Showing posts with label Cartoon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cartoon. Show all posts

22 April 2015

Are You Happy About Star Studded Climate Change Hypocrisy?



Pop music phenom Pharrell Williams has been lending his voice to star studded crusades against global warming global climate disruption  carbon pollution anthropogenic  climate change.

First, the singer songwriter who originated the peppy hit "Happy" jetted to Davos, Switzerland to be with former Vice President (and Inconvenient Truth purveyor) Al Gore to announce a second round of Live Earth concerts in June which is intended to "harmonize humanity all at once."  


[L] Al Gore [C] Pharrell Williams at World Economic Summit in Davos, Switzerland 2015

While Pharrell Williams fondly remembers having a ball at the Rio de Janeiro concert in 2007, he lamented:  “You would have pundits and comedians who didn’t understand global warming and we were often ridiculed. We wanted to do something very different this time.”

Pharrell lent his celebrity status to the International Day of Happiness at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on March 20th.




His clarion call to convert from Climate Change to Climate Action rings hollow considering his hypocrisy.  Pharrell sits alone on a private plane and globe trots in order to attend  green dog and pony shows, yet the little people are supposed to sacrifice for climate change.

To celebrate Earth Day with a telling backdrop, President Barack Obama flew to the Everglades for an event (as Alligator Alley can be portrayed to be already effected by Climate Change).  Per Mar Knoller, that day trip to Florida was an 1869 mile jaunt in which Air Force One 9,180 gallons of fuel alone.  But that's OK, since the President's plane also ferried Bill Nye the Mechanical Engineer billing himself as a Science Guy for PBS Kids, in a "Call to Action" 




 That must have covered their carbon footprint, right?

If that's not enough policy pollution, consider the Global Citizen Earth Day Concert on the National Mall last weekend.  Hoards of ecologically conscious citizens of the world flocked to see Mary Blige Usher and the Fall Out Boy. The organizers may have been proud that the concert was powered through solar power, they ought to be ashamed at how their people left the open space in the District of Calamity (sic).





15 April 2015

Hillary Hiding Her EMails Continues to Haunt Her Reputation for Honesty




Prior to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) formal campaign announcement, there were questions about her emails while at the State Department . It was revealed that Mrs. Clinton exclusively used a personal email (HDR22@clintonemail.com) stored on a private server during her tenure at Foggy Bottom.  Additionally, Mrs. Clinton only turned over her emails in late 2014 with paper copies of the work emails that she deemed relevant.

Of course, there are plenty of questionable things already associated with the email imbroglio. Only using a personal email account was highly irregular and probably insecure.  Mrs. Clinton's lame rationale about using only one device associated with an email was lanced when it was shown that Hillary used both an Ipad as well as her trusty Blackberry.  State Department policy requires immediate surrender of all work materials to an archivist, who then determines what is personal. It was odd that Hillary printed out emails for the State Department rather than the electronic originals (making it difficult to do computer searches).  Then there is the oddity of months longs gaps in emails including when  Mrs. Clinton traveled to Libya and was photographs of her using her Blackberry, there are no record of documents.  Hmm.


 Now it has been revealed that House Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA 49th) had sent a letter to the State Department on December 12, 2012 which specifically asked if the Secretary of State ever used a personal email account to conduct official business.  Uh oh.

Well, Mrs. Clinton resigned from the State Department February 1, 2013.  The State Department did not respond to the House Government Reform Committee until March 27, 2013 and their response merely was a copy of the policy that all State Department employees : “should make it clear that his or her personal email is not being used for official business.”.

While the Lamestream Media sought to create a frenzy for Hillary's Mystery Machine Listening Tour road trip to Iowa, Mrs. Clinton is slipping in the polls in key battleground states to Republican challengers.  Quinnipiac Poll Assistant Director Peter Brown attributes this drop to the perception that Hillary Clinton is a dishonest politician, which can be attributed to the continuing email embarrassment.

If convicted, an official who obstructs or destroys federal documents could be barred from office. It is almost inconceivable that an Obama Department of Justice (under Attorney General Eric Holder or the stalled nominee Loretta Lynch) would ever prosecute or seek to convict such a high profile progressive politician.  But there are no such strictures in the court of public opinion.  Hillary for America intends to raise $2.5 billion for their campaign.  But she who raises the most cash does not always win (sic). In 1980, Governor John Connally (D R-TX) was considered a great orator and had a distinct fundraising advantage.  In the end, Connally spent $11 million and only garnered one delegate. How embarrassing.  Actually, not as embarrassing as Hillary's continuing email embarrassments.

h/t: Hot Air
      John Cole 

23 March 2015

Governor Moonbeam and the Green Global Test

As Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) was barnstorming the mainstream media before the presumed Republican presidential candidate makes his intentions official, he spoke about Climate Change on Late Night with Seth Myers.




