I always loved this song for the driving keyboard line and the lyrics always seem to be relevant.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Friday, October 09, 2009
LIRR Disability Claims Still Being Processed
Last year, it was revealed that retiring LIRR employees were getting federal disability checks when they were undeserving of them. That was costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and yet a year later the disability claims are still being rubber stamped:
Did the LIRR change the way that they processed these claims? It doesn't appear so, although the LIRR had cracked down on those facilitating bogus claims (including arrests of several involved in October 2008). The problem is that once the claims are submitted to the FRB, they're rubber stamped, regardless of the actual merit of these claims.
The agency, the Railroad Retirement Board, which is the equivalent of Social Security for railroad workers, said last October that it would use greater oversight to examine claims filed by L.I.R.R. employees after reports in The New York Times that virtually every career L.I.R.R. employee applied for and received disability payments from the federal government.As the Times notes, retirees have obtained $250 million since 2000 from the federal government in addition to state pensions and benefits (that until recently included free access to state parks and golf courses, including the famous Bethpage golf course.
But in the six months since the changes were adopted, the agency approved 64 of the 66 occupational disability claims filed by retired L.I.R.R. workers, according to the review, an audit by the Government Accountability Office that is to be released on Friday. A copy of the report was obtained by The Times.
The approval rate was roughly 97 percent, about the same level as before the new measures were enacted.
“Business as usual,” said Daniel Bertoni, the director of disability issues at the Government Accountability Office, who oversaw the study.
Did the LIRR change the way that they processed these claims? It doesn't appear so, although the LIRR had cracked down on those facilitating bogus claims (including arrests of several involved in October 2008). The problem is that once the claims are submitted to the FRB, they're rubber stamped, regardless of the actual merit of these claims.
President Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize
President Barack Obama, who took office just weeks before the Peace Prize Committee met to actually decide this prestigious prize, won the award and stunned the crowd who gathered in Oslo to hear the announcement.
No, the Committee states:
Hardly.
He did nothing other than issue a few utterances that he would do things differently than his predecessor, President George W. Bush. That was apparently more than enough to win the award. It wasn't so much Obama winning the award as yet another rebuke of President Bush, who still manages to get under the skin of the elites in Europe.
Palestinian terrorist Yasir Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize for signing the Oslo Accords, which was at the time seen as a huge step forward in Arab-Israeli relations.
As for a new climate, it's interesting that the Committee claims that Obama created a new climate for international relations, when he sucks up to dictators and despots and forsakes US allies. His pursuit of talking to Iran will result in Iran having still more time to pursue its nuclear weapons goals, one that will likely result in the first use of nuclear weapons since the end of World War II.
Meanwhile, there were far more deserving candidates that were overlooked, including Tsvingerai of Zimbabwe, who should have won the election against thug Robert Mugabe, but eschewed violence to take a position within the government and seek reconciliation. Throw in various aid groups that were providing aid to Afghan refugees.
How exactly was Obama nominated? Well, the process allows media elites, academics, and others to nominate candidates and the Committee votes on the results:
Clearly, this was a hugely political decision, and one based on no merits whatsoever.
UPDATE:
There are calls for Obama to turn the award down. That might be a wise decision, because this is a mockery of an award that has long been mocked, particularly when you've got more worthy candidates and prior winners who actually accomplished something - whether it was a lifetime of work or signing a peace treaty or ending a conflict or providing assistance to refugees or other humanitarian work.
Obama has done none of that.
UPDATE:
On further reflection, this isn't just a mockery, it's a travesty to all those who actually furthered the goals of peace. It further diminishes this award and shows just how politicized the award has been. Instead of awarding the prize to those who are truly worthy of receiving it, Obama receives the award primarily because he isn't President Bush. In other words, Bush Derangement Syndrome is still alive and well among the elites.
The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.For what actual accomplishment did Obama win for? Did he attempt to bring peace to a longstanding conflict? Did he sign an international accord or agreement?
Speculation had focused on Zimbabwe's Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, a Colombian senator and a Chinese dissident, along with an Afghan woman's rights activist.
The Nobel committee praised Obama's creation of "a new climate in international politics" and said he had returned multilateral diplomacy and institutions like the U.N. to the center of the world stage. The plaudit appeared to be a slap at President George W. Bush from a committee that harshly criticized Obama's predecessor for resorting to largely unilateral military action in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
NBC News reported that White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called Obama with the news just before 6 a.m. Aides said the president felt "humbled" by the committee's decision.
No, the Committee states:
"...for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"
Hardly.
He did nothing other than issue a few utterances that he would do things differently than his predecessor, President George W. Bush. That was apparently more than enough to win the award. It wasn't so much Obama winning the award as yet another rebuke of President Bush, who still manages to get under the skin of the elites in Europe.
Palestinian terrorist Yasir Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize for signing the Oslo Accords, which was at the time seen as a huge step forward in Arab-Israeli relations.
As for a new climate, it's interesting that the Committee claims that Obama created a new climate for international relations, when he sucks up to dictators and despots and forsakes US allies. His pursuit of talking to Iran will result in Iran having still more time to pursue its nuclear weapons goals, one that will likely result in the first use of nuclear weapons since the end of World War II.
Meanwhile, there were far more deserving candidates that were overlooked, including Tsvingerai of Zimbabwe, who should have won the election against thug Robert Mugabe, but eschewed violence to take a position within the government and seek reconciliation. Throw in various aid groups that were providing aid to Afghan refugees.
How exactly was Obama nominated? Well, the process allows media elites, academics, and others to nominate candidates and the Committee votes on the results:
1. Members of national assemblies and governments of states;Those nominations begin in September of the year before. In other words, the nominations began September 2008, before Obama was elected President in November 2008, and months before he was sworn in.
2. Members of international courts;
3. University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes;
4. Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
5. Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
6. Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (proposals by members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of the Committee after February 1) and
7. Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute.
Clearly, this was a hugely political decision, and one based on no merits whatsoever.
UPDATE:
There are calls for Obama to turn the award down. That might be a wise decision, because this is a mockery of an award that has long been mocked, particularly when you've got more worthy candidates and prior winners who actually accomplished something - whether it was a lifetime of work or signing a peace treaty or ending a conflict or providing assistance to refugees or other humanitarian work.
Obama has done none of that.
UPDATE:
On further reflection, this isn't just a mockery, it's a travesty to all those who actually furthered the goals of peace. It further diminishes this award and shows just how politicized the award has been. Instead of awarding the prize to those who are truly worthy of receiving it, Obama receives the award primarily because he isn't President Bush. In other words, Bush Derangement Syndrome is still alive and well among the elites.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Congressional Democrat Health Care Overhaul Roundup; Now Including Windfall Profits Taxes On Insurers?
Sen. Max Baucus' health care proposal hasn't been reduced to legislation which is clear from the CBO and JCT treatment (both noting that there is no legislation based on the Baucus version), and that abomination likely will be twice as expensive as the CBO claims. Then there are the taxes imposed to make it work. The Baucus plan would result in marginal tax rates as high as 70%.
The CBO and JCT also note that the taxes imposed under the proposal kick in three years before the benefits start (10 years of revenues, 7 years of benefit, in the 10 year period being studied). Any shortfall in revenues in the first three years will compound shortfalls later and result in an ever more unbalanced situation.
With all these shortfalls creeping into every bill, no matter how expensive and how much Democrats have tried to hide the true costs, the need to raise revenue is all too necessary under all these plans.
Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now urging Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY/tax cheat) to consider a windfall profits tax on health insurance companies, in lieu of either the surtax on wealthy taxpayers currently contained in HR 3200 or the tax on high value plans proposed by Baucus.
Never mind that the windfall profits tax will never provide the kind of revenue necessary to make the plan work. Never mind that a windfall profits tax will be passed on to the consumer because the entities involved will not absorb the cost but rather pass it on to their users.
Never mind that windfall profits taxes are a mighty difficult thing to do when the profits in the health care insurance sector are roughly 3%, or lower than what you'd find in the technology sector. This is razor thin profits, but Pelosi and Democrats know that raising taxes on most Americans is a nonstarter. They have to find a way to increase those taxes by any means necessary, even a back-door tax such as through a windfall profits tax.
If 3% is considered a windfall profit, how long before these same redistributionists look at the other companies on the list for windfall profits? When the taxes hit, the profits will disappear altogether, along with the services provided.
UPDATE:
The Hill has posted a story relating to the windfall profits tax.
The CBO and JCT also note that the taxes imposed under the proposal kick in three years before the benefits start (10 years of revenues, 7 years of benefit, in the 10 year period being studied). Any shortfall in revenues in the first three years will compound shortfalls later and result in an ever more unbalanced situation.
With all these shortfalls creeping into every bill, no matter how expensive and how much Democrats have tried to hide the true costs, the need to raise revenue is all too necessary under all these plans.
Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now urging Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY/tax cheat) to consider a windfall profits tax on health insurance companies, in lieu of either the surtax on wealthy taxpayers currently contained in HR 3200 or the tax on high value plans proposed by Baucus.
Never mind that the windfall profits tax will never provide the kind of revenue necessary to make the plan work. Never mind that a windfall profits tax will be passed on to the consumer because the entities involved will not absorb the cost but rather pass it on to their users.
