Obamas on the search for a Portuguese Water Dog

Michelle Obama says her family has decided to make a Portuguese Water Dog the first dog around the Obama White House. The First Lady told People Magazine the Obamas are searching animal rescues for that particular breed.

Mrs. Obama says she hopes the lucky Portuguese Water Dog will move into the White House in April after she and President Obama take their daughters on Spring Break.

She recaps a typical conversation with her daughter Sasha about the dog's arrival: "So Sasha says, 'April 1st.' I said, 'April.' She says, 'April 1st.' It's, like, April!," Mrs. Obama recalls. "Got to do it after spring break. You can't get a new dog and then go away for a week."

So why a Portuguese Water Dog? "Temperamentally they're supposed to be pretty good," Mrs. Obama says she learned from Sen. Ted Kennedy who owns some water dogs himself. "From the size perspective, they're sort of middle of the road – it's not small, but it's not a huge dog. And the folks that we know who own them have raved about them. So that's where we're leaning."

I guess the next big questions is, what will the Obama's name their new dog?

Read more...

Obama's Census-ational Power Grab

After President Barack Obama nominated his second Commerce Secretary candidate in two weeks, his uber-liberal core constituency began screeching that his “big tent” was “bursting at the seams.” A grand jury investigation into state contracts for political donors had forced New Mexico governor Bill Richardson to drop out and Obama tapped New Hampshire Republican Sen. Judd Gregg. California Rep. Barbara Lee petulantly decried Gregg's complaints over Clinton Administration Census Bureau methods.

Gregg didn't refuse to fund the Census, as Lee wants the public to believe. He objected to Clinton administration attempts to “redraw their congressional districts” and reallocate federal grants to states with “statistical sampling” adjustments. The Supreme Court ruled against Census use of statistical sampling to reapportion the 435 House of Representative seats in the 1999 case Commerce Department v. U.S. House. Alas, the high court did not outlaw statistical samples methods to redistrict within states. But Lee got her way: Gregg too dropped out on February 12, citing his dissatisfaction with the administration's handling of the census and stimulus packages Thus, the “recurrent fantasy of Census critics on the Left” remains, to revise “population numbers more to their liking,” observes former Census chief Bruce Chapman (1981-1983). If successful, such a feat would redistribute power and funds for least a decade -- and could permanently damage America's political landscape and its carefully constructed internal balance of power.

Nevertheless, President Obama relaunched the notion into political play on February 5. The Census Census Bureau will report directly to his Chief of Staff for the 2010 decennial count. Wresting Census from Commerce Department to White House control threatens “reckless politicization of the Census Bureau.” It could project “the image of a Chicago-style partisan power play” -- and corrupt all fundamental data sustaining U.S. national statistics. Obama is a Daley-style Democrat, though, and Democratic party stalwarts since Jimmy Carter have broadly supported deploying the Census to their permanent political advantage. In 1978, President Carter ordered immigration enforcement officers not to arrest illegal aliens without executive branch approval, reports retired senior INS investigator Michael Cutler, who afterwards sarcastically labeled them “pre-citizens.” Angry immigration enforcement officers nationwide adopted Cutler's term to protest Carter's outrageous political maneuver.
Over law enforcement objections, Democrats have been monkeying with the Census ever since. Besides Obama, the chief culprits today are partisans like New York City Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a former ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census, who want Obama to appoint former Census chief Kenneth Prewitt to head the 2010 Census. Prewitt advocated “statistical sampling” to reapportion House seats under Clinton, until the Supreme Court nixed it in 1999.

Then, as now, Democrats coveted statistical projection to enumerate for the census rather than counting individuals one by one. Opponents correctly recognize “the proposal as a violation of the Constitution, which calls for 'actual enumeration',” and an obvious ploy to bolster Democratic standing in congressional redistricting following the census, according to the Los Angeles Times.

In politics, though, pretense is everything.

