanding of the protection of free speech. We recognize that.” If the video is indeed one of the causes of violence in the Muslim world, it becomes self-evident that those affected countries are not exactly huge fans of free speech and tolerance. Pakistan tops our list as “most tolerant,” after Pakistan’s railway minister offered $100,000 to anyone who kills the maker of the video.
To be sure, Obama did attempt to make a case against extremism, reminding his audience, “Let us remember that Muslims have suffered the most at the hands of extremism.” While technically correct, it’s another Obama half-truth as most Muslim suffering is self-inflicted. None of these attacks and protests were the work of non-Muslims. (In related news, the New York display of the taxpayer funded “art” piece “Piss Christ,” in which a crucifix is submerged in the artist’s urine, did not cause rioting or murderous violence from Christians.)
Throwing gas on the fire, Obama let loose a string of “the future must not belong to” so-and-so remarks, including, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” He followed up this statement with a quote from Gandhi and a pleasant bromide about condemning intolerance, generally. Which statement is more likely to be repeated by Muslim extremists?
Again, perhaps the president should have focused on the imminent danger posed to the world by Iran. The ongoing Iranian nuclear crisis warranted short shrift in Obama’s speech — clearly, the matter is not a priority for him. Maybe it should be, though: In his usual, even-keeled delivery, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad this week again called for the “elimination” of Israel. We suppose this sounds slightly better than the phrase he used in 2005 — that Israel should be “wiped off the map” — but it still reflects deadly intent and nukes would be a tool to that end.
Nor would Obama meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who warned that Iran will effectively have a nuclear weapon by next summer, and helpfully drew a literal red line so the illiterates at the UN understand. The president was too busy chatting with the harpies on “The View” to be bothered with what he told “60 Minutes” was “noise.” Obama’s priorities are so out of whack, even NBC News Obamaphile Andrea Mitchell scolded, “This was not the moment to sit down with ‘The View.’”
No, it was actually the moment to sit down with other world leaders, one-on-one, in serious discussions about grave matters, as many foreign heads of state — including Israel’s Netanyahu — had asked him to do. However, that task fell to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. No doubt foreign leaders were unimpressed by the president’s acting like they didn’t exist.
Something else didn’t exist, either: respect from the president for those who were murdered in Libya. In that same “60 Minutes” interview, the tone-deaf Leader of the Free World referred to the violence in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere, including the context of four murdered Americans, as “bumps in the road.” As columnist Charles Krauthammer notes, “If Romney had said that the death of our ambassador, the attack on our embassy, the death of three other Americans, the hoisting of the black al Qaeda flag over four U.S. embassies, and demonstrations all over the Middle East all the way to Indonesia including a burning in effigy of Obama in Sri Lanka of all places is a bump in the road, it would be a three day headline.” Indeed. The president’s statement is disgraceful.
Read this HERE.
Another scheme to have the taxpayers pay for the retirement of others.
Calif. Creates State-Run ‘Opt-Out’ Private Sector Retirement Savings Scheme; AP Cites As Potential ‘National Model’
Read HERE and hope it does not go nationwide!
Here is an illegal way to make some things look good for obama…
It is beyond reason. The inmates clearly have control of the asylum. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s rant before the U.N. General Assembly in New York this week would better have been delivered in Stockholm. The famous Stockholm Syndrome was named for the way some hostages began to identify with their terrorist captors. It was offered as a psychological disorder.
In New York, at the U.N., this psychological disorder is the new order of business. Ahmadinejad called for a new world order. Of what? A rule of a U.N. world body dominated — or at least held hostage by — the Terroristans that make up an increasing number of the members of the General Assembly.
The U.N. was founded to test the idea of collective security. Every member of the General Assembly had to declare war on Nazi Germany in order to gain admission to the new world organization, in 1945. Why must they have declared war on Nazi Germany? Because any government that did not see the Nazis as hostile to world peace could not be trusted to engage to work for world peace, could not be trusted to recognize rising threats to peace. Nazi Germany was thereby branded an international outlaw regime.
But how to explain Ahmadinejad’s oh-so-respectful reception at the U.N.? He has openly called for the destruction of other U.N. members — namely the United States and Israel. He represents a regime that made war on the United States as long ago as 1979. When the Iranians invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in that year — and held our people hostage for 444 days — they were violating the oldest rules of diplomacy. A nation’s embassy in a foreign capital is sovereign territory of that nation. Invading and occupying our Embassy was, under centuries of international law, no different from invading and occupying Tallahassee, Florida or Olympia, Washington.
This is the eve of the most important election of our lifetimes. Quite possibly the most important in our country’s two hundred and thirty six year history, keeping mindful that we were fighting for our freedom then, and that this election is no less than a war to maintain those freedoms preserved for us in fields of conflict all over the globe.
Barack Hussein Obama is an evil man. Look beneath the false smile and ingratiating words and there’s rot and corruption seething away just under the surface. This is an extreme left-wing radical, inculcated from birth with ultra radical memes. Why be surprised by a snake when it behaves like a snake?