Never mind that windfall profits taxes are a mighty difficult thing to do when the profits in the health care insurance sector are roughly 3%, or lower than what you'd find in the technology sector. This is razor thin profits, but Pelosi and Democrats know that raising taxes on most Americans is a nonstarter. They have to find a way to increase those taxes by any means necessary, even a back-door tax such as through a windfall profits tax.
If 3% is considered a windfall profit, how long before these same redistributionists look at the other companies on the list for windfall profits? When the taxes hit, the profits will disappear altogether, along with the services provided.
UPDATE:
The Hill has posted a story relating to the windfall profits tax.
Suicide Bomber Strikes Indian Embassy In Kabul
Look for India to blame the ISI and the Taliban for this.
A suicide car bomber detonated his vehicle outside the Indian Embassy in the busy center of Afghanistan's capital on Thursday, killing 17 people and wounding nearly 80 in the second major attack in the city in less than a month.A suicide bomber targeted the Indian embassy in Kabul. The Taliban took responsibility for the blast. This isn't the first time either, and this latest bombing comes on the heels of a report in an Indian newspaper that the ISI was trying to convince the Taliban to go after India in Jammu and Kashmir across the Line of Control instead of going after Pakistanis.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for the 8:30 a.m. assault and said the embassy was the target.
The blast occurred a day after the Afghanistan war reached its eighth anniversary and as President Barack Obama considered a request for between 10,000 and 40,000 additional troops prepared by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.
The "jail or jihad" option offered to the Taliban seems a useful diversion for ISI. The Pakistan military establishment has had to fight the Taliban, once its close allies in Afghanistan, but is looking to turn the situation to its advantage.The tension between India and Pakistan just got ratcheted up another notch.
Apprehensions in Indian security circles that the crackdown by the Pakistan army on Taliban — seen as a last resort after the jihadis turned their guns on the Pakistani state — could mean trouble in Kashmir are being proved correct. Not only have infiltration attempts by regular jihadi outfits like Lashkar-e-Taiba gone up, the presence of Taliban poses a new threat.
Highly placed sources said BSF and the Army had been alerted about the developments after intelligence intercepted talk about infiltration bids in the next 15 to 20 days.
"Although the Taliban is yet to successfully infiltrate into India, the coming days will pose a challenge as their attempts to sneak in are expected before the onset of winter," said a senior official. The infiltration is closely controlled and monitored by the ISI and Pakistan army which is often involved in the crossings.
About Those Corzine Attack Ads
New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine has nothing else to do but attack his Republican opponent Chris Christie. It's not like Corzine can actually run on his record.
State spending is out of control and playing games like trying to omit the federal stimulus from his budget figures to make it appear like he cut spending is just the tip of the iceberg.
Corzine hasn't actually accomplished anything that he wants to bring attention to: we've got higher sales taxes and higher property taxes (when he promised that the sales tax hike would provide property tax relief).
The state workforce is higher than when he originally took office, even if he claims that he's cut it down from inflated numbers of a year or two ago.
The state's economy situation is worse than when he took over.
The pension timebomb is even worse now; particularly when Corzine repeatedly called on municipalities to skip pension payments to avoid hiking taxes to cover their obligations.
Corruption is as rampant now as ever.
If it's about the economy, why is it that Corzine is doing everything but talking about what he's done to improve it? That answer is self-evident. He's raised taxes and made the state's tax burden even higher than when he took office. Businesses are less likely to come to New Jersey because of the tax burden (except when they're relocating from New York City where the burden is higher still). Taxpayers are fleeing the state in droves, increasing the per capita tax burden on those that remain.
And on that note, Christie must do a much better job explaining what he will do to improve the economy - and taking Corzine and Trenton to task for unconscionable state spending at a time when revenues simply can't work.
State spending is out of control and playing games like trying to omit the federal stimulus from his budget figures to make it appear like he cut spending is just the tip of the iceberg.
Corzine hasn't actually accomplished anything that he wants to bring attention to: we've got higher sales taxes and higher property taxes (when he promised that the sales tax hike would provide property tax relief).
The state workforce is higher than when he originally took office, even if he claims that he's cut it down from inflated numbers of a year or two ago.
The state's economy situation is worse than when he took over.
The pension timebomb is even worse now; particularly when Corzine repeatedly called on municipalities to skip pension payments to avoid hiking taxes to cover their obligations.
Corruption is as rampant now as ever.
If it's about the economy, why is it that Corzine is doing everything but talking about what he's done to improve it? That answer is self-evident. He's raised taxes and made the state's tax burden even higher than when he took office. Businesses are less likely to come to New Jersey because of the tax burden (except when they're relocating from New York City where the burden is higher still). Taxpayers are fleeing the state in droves, increasing the per capita tax burden on those that remain.
And on that note, Christie must do a much better job explaining what he will do to improve the economy - and taking Corzine and Trenton to task for unconscionable state spending at a time when revenues simply can't work.
Poll Finds 1/3 of Parents Oppose Swine Flu Immunizations
I'm not particularly shocked by this study, which claims that one third of parents oppose immunizing their kids against swine flu. The reasons may vary - from thinking that the swine flu isn't any more dangerous than the regular flu or that the vaccine itself isn't sufficiently tested, but the rationales are mostly due to the lack of information about the vaccine and the threat posed by influenza than objective opposition based on facts about the vaccine.
Influenza kills 30,000 to 40,000 people in the US annually. Swine flu was found to be highly communicable, even if the mortality rates weren't different than the seasonal flu in the US. Influenza can affect anywhere from 10-25% of the American public, which means that it can have a serious effect on the productivity of the US economy as well as overburden the health care delivery system. Immunizations can reduce the severity of the influenza outbreaks, and prevent widespread disruptions to school routines, as was the case in New York City last year, where a dozen schools were shuttered because of outbreaks among the student population.
The AP poll found that 38 percent of parents said they were unlikely to give permission for their kids to be vaccinated at school.The swine flu vaccine (H1N1) is based on the same seasonal flu vaccine that is updated annually by scientists who make best guess estimates of the top influenza strains that are likely to be spread during the upcoming flu season. The H1N1 vaccine is made using the same processes as the seasonal flu vaccine.
The belief that the new vaccine could be risky is one federal health officials have been fighting from the start, and they plan an unprecedented system of monitoring for side effects.
They note that swine flu vaccine is made the same way as seasonal flu vaccines that have been used for years. And no scary side effects have turned up in tests on volunteers, including children.
On Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius appealed for widespread inoculation against swine flu, vouching unconditionally for the vaccine: "We know it's safe and secure."
The AP poll, conducted Oct. 1-5, found 72 percent of those surveyed are worried about side effects, although more than half say that wouldn't stop them from getting the vaccine to protect their kids from the new flu.
Giving flu shots to schoolchildren is also an idea many parents are still getting used to. It was only last year that the government recommendation kicked in for virtually all children to get it. Seasonal flu vaccination rates for children last year ranged from about 48 percent for toddlers to about 9 percent for teens.
Influenza kills 30,000 to 40,000 people in the US annually. Swine flu was found to be highly communicable, even if the mortality rates weren't different than the seasonal flu in the US. Influenza can affect anywhere from 10-25% of the American public, which means that it can have a serious effect on the productivity of the US economy as well as overburden the health care delivery system. Immunizations can reduce the severity of the influenza outbreaks, and prevent widespread disruptions to school routines, as was the case in New York City last year, where a dozen schools were shuttered because of outbreaks among the student population.
Missing Iranian Nuclear Scientists Defected To US?
Iran has to be wondering when the other shoe is going to drop considering that two Iranian nuclear scientists appear to have defected to the US. Iran had believed that the US somehow captured the duo, including one that went to Saudi Arabia on the haj.
It may also explain why Iran was suddenly willing to spill the beans about the nuclear enrichment facility in Qom. They must have realized that the West knew about it anyways, and wanted to get ahead of the news to make it appear that they're giving a concession when it is simply a ploy to buy more time to continue enrichment activities.
This isn't the first time that individuals linked to Iran's nuclear program have gone missing. Two years ago a high ranking Iranian official disappeared in Turkey. Iran claimed the US or Israel captured him, but both countries deny any involvement.
These kinds of disappearances are important for several reasons. It disrupts the nuclear weapons program because the knowledge base is affected along with the need to tighten security further to protect against further disappearances. It also gives the West additional insight into the Iranian program, and can provide critical information about locations and status updates on the enrichment activities.
Two Iranian nuclear scientists who mysteriously disappeared in recent weeks have defected to the United States, it was reported yesterday.These two will be able to give the US, the IAEA, and others insight into the Iranian nuclear weapons program that they have been unable to attain to date.
Iran confirmed that one of the atomic researchers, Shahram Amiri, vanished during a Muslim pilgrimage, the hajj, to Mecca in Saudi Arabia.
Officials in Tehran said they had evidence that the United States spirited him away.
"We have found documents that prove US interference in the disappearance of the Iranian pilgrim Shahram Amiri in Saudi Arabia," Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said.
Amiri worked at Tehran's Malek Ashtar University, a facility closely tied to Iran's military. The university's Web site said it is involved in "special national research projects."
Amiri's defection was reported by a Saudi-owned newspaper, Asharq al-Awsat, which said he is likely to have top-secret information about Iran's uranium-enrichment plant hidden in a mountain near Qom.
The newspaper said a second Iranian nuclear scientist was arrested in the country of Georgia a few weeks ago and agreed to defect to the West.
