President Obama and Republican Congressional Leaders meet

As the Earmark Ban failed in the Senate today, Republican Congressional leaders met with President Obama to try and resolve differences over the Bush era tax cuts. Both the President and Republicans called the meeting 'very productive'. Maybe the President is trying to make an effort?

While Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell specifically stated that they were against any tax increases from when the rates were established in 2001 and 2003 which were set to expire at the end of this year, President Obama went on to say that he would oppose any permanent extension of tax cuts to individuals making more than $200,000, and $250,000 for couples.

While it should be somewhat of a good compliment to President Obama that he is working with Republicans, and even announced yesterday a freeze on pay to Federal Government workers who earn ridiculous salaries and pension funds, Republicans in the House seem to be tied with working on solutions in the coming year ahead, while trying to find a compromise in the Democratic controlled Senate.

Many Republicans would like to see the controversial Health Care Law that was shoved down the throats of every single American repealed, but don't beat on that. Democrats in the Senate have already made their decision on that and are standing firm, not to mention having it vetoed by President Obama, and it is unlikely that Congress would get a 2/3 majority vote to over-ride the President's power.

But obviously, the Health Care Law and future taxes will start coming into fruition and will need to be discussed extensively in Congress, not to mention trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities including Social Security and Medicare, and let's not forget about our $14 trillion and growing national debt that everyone is also suppose to pay back (at least that is what our Federal Government expects us to do, even though it will never be repaid).

Where is all of this money going to come from?

People are sick and tired of being taxed to death in this country, but somewhere along the line, they'll have to find the money, won't they?

U.S. documents leaked

On Sunday,  an online whistle blowing organization known as WikiLeaks, were able to get their hands on hundreds of thousands of classified U.S. State Department secret memos and documents which detailed relationships and diplomacy, particularly in the Middle East.

The details of some of these secret documents centered around countries such as Saudi Arabia,  apparently trying to pressure the U.S. to take action against Iran and its nuclear program; additionally, there was also major concern to get the U.S. to move on problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan, centering around al-Qaeda; as well as growing discontent in North Korea. WikiLeaks went on to say that they were quite surprised by the level of espionage that the U.S. is engaging in, after analyzing the documents in full.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated in a press conference this afternoon, that the U.S. would take 'aggressive steps' in finding those responsible for leaking the documents.

To be quite frank, I'm actually glad that Wikileaks released the documents which they claim more than half were unclassified anyway. Whether or not they actually where does not really concern me, but rather the U.S. Government continued ability to remain secretive about issues when it comes to foreign policy. Americans are already angry and fed up with things they're not supposed to know anything about,  so Americans knowing some of these so called 'classified' memos would be more comforting, rather than finding out later on that these things were kept behind closed doors and kept away from the American people which would make everyone, probably twice as angry.

Do we need to re-analyze the Bush Administration's policies that were kept from the American people?

The release of these documents are an embarrassment to the Obama Administration, and rightfully so. This President campaigned on the objective that he would provide more openness and transparency in Government and set up a stronger dialogue with the American people. 

I think a majority of Americans now realize that was obviously a false pretense, and he can add this to his list that has exposed him as nothing more than a pathological liar. 

Happy Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

TSA inspections despicable among travelers

The new measures enacted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at airports nationwide have become the talk of controversy over the last few weeks. Today, more than two million people will be traveling the day before Thanksgiving and will have to endure these new measures which include body-scanning machines and rather intrusive and intimate pat-downs by TSA agents.

I’d just like to say how thankful I am that I will not be in that crowd today.

Travelers are not happy with the new body-scanning machines because TSA agents are allowed to basically see people on “this side” of being completely nude; and the pat-downs they are finding as a simple violation of privacy rights.

Some of the outrageous and embarrassing stories among travelers that have surfaced recently include a breast cancer survivor having to remove her prosthetic breast during a TSA inspection; a victim of sexual assault, felt the pat-down so intrusive she felt that she was being assaulted all over again; another TSA agent broke the bag of a bladder cancer patient, leaving him soaked in his own urine; a three year old child was forced to surrender her teddy bear, to endure a full body pat-down; and on the more comical front, a guy stripped all the way down to his boxer shorts to avoid even being touched by an agent. The searches by the TSA are beyond despicable.

Interestingly, Government officials are apparently exempt from having to endure any of this airport nonsense. But what is more interesting is the conflict of interest between Michael Chertoff, the former Homeland Security Secretary and his relationship with consulting to Rapiscan Systems, one of two companies designing the new body-scan systems at airports. Chertoff, and some of our top legislators including Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts and Congressman Mike Castle of Delaware have monetary stakes in Rapiscan. Senator Kerry apparently has a value between $500,000 and $1 million in the scanning corporation, while Congressman Castle has about $65,000.

