How Low Can He Go?

One of the reasons why the Left hated all things George W. Bush - besides cutting taxes, halting Federal funding for stem cell research and nominating conservative judges to the Federal bench - was the way he conducted foreign policy. He started his Administration by skillfully negotiating the release of American naval aviators being held hostage by the Communist Chinese after their P-3 reconnaissance aircraft was damaged in a mid-air collision with a Chinese fighter. While gaining the aircrew their freedom, Mr. Bush insisted that they were conducting lawful operations in international airspace and were the innocent victims of Chinese aggression, a position that while undeniably true, ran counter to the traditional liberal position that the United States is always to blame in any international incident. He refused to apologize to the ChiComs just as he refused to apologize to the Russians for abandoning the ABM Treaty, or to the UN for calling them a debating society while he liberated Afghanistan, or to the Europeans for waterboarding Al Qaeda thugs while they whined in outrage. George W. Bush was the Prince of Darkness as far as liberals were concerned because of his America First attitude and they longed for someone who would conduct foreign policy in a different way, the right way, the liberal way.

Enter Barack Obama, the answer to a socialist's prayer. He promised repeatedly and profusely during last year's campaign that he would break with George W. Bush's policies and handle our foreign affairs in a friendlier, more collaborative way, to negotiate directly with the Iranians over their nuclear program, to assure the Muslim world that the United States was not at war with them, to make nice with the Russians and the Chinese and the Cubans and the Palestinians and anyone else who hates us so they won't hate us anymore, and lead us into a brighter, friendlier, more peaceful future. Let's see how he's done so far:

• His first major press interview was given to Al Arabiya television on 26 January in an effort to reach out to Muslims. Since that interview, 273 American servicemen have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting Muslim extremists.

• At the Summit of the Americas in April, he was punked by Hugo Chavez.

• North Korea successfully tested a nuclear weapon on 25 May (Memorial Day), test-fired seven missiles on the Fourth of July and took two American journalists - both employees of Al Gore - hostage after they tried to sneak into the country, and demanded a personal visit by a high-profile American politician to release them. After criticizing George W. Bush's handling of North Korea during the Presidential campaign, Obama gave the pot-bellied syphilitic dog eater what he wanted and gave Kim Jong-Il a photo op with Bill Clinton.

• After personally appealing to Aleksandr Medvedev and Vladimir Putin, they refused to support further UN sanctions against Iran to stop their nuclear program. However, Obama did agree to cancel installation of missile defense radars in Poland and the Czech Republic, two of our NATO allies.

• A personal appeal to the Chinese Communists during his recent trip to Asia to support additional sanctions against Iran and to allow their own people greater freedom was ignored. His "town hall meeting" was broadcast into an electronic blind alley. However, the Chinese allowed Obama to walk the Great Wall for a photo op - alone. of course.

• Also during his Asia trip, Obama bowed to Emperor Akihito of Japan. This was a follow-up to his actions during the G20 Conference in London last April when he bowed deeply to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. To my knowledge, no foreign head of state has reciprocated.

It would seem, then, that Obama's approach to foreign policy has not advanced American interests one whit but has allowed hostile powers to advance theirs, which is why he was validated with the Nobel Peace Prize in October. You see, Barack Obama represents the America of a liberal's dream, a weak, servile, diffident oaf of a country, insecure, ineffective and desperate for the world's approval. He is ready to sacrifice his own citizens' best interests and is eager to please, qualities that may be repugnant to the average American but highly prized among the effeminate, socialist elite. Can you imagine George Washington or Andrew Jackson bowing to the monarch they defeated, George III? How about Theodore Roosevelt kissing the hand of the King of Spain? Or Ronald Reagan paying homage at Lenin's Tomb? Don't think so? Well, neither do I. The President of the United States leads the world's greatest nation and should acquit himself as such, bowing to no-one but Christ Himself. Obama's foreign policy insults the American people and invites the very disrespect and tension he claims to want to prevent, and it can also invite disaster, for as Jimmy Carter lost us the Panama Canal and gave us Soviet adventurism in Afghanistan and Nicaragua, and Desert One and 444 days of American hostages in Iran, and as Bill Clinton brought us successive failures in Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda and Haiti, and - failure par excellence - Jimmy Carter giving nuclear reactors to North Korea, the Priest-King's fumbling has gained only contempt for America abroad and a nation that holds us in contempt will make dangerous decisions like invading Taiwan, launching missiles at Hawaii, attacking Israel, sending twenty million illegal immigrants across our borders or, God forbid, giving nuclear weapons to Al Qaeda.