It may also explain why Iran was suddenly willing to spill the beans about the nuclear enrichment facility in Qom. They must have realized that the West knew about it anyways, and wanted to get ahead of the news to make it appear that they're giving a concession when it is simply a ploy to buy more time to continue enrichment activities.
This isn't the first time that individuals linked to Iran's nuclear program have gone missing. Two years ago a high ranking Iranian official disappeared in Turkey. Iran claimed the US or Israel captured him, but both countries deny any involvement.
These kinds of disappearances are important for several reasons. It disrupts the nuclear weapons program because the knowledge base is affected along with the need to tighten security further to protect against further disappearances. It also gives the West additional insight into the Iranian program, and can provide critical information about locations and status updates on the enrichment activities.
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Dow To Begin Promoting Thin Film Solar Shingles
Solar power is one of the ways that the nation can reduce its dependence on petroleum products, but a problem has always been cost and the ability to retrofit structures to accept the solar systems.
Dow appears to have figured out how to make thin film solar shingles that could be installed by a roofer just as they would asphalt shingles. An electrician would be required to hook up the array to an inverter and the household power, but that's a significantly lower cost than having to bring in a specialized company to install a solar system.
The solar shingles will begin test marketing in 2010.
In parts of the country where there is ample sun, this could be a significant source of alternative energy and reduce energy consumption from utility companies. At the same time, as more people convert to such systems, tax revenues from utility taxes and fees will decline, meaning that states will find themselves in a bind to come up with new revenue sources.
Dow appears to have figured out how to make thin film solar shingles that could be installed by a roofer just as they would asphalt shingles. An electrician would be required to hook up the array to an inverter and the household power, but that's a significantly lower cost than having to bring in a specialized company to install a solar system.
The solar shingles will begin test marketing in 2010.
Dow plans to begin test-marketing the solar shingle in mid-2010, initially targeting new-home construction. Ms. Palmieri said the market could be worth $5 billion by 2015 and noted that 90 percent of homes in the United States use asphalt shingles.I think this has serious potential, although I wonder how it would hold up to repeated impacts caused by falling branches and other tree debris. Another potential issue would be weight, particularly on older homes; if the weight is comparable, then solar could gain wider adoption.
Dow designed the shingles, which will initially be manufactured at the company’s Midland, Mich., facility. Global Solar of Tucson, Ariz., is supplying the thin-film solar cells.
Thin-film has generally not been used for residential systems because of its relatively low efficiency – Global Solar’s cells are 10 percent efficient. That means a larger array is required generate the same of amount of electricity as conventional solar panels.
But Dave Parrillo, the senior research and development director for Dow Solar Solutions, said the solar shingles can offset between 40 percent and 80 percent of a home’s electricity consumption.
In parts of the country where there is ample sun, this could be a significant source of alternative energy and reduce energy consumption from utility companies. At the same time, as more people convert to such systems, tax revenues from utility taxes and fees will decline, meaning that states will find themselves in a bind to come up with new revenue sources.
Egypt Cuts Ties With The Louvre
Egypt has cut ties with the Louvre in Paris over the museum's refusal to return artifacts that Egypt considers stolen from the country by archeologists.
Egypt's antiquities officials have been waging a more aggressive campaign to secure the return of artifacts taken from the country as a way to preserve the nation's heritage.
Egypt said Wednesday its antiquities department severed ties with France's Louvre museum because it has refused to return what are described as stolen artifacts, one of the country's most aggressive attempts yet to reclaim relics from some of the world's leading Egyptology collections.The museum houses antiquities from around the world, and Egypt's move is the most aggressive to date to demand the return of priceless artifacts that were taken in various archeological expeditions through the decades.
The Louvre's communications office said the museum is open to returning the artifacts demanded by Egypt, though the decision has to be taken by a special committee.
The Egyptian ruling means that no archaeological expeditions connected to the France's premier museum will be allowed to work in Egypt. Already Egypt has suspended an excavation sponsored by the Louvre at the massive necropolis of Saqqara and canceled a lecture in Egypt by a former curator of the museum.
"The Louvre Museum refused to return four archaeological reliefs to Egypt that were stolen during the 1980s from the tomb of the noble Tetaki," near the famed temple city of Luxor, said a statement quoting Supreme Council of Antiquities head Zahi Hawass.
Egypt's antiquities officials have been waging a more aggressive campaign to secure the return of artifacts taken from the country as a way to preserve the nation's heritage.
Obama Rules Out Large Reduction in Afghan Force
Read the headline carefully. President Obama has ruled out a large reduction in US forces in Afghanistan. It doesn't say that President Obama has ruled out any reduction of forces. It also doesn't say that President Obama will increase forces as requested by those on the front lines, including Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
A significant number of Democrats want to see the American commitment in Iraq curtailed; they want to bring the troops home. In fact, 98 have signed on to a House bill calling for an exit strategy for Afghanistan.
Sen. Carl Levin makes a nonsensical argument that increased US presence in Afghanistan is counterproductive because it looks like the US is an occupying nation. Has Levin looked over to Iraq? The US troop presence is slowly declining from its peak during the surge, and Iraqis now have political and civil control over most of the country, even if they're still dealing with a tenuous security situation because of insurgents that want to kill and maim Iraqis at every opportunity.
The US presence in Afghanistan (troop authorization is 68,000) is nearly half of the number that we've seen in Iraq (which was more than 120,000), and the reason that the Taliban have been resurgent is because US, Afghan, and NATO forces have not been able to shut down the cross-border Taliban operations and the NATO forces have largely taken defensive positions, rather than striking out offensively against the Taliban to thwart their slow creep back into positions of control around the country. The US isn't seen as an occupying nation unless the US makes that its goal; and that was never the goal. It was to get the nation on its feet and set a course to being a functional state.
There is a long way to go before that happens, but cutting forces is going to severely undermine that goal. Moreover, it will give the Taliban a chance to spread, and with it bring al Qaeda back into prominence.
At the same time, you've got Democrats complaining that the war in Afghanistan didn't start until this year, a clear slam at the Bush Administration, which is playing things too cute by half given the Democrats reluctance to send troops to Afghanistan to combat the Taliban and to thwart the Taliban and al Qaeda from regaining a safe haven there.
Meeting with leaders from both parties at the White House, Mr. Obama seemed to be searching for some sort of middle ground, saying he wanted to “dispense with the straw man argument that this is about either doubling down or leaving Afghanistan,” as White House officials later described his remarks.President Obama is in a tough position, and continued support for the Afghanistan operations is coming from Republicans, as Democrats' support is clearly wavering.
But as the war approached its eight-year anniversary on Wednesday, the session underscored the perilous crosscurrents awaiting Mr. Obama. While some Democrats said they would support whatever he decided, others challenged him about sending more troops. And Republicans pressed him to order the escalation without delay, leading to a pointed exchange between the president and Senator John McCain of Arizona, his Republican opponent from last year’s election.
Mr. McCain told the president that “time is not on our side.” He added, “This should not be a leisurely process,” according to several people in the room.
A few minutes later, Mr. Obama replied, “John, I can assure you this won’t be leisurely,” according to several attendees. “No one feels more urgency to get this right than I do.”
Still, compared with the harsh debate over health care, the tone was civil and restrained during the 75-minute meeting in the State Dining Room as Mr. Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and about 30 members of Congress gathered around a large table with only glasses of water and notebooks in front of them.
Mr. Obama summoned the lawmakers to assure them that he would keep their concerns in mind as he considered the request of his commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, for as many as 40,000 more troops. The president plans to meet with his national security team on Wednesday to talk about Pakistan and on Friday to talk about Afghanistan. Aides plan to schedule one more meeting before he decides on General McChrystal’s proposal.
A significant number of Democrats want to see the American commitment in Iraq curtailed; they want to bring the troops home. In fact, 98 have signed on to a House bill calling for an exit strategy for Afghanistan.
Walz, for instance, has signed onto a bill by Rep. Jim McGovern (Mass.), the most vocal critic among House Democrats of the Afghan war, calling on Obama to develop an “exit strategy” for getting U.S. forces out of the troubled country. The McGovern bill has 98 co-sponsors, including more than two dozen freshman and sophomore Democrats.Again, read this carefully; they say that the US squandered an opportunity to go after the Taliban by focusing on Iraq, and yet when the opportunity presents itself to go after the Taliban (with more troops - since that's what was diverted by Iraq according to this line of thinking), they're opting to curtail operations further.
McGovern also released a bipartisan letter to Obama last week, urging the president to “reject any recommendation for a further escalation of U.S. military forces” in Afghanistan.
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who like Walz was opposed to the Iraq war, said he signed onto the McGovern letter because boosting the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan isn’t the right solution.
Sen. Carl Levin makes a nonsensical argument that increased US presence in Afghanistan is counterproductive because it looks like the US is an occupying nation. Has Levin looked over to Iraq? The US troop presence is slowly declining from its peak during the surge, and Iraqis now have political and civil control over most of the country, even if they're still dealing with a tenuous security situation because of insurgents that want to kill and maim Iraqis at every opportunity.
The US presence in Afghanistan (troop authorization is 68,000) is nearly half of the number that we've seen in Iraq (which was more than 120,000), and the reason that the Taliban have been resurgent is because US, Afghan, and NATO forces have not been able to shut down the cross-border Taliban operations and the NATO forces have largely taken defensive positions, rather than striking out offensively against the Taliban to thwart their slow creep back into positions of control around the country. The US isn't seen as an occupying nation unless the US makes that its goal; and that was never the goal. It was to get the nation on its feet and set a course to being a functional state.