One has to ask the question if our federal legislators are actually supporting national security, or simply just going with the flow to make a fast buck on the process? Maybe they should rename Rapiscan Systems as “Grab and Scan”.

During a breakfast meeting with the Christian Science Monitor, TSA chief administrator John Pistole is quoted as saying “if passengers don’t undergo screening, then they don’t have a right to fly. I see flying as a privilege that is a public safety issue.” Apparently Mr. Pistole has never read 49 USC Section 40103, Provision II which clearly spells out “a citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through navigational airspace.”

Now the TSA of course will continue to insist that it is simply enhancing safety in national security in airports, while taking into consideration privacy among travelers. Is that right?

Did the TSA ever take into consideration other alternative solutions? Maybe, adopting the same model that enforced airport security in Israel, which was profiling passengers? Or what about bomb-sniffing dogs at airports?

Oh, I forgot, we can’t have bomb trained dogs at airports because that would mean a TSA agent wouldn’t get a huge paycheck, benefits and a largely inflated pension fund, paid for kindly, with American tax payer money.

Nevertheless, a majority of Americans have found new measures from the TSA as too extreme, and today, people nationwide are revolting and will be voicing their concerns by boycotting many airports.

Tension between North and South Korea

Just two days after the discovery of its enriched uranium for its nuclear program, the hostile dictatorship of North Korea fired artillery against South Korea earlier today, for about an hour on the island of Yeonpyeong. The attack left two South Korean marines dead, and left 16 wounded including soldiers and civilians. It is probably the deadliest attack between the two discontent countries in over fifty years.

In a country where people are brainwashed, shut off from the rest of the world, cell phones and computers banned, no economy, no food, citizens are thrown in concentration camps and suffer from disease and starvation, one would wonder how North Korea is so powerful? One of those factors is primarily its communist dictatorship run by Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Il, and their ability to have acquired technology from the now-defunct Soviet Union, and have grown its men into the fourth largest standing army in the world.

The more friendly, U.S. backed South Korea has responded to the attacks by putting its military on high alert, while North Korea has indicated that if any further retaliation, serious consequences will follow. The situation between the two Koreas seems to be tittering on the brink of getting very out of hand. For one, South Korea knows that North Korea is not exactly a country to fool around with and will be destroyed, prompting intervention from American forces; and secondly, if another Korean war does occur, most likely China will cease from providing food and investment to North Korea, since they have relayed heavily on China due to Kim Jong-Il’s dictatorial leadership.

The United States has condemned the attacks, and President Obama is apparently ‘outraged’ and the six party talks between the U.S., North Korea, South Korea, Russia, Japan and China, have stalled. But why he is outraged, remains unclear, since it should not be any surprise to anyone that North Korea has been secretly planning assaults against South Korea since basically the end of World War II, and there have been minor attacks taken place several times over the last fifty years.

Most likely, as violence increases from North Korea, the United States will enforce sanctions against North Korea, which of course, will do absolutely nothing.

Is Obama keeping U.S. safe from a “new” nuclear war and terror?

What is obviously continuing to be an escalating global threat, it was confirmed yesterday that North Korea has enriched uranium for its nuclear facilities. The news apparently sent shockwaves through Washington, yet some U.S. Officials were not entirely surprised by the situation… Well, the ones that were not surprised, at least understand that we’ve only been warned about North Korea’s anticipated progress on advancing its nuclear ambitions for fifteen years, or more. Yet nothing was ever done, except sign a piece of paper with the United Nations.

Back in June 2009 while in France, President Obama was asked at a press conference about North Korea and its relationship with Iran concerning their nuclear ambitions. The President seemed rather evasive on addressing the issue and could not clearly answer the United States’ policy with North Korea specifically, although he ended his statement by saying:

“I don’t think that there should be an assumption, that we will simply continue down a path in which North Korea is constantly destabilizing the region, and we just react the same ways by after they do these things after a while, we reward them.”

Well, why don’t we stop assuming Mr. President? After all, North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il has shown a clear defiance all this time, and violated its resolution with the United Nations. That should be enough of an indicator that they are one step further in expanding their program.

But North Korea, continuing its nuclear plans is just the tip of the iceberg. The United States has feared North Korea intention to sell missiles and nuclear technology to Iran. Even more terrifying, is the notion of North Korea ,possibly one day selling any of its nuclear programs to al-Qaeda, something that the terrorist network would absolutely love to get its hands on.

Iran has actually continued its operations out of the Middle East, in moving forward in establishing their nuclear plans. Now, the country is apparently mining for uranium in Venezuela. Russia agreed earlier this year, to help Venezuela build a nuclear reactor plant, and continued its relationship in assisting Iran. Over the course of the last several years, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have meet with each other in their respective countries to discuss their plans, with Venezuela actually allowing Iran to take over a mining site within its own country to obtain uranium.

