Thursday, August 30, 2012

Will Sudan really get elected to UN Human Rights Council?

Will Sudan really get elected to the Human Rights Council?

 

Posted By Colum Lynch 

It's a story all too familiar.

A government responsible for mass murder, crushing democratic dissent, or engaging in nuclear, chemical, or biological shenanigans gets elected to the U.N. institution responsible for policing just that -- whether upholding human rights, democracy, or disarmament.

Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir stands charged by the International Criminal Court with orchestrating a campaign of genocide in Darfur. So what better place to defend oneself than with a seat on the Geneva-based Human Rights Council?

A couple of months back, Sudan was quietly included on a slate of five African countries -- the others are Ethiopia, Gabon, Ivory Coast, and Sierra Leone -- due to run unchallenged for seats on the 47-member council this November.

The selection of Sudan as a candidate has provided U.N. critics with another example of the U.N.'s abject moral state. In Washington,Ileana Ros-Lehtinen(R-FL), the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs committee issued a statement Monday, saying Sudan's candidacy shows the U.N. is broken. "As Sudan appears poised to win a seat on the UN Human Rights Council, the UN has hit a new low," she said. "The UN has surrendered to despots and rogue regimes as it allows the likes of Iran's Ahmadinejad, Venezuela's Chavez, and now Sudan's Omar al-Bashir to corrupt the system and use it to further their own oppressive and despotic schemes."

Human Rights groups agree that Sudan's election would be disastrous but they have focused their efforts on persuading African government to drop Sudan. Previous campaigns by Western governments and human rights advocates have succeeded in preventing Azerbaijan, Belarus, Iran, and Syria from getting seats on the council.

"Sudan is as unfit candidate as they get, with a horrendous record of mass abuses against civilians in Darfur, Blue Nile, and South Kordofan," said Philippe Bolopion, the U.N. representative for Human Rights Watch. "Its election would be a blow to both the victims of the Sudanese regime and the credibility of the Human Rights Council."

The real culprit in this unfolding spectacle is the U.N. system of regional voting blocs, which generally pre-select a list of candidates based on which country is next in line. The practice ensures that everyone gets their chance -- whether they deserve it or not -- and there are no messy elections. Sudan, which has previously been blocked from serving on the U.N. Security Council, has been waiting in line a long time for a choice committee appointment. And African states appear unwilling to deny them their chance, even if it may prove embarrassing.

Asked how the Africans could put forward a country so clearly unsuited for the job, one African ambassador told Turtle Bay, "Even if we believe deep down that Sudan, whose president has been indicted, shouldn't be elected, nobody wants to jeopardize their relations by telling Sudan you don't qualify because you have a human rights problem. We will be sitting at the table with them in future."

The United States -- which has often benefited itself from the system of regional slates -- has for the moment joined an informal coalition of governments and human rights organizations that are seeking to upend Sudan's candidacy. They have urged Kenya to break ranks with the African group and run a campaign against Sudan's inclusion.

"Sudan, a consistent human rights violator, does not meet the Council's own standards for membership," said Kurtis A. Cooper, a spokesman for the U.S. mission to the United Nations. "It would be inappropriate for Sudan to have a seat on the Council while the Sudanese head of State is under International Criminal Court indictment for war crimes in Darfur and the government of Sudan continues to use violence to inflame tensions along its border with South Sudan."

Diplomats and other observers say Sudan's mission in Geneva has signaled that it may be willing to pull out of the competition, but it is not prepared to do so publicly at this stage. In exchange, they expect that Sudan will seek assurances from other African states to oppose a U.S. and European effort to strengthen the Human Rights Council's scrutiny of its human rights conduct.

Follow me on Twitter @columlynch

Bishop Calls on All Christians to Leave Democratic Party

Wow! This is pretty amazing that a Black man would use his influence to do this. As you consider and pray about his exodus call, pray for safety for him and his family. The opposition, after all, doesn’t play fair.

