Wake Up America, Before Things Get Out of Reach!

See Hillary Run! (See 1 below.)

Our Attorney General seems to have acquired a preference for skirting the law. Interesting that Holder is able to get away with what the press, media and Far Left Conspirators consistently attacked GW's department for. Just more political hypocrisy?(See 2 below.)

Saudis reject Obama's overtures and proposals out of hand and suggest the adminisitration get serious about major issues of their concern, ie. Iran etc. Obama rolled again by the friendly Saudis. Oh well, back to the drawing board and apply more pressure on Israel. (See 3 below.)


REGARDLESS OF YOUR POLITICAL TIES, YOU SHOULD READ THIS! Sen. Tom Coburn is an MD (general practitioner) and GOP Sen. from Okla. and recognized as 'the conscience' of the U.S Senate. He is well respected on both 'sides of the aisle' & probably one of the few senators to actually read these 'bail-out' bills. (Google him for his background.)

I posted Cobern's comments months ago but are worth repeating and fits what I have been writing about how through "compromise" politicians scratch each others back and the waste and pork just mounts.

There is nothing partisan or sacred about waste and stupidity. It infects both aisles. We have the ability to stop this and if we fail to do so, because we remain party-line divided, we deserve the future we get because we will have earned it.

Republicans blew their chance to start us on the right path and now Obama and Democrats are engaged in a multiplier effect. Coburn is correct in pointing out we have reached the point of a fiscal no return. Wake up America! (See 4 below.)

I do not know how to scan nor do I have such equipment but I received a copy of the actual Cambridge Police Report involving the arrest of Professor Gates and his conduct was loutish at best and he deserved what he got.

This article about the arresting officer was taken off a friend's web page and buttresses the kind of background and training the arresting officer has had and suggests the kind of person he is. 'Uppytiness' transcends race appartently.(See 5 below.)

This article suggests the genesis of some of the Black communitiy's antipathy towards Israel as well as Obama's, I have not checked the source but I do not care because what is said is, in my opinion, on the mark and bears posting. (See 6 below.)

Sent by a long time classmate friend and fellow memo reader. I concur. (See 7 below.)

Dick

1) Is Hillary Revolting?
By James Lewis

Don't answer that. I should have said: "Is Hillary Rebelling?"

There. That's it.

This is an "exclusive" from the NY Daily News -- a leak from the Clintons' permanent campaign staff. It proclaims that:

"Hillary Clinton's camp is election-ready."

What? I thought we just had one of those.

But no,

"Hillary Clinton says running for office isn't on her "radar," but she still has an eight-person political team and sports two overflowing campaign war chests. ... Clinton's failed presidential bid is now $1 million in the black, and her old Senate campaign committee has $2.1 million in the bank, much of it transferred in from the presidential account."

Hmmm. Does Obama know he has a traitor in his ranks?

Actually Hillary started her renewed campaign last Sunday. Mark that on your political calendar: July 26, 2009. Before last weekend, she was hard to find in the headlines. But now we know that she is Militantly Against Iranian Nukes.

Translation: All you Jewish Democrats, send your money to Hillary Clinton's war chest to keep Obama from kissing the hem of the Ayatollahs.

Until now Mrs. Clinton was effectively checkmated by Obama and the Gang from Chicago. Hillary Clinton is our Sec. State in title, but in his Soviet fashion Obama appointed multiple Commissars to keep an eye on her. So we have Dennis Ross for the Middle East (oops! just got fired for being too pro-Israel), George Mitchell, Rahm Emanuel, and one Barry Soetoro Barack Hussein Obama, President of the Politburo and General Savior of Humanity. They all do FoPo, when they have a moment to spare from really important stuff.

And then there's Veep Joe, the official Federal Commissar for Comedy Relief, who makes up his own foreign policy on the spot. Says Joe about Russia, "They're ... clinging to something in the past that is not sustainable" because their economy and population are "withering." Let's see, that would be stupid, unnecessarily provocative, undiplomatic, stepping on painful Russian toes, and going bang against the official policy of our nominal SecState.

Can you imagine Hillary calling Joe on the phone after that little contretemps? They should have a Marine Corps drummer following the Vice President, ready to hit a rim-shot whenever he drops a good line: Ching-Boom! Another laugh line from Joe. What a card.

