The recent employment figures show 216,000 jobs were created in March, allowing the unemployment rate to fall from 8.9% to 8.8%. And according to David Dreier, Republican Chairman of the House Rules Committee, John Boehner is the one responsible for these newly created jobs.
Contain your laughter!!!
Mr. David Dreier praised John Boehner, saying;
Speaker Boehner has consistently been saying not only, “where are the jobs,” and we’re all gratified that the positive signs of getting our fiscal house in order played a big role in creating 216,000 non-farm, payroll jobs last month and brought the unemployment rate from 8.9 down to 8.8%.
So what exactly is Mr. Dreier talking about when he says “getting our fiscal house in order?” Well, to answer that question, we have to look at what House Republicans have concentrated on in the last 2 months since they took control of the House of Representatives.
House Republicans have voted to repeal President Obama’s health care law. According to a report by David M. Cutler, repealing healthcare would “slow job growth by 250,000 to 400,000 annually.” The report also show an increase in medical spending by $125 billion by the end of this decade, and another $2,000 increase in yearly insurance premiums for families.
Republicans in the House have also voted to defund NPR. Exactly how many jobs will this create? Zero. But it will take away $22 million dollars from the organization. Sigh!
Repealing Planned Parenthood…. Jobs created? Another big ZERO, as per The Huffington Post
House Republicans are intent on cutting $61 billion from the budget. This must be where the 216,000 jobs came from! Well, let’s take a look. The Senate hasn’t agreed on this $61 billion cut, so in essence, this budget cut, called H.R 1 is not law. Jobs created? Zero. In fact, many economists agreed, that if the Republican’s budget cuts detailed in H.R. 1 go into effect, hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost.
And so the confusion continues. If the bills that House Republicans have voted on haven’t created any jobs, then how exactly is Mr. Dreier crediting John Boehner with creating 216,000 of them last month?
Well, Dreier knows he is lying. But its something Republicans have been doing for some time now. It’s called the power of persuasion – you say something often enough, eventually, although it may be a lie, it will be accepted as truth by many.
Since gaining power in the House of Representatives, Republicans have attacked just about every major group of middle class Americans it could classify. So there should be no surprise that the American Association of Retired Persons also known as the AARP is next in line for the GOP’s crosshairs.
Republicans are now asking the IRS to investigate the AARP, in an effort to cut off funding to the organization. Their reasoning is that because of AARP’s support for President Obama’s Health Care reform, the group is than bound to profit from the reform and thus, should be stripped of its federal funding. The Boston Globe reports;
Three veteran GOP representatives released a report that estimates the seniors lobby could make an additional $1 billion over 10 years on health insurance plans whose sales are expected to pick up under the new law. They also questioned seven-figure compensation for some AARP executives.
“Based on the available evidence, substantial questions remain about whether AARP should maintain its tax-exempt status,” said the report, released by Reps. Wally Herger of California, Charles Boustany of Louisiana and Dave Reichert of Washington.
AARP said profit had nothing to do with its support for President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, which expands coverage to nearly all Americans, a longstanding goal of the organization.
“We are very disappointed in the report and reject its conclusions,” said AARP President Lee Hammond. “AARP is no more an insurance company than we are an online travel company … the royalties we receive allow us to keep member dues low.”
Can we expect to see massive protests from the seniors in the Teaparty? After all, this organization represents them and provides benefits for their well-being in their golden years. When will the first march on Washington take place?
Don’t hold your breath. Defunding AARP, although it will eventually hurt TP seniors currently under the program, has absolutely no effect on the millionaires and billionaires who fund the Teaparty. In fact, taking away from AARP works in favor of the wealthy. Republicans lackeys will make certain that this money get’s to them in the form of another well deserved tax-cut.
The Daily Kos features a graph showing industry growth under the last three presidents – Clinton, Bush and Obama. And according to their figures, Obama seems to be the most ‘pro-business-growth’ president among the three. But don’t tell this to Koch Brothers, who earlier this week called the president, the most anti-corporate president ever. Charles Koch went on to say;
“He’s the most radical president we’ve ever had as a nation, and has done more damage to the free enterprise system and long-term prosperity than any president we’ve ever had. His father was a hard-core economic socialist in Kenya, Obama didn’t really interact with his father face-to-face very much, but was apparently from what I read a great admirer of his father’s points of view. So he had sort of antibusiness, anti-free enterprise influences affecting him almost all his life. It just shows you what a person with a silver tongue can achieve.”
