PUNDIT PRESS HAS MOVED

Today marks a very exciting day as we launch the new and improved Pundit Press. We have joined forces with High Plains Pundit to design a new website to provide our readers with even more news and information.


Here is the link that will direct you to the new Pundit Press website: http://thepunditpress.com/


This new partnership will also include all 3 of Danny R. Butcher's (aka High Plains Pundit) internet radio shows, Nightly Review, The Danny R. Butcher Show, and Sunday Night Sports Talk.


A special thank you to all of the Pundit Press readers out there for your continued support. We are very excited about what the future holds for Pundit Press, and we hope that you continue with us on this journey.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Massive Oil Find in Texas

A series of domestic oil finds may be able to increase American oil production by up to 25% in the next decade. Of course there is controversy over the method to extract this sea of fuel-- hydraulic fracturing (Unlikely Hospitalist will love this one).

But it appears well worth it.

“It’s the one thing we have seen in our adult lives that could take us away from imported oil,” said Aubrey McClendon, chief executive of Chesapeake Energy, one of the most aggressive drillers. “What if we have found three of the world’s biggest oil fields in the last three years right here in the U.S.? How transformative could that be for the U.S. economy?”

Drill, baby, drill!

Please bookmark!

Turncoat Nation!


Please bookmark!

Weiner's Wiener Makes a Cameo? What a dick?

Twitter is abuzz with the idea that Rep Anthony Wiener (D-New York) sent a photo tweet of his package to a self described type A Seattleite. Who know if it is true, but some reputable folks are putting their name behind it.

Stacy McCain wonders about the authenticity of Weiner's Wiener and Who is Gennette Nicole Cordova? As always he is on top of things and has lots of updates.

Doug Ross plugs the Gennette Nicole Hole.

Meanwhile Big Government why Rep Weiner cares what time it is in Seattle.

And Big Journalism wonders why Anthony Weiner would selectively edit himself?


Twitter hashtag #WeinerGate is the place to go for up to date news and entertainment!

Update #1 The Lonely Conservative has lots of links and a round up!

Update #2 No Sheeples Here has a must see photoshop. There is really nothing left to say!
Please bookmark!

Obligatory Keith Olbermann Calls FoxNews an Enemy of Democracy on the First Episode of his New, Shitty Show

Enjoy and vomit:



Please bookmark!

The Best Under-the-Radar Conservative Sites- Today: Libertarian Republican

We here at Pundit Press love our fellow bloggers and we're always looking for a way to give back. We've started an on-going series to highlight our favorite under-the-radar sites on the internet.  And no, I don't mean "under the radar" like, "dude, that site is so under the radar, the man will never bring it down!" I mean "under the radar" as in, "even though that site is under the radar of most readers, it is still great."

Today's spotlight: Libertarian Republican
With biting commentary on the world today and a sophistication that most sites fail to grasp, Libertarian Republican has fulfilled a niche on the internet.

So... go check them out!

Former UtR Conservative Sites:

Reaganite Republican
The Lonely Conservative
High Plains Pundit
Pirate's Cove

Please bookmark!

Friday, May 27, 2011

Rudy Giuliani Leads in New National Poll

Well, go figure:
A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation national poll shows the former New York City mayor atop the slow-forming Republican primary field.
The survey shows Giuliani getting 16 percent of independents and Republicans, with nominal frontrunner Mitt Romney a point behind at 15 percent.

Sarah Palin gets 13 percent.

Neither Palin nor Giuliani are sure things for the 2012 election, and their perches in the new poll — the first taken by the news organization since Mike Huckabee, Mitch Daniels and Donald Trump bowed out — speak to how wide-open the race is.

Palin, the former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential nominee, has increasingly sent signals that she might jump in, and is launching a bus tour on Sunday that will take her to New Hampshire for the first time since the 2008 race.

Please bookmark!

Obama and Foreign Policy; The Rest of His Speech

In his controversial talk at the State Department, President Obama was expected to discuss the “Arab Spring”. However, after much White House discussion, a decision was made to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an unwelcome surprise for Prime Minster Netanyahu, immediately before his visit to the White House. The assertions that the “1967 borders” should be the basis for “peace”, that borders would be discussed before other issues, the omission of any demands on the Palestinians, including recognition of a Jewish state, incitement to violence, and the influx of millions of Palestinians to the Jewish state, are now recognized as having making matters worse.

The last minute inclusion of material regarding Israel meant that most of the speech was ignored.. But there is much in the rest of President Obama’s State Department speech that also needs to be examined, since our President once again shows himself to be naive and poorly informed on issues related to the “Arab Spring”. Some observations follow.

1. With respect to Islamic terror, President Obama is obsessed with pinning the entire responsibility on Al Qaeda, while ignoring the much larger strategic threat posed by revolutionary Islamism This war is not against Al Qaeda; it is against militant Islam, of which Al Qaeda is one part. A basic tenet of this administration is that al-Qaida is the enemy because they were the ones who attacked America in 2001. In his speech after the killing of Osama Bin Laden, he couldn’t say the words Al Qaida too many times.

The emphasis on Al Qaeda served an important function for Obama in the election campaign of 2008, when Obama in effect distinguished between Al Qaida and all other types of revolutionary Islam.. At that time, for purposes of campaigning and demonizing the opposition, he could oppose the invasion of Iraq, and he could support engagement with Iran and other elements of radical Islam as long as he could pretend that only Al Qaeda was the enemy. This also allowed him to avoid the trap of being labeled a pro-appeasement dupe.

Yet this is a war against radical Islam. The clear strategic threat is posed by revolutionary Islamism, which includes Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkish groups, and others, all serious threats to the US and our allies. Some are terrorist groups, others are nations that sponsor terrorist groups. To narrow the focus to Al Qaeda is to encourage those who claim the war on terror is simply fear mongering. It is most certainly not. There are significant numbers of persons who wish to kill those of us who are not Muslim

Let us be clear. As Barry Rubin has pointed out, while Al Qaida may be fading, Iran is marching toward nuclear weapons and the systems to deliver them. Hezbollah all but controls Lebanon, Hamas controls Gaza and will likely end up controlling the West Bank, the Muslim Brotherhood will probably control Egypt, and Turkey is moving toward Iran and away from he West.

2. In his speech, Obama stated his support for democracy. Using impressive language, he supported "free speech, the freedom of peaceful assembly, the freedom of religion, equality for men and women under the rule of law, and the right to choose your own leaders—whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus, Sanaa or Tehran." President Obama has high hopes for the “Arab spring.” This is to say the least confusing when one examines how the US under the current administration has dealt with the important issues of the area.

AS Matthew Brodsky indicates, in Tehran Obama supported the regime and not the people after fraudulent elections and the murder of Iranian protesters two years ago. The beginning of the so-called Arab spring occurred two years ago in the streets of Tehran. We remember the killing of Neda Agha-Soltan, a young woman dying in the streets of Teheran, her death captured on video by bystanders. Where was the exercise of those rights then?. And what about the opposition within Iran? They know that they were neglected by Obama when it mattered, and so they don’t trust anything that he says.

To automatically welcome change in the Arab world is not a prudent path. The cliché is "be careful what you wish for". We got rid of the Shah and got the Ayatollahs. We got rid of Mubarak, a pro-American autocrat, and now we will get an anti-American autocrat. I harbor no illusions about Muammar Qadaffi, but after Qadaffi's 42 years in power, what comes next? It matters.

3. Iran is one of the most important threats in the region, but it filled a minor role in the speech. Today Iran is the chief sponsor of terror, and is working feverishly on an illicit nuclear program. Not only Israel, but most Arab nations, are concerned about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Iran’s rulers now know that Obama can be ignored without consequence. Nothing in his speech will change that perception.

4. In Damascus, the citizen opposition currently being massacred on the streets are calling for the same universal rights as Obama. And yet our president has failed to call for regime change in Syria, The Assad regime is Iran's partner and as pointed out by Brodsky, is "a perfect example of the failure of the White House's engagement strategy".

In his speech, Obama said, "President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that transition or get out of the way." Doesn’t our President understand that Assad has made his choice? Bashar Assad now knows that Obama’s words mean nothing. Plus what must Assad’s opponents in the street think when Obama says to them "Our message is simple: If you take risks that reform entails, you will have the full support of the United States." Full support? To what is he referring? Over 1000 Syrian citizens have been murdered in the streets. In what way has the US given them “full support”?

No one wants war. However, it is critical to distinguish between the entities that start wars and those that act to defend themselves from the consequences of the hostile actions of others. It is not the US that is instigating war. To try to avoid war by appeasing aggressors simply delays the inevitable, and increases the human cost.

