Tag Archives: Obama administration

Israeli officials: Iran vote shows growing threat | TPM News Pages

Israeli officials: Iran vote shows growing threat | TPM News Pages.

KARIN LAUB
AP News

Jun 13, 2009 10:49 EST

The re-election of hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a disputed vote underscores the growing threat posed by Tehran and its nuclear ambitions, two senior Israeli politicians said Saturday, urging the world not to engage in dialogue with Iran.

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon and Vice Premier Silvan Shalom appeared to be expressing their personal views and not those of the Israeli government. Government spokesman Mark Regev said it was not clear when the Israeli government would make a formal statement.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has argued that Iran’s nuclear ambitions, not Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians, should occupy the world’s attention.

Friction has been growing between Israel and the U.S. over Netanyahu’s refusal to endorse the idea of Palestinian statehood and a settlement freeze, as sought by the Obama administration.

Netanyahu is to deliver a major policy speech Sunday to clarify his positions. The re-election of Ahmadinejad, who has called for Israel to be wiped off the map, could strengthen his argument.

Authorities in Iran declared Ahmadinejad was re-elected in a landslide, though his opponent, reformist Mir Hossein Mousavi, claimed fraud and threatened to challenge results that he denounced as “treason.”

Despite the fluid situation, the statements by Ayalon and Shalom presumed an Ahmadinejad victory.

“If we had any shred of hope for change in Iran, the re-election of Ahmadinejad demonstrates the increasing Iranian threat,” Ayalon said in a text message sent to news organizations.

Ayalon also said there was no difference between the incumbent and Mousavi concerning “the nuclear issue and terror,” an apparent reference to Iran’s support for the Palestinian militant faction Hamas and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

“With the results of the Iranian elections, the international community has to stop the Iranian nuclear problem and terrorism from Iran immediately,” Ayalon said.

Shalom, who also serves as Israel’s minister for regional cooperation, said in a statement: “The election results in Iran are blowing up in the face of those who thought that Iran is built for real dialogue with the free world, concerning its nuclear program.”

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said he did not think there would be any change in American policy toward Iran “because the same person will be there,” Carter said after a meeting with the Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in the West Bank town of Ramallah.

“Hopefully, he’ll moderate his position,” he said about Ahmadinejad.

The Palestinians also watched the Iranian vote closely. Iran is a major patron of Hamas, the Islamic militant group that overran Gaza two years ago, ousting the forces loyal to Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

Abbas and his aides have in the past accused Iran of meddling in Palestinian affairs and making Palestinian reconciliation more difficult.

An Abbas aide, Saeb Erekat, hinted at Iran’s role Saturday. “We want Iran to take the side of Palestine, not this faction or that faction,” he said.

Source: AP News

GAFFNEY: Americas first Muslim president? – Washington Times

GAFFNEY: Americas first Muslim president? – Washington Times.

Obama aligns with the policies of Shariah-adherents

COMMENTARY:

During his White House years, William Jefferson Clinton — someone Judge Sonia Sotomayor might call a “white male” — was dubbed “America’s first black president” by a black admirer. Applying the standard of identity politics and pandering to a special interest that earned Mr. Clinton that distinction, Barack Hussein Obama would have to be considered America’s first Muslim president.

This is not to say, necessarily, that Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim any more than Mr. Clinton actually is black. After his five months in office, and most especially after his just-concluded visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, however, a stunning conclusion seems increasingly plausible: The man now happy to have his Islamic-rooted middle name featured prominently has engaged in the most consequential bait-and-switch since Adolf Hitler duped Neville Chamberlain over Czechoslovakia at Munich.

What little we know about Mr. Obama’s youth certainly suggests that he not only had a Kenyan father who was Muslim, but spent his early, formative years as one in Indonesia. As the president likes to say, “much has been made” — in this case by him and his campaign handlers — of the fact that he became a Christian as an adult in Chicago, under the now-notorious Pastor Jeremiah A. Wright.

With Mr. Obama’s unbelievably ballyhooed address in Cairo Thursday to what he calls “the Muslim world” (hereafter known as “the Speech”), there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself. Consider the following indicators:

• Mr. Obama referred four times in his speech to “the Holy Koran.” Non-Muslims — even pandering ones — generally don’t use that Islamic formulation.

• Mr. Obama established his firsthand knowledge of Islam (albeit without mentioning his reported upbringing in the faith) with the statement, “I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed.” Again, “revealed” is a depiction Muslims use to reflect their conviction that the Koran is the word of God, as dictated to Muhammad.

• Then the president made a statement no believing Christian — certainly not one versed, as he professes to be, in the ways of Islam — would ever make. In the context of what he euphemistically called the “situation between Israelis, Palestinians and Arabs,” Mr. Obama said he looked forward to the day “. . . when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.”

Now, the term “peace be upon them” is invoked by Muslims as a way of blessing deceased holy men. According to Islam, that is what all three were – dead prophets. Of course, for Christians, Jesus is the living and immortal Son of God.

In the final analysis, it may be beside the point whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim. In the Speech and elsewhere, he has aligned himself with adherents to what authoritative Islam calls Shariah — notably, the dangerous global movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood — to a degree that makes Mr. Clinton’s fabled affinity for blacks pale by comparison.

For example, Mr. Obama has — from literally his inaugural address onward — inflated the numbers and, in that way and others, exaggerated the contemporary and historical importance of Muslim-Americans in the United States. In the Speech, he used the Brotherhood’s estimates of “nearly 7 million Muslims” in this country, at least twice the estimates from other, more reputable sources. (Who knows? By the time Mr. Obama’s friends in the radical Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) perpetrate their trademark books-cooking as deputy 2010 census takers, the official count may well claim considerably morethan 7 million Muslims are living here.)