As “one of our country's premier scientific agencies,” the Census Bureau “should be accorded the status of peers such as NASA, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Science Foundation,” Maloney said last September, on introducing the “Restoring the Integrity of American Statistics Act of 2008” to make it independent in 2012. With backing from the census chiefs of the last seven presidents, from Richard M. Nixon to George W. Bush, Maloney heralded the bill as “a clear signal to Americans that the agency they depend upon for unbiased monthly economic data as well as the important decennial portrait of our nation is independent, fair, and protected from interference.” It went no where, although Maloney plans to reintroduce the bill this session.

Yet in February 2009, Maloney sings a different tune. “Obama won the election. Ultimately he's the boss anyway,” says a staff member, waving her true political colors. Therefore, the argument goes, it doesn't matter whether the Census Bureau reports to the White House or Commerce. And on Feb. 12, Maloney claimed that former Census chiefs' concerns over the Obama administration Census agency hijacking amount to a “page from Seinfeld...a show about nothing.”

Chapman and Charles Louis Kincannon (Census chief, 2002-2008) vociferously disagree. Science should be scientific. Statisticians almost universally reject adjusting numbers. It follows that having Census report to the White House---which has previously never been done---would turn statistical science “into something where speculation and guesswork could introduce egregious and prejudicial errors.”

It is bad enough that the Constitutional Census clause does not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens. The founding fathers would undoubtedly have cast it differently had they envisioned a time when illegal aliens would distort the rights of citizens to fair representation.

“Undocumented is synonymous with unauthorized and illegal,” observes Connecticut Data Center manager Orlando J. Rodriguez at the University of Connecticut. Illegal aliens, if counted, will “distort the relative voting power of all citizens nationwide,” thereby influencing “America's representative political system.” Excluding non-voters from congressional reapportionment would provide a much broader geographical dispersement of House seats, and fairer citizen and voter representation, he found in 2007 and subsequent studies. The converse is to allow illegal alien settlement to generate Congressional seats for southern border states at the expense of citizens and voters in northern and mid-western states.

Most disconcerting, however, is Democrats' “plain hope” to leverage illegal aliens via controversial sampling and computer modeling to “'adjust' the Census numbers in 2010,” and further distort citizens' relative voting power. Surely, Americans should not tolerate a political party redistributing power and funds away from citizens by riding roughshod over the Constitutional requirement for actual numeration.

“Let's see,” Chapman quips of Democratic concerns. Obama Commerce nominee Gregg “cannot be trusted, but the Democratic politicos in the West Wing can?”

By commandeering the Census Bureau, Obama may hope to orchestrate a silent political coup. If so, however, key House Democrats insist this amounts to “nothing.”

Source..

Read more...

GOP Mayor Gives His Support For Obama's Stimulus Bill

As a whole, the Republican Party could face another internal dilemma. This is in regards to the economic stimulus bill. United States President Barack Obama has continuously clashed with Republicans in Congress. The economic stimulus bill had passed through the United States House of Representatives. It was a bittersweet victory because there were no GOP votes on board.

A compromise has been reached in the US Senate between Democrats and moderate Republicans in this regard. Still, many Senate Republicans are opposed to Obama’s economic stimulus. However, there could be internal tensions within the GOP as a whole as a result.

So far, most of the GOP Governors are giving their support to Obama’s stimulus bill. They have split from their fellow peers in the US Congress. Asides from that, the National Governors Association is giving its support of it as well. However, these governors are not the only ones in support of the bill.

James Brainard, a Republican mayor in a Republican county of Indiana, gives his support for Obama’s stimulus bill. He explains that the government should be investing in the country’s infrastructure. Brainard explains that this is something government is supposed to do. He adds it will create value for the long-term.

He does explain that he would put the stimulus money to effective use. Brainard does fear a possible filibuster. While that does seem to be a highly slim possibility, Senate Democrats are confident that the stimulus will pass. The Senate vote has been pushed to Tuesday in that respect. So far, three GOP Senators are on board with Obama’s stimulus plan.

In respect to the stimulus money, Brainard feels that a good chunk of money given to states should be given to the mayors.

“It is a proven fact that cities are going to get shovels in the ground faster than the states do,” Brainard said. In that respect, Brainard implies that the cities and towns could get to work much faster than the states can.

Brainard did say that he would use the stimulus money for roads and projects. To him, it would make people more competitive for jobs and so forth. Overall, it looks like Brainard is another Republican that is giving forth his support to Obama’s stimulus bill. One question should be asked: How many other Republicans will step forward and give their support to the stimulus?
Source..

