REASONS FOR OBAMA GETTING NOBEL PEACE PRIZE??

Barack Obama today admitted he does not think he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize after being sensationally awarded the honour.

The  president said he was both "surprised and deeply humble"' to win the award.
The Nobel Committee has shocked the world by choosing Mr Obama

It used to be the rule that the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to politicians if they could point to tangible political successes. American presidents and politicians have consistently been recipients of the award: Theodor Roosevelt received the award in 1906 for his role in securing a peace deal between Russia and Japan. Woodrow Wilson was honored with the prize in 1919 for his work on the creation of the League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations. Martin Luther King was presented with the award in 1964 for his commitment to civil rights for African Americans. The former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was even controversially given the nod in 1973 for his role in negotiating an end to the Vietnam War.

Now it is the turn of the 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama, who was awarded the prize on Friday for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples," in the words of the Nobel committee.
It is possible to reward diplomatic efforts and thus make them more effective. The former German Chancellor Willy Brandt greatly benefited from that in 1971, when he was awarded the Nobel Prize for his famous Ostpolitik policy of rapprochement with the Warsaw Pact states. At the time, Brandt was no less controversial within Germany than Barack Obama is within the US today; the opposition was up in arms and ridiculed him in the most objectionable fashion. But Brandt, who like Obama was a fan of international diplomacy, had already signed the Eastern Treaties when the committee handed down its decision.

In contrast, who has accepted Obama's outstretched hand today? Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? The Taliban? North Korea's Kim Jong-Il? Russia's Vladimir Putin or Dmitry Medvedev? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas? None of them. Nowhere is there any success in sight.
Former Polish president and 1983 Peace laureate Lech Walesa slammed the decision as 'too early'.

'So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far. He is still at an early stage. He is only beginning to act,' he said today to a London Daily Mail reporter.He added: 'This is probably an encouragement for him to act. Let's see if he perseveres. Let's give him time to act.'

But his "soul mate", former president Jimmy Carter congratulated Obama saying:
"it was a bold statement from the Nobel committee. It shows the hope his administration represents not only to our nation but to people around the world".


My question is since the nomination was made nine days after Obama was sworn in as president. Who nominated him? And was this an award for the man who lost the Olympics for Chicago, but was rewarded for his radical shift of America towards European socialism?

This morning the field for the Nobel Peace Prize still appeared wide open.

'It's quite likely this committee will reward somebody who is engaged in current processes,' said Kristian Berg Harpviken, head of the International Peace Institute in Oslo (PRIO). Could it be he got the Nobel because he was not Bush?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1219201/Barack-Obama-awarded-Nobel-Peace-Prize

LESSONS FROM NHS IN GREAT BRITAIN AND COMMENT ABOUT NOBEL PRIZE

Before I write about the subject that I chose for todays blog. I aam comeled to offer this feature article that appears in the London Telegraph about our President winning the Nobel Peace Prize. It illustrates the absurdity of the prize for a man who has been president for only 37 weeks and has not overwelmed all in Great Britain.
"Barack Obama has won the Nobel Peace prize and I’m still reeling at the shock. Most of us are, I should think.

Here are my theories as to how it might have come about:
1. Unlike in most of the rest of the world Øbama Køøl Aid (TM) remains Oslo’s most popular beverage.
2. The Norwegian prize committee’s sense of irony is growing ever more sophisticated, as it hinted when it gave the prize in 2002 to comedy ex-president Jimmy Carter, and hinted more strongly when it gave the prize in 2007 to climate-fear-promoting comedy failed-president Al Gore.
3. The other candidates on the shortlist were Robert Mugabe; Osama Bin Laden; Ahmed Jibril; and the late Pol Pot". (not everyone is swooning over the selection) It is important to note the fact that Obama was nominated in January when he was in the office of president less than a month!!


While Obama and his sycophants Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi are trying to take over 1/6th of the economy with their socialized medicine scam. I think it is important that we all understand the problems incumbent upon any government controled program, particularly our personal Health Care!
The number of NHS( in England, Scotand and Wales) errors putting patients at risk has soared by 12 per cent in just six months, according to figures released yesterday.