Poland did not initiate the war with Germany in 1939. The US was not the party to start a war with Japan in 1941. Czechoslovakia was a passive victim of French and British perfidy, forced to surrender to Germany in 1938. With respect to radical Islam, this is 1938 all over again. To claim, as some have, that the “war on terror” was simply a Bush plan to achieve political aims, or a war for oil, is absurd. Michael Moore, Code Pink, and the other paranoid conspiracy thinkers, blame America. They are wrong.

Obama has done a terrible job in his prosecution of US foreign policy. He has undermined our allies. He has, “engaged with” and befriended our enemies. He has flattered and bowed to autocratic dictators, while humiliating our friends.

This will not cost him the election in 2012; that will be decided on the issues of unemployment, and which party scares voters more on the future of Medicare.

But the legacy of Barack Obama, and whether he will be judged by the chroniclers of history to be wise or foolish, will be determined by how he handles foreign policy issues; it is these that currently threaten the survival of the free world. Right now, the major issue facing America is Islamic jihad, and the threats it poses to America and to our allies.

I predict that Obama will exceed the record of Jimmy Carter as a failed President. He has proven himself to be dangerously narcissistic, uninformed, and unwise. He is a victim of hubris, of a narrow ideology that has been thoroughly discredited, and of an unwillingness or inability to ask what is in the best interests of our great nation. We need better.



Please bookmark!

UK Scientists: Obama "Obsessed with his Street Cred"

Members of the Royal Society in the United Kingdom stated yesterday that President Barack Obama was obsessed with his perception of "street cred" and that he intentionally avoids things to keep it high.

This comes after Mr. Obama snubbed the group, an organization of world-leading scientists, when they planned on awarding him the King Charles II medal.  The medal is given out only in "extraordinary circumstances" to leaders who "made an outstanding contribution to furthering scientific research in their country."

Sources also stated that the group was "deeply offended."

According to a source in the British government:
“The Royal Society was really keen to do something with Obama and they expected him to be very honoured by the medal. Instead they received a very short response from his people saying that it would be better for him to visit a state school. The inference they took from that was that he was more interested in cultivating his street cred than in building links with British scientists.”
The "street cred" referred to was what the President did instead of meeting with scientists, which was hang out with students at a London school.
"Obsessed with street cred"
The Telegraph continues:
But Mr Obama’s aides responded to the invitation with a “very short” note in which they said the president would rather spend time at a south London state school.

Mr Obama visited The Globe Academy in Southwark with David Cameron, the Prime Minister, on Tuesday.

The two leaders swapped a number of high-fives with pupils before rolling up their sleeves for a game of table tennis against two schoolboys.

Please bookmark!

Perry on 2012 Run: “I’m Going to Think About It”

Texas Governor Rick Perry may indeed run for President in 2012, as shown by his recent comments.
Perry
More from Statesman:
“I’m going to think about it” after the legislative session ends Monday, Perry said. He added, “But I think about a lot of things.”

For years, Perry has said that he would not run for president and that he had no interest in the job. He has often said that he has said no to the presidential question in as many ways as he could.
But he and his advisers have inched closer to saying he may run all week, following the announcement that Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels would not enter the GOP field. A couple of days ago, he told Greta Van Susteren on Fox News that a run was tempting.

Many conservatives have called on Perry to enter a field which could have room for a social and fiscal conservative with Perry’s energy and charisma. And, intentionally or not, the governor has set himself up for a run over the last couple of years, making a Texas/Washington contrast the focus of his 2010 re-election and writing a book called “Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America From Washington.”
Perry was asked about the presidency during a press conference to hail a voter-identification law that he has signed into law.

The presidential talk began when a reporter asked Perry for his reaction to the fact that the Hispanic Republican Conference of Texas, a group of state legislators, endorsed him for president on Thursday.

“I don’t make a lot of anything dealing with that until we get past the Monday deadline for this legislative session,” Perry said. “That’s our focus. I appreciate everybody’s interest. All of us know that the work at hand is the most important thing we have to do in getting this balanced budget finalized and passing pieces of legislation like this.”


Please bookmark!

Ignoring Pawlenty

Everyone likes former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty.

His electoral and gubernatorial records is very impressive for somebody from Minnesota, while his courage to take on ethanol subsidies in Iowa and support American intervention in Libya has won him over some people who considered him boring and uninteresting.

But he's still being ignored by most Conservatives and Republicans.

Why?

Because the 2012 Republican base is acting a lot like the 2008 Democrat base: looking for the charismatic choice that will excite us next year instead of the substantive choice that will effectively lead us in two, which creates a situation where we are going against our historical roots of picking substance over style.

Republican voters in Iowa and New Hampshire will be heading to the polls in eight months to hopefully elect America's next President, but that is only going to occur if they focus on serious candidates who can win in 2012, and be able to govern in 2013.

That candidate, I believe, is Tim Pawlenty. But the main message, regardless of who our nominee is, stands strong: we cannot follow the Democrat lead in going for charismatic politicians instead of substantive leaders.

America needs leadership; not cheerleaders.

What say you?

Yemen Faces Civil War as Tribes Take Army Camp

Yemen is facing another civil war as the country teeters. Tribesmen formerly allied with dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh have turned on the government and have reportedly seized an army camp. This comes as at least 100 people have been killed in the newest week of fighting. Yemeni jets have bombed rebel positions and Saleh shows no sign of stepping down as he promised.

The protests are continuing, and perhaps growing:

In Sanaa, tens of thousands of people gathered after Friday prayers for what they said would be a “Friday of Peaceful Revolution” against Saleh, releasing white doves and carrying the coffins of about 30 people killed in clashes this week.

And the possibility of violence is increasing:

“We are now in mediation and there has been a ceasefire between the two sides … But if Ali Abdullah Saleh returned (to fighting) then we are ready. We are steadfast and victorious,” Sadeq al-Ahmar told protesters in “Change Square.”
“We wanted it (revolution) to be peaceful but Saleh, his sons and his clique wanted war. We will not leave them the opportunity to turn it into a civil war. There is mediation going on now,” Ahmar told Reuters.

Unless Saleh is removed by some in his inner circle, a civil war is almost inevitable.

Cross posted at World Threats.

Please bookmark!

America's Budget at Standstill

The United States Congress is at a standstill on our 2012 fiscal budget: Democrats are refusing to introduce their own plan, Republicans are being stonewalled on theirs and President Obama's so unserious that not one member of his party supported it Wednesday.

Fun times in Washington.

With everyone politically dug in deep, and the President lacking all creditability, nothing will get done until both sides admit some unfortunate facts, and yes, compromise.

Fact #1: Entitlements accounted for over sixty percent of government spending in last year's budget, which means we spend three times more in handouts than we do in protecting those who receive the handouts. It doesn't need to be said, but the sacred cow must be slayed.

Fact #2: Government revenues must be raised to help eliminate our budget deficit, but by encouraging job creation and fostering economic development through corporate tax reductions to revive our economy to pre-recession receipts of $2.7 trillion.

Fact #3: American citizens expect their elected representatives to stay at work and craft a budget worthy of passage, and as such Congress should remain in constant session in Washington until a budget deal is reached; no vacations.

Congress passed on making the tough choices in 2010 for political reasons, and now some are hoping to exploit tough choices for political reasons, which only leaves the public annoyed and frankly dispirited.

This has to end now.

What say you?

Where's the Outrage?