Well if President Obama is doing so much damage to America’s free enterprise system, then why are U.S. businesses showing more profit than ever? The Huffington Post had this report;
U.S. corporate profits hit an all-time high at the end of 2010, with financial firms showing some of the biggest gains, data from the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis show. Corporations reported an annualized $1.68 trillion in profit in the fourth quarter. The previous record, without being adjusted for inflation, was $1.65 trillion in the third quarter of 2006.
Michele Bachmann, a potential Republican presidential candidate chimed in with this piece of wisdom;
I think that the agenda that we have seen – we know that sixty-three percent of all households have seen a major decline in their personal wealth, a decline in their personal income, and an increase in their debt level. That’s all attributable directly to Barack Obama’s principles. I don’t think it’s by accident we’re seeing people struggling and we’re seeing redistribution of wealth. I think Barack Obama is getting exactly the outcome that he hoped for.
If you listen to these billionaire cry-babies, you’ll realize the magnitude of their greed. For no matter how many profit records are broken because of the economic policies of this administration, the Koch brothers and the Republican party will continue calling President Obama a marxist, socialist, communist, who hates corporations and is actively redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor. The facts however, says otherwise.
Eric Cantor doesn’t know how laws are made. The number 2 Republican in the House of Representative held a news conference yesterday and allowed the following words to come out his mouth;
“…the Senate’s got to act, prior to the expiration of the CR. If it does not act, HR 1 becomes the law of the land.”
Cantor was talking about a House Resolution to fund the government for this budget. So far, the House and Senate congressional members have agreed to two temporary Continued Resolutions (CR), because an agreement could not be reached on specific budgetary issues like spending cuts. Republicans want to cut over $61 billion from the budget. So what Cantor was saying here, is that if the Senate cannot submit their bill for the next budget, then the HR1 bill passed by the House of Representatives automatically becomes “the law of the land.”
What the statement from Mr. Cantor demonstrated, was that the Republican Majority Leader was not aware of how laws are made, or he tried unsuccessfully to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people. Anyone and everyone knows that in order for a bill to become law, both House and Senate must agree on the bill and the President must sign it into law.
In the video below, Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC tore into Mr. Cantor and his ill-informed comments.
You want your government small and non-intrusive? Well try this one on for size! Jan Brewer, the same Republican governor who tried to make racial profiling legal in her state of Arizona, just signed another racially motivated bill into law. This time, Mrs. Brewer is targeting minority women electing to get a legal abortion in her state.
According to House bill 2443, it will now be a crime for abortion providers to provide the service base on the race or sex of the fetus. The explanation for the law, as stated by its supporters, is that abortion facilities are disproportionately setting up their operations in minority neighborhoods, so in an effort to curb these clinics from setting up shops, Jan Brewer’s law will allow for doctors to be sued legally for performing the procedure.
The law allows the father of an aborted fetus – or, if the mother is a minor, the mother’s parents – to take legal action against the doctor or other health-care provider who performed the abortion. If convicted of the felony, physicians would face up to seven years in jail and the loss of their medical license.
The ruling would be totally ridiculed and frankly called racists if the law made the language more direct, like saying any physicians performing abortions for minorities can face up to seven years in jail if convicted, so the wisdom at play here, is to put these physicians on notice – having them second-guessing any decision to offer the service to those minorities women requesting it. A physician knowing they can end up in jail or fined if a case is brought against them, will reconsider performing this service to minorities.
Conservatives place great emphasis on their love for small government. Yet, not small enough that it won’t dictate what you can or cannot do with your own productive organs.
A new CNN poll reveals some shocking details – Americans are wising up to the Teaparty and what they really stand for. Imagine that? The poll shows that the unfavorable rating of the Teaparty have risen to 47%. That’s up from a year ago, when more Americans bought into their so-called “grassroots” foundation.
Since January 2010, when only 26% of Americans found the movement to be unfavorable, more revelations were made about where their funds were coming from. And with those revelations, more and more Americans began realizing that the Teaparty movement is a lobbying organization for the rich. People like the Koch brothers and Dick Armey have invested heavily into the Teaparty, and in return for their investment, the movement goes out to protest any policy measure that goes against their rich sponsors.
