Time For a BBA?

Sounds GREAT. But will it ever pass?

Hey folks,

Happy Hump Day to ya. Yeah this SOUNDS great. It really does. But will it ever pass? I have my doubts on BOTH sides. According to Human Events Online - EXCLUSIVE: Governors Barbour, McDonnell, and Perry Call on Congress for a Balanced Budget Amendment by Emily Miller 03/29/2011

Governors Haley Barbour (R.-Miss.), Bob McDonnell (R.-Va.), and Rick Perry (R.-Tex.) sent a letter to the Democrat and Republican congressional leaders on Tuesday evening

calling on them to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) to the U.S. Constitution.

“We believe it is time that the federal government be required to live within its means and balance its books every year, just as we are required to do in our respective states,” wrote the three governors in a letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS.

The governors’ letter was sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), Speaker of the House John Boehner (R.-Ohio), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnnell (R.-Ky.), and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (R.-Calif.).

“Currently, 49 states have some form of a balanced budget requirement. Millions of working families across the country balance their checkbooks every year and we believe that Congress needs to do the same,” the governors wrote.

Because the federal government is not required to balance its budget, this year alone spending will exceed revenue by $1.5 trillion. The accumulation of the years of federal budget deficits has left the U.S. with a national debt of $14.1 trillion. The debt is projected to hit the statutory limit within the next two months, at which point Congress will have to decide to raise the debt ceiling.

“In Mississippi we are required to have a balanced budget. That legal requirement makes a world of difference. And [it’s] getting our legislature to live within our means,” Barbour told HUMAN EVENTS in an interview. “The country would benefit if there were a national Balanced Budget Amendment.”

“The fact that the federal government has no Balanced Budget Amendment is to me one of the great cancers of the republic,” McDonnell told HUMAN EVENTS by phone. “I think that transferring the spending restraints that are required in every state through a Balanced Budget Amendment is what needs to be done at the federal level.”

The governors’ letter supports specific BBA legislation in the House sponsored by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R.-Va.) and in the Senate by Senators John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah). “We support and appreciate their leadership and their effort to solve the deepening budget crisis and ask that you work with them to pass a balanced budget amendment in the 112th Congress,” the governors wrote.

In early February, Cornyn organized a conference call with McDonnell, Barbour, Perry, and Goodlatte to get state support for a BBA. A constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate, so it would require bipartisan support for passage.

“From my conversation with them, I think they see themselves as a kind of counterbalance to the overreach in Washington,” Cornyn told HUMAN EVENTS of the call with the governors. “They can use the authority they’ve been given in their states by organizing together and forcing Washington to change. I think that’s a very constructive development.”

The governors have all been struggling to balance their own states’ budgets during this current legislative term. Along with a weak economy, the states are also forced to budget for the unfunded federal mandates, especially from the health care law known as ObamaCare, as well as education and environmental regulations. ObamaCare has forced more people into the Medicaid program, which is split 50/50 between the states and the federal government.

“We have sued the federal government to try to declare ObamaCare unconstitutional. It would increase our Medicaid rolls by two-thirds. We already have more than 20% of our population on Medicaid. And this will put us up to more than a third of our population on Medicaid. And by the time the program is fully in effect, it will cost us an extra $440 million a year,” Barbour told HUMAN EVENTS.

“Medicaid is a budget buster for Virginia and, really, every state,” McDonnell told HUMAN EVENTS. “This ObamaCare bill not only adds more spending, but it really hamstrings the governors with these maintenance-of-effort requirements. I mean this is eligibility requirements. But you really can’t do anything creative or entrepreneurial or try to reduce Medicaid spending in your states. So it’s a bad situation. And the federal government doesn’t seem interested at this point in giving us the tools to control the costs.”

According to Article V of the U.S. Constitution, an amendment must get a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, and be ratified by three-quarters of the states. So in the Democrat-majority Senate, the amendment would need all 47 Republicans votes plus 20 Democrats for passage.

McConnell is expected to launch an all-out push to get grassroots support for a BBA during the debate with President Obama over the terms of raising the debt ceiling.

The Senate voted on March 2 for a non-binding amendment for a BBA, sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee (R.-Utah). The final vote was 58-40. If that test vote would be an accurate measure for vote counting, then only nine more Democrats are needed to pass a BBA this year.

The last time that the Senate voted on a binding Balanced Budget Amendment was in 1997, when the measure sponsored by Hatch, failed by only one vote. The 1997 BBA was supported by 11 Democrats, four of whom are still in the Senate: Max Baucus (Mont.), Tom Harkin (Iowa), Herb Kohl (Wisc.), and Mary Landrieu (La.).

For the March 2 vote, Kohl voted in favor, but Baucus and Harkin voted against it. Landrieu did not vote. The three who voted in favor of the BBA in 1997 are considered good potential supporters of a 2011 BBA, which leaves six more needed for passage.

In the House, Goodlatte’s BBA bill is considered more likely to get bipartisan support for passage. The House passed a BBA in 1995 as part of the “Contract With America.”

Under the new Senate Republican version of the BBA, the federal government would have to balance federal spending to incoming revenue each year, cap spending at 18% of the gross domestic product (GDP), require a two-thirds vote in Congress to pass a budget that is out of balance or to raise taxes, mandate that the President submit a balanced budget each year, and get a three-fifths vote to raise the debt ceiling.

“Undoubtedly, Washington has a spending problem, and this problem is getting worse,” the three governors wrote in the letter to Congressional leaders. “Hence, a balanced budget amendment is a common-sense measure that is long overdue and whose time has come.”

Now again, SOUNDS like a great idea. But they need Two Thirds to pass it. That means Two Thirds that will have to agree to spend within their means? Like I said, I have my doubts.

Peter

God Speed Geraldine Ferraro

Preview for Sunday 032711

Hey folks,

Happy Sunday to you. Welcome to the Big Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog. You know who this is. You know where to find me. Glad you checked in today.

Coming right up?

Alternative Energy Farce

Alternative Energy Farce Part Two

Dangers In Your Back Yard

DLA For Sunday 032711

IWA For Sunday 032711

Before we get to all that. I just want to take a second and say God Speed to Geraldine Ferraro. May her family have the peace and comfort they need in this time.

I like Geraldine Ferraro. She really made quite the name for herself as a District Attorney Prosecuting cases that involved Rape, Child Abuse and Domestic Violence, before running for Congress. She won U.S. House of Representatives from New York's 9th Congressional District in Queens in 1978 with 53 percent of the Votes in a THREE Way race. She appealed to everyone at the time. Democrats because she was one, Republicans because she called herself a "small c Conservative." Which means she was a SANE Democrat. {Smile} She even appealed to Minorities because of her Italian Heritage.

Of course, along with all that, she also made history in 1984 in the Presidential Primary Season, becoming the first Woman VP Candidate with Walter Mondale. She was strong, funny, and serious. She was the Left's version of Sarah Palin. Yet, of course, they LOVED her.

Again, may you rest in peace Geraldine. You WILL be missed.

Be right back.
Peter

Alternative Energy Farce

I keep trying to caution you. WAIT and SEE.

Hey folks,

Yes, I'm talking about Energy again. Why? We NEED it. There is starting to be more and more talk about the higher Gas Prices. We have already discussed this in depth. Now more and more Liberals are starting to call for investigations once again. We already KNOW one of the BIGGEST contributing factors. Obama.