There is a long way to go before that happens, but cutting forces is going to severely undermine that goal. Moreover, it will give the Taliban a chance to spread, and with it bring al Qaeda back into prominence.
At the same time, you've got Democrats complaining that the war in Afghanistan didn't start until this year, a clear slam at the Bush Administration, which is playing things too cute by half given the Democrats reluctance to send troops to Afghanistan to combat the Taliban and to thwart the Taliban and al Qaeda from regaining a safe haven there.
The Rebuilding of Ground Zero, Part 81
It's about damned time. The former Deutsche Bank building demolition will finally resume its work after a two-year delay resulting from a deadly fire that killed two FDNY firefighters because standpipes were cut and other safety issues that were discovered in the aftermath.
What we do know is that the delays in demolition have delayed reconstruction efforts throughout Ground Zero since that building was to provide access to the rest of the site.
UPDATE:
The WTC Memorial Plaza continues to be built out; construction of the SW portion of the site is now underway. There are 694 pieces of steel involved in this section, and after this work is done, only a small section adjacent to the PATH station will need to be erected. The SW corner has been exceedingly difficult to build because of foundation work and the close proximity to the PATH tracks. When the work is done, the PATH tracks will be nearly completely enclosed but for that one area adjacent to the station.
Now, three and a half years after demolition of the 41-story tower began, workers next week will start the arduous job of dismantling its 26 remaining stories and removing 15,750 tons of concrete and 11,000 tons of steel.Demolition work is also progressing on the nearby Fiterman Hall that was plagued by political indecision and an inability of the City and State to get the demolition work underway. Fiterman Hall will eventually be rebuilt for the Borough of Manhattan Community College, but plans for a new structure on the site of the former Deutsche Bank building are up in the air. It will be the site of a vehicle security center for vehicles entering Ground Zero, but beyond that, it isn't clear what will happen.
Crews have already replaced the black plastic netting shrouding the building with blue, fire-retardant netting; removed all the walls, glass, plumbing and work sheds from the interior; and erected a plywood perimeter around the top three floors. The construction manager, Bovis Lend Lease, expects to get a permit from the city’s Buildings Department early next week to resume demolition.
In the coming months, ironworkers, operating engineers and laborers will go floor by floor, smashing the concrete into rubble, cutting the steel beams and lowering the debris to the ground under the watch of a small army of fire guards, inspectors and regulators. Sometime next spring, the star-crossed building will cease to exist.
“We believe we have developed a plan utilizing the latest techniques and best practices to safely and efficiently deconstruct 130 Liberty Street,” Steven H. Sommer, a senior vice president of Bovis Lend Lease, said in an interview on Tuesday.
What we do know is that the delays in demolition have delayed reconstruction efforts throughout Ground Zero since that building was to provide access to the rest of the site.
UPDATE:
The WTC Memorial Plaza continues to be built out; construction of the SW portion of the site is now underway. There are 694 pieces of steel involved in this section, and after this work is done, only a small section adjacent to the PATH station will need to be erected. The SW corner has been exceedingly difficult to build because of foundation work and the close proximity to the PATH tracks. When the work is done, the PATH tracks will be nearly completely enclosed but for that one area adjacent to the station.
Rangel Brings Home Bacon To CCNY
Imagine a politician managing to get $3 million in grant money for a program that the Pentagon doesn't even want. Now, imagine the uproar over such wasteful spending.
Where's the outrage when this politician happens to be none other than Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), who happened to steer the $3 million grant to the City College of New York (CCNY), where he's already directed millions of dollars to his namesake program:
How exactly is that fiscally responsible?
UPDATE:
House Republicans again attempted to get rid of Rangel as chairman of the Ways and Means committee, but fell short in their latest effort.
House Democrats are protecting a corrupt fellow Democrat; they'd much prefer swimming in the corruption instead of draining the swamp.
Where's the outrage when this politician happens to be none other than Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), who happened to steer the $3 million grant to the City College of New York (CCNY), where he's already directed millions of dollars to his namesake program:
Two years after creating a center in his own name at City College, Harlem Rep. Charles Rangel has come through with a $3 million defense grant for the school -- for a project the Pentagon doesn't even want, The Post has learned.A Long Island company hired a lobbyist to push for this spending, and Rangel obliged, even though the Pentagon wasn't interested.
The $3 million cash infusion is going to an existing academic department, rather than to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at CCNY, a $30 million project that will immortalize Rangel's name and house his papers when he retires. Rangel had previously arranged $2 million in taxpayer funds for the center.
The latest piece of congressional pork is to fund research into new composite materials that could be used to protect Army trucks from attack. The grant is tucked into the massive Defense Appropriations Bill moving through Congress.
Word of the funding comes as the House is set to vote today on a Republican-backed resolution to strip Rangel of his Ways and Means Committee chair pending an ethics investigation, after revelations that he didn't disclose income on multiple properties, as well as failure to pay taxes and other issues.
The Pentagon doesn't want the research money, but Rangel got the funding anyway by getting the Appropriations Committee to direct the cash to CCNY.
How exactly is that fiscally responsible?
UPDATE:
House Republicans again attempted to get rid of Rangel as chairman of the Ways and Means committee, but fell short in their latest effort.
Despite the expected defeat Wednesday, the GOP did keep the spotlight on the New York Democrat's ethical problems, although the matter will be turned over to the House ethics committee for a long-term investigation. The House voted 246-153 to refer the resolution to remove him to that panel in a partisan vote that had no meaning except to revisit Rangel's problems.This whole mess has been in the hands of the ethics committee for months now. They've dragged their feet on the matter, and Pelosi has demurred in taking action.
House Democrats are protecting a corrupt fellow Democrat; they'd much prefer swimming in the corruption instead of draining the swamp.
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Unintended Consequences Of Fast Food Calorie Counts
New York City implemented a mandatory requirement that fast food restaurants offer calorie counts for their food items sold at their restaurants throughout New York City in July 2008. Well, things haven't exactly worked out as the so-called health experts thought.
Instead of reducing caloric intake, a study found that people actually consumed more (via Gothamist).
This is actually the first rigorous study of the calorie count, and the results suggest that the law didn't exactly work out as intended. In fact, it suggests that those who were affected by the calorie counts ate 36 calories more than had they ignored the counts.
The study's authors suggest more education of consumers is needed.
So, what's the answer for the nanny staters in New York City? As the NY Times reports, the proponents are not sure what they can do, but they're looking into it.
Instead of reducing caloric intake, a study found that people actually consumed more (via Gothamist).
Influence of labeling on the nutrient content of purchased food. People in New York City purchased a mean number of 825 calories before menu labeling was introduced and 846 calories after labeling was introduced (Exhibit 2). The number of calories purchased in Newark before and after labeling also did not appreciably change (823 calories before labeling and 826 calories after). Similar results were found for saturated fat, sodium, and sugar, with no appreciable or significant differences before or after labeling was instituted.23Caloric intake increased regardless of age and gender among those studied in New York City. The original law was imposed after a cursory study claimed that those consumers of Subway stores where the calorie counts were voluntarily posted consumed less calories.
This is actually the first rigorous study of the calorie count, and the results suggest that the law didn't exactly work out as intended. In fact, it suggests that those who were affected by the calorie counts ate 36 calories more than had they ignored the counts.
The study's authors suggest more education of consumers is needed.
So, what's the answer for the nanny staters in New York City? As the NY Times reports, the proponents are not sure what they can do, but they're looking into it.
The findings, to be published Tuesday in the online version of the journal Health Affairs come amid the spreading popularity of calorie-counting proposals as a way to improve public health across the country.So, if labels are insufficient, what else can be done that doesn't constitute coercion or banning of food items? That's clearly where the nanny-staters are looking since this move didn't work out as intended. Increased education may not result in any changes as the authors of the study note. That leaves few options.
“I think it does show us that labels are not enough,” Brian Elbel, an assistant professor at the New York University School of Medicine and the lead author of the study, said in an interview.
New York City was the first place in the country to require calorie posting, making it a test case for other jurisdictions. Since then, California, Seattle and other places have instituted similar rules.
Calorie posting has even entered the national health care reform debate, with a proposal in the Senate to require calorie counts on menus and menu boards in chain restaurants.
This study focused primarily on poor black and Hispanic fast-food customers in the South Bronx, central Brooklyn, Harlem, Washington Heights and the Rockaways in Queens, and used a similar population in Newark, which does not have a calorie posting law, as a control group. The locations were chosen because of a high proportion of obesity and diabetes among poor minority populations.
George Will Gets It Wrong On Obamas' IOC Copenhagen Speeches
President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama may bea malignant narcissists, but their speeches before the IOC in Copenhagen don't prove the claim. George Will seems to think that it does, but he gets it wrong.
What the Copenhagen speeches show is an abject failure to persuade the IOC that Chicago had a superior bid to other cities in the competition combined with a failure to understand the IOC and how they chose cities to host the Games.
It also exposed yet another failure of the Administration officials to recognize no-win situations and put the President in a bind no matter how he responded to the challenge.
If Obama didn't go and Chicago didn't win, Obama loses.
If Obama goes and Chicago doesn't win, Obama loses.