But although a majority of Americans view the Teaparty in an unfavorable way, they are not alone. The CNN poll also finds both the Democratic and Republican party with a high unfavorable reading. Democrat’s polls split almost down the middle, with 46% in favor and 48% expressing a negative view. Republicans are in the same boat. The American people voted 44% in favor of the GOP, and 48% against.
Republicans have long wished for the time when the poor and suffering would move out-of-the-way, and allow the millionaires, billionaires and Corporations to prosper. In their view, poor and middle class Americans are trying to take away all the programs the government has established to benefit the rich. Republicans call these “entitlement programs,” and the sooner they’re able to push and squeeze others off these programs, the sooner the rich can benefit.
No place is this more evident than in Florida, where a new Teaparty candidate, representing the Republican party, held a townhall meeting to address his supporters. Mr. Allan West, the House representative for Southeast Florida told the crowd that he would love to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and federal income tax, while retaining tax cuts for billionaires. West also wants to stop the extension of unemployment benefits to the middle class and refers to the government providing these benefits to middle class Americans as, “rewarding bad behavior.”
In reference to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, West thinks that leaving these services in tact will deplete our GDP by 2030 or 2040. His plans would be for the eventual dismantling of these services that again for the most part assist the poor people and middle class. Spokeswoman for DCCC Jennifer Crider said;
“Everyone agrees we need to cut spending, but Representative Allen West is making the wrong choice by forcing seniors to shoulder the burden and while not asking Big Oil companies making record profits to sacrifice even the smallest amount.”
Social Security is a program that mostly pays for itself. Over the last few years, however, the program has began to show signs that it will eventually fall short of its goals of comfortably providing for its beneficiaries, mainly because more people are entering into retirement and also because the labor force is reduced due to the economic downturn. Republicans, who have been trying to dismantle the program for decades, are now using the economy and the federal deficit as reasons to bring social security to its knees. Some Democrats, like Senate Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, are determined to fight these efforts of the Republicans. In a recent interview, Mr. Reid said;
“I have said clearly and as many times as I can, leave Social Security alone. Social Security does not add a single penny, not a dime, a nickel, a dollar to the budget problems we have. Never has and for the next 30 years it won’t do that.
“So what I’ve said, if you want to look at something to take care of the out years, let’s do it at the right time. It is not in a crisis at this stage. Leave Social Security alone. We have a lot of other places we can look that are in crisis. Social Security is not. I repeat, for the next approximately 30 years people will draw 100% of their benefits.”
Mr. West’s thinking is common amongst Republican party members. Many Republican governors nationwide have begun breaking down the middle class in order to support their rich donors. Recent examples in Wisconsin, Detroit, and Florida are just some of the states where Republican governors are creating laws geared towards removing any form of assistance from the middle class worker, and transferring that assistance to the rich. Rick Scott of Florida recently proposed a bill that will cut school subsidies in his state by $1.3 billion, while at the same time, giving a tax cut of $1.6 billion to millionaires.
It is a transfer of wealth like we haven’t seen in quite a long time, and it started over 30 years ago when Ronald Regan introduced the idea of trickle down economics. The concept embraces the belief that giving to the rich will in turn allow them to provide jobs to the middle class, thus trickling down the wealth. But this idea failed in the Reagan years, causing the president to raise taxes in an effort to fight off a downward turn in the 1980 economy. And although it failed then, trickle down economics was embraced by conservatives over the past 30 years, and contributed heavily to the most recent recession that started in 2007/2008 under the Bush administration. According to reports from The Atlantic;
When Clinton left office in 2000, the Census counted almost 31.6 million Americans living in poverty. When Bush left office in 2008, the number of poor Americans had jumped to 39.8 million (the largest number in absolute terms since 1960.) Under Bush, the number of people in poverty increased by over 8.2 million, or 26.1 per cent. Over two-thirds of that increase occurred before the economic collapse of 2008.
Unfortunately, here we are in 2011, and the trickle-down trend has continued. Republicans are now taking away from schools, education, cutting back on planned parenthood and public radio, in an effort to finance the bank accounts of the rich. Will the American people wake up from their slumber before it’s too late? Will we ever realize that the last 30+ years of trickle down economics did nothing for the middle class, and everything for th über rich? If we continue to go down this path we’ve been on for the past 30 years, why should we expect a different outcome?
