US Lied To India About Mumbai Attack-Protected Pakistan Intellegence

from YID With LID by Jeff Dunetz


US Lied To India About Mumbai Attack-Protected Pakistan Intellegence: "

It was a horrible attack, terrorists ravaging the Indian City of Mumbai. Just like America's horrible 9/11 its know by its date 26/11 (November 26th). According to the latest documents released as part of the Wikileaks document dump, the United States Government was pressuring India to keep secret any information about Pakistani Intelligence involvement in the attack . Three specific State Department Cables are outlined in a report by Times of India



The first set of cables exposes how Washington backstabbed India after 26/11. The cables - explicitly show how - America paid more attention to the concerns of the ISI Chief Ahmad Shuja Pasha - rather than Indian concerns. The first set of cables show that USA post 26/11 expressed concerns over India's intentions to make public information related to 26/11. It was believed that rogue elements within the ISI were involved with the attack.

...What is more appalling is that this was done to prevent embarrassment to ISI Chief Ahmad Shuja Pasha post the release of this information by India. And to pacify Pakistan's insecurity over the release of this information, USA asked India to withhold any information on the 26/11.

Not known and certain to shock Indians is the news that while Pranab Mukherjee was working to put pressure on Pakistan, USA was playing a double game, trying its best to stop India from releasing information that nailed the Pakistani role. “We are concerned that the India’s premature public dissemination of this information will undermine essential law enforcement efforts and forestall further Indo-Pakistan cooperation. Our goal is not only to bring the perpetrators of this attack to justice, but also to begin a dialogue that will reduce tensions between India and Pakistan,” the first cable from USA Embassy in Islamabad to Secretary of State dated on January 2009 said.

In the second and third cable dated on January 2009, USA Embassy said,

“If Pasha (ISI Chief) is embarrassed, by what is essentially public dissemination without the Indians providing the results of their own investigation, it will undercut Pakistan ability to pursue its investigation, generate a public backlash in Pakistan and could undermine Pasha personally.” “Therefore we believe Department should urge the Indian govt to delay the release of the information about their investigation until intelligence and law enforcement sharing with Pakistan (and with us) has been able to move forward.”

It's sad that our government tried to blunt the investigation of this horrible crime. This was not just a terrorist attack it was a sexual crime. According to the Mumbai Mirror

Disturbing photographs made available to this newspapers by police sources indicate that several of the guests at the Taj Mahal Hotel during the siege November 26 were sexually humiliated by the terrorists and then shot dead.



Police sources confirm that even as the terrorists were engaged in a fierce combat with NSG commandos, they were humiliating their hostages before ending their terrifying ordeal.



Foreign guests were their particular target. Eight of the 31 killed at the Taj were foreign nationals.

'Even the Rabbi and his wife at Nariman House were sexually assaulted and their genitalia mutilated,' said a senior officer of the investigating team, not wishing to be quoted. [The Rabbi's wife was pregnant]

I would love to understand the American reaction to that attack because at first glance our protection of the ISI was wrong in every way.

Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list.
Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com

"

Analysis of the Economic Impact of a 25 percent Corporate Income Tax Rate

from The Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft


Analysis of the Economic Impact of a 25 percent Corporate Income Tax Rate: "The CDA’s simulation shows the powerful effects that lowering the corporate tax rate can have on the U.S. economy."

Crazy Al Grayson Brings Out Posters of Palin, Beck, Rush, Hannity & O’Reilly During His Wealth Redistribution Speech on House Floor (Video)

from The Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft


Crazy Al Grayson Brings Out Posters of Palin, Beck, Rush, Hannity & O’Reilly During His Wealth Redistribution Speech on House Floor (Video): "

Crazy Al’s Last Hurrah…

Alan Grayson (D-FL) brought out posters of Rush, Beck, Hannity, O’Reilly, Palin, Gingrich and GW today on the House Floor to push the democrat’s latest wealth redistribution plan.

Click on Photo for Video-

Of course, he couldn’t bash conservatives without including Sarah Palin.



Mediaite posted the transcript.

Let’s start with this gentleman here, the man with the cigar, Rush Limbaugh. Doesn’t he look happy? According according to Newsweek, he makes $58.7 million a year, and extending the tax cuts means he’ll have another $2.7 million. Mega dittos, Rush, and mega money. Let’s look at the next one.

Here’s Glenn Beck, according to Newsweek Glenn Beck makes $33 million a year as a pundit and extending the Bush Tax Cuts means a cool $1.5 million for Glenn bBeck’s ongoing imitation of Howard Beale from Network. Now let’s look at the next one.

Sean Hannity. Newsweek says that Sean Hannity, this man of the people makes $22 million a year from his act on Fox. And that means the Bush Tax cuts mean an extra $1 million. $1 million for Sean Hannity. Maybe he can afford some anger management classes. Let’s take a look at the next one.

Bill O’Reilly. He makes a modest $20 million a year from his gig on Fox. That means that the Bush tax cuts give him not quite seven figures, nearly $914,000 of extra cash. It’s easy to see why Bill O’Reilly wants to see the Bush tax cuts extended. And I have to say, he’s no pinhead when it comes to that.

And Now, Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin has made $14 million this year from cashing in on her fame. In fact, she’s done a better job of turning fame into cash than anyone in American history. $14 million. So she wants the Bush tax cuts extended so she can make an extra cool $638,000. As she was — as she would gesture (shoulder shrug.)

Of course, Grayson’s friends at the Democratic Underground may have enjoyed his speech but his arguments are not honest nor are they based in fact.

