IF ONLY THIS ACTION WAS IN OUR CONGRESS

The news informs us that Obama is ready to push legislation to grant AMNESTY to illegals. Those who are for amnesty always speak of a Nation of Immigrants, and that we must know who is here legally by registering all residents in the USA now.
They also stress that because they will never voluntarily leave, we must "fix" the immigration system by making all those here illegally, legal.

But across the Pacific Ocean where illegals are not counted in the millions but in the thousands, in Japan. The Diet is passing a law to tighten up the regulations that regulate people who are in their country legally on visas and people who are there illegally as this article copied from The Japan Times English version illustrates.

"The Lower House passed bills Friday making it easier for the Justice Ministry's Immigration Bureau to keep tabs on foreigners who have overstayed their visas as well as others residing legally in the country.

The Upper House is also expected to pass the bills, which have the support of both the Liberal Democratic Party-New Komeito ruling bloc and the Democratic Party of Japan, the largest opposition party.

The Immigration Bureau and lawmakers worked out the bills to reduce the number of undocumented foreign residents, which the bureau estimates to be about 110,000.

"The bills suggest the government has set its sights on cracking down on undocumented foreigners," said Amnesty International Japan official Sonoko Kawakami. "But it remains unclear how people in a difficult situation, like those applying for refugee status, will be dealt with."

The bills will abolish the Alien Registration Act and revise the immigration control and resident registration laws. Responsibility for overseeing foreign residents will be shifted from municipalities to the Immigration Bureau, which will keep track of personal information, including name, address, visa type and expiration date.

"Municipal officials are simply doing their jobs registering foreigners in compliance with the Alien Registration Act," immigration lawyer Shogo Watanabe said, adding that local governments issue alien registration cards to overstayers with the words "no residential status" typed on them.

With the passage of the bills, undocumented foreigners who are not granted special permission to stay will be detained for deportation.

To prevent the deportation of overstayers with a legitimate reason to reside in the country, the bills also require the Justice Ministry to clarify and announce the standards for granting special permission to stay.

Since 2003, about 10,000 foreigners a year on average have been granted special permission to stay, according to the Immigration Bureau. Granting permission is entirely at the discretion of the Justice Ministry.

A new form of identification, called a "zairyu" (residence) card, will replace alien registration cards, with the information on them kept by the Justice Ministry.

Foreign residents will be listed on the Juki Net resident registry network, a computer network linking municipalities that contains demographic information of Japanese residents.

The punishments for failing to report one's address and other personal information will become harsher. In order to curb fake marriages, the bills give the justice minister the authority to revoke the spousal visas of those who fail to conduct "activities spouses normally do" for six months. Special consideration would be given to spouses who live separately because of mitigating circumstances, including abuse".

I realize Japan is a small country geographically and it makes keeping track of aliens an easier job. But it would be nice if our elected officials considered the granting of citizen status to the 10 to 12 million illegals a violation of the public trust and a direct insult to all those who came here legally and assimilated into our culture!

It is unfortunate that people didn't pay attention to the news item in 2007 from KTLS, Los Angeles, Ca.
"LA County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich has announced that a new report shows illegal aliens and their families in Los Angeles County collected over $35 million in welfare and food stamp allocations in July.

In the report, illegals are said to have collected nearly $20 million in welfare assistance for July 2007 and an additional $15 million in monthly food stamp allocations for an estimated annual cost of $440 million.

"Illegal immigration continues to have a devastating impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,"said Antonovich. "In addition to $220 million for public safety and $400 million for healthcare, the $440 million in welfare allocations bring the total cost to County taxpayers that exceeds $1 billion a year -- this does not include the skyrocketing cost of education."

People often imply that illegal aliens aren't hurting anyone when they break our laws. It's useful to remember that the illegal aliens are ripping off a billion dollars a year from the legal residents of LA County alone".
CALL, EMAIL, SHOUT AND SCREAM at your Congress person and Senator to vote against this travesty!

REFLECTIONS ON GOVERNMENT HEALTH INSURANCE

It is apparent that president Obama and his merry band of leftist followers plan to destroy the private health Insurance industry that covers over 65% of the populace of the USA, and replace it with a government single payer program. Socialized medicine!
This despite the fact that polls show that in early 1993 the sense of a health care crisis was far more widespread than it is today – a 55% majority in 1993 said they felt the health care system needed to be “completely rebuilt” compared with 41% today. Health care costs were also a broader problem in 1993 – 63% of Americans said paying for the cost of a major illness was a “major problem” for them, compared with 48% currently.


In my life I have experienced government medicine first hand by being a Navy veteran with a service connected disability that makes me eligible for Veterans medical care and medicines.
Persoanally, I think the Congress of the USA doesn't allow enough money for the VA to care for the varied wounds and mental traumas that have occured to our brave warriors from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of the 23.4 million veterans currently alive, nearly three-quarters served during a war or an official period of conflict, and the 2009 budget for this 12.7% of the U.S.population is 40 billion dollars!