America can once again be what the founding fathers intended it to be. The preamble to the constitution says it best;
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Good evening. Tonight, I’d like to update the American people on the international effort that we have led in Libya – what we have done, what we plan to do, and why this matters to us.
I want to begin by paying tribute to our men and women in uniform who, once again, have acted with courage, professionalism and patriotism. They have moved with incredible speed and strength. Because of them and our dedicated diplomats, a coalition has been forged and countless lives have been saved. Meanwhile, as we speak, our troops are supporting our ally Japan, leaving Iraq to its people, stopping the Taliban’s momentum in Afghanistan, and going after al Qaeda around the globe. As Commander-in-Chief, I am grateful to our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and their families, as are all Americans.
For generations, the United States of America has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and advocate for human freedom. Mindful of the risks and costs of military action, we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world’s many challenges. But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act. That is what happened in Libya over the course of these last six weeks.
Libya sits directly between Tunisia and Egypt – two nations that inspired the world when their people rose up to take control of their own destiny. For more than four decades, the Libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant – Moammar Gaddafi. He has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world – including Americans who were killed by Libyan agents.
Last month, Gaddafi’s grip of fear appeared to give way to the promise of freedom. In cities and towns across the country, Libyans took to the streets to claim their basic human rights. As one Libyan said, “For the first time we finally have hope that our nightmare of 40 years will soon be over.”
Faced with this opposition, Gaddafi began attacking his people. As President, my immediate concern was the safety of our citizens, so we evacuated our Embassy and all Americans who sought our assistance. We then took a series of swift steps in a matter of days to answer Gaddafi’s aggression. We froze more than $33 billion of the Gaddafi regime’s assets. Joining with other nations at the United Nations Security Council, we broadened our sanctions, imposed an arms embargo, and enabled Gaddafi and those around him to be held accountable for their crimes. I made it clear that Gaddafi had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said that he needed to step down from power.
In the face of the world’s condemnation, Gaddafi chose to escalate his attacks, launching a military campaign against the Libyan people. Innocent people were targeted for killing. Hospitals and ambulances were attacked. Journalists were arrested, sexually assaulted, and killed. Supplies of food and fuel were choked off. The water for hundreds of thousands of people in Misratah was shut off. Cities and towns were shelled, mosques destroyed, and apartment buildings reduced to rubble. Military jets and helicopter gunships were unleashed upon people who had no means to defend themselves against assault from the air.
Confronted by this brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis, I ordered warships into the Mediterranean. European allies declared their willingness to commit resources to stop the killing. The Libyan opposition, and the Arab League, appealed to the world to save lives in Libya. At my direction, America led an effort with our allies at the United Nations Security Council to pass an historic Resolution that authorized a No Fly Zone to stop the regime’s attacks from the air, and further authorized all necessary measures to protect the Libyan people.
Ten days ago, having tried to end the violence without using force, the international community offered Gaddafi a final chance to stop his campaign of killing, or face the consequences. Rather than stand down, his forces continued their advance, bearing down on the city of Benghazi, home to nearly 700,000 men, women and children who sought their freedom from fear.
At this point, the United States and the world faced a choice. Gaddafi declared that he would show “no mercy” to his own people. He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment. In the past, we had seen him hang civilians in the streets, and kill over a thousand people in a single day. Now, we saw regime forces on the outskirts of the city. We knew that if we waited one more day, Benghazi – a city nearly the size of Charlotte – could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.
It was not in our national interest to let that happen. I refused to let that happen. And so nine days ago, after consulting the bipartisan leadership of Congress, I authorized military action to stop the killing and enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1973. We struck regime forces approaching Benghazi to save that city and the people within it. We hit Gaddafi’s troops in neighboring Ajdabiya, allowing the opposition to drive them out. We hit his air defenses, which paved the way for a No Fly Zone. We targeted tanks and military assets that had been choking off towns and cities and we cut off much of their source of supply. And tonight, I can report that we have stopped Gaddafi’s deadly advance.
In this effort, the United States has not acted alone. Instead, we have been joined by a strong and growing coalition. This includes our closest allies – nations like the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Turkey – all of whom have fought by our side for decades. And it includes Arab partners like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, who have chosen to meet their responsibility to defend the Libyan people.