Once again…

THE TRUTH – BUSH TAX CUTS GREW THE ECONOMY.

During the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth.

Not only were more jobs lost after the 9-11 attacks in 2001 than in the 2008 market crash, but more jobs were created by President Bush’s pro-business policies and tax cuts than by the Obama-Pelosi “spend your way to hell” Keynesian failure.

Crazy Grayson forgot to mention that.

Enjoy your retirement, Crazy Al.

"

Delaying Tax Vote Could Crash Stock Market - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)

Found this interesting link on the Drudge Report:

Delaying Tax Vote Could Crash Stock Market - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)

http://politics.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2010/12/2/delaying-tax-vote-could-crash-stock-market.html

Breaking: Obama Administration Suppressed Information & Shielded Pakistan’s Intelligence Chief After Mumbai Attacks

from The Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft


Breaking: Obama Administration Suppressed Information & Shielded Pakistan’s Intelligence Chief After Mumbai Attacks: "

The Obama Administration defended Pakistan and shielded Pakistan’s security chief following the Mumbai terror attacks that killed at least 175 people and wounding at least 308.



The Mumbai terrorists leaders cheered and praised Allah as the infidel hostages at the Taj Hotel were lined up and shot dead. The Mumbai terrorists also sexually humiliated their victims at the Taj before killing them.

The Times of India and Pipeline News reported:

In yet another Wikileaks disclosure, which could lead to awkwardness in Indo-US relations, a leaked cable suggests that the US might have tried to not just suppress information related to involvement of Pakistani agencies in 26/11 but also defend ISI. The cable from US embassy in Pakistan to secretary of state Hillary Clinton in January 2009 says “premature dissemination” of this information could escalate tension between India and Pakistan.

“We are concerned that the India’s premature public dissemination of this information will undermine essential law enforcement efforts and forestall further Indo-Pakistan cooperation. Our goal is not only to bring the perpetrators of this attack to justice, but also to begin a dialogue that will reduce tensions between India and Pakistan,” says the cable.

It’s also clear from another cable sent in the same month that the US tried to shield ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha from any fallout of investigations into 26/11 by India as the findings clearly suggested that ISI played a role in the attacks. The cable from the US embassy in Islamabad says India should be urged to delay the release of the information about their findings “until intelligence and law enforcement sharing with Pakistan (and with us) has been able to move forward”.

“If Pasha (ISI chief) is embarrassed, by what is essentially public dissemination without the Indians providing the results of their own investigation, it will undercut Pakistan ability to pursue its investigation, generate a public backlash in Pakistan and could undermine Pasha personally,” it says.

"

Hundreds Line Up For Assistance as Obama Depression Lines Form In Georgia

from Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft


Hundreds Line Up For Assistance as Obama Depression Lines Form In Georgia: "

The democrat’s economic policies are taking a toll on the American people.

Obama is the worst jobs president since the Great Depression. More than 40 million Americans are now receiving food stamps, a record.

It’s so bad that Americans are lining up overnight to gain heating assistance.

Click on Photo for Video–

CBS Atlanta reported:

A Marietta nonprofit group that helps people pay energy bills was forced to turn away dozens of people after it ran out of funding.

The Tallatoona Action Partnership opened its doors Wednesday to find hundreds of people — some who had spent the night in the parking lot — waiting in line for assistance.

The partnership disperses federal funding to people in need, said Sarita Johnson, the group’s Cobb energy coordinator. She said 570 people were granted appointments. The others, including people who showed up at the Mansour Center Thursday, were put on a waiting list, she said.

“It breaks my heart to have to stand out here and tell people that unfortunately, I cannot see them and that funds are exhausted,” Johnson said.

“It’s kind of cold. It’s getting around Christmas, and I was in need of help with my energy assistance,” said Niko Northington, after she was turned away.

Michelle Buttler was also disappointed. She recently left her job as a hair stylist after clients stopped scheduling appointments to save money. “I took on a nanny job with someone that’s starting a business,” she said. “Unfortunately, they called me Sunday night and told me they no longer can assist me because they’re financially broke.”

"

Tax Breaks for Bailout Recipients Spark Debate

from WSJ.com: US Business


Tax Breaks for Bailout Recipients Spark Debate: "A series of tax relief measures is saving companies bailed out by the government like GM, Citigroup and AIG billions of dollars at a time when concern over tax revenues has risen.

"

ObamaCare: Actor Andy Griffith’s “misleading” Medicare advertisements exposed

from Back to Basics by Jim Kouri


ObamaCare: Actor Andy Griffith’s “misleading” Medicare advertisements exposed: "

The clever and charming TV lawyer “Matlock” appears to have been either duped by an unscrupulous leftist political machine or he appears to be complicit in betraying his fellow senior citizens by spouting dialogue written for him by members of the cynical Obama Administration.

TV and motion picture star Andy Griffith. Photo: CBS

A public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption obtained documents from the Obama Department of Health and Human Services regarding a series of three Medicare television advertisements featuring actor Andy Griffith, which were deemed misleading by a number of press outlets, including the nonpartisan FactCheck.org.

The ObamaCare support team obviously believed that Griffith, who starred as Sheriff Andy Taylor on the long-running TV series The Andy Griffith Show and later played a criminal defense lawyer on the equally popular series Matlock, was the perfect spokesperson for an unpopular program. With the majority of Americans opposed to ObamaCare and its proponents, who would be a better and more believable spokesman than an elderly and homey Andy Griffith?

