Rep. Steve King (R-(Iowa) says that he is not surprised that President Barack Obama’s healthcare plan will cost so much to implement. King recalls hearing the President say that he believes FDR’s New Deal would have been more successful if more money had been spent on it. King calls Obama a “Keynesian economist on steroids.” (:25)
By Leah Valencia – University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) pointed her finger at the Bush administration Thursday, blaming it for the current conditions in Afghanistan.
“Our troops in Afghanistan are at risk because… the entire Bush administration looked the other way on Afghanistan, there was never a plan,” Pelosi said during her weekly press conference.
The Speaker said that during President Bush’s time as Commander in Chief the Taliban gained strength because there was not a policy that indicated to the Afghan government that the U.S. would not tolerate corruption.
“We have missed opportunities over the years and made matters worse…for President Obama,” Pelosi said.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney accused President Barack Obama Wednesday night of being weak in his strategy for Afghanistan, saying that his indecision “hurt our allies and embolden our adversaries.”
“The White House must stop dithering while America’s armed forces are in danger,” Cheney said while making remarks at a function held by the Center for Security Policy.
Pelosi defended the current President, saying that he should take the appropriate time needed to make sound decisions.
“The President should not make a decision any sooner than he has the right information to do so,” she said. “Matters are so much worse because of the missed opportunities for seven and a half years, it is really tragic.”
At a speech he delivered Wednesday afternoon, President Barack Obama made clear that “it is essential to make more credit available to smaller banks and community financial institutions that these businesses depend on”. (0:21)
John DuBois, University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service
A new policy introduced by the Obama administration Monday restricts the federal government’s authority to prosecute medicinal marijuana patients and sanctioned suppliers. Instead, federal resources will be diverted toward apprehending larger criminal operations.
Mondays decision was praised by medical marijuana activists.
“This is an important step forward today. The federal government said, that they will respect state laws regards to medical marijuana,” said Mike Meno, Assistant Director of Communication for the Marijuana Policy Project, an organization based on reforming existing marijuana laws. “We think this is great and more [reforms] should follow.”
However, the responses to the decision have not all been optimistic. House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar Smith (R-Texas) charged in a statement Monday that “the Administration is tacitly condoning the use of marijuana in the U.S.” The statement goes on to read “If we want to win the war on drugs, federal prosecutors have a responsibility to investigate and prosecute all medical marijuana dispensaries and not just those that are merely fronts for illegal marijuana distribution.”
The new policy states that those who use or provide marijuana without medical clearance will still be prosecuted. Fourteen states currently permit marijuana for medical use; Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
By Justin Duckham-Talk Radio News Service
While the approval of the America’s Healthy Future Act in the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday seemed to hasten the pace of health care reform, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) does not believe the House will be prepared to bring similar legislation to the floor by early November.
“I think it would be very doubtful that we would get a vote prior to the first week of November,” Hoyer said during a pen and pad session with reporters.
There has been some concern that the proximity of the ongoing debate over health care reform to two crucial gubernatorial campaigns in Virginia and New Jersey could sway the manner in which Congress shapes the legislation, a notion that Hoyer flatly rejected.
“Frankly, I think these gubernatorial elections…pretty much stand on their own,” the Majority Leader said. “They will have minimum effect on the health care deliberation.”
Hoyer stated that he believes the House will hold its vote by Christmas, but stressed that he could not guarantee it.
Initially, both Hoyer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sought to hold a vote prior to the August recess, a deadline originally pitched by the White House.
The Republicans need to take a “chill pill” about their reaction to the president being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. They have gone overboard and are risking the “sour grapes” perception by the public at large. If there are any sour grapes, they should be found in the garden of former President Bill Clinton. I speculate that upon hearing the news Friday morning, President Clinton let out a few expletives that would have made Rahm Emanuel blush. President George Bush must have done the same.
The fact is that the Norwegian Nobel Committee decides who is the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. Norway is a peaceful country with a long history of making surprising choices with the Nobel. Not only did they give it to Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat, but Henry Kissinger also won. Many people were shocked when both of these men were awarded the peace prize. The prize has been used as both an award and as a carrot to promote better action and leadership on specific issues. In my view, President Obama is getting the award for what some would call “representative leadership.” There were other people in addition to Mikhail Gorbachev and former President Ronald Reagan who were responsible for ending the communist era. However, both of the leaders were the individuals who represented the change. The same is true for President Obama. Many people have worked on climate change and non-proliferation, but he is the one who represents much of what is being done and the change that is taking place in the world.
The carping on the airwaves has included the fact that the nominations are made in February and that President Obama had only been president for a very short period of time. The fact is that the Norwegian Nobel Committee can decide at any point to change its mind and decide that candidate Obama had already reached across the ocean with his goals and dreams by the time he became president.
It is also something to be proud of as Americans. This year was an excellent year for Nobel Prizes won by Americans. Some of the medicine, chemistry and physics prizes went to Americans. I didn’t see any Russians on the list, and despite China’s huge population only one Chinese person was on the list. America should be proud. We may be having a difficult time economically, but we are still out in the forefront contributing to science and medicine.
There were some Republicans who were proud of the president and Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly was one of them. He said as Americans we should be proud, but not so with the Republican Party and its Chairman Michael Steele. There are times to comment and times to let it be, and his timing was way off. He asked, “What has the president accomplished?” The Norwegian Nobel Committee was clear in what it stated about the award. It was due to President Obama’s “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people.”