Him and his Ilk, LOVE this. They WANT people out there talking about speeding up the switch to Alternative Energy as a way to combat the Higher Gas and Heating Costs. The higher Electric Bills. The higher Food Costs. But as we have also discussed in depth, it is THEIR Policies that are driving the cost of EVERYTHING up.

But here we are again, Alternatives. Lets look at three. Solar, Wind, and Ethanol.

First up, Solar. Remember this? OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center

11 Thousand Homes, out of a Population of around 18,537,969 at a cost of about $340 Million dollars. So that's about $30,900 a home.

Maybe a good start, but only 11,000 homes in one County, in one State.

However, my Brain tells me that even though this may work in Florida, it will not in Washington. They do not have enough Sunshine there. So they will have to come up with something else. So Solar will NEVER be Universal. What works here, may not work elsewhere. FPL spent $688 Million the these three Projects. like I said, for this one, a cost of about $30,900 a home. Where is that money coming from? Of whom are they going to pass the cost onto? What will Seattle do? Will it work? We should know in about 5 years. So what are we going to do in the meantime? What about the other around 18,526,969?

So what about Wind? For a Windmill to be efficient, the Wind must be blowing at a content 30 miles an hour. However, it makes so much noise, the residents that live near them, SUED. So now they will turn them OFF when the Wind hits 23 MPH. I'm not kidding. According to Human Events Online - Painful Lessons for Wind Power by Brian Sussman 03/24/2011

Wind energy took another blow—this time in Massachusetts.

Wind One is the 400-foot-tall wind turbine owned by the town of Falmouth, on the southwestern tip of Cape Cod. The residents of Falmouth initially welcomed Wind One as a symbol of green energy and a handy way to keep local taxes down. Electricity generated by the turbine would be used to power the municipality’s infrastructure, thus shaving about $400,000 a year off its utility costs.

Installed in the spring of 2010 at a cost of $5.1 million (with some $3 million derived through grants, government kickbacks, and credits), the huge turbine cranks out 1.65 megawatts of electricity during optimum conditions.

The topography of Falmouth is stunningly beautiful. Small ponds, creeks, pines, and oaks rest adjacent to the rocky beachfront. What’s totally out of place is a monstrous pillar of white steel rising from the countryside, topped with its whirling three-bladed rotor. However, proving that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, one local told a Public Radio reporter the turbine is “quite majestic.”

But as soon as her majesty was switched on, residents began to complain—Wind One was as loud as an old Soviet helicopter.

Neil Anderson lives a quarter of a mile from the turbine. He’s an avid supporter of alternative energy, having owned and operated a passive solar company on Cape Cod for the past 25 years. “It is dangerous,” he told WGBH in Boston. “Headaches. Loss of sleep. And the ringing in my ears never goes away. I could look at it all day, and it does not bother me … but it’s way too close.”

Tired of the constant chopping sound, pained residents decided to lawyer up. This month a deal was struck with the town to disengage the turbine when winds exceed 23 miles an hour. This is problematic because giant windmills such as Wind One operate at optimum efficiency at about 30 miles an hour.

So now Falmouth’s investment has taken a hit. According to Gerald Potamis, who runs the wastewater facility, shutting off the turbine during higher winds will cost the town $173,000 in annual revenue, because now they’ll have to rely more on natural gas.

Truth is, wind turbines have always suffered from the NIMBY—not in my backyard—syndrome. Look no further than the largest concentration of wind turbines in the world, constructed in the 1970s just east of the San Francisco Bay. Some 4,500 windmills are ensconced atop 50,000 acres of grassy hills, generating a modest 576 megawatts of power. Officially known as the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, one would suppose the wind farm is an icon of greenness. But instead, Altamont Pass is the poster girl of eco-infighting.

Ever since the multitude of windmills was installed, a significant increase in the numbers of dead birds has been reported. Activists immediately went ballistic, demanding action. Over the decades, lawsuits have been filed and millions of dollars spent procuring studies to track the bird body count in an effort to determine how to address the problem.

In 2008, a two-year, taxpayer-funded examination of the problem was conducted by the Altamont Pass Avian Monitoring Team. During the study period, the monitoring team determined that 8,247 birds were wacked dead by the turbine blades.

In 2010, a settlement was finally reached between the Audubon Society, Californians for Renewable Energy, and the company running the wind farm, NextEra Energy. Nearly half of the smaller turbines will now be replaced by newer, more bird-friendly models. The project is expected to be complete by 2015 and includes $2.5 million for raptor habitat restoration, all of which is expected to increase the price of energy being supplied to the grid by this portrait of green power.

Painful to the ears, and especially painful to the birds, the painful lesson environmentalists need to learn is that the answer to America’s growing energy needs is not blowing in the wind.

Be right back with Part Two.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center
Human Events Online - Painful Lessons for Wind Power
Ecopolitology - Cornfields vs. Oilfields (Infographic)

Alternative Energy Farce Part Two

Solar, Wind, Ethanol

Hey folks.

We're back.

OK. So we just got done talking about Solar and Wind. Remember also, when done Drilling, the Platforms go away and there is no real evidence that they were even there. Windmills? Well, they are just left in place. Cost too much to remove them. Just a bit of a side not there.

So what about Ethanol? As we have already discussed in the past:

Not tested.
Not Cheaper.
Causing Food Riots.
And some want to INCREASE the usage.

So is it a great Alternative? I just got this last week in the Emails.

Hello Peter!

Kate here, and we've created an interesting infographic that I think you might enjoy. With today's ever increasing gas prices, it's a wonder why we don't push harder for alternative sources of fuel. But at the same time, these alternative sources aren't as amazing as you would think. We've highlighted the pros and cons regarding corn ethanol, and presented information about just how effective an energy source it really is.

Now this was put together by Timothy Hurst over at Ecopolitology. Although this guy IS a Environmentalist, I would not call him an Environut. He is a guy that is concerned about the Environment and takes the time to really study things like this. Here is the Chart of the Pros and Cons of Ethanol.



So what is more important to you? Food, or taking even more land away to grow "energy." Now I appreciate that there may be some positives. Just like there are positives with Solar and Wind, IN THEORY. But the problem is, bringing the THEORY into Reality. To wake up from the "Green Dream" and realize that this is DECADES out in the future, and we have $4.00 a gallon Gas Prices NOW. And going up as we speak. There is no magic switch to switch to. There are no Alternatives on a mass and affordable scale.

As I keep saying folks, lets do it. Lets keep taking these baby steps toward a "Greener" future. But in the meantime, lets use what we have, and get more of it. Lets USE OUR OWN RESOURCES. Lets increase supply, American Security, and lets lower prices. The answer is right here, in front of our faces.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center
Human Events Online - Painful Lessons for Wind Power
Ecopolitology - Cornfields vs. Oilfields (Infographic)

Dangers In Your Back Yard

We all need to be aware of this.

Hey folks,

Especially if you, like me, have Kids. We do not know. I will admit, I did not care. I love the way they look. Never took much more thought about it than that. What am I talking about? Plants.

Look, I'm no Gardener. Not by a long shot. I have no idea what this Plant is compared to that Plant. If I think it's pretty, or gives off a great smell, there is a good chance I would go for it. Plant them and wait on the Blooms.

However, I did not take thought as to the fact that these could pose a danger to me, Pets, and more importantly, my Children. Until now. BG sent this one in to me saying that we all need to be aware of this. I couldn't agree more. So that is what I want to talk about today in the Health and Science Segment this Week.