The Lamestream Media would love to paint Senator Cruz as one who sets the world on fire, not just from misunderstood political metaphors but also due to partisan politics on the environment.

Ardent environmentalist Governor Jerry Brown (D-CA) used his appearance on Meet the Press as a forum to besmirch Senator Cruz as being unfit for office due to a green global leadership test.


Although this is Jerry Brown's fourth term as Governor of California, long time political observers can recall how Governor Moonbeam hesitated in taking prevailing scientific wisdom in eradicating the Mediterranean fruit fly in 1981, which compounded problems.   Lest anyone believe that Jerry Brown was virtuously standing up for green health concerns, when he ran for governor in 2010, Brown quipped: "If I see a Medfly, I'm going to spray that sucker. I'm not waiting this time."

Notwithstanding Governor Moonbeam's scientific shilly shallying on the Medfly, Brown backs his bluster against a Tea Party bete noir with the 90% scientific consensus statistic.  Well, at least Brown did not use the Al Gore settled science canard.  Wonder if how much of this consensus was based on the falsified East Anglia hockey stick model.  Then there is the temptation for climate scientists can  to claim "the sky is falling" for more money to study the issue.

Senator Cruz noted that satellite data over the last 17 years has not shown any increase in temperatures.


What have leading climate scientists had to say about this mercurial anomaly?


Governor Moonbeam's Green Global test seems little more than a progressive popularity contest and paint your political opponents as ignorant knuckle draggers.  As Governor Brown admitted on Meet the Press, he would have run for President (again) if he were only 10 years younger. But he probably would have run as a watermelon candidate-- green on the outside and red on the inside. 






27 February 2015

Barack Obama on DHS Funding

Barack Obama on DHS Funding   

 During the lame duck session of the 112th Congress, House Republicans fully funded FY 2015 budget, with the exception of Department of Homeland Security, in which a short term continuing resolution was applied to allow for a rider which would not Congressionally fund President Obama's Executive Action on illegal immigration.

 In the new 113th Congress, Senate Democrats refused to allow cloture to debate the DHS bill, lest the funding bill pass on majority terms.  The Obama White House and lackeys in the Lamestream Media and Senate Democrats are striving to frame Republicans for being obstructionists for not rubber stamping Mr. Obama's extra-constitutional effective amnesty. 

 Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has suggested bifurcating the Executive Amnesty issue from DHS funding.  But this legislative legerdemain was acceptable to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) only if House Speaker John Boehner acceded to Obama's will.  So far, Speaker Boehner holds the attitude that Senate Democrats ought to "get off their asses" and vote on the House bill. 

The GOP opponents seek to claim that Republicans will endanger the nation due to not funding DHS's $38 Billion budget. Alas, 80% of DHS's 240,000 employees are essential workers, who are required to report to work without a guaranteed pay check (even though all workers have routinely been paid after a budget standoff).  So security should not be an issue, even though the Obama Administration has been hyping the Boko Haram and al Shabob threat on the Mall of America and other Jewish owned shopping centers (but this has nothing to do with certain religions). 

So now the Obama Administration's tact has shifted to hardball politics.  During a townhall meeting telecast on MSNBC and Telemundo, President Obama dared the Republicans to pass the House bill, which would merit another Obama veto.   

  

 May the majorities in Congress stick to their principles and not quickly fold to a passive aggressive bully chief executive.  No matter what, the Lamestream Media is ready to repudiate Republicans. But the shutdown is so targeted that the public won't shed tears over the World War II monument being shut down as during the Flying Flip shutdown of October 2013.

28 July 2014

R.I.P. Liberal Archie



Although the magazine hit the newsstands today, the news had leaked out several months ago-- ARCHIE ANDREWS IS DEAD.  In "Life with Archie" #36, Archibald Andrews was shot while diving in front of a bullet to save his "best friend" Keven Keller (sorry Jughead), an openly gay newly elected Senator who wanted to champion gun control.

Perhaps this writer is too far removed from pre-teen consumer spending patterns, but it seems inconceivable that there is much of a market for such Archie comics priced at $9.99 aside from an OCD Comic Book Guy. Paltry Archie Comics sales figures bear this bias out.  The regular Archie comic ranked #327th selling 4,063 copies.  The penultimate "Life with Archie" #35 sold 2,064 copies.

Archie Comics CEO Jon Goldwater claims that this dramatic demise of the beloved redhead from Riverdale High was difficult. But judging from the edgy additions to an evergreen strip of innocence, Archie's ending with a big bang was not shocking.

Goldwater has tried to make Riverdale more relevant by adding homosexual characters like Kevin Keller, Harper the "handicapable" character, interracial relationships (in which Archie fathers a child with Valerie of Josie and the Pussycats).  Goldwater also sought to capitalize on the zombie phenomenon with "Afterlife with Archie".   