In the best line of a lackluster campaign Bob Dole challenged the voters who were swallowing the liberal line of the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media.  At the time they were carrying the water for Bill Clinton in the 1996 election.  By that time Mr. Clinton’s Bimbo Eruptions and complete lack of ethics had become common knowledge but the unengaged in fly-over country were lapping up the Clinton mantra “Character Doesn’t Matter” and preparing to not vote in droves.
Today we face a crisis that is more pertinent to the beating heart of American liberty than whether or not the President is or is not a morally challenged serial abuser of women or what “is” means.  Today we again face a challenge that was also presented to us by Mr. Clinton twelve years ago when he waged in an unconstitutional wag-the-dog air war against Yugoslavia that even some of his supporters speculated was more about diverting attention from his Oval Office escapades than anything else. 
This re-run of Clinton’s war by decree prompts this writer to ask: Who has the right to commit America to war?  Who has the right to send our soldiers into harm’s way?  Does America go to war by the act of Congress or by the whim of the Executive?
In this matter, which strikes at the heart of the American Experiment no one in Congress, except Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, two polar opposites from the right and the left, had the integrity to ask these questions.  The media totally abdicated its watchdog role.  This is a matter that should be at the forefront of the consciousness of the American people.  We should have risen up and demanded an explanation.  But instead, since our Congressional leaders ignored it and the media treated the only two elected officials who did speak out as if they wore aluminum hats, our fellow citizens hit the mental snooze button, and rolled over to watch a reality show so they could ignore reality.
On March 19, 2011 President Obama’s administration declared war on Libya by launching 112 Tomahawk missiles at targets within the country.  I say the administration declared war because the United States Congress was not consulted.  Congressional leaders weren’t even advised of these acts of war until 90 minutes before the bombs started falling.  And this was not really consultation. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said “I wouldn’t call it consultation as much as laying it out.”  He [President Obama]had spent time consulting with the U.N. and the Arab League but he couldn’t be bothered with consulting the United States Congress?  Which brings me back to the quote from Bob Dole, “Where’s the outrage?”
The Constitution in Article One Section Eight ever wary of giving the executive too much power gave Congress the exclusive power to declare war.  Ever since Harry Truman decided for domestic political reasons to call a war in Korea that cost 54,229 American lives a Police Action our Presidents have followed the guns and butter policies of peace at home and war abroad.  However; Johnson, Bush I, and Bush II  sought and received Congressional approval before committing America to war in all but name.  Only “Where is the Outrage” Clinton presumed to have the power to wage war by Executive Order. 
Today we are faced with an out of control administration that believes it can involve America in a war on the whim of the executive instead of the act of Congress.  They pointed towards the War Powers Act as a fig leaf to cover their actions.  This administration is headed by a lawyer and filled with lawyers, and yet they presumably did not know that the War Powers Act specifically says, “The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”  And it is clear that not one of the three circumstance explicitly named by the Act applied to the situation of our attack upon Libya. 
The President has said he doesn’t need Congressional Approval, Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media repeats that the President has the authority, and the Justice Department says the president has all the authority he needs for the war in Libya. 
However, due to President Obama’s clear circumvention of Congressional approval and his egregious and erroneous appeal to the War Powers Act, I am stating categorically that his attack upon Libya is an abuse of executive power and an unconstitutional action.  This is not my opinion alone.  Many Americans from constitutional law experts to his own liberal Democrats are beginning to say the same thing, which brings me back to the quote from Bob Dole, “Where’s the outrage?”
If this is a blatant abuse of power and an unconstitutional act leading to war I also say this rises to the level of an impeachable offense.  In this I find myself standing for the first time with the most liberal Democrats.  And in another departure from tradition I am also in agreement with Vice President Joe Biden when he said, “launching an attack without congressional approval is an impeachable offense.”   No matter what the administration says, no matter what the media says, we the people need to hold those who would violate the constitutional limitations of our government to account or they will continue to transgress the limits and do whatever they want.
In another quote that seems as relevant today as it was fifteen years ago Senator Dole asked, ''When do the American people rise up and say, 'Forget the media in America! We're going to make up our minds! You're not going to make up our minds!' This is about saving our country!''
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion for Southside Virginia Community College.  He is the author of the History of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com View the trailer for Dr. Owens’ latest book @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ypkoS0gGn8 © 2011 Robert R. Owens dr.owens@comcast.net  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook.

Newest Psychosis: 'Facebook Depression'

As if life for emo teenagers wasn't troubled enough, now we have a whole new dilemma for the social networking generation.

Call it 'facebook depression.'

That's right, that thing that you use to find a few old friends but instead get barraged by 5,000 people you never want to talk to (or friend) is causing rampant depression. It's almost sickly sweet:

"If I’m just like sad or something and just kind of chillin’ at home and I see pictures of people having a party I’m like oh that's awesome… like I’m not there... that's kind of depressing,” explained high school student Elizabeth Kisch. But Kisch also says she doesn't take Facebook too seriously.

“It's very easy to compare yourself to others when you just see what they show in their Facebook page which may or may not match reality,” explained Dr. Ken Ensroth, a child and adolescent psychiatrist.

And how do you know if your child is becoming an unstable egomaniac?

So how do parents know if their child is slipping into a "Facebook Depression." Dr. Ensroth says parents need to talk to their children, ask questions, and look for signs they're not happy.

“Stomach aches, lot of headaches... I’m sick I don't want to go to school... low energy... fatigue… trouble sleeping,” he explained.

Wow.

Please bookmark!

Just 12% of Israelis Consider Obama Pro-Israel

While the debate over President Obama's recent Middle East speech is being debated here at home, it has made a big wave in Israel. Pundits stateside are considering how the speech and policy shift will affect the American Jewish vote-- which overwhelmingly went to Barack Obama in 2008.

It appears that Obama would not fare too well in Israel:

When asked in the poll whether they saw Obama’s administration as more pro-Israel, more pro-Palestinian or neutral, just 12 percent of Israeli Jews surveyed said more pro-Israel, while 40% said more pro-Palestinian, 34% said neutral and 13% did not express an opinion.

It also showed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's approval at 51%.

Please bookmark!

Palin Prepares Summer Bus Tour

While Sarah Palin has not officially entered the presidential race, she is certainly staying in the limelight. The former Alaska governor has decided to take a summer bus tour around the country. This will keep her in the public eye as the debate over who will be the next GOP nominee heats up.

And so... it may have begun:

Palin advisers declined to provide additional details of the itinerary, but the trip will include a stop in New Hampshire. They also would not engage questions about whether the tour is a precursor to a presidential campaign. Asked the purpose of the trip, Tim Crawford, the treasurer of Palin’s PAC, said, “Because she wants to see how this nation was built and get fired up about that.”

Palin is also hinted towards it publicly:

More recently, Fox News host Greta Van Susteren asked about Palin’s possible desire to run. “I have that fire in my belly,” the former governor replied.

Hmmmm.


Please bookmark!

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Women of the View: It's Okay for Liberals to Call Women "Sluts"

Did they really say it?  You know it:

Please bookmark!

Ed Schultz Suspended for Calling Laura Ingraham a "Slut"

MSNBC host Ed Schultz is a controversial figure to say the least. He is the most abrasive of all of the MSNBC talking heads and is also a radio host. He was a big proponent against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker during the public sector union debate.


Yesterday he called fellow radio host Laura Ingraham a "slut" and a "talk slut." In response, MSNBC has suspended the night host.

"President Obama is going to be visiting Joplin, Mo., on Sunday but you know what they're talking about, like this right-wing slut, what's her name? Laura Ingraham?

"Yeah, she's a talk slut. You see, she was, back in the day, praising President Reagan when he was drinking a beer overseas. But now that Obama's doing it, they're working him over."

But Schultz said Wednesday night there were no excuses for his language, explaining, "It doesn't matter what the circumstances were."

What a disgrace.


Please bookmark!

Wisconsin Collective Bargaining Law Struck Down by Judge Sumi Whose Son is an AFL-CIO Activist

This is the definition of a conflict of interest:
Wisconsin's law taking away nearly all collective bargaining rights from most public workers was struck down Thursday by a circuit court judge but the ruling will not be the final say in the union fight that brought tens of thousands of protesters to the Capitol earlier this year.

The state Supreme Court has scheduled arguments for June 6 to decide whether it will take the case and Republicans who control the Legislature could also pass the law a second time to avoid the open meeting violations that led to the judge's voiding the law Thursday.

Gov. Scott Walker pushed for the law as a way to help balance the state budget. His spokesman had not seen the ruling and had no immediate comment. Spokesmen for Republican leaders in the Legislature also did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Walker and Republican leaders have said they would pass the law again as part of the state budget next month if necessary.
And her son?:
He has developed his professional political experience serving as a lead field manager with the AFL-CIO and as data manager for the SEIU State Council through the 2008 election cycle.

Please bookmark!

Peter King: Giuliani Is "Very Close To Running"

Rudy Giuliani is "very close to running" for the White House again.

That's according to Representative Peter King, who is friends with New York City's former Mayor, and who has been putting the candidate's name into media speculation for the past couple of months now, even though some in the Nassau County Republican Party are suggesting his own "favorite son" candidacy.

The Congressman also said that Giuliani's biggest problem in 2008 - besides the obvious placement of all his eggs into the Florida basket - is that he relied on too many advisers, and as a result the electorate never learned about the true Rudy.

Can the 2012 Republican race get any more chaotic?

I highly doubt it.

Giuliani should enter the fold, because the Republican race is currently without a real front-runner, and we could always use another strong voice for American involvement in world affairs.

What say you?

Weekly Jobless Claims Rise "Unexpectedly" by 10,000, to 424,000

It's always "unexpectedly," isn't it?  Well, either way the United States' jobless claims rose over 2% this past week.
Well, at least President Obama is enjoying himself
Please bookmark!

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

EPA Administrator and UK Energy and Climate Committee Confirm Safety of Hydraulic Fracturing

It has been a good week for proponents of hydraulic fracturing. First the United Kingdom's Energy and Climate Committee confirmed that hydraulic fracturing for natural gas did not pose a significant threat to the safety of fresh water aquifers.

Specifically:

We conclude that hydraulic fracturing itself does not pose a direct risk to water aquifers, provided that the well-casing is intact before this commences. Rather, any risks that do arise are related to the integrity of the well, and are no different to issues encountered when exploring for hydrocarbons in conventional geological formations. We recommend that the Health and Safety Executive test the integrity of wells before allowing the licensing of drilling activity.

