Monday, June 1, 2009

Who is behind the 2 state solution for israel and the Palis


I just love it how when some of the ignorant try so hard to bash president Obama and they start accusing him without know the facts or the truth, the latest was blaming Obama for the 2 state solution for israel and the Palis, I guess this is the flavor of the week, amazing how no one saw this proposal during Bush days, I will share with u a post that tells u where this idea came from, check it out:

WASHINGTON: President George W. Bush reaffirmed his commitment for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue and called on Saudi Arabia and other Middle East nations to work for a final resolution to the long-standing problem.

He made the remarks on Thursday at a White House reception for a group of more than 40 women from the Middle East and North Africa visiting the United States.

Bush told the delegation that he has moved Israel closer to accepting a two-state solution during his time in office.

I believe there needs to be a Palestinian state, and I stand by it, Bush said.

More than six years ago, I became the first American president to call for the creation of a Palestinian state.

Bush said he sympathized with the plight of the Palestinian people.

I said that Palestinians should not have to live in poverty and occupation and I laid out a new vision for the future — two democratic states, Israel and Palestine — living side by side in peace and security.

He praised Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah as both a great friend and ally and hoped that other nations would unite with America to seek an equitable solution.

I have worked hard to change the terrible condition of Palestinians, and I ask for the support of Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to achieve this, Bush said.

Bush dismissed notions of Islamophobia behind America's current stance in the Middle East and Iraq and spoke of his respect for Islam and Muslims.

Muslims and Christians pray to the same God, Bush said, vehemently denying reports that portray him as a person against Islam and Muslims.

Bush portrayed himself as a friend and an ally of Arab governments who support peace.

At the end of the meeting, he told the delegation he would be meeting with the mothers of American soldiers killed in Iraq, saying he has a duty to console them and stand by their side.

The delegation, consisting of women from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Yemen, Bahrain, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco and Qatar, is part of an exchange program to promote economic and educational reform in their home countries.

dont u love it when 2 love birds are holding hands,lol. well this is the Bush for u.

Friday, May 29, 2009

Paper Apologizes For Publishing 'Assassinate Obama' Ad




WARREN, Pa. — A northwestern Pennsylvania newspaper is apologizing for running a classified advertisement calling for the assassination of President Barack Obama.

Warren Times Observer Publisher John Elchert says the ad appeared Thursday. It read, "May Obama follow in the steps of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy!" The four presidents were all assassinated.

Elchert tells The Associated Press that the newspaper's advertising staff didn't make the historical connection.

He says the newspaper turned information over to police and that the Secret Service is investigating the person who placed the ad.

A note in Friday's paper says the newspaper "apologizes for the oversight."

Obama most popular world leader


nytimes.com:

PARIS: President Barack Obama remains by far the most popular world leader among people in major Western nations and is the one political figure on whom people consistently pin their hopes in the economic crisis, according to new polls conducted for the International Herald Tribune.

Also domestically and after three months on the job, President Obama continues to be widely popular.

That is according to a new poll released today by Gallup that shows Obama's approval rating at 65%.

President Obama's approval rating has stayed relatively consistent -- and high -- since he was sworn into office in January. He started out with a 66% rating and dropped temporarily to 62% in March.

That puts Obama into a select group of presidents whose approval ratings have increased from February to May of their first year in office.

Since World War II, only three first-term presidents -- Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan -- have had a higher average approval rating in May of their first year.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

my weekly report card on how president Obama is progressing


I have decided to do a weekly report card on how president Obama is progressing and what achievements he made and basically evaluate his performance and what grades will he get on political (defense) , economical, ethical (abortion) ,and other areas. In this weekly report, I am giving Obama an "A" on all of these topics and let me explain why:

This week, we learned that President Obama really is capable of political courage and idealism, as well as calculation. The question is how he will apply these gifts to the financial crisis as well as to issues closer to both his heart and to the strengths of his intellect, such as defense of the Constitution.