But,my experience with the VA medicine is good, even though I have to travel 42 miles each way to See my VA doctor twice a year, and the yearly blood and x-ray exams. I am lucky to get the medicines I need from the VA pharmacy via the US mail at a deep savings.

So I am offering a plan to cover the estimated 46 million people who do not have medical insurance by utilizing special clinics for those who either cannot afford medical insurance, or choose to not spend the money to buy it.
If it is good enough for those who put their lives on the line for the Country, why not utilize special clinics for those who don't have insurance?

There will be those that cry second class treatment for these people, but if it is good enough for those who risked life and limb for their Country. Why not for those who cannot or will not buy health insurance?

There is the question of how do you staff these clinics with doctors and nurses?
It is a fact that most medical and nursing students utilize government guaranteed loans that accumulate in some cases to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I suggest that instead of relying on the doctor and nurse graduate to pay back the loan. Many never do! The requirement should be for every year the medical student or nurse attends school on a government loan, they must pay back one year of service to the government by serving a year in these clinics.

All clinics should be placed on regular bus lines so that no one could say they were inaccessible, and emergency rooms would be open 24 hours a day, unlike the VA clinics!

Of course there are horror stories about VA clinics as this post on VETERANS TODAY illustrates, but then there are many such cases in the private practice of medicine. Else there would not be any malpractice lawyers!

"The Veterans Affairs Department appears poised to hit a milestone it would rather avoid. That's a backlog of 1 million claims to process.

The milestone approaches as the agency scrambles to hire and train new claims processors. VA officials are working with the Pentagon to create by 2012 a system that will allow the two agencies to electronically exchange records. The process is now done manually on paper.

Former Marine Corporal Patrick Murray of Arlington, Virginia, says the first claim he filed was lost. The second ended up at a VA office in Colorado.

The 25-year-old Murray was severely burned and his right leg was amputated after a roadside bomb explosion in 2006. He says it's mind-boggling to have spent 11 months in Walter Reed Army Medical
Center and in outpatient care, only to find out he had to mail his records to the VA to prove he was injured".

Before we dismantle the present private medical system that is the envy of the World. I believe we should consider the establishment of clinics for people without insurance.
And do not tell me that this concept is degrading to those who have no insurance! If it is good enough for us veterans, then it is good enough for those who have done nothing to warrant medical care except get sick!

OBAMA ACTS LIKE A USED CAR SALESMAN

If any of you have ever bought a used car, not a previously leased car, but a car with a lot of miles on it. A car that may or not be in good mechanical order.'
You have experienced as I id when I purchased my four year old ford coupe. The salesman wanted to make a deal and he highlighted the fact that the car had low mileage, even though I later found out that the speedometer had been turned back a few thousand miles. He lighted the good points of the car never letting on that the car would be a mechanical nightmare for me later.
So I bought the car, fat dumb and happy I drove home in my first car. Then the fuel pump failed, the carburetor vapor locked almost every day and the transmission developed a strange noise. Turned out they had put sawdust in the transmission!
I bought a lemon!

Well, I believe Obama is trying to sell a lemon to the American taxpayers in his health care bill. A bill that is not even finsihed being dratted, but has over 700 pages detailing rules, regulations and all manner of bureaucratic BS.

The American people have a right to know what’s in the Bill and I would hope that our elected representatives get to read the bill before they vote on it. But with Obama setting a July 31st deadline that possibility is doubtful. Maybe they will have a speed reader read it to the Congress!

Just like a used car salesman, Obama has to make the sale quick on this massive expenditure that presently does not even cover about 30,000 of the uninsured poor!Senator Kyl offered several reasons why proposed health care reform may fail if the Senate does not pass it quickly.

“There’s a reason why the president has said ‘if we don’t get this done soon, it’s not going to happen,’” Kyl said. “Why? Why does he say that?

“Because he knows that momentum will inevitably slow for something that’s extraordinarily costly, will deny people the coverage that they already have, will ration their health care, and could provide some kind of government insurance company that’s going to drive out the private insurance companies that provide all these options,” he said.

“It will impose new taxes, it will tell employers that they either have to pay a certain amount of money to cover people or they’re going to be fined,” Kyl added.

Obama’s clock may be ticking, but some lawmakers say more time is needed to ensure effective reform of America’s health care system.And I agree with those who say it is time to slow down and thoroughly examine a bill that will affect our lives and those of our children for generations to come!

If you look at the rhetoric coming from the White House and from members of Congress, they’re using the same rhetoric that they had with the stimulus bill – that this ‘needs to be done,’ it ‘needs to be done quickly,’ and when it comes to the cost it’s like 'Yeah, but you've got to think about the cost of what will happen if we don’t pass this,'” McClusky said.

