Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts

Friday, April 26, 2013

Bush Library Opens As His Approval Rating Is Up

Bush 43 Library opens

5-Living Presidents Gather for 43 Library Opening

Former first lady Laura Bush, U.S. President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama, former President George W. Bush, former President Bill Clinton and Former first lady Hillary Clinton, former President George H.W. Bush and former first lady Barbara Bush and former President Jimmy Carter attend the opening ceremony of the George W. Bush Presidential Center April 25, 2013 in Dallas, Texas. (Former living first ladies Rosalynn Carter and Nancy Reagan did not attend.)

WAPOGeorge W. Bush will return to the spotlight this week for the dedication of his presidential library, an event likely to trigger fresh public debate about his eight fateful years in office. But he reemerges with a better public image than when he left Washington more than four years ago.

Since then, Bush has absented himself from both policy disputes and political battles. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll suggests that the passage of time and Bush’s relative invisibility have been beneficial to a chief executive who left office surrounded by controversy.

Days before his second term ended in 2009, Bush’s approval rating among all adults was 33 percent positive and 66 percent negative. The new poll found 47 percent saying they approve and 50 percent saying they disapprove. Among registered voters, his approval rating today is equal to President Obama’s, at 47 percent, according to the latest Post-ABC surveys.

Majorities said they still dis­approve of Bush’s performance on the Iraq war and the economy, but his economic approval numbers nearly doubled between December 2008 and today, from 24 percent to 43 percent, with 53 percent disapproving. Iraq remains the most troublesome part of his legacy. Today, 57 percent say they disapprove of his decision to invade, though that is down from 65 percent in the spring of 2008, the last time the question was asked.

Historians say it will take years, even decades, for any substantial revision of his presidency to take place. Bush has said he is content to let history judge him and told the designers of his presidential museum to present the facts and let visitors decide whether he was right. But some allies see Thursday’s official opening of the library in Dallas as an opportunity to begin to set his presidency into broader perspective.

“Obviously, it’s a big moment for him,” former British prime minister Tony Blair said in a telephone interview from London. “It’s a chance for him to explain that his political philosophy encompasses much more than the decisions he had to take after 9/11. We forget this sometimes. . . . This is a much more rounded person with many more dimensions to him than the caricature often portrays.”

Contemporary judgments of Bush’s presidency have been harsh. The war in Iraq, which he launched on the basis of faulty intelligence in the aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, left this country deeply divided. His final months in office brought a collapse of the financial system that led to the worst recession since the Great Depression. In between, his administration’s wobbly response to Hurricane Katrina damaged his image.

But Bush will return to public view at a moment when some parts of his record are being viewed more charitably. His advocacy for immigration reform and his relative success at attracting Hispanic votes, for example, are now seen as a model for a Republican Party that has awakened to its glaring deficit in the Latino community.

Thursday’s events are likely to be shorn of partisanship, though commentary around them may not be. The guest list will be topped by Obama and all living former presidents, including Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush. Blair, who stood steadfastly with Bush after the 2001 attacks and his decision to invade Iraq 18 months later, will be among the many dignitaries and Bush administration alumni who will gather on the campus of Southern Methodist University.

Karen Hughes, who served as counselor to Bush, said the former president told her that he considers the day “a joyful opportunity to give thanks” — to the other presidents for being there, to those who served in his administration, to the workers who built the architecturally handsome Bush Center.

Former advisers say no one should expect the opening of the library and museum to bring a notable change in Bush’s generally low-profile post-presidency. “It’s a little too simplistic to say this is some big coming out or that some definitive change will happen that will mark a new approach to things by Bush or his people,” said Karl Rove, who served as Bush’s chief political adviser and White House deputy chief of staff.

Still, members of Bush’s team recognize the significance of the moment and are prepared to take on some of his critics, if necessary, amid the glare of media attention this week. “Clearly some pretty significant distortions have been fostered by the current president and others,” Hughes said. “Those of us who worked for him see it [the dedication ceremony] as an opportunity to set the record straight in some cases.”

Bush advisers believe that over time, more attention will focus on aspects of his presidency that were overshadowed by the controversies of his national security and economic records. They point to his initiative to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa, which has helped save hundreds of thousands of lives; his efforts to bring accountability and higher standards to public education; and his advocacy for comprehensive immigration reform, which was rejected by his party.

Bush’s decision to stay out of the public arena in recent years reflects his humility and his belief that he owed his successor “a decent interval of silence,” as Rove called it. He played no role in the 2012 campaign, neither attending the Republican National Convention last summer nor campaigning for Mitt Romney last fall. But there was no clamor among the Republican candidates for his participation.

Instead, Bush has quietly pursued activities that grew out of his presidential agenda. Much of that work, focusing on global health, the role of women in the Middle East, education and the economy, is carried out through the Bush Institute, which was founded in 2009 and shares the 23-acre site at SMU with the presidential library and museum.

The institute and the new museum are designed to highlight the values and principles that guided Bush in office. “Freedom is really the one central axis around which everything revolves,” said Mark Langdale, president of the George W. Bush Foundation.

Bush and former first lady Laura Bush have spent time in Africa on projects related to the AIDS initiative and other health issues. The former president also spends considerable time with wounded veterans and has participated with them in vigorous mountain-biking expeditions. He has taken up painting. He and his wife recently became grandparents for the first time.

He gave 70 speeches last year and plans 60 or so this year, according to Dan Bartlett, who was counselor to Bush in the White House. The paid speeches are all off the record, but one adviser said Bush is extremely candid in the question-and-answer sessions. He and former president Bill Clinton have done a series of joint appearances.

Last week’s Boston Marathon bombing was a tragic reminder of the episode that changed Bush’s presidency. After 9/11, Bush ­implemented aggressive ­anti-
terrorism policies, many of which were embraced by the Obama administration, though not the controversial interrogation measures authorized under Bush. A recent report by the Constitution Project concluded that those policies resulted in torture of some detainees.

Some Bush allies say Obama has gone out of his way to be critical of his predecessor and often has not acknowledged what they contend were key policies that have been helpful to him. They highlight two decisions by the former president that have proved beneficial to Obama in office: One was the troop surge in Iraq, which was highly controversial at the time but which, they contend, made it possible for Obama to end the war as quickly as he did.

The other was Bush’s decision in the fall of 2008 to press Congress to pass the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) to bail out financial institutions. That was equally controversial, especially among Bush’s fellow Republicans, but his advisers argue that it helped stabilize the financial system before Obama took office.

“Both reflected strong presidential leadership and, as we now see in retrospect, excellent judgment,” said Joshua Bolten, who served as Bush’s White House chief of staff.