They show that 459,500 patient safety incidents occurred between October 2008 and March this year, compared to around 410,000 in the previous six months.
Of the latest cases, more than 5,700 victims died or suffered serious harm as a result.
At risk: The number of NHS errors rose 12 per cent in six months
Health service bosses say the rise is likely to have occurred since trusts are being encouraged to report incidents, rather than because the number of mistakes is actually increasing. ( YOU MEAN THEY WERE NOT REPORTING ERRORS BEFORE BEING ORDERED?)
But critics argue stringent Whitehall targets make doctors and nurses more likely to make serious mistakes. GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS WILL DO THIS HERE IN THE USA!

They say the latest figures are likely to be only the tip of the iceberg, as so many previous mistakes have been swept under the carpet rather than being reported to the authorities.
The National Patient Safety Agency revealed most reported incidents - 303,016, or 66 per cent - resulted in no harm to the patient, while 122,246, or 27 per cent, resulted in low harm.
A further 28,521 (6 per cent) of incidents resulted in moderate harm while 5,717 (1 per cent) resulted in death or severe harm.

The most commonly reported incident was an accident involving the patient that could possibly have been prevented..
This was followed by errors or near misses with treatments or procedures (10.1 per cent) and medication (9.4 per cent).
Reports were provided by 382 out of the 392 health trusts in England.

Around 28,000 reports, six per cent of the total, resulted in moderate harm which included mistakes made in surgery that would require a repeat operation, a patient falling out of bed and knocking themselves unconscious for a short period or wrong blood given a patient resulting in temporary kidney failure.

The 3,717 reports of severe harm will have included things like a patient given the wrong medication which they are allergic to making their heart stop resulting in brain damage, ambulance crews moving a patient with a back injury resulting in paralysis or wrong blood given to a young woman meaning she will develop antibodies that could affect any future pregnancy. SOURCE:LONDON TELEGRAPH
Forget the cost of private insurance. You can always absorb this cost, but if the socialization of our medical care costs you your life or a loved one. No amount of savings or expenditure will restore it!

THE LIES AND CHICANERY OF DEMOCRATS HEALTH SCHEME

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan


Many people will question why I used the title I used for this blog. Read on and you will se just  few of the many reasons I used the terms in the title.
A senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told CNSNews.com that it is “likely” that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a “shell” for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.

Under the procedure, the substance of House Resolution 1586 would be removed and replaced with the entire Senate health care package. The maneuver would initially require the support of 60 senators to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 1586 (i.e., end debate on the congressional procedure and move forward).
If Reid wins 60 votes, then debate begins on his health care package. Reid could then decide to block all amendments and attempt to get a vote on the entire package.

The Democrats including Senator Max Baucus of Montana have repeatedly used the American Journal of Public Health claims that 44,789 working-age adults die each year because they lack basic health insurance.

Researchers at Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Health Alliance found that uninsured Americans have a 40 percent higher risk of death than those who carry some sort of insurance. This number is up from a 25 percent excess death rate found in 1993. I wonder how they made this assumption. Did they consider the following statistics of the 2,426,264 who died in 2006 to come to their drastic and ominous decision, or where political bias the motivating factor. Any one who has watched Harvard for any time realizes that it is a Left wing Institution.
However, anotrher study done in 2008, Stan Dorn, a senior research associate at the Urban Institute, published another study based on the IOM methodology, again using more recent data, and found that 22,000 die due to lack of insurance. Who can you believe?
Certainly not anyone who carries the water for Obama.
In 2006 the number of people who died and the cause are listed as found in the NHI report.

Heart disease: 631,636
Cancer: 559,888
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 137,119
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 124,583
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 121,599
Diabetes: 72,449
Alzheimer's disease: 72,432
Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,326
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 45,344
Septicemia: 34,234
Source: NIH Deaths: Final Data for 2006,

With so many causes for the death of over 2 million people, the scare tactic of using a claim that almost 50,000 die without Health Insurance(was used by Sen. Baucus yesterday) is suspicious at the very least. But then since  Obama took over the White House and the Democrats gained control of Congress. Claims of crisis and disaster has been the modus operandi!

He(president Obama) has said repeatedly that he will not raise taxes on the midle class, but the Baucus Bill would raise taxes severly!

It will tax medical devices 29 million dollars, that will  not be  absorbed by the manufacturers, but passed on to the consumer.Everything from breast pumps for new mothers to atificial hips will be taxed.
And when the concept of reforming our present health insurance system that comprises 17% of our GNP, it was sold to tthe people as a way  to cover all people who do not have insurance. BUT the Baucus Bill that Obama supports will not cover 25 million people!!

ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL IN DETROIT

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Apparently Ronald Reagan had it right when he said" if it stops moving subsidize it". The "IT" he was refering to was not the it that is being subsidizes(aka given), but  money given to the non-earners from hard working tax payers.

When you compare the billions given to Wall Street bankers with the amount that is now given in Detroiy,15 million dollars, it is insignificant. But when you realize that 99% of the recipients are minorities who will vote for Democrats in 2010, and the bankers will not only vote but contribute large sums of money to re-elect those who gave them the money. You can understand that this is just another example of reditribution of wealth only to those who support Obama and the Democrats!

The stimulus bill was sold to the public as a "shovel ready program" that would put people back to work, but with the unemployment hovering around 10%  it appears that all the stimulus is doing is reassuring that Obama and his Congressional sycophants get re-elected!

The assistance in Detroit, announced by the media today, is from a 15 million dollar pile of money coming to Detroit, Michigan as part of the stimulus package.
I believe in charity for the homeless in the form of food kitchens and temporary housing for the really homeless, but it should come from the private sector via the Churches and Community organizations like San Francisco's Glide Memorial Center, which has been doing GODS work for decades. Not from the tax payers!

The thing that is going on Detroit has two fatal flaws that make it a non-starter before it began. One is that if you give money in the form of cash or check how do you know that the people whom you are giving it to will spend it on the intended purpose for which you gave the money?
The second is the final qualification sentence in the list of things that woul qualify a person or family for  the assistance. "That they must be able to maintain housing after receiving assistance. How can a homeless person do this?And by the wat how will those giving away the money determine that those who apply as homeless have bee residents of Detroit for at least six months. Will they evn try?
Also, a resident must make 50 percent less than the median area income, which would be less than $24,850 for single Detroit residents and less than $35,500 for a family of four.

All this is accomplishing is redistributing the wealth as we know Obama has promised he will do.
But there is a brewing problem with this seemingly good deed. The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center recently disclosed that close to half of all households will pay no income tax this year. Some will pay less than zero -- that is, they'll get money from those of us who do pay taxes.


The Tax Policy Center adds that this year the average income-tax rate for the bottom 40 percent of earners will be negative and that their cash subsidy will equal 10 percent of the total amount the income tax brings in, thanks to the Earned Income Tax Credit and President Obama's "Making Work Pay" program.

The view from the top also shows the lopsidedness of the tax system. The top 20 percent of earners makes about 53 percent of the income in America but pays 91 percent of the income tax. The top 1 percent pays 36 percent. The IRS says the bottom half of earners pays less than 3 percent.
This presents a serious problem because government has such vast powers to dispense favors. As Shaw suggested, people who pay no tax will not hesitate to vote for politicians who promise big spending. Why not? They will get stuff without having to pay for it. Source:PatriotPost.com

And to the  insult of the tax payers. The City of Chicago was visited today by the U.S.  Attorney General and the Secretary of Education to meet with officials of the Chicago leadership. The meeting was held because of the national outrage from the TV pictures of an honor high school student being beaten to death with large boards.Why did they not visit Los Angeles or New York where crime is rampant?
Why now? I believe that the Obama administration lost the bid to bring the Olympics to Chicago which would have brought millions to Chicago politicians. So now they are going to get money from Obama that will be handed over in the name of reducing the killing of teens, but will in fact be used to buy continued support for Democrats and Obama.
The amount is unspecified as is what they will use it for. Clinton when he was president sent millions to major cities including Chicago to establish midnight basket ball. But the plan failed to stop the killing!

Not one of the participants in the "meeting" mentioned increasing law enforcement and severe punishment for offenders. This is a dirty thought for Liberals who believe, as they have for decades, if you throw money at problems they will fade away. As Thomas Sowell says; ".the problem with the political left is that they seem to have no sense of the tragedy of the human condition. All problems seem to them to be due to other people not being as wise or as noble as they are".
So unknown millions will go to Chicago and it will still have a crime rate among the youth unless the law enforcement people begin a war against the gangs!.

Don't hold your breath until that happens, as long as the Daley machine and the Obama machine believe in spending other peoples money will stop crime and solve all of societies problems!

IS THE MUSLIM RELIGION THE ONLY RELIGION OBAMA MEETS WITH?