Plant exposures are a common source of poisoning in the United States, with 58,933 exposures reported to the Poison Control Centers in 2009. Two thirds of these events occurred in children younger than 5 years of age, reflecting exploratory ingestions in this age range. Most exposures are benign, although serious morbidity and mortality do occur. A regional poison center or a medical toxicologist can assist with patient treatment and potentially with plant identification. The regional poison control center should be contacted (800-222-1222) to discuss optimal management of all known or suspected poisonings. Pictured is a foxglove (Digitalis species), which contains cardioactive glycoside known to causes digitalis toxicity if ingested.

This is courtesy of Medscape Today, from WebMD it goes on to talk about this Story.

An 11-month-old child presents with oropharyngeal erosions and dysphagia after chewing the leaves of this common household plant. To what genus does this plant belong? Philodendron

In this particular case, esophageal erosions and stricture developed, followed by sudden death 17 days after exposure thought to be due to vagotonia secondary to the esophageal lesions.

Due to its common use as an ornamental houseplant, pediatric exploratory ingestions of Philodendron species are relatively common. The leaves of these plants contain raphides of oxalate, spindle-shaped crystals that cause mechanical irritation when chewed. Rarely, airway edema and obstruction may ensue. Ocular exposure causes pain, redness, and swelling. Other genera that share the philodendron's broad, showy leaves, raphides of oxalate, and clinical manifestations include Caladium, Dieffenbachia, and Spathiphyllum. Pictured on this page is Caladium bicolor.

There is a Slide show over at there sight, where that talk about Photodermatitis, Physostigmine, Antidigoxin Antibodies, Poison Hemlock, Toxicodendron, Ricinus, Holly Berries, Aconitum, Euphorbia pulcherrima, or Poinsettia, Phytolacca Americana, or Pokeweed, and much more. Like what happens when you come into contact, and true stories of those that have, and the conclusions of these incidents.

Now I will admit, I do have some of these in my back yard. I had NO Idea that they were dangerous. Now I know. You may have to sign up for this one, but it's FREE and it's worth it, for the knowledge you will gain. Be safe out there, and keep your Kids safe out there, by teaching THEM what they need to be cautious of.
Peter

Sources:
Medscape Today

DLA For Sunday 032711

Nothing much to add to this.

Hey folks,

Our winner of the Display of Logic Award this Week, speaks for himself. I have nothing to add to this. It's by Bjorn Lomborg, and it appeared in the USA Today, Thursday 032411 - 'Earth Hour' won't change the world. Just read and absorb the WEALTH of information in this one Article.

Copenhagen's central square hardly competes with New York's Times Square for glitz, but it is prime commercial space in my home of Denmark. Now there's a new advertiser among the neon signs: a brightly lit billboard exhorts everyone to participate in "Earth Hour," the 60 minutes on Saturday night in which the whole world is urged to dim the lights to cut greenhouse emissions.

There is a certain irony in renting brightly lit advertising space to exhort us to save electricity for one hour — but this is apparently lost on the organizers. Dimming the lights is promoted online as a "vote for mother Earth" that will reveal "the impact we have on the environment."Actually, the only real result will be to make it harder to see. The environmental effect of the past three annual lights-out hours has been negligible. If everyone in the world participated in this year's Earth Hour, the result would be the same as turning off China's carbon emissions for roughly 45 seconds.

When we switch off the electricity, many of us turn to candlelight. This seems natural and environmentally friendly, but unfortunately candles are almost 100 times less efficient than incandescent light bulbs, and more than 300 times less efficient than fluorescent lights. Using one candle for each extinguished bulb cancels the CO2 reduction; two candles emit more CO2.

Millions of well-intentioned people will take part in Earth Hour. I commend the efforts by organizers to encourage participants to continue engaging in environmentally friendly choices such as recycling or saving energy after the hour has actually ended. But I fear that the campaign is symptomatic of an environmental movement that has become too focused on hollow, feel-good actions that at best only inch us in the right direction.

In a bid to cut carbon emissions, the environmental movement has pushed for "green" alternative energy to be used around the world. Many countries now provide financial support to solar panels and wind turbines. But this technology is still inefficient, so the environmental results are negligible.

Solar subsidies

Germany is a good example. Despite being a fairly cloudy country, it has led the world in solar panel subsidies, spending $75 billion putting inefficient, uncompetitive solar technology on rooftops. This delivers a trivial 0.1% of Germany's total energy supply, and will postpone the effects of global warming by just seven hours in 2100. With the financial crisis, Germany and others have to rein in lavish subsidies. It is easy to forget that while sunlight is renewable, subsidies certainly aren't.

Similarly, many environmentalists enthusiastically endorsed government financial support for biofuel as a silver bullet to cut carbon emissions. The subsidies are now massive and entrenched, and one-sixth of the world's corn supply is burned just to help fuel America's cars, contributing to the highest-ever food prices and increasing starvation.

As other countries race to create more food, forests are being razed for agriculture, causing more emissions than will be saved from biofuels over the next hundred years.

It's easy to feel as if we're helping the planet if we have a government-funded solar panel on the roof, or fill our car with fuel from a tank adorned with green slogans — but the reality is that we're doing no such thing.

'Feel good' policies

It is time to look to a smarter solution to global warming that would do more than just make us feel good about ourselves. We will not make a sustainable shift away from dependence on fossil fuels so long as the alternatives remain so expensive. Solar panels are still about 10 times more costly than fossil fuels in terms of cost per unit of energy output. That's the reason only well-heeled Westerners (being paid significant subsidies by their governments) can afford to install them.

Consider how this would change if our innovation made solar cells or other green energy technology cheaper than fossil fuels. Everyone would shift to the cheaper and cleaner alternatives, including the world's developing nations, who cannot afford to engage in today's hollow, "feel good" policies.

Much more investment in research and development is needed to bring about game-changing breakthroughs for alternative-energy technologies — something in the order of 0.2% of global gross domestic product, or $100 billion annually.

The harsh reality is that the shift away from fossil fuels will not be easy. Reducing carbon emissions is a lot more difficult than dimming the lights for an hour. It requires genuine willpower and investment. Instead of just dimming our lights, we need to get much brighter about solving global warming.

Bjorn Lomborg is the subject of the film COOL IT, out on DVD March 29. He is also the author of The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It, and director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center at Copenhagen Business School.

Be right back.
Peter

IWA For Sunday 032711

More Proof that Liberals only care about Dictating, not following.

Hey folks,

Time to wrap things up with the Idiot of the Week. Back on September 16, 2010, Rep. Anthony Weiner D-NY, was all about Obamacare. He even claimed HE wrote it.

Here's a clip of Rep. Anthony Weiner at a town hall meeting, asked about the health care bill, declaring, "I wrote the bill. ... The bill and I are one."

Weiner made the comments on Monday night at the Middle Village Property Tax Association, taking rather strong ownership of the congressional reform bill that few are embracing when a voter asked about it. Weiner had been a strong advocate for a single-payer option, which was never part of the final drafts.

Well, we all know what happened. It passed. It became the Law of the land, until a Judge struck it down ruling the whole thing Unconstitutional. That is not stopping Obama and Crew from continuing to implement it. But now, the Bill, I mean Weiner, wants to be the next Mayor of New York, wants NOTHING to do with the Bill he CLAIMED to have written.

According to the Politico - Anthony Weiner: Waiver might work for New York

Rep. Anthony Weiner said Wednesday he was looking into how a health law waiver might work for New York City.

Weiner, who is likely to run for mayor of New York, said that because of the city’s special health care infrastructure, his office was looking into alternatives that might make more sense. Weiner is one of the health care law’s biggest supporters; during the debate leading up to reform, he was one of the last holdouts in Congress for the public option.