Bolten also noted that spending during most years of Bush’s presidency was below 20 percent of gross domestic product, the target now established by House Republicans in their budget blueprint. No president since Richard M. Nixon, other than Clinton, can make such a claim, he said.

But on fiscal issues, Bush draws criticism from both left and right. Tea party Republicans regard him as a reckless spender. Democrats say his tax cuts and two wars that were not paid for helped create larger deficits, though Obama accepted making the bulk of those cuts permanent last December.

Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the country would be happy to have the deficit levels of Bush’s presidency, but she declined to praise his overall record. She said that his record on neither tax cuts nor spending “was particularly fiscally responsible.”

Bush has continued to bear much of the culpability for the condition of the economy. On Election Day last November, 53 percent of voters said they blamed Bush for the current economic problems, while 38 percent blamed Obama, according to exit polls.

Iraq looms larger than perhaps any other issue over Bush’s legacy, but Blair said the former president’s attitude toward his decisions has not changed. “There was never any doubt while he was in office, and there’s not any doubt now,” he said.

Blair said Bush continues to believe that the world is safer without Saddam Hussein in power and added: “When you see what is happening in Syria today, the sense of that argument is evident. . . . What it does is just make clear that these decisions are very difficult. If you intervene, it can be very tough. If you don’t intervene, it can also be very tough.”

One section of the Bush museum, known as the Decision Points Theater, focuses on four key decisions: the invasion of Iraq, the troop surge, the financial crisis and the response to Hurricane Katrina. Visitors will hear the information available to the president at the time and then choose what they would do in each case. Bush, on video, will explain his decisions.

Presidential historian Douglas Brinkley of Rice University recently toured the Bush museum; he called it “beautifully designed” but predicted that it would spark controversy. “It’s going to be mocked and trashed by liberal Democrats, and conservative Republicans are going to say what a marvelous place it is,” he said. As for Bush’s potential place in history, he said, “It’s going to be hard for him to rehabilitate fully.”

Stanford University’s David Kennedy predicted that judgments about Bush are not likely to change unless perceptions of Iraq and what triggered the financial crisis change first. Presidents are judged on foreign policy and economic policy, he said, adding: “In neither one of those areas do I see anything on the horizon that will change people’s opinion.”

But H.W. Brands, a professor of history at the University of Texas, said it’s quite possible that Bush’s legacy could undergo a genuine reworking as time passes. “The worse a president’s reputation when he leaves office, the better chance there is for revision,” he said. “Every so often there’s a new generation of historians, and they have to come along and challenge the conventional wisdom.”

BushLibrary-Barney and Mrs Beasley -_2545646b

Busts of presidential pets Barney and Miss Beazley are seen during a tour of the George W. Bush Presidential Center - which will house the George W Bush library.

Related:

Star-Studded Political A-List Gathers for Bush Library Unveiling

George W Bush library to open as former President's popularity soars

Busts of presidential pets Barney and Miss Beazley at George W. Bush Library

U.S. Presidential Libraries

Bush 43 Portraits Hung in White House

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Origins of Fast and Furious accidentally revealed by White House

Origins of "Fast and Furious" accidentally revealed by White House
Coach is Right ^ | 10/19/2011 | Doug Book

Re-Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2011 2:37:18 PM by Oldpuppymax at FreeRepublic

Intent upon linking the genesis of ”gunwalking” to the Bush Administration, the Obama Regime has unwittingly revealed compelling leads to the birth of Operation Fast and Furious, its possible father, former Agent in Charge of the ATF’s Phoenix Branch, William Newell and the man who may be the Operation’s D.C Godfather, White House National Security Council staffer Kevin O’Reilly.

At the beginning of October, the White House released a number of emails shared between Newell and O’Reilly during the summer of 2010. By this frequently employed method of ”selective release”, the Regime intended to relay the ”fact” that as neither Fast and Furious nor “gunwalking” were mentioned in the correspondence, the topics were obviously not directly discussed by the pair. (1)

It was hoped that this would bolster the White House claim that it knew nothing of the Operation until TV news reports brought it to the attention of the nation at large in 2011.

But in its expectation that linking gun walking to Bush might take Fast and Furious pressure off the Regime, the White House habit of deliberately providing carefully crafted half-truths or misinformation to media lackeys took a careless turn for the worse.

After it was leaked to him by the White House, AP reporter Pete Yost was only too glad to run with the story of 2007 ATF Operation Wide Receiver and its loss of firearms across the Mexican border during the Bush Administration.

But the Regime’s Ministry of Disinformation provided Yost with too much material. For it was also revealed that the man in charge of that purely accidental ”gun walking” by the Bush led ATF was Phoenix Agent in Charge Bill Newell.

(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ... - POSTED BY COACH COLLINS, ON OCTOBER 19TH, 2011

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

 Origins of Fast and Furious accidentally revealed by White House

By Doug Book, staff writer

Intent upon linking the genesis of ”gunwalking” to the Bush Administration,  the Obama Regime has unwittingly revealed compelling leads to the birth of Operation Fast and Furious,  its possible father, former Agent in Charge of the ATF’s Phoenix Branch,  William Newell and the man who may be the Operation’s D.C  Godfather,  White House National Security Council staffer Kevin O’Reilly.

At the beginning of October,  the White House released a number of emails shared between Newell and O’Reilly during the summer of 2010. By this frequently employed method of  ”selective release”,  the Regime intended to relay the  ”fact”  that as neither Fast and Furious nor “gunwalking” were mentioned in the correspondence,  the topics were obviously not directly discussed by the pair.  (1)

It was hoped that this would bolster the White House claim that it knew nothing of the Operation until TV news reports brought it to the attention of the nation at large in 2011.

But in its expectation that linking gun walking to Bush might take Fast and Furious pressure off the Regime,  the White House habit of deliberately providing carefully crafted half-truths or misinformation to media lackeys took a careless turn for the worse.

After it was leaked to him by the White House,  AP reporter Pete Yost was only too glad to run with the story of 2007 ATF Operation Wide Receiver and its loss of firearms across the Mexican border during the Bush Administration.
But the Regime’s Ministry of Disinformation provided Yost with too much material. For it was also revealed that the man in charge of that purely accidental  ”gun walking”  by the Bush led ATF was Phoenix Agent in Charge Bill Newell.

In short, by managing Wide Receiver in Phoenix,  Newell had gained first hand experience in the walking of guns to Mexico!

In early 2009,  Barack Obama,  Hillary Clinton and other Regime members systematically advanced the phony claim that 90% of weapons found at Mexican crime scenes originated in US gun stores. What better way for Newell to impress his new bosses than by suggesting that walking guns to Mexico might make the 90% claim come nearer to the truth!  