The Obama Administration spent $3,184,000 in taxpayer funds to produce and air the Griffith “propaganda” spots on national television in September and October of 2010 to educate “Medicare beneficiaries, caregivers, and family members about forthcoming changes to Medicare as a result of the Affordable Care Act.” The political advertisements were intended to decrease the amount of damage suffered by the Democrat Party at the polls on November 2.

According to the documents released to the top watchdog group Judicial Watch:

“Mr. Griffith is featured in three Medicare television ads and provided his services to the government at no charge pursuant to a gratuitous services agreement. These three spots, ‘1965,’ ‘Music to My Ears,’ and ‘Cozy Chair,’ [were only aired] in September and October 2010. The production for the three advertisements cost $404,000; the total amount budgeted for the national media placement is $2.78 million, which breaks down per ad to $754,000 (‘1965’), $1,112,000 (‘Music to My Ears’), and $1,390,000 (‘Cozy Chair’).”

In press statements touting the new Griffith advertising program the Obama White House described its purpose: “The Affordable Care Act [Obamacare] will strengthen the health care system for all Americans, but senior citizens in particular stand to benefit from the new law. And the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is getting a little help delivering the good news from a well-known TV star: Andy Griffith.”

However, according to FactCheck.org, a project of the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, the advertisements intentionally misinform the American people: “Would the sheriff of Mayberry mislead you about Medicare? Alas, yes. In a new TV spot from the Obama administration, actor Andy Griffith, famous for his 1960s portrayal of the top law enforcement official in the fictional town of Mayberry, N.C., touts benefits of the new health care law. Griffith tells his fellow senior citizens, ‘like always, we’ll have our guaranteed [Medicare] benefits.’ But the truth is that the new [Obamacare] law is guaranteed to result in benefit cuts for one class of Medicare beneficiaries – those in private Medicare Advantage plans.”

The new documents show the public relations firm Porter Novelli produced the advertising campaign. One of these documents lists the Porter Novelli staff involved in producing the advertisements and details that former Obama campaign spokesperson Catherine “Kiki” McLean contributed 21 hours of her time to the project.

Porter Novelli’s website notes McLean served as a “senior adviser to the Hillary Clinton for President campaign and appeared as an on-air surrogate for the Obama for America campaign.” She is currently the Senior Partner, Global Head of Public Affairs, and Managing Director for Porter Novelli.

“Taxpayers don’t want their money wasted on propaganda for Obamacare. And it is a scandal that an Obama insider is involved in the contract for these misleading ads,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

“Taxpayers and Congress should be upset the Obama administration wastes millions of taxpayer dollars on this propaganda campaign at a time when the government desperately needs to tighten its belt. Even Barney Fife would see that these Obamacare ads are bogus,” he added.

Thanks to Judicial Watch’s Jill Farrell for her help with this report.

ObamaCare: Actor Andy Griffith’s “misleading” Medicare advertisements exposed is a post from: Back to Basics

Incoming search terms:

• Porter Novelli medicare

"

Greek ‘End Game’ Veers to Debt Restructuring Risk: Euro Credit

from BusinessWeek - Business News, Stock Market & Financial Advice


Greek ‘End Game’ Veers to Debt Restructuring Risk: Euro Credit: "Greece risks having to restructure its debt even with an extension in terms of the loan repayments by the European Union as the economy remains mired in recession."

Obama's Deficit Commission Calls for Health Care "Death Panels" And Reveals Obamacare LIES

from YID With LID by Jeff Dunetz


Obama's Deficit Commission Calls for Health Care "Death Panels" And Reveals Obamacare LIES: "

President Obama's deficit commission has not been very kind to his signature Obamacare program, not only does it say that the healthcare savings promised by the president are a total mirage, but it reports that to keep Federal Government health care spending in check, the Department of Health and Human Services will have to rely on what Sarah Palin called 'death panels.'



As you may remember, during the Obamacare debate the progressives promised that the plan would save $170 Billion during the first ten years and much more afterward. The Medicare Chief Actuary said that projection was nonsense, and the deficit commission goes further calling the promised savings

...phantom savings from scheduled Medicare reimbursement cuts that will never materialize and from a new long-term care program [the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act, or “CLASS Act] that is unsustainable (see page 16 of their report which is embedded below)

The commission's plan called The Moment of Truth, keeps most of Obamacare, but repeals the long-term care program included in the legislation, calling it 'financially unsound.'



The commission would gradually phase out the federal tax break for job-based health plans, a change that would force workers and their families to seek out cost-conscious insurance. (The recommendation probably forces commission members to seek out protection from AFL-CIO or SEIU hit squads).



And (Sara Palin detractors take note) they recommend that the federal government

For the first time, the government would set — and enforce — an overall budget for Medicare, Medicaid and other federal programs that cover more than 100 million people, from Alzheimer's patients in nursing homes to premature babies in hospital intensive care.



Palin attracted wide attention by denouncing nonexistent 'death panels' in Obama's overhaul, but a fixed budget as the commissioners propose could lead to denial of payment for medical care in some circumstances.

Overall, the nation will spend about $2.6 trillion this year on health care, and some claim that a significant share of that is for procedures and tests that are of little benefit to patients like giving a pacemaker for a 100-year old woman for example. There would need to be a panel to make those decisions on a mass vs an individual patient basis. The methodology for those decisions is the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), which will recommend measures to reduce Medicare spending. Formally, the board is forbidden to make recommendations that ration care, increase revenues, or change Medicare beneficiaries’ benefits, cost-sharing, eligibility, or subsidies. For the board, reimbursement for doctors and other medical professionals seems the only target left. But by cutting payment they can effectively ration care.