The only responsible US foreign policy voices are now coming from military sources: Admiral Mullen, the Chairman of JCS, and Robert Gates, the SecDef. They are the only people who seem to take out-of-control nuclear proliferation seriously.

In sum, we have half a dozen Sec. of States, with Hillary frantically trying to make everybody else sing to her tune. Nobody is actually in charge. But all the cross-talk has a purpose of sorts: It gives Obama the last word.

Mrs. Clinton is far and away the weakest SecState in decades -- which not her fault. She's been hog-tied by the Obamanoids, who have sliced and diced the normal powers of the office. I suspect she's been wildly frustrated, not being all that good at playing with other kids anyway.

Ever since her defeat by the Chicago Machine, Hillary has been plotting with Bill to seize that moment when Obama's glorious sky-hooting fireworks start to fizzle out. That first critical moment of Obama's weakening is happening right now. Hillary and Bill are looking at Obama's MediCrunch -- a repeat of HillaryCare, the first great failure for the Clinton administration -- which is what happened the last time the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress and the Presidency.


HillaryCare was enough to scare tens of millions of Americans, who promptly voted in the Gingrich Congress in 1994 and ultimate got George W. Bush elected. So Bill and Hillary have seen this flick before, and they are prepared to seize the moment. That's why Hillary is suddenly coming alive again in public.

It's an open revolt in the ranks.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if ole' Bill and his buds were undercutting Obama in Congress. I mean, how is it that the Democrat-controlled CBO is suddenly telling the truth about the certifiably insane MediCoup that Obama is trying to pull off? The CBO wasn't supposed to do that.

So maybe Bill is pulling strings with his friends, behind the scenes? Just a thought.

As I see it, the Arkansas Mafia is going to the mattresses ‘cause the Mob from Chicago is suddenly looking vulnerable. This could be the shootout we've been waiting for ever since Obi One nailed Slick Willie as a racist -- and the liberal media all went, Yeah! Yeah! Racist! Racist! Imagine that. After selling their souls to The Slick One for almost twenty years, all the liberal mediots suddenly figured out he was really a racist. The first Black President? The one with his office in Harlem?

It meant the end of Hillary's campaign. It also meant that Slick wouldn't be heading back to the White House any time soon. Or ever. No doubt Slick is still choking with rage when he remembers that moment.

Back in 1979 when Jimmy Carter kept trying Apology Politics with Darth Vader Khomeini, it was Ted Kennedy who assaulted Jimmy from the Left. That history may repeat in the next few years, except that Hillary is attacking Obama from the middle. You can't get to Obama's Left. So Hillary's first target is the Jewish vote, which looks ready to walk away from Obi. Hillary is giving them a choice -- without the painful necessity of having to vote Republican. And the nice Jewish ladies in New York still love Hillary. They are hopeless.

This is the time Hill and Bill have been waiting for. They've been watching the Obumbler paint himself into one corner after the next, over and over again, and salivating at the chance they knew would come. Comes the looming catastrophe of ObamaScare, and Hillary starts nipping at Obi's ankles like a mad Chihuahua.

All the Democrats in Congress are running scared, caught between the wild-eyed fanatics of Obamaland and tens of millions of voters, who are finally glomming on to the fact that they've been sold a complete bill of goods by the liberal media --- again!!!

Will we see another GOP Congress next year?

Or will the United States just go slurping down that garbage disposal of history?

It's a toss-up. I'm not betting either way.

Go, Hillary! Go Barry!


Let's hope for a nice long fight -- because they do deserve each other.

2) Eric Holder's Hate Crime Color Scheme
By Jan LaRue

Imagine the Ku Klux Klan in full regalia standing before a polling place deep in Dixieland hurling racial insults at black people arriving to vote in the last election. Imagine further a Republican-run U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) dropping the civil complaint against the KKK that had been filed by a Democrat-run DOJ.

Unless you've dropped acid, your fantasy life probably can't get you there.

Try reality.

The Obama DOJ has admitted dropping a civil complaint filed by the Bush DOJ on Jan. 7, 2009, accusing members of the New Black Panther Party of "wearing black berets, black combat boots, black dress shirts and black jackets with military-style markings, brandishing a 2-foot-long nightstick and issuing racial threats and racial insults" at voters in Philadelphia, during November's election," according to an exclusive in The Washington Times on July 30. Members of Congress want to know why.