To summarize, then: in just one month, the United States has worked with our international partners to mobilize a broad coalition, secure an international mandate to protect civilians, stop an advancing army, prevent a massacre, and establish a No Fly Zone with our allies and partners. To lend some perspective on how rapidly this military and diplomatic response came together, when people were being brutalized in Bosnia in the 1990s, it took the international community more than a year to intervene with air power to protect civilians.
Moreover, we have accomplished these objectives consistent with the pledge that I made to the American people at the outset of our military operations. I said that America’s role would be limited; that we would not put ground troops into Libya; that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation, and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners. Tonight, we are fulfilling that pledge.
Our most effective alliance, NATO, has taken command of the enforcement of the arms embargo and No Fly Zone. Last night, NATO decided to take on the additional responsibility of protecting Libyan civilians. This transfer from the United States to NATO will take place on Wednesday. Going forward, the lead in enforcing the No Fly Zone and protecting civilians on the ground will transition to our allies and partners, and I am fully confident that our coalition will keep the pressure on Gaddafi’s remaining forces. In that effort, the United States will play a supporting role – including intelligence, logistical support, search and rescue assistance, and capabilities to jam regime communications. Because of this transition to a broader, NATO-based coalition, the risk and cost of this operation – to our military, and to American taxpayers – will be reduced significantly.
So for those who doubted our capacity to carry out this operation, I want to be clear: the United States of America has done what we said we would do.
That is not to say that our work is complete. In addition to our NATO responsibilities, we will work with the international community to provide assistance to the people of Libya, who need food for the hungry and medical care for the wounded. We will safeguard the more than $33 billion that was frozen from the Gaddafi regime so that it is available to rebuild Libya. After all, this money does not belong to Gaddafi or to us – it belongs to the Libyan people, and we will make sure they receive it.
Tomorrow, Secretary Clinton will go to London, where she will meet with the Libyan opposition and consult with more than thirty nations. These discussions will focus on what kind of political effort is necessary to pressure Gaddafi, while also supporting a transition to the future that the Libyan people deserve. Because while our military mission is narrowly focused on saving lives, we continue to pursue the broader goal of a Libya that belongs not to a dictator, but to its people.
Despite the success of our efforts over the past week, I know that some Americans continue to have questions about our efforts in Libya. Gaddafi has not yet stepped down from power, and until he does, Libya will remain dangerous. Moreover, even after Gaddafi does leave power, forty years of tyranny has left Libya fractured and without strong civil institutions. The transition to a legitimate government that is responsive to the Libyan people will be a difficult task. And while the United States will do our part to help, it will be a task for the international community, and – more importantly – a task for the Libyan people themselves.
In fact, much of the debate in Washington has put forward a false choice when it comes to Libya. On the one hand, some question why America should intervene at all – even in limited ways – in this distant land. They argue that there are many places in the world where innocent civilians face brutal violence at the hands of their government, and America should not be expected to police the world, particularly when we have so many pressing concerns here at home.
It is true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action. But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what’s right. In this particular country – Libya; at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves. We also had the ability to stop Gaddafi’s forces in their tracks without putting American troops on the ground.
To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and – more profoundly – our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.
Moreover, America has an important strategic interest in preventing Gaddafi from overrunning those who oppose him. A massacre would have driven thousands of additional refugees across Libya’s borders, putting enormous strains on the peaceful – yet fragile – transitions in Egypt and Tunisia. The democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power. The writ of the UN Security Council would have been shown to be little more than empty words, crippling its future credibility to uphold global peace and security. So while I will never minimize the costs involved in military action, I am convinced that a failure to act in Libya would have carried a far greater price for America.
Now, just as there are those who have argued against intervention in Libya, there are others who have suggested that we broaden our military mission beyond the task of protecting the Libyan people, and do whatever it takes to bring down Gaddafi and usher in a new government.
Of course, there is no question that Libya – and the world – will be better off with Gaddafi out of power. I, along with many other world leaders, have embraced that goal, and will actively pursue it through non-military means. But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.
The task that I assigned our forces – to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger, and to establish a No Fly Zone – carries with it a UN mandate and international support. It is also what the Libyan opposition asked us to do. If we tried to overthrow Gaddafi by force, our coalition would splinter. We would likely have to put U.S. troops on the ground, or risk killing many civilians from the air. The dangers faced by our men and women in uniform would be far greater. So would the costs, and our share of the responsibility for what comes next.