The deficit commission recommends strengthening the IPAB it says on page 43:

To the extent health costs are projected to grow significantly faster than that pace, we recommend the consideration of structural reforms to the health care system. Commissioners have suggested various policy options, including: moving to a premium support system for Medicare; giving CMS authority to be a more active purchaser of health care services using coverage and reimbursement policy to encourage higher value services; expanding and strengthening the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) to allow it to make recommendations for cost-sharing and benefit design and to look beyond Medicare; adjusting the federal-state responsibility for Medicaid, such as block grants for acute or long-term care; establishing a robust public option in the health care exchanges; raising the Medicare retirement age; and moving toward some type of all-payer system.

Observers say that a stronger IPAB is not going to be a pretty sight

'Unless the economy turns around, these are the kinds of the proposals that are going to be debated,' added Ferguson, a professor at George Washington University. She called some 'pretty Draconian.'

There are other recommendations which would cause seniors to pay more for their health care revealing another Obamacare lie. The deficit commission found that Medicare's co-payments are low in most cases, encouraging overtreatment and overuse. Revamping cost-sharing would raise $110 billion through 2020. In return, seniors would get an annual cost-sharing limit of $7,500, stop-loss protection that isn't currently offered under traditional Medicare.



The AARP is surprisingly indignant because they helped to push the plan through.

'They are asking sick people to pay more in terms of cost-sharing,' said John Rother, AARP's top health policy expert. 'You are a Social Security beneficiary living on $15,000 a year, and they want you to pay up to $7,500? We are talking about bankrupting people. This doesn't fly in the real world.'

Based on their record, what AARP is really upset about is the possible loss of licensing income from selling Medigaps plans.



Sadly while this report validates everything that was predicted by Obamacare's naysayers, it is the American people, especially the seniors who were abandoned by AARP who will learn about the President's lies first-hand and will suffer their consequences.



TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010

Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list.
Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com

"

Morning Bell: Libertad!

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by Mike Gonzalez


Morning Bell: Libertad!: "

The Heritage Foundation has never been one to rest on laurels. We know that if we want to live in a country where freedom, opportunity and civil society are to flourish, we must remain vigilant and heed Ronald Reagan’s words that “freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

That is why today, we are excited to launch Libertad.org, our new Spanish-language website. Libertad.org will communicate the message of conservatism to a Hispanic audience that prefers to read news in their first language. We are a country of opportunity, one where Hispanics have the opportunity to become the latest in a long list of immigrants from the world over who have realized the American Dream.

It has never been more important to reach out to new audiences and constituencies. Liberals are relentlessly pursuing an America where a permanent Big Government rules nearly all aspects of our lives through an intrusive bureaucracy supported by a victimized constituency.

The progressives’ appeal to Hispanics is clear, if ham-fisted and pernicious. They offer a basic quid pro quo that boils down to ‘you are victims in this unfair, racist society and have no hope to get ahead without government handouts. Join our coalition, help us grow government, and we’ll make sure that you, too, become a protected group.’ It’s a bargain that would only consign Hispanics to permanent underclass status and contribute to making the country they immigrated to more like the one that they left.

President Obama was not shy about these designs in the weeks leading up to the recent midterm elections, when he pleaded with Hispanics to “punish our enemies”—a comment so maladroit that he had to apologize for it almost immediately.

It is for this reason that we at Heritage will make sure that Hispanics who read their news in Spanish will hear the other side of the argument. In Libertad.org, Spanish-speakers will be able to read the opposite of the progressives’ message of gloom and doom. It is called Libertad.org as Liberty is what our country offers and cannot be taken away.

This site will not be designed to pander, but to share and educate. It will offer some of the same cutting-edge research and analysis available on Heritage.org with additional resources for a new readership. Libertad.org will not reinforce the idea that cultural assimilation is a bad thing; on the contrary, our success as a unified country depends on it. We offer these perspectives in Spanish, because we simply want Heritage to be accessible to all citizens.

Those who cherish American traditions because they intuitively know that they are intricately linked to America’s success are likely to prefer policies that conserve the culture. Those who understand that the family is the fulcrum of the good life and a bulwark against decadence will, like so many immigrants before them, strive to keep their own household intact and choose pro-family policies.

Embracing such policies would almost be a self-fulfilling prophecy of success. Those who rise earlier, work harder and constantly seek opportunities to improve will want to see their hard work rewarded with material possessions that are beyond government’s confiscatory power.

Libertad.org will also reach out beyond the pages to communicate directly with this new audience. On Facebook and Twitter (@LibertadUSA), we will listen to, and engage with, new voices on the American landscape. We will also produce and share Spanish-language video and interviews. We are excited to start this conversation.

The progressive agenda is clear. The Obama Administration is bent on a relentless pursuit of policies that over-tax, over-regulate and over-spend Americans. The government has ignored every warning sign to reduce the size of government and government spending by passing one inept law after another, including the onerous and intrusive health care bill with an estimated cost well over 1 trillion dollars.

We are undertaking this effort because we think our message of opportunity, self-reliance, patriotism, responsibility and civility resonates with all Americans, including Hispanics.

We firmly believe that this country is exceptional and its underpinnings of liberty are worth preserving and defending. We ask for your support as we seek to ensure that our conservative movement is alive and well for generations to come as we embark on this new chapter for The Heritage Foundation.

Quick Hits:

• The Obama administration announced yesterday it would not allow any natural gas or oil energy development off the Atlantic Coast or in the eastern Gulf of Mexico.