Archie taking a bullet generated lots of publicity while burnishing Archie's brand with heroic virtues.  This dramatic denouement also conveniently closes a clumsy story-line.  Several years ago, Archie marries both Betty and Veronica (albeit in parallel universes).  After an issue of remembrance, readers can celebrate Archie's 75th anniversary. 

It's a pity that Goldwater could not honor its few remaining readers and let Archie Comics die with dignity in plots that continued to revolve around high school hijinx, malt shops and fickle flirtations.  Alas, rather than making Riverdale more relevant, the death of liberal Archie makes the funny papers more of a joke.




Pundits pontificated as to how other storied comics could politicize themselves.  Conservative critics satirized Archie's apotheosis by speculating how his friends would perish is a politically correct cacotopia.



Considering the paltry sales of Archie's comics, this PC stunt will not sustain increased sales.  However, culturally it seems to epitomize how mass media is jumping the shark ala "The Fonz" on Happy Days (1977).  



Whoa!



22 July 2014

What Does H.A.M.A.S. Really Stands For?


Hamas is a Palestinian Sunni Muslim group that is internationally recognized as a terrorist organization.  Hamas which has dominated the Gaza Strip since 2005 when Israeli settlements were voluntarily relinquished settlements to implement the Oslo Accords as part of the peace process.

Hamas is an acronym for Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah, Arabic for "Islamic Resistance Movement".  The acronym means "Enthusiasm".  But sometimes acronyms are given more meaning by actions. 

The modus operandi of Hamas is to indiscriminately lob crude missiles at their Israeli "enemy" (the one's who ceded the territory where they operate).  But these "brave" Muslim Brotherhood affiliates operate their rockets in the middle of civilian settlements, schools  or mosques.   The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) discovered 20 missiles in schools run by UNRWA and then handed them back to the "local authorities" to then be fired at Israel.  Then there is  the Shuja'iya neighborhood in Northern Gaza, Hamas used a mosque and two adjacent buildings connected by tunnels were extended to the Israeli border and used as a depot for Hamas rockets. 




Even though the Israeli Defense Forces give early warning to civilians to evacuate before the IDF attacks in Gaza, the inhabitants defiantly refuse to leave.  Some pro-Palestinian apologies reason "Where can they go?"  But Hamas spokemen urged the civilians not to heed the IDF warnings.  These human shields can then be pointed to as brutality by their enemy.  This is why Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu labels Hamas tactics as a double war crime.


Hamas knows that it can not win conventional warfare against the IDF, but if enough Palestinian civilians are killed during Operation Protective Edge, the International Press can decry the humanitarian loss along with an anti-semetic gloss.  

Former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meier anticipated this culture of death among militant Palestinians when she proclaimed: "We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children.  We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.".

Even though Hamas might sound like enthusiasm in Arabic, based upon their tactics and weltanschaaung, what Hamas really stands for is Hiding Among Mosques and Schools.



15 January 2014

Iranian Big Science and Western Farsi-cal (sic) Reactions


Iran has boldly been pursuing several big science projects that have dual use.   The space program for the Islamic Republic of Iran is unlikely to foster a business of launching commercial satellites or out-of-this-world travel packages for more than space monkeys, unlike Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic or Space X.






 The same technology used for launching spacecraft can be applied to military applications like ICBMs.

The other Iranian project is nuclear power.  Why an oil rich nation needs to have nuclear power for peaceful endeavors is dubious.  But the Iranians have been refining their "peaceful" products from centrifuges to create bomb grade nuclear fuel.  Moreover, these nuclear sites have been scattered throughout the country and many have been buried.




As of January 20th, 2014, an "interim" accord between the six major powers and Iran takes effect.  The pact, facilitated by U.S. Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman, lifts hard fought international sanctions and access to $4.2 billion in frozen assets which have been crippling Tehran regime in exchange for a six month promise to dilute half of its 20% enriched uranium to 5% enriched uranium levels.

The Iranians feel free to continue their "research" and need not dismantle facilities.  The Iranians believe that this interim agreement legitimizes its nuclear program, while the west disagrees.  Moreover, the Iranian chief negotiator Abbas Aranqui, indicates that there are "non-papers" or secret side agreements which validate Iran's right to continue nuclear research along with a joint commission to oversee the deal.

Despite assertions that these sanctions can quickly be reapplied if Tehran is proven to be pursuing a non-peaceful nuclear program, this talk is worth the paper on which it is written.  It is highly unlikely that the Russian Federation and the Peoples Republic of China will be open to reapply these hard fought for international sanctions, especially if the free flow of Iranian oil and a fly in the West's ointment helps their positions.


Wendy Sherman
This "interim accord" is shaping up to be like Wendy Sherman's other negotiating gem under the Clinton Administration which intended to prevent North Korea's nuclear program in exchange for food.  See how well that worked, and the proliferation of nuclear technology to both Pakistan and Iran, the latter which later tried to share it with Syria.