To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq. Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops and the determination of our diplomats, we are hopeful about Iraq’s future. But regime change there took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives, and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya.
As the bulk of our military effort ratchets down, what we can do – and will do – is support the aspirations of the Libyan people. We have intervened to stop a massacre, and we will work with our allies and partners as they’re in the lead to maintain the safety of civilians. We will deny the regime arms, cut off its supply of cash, assist the opposition, and work with other nations to hasten the day when Gaddafi leaves power. It may not happen overnight, as a badly weakened Gaddafi tries desperately to hang on to power. But it should be clear to those around Gadaffi, and to every Libyan, that history is not on his side. With the time and space that we have provided for the Libyan people, they will be able to determine their own destiny, and that is how it should be.
Let me close by addressing what this action says about the use of America’s military power, and America’s broader leadership in the world, under my presidency.
As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than keeping this country safe. And no decision weighs on me more than when to deploy our men and women in uniform. I have made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies, and our core interests. That is why we are going after al Qaeda wherever they seek a foothold. That is why we continue to fight in Afghanistan, even as we have ended our combat mission in Iraq and removed more than 100,000 troops from that country.
There will be times, though, when our safety is not directly threatened, but our interests and values are. Sometimes, the course of history poses challenges that threaten our common humanity and common security – responding to natural disasters, for example; or preventing genocide and keeping the peace; ensuring regional security, and maintaining the flow of commerce. These may not be America’s problems alone, but they are important to us, and they are problems worth solving. And in these circumstances, we know that the United States, as the world’s most powerful nation, will often be called upon to help.
In such cases, we should not be afraid to act – but the burden of action should not be America’s alone. As we have in Libya, our task is instead to mobilize the international community for collective action. Because contrary to the claims of some, American leadership is not simply a matter of going it alone and bearing all of the burden ourselves. Real leadership creates the conditions and coalitions for others to step up as well; to work with allies and partners so that they bear their share of the burden and pay their share of the costs; and to see that the principles of justice and human dignity are upheld by all.
That’s the kind of leadership we have shown in Libya. Of course, even when we act as part of a coalition, the risks of any military action will be high. Those risks were realized when one of our planes malfunctioned over Libya. Yet when one of our airmen parachuted to the ground, in a country whose leader has so often demonized the United States – in a region that has such a difficult history with our country – this American did not find enemies. Instead, he was met by people who embraced him. One young Libyan who came to his aid said, “We are your friends. We are so grateful to these men who are protecting the skies.”
This voice is just one of many in a region where a new generation is refusing to be denied their rights and opportunities any longer. Yes, this change will make the world more complicated for a time. Progress will be uneven, and change will come differently in different countries. There are places, like Egypt, where this change will inspire us and raise our hopes. And there will be places, like Iran, where change is fiercely suppressed. The dark forces of civil conflict and sectarian war will have to be averted, and difficult political and economic concerns addressed.
The United States will not be able to dictate the pace and scope of this change. Only the people of the region can do that. But we can make a difference. I believe that this movement of change cannot be turned back, and that we must stand alongside those who believe in the same core principles that have guided us through many storms: our opposition to violence directed against one’s own citizens; our support for a set of universal rights, including the freedom for people to express themselves and choose their leaders; our support for governments that are ultimately responsive to the aspirations of the people.
Born, as we are, out of a revolution by those who longed to be free, we welcome the fact that history is on the move in the Middle East and North Africa, and that young people are leading the way. Because wherever people long to be free, they will find a friend in the United States. Ultimately, it is that faith – those ideals – that are the true measure of American leadership.
My fellow Americans, I know that at a time of upheaval overseas – when the news is filled with conflict and change – it can be tempting to turn away from the world. And as I have said before, our strength abroad is anchored in our strength at home. That must always be our North Star – the ability of our people to reach their potential, to make wise choices with our resources, to enlarge the prosperity that serves as a wellspring of our power, and to live the values that we hold so dear.
But let us also remember that for generations, we have done the hard work of protecting our own people, as well as millions around the globe. We have done so because we know that our own future is safer and brighter if more of mankind can live with the bright light of freedom and dignity. Tonight, let us give thanks for the Americans who are serving through these trying times, and the coalition that is carrying our effort forward; and let us look to the future with confidence and hope not only for our own country, but for all those yearning for freedom around the world. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.