And of course,  in White House NSC staffer Kevin O’Reilly,  Newell had a friend in very high places. So,  as Fast and Furious reporter Mike Vanderboegh puts it,  ”…Newell may have  ”weaponized”  the desire for more better statistics on the part of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and others to support the…meme…that 90% of weapons seized in Mexico…actually came from American civilian market sources.”

So Newell makes the suggestion,  O’Reilly delivers it to the right people in the White House and Fast and Furious is born. Could it have happened that way?

Apparently Congressman Darrell Issa’s House Government Reform Committee  takes the possibility quite seriously,  for it has just subpoenaed  ”all communications TO OR FROM  (my caps)  William Newell…between December 14th,  2010 to January 25th,  2011 and March 16th  to March 19th,  2009.”  The date specific requests mean the Committee must have reliable information regarding the associations and correspondence of Newell during those periods. And Newell is known to have spoken often with O’Reilly during that time.  

Unlike other Fast and Furious participants who have been promoted or transferred to new positions in Washington D.C.,  Kevin O’Reilly has been shuffled off to Iraq by the Obama/Holder Department of Justice,  out of subpoena range of the Issa/Grassley congressional committees. Remember,  there are no coincidences in the Obama Regime.

So did a suggestion to a White House ensconced friend by a practiced “gunwalker” hoping to make a name for himself with the new administration lead to the deadly Fast and Furious scheme? If so, who but Barack Obama & Co could create such a tangled and convoluted web from such a simple beginning!

Use this site to contact your Congressional Representative:

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

  To read more about this issue use these links:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20114184-10391695.html

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-second-bush-era-gun-smuggling-probe-202043091.html?ugccmt_success=NONJS_POST_SUCCESS#ugccmt-post-frm-container

http://reasonedpolitics.blogspot.com/2011/04/hillary-eric-wikileaks-and-batfe.html

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2011/10/ssi-exclusive-is-this-any-way-to-run.html

http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2011/10/12/fast-and-furious-subpoenas/

Further reading: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20083772-10391695.html

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-st-louis/gun-trafficking-as-compared-to-william-newell-s-definition-of-gunwalking

http://www.scribd.com/doc/65906548/Newell-Letter-to-Oversight-Committee

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2011/10/sipsey-street-exclusive-was-gunwalker.html

Related posts: http://www.coachisright.com/fridays-white-house-fast-and-furious-e-mail-dump-means-pressure-increasing-on-obama/

http://www.coachisright.com/ooops-trying-to-cover-up-obama-tripped-up-attorney-general-holder-on-fast-and-furious/

http://www.coachisright.com/fast-and-furious-spin-wont-help-holder-obama-next-to-fall/

http://www.coachisright.com/rep-issa-chooses-bloggers-to-replace-legacy-media-in-fast-and-furious-reporting/

See Coach on Youtube! Go to the new Coach’s Locker Room page to see and what the Coach has to say on the issues that conservatives care about.  In this world you may have knowledge or you may have repose, but you may not have both.  What have you done today to deserve to live in America?

clip_image001

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Totalitarian Program ‘Agenda 21′ Now in Effect!

Totalitarian Program ‘Agenda 21′ Now in Effect!  -  Written on September 13, 2011 by ralph barker

Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level. - George H. Bush

Bush Biting Liberty's Neck

Agenda 21 isn’t coming. It is here. Most don’t know about it. They’ve never heard of it, but it is creeping in the back door right now. So, look behind you. It may already be in your backyard.

What is Agenda 21? It is a United Nation’s program presented and approved in Rio in 1992. At that time American conservatives laughed it off. “This is too crazy,” they said. “Impossible. It will never happen. Not here!” Well, it is happening. It is happening here and it is happening now. Agenda 21 is a totalitarian comprehensive environmental program that, when fully implemented, will direct where you live, how much water you can use, and how and where you can travel.

Agenda 21 is being marketed as a worldwide effort to ensure that all human beings will have access to adequate housing, health care, water and food. Of course this will require a massive redistribution of wealth from prosperous countries to poorer countries. Predictably, capitalistic countries, like the United States, will suffer lower standards of living.

It’s noteworthy that Presidents George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, through Executive Orders, have signed onto Agenda 21. Hundreds more governors, mayors, and county commissioners have also signed on.

Agenda 21 and related programs will eliminate many things we hold dear. These have been declared “unsustainable” and will be abolished. Here are some of them:

  1. All private property rights (property ownership)
  2. All forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer
  3. Livestock production and most meat consumption
  4. Privately owned vehicles and personal travel
  5. Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel
  6. Single family homes
  7. Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting
  8. Human population must be reduced to fewer than 1 billion people

It’s not coming from Washington D.C. or state legislatures for the most part. It is seeping in through local city and county governments. Agenda 21 brings with it stealthy code words, comforting words such as “smart growth,” “social justice,” “bio-diversity,” and “sustained development.” You will hear them often. Translated these terms effectively mean total environmental dictatorship and the elevation of the pagan practice of the worship of Mother Earth. Not a joke.

179 countries, including the United States, initially signed on to the Agenda in 1992. Many more have joined since then. It is already in progress in 600 U.S. cities. You can check the list of committed countries and cities at: http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=11454. You can also read the specific programs being implemented.

Agenda 21 is designed to control every aspect of human life on every square inch of planet earth. As a biblical worldview dims in the world man falls to the bottom of the food chain.

If Agenda 21 succeeds animals will become more important than man as will plants and trees. We can already see ample evidence of this process in motion today. Agenda 21’s real message is: “Man is the problem. Nature must be preserved and take precedence. Mother Earth must not be scratched.“

Agenda 21 is just another attempt by man to recreate heaven on earth. David Chilton, in his insightful book Paradise Restored, presents an important historical dynamic. Chilton submits that man, ever since he was expelled from Eden, has tried to get back in. Each time he tries, he creates another hell on earth. Agenda 21 will be no different.

Many socialistic, communistic, and liberal organizations and international leaders are behind Agenda 21 and its related programs. It will take dedication of time and effort on our part to truly understand all the implications of this pervasive program. The investment of time will be worth it.

I encourage you, no, beg you, to learn of this Agenda. Take the time. Think of the world your children will inherit if we don’t stop it and similar assaults on our freedoms.  Do not make the mistake of writing this off as some conspiracy theory. It may or may not be a conspiracy, but it is not a theory. It’s here. Look behind you.