“The president said, ‘If you have better ideas that can accomplish the same thing, go for it,’” said Weiner. “I’m in the process now of trying to see if we can take [President Barack Obama] up on it in the city of New York, … and I’m taking a look at all of the money we spend in Medicaid and Medicare and maybe New York City can come up with a better plan.”

New York is one of two states that pass on Medicaid expenses to cities and localities, so “the city winds up having an enormous Medicaid expense,” Weiner said.

Well, then you should be all FOR it. Right? Obamacare will SAVE us money. Right? YOU wrote the Bill. YOU are all for it. Before you were against it?

The congressman was trying to debunk Republican “myths” about the health care law during a speech at the Center for American Progress. He used the waivers as way to describe how flexible the law actually is and how “this notion that the government is shoving the bill down people’s throats” is not true.

“The administration needs to make this argument more forcefully,” he said. “A lot of people who got waivers were … people who are our friends.”

The New York Democrat said that he does not have the power to get the city to apply for a waiver but that he is “personally looking at whether he can make the numbers work.”

“We in New York already have hospitals, we already employ doctors and we employ nurses. We have a lot of uninsured people. … [Setting up] the exchanges is the one piece of the puzzle that would be difficult for us to do,” he said. “I’m just looking internally to whether the city can save money and have more control over its own destiny.

"Save money and have more control over its own destiny?" THAT is what EVERYONE wants. Not just friends of Obama and Crew. EVERYONE. We all want the Government to step aside and allow ALL Americans the RIGHT to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. We HAD the greatest Healthcare System in the World. Obamacare threatens to, and WILL, if left un-repealed, destroy that. Our Idiot knows it. That is why he wants a Waiver. Yeah, he might want to claim credit for writing it. He might have preached about the Virtue of it. He may want YOU to be forced to obey it. As long as, uh, he doesn't have to as well. But then again, he IS a Liberal.
Peter

Sources:
Politico - Weiner says he 'wrote' the House health care bill - Maggie Haberman: Weiner says he 'wrote' the House health care bill September 16, 2010
Politico - Anthony Weiner: Waiver might work for New York

Japan Food Off Market, Increases World Food Shortage

While we WILLING cut our own.

Hey folks,

Happy Friday!! I hope you have a great one. Since it is Friday, time to check in with the Emails. This week was pretty good. But I do need to comment on this one. Not the reason it was written, but the REALITY of the situation.

"Peter, would you eat, drink, or even handle anything from Japan right now? Why would this be a question?"

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing when they came out day before yesterday and said, "don't give infants the water. It is TWO TIMES the safety level. But it's safe for Adults." Uh, yeah, no thank you. But there is a bigger point to be made here.

What LP is talking about here is this Story from Breitbart - Global food scare widens from Japan nuclear plant Mar 24 09:08 AM US/Eastern

Countries across the world shunned Japanese food imports Thursday as radioactive steam leaked from a disaster-struck nuclear plant, straining nerves in Tokyo.

The grim toll of dead and missing from Japan's monster quake and tsunami on March 11 topped 26,000, as hundreds of thousands remained huddled in evacuation shelters and fears grew in the megacity of Tokyo over water safety.

The damage to the Fukushima nuclear plant from the tectonic calamity and a series of explosions has stoked global anxiety. The United States and Hong Kong have already restricted Japanese food, and France wants the EU to do the same.

Russia ordered a halt to food imports from four prefectures -- Fukushima, Gunma, Ibaraki and Tochigi -- near the stricken plant 250 kilometres (155 miles) northeast of Tokyo.

Moscow also placed in quarantine a Panama-flagged cargo ship that had passed near the plant and put its 19 crew under medical supervision after detecting radiation levels three times the norm in the engine room.

Australia banned produce from the area, including seaweed and seafood, milk, dairy products, fresh fruit and vegetables.

It said, however, that Japanese food already on store shelves was safe, as it had shipped before the quake, and that "the risk of Australian consumers being exposed to radionuclides in food imported from Japan is negligible".

Singapore also suspended imports of milk products and other foodstuffs from the same four prefectures and Canada implemented enhanced import controls on products from the quartet.

The Philippines banned Japanese chocolate imports.

"Food safety issues are an additional dimension of the emergency," said three UN agencies in a joint statement issued in Geneva, pledging they were "committed to mobilising their knowledge and expertise" to help Japan.

Japan was taking the right actions, said the International Atomic Energy Agency, World Health Organization, and Food and Agriculture Organization.

"Food monitoring is being implemented, measurements of radioactivity in food are taking place, and the results are being communicated publicly."

Now it goes on to talk about the Water, and the whole disaster situation. Click the link to check it out. But, well, so, to answer your question, NO. No I would not eat nor drink anything that is coming from Japan right now.

However, this also illustrates another point of reality. The more you restrict something, the less you have. When you have little of something, something interrupts supply, you have even LESS.

We have already seen World Food Supplies diminish because of the "Green Dream." Ethanol. We are PAYING Farmers in this Country, and many others are as well, to STOP GROWING Food, and START growing Fuel. Our Administration in this Country and others, want to increase Ethanol to 15 percent of every gallon of fuel. As we learned in that past Conference Call, the tests are underway, but no one knows the effect it will have in your cars. If it damages the Engine, who's responsible for fixing it? So on and so forth.

So untested, unknown, and it really is NOT the Saviour from Oil that some make it out to be. I have an EXCELLENT Graph on this I will share with you, about the Pros and Cons of Ethanol this Weekend. But we already know, that this untested, pursuit has lead to Food Prices Skyrocketing, and even Riots. We are WILLING reducing the World Food Supply, so when something happens like this, we have even LESS.

It's the same thing with Oil. We are PAYING BILLIONS to foreign Governments to DRILL off our Coasts. We are allowing foreign Countries to put underwater storage tanks off our Shores. Yet we are not allowing US companies to Drill. We are not giving US Citizens Jobs. We are not using our OWN resources. So we have LESS Supply. World demand up. Japan, Libya, and turmoil in the entire Middle East Region, effects both Demand and Price. Libya and the Middle East, and World demand, already increased the Price to over $105.00 a Barrel. NOW add in Japan? Last I checked, $110.00. With no real desire for some to increase Production.

So when you start restricting whatever it is, you have limited supply stream. When something happens to disrupt that supply stream, you GET and HAVE even LESS of what you have ready restricted yourself into having.

This is why it is so important to have TRULY intelligent people, Adults if you will, looking at REALITY and the World Stage. This is why we need truly, not invented or alleged, but TRULY intelligent people coming up with better Policies, than those we have now.
Peter

Link: Breitbart - Global food scare widens from Japan nuclear plant

Professionally Trained Phoniness Of Liberals

Nothing about them is REAL, Truthful, or Heart felt.

Hey folks,

This is WAY TOO FUNNY! Seriously {Laughing} I can't believe what I just read. Happy Thursday to ya. {Laughing} I really can't believe what I just read. Well, I CAN. But the fact that they A, WROTE IT, and B, it was Published. I KNOW that it's true. But to admit it? Of course they have LONG stopped trying to hide who they are. Now they are actually showing us how they operate.

Truth is, NOTHING about these people is real. Nothing about these people is Truthful. There are no FIRM and concrete founding beliefs. There is NOTHING. They are trained from an early age to just accept whatever they are told, FEEL good about what they are told, and THAT will make them smart, caring, and loved.