Incidentally, on Chavez’s numerous trips to Iran in the last two years, he also began subsidizing the Militant Islamic group Hezbollah in Lebanon, while continuing to work in conjunction with Iran on its nuclear programs. 

Why in the world would a Latin American President be giving money to an organization bent on destroying the United States and Israel?

The commonality of these three countries is based on the fact that they have been working to create a nuclear program that could threaten the safety of the world. Taking into consideration Chavez’s relationship with Hezbollah, which in itself has ties with al-Qaeda and Iran’s relationship with North Korea, which in turn could sell its missiles or weapons to al-Qaeda, paints a very disturbing picture as to what the United States is doing to seriously address this matter.

President Obama has done little when has come to moving forward on solutions to force North Korea and Iran to dismantle their nuclear plans, and is reluctant to admit putting sanctions against Venezuela and its connections to Iran and Middle East terrorist organizations.

The President also seems to be very reluctant to admit that al-Qaeda has moved its breeding grounds to North Africa in the Sahara desert, since the terrorist network has felt increasing heat to move away from Pakistan and Yemen. In September, al-Qaeda kidnapped five French nationals in Niger, and are currently holding them hostage. As of yesterday, al-Qaeda is reportedly demanding that France pull its troops out of Afghanistan if they want to see the hostages released. This, at the height of the NATO summit last week, which its topic of discussion was pulling out of Afghanistan by 2014.

Here’s a side recommendation to the French Government: If they are successful in getting its citizens out of the hands of al-Qaeda, then they should step up and use their own nuclear weapons as a primary defense in the war on terror, along with the United States. One problem resolved. Wouldn’t want to see all of that nuclear testing in the French Polynesian ocean near the Tahitian Moruroa Atoll go to waste.

But these are continuous escalating global threats. I would question President Obama as to how serious he is on taking affirmative action against these countries nuclear plans and the continuation of the threat from al-Qaeda in order to protect the United States, with the assistance of our allies. He can either get the United States to move on these problems; or simply just do what he said in his speech back in June of 2009, and just let them do their thing and reward them later.

This is probably the biggest world threat since the end of the Cold War, and this is not the extension of it, but rather something much worse.

NATO putting on the pressure to pull out of Afghanistan

Last weekend President Obama hopped all over the financial summits in Asia to discuss global economic reform, and now this weekend, he is meeting with leaders at the NATO summit in Lisbon concerning the War in Afghanistan.

As many may remember, President Obama repeatedly stated that he wanted troops to come home by 2011 and handover the responsibility to Afghan forces. Now it appears that officials are more or less focusing to withdraw the 100,000 troops, which included the 30,000 troops ordered by President Obama last year, by 2014.

The reason for this?

Mainly because Afghanistan has shown very little signs of stabilizing itself.

It shouldn’t appear to be such a shocker to President Obama, nor for any official in our Federal Government, as Afghanistan remains one of the top unstable governments in the entire world and has dealt with a continuous civil war for many decades, both from the invasion from the Soviet Union in the 1970’s, to an internal war throughout the 1990’s which resulted in the Taliban. Yet every time there seemed to be a war going on in Afghanistan, it was never able to build itself into a stabilized country.

I seem to recall we also went into Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein. Yet after years of fighting a war in that country, Iraq is still quite unstable and the place is pretty much uninhabitable.

Of course, the primary reason for going into Afghanistan back in 2001 in the first place, was to overthrow the Taliban and dismantle the al-Qaeda network, as a direct result of the September 11^th terrorist attacks. Since that time, the U.S. Military has been unsuccessful in capturing the real ringleader behind those attacks, Osama bin Laden, ranging from theories that he is dead, or hiding out someplace in Pakistan.

President Obama has quite a bit to deal with right now in the Middle East, from leaving Iraq, to stabilizing Afghanistan, and apparently ignorant over Iran’s nuclear program.

At the NATO summit, leaders are pressuring President Obama to implement a better strategy for exiting Afghanistan by that time. While NATO has no exact departure date to be set in 2014, it is projected that the new war efforts in Afghanistan will cost American taxpayers $125 billion through these next three and a half years. Never mind the fact that the United States has enough problems on its plate including servicing its $14 trillion national debt, and providing health care for veterans that just returned from Iraq.

The real question remains as to when the United States does in fact leave Afghanistan, is that country going to be able to sustain itself as a stable government with democracy and its Afghan forces; or will it just become another breeding ground for future generations of al-Qaeda, again posing as a threat to our country’s national security, and the rest of the world?