On June 28, the country of Honduras ousted its president for his illegally trying to extend his term as president in the country. In doing so, he attempted to follow the lead of Venzuelan President Hugo Chavez who did the same thing in his country.
Hugo Chavez has threatened to invade Honduras in retaliation for them upholding their own constitution. So what did the United States do? The Obama adminstration immediately criticized the Honduran governement’s legal actions and sided with Hugo Chavez and the wannabe Honduran dictator Zelaya.
Sadly, Obama is showing he is no friend of freedom.
One of the most brilliant political moves I have ever seen was when Barack Obama made Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State. The two had been bitter rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination. They clearly did not care for each other.
In making Hillary Clinton his Sec. State, Obama seemed to be following the adage to keep your friends close and your enemies closer. He gave her one of the most prestigious positions in his Cabinet, then he stripped that position of its influence. Case in point, Obama is scheduled to travel to Russia next week but his Secretary of State will not accompany him.
Back in May, Dick Morris wrote how Obama has taken authority away from Hillary Clinton.
Former Sen. George Mitchell is in charge of Arab-Israeli relations. Dennis Ross has Iran. Former U.N. Ambassador Dick Holbrooke has Pakistan and Afghanistan. And Hillary has to share her foreign policy role on the National Security Council (NSC) with Vice President Biden, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, CIA chief Leon Panetta and NSC staffer Samantha Powers (who once called Hillary a “monster”).
Obama maneuvered the Clinton’s into a corner where he could keep his eye on them but they can’t do any real damage to him. As part of the administration, Hillary cannot criticize Obama and neither can her husband. Doing so would be viewed as a betrayal.
What does surprise me is that the Clinton’s let themselves be caught in that political trap. They were supposed to be brilliant political strategists in their own right. How could they not see this coming? Rather than accepting the Sec. State nomination, Hillary’s best move would have been to announce that she was honored by the nomination and she fully supports Obama but she feels that she can best support him by remaining in the Senate and representing the people of New York. Now, she finds herself irrelevant with no senate seat and no influence in the president’s administration.
Bill Clinton at least is showing that he is not happy with the situation. Karen Gillenbrand was appointed to fill Hillary’s vacated senate seat. That seat will be up for election in 2010. The White House supports Gillenbrand and has made it clear they do not want any competition for her in the primary election. Bill Clinton is going to do a fund-raiser for Gillenbrand’s presumed primary opponent. Uh oh. Trouble in paradise?
It will be interesting to see if Hillary can get out of the trap she is in. Her only hope will be an unpopular Obama. Lucky for her, his approval ratings are headed south quickly. As the economy tanks, Hillary could eventually resign and distance herself from its failed economic policies (“I was not a domestic advsior) as well as foreign policy (“I tried to work with the president but he refused to listen to me”). Even so, it might be too late. Clinton influence seems to be irrevocably diminished.
(Hat tip: Hot Air)
Three is a pattern. Add Maine to the list.
Elaine Thibodeau of the State of Maine’s Department of Professional and Financial Regulation has sent a letter to the Christian Action Network (CAN) in which they were told to pay a fine totaling $4,000 for not being properly registered in the state as a fund-raising organization and for improperly using the name of Maine’s governor in its fund-raising letter. http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/maine-fines-group-for-inflammatory-anti-muslim-message/.
CAN says they were properly registered and have the canceled checks that Maine cashed to prove it. As far as using the governor’s name, telling people to write the governor does not imply the governor supports CAN’s position.
Most telling is that Thibodeau claims that CAN’s fund-raising letter “contained an inflammatory anti-Muslim message.”
Think about what that says. The state of Maine says that CAN (or anyone else) is not allowed to send a letter that contains an inflammatory anti-Muslim message. Certain Islamic sects and the U.N. agree with that, but it is not consistent with our constitutionally protected rights in this country. We have the right to make inflammatory anti-anything messages.
If there was any doubt there there is a trend to erode our rights in this country, there should not be any doubt now. First Connecticut, then California’s speaker, now Maine. Christians are a special focus in this trend. We must not be intimidated into being silenced.
The LA Times published an interview with the Speaker of the California Assembly last Saturday. One response with from her is particularly telling:
How do you think conservative talk radio has affected the Legislature’s work?
The Republicans were essentially threatened and terrorized against voting for revenue. Now [some] are facing recalls. They operate under a terrorist threat: “You vote for revenue and your career is over.” I don’t know why we allow that kind of terrorism to exist. I guess it’s about free speech, but it’s extremely unfair.
Again we see a Democrat who does not understand democracy. She refers to free speech as terrorism. More importantly, she does not even understand that what she is actually bemoaning is the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. That means if we don’t like the government raising our taxes, we are constitutionally protected when we contact our legislators and tell them we will not vote for them if they raise those taxes.
We are in danger of losing our freedoms when people like California’s Speaker keep getting put back into office. Thankfully, she is up against a term limit and cannot be re-elected next year. This is why term limits are necessary.
(Hat tip: Hot Air)
This afternoon I was talking with someone about faith and work. I told him I thought this was an interesting time in our country. I see Catholics and Christians in general being more vocal about their faith and their right to participate in the public sphere. At the same time, I see more opposition than ever against people of faith in this country, specifically Christian faith.
I considered that a bit more and realized that trend of Christians being more outspoken is in response to the trend of trying to deny Christians their right to participate in public affairs. I found the proof of that a few hours later. The state of Connecticut has taken the lead in trying to disenfranchise Catholics. Earlier this year some Connecticut legislators introduced a bill to force the Catholic church, and only the Catholic church, to change its organizational structure. The bill was unconstitutional as the first amendment prohibits government from interfering with the exercise of religion. A state mandating the organizational structure of a church is so obviously the exact kind of interference that the first amendment prohibits that the sponsors were forced to withdraw the bill after attention was drawn to it. The archdiocese of Bridgeport, Connecticut was instrumental in leading the opposition.