They, some, do not understand WHY people are dropping Papers, leaving Liberal News Networks, and Independents are FLOCKING to the Right in droves? Why are people joining Talk Radio, the Internet, and Fox News? Because CONSERVATISM is REAL. Conservatives are never wavering, always constant, and able to explain WHY. We can back what we say with FACTS and TRUTH. WE win every time when we debate these people on the merits of WHATEVER the topic is.

For years, until Bush 43, the Liberals attempted to hide who they are. After Bush 43? They came out of the closet. They no longer attempt to hide themselves. They believed that due to Bush, and then Iraq, that there were enough people in this Country that HATE Bush, HATE War, and WANT a new Socialistic type change for this Country. Problem is, they were WRONG.

This Country IS Conservative. Most in this Country LOVE this Country, love God, do not WANT this Country to be changed into the new USSA. Another thing they were wrong about, even after YEARS of the Public School System, there really are not enough Stupid People in this Country, willing to blindly accept whatever they are told and just go with it.

So now that they are out of the Closet, there is no going back. Now they have to get people to believe that THEY are the smartest people in the room. Smart, sophisticated, right on whatever they think or say. They want people to believe that anyone that disagrees with them, are stupid, Religious Hicks, and Neanderthal. But it is THEY, that look like fools anytime they go up against a REAL Conservative. So they need to be TRAINED. {Laughing} They need to be trained how to deal with those dumb Hicks.

I'm going to stop talking now. Just read this. See you tomorrow for From the Emails Friday.

Washington Post - Media Matters boot camp readies liberal policy wonks for the camera’s close-up By Jason Horowitz, Tuesday, March 22, 8:15 PM

“I’m here to be intensely trained,” Lee Brenner announced as he came through the door of a discreet building near Dupont Circle.

The brick carriage house is usually the headquarters of the Mathematical Association of America, but for a few days in the middle of March, the left-wing organization Media Matters for America converted it into a partisan boot camp where rebel forces were trained for combat on Fox News. Over four grueling days, Harvard-honed instructors drilled a dozen softie policy wonks, molding them into an elite unit of smiling, succinct and well-coiffed talking heads.

Since its inception in August 2009, the Progressive Talent Initiative, or PTI, has trained nearly 100 pundits who have appeared 800 times on television and radio. Media Matters uses that metric to pitch donors for more contributions, but its leadership believes that the surge of camera-ready liberals has recaptured lost ground in the media wars against conservatives.

“There was a chronic imbalance,” said David Brock, the founder of Media Matters, which picks up the entire cost of the course. “We didn’t just want to accept that this is the way it is.” Brock is a former conservative writer at the American Spectator who was instrumental in efforts to discredit Anita Hill and to oust Bill Clinton, and who made a sharp left turn a decade ago.

The primary mission of Media Matters, he said, is to obsessively monitor Fox News and call attention to its distortions. But now it’s moving into the operational phase, transforming from observers to shock troops. The organization, he said, had to “professionalize the training and booking” of a left-leaning counterpoise.

Media Matters selected the coterie of attractive, articulate participants from 100 applicants, the largest pool so far. All in mid-career, the class included liberal think tank directors, former Capitol Hill staffers and presidential campaign aides, a pollster, a university professor, a combat veteran and contestants from both “American Idol” and “The Apprentice.”

Brenner, a former producer of CNN’s “Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer” and political director at MySpace, had recently founded a digital communications firm called FastFWD Group and an online magazine called HyperVocal.com.

To observe the training, The Post agreed to withhold the names of participants who asked not to be identified, which many of them did when instructors warned that a public alliance with Media Matters could jeopardize their chances of getting booked on Fox. Since Brenner said he had already criticized Fox on the record, he for one was willing to risk alienating “On the Record With Greta Van Susteren.”

Camera practice

On Wednesday morning, Brenner, who has black coiled hair, a pleasant demeanor and a taste for the blazer-and-jeans look, climbed the stairs to perform his “baseline video” hit with instructor John Neffinger.

Neffinger, 39, is one of the three partners in KNP Communications, a D.C.-based firm that Media Matters contracts to conduct the training. An attorney with a boyish, Tom Cruise charm (equal parts “The Firm” and “Magnolia”), Neffinger had a promising career teaching public speaking to executives, including those who “sold cigarettes to kids,” he said. He abandoned all that for the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard.

There, he met Matthew Kohut, 45, a reserved former jazz bassist working as a speechwriter for the renowned professor Joseph Nye. Kohut, the son of a famous pollster, introduced Neffinger to his pal, Seth Pendleton, 47, who earned a master’s degree from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and is a member of the Screen Actors Guild. (In 1994, Pendleton appeared as a stand-in on the Albert Einstein-themed romance “I.Q.” during a scene crawling with rhesus monkeys.)

After John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign, the three Democrats decided to use their gifts for communication to rescue their ailing party.

“I’m not going to play gotcha with you,” Neffinger said to Brenner as he directed him to a seat in front of a video camera. “What’s your issue area?”

Brenner explained that his firm dealt with new-media journalism.

“Joining us now to talk new media is Democratic strategist Lee Brenner,” Neffinger boomed in character.

“Thanks for having me,” Brenner said. And suddenly, the interview didn’t go so well. The corners of Brenner’s mouth tended to twitch on the way to a smile. But Neffinger accentuated the positive, especially the sign-off, when Brenner looked most at ease. “As we like to say,” he said, “you stuck the landing.”

Brenner joined the other participants in a wood-paneled room on the carriage house’s ground floor. A camcorder stood on a tripod in the middle of desks arranged in a horseshoe formation. Black and white boards hung on the walls. Brock, with graying hair and blue tie, offered some words of wisdom to the class. Their conservative antagonists had all gone through rigorous media training at the Leadership Institute, he warned, but now they, too, would be armed with the ammunition to compete.

Pendleton took the floor.

“You are going to be challenged. You are going to be exhausted. You are going to be frustrated,” he said, before surveying the group about how they felt when they went on television.

“I tend to get dry, so I need to hydrate,” Brenner said to the class. “Hydrate. Pee. Call my mom.”

‘Liberal’ associations

The problem for the soldiers of the left, according to Media Matters instructors, is that they are just too smart for their own good. The traditional dependence on facts and figures, on being right, is no longer germane. Too often these wonks disappear into the policy weeds or fall through the cracks of nuance.

Sources:
Washington Post - Media Matters boot camp readies liberal policy wonks for the camera’s close-up

Mortgage Interest Deduction Under Attack

Now THERE is a way to help Housing.

Hey folks,

So all last week we talked about Energy. We talked about how using more of our own, would jump start the Economy, Increase our National Security, Create Jobs, and Lower Prices. Over all, Energy is a key factor in our, and or, ALL Economies.

Another? Housing. Some would say, that Housing is what started us down this Recession Road. Foreclosures on the rise. STILL. No really significant increase in New Homes. People not being able to get loans. People not willing to take the chance with the biggest purchase they will ever make.

So what does this Administration do? Throw money at the Bankers. Move money around. Talk tough. SAY that they want to help the Home Owners, and CLAIM that they want to help those looking for a Home.

However? At the same time, they are looking at killing a HUGE incentive. The Mortgage Interest Deduction. So what does that mean? When you go to file your Taxes, that little chuck that you get to right off, the Interest that you paid toward your Mortgage, will not longer be there. So? You will pay MORE in Taxes.

Now just like higher Gas Prices really having no effect on those in Congress. {Even if they had to pay their own. Millionaires all} People like Rush, or Soros, even people like Mikey Moore, no, none of these people are really impacted all that much with higher Gas Prices. What is $5.00 a Gallon when your Income is in the Millions?

