Obama compares Iranian hardliners to GOP and then …

Obama, in his speech attempting to rally support for his nuke deal with Iran, compared the hardliners in Iran to Republicans.

“It’s those hardliners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal,” he claimed, though those are the very people with whom he negotiated his cave in. “They’re making common cause with the Republican caucus.”

This remark was greeted with laughter and applause, according to the White House website.

The only difference between hardliners in Iran and Republicans is that Obama will negotiate with hardliners.

Overlooked by many in the media was Obama’s confession that his deal will fund more terrorism in the Middle East:

Now, this is not to say that sanctions relief will provide no benefit to Iran’s military.  Let’s stipulate that some of that money will flow to activities that we object to. We have no illusions about the Iranian government, or the significance of the Revolutionary Guard and the Quds Force. Iran supports terrorist organizations like Hezbollah. It supports proxy groups that threaten our interests and the interests of our allies — including proxy groups who killed our troops in Iraq.  They try to destabilize our Gulf partners. But Iran has been engaged in these activities for decades. They engaged in them before sanctions and while sanctions were in place.

So, the deal will provide funds to those who wish to kill more Americans.

Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Can I get a witness?

Hezbollah fighters take an oath to continue to fight against Israel. (AP photo)

What is unsaid can speak quite loudly about what the president and his lackeys think

Clip from beheading video at Breitbart.

Fox News reports that a video released Sunday purports to show the Islamic State beheading 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya.

A masked man is quoted as saying in English:

“All crusaders: safety for you will be only wishes, especially if you are fighting us all together. Therefore we will fight you all together. The sea you have hidden Sheikh Usama Bin Laden’s body in, we swear to Allah we will mix it with your blood.”

The White House released a statement condemning the slaughter. This is the entire statement:

“The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists.  We offer our condolences to the families of the victims and our support to the Egyptian government and people as they grieve for their fellow citizens.  ISIL’s barbarity knows no bounds.  It is unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity.  This wanton killing of innocents is just the most recent of the many vicious acts perpetrated by ISIL-affiliated terrorists against the people of the region, including the murders of dozens of Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai, which only further galvanizes the international community to unite against ISIL.

“This heinous act once again underscores the urgent need for a political resolution to the conflict in Libya, the continuation of which only benefits terrorist groups, including ISIL.  We call on all Libyans to strongly reject this and all acts of terrorism and to unite in the face of this shared and growing threat.  We continue to strongly support the efforts of the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General Bernardino Leon to facilitate formation of a national unity government and help foster a political solution in Libya.”

Can you see what one word is never mentioned?


To Obama all religions are equal, equally bad

Obama just couldn’t resist.

At the National Prayer Breakfast he threw Christianity under the bus and backed up over it twice by comparing things done in the name of Christianity to what Islamic fascists are doing in the name of Muhammad, calling both “those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends.”

“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history,” he said. “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”

The Inquisition, sure, but the Crusades were a defensive battle against an Islamic invasion that could have swept across Europe.

But in an show of our sensitivity to the current Islamic invaders, our military has largely removed the term crusade from its lexicon.

In September 2001, President George W. Bush said, “This crusade — this war on terrorism — is going to take a while …” He later apologized for the remark because of how Muslims view the word crusade. Christians will get no such apology from this president.

Obama next went on to twist the role of Christians further. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ,” he claimed of a tiny minority, without bothering to mention the prominent role of Christians in ending both of those.

“And so, as people of faith, we are summoned to push back against those who try to distort our religion — any religion — for their own nihilistic ends,” Obama said. “And here at home and around the world, we will constantly reaffirm that fundamental freedom — freedom of religion — the right to practice our faith how we choose …”

Uh, Barack, ISIS and al-Qaida are practicing their faith how they choose. They are trying to establish a caliphate.

Michael Ramirez cartoon by IBD


White House picks nits with pool reporters’ dispatches

Everybody’s an editor.