Even more troubling were the commitments the president made in Cairo to promote Islam in America. For instance, he declared: “I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.” He vowed to ensure that women can cover their heads, including, presumably, when having their photographs taken for passports, driver’s licenses or other identification purposes. He also pledged to enable Muslims to engage in zakat, their faith’s requirement for tithing, even though four of the eight types of charity called for by Shariah can be associated with terrorism. Not surprisingly, a number of Islamic “charities” in this country have been convicted of providing material support for terrorism.

Particularly worrying is the realignment Mr. Obama has announced in U.S. policy toward Israel. While he pays lip service to the “unbreakable” bond between America and the Jewish state, the president has unmistakably signaled that he intends to compel the Israelis to make territorial and other strategic concessions to Palestinians to achieve the hallowed two-state solution. In doing so, he ignores the inconvenient fact that both the Brotherhood’s Hamas and Abu Mazen’s Fatah remain determined to achieve a one-state solution, whereby the Jews will be driven “into the sea.”

Whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim or simply plays one in the presidency may, in the end, be irrelevant. What is alarming is that in aligning himself and his policies with those of Shariah-adherents such as the Muslim Brotherhood, the president will greatly intensify the already enormous pressure on peaceful, tolerant American Muslims to submit to such forces – and heighten expectations, here and abroad, that the rest of us will do so as well.

Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy.

Supreme Court Delays Chrysler’s Swift Sale – washingtonpost.com

Justices May Consider Creditors’ Appeal

SLIDESHOW
Previous Next

Indiana Pension Fund attorney Tom Lauria is interviewed outside Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company's unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano)
Indiana Pension Fund attorney Tom Lauria is interviewed outside Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company’s unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano) (Louis Lanzano – AP)

Chrysler attorney Corinne Ball exits Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company's unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano)
Chrysler attorney Corinne Ball exits Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company’s unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano) (Louis Lanzano – AP)

Indiana Pension Fund attorney Glenn Kurtz exits Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. A U.S. appeals court said Friday it would conditionally approve Chrysler's sale to Fiat but is keeping the deal on hold until Monday to allow an appeal. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company's unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano)
Indiana Pension Fund attorney Glenn Kurtz exits Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. A U.S. appeals court said Friday it would conditionally approve Chrysler’s sale to Fiat but is keeping the deal on hold until Monday to allow an appeal. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company’s unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano) (Louis Lanzano – AP)

Chrysler attorney Corinne Ball exits Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company's unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano)
Chrysler attorney Corinne Ball exits Manhattan federal court, Friday, June 5, 2009, in New York. The appeals court heard arguments Friday from attorneys representing Chrysler LLC, Fiat Group SpA and a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, the latter of which say the deal approved by a bankruptcy judge unfairly favors the interests of the company’s unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano) (Louis Lanzano – AP)

//

Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, June 9, 2009

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday held up the sale of Chrysler’s assets to Italian automaker Fiat, at least temporarily interrupting the Obama administration’s massive and speedy restructuring of the U.S. auto industry.

This Story

// <![CDATA[

var rn = ( Math.round( Math.random()*10000000000 ) );
document.write('’) ;
//
]]>

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s 53-word order did not hint at what she thought of an appeal led by a group of Indiana pension and construction funds, which stand to see their investments in Chrysler reduced with no say in the process. Instead, she instructed simply that the transaction is “stayed pending further notice.”

The decision buys the court time to consider objections filed over the weekend, and it comes as the clock is ticking. Fiat can back out of the deal if it is not finalized by Monday, and the government has warned that the only alternative would be to force the nation’s third-largest automaker into liquidation, throwing the industry in turmoil and leaving tens of thousands of people without jobs.

The stakes may be higher for the Obama administration: If the court backs some of the claims, it could disrupt plans to rescue a hrGeneral Motors and weaken the government’s hand in stabilizing the troubled economy.

“Every day that Chrysler remains in bankruptcy without consummating the sale threatens to postpone the resumption of production even further and to prolong the period of $100-million-per-day losses” financed by taxpayers, Elena Kagan, the U.S. solicitor general, said in a 26-page filing with the high court.

A host of business and conservative groups applauded Ginsburg for standing up to what one called the Obama administration steamroller. And Congress is beginning to stir. Legislation is being drafted to reverse decisions by Chrysler and GM to close thousands of dealerships. The Senate Banking Committee, meanwhile, is preparing to hold a hearing this week on the government’s role in the auto rescue.

The significance of the court’s action remains to be seen. The language Ginsburg used in her order usually signals a delay of short duration.

There could be several explanations, not the least of which is that the justices may not have had time to fully consider the request. Court filings from those opposing the deal began arriving over the weekend and into Sunday. The government’s response in opposition did not arrive at the court until shortly before justices convened yesterday at 10 a.m.

The petitions are directed at Ginsburg because she is the justice responsible for the circuit that includes New York, where the suit was filed. She may decide the stay issue on her own or refer the question to the full court. If it’s the latter, that could explain the need for more time. The full court would have to vote on whether to hear the merits of the case.

“We understand this to be an administrative extension designed to allow sufficient time for the Court to make a determination on the merits of the request for a stay,” an administration official said. A Chrysler spokesman said the company had no immediate comment.

Richard Mourdock, Indiana state treasurer, said he hoped the court would agree to a hearing. The stay, he said, “moves us one step closer to what I’ve argued for all along, which is a fair hearing by the highest court.”