Read more...

Obama “Welcomes Debate” From GOP By Mocking Their Tax Cut Suggestions, Says Stimulus Is Spending

WILLIAMSBURG, Va. — A fired-up Barack Obama ditched his TelePrompter to rally House Democrats and rip Republican opponents of his recovery package Thursday night – at one point openly mocking the GOP for failing to follow through on promises of bipartisanship.

In what was the most pointedly partisan speech of his young presidency, Obama rejected Republican arguments that massive spending in the $819 billion stimulus bill that passed the House should be replaced by a new round of massive tax cuts.

“I welcome this debate, but we are not going to get relief by turning back to the same policies that for the last eight years doubled the national debt and threw our economy into a tailspin,” said President Obama – sounding more like Candidate Obama than at any time since he took the oath of office less than a month ago.

Obama, speaking to about 200 House Democrats at their annual retreat at the Kingsmill Resort and Spa, dismissed Republican attacks against the massive spending in the stimulus.

“What do you think a stimulus is?” Obama asked incredulously. “It’s spending — that’s the whole point! Seriously.”

Click the link to see humorous, teleprompter-free Obama herky-jerk his way through some tax cut bashing.

But as for Obama’s suggestion that stimulus is spending, let me say this: Government spending is burden. Burden we taxpayers have to carry. And further burdening the taxpayers is not, in any way, going to stimulate economic growth.

Think about it this way: How is Obama’s stimulus spending spree going to be paid for? In order to spend $900 billion to create/save 4,000,000 jobs (at a cost of $225,000/job) as Obama suggests, the money must first come from somewhere. Which means we either raise taxes substantially (a bad, bad idea in a time of recession) or we borrow the money. Thus exploding our already out of control national debt. Which will eventually be tax burden anyway because, at some point, we really are going to have to start paying the debt down.

The more we add to it now, the more our children and grand children will have to pay.

So how is that stimulus?

Obama can mug for the camera and make smug comments about how everyone knows that stimulus means spending (watch the video at the link), but just because Obama says it’s true doesn’t mean it is true.

He really does seem to be letting this messiah stuff go to his head.

Source..

Read more...

Gaza-Israel Crisis in Context

Gaza currently has 1.5 million people running out of food, fuel, and water suitable for drinking. The region has been set ablaze with Israeli attacks, leaving hospitals unable treat the myriad of people in desperate need of care. As a recent editorial in The Nation pointed out, 75 percent Gaza is without electricity and their sewage systems are bordering ruin. Furthermore, the loss of a dozen Israeli deaths and just over a dozen injured, Gaza has been lost over 600, a quarter of them being civilian. To say that this is a mere crisis would be as grave an injustice as the conflict itself.


All of this has created a dividing line in the mainstream media punditocracy. Neo-conservatives, the Israel Lobby, Christian Zionists, J Street, Jewish Voice for Peace, and Peace Now have engaged in some of the most vitriolic debate many have had the misfortune of seeing in a long while.


The worst has been directed towards those seeking a just peace, questioning the actions of Israel and proposing actions, ranging from conventional to the extreme, in hope of bringing this age-old crisis. Neoconservative writer Andrew Sullivan has compared The Nation’s Eric Alterman to the authors of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. He writes, “Boston Globe columnist Cathy Young has accused me of blaming Hitler’s victims for Palestinian misery.” Statements just as striking can be found (predictably) in publications such as Commentary and The Weekly Standard.


All of this couldn’t come at a worse time. America is in shambles, and our credibility in the Middle East has been squandered on account of eight years of belligerent foreign policy, unjust wars, wrongful imprisonment, torture, and the perception that the US works only in the best interest of Israel. Attempting to play a vital role as the “middle man” will be take an extraordinary amount of finesse, not to mention the need to send a strong and clear message to the world that we wish only for justice and peace in the region.


This is easier said than done. The US has a long history of failure in the area of Middle East diplomacy, and this is particularly true in regard to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. More often than not, it is that the US and the international community lacks the resolve to implement and enforce agreements, while giving a wink and a pass to breaches of the agreements.