Each of his major speeches of the past week was a tour de force. At Notre Dame he spoke candidly and movingly about reproductive rights and tolerance. His quest for common ground won repeated applause from this largely Catholic audience, some of whom evidently are less dogmatic than their church's leaders. Said Obama:

So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions, let's reduce unintended pregnancies. (Applause.) Let's make adoption more available. (Applause.) Let's provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term. (Applause.) Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women." Those are things we can do. (Applause.)

At Annapolis, he sounded as resolutely committed to national defense as any chicken hawk, and rather more serious about what true national security entails -- and he got repeated ovations from the midshipmen, among them John McCain IV.

Speaking in the Rose Garden on Friday about credit card abuses, Obama signed a bill that takes a small step on behalf of consumers to prohibit the most extreme of bait-and-switch tactics. The President said, "Statements will be required to tell credit card holders how long it will take to pay off a balance and what it will cost in interest if they only make the minimum monthly payments. We also put a stop to retroactive rate hikes that appear on a bill suddenly with no rhyme or reason." Credit card abuses are the easiest to remedy of the financial scandals, but Obama was on the right side of the issue and in good form.

It was his major address Thursday at the National Archives, with America's most sacred documents as backdrop, that was Obama at his most thoughtful and eloquent, as well as brave. "I have studied the Constitution as a student;" he declared, "I have taught it as a teacher; I have been bound by it as a lawyer and legislator. I took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief, and as a citizen, I know that we must never -- ever -- turn our back on its enduring principles for expedience sake."

Obama stuck to his decision to close the prison at Guantanamo, just a day after the Senate, by a vote of 94-6, denied him the funds to shift detainees, out of concern that alleged terrorists would be instead locked up in maximum security prisons in the continental United States, possibly to escape or might someday be released into American communities. It's an absurd worry, yet where to house terrorists is for most legislators the ultimate NIMBY issue.

Obama himself muddied the waters in his insistence that he planned to keep detainees in "prolonged detention," just not at Guantanamo. That, in turn, created the sense that Obama's insistence about shutting down the prison was more about symbolism than constitutional substance.

His rather complex position provided fodder for critics on both the right and the left. Dick Cheney appointed himself to make a quasi-official response, in an unrepentant speech defending torture. I suppose we are fortunate that the faces of today's Republican Party are Cheney and Rush Limbaugh, guaranteeing that the Republicans will stay around 30 percent of the electorate. On the other hand, it is odd that Obama would seize on the symbolism of Guantanamo as abhorrent and inconsistent with American values while insisting that "prolonged detention" without trial for accused terrorists could be justified. In a letter sent Friday to the president, Sen. Russ Feingold warned that "such detention is a hallmark of abusive systems that we have historically criticized around the world."

The New York Times editorial page effusively praised the president's stance. Its editorial of May 22 began, "We listened to President Obama's speech on terrorism and detention policy with relief and optimism."

But in two news stories, May 23, Times reporters first pointedly questioned whether the prolonged detention concept was constitutional -- and then suggested that Obama had handed Republicans "a wedge issue."

Having taken a principled position, Obama now needs to deliver -- with a strategy for handling the remaining detainees that both addresses the security concerns and offers more than a fig leaf of constitutionality.

All week, Obama demonstrated his great skills as a teacher and orator, but it remains to be seen how he will use these outsized gifts as challenges on several fronts continue to unfold. He chose to invest some political capital on the issue of reproductive rights, but not on the issue of gay marriage; he took a real political risk in beginning the process of shutting down the infamous prison at Guantanamo but not in aligning himself with a constitutional treatment of detainees wherever they are ultimately housed. And though he criticized financial excess in general terms and had some good things to say about credit card abuses, he has not yet thrown the full weight of his office behind comprehensive financial reform.

It is tempting to explain his choices simply in terms of his own history and deep knowledge of some issues but not others. If there is any issue that Obama knows well, it is constitutional law. One can see the blend of idealism and calculation in his decision to close Guantanamo, but not to insist on full due process for detainees. Maybe this is all that public opinion and anxious legislators can take for now. We'll have to see how the public reacts as he moves forward with concrete plans to change procedures and move detainees.