Obama would only claim partial credit if Chicago wins the bid, and it is all too apparent that the Chicago bid was wanting even without Obama stepping in. Obama went because other cities had their respective national leaders go and promote the cities involved in the competition.
If you actually read the speeches, as oppose to read the punditocracy, you'd see that the speech was wanting on that very issue - the Obamas were supposed to be selling Chicago, and they didn't make the sale.
Here's the text of the speeches.
The speeches were supposed to persuade, but they do nothing of the sort. They are completely devoid of any reason to actually vote for Chicago over any of the other cities. That's the primary failure of the speeches.
Read Michelle and President Obama's speech, and it's all about the family and their attachment to sports; it was not about how the Bears or the Cubs and the White Sox make Chicago a huge sports town where the fans will make the Olympics commercially successful. After all, this is about the Olympics making money and being a successful operation.
It's about their personal connections to the city - not about the City itself and what it can do for the Olympics. That was a huge mistake. I'm not sure who thought that the Obamas' personalizing Chicago would help it win over the IOC, but it was a failed gambit. It would have been better had they not spoken at all since they completely missed the point of why they were there in the first place.
Had they instead spoken of the fans' devotion to teams despite failure to achieve for decades (Cubs fans!) they might have seen how the City could embrace all manner of sports that don't normally garner the kind of respect that basketball, swimming and gymnastics usually gets. I'm talking about the secondary sports that could use a boost from a fanatic crowd that would come out to cheer. None of this came across in the speeches.
What the Copenhagen speeches show is an abject failure to persuade the IOC that Chicago had a superior bid to other cities in the competition combined with a failure to understand the IOC and how they chose cities to host the Games.
It also exposed yet another failure of the Administration officials to recognize no-win situations and put the President in a bind no matter how he responded to the challenge.
If Obama didn't go and Chicago didn't win, Obama loses.
If Obama goes and Chicago doesn't win, Obama loses.
Obama would only claim partial credit if Chicago wins the bid, and it is all too apparent that the Chicago bid was wanting even without Obama stepping in. Obama went because other cities had their respective national leaders go and promote the cities involved in the competition.
If you actually read the speeches, as oppose to read the punditocracy, you'd see that the speech was wanting on that very issue - the Obamas were supposed to be selling Chicago, and they didn't make the sale.
Here's the text of the speeches.
The speeches were supposed to persuade, but they do nothing of the sort. They are completely devoid of any reason to actually vote for Chicago over any of the other cities. That's the primary failure of the speeches.
Read Michelle and President Obama's speech, and it's all about the family and their attachment to sports; it was not about how the Bears or the Cubs and the White Sox make Chicago a huge sports town where the fans will make the Olympics commercially successful. After all, this is about the Olympics making money and being a successful operation.
It's about their personal connections to the city - not about the City itself and what it can do for the Olympics. That was a huge mistake. I'm not sure who thought that the Obamas' personalizing Chicago would help it win over the IOC, but it was a failed gambit. It would have been better had they not spoken at all since they completely missed the point of why they were there in the first place.
Had they instead spoken of the fans' devotion to teams despite failure to achieve for decades (Cubs fans!) they might have seen how the City could embrace all manner of sports that don't normally garner the kind of respect that basketball, swimming and gymnastics usually gets. I'm talking about the secondary sports that could use a boost from a fanatic crowd that would come out to cheer. None of this came across in the speeches.
NYS Pension Pay To Play Scandal Nets A Plea Deal
Ray Harding entered a guilty plea to taking $800,000 in pay to play fees in connection with New York's pension mess.
Ray Harding, who quietly registered as a financial broker several years ago, admitted in Manhattan Supreme Court he got the money as a "reward" for his support of former state Controller Alan Hevesi.Sorry, but I think Harding would get off lightly if he's able to continue practicing law and avoid jail time if he cooperates with authorities. At a minimum, he should lose the law license, precisely because he violated state ethics and criminal law. Harding is expected to turn state's evidence on Hank Morris and other figures involved in the huge scandal that began during Alan Hevesi's turn as comptroller. Another person implicated in the scandal, investment adviser Saul Meyer also pleaded guilty to paying Morris $300,000 in kickbacks.
Harding said Hank Morris, Hevesi's political guru, made him a middleman on some deals so he could reap the fees.
"This is a fatally flawed system and it is a corrupted system," said Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who noted there have been pension fund abuses for 30 years under a number of controllers.
"The old adage is, 'Follow the money.' The money in New York state is the pension fund. If you're looking for corruption, follow the money. It will lead you to the ... state controller's office."
Harding, 74, who faces up to four years in jail, has agreed to cooperate in Cuomo's ongoing probe of the pension system.
Prosecutors said he could be spared jail time and keep his law license if he cooperates fully.
Iran Seeking Upgrades To Qom Enrichment Facility
Iran is looking to upgrade the enrichment centrifuges at Qom.
Iran is already well past the threshold level of enrichment necessary for industrial production of enriched uranium; they've gone well past experimental installation of centrifuges, and are now working on full-scale production with one goal in mind; nuclear weapons.
As others note, when will the Obama Administration admit the painfully obvious fact that Iran is intent upon developing a nuclear weapons infrastructure and that the upgraded centrifuges are part of that process?
Tuesday's Kayhan daily quotes the head of Iran's nuclear agency, Ali Akbar Salehi, as saying the country has carried out research and development for a new generation of centrifuge to be made domestically.That's a curious situation, given that it has been believed that Iran has been operating IR-2 centrifuges for some time. The IR-2 centrifuges are based on the Pakistani P-2 centrifuges, which are a vastly more efficient system than the large number of P-1 (IR-1) centrifuges that Iran currently operates.
The machines would be more advanced than the decades old P-1 type centrifuges acquired on the black market and in use at Iran's other enrichment facility in Natanz.
Iran is already well past the threshold level of enrichment necessary for industrial production of enriched uranium; they've gone well past experimental installation of centrifuges, and are now working on full-scale production with one goal in mind; nuclear weapons.
As others note, when will the Obama Administration admit the painfully obvious fact that Iran is intent upon developing a nuclear weapons infrastructure and that the upgraded centrifuges are part of that process?
But For Palestinian Terror, Operation Cast Lead Would Not Have Occurred
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas is considering taking the severely flawed and biased Goldstone Report to various international bodies in a bid to bring Israeli officials before their jurisdiction in charges of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As YnetNews reports:
But for kassam and mortar attacks, Israel would not have engaged in Operation Cast Lead.
But for kassam and mortar attacks, Israel would not have engaged in restricting humanitarian aid that was repeatedly hijacked by Hamas to further their war goals (reequiping Hamas at the expense of the civilian population).
But for Palestinian terror attacks, Israel would not need to maintain security checkpoints to thwart suicide bombers.
Without the thousands of rockets and mortars fired at Israel, each with the deadly intent to murder and maim Israelis with range of those mortars and rockets, Israel would not have engaged in an operation that was meant to stop the terrorists from firing on Israel in the first place. That civilians were inadvertently killed in the process is lamentable, but Hamas purposefully put civilians in harm's way by commingling with civilians, wearing civilian clothes, and firing rockets and mortars from civilian areas, including in close proximity to UN facilities.
The Palestinians are hoping to use the Goldstone Report to further undermine Israel's ability to defend itself from future attacks along the same lines.
As others have noted, the overwhelming number of those killed in Gaza were not civilians as the Palestinians propagandize, but were Hamas and Islamic Jihad members. They were counted as civilians primarily because they were wearing civilian garb, even if their longstanding ties to the terror groups were well known. In fact, Israel went above and beyond established international law and the Geneva Conventions to minimize civilian casualties by attempting to contact those individuals personally and directly to get them out of harm's way even as Hamas was engaging in all manner of war crimes to purposefully put civilians in harm's way.
The move appeared to mark a change in position, as the Palestinian delegation on Friday backed a move at the UN Human Rights Council to defer a vote on whether the report should be passed on.That's a serious situation, particularly because if they're going to claim that Israel violated Palestinian human rights, they better bring Ismail Haniyeh and other Hamas leaders before the same bodies to convict them of war crimes as well - for precipitating the Operation Cast Lead in the first place.
Erakat said Abbas' decision came "in light of the controversy that has arisen" around the report, which accused Israel of committing war crimes during its three-week Gaza war that erupted December 27.
"We want to discuss the report in international bodies so they will take decisions on what emerged in the report, in order to insure that the crimes committed by Israel against our people are never repeated," he said.
But for kassam and mortar attacks, Israel would not have engaged in Operation Cast Lead.
But for kassam and mortar attacks, Israel would not have engaged in restricting humanitarian aid that was repeatedly hijacked by Hamas to further their war goals (reequiping Hamas at the expense of the civilian population).
But for Palestinian terror attacks, Israel would not need to maintain security checkpoints to thwart suicide bombers.
Without the thousands of rockets and mortars fired at Israel, each with the deadly intent to murder and maim Israelis with range of those mortars and rockets, Israel would not have engaged in an operation that was meant to stop the terrorists from firing on Israel in the first place. That civilians were inadvertently killed in the process is lamentable, but Hamas purposefully put civilians in harm's way by commingling with civilians, wearing civilian clothes, and firing rockets and mortars from civilian areas, including in close proximity to UN facilities.
The Palestinians are hoping to use the Goldstone Report to further undermine Israel's ability to defend itself from future attacks along the same lines.