How, then, are we to overcome these obstacles?


We must first begin with a change in perception. An example of such change would be US citizens overcoming the notion that Israel has for years been sacrificing land for peace. While it is true that land has been transferred, these plots are by no means sacrificial. The regions are settlements, having gone beyond it’s pre-1967 borders. In short, they are returning land that they confiscated and settled upon, forcing an outrageous number of Palestinians from their homes.


Doing this will force the US and the international community to hold both sides accountable for their former agreements. All sides endorsed UN Resolutions 424 and 338, the Oslo Accords of 1993, Bush’s “Road Map for Peace” in 2003, as well as those agreed upon at Annapolis. The only thing at play here is forcing both sides to be implement what was already agreed upon.


Secondly, the US must consistently apply their calls for democracy with the results of the democratic process of elections. The crusade for global democracy has resounded from Washington for some time, but leaders have been very selective when recognizing those democratically elected. If the goal is to have “the people” vote, and “the people” vote for a group that the US doesn’t particularly like (i.e. Hamas), the US must, if wishing to be consistent in their crusade for global democracy, recognize the decision of the people. To do otherwise is to be horribly inconsistent, fueling the Arab world’s impression that it isn’t so much democracy that we want, but rather to put leaders in power that have US interests and secular values at the forefront of their mind.


It would do us well recognize the fact that without a resolve which favors a two-state solution and a complete (or almost complete) withdraw from illegal settlements, there will be further tension in other areas of the Middle East. Iran, al Qaeda, and Hezbollah have much to gain from a failed peace process. Recruitment will increase, policies will be justified, and alliances will be solidified.


The US must identify and condemn various actions committed by both sides. The difficulty in doing so rests, at least in part, with the fact that we are dealing with two radically different groups.


Israel is a nation with a capitol, huge military and economic subsidies from the US, as well as a military force that rules the region like a colony, punishing a people collectively. As UN human rights representative of the territories has recently been quoted as saying, Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is a “crime against humanity.” Women, children, and the elderly have been victims of attacks from Israeli air strikes. Palestinians are required to carry color-coded IDs and travel permits. Civilians have had their homes demolished. One must also include the barricades, checkpoints, and settler-only roads.


On the other hand, the Palestinians left with little more than guerrilla warriors and the unconventional tactics often accompanying them. As Hamas leader Khaled Meshal said to Alya Rea of CounterPunch, “Unfortunately the insistence on violent repression by or assailants leads to innocent blood on the streets. Since 1996, 12 years ago, we have proposed to exclude civilian targets from the conflict on both sides. Israel did not respond to that. When Israel insists on killing our kids, our elders and senior citizens and women, and bombarding houses with the gunships, F-16s and Apaches, when Israel continues these attacks, what is left for the Palestinians to do? They are defending themselves with whatever they have.”


None of this is to say that targeting civilians is ethically permissible. All that is meant here is to put the situation into context. One country with a capitol, subsidized military and economy, the ownership of nuclear weaponry and a state of the art military over against a colonized people with little more than Qassam missiles, outdated artillery, and individuals willing to be human bombs in order to settle a score.


President Obama has a tough road ahead, both on the home-front and internationally. But he must have the courage and wisdom to confront this age-old controversy in a way and with a resolve that former presidents have not. Unless he begins seeing the bigger picture, with all its complexities (i.e. religious, ethnic, economic, and militaristic), he will follow the same path as those who went before him. A path covered as much with the inhumane and unjust as much as it is with the blood and tears of the innocent.

Source : http://distributism.blogspot.com

Read more...

Obama to KEEP his Blackberry

Yes, we can! Maybe all the hootin’ and hollerin’ about Barack’s quandary regarding the status of his BlackBerry actually ended up helping the President keep the addictive device. For personal use only, Mr. Obama’s BlackBerry will still be in commission, though we do hope he opts to upgrade to a Bold or 8900, at least (give us a call Mr. President, we’ll hook you up)! It will make it more worthwhile since he will be forced to use an awkward and clunky-looking Sectera Edge, which has been approved by the NSA for official use, as a business device. As if this news wasn’t the best free advertising anyone can get, the folks at RIM must be bursting with glee. While we’re all familiar with the device that has been like an appendage for Obama, you might be interested in taking a peek at the Sectera Edge, so hit the jump for an image and details!