IN THE RECENT PAST THE CHINESE COMMUNIST FLAG WAS FLOWN ON THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN.AND TtHERE WAS A MUSLIM CELEBRATION HELD IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE WHITE HOUSE LAST MONTH. PRESIDENT OBAMA SPOKE ADMIRINGLY OF THE RELIGOUS VALUES OF THE MUSLIM RELIGION.

And when he visited Cairo, Egypt last year he said this:"I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

However, for the past eight years, the White House recognized the National Day of Prayer with a service in the East Room, but this year, President Obama decided against holding a public ceremony.

Under the Bush administration, the White House hosted an interfaith service each year, inviting protestant, Catholic and Jewish leaders for an event at the East Room.

President Ronald Reagan and President George H.W. Bush also marked the day with a White House observance.
Despite numerous attempts to get a representative from the executive office to attend, "it doesn't appear they are going to fulfill our request," said Becky Armstrong, marketing and media manager of the National Day of Prayer Task Force.source:CNN.com


The National Day of Prayer goes all the way back to 1775,it  was temporarily ended at the end of the Revolution, and then was re-established in 1795, while George Washington was president. But, now that President Obama doesn’t need to fake any belief to get elected (anyone want to bet that he starts attending a church in 2011?) and he can’t attend a bigoted, separatist, hard left church, well, he is taking that position to say “sc**w you” to tradition and religious believers.( note to readers, to date Obama has not chosen a church to attend!)
Of course it is for God to determine, but I have not seen the ‘fruits’ on Christianity in this man.

His answer to the question ‘what is sin’? He answered, “Being out of alignment with my values.” (Based on this answer, I’d say he either has a god complex, or doesn’t have a clue what God says about sin).I belive it is the former.


Now Onbama has stiffed the Dali lama, the Tibetan titular leader of the Buddist religion, by refusing to even meet with him! The reason his sycophants give is that he does not want to offend the Cinese whom he will vist shortly!
The decision came after China stepped up a campaign urging nations to shun the Tibetan spiritual leader.

It means Mr Obama will become the first president not to welcome the Nobel peace prize winner to the White House since the Dalai Lama began visiting Washington in 1991.

Obama's decision dismayed human rights and Tibetan support groups, who said he had made an unnecessary concession to the Chinese, who regard the Dalai Lama as a "splittist", despite his calls for autonomy rather than independence for Tibet. The Chinese invaded in 1950, forcing the young leader to flee.

Sophie Richardson, Asia advocate for Human Rights Watch, said: "Presidents always meets the Dalai Lama and what happens? Absolutely nothing.

Mr Obama has changed his position on Tibet since his election campaign.


In April 2008, he was joined by Hillary Clinton, then his rival for the Democratic nomination and now his Secretary of State, in calling on George W Bush to boycott the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony in protest at the bloody repression of a popular uprising in Tibet.
"If the Chinese do not take steps to help stop the genocide in Darfur and to respect the dignity, security, and human rights of the Tibetan people, then the President should boycott the opening ceremonies," they said.

Frank Wolf, a Republican congressman and outspoken critic of China's human rights record, said: "What would a Buddhist monk or Buddhist nun in Drapchi prison think when he heard that President Obama, the president of the United States, is not going to meet with the Dalai Lama?


"It's against the law to even have a picture of the Dalai Lama. I can almost hear the words of the Chinese guards saying to them that nobody cares about you in the United States."
Ms Richardson said treating human rights as separate from other issues guaranteed failure "across the board". source:Telegraph UK.com

The idea that if you are nice to the Chinese Communist Party up front you can cash in later is just wrong. If you lower the bar on human rights they will just move it lower and lower." This also aplies to our diplomatic relations to the Russians. Obama's giving way to Putin's demand that the USA abandon the bases in Poland and the Czech Republic for missile defense is an example of a "QUID" with no "PRO QUO"!


My opinion is only worth the words that I put in my blog but I believe I say the truth when I say: We removed prayer from schools, we have the highest abortion rate in the world, we want to remove every reference of God from all the public places, and we called Good things bad and bad things Good. But God in His sovereign ways will not force in to us His will but rather will let us make our own choices. It is evident that as a nation we decided to remove God from our lives. As a result of these choices, He is no longer present in this nation and in our lives to protect us from the one who wants to destroy us and his minions. A nation without God is a nation in serious trouble and ultimately in a path for judgment.