As others have noted, the overwhelming number of those killed in Gaza were not civilians as the Palestinians propagandize, but were Hamas and Islamic Jihad members. They were counted as civilians primarily because they were wearing civilian garb, even if their longstanding ties to the terror groups were well known. In fact, Israel went above and beyond established international law and the Geneva Conventions to minimize civilian casualties by attempting to contact those individuals personally and directly to get them out of harm's way even as Hamas was engaging in all manner of war crimes to purposefully put civilians in harm's way.
Louisiana ACORN Embezzlement Investigation Continues
According to a review of documents provided to the Louisiana Attorney General's office based on an internal review, $5 million was embezzled by ACORN employees in the New Orleans office, and not $1 million. Where did the money go, and more importantly, who took it?
Curiously, this New York Times article notes that Lewis admits that Dale Rathke did embezzle some unidentified sum of money from ACORN coffers, but disagrees that the amount of money involved was $5 million. That amount apparently comes from two members of the Board of Directors of the national ACORN group that were voted out of office.
The new amount was reported in a subpoena released Monday from an investigation by Attorney General Buddy Caldwell. It is unclear if the money was taken from state, federal or private funds, according to the subpoena.Bertha Lewis of course is going to claim that the charges are false (and that's even without seeing the charges or other information relating to the case), but she also claimed that the O'Keefe and Giles videos were isolated cases, right before 5 videos showing substantially similar illicit responses made by ACORN employees at offices all across the country.
ACORN Chief Executive Officer Bertha Lewis said the new embezzlement allegation is "completely false." She said she would comment further after she and ACORN attorneys have a chance to review the subpoena.
Caldwell issued subpoenas in August seeking documents related to ACORN International then-President Wade Rathke and his brother, Dale Rathke, who kept the group's books. Those subpoenas targeted possible violations of state employee tax law, obstruction of justice and violations of the Employee Retirement Security Act.
The attorney general made inquiries in June into alleged embezzlement within ACORN that happened 10 years ago. The group last year dealt with an internal dispute and a lawsuit involving accusations that Dale Rathke made nearly $1 million in improper credit card charges in 1999 and 2000. Rathke's brother and a donor repaid the money.
Curiously, this New York Times article notes that Lewis admits that Dale Rathke did embezzle some unidentified sum of money from ACORN coffers, but disagrees that the amount of money involved was $5 million. That amount apparently comes from two members of the Board of Directors of the national ACORN group that were voted out of office.
The subpoena, part of an investigation into accusations of state tax violations and obstruction of justice at Acorn, said the internal review was raised in a board meeting in October 2008 that was attended by Bertha Lewis, the chief executive.So, based on the aforementioned information, it appears that the AP wire report left out critical information that identifies that Lewis admits that embezzlement did occur, and that Lewis was merely questioning the $5 million sum, which is a figure that links back to two former board members.
“Current high-ranking members of Acorn have publicly acknowledged that the embezzlement did in fact occur, but the exact amount of the embezzlement was unknown,” the subpoena said. “It is still unclear if some of the monies embezzled are from state, federal or private funds.”
In a phone interview, Ms. Lewis acknowledged that the internal review found that Dale Rathke, brother of Wade Rathke, the founder of Acorn, had embezzled money from Acorn and affiliated charitable organizations in 1999 and 2000. But she said that the review had found that the amount embezzled was a little less than $1 million, a figure that has already been publicly disclosed and acknowledged.
She said the $5 million figure came from two former directors who had since been voted off the board.
Intel Officials Report Zazi's Al Qaeda Connections
How did Najibullah Zazi come to the attention of the FBI in the first place? This article sheds little light, but what it leaves out is key:
So how is the Obama Administration handling this particular terror plot and investigation? Well, they want to distinguish themselves from the methods used by the Bush Administration, and that's primarily a media tactic. They want to show that the Adminnistration is engaged without hyping the threat, but using all the tools at their disposal, including the very kinds of tactics that the left lambasted the Bush Administration over:
Moreover, while law enforcement has Zazi in custody, it is all but clear that the terror plot has been fully exposed, along with his coconspirators. The CIA and other national security agencies have to track down Zazi's contacts overseas, which involves rolling up a terror cell that may lead back to top al Qaeda terrorists operating in Afghanistan or Pakistan.
UPDATE:
Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Zazi plot was one of the most serious terror plots disrupted since 9/11.
The CIA learned about Najibullah Zazi through one of its sources and alerted domestic agencies, including the FBI, the officials said.It would appear that Zazi's communications were intercepted at some point, whether he was outside the US at the time or not isn't clear. If he was inside the US and someone from al Qaeda was communicating with him, that means that FISA and the Patriot Act as amended by Congress was invoked; in particular it relates to the interception of foreign communications into the US, which was one of the areas that civil libertarians were so concerned with. It would also explain why Congress was alerted to the investigation and subsequent arrest of Zazi.
US intelligence first became aware of Zazi in late August, a senior administration official said. Interest in Zazi surfaced just weeks before prosecutors claim he was planning to strike on the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
The intelligence and administration officials declined to offer more details on the operative.
The fact that intelligence officials learned of Zazi through a CIA source sheds more light on the government's claim that the charges against him are part of a broader, international case.
So how is the Obama Administration handling this particular terror plot and investigation? Well, they want to distinguish themselves from the methods used by the Bush Administration, and that's primarily a media tactic. They want to show that the Adminnistration is engaged without hyping the threat, but using all the tools at their disposal, including the very kinds of tactics that the left lambasted the Bush Administration over:
In interviews, senior Obama officials stressed their efforts to set a different tone than the previous administration; the White House says it avoided trumpeting either the elevated threat level or the averted crisis, while portraying Obama as highly involved in monitoring developments. As Zazi drove across the country under heavy surveillance, John O. Brennan, Obama's top counterterrorism adviser, briefed the president three to four times a day on Zazi's activities .For all of the vilification of the Patriot Act, it appears that it has been tweaked sufficiently to find itself getting reauthorization support from the President.
Shortly after taking office, Obama discarded the term "global war on terror," along with some of its most controversial tools, and aides describe a president who has been deliberative in implementing his own security policy. He has come under fire for not abandoning some of George W. Bush's policies, such as warrantless wiretapping and rendition, and faced criticism for jettisoning others, including enhanced interrogation techniques and secret prisons.
At the same time, the Obama administration is pressing Congress to move swiftly to reauthorize three provisions of the USA Patriot Act set to expire in late December. They include the use of "roving wiretaps" to track movement, e-mail and phone communications, a tool that federal officials used in the weeks leading up to Zazi's arrest.
Moreover, while law enforcement has Zazi in custody, it is all but clear that the terror plot has been fully exposed, along with his coconspirators. The CIA and other national security agencies have to track down Zazi's contacts overseas, which involves rolling up a terror cell that may lead back to top al Qaeda terrorists operating in Afghanistan or Pakistan.
UPDATE:
Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Zazi plot was one of the most serious terror plots disrupted since 9/11.
Monday, October 05, 2009
Palestinian Authority Ratcheting Up Terror Quotient
If the first three intifadas ended in failure, what are the chances that a fourth being suggested by the Palestinian Authority will succeed? That's precisely the course of action that the so-called partners in peace in Fatah are pursuing.
They are lying about Israel to their brethren. They are lying about Israel's intentions to somehow Judaize what is already Jewish - the 3,000+ year connection to Jerusalem.
And they are more than willing to engage in violence to pursue their ideological goals.
Moreover, this most recent violent outbreak occurred because a group of Jews went onto the Temple Mount to pray; a location that is considered so sacred by Orthodox Jews that they don't dare step foot on the Temple Mount for fear of walking on the Holy of Holies - where inner sanctum of the Holy Temples once stood because they are ritually impure. These Jews who went on to the Temple Mount had the audacity to actually pray in a location that Arabs have attempted to rewrite history to eliminate the historical connection of Jews to the Temple Mount, Jerusalem, and Israel.
Abbas and the other Fatah thugs are continuing to push the nonsense that housing projects are an impediment to peace, when the only impediment is the fact that Israel doesn't have a honest partner in peace that actually wants a 2-state solution. Fatah, Hamas, and the Palestinian Authority have one goal in mind; the elimination of a Jewish state of Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian state over all else.
They are lying about Israel to their brethren. They are lying about Israel's intentions to somehow Judaize what is already Jewish - the 3,000+ year connection to Jerusalem.
And they are more than willing to engage in violence to pursue their ideological goals.
The Palestinian Authority on Monday evening condemned Jerusalem's decision to restrict entrance to the Aksa Mosque compound on the Temple Mount, calling on Palestinians to confront Israel in light of the "Israeli aggression."Palestinians have been stockpiling rocks on the Temple Mount to pelt Jewish parishioners praying at the Western Wall (Kotel) just below. The Israeli authorities have limited access to the Temple Mount precisely because they want to head off a violent confrontation, and that is now being treated as an act of violence, or somehow claiming that it is Israeli aggression.
"We call on the Palestinian public to confront Israel and its plans, that are intended to prevent the Palestinian people from fulfilling their aspirations of establishing a Palestinian state in the occupied territories," read a statement issued by the government of PA Prime Minister Salaam Fayad in Ramallah.
The PA government publicly decried "Israel's attempts to conduct Jewish prayer services in the Aksa compound" and urged the world "to force Israel to halt is efforts to Judaize the city."