Mitigation of the risk to water aquifers from hydraulic fracturing relies on companies undertaking the proper measures to protect the environment from pollution. However, there is no evidence that the hydraulic fracturing process itself poses a direct risk to underground water aquifers. That hypothetical and unproven risk must be balanced against the energy security benefits that shale gas could provide to the UK. We conclude that, on balance, a moratorium in the UK is not justified or necessary at present. But evidence must continue to be collected and assessed. We recommend that the Department of Energy and Climate Change monitor current drilling activity in the Bowland Shale formation extremely closely during its early stages in order both to assess the likely environmental impact of large scale shale gas extraction in the UK and also to promote public confidence in the regulation of the activity.
This is a remarkable assertion. Particularly if you have been following the plight of shale gas drilling in the Northeast, where "hydrofracking" has been blamed for everything from polluting the food supply, to contaminating pristine fresh water aquifers, to subjugating the community to a permanent recession. It truly is the energy resource that despoils everything it comes in contact with.

If only the facts didn't get in the way!

Yesterday, Energy in Depth, noted the response of EPA Administrator Sheila Jackson to a question posed regarding hydraulic fracturing:


Her response speaks for itself, "I am not aware of any proven case where the fracking process has affected water, although there are investigations ongoing.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public works welcomed the statement. Stating:
"I have great respect for Lisa Jackson and I always appreciate her honesty. Although we disagree on most issues, when you ask her a question she gives you an honest answer. Over the past two years, I have asked various Obama Administration officials if they know of a single confirmed case of groundwater contamination from these fracked formations and every time the answer is no. Lisa Jackson's statement today that she does not know of any proven case of water contamination further demonstrates that States are regulating hydraulic fracturing effectively and efficiently, and there is no need for the federal government to step in."
This episode of events has been picked up by HotAir and Instapundit. The question, though is will it be picked up by the New York Department of Environmental Protection? The final SGEIS report is due out this summer and it will be telling when they finally reveal their thoughts. Will politics trump science again, as I suspect, or are the professionals of the DEP truly professional and able to put scientific rigor above political correctness?

Time will tell?

Update: Great minds think alike? South of 5 and 20 has similar thoughts!

Please bookmark!

Police Scramble Helicopter, Thermal Imaging Equipment to find Boy who Kicked Ball into a Window

Fifteen-year-old Tom Clarke was practicing soccer when he accidentally kicked the ball into a window.  Not losing a step, British police were alerted to the problem by the next-door neighbor Bobby Cellar.  The Thames Valley Police logged the complaint as criminal damage and dispatched a helicopter, thermal imaging equipment, a patrol car, and multiple policemen to find the boy.
The culprit
Eventually they found the terrified teen.  He promptly apologized for kicking the ball into his neighbor's yard and his father offered to pay for any damages.

More from the Daily Mail:
His furious father insists the schoolboy has never been in trouble before and branded the police reaction ‘extremely heavy handed’.

But police – and the owner of the greenhouse – have not backed down and Tom fears the incident could derail his hopes of becoming a teacher.

The football fan was having a kickabout with his cousin in a pub garden in Chalgrove, Oxfordshire, when the problem started.

He kicked the ball and – like countless schoolboys before him – watched in horror as it looped over a garden fence and smashed through a pane of glass in the greenhouse.

Unsure what to do next, he went into the pub, unaware of the dramatic chain of events about to unfold.

Please bookmark!

Video- President Reagan's 1981 Inaugural Address



Please bookmark!

New Paul Ryan Medicare Video

A new video from Paul Ryan shows he's not backing down:



Please bookmark!

Jared Laughner found Mentally Incompetent to Stand Trial

Jared Laughner, who brutally murdered eight people in the January shooting that almost killed Gabrielle Giffords, has now been found mentally unfit to stand trial.


If he is declared incompetent he will be sent to a federal facility for a maximum of four months to see if he can be restored to competency.

If found incompetent, Loughner will likely be sent back to the same place where he was previously evaluated, the Bureau of Prisons' Medical Center for federal Prisoners in Springfield, Mo. He spent five weeks there in March and April undergoing two intense mental examinations, DOJ sources told CBS News' Brown.

Federal mental health experts will not be gauging whether Loughner is sane, or what his mental state was at the time of the shooting; but as to whether he understands the charges against him and if he can help his attorney's in his defense.

Whoa.

Please bookmark!

In Defense of Michael Savage

Britain has upheld a ban against Michael Savage, saying that the radio host is not allowed to enter the country because there is "no evidence" that he did not commit a crime.  I'm sorry, but this is one of the most ridiculous things I have heard in my life.

In the United States and in Great Britain, individuals are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.  That means that the accuser must prove that the defendant is guilty.  In this case, Mr. Savage is the defendant.

So what does Britain do?  Say they literally have no evidence at all, but that it is up to Mr. Savage to prove that he is innocent.  Now, tell me, how does one show that they did not do something wrong?  You see, it's a simple logical fallacy:  trying to prove a negative.

There is no real documentation that Mr. Savage can pull out and say, "Here, the United States government says I'm innocent" because he did nothing wrong.  There is nothing that says Mr. Savage did anything right or wrong because there was never a need for it; there was no trial, no hearing, no nothing.
Mr. Savage
That is why, in our justice system, the proof is squarely on the prosecutor's shoulders.  If he is to show that something is true, then he must have evidence:  a gun, a bloody car, and in Mr. Savage's case, maybe a transcript.  But they have nothing of the sort.  Instead, they demand that Mr. Savage prove something is not true.

They might as well ask a random person on the street to prove they weren't abducted by aliens last night and that, until they do, they are going to prison.

Simply saying this is ridiculous is not enough.  Go to this site to sign Mr. Savage's petition and demand freedom.

Please bookmark!

Watch President Obama Speaking to Parliament Live (Streaming Video)- May 25, 2011

The speech is scheduled to start at 10:30EST.  Enjoy (or not):

Free TV Show from Ustream
Please bookmark!

Pundit Press Breaks 750,000 Pageviews All-Time

Pundit Press is now officially three-quarters to one million pageviews all-time.  That's right, we've reached 750,000 (750,015 to be exact).  That's from September 12, 2010 to today (May 25, 2011).  We expect to reach 1,000,000 by mid-summer.

Thank you to all our loyal readers.  With all of you, we'll reach 1,000,000,000 one day.

Please bookmark!

Uh-Oh: John Edwards to be Indicted for Spending Campaign $ on Adultery Cover-up

John Edwards has always been a phony.  From his campaign promises to end practically 'all bad things' to sleeping with a woman while his wife was battling cancer.  And, of course, the love child that came from that.

Outside of politics, however, it seemed that Edwards had gotten off scot-free.  Not anymore.
Phony
According to a report, Edwards will be indicted for using campaign funds to pay for a cover-up of his adultery and love child.  How much did he illegally use?  More than one million dollars.  What's left for him is this:  make a deal or face trial.

And this guy was almost Vice President.

Please bookmark!

Wednesday Bush-a-Thon

For your perusal:



Consider this an open thread.

Please bookmark!

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Hydrofracking Hysteria Gets Cold Shoulder in the UK

I say hydrofracking hysteria as there is no other explanation for it. I came across an article at Salon.com the other day that made the assertion, without a single iota of evidence, that "gas drilling contaminates your food".

Written by Barry Estabrook it should be used as the primer for those wishing to advocate hyperbole and rhetoric over substance. As an example he notes an occurrence that took place in Pennsylvania when the Department of Agriculture quarantined cattle from a Tioga County farm after a number of cows came into contact with drilling wastewater from a nearby natural gas operation.

From Mr. Estabrook's article:

"The animals had come into wastewater that leaked from a nearby well that showed concentrations of chlorine, barium, magnesium, potassium, and radioactive strontium." (Emphasis mine)

Fair enough I suppose, only there was never any assertion by the Department of Agriculture that radioactive strontium was ever identified. If you are wondering what happened to the unfortunate cows poisoned by frack fluid they were quarantined from the food supply following the recommended guidelines from the Food Animal Residue Avoidance and Depletion Program.

That's a pretty nice bit of regulation we have there, I think.

The author adds this frightening anecdote without attribution:

"In Louisiana, 16 cows that drank fluid from a fracked well began bellowing, foaming and bleeding at the mouth, then dropped dead. Homeowners near fracked sites complain about a host of frightening consequences, from poisoned wells to sickened pets to debilitating illnesses."

I see this type of argument regularly. Just today a Facebook friend linked an article from Fuel Fix titled "Nat gas feud pits prosperous N. Texans against energy industry". While the article is very short on facts it is rich with anecdotes, hyperbole and innuendo.