• President Ronald Reagan’s attorney general Ed Meese and assistant secretary of defense Richard Perle said today that Reagan would not have supported the New Start Treaty or the tactics being used to pass it, in a Wall Street Journal editorial. (subscription required)


• According to California’s own Public Utilities Commission, Gov-elect Jerry Brown’s renewable energy standard plan will increase energy costs by 14.5%.


• The left’s effort to massively expand the power and size of the FDA ran into a Constitutional problem when conservatives pointed out that the Senate bill creates new taxes which only a bill originating from the House is allowed to do.


• The eight Republican Senators who voted to protect earmark spending are already enabling $100 billion in higher government spending.

"

Forget Earmarks, FEMA Declarations Show Federalization Run Amok

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by Matt Mayer


Forget Earmarks, FEMA Declarations Show Federalization Run Amok: "

The 2010 hurricane season ended yesterday, utterly failing to measure up to the Category 5 predictions made in the spring. The failure of a single hurricane to strike the United States makes it five years since a hurricane of Category 3 strength or higher has struck the United States. You remember 2005, right? The year Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma pummeled the Gulf Coast, FEMA Director Mike Brown, and President George W. Bush. Those were the busy days of FEMA.

Despite no hurricanes striking the U.S. and only one minor earthquake, FEMA has issued 106 declarations in 2010 and is projected to end the year (1/20/10 to 1/19/2011) with 123 issued declarations. President Barack Obama is on pace to close his first two years in office with 231 FEMA declarations, which would be the most issued by a president in his first two years and he did it without one hurricane striking the United States. To put President Obama’s pace in perspective, President Ronald Reagan’s FEMA issued 228 declarations over the course of his entire presidency. President Bill Clinton, current holder of the most FEMA declarations in one year (157 in 1996), only mustered 115 declarations in his first two years. Even the prodigious FEMA under President Bush hit 220 declarations in his first two years.

Even if we just look at Major Disaster Declarations — the most severe FEMA declaration — President Obama already has issued 79 in 2010, which is a single year record for FEMA. President Clinton’s 1996 record year only saw 75 Major Disaster Declarations. President Bush, burned by 2005, matched President Clinton’s 75 Major Disaster Declarations in 2008. With 50 days remaining in the year, President Obama sits tied with President Bush for the most Major Disaster Declarations over a two year period with 138 (Bush hit that mark in 2007-2008). If Las Vegas took odds on such things, it would be a pretty safe bet to make that President Obama will end the year as the two year record holder.

This madness must end, as it symbolizes the federalization of our lives in a heretofore unprecedented manner.

From 1787 to 1992, virtually every natural disaster that occurred in America was handled entirely by states and localities and without any federal involvement. Starting in 1993, we have federalized more natural disasters every presidential administration. From tornadoes to floods to fires to storms, events that just twenty years ago were ignored by Washington are today treated as if a Category 5 hurricane has hit. This federalization, like Medicaid, transportation, and earmarks, has created a growing level of dependency by states and localities on FEMA to the point where state emergency management budgets have been cut knowing that FEMA would subsidize the state’s natural disaster functions.

As a result, states aren’t prepared for the routine and FEMA spends too little time preparing for the truly catastrophic. Perhaps with the needed federal budget cuts, the Congress will heed our calls over the last four years to amend the Stafford Act to eliminate certain categories of natural disasters from being eligible for FEMA declarations and substantially increasing the threshold requirement to obtain a FEMA declaration:

• The Solution to FEMA’s Budget Woes Is Not More Money


• Federalizing Disasters Weakens FEMA–and Hurts Americans Hit by Catastrophes


• States: Stop Subsidizing FEMA Waste and Manage Your Own Local Disasters


• Homeowners’ Defense Act Rewards States for Bad Property Insurance Decisions


• Principles for Reform of Catastrophic Natural Disaster Insurance


• Hurricane Insurance: Forcing All to Subsidize the Few


• The Local Role in Disaster Response: Lessons from Katrina and the California Wildfires


• FEMA and Federalism: Washington Is Moving in the Wrong Direction

The Senate couldn’t kill earmarks. Maybe it can handle FEMA.

"

The End of Diplomacy As We Know It

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by Helle Dale


The End of Diplomacy As We Know It: "

There is no such thing as secret diplomacy anymore, maybe not even plain old diplomacy. This week’s mammoth WikiLeaks dump of State Department Internet traffic has ensured that henceforth all diplomacy may end up in the public domain at the push of a button.

WikiLeaks is nothing less than an assault on the rights of free, sovereign nations to manage their foreign policy and conduct diplomacy in the interest of a safer world. U.S. national security and ability to be a global leader has suffered as a consequence.

What American diplomats report back to the State Department from U.S. embassies—whether their thoughts are profound and insightful or silly and superficial—may in the future end up in the public domain. Like the cache of e-mail traffic from the field in Afghanistan and Iraq that made up the previous WikiLeaks dump, the most recent dump of over half a million U.S. diplomatic cables represents the raw materials of human relations and observations.

None of these cables were meant for the public eye, and in many cases the cables are classified or even secret communication. The argument presented by The New York Times and by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is that Americans deserve transparency about their government’s conduct of foreign affairs. But no, what Americans deserve is a government of sufficient checks and balances to prevent abuse and misconduct, such as exercised by the Congressional Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees. Americans do not deserve to have their diplomats’ confidential communications blasted out to the global public to friend and foe alike.

Just think for a moment what damage to personal relationships a misdirected, tactless e-mail can cause. Now multiply that by WikiLeaks magnitude.