Projecting weakness is a stupid and irresponsible strategy that has failed more times than we can count. If the Priest-King needs corroboration, have him ask Neville Chamberlain.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30271562/

Source: http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-2009-09-18-voa11-68664422.html

Source: http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/01/27/65087.html

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/casualties.htm

Source: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/04/AR2009080400684.html

Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/05/seven-fourth-of-july-missile-tests-defies-west/

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/5381109/North-Koreas-nuclear-activities-timeline.html

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052501961.html

This Man Is A Muslim Terrorist Who Murdered Thirteen People

Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 118: Any person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he— (1) has a premeditated design to kill; (2) intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm; (3) is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to another and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or (4) is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, sodomy, rape, robbery, or aggravated arson;
is guilty of murder, and shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct, except that if found guilty under clause (1) or (4), he shall suffer death or imprisonment for life as a court-martial may direct.

Last Thursday, 05 November 2009, MAJ Nidal Malik Hasan walked into the Soldier Readiness Center on Fort Hood, Texas, shouted, "Allahu Akbar!" at the top of his lungs and began firing, killing thirteen soldiers and wounding 31 others before he himself was shot by a brave civilian police officer, Kim Munley, who was herself wounded while trying to stop him. If not for her brave actions, MAJ Hasan would have continued killing his fellow soldiers until he ran out of ammunition and God knows how many that might have been.

This was a terrorist attack and MAJ Hasan is the terrorist who perpetrated it. It's that simple, and no amount of politically-correct hand wringing on the part of the Priest-King or his subordinates can change it. Here we have an active-duty commissioned officer who perpetrated an act of jihad against the United States, murdering the very soldiers he was sworn to lead, a betrayal of the highest order and one which must be strictly punished. If it is to have any meaning at all, MAJ Hasan must be held to account by the same Uniform Code of Military Justice under which all service members are subject, tried, sentenced and hanged like any other
murderer. To do otherwise is to strip it of its force, betray everyone wearing the uniform, undermine discipline and confidence in the chain of command and acknowledge that placating the very people who have been attacking us is more important than executing justice.

What else are we to believe? In remarks last Friday in the Rose Garden, the Priest-King stated blandly that, "We don't know all the answers yet. And I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts," by which he meant, the fact that MAJ Hasan was a Muslim who had repeatedly contacted a rabidly pro-terrorist mullah in Yemen, who had repeatedly tried to contact Al Qaeda, who had railed against US policy in the Middle East to his superiors and advocated conscientious objector status for every Muslim in the US military and then shot 44 people does not mean he is a terrorist, which is just patently absurd. The Priest-King was then followed on Sunday by GEN George Casey, the Army Chief of Staff, who stated, "Speculation could potentially heighten backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers," and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who opined, "This was an individual who does not represent the Muslim faith," which statements again are plainly idiotic but which were intended to soften the hurt feelings of the people who yearn for our destruction, which apparently is the highest calling of this embarrassment of an Administration.

...and they seemed to be working in at least one respect. According to Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council for American-Islamic relations (CAIR), a Muslim advocacy group frequently critical of US policy - the policy of defending ourselves against bloodthirsty Islamic thugs - the muted reaction to MAJ Hasan's bloody rampage "...shows our society has matured in how it responds to these incidents." Wow, that's great. We've been attacked so frequently by Muslim terrorists that our leaders don't retaliate any more, which terrifies the living hell out of me but which gives great comfort to Mr. Hooper and his America-hating ilk.