Fiat representatives did not respond to phone calls yesterday. But in arguing against a stay of the sale in lower courts, Fiat said it was concerned about Chrysler’s eroding value.

GOP seeks to trim stimulus, cut deficit – Washington Times

GOP seeks to trim stimulus, cut deficit – Washington Times.

Economy improves with billions unspent

With the economy showing signs of recovery, fiscally conservative economists and Republican lawmakers are suggesting that the large unspent portion of the nearly $800 billion stimulus fund should be redirected to slash this year’s nearly $2 trillion annual deficit.

Democratic lawmakers, Obama administration officials and many economists doubt the wisdom of truncating the stimulus program so soon after it began. But Republican congressmen and economists who were not thrilled with the stimulus effort are increasingly calling for it to be foreshortened as a return to economic growth appears closer at hand.

Administration accounting shows that relatively little of the stimulus funds that would directly create jobs have been spent. The White House says $112 billion from the stimulus account has been spent or obligated. In addition, much if not most of the economic recovery expenditures have been spent to pay for state assistance, unemployment and Medicaid benefits, and other safety net programs that would create few if any new jobs.

Nevertheless, there are increasing reports that key sectors of the economy are beginning to show modest signs of recovery.

TWT RELATED STORY:
Obama looks to ‘accelerate’ stimulus

Construction spending is up slightly for the second straight month, factory orders rose 0.7 percent in April, existing home sales were up three months in a row, and banks have begun raising capital again and showing signs of growth. These and other economic signals have sparked a rally on Wall Street that has raised stock values by more than 30 percent since March.

No one suggests the economy is out of the woods. The unemployment rate, always the last economic figure to show improvement in the aftermath of recessions, continues to climb, rising from 8.9 percent in April to 9.4 percent in May — though the figure of 345,000 jobs lost last month was sharply below economic forecasts and marked the fourth straight month that the pace of layoffs has slowed.

That is one of the reasons why top economists such as Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, see the pace of the nation’s economic contraction slowing and entering a recovery stage later this year. A survey of 45 economists by the National Association for Business Economics (NABE) Outlook reported late last month that the end of the recession is near.

“The good news is the NABE panel expects economic growth to turn positive in the second half of this year, with the pace of job losses narrowing sharply over the remainder of this year and employment turning up in early 2010,” NABE President Chris Varvares said. Nearly three out of four of the panel’s economists said they expected the recession would end by the third quarter.

But some economists think President Obama’s stimulus plan has had little if anything to do with the economy’s new signs of life, that a lot of the heavy lifting in the recovery is a result of actions taken by the Federal Reserve, and that once the recession ends, the remaining funds, estimated to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars next year, should be returned to the U.S. Treasury.

Democrats Weigh Health Mandate as Obama Urges Taxing Wealthy – Bloomberg.com

The socialist plan is coming along nicely.  Tax the heck out of the rich, take away tax deductions, the wealthy stops contributing to charity since they have no incentives for giving, charities have to close, businesses have to fire people in order to pay these taxes; government have to grow larger in order to help these people that used to be helped by the charities and those that have been fired in order for the employees to be able to pay their taxes.

Democrats Weigh Health Mandate as Obama Urges Taxing Wealthy – Bloomberg.com.

By Laura Litvan and Ryan Donmoyer

June 7 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama wants Congress to consider taxing the wealthy instead of workers to pay for a health-care overhaul, as House Democrats discuss a plan to require health insurance for most Americans.

The Obama administration stepped up efforts to influence health-care legislation today as advisers David Axelrod and Austan Goolsbee appeared on television talk shows to discuss the issue.

The president is trying to avoid broad-based levies such as a Senate proposal to tax some employer-provided health benefits Axelrod said. Instead he is urging lawmakers to reconsider limiting all tax deductions for Americans in the highest tax brackets.

“He made a very strong case for the proposal that he put on the table, which was to cap deductions for high-income Americans, and he urged them to go back and look at that,” Axelrod said on the CNN’s “State of the Union.” Goolsbee, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” said Obama is “mindful” about how “ordinary Americans are able to foot the bills” and never proposed taxing employee benefits.

House Democrats are weighing a new proposal in response to Obama’s call for legislation to be enacted by August. An outline of the plan obtained by Bloomberg News would require Americans to have insurance with some exceptions.

It would probably exempt those who can prove they can’t find an affordable policy. There could be a tax penalty for those with adequate financial resources who don’t elect to get insurance, according to the outline.

Group Rates

The outline suggests consumers who have individual health insurance policies that they like could keep them. Still, it says that “by and large” the nation’s market for individually purchased health insurance policies would move to a new federally operated exchange. It would permit both individuals and employees of small firms to buy policies at less expensive group rates.

“States will have the option to run a state exchange but the default will be a national exchange,” according to the outline.

Karen Lightfoot, a spokeswoman for House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat whose panel is working on a proposal, said the document that is circulating is not the official work of the committee.

All House Democrats will be briefed June 9 on the details of a single piece of legislation that three House committees will work on, with the House slated to act by the end of July. The proposal is part of a broader push by Democrats in Congress to complete a revamp of the U.S. health-care system by an early fall timetable set by Obama.

Kennedy’s Approach

In the Senate, health committee chairman Edward Kennedy has an early draft of legislation that also includes a so-called “individual mandate,” and would require all employers to supply health insurance for workers or contribute to the cost of a plan.

Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, would also create a public health plan to compete with private insurers, a priority of Obama’s that is opposed by Republicans, and would bar insurers from limiting coverage.