For at least four reasons, this WikiLeaks episode will damage U.S. public diplomacy and indeed diplomacy generally: (1) Foreign governments cooperating with the United States, including several in the Arab world, have been severely compromised, with direct national security implications; (2) foreign leaders who are treated with less than respect in U.S. cable traffic, such as Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi or Germany’s Angela Merkel, will not be thrilled—and very possibly their publics won’t like it either; (3) communications between U.S. diplomats will be less candid as public disclosure is a possibility anytime; and (4) the U.S. will find it harder to act as a world leader. The WikiLeaks phenomenon makes the U.S. government look ridiculous, like the gang that could not shoot straight. It all adds to the impression, also fostered by the Obama Administration, that the U.S. is a superpower in chaos and decline.

Several actions need to be taken by the U.S. government to gain control of the situation, as outlined by the speakers at The Heritage Foundation’s November 17 event “WikiLeaks: A Danger to U.S. National Security.”

First and foremost, the leaker or leakers must be punished as severely as possibly under the law to demonstrate the seriousness of the crime. Secondly, the State Department and the Pentagon need to take cyber hygiene and information security far more seriously than they have up to this point. For individuals like Private Bradley Manning (who has been identified as the leaker of the e-mail traffic relating to Iraq and who may also be responsible for this week’s WikiLeaks blast) to have access to this volume of sensitive material is unconscionable and sloppy. And thirdly, all this needs to happen without creating a whole new set of government stovepipes that will prevent the U.S. intelligence community from sharing critically important information.

Indeed, damage control in the WikiLeaks scandal will very much depends on the U.S. government’s ability to show the world that it is back in charge of its own foreign policy.

"

DHS Inspector General: FEMA Improperly Awarded Fire Grant to ACORN

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by David Muhlhausen

DHS Inspector General: FEMA Improperly Awarded Fire Grant to ACORN: "

The Daily Caller recently reported on and posted an embargoed Department of Homeland Security Inspector General audit of a FEMA fire prevention grant to the ACORN. In fiscal year 2007, ACORN created the ACORN Institute to specifically apply for a $1 million FEMA grant to help urban communities prevent fires. According to the Inspector General audit, FEMA’s grant application review panel recommended against awarding ACORN grant funding because of concerns over ACORN’s lack of fire prevention experience and doubts about the proposed project’s effectiveness. Despite the panel’s rejection based on the merits of ACORN’s grant application, FEMA awarded ACORN $450,484 in grant funding.

The Inspector General audit found that ACORN mislead FEMA by stating in its grant application that ACORN was experienced at implementing fire prevention programs in Madison, North Carolina, New Orleans, Louisiana, and Berkley, California. The Inspector General found that ACORN did not have any involvement in fire prevention programs in these communities.

In addition, the audit found that FEMA awarded ACORN the grant funding despite rejecting or funding at lower levels other organizations applying for grants to fund similar fire prevention programs. The Inspector General audit concluded that “the lack of experience ACORN Institute demonstrated in fire prevention and safety and its unconfirmed collaboration with experts in this area, FEMA should not have awarded these grants to ACORN Institute.”

Despite billions in grants across the United States, the FEMA’s fire grant program has not reduced the number of deaths and injuries resulting from fires. A Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis Report found that “fire grants, including grants that subsidize the salaries of firefighters, had no impact on fire casualties [and] failed to reduce firefighter deaths, firefighter injuries, civilian deaths, or civilian injuries.” More damning, the report found that fire departments that did not received federal grants “were just as successful at preventing fire casualties as grant-funded fire departments.”

"

How to Tell When ObamaCare Supporters Are Nervous

from Cato @ Liberty by Michael F. Cannon


How to Tell When ObamaCare Supporters Are Nervous: "

By Michael F. Cannon

Supporters have gone to great lengths to make ObamaCare appear popular or to make repeal seem impossible. But this op-ed by my friend Jonathan Cohn made my jaw drop.

First, Cohn notes that the Senate recently voted down two efforts to repeal one of ObamaCare’s more unpopular provisions: the “1099 reporting tax,” which will place an enormous burden on small businesses. ”Neither provision,” Cohn obliquely reports, “got enough votes to pass.” He concludes:

Critics of health care reform [sic] this week thought they would get their first win in the campaign to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Instead they got a lesson in just how politically challenging a wholesale repeal might be.

If opponents can’t even repeal the unpopular parts of ObamaCare, how can they repeal the whole thing?

Cohn neglects to mention a few important details. The reason neither amendment received “enough votes” is because, due to procedural considerations, each would have needed a 2/3 majority to pass — i.e., 67 votes. The Republican amendment actually received 61 votes. (The Democratic amendment received only 44 votes.) Reading Cohn’s account, though, you might think — and Cohn might think, or just want you to think — that both failed because they lacked majority support. In fact, the Republican amendment received a filibuster-proof majority. Even though it included $19 billion of spending cuts. And in a chamber with only 41 Republicans. (Another six arrive next month.) And the mere fact that Democrats offered an amendment to repeal part of ObamaCare is notable in itself. Cohn’s spin aside, the skirmish over the 1099 reporting tax shows that Democrats are divided and ObamaCare supporters are on the run.

Second, Cohn writes, “advocates of repeal have one extra liability that the law’s architects did not — a lack of majority support even before the wrangling begins.” As evidence, he cites a single Gallup poll from July 2009 that found 50 percent of the public supported “comprehensive health care reform.” Oy, where to begin. First, by Cohn’s own single-poll standard, he is just flat wrong. Advocates of repeal can point to the latest Rasmussen poll, which shows that 58 percent of adults support wholesale repeal. (Polls have clocked support for repeal as high as 61 percent.) Second, support for “comprehensive health care reform” is not the same thing as support for ObamaCare. If Gallup were to ask Cato employees whether they support comprehensive health care reform, my guess is that at least 50 percent would answer yes. (Presumably, Cohn would then write an oped titled, “Even Libertarians Support ObamaCare!”) Advocates of repeal have something else going for them, too: 17 months of consistent public opposition to ObamaCare.