Moreover, this most recent violent outbreak occurred because a group of Jews went onto the Temple Mount to pray; a location that is considered so sacred by Orthodox Jews that they don't dare step foot on the Temple Mount for fear of walking on the Holy of Holies - where inner sanctum of the Holy Temples once stood because they are ritually impure. These Jews who went on to the Temple Mount had the audacity to actually pray in a location that Arabs have attempted to rewrite history to eliminate the historical connection of Jews to the Temple Mount, Jerusalem, and Israel.
Abbas and the other Fatah thugs are continuing to push the nonsense that housing projects are an impediment to peace, when the only impediment is the fact that Israel doesn't have a honest partner in peace that actually wants a 2-state solution. Fatah, Hamas, and the Palestinian Authority have one goal in mind; the elimination of a Jewish state of Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian state over all else.
Where Efficiencies Run Into Reality
Instapundit points out that Oregon is once again considering mileage taxes and that a national mileage tax is coming under consideration in Congress.
I've discussed the subject of mileage taxes and the fact that they would be a poor substitute for existing motor fuel taxes, but the problem is much more than just fuel taxes and declining revenues as vehicles become more efficient. It creates a taxing feedback loop where revenues fall short of expectations and the taxing jurisdiction needs to raise revenue in some fashion - either by increasing existing taxes, or finding other items to tax in its stead.
The same problem exists wherever efficiencies drive the marketplace. We see it with home heating oil, electricity, natural gas, and other utilities that provide power for home and business usage. A significant portion of those utility bills goes to pay various taxes and fees. As homes and businesses upgrade to more efficient HVAC, fixtures and appliances, the less energy is used, causing a declining revenue per capita.
This is yet another fundamental problem with the tax base as currently construed. If you intend to raise a set amount of revenue from a given item, if the consumer's use of that item becomes more efficient, they will not need nearly as much of it, causing a shortfall in usage. The state's response to the shortfall is either to raise the fee or tax or to incur a shortfall in revenues.
I've discussed the subject of mileage taxes and the fact that they would be a poor substitute for existing motor fuel taxes, but the problem is much more than just fuel taxes and declining revenues as vehicles become more efficient. It creates a taxing feedback loop where revenues fall short of expectations and the taxing jurisdiction needs to raise revenue in some fashion - either by increasing existing taxes, or finding other items to tax in its stead.
The same problem exists wherever efficiencies drive the marketplace. We see it with home heating oil, electricity, natural gas, and other utilities that provide power for home and business usage. A significant portion of those utility bills goes to pay various taxes and fees. As homes and businesses upgrade to more efficient HVAC, fixtures and appliances, the less energy is used, causing a declining revenue per capita.
This is yet another fundamental problem with the tax base as currently construed. If you intend to raise a set amount of revenue from a given item, if the consumer's use of that item becomes more efficient, they will not need nearly as much of it, causing a shortfall in usage. The state's response to the shortfall is either to raise the fee or tax or to incur a shortfall in revenues.
NYC Dept. of Education Severely Limiting Bake Sales
The nanny state kicks in once again, and now they're severely limiting bake sales in New York City public schools on grounds that so many students are obese.
In other words, the very programs that can improve health and wellness are going to be adversely affected by the curbs on bake sales.
It's all about the unintended consequences.
The change is part of a new wellness policy that also limits what can be sold in vending machines and student-run stores, which use profits to help finance activities like pep rallies and proms. The elaborate rules were outlined in a three-page memo issued at the end of June, but in the new school year, principals and parents are just beginning to, well, digest them.The bake sales are a critical part of fundraising in schools, which means that after school activities, including sports and recreation will be adversely affected.
Parent groups and Parent-Teacher Associations are conspicuously given an exception: once a month they are allowed to sell as many dark fudge brownies and lemon bars as they please, so long as lunch has ended. And after 6 p.m. on weekdays, anything goes. But at that hour, most students are long gone, and as far as the Education Department is concerned, stuffing oneself with coconut macaroons and peanut butter cookies at that hour is one’s prerogative.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has made both public health and public education centerpieces of his tenure, and the changes in the schools’ food are an outgrowth of his efforts to curb trans fats, salt and other unwanted additives.
Roughly 40 percent of the city’s elementary and middle school students are overweight or obese, according to the Education Department. The department also found a correlation between student health and performance on standardized tests, according to a survey it released in July.
The previous regulations limited sales to once a month and allowed them at any time during that day, but they were loosely enforced. Officials say they will do more to monitor the new regulations.
In other words, the very programs that can improve health and wellness are going to be adversely affected by the curbs on bake sales.
It's all about the unintended consequences.
Why Corzine Is Creeping Closer To Christie In the Polls
Jennifer Rubin wonders why Jon Corzine is creeping up on Chris Christie in the polls. There's a real simple reason. Money. The incumbent governor, Democrat Jon Corzine, is spending three times as much money on retaining his job as Republican Chris Christie is spending to win the job.
Corzine is likely going to put up $35 million of his own money to hold the job, and that's not counting the millions that the Democrats are funneling into the state so that this bellweather state can help lead Democrats into 2010. That's because Corzine eschewed public financing.
Christie is accepting public financing, which limits how much money he can spend to $11 million. The various Republican PACs can spend more on his behalf, but it will have to make up a significant gap because Corzine can spend so much personally.
That's why you see so many Corzine attack ads; they're effective even if they're blatantly and fundamentally dishonest because it can smear Christie in a way that Christie can't respond to every attack. Corzine can't use his Wall Street resume to bolster his policy credentials because the state's economy is such a mess and because of his ties to Goldman Sachs.
Corzine was originally elected because voters saw him as a solution to the state's financial woes. The problem is that four years later and the state's budget situation is in even worse shape; the state's economy and business climate is among the worst in the nation, unemployment is at historic highs and the state's tax burden is among the worst in the nation.
Now, with the economy in the crapper, Corzine is busy attacking Christie and Christie can't focus on the one issue that is paramount to voters; the state of the economy. Money may trump policy yet in New Jersey, despite the fact that Corzine's policy has been an unmitigated disaster for New Jersey.
UPDATE:
Will there be a backlash from the fact that so many counties in New Jersey rank prominently among the highest property taxed in the nation? After all, Gov. Corzine claimed that he provided property tax relief in the form of an increase to the state sales and use tax. One year after imposing the sales tax hike, he cut the property tax relief program significantly, all while property taxes continued rising. His original budget proposal in 2009 was to eliminate the property tax relief program altogether, but the outcry over that forced him to reconsider and limit the relief program.
Corzine did nothing to reduce the property tax burden; he simply attempted to shift the tax burden and resulted in higher taxes all around without any measurable effect. Taxpayers pay more, and get less in return. Throw in the governor's statements calling on municipalities to reduce pension payments in fulfillment of their obligations, and you've got a ticking time bomb that is waiting to go off.
The only way to get the situation under control is to seriously cut state spending, not just around the fringes. That means making serious cuts to programs that are cash cows for the entrenched interests. But only then will the state be put on a fiscally responsible path.
Corzine is likely going to put up $35 million of his own money to hold the job, and that's not counting the millions that the Democrats are funneling into the state so that this bellweather state can help lead Democrats into 2010. That's because Corzine eschewed public financing.
Christie is accepting public financing, which limits how much money he can spend to $11 million. The various Republican PACs can spend more on his behalf, but it will have to make up a significant gap because Corzine can spend so much personally.
That's why you see so many Corzine attack ads; they're effective even if they're blatantly and fundamentally dishonest because it can smear Christie in a way that Christie can't respond to every attack. Corzine can't use his Wall Street resume to bolster his policy credentials because the state's economy is such a mess and because of his ties to Goldman Sachs.
Corzine was originally elected because voters saw him as a solution to the state's financial woes. The problem is that four years later and the state's budget situation is in even worse shape; the state's economy and business climate is among the worst in the nation, unemployment is at historic highs and the state's tax burden is among the worst in the nation.
Now, with the economy in the crapper, Corzine is busy attacking Christie and Christie can't focus on the one issue that is paramount to voters; the state of the economy. Money may trump policy yet in New Jersey, despite the fact that Corzine's policy has been an unmitigated disaster for New Jersey.
UPDATE:
Will there be a backlash from the fact that so many counties in New Jersey rank prominently among the highest property taxed in the nation? After all, Gov. Corzine claimed that he provided property tax relief in the form of an increase to the state sales and use tax. One year after imposing the sales tax hike, he cut the property tax relief program significantly, all while property taxes continued rising. His original budget proposal in 2009 was to eliminate the property tax relief program altogether, but the outcry over that forced him to reconsider and limit the relief program.
Corzine did nothing to reduce the property tax burden; he simply attempted to shift the tax burden and resulted in higher taxes all around without any measurable effect. Taxpayers pay more, and get less in return. Throw in the governor's statements calling on municipalities to reduce pension payments in fulfillment of their obligations, and you've got a ticking time bomb that is waiting to go off.
The only way to get the situation under control is to seriously cut state spending, not just around the fringes. That means making serious cuts to programs that are cash cows for the entrenched interests. But only then will the state be put on a fiscally responsible path.
IAEA: Iran Testing Nuclear Warhead Designs
So much for Iran claiming that they're interested solely in peaceful uses of nuclear power. The IAEA admits that Iran is working towards nuclear weapons and missile technologies enabling the regime to fire nuclear weapons at Europe, Israel, and much of the Middle East.