The effort to overhaul health-care would affect a sector that makes up 17 percent of the U.S. economy. The goal of Democratic supporters is to provide insurance to most of the nation’s 46 million uninsured, and lower the soaring cost of care. A key challenge is the potential impact of legislation on an already rising U.S. budget deficit that may reach $1.8 trillion this year.

Axelrod, speaking on CNN today, said the ultimate goal of legislation is to reduce costs.

“We have to bring down the cost of health care,” he said. “If we do that and make it affordable, people are going to buy it, mandate or no mandate.”

Burdens on Business

Google Inc. Chief Executive Eric Schmidt, speaking on Fox, said reducing costs would also ease burdens on business.

“The only way to really address this is to address the combination of coverage and cost,” Schmidt said. “So anything that the Congress and the president does has to do that. And from my perspective, the sooner the better.”

“You won’t fundamentally solve the problems in business until you solve the problem of spiraling health-care costs, which is driving everybody crazy,” he added.

Lawmakers have a plethora of proposals to raise the hundreds of billions estimated to be needed for an overhaul, including new taxes on soda, beer, and wine, and a partial tax on employer-provided health insurance for the first time. The tax-free nature of employer-provided insurance is the biggest tax expenditure in the federal budget.

Taxing Cap Deductions

Obama’s own proposal would set a 28 percent cap on tax deductions for items such as mortgage interest, investment expenses and charitable gifts for Americans in the two highest tax brackets, which would be 36 percent and 39.6 percent under his proposals. Without the cap, they would be able to deduct 36 cents and 39.6 cents on the dollar for those expenses, respectively.

Obama also proposes new taxes on securities dealers and life insurers, and to raise revenue by prohibiting certain estate-planning techniques.

House Democrats intend, like Kennedy, to include a new government program to provide health-care to a portion of the uninsured who don’t already qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, according to the outline.

While the lawmakers continue working out the details, they intend the new program to operate through the exchange and for both the public program and private insurance policies to have the same basic benefits.

Helping the Poor

House Democrats want to improve the Medicaid health-care system for the poor, including a uniform benefits package and “improved” provider payments. They are weighing whether to add people who are near the poverty level to Medicaid or to provide subsidies to allow them to purchase their own policies.

The plan would place new restrictions on private insurers, including a bar on excluding coverage for those with “pre- existing conditions.”

The legislation would seek to get some cost savings from Medicare and Medicaid, including incentives for doctors to coordinate their care and get bonuses for improving quality, according to the outline.

To contact the reporter on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: June 7, 2009 13:43 EDT

Senate Rejects Funding to Close Guantanamo Prison – washingtonpost.com

Senate Rejects Funding to Close Guantanamo Prison – washingtonpost.com.

Sally Quinn – Gen. Jones and the Anonymous Long Knives – washingtonpost.com

By Sally Quinn

Monday, May 18, 2009

The knives are out. The tom-toms are beating. And by Washington standards it’s soon. Usually the trashing of the national security adviser takes longer.

In recent days articles have appeared in The Post and the New York Times questioning the abilities of retired four-star Gen. Jim Jones, the former commandant of the Marine Corps and former NATO commander. Of all the power games in Washington, this one probably has the highest stakes. This is dangerous to the players and to the country.

The national security adviser is the person who sees the president most often and has his ear. Each adviser has his or her own style. Jones is reserved, confident and low-key; this does not sit well with his detractors. Traditionally the job of the national security adviser is to synthesize information between the secretary of state and the secretary of defense. This person is meant to listen to all voices and then present them to the president along with his own advice. Success or failure depends on the adviser’s relationship with the president. Period. National security adviser is the most coveted job in foreign policy, even more so than secretary of state, under the thinking that while the secretary is traveling the globe, being America’s ambassador to the world and eating a lot of bad food at boring banquets, the adviser is in Washington making and overseeing policy.

There is always pushback, sometimes from State, sometimes from the Pentagon. In the Bush administration, Condoleezza Rice could not control Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld or his mentor, Vice President Dick Cheney, who tried to marginalize Colin Powell at State. In her case the knives were out from both sides. The knives are always anonymous.

Today, the sniping is reportedly coming mostly from State Department officials and some staffers at the White House. Jones, not surprisingly, has a good relationship with the Pentagon. So who’s out to get him? Reporters across town are being called and spun. Jones is out of it, they are told, doesn’t show up; doesn’t speak up at meetings; works only a 12 1/2 -hour day; doesn’t stand next to the president in photographs; doesn’t like to give interviews. Funny, but those all sound like things the national security adviser should be doing. Reporters are protecting their sources, but Hillary Clinton is apparently not behind the stories. She likes her job, those who have been spun say, and gets along well with Jones.

Meanwhile, the stakes are higher than ever: Iraq is not resolved. Iran could go nuclear at any moment. Pakistan, already a nuclear state, is chaotic. Afghanistan is hanging on by a thread. The Arab-Israeli peace talks have stalled. And that’s not to mention North Korea and other hot spots. If ever there was a time to work as a team, this is it. If the leaders of those hot spots think that the Americans are internally divided and do not respect each other or that President Obama is too weak to control the sniping around him, it could be harmful to our foreign policy.

To be sure, Jones operates differently than many of those around him. His is a military staff style. Jones didn’t seek this job and doesn’t need it. He has no agenda except to serve the president. He is not interested in personal power. To some in Washington this is difficult to understand. After all, here is a man secure enough that he doesn’t need to drape himself around the president in photos, to dominate meetings with his views, to assert himself publicly. He has already proved himself. He could be out making a fortune and taking his family on boat rides.