Fox News ran a story with an eyewitness at the scene on Nov. 4. The Bush DOJ had sought an injunction against the Panthers to prevent further violations of the 1965 Voting Rights Act:


Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were deployed at the entrance to a Philadelphia polling location wearing the uniform of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, and that Samir Shabazz repeatedly brandished a police-style baton weapon.


[P]arty Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz confirmed that the placement of Samir Shabazz and Jackson in Philadelphia was part of a nationwide effort to deploy New Black Panther Party members at polling locations on Election Day.


The Department seeks an injunction preventing any future deployment of, or display of weapons by, New Black Panther Party members at the entrance to polling locations.


Eric Holder, the newly appointed Attorney General of the United States, told the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs on June 17: "We will not tolerate murder, or the threat of violence, masquerading as political activism," according to Devlin Barrett writing for Breaking News 24/7. "So let me be clear. The Justice Department will use every tool at its disposal to protect the rights ensured under our Constitution."


The DOJ Web site states: "If you know of activities that intimidate, coerce, threaten, or oppress voters based on race, color, religion, or national origin, please contact the Criminal Section." Holder needs to explain why its "Criminal Section" isn't prosecuting the Panthers on felony charges of violating 18 U.S.C. § 245. Section 245 states:


(b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with--


(1) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from--


(A) voting or qualifying to vote, in any primary, special, or general election; ... shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and ... if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon ... shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;


Holder was certainly aware of Sec. 245 when he testified before Congress on June 25. He quoted the section urging Congress to pass a new "hate crimes" law which would allow the federal government to prosecute crimes based on sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability even if the victim wasn't engaged in a federally protected activity. Holder "cited the recent killing of a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. The alleged assailant is a white supremacist."


Holder said the expansion of the hate crime law was needed if states lack the "capacity," "willingness" or "desire to prosecute these kinds of cases," even though he does not think "that there is a trend among the states or local jurisdictions in failing to go after these kinds of crimes," according to columnist Debra Saunders.


Since Pennsylvania hasn't indicted the Panthers, wouldn't Holder's logic compel that the feds should? If DOJ can't make the case under Sec. 245 against armed Black Panthers who told Chris Hill, a white Republican poll watcher, "White power don't rule here," and called Larry Counts, a black Republican poll watcher a "race traitor," why is Holder confident that DOJ can successfully prosecute hate crimes based on something as subjective as "perceived gender identity"?


Or is it Holder's goal simply to chill politically incorrect speech?


Holder's response to a question by Sen. Jeff Sessions leads to that conclusion:


Sessions: "[A] minister gives a sermon, quotes the Bible about homosexuality, is thereafter attacked by a gay activist because of what the minister said about his religious beliefs and what Scripture says about homosexuality." Is the minister protected, is what Sessions said. Here's a portion of the answer, the testimony from Eric Holder.

HOLDER: Well, the statute would not -- would not necessarily cover that. We're talking about crimes that have a historic basis. Groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of the color of their skin, their sexual orientation, that is what this statute tends -- is designed to cover. We don't have the indication that the attack was motivated by a person's desire to strike at somebody who was in one of these protected groups. That would not be covered by the statute.


Since religion is one of the classes included in the definition of hate crimes, what authority does Holder have to exclude the attack on the minister from being "covered by the statute"?


Holder, the first black U.S. attorney general, gave a speech at DOJ in honor of Black History Month on Feb. 18, just 16 days after his confirmation. He used the occasion to tell us that the United States is "essentially a nation of cowards" when it comes to race relations.


Unless Holder considers "brandishing a 2-foot-long nightstick" just an innovative invitation to "talk with each other about things racial," it appears that his DOJ is cowering before the New Black Panthers.


Since the statute of limitations hasn't run on filing felony charges under Sec. 245, Mr. Hill and Mr. Counts should request a conversation with Holder about "unresolved racial issues" in Philadelphia.


Maybe Holder will have them over for a beer.


Jan LaRue is Senior Legal Analyst with the American Civil Rights Union; former Chief Counsel at Concerned for Women; former Legal Studies Director at Family Research Council; and former Senior Counsel for the National Law Center for Children and Families.