While it’s true that just about everybody loves a clown, you sure wouldn’t want one running the country. Which leads me to the clowns over at the three ring circus better know as the Republican and Tea Parties. Never in the history of politics has there ever been such a motley crew so anxious to threw their hats in the ring to become the next president of the United States.
Now don’t get me wrong, having a savory mixed bag of nuts running for the position wouldn’t be so bad — in fact it would add a little excitement to the sometimes mind numbing selection process — if the candidates weren’t so ridiculously unsuited for running a chicken-coop, let alone the highest office in what still is known as the most powerful country in the free world!
Now there are some who do have a fear of clowns, with their perpetual maniacal red smiles, those crazy eyes with surprised expression, and of course, there’s that pasty white paint giving them a creepy ghostly appearance–another thing in common with Republicans! And like all clowns, the Republicans and Tea Party can’t ever be taken seriously beacuse of the constant silly things they’re always doing to get a laugh out of us:
Newt Gingrichflip-flopping on his views over whether the United States coulda, woulda, shoulda secured the air space over Qadhafi’s Libya or even whether or not the US should have gotten involved at all in preventing the tyrant from slaughtering his own people protesting his regime.
Sarah Palin, throwing insults at the President and bad-mouthing him as he traveled overseas on a good will mission to Brazil, and her constant criticism of the First Lady’s efforts to help get American children to eat healthier.
Michele Bachmann, rewriting history by stating thet the “Founding Fathers” – who signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and created framework for the Constitution – did all they could to stop slavery in the New World.
Mike Huckabee, insisting that President Obama is not a United States citizen and is a secret member of the Mau Mau, whose sole interest is to kill all white folks in the country–in the name of Allah, no less.
And the latest bozo, Donald ‘Bring Me The Money’ Trump, who claims he will win the presidency if put up against Obama because he’ll put into effect a strategy to send aid and armies to help countries in need across the world—for a nominal fee! The Donald apparently is also an ardent Birther, who, as a guest recently on the television show “The View” also demanded that the President show his birth certificate.
And those still aren’t the scariest things about these clowns, because even though a fifth grader has more intelligence than all these “candidates” combined, there are still so called “true americans” who will cast their votes for them in the 2012’s presidential election because they “share the same views”. Really? That’s scary. Could you imagine any of them holding up against what Obama has gone through in the last almost four years of his presidency?;
Getting America through the war in Afghanistan–a war made impossible to avoid thanks to the previous administration.
Taking over, and reducing our military operations in Iraq, essentially bringing that war to an end.
Dealing with what many consider the biggest recession since the last depression and pulling the United States economy back from the verge total of collapse.
Engineering bailouts to businesses and banks in hopes of creating new jobs and new loan opportunities.
Creating the biggest tax cut for over 95% of Americans and small businesses in over 60 years.
Establishing healthcare for all Americans by passing a healthcare reform bill.
Reforming our financial system in an attempt to stop Wall Street from gouging the American citizens
Reforming the Student Loans process, making it easier for American students to get and repay their student loans.
Aiding the efforts of Middle Eastern citizens to free themselves from the tyranny of despots , installed sometimes by the regimes of past American presidents.
Thousands of deaths in the wake of Haiti’s massive earthquake and delivering aid to that country.
The most horrendous oil spill in history by BP Oil which will affect our waters and sea life for decades to come.
The triple disaster in Japan with earthquake, tsunami and the subsequent nuclear plant breakdowns.
Which of the Republican/Tea Party hopefuls will last one month in President’s Obama’s shoes? They’ll be crying fake clown tears, like their Speaker of the House John Boehner, in no time.
President Obama is showing that he has what it takes to be the calm, rational, thoughtful, humanistic leader this country needs. The GOP has a long way to go before they learn that throwing pies, handing out exploding cigars and shocking folks with joy buzzers does not a world leader make. Exit stage left fools!
And the good news is that if President Obama still cares enough to shoot for a second term after putting up with all the Republican antics from his first term, there will be no contest as to who will have center ring under the Big Top. He just better make sure he has his whip and chair to keep the loonies in check.