Obama has said many times that he wants to hear all voices. He famously assembled a team of rivals. And if those who are sniping think Jim Jones is not doing a good job, they should go directly to the president, not leak and spin to the press. That’s their duty. Obama is not afraid to cut his losses. He did that with Jim Johnson, one of the vice presidential vetters, when questions arose about his role in the Fannie Mae scandal. Tom Daschle and Bill Richardson were dropped from Cabinet appointments. Which is why Obama should put an end to this sniping. Either Jones is doing a good job or he is not. If he is not, the president should make a change. If the president continues to have confidence in Jones, those who are attacking him should beware. They are messing with the wrong dude. Those ribbons on his uniform were not awarded for nothing.

The writer is a moderator, with Jon Meacham, of On Faith, an online conversation on religion.

Despite ‘surge’ at Mexico border checks, few guns found | Front page | Chron.com – Houston Chronicle

Associated Press

May 16, 2009, 10:31AM

Denis Poroy AP

Ariz. — Hawks circle above the lines of traffic at the hot, arid border crossing into Mexico. Sagebrush catches clothes tossed by fence climbers. Three curious, dusty horses watch the federal agents tapping on car windows, opening trunks, looking in vain for contraband.

An agent notices the horses and wonders aloud if they’re wild. A colleague notes the temperature: 92 degrees.

“We’re sucking up a lot of exhaust out here,” supervisory Customs and Border Protection officer Edith Serrano says, shrugging in her uniform.

This is what the Obama administration’s new commitment to help Mexico fight its drug cartels looks like.

President Barack Obama this spring promised his Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderon, that the United States would fight two of the biggest contributions U.S. residents make to the drug cartels Calderon has vowed to eradicate: cash and weapons, the latter hard to come by in Mexico.

For the past five weeks, hundreds of agents participating in a newly intensified $95 million outbound inspection program have been stepping into southbound traffic lanes, stopping suspicious-looking cars and trucks.

The Associated Press fanned out to the busiest crossings along the Mexican border — San Diego, Nogales, El Paso and Laredo — to see how effective the inspections are.

The findings? Wads of U.S. currency headed for Mexico, wedged into car doors, stuffed under mattresses, taped onto torsos, were sniffed out by dogs, seized by agents and locked away for possible investigations. No guns were found as the reporters watched; they rarely are.

“I do not believe we can even make a dent in (southbound smuggling) because that assumes the cartels are complete idiots, which they’re not. Why in the world would they try to smuggle weapons and currency through a checkpoint when there are so many other options?” said Border Patrol Agent T.J. Bonner, president of the agents’ union.

According to CBP, between March 12 and April 30 officers seized:

—Fifty-one pieces of ammunition, weapons parts and guns, a minuscule fraction of the 2,000 weapons the Mexican government estimates are smuggled south every day.

—$12 million in cash, less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the $17 billion to $39 billion the U.S. Justice Department estimates is illegally sent to Mexico from the U.S. annually, but more than the $10 million seized in outbound checks in 2008.

— Sixty-one people on charges involving weapons or currency offenses and on outstanding warrants.

Millions of cars pass into Mexico from the United States every year. The federal government doesn’t keep track but a count by Texas A&M International University’s Texas Center for Border Economic and Enterprise Development shows more than 27 million vehicles a year drove into Mexico just from Texas.

The outbound checkpoints the AP observed stopped sometimes one out of four cars, sometimes one out of 100, and not every day. Even that amount created huge traffic backups at some locations and, agents said, might have allowed spies to call any smugglers heading that way and warn them to put off their Mexico trip.

Agents across the border said the first few minutes of their operation are the most precious. That’s how long it takes for “scouts” watching from a bridge in San Diego lined with taxis to radio ahead to smugglers to stay away. In Nogales, a dozen men dashed along a Mexican hill about 150 yards from the checkpoint last week.

“We tend to see spotters up there,” said CBP agent Brian Levin. “They sit up on those hills and watch everything we do.”

Inspectors retreat, then mount another “surge” after a while standing on the side of the freeway.

Some of those stopped were sanguine, others annoyed.

“I guess they think I have drugs or something,” said Daniel Saucedo, a 15-year-old Albuquerque high school student who clambered out of the passenger side of a small white pickup truck with his two dogs last week in El Paso. “It’s dumb,” he said.

William Molaski, port director in El Paso, said agents at his four El Paso bridges haven’t found much since the focus on outbound checks started in early April — one handgun and only about $400,000 — “but not for lack of trying.”

Without providing any numbers, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told attendees at the Border Trade Alliance International Conference on April 21 that, just a few weeks into the intensified outbound inspections, she was amazed at how much had already been seized. “It’s unbelievable,” she said. “So the notion that there wasn’t a river of cash and a flood of guns going into Mexico is a myth. I mean, there was. We want to stop that river.”

CBP’s 2010 budget request, released May 7, includes an additional $46 million specifically targeted at southbound enforcement.

Customs inspectors’ techniques range from primitive to high-tech, with about an equal success rate. Sometimes a small white truck drives slowly alongside vehicles that have been pulled over, beaming X-rays at them to reveal hidden cash or weapons. A smaller X-ray unit scans spare tires or pieces of luggage, a hand-held density meter called a “Buster” can reveal hidden compartments loaded with cash, a fiber-optic scope snaked into gas tanks looks for hidden cargo and trained dogs can sniff out cash or weapons.

But before they get to any of the gadgets, officers knock with a knuckle or flat palm on a car’s body panels. And they ask, again and again: “Do you have any weapons? Cash? Merchandise?”