3)Saudis reject Obama's plan for ties with Israel: Top urgency is Iran threat



Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal's rejection of the Obama administration's Middle East approach was a lot more comprehensive than a blunt refusal to improve relations with Israel to help restart peace talks. Washington sources report that in closed-door talks with US leaders, including secretary of state Hillary Clinton, the Saudi prince urged the US to get off their backs on the Israeli-Palestinian issue and deal more seriously and effectively with top-urgency action for stopping Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb.

After those talks, Saud said his government would not consider steps suggested by the Obama administration until Israel accepted Arab demands "to withdraw from all occupied Palestinian territories."

With Clinton looking on at a joint State Department news conference Friday, July 31, the Saudi foreign minister dismissed Obama principles one by one: "Temporary security and confidence building measures will also not bring peace," he maintained and rejected "incrementalism and a step-by-step approach."

What is required, he said is "a comprehensive approach that defines the final outcome at the outset and launches into negotiations over final-status issues, including the future Palestinian state, control of Jerusalem, the return of Palestinian refugees, water and security."

Our Gulf sources note that the Saudi foreign minister thus reaffirmed in public the rejection of President Barack Obama's Middle East policies which he encountered when he met King Abdullah in Riyadh on June 3.

This week, the Saudis sought to to elicit more rejections from the seven Arab rulers who received personal letters from the US president asking for their cooperation in the peace effort by normalizing gestures towards Israel.

Political sources comment that by stipulating Israel's surrender on all its core issues with the Palestinians before negotiations even begin the Saudis render those negotiations superfluous.

It means Israel will only be asked to arrange for the technicalities and timelines for its predetermined pullback to the pre-1967 (or 1949) lines, its handover of Jerusalem to Arab control, the distribution and administration of regional water resources and the return of the refugees and their descendants to the homes they forfeited on account of the 1948 Arab war against the new Israeli state.

Two motives account for this Saudi all-or-nothing dictatorial position on Middle East peace, according to analyst reports:

1. Riyadh is loath to waste effort on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or any other elements of the Obama program such as détente with Syria when far more urgent business tops the royal agenda: The Saudis object strongly to the further entrenchment of the Shiite-ruled government in Baghdad and the restoration of Syrian influence in Beirut - both under US auspices. Washington is also seen to be making overtures towards Hizballah which can only strengthen the hand of the Lebanese Shiite extremists in the Lebanese government coalition.

Furthermore, they see the bitter rift between the Hamas rulers of the Gaza Strip and the Fatah faction governing the West Bank as irreconcilable and therefore an insurmountable barrier to Middle East peacemaking.

2. The Saudis maintain that Obama and his Middle East envoy George Mitchell have been sidetracked by minor regional issues from dealing with the primary concern of the Gulf and Middle East region, the looming threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. Until that cloud is lifted, they say, no other initiatives have a chance. Paradoxically, this reading of the Middle East impasse is shared by Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his defense minister Ehud Barak.

Saudi al Faisal's angry snub of the Obama administration's Middle East plans carries a clear message: First tackle the perils besetting us from the east and the north (Iraq and Iran) before you badger us about the Israelis and Palestinians.

4)"We are going in exactly the wrong direction. We ought to be standing on the principles that made this country great. There ought to be a review of every program in the Federal Government that is not effective, that is not efficient, that is wasteful or fraudulent, and we ought to get rid of it right now. We ought to say, you're gone, to be able to pay for a real stimulus plan that might, in fact, have some impact.

I would be remiss if I didn't remind everybody that next week we are going to hear from the Obama administration wanting another $500 billion. Outside of this, they are going to want another $500 billion to handle the banking system. Still not fixing the real disease-the pneumonia-we are going to treat the fever or treat the cough, butwe are not going to treat the real disease.

Until we treat the real disease, this is pure waste. It is worse than pure waste. It is morally reprehensible, because it steals the future
of the next two generations.

I am going to wind up here and finish, but I wanted to spend some time to make sure the American people know what is in this bill. I think once they know what is in thisbill, they would reject it out of hand.

Let me read for my colleagues some of the things that are in this bill..