Property owners describing soap like bubbles floating off the drain pipes. Asthma, headaches, weird rashes and debilitating vertigo puzzling doctors who ultimately are left asking what these people have been exposed to. Such an intuitive physician. I would argue though, having seen it first hand, that the true motivation can be found in this short passage: "He said he has sunk $1.2 million into the two-acre property over the last four and a half years, building a house, landscaping it and putting in an irrigation system for a small vineyard he and his wife had wanted to plant." Sounds a lot like what I hear up here in beautiful New York.

While this nonsense continues to be trumpeted in the states there seems to be some degree of sanity and critical thinking taking place across the pond. Today the UK Parliament Energy and Climate Committee published one of the first reports on shale gas outside of North America and the report will no doubt come as a shock to progressive environmentalists and potentially the New York state Department of Environmental Protection.

Tim Yeo MP, Chairman of the Committee said:

"There has been a lot of hot air recently about the dangers of shale gas drilling, but our inquiry found no evidence to support the main concern – that UK water supplies would be put at risk.

There appears to be nothing inherently dangerous about the process of 'fracking' itself and as long as the integrity of the well is maintained shale gas extraction should be safe.

The Government's regulatory agencies must of course be vigilant and monitor drilling closely to ensure that air and water quality is not being affected."

The report adds:

The inquiry found no evidence that the hydraulic fracturing process involved in shale gas extraction – known as ‘fracking’ - poses a direct risk to underground water aquifers provided the drilling well is constructed properly. The committee concluded that, on balance, a moratorium in the UK is not justified or necessary at present.

The MPs, nevertheless, urge the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to monitor drilling activity extremely closely in its early stages in order to assess its impact on air and water quality.

It didn't take very long for enviro tears to start flowing:

Craig Bennett, the policy and campaigns director at Friends of the Earth, said: "Instead of seeing shale gas as a miracle fix, the government should focus on developing the clean, safe energy alternatives at our fingertips like solar power and wind."

Allott added: "Shale gas is a dangerous distraction from the urgent need for us to tackle climate change. Chasing after risky and hard-to-get fossil fuels like shale gas, tar sands or drilling for oil in the Arctic may seriously undermine the move towards renewables as the only effective and sustainable solution to our energy challenges."

That last paragraph pretty effectively sums up the argument against energy production. If it is effective and scalable, it is unacceptable!

It will be more than fascinating to see how this plays out in the states. I can hardly wait!

H/T No Hot Air

Please bookmark!

NY-26 Special Election Results

UPDATE (10:46 PM):

Thanks for visiting Pundit Press tonight. Please check out the rest of our blog.

UPDATE (10:44 PM):

Final thoughts - Hochul's victory will be short lived; Corwin's defeat will be used against Paul Ryan; Davis should be kicked and Murphy wasted his time.

UPDATE (10:41 PM):

With eighty-seven per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 44,813/48%
Corwin (R) - 39,468/42%
Davis (TP) - 8,152/9%
Murphy (GR) - 1,013/1%

This is my final update for the evening.

UPDATE (10:35 PM):

Jack Davis - fake Tea Partyer - was the margin between Hochul and Corwin. This longtime Republican seat shouldn't be going into Democrat hands tonight...

UPDATE (10:33 PM):

Jane Corwin concedes.

UPDATE (10:28 PM):

With eighty-six per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 44,682/48%
Corwin (R) - 39,365/42%
Davis (TP) - 8,130/9%
Murphy (GR) - 1,010/1%

Local media isn't buying the AP's "Hochul victory."

UPDATE (10:24 PM):

With eighty-two per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 43,370/49%
Corwin (R) - 38,248/42%
Davis (TP) - 7,632/8%
Murphy (GR) - 978/1%

Keep in mind that 6,200 absentee ballots are floating around.

UPDATE (10:18 PM):

With eighty-three per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 41,832/49%
Corwin (R) - 36,774/42%
Davis (TP) - 7,327/8%
Murphy (GR) - 946/1%

UPDATE (10:14 PM):

It's being reported that Democrat Kate Hochul has won.

UPDATE (10:08 PM):

The local reports are now confusing me. Stay tuned.

UPDATE (10:04 PM):

With seventy-five per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 37,785/49%
Corwin (R) - 33,042/42%
Davis (TP) - 6,527/8%
Murphy (GR) - 843/1%

I apologize for the miscalculations. Local reports are all over the place.

UPDATE (10:00 PM):

With seventy-six per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 37,201/49%
Corwin (R) - 32,679/42%
Davis (TP) - 6,378/8%
Murphy (GR) - 832/1%

UPDATE (9:56 PM):

With fifty-five per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 34,208/48%
Corwin (R) - 30,544/43%
Davis (TP) - 5,973/8%
Murphy (GR) - 780/1%

UPDATE (9:53 PM):

With forty-nine per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 31,773/48%
Corwin (R) - 28,176/43%
Davis (TP) - 5,487/6%
Murphy (GR) - 718/1%

It appears the initial results were miscalculated.

UPDATE (9:48 PM):

There's a problem with the WGRZ results page. Stay tuned.

UPDATE (9:44 PM):

With forty-four per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 37,358/49%
Corwin (R) - 31,383/42%
Davis (TP) - 5,928/8%
Murphy (GR) - 696/1%

UPDATE (9:40 PM):

With thirty-one per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 34,943/50%
Corwin (R) - 29,072/41%
Davis (TP) - 5,497/8%
Murphy (GR) - 594/1%

UPDATE (9:36 PM):

With twenty-three per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 29,900/50%
Corwin (R) - 24,276/41%
Davis (TP) - 4,796/8%
Murphy (GR) - 495/1%

UPDATE (9:33 PM):

With fifteen per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 20,202/50%
Corwin (R) - 16,682/41%
Davis (TP) - 3,253/8%
Murphy (GR) - 340/1%

UPDATE (9:30 PM):

This race is going to be tight folks. Prepare for a long night.

UPDATE (9:29 PM):

With eleven per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 16,334/50%
Corwin (R) - 13,487/41%
Davis (TP) - 2,770/8%
Murphy (GR) - 272/1%

UPDATE (9:25 PM):

With four per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 6,004/47%
Corwin (R) - 5,077/41%
Davis (TP) - 1,320/11%
Murphy (GR) - 81/1%

Get up-to-the-minute results at WGRZ.

UPDATE (9:22 PM):

With three per cent of precincts reporting.

Hochul (D) - 3,988/47%
Corwin (R) - 3,419/40%
Davis (TP) - 977/12%
Murphy (GR) - 67/1%

UPDATE (9:18 PM):

With one per cent of precincts reporting.

Corwin (R) - 1,444/44%
Hochul (D) - 1,409/43%
Davis (TP) - 390/12%
Murphy (GR) - 20/1%

--Original Post--

Voting has now ended in New York's 26th congressional special election. I will be updating the election results all night long. Stay tuned.

Jane Corwin (R) - 0
Kathy Hochul (D) - 0
Jack Davis (TP) - 0
Ian Murphy (GR) - 0

America's New Hero: Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu addressed a joint-meeting of Congress this afternoon and knocked the socks off America's Representatives and Senators. His speech was both eloquent and simple, yet very extensive and quite significant.

I did not have the pleasure of watching his address today, but I just read it, and I'm very impressed with the former Sayeret Matkal commander's unique ability to inspire both political parties with his infectious patriotism and principles.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has accomplished something that few foreign leaders can ever claim: awe and love from not only the assembled Congress, but from the American people, who usually reserve such affections for fellow citizens and not foreign diplomats.

Our deep love for Israel has never reached its current high; neither has our love for Israel's leader. I hope they appreciate their Prime Minister, because most of America is in envy of them right now for that very reason.

What say you?

Video- Netanyahu's Entire Speech to Congress, May 24, 2011

Here's Mr. Netanyahu's speech.  Enjoy:


Please bookmark!

Obama Compares Self to Reagan

A little red meat for our readers. While meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron, President Barack Obama compared the recent uprisings int eh Middle East to the Cold War and his own role to that of former President Ronald Reagan.

They liken their personal efforts to two leaders who came before them: Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

"We will stand with those who want to bring light into dark, support those who seek freedom in place of repression, aid those laying the building blocks of democracy," they wrote.

"We will not stand by as their aspirations get crushed in a hail of bombs, bullets and mortar fire. We are reluctant to use force, but when our interests and values come together, we know that we have a responsibility to act."

What?

Please bookmark!