The best and most effective tonic for this situation, to achieve justice for the victims of Fort Hood and send a clear and unmistakable message to other pro-jihadist sympathizers in the military, is the direct route: Death. MAJ Hasan violated his oath as an officer, he murdered thirteen fellow soldiers and tried to kill 31 more and he did so in furtherance of global Islamic jihad, whether in concert with Al Qaeda or not. He has proven himself an enemy of the United States, he has set his face against us and thus he deserves the same fate as other traitors from the past: Six feet of Texas soil and as much rope as it takes to hang him.

Source: http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/military_justice/punitive-articles-of-the-.shtml




Source: http://www.wiredprnews.com/2009/11/08/obama-urges-nation-to-not-jump-to-conclusions-after-shootings_200911086849.html

This Is What He Fought For?

Mark Saturday, 07 November 2009, folks. Mark it in red on your calendar and anywhere else where you'll remember it, because it's one of those dates that will stand in the annals of infamy. Yesterday was the day that the liberals who currently control the levers of government in this country decided to give the finger to America, to trade the promise of prosperity for the certainty of failure, to swap their freedom and ours for the swamp of mediocrity, and we don't know if it can be undone.

The vote was 220-215 to pass HR 3962, the 1990-page, $1.2 trillion monstrosity that, if passed by the Senate and signed by the Priest-King, will grant the Federal government unmitigated control over the country's health care system from top to bottom. That the vote was so close - the Democrats hold a 258-177 majority in the House - tells us several things about the current state of affairs. First, there is a very real wave of anger growing in this country over how the Democrats are governing. The TEA parties last Spring, the bitter town hall meetings of August and September and the protest at the Capitol last Thursday are indicators of that anger. Ordinary people are furious that their government is hell-bent on taxing, spending and regulating them into Third World status and the more conservative Democrats in the House are feeling it. Despite a personal visit by the Priest-King to the Capitol yesterday morning and a hurried speech at the White House yesterday afternoon, 39 House Democrats nonetheless opposed the bill. Second, it illustrates how tenuous the liberals' grip really is, that with months of lobbying by President Obama preceded by years of lobbying by such boobs as John Dingell and Ted Kennedy, with large majorities in the House and Senate, the measure only passed by two votes. Third, it provides a valuable insight into the liberals' real motives. In the teeth of such vehement public opposition as I mentioned above, despite unemployment remaining the voters' number-one concern (the Labor Department announced on Friday that the nation lost another 190,000 jobs in October, bringing the total lost under the Obama Administration to 5.7 million), despite getting a clear signal from the citizens by losing the governorships in New Jersey and Virginia last Tuesday, the Democrats decided nonetheless to push ahead with health care reform. They did this because health care reform and check-card voting and global warming and gays in the military are only milestones on the way to their true objective, which is the transformation of the United States into a true socialist state.

The American people were handed the checks for the $160 billion stimulus package and the $700 billion TARP package under President Bush, and have been handed the checks for the $850 billion stimulus package, the $1 trillion bank bailout bill and a $3.5 trillion FY2010 Federal budget under President Obama, to what result? Unemployment continues to climb as I said - 10.2% now - proving that simply spending huge amounts of money doesn't solve that problem. But spending huge amounts of money, including seizing the nation's health care system, redistributes wealth from those who have earned it to those who haven't. Since the Federal government has already taken over the investment banking industry (Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs, etc.), the insurance industry (AIG), the home mortgage industry (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac), and the automobile industry (except for Ford, who refused bailout money and actually turned a $1 billion profit in 3Q2009), and already provides entitlements through Social Security, Medicare, prescription drugs and Medicaid, it stands to reason that the liberals would want control over health care in toto. They want control over our medical records, our diet, how much exercise we get, which doctor we see, where we see him or if we see one at all, what we serve our children for dinner and how much TV they watch, which drugs we can have and how much they'll cost, how long we can live ("end of life options") and whether we live at all (taxpayer-funded abortions) and through this control, create an American proletariat, a classless society in which everyone -except the libs at the very top, the Politburo, if you will - lives the same, hopeless, miserable life. Barney Frank said as much during an appearance on MSNBC on the 26th, saying, "We are trying on every front to increase the role of government." Wake up, folks, this is what we're facing.