The biggest earmark in history is in this bill. There is $2 billion in this bill to build a coal plant with zero emissions. That would be great, maybe, if we had the technology, but the greatest brains in the world sitting at MIT say we don't have the technology yet to do that. Why would we build a $2 billion power plant we don't have the technology for that we know will come back and ask for another $2 billion and another $2 billion and another $2 billion when we could build a demonstration project that might cost $150 million or $200 million? There is nothing wrong with having coal-fired plants that don't produce pollution; I am not against that. Even the Washington Post said the technology isn't there. It is a boondoggle. Why would we do that?

We eliminated tonight a $246 million payback for the large movie studios in Hollywood .

We are going to spend $88 million to study whether we ought to buy a new ice breaker for the Coast Guard. You know what. The Coast Guard needs a new ice breaker. Why do we need to spend $88 million? They have two ice breakers now that they could retrofit and fix and come up with equivalent to what they needed to and not spend the $1 billion they are going to come back and ask for, for another ice breaker, so why would we spend $88 million doing that?

We are going to spend $448 million to build the Department of Homeland Security a new building. We have $1.3 trillion worth of empty buildings right now, and because it has been blocked in Congress we can't sell them, we can't raze them, we can't do anything, but we are going to spend money on a new building here in Washington .

We are going to spend another $248 million for new furniture for that building; a quarter of a billion dollars for new furniture. What about the furniture the Department of Homeland Security has now? These are tough times. Should we be buying new furniture? How about using what we have? That is what a family would do. They would use what they have. They wouldn't go out and spend $248 million on furniture.

How about buying $600 million worth of hybrid vehicles? Do you know what I would say? Right now times are tough; I would rather Americans have new cars than Federal employees have new cars. What is wrong with the cars we have? Dumping $600 million worth of used vehicles on the used vehicle market right now is one of the worst things we could do. Instead, we are going to spend $600 million buying new cars for Federal employees..

There is $400 million in here to prevent STDs .. I have a lot of experience on that. I have delivered 4,000 babies. We don't need to spend $400 million on STDs. What we need to do is properly educate about the infection rates and the effectiveness of methods of prevention. That doesn't take a penny more. You can write that on one piece of paper and teach every kid in this country, but we don't need to spend $400 million on it. It is not a priority.

How about $1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs? That might even be somewhat stimulative. New sewers. That might create jobs.

How about $150 million for a Smithsonian museum? Tell me how that helps get us out of a recession. Tell me how that is a priority. Would the average American think that is a priority that we ought to be mortgaging our kids' future to spend another $150 million at the Smithsonian?

How about $1 billion for the 2010 census? So everybody knows, the census is so poorly managed that the census this year is going to cost twice-in 2010 is going to cost twice what it cost 10 years ago, and we wasted $800 million on a contract because it was no-bid that didn't perform. Nobody got fired, no competitive bidding, and we blew $800 million.

We have $75 million for smoking cessation activities, which probably is a great idea, but we just passed a bill-the SCHIP bill-that we need to get 21 million more Americans smoking to be able to pay for that bill. That doesn't make sense.

How about $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges? Since when is a community college in my State a recipient of Federal largesse? Is that our responsibility? I mean, did we talk with Dell and Hewlett-Packard and say, How do we make you all do better? Is there not a market force that could make that better?
Will we actually buy on a true competitive bid? No, because there is nothing that requires competitive bidding in anything in this bill. There is nothing that requires it. It is one of the things President Obama said he was going to mandate the Federal Government, but there is no competitive bidding in this bill at all.
We have $10 million to inspect canals in urban areas. Well, that will put 10 or 15 people to work. Is that a priority for us right now?

There is $6 billion to turn Federal buildings into green buildings. That is a priority, versus somebody getting a job outside of Washington , a job that actually produces something, that actually increases wealth?

How about $500 million for State and local fire stations? Where do you find in the Constitution us paying for local fire stations within our realm of prerogatives? None of it is competitively bid - not a grant program.

Next is $1.2 billion for youth activities. Who does that employ? What does that mean?

How about $88 million for renovating the public health service building? You know, if we could sell half of the $1.3 trillion worth of properties we have, we could take care of every Federal building requirement and backlog we have.

Then there's $412 million for CDC buildings and property. We spent billions on a new center and headquarters for CDC. Is that a priority? Building another Government building instead of - if we are going to spend $412 million on building buildings, let's build one that will produce something, one that will give us something.

How about $850 million for that most "efficient'' Amtrak that hasn't made any money since 1976 and continues to have $2 billion or $3 billion a year in subsidies?