There are some disturbing facts out there that seem to be getting ignored in all the Lame Stream Media’s hype, hoopla and misdirection. In the first part of this article, published last week, I mentioned Janet (the Mustache) Napolitano. Her ‘Homeland Security’ has set new standards for intrusive deviance and malfeasance in office… while ‘securing’ absolutely nothing. Three hundred and fifty-one or more Homeland Security ‘officers’ dismissed for theft. Thuggish behavior, more in line with Adolf Hitler’s ‘Brown Shirts’ than an American agency, are the rule rather than the exception.
Finish reading it all HERE.
Tell you, every single muslim dominated country will hammer the useless nations to stop free speech until it becomes international law!
(AP) — Algeria is proposing an initiative under the auspices of the United Nations that would limit freedom of expression in order to prevent the stigmatizing and denigrating of Islam.
Algeria’s Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci said a global response is needed following the recent violent demonstrations provoked by a U.S.-produced video which mocks Muslims and the Prophet Muhammad.
Dozens of world leaders raised the issue of free speech versus denigration of religion at this year’s ministerial meeting of the U.N. General Assembly.
Malaysia’s foreign minister Anifah Aman told the assembly on Saturday that attacks on Islam shouldn’t be protected by freedom of speech laws.
“Why is it when Muslims are stigmatized and defamed, it is defended as freedom of expression?” he asked.
Could This Be a Trick to Drive Even More Investors to U.S. Treasuries?
The financial crisis of 2008-2009 crumbled the U.S. economy to a degree not seen since the great depression. Now another economic problem is emerging—a problem 46 times bigger than the gross domestic product (GDP) of the U.S. economy.
It’s the financial crisis involving derivatives markets.
Starting next year, to “prevent” another financial crisis, traders need to back up their derivatives by top-rated collateral such as U.S. Treasuries. (Source: Bloomberg, September 11, 2012.) The current value of the derivatives markets stands at about $648 trillion!
This collateral rule was the result of the Dodd-Frank Act, which was passed in the midst of the financial crisis of 2008. Companies like American International Group Inc (NYSE/AIG) did not have their derivatives backed up by enough capital; American International ended up needing a $182.3-billion bailout to protect itself from collapse.
It has been said that the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression was caused by derivatives backed by insufficient collateral. Hence, one would think raising the collateral requirement by which derivatives are backed should avert another financial crisis. It sounds like a great idea, in a perfect world. But it’s not the case in this current U.S. economy.
Two important points here:
The U.S. Treasury market is worth about $11.0 trillion. But the derivatives market is worth $648 trillion. The demand for U.S. Treasuries will surge next year, as derivative players rush to back their derivatives with U.S. Treasuries. Doesn’t this almost guarantee the yields on U.S. Treasuries will fall even lower?
Bank of America Corporation (NYSE/BAC) and JP Morgan & Chase Co (NYSE/JPM) have the biggest derivative components on their balance sheets. Together, they hold $140 trillion of derivatives instruments! If the collateral requirement to hold derivatives is increased, then banks will have to hoard more cash in the case their derivatives position goes against them.
But backing derivatives with liquid collateral causes a cascading effect—lending could be curtailed as cash requirements increase. But if we have no lending, we have no growth, and the lingering effects of the financial crisis continue.
As I have been writing, the U.S. economy is at a critical point. The derivative collateral issue is just going to be another red light. These regulations are being implemented at a time when banks are still struggling to fix their balance sheets and lending is soft. Sure, we do not want another financial crisis in our economy, so more regulation is important, but the U.S. economy is still battling the previous financial crisis.
Continue reading on how our dollar will be worth less and less HERE.
About time that SNL and comedians started really making jokes of obama. Obama will know it is really bad when letterman starts cranking out obama jokes!
I think we’re at the most dangerous time in our political history in terms of the balance of power in the role that the media plays in whether or not we maintain a free democracy or not. You know, when I first started in politics – and for a long time before that – everyone on both sides, Democrats and Republicans, despised the press commonly, because they were SOBs to everybody. Which is exactly what they should be. They were unrelenting. Whatever the biases were, they were essentially equal-opportunity people.
That changed in 1980.
There are a lot of reasons for it. It changed—an important point in the Dukakis-Bush election, when the press literally was trying to get Dukakis elected by ignoring what was happening in Massachusetts, with a candidate who was running on the platform of “He will do for America what he did for Massachusetts”—while they were on the verge of bankruptcy.
Also the change from evening news emphasis to morning news by the networks is another factor that’s been pointed out to me.
Most recently, what I call the nepotism that exists, where people get jobs—they’re married to people who are in the administration, or in politics, whatever.
But the overwhelming bias has become very real and very dangerous. We have a First Amendment for one reason. We have a First Amendment not because the Founding Fathers liked the press—they hated the press—but they believed, as [Thomas] Jefferson said, that in order to have a free country, in order to be a free people, we needed a free press.
This may or may not be a halloween prank from the old days. I could not find where this took place or when.
This is the Buckley Family. The children’s names were Susan and John. As a Halloween joke, all the kids in the neighborhood were going to get a dummy and pretend to chop its head off. The Buckley children thought it would be hilarious to actually murder their mother, so when the kids walked up the the door, they got an axe and slaughtered her. Once everyone figured out what they had really done, they called the police, but the kids were long gone by then. The only picture of them was this photo, taken by a trick or treater. The mothers body was later found half eaten.