Even the White House, as a Washington Post story buried in the Style section recounts.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest speaks to the media during his daily briefing. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

When the president travels, but not while golfing, a small pool of reporters are allowed to tag along so long as they agree to share their reports with all the other media. The system has evolved to the point where the White House has created a database of media and does the distributing.

That’s where the editing comes in. WaPo says the White House has demanded deletions or alternations in pool reporting as a condition of distribution.

On one trip, then-deputy press secretary Josh Earnest (Is that name an oxymoron?) demanded that a Post reporter change his story, which “contained a comment juxtaposing a speech Obama had given two days earlier lauding freedom of the press with the administration’s decision to limit access to presidential photo ops on the trip.”

The reporter argued but agreed.

Free press? Owned press? Are we getting news accounts or press releases?

Here is another example:

As the pool reporter on a presidential trip to California in mid-2012, Todd Gillman of the Dallas Morning News included a colorful scene in his pool file: Obama walking back to the press section of Air Force One bearing a dessert with a lighted candle to honor a veteran reporter who was making her final presidential trip. Gillman added the seemingly innocuous detail that Obama asked the honoree to blow out the candle and make a wish, “preferably one that had something to do with the number 270,” the minimum number of electoral college votes the president needed to win reelection.

The White House refused to dispatch the report. Only after the reporter appealed the decision to the press secretary was it sent, a day later. Old news is no news.

The White House Correspondents Association is considering finding another to send out pool reports that skirt the White House system.

William Allen White, the Kansas newspaper editor in the early 20th century, once said, “There are three things that no one can do to the entire satisfaction of anyone else: make love, poke the fire, and run a newspaper.”


White House propaganda machine cranks out a false doom and gloom report on climate change here and now

Atop the White House web page today is a link to an 840-page report on how climate change is affecting us all right here and now by damaging the economy.

In the portion on the Southwest, the Third U.S. National Climate Assessment warns that agriculture will be harmed by continued drought “and more rapid changes in the seasonal timing of crop development due to projected warming and extreme events,” ignoring the fact that crops are being decimated now, not by climate change, but because hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of fresh water have been dumped into the Pacific Ocean in a futile gesture to preserve the habitat of some rare minnow.

Parched Southwest as shown in White House propaganda document

The report goes on to say, “The decade 2001-2010 was the warmest in the 110-year instrumental record, with temperatures almost 2°F higher than historic averages, with fewer cold air outbreaks and more heat waves.” A century does not a climate make. 

The Southwest is prone to drought,” the report shockingly informs us. “Southwest paleoclimate records show severe mega-droughts at least 50 years long. Future droughts are projected to be substantially hotter, and for major river basins such as the Colorado River Basin, drought is projected to become more frequent, intense, and longer lasting than in the historical record.”

It does not mention that the 21st century was probably the wettest on record and what we are calling a drought may well be the normal climate for this region.

The problem with the water supply is, as I’ve long argued, is that the supply is treated like a communal commodity instead of something to be sold in an open market where price can dictate supply to the highest and best use. Today the few remaining editorialists at the Review-Journal agreed.

The report further notes the potential for increased wildfires, without a passing mention of the fact the wildfires have increased dramatically due not to drought but to mismanagement of public land by federal agencies that have let grass and brush grow unchecked by reducing grazing by cattle and sheep. Each major wildfire kills thousands of the very animals the federal agencies claim they want to protect.

But just to have it both ways so they can say I told you so no matter what happens, the report forecasts, “An increase in winter flood hazard risk in rivers is projected due to increases in flows of atmospheric moisture into California’s coastal ranges and the Sierra Nevada. These ‘atmospheric rivers’ have contributed to the largest floods in California history and can penetrate inland as far as Utah and New Mexico.”

The researchers at Heritage picked out a few of the claims in the huge report for specific refutation:

NCA Quote: “the frequency and intensity of some extreme weather events are increasing”

Reality: The latest report on the science from The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and analysis provided by the adminstration’s own National Climatic Data Center conclude that there isn’t a case for extreme weather increases – no significant trends for floods, droughts, hurricanes or tornadoes.