Often the dogs make the finds.

Grill, a “currency canine,” smelled something on 63-year-old Isabel Ortega Garcia on April 3 in Hidalgo, Texas, when Ortega was walking into Mexico. When Grill got excited, agents patted Ortega down and found $148,000 in neat wads of $100 bills taped around her waist.

Two weeks earlier in Laredo, Akim sniffed cash under the floor of a southbound bus. Under the seats, in a hidden compartment, were 75 bundles of bills totaling $2,997,510.

But even finding that much cash doesn’t always yield an arrest. Without a U.S. attorney’s say-so, the best an agent can do is seize any cash amounts over $10,000 that the traveler does not declare, hand them a receipt and send them on south.

The best case scenario for agents who seize undeclared currency is that federal prosecutors decide to bring charges and begin a forfeiture procedure. But often it is a race against the clock as inspectors on the scene try to collect enough evidence to make it an attractive case for prosecutors.

Although Laredo leads the country in cash seizures right now, even there seizing cash is rare, and arresting someone even more unusual, a weapons seizure rarer still. And that’s where the inconvenience to travelers and agents’ frustration set in.

Officers have no booths, no signs for drivers or lanes to pull people over in. Yet.

“We don’t have the infrastructure that we need to conduct safe outbound inspections,” said Oscar Preciado, director of San Diego’s San Ysidro port of entry.

The Obama administration has budgeted $269 million to upgrade these southern ports, adding lanes and pull-over spaces. Perhaps most importantly they’ll be adding shade for the wilting agents who wade into traffic under the blazing sun.

Over five hours on a recent day, outbound traffic from Laredo, Texas, to Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, experienced the gamut from clear, moving traffic, to multi-agency teams laying travelers’ lives bare, unpacking, X-raying and interviewing.

Farther west, during a two-hour “surge” in El Paso, not a single seizure was made as agents stopped dozens of vehicles.

Horns blared during afternoon rush hour south of San Diego as cars jammed the two freeways that merge at San Ysidro border crossing.

On the Mexican side soldiers toting M-16 rifles select a few motorists to wave aside for inspection.

“It’s a time-waster, but I understand they have a job to do,” said Maria Soto, 50, of San Diego, who watched a soldier search her silver Toyota 4Runner.

Mexican officials say it is extremely rare to find anyone with weapons. The last time anyone in Tijuana could remember was April 17, when an American couple was found with 123 bullets.

Outbound checks have been going on, on a much smaller scale, for decades.

The weapons — easily purchased in the U.S. and banned in Mexico — are a major conundrum for this administration.

Obama said while campaigning that he favored a ban on sales of assault weapons. But Congress isn’t budging on the issue, and guns in the U.S., particularly in southern border states, remain easy to buy legally.

“The real issues of assault weapons and bulk cash do not initiate at the border and cannot be solved there,” said David Shirk, director of the University of San Diego’s Trans-Border Institute. “But gun control? That’s a discussion the current administration is reluctant to wade into.”

Local police and sheriff’s departments are lending agents to CBP to help with the stops. Border czar Alan Bersin said he is confident that sporadic checks are keeping smugglers away, a sentiment echoed by other U.S. authorities.

“It’s creating a deterrent effect,” Bersin said in an interview, while discarding the idea of inspecting everyone.

Mexican customs inspector Ricardo Briseno, 27, says the increase in U.S. inspections of Mexico-bound cars has made his job easier, even though the only effective solution would be to stop every car.

“At least it’s something,” he said. “We are working together on a shared problem.”

This story was reported by Associated Press writers Alicia A. Caldwell in El Paso, Martha Mendoza in Nogales, Ariz.; Christopher Sherman in Laredo, Texas; and Elliot Spagat in San Diego.

via Despite ‘surge’ at Mexico border checks, few guns found | Front page | Chron.com – Houston Chronicle.

Despite 'surge' at Mexico border checks, few guns found | Front page | Chron.com – Houston Chronicle

Associated Press

May 16, 2009, 10:31AM

Denis Poroy AP

NOGALES, Ariz. — Hawks circle above the lines of traffic at the hot, arid border crossing into Mexico. Sagebrush catches clothes tossed by fence climbers. Three curious, dusty horses watch the federal agents tapping on car windows, opening trunks, looking in vain for contraband.

An agent notices the horses and wonders aloud if they’re wild. A colleague notes the temperature: 92 degrees.

“We’re sucking up a lot of exhaust out here,” supervisory Customs and Border Protection officer Edith Serrano says, shrugging in her uniform.

This is what the Obama administration’s new commitment to help Mexico fight its drug cartels looks like.

President Barack Obama this spring promised his Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderon, that the United States would fight two of the biggest contributions U.S. residents make to the drug cartels Calderon has vowed to eradicate: cash and weapons, the latter hard to come by in Mexico.

For the past five weeks, hundreds of agents participating in a newly intensified $95 million outbound inspection program have been stepping into southbound traffic lanes, stopping suspicious-looking cars and trucks.

The Associated Press fanned out to the busiest crossings along the Mexican border — San Diego, Nogales, El Paso and Laredo — to see how effective the inspections are.

The findings? Wads of U.S. currency headed for Mexico, wedged into car doors, stuffed under mattresses, taped onto torsos, were sniffed out by dogs, seized by agents and locked away for possible investigations. No guns were found as the reporters watched; they rarely are.

“I do not believe we can even make a dent in (southbound smuggling) because that assumes the cartels are complete idiots, which they’re not. Why in the world would they try to smuggle weapons and currency through a checkpoint when there are so many other options?” said Border Patrol Agent T.J. Bonner, president of the agents’ union.