The text of that bill, which was 1,071 pages, was not made available in final form for public inspection until the night before it faced a final vote in Congress.

“They (congressional Democrats) don’t deal with facts and figures when they’re talking about it. They’re just dealing in psychic projections, basically, in what they think this legislation will do,” he added.
Source: CNSNews.com
The president is playing the "shell and pea" game with the American public, when he says that he does not want Socialized medicine. He wants it but through the back door of regulation and squeezing the life out of PRIVATE insurance that today covers over 65% of the American public with the best medical coverage in the World!
Yes, it is expensive, but so is bailing out car companies that should have been allowed to go bankrupt!

Will the unions and the :eftists prevail, or will the silent majority rise up and roar no to this dastardly attempt to sneak in another socialism scheme?

WHEN WILL OBAMA STOP CRYING THE WOLF IS AT THE DOOR?

British economist John Maynard Keynes argued in "General Theory of Employment Interest and Money" that lower aggregate expenditures in the economy contributed to a massive decline in income and to employment that was well below the average. In this situation, the economy might have reached a perfect balance, at a cost of high unemployment.
Although Keynes never mentions fiscal policy in The General Theory, and instead advocates the need to socialize investments, Keynes ushered in more of a theoretical revolution than a policy one. His basic idea was simple: to keep people fully employed, governments have to run deficits when the economy is slowing because the private sector will not invest enough to increase production and reverse the recession. Keynesian economists called on governments during times of economic crisis to pick up the slack by increasing government spending and/or cutting taxes.

In 1928 and 1929 prior to the great depression, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to try to curb Wall Street speculation (otherwise known as a "bubble"). Many historians like Brad DeLong believe the Fed. "overdid it" and brought on a recession. Moreover, the Fed then sat on its hands: "The Federal Reserve did not use open market operations to keep the money supply from falling.... [a move] approved by the most eminent economists."
There was not yet a "too big to fail" mentality at the federal government policy level. And today to pay for Obama's spending the Fed has had to artificially raise the principal on our T-Bonds to get foreign governments to buy them! Source: Wikapedia.com

It appears that president Obama is, if not a student of the Keynesian theory,a person who is using Keynes ideas to spend our country out of what he refers to as an impending economic disaster

During the Depression, Roosevelt tried public works, farm subsidies, and other devices to restart the economy, but never completely gave up trying to balance the budget. According to the Keynesians, he needed to spend much more money, but they were unable to say how much more.
Keynesian economists assumed poor people would spend new incomes; however, they saved much of the new money; that is, they paid back debts owed to landlords, grocers and family. Keynesian ideas of the consumption function were upset in the 1950s by Milton Friedman and Franco Modigliani,but apparently Obama has either forgot or put aside that portion of our history.
He has spent or committed trillions of dollars to government take over programs, and he always prefaces his program with the idea that if we do not do it we will have financial disaster in the future. Never once admitting that the debt he is growing will saddle not only this generation, but generations to come after us with the burden of high taxes and a weak dollar!

A perfect example of how this president uses fear to persuade any doubting people that what he is proposing is necessary to avoid a disaster is his speech today about Wall Street.

Obama said; “Wall Street seems to maybe have a shorter memory about how close we were to the abyss than I would have expected,” President Obama told Bloomberg News in an interview published on Wednesday. Most prudent thinkers will agree the word "abyss" is a large and shameful description of our times.

“When I hear some of the commentary that’s been creeping up about, “You know, it’s time for government to get out of the economy. And what’s the Obama administration doing?’ I have to try to remind them -- all we’re doing is cleaning up after the mess that was made,” Yes he inherited a large debt, but it is about time that Obama takes some of the blame for spending us into a 11.4 trillion dollar debt!

Obama's comments came hours before the unveiling of what are the most sweeping changes to the US financial regulatory system since the 1930s, as an attempt to prevent last year's financial crisis from happening again they say.


Although acknowledging that "you’re starting to see the engines of the economy turn,” the President added that "it’s going to take a long time” for a robust recovery to emerge.

The proposals to be announced today will require approval by Congress and the administration is hoping to have the legislation passed by the end of the year.

The President also told Bloomberg that "as soon as this economy has stabilised, we want the market to do what it does best, and that is produce jobs, invest.” He cannot be serious!

Mr. Keynes said this about people who claim to know the way to solve economic problems.
"The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back... soon or late, it is ideas, not vested interests, which are dangerous for good or evil".

THE MARCH TO SOCIALISM THROUGH REGULATIONS

Obama's new Financial regulations that he will propose today will in my opinion wreck the incentive of innovation and risk taking that has made this country great over the last two hundred plus years.

One of the "nanny" state goodies being proposed by the Obama administration to address what they say were the causes of the financial meltdown.Is his plan to overhaul the nation's "outdated" financial system.