Source:  Patriot Update

For more information on details concerning implementation of Agenda 21 please check out:

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ (Actual document-40 chapters, 294 pages)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esJY2SK_4tE (Glenn Beck)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM

http://green-agenda.com

http://vigilantcanuck.com/2010/08/22/agenda-21-reduction-of-the-worlds-population-by-80-to-90-percent/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVTGK1uYqJo

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2011/09/08/feds-accusing-nyc-suburb-segregation (Hannity-Agenda 21 in action).

Friday, July 1, 2011

UNBELIEVABLE OBAMA GAFFES, Mistakes, Lies, and Confusion… and His Legacy

Video:  UNBELIEVABLE OBAMA GAFFES, Mistakes, Lies, and Confusion

As you watch, just imagine if George W. Bush had done these gaffes. We wouldn't hear the end of it.

Or how about the un-ending media taunts of and down right lies about Sarah Palin and now Michele Bachmann and many of the rest of the GOP field…  The media so unfairly went after Palin, like for years they did with Dan Quayle. This type of unfair abuse of politicians even coined new words: Quaylenized or Palinized.

Yet with Obama, the media ignores virtually mistakes, goofs, and misstatements. And this type of media failure is called ‘blind worship’ or ‘selling out’!

Today Obama got his daughter, Malia’s, age wrong twice during a press conference.  Can you imagine if it had been Palin, Bachmann or any of the GOP candidates?

--> Video:  Obama’s Legacy  in HD <--

Best Yard Sign

Herman Cain Blasts Obama:  He’s Not “A Strong Black Man’

Can Any Republican Presidential Candidate Withstand Being Palinized?

Palin Update Alert and Why She Can Win

Was John Lennon a Closet Republican?  It Seems So!

Communists to Back Obama and Democrats in 2012

clip_image001

h/t to George King and Deonia Copeland

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Obama: The UN’s True Believer

Anything so as not to appear to be like George Bush.

That was the not-so-hidden theme of President Barack Obama’s speech on Libya last Monday. In his first crack at his predecessor, Obama defended his decision to not expand the American mission in Libya by saying “we went down that road in Iraq.” In another, an allusion to the superiority of his approach to foreign affairs over that of Bush’s, Obama stressed the fact he was acting in Libya out of humanitarian motives and on the basis of a United Nations (UN) mandate (Bush did not obtain one for his Iraq invasion).

Obama_Global_Citizen_UN”The Libyan opposition, and the Arab League, appealed to the world to save lives in Libya,” Obama said. “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.”

But while Obama is priding himself on not being like George Bush, the current president’s well-known penchant for multilateral action abroad and for putting American interests and foreign policy in the hands of international bodies is turning out to be a disaster for everyone involved, especially for the Libyans. In the end, American reliance on the UN to determine its foreign policy will ultimately wind up costing more money and lives than a quick and massive, unilateral NATO invasion. At the other end of the scale, negotiations and no intervention would have even been more preferable.

Obama stated the UN established the No-Fly Zone to protect Libyans from Gaddafi and proudly said in his speech NATO warplanes prevented a massacre in Benghazi, which the Libyan dictator’s troops were poised to overrun two weeks ago. While this is true, Obama failed to mention that it took three weeks to get that mandate, during which time Gaddafi’s troops ousted most of the rebel forces from Western Libya.

Before their ouster, the rebels occupied towns and cities as close as 30 kilometres to Tripoli. A quick intervention by NATO ground troops to bolster rebel positions, or the threat to do so, would have seen Gaddafi’s small army confined to the Tripoli area. Military force is the only thing a nasty bully like Gaddafi appears to understand. George Bush’s invasion of Iraq, for example, caused the Libyan leader to give up his weapons of mass destruction program, since Gaddafi was afraid he would be next.

But during this wait for UN approval for action, the Libyan dictator captured the rebel-held areas in Western Libya, after which he sent in his secret police to hunt down rebel supporters. The resulting death toll is unknown. The hunt for rebel sympathizers continued as his forces advanced into rebel-held Eastern Libya. After their retreat, several hundred people were listed as missing by the Libyan Red Crescent. In a dozen cases, Human Rights Watch reports “government forces answered the mobile phone of the missing person.” Gaddafi’s “campaign of killing”, which Obama said the UN-mandated bombing stopped, continues.

Ironically, to end the violence and the killing, Obama’s current proposed plan entails violating the UN mandate he is so proud of having brought about. But Obama would never admit he is doing so, since the UN is sacrosanct among leftists, and he would also be acting, once again, like George Bush in his unwillingness to be bound by the UN’s restrictions (Obama has previously said he wants Gaddafi gone, but regime change is also not part of the UN mandate).

This latest mandate violation concerns the proposed plan under consideration by Obama and NATO to arm and train the rebel force, which has proven woefully inadequate in battle against Gaddafi’s troops. But Paragraph 9 of UN Resolution 1970, which establishes sanctions against Libya, unambiguously states: “… all Member States shall immediately take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply … to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Republic)… of arms and related materials of all types…”  Arming the rebels would therefore be illegal.

However, in a contortion worthy of Houdini, Hillary Clinton says Paragraph 4 of UN Resolution 1973 allows arms shipments to the rebels. But if so, this passage, which only mentions “necessary measures,” says this is to happen only if civilians are “under threat of attack.” If Gaddafi pulls back to Western Libya and allows the war to settle into a stalemate, then there is no legal justification for the Obama administration to pursue this policy. Moreover, arming and training the rebels will be very expensive and lead to more violence and death in a protracted struggle.

Other dangers also exist in giving the rebels weapons. A justifiable fear exists the United States would be arming hardcore Islamists among their number who would one day turn their guns against the West, which speaks against the plan. Also speaking against the plan is the fact the rebels want to kill Gaddafi and his supporters, tribal or otherwise, which is the main reason for his fierce resistance. A warning against such massacres was issued to the rebels this week, and such admonitions usually do not arise in a vacuum.

Rebel massacres with American-supplied weapons would undoubtedly not look good on the White House, especially after the UN resolution Obama sponsored to protect Libyan civilians. Such a horrific development would be particularly embarrassing for the president who said in his Monday speech: “The United States is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.” In this case, his shipping arms to the rebels may actually result in such slaughter and mass graves.

Like with Tunisia and Egypt, the Obama administration appears not to have had any prepared policy regarding an uprising in Libya, proving once again it is reactive rather than proactive and deeply over its head in the foreign affairs field. Relying on UN resolutions to determine American action in Libya is producing a worse-case scenario: a long, expensive and exhausting conflict with a large number of civilian casualties, which the “historic Resolution” and American air intervention were meant to prevent. It is a scenario that may yet require American soldiers, despite the president’s and Defense Secretary Robert Gate’s denials, if Gaddafi threatens to overrun Eastern Libya again.


Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com  -  URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/04/01/obama-the-un%e2%80%99s-true-believer/

Who is Barack Obama?  -  A Terrifying Analysis – Israel Commentary

U.N. Admits at Least $600G Lost on Overpriced Boat that Housed Haiti Peacekeepers

So $62,590,000 has been spent to kill people without the consent of Congress:  At least 110 Tomahawk Missiles Fired at Libya by US  -  Editor’s Note: Each Tomahawk missile costs $569,000.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Zogby: Palin Person of the Year, Bush, of Decade

By Jim Meyers  -  Wednesday, 15 Dec 2010 04:33 PM  - NewsMax

Former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is the Person of the Year for 2010, according to a new survey by Zogby International, which also designated George W. Bush as Person of the Decade (2000-2010).

Palin, Zogby, Person of Year, BushPalin was cited by 21 percent of the respondents, while 16 percent chose President Barack Obama. Glenn Beck and Julian Assange of WikiLeaks notoriety tied with 13 percent.

None of the other seven possible choices for Person of the Year — Gen. David Petraeus, Hillary Clinton, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Conan O’Brien, Apple’s Steve Jobs, basketball star LeBron James, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates — garnered more than 6 percent.

Democrats favored Obama with 33 percent, while Palin won among Republicans (39 percent) and independents (17 percent).

Bush, Zogby, Palin, Person of the YearIn the Person of the Decade polling, Bush was chosen by 44 percent of respondents, followed by Obama with 20 percent, and Osama bin Laden with 11 percent.

Zogby’s poll of nearly 2,000 adults found that 40 percent of respondents believe the BP oil spill is the news story of the year, with the midterm elections second at 34 percent.

The 2001 terrorist attacks is the news story of the decade, according to 73 percent of respondents.

The most significant political story of 2010 is the emergence of the tea party, Zogby found, while the most significant international news story of the year is the Haiti earthquake, and the most significant issue of the decade is the rise in terrorism.

Time Person Of The Year 2010: Mark Zuckerberg

NEW YORK -- Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been named Time magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2010, beating out a long list (100) competitors.  Julian Assange of WiliLeaks was rumored to take the award and the cover although on the official list of 100.

At 26, Zuckerberg is the youngest "Person of the Year" since the first one chosen, Charles Lindbergh; he was 25 when he was named in 1927, Time said Wednesday. Zuckerberg beat out Britain's Queen Elizabeth II by just two weeks: She was 26 when she was named in 1952.

Incidentally, Queen Elizabeth II has recently joined Zuckerberg's social networking behemoth.

Zuckerberg has put himself on the map not only as one of the world's youngest billionaires, but also as a clip_image002prominent newcomer to the world of philanthropy.

Earlier this year, he pledged $100 million over five years to the Newark, N.J. school system. Now, he's in the company of media titans Carl Icahn, 74, Barry Diller, 68, and others who have joined Giving Pledge, an effort led by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and investor Warren Buffett to commit the country's wealthiest people to step up their charitable donations.

Zuckerberg owns about a quarter of Facebook's shares.

Zuckerberg has built Facebook into an international phenomenon by stretching the lines of social convention and embracing a new and far more permeable definition of community. In this new world, users are able to construct a social network well beyond what would ever be possible face-to-face.

"I'm trying to make the world a more open place," Zuckerberg says in the "bio" line of his own Facebook page.

Born in Zuckerberg's Harvard dorm room, the site has in six years grown to more than 500 million users worldwide and a dollar worth in the billions.

Facebook was the subject of director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin's film "The Social Network." It features a dark portrayal of Zuckerberg by Jesse Eisenberg, as well as the direction he's taking his company and his status as one of America's most influential figures.

The film has been picked as the best of the year by the New York Film Critics Circle, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the National Board of Review. On Tuesday, it received six Golden Globe nominations, including best picture, drama, going up against its chief rival, the British monarchy tale "The King's Speech," which led with seven nominations.

Time's "Person of the Year" is the person or thing that has most influenced the culture and the news during the past year for good or for ill.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke received the honor last year. The 2008 winner was then-President-elect Barack Obama. The 2007 winner was Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

Other previous winners have included Bono, President George W. Bush, and Amazon.com CEO and founder Jeff Bezos.

clip_image003

The World's Most Influential People

In our annual TIME 100 issue we name the people who most affect our world More »

America by Heart : Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag

Decision Points

clip_image001

The Social Network (Two-Disc Collector's Edition)

The Social Network [Blu-ray]

Related:

The Audacity of American Exceptionalism

Fear Factor: Palin Derangement Syndrome

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Visit From the President

No fanfare, no press called, not looking for votes - just shows up. Kind of reminds me of the time he "showed up" in Iraq serving meals at Thanksgiving wasn't it and even his mother didn't know he was there!

Class shows up...

The doctor had his TV on in his office when the news of the military base shootings came on. The husband of one of his employees was stationed there.

He called her into his office and as he told her what had happened, she got a text message from her husband saying, "I am okay." Her cell phone rang right after she read the message. It was an ER nurse,” I’m the one who just sent you a text, not your husband. I thought it would be comforting but I was mistaken in doing so. I am sorry to tell you this, but your husband has been shot 4 times and he is in surgery."

The soldier's wife left Southern Clinic in Dothan and drove all night to Ft. Hood. When she arrived, she found out her husband was out of surgery and would be OK. She rushed to his room and found that he already had visitors there to comfort him. He was just waking up and found his wife and the visitors by his side. The nurse took this picture.

clip_image001
What? No news crews and cameras? This is how people with class respond and pay respect to those in uniform.

I sent my cousin in Fayetteville, N.C. (Retired from Special Forces) that picture of Geo W. visiting the wounded at Ft. Hood. I got this reply:

What is even better is the fact George W. Bush heard about Fort Hood, got in his car without any escort, apparently they did not have time to react, and drove to Fort Hood. He was stopped at the gate and the guard could not believe who he had just stopped. Bush only asks for directions to the hospital then drove on. The gate guard called that "The president is on Fort Hood and driving to the hospital." The base went bananas looking for Obama. When they found it was Bush they immediately offered escort and Bush simply told them to shut up and let him visit the wounded and the dependents of the dead. He stayed at Fort Hood for over six hours and was finally asked to leave by a message from the White House. Obama flew in days later and held a "photo" session in a gym and did not even go to the hospital. All this I picked up from two soldiers here who happened to be at Fort Hood when it happened.

This Busy/Obama/Ft. Hood story is something that should be sent to every voter in the US.

'Miss Me Yet?' Billboard With Photo Of Bush Is Real; Not An Internet Trick

A billboard near Wyoming, Minn. Courtesy Minnesota Public Radio.