According to CBP, between March 12 and April 30 officers seized:

—Fifty-one pieces of ammunition, weapons parts and guns, a minuscule fraction of the 2,000 weapons the Mexican government estimates are smuggled south every day.

—$12 million in cash, less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the $17 billion to $39 billion the U.S. Justice Department estimates is illegally sent to Mexico from the U.S. annually, but more than the $10 million seized in outbound checks in 2008.

— Sixty-one people on charges involving weapons or currency offenses and on outstanding warrants.

Millions of cars pass into Mexico from the United States every year. The federal government doesn’t keep track but a count by Texas A&M International University’s Texas Center for Border Economic and Enterprise Development shows more than 27 million vehicles a year drove into Mexico just from Texas.

The outbound checkpoints the AP observed stopped sometimes one out of four cars, sometimes one out of 100, and not every day. Even that amount created huge traffic backups at some locations and, agents said, might have allowed spies to call any smugglers heading that way and warn them to put off their Mexico trip.

Agents across the border said the first few minutes of their operation are the most precious. That’s how long it takes for “scouts” watching from a bridge in San Diego lined with taxis to radio ahead to smugglers to stay away. In Nogales, a dozen men dashed along a Mexican hill about 150 yards from the checkpoint last week.

“We tend to see spotters up there,” said CBP agent Brian Levin. “They sit up on those hills and watch everything we do.”

Inspectors retreat, then mount another “surge” after a while standing on the side of the freeway.

Some of those stopped were sanguine, others annoyed.

“I guess they think I have drugs or something,” said Daniel Saucedo, a 15-year-old Albuquerque high school student who clambered out of the passenger side of a small white pickup truck with his two dogs last week in El Paso. “It’s dumb,” he said.

William Molaski, port director in El Paso, said agents at his four El Paso bridges haven’t found much since the focus on outbound checks started in early April — one handgun and only about $400,000 — “but not for lack of trying.”

Without providing any numbers, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told attendees at the Border Trade Alliance International Conference on April 21 that, just a few weeks into the intensified outbound inspections, she was amazed at how much had already been seized. “It’s unbelievable,” she said. “So the notion that there wasn’t a river of cash and a flood of guns going into Mexico is a myth. I mean, there was. We want to stop that river.”

CBP’s 2010 budget request, released May 7, includes an additional $46 million specifically targeted at southbound enforcement.

Customs inspectors’ techniques range from primitive to high-tech, with about an equal success rate. Sometimes a small white truck drives slowly alongside vehicles that have been pulled over, beaming X-rays at them to reveal hidden cash or weapons. A smaller X-ray unit scans spare tires or pieces of luggage, a hand-held density meter called a “Buster” can reveal hidden compartments loaded with cash, a fiber-optic scope snaked into gas tanks looks for hidden cargo and trained dogs can sniff out cash or weapons.

But before they get to any of the gadgets, officers knock with a knuckle or flat palm on a car’s body panels. And they ask, again and again: “Do you have any weapons? Cash? Merchandise?”

Often the dogs make the finds.

Grill, a “currency canine,” smelled something on 63-year-old Isabel Ortega Garcia on April 3 in Hidalgo, Texas, when Ortega was walking into Mexico. When Grill got excited, agents patted Ortega down and found $148,000 in neat wads of $100 bills taped around her waist.

Two weeks earlier in Laredo, Akim sniffed cash under the floor of a southbound bus. Under the seats, in a hidden compartment, were 75 bundles of bills totaling $2,997,510.

But even finding that much cash doesn’t always yield an arrest. Without a U.S. attorney’s say-so, the best an agent can do is seize any cash amounts over $10,000 that the traveler does not declare, hand them a receipt and send them on south.

The best case scenario for agents who seize undeclared currency is that federal prosecutors decide to bring charges and begin a forfeiture procedure. But often it is a race against the clock as inspectors on the scene try to collect enough evidence to make it an attractive case for prosecutors.

Although Laredo leads the country in cash seizures right now, even there seizing cash is rare, and arresting someone even more unusual, a weapons seizure rarer still. And that’s where the inconvenience to travelers and agents’ frustration set in.

Officers have no booths, no signs for drivers or lanes to pull people over in. Yet.

“We don’t have the infrastructure that we need to conduct safe outbound inspections,” said Oscar Preciado, director of San Diego’s San Ysidro port of entry.

The Obama administration has budgeted $269 million to upgrade these southern ports, adding lanes and pull-over spaces. Perhaps most importantly they’ll be adding shade for the wilting agents who wade into traffic under the blazing sun.

Over five hours on a recent day, outbound traffic from Laredo, Texas, to Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, experienced the gamut from clear, moving traffic, to multi-agency teams laying travelers’ lives bare, unpacking, X-raying and interviewing.

Farther west, during a two-hour “surge” in El Paso, not a single seizure was made as agents stopped dozens of vehicles.

Horns blared during afternoon rush hour south of San Diego as cars jammed the two freeways that merge at San Ysidro border crossing.

On the Mexican side soldiers toting M-16 rifles select a few motorists to wave aside for inspection.

“It’s a time-waster, but I understand they have a job to do,” said Maria Soto, 50, of San Diego, who watched a soldier search her silver Toyota 4Runner.

Mexican officials say it is extremely rare to find anyone with weapons. The last time anyone in Tijuana could remember was April 17, when an American couple was found with 123 bullets.

Outbound checks have been going on, on a much smaller scale, for decades.

The weapons — easily purchased in the U.S. and banned in Mexico — are a major conundrum for this administration.