Let's look at just two provisions in HR 3962. First, there would be an age limit placed on insurance premiums such that someone 64 years old could not be charged more than twice the premium of an 18 year-old. Sounds great if you're a senior citizen, right? But since seniors consume about five times as much in health care costs, the money to pay for that would have to come from the 18 year-old, who would see his health insurance premiums skyrocket. Second, families earning up to 400% of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL) would receive taxpayer-funded subsidies to purchase health insurance through a new federally-regulated "health exchange," while families at 300% of FPL who buy their health insurance through their employer would receive no assistance at all, the effect being to punish people who refuse to go with the government plan. Again, these are just two of the measures by which the liberals will assert totalitarian control over our lives if they have their way.

There is still a fight to be fought in the Senate and lots of opportunities to stop this insanity before it's too late. Seeing Nancy Pelosi cheerfully, even gleefully announcing the surrender of our liberty should stir us to action, but seeing her do so in front of the man who fought so hard and sacrificed so much to get it enfuriates me. My fellow patriots, STAND UP AND TAKE BACK YOUR COUNTRY BEFORE THERE'S NOTHING LEFT TO SAVE!

Source: http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20091105/US.Health.Care.Overhaul/

Source: http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm2648.cfm

Source: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/11/06/obama-jobs-deficit-hits-77-million-and-climbing/

Source: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/10/27/barney-frank-we-are-trying-on-every-front-to-increase-the-role-of-government/

What's Wrong with Baseball

I'm sure that the story line from Major League Baseball's communications department today is the wild finish early this morning in Game 2 of the American League Championship Series between the Yankees and the Angels, with the Yankees pulling off yet another of their comeback victories. (Who ever thought that Jerry Hairston, Jr. would score the winning run in the 13th inning?) But the storyline they want everyone to ignore and to keep ignoring is the weather. The weather in Yankee Stadium was 45 degrees Fahrenheit at game time with rain and wind, and with the championship series in both leagues yet to be completed, we stand a very good chance of playing the World Series in November which, I'll just state the obvious, is just a plain stupid idea: If you like playing baseball in the winter, go to the Caribbean.

We've reached this point because Major League Baseball is trying to generate as much revenue as possible by lengthening the season, and they have to generate revenue because, for one, player salaries have been on a rocket ship for 34 years. In 1975 when Andy Messersmith and Dave McNally won their landmark arbitration case, the average major leaguer made $45,238 for the season - this season, the average Yankee made over $7,748,000 on the highest-paid club in the majors. Even with record attendance and high TV and merchandising revenues, Major League Baseball is desperate for cash and will do anything, even extend the season past Halloween, to make more, even though this generates something else the owners would rather do without: Scorn.

Baseball is a summer sport. For 65 years, the World Series was played the first week of October when the weather was as near-perfect as possible and fan interest was high. Then, in 1969, baseball decided to add a best-of-five League Championship Series which the calendar could still support, and which helped extend the season of two more teams. This scheme was changed to a best-of-seven format in 1985 and then, in 1995, a best-of-five Division Series was added in both leagues, meaning that eight teams made it to the postseason rather than the original two. In 1903 when the first World Series was played between the Boston Pilgrims and the Pittsburgh Pirates, the Pilgrims managed to beat the Pirates five games to three but yet the season was over by 13 October and neither team played more than 148 games total. The following year, because of the interest the Series generated, the regular season was lengthened from 140 to 154 games which was acceptable since the playoffs were still limited to the Series, and in 1961 when the regular season was lengthened yet again to 162 games, it was still OK: The regular season was over by the end of September with the World Series concluded the same time it always was.