Here is one of my favorites: $75 million to construct a new "security training'' facility for State Department security officers, and we have four other facilities already available to train them. But it is not theirs. They want theirs. By the way, it is going to be in West Virginia . I wonder how that got there? So we are going to build a new training facility that duplicates four others that we already have that could easily do what we need to do. But because we have a stimulus package, we are going to add in 'oink pork.'

How about $200 million in funding for a lease-not buying, but a
lease of alternative energy vehicles on military installations?

We are going to bail out the States on Medicaid. Total all of the health programs in this, and we are going to transfer $150 billion out of the private sector and we are going to move it to the Federal Government. You talk about back dooring national health care. Henry Waxman has to be smiling big today. He wants a single-payer Government-run health care system. We are going to move another $150 billion to the Federal Government from the private sector.

We are going to eliminate fees on loans from the Small Business Administration. You know what that does? That pushes productive capital to unproductive projects. It is exactly the wrong thing to do.

Then there is $160 million to the Job Corps Program-but not for 20 jobs and not to put more people in the Job Corps but to construct or repair buildings.

We are going to spend $524 million for information technology upgrades that the Appropriations Committee claims will create 388 jobs. If you do the math on that, that is $1.5 million a job. Don't you love the efficiency of Washington thinking?

We are going to create $79 billion in additional money for the States, a "slush fund,'' to bail out States and provide millions of dollars for education costs. How many of you think that will ever go away? Once the State education programs get $79 billion over 2 years, do you think that will ever go away? The cry and hue of taking our money away - even though it was a stimulus and supposed to be limited, it will never go away. So we will continue putting that forward until our kids have grandkids of their own.

There is about $47 billion for a variety of energy programs that are primarily focused on renewable energy. I am fine with spending that. But we ought to get something for it. There ought to be metrics. There are no metrics. It is pie in the sky, saying we will throw some money at it.

Let me conclude by saying we are at a seminal moment in our country. We will either start living within the confines of realism and responsibility or we will blow it and we will create the downfall of the greatest Nation that ever lived. This bill is the start of that downfall. To abandon a market-oriented society and transfer it to a Soviet-style, government-centered, bureaucratic-run and mandated program, that is the thing that will put the stake in the heart of freedom in this country.

I hope the American people know what is in this bill. I am doing everything I can to make sure they know. But more important, I hope somebody is listening who will treat the pneumonia we are faced with today, which is the housing and mortgage markets.
It doesn't matter how much money we spend in this bill. It is doomed to failure unless we fix that problem first. Failing that, we will go down in history as the Congress that undermined the future and vitality of this country. Let it not be so."

5) From the Wall Street Journal's staff blog on the recent incident involving Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Cambridge police officer Sgt. James Crowley:


In 2007, Crowley attended a three-day program for police officers on racial profiling at the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. He so impressed the staff there that he was invited back a year later for an advanced seminar, museum officials say.

Crowley's attendance at the Jewish civil-rights organization's programs hasn't been previously reported, though it is widely known that he taught his own course on the subject at a local police department.

Sunny Lee-Goodman, director of the "Tools for Tolerance" law enforcement program at the Museum of Tolerance, says attendees of the "Perspectives on Profiling" program explore the perils of racial profiling. Using interactive exhibits at the museum, officers study both the Holocaust and the civil-rights movement in America. Officers also engage in soul-searching about their own prejudices.

She says of Crowley: "He stands out to me. He was one of those people who really engaged in sessions, who really showed a high level of understanding of the issue."

Adding to the irony, Gates is often prominently featured at the museum's law-enforcement training programs, which has held classes for about 100,000 police officers in both Los Angeles and New York City since 1996.

At the center's New York tolerance center, etched on a wall near inspirational words from Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., is a quotation from Gates: "There is no tolerance without respect. There is no respect without knowledge."

6) THE SOURCE OF OBAMA'S ANTI-ISRAEL POLICY
BY E.W. Jackson Sr.


Like Obama, I am a graduate of Harvard Law School. I too have Muslims in my family. I am black, and I was once a leftist Democrat. Since our backgrounds are somewhat similar, I perceive something in Obama's policy toward Israel which people without that background may not see. All my life I have witnessed a strain of anti-Semitism in the black community. It has been fuelled by the rise of the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan, but it predates that organization.