NCA Quote: “In Arctic Alaska, the summer sea ice that once protected the coasts has receded”

Reality: Global warming is supposedly global.  Global sea ice (Arctic and Antarctic) is above average and, for this time of year, it is at its highest level in 30 years, which is the third-highest on record.

The authors apparently do not think anybody is checking their statements or they couldn’t possibly think they would get away with this one:

NCA Quote: “It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed.”

Reality: The past 15 years have seen the climate model predictions stray farther and farther from actual temperatures (here and here).  Last year, prominent climatologist, Hans von Storch, said, “If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models.”  Maybe Professor von Storch needs four more years to be sure the models are wrong, but there are no grounds on which the models can be declared “confirmed.”  Instead, the predictions are getting worse and worse.

As the editorialists at Investor’s Business Daily point out, the whole thing is a propaganda ploy. It is not science, merely politics and a distraction from real problems with the economy and global politics.

It is another excuse to shred the Constitution. “Obama’s top political adviser, John Podesta, has made it clear what the White House is doing.” IBD noted. “The president plans to issue executive orders under the Clean Air Act to cap carbon dioxide emissions — and use them to control the entire economy.”

Of course Harry Reid, who has long been pushing green energy alternatives supplied by his campaign contributors, immediately jumped into the fray this morning and blamed everything on his favorite whipping boys:

And this illustrates Harry’s problem using his own favorite analogy provided by his wife Landra:

Chip Bok cartoon

Obama’s sequester doomsaying on children’s vaccinations was hypocrisy

The White House was caught with its doom-and-gloom facts down around its ankles Tuesday during a hearing in Washington.

Maryland Rep. Andy Harris, a Republican, asked Centers for Disease Control Director Tom Frieden about a White House claim that sequestration budget cuts would reduce childhood vaccinations under a federal program called 317 by 2,050 in Maryland alone.

When Frieden couldn’t recall any facts or figures, Harris supplied them. He said the sequester cuts the 317 program by $30 million, but Obama’s own budget, which was submitted to Congress and failed to get a single vote, would have cut that program by $58 million — nearly double.

“So actually, the president cut twice as much in his budget. Can I assume that the president’s proposed cut would’ve reduced funding to 4,100 children in Maryland?” Harris asked. “Is it your testimony that under the president’s proposed cut of $58 million in his budget to the 317 program, you could have avoided cuts to vaccines to children in Maryland?”

White House responds to secession petitions with complete ignorance of the Constitution

Remember those petitions to secede from the United States posted on a White House website, including two from Nevada?

Well, the White House has gotten around to responding.

Jon Carson, director of the Office of Public Engagement at the White House, writes:

Our founding fathers established the Constitution of the United States “in order to form a more perfect union” through the hard and frustrating but necessary work of self-government. They enshrined in that document the right to change our national government through the power of the ballot — a right that generations of Americans have fought to secure for all. But they did not provide a right to walk away from it.

To begin with, the Constitution does not “provide” rights. It establishes limits on the federal government’s power to abridge or infringe upon natural rights of individuals and the states, as noted in the Ninth and Tenth amendments of the Bill of Rights.

Carson goes on to quote Lincoln as saying the nation is perpetual and the Supreme Court as saying the union is indestructible, but never cites chapter and verse from the Constitution itself, because it is not there — in the folds or the penumbras or the footnotes.

No mention is made of the Declaration of Independence, which was cited in most of the petitions.

The Declaration says:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Now, I’m not saying it would be a good idea to do so, nor that it was a good idea at the time of the Civil War, but to deny the right to do so is counter to common sense, natural law and the principle that governments are instituted among men to serve their needs and not be their masters in perpetuity.

The Nevada Constitution states:

“(T)he Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers … The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existance [existence], and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.”

But no Congress may bind a future Congress, though they often try. Likewise, no generation of Nevada voters may bind or enslave a future generation.