But beyond simply lengthening the season, baseball has changed the way most games are played. In decades past, teams traveled by train from city to city and needed more time in the schedule to accomodate it, and thus played more doubleheaders. Now the clubs fly, need less time for travel and play more three- and four-game series. In the old days, most games were played during the day. Now, most games are played at night to allow more fans to watch the game in person (preferably) or on cable TV (not as preferred but still OK since baseball gets a cut). We are therefore left with a baseball season that has been stretched at least three weeks past its normal limits and which is played at a leisurely pace, all to generate as much revenue as possible, a ludicrously long season that unnaturally overlaps football, hockey and even basketball and instead of creating more fan buzz, playoffs that create more material for late-night comedians, e.g., "C.C. Sabathia tried to master a new pitch the other night but just can't get the hang of the split-finger snowball."

What to do about this ridiculous situation? I have a few ideas. First, the regular season exists to eliminate those teams that just can't compete at a high level, and an extra eight games don't make much difference where that is concerned. Thus I would start by returning to the old 154-game schedule with Opening Day no later than 02 April. Second, I would schedule at least seven more doubleheaders during the regular season for each team, since travel time isn't the factor it was 75 years ago and every day saved in May and June would then be available in September and October. Third, scale the Division Series and League Championship Series back to best-of-five games each - eight teams could still make the playoffs but would have to prove very quickly who deserved to play in the World Series. And last, I would dictate with absolute certainty that the seventh and deciding game of the World Series would be played not later than the fifteenth of October, network rights or marketing schemes or anything else notwithstanding. Baseball has survived scandals and wars and integration and strikes, but baseball cannot survive the image of playing in the snow and has to find a way out of this mess, and quickly.

Source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_did_MLB_go_to_154_game_season

Source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_MLB_always_have_a_162-game_season

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ipsa/A0112331.html

Source: http://www.hickoksports.com/history/reservec.shtml

Source: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries

Source: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/news/2000/12/22/free_agency_ap/

The Body, The Body, The Body!

FOOTNOTES OF HISTORY DEPT.: On 30 April 1976, at the Capital Centre in Landover, Maryland, two-time heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali defended his title against the little-known Jimmy Young of Philadelphia in a fight widely viewed as just another payday for the champ - he would make $2 million for the bout and was expected to dominate his less-experienced, less-talented opponent. However, Young, whose record stood at 17-4-2, had no intention of being yet another Ali victim. Having beaten Ron Lyle in a straight-up fight and having fought the powerful Earnie Shavers to a standstill, Young was a cagey, crafty fighter who was difficult to hit. For fifteen rounds, Young dodged, weaved and counterpunched the champion silly, avoiding most of the heavy blows while scoring repeatedly himself. Ali never seemed to get a clean shot at him and for many of the fans in the arena and watching on TV, it seemed that they were witnessing an upset. Yet in a surprise announcement, Referee Tom Kelly scored the fight 72-65; judges Larry Barrett and Terry Moore had it 70-68 and 71-64, respectively: Amid a chorus of boos and insults from the capacity crowd, Ali was declared the winner in a unanimous decision and retained his title. Ken Norton (who was calling the action ringside for NBC and who had beaten Ali and broken his jaw two years previous) thought that Young had clearly outduelled the champion. Confirming popular opinion, Ali refused a rematch with Young, unwilling to face such a cunning opponent - and further embarrassment - ever again.

Why was there such outrage over the decision? Why was there such a disconnect between the fans watching the fight and the officials who decided it? Because Young's style of boxing, designed to frustrate and confuse his opponent, to protect himself from Ali's deadly combinations while allowing him to score with jabs and straight rights, was not what makes a champion. Simply surviving didn't impress anybody - if Young really wanted to beat Muhammad Ali and take his belt, he had to be the aggressor, he had to take the fight to him and whip him on national TV. Against a legend like Ali, Jimmy Young would have to take risks, get in close and knock the champ out at point-blank range, something he was clearly unwilling to do. That being the case, the judges saw no justification for giving him Ali's title: Jabbing and counterpunching just weren't good enough.