“Where are the jobs!?” was a question John Boehner asked to anyone who gave him the time of day. But then again, a campaign was on the way for the 2010 mid-term election, so asking this question at a time when over 15 million Americans were without work seemed like the thing to do. Boehner promised Americans that if he wins, job creation will be his number one priority, but since winning, the new House Speaker had more important things to take care of.
But the people are still waiting, and John Boehner – now almost 4 months into his leadership role – has to come up with a reason why he hasn’t stuck to his campaign promise. So what’s easier to do, than blame President Obama? Nothing… so that’s exactly what Boehner is now doing. On his website, Boehner had this to say;
“Any improvement in the jobs situation for our country is welcome news, but unemployment is still far above where the Obama Administration promised it would be when it forced our children to pay for the ‘stimulus’ fiasco, which accelerated a government spending binge that continues to block our nation’s path to prosperity.
“The path to prosperity and job creation lies in liberating our economy from the shackles of excessive government and unleashing the awesome potential of the American people. This has been and will continue to be the number-one priority for our new majority.”
If Mr. Boehner knows the pathway that leads to “to prosperity and job creation” then why doesn’t he take the initiative – hold America’s hand and lead us down the “path?”
Knowing the opportunistic nature of Boehner and his Republican allies, it is obvious he will claim that this pathway is the focus of his new majority. It is, however, impossible to understand how actions like defunding NPR – a move that House Republicans classified as an “emergency” – created jobs. And when the Boehner led House of Representatives focused like a laser on reducing $300 million in funding from Planned Parenthood, Americans are still asking, “Boehner, where are the jobs?!?!?!”
Americans are finally wising up though. It might be a little too late because the 2010 elections saw many Republican governors elected and a change in leadership in the House of Representative. But based on the actions – or lack thereof – of these Republicans, Americans have begun a real grass-root effort to make their voices heard. It is an effort that started in Wisconsin due to the over-reaching of another Republican governor whose intent is on silencing the Wisconsin workers and taking away their basic rights.
This grass-root initiative has spread nationwide, and the outlook for 2012 will be another message of change. This time though, it will be a change from the Corporate agenda Republicans are trying to push, to a focus on the middle class and really getting the American economy back on track.
But with another upcoming election, prepare for more baseless promises from the Republicans.
Despite a hold that a judge placed on Scott Walker’s union busting bill, Walker couldn’t wait for the legal process to unfold. On Friday, he published the bill on the state’s legislature website. According to the posting, the state’s law requires all bills to be published within 10 working days of its becoming law.
Also customary, according to Journal Sentinel;
The measure sparked protests at the Capitol and lawsuits by opponents because it would eliminate the ability of most public workers to bargain over anything but wages.
The restraining order was issued against Democratic Secretary of State Doug La Follette. But the bill was published by the reference bureau, which was not named in the restraining order.
Laws normally take effect a day after they are published, and a top GOP lawmaker said that meant it will become law Saturday. But nonpartisan legislative officials from two agencies, including the one who published the bill, disagreed.
“I think this is a ministerial act that forwards it to the secretary of state,” said Stephen Miller, director of the Legislative Reference Bureau. “I don’t think this act makes it become effective. My understanding is that the secretary of state has to publish it in the (official state) newspaper for it to become effective.”
Walker signed the bill March 11. Under state law, it should be published within 10 working days, which was Friday.
Tripping over himself in all manner of ways, is Republican hopeful for the 2012 presidential elections, Newt The Gingrich.
Mr. Gingrich exemplifies the Republicans response to President Obama in all his policy endeavors, and that is – look at the President’s position, and find a way to say and do the complete opposite.
So in keeping with that philosophy, the video below shows Newt Gingrich, criticizing President Obama for not acting on behalf of the Libyans being killed by Muammar Qadhafi. Asked what he would have done differently, Newt replied;
Exercise a no-fly zone this evening!… All we have to say is, slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and we are intervening.
Breaking News: President Obama and the International Community Exercised a No-Fly Zone over Libya.
Let’s now rejoin Newt, and see how he feels about this no-fly zone…
Mr. Gingrich, how do you feel about President Obama’s no-fly zone over Libya?
I would not have interveneD. I think there are a lot of other ways to affect Qadhafi.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By agreeing to this, we can analyze browsing behavior and unique IDs on this site. Declining or revoking consent may affect certain features.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.