Live Video: Watch Netanyahu Speech to Congress

Update-  The speech is over.  Watch the entire video here.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is speaking to the US Congress today:


Free TV Show from Ustream

The speech is now over. Here's a synopsis from FoxNews:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that Israel "will be generous" in giving back land to establish a Palestinian state, but will not return to the 1967 borders and will not agree to a divided Jerusalem.
Netanyahu, in an address before a joint meeting of Congress, outlined his terms for peace following a dispute with President Obama over the boundaries of a future Palestinian state. Obama last week called for a two-state solution based on Israel's borders before the 1967 Six Day War. Netanyahu, along with pro-Israel members of Congress, said those lines would endanger the security of Israel -- a claim the prime minister repeated Tuesday.
"Israel will not return to the indefensible boundaries of 1967," he said. "Israel will be generous on the size of the Palestinian state, but we'll be very firm on where we put the border with it."
"Peace must be anchored in security," Netanyahu said.
The two leaders, though, have sought to dial back tensions following their meeting in Washington last week. Obama stressed that he has not called for a return to the exact borders Israel held before capturing east Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza Strip in June 1967. He, like the Palestinians, is open to land swaps so Israel can hold on to settlements it built after the 1967 war.
Netanyahu acknowledged this finer detail, saying he agrees with Obama that the final border "will be different" from the 1967 lines. He stressed that he wants to achieve a vital peace deal and said he is "willing to make painful compromises." While some settlements would be incorporated into the final borders, he said, "some settlements will end up beyond Israel's borders."
Netanyahu tried to place the ball in Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' court, calling on him to do two things -- publicly endorse the concept of a "Jewish state" alongside a Palestinian one, and "tear up your pact with Hamas." He also said a Palestinian state should be "fully demilitarized" and Israel must be able to maintain a military presence along the Jordan River.
Netanyahu said he would be prepared to pursue a "far-reaching compromise" and welcome a Palestinian state into the United Nations.
The Israeli leader meanwhile sought to assure U.S. lawmakers Tuesday that the bond between their countries is as strong as ever.
"Israel has no better friend than America, and America has no better friend than Israel," Netanyahu said. He called his nation America's "unwavering ally," and said his people "will always be pro-American." He reminded U.S. lawmakers that, amid the tumult in the Middle East, Israeli is the "one anchor of stability."
The prime minister began his address by congratulating the U.S. on killing Al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden. "Congratulations, America. Congratulations, Mr. President. You got bin Laden. Good riddance," he said. Netanyahu was interrupted many times by applause and standing ovations throughout his address.
Israel, which enjoys strong bipartisan backing in Congress, had been rattled by Obama's Israel comments last week. Obama has not, however, offered proposals for how to return the two sides to the bargaining table. Palestinians are refusing to come back as long as Israeli settlement construction continues.
In a sign of the sympathy Netanyahu enjoys in Congress, Obama's own political ally, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, challenged Obama on the border issue at the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC dinner.
"No one should set premature parameters about borders, about building or about anything else," Reid said. The reference to building alluded to earlier U.S. demands that Israel renew an expired moratorium on settlement construction.
Netanyahu's address to Congress marked the first time he has laid out a blueprint for peacemaking.
In a statement to Fox News, the Palestinian Authority on Tuesday accused Netanyahu of "setting preconditions before starting negotiations." They said the 1967 lines are the only basis on which to re-launch peace talks and that East Jerusalem should be the capital of a future Palestinian state.
"After the speech, the Palestinians are determined more than ever to go to the U.N. and call for international recognition of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders," the PA said, referring to a U.N. statehood push opposed by Netanyahu and Obama.
The Palestinians have embraced Obama's support for the 1967 lines as the basis of the final borders between Israel and a future Palestine, but largely ignored Obama's other key proposals.
Among them: his opposition to their plan to ask the U.N. to recognize their independence; his criticism of a Palestinian power-sharing deal that would bring the Hamas militant group into the government; and his calls that Israel be formally recognized as the homeland of the Jewish people. Acceptance of the "Jewish state" is seen as a rejection of the demands of Palestinian refugees to return to lost properties in what is now Israel.
Abbas is to consult with leaders of his Fatah movement as well as the Fatah-dominated umbrella group, the Palestine Liberation Organization, on Wednesday to consider his next move.
Obama has said Israel should not be expected to negotiate with a government that does not recognize its right to exist.

Please bookmark!

Explosion at Iranian Refinery as Ahmadinejad Visits

There is word from Iran that a refinery has suffered an explosion as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is visiting. Iranian officials blame the blast in the Arab-majority city of Abadan, a key battlefield in the Iran-Iraq War. Two people were reportedly killed, and 20 were injured.



It appears that this explosion could hurt the Iranian economy:

The plant alone accounts for about 25 percent of Iran's fuel production, which is about 1.67 million barrel per day.

Fazel Kaebi, an Abadan resident, told The Associated Press over the phone that he saw ambulances and rescue teams rush to the site shortly after the explosion. He said the townspeople had noticed black smoke coming from the refinery in the past few days, which he speculated could have been from a fire.

Hmmm.

Please bookmark!

Rep. King: Guiliani "Very Close to Saying he’s Going to Run”

Rudy Giuliani, who decided not to run last year for New York Senate (which he likely could have won), is now very close to deciding that he will run for President in 2012.  This comes from New York Republican Peter King, a long time friend of Giuliani.

Speaking at a dinner in Washington, King stated that Giuliani “is very close to saying he’s going to run...If he were to make the decision today, he would run.”

If he did run, he better realize that he cannot put all his eggs in the Florida basket, which is what he did in 2008.  By that time, momentum was completely against him and he came in third, never to rise again.

According to the Washington Examiner, Giuliani has been quietly building his campaign, gathering supporters and "exploring strategies."
Mr. Giuliani
The article goes on:
Yet there are some indicators to encourage the former mayor. In a new poll of New Hampshire Republicans released Monday by television station WMUR, Giuliani tied for third, well behind frontrunner Mitt Romney but ahead of Tim Pawlenty, Sarah Palin, Daniels, Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, and Herman Cain. When WMUR asked New Hampshire GOP primary voters which candidate is the strongest leader, Giuliani placed second to Romney, although a distant second. If Giuliani were to run, he would likely focus his efforts on the Granite State.

Still, the idea of another Giuliani campaign will strike some observers as implausible. Although revered by many in the Northeast as the man who saved New York City from decades of crime and decline, Giuliani's main claim to fame among most Republicans -- his performance after the September 11 terrorist attacks -- is nearly a decade in the past. Issues have changed. Voter priorities have changed. The political cast of characters has changed. Despite all that, the race might soon include Giuliani, and voters who are unhappy with their current choices might have another.

Please bookmark!

When Will the World End? It's been Postponed Until October

Harold Camping, nut-job extraordinaire, now says that his predication of Doomsday was just a bit off.  Five months to be exact: October 21.  Sure, he guaranteed May 21, sure he guaranteed the world would end in 1994, be he really, really means it this time.  Honest!
Still here
More from Reuters:
The evangelical Christian broadcaster whose much-ballyhooed Judgement Day prophecy went conspicuously unfulfilled on Saturday has a simple explanation for what went wrong -- he miscalculated.

Instead of the world physically coming to an end on May 21 with a great, cataclysmic earthquake, as he had predicted, Harold Camping, 89, said he now believes his forecast is playing out "spiritually," with the actual apocalypse set to occur five months later, on October 21.

Camping, who launched a doomsday countdown in which some followers spent their life's savings in anticipation of being swept into heaven, issued his correction during an appearance on his "Open Forum" radio show from Oakland, California.

The headquarters of Camping's Family Radio network of 66 U.S. stations had been shuttered over the weekend with a sign on the door that read, "This Office is Closed. Sorry we missed you!"
During a sometimes rambling, 90-minute discourse that included a question-and-answer session with reporters, Camping said he felt bad that Saturday had come and gone without the Rapture he had felt so certain would take place.

Reflecting on scripture afterward, Camping said it "dawned" on him that a "merciful and compassionate God" would spare humanity from "hell on Earth for five months" by compressing the physical apocalypse into a shorter time frame.

Please bookmark!

China Engaging Pakistan and Threatening The United States


In what would be a break from normal Chinese military operation, The People's Liberation Army, are considering an offer from Pakistan to build a naval base at Gwandar. This particular development takes on a rather provocative tone as "China 'asks USA to respect Pak sovereignty'".
In the wake of the US raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin Laden, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China”, a media report claimed today.
The warning was formally conveyed by the Chinese foreign minister at last week's China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, The News daily quoted diplomatic sources as saying. China also advised the USA to “respect Pakistan's sovereignty and solidarity”, the report said.

The Chinese leadership was “extremely forthcoming in assuring its unprecedented support to Pakistan for its national cause and security” ...
Are we now one predator drone strike in the badlands of Pakistan from war with China or is this bluff and bravado from an increasingly powerful nation seeking to expand it's local influence?

Does it matter?

Please bookmark!