We now have a situation in Afghanistan that bears some resemblance to my pugilistic example. LTG Stanley McChrystal, President Obama's hand-picked commander in that theater, has requested 40,000 additional troops to augment his current force of 68,000, over and above the 17,000 personnel he received in the Spring. LTG McChrystal is convinced that without these reinforcements, he will be unable to counter the current Taliban offensive and may not be able to hold the country; that is, the United States might lose the war. He wants the strength to get in close, take the fight to the enemy and knock them out, yet President Obama is notably reluctant to approve LTG McChrystal's request as this contravenes his party's 45-year aversion to military action and his own liberal instincts. Having repeatedly stated that the war in Afghanistan was the one we had to win, the President now searches for a way to abandon it. (Recall that then-Senator Obama vehemently opposed President Bush's troop surge in Iraq in 2007, claiming the war was already lost. Since that surge actually worked, His Serene Loftiness is reluctant to validate conservative military strategy yet again.) He hesitates, he considers shifting away from defeating the Taliban and toward pursuing Al Qaeda, away from Afghanistan altogether and toward Pakistan, he commissions a review of LTG McChrystal's plan and floats trial balloons through his surrogates like negotiating with the Taliban rather than destroying them, he has SecDef Robert Gates rebuke LTG McChrystal and CENTCOM chief GEN Petraeus for publicly advocating for McChrystal's strategy, he rebukes LTG McChrystal on board Air Force One personally, his willing accomplices in the news media publish opinion polls and reports indicating the American public's fatigue with the eight-year war and their doubts as to whether continuing the fight is worth it, he does everything possible to avoid simply approving LTG McChrystal's request. He considers withdrawing most American combat troops and relying instead on armed Predator drones, special operations forces and airstrikes to do the job, jabbing and counterpunching from a distance like Jimmy Young did, keeping the enemy off-balance and avoiding the big knockout punch.

...instead of delivering the big knockout punch. President Obama, like Jimmy Young, instinctively chooses a defensive strategy that assures personal survival but surrenders the initiative to his opponent, thereby guaranteeing defeat. If we are not actively pursuing the Taliban and attacking them first, we are inviting them to do the same to us, and with Taliban forces gaining momentum throughout Afghanistan, we must do everything possible to stop them, regain the initiative and crush them, or else risk losing the war, which we cannot afford to do. Bill Clinton relied on cruise missiles and airstrikes for nearly three months against Serbia in 1999 but the only thing that drove the Serbs to the bargaining table was the threat of ground invasion, so Obama has that example from his immediate Democrat predecessor from which to draw inspiration. We cannot lose Afghanistan. That is a simple, undeniable fact and one which His Serene Loftiness claims to understand. If that is indeed the case, Mr. President, then answer LTG McChrystal's request, commit the troops, fight America's enemies toe-to-toe and win the war...or slink away, disgraced and defeated, to your eternal shame.

Source: http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1897542,00.html

Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/10/white-house-furious-at-gen-mcchrystal-for-going-public.html

Source: http://www.upiasia.com/Top_News/2009/09/24/Petraeus-urges-linking-anti-terror-efforts/UPI-23211253766119/

Source: http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2009/09/mcchrystal_to_resign_if_not_gi.php

Never Mind...

BIG SURPRISE: After forcefully and repeatedly stating that he would close the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as a candidate last year and signing an Executive Order to that effect two days after his Inauguration, it now appears very likely that President Obama will fail to make good on that promise. The White House says that poor recordkeeping by the Bush Administration is to blame for the mess but the real reason, the real problem driving this development is what I mentioned in this space eight months ago: Whatever the President and his fellow liberal true believers may think, you can't close Gitmo because there's nowhere else for these guys to go. They're the most dangerous people on Earth and nobody wants them, not Obama's socialist friends in Europe nor his other socialist friends here in America. No Congressman, no Senator and no city councilman, no matter how solid their Leftist credentials, wants a bunch of Al Qaeda thugs living in the same ZIP code as their constituents and they'll do whatever they have to do to keep that from happening - have you noticed that with the avalanche of spending from Obama and the Congressional Democrats on everything else that there's not one penny approved for closing Gitmo? No conicidence there, my friends, no coincidence at all.

