In his speech on the economy on September 8, President Barack Obama tied our nation's fiscal recovery to the passage of three free trade agreements (FTA) currently awaiting approval. Said the president:
Now it’s time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements that would make it easier for American companies to sell their products in Panama and Colombia and South Korea — while also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by global competition. (Applause.) If Americans can buy Kias and Hyundais, I want to see folks in South Korea driving Fords and Chevys and Chryslers. (Applause.) I want to see more products sold around the world stamped with the three proud words: “Made in America.” That’s what we need to get done.
While the Republicans may disagree with much of what the president proposed, their leadership is adamantly and enthusiastically behind the trade agreements. Evidence of the bipartisan support for the agreements is found everywhere. Last week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kent.) wrote an op-ed piece in the Washington Post lamenting the languishing of the trade agreements on President Obama’s desk and imploring him to pass them along to Congress.
Democratic Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio has been harshly critical of the Obama administration as of late, and is now advocating a challenge to President Obama in a primary. According to Kucinich, such an endeavor would likely turn Obama into a better president.
Kucinich said on CNN:
Can I see someone coming forward to challenge President Obama from the ranks of the Democratic Party? I suppose it’s possible. There again, it’s going to be about the economy, and that’s what it should be about. We have to get America back to work. And frankly, we have to stop wasting money on these wars that’s causing us to be able to lose the resources we need to focus money at home. So should President Obama have a challenge? I say he should. I think it would make him a better president if he received a Democratic challenge in the Democratic primary. Will I be that candidate? No.
Bob Turner, former television executive and the Republican candidate vying to secure Anthony Weiner’s former congressional seat, has swiped first place in a new poll by Siena College Research Institute. With one day to go before the Sept. 13 special election, Turner holds a six-point lead over Democratic Assemblyman David Weprin, a sharp turn from Siena College’s August 10 poll when Weprin led with 48 percent of likely voters over Turner’s 42 percent.
"Turner holds a small five-point lead in the Queens portion of the district, where he was trailing by 10 points in the previous Siena College Poll, and he has increased his lead in Brooklyn from six points previously to a now healthy 12-point bulge," said Siena College pollster Steven Greenberg. Turner’s six-point lead has shocked many pundits and analysts, as the 9th Congressional District has historically been a "blue" district, with a Democrat holding the reign since 1923.
The disparity in the candidates’ poll numbers stems from wavering loyalty to the Democratic Party and Turner’s edge on independent voters. "While Turner has an overwhelming 90-6 percent lead among Republicans, Weprin has only a 63-32 percent lead among Democrats, and Turner has a 38-point lead among likely independent voters," asserted Greenberg.
In a somewhat shocking announcement, former GOP presidential contender Tim Pawlenty announced that he will be endorsing Mitt Romney for president. The former Minnesota Governor sent an email to Romneys supporters early today indicating that Romney alone possesses the necessary qualities to bring America out of this economic crisis.
Pawlenty also announced his endorsement online at the National Review. In a post entitled, “My Endorsement: Mitt Romney for President,” Pawlenty wrote:
Mitt Romney is running for president, and I am proud to endorse him.
Alone among the contenders, he possesses the unique qualifications to confront and master our severe economic predicament. His abiding faith in our country’s exceptional historical position as a beacon of freedom will make him the most important leader in a world that depends upon a strong America to stay at peace.
The military-industrial complex is pulling out all the stops to ensure that not one dime of its vast federal largess is taken away even as the nation faces nearly $15 trillion in debt. Defense contractors, Representatives and Senators, and current and former Defense Secretaries are working together to thwart actual and potential cuts in defense spending resulting from the August debt ceiling deal.
The deal calls for $350 billion in defense cuts over 10 years — an average of $35 billion per year. In addition, it tasks the newly created congressional super-committee with finding an additional $1.2 trillion in savings over that same time period. Should the committee fail to come to an agreement on those savings, automatic cuts totaling the same amount, split evenly between defense and domestic spending, are slated to occur. If that took place, defense spending would then be reduced by $600 billion, an average of $60 billion per year.
That may sound like a huge dent in the Pentagon’s budget, but there are two things to keep in mind.
The enlightened scholars of the American Political Association gathered for a convention during Labor Day Weekend, and wouldn’t you know it, the degreed wizards agree: Tea Party Americans are bigots.
While last week’s report in the Washington Times is hardly unique, it suggests Tea Party Americans can expect the mainstream media and its lefitst allies to continue smearing the grass-roots movement as part of their effort on behalf to reelect President Obama.
Despite abundant evidence to the contrary, the Left has been peddling the lie that Tea Party members are sheet-wearing night riders for some time, and the charge hasn’t just come from the fever swamps of the blogosphere. Seemingly intelligent top-level officials in Washington say the same thing.
In yet another display of government inefficiency, government officials in Bethesda, Maryland, located just outside of Washington, D.C., have decided to spend $4 million to house 12 homeless people for a single year. That averages out to approximately $330,000 per person, a figure that grows even more absurd when one observes that the average price of a single family home in the United States is just over $170,000.
The story was first reported by the Washington Examiner:
Owned and operated by Montgomery County's Housing Opportunities Commission, the "permanent supportive housing" facility will be at 4913 Hampden Lane — between Woodmont Avenue and Arlington Road in downtown Bethesda — and will house six studio and six one-bedroom apartments.
The project received $1 million in federal stimulus money, as well as $944,829 from the Montgomery County Department of Housing and Community Affairs and $2.1 million in Low-Income Housing Tax Credits from the state.
Two weeks ago, President Obama ordered a massive review of 300,000 deportation cases of illegal aliens because they had either not broken any other laws while living in the country illegally or are considered “lesser offenders.” The first high-profile beneficiary of the policy has a familiar name: Obama.
That’s right, the president’s illegal-alien uncle, Omar Onyango Obama, who was caught driving drunk and has evaded a deportation ordered since 1992, was “quietly released” from custody, the Boston Globe reported last week.
His successful evasion of the nation’s immigration laws mirrors that of Obama’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango, who hired a slick immigration attorney to convince an immigration court to give her asylum.
Recently W. Cecil Steward, dean emeritus of the UNL College of Architecture (Lincoln, Nebraska), launched what can only be described as a diatribe against a talk I gave recently in Lincoln. My topic was Sustainable Development and how it is transforming out nation. In his article, Mr. Steward, rather than provide any substance on the issue, prefers instead to use words designed to paint me as an extremist playing on people’s fear.
Specifically, Mr. Steward accuses me of misrepresenting Lincoln’s local Comprehensive Development Plan, and its imposition of Sustainable Development as a “cover for a United Nations based international conspiracy.” I have worked on this issue for more than 18 years and have routinely experienced similar attacks against my message and my character in cities where I have appeared. For some reason those working to enforce Sustainable Development policies scramble to discredit me and blow a well orchestrated smokescreen to cover their work. Apparently honest debate and disagreement are not part of their plans.