Iran need not build an extensive atomic arsenal to try to annihilate America, which revolutionary Iranian government still considers "the Great Satan".  A few placed nuclear bombs on ICBMs set to explode in the atmosphere could effective bomb America into the stone-age via an EMP, an electromagnet pulse.

So much for Farsi-cal (sic) scientific projects.   It's a pity that the responses in most of the West to these Iranian provocations seems like a sick joke.



12 November 2013

Satirizing the Quirks of Social Media Communication

While the Internet 2.0 has greatly increased a sense of feeling connected with others on the World Wide Web, this phenomenon has caused some quirks in communications. 

Jimmy Fallon and Justin Timberlake satirized the proliferation of hashtags through a reductio ad absurdum video using the hagtags in real life dialogues.




Since short written exchanges can be misconstrued without facial cues, many internet interlocutors choose to use emoticons.   To supplement these non-verbal cues,  entrepreneurs Paul and Douglas J. Sak  patented and sought to market new punctuation to clarify things-- the Sarcmark.






Free spirits chafed at profiting from punctuation.  A mock website "Open Sarcasm" sought to blacklist the SarcMark in favor of the temherte slaq (the inverted exclamation point) with a tongue in cheek tag line: "Sarcasmists of the World Unite!" 


But another reason that  the SarcMark has failed to catch on was the price for being smarmy.  The grammatical genius initially priced his punctuation at $1.99 for lifetime use, whereas typing ;-) was just three keystrokes and had no cost.  Brilliant!  


Communication has changed in the Internet Age.  Now, sending e-mails are too long for the digerati and may be considered passé.  Traditional types often have difficulty in adjusting to sharing in 140 characters or less.  




Short form social media like Twitter will not be the be all and end all in communicating complex thought.  But it can attract eyeballs to see something more.

h/t: Mike Keefe

11 August 2013

Dr. Dean's Delayed Diagnosis of IPABs



Although  former Vermont Governor and 2004 Presidential Candidate Howard Dean (D-VT) has been out of the practice of medicine for a number of years in lieu of politics, the Doctors delayed diagnosis of IPABs is right on the money.

Recently, Howard Dean wrote an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal in which he prognosticated:  "The IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them."  

For those who did not thoroughly study the 2,700 pages of legislation that comprised the ironically titled "Affordable Care Act", otherwise know as Obamacare, IPABs are the 15 member Independent Payment Advisory Board which the HHS Secretary Sebilus appoints that decides the amount that the government will reimburse physicians for medical procedures. 

This was  supposedly intended as a cost control mechanism for Medicare, but in reality will act as a rationing board.  The IPAB name implies that these opinions are advisory, but those opinions become the reality. A medical advisory board made the modest proposal in 2011 that yearly mammograms are unnecessary for women between 40 and 49, and HHS suggesting that self-examinations of breasts.  It did not seem that there were medical breakthroughs which prompted these changes in practice but it certaily would save costs for a single payer system.

At the start of his first term, Dr. Betsy Mc Caughey observed that President Obama's former Health Advisor Dr Ezekiel Emanuel (the brother of then Chief of Staff now Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel .D-Chicago) believed that doctors serve two masters: the patient and society and that medical students should be trained  to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care."  

While public pressure forced the Obama Administration in January 2011 to drop "Complete Lives System" inspired end-of-life counseling during the elderly's annual check ups, the philosophy of cost cutting during the last 18 months of a person's life remains with IPABS.  Instead of cajoling vulnerable senior citizens to just "take a pill", the patient is cut out of the process by "Advisory Boards" which make certain treatments financially unviable, depending upon one's status. 

When Sarah Palin labled IPABs as "death panels", she was roundly criticized as a scare monger who was stupid, don't cha know?  




A couple of years later,  Dr. Dean  diagnosed IPABs as rationing boards,  it makes  more sense, right?

Howard Dean suggested that: "Getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on."  Obviously, the former DNC chair has not gotten with the program to think that Obamacare is about improving healthcare in America.  It seems that it more about control.

Unless Tea Party House Republicans are successful in defunding Obamacare from the FY2014 budget, all Americans will be mandated to participate in the program or pay a tax.  Nevertheless, the IRS will be in charge of collections and monitoring all of the health information.  Recent reports have indicated that health records will be vulnerable to hackers and scammers.  In addition, the IRS has shown political partisanship in vetting Tea Party tax exempt applications and for surrepticiously sharing this information.  Why couldn't the Obamacare cost cutting extend to denying treatment to political opponents?

Allow me to dispense a rhetorical palliative to Obamacare opponents– as P.J. O’Rourke put it: “If you thought that health care is too expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free.”  Alas, the Affordable Care Act is doubling many peoples’ rates and may cost some their hides. 