Source : http://www.mobilecrunch.com/

Read more...

America's new president, Barack Obama

Barack Obama began his victory speech Nov. 4 by proclaiming the greatness of America. "If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, " he said, "who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

All of America hopes, however, that Barack Obama's presidency is notable for reasons other than his race, that he goes down in history not just as the nation's first black president but as an undeniably successful one.

Today's inauguration stands to be an even louder affirmation of America's great promise.

Fittingly, the president-elect has invited some Americans whose bitter experiences with segregation may have turned them into the doubters Mr. Obama addressed in his acceptance address.

He has invited the surviving Tuskegee Airmen, the successful but unappreciated black World War II pilots who escorted bombers into an occupied Europe. He also has invited the nine black students who endured mob violence to integrate Central High School in Little Rock, Ark., in 1957. Ruby Bridges, who at age 6 braved a gantlet of bigots to integrate William Frantz Elementary in the 9th Ward, is also expected to be at the inauguration, as a guest of Sen. Mary Landrieu.

Those guests will comprise a living timeline of America's move toward freedom, equality and full participation -- a timeline that will be amended today when Barack Obama becomes the first man of African descent to assume the presidency of the United States.

One of the Tuskegee Airmen, 82-year-old Lt. William Broadwater, told the Washington Post, "Now we feel like we've completed our mission. This inauguration will be the ultimate result."

It is, indeed, an opportunity for America to celebrate itself, an opportunity to remind ourselves and the rest of the world that while this country has never been perfect, it has held fast to a set of ideals that moves us in that direction.

Our country is at war in Iraq and Afghanistan and on the domestic front is dealing with a recession that some fear could worsen into a depression. Our state, like so many others, is facing an enormous budgetary crisis and, on top of that, is being washed away by an encroaching Gulf of Mexico. Our community, almost four years after the levees failed during Hurricane Katrina, is still recovering from that cataclysmic event and still asking to be better protected from future storms.

The challenges facing the new president are multiple, severe and urgent, but he will need to be equal to them all. He does not have the luxury of easing into the job or failing at any of these tremendous tasks.

Coastal Louisiana's needs are pressing, and the president-elect has given strong signals that he's heard them and intends to act. During a New Orleans campaign stop, he decried the ineptitude that defined FEMA's response to Hurricane Katrina and committed to helping protect this area from future flooding.

"I promise you that when I'm in the White House I will commit myself every day to keeping up Washington's end of this trust, and I will make it clear to members of my administration that their responsibilities don't end in places like the Ninth Ward -- they begin there."

The work is vast. Thousands of homes still need to be rebuilt, a replacement for Charity Hospital in only the early planning stages, and the public schools are in the midst of a transformation that will take some time to complete.

Despite its notoriously inauspicious start, the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina improved dramatically once President Bush created a Gulf Coast recovery office and appointed Donald Powell to its top position. Mr. Powell was succeeded by retired Marine Gen. Douglas O'Dell, who has been crucial in helping local officials communicate with federal bureaucrats and vice versa.

It is important that the new president keep the Gulf Coast recovery office open and that its top position be filled with a person he listens to, trusts and respects. He may find that Gen. O'Dell meets all those qualifications, but if there's another dynamic leader who's more likely to have the new president's ear and confidence, that's the person Mr. Obama should appoint to lead the recovery office.

Going back to the days when he was campaigning, Barack Obama has both acknowledged his importance to black Americans who celebrate him as a historical first and promised to represent Americans of all stripes. He promised to be inclusive, and his appointment of a Cabinet both racially and ideologically diverse suggests it's a promise he means to keep.

During his Nov. 4 speech, he said, "And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your president too."

This country is experiencing tough times and will likely be facing them well into this new president's administration. If Barack Obama can pull this nation together and help us overcome those challenges as one, not only will he be exhibiting the qualities of a great president, but we'll in turn be demonstrating why America is the envy of the world.

Source : http://blog.nola.com

Read more...