Obama's plan seeks to overhaul the nation's system of financial regulations. The White House makes its case for this approach in an 85-page white paper that describes the roots of the crisis. Gaps in regulation allowed companies to make loans many borrowers could not afford. They believe that funding came from new kinds of investments that were poorly understood by regulators. They further believe and are saying that big firms paid employees massive bonuses, while setting aside little money to absorb potential losses.

By vastly expanding the mandate of the Federal Reserve, Obama is giving the quasi-independent agency regulatory power, that is not not answerable to Congress.Just as all 15 other Czars of Obama creation have no one to report to other than the president.
If you're a company and have a complaint about how the Fed is regulating your business,good luck. You will get no satisfaction from our lawmakers.Ask the minority bond holders in the Chrysler and Gm "rapid" bankruptcy, or the dealers ho were summarily "fired" by the now government run car companies, how much satisfaction they got by complaining. It is said that some dismissed dealers were even given a gag order from the government! So much for free speech!

This is a nightmare for those who value free, independent markets. And it will get worse as time passes. Interpreting Obama's broad goals will be the job of federal regulators who may take the opportunity to impose even more draconian restrictions.

I see no other end result from these regulations except the loss of American pre-eminence in world finance. What set us apart from other nations was the freedom enjoyed by companies large and small to generate capital for investment, for business and job creation, and for new industries and technologies. Obama will mostly destroy that. Risk taking will be frowned upon, perhaps even made illegal in some ways. It was risk taking by entrepreneurs, financiers, markets, and investors that greased the wheels of capitalism and created a financial system where the entire world was welcome to join in the joy of wealth creation.
Where would be today if Henry Ford listen to government regulators who told him he could not risk the millions he spent developing the first assembly line for automobile production?
Or if the government regulators had told Bill Gates or Steve Jobs that their ideas for personal computers were not worth the risk of asking people to invest in their dreams?

Obama is marching us directly into government control of all forms of business and the way we live our lives, even how and when we die if he gets his socialised medicine scheme passed!
There is no doubt in any ones mind who examines what he has done and what he proposes to do. That Obama is a hard core progressive who believes in the government control over our lives. He and his band of sycophants believe we "rubes" do not have the brains to fend for ourselves, so they will tell us( really demand us) how we should live from cradle to grave!

OBAMA SPIN IS USED ONCE AGAIN!

The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is...Winston Churchill

During a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in the White House Oval Office yesterday.
President Barack Obama welcomed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's endorsement of Palestinian independence as a way to restart peace talks and called on Arab neighbors to join the discussion.

Obama also downplayed, as he does with anything that doeS not make him look good, the criticism from Arab neighbors that Netanyahu's conditions were predictable.
Obama was quoted as saying: "Well, first of all, I think it's important not to immediately assess the situation based on commentary the day after a speech."
This despite the fact that aides distributed glowing reaction to his US-Muslim speech the day after he delivered it in Cairo.

"I think any time an Israeli prime minister makes a statement, the immediate reaction tends to be negative on one side. If the other side is making a statement, oftentimes the reaction is negative in Israel," Obama said

However,Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the speech "closed the door to permanent status negotiations".
He added: "We ask the world not to be fooled by Netanyahue's use of the term Palestinian state because he qualified it.
"He declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel, said refugees would not be negotiated and that settlements would remain."

Yasser Abed Rabbo, an adviser to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, said: "The international community should confront this policy, through which Netanyahu wants to kill off any chance for peace.

"They must isolate and confront this policy which Mr Netanyahu is adopting and exert pressure on him so that he adheres to international legitimacy and the road map," he added, referring to a US and European-supported 2003 peace plan.

The Palestinians are irate over Mr Netanyahu's condition that they recognise Israel's legitimate right to exist as a Jewish state, ensuring Palestinian refugees and their descendents who have lived outside of Israel's borders since 1948 are not allowed to return.

Mr Netanyahu also said such a state must be demilitarised and promised that all of Jerusalem would remain as Israel's capital despite the Palestinian desire to make the eastern part of the city, a traditionally Arab area, their future capital one day.

The speech was intended as an answer to President Barack Obama's address to the Muslim world in Cairo earlier this month in which he said he expected Israel to make significant moves towards peace with its Palestinian neighbour.

By staying firm to his commitment to what he calls "the natural growth" of existing settlements, he bucked Mr Obama's call for a blanket settlement freeze. In embracing settlers as the country's "brothers and sisters" and reiterating his support for a united Jerusalem, he hoped to hold off a potential storm of dissent from Right-wing partners that keep his government from collapsing.
SOURCE: JERUSALEM POST

However a White House spokesman, trying to make a "purse out of a sows ear", said that Mr Obama "welcomed" Mr Netanyahu's speech and that his endorsement of the eventual creation of a Palestinian state was "an important step forward".Once again Obama spins a negative to an apparent positive to make him look like he is on top of the situation. This is not unlike his assertion that his "spendulus" program has saved hundreds of thousands of jobs despite the fact that the unemployment rate at 9.4% is the worst in the last 30 years!