The award did not say that he created peace or that a treaty had been signed. The honor states that it is for “effort.” Like him or hate him, Barack Obama has put in the effort. He did it before he became president and has continued to do it since taking the highest office in the land.
The Republicans really went overboard with their fundraising letter that they produced and distributed just 30 hours after the prize was announced. They sent the letter to their vast e-mail list, and my guess is that it will go directly to their direct mail house.
In his fundraising appeal the Republican Chairman said: “It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working toward peace and human rights.”
Steele goes on and lumps the Democrats in the same boat as people on the very far Left. He stated: “the Democrats and their international leftist allies want America made subservient to the agenda of global redistribution and control. And truly patriotic Americans like you and our Republican Party are the only thing standing in their way.”
He goes on with his pitch to say, “Help our party spread the word about the Obama Democrats’ dangerous naïveté and power grab. Please support GOP elected officials as they work to hold the Democrats accountable by making a contribution of $25, $50, $100, $500, or $1000 to the Republican National Committee today.”
It is shameful that the Republican Party is so desperate to raise cash that they would stoop to the lowest tactics possible and utilize the receipt of the Nobel Peace prize by the president to raise money and red bait by saying “leftist allies.” It is a complete outrage, and the Republican Party really should take its foot out of its mouth and substitute “a chill pill.”
Republicans would do themselves a favor if they put aside partisan differences and were proud of the Nobel committee’s recognition of our president instead of using the award as a divisive fundraising technique.
Singer Lady Gaga issues a message to President Barack Obama, saying that she will push him and his administration to fulfill the President’s campaign promises. (0:32)
By Talk Radio News Service White House Staff
President Obama says he was “surprised and deeply humbled” to be awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. Mr. Obama, who learned the news in a 6:00 a.m. phone call from White House Secretary Robert Gibbs, will travel to Oslo, Norway for the Dec. 10 award ceremony, which comes with a $1.4 million prize.
Standing in a sunny Rose Garden Friday morning, Obama said he doesn’t feel like he deserves “to be in the company” of prior winners,” adding “I do not view it as a recognition of my accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership.”
The Norwegian Nobel Committee, which made the stunning announcement around 5:00 a.m. Eastern time, said it selected Mr. Obama for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”
Asked by Talk Radio News about First Lady Michelle Obama’s reaction, the President declined to comment. He appeared to downplay the event, saying daughter Malia came into the their bedroom to say “You won the Nobel Peace Prize.”
Just 8 1/2 months into the job, Mr. Obama is now the third sitting American President to win the coveted award. Theodore Roosevelt won in 1906 for brokering an end to a war betwen Russia and Japan, and Woodrow Wilson was selected for the honor in 1919 for helping to establish the League of Nations after World War I.
By Leah Valencia, University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service
During testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, former CIA counter-terrorism official Robert Grenier said that a strong U.S presence in Afghanistan could be useful in fighting Al-Qaida.
Wednesday’s hearing was set against the backdrop of the national debate on the U.S.’s military policy in Afghanistan. President Obama is currently under pressure to decide whether or not to send more troops to Afghanistan as requested by General Stanley McChrystal.
In his remarks, Grenier said that a “robust presence” of forces is needed in Afghanistan.
“Much of our relative success against Al-Qaida leadership, particularly across the border in Pakistan, [we owe] to our intelligence and military platform we have inside Afghanistan,” Grenier said. “If that were to be diminished, I believe our success would diminish with it.”
Grenier said that a U.S. presence is crucial, but shot down suggestions that launching counter-terrorism operations offshore would be effective.
President Obama has yet to indicate if he will send more troops to Afghanistan.
The President, speaking just a few minutes ago, calls today‘s historic nuclear talks with Iran “constructive,” but says it’s just a beginning. The next steps, Obama says, are up to Tehran.
Speaking in the Diplomatic Reception, the President said Iran has just 14 days to allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) into its uranium-enrichment facility near Qum. He added Iran must follow up by being more transparent. The entire international community, Mr. Obama claimed, “is united” on this matter.
But during today’s talks in Geneva between Iran and the so-called P5+1 (the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany), Iran gave no indication that it is willing to back down on its nuclear program.
At the talks, which included the highest-level bilateral discussions between the U.S. and Iran in years, Tehran also agreed to an additional meeting later this month.
Asked whether the additional talks are merely an attempt by Tehran to stall the West, presidential press secretary Robert Gibbs said: “The Iranians need to understand that we mean business.” If talks do not yield fruitful results soon – and by soon, the White House means Dec. 31 – then tougher sanctions will be on the table, Gibbs said.
What kind of sanctions is Obama considering? The President is said to be weighing the cutoff of gasoline supplies to Iran, the thought being that this would further weaken the wobbly Iranian economy. Why does Iran – the world’s 4th biggest oil producer – have to import gasoline in the first place? Because existing sanctions have choked its refineries of spare parts needed to process enough crude to meet its needs – it is estimated that Tehran imports about 25% of its gas.
These sanctions have, in fact, appeared to have an impact. The CIA has reported that fuel shortages forced the regime to ration fuel in July 2007 and impose a stiff fuel tax in October of last year. Both moves, intelligence analysts say, “were met with stiff resistance and violent protests.”
– TRNS Staff