20 July 2013

S.O.S. From Legislative Leviathans



Three years ago, President Barack Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ( Pub. L-11-203).  When it was passed, it was a long  2,319  page piece of legislation.  Although financial legislation can be tricky, Sarbanes-Oxley (2002) was only 66 pages and Gramm-Leach–Bliley (1999) was 145 pages.    This contemporary financial legislation was legislatively loquacious compared to the Federal Reserve Act (1913) that took 31 pages or Glass-Steagall (1933) that was 33 pages.

 But much like Obamacare (the misnamed Affordable Care Act), the bloated Dodd Frank bill delegated bureaucratic the authority to write implementing regulations. Currently, Dodd-Frank is comprised of 13,789 pages of rule-making from ten different regulatory agencies.   





To put this into terms which most people can wrap their minds around, Dodd-Frank is now the equivalent of 28 copies of War and Peace.  And Mel Brooks quipped that no-one makes it through War and Peace.   When Congressman John Conyers was chided for not reading legislation before voting for it, he snarkily noted that it would have taken him two days with two lawyers assistance to understand the original Obamacare legislation 1,000 pages, when in actuality it topped  2,000 pages. 





Winston Churchill rightly reflected that: “When you have 10,000 regulations, you destroy all respect for the law.”  Compliance to the bureaucratic diktats of the Red Tape State increases costs on everyone.  Companies contort themselves to comply but find that the Executive Branch can postpone  crucial aspects of laws like the employer mandate of Obamacare on the President’s whim or for political reasons. 

One of the unique aspects of Dodd-Frank is finally being fulfilled after the Senate compromise to keep the shell of a filibuster.  To prevent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) from using the “Nuclear Option”, Republicans allowed Advise and Consent votes on several Cabinet nomination as well as formally approving Richard Cordoray, who was unconstitutionally made a recess appointment by President Barack Obama in January 2012, as the head of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.  

The BCFP could not formally come into being until the Director passed Senate confirmation, which was delayed for two and half years.  Republicans had been holding out on confirming the BCFP Director to encourage a decentralized organizational structure.  The implementing legislation gives the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection its own funding mechanism which is funded through the United States Federal Reserve.  So the Dodd Frank can finally implement  an agency that can write and enforce bank rules, conduct bank examinations, monitor financial markets, as well as collecting and tracking consumer complaints without being beholden to elected officials with power of the purse strings.  This legislative leviathan may prove to become a political Frankenstein which threatens our constitutional Republic. 

What can be done to avoid such governing monstrosities again?  


  • Firstly, either abolish or reorganize the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection to have an Executive Board rather than a Consumer “Czar” and be financially responsible to the legislative branch rather than being an “independent” branch of government.  



  • Secondly, while it might seem kind of quaint, but  to follow the Constitution.  Can the legislative branch actually delegate lawmaking authority which is not responsible to any elected official?  Why is it that bills which raise revenue are continually first conjured in the Senate, when the written organic law of our Republic requires them to start in the People’s Chamber  i.e. the House of Representatives. 


Two ways of handling this would be for lawmakers to attribute what clause of the Constitution corresponds to each part of the law.  Or having some Congressional Constitutional Majordomo to scrutinize clauses for constitutional compliance. 





  • Fourthly, as the Federal Reserve Act and Glass-Steagall show, important financial legislation can be implemented without needing a backhoe to lift the printed bill.  Congress should pass legislation that is no longer than 50 pages long.  This is longer than some Tea Party type legislators advocate, but it is readable by the Member and can accommodate for the complexities of contemporary government.



  • Finally, the Congress must Enact legislation to  take control over expensive Executive Branch regulations.  It is understandable that members of Congress are not going to have expertise in complex areas of governmance, like the financial industry and the environement.  But they must not cede authority to smug technocratic bureaucrats who are given wide deference by the judiciary and are not beholden to the ballot box.


In 2011, the House passed REINS, Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny Act, which required Congressional approval for any regulation that has the aggregate annual cost of compliance of $100 million or more.  Alas, this common sense legislation was left to die in the Senate.  





Compliance costs with the legislative leviathan is strangling growth in the American economy and is chipping away at household budgets.   The REINS legislation could be enhanced by adding a 5 year sunset provisions to any costly regulation which could be reapproved by Congress.  This would rein in an overzealous Executive Branch in issuing regulations as well as tempering the bureaucratic beast.

h/t: Davis Polk
     Eric Allie

03 December 2012

Palestine Pop Quiz

The United Nations recently voted 138-9 (with 41 abstentions) to elevate "Palestine" with non-member state status. Before delving into the meaning of according observer status it is worth taking a Palestine Pop Quiz.


Perhaps a primer on the disputed territory of the West Bank would be instructive--

Since "Palestine" is comprised of two separate exclaves, the separate areas (Gaza and the West Bank) with separate governments (Gaza's by the terrorist inspired Hamas and the West Bank by Fatah) . So its territory stability is dubious.  And both Gaza and the West Bank use the Israeli Shekel as its currency.


