Have a Blessed Easter!

Oh, Boy....Illinois Loses Its Credit Card Privileges

Bank of America is cancelling the State of Illinois' credit cards (used by employees for state business) because the State of Illinois is not paying its credit card bills.

"All of this despite a 67% income tax increase has still left the State of Illinois unable to pay its bills on time and a Governor who insists cutting spending is just plain wrong."

President Obama Seems Out Of Touch

I'd like to share this with you, especially since this quote was removed by the Associated Press last night. 

Mr. Obama, when a fellow citizen expressed concern about the high price of gasoline, just advised the gentleman to buy a new gas-efficient vehicle.



"If you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know," Obama said laughingly. "You might want to think about a trade-in."

Watch the video.  Mr. Obama may have been "laughing", but he didn't get any guffaws in response.

Obama Opposes Paying our Military If the Government Shuts Down

President Obama officially opposes House bill 1363 that would continuing paying our military in the case of a government shutdown.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503

April 7, 2011
(House)
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
H.R. 1363 – Department of Defense and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011
(Rep. Rogers, R-Kentucky)

The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 1363.....This bill is a distraction from the real work that would bring us closer to a reasonable compromise for funding......
see http://majorityleader.house.gov/blog/2011/04/funding-our-troops-is-a-distraction.html for the rest of Obama's statement.

So, how, exactly, Mr. President, is paying our troops a "distraction"?  Shouldn't paying our troops be at least near the top of your 'To-Do' list, Mr. Commander-In-Chief?

Again, this would be a NEW policy concerning military pay, brought to you by Obama.

Obama Seems to Be Threatening Military Paychecks if Government Shuts Down

It appears that, perhaps in a bit of an angry snit, the Obama Administration may refuse to pay military personnel during a government shutdown.

A Defense Department memo states that "Military personnel and exempt Defense Department civilian employees are required to continue working without pay during a government shutdown."  These apparently are preliminary guidelines.

This was NOT the policy during the Clinton Administration, when guidelines set down during the Reagan Administration were followed.  So this is a NEW policy of President Obama's.

Just thought you'd know.

The Proposed Republican Budget

Congressman Paul Ryan has set out a new budget for the United States which cuts $4.4 trillion dollars over the next 10 years.

FINALLY, someone in D.C. is really getting serious about this debt. The United States government hits its debt ceiling May 16th, according to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. That's the date that, basically, the U.S. government defaults on all its loans. Currently, the debt is set at a ceiling (a "debt limit") of $14.29 TRILLION DOLLARS. Face it, we can't pay back that much money. So why in the world do Democrats want to raise the debt limit?

Writing to Congress, Mr. Geithner penned, “I hope this information is helpful as you plan the legislative schedule for the coming weeks.” Don't worry, Mr. Geithner, We, The People, will be watching "the legislative schedule" and discourses in the next few weeks.

Going back to Mr. Ryan's proposed Path to Prosperity, let's look at a quick pictorial view of our economic situation: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703806304576242612172357504.html

Interesting New Developments in Africa & Middle East

The United States has pulled its jets out of Libya.

Now NATO is low on jets to attack Gaddafi-led forces.

What happened to our "humanitarian" concerns? We're waiting to hear, President Obama. Of course, it took 10 days for Obama to address the nation after he started bombing Gaddafi.

And now the French have started attacking the presidential palace in Ivory Coast. Joined by U.N. forces, they are attacking Mr. Gbabgo, who lost the bid for president of Ivory Coast last year but refused to yield to the legally-elected president, Mr. Ouattara. This has resulted in a year-long civil war and horrific massacres.

While the United Nations states it is “not a party to the conflict,” France says that they are in Ivory Coast "at the request of the United Nations" for humanitarian reasons.

So, are we in this fight, too?

Egypt Going Democrat??

Okey, Dokey, let's see how those democratice movements are going over in the Middle East and Africa. We'll start with Egypt. First, the military took over Egypt, suspended its constitution, " raising questions about how deeply the military understands the democratic process and the demands of modern politics." The military did promise election within six months, which has allowed the previously-outlawed Muslim Brotherhood to rise in power. Apparently in cahoots with the military, the Muslim Brotherhood aims to be voted into power in the upcoming elections. What is the Brotherhood? The Muslim Brotherhood aims to impose Sharia law in Egypt, and espouses jihad and "radical transformation" of Western and more liberal Islamic societies. Practical Outcomes of Increased Islaminization (is that a word?) of Egypt

• An election hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood calling for quick elections--which will help the Brotherhood gain political power, since they're by far the most organized political party and are ready for elections, unlike other political parties


• Arrest of eighteen women protesting in Tahrir Square in Cairo, who were then beaten, shocked, strip-searched and then subjected to "virginity tests".


• A call to war against Israel.


• A return of al-Qaradawi, "widely considered the preeminent Muslim Brotherhood theologian", who praises Adolf Hitler for exterminating Jews, and has been banned from the United States for advocating violence against the West.

What's your bet on the results of this "democracy movement"?

Libyan Rebels: Who are They?

National Public Radio insists that the Libyan rebels are NOT affiliated with Hezbollah or al-Qaida or any other terrorists. Their source of information is a member and former leader of an anti-Gaddafi rebel group, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), who insists that LIFG is not associated with al-Qaida. NPR supports this one-sided and unconfirmed LIFG rebuttal despite the LIFG being declared a terrorist organization by the United States, as well as a declaration by al-Qaida that the two groups had joined up.

NPR also insists that the rebels are part of a "decidedly nationalist, democratic movement." Hmmm.....

Yet that fact is that rebel leaders include Mr. al-Hasady, a known mujahideen--defined as "a military force of Muslim guerilla warriors engaged in a jihad" or simply "terrorists" (courtesy of the Free Dictionary)--recruits and trains rebel soldiers. His underling Mr. al-Barrani is a member of the afore-mentioned LIFG. Another rebel leader, Mr. Ben Qumu, has worked for both Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.

And just what are the rebels rebelling against? Even NPR admits that the Libyans are fighting against a regime that has led to a horrible economic situation. But does this lead to democracy?

The answer is: Not Necessarily, and, truth be told, Not Likely. President Obama states that the Libyan rebels are "saying the right things" so far. "Most of them are professionals, lawyers, doctors, people who appear to be credible."

Wow, that's comforting. On the other hand, Bob Baer, ex-CIA who's been in Libya, feels that the U.S. has no clue about the rebel forces. "They [the U.S. and CIA] don't have a clue. These guys [the "rebels"] are as likely to attack the CIA as Qaddafi."

So, according to Obama, we might be doing the right thing, for hopefully the right people. Hope and Change, anyone?

Losing in Libya

Amidst bombings of Libyan rebels and civilians, the opposite of why the U.S. is involved in Libya, there have been talks of ceasefires.

Including talk of ceasefire by the Libyan rebels.

Reportedly, Gaddafi's son has also asked for a ceasefire, which has been rejected by the rebels.

And reports that U.S. jets will be pulled out of the NATO airstrikes. Apparently, the U.S. will continue to participate in NATO bombings through today, Monday April 4th.

How does this square with President Obama's stated need that the United States must enter into the conflict between Gaddafi and the Libyan rebels?

Obama has stated that we need to intervene for humanitarian reasons and to stop "brutal repression". So how does a stalemate, either due to ceasefires or to an ineffective warmongering, work to this end?

It doesn't. A stalemate will only lead to more civilian deaths.

Which means Obama loses. So why, exactly, are we fighting Libya?