No one is saying that getting repeal through the Senate is likely in the next two years. But the fact that supporters have to shade the truth like this suggests they are nervous.

How to Tell When ObamaCare Supporters Are Nervous is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog

"

American Taxpayers Should Not Bail Out the European Union

from Cato @ Liberty by Daniel J. Mitchell


American Taxpayers Should Not Bail Out the European Union: "

By Daniel J. Mitchell

The fiscal disintegration of Europe is bad news, though I confess to a bit of malicious glee every time I read about welfare states such as Greece and Portugal getting to the point where they no longer have the ability to borrow enough money to finance their bloated public sectors (I have mixed feelings about Ireland since that nation at least has been a good example of low tax corporate tax rates, but I still think they should get punished for over-spending and bailouts). This I-told-you-so attitude is not very mature on my part, but one hopes that American politicians will learn the right lessons and something good will come from this mess.

I have not written much about the topic in recent months, in part because I don’t have much to add to my original post about this issue back in February. All the arguments I made then are still true, particularly about the moral hazard of bailouts and the economic damage of rewarding excessive government. So why bother repeating myself, particularly since this is an issue for Europeans to solve (or, as is their habit, to make worse)?

Unfortunately, it appears that all of us need to pay closer attention to this issue. The Obama Administration apparently thinks American taxpayers should subsidize European profligacy. Here’s a passage from a Reuters report about a potential bailout for Europe via the IMF.

The United States would be ready to support the extension of the European Financial Stability Facility via an extra commitment of money from the International Monetary Fund, a U.S. official told Reuters on Wednesday. “There are a lot of people talking about that. I think the European Commission has talked about that,” said the U.S. official, commenting on enlarging the 750 billion euro ($980 billion) EU/IMF European stability fund. “It is up to the Europeans. We will certainly support using the IMF in these circumstances.” “There are obviously some severe market problems,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “In May, it was Greece. This is Ireland and Portugal. If there is contagion that’s a huge problem for the global economy.”

This issue will be an interesting test for the GOP. I think it’s safe to say that the Tea Party movement didn’t elect Republicans so they could expand the culture of bailouts – especially if that means handouts for profligate European governments. Some people will argue that American taxpayers aren’t at risk because this would be a bailout from the IMF instead of the Treasury. But that’s an absurd and dishonest assertion. The United States is the largest “shareholder” in that international bureaucracy, and there’s no way the IMF can get more involved without American support.

In some sense, this is a corporatism vs. free markets battle for Republicans. Big banks and Wall Street often support bailouts since they like the idea of somebody else saving them from their bad investment decisions (though American financial institutions fortunately are not as exposed as their European counterparts). Economists despise bailouts, by contrast, since they subsidize risky choices and lead to the misallocation of capital.

Which side is John Boehner on? Or Mitch McConnell? And what about Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee?

American Taxpayers Should Not Bail Out the European Union is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog

"

NYC to Dispatch New ‘Organ Preservation Units’ With 911 Responders

from The Blaze - Stories by Meredith Jessup


NYC to Dispatch New ‘Organ Preservation Units’ With 911 Responders: "

Health care reformers may deny the existence of so-called “death panels,” but New York City’s creepy new “organ preservation” service is hard to ignore.

The New York Times reports (emphases mine):

Some 911 calls in Manhattan will now bring out two ambulances, one hurrying to the scene and one lagging slightly behind.

The first one will try to save the patient’s life. The second one will try to save the patient’s kidneys, in case the first ambulance fails.

After months of grappling with the ethical and legal implications, New York City medical officials are beginning to test a system that they hope will one day greatly increase the number of organs collected for transplant.

For five months starting Wednesday, the city will deploy a specially trained team that will monitor 911 calls for people who may be in danger of dying, like those having a heart attack. If efforts to resuscitate the patient fail, the team will quickly move in and try to save the kidneys; normally, patients who die outside hospitals cannot be donors because if too much time passes after the heart stops beating, the organs are unusable.

City officials said the project would be the first of its kind in the United States, though similar operations have been carried out in Europe. They said that they believed they had solved any ethical problems by adopting what they called very conservative standards for who would qualify as a donor.

To overcome fears that patients would be allowed to die for the sake of their organs, officials said that doctors and paramedics trying to resuscitate a patient would not be told whether the preservation unit was waiting in the wings until a supervisor had given the order to stop rescue efforts. The organ team, which will travel in a bright red and white ambulance marked “Organ Preservation Unit,” is supposed to remain out of sight.

The deceased patient would have to be as an organ donor and the family would would also have to lend their consent. According to the Times, the new trial program is being financed by a federal grant.

So, if you’re in Manhattan and are having a heart attack, wouldn’t it be pretty disconcerting to know that plans to harvest your organs are being made before you even reach the nearest hospital?

(h/t Weasel Zippers)

"

Michelle Obama-backed childhood nutrition bill clears Congress

from TheHill.com by jpecquet@thehill.com (Julian Pecquet)


Michelle Obama-backed childhood nutrition bill clears Congress: "

President Obama is expected to quickly sign legislation that would establish nutrition standards for all food sold in schools.