Who paid for it? We have a partial answer. (By Bob Collins/Minnesota Public Radio)

By Mark Memmott

Internet chatter had led to speculation that it might be an urban myth -- nothing more than clever digital trickery spreading via the Web.

But our friend Bob Collins at Minnesota Public Radio assures us he's seen it with his own eyes:

There is a billboard along I-35 near Wyoming, Minn., with a huge photo of former president George W. Bush and this question: "Miss Me Yet?"

Now, the push is on to find out who paid to have it put up.

Bob says there's no readily apparent claim of ownership on the billboard, so he's heading back to the scene to see if he can find out who's behind the message. He's also got some local politicos looking into it. He'll keep us posted.

At first glance, it would seem to be from some person or group who isn't thrilled by President Barack Obama's performance so far -- unless it's a more ironic message from those who didn't think too much of Bush and want to remind voters about him.

Anyone out there know anything about where it came from? Tell us and we'll pass the word to Bob. As he says, we could do a little crowd-sourcing.

There are a lot of things about Bush that the American people didn’t like, especially toward the end. But after a year of Obama, his sure looking a lot better to a lot of people!!

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Secret Service Secrets: Obama Threats Up 400 Percent

A new book by Newsmax Chief Washington Correspondent Ronald Kessler features startling revelations about current and former U.S. presidents, including Barack Obama.

"In the President's Secret Service: Behind the Scenes With Agents in the Line of Fire and the Presidents They Protect," released Tuesday, discloses that threats against the president have increased dramatically — by a staggering 400 percent since Obama entered the White House.

Kessler is the first journalist to penetrate the wall of secrecy that surrounds the U.S. Secret Service, and his book is based on interviews with more than 100 current and former agents.

See Video: Ron Kessler Details Obama, Bush Secrets, More - Click Here Now

The book not only offers intriguing stories about presidents from JFK to George W. Bush but also provides an inside look at the current White House resident, including the fact that, despite his iffy denials, Obama is still smoking cigarettes.

Kessler also reveals that Obama and his wife, Michelle, are well-liked by the Secret Service agents who protect them. Kessler's book reveals that on April 4, 2008, just before Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, spoke at the National Press Club, Obama secretly met with Wright at the pastor's home. So that they would not be noticed, agents made a point of driving Obama in a minivan instead of the usual Suburban. They parked their other vehicles a block away. Obama spent an hour with Wright and then left.

During Wright's Press Club speech, he confirmed that he thought America created the AIDS virus to kill off blacks. After that, Obama claimed to have severed ties with him.

Once Obama entered the White House, the Secret Service experienced a 400 percent increase in the number of threats against the president, in comparison with his predecessor George Bush. While most of the threats were not credible, each had to be checked out and adjudicated.

"Because the Secret Service thinks calling attention to threats gives people ideas and generates more threats, the agency never publicly characterized their frequency," Kessler observes.

Agents told Kessler that both Barack Obama — code-named Renegade — and wife Michelle — code-named Renaissance — treat them with respect, as does Vice President Joe Biden. Still, agents were shocked when Biden revealed the location of the “undisclosed location” — or safe house for the vice president and president. If they had done the same, they would have been fired.

Obama invited agents to dinner twice, including a party for relatives at his home, and the Bidens buy agents food.

Contrary to Obama's repeated claims that he is quitting smoking, he has continued to smoke regularly, agents say. A week after being sworn in as president, Obama told CNN's Anderson Cooper that he hadn't had a cigarette on the White House grounds. That left open the possibility that he smokes on the Truman Balcony and in the White House residence and West Wing.

Agents say he smokes outside the White House as well.

Among the many other disclosures in Kessler's book In the President's Secret Service:

  • George W. Bush's daughters Barbara and Jenna gave their Secret Service details a hard time and would try to lose the agents assigned to them.
  • To this day, agents, including Chuck Taylor, who was on the Kennedy detail the day JFK was assassinated, believe they could have saved the president's life if they had been stationed on the back running boards of his car. But Kennedy told agents he didn't want them to ride on the rear running boards.
  • Lyndon Johnson would walk around naked in the presence of his daughters; his wife, Lady Bird; and female secretaries. He was quite well endowed in the testicles, so everyone started calling him bull nuts. He found out about that and was very disturbed.
  • Johnson was angry when a guest was served rare roast beef on Air Force One, and threatened to send the two stewards to Vietnam if they ever served "raw" meat again.
  • Agents say Richard Nixon was the strangest president they ever protected. He had no relationship with his wife and did not sleep with her. He also would walk on the beach wearing a blue suit and dress shoes. Even in the summer he would insist on having a fire burning in the fireplace.
  • Gerald Ford's code name was Passkey. He was considered very cheap. Caddies at a golf club in California usually receive $25 tips, but Ford gave a dollar, if anything at all.
  • Ford was, indeed, a klutz. The day after he left office, he was driving an electric golf cart in Palm Springs, Calif., when he accidentally crashed into an electric panel hanging on the wall of a shack for golf carts.
  • Agents considered Jimmy Carter sanctimonious and a phony. The former peanut farmer pretended to be one of the people but actually had little regard for the “little people,” agents say.
  • Ronald Reagan was folksy, and agents loved him. But they feared Nancy Reagan, and many saw her as cold and calculating.

    The White House "is a character crucible," Bertram S. Brown, M.D., a psychiatrist who formerly headed the National Institute of Mental Health and was an aide to President Kennedy, told Kessler.

    "It either creates or distorts character. Few decent people want to subject themselves to the kind of grueling abuse candidates take when they run in the first place."

    Brown, who has seen many top Washington politicians and White House aides in his practice, added: "Many of those who run crave superficial celebrity. They are hollow people who have no principles and simply want to be elected.

    "Even if an individual is balanced, once someone becomes president, how does one solve the conundrum of staying real and somewhat humble when one is surrounded by the most powerful office in the land, and from becoming overwhelmed by an at times pathological environment that treats you every day as an emperor?

    "Here is where the true strength of the character of the person, not his past accomplishments, will determine whether his presidency ends in accomplishment or failure."

    By: Jim Meyers - Monday, August 3, 2009 7:23 PM

    Posted: Daily Thought Pad

  • Friday, May 1, 2009

    On Torture And War Criminals

    Jon Stewart says Truman was a ‘War Criminal’ because he ordered the use of the atomic bomb against Japan.  Forget that it saved hundreds of thousands of American soldiers who didn’t have to die during a land invasion of Japan.  America killed it’s enemies, and now that’s wrong.  Apparently...

    The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c
    Cliff May Unedited Interview Pt. 2
    thedailyshow.com
    Daily Show
    Full Episodes
    Economic CrisisFirst 100 Days

    As Allah notes, “Behold the face of mindless anti-torture absolutism." Like what you see?