A FOX GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE, AKA-WHITE HOUSE

The short Bio. on Norman Eisen shows that he worked for the prestigious law firm of Zuckerman Spaeder. He was a classmate of the sitting president. Just one more of the Harvard boys running the day to day operations of the Obama administration.
His professional history reveals that he spent much of his time defending people who were accused of ethical crimes and misdemeanors.
Therefore, it is understandable that Obama picked him for his "ethics" transitional team and now he heads the ethics "department" of the Obama White House.

The only problem with this picture is that apparently he did not do a very good job of vetting some of the choices Obama made for his Cabinet positions, and now it would appear that he has taken over the job of covering up dirty tricks perpetrated by "friends of Obama"!
At the end of only his second full week in office, President Barack Obama's administration slammed into Washington's unwritten law( pay your taxes) as two key government nominees withdrew under a cloud of tax problems.
Former Sen. Tom Daschle pulled out Tuesday as Obama's pick as Health and Human Services secretary, citing a growing chorus of criticism over his failure to fully pay taxes from 2005 through 2007He has since paid more than $140,000 including interest, then there was News of Nancy Killefer pulling her candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for the federal government, saying she didn't want her failure to submit payroll taxes for household help to be a distraction for the president. She had faced but subsequently settled a Washington city government tax lien of $946.69 on her home.
The one that slipped by, because he was described as being to valuable to turn down is Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. He had failed to pay taxes on a portion of his income when he worked for the International Monetary Fund. Geithner's tax history was the first to raise red flags in the Senate, but the Ethics man did not raise an objection so we have a tax "cheat" running the IRS!

The Obama administration pledged to focus on ethics and government openness and transparency.Apparently this has become a forgotten promise, as the firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin shows.

"The White House's decision to fire AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin came amid politically-charged tensions inside the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that runs AmeriCorps. Top executives at the Corporation, Walpin explained in an hour-long interview Saturday, were unhappy with his investigation into the misuse of AmeriCorps funds by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California and a prominent supporter of President Obama. Walpin's investigation also sparked conflict with the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento amid fears that the probe -- which could have resulted in Johnson being barred from ever winning another federal grant -- might stand in the way of the city receiving its part of billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. After weeks of standoff, Walpin, whose position as inspector general is supposed to be protected from influence by political appointees and the White House, was fired.

Walpin learned his fate Wednesday night. He was driving to an event in upstate New York when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform. "He said, 'Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it's time to move on,'" Walpin recalls. "Eisen said, 'You can either resign, or I'll tell you that we'll have to terminate you." Source: Amereican Thinker

Mr. Walpin, a 78 year old attorney known for his honesty and decisions that have never been influenced by politics over his more than 50 years in the law, had also just sent a report to the White House that he just finished. A report on the misuse of "stim" funds by the City University of New York. The two reports taken together would have placed Obama cronies in the sights of a criminal investigation. Hence, we have to be a least a little suspicion that the timing of his firing was "very interesting" as Walpin put it.

In case anyone thought this was still America, have a look at the official White House blog of Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, who addresses the problem of people exercising their First Amendment rights and speaking up against the way the government has been wasting our money under the guise of "stimulus":

"First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program." Source: Washington Examiner

A White House spokesman says the administration would not immediately offer any more details of Eisen's role in the White House Counsel's office. Now we know he is one of BHO's "hatchet" men!

Eisen, was co-founder of the good government group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW),and has previously represented federal officials and agencies on ethics issues.

According to his bio on Zuckerman Spaeder's Web site, Eisen was co-chairman of the firm's public client practice. He has assisted public officials investigating the subprime lending crisis; examining student loan marketing activities; and managing complex securities litigation.

Eisen also has represented government clients to "conduct internal investigations of their offices, represented them in disputes with the federal government and translated their policy ideas into statutes, regulations, executive orders, and programs."

Additionally, he has defended cases involving violations of government ethics rules and related misconduct, and now he is a point man for cover ups for Friends of Obama and their crimes!

OFF THE BOOKS DEAL WITH RUSSIA?

IT IS NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT OUR COUNTRY HAS A MORE THAN 13 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT, AND IT IS GROWING BY MORE THAN 3.8 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY.

Now comes the news that the Obama administration, that is restricting our exploration of crude oil resources, is helping Russia develop a pipe line to aid the Russians in selling gas to Western Europe to the tune of billions of dollars.

A report in the Tokyo Times, June 9, 2009, demonstrates the way Obama is furthering his "one world" vision at the expense of the U.S. taxpayers. It appears that he is He## bent on bankrupting this country while destroying the free enterprise system!