Netanyahu Speech to Congress Transcript- May 24, 2011

Here is the entire transcript of Mr. Netanyahu's speech to Congress:

ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BINYAMIN NETANYAHU DELIVERS REMARKS

TO A JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS

MAY 24, 2011

SPEAKER: ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Vice President Biden, Speaker Boehner, distinguished senators, members of the House, honored guests, I’m deeply moved by this warm welcome. And I’m deeply honored that you’ve given me the opportunity to address Congress a second time.

Mr. Vice President, do you remember the time that we were the new kids in town?

And I do see a lot of old friends here, and I see a lot of new friends of Israel here, as well -- Democrats and Republicans alike.

Israel has no better friend than America, and America has no better friend than Israel.

We stand together to defend democracy. We stand together to advance peace. We stand together to fight terrorism.

Congratulations, America. Congratulations, Mr. President. You got bin Laden. Good riddance.

In an unstable Middle East, Israel is the one anchor of stability. In a region of shifting alliances, Israel is America’s unwavering ally. Israel has always been pro-American. Israel will always be pro-American.

My friends, you don’t have to -- you don’t need to do nation- building in Israel. We’re already built.

You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it.

And you don’t need to send American troops to Israel. We defend ourselves.

NETANYAHU: You’ve been very generous in giving us tools to do the job of defending Israel on our own. Thank you all, and thank you, President Obama, for your steadfast commitment to Israel’s security.

I know economic times are tough. I deeply appreciate this.

Some of you have been telling me that your belief has been reaffirmed in recent months that support for Israel’s security is a wise investment in our common future, for an epic battle is now under way in the Middle East between tyranny and freedom. A great convulsion is shaking the earth from the Khyber Pass to the Straits of Gibraltar. The tremors have shattered states. They’ve toppled governments. And we can all see that the ground is still shifting.

Now, this historic moment holds the promise of a new dawn of freedom and opportunity. There are millions of young people out there who are determined to change their future. We all look at them. They muster courage. They risk their lives.

They demand dignity. They desire liberty. These extraordinary scenes in Tunis and Cairo evoke those of Berlin and Prague in 1989. Yet, as we share their hopes...

(A protester)

You know, I take it as a badge of honor, and so should you, that in our free societies you can have protests. You can’t have these protests in the farcical parliaments in Tehran or in Tripoli. This is real democracy.

Thank you.

So as we share the hopes of these young people throughout the Middle East and Iran that they’ll be able to do what that young woman just did -- I think she’s young; I couldn’t see quite that far...

... we must also remember that those hopes could be snuffed out, as they were in Tehran in 1979.

You remember what happened there. The brief democratic spring in Tehran was cut short by a ferocious and unforgiving tyranny. And it’s this same tyranny that smothered Lebanon’s democratic Cedar Revolution and inflicted on that long-suffering country the Medieval rule of Hezbollah.

So today the Middle East stands at a fateful crossroads. And like all of you, I pray that the peoples of the region choose the path less traveled, the path of liberty.

No one knows what this path consists of better than you. Nobody.

This path of liberty is not paved by elections alone. It’s paved when governments permit protests in town squares, when limits are placed on the powers of rulers, when judges are beholden to laws and not men, and when human rights cannot be crushed by tribal loyalties or mob rule.

Israel has always embraced this path in a Middle East that has long rejected it. In a region where women are stoned, gays are hanged, Christians are persecuted, Israel stands out. It is different.

And this was seen...

There was a great English writer in the 19th century, George Eliot. It’s a she. That was a pseudonym in those days.

George Eliot predicted over a century ago that once established the Jewish state -- here’s what she said, “The Jewish state will shine like a bright star of freedom amid the despotisms of the East.”

Well, she was right. We have a free press, independent courts, an open economy, rambunctious parliamentary debates.

Now, don’t laugh.

Ah, you see, you think you’re tough on another -- on one another here in Congress? Come spend a day in the Knesset. Be my guest.

Courageous Arab protesters are now struggling to secure these very same rights for their peoples, for their societies.

We’re proud in Israel that over 1 million Arab citizens of Israel have been enjoying these rights for decades.

Of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa, only Israel’s Arab citizens enjoy real democratic rights.

Now, I want you to stop for a second and think about that. Of those 300 million Arabs, less than one-half of 1 percent are truly free and they’re all citizens of Israel.

This startling fact reveals a basic truth: Israel is not what is wrong with about the Middle East; Israel is what is right about the Middle East.

Israel fully supports the desire of Arab peoples in our region to live freely. We long for the day when Israel will be one of many real democracies in the region -- in the Middle East.

Fifteen years ago, I stood at this very podium. By the way, it hasn’t changed.

I stood here and I said that democracy must start to take root in the Arab world. Well, it’s begun to take root. And this beginning holds the promise of a brilliant future of peace and prosperity. Because I believe that a Middle East that is genuinely democratic will be a Middle East truly at peace.

But while we hope for the best and while we work for the best, we must also recognize that powerful forces oppose this future.

They oppose modernity. They oppose democracy. They oppose peace.

Foremost among these forces is Iran. The tyranny in Tehran brutalizes its own people. It supports attacks against American troops in Afghanistan and in Iraq. It subjugates Lebanon and Gaza. It sponsors terror worldwide.

When I last stood here, I spoke of the consequences of Iran developing nuclear weapons. Now time is running out, the hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us: a militant Islamic regime armed with nuclear weapons.

Militant Islam threatens the world. It threatens Islam.

Now, I have no doubt, I’m absolutely convinced that it will ultimately be defeated. I believe it will eventually succumb to the forces of freedom and progress. It depends on cloistering young minds for a given amount of years, and the process of opening up information will ultimately defeat this movement.

But like other fanaticisms that were doomed to fail, militant Islam could exact an horrific price from all of us before its eventual demise. A nuclear armed Iran would ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. It would give terrorists a nuclear umbrella. It would make the nightmare of nuclear terrorism a clear and present danger throughout the world.

I want you to understand what this means, because if we don’t stop it, it’s coming.

They could put a bomb anywhere. They could put it in a missile. They’re working on missiles that could reach this city.

They could put it on a -- on a ship, inside a container. It could reach every port.

They could eventually put it in a suitcase or in a subway.

Now, the threat to my country cannot be overstated. Those who dismiss it are sticking their heads in the sand. Less than seven decades after 6 million Jews were murdered, Iran’s leaders deny the Holocaust of the Jewish people, while calling for the annihilation of the Jewish state.

Leaders who spew such venom should be banned from every respectable forum on the planet.

Now, there’s something that makes the outrage even greater. And you know what that is? It’s the lack of outrage. Because in much of the international community the calls for our destruction are met with utter silence.

It’s even worse, because there are many who rush to condemn Israel for defending itself against Iran’s terror proxies.

Not you. Not America.

You’ve acted differently. You’ve condemned the Iranian regime for its genocidal aims. You’ve passed tough sanctions against Iran.

History will salute you, America.

President Obama has said that the United States is determined to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The president successfully led the Security Council at the U.N. to adopt sanctions against Iran. You in Congress passed even tougher sanctions.

Now, these words, and these, are vitally important. Yet the ayatollah regime briefly suspended its nuclear weapons program only once, in 2003, when it feared the possibility of military action. In that same year, Moammar Gadhafi gave up his nuclear weapons program and for the same reason.

The more Iran believes that all options are on the table, the less the chance of confrontation.

And this is why I ask you to continue to send an unequivocal message that America will never permit Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

Now, as for Israel, if history has taught the Jewish people anything, it is that we must take calls for our destruction seriously.

We are a nation that rose from the ashes of the Holocaust. When we say “Never again,” we mean never again.

Israel always reserves -- Israel always reserves the right to defend itself.

My friends, while Israel will be ever-vigilant in its defense, we’ll never give up our quest for peace. I guess we’ll give it up when we achieve it.

Because we want peace. Because we need peace.

Now, we’ve achieved historic peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, and these have held up for decades.

I remember what it was like before we had peace. I was nearly killed in a firefight inside the Suez Canal -- I mean that literally -- inside the Suez Canal. I was going down to the bottom with a 40- pound pack -- ammunition pack on my back, and somebody reached out to grab me. And they’re still looking for the guy who did such a stupid thing.

I was nearly killed there.

And I remember battling terrorists along both banks of the Jordan.

Too many Israelis have lost loved ones, and I know their grief.

I lost my brother. So no one in Israel wants to return to those terrible days.

The peace with Egypt and Jordan has long served as an anchor of stability and peace in the heart of the Middle East. And this peace...

This peace should be bolstered by economic and political support to all those who remain committed to peace.

The peace agreements between Israel and Egypt and Israel and Jordan are vital, but they’re not enough. We must also find a way to forge a lasting peace with the Palestinians.

Two years ago, I publicly committed to a solution of two states for two peoples: a Palestinian state alongside a Jewish state.

I’m willing to make painful compromises to achieve this historic peace. As the leader of Israel it’s my responsibility to lead my people to peace.

Now, this is not easy for me. It’s not easy...