Obama said while campaigning that he favored a ban on sales of assault weapons. But Congress isn’t budging on the issue, and guns in the U.S., particularly in southern border states, remain easy to buy legally.

“The real issues of assault weapons and bulk cash do not initiate at the border and cannot be solved there,” said David Shirk, director of the University of San Diego’s Trans-Border Institute. “But gun control? That’s a discussion the current administration is reluctant to wade into.”

Local police and sheriff’s departments are lending agents to CBP to help with the stops. Border czar Alan Bersin said he is confident that sporadic checks are keeping smugglers away, a sentiment echoed by other U.S. authorities.

“It’s creating a deterrent effect,” Bersin said in an interview, while discarding the idea of inspecting everyone.

Mexican customs inspector Ricardo Briseno, 27, says the increase in U.S. inspections of Mexico-bound cars has made his job easier, even though the only effective solution would be to stop every car.

“At least it’s something,” he said. “We are working together on a shared problem.”

This story was reported by Associated Press writers Alicia A. Caldwell in El Paso, Martha Mendoza in Nogales, Ariz.; Christopher Sherman in Laredo, Texas; and Elliot Spagat in San Diego.

via Despite ‘surge’ at Mexico border checks, few guns found | Front page | Chron.com – Houston Chronicle.

George F. Will – The Obama Administration’s Economic Lawlessness – washingtonpost.com

George F. Will – The Obama Administration’s Economic Lawlessness – washingtonpost.com.

Tincture of Lawlessness

Obama’s Overreaching Economic Policies

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Anyone, said T.S. Eliot, could carve a goose, were it not for the bones. And anyone could govern as boldly as his whims decreed, were it not for the skeletal structure that keeps civil society civil — the rule of law. The Obama administration is bold. It also is careless regarding constitutional values and is acquiring a tincture of lawlessness.

This Story

<!–
var rn = ( Math.round( Math.random()*10000000000 ) );
document.write(‘<script src=”http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/13/AR2009051303014_StoryJs.js?’+rn+'”></script>&#8217;) ;
// –>

In February, California’s Democratic-controlled Legislature, faced with a $42 billion budget deficit, trimmed $74 million (1.4 percent) from one of the state’s fastest-growing programs, which provides care for low-income and incapacitated elderly people and which cost the state $5.42 billion last year. The Los Angeles Times reports that “loose oversight and bureaucratic inertia have allowed fraud to fester.”

But the Service Employees International Union collects nearly $5 million a month from 223,000 caregivers who are members. And the Obama administration has told California that unless the $74 million in cuts are rescinded, it will deny the state $6.8 billion in stimulus money.

Such a federal ukase (the word derives from czarist Russia; how appropriate) to a state legislature is a sign of the administration’s dependency agenda — maximizing the number of people and institutions dependent on the federal government. For the first time, neither sales nor property nor income taxes are the largest source of money for state and local governments. The federal government is.

The SEIU says the cuts violate contracts negotiated with counties. California officials say the state required the contracts to contain clauses allowing pay to be reduced if state funding is.

Anyway, the Obama administration, judging by its cavalier disregard of contracts between Chrysler and some of the lenders it sought money from, thinks contracts are written on water. The administration proposes that Chrysler’s secured creditors get 28 cents per dollar on the $7 billion owed to them but that the United Auto Workers union get 43 cents per dollar on its $11 billion in claims — and 55 percent of the company. This, even though the secured creditors’ contracts supposedly guaranteed them better standing than the union.

Among Chrysler’s lenders, some servile banks that are now dependent on the administration for capital infusions tugged their forelocks and agreed. Some hedge funds among Chrysler’s lenders that are not dependent were vilified by the president because they dared to resist his demand that they violate their fiduciary duties to their investors, who include individuals and institutional pension funds.

The Economist says the administration has “ridden roughshod over [creditors’] legitimate claims over the [automobile companies’] assets. . . . Bankruptcies involve dividing a shrunken pie. But not all claims are equal: some lenders provide cheaper funds to firms in return for a more secure claim over the assets should things go wrong. They rank above other stakeholders, including shareholders and employees. This principle is now being trashed.” Tom Lauria, a lawyer representing hedge fund people trashed by the president as the cause of Chrysler’s bankruptcy, asked that his clients’ names not be published for fear of violence threatened in e-mails to them.

The Troubled Assets Relief Program, which has not yet been used for its supposed purpose (to purchase such assets from banks), has been the instrument of the administration’s adventure in the automobile industry. TARP’s $700 billion, like much of the supposed “stimulus” money, is a slush fund the executive branch can use as it pleases. This is as lawless as it would be for Congress to say to the IRS: We need $3.5 trillion to run the government next year, so raise it however you wish — from whomever, at whatever rates you think suitable. Don’t bother us with details.

This is not gross, unambiguous lawlessness of the Nixonian sort — burglaries, abuse of the IRS and FBI, etc. — but it is uncomfortably close to an abuse of power that perhaps gave Nixon ideas: When in 1962 the steel industry raised prices, President John F. Kennedy had a tantrum and his administration leaked rumors that the IRS would conduct audits of steel executives, and sent FBI agents on predawn visits to the homes of journalists who covered the steel industry, ostensibly to further a legitimate investigation.

The Obama administration’s agenda of maximizing dependency involves political favoritism cloaked in the raiment of “economic planning” and “social justice” that somehow produce results superior to what markets produce when freedom allows merit to manifest itself, and incompetence to fail. The administration’s central activity — the political allocation of wealth and opportunity — is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.

georgewill@washpost.com