"Germany's ex-Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a legend in Russia. He serves Gazprom's interests for a measly couple of million euros a year, sits in on sessions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and writes books about his staunch friendship with "Genosse Wladimir," who, in the not-so-distant past, earned himself the well-deserved nickname of "Stasi" among business circles in gangster-ridden St. Petersburg.

But it is not immediately obvious whether it is Schroeder licking Vladimir Putin's boots nowadays or vice versa. The two are building, or trying to build, the Nord Stream gas pipeline, an exceptionally costly project that satisfies twin strategic objectives. Demonstratively hostile to the interests of both Belarus and Ukraine, the pipeline is intended to ensure that these countries are under Russia's energy thumb, regardless of who is in power.

As a bonus, the pipeline will also consolidate the Russian economy's status as an appendage of Germany's — its supplier of natural resources. Some of Schroeder's predecessors as German chancellor sought to attain the same objective by rather different means.

The Kremlin's achievements in securing the help of Americans willing to offer their influence are equally impressive. Indeed, the Obama administration's Russia policy is being nurtured with advice from people who have no official position in the administration but who do have close business ties to Russia and the Kremlin: Henry Kissinger, James A. Baker, Thomas Graham and Dimitri Simes.
The first two are major geo-politicians; Graham and Simes are respected as outstanding Russia specialists. They write key reports for the administration, and shuttle between Moscow and Washington, coordinating the parameters of the Obama administration's effort to "reset" the bilateral relationship.

Like Schroeder, all these people are not economically disinterested. Baker is a consultant for the two companies at the commanding heights of the Russian economy, Gazprom and Rosneft. The Kissinger Associates lobbying group, whose Russian section is headed by Graham, feeds into the Kissinger- Primakov working group, a quasi- private sector effort, blessed by Putin, to deepen ties between Russia and the United States.Is this deal even known by the U.S. Congress, that is the big question?

It is highly instructive to read the recommendations of these people and groups, as they unobtrusively render the objectives of their Kremlin clients into a language familiar to American leaders.

Graham's latest contribution, "Resurgent Russia and U.S. Purposes," is most revealing in this respect. The author finds the government of a "Russia getting up off its knees" to consist of progressive modernizers fully aware of the challenges facing their country as it attempts to "return to the great powers club."

To become a genuinely developed and "modern country," Graham continues, "in the coming decade Russia will need to invest at least one trillion dollars in modernizing its infrastructure. America and the West in general have a vital interest in seeing the modernization of Russia succeed. The lion's share of the technologies, knowhow, and a substantial proportion of the investment, needs to come from Europe and the U.S."
In addition to the technology and investments, Graham quietly slips in a foreign policy suggestion for the Obama administration that is sure to please the Kremlin: "Finlandizing" Ukraine. Unless that sort of appeasement is pursued, he warns, Russia will continue to oppose the U.S. "wherever and whenever it can."

According to Graham, "At the extreme, a weak Russia, with its vast resources and sparse population east of the Urals, could become the object of competition among the great powers, notably China and the U.S."

That unspoken help-us-develop-or- we'll-let-the-Chinese-do-it threat is a logical development of Putin's homily at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, where he advocated decisive action to end the world economic crisis. His recipe? Western countries should write off half a trillion dollars' worth of debt owed to them by the Russian state corporations run by his pals from the Dresden KGB and the Ozero dacha cooperative. But no amount of money will succeed in modernizing Putin's kleptocratic regime, which has already squandered trillions in oil wealth.

Simply put, the Putin system is institutionally and intellectually antithetical to the task of modernization.

Graham's only error in his presentation is his attempt to frighten the administration with a hypothetical confrontation between the U.S. and China over Russian resources. This is not his area of specialization. Kissinger works personally with the Chinese account, jointly propounding with his longtime rival Zbigniew Brzezinski the notion, so seductive for an America growing weary of its imperial burden, of a global Big Two.

Here is a recent sample of Kissinger's geopolitical arts: "The role of China in a new world order is crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system.
The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations" after the war.

No doubt Kissinger believes every word he wrote, but his ideas also honestly articulate the aspirations of his customers. It's just that not all customers have the same motives.

One wants to get his hooks into a further trillion dollars that it can pick away at, while the other wants to become "a central construct of the system of international relations." In both cases, the customers are getting the influence for which they are paying".

This is certainly not a story you will find in our newspapers or on TV, as the propaganda arm for Obama does not want to let the people in the USA know that he is more concerned with One World success through Progressive-ism, than he is OUR own Constitutional government as it stands today!

DISTURBING INFORMATION FROM JAPAN ABOUT OBAMA'S PROGESSIVNESS

IT IS NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT OUR COUNTRY HAS A MORE THAN 13 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT, AND IT IS GROWING BY MORE THAN 3.8 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY.

Now comes the news that the Obama administration, that is restricting our exploration of crude oil resources, is helping Russia develop a pipe line to aid the Russians in selling gas to Western Europe to the tune of billions of dollars.