"

More theft of your money by FCC

from USACTION NEWS by Editor


More theft of your money by FCC: "

FBN’s Dennis Kneale on the FCC’s multi-billion dollar broadband plan that subsidizes rural phone service.

If you can see this, then you might need a Flash Player upgrade or you need to install Flash Player if it's missing. Get Flash Player from Adobe.

FCC to move on net neutrality despite opposition from congress

Net ‘Neutrality’ and the destruction of free speech

Did They Really Think We Wouldn’t Fight to Keep the Internet Free?

"

Video: Google Earth finds Jewish Star of David on Iranian Building

from theblogprof by The blogprof


Video: Google Earth finds Jewish Star of David on Iranian Building: "Heh:

It was there for decades. DECADES! Here's the Fox News piece that Megyn pointed out: Satellite Image Shows Star of David on Iranian Airport Building's Roof. Why don't they just keep in on there. You know - in the name of tolerance.

"

Video: New Report on Afghan Self-burners - A Unique feature of Islamic Culture

from theblogprof by The blogprof

Video: New Report on Afghan Self-burners - A Unique feature of Islamic Culture: "It's ironic that the feminazis in the US have climbed in bed with the most oppressive ideology to women possible in the world. Liberals have to willingly ignore stories like this:

"

CBO: Even though 3.5 million jobs have been lost since stimulus passed, we're going to stick with our claim that it created 3.5 million jobs

from theblogprof by The blogprof


CBO: Even though 3.5 million jobs have been lost since stimulus passed, we're going to stick with our claim that it created 3.5 million jobs: "In the runup to the stimulus boondoggle vote in February 2009, Obama promised that 3.5 million NEW jobs would be created. Instead, 3.5 million jobs have been lost, yielding a 7 million jobs deficit for Obama in addition to his astronomical fiscal deficit. He even got cocky a few times and claimed he'd create 5 million new jobs:

Obama did promise a whole bunch of new jobs. Let's just check out that success, shall we? The below graph represents the gross numbers of able-bodied workers, in thousands, outside the workforce and no longer looking for jobs:

The numbers on the abscissa are in the thousands. The data is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note the star. That represents when the stimulus boondoggle was passed. And here are the jobs numbers:

How is Obama and his ilk saying with straight faces that the stimulus worked, exactly? There is absolutely no indication in the data that it did anything other than waste money. The data is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. You can clearly see from the jobs data that the stimulus did nothing. There was no change in direction or even trajectory, and the jobs numbers didn't even start to bend upwards until a year later. The only sector that made out is government:

The unemployment rate continues to hover around 10%. Recall that the stimulus package was supposed to stop the unemployment rate at 8%! A crisis could become a calamity? Remember that? Here's how that looks (via Michael's Comments):

Note that the blue lines are the numbers that Obama's team came up with. So the actual unemployment rate is not only worse that what would happen with porkulus, but even worse than was predicted without it. The CBO, however, is giving Obama political cover in the form of fraudulent jobs numbers that don't actually exist. From ABC News:

The Congressional Budget Office has weighed in on the effects of the government’s stimulus spending this past summer and concludes that the Recovery Act raised the GDP, lowered unemployment, and increased the number of people with jobs, but the range of numbers is very, very broad. The CBO also suggests the major effects of the stimulus peaked during what the administration once called the Summer of Recovery, are diminishing, and will “wane gradually” during these final months of 2010.

The unemployment rate has been above 9.5% for 15 straight months. It was around 7% when the stimulus was signed into law. How does the CBO say that the stimulus lowered unemployment when it's actually up more than 2 percentage points? Further:

Price tag: CBO says the original price tag of $787 Billion is actually going to be higher for the 10 year period: $814 Billion spent into the economy 2009-2019.

Jobs: CBO counts them differently than the Recovery Act, but concludes based on economic models that in just the third quarter, July through September, stimulus spending “increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.6 million.” (Vice President Biden claims “millions” of jobs have been created and at one point forecast 500 thousand additional jobs a month, an optimistic prediction that did not come true in monthly government reports.)

Uh - WHA??? CBO claims that jobs were created or saved jobs is BASED ON THEORETICAL MODELS, not actual data. From a prior post of mine: CBO Report Claiming 1.5 Million Jobs Created Or Saved Was Pre-Ordained to Show the Stimulus Succeeded, Based On Models That Show Saved Jobs No Matter What

The CBO model started by automatically assuming that government spending increases GDP by pre-set multipliers, such as:

• Every $1 of government spending that directly purchases goods and services ultimately raises the GDP by $1.75;
  
• Every $1 of government spending sent to state and local governments for infrastructure ultimately raises GDP by $1.75;
• Every $1 of government spending sent to state and local governments for non-infrastructure spending ultimately raises GDP by $1.25; and
  
• Every $1 of government spending sent to an individual as a transfer payment ultimately raises GDP by $1.45.

(Note that all CBO figures in this post represent the midpoint between their high and low estimates.)

Then CBO plugged the stimulus provisions into the multipliers above, came up with a total increase in gross domestic product (GDP) of 2.6 percent, and then converted that added GDP into 1.5 million jobs.

The problem here is obvious. Once CBO decided to assume that every dollar of government spending increased GDP by the multipliers above, its conclusion that the stimulus saved jobs was pre-ordained. The economy could have lost 10 million jobs and the model still would have said that without the stimulus it would have lost 11.5 million jobs.

In other words, the books are cooked. The actual data shows the opposite of what Obama claims. No jobs were created and its doubtful that many were saved, sans perhaps government jobs that don't do diddly squat for the GDP.Every single job in America could have been lost, and the CBO would still say jobs were created. It's a farce.

"