... because I recognize that in a genuine peace, we’ll be required to give up parts of the ancestral Jewish homeland. And you have to understand this: In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers.

We’re not the British in India. We’re not the Belgians in the Congo. This is the land of our forefathers, the land of Israel, to which Abraham brought the idea of one God, where David set out to confront Goliath, and where Isaiah saw a vision of eternal peace.

No distortion of history -- and boy, am I reading a lot of distortions of history lately, old and new -- no distortion of history could deny the 4,000-year-old bond between the Jewish people and the Jewish land.

But there is another truth: The Palestinians share this small land with us. We seek a peace...

... in which they’ll be neither Israel’s subjects nor its citizens. They should enjoy a national life of dignity as a free, viable and independent people living in their own state.

They should enjoy a prosperous economy where their creativity and initiative can flourish.

Now, we’ve already seen the beginnings of what is possible. In the last two years, the Palestinians have begun to build a better life for themselves.

By the way, Prime Minister Fayyad has led this effort on their part and I -- I wish him a speedy recovery from his recent operation.

We’ve helped, on our side, we’ve helped the Palestinian economic growth by removing hundreds of barriers and roadblocks to the free flow of goods and people, and the results have been nothing short of remarkable. The Palestinian economy is booming. It’s growing by more than 10 percent a year. And Palestinian cities -- they look very different today than what they looked just few -- a few years ago. They have shopping malls, movie theaters, restaurants, banks. They even have e-businesses, but you can’t see that when you visit them.

That’s what they have.

It’s a great change.

And all of this is happening without peace. So imagine what could happen with peace.

Peace would herald a new day for both our peoples, and it could also make the dream of a broader Arab-Israeli peace a realistic possibility.

So now here’s the question -- you’ve got to ask it -- If the benefits of peace with the Palestinians are so clear, why has peace eluded us?

Because all six Israeli prime ministers since the signing of the Oslo accords agreed to establish a Palestinian state, myself included. So why has peace not been achieved?

Because so far the Palestinians have been unwilling to accept a Palestinian state if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it.

You see, our conflict has never been about the establishment of a Palestinian state. It’s always been about the existence of the Jewish state. This is what this conflict is about.

In 1947 the U.N. voted to partition the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews said “Yes.” The Palestinians said “No.”

In recent years, the Palestinians twice refused generous offers by Israeli prime ministers to establish a Palestinian state on virtually all the territory won by Israel in the Six-Day War.

They were simply unwilling to end the conflict.

And I regret to say this: They continue to educate their children to hate. They continue to name public squares after terrorists. And, worst of all, they continue to perpetuate the fantasy the Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of Palestinian refugees.

My friends, this must come to an end.

President Abbas must do what I have done. I stood before my people -- and I told you it wasn’t easy for me. I stood before my people, and I said, “I will accept a Palestinian state.”

It’s time for President Abbas to stand before his people and say, “I will accept a Jewish state.”

Those six words will change history. They’ll make it clear to the Palestinians that this conflict must come to an end, that they’re not building a Palestinian state to continue the conflict with Israel, but to end it.

And those six words will convince the people of Israel that they have a true partner for peace.

With such a partner, the Palestinians -- or, rather, the Israeli people will be prepared to make a far-reaching compromise; I will be prepared to make a far-reaching compromise.

This compromise must reflect the dramatic demographic changes that have occurred since 1967.

The vast majority of the 650,000 Israelis who live beyond the 1967 lines reside in neighborhoods and suburbs of Jerusalem and greater Tel Aviv.

Now, these areas are densely populated, but they’re geographically quite small. And under any realistic peace agreement these areas, as well as other places of critical strategic and national importance, will be (ph) incorporated into the final borders of Israel.

The status of the settlements will be decided only in negotiations. But we must also be honest. So I’m saying today something that should be said publicly by all those who are serious about peace: In any real peace agreement, in any peace agreement that ends the conflict, some settlements will end up beyond Israel’s borders.

Now, the precise delineation of those borders must be negotiated. We’ll be generous about the size of the future Palestinian state. But as President Obama said, the border will be different than the one that existed on June 4th, 1967. Israel will not return to the indefensible boundaries of 1967.

So I want to be very clear on this point: Israel will be generous on the size of a Palestinian state, but we’ll be very firm on where we put the border with it.

This is an important principle; shouldn’t be lost.

We recognize that a Palestinian state must be big enough to be viable, to be independent, to be prosperous.

All of you, and the president, too, have referred to Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, just as you’ve been talking about a future Palestinian state as the homeland of the Palestinian people.

Well, Jews from around the world have a right to immigrate to the one and only Jewish state.

And Palestinians from around the world should have a right to immigrate, if they so choose, to a Palestinian state.

And here’s what this means: It means that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside the borders of Israel.

You know, everybody knows this. It’s time to say it. It’s important. And as for Jerusalem, only a democratic Israel has protected the freedom of worship for all faiths in the city.

Throughout the millennial history of the Jewish capital, the only time that Jews, Christians and Muslims could worship freely, could have unfettered access to their holy sites, has been during Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem.

Jerusalem must never again be divided. Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel.

I know this is a difficult issue for Palestinians, but I believe that with creativity and with goodwill, a solution can be found. So this is the peace I plan to forge with a Palestinian partner committed to peace. But you know very well that in the Middle East the only peace that will hold is a peace you can defend. So peace must be anchored in security.

In recent years, Israel withdrew from South Lebanon and from Gaza. We thought we’d get peace. That’s not what we got.

We got 12,000 rockets fired from those areas on our cities, on our children, by Hezbollah and Hamas.

The U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon, they failed to prevent the smuggling of this weaponry. The European observers in Gaza, they evaporated overnight.

So if Israel simply walked out of the territories, the flow of weapons into a future Palestinian state would be unchecked. And missiles fired from it could reach virtually every home in Israel in less than a minute.

I want you to think about that, too. Imagine there’s a siren going on now, and we have less than 60 seconds to find shelter from an incoming rocket.

Would you live that way? Do you think anybody can live that way?

Well, we’re not going to live that way, either.

The truth is that Israel needs unique security arrangements, because of its unique size. It’s one of the smallest countries in the world.

Mr. Vice President, I’ll grant you this: It’s bigger than Delaware.

It’s even bigger than Rhode Island. But that’s about it.

Israel on the 1967 lines would be half the width of the Washington Beltway.

Now, here’s a bit of nostalgia. I came to Washington 30 years ago, as a young diplomat. It took me a while, but I finally figured it out: There is an America beyond the Beltway.

But Israel on the 1967 lines would be only nine miles wide. So much for strategic depth.

So it’s therefore vital, absolutely vital, that a Palestinian state be fully demilitarized.

And it’s vital, absolutely vital, that Israel maintain a long-term military presence along the Jordan River.

Solid security arrangements on the ground are necessary not only to protect the peace, they’re necessary to protect Israel in case the peace unravels. Because in our unstable region, no one can guarantee that our peace partners today will be there tomorrow.

And, my friends, when I say “Tomorrow,” I don’t mean some distant time in the future. I mean tomorrow.

Peace can only be achieved around the negotiating table. The Palestinian attempt to impose a settlement through the United Nations will not bring peace.

It should be forcefully opposed by all those who want to see this conflict end.

I appreciate the president’s clear position on this issue. Peace cannot be imposed. It must be negotiated.

But peace can only be negotiated with partners committed to peace, and Hamas is not a partner for peace.

Hamas -- Hamas remains committed to Israel’s destruction and to terrorism.

They have a charter. That charter not only calls for the obliteration of Israel, it says kill the Jews everywhere you find them.

Hamas’ leader condemned the killing of Osama bin Laden and praised him as a holy warrior.

Now, again, I want to make this clear: Israel is prepared to sit down today and negotiate peace with the Palestinian Authority.

I believe we can fashion a brilliant future for our children.

But Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government backed by the Palestinian version of Al Qaida. That we will not do.

So I say to President Abbas, “Tear up your pact with Hamas, sit down and negotiate, make peace with the Jewish state. And if you do, I promise you this: Israel will not be the last country to welcome a Palestinian state as the new member of the United Nations. It will be the first to do so.”

My friends, the momentous trials of the last century and the unfolding events of this century attest to the decisive role of the United States in defending peace and advancing freedom. Providence entrusted the United States to be the guardian of liberty. All people who cherish freedom owe a profound debt of gratitude to your great nation.

Among the most grateful nations is my nation, the people of Israel, who have fought for their liberty and survival against impossible odds in ancient and modern times alike.

I speak on behalf of the Jewish people and the Jewish state when I say to you, representatives of America, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your unwavering support for Israel. Thank you for ensuring that the flame of freedom burns bright throughout the world.

May God bless all of you, and may God forever bless the United States of America.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

And thanks to 4law for the text

Please bookmark!

Check this out!