A report in the Tokyo Times, June 9, 2009, demonstrates the way Obama is furthering his "one world" vision at the expense of the U.S. taxpayers. It appears that he is He## bent on bankrupting this country while destroying the free enterprise system!


"Germany's ex-Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a legend in Russia. He serves Gazprom's interests for a measly couple of million euros a year, sits in on sessions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and writes books about his staunch friendship with "Genosse Wladimir," who, in the not-so-distant past, earned himself the well-deserved nickname of "Stasi" among business circles in gangster-ridden St. Petersburg.

But it is not immediately obvious whether it is Schroeder licking Vladimir Putin's boots nowadays or vice versa. The two are building, or trying to build, the Nord Stream gas pipeline, an exceptionally costly project that satisfies twin strategic objectives. Demonstratively hostile to the interests of both Belarus and Ukraine, the pipeline is intended to ensure that these countries are under Russia's energy thumb, regardless of who is in power.

As a bonus, the pipeline will also consolidate the Russian economy's status as an appendage of Germany's — its supplier of natural resources. Some of Schroeder's predecessors as German chancellor sought to attain the same objective by rather different means.

The Kremlin's achievements in securing the help of Americans willing to offer their influence are equally impressive. Indeed, the Obama administration's Russia policy is being nurtured with advice from people who have no official position in the administration but who do have close business ties to Russia and the Kremlin: Henry Kissinger, James A. Baker, Thomas Graham and Dimitri Simes.
The first two are major geo-politicians; Graham and Simes are respected as outstanding Russia specialists. They write key reports for the administration, and shuttle between Moscow and Washington, coordinating the parameters of the Obama administration's effort to "reset" the bilateral relationship.

Like Schroeder, all these people are not economically disinterested. Baker is a consultant for the two companies at the commanding heights of the Russian economy, Gazprom and Rosneft. The Kissinger Associates lobbying group, whose Russian section is headed by Graham, feeds into the Kissinger- Primakov working group, a quasi- private sector effort, blessed by Putin, to deepen ties between Russia and the United States.Is this deal even known by the U.S. Congress, that is the big question?

It is highly instructive to read the recommendations of these people and groups, as they unobtrusively render the objectives of their Kremlin clients into a language familiar to American leaders.

Graham's latest contribution, "Resurgent Russia and U.S. Purposes," is most revealing in this respect. The author finds the government of a "Russia getting up off its knees" to consist of progressive modernizers fully aware of the challenges facing their country as it attempts to "return to the great powers club."

To become a genuinely developed and "modern country," Graham continues, "in the coming decade Russia will need to invest at least one trillion dollars in modernizing its infrastructure. America and the West in general have a vital interest in seeing the modernization of Russia succeed. The lion's share of the technologies, knowhow, and a substantial proportion of the investment, needs to come from Europe and the U.S."
In addition to the technology and investments, Graham quietly slips in a foreign policy suggestion for the Obama administration that is sure to please the Kremlin: "Finlandizing" Ukraine. Unless that sort of appeasement is pursued, he warns, Russia will continue to oppose the U.S. "wherever and whenever it can."

According to Graham, "At the extreme, a weak Russia, with its vast resources and sparse population east of the Urals, could become the object of competition among the great powers, notably China and the U.S."

That unspoken help-us-develop-or- we'll-let-the-Chinese-do-it threat is a logical development of Putin's homily at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, where he advocated decisive action to end the world economic crisis. His recipe? Western countries should write off half a trillion dollars' worth of debt owed to them by the Russian state corporations run by his pals from the Dresden KGB and the Ozero dacha cooperative. But no amount of money will succeed in modernizing Putin's kleptocratic regime, which has already squandered trillions in oil wealth.

Simply put, the Putin system is institutionally and intellectually antithetical to the task of modernization.

Graham's only error in his presentation is his attempt to frighten the administration with a hypothetical confrontation between the U.S. and China over Russian resources. This is not his area of specialization. Kissinger works personally with the Chinese account, jointly propounding with his longtime rival Zbigniew Brzezinski the notion, so seductive for an America growing weary of its imperial burden, of a global Big Two.

Here is a recent sample of Kissinger's geopolitical arts: "The role of China in a new world order is crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system.
The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations" after the war.

No doubt Kissinger believes every word he wrote, but his ideas also honestly articulate the aspirations of his customers. It's just that not all customers have the same motives.

One wants to get his hooks into a further trillion dollars that it can pick away at, while the other wants to become "a central construct of the system of international relations." In both cases, the customers are getting the influence for which they are paying".

This is certainly not a story you will find in our newspapers or on TV, as the propaganda arm for Obama does not want to let the people in the USA know that he is more concerned with One World success through Progressive-ism, than he is OUR own Constitutional government as it stands today!

WHAT IS THERE IN THE UN RESOLUTION THAT CHEERS HILLARY?