His Serene Loftiness is learning a hard lesson with Gitmo just as he has with health care reform, that is, simply wanting things to work according to socialist dogma isn't good enough. With health care, many millions of people resist the thought of being ordered into a government-run program that will be more expensive, more wasteful, more corrupt, more regimented and less free than anyone can predict, and are letting the Messiah-in-Chief know it. With Guantanamo Bay, the possibility of Al Qaeda suicide bombers running loose in America freezes the blood of the diest of die-hard liberals. They may have railed against George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Alberto Gonzalez, and demanded the closure of Guantanamo Bay and civil rights for terrorists but when asked to keep those terrorists in their own districts, they rediscover the old mantra of NIMBY: Not In My Back Yard. (Remember how the dear departed Ted Kennedy, ever the champion of clean energy and the environment, quashed a wind turbine project off Cape Cod three years ago because it would ruin the view?) Obama would do well if he would simply admit his mistake and reverse his order, if he would demonstrate an ability to think objectively and keep Gitmo open, but to do so would require intelligence, character, a sense of leadership and humility, and nothing in Obama's past suggests he is capable of such greatness: Too bad for us.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/25/ap-guantanamo-close-january/?test=latestnews

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30860366/

Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/20/white_house_closing_gitmo_a_hasty_decision_96593.html

Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secretary-Robert-Gibbs-8/13/09/

Source:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/27/kennedy_faces_fight_on_cape_wind/

Dear Leader

Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Barack Obama the great peerlessly brilliant President of all the Americas is a great unequaled inflexible political genius of a large caliber always on the offensive to stiffen the steel-strong rock-hard ranks of the American Democratic Socialist Workers Proletariat into a match-for-a-hundred invincible force of strong patriotic anti-Republican anti-imperialist revolutionary spirit with a zeal of defending the Leader with their own lives at one stroke.

Once again Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Barack Obama has found the perfect way to uplift the capability of the American Democratic Socialist Workers Proletariat, delivering an inspirational and historic speech of decisive strategic power value to the boy schoolchildren and girl schoolchildren of the invincible mighty relentless unstoppable American Marxist Unified People next Tuesday. Hearing the cry of the people for his unique invaluable priceless wonderful leadership, the Mighty Sun of the 21st Century will uplift their joyous hearts with this immortal feat, propagating his glory and inspiring them to struggle forward with revolutionary fervor:

Menu of Classroom Activities
President Obama’s Address to Students Across America
(Pre-K6)
Produced by Teaching Ambassador Fellows, U.S. Department of Education
September 8, 2009

Before the Speech
Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama. Teachers could motivate students by asking the following questions:
Who is the President of the United States?
What do you think it takes to be president?
To whom do you think the president is going to be speaking?
Why do you think he wants to speak to you?
What do you think he will say to you?
Teachers can ask students to imagine that they are delivering a speech to all of the students in the United States.
If you were the president, what would you tell students?
What can students do to help in our schools?
Teachers can chart ideas about what students would say.
Why is it important that we listen to the president and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?

During the Speech
As the president speaks, teachers can ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful. Students could use a note]taking graphic organizer such as a "cluster web;" or, students could record their thoughts on sticky notes. Younger children could draw pictures and write as appropriate. As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following:
What is the president trying to tell me?
What is the president asking me to do?
What new ideas and actions is the president challenging me to think about?
Students could record important parts of the speech where the president is asking them to do something. Students might think about the following:
What specific job is he asking me to do?
Is he asking anything of anyone else?
Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?
Students could record questions they have while he is speaking and then discuss them after the speech. Younger children may need to dictate their questions.

After the Speech
Teachers could ask students to share the ideas they recorded, exchange sticky notes, or place notes on a butcher]paper poster in the classroom to discuss main ideas from the speech, such as citizenship, personal responsibility, and civic duty.
Students could discuss their responses to the following questions:
What do you think the president wants us to do?
Does the speech make you want to do anything?
Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?
What would you like to tell the president?