The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

Clearly, Palestine in lacking on several scores.  The permanent populate requirement is interesting since Palestinian leaders frequently demand that their residents become citizens in the state of Israel.  



The territorial item is tricky not just because of the two exclaves.  The signed Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement (1995) proclaims that the Palestinian Legislative Council lacks jurisdiction over  "issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations: Jerusalem, settlements, specified military locations, Palestinian refugees, borders, foreign relations and Israelis".  Without control over borders, it should fail the territory test.
[
Then there is the capability to enter into relations with other states.  While a couple of countries, like Argentina, Brazil and El Salvador recognize the State of Palestine and comprised of the West Bank. But international obligations contained in the Israeli Palestinian Agreement declare that: 

The [Palestinian Legislative] Council will not have powers and responsibilities in the sphere of foreign relations, which sphere includes the establishment abroad of embassies, consulates or other types of foreign missions and posts or permitting their establishment in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip, the appointment of or admission of diplomatic and consular staff, and the exercise of diplomatic functions.   [Article 9, paragaph 5].

Moreover, Article 4 of the United Nations Charter mandates that "Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving states".  How does that work with Palestinians who have routinely rejected a two state solution, engage in terrorism and vow to push Jews in Israel into the sea?

So if agreements and law mattered to the United Nations, Palestine should not qualify for non-member state status.

Some sophisticates like John Batchelor claim that the U.N. non-member state status is the equivalent of a Junior Membership in a Country Club.  Non-Member states do not have a vote in the U.N. General Assembly but can raise resolutions by itself and participate in international organizations.

Palestinians conflated this U.N. vote as international legitimization of its state status, albeit in unofficial status.  But the real reason for this move may have been Palestinian participation in international organizations.  Expect "Palestine" to accuse Israel of genicide, despite the terrible tactics which Palestinians use in their indiscriminate missile attacks on Israeli civilians.  Then there was the UNESCO proclamation that the Jewish Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel's Tomb in the West Bank are actually Muslim holy sites.

The Israelis can rightly conclude that any agreements with Palestinians are worth the paper that they are printed on, as the international community will conveniently ignore limitations when it so chooses.  Moreover, it confirms that Palestinians have no interest in negotiated peace and seek to wipe Israel off the map.

Congress has passed a law which forbids funding any agency that gives full recognition to Palestinian statehood.  But knowing the way Attorney General Holder operates as well as the feckless foreign policy of the Obama Administration, adhering to the law is about as assured as the UN observing the Montevideo Convention.

h/t: DryBones
      Snapshops a Camera



01 December 2012

Fiscal Cliff Notes



In one month, unless Congress and the President can agree upon a solution, sequestration will occur which will automatically make an across the board 10% budgetary reduction. In the District of Calamity, this willy-nilly cost cutting is know as going  over the fiscal cliff.


As most Americans are in the Christmas preparation rush and President Obama is set to rush off to a 20 day $4 million holiday in Christmas Vacation in Hawaii, it does not seem that the calamitous effects if the Lame Duck Congress is unable to craft a compromise budget are widely understood. So here are some fiscal cliff notes:



 President Obama offered an idea to allegedly avoid the sequestration crisis:


It is worth noting that all of the savings which the White House offers are vague and in the future.  So what do conservatives think of this "plan"?  Think of Charlie Brown trying to placekick the football with a conniving center like Lucy.





Maybe we should not take Mr. Obama's first proffered plan seriously.  Charitably, it might be an opening bid.  Maybe Mr. Obama's pronouncement during the debate the sequestration will not happen alludes to political omnipotence.  More likely, President Obama is posturing and forcing the fiscal cliff is a strategy to blame Republicans either for the resulting taxes or for the wrecked economy when we go over the fiscal cliff.  Then the White House can look "reasonable" by trimming their outrageous opening offer by a third and still blame what Mr. Obama has termed "the enemy".

Well, President Obama's proposal was not taken too seriously on Capitol Hill.  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) laughed at Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner when the White House's "Modest Proposal" was presented last week. McConnell opined that Obama made an outlandish proposal that should not be taken seriously and was a step backwards.  Moreover, the Senate Republican leader proclaimed:  "President Obama can't get everything that he wants. Those days are over."

President Obama played Campaigner-in-Chief by pitching his opening offer at a toy factory near Philadelphia, comparing uncooperative Republicans who were Scrooges and going to give middle class folks lumps of coal in their stockings.  The urging the wealthy to pay "their fair share" class warfare is rich, as there is no way that the top 2% of taxpayers will be able to cover the $166 billion tax hike in 2013.