Every day that Iran goes without sanctions and investigators scouring the country for more signs of the Iranian nuclear weapons program, is another day that Iran continues to operate its centrifuges in pursuit of the very materials necessary to build the nuclear weapons that would be used to fulfill the regime's ideological and religious obligations.
That Iran has allowed inspectors to see the facility at Qom just goes to show that they're playing for time. Observers have been noting for some time now that Iran has more than a dozen suspected nuclear weapons development sites, and Iran must expect that showing a second facility (the first being the already recognized at Natanz) would give them the opportunity to have the world look at a dog and pony show while work continues unabated elsewhere.
Iran has the capability to produce a nuclear bomb and has tested how to make a warhead capable of striking Israel and parts of southern Europe, according to a secret report by the UN's atomic energy watchdog.Iran never gave up the ghost of obtaining nuclear weapons and the means to attack its enemies throughout the region and into Europe. They are hellbent on nuclear blackmail, and it once again points out that the Bush Administration was right to indicate Iran's intentions to pursue nuclear weapons even as the CIA and the media lambasted the administration over similar claims that turned out to be wrong in the case of Iraq.
The report, a secret annex to the International Atomic Energy Agency's annual report, is based possibly on evidence smuggled out of Iran by the wife of a spy working for the Germans.
The report, excerpts of which were posted on the Internet over the weekend, concludes that Iran already "has sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device."
It presents evidence that Iran has done extensive research and testing on how to make components of a nuclear payload to be delivered by the medium-range missile known as Shahab 3.
The finding goes beyond America's official stance and could complicate talks in Geneva to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.
In 2007, American intelligence agencies reported that Iran had suspended its research into making a nuclear warhead in 2003. That assessment was rejected by Britain and France, whose position mirrors that of the IAEA secret report.
Every day that Iran goes without sanctions and investigators scouring the country for more signs of the Iranian nuclear weapons program, is another day that Iran continues to operate its centrifuges in pursuit of the very materials necessary to build the nuclear weapons that would be used to fulfill the regime's ideological and religious obligations.
That Iran has allowed inspectors to see the facility at Qom just goes to show that they're playing for time. Observers have been noting for some time now that Iran has more than a dozen suspected nuclear weapons development sites, and Iran must expect that showing a second facility (the first being the already recognized at Natanz) would give them the opportunity to have the world look at a dog and pony show while work continues unabated elsewhere.
NY Lt. Gov. Clashing With Gov. Paterson Over Budget Cuts
Governor David Paterson can't win, even when he gets the Court of Appeals to rule on his behalf. The court recently ruled that he had the right to appoint a Lieutenant Governor under state law. It's not a ruling I can agree with, but they are paid to make the decision, so Paterson's choice of Richard Ravitch is the legitimate and legal Lieutenant Governor.
The problem now is that Ravitch is slamming Paterson for not doing more to slash the state budget, which is already hemorrhaging $3 billion in the fiscal year 2009-2010 budget.
The problem now is that Ravitch is slamming Paterson for not doing more to slash the state budget, which is already hemorrhaging $3 billion in the fiscal year 2009-2010 budget.
Ravitch, allied with state Budget Director Robert Megna, wants the governor to lay out specific plans for slashing the projected $3 billion deficit, but Paterson is resisting for fear that the sure-to-be-unpopular cuts would drive down his in-the-basement popularity even further, administration insiders said.Paterson has been over his head as governor and his political choices have been awful, and he's made all kinds of enemies in a very short time, antagonizing Democrat party leaders from President Obama on down. He's now ignoring the key reason that New York is in dire fiscal shape - a state budget that the state cannot afford. State spending rose at a time when revenues fell sharply, and the state isn't likely to see Wall Street recover its record profits (and hence tax receipts) anytime soon. That means we're talking a structural deficit that will not be solved unless receipts and expenditures are brought into line with each other.
Richard Ravitch
Richard Ravitch
The insiders described Ravitch, whose controversial appointment by Paterson was challenged by lawmakers before being sanctioned in a 4-3 vote by the Court of Appeals last month, as increasingly frustrated over his inability to get the governor to focus on the state's worsening fiscal situation.
"Ravitch wants more time to get to the governor, to talk to him about what should be done, and he's not been able to get it. He's being blocked," said an administration source.
"The governor is avoiding Ravitch, doing a lot of other things, like going to California to hang out with the governor there," the source continued, referring to Paterson's trip late last week for an event with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and for what is believed to have been at least one political fund-raiser.
Paterson's refusal to take a tough stand on slashing the budget is being blamed on his secretary and chief of staff, Lawrence Schwartz, a longtime political operative and former top aide to Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano.
A source close to Paterson described Schwartz's decision-making style as, "politics first, government second."
Sunday, October 04, 2009
A Worrisome Trend
Friday's failure of Chicago to win the bid to host the 2016 Olympics may turn out to be a blessing in disguise for Chicago as Mike Lupica notes, but it clearly exposed problems with the Obama Administration and its worldview.
It also revealed a naivete and inexperience that extends to foreign policy and basic diplomacy.
Presidents do not attend major events unless their underlings have prepped the situation on the ground so that it favors the President to use his political capital to achieve success. It is all too apparent that the Administration did not understand the IOC and its byzantine politics. That's unforgivable precisely because they should have known what to expect from the USOC and Chicago 2016 committee. They admitted that much when they expressed those sentiments on Air Force One on the trip home from Copenhagen.
If the Administration knew that it was going to attend the IOC meeting, where was the preparation to insure the President would not get embarrassed if things didn't work out? It appears that it was wholly inadequate.
And that's going to get the US in trouble in the next three years. The President wants to rush headlong into talks with Iran, a totalitarian repressive regime that regularly lies, obfuscates, and alternates between secrecy and bold aggressive statements calling for the destruction of Israel, death to the US and is sitting on a vast nuclear program that is geared towards the production of nuclear weapons. Underestimating the politics of the IOC is one thing; to forge ahead and not understand the base rationale for Iran's pursuit of those nuclear weapons and missile technology is unforgivable.
Yet, that's the path we're apparently on. The President doesn't quite understand that talking, or the appearance of talking with the illegitimate leaders of Iran, including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, actually legitimizes the regime and undermines the opposition that has been fighting to make sure their voice is heard despite a violent crackdown against the regime. The regime in Tehran wants nuclear weapons, and missteps in understanding the nature of the problem means that this Administration is falling into needless mistakes; mistakes that threaten US national security and the security of our allies throughout the world.
Everyone watched and saw the Administration's inability to seal the deal at the IOC. The best thing you can say is that he was in a no-win situation because had he not gone and Chicago lost, he would have been blamed for not going to support the bid, but he did go and Chicago still came in fourth.
That speaks to fundamental weaknesses in the Chicago bid or to the IOC's reaction to the Administration's efforts in Copenhagen. I suspect it's a bit of both.
The problem is that these issues keep cropping up all over the place with this Administration, whether it's the failure to properly vet candidates for top policy positions or fundamentally misreading the state of the economy.
That's the worrisome trend; the on the job training isn't working fast enough and the repercussions are going to linger.
It also revealed a naivete and inexperience that extends to foreign policy and basic diplomacy.
Presidents do not attend major events unless their underlings have prepped the situation on the ground so that it favors the President to use his political capital to achieve success. It is all too apparent that the Administration did not understand the IOC and its byzantine politics. That's unforgivable precisely because they should have known what to expect from the USOC and Chicago 2016 committee. They admitted that much when they expressed those sentiments on Air Force One on the trip home from Copenhagen.
If the Administration knew that it was going to attend the IOC meeting, where was the preparation to insure the President would not get embarrassed if things didn't work out? It appears that it was wholly inadequate.
And that's going to get the US in trouble in the next three years. The President wants to rush headlong into talks with Iran, a totalitarian repressive regime that regularly lies, obfuscates, and alternates between secrecy and bold aggressive statements calling for the destruction of Israel, death to the US and is sitting on a vast nuclear program that is geared towards the production of nuclear weapons. Underestimating the politics of the IOC is one thing; to forge ahead and not understand the base rationale for Iran's pursuit of those nuclear weapons and missile technology is unforgivable.
Yet, that's the path we're apparently on. The President doesn't quite understand that talking, or the appearance of talking with the illegitimate leaders of Iran, including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, actually legitimizes the regime and undermines the opposition that has been fighting to make sure their voice is heard despite a violent crackdown against the regime. The regime in Tehran wants nuclear weapons, and missteps in understanding the nature of the problem means that this Administration is falling into needless mistakes; mistakes that threaten US national security and the security of our allies throughout the world.
Everyone watched and saw the Administration's inability to seal the deal at the IOC. The best thing you can say is that he was in a no-win situation because had he not gone and Chicago lost, he would have been blamed for not going to support the bid, but he did go and Chicago still came in fourth.
That speaks to fundamental weaknesses in the Chicago bid or to the IOC's reaction to the Administration's efforts in Copenhagen. I suspect it's a bit of both.
The problem is that these issues keep cropping up all over the place with this Administration, whether it's the failure to properly vet candidates for top policy positions or fundamentally misreading the state of the economy.
That's the worrisome trend; the on the job training isn't working fast enough and the repercussions are going to linger.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)