We heard it in Jesse Jackson's "HYMIE town" remark years ago during his presidential campaign. We heard it most recently in Jeremiah Wright's remark about "them Jews" not allowing Obama to speak with him. I hear it from my own Muslim family members who see the problem in the Middle East as a "Jew" problem.

Growing up in a small, predominantly black urban community in Pennsylvania, I heard the comments about Jewish shop owners. They were "greedy cheaters" who could not be trusted, according to my family and others in the neighborhood. I was too young to understand what it means to be Jewish, or know that I was hearing anti-Semitism. These people seemed nice enough to me, but others said they were "evil". Sadly, this bigotry has yet to be eradicated from the black community.

In Chicago, the anti-Jewish sentiment among black people is even more pronounced because of the direct influence of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Most African Americans are not followers of "The Nation", but many have a quiet respect for its leader because, they say, "he speaks the truth" and "stands up for the black man". What they mean of course is that he viciously attacks the perceived "enemies" of the black community - white people and Jews. Even some self-described Christians buy into his demagoguery.

The question is whether Obama, given his Muslim roots and experience in Farrakhan's Chicago, shares this antipathy for Israel and Jewish people. Is there any evidence that he does? First, the President was taught for twenty years by a virulent anti-Semite, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. In the black community it is called "sitting under". You don't merely attend a church, you "sit under" a Pastor to be taught and mentored by him. Obama "sat under" Wright for a very long time. He was comfortable enough with Farrakhan - Wright's friend - to attend and help organize his "Million Man March". I was on C-Span the morning of the march arguing that we must never legitimize a racist and anti-Semite, no matter what "good" he claims to be doing.

Yet a future President was in the crowd giving Farrakhan his enthusiastic support.
The classic left wing view is that Israel is the oppressive occupier, and the Palestinians are Israel's victims. Obama is clearly sympathetic to this view. In speaking to the "Muslim World," he did not address the widespread Islamic hatred of Jews. Instead he attacked Israel over the growth of West Bank settlements. Surely he knows that settlements are not the crux of the problem. The absolute refusal of the Palestinians to accept Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is the insurmountable obstacle. That's where the pressure needs to be placed, but this President sees it differently. He also made the preposterous comparison of the Holocaust to Palestinian "dislocation".

Obama clearly has Muslim sensibilities. He sees the world and Israel from a Muslim perspective. His construct of "The Muslim World" is unique in modern diplomacy. It is said that only The Muslim Brotherhood and other radical elements of the religion use that concept. It is a call to unify Muslims around the world. It is rather odd to hear an American President use it. In doing so he reveals more about his thinking than he intends. The dramatic policy reversal of joining the unrelentingly anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and pro-Islamic UN Human Rights Council is in keeping with the President's truest - albeit undeclared - sensibilities

Those who are paying attention and thinking about these issues do not find it unreasonable to consider that President Obama is influenced by a strain of anti-Semitism picked up from the black community, his leftist friends and colleagues, his Muslim associations and his long period of mentorship under Jeremiah Wright. If this conclusion is accurate, Israel has some dark days ahead. For the first time in her history, she may find the President of the United States siding with her enemies. Those who believe, as I do, that Israel must be protected had better be ready for the fight. We are.

NEVER AGAIN!

E.W. Jackson is Bishop of Exodus Faith Ministries, an author and retired attorney.


7) The recently passed "cash for clunkers" program is a perfect example of how government policy can make the economy worse. By incentivizing Americans to destroy
fully paid-for cars so they can go deeper into debt buying brand new ones,
the government weakens an already crippled economy.

It is clear that severe tax increases have or will be taking place in the US
on both state and federal levels. It is also clear tax increases have a
multiplier effect on GDP contraction. There is of course a delay before the
tax shock translates into GDP decline. It is entirely possible that with the
temporary impact of stimulus, we may be looking at a prolonged "W" type
recovery that is far more protracted than many currently estimate.

The most worrying aspect of the report and something that cannot be
downplayed however, is consumer spending. Massive wealth loss, rising
unemployment, tight credit conditions, reduced income and consumer
deleveraging all point to a very subdued outlook for the U.S consumer in the
months ahead and only a gradual pace of economic recovery. The U.S savings rate is set to move higher even from its current 15 year high and spending on big ticket items will remain fragile at best.