Some have suggested that Republicans should take President Obama at face value and then vote "present" on his outrageous offer.  Of course, there are not enough Democrat votes to ensure passage in the House, but much like the Obamacare bill, a handful of squish Congressmen can be "bought off". A better tact might be to take Guy Benson's suggestion and pass the Simpson-Bowles bi-partisan deficit reduction plan, which the Obama Administration commissioned and was hailed by an adoring Lamestream Media and then promptly abandoned.  But unless Congress and the President get serious about avoiding the fiscal cliff, it might be Thelma and Louise time.



h/t: A.F. Branco

25 October 2012

Slow Political Poison Passively Given at Boca Raton

[L] Gov. Mitt Romney [C] moderator Bob Schieffer  [R] President Barack Obama

This year’s cycle of Presidential debates have all been influential and informative, but in different ways that one would expect.  This is especially true about the slow poison that was passively administered in Boca Raton, Florida.

During the first debate in Denver, unanimous opinion was that Republican Presidential Nominee Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) won a decisive victory against Democrat Nominee President Barack Obama (D-IL).  Focus groups dramatically swung towards the challenger.  It seemed that the distorted image of Romney which the Obama 2012 campaign spent $100 million in early television advertising went to waste compared to many voters first unfiltered view of candidate Romney

After being buoyed by Vice President Joe Biden’s (D-DE) brash performance in the Vice Presidential debate against GOP VP Nominee Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI 1st), it seems that Obama advisors wanted the President to seem less somnolent.  So the Presidential Townhall debate in Richmond was a Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em affair. Alas, it seemed like Mr. Romney was fighting tag team against both Mr. Obama and moderator Candy Crowley, as the “moderator” interrupted Romney 28 times and the President only nine times, yet Obama spoke for three additional minutes.


In addition, Crowley chose to violate her agreed upon position as moderator and played real time (and wrong) instant fact checker.   At a key moment, when Mr. Romney pressed Mr. Obama about his Rose Garden statements regarding not calling the action in Libya an act of terrorism, Crowley verbally pushed her way in and insisted that the President had called it an act of terror.




Yet during post debate interviews, the CNN journalist admitted that she was wrong and that Governor Romney was right on the point.

Everyone expected that the Foreign Policy debate in Boca Raton, Florida would concentrate on the Benghazi blunder and candidates trading barbs.  In fact, Boca Raton debate Moderator Bob Schieffer started the candidate forum with a couple of wide open questions about Benghazi seemingly  begging for blood to be drawn.  But Mitt Romney did not take the bait.  In fact, he pretty much deferred that issue.  Later in the forum, Romney expressed support for some of Obama’s foreign policy as he differentiated is own vision to defend democracy and pursue peace through strength.

Many conservatives stomachs churned, suspecting that their standard bearer was blowing it.  But after a few rounds of questioning, it dawned on many right-leaning political observers that Romney’s deferential debate performance was what Bill Sammon would call Strategery .  Saturday Night Live mocked Republican Presidential candidate then Governor George W. Bush (R-TX) for being a bumkin and a Bush who was prone to mispronounce words, despite Ivy League educations.  The “43" Administration used Strategery as an inside joke for meetings, taking the press misestimation of their skills to their advantage.

Foreign policy is the domain of Presidents and not challengers.  So when going toe-to-toe with President Obama, Romney was likely to be diminished by a reply by the President “Well, I was in the situation room” as well as “This deals with classified matters” and “We can not comment on a matter in which we are still investigating.”  None of those potential retorts would do the challenger any good.

The tag team phenomenon of moderator Crowley just so happening to have the Rose Garden transcript and master debater Obama suggesting to Crowley to read the transcript leads some cynics to conclude that it was a convenient set up.  So Bob Schieffer’s begging for blows about Benghazi might have been a trap. Had Romney engaged about Libya, he would have muddied the waters and partisans would claim “He’s playing politics with a tragedy.”   So to use a football analogy, it was wise to play prevent football and punt on such challenges.


Partisan Democrats would declare President Obama the winner no matter what in the third debate. So the surrogates in the spin room were anxious to say that Obama had won on points with all of his jabs.  Perhaps.  But that missed the point of Romney’s strategery.  Although politics is my favorite contact sport, it is not won or lost on the best out of three debate scores.




During the first debate, Romney was iconoclastic, shattering the false image that the Obama campaign had peddled against him during the summer.  At the second debate, Romney demonstrated that he could go toe-to-toe arguing with his opponent.  That is important, as the incumbent was fighting on a level playing field with the challenger, mooting many inherent advantages of incumbency.  For the third debate, Romney’s mission was to not make unforced errors and appear statesman-like.

I likened the debate to a slow political poison given in Boca Raton because Romney’s subtle strategy was not to win the debate but to win votes.  By appearing reasonable and giving credit to good parts of Obama’s foreign policy, he burnished his credentials of being bipartisan and reasonable. By not engaging in pointed attacks while standing for what Dennis Prager would call Americanism as well as echoing President Ronald Reagan’s peace through strength, he appealed to undecided voters (many of whom could be called Reagan Democrats) as well as women who recoil from too much conflict.  And then there was Mr. Obama’s debate demeanor.