All the media are highlighting the fact that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is pleased with the UN resolution "condemning" North Korea for the nuclear tests and the provocative missile launches.

But it appears to me that Clinton is either putting on a good face for the Obama administration, or is naive enough to believe that the UN resolution is more than just useless words on paper!

The Wall Street Journal has an article on the Web today that illustrates how weal the watered down version of the UN reprimand had to be to get China, Russia and other Communists nations who sit on the UN Security Council, to sign on to the worthless document.

"Friday's UN resolution was weaker than the one the U.S. and its allies initially sought.

The new text prohibits the export of all North Korean weapons and the import into North Korea of all arms, excluding small arms, if they are reported to the U.N. That exception was a key demand of China, which exports small arms to North Korea, a Western diplomat said.

Moscow and Beijing agreed to the U.S. draft after language on inspecting North Korean cargo ships in international waters was diluted. Russia and China feared that inspections on the high seas could spark a military conflict with Pyongyang, a Western diplomat said.

"We believe sanctions such as cargo inspections are very complicated and sensitive and countries involved must act prudently and with sufficient grounds," said Zhang Yesui, China's U.N. envoy.

Under the compromise, the resolution says the Security Council "calls upon" -- instead of the earlier "authorizes" -- all U.N. nations to inspect the ships for nuclear-related material and other contraband, with the consent of the vessel's flag state. Flag states that refuse to have a ship boarded must direct the vessel to "an appropriate and convenient port" for inspection -- a loophole that could allow nations both to avoid inspections or to deny ships entry.

At a White House news conference, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., acknowledged that the sanctions don't guarantee a North Korean ship will divert to a nearby port, and the resolution doesn't allow the use of military force"
So essentially the sanctions are worthless!



Complicating the North Korean nuclear situation,until now, South Korean presidents have unreservedly backed the six-party talks -- a forum that includes the U.S., the two Koreas, Japan, China and Russia. The multilateral group was launched by the Bush administration in 2003 after Pyongyang withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and it has been enthusiastically supported by the Obama White House. All six parties say they agree about the need to "denuclearize" the Korean peninsula. Yet the North is believed to have two nuclear programs: a plutonium program and a highly enriched uranium program that Pyongyang alternately denies or boasts about.

The talks -- only the latest iteration of an over twenty year effort to stunt North Korea's nuclear program,haven't worked. And Mr. Lee, speaking at the president's private offices, is the first national leader to publicly acknowledge their failure.

"The North Koreans have gained, or bought, a lot of time through the six-party-talks framework to pursue their own agenda. I think it's important now, at this critical point in time, for us not to repeat any past mistakes," he says. Now, it's "very important for the remaining five countries -- which excludes North Korea -- to come to an agreement on the way forward."

Mr. Lee is obliquely referring to the conflicting goals of the six-party talk participants. South Korea's stated goal is the denuclearization and ultimate reunification of the Korean peninsula. This was the U.S. position under Bush, but now that Obama has indicated that we can accept Iran having a nuclear program.It is not clear that the Obama administration will strive for this result.

China and Russia don't want to see the Kim regime fall, fearing floods of refugees, weapons proliferation, and, most importantly, the potential collapse of a buffer state between them and the democratic nations of North Asia. China has proved an especially difficult negotiating partner since it has served as the North's main economic support since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
And I believe that Putin's Russia was complicit in aiding North Korea with their nuclear program.

South Korea's President, Mr. Lee says, "the United Nations resolution calling for increased sanctions looks weak".

What about stricter financial sanctions, like the kind the U.S. Treasury successfully leveled against Banco Delta Asia (a North Korea enabler) in Macau in 2005? That is "one type of sanction that we can level." Should the U.S. add the North to the list of terror-sponsoring nations? "That in itself may have some symbolic meaning. But in actuality, having North Korea on the list or not will not make really much of a difference," he says.

Mr. Lee added that the bottom line: "Our ultimate objective is to try to convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program, but we must also ask ourselves: What do the North Koreans want in return for giving up their nuclear weapons program? I think this is the type of discussion that the five countries should be engaging in now."

It is not even on the table for consideration, but I believe the USA cannot talk, talk, talk until the North Koreans have the nuclear weapons that can be fitted to the long range missiles that they are developing, before we consider a pre-emptive strike on their missile bases. Or do we wait until the missiles start falling on Alaska and Hawaii?

And to highlite the type of reaction that North Korea had to the UN sanctions there is this from the Japoanese News Agency,Kyodo News Agency.
"North Korea reacted with anger Saturday to a U.N. resolution meant to punish the country for its latest nuclear test, saying it will ''weaponize'' more plutonium, begin uranium enrichment and react militarily to blockades.
In a Foreign Ministry statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency, North Korea also called the resolution, "yet another vile product of the U.S.-led offensive aimed at undermining North Korea's ideology and system".