THE CONITIVE DISSONANCE OF POTUS, aka OBAMA

Cognitive dissonance is described by webster: "as refusing to process facts that conflict with deeply held beliefs". And this aptly describes the way Obama has been acting the past few months, and came to a culmunation when he chaired the UN Securuty Council meeting with 19 other leaders of Countries sitting at the table.

His position was and still is, that we can talk the madmen in control of Iran not to build nuclear bombs. While he spoke to the Security Council he had in his mind, and for all I know, in his pocket news that Iran has buit a new facility for enriching uranium securely within a mountain. But even though he had these facts he talked of his dream of a nuclear free world and the abilty of talking Iran out of developing nuclear weapons.
This feckless naivete brought shock and disbelief to the president of France and any person who acknowledges that North Korea is also in the process of getting nuclear weapon cabapability.

In March of this year Obama said this:"“Let me be clear: Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran’s neighbors and our allies. The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles. As long as the threat from Iran persists, we intend to go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.” That was President Obama, speaking in Prague. What or whom changed his mind? source:CSN NEWS.com

In December 2007, the National Intelligence Estimate announced, “We assess with moderate confidence [that] Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.” Well, Tehran just admitted it has a second uranium enrichment facility. Fuel produced there could be used to develop nuclear weapons.

When Obama addressed the General Assembly,he actually said, "No one nation can dominate another nation." That adolescent mindlessness was followed with the declaration that "alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long-gone Cold War" in fact "make no sense in an interconnected world." Has he discounted Borth Korea also?

Now while he dithers over General McCrhrystal's request for more troops, Obama has decided to abrogate the pact with Poland and the Czech Republic to set up a defensive missile base and radar station to detect icoming missiles. It appears that this was decided when Obama visited with Russia's KGB man, Putin, because Putin stongley objected! What did we get in return? Nothing fro m Russia and Communist China, who keep sending gasoline and strategigic materials and weapons to Iran!
The reason given was that Iran is developing short range missiles more than they are long range missiles that could reach Europe and our Middle East bases.
Strangly, the administration claims that we don’t need the sites in eastern Europe since “U.S. missile-defense capabilities and technologies have advanced in recent years.” That ought to be an argument to deploy them even more widely, not to scrap one site because the defenses elsewhere (say in Alaska or California) are working.And since Naval ship based missiles are subject to the new anti-ship missiles that we know Iran has recieved from China, now makes them vulnerable to destruction if they come into firing range. They offer little to our Iranian nuclear missile defense, if and when they are needed.


By canceling the missile defense plans for Europe we are affectively telling  the world that “America is harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend.” By abandoning promises to our allies and failing to share the benefits of our missile defenses. Abandoning the planned anti-missile sites results in producing a self-inflicted wound we cannot afford at this critical time of our Republic!


And to further make my point that Obama ignores facts. Try this on for size! Obama publicly sends McCrystal to Afghanistan as the new commander and asks for his assessment of the situation. McCrystal does not tell Obama what he wants to hear (in private) so he decides to do something other than what his commander on the ground tells him he needs to do, and then has the gaul to say it publicly at a military conference in England.
Apparently this angered Obma. So he summond the general to ameeting in Copenhagen in his 747. Apparently to remind the general who is Commander in Chief, even though he does not act like it I believe!
As he has done much of the time, when issues are divisive to the voters. He sends out his sycophants, as he did yesterday when General Jones appeared on two networks to dicredit the man POTUS sent to Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban. The Securitry adviser is a retired Army General who is acting as hatchet man for Obama to discredit the Commander in the field by stating that there are many other isues that must be decided before POTUS decides to send 40,000 more troops as were requested!  Like how to placate the anti war movement that voted for Obama who when in the Senate ,opposed the Iraq war!!

Apparently Obama reacted like Truman did to General McArthur when he spoke out to the public about bombing China to win in Korea. Obama I believe was very mad and demanded a meeting with McCrhrystal in Copenhagen to tell him who was in charge! The meeting lasted only 25  minutes. Just long enough for a one way conversation by Obama!

What apparently prompted the meeting was that in London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to "Chaos-istan".
When asked whether he would support it, he said: "The short answer is: No."
He went on to say: "Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support."

The remarks have been seen by some in the Obama administration as a barbed reference to the slow pace of debate within the White House.
Gen McChrystal delivered a report on Afghanistan requested by the president on Aug 31, but Mr Obama held only his second "principals meeting" on the issue last week! Jones said thre more meetings were scheduled!!