But for Grandma in upstate NY? Trying to heat her Home? The Unemployed trying to drive to interviews? The Single Mom working two Jobs just to put food on the Table, which she may not be able to afford now anyway, now that the Prices of EVERYTHING are going up? These are the people that the reduction or elimination of the Mortgage Interest Deduction will hit the hardest. Those on fixed incomes, and the Middle Class. Receiving even MORE of a benefit from this are those with Children.

Now there are some trying to do something about this.

SaveMyMortgageInterestDeduction.com is dedicated to preserving the Mortgage Interest Deduction and protecting Homeownership.

The income tax deductions for mortgage interest and real estate taxes primarily benefit middle class taxpayers, and larger benefits are collected by larger households and families, such as those with children.

Introduced by Rep. Gary Miller of California, H. Res. 25 supports retaining the mortgage interest deduction.

At present, there are more than 40 co-sponsors for this important resolution.

There are ways for people to take action in support of the mortgage interest deduction.

Owners and renters think tax incentives to promote homeownership are reasonable.

72 percent of home owners agree and 82 percent of renters.
81 percent of the public feels that the mortgage interest deduction should remain in the tax code.

Support is strong across party lines.

69 percent of Republicans, 70 percent of Independents, and 83 percent of Democrats think it's reasonable to have tax incentives for homeownership.

70 percent of the public would oppose a political candidate who proposed eliminating the mortgage interest deduction.

NAHB research reveals that tampering with the mortgage interest deduction would have a disproportionate impact, as a share of household income, on younger home owners.

Analysis by NAHB experts debunks the myth that the mortgage interest deduction is claimed by a relatively small number of taxpayers and primarily benefits higher-income taxpayers.

Other housing provisions might be at risk:

Home equity loan interest deduction.
Property tax deduction.
Capital gains tax exclusion.
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit.
Depreciation for residential rental property.

More information and news releases can be found at www.SaveMyMID.com.

So it WILL effect you. Most of us. This is another POOR choice by this Administration and the Liberal Left, TAX, TAX, TAX, crowd. Now if you want to get involved in this?

Show YOUR support for the mortgage interest deduction and tell your Representative to co-sponsor H. Res. 25:

Call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 to reach your Representative's office.

OR

Visit www.House.gov to find your Representative's website and send an e-mail in support of H. Res. 25.

AND BE SURE TO

Thank your Representative if he/she is already a co-sponsor of H.Res. 25 or decides to become a co-sponsor.

Read the resolution
Co-sponsors

Again folks, those hardest hit with Liberal Ideals? Minorities, the Poor, and the Middle Class. You know, those they CLAIM to be trying to help.
Peter

More On The Absurd Claim, Oil Companies Not Drilling In Held Lease Areas

They continue to spread the Lie.

Hey folks,

During that Conference call last week, I asked John Felmy, Chief Economist with API, about this absurd argument that Obama brought up about Oil and Natural Gas Companies, not drilling or doing anything in areas that they have already gotten approved and granted. Here is the exchange.

34:19 MR. CARLOCK: This is Peter from OPNTalk again, if nobody has a question right this second. Could we just clarify one more thing from the president’s speech? And I know that a lot of people on the left jumped all over it when he said it. There are a lot of permits already in existence that nobody is drilling yet, or drilling now. And is the explanation not as simple as, well, there’s just not enough oil to produce to justify the expense?

34:52 MR. FELMY: Well, I think you mean leases. And there are leases that aren’t being explored for right now primarily because of the permitting situation. If you can’t get a permit, you can’t explore in those leases. And it’s also a case that – you know, this issue has come up before. And it’s being spun in a way that’s just ridiculous.

You know, you got all these idle leases, and you have companies that are just sitting on them. I mean, that’s just plain silly. These companies have spent millions of dollars in terms of looking at getting bids out and looking for it. And they’re going to prioritize where they think the best opportunity is based on their seismic work and whatever. And you got a series of priorities that you would focus on irrespective of the permitting issue.

But now, it’s hard to make an argument: Well, why aren’t you drilling when the same, you know, folks are not releasing permits to drill? So that’s the added dimension. You know, we heard this back a couple years ago. And it was just silly. It was a desperate attempt to, you know, add Washington political spin.

35:57 MR. CARLOCK: Very good.

Those are just the facts folks. That is the reality of the situation. However, some in Government wants to continue this absurd argument. So here is even MORE on why this is a completely ridiculous argument on the Left. Once again Ladies and Gentlemen, John Felmy.

Energy Tomorrow - Developing Domestic Energy - What the Issue Is
By John Felmy

As a rule of thumb it is generally not a good idea to spend a lot of time arguing against the ridiculous. But when the ridiculous is coming from folks who have the power to implement policies which will harm our economic and energy security an exception to the rule is warranted. Such is the case with the notion that oil and natural gas companies don't want to develop oil and natural gas resources.

"The issue "is not a failure of the government to lease lands or to authorize drilling," [Sen. Robert] Menendez said. "It is that millions of acres under lease exist but the industry is not developing them."

Of course a year ago Sen. Menendez let "...the administration know that offshore drilling is a non-starter for me," and earlier in the week we got "The other side of the aisle likes to say if we just produced more oil and gas, prices will go down, but the facts suggest something different." So I suppose it is good news that the Senator is now eager for increased domestic production. But the above argument is what we call "The 'Use It or Lose It' Deception" and while there are numerous political reasons why we might be seeing it right now, I will simply assume those making the argument have no idea how energy production works. Erik explains here:

"Companies purchase leases for the right to explore for the resources. You don't know if a lease actually contains oil or natural gas until you move forward and drill an exploratory well. Companies purchase a large portfolio of leases to give them the greatest opportunity to find oil and natural gas. They work hard to survey and study all of their leases with the hope that they can narrow the list down to a subset that have the best likelihood of actually containing oil or natural gas. However, it is not uncommon for a company to spend $100 million to drill a well and find no oil or natural gas. In fact, companies drill more wells that have no oil or natural gas than wells that actually do."

In other words, within the leased lands there are more areas which do not contain oil than do. A company that randomly dropped $100 million wells onto leased land where there was no oil would soon be out of business and would contribute nothing to the supply of oil. The effect on price? Please consult the law of supply and demand.

Now please ask yourself. Who in their right mind would advocate for expensive, symbolic projects which raise costs for consumers and return nothing? Oh wait, we are in Washington, please withdraw the question.

Developing America's domestic oil and natural gas resources is necessary to power our nation's economy, create jobs and enhance our nation's energy security. And America's oil and natural gas companies invest heavily and want to invest more, to develop these resources. Unfortunately, from the very beginning, the current administration has taken dozens of specific steps to stop or delay development. And as to those leases, Erik has more:

The administration itself is preventing the industry from developing these leases because it is not issuing permits to drill or conduct seismic studies of these leases. They want the industry to develop the leases it already possesses, but they won't grant the permits to do so.

The administration's approach to energy policy is to propose and support energy taxes. However, a recent study by Wood Mackenzie concludes increased access to domestic oil and natural gas--rather than increased taxes on the U.S. oil and natural gas industry--is the best strategy for increasing government revenue, jobs and energy production. Increased access could (by 2025) create 530,000 jobs, deliver $194 billion more in tax, royalty and other revenue to the government, and boost domestic production by four million barrels of oil equivalent a day. Raising taxes on the industry with no increase in access could reduce domestic production by 700,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day (in 2020), sacrifice as many as 170,000 jobs (in 2014), and reduce revenue to the government by $128 billion dollars by 2025.