President Obama relished taking the fight to Mr. Romney by interrupting him numerous times, using sneering condescension in addressing his opponents issues and demonizing his challenger.  Of course, this is indicative of the Obama 2012 campaign, which has been all about ad hominem attacks rather than presenting a real second term agenda.  The negative message constantly coming from Obama 2012 materials is in marked contrast to the Hopey Changey meme from 2008.  Even if that is the Democrat’s Presidential Re-Election strategy, it is a mistake for Obama to be that messenger, particularly in an event when he is side-by-side to his opponent.  The dirty work is typically left to Vice Presidents, who’s essential qualities typically  include breathing, carrying his home state and doing dirty work on the stump for his boss.

Obama’s punchy performance might have rallied the base (again) but did not expand his supporters. Obamatons, and seemingly the Boca Raton Press Corps, cheered when Mr. Obama hit back on charges that the Obama Administration has been rapidly cutting the US Naval Fleet.  Candidate Obama snarkily retorted about horses and bayonets.



Politically, this was acting stupidly on electoral college politics.  Virginia is a swing state and the Virginia Tidewaters have lots of military voters.  Even if the military votes are waylaid this cycle, there are lots of veterans and military spouses that will still be going to the polls who would neither appreciate dramatically cutting the fleet nor the derisive tone of the reply.

While it can not readily be proven, I believe that Romney’s reticence to get down and dirty during the Boca Raton debate threw Obama’s briefing binder out the window.  It is reasonable to think that Obama was ready to smack down his opponent on nuances of Benghazi and then sell the narrative that Republican Romney was a warmonger. When Romney did not use the anticipated playbook, Obama had to improvise, which deprived him of much (but not all) of his practiced retorts.

Although Romney projected less aggression in Boca Raton, he was not acquiescent to Obama. The Apology Tour jab was a good example.  While Mr. Obama denied that he went on an Apology Tour in 2009 and basically to check the transcript that sorry was the hardest word, the public understood it as such.  This allowed Romney to springboard by noting that we did not dictate to the world but that we freed the world from dictators. This was done in a genteel and not overwrought manner while still scoring points.

 Romney’s strategic passivity and bipartisanship made Romney appear statesman-like and almost the incumbent whereas Obama’s flailing aggression looked desperate and had the vibe of a challenger rather than the incumbent. Focus groups on various networks came to the surprising conclusion that Obama scored on points but Romney tended to win over undecided voters by being a statesman.  Polling coming out after the debate shows some narrowing in the horse race, but the big gap (16%) that Romney had amongst female voters has evaporated.  So much for the War on Women meme.


What would really be instructive is likeability factor.  Even though President Obama’s national overall approval rate hovers at 47% no matter how they tweak the survey sample, Mr. Obama has consistently topped 50% on likeability.   That may be an extension of the Hope and Change phenomenon that sounded nice and people inserted whatever they wanted.  In the last month, the Obama 2012 campaign has capitalized on killing Big Bird attack and the puerile Binders Full of Women gimmick to besmirch Romney.  Most of that snark was by surrogates or on the campaign hustings.

 As the third debate went on, Obama fed upon the bile building up in his antagonistic answers.  So the first part of his “In the Navy” answer sounded like a reasonable (but mistaken point) about horses and bayonets and newer technologies.  But then Obama went further and sarcastically noted: There are these things called aircraft carriers.”  That sort of condescension only sells with the truly convicted.  It impeaches the aura of the good graces of likeability which remained with him from the prior campaign.  The sarcastic “Aircraft Carrier” trope probably made Obama feel pretty good and rang well in his ears but to females watching it made Obama sound petty and petulant.

It is ironic that by Romney not engaging in the muck about Benghazi, it was spoken about more after the debate.  Now that journalists from CBS News and Fox News Channel have the real time communications during the Benghazi attack, the media who chose not to be Obama stenographers can report on the horrific response without denouncing it as a partisan Republican attack.

So by being somewhat passive, classy seeming informed and giving approval to his opponent’s foreign policy successes, Romney seemed bipartisan, statesmanlike and positive while protecting his political position.  This change in tactics causes the real Obama to come out once he ran out of scripted one liners.  So a haughty, petulant and unscripted Obama was on display for voters to see vis-a-vis Romney.

I watched the debate with a bunch of right minded partisans gathered for the Battleground State Talkers Tour event.  Assuredly, the audience would have preferred seeing a pugilistic performance from Romney.  But in my estimation, Romney’s Boca Raton debate performance was a slow poison for his opposition. It was not satisfying for someone who’s favorite contact sport is politics, but I think that is was a successful tactic to take.   In less than two weeks, it should become clear if the “strategery” was successful in electing the 45th President of the United States.

h/t: A.F. Branco
     Gary McCoy