Extension of the Speech
Teachers could extend learning by having students:
Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants, puzzle pieces, or trails marked with the following labels: personal, academic, community, and country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in that area. It might make sense to focus first on personal and academic goals so that community and country goals can be more readily created.
Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short]term and long]term education goals. Teachers would collect and redistribute these letters at an appropriate later date to enable students to monitor their progress.
Write goals on colored index cards or precut designs to post around the classroom.
Interview one another and share goals with the class to create a supportive community.
Participate in school]wide incentive programs or contests for those students who achieve their goals.
Write about their goals in a variety of genres, such as poems, songs, and personal essays.
Create artistic projects based on the themes of their goals.
Graph individual progress toward goals.

Menu of Classroom Activities
President Obama’s Address to Students Across America
(Grades 7-12)
Produced by Teaching Ambassador Fellows, U.S. Department of Education
September 8, 2009

Before the Speech
Conduct a "quick write" or "think/pair/share" activity with students. (In the latter activity, students spend a few minutes thinking and writing about the question. Next, each student is paired with another student to discuss. Finally, the students share their ideas with the class as a whole). Teachers may choose to ask the following questions:
What ideas do we associate with the words "responsibility," "persistence," and "goals?"
How would we define each term?
Teachers then may choose to create a web diagram of student ideas for each of the words.
Have students participate in a "quick write" or brainstorming activity. Teachers may ask students:
What are your strengths?
What do you think makes you successful as a student and as a person?
Teachers may engage students in short readings. Teachers may post in large print around the classroom notable quotes excerpted from President Obama’s speeches on education. Teachers might ask students to think alone, compare ideas with a partner, or share their thoughts with the class. Teachers could ask students to think about the following:
What are our interpretations of these excerpts?
Based on these excerpts, what can we infer that the president believes is important in order to be educationally successful?
Create a "concept web." Teachers may ask students to think of the following:
Why does President Obama want to speak with us today? How will he inspire us?
How will he challenge us?
What might he say?
Do you remember any other historic moments when the president spoke to the nation?
What was the impact?
After brainstorming answers to these questions, students could create a "cause]and]effect" graphic organizer.

During the Speech
Teachers might conduct a "listening with purpose" exercise based on the following ideas: personal responsibility, goals, and persistence. Teachers might ask pairs of students to create a word bank at the top of a notes page that has been divided into two columns. On the right]hand side, students could take notes (trying to capture direct quotations or main ideas) while President Obama talks about personal responsibility, goals, or persistence. At the end of the speech, students could write the corresponding terms from the word bank in the left]hand column, to increase retention and deepen their understanding of an important aspect of the speech.

Teachers might conduct a "listening with purpose" exercise based on the themes of inspiration and challenges. Using a similar double]column notes page as the one described above, teachers could focus students on quotations that either propose a specific challenge to them or that inspire them in some meaningful way. Students could do this activity individually, in pairs, or in groups.
Transition/Quick Review
Teachers could ask students to look over their notes and collaborate in pairs or small groups. Teachers might circulate and ask students questions, such as:
What more could we add to our notes?
What are the most important words in the speech?
What title would you give the speech?
What is the thesis of the speech?

After the Speech
Guided Discussion:
What resonated with you from President Obama’s speech? What lines or phrases do you remember?
Whom is President Obama addressing? How do you know? Describe his audience.
We heard President Obama mention the importance of personal responsibility. In your life, who exemplifies this kind of responsibility? How? Give examples.
How are the individuals in this classroom similar? How is each student different?
Suppose President Obama were to give another speech about being educationally successful. To whom would he speak? Why? What would the president say?
What are the three most important words in the speech? Rank them.
Is President Obama inspiring you to do anything? Is he challenging you to do anything?
What do you believe are the challenges of your generation?
How can you be a part of addressing these challenges?

　
The brilliance of Dear Leader knows no bounds and this stroke of invincible genius boosts the effective invincibility of the American Democratic Socialist Workers Proletariat a thousandfold, sending the criminal Republican imperialists reeling in a panic, smashing their frantic anti-Revolutionary schemes at one stroke. Hail victory! Hail the Leader!　
　

Source: http://www.ed.gov/teachers/how/lessons/7-12.pdf

Source: http://www.ed.gov/teachers/how/lessons/prek-6.pdf