America's oil and natural gas industry supports 9.2 million jobs. Positive energy policy has the potential to increase that number, while negative policies can put many of those jobs at risk. Energy is a global business and negative policies could shift these American jobs offshore to other areas around the world. We have already seen rigs leave the Gulf and move to Africa and South America.

What we don't need from policy makers is a communications campaign designed to obfuscate the fact that an energy policy of "no" is no energy policy for America. What we need from policy makers is a firm "yes" to developing the energy that Americans use today, and will use tomorrow.

Get briefed on the onshore and offshore lease programs.

So there you have it once again folks. FACTS and REALITY vs the Political Spin and Rhetoric. Ask yourself this. "What about me?" Someone tells you that you can go did for Gold in Area A. So you buy that right. You go and scan the area, you find little to nothing. However, all indications are that Area B DOES contain Gold. So you go back and they say, "Sorry. We gave you a lease for Area A, So unless you spend a few Million on the Lease you already have, we will not give you one for B." So ask yourself, would you throw that money away KNOWING that there is no Gold? Or at least not enough to make up the cost of going to get it? Of course not. That is what the Government is doing. They KNOW that there is no Oil in these areas, or the Companies WOULD be Drilling as we speak. They ARE they ones playing games here, not the Oil Industry. Most likely at the Direction of Obama. It really IS just that simple.
Peter

Sources:
Energy Tomorrow - Developing Domestic Energy - What the Issue Is

78 Percent of NY Votes Agree Performance Over Unions,

Preview for Sunday 032011

Hey folks,

I know, I know,

Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a temporary restraining order Friday, barring the publication of a controversial new law that would sharply curtail collective bargaining for public employees.

But that will now go to the Courts and they will lose. The Unions that is. Not to mention, that this very Ruling in illegal. But it will play out, and Wisconsin will win in the long run.

Happy Sunday to ya folks. I AM your Provocateur of Thought himself, Peter Carlock, and this IS the Big Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog. Glad you stopped by. We are fully loaded today and I can wait to get started.

Remember, you can follow along on Twitter, get the quote of the day, and see the Pictures, ETC, over at Facebook. If you want to be a part of the OPNTalk Blog, the Email is opntalk@gmail.com.

Coming right up today?

Why Hillary, and Many Others Are Tired Of Obama
You Are A Victim of Bullying, Unless You Are White
More Facts On Drilling, Permits, and Obama
Do Not Fear Japan Radiation In America.
DLA For Sunday 032011
IWA For Sunday 032011

All that in just a second. First, the unions are losing big time, all across this country. The popular opinion of most Voters is that unions, which is just a siphon for Cash to the democrat Party, have over stayed their welcome. Most feel that Performance should dictate everything from Salaries, to actually keeping your job. Not "Collective Bargaining." You want proof of this. Check this out. According to the NY Post - Majority of New York City voters think teacher layoffs should be based on performance: poll. Yes New York City Voters. You can't get a more Liberal Town than New York City.

LIFO must go!

A whopping 78 percent of New York City voters said teacher layoffs should be based on performance, not the seniority-based "last-in, first out" law, a poll released today found.

Even 63 percent of voters in union households agree that layoffs should be based on merit, not LIFO, according to the Quinnipiac College survey.

Meanwhile 73 percent of voters said layoffs of cops, firefighters and other government workers should be determined by performance, not seniority. And a majority of voters in union households agree.

The results mirror the findings of a statewide poll released last month, which found that 85 percent of voters backed the elimination of LIFO.

Unions are WAY out numbered. But did you catch that one part? Read that again.

Even 63 percent of voters in union households agree that layoffs should be based on merit, not LIFO, according to the Quinnipiac College survey.

That is rank and file Union Members. Even THEY say Unions must go. New York folks. If New York Liberals feel this way, imagine, well, you don't have to. According to this, "85 percent of Voters backed the elimination" of Unions. 85 percent.

I know, LIFO stands for Last In, First Out. Or Seniority. But that IS one of the first things Unions fight for. They want Tenure for Teachers, Police, Firefighters. They want "Collective Bargaining." Which means they want to keep the ability they have to strong arm both the Private and Public Sector Employers to LIFO, Salaries, Medical Coverage, and Retirement Plans. They WANT total control over the Employer, and of course, all that money. The People are starting to see this for what it is. The People are saying ENOUGH.

Going to fill my cup. Be right back.
Peter

Sources:
JS- Dane County judge halts collective bargaining law By Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel March 18, 2011
NY Post - Majority of New York City voters think teacher layoffs should be based on performance: poll.

Why Hillary, and Many Others Are Tired Of Obama

The World will love us?

Hey folks,

Thanks to Obama and his indecision, his reckless and seemingly careless attitude, towards, well, everything, the World doesn't love us more. They do not fear us. They are actually confused about us.

It really is simple folks. It is so bad that even Hillary wants out. When prodded several times about her future with Obama, she gave the same one word answer over and over again. No.

No to continuing her role she has now. No to VP. No to anything to do with Obama. She is said to be tired, and worn out. She is said to be in complete disagreement with Obama on nearly everything on the World stage.

One of her latest missions, go to Paris, meet with the G8 Foreign Ministers, and assure them of our commitment on Libya. What happened? She did what she was told, as Obama goes off on another Vacation, and the World was left confused. Not reassured. But confused. According to FP - European governments “completely puzzled” about U.S. position on Libya Posted By Josh Rogin

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's meetings in Paris with the G8 foreign ministers on Monday left her European interlocutors with more questions than answers about the Obama administration's stance on intervention in Libya.

Inside the foreign ministers' meeting, a loud and contentious debate erupted about whether to move forward with stronger action to halt Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi's campaign against the Libyan rebels and the violence being perpetrated against civilians. Britain and France argued for immediate action while Germany and Russia opposed such a move, according to two European diplomats who were briefed on the meeting.

Clinton stayed out of the fray, repeating the administration's position that all options are on the table but not specifically endorsing any particular step. She also did not voice support for stronger action in the near term, such as a no-fly zone or military aid to the rebels, both diplomats said.

"The way the U.S. acted was to let the Germans and the Russians block everything, which announced for us an alignment with the Germans as far as we are concerned," one of the diplomats told The Cable.

In other words, she did what Obama told her to do. Talk but say nothing. Do not actually take a firm position. Let others lead.

Clinton's unwillingness to commit the United States to a specific position led many in the room to wonder exactly where the administration stood on the situation in Libya.

"Frankly we are just completely puzzled," the diplomat said. "We are wondering if this is a priority for the United States."

As Obama goes on another Vacation with the Family. I wonder why they are puzzled.

On the same day, Clinton had a short meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in which Sarkozy pressed Clinton to come out more forcefully in favor of action in Libya. She declined Sarkozy's request, according to a government source familiar with the meeting.

Sarkozy told Clinton that "we need action now" and she responded to him, "there are difficulties," the source said, explaining that Clinton was referring to China and Russia's opposition to intervention at the United Nations. Sarkozy replied that the United States should at least try to overcome the difficulties by leading a strong push at the U.N., but Clinton simply repeated, "There are difficulties."

Yeah. The difficulties ARE Obama. He is the problem. That's what she was saying without saying it folks. The difficulties ARE Obama.

One diplomat, who supports stronger action in Libya, contended that the United States' lack of clarity on this issue is only strengthening those who oppose action.

"The risk we run is to look weak because we've asked him to leave and we aren't taking any action to support our rhetoric and that has consequences on the ground and in the region," said the European diplomat.