    For the record, during the debates, both Obama and Hillary listed Truman as among their most admired Presidents.  Who knew that Obama condoned war crimes?

    But now that Obama and the liberal Democratic Congress have opened the door to the notion that like a Banana Republic the United States should retroactively judge and prosecute former leaders and administrations instead of being the shining example that we have always been of  the smooth and perfect transfer of power after a civilized election… people like Jon Stewart think it is acceptable to judge and disparage a former wartime president that has always been praised by his peers and for generations since, for his courage and decisiveness at a time when we needed it.  

    These types of statements and behavior and what they lead to is only the beginning of the drama caused by the release of the Top Secret classified CIA memos:

    Cliff May was a guest on the Daily Show and posed a series of interesting questions to host Jon Stewart regarding interrogation, war and war crimes.  It comes at about the 5:50 mark. Cliff May asks Stewart whether Truman's use of the atomic bomb was a war crime, Stewart ruminates and then responds with an unequivocal "yes." He's certainly not the only American who would take that view, but it's a useful reminder that the most vocal and popular criticism of the Bush administration's war on terror policies comes from people who, if they were being as honest as Stewart, would also judge Lincoln (suspension of habeas), FDR (internment), and Truman (use of nuclear weapons) as war criminals or tyrants or worse.

    Stewart repeats the charge again later in the interview, but you have to wonder whether this was one of the rare times that he just got outmaneuvered on his own show. Serious people have debated Truman's decision for 60 years, but even those who disagree with that decision rarely describe it as "criminal." And if it was criminal, whatever crimes the left alleges of President Bush seem pretty trivial in comparison.

    See Video:  Cliff May Unedited Interview Pt. 2

    “Hundreds of thousands of lives were saved by averting a U.S. invasion of the Japanese home islands, and all ‘this tool’ can do is point a finger and mumble ‘yes’ in response to whether Truman’s a war criminal or not.”

    As always, it is hard to tell whether Stewart's clown nose is off or on, but it appeared to be off at that moment -- that is, he was giving a serious answer, not one intended to get laughs.

    The rapid end to the War in the Pacific was a blessing to many Americans.

    I don't believe that President Truman was a "war criminal" and the rapid end to the War in the Pacific was a blessing to many Americans.  You can bet that neither Jon Stewart’s mindless comment nor the clip will make it to the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri.

    Torture? No. Except...

    WASHINGTON -- Torture is an impermissible evil. Except under two circumstances. The first is the ticking time bomb. An innocent's life is at stake. The bad guy you have captured possesses information that could save this life. He refuses to divulge. In such a case, the choice is easy. Even John McCain, the most admirable and estimable torture opponent, says openly that in such circumstances, "You do what you have to do." And then take the responsibility.

    Some people, however, believe you never torture. Ever. They are akin to conscientious objectors who will never fight in any war under any circumstances, and for whom we correctly show respect by exempting from war duty. But we would never make one of them Centcom commander. Private principles are fine, but you don't entrust such a person with the military decisions upon which hinges the safety of the nation. It is similarly imprudent to have a person who would abjure torture in all circumstances making national security decisions upon which depends the protection of 300 million countrymen.

    The second exception to the no-torture rule is the extraction of information from a high-value enemy in possession of high-value information likely to save lives. This case lacks the black-and-white clarity of the ticking time bomb scenario. We know less about the length of the fuse or the nature of the next attack. But we do know the danger is great. We know we must act but have no idea where or how -- and we can't know that until we have information. Catch-22.

    Under those circumstances, you do what you have to do. And that includes waterboarding.

    Did it work? The current evidence is fairly compelling. George Tenet said that the "enhanced interrogation" program alone yielded more information than everything gotten from "the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together."

    Michael Hayden, CIA director after waterboarding had been discontinued, writes (with former Attorney General Michael Mukasey) that "as late as 2006 ... fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of al-Qaeda came from those interrogations." Even Dennis Blair, Obama's director of national intelligence, concurs that these interrogations yielded "high value information." So much for the lazy, mindless assertion that torture never works.

    Asserts Blair's predecessor, Mike McConnell, "We have people walking around in this country that are alive today because this process happened." Of course, the morality of torture hinges on whether at the time the information was important enough, the danger great enough and our blindness about the enemy's plans severe enough to justify an exception to the moral injunction against torture.

    Judging by Nancy Pelosi and other members of Congress who were informed at the time, the answer seems to be yes. In December 2007, after a Washington Post report that she had knowledge of these procedures and did not object, she admitted that she'd been "briefed on interrogation techniques the administration was considering using in the future."

    Today Pelosi protests "we were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any other of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used." She imagines that this distinction between past and present, Clintonian in its parsing, is exonerating.

    On the contrary. It is self-indicting. If you are told about torture that has already occurred, you might justify silence on the grounds that what's done is done and you are simply being used in a post-facto exercise to cover the CIA's rear end. The time to protest torture, if you really are as outraged as you now pretend to be, is when the CIA tells you what it is planning to do "in the future."

    But Pelosi did nothing. No protest. No move to cut off funding. No letter to the president or the CIA chief or anyone else saying "Don't do it."

    On the contrary, notes Porter Goss, then chairman of the House Intelligence Committee: The members briefed on these techniques did not just refrain from objecting, "on a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda."

    More support, mind you. Which makes the current spectacle of self-righteous condemnation not just cowardly but hollow. It is one thing to have disagreed at the time and said so. It is utterly contemptible, however, to have been silent then and to rise now "on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009" (the words are Blair's) to excoriate those who kept us safe these harrowing last eight years.

    Charles Krauthammer :: Townhall.com Columnist

    By: Charles Krauthammer - a 1987 Pulitzer Prize winner, 1984 National Magazine Award winner, and a columnist for The Washington Post since 1985.

    Political Cartoon by Chip Bok

    Related Resources:

    Monday, February 2, 2009

    George W. Bush in Time's People Who Mattered... 2008

    Now Ex-President George W. Bush ("W" or #43)

    BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI FOR TIME

    George W. Bush may have seemed like a diminished figure on the political scene this year, but in fact he was everywhere, his role in American politics perhaps larger than ever before. If you had to summarize the Democrats' message — the one that led to their sweeping victories in November — you might land upon, simply, "We're not Bush." Even his own party chose one of his longtime rivals as its nominee. It's hard to imagine the Obama moment if Bush had been less interested during his presidency in the expansion of U.S. power and more interested in financial management. Like all Presidents, though, Bush hopes history will judge him less like, say, Harding and more like another President who fought an unpopular war, Lincoln.