On financial reform, however, it is very hard, based on past performance, to imagine Obama staking out a courageous position and trying to move public opinion on an issue where most of the Senate is siding with, say, Wall Street. In the coming months, there will be plenty of opportunities. They will include whether to enact regulation of derivatives, hedge funds and private equity companies; whether to support Elizabeth Warren's proposal for a financial product safety commission; whether to keep on bailing out insolvent banks versus taking them into receivership; and how to get serious about saving several millions of American families from foreclosure. On all of these fronts, administration policy to date has been too weak and far too kind to Wall Street.

One thing we learned this week is that whatever this president's deficits, they do not include a lack of eloquence, leadership, or nerve. It makes his attempt to straddle the issue of the detainees seem less than fully thought through, and his dithering on the financial crisis all the more bewildering.

Petraeus Endorses Obama's Plans To Close GITMO, End Torture


Things in politics are always changing , and u can never judge or pre judge , just like many in the republicans and conservatives jumped on president Obama criticizing him on his plans to close GITMO and the halt of torture in interrogations, now we hear new voices of these republicans and conservatives.

General David Petraeus said this past weekend that President Obama's decision to close down Gitmo and end harsh interrogation techniques would benefit the United States in the broader war on terror.

In an appearance on Radio Free Europe on Sunday, the man hailed by conservatives as the preeminent military figure of his generation left little room for doubt about where he stands on some of Obama's most contentious policies.

"I think, on balance, that those moves help [us]," said the chief of U.S. Central Command. "In fact, I have long been on record as having testified and also in helping write doctrine for interrogation techniques that are completely in line with the Geneva Convention. And as a division commander in Iraq in the early days, we put out guidance very early on to make sure that our soldiers, in fact, knew that we needed to stay within those guidelines.

"With respect to Guantanamo," Petraeus added, "I think that the closure in a responsible manner, obviously one that is certainly being worked out now by the Department of Justice -- I talked to the Attorney General the other day [and] they have a very intensive effort ongoing to determine, indeed, what to do with the detainees who are left, how to deal with them in a legal way, and if continued incarceration is necessary -- again, how to take that forward. But doing that in a responsible manner, I think, sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees."

The remarks appear to be the first from Petraeus since the closure of Guantanamo and Bush Administration use of enhanced interrogation techniques became hot-button partisan issues. They couldn't come at a better time for Obama. The president has found himself under intense political heat after the United States Senate soundly rejected his request for funds to shut down the prison. Dueling speeches between Obama and Cheney this past Thursday, moreover, did little to tamp down the controversy over the president's release of memos depicting the legal authorization fro the use of torture.

The president got a boost on Sunday when former Secretary of State Colin Powell came to his defense on both subjects. In conducting his RFE interview, Petraeus because the second figure who garners far more respect and popularity among Republicans than Cheney to offer his backing for Obama's national security plans.

Friday, May 22, 2009

A conservative:Waterboarding is TORTURE


Erich "Mancow" Muller, a Chicago-based conservative radio host, recently decided to silence critics of waterboarding once and for all. He would undergo the procedure himself, and then he would be able to confidently convince others that it is not, in fact, torture.

Or so he thought. Instead, Muller came out convinced.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke," Mancow said. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back... It was instantaneous... and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."

"I wanted to prove it wasn't torture," Mancow said. "They cut off our heads, we put water on their face... I got voted to do this but I really thought 'I'm going to laugh this off.' "


watch video on right (first video in the bottom on the video bar thats the best >>>>>

Cheney is wrong about Obama


In an interview airing this Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union," former Bush Administration Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge told John King that he thinks former Vice President Dick Cheney is wrong in his assertion that the Obama administration has made the country less safe.

KING: You had the intelligence. You served in a very sensitive position in those days after 9/11. Do you believe we are less safe today, because of steps taken by President Obama?


RIDGE: I do not.

KING: You disagree with Dick Cheney then?

RIDGE: Yeah, I disagree with Dick Cheney. But I also disagree with the approach both men are taking. [...]

At the end of the day as Americans, e pluribus Unum. We're in this together. And at the end of the day, it is a challenge that we're going to need to confront together.

watch video on the right , middle video bar >>>>