British and French frustration with the lack of international will to intervene in Libya is growing. British Prime Minister David Cameron said on Tuesday that Arab sentiment was, "if you don't show your support for the Libyan people and for democracy at this time, you are saying you will intervene only when it's about your security, but you won't help when it's about our democracy."

France sent letters on Wednesday to all the members of the U.N. Security Council, which is discussing a Lebanon-sponsored resolution to implement a no-fly zone, calling on them to support the resolution, as has been requested by the Arab League.

"Together, we can save the martyred people of Libya. It is now a matter of days, if not hours. The worst would be that the appeal of the League of the Arab States and the Security Council decisions be overruled by the force of arms," the letter stated.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe wrote on his blog, "It is not enough to proclaim, as did almost all of the major democracies that ‘Qaddafi must go.' We must give ourselves the means to effectively assist those who took up arms against his dictatorship."

In an interview with the BBC on Wednesday in Cairo, Clinton pointed to the U.N. Security Council as the proper venue for any decision to be made and she pushed back at the contention by the British and the French that the U.S. was dragging its feet.

"I don't think that is fair. I think, based on my conversations in Paris with the G-8 ministers, which, of course, included those two countries, I think we all agree that given the Arab League statement, it was time to move to the Security Council to see what was possible," Clinton said. "I don't want to prejudge it because countries are still very concerned about it. And I know how anxious the British and the French and the Lebanese are, and they have taken a big step in presenting something. But we want to get something that will do what needs to be done and can be passed."

"It won't do us any good to consult, negotiate, and then have something vetoed or not have enough votes to pass it," Clinton added.

Clinton met with Libyan opposition leader Mahmoud Jibril in Paris as well, but declined to make any promises on specific actions to support the Libyan opposition.

We feel ya. We are with ya. But, uh, well, good luck.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry (D-MA) also doubled down on his call for a no-fly zone over Libya in a speech on Wednesday at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"The international community cannot simply watch from the sidelines as this quest for democracy is met with violence," he said. "The Arab League's call for a U.N. no-fly zone over Libya is an unprecedented signal that the old rules of impunity for autocratic leaders no longer stand... The world needs to respond immediately to avert a humanitarian disaster."

And Clinton's former top aide Anne-Marie Slaughter accused the Obama administration of prioritizing oil over the human rights of the people of Libya.

"U.S. is defining ‘vital strategic interest' in terms of oil and geography, not universal values. Wrong call that will come back to haunt us," she wrote on Wednesday on her Twitter page.

Thank you Obama. Obama plays King, as the World becomes more and more dangerous. Obama plays King, as the World Burns. We actually had the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney come out and say THIS.

“We are leaving on schedule on Friday. It bears repeating that this is a crisis – there is no question about it. And it is a crisis in Japan. It is not a crisis in the United States.”

So yeah, Obama is still going on Vacation. It's their problem. Not ours. He is too busy to worry about it. Too busy to deal with Libya, the Energy Situation, Housing, Jobs, and the Economy. He is too busy traveling the World, to places where nothing is happening, to deal with anything else. What about Iran? How did Little Hitler get bumped off the Radar? Seriously. Let him get his Bomb, and wipe out Israel. Then maybe we might think about it. Right? And they wonder WHY the World is puzzled and are starting to think, perhaps, we just no longer care?
Peter

Sources:
FP - European governments “completely puzzled” about U.S. position on Libya
CFP - Narcissist Of The Day

You Are A Victim of Bullying, Unless You Are White

According to Obama's DOJ that is.

Hey folks,

What do you think of Hate Crimes? You know where I stand on this. Crime is Crime. Does it make it less terrible if the Victim is White, rather then Black? Christian rather than Jew. Man rather than Woman?

Seriously. Are you MORE Dead if you were killed by someone of whom it is perceived to have Hated you? Are you more dead? Does a Rape of a White Straight Woman mean less than a Rape of a Black Lesbian?

Well it does if you are a Liberal. Yes. If they think that they can get inside your head, or rather, put you into one of their little box of stereotypes, well, then they will charge you more because you are that much more evil,,wait, can't use that word. Uh, you are more, uh, Oh forget it. It just is badder if they say so. Those poor Minorities deserve added and special protection.

So is the same, it would seem, for Obama and his Wife. They have taking up the cause of ending Bullying. As long as the Bullied is not a White Guy. I'm not kidding. According to The Washington Times - DOJ to white male bullying victims: Tough luck

The viral video sensation showing a bullying incident at an Australian school has brought the issue of bullying back into the spotlight. Here in the United States, the Obama administration has made school bullying a federal issue. Last week, President Barack Obama addressed an anti-bullying conference with First Lady Michelle Obama at his side. The administration's anti-bullying campaign has been ongoing since the beginning of Mr. Obama's term. The Department of Justice announced in December 2010 its intention to hold liable school districts that fail to protect students that are bullied.

DOJ’s website states:

The Civil Rights Division and the entire Justice Department are committed to ending bullying and harassment in schools, and the video highlights the Department’s authority to enforce federal laws that protect students from discrimination and harassment at school because of their race, national origin, disability, religion, and sex, including harassment based on nonconformity with gender stereotypes.

The statement later says:

The enforcement of the Equal Protection Clause, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 in school districts is a top priority of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. Additional information is available at the Civil Rights Division’s Educational Opportunities Section website at www.justice.gov/crt/edo/.

Here is the catch. DOJ will only investigate bullying cases if the victim is considered protected under the 1964 Civil Rights legislation. In essence, only discrimination of the victim’s race, sex, national origin, disability, or religion will be considered by DOJ. The overweight straight white male who is verbally and/or physically harassed because of his size can consider himself invisible to the Justice Department.

Apparently, the Justice Department is going by George Orwell’s famous Animal Farm ending: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.”

“We can only take action where we have legal authority,” wrote DOJ spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa in a December 2010 e-mail to The Washington Times Water Cooler. She continues:

“As stated in the website below, we are statutorily authorized to initiate suits under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, and under Title III of the American with Disabilities Act. More information on the Civil Rights Act, Equal Educational Opportunities Act, and the ADA can be found here:

http://www.justice.gov/crt/edo/faq.php#3 "

So there you have it folks. Poor White Male Kids beware. The Obama Administration and his DOJ do not care about you. Worse than that, they have basically just declared open season on ya.

The Justice Department’s anti-bullying initiative is tantamount to bringing hate crime legislation to the public school system. Obviously, not only is the heterosexual white male student out of luck but inner city minority students lose out in this deal too.

If a schoolyard bully is a straight black male and his target is another straight black male where does that leave the victim in the eyes of Attorney General Eric Holder? What about two female students of the same sexual orientation and race? Is the victim in the latter situation considered to be less equal in the eyes of Obama’s Justice Department than a minority student who is picked on by a heterosexual white male student with no disabilities?

Unfortunately, the Justice Department is politicizing its priorities yet again. One must wonder why the administration believes it should be micro managing local school districts bullying problems. When the Justice Department is more interested in making ideological statements through seemingly sugar coated campaigns, no one should feel protected.

Do YOU feel protected? Seriously? We have already learned that the DOJ will not investigate crimes when the Defendants are Black. We already know that Obama only seems to get involved in overthrowing Governments that are being opposed by Islamofascists. I mean help the people. We already know that he doesn't care about some of our own Allies. He is on Vacation again while the World Burns. So do you? Do you feel protected?
Peter

Sources:
The Washington Times - DOJ to white male bullying victims: Tough luck