    John Cloud

    Tuesday, January 20, 2009

    Bush Exits

    Bill O'Reilly
    by  Bill O'Reilly 

    Bush leaves office with a 34 percent approval rating, according to a recent Gallup poll. That ties him with Jimmy Carter's approval rating when he left office in 1981, not exactly a place you want to be. However, the war on terror issue is still being defined and will likely help Bush when history is written down the line.

    Immediately after the attack on 9/11, Muslim jihadists had a big wind at their backs. We saw TV images of Muslims dancing in the streets as the great Satan America was humbled by al-Qaida. Almost instantly, the invincibility of the United States was challenged and the physical safety of Americans, at risk. It was very possible that further attacks were close.

    Moving quickly, the Bush administration reorganized the FBI into a terror-fighting organization and toppled the Taliban in Afghanistan, disrupting al-Qaida's command and control. Those successful tactics blunted a number of active terror plots and resulted in the capture of a number of al-Qaida big shots, all of whom broke under coerced interrogation. The information they gave up allowed the Bush administration to further damage the terrorist infrastructure.

    Then came Iraq, an operation designed to cleanse the Muslim world of the huge terrorist enabler Saddam Hussein. The price of that war is still being debated, but what honest people don't dispute is that the al-Qaida foot soldiers who invaded Iraq hoping to defeat the U.S. military were eventually decimated. The price for America in Iraq has been enormous, but al-Qaida has also paid big.

    Today, the terror threat still exists, but is no longer centralized and has lost most of its momentum. In short, the United States is winning the shooting war, and President Bush should get credit for that.

    On the economic front, however, the picture is different. The dramatic rise in oil prices last spring was artificially driven by greedy speculators, some of whom worked out of brokerage houses like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs. The oil company chieftains quickly realized they could make billions raising their prices to reflect the upward price speculation and did so with gusto. Thus, millions of consumer dollars were diverted to gas bills instead of other obligations. That lighted the fuse of the recession.

    At the same time, banks were making risky home loans to unqualified consumers. The banks then sold many of those loans to quick-buck artists at places like Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers. When consumers began to default because money became tight, panic ensued and the recession roared in.

    Where was President Bush while all this was happening? He continued to put forth that the economy was fundamentally strong when it was not. That is on the president. If his economic advisers misled him, he should have said so. But Bush is leaving office with no credible explanation for the collapse.

    The Democratic Congress also stood by and did nothing to protect the folks. Last July, Congressman Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told the world Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "in good shape going forward."

    A few weeks later those mortgage entities collapsed. Frank is now blaming the Republicans, but he is being flat-out dishonest in not taking any responsibility.

    Like a sports team that loses big, the head coach is the main guy. After Iraq and the wobbling economy, the folks lost confidence in President Bush, and Barack Obama capitalized on that.

    The truth is that the Bush administration did very well in protecting us against terrorist killers -- but not so well in protecting us against Wall Street greed heads.



    Mr. O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of "Who's Looking Out for You?"

    Monday, January 19, 2009

    Bush Commutes Sentences of Border Agents Compean, Ramos



    WASHINGTON – In his final acts of clemency, President George W. Bush on Monday commuted the prison sentences of two former U.S. Border Patrol agents whose convictions for shooting a Mexican drug dealer ignited fierce debate about illegal immigration.

    Bush's decision to commute the sentences of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who tried to cover up the shooting, was welcomed by both Republican and Democratic members of Congress. They had long argued that the agents were merely doing their jobs, defending the American border against criminals. They also maintained that the more than 10-year prison sentences the pair was given were too harsh.

    Rancor over their convictions, sentencing and firings has simmered ever since the shooting occurred in 2005.

    Ramos and Compean became a rallying point among conservatives and on talk shows where their supporters called them heroes. Nearly the entire bipartisan congressional delegation from Texas and other lawmakers from both sides of the political aisle pleaded with Bush to grant them clemency.

    Bush didn't pardon the men for their crimes, but decided instead to commute their prison sentences because he believed they were excessive and that they had already suffered the loss of their jobs, freedom and reputations, a senior administration official said.

    The action by the president, who believes the border agents received fair trials and that the verdicts were just, does not diminish the seriousness of their crimes, the official said.

    Compean and Ramos, who have served about two years of their sentences, are expected to be released from prison within the next two months.

    They were convicted of shooting admitted drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete Davila in the buttocks as he fled across the Rio Grande, away from an abandoned van load of marijuana. The border agents argued during their trials that they believed the smuggler was armed and that they shot him in self defense. The prosecutor in the case said there was no evidence linking the smuggler to the van of marijuana. The prosecutor also said the border agents didn't report the shooting and tampered with evidence by picking up several spent shell casings.

    The agents were fired after their convictions on several charges, including assault with a dangerous weapon and with serious bodily injury, violation of civil rights and obstruction of justice. All their convictions, except obstruction of justice, were upheld on appeal.

    With the new acts of clemency, Bush has granted a total of 189 pardons and 11 commutations.

    That's fewer than half as many as Presidents Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan issued during their two-term tenures. Bush technically has until noon on Tuesday when President-elect Barack Obama is sworn into office to exercise his executive pardon authority, but presidential advisers said no more were forthcoming.

    The president had made most of his pardon decisions on low-profile cases, but his batch in December created controversy.

    Isaac Robert Toussie of Brooklyn, N.Y, convicted of making false statements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development and of mail fraud, was among 19 people Bush pardoned just before Christmas. But after learning in news reports that Toussie's father had donated tens of thousands of dollars to the Republican Party a few months ago, as well as other information, the president reversed his decision on Toussie's case.

    The White House said the decision to revoke the pardon — a step unheard of in recent memory — was based on information about the extent and nature of Toussie's prior criminal offenses, and that neither the White House counsel's office nor the president had been aware of a political contribution by Toussie's father and wanted to avoid creating an appearance of impropriety.

    In an earlier high-profile official act of forgiveness, Bush saved Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, from serving prison time in the case of the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstructing justice. Bush could still grant him a full pardon, although Libby has not applied for one.

    Bush's batches of pardons, however, have never included any well-known convicts like junk bond dealer Michael Milken, who sought a pardon on securities fraud charges, or two politicians convicted of public corruption — former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., and four-term Democratic Louisiana Gov. Edwin W. Edwards — who wanted Bush to shorten their prison terms.

    Clinton issued a total of 457 in eight years in office. Bush's father, George H. W. Bush, issued 77 in four years. Reagan issued 406 in eight years, and President Carter issued 563 in four years. Since World War II, the largest number of pardons and commutations — 2,031 — came from President Truman, who served 82 days short of eight years.

    © 2009 Associated Press.