Not content to just violate one clause of the first amendment, the state of Connecticut has upped the ante. Its Office of State Ethics has launched an investigation into the archdiocese’s actions in opposing the unconstitutional bill last March. The government claims that the archdiocese acted as a lobbying organization for higher buses to take people to protests and using its web site to encourage church members to contact their legislators about the bill. The government is claiming the archdiocese was required to register as a lobbying organization.
Bridgeport’s Archbishop William Lori calls the investigation a violation of the first amendment’s guarantee to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. I says that it is also a violation of the right to petition the government. Requiring people or organizations to register as lobbyists, especially when they are targets of proposed legislation prohibits those organizations from exercising their right of petition.
Who would have thought that in 2009 there would be overt government action in this country to suppress a churchi? Yes, Christians are being more vocal because they must if they want to preserve their own rights.
Scary stuff coming out of California. The District Attorney of Contra Costa County (located just east of San Francisco) has announced that his office will stop prosecuting many misdemeanor crimes including assault, theft, and burglary. He will also stop prosecuting drug felonies involving “small” amounts of certain narcotics.
One shop owner who has had problems with theft summed it up correctly, “”If [criminals] know they’re not going to be prosecuted, there’s going to be a lot more shoplifting.”
Now I think this announcement is the DA’s attempt at playing hardball with the county supervisors for cutting his budget. I bet it will be effective. The public outrage at the DA for effectively legalizing a number of crimes will likely push the county supervisors to give him what he wants – an increased budget.
Even if the county supervisors reconsider, expect a jump in crime there. Good luck shop owners and home owners in California’s Contra Costa County. Your DA just declared open season on your property and safety.
(Hat tip: The Anchoress)
Last night Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepted the Margaret Sanger Award from Planned Parenthood. The award is the organizations “top honor” and is named after their founder.
I find some irony that the Secretary of State serving the first black U.S. President is accepting an award named in honor of Margaret Sanger considering her racist views.
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The mostsuccessful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if
it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
— Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America . New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.
“Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.”
— Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review , October 1921, page 5.
Sanger advocated forced sterilization of African-Americans (among others). She believed African-Americans were “unfit”. Not only would she have not voted for Barack Obama, she believed he should not have even been born. Yet President Obama’s Secretary of State accepted an award in honor of her.
Why there is no outcry over this racist award is scandalous.
The $700 billion bailout bill for the sub-prime lending crisis is still making its way through congress today. Meanwhile, California’s governer Schwarzenegger has announced that his state may need a $7 billion dollar emergency loan to fund day-to-day operations because the current credit shortage has hampered its ability to access short-term loans it relies on to stay solvent.
I figure why let the federal and state governments have all the fun. Today I am announcing the Jason bailout bill. I have a couple car loans and student loans that need to be paid off. Just like the federal government, my bailout should also contain tax incentives and spending to help the economy. Therefore, my bailout bill needs to be at $10 million dollars.
After retiring my debt, I will put millions back into the economy and create jobs. Some of these jobs will be created by building a new and much larger house, hiring people to maintain the house, and buying goods & services (read: I want a Lexus a to be able to take frequent travel vacations).
I call on congress to pass my bailout bill immediately so I can help prop up the economy.
I haven’t written much on this year’s presidential campaigns but I have been following them. I’ve been amazed at how McCain’s campaign has been energized by his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate.
Even more amazing is how the Obama campaign seems to have lost its collective mind by this news. So much so that Obama keeps comparing Palin’s experience to his own. Obama has forgotten he is the candidate for the top office while Palin is running for Vice President.
Like this quote reported by Politico last Saturday:
“I know the governor of Alaska has been, you know, saying she is change,” Obama said at a town hall meeting here. “And that is great. She is a skillful politician. But when you [have] been taking all these earmarks when it is convenient and then suddenly you are the champion anti-earmark person.
“That is not change, come on,” Obama continued. “I mean, words mean something. You can’t just make stuff up. You can’t just make stuff up. We have a choice to make and the choice is clear.”
The comments were his harshest attack yet on Palin . . .
Obama’s campaign was comparing his experience as a “community organizer” against her experience as a “small-town mayor” (ignoring that she is a current sitting governor) on the very day she was announced as McCain’s running mate. That was the first indication that Palin scared them.
Karl Rove wrote an article about it today:
Of all the advantages Gov. Sarah Palin has brought to the GOP ticket, the most important may be that she has gotten into Barack Obama’s head. How else to explain Sen. Obama’s decision to go one-on-one against “Sarah Barracuda,” captain of the Wasilla High state basketball champs?
It’s a matchup he’ll lose. If Mr. Obama wants to win, he needs to remember he’s running against John McCain for president, not Mrs. Palin for vice president.
Aaaghh! Karl! Don’t go giving the opposition advice for victory. We want Obama to keep comparing himself to the candidate for the lesser office. It shows the public that he is not qualified to be president. It is why Obama will lose in November.
So “McCain chooses Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for V.P. ”
I love everything about this pick. Palin has bona fide conservative credentials. She’s smart, pretty (something McCain is sorely lacking), and threatens to take some dissatisfied Hillary supporter votes away from the Democrats.
On top of it all, McCain stole Obama’s thunder after last night’s DNC acceptance speech. This should be a day where all the news sites are talking about Obama. But looking at those sites today, you wouldn’t even know Obama gave his most important speech of the campaign last night. Oba-who?