Bishop Calls on All Christians to Leave Democratic Party

1:00PM EDT 8/8/2012 Charisma News Staff

 

Image002
E.W. Jackson (Facebook)

Bishop E.W. Jackson is making a war cry: “Let God’s people go!”

Jackson, a Marine Corps veteran, graduate of Harvard Law School and adjunct professor of law, is echoing the words of Moses in a campaign to persuade Christians of all races that the time has come for a wholesale exodus of Christians from the Democrat Party.

The former candidate for U.S. Senate in Virginia points to what he calls the Democrat party's “cult-like devotion” to abortion; the rejection of the traditional biblical model of family; the hostility hurled at those who express a Christian viewpoint such as Chick-fil-A president and Chief Operating Officer Dan Cathy; the actions of organizations such as the ACLU and the Foundation For Freedom From Religion in suing cities and towns for displaying crosses at memorials or mentioning the name Jesus in prayer at official events.

Beyond all of this, Jackson says, Democrat operatives are also attacking Gabrielle Douglas, the 16-year old black American who won the 2012 gold medal in gymnastics.

“The accomplished young lady had the nerve to give glory to God for her win,” Jackson says. “This apparently offended liberals.”

Case in point: Mary Elizabeth Williams, journalist for the progressive online magazine Salon.com, wrote, “I've often wondered what it is about Christians like Douglas that unnerves me so ... Douglas and her ilk seem to espouse a faith based on what is commonly referred to as 'The God of Parking Spaces.'”

Jackson, founder and president of STAND (Staying True to America's National Destiny), responds: “Progressives are indeed 'unnerved' by devout Christians. That's why they resort to ridicule, even of a 16-year-old Olympic medal winner. Williams says we worship 'The God of Parking Spaces,' but I would prefer Gabby's God of grace and kindness to the leftist's god of ridicule and persecution.

“Our Heavenly Father loves us and helps those who are humble enough to ask Him.”

Later this month when Democrats make same-sex marriage part of their official Party Platform, the former practicing attorney says they will be spitting in the face of every Bible-believing Christian in America: “They will be saying, 'We don't care what you think, what you believe, or what the Bible or the God of the Bible says. We know better than God.'”

Jackson's message to Christians is, “The Democrat Party has turned its back on Christians. It is time to turn our backs on the Democrat Party.”

 

“If not us, who?  If not now, when?” – Ronald Reagan


All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Thomas Jefferson

__,_._,___

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Story the Media Won't Tell: Obama Is Losing

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/08/25/2012-Untold-Story-Obama-Is-Losing

Story the Media Won't Tell: Obama Is Losing

John Nolte25 Aug 2012

Actions speak louder than polls…

It's 8:21 on a Saturday morning and according to this photo snapped by Sharon Broadie, this is the size of the crowd that showed up in Powell, Ohio, (just outside of Columbus) to see Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan:

Image001

Here's a look at the line to get in, and another look at the crowd from another source. And a real jaw-dropper.

Meanwhile, President FailureTeleprompter is relegated to rationalizing his lack of turnout into a "deliberate" desire for smaller, more intimate crowds. Yeah, that sounds like the Mr. Greek Column we've all come to know and grow tired of.

Meanwhile, the media refuses to report on the size of either side's crowds.

Meanwhile, across the country, the documentary film "2016" has just opened wide on over 1,000 screens and in the heart of Hollywood's biggest season hit #3 at the box office.

Meanwhile, though their Media Palace Guards assure us this is not the case, the Obama campaign's increasingly desperate and shrill campaign is acting more and more like a campaign so far behind and so in fear of losing, they feel they have nothing to lose. From "felon" to "chains" to "Mitt killed my wife" to one bald-faced lie after another, President Obama has forsaken the dignity of the office and -- should he win a second term -- all hope of bringing the country together after the kind of scorched-earth campaign only the terrified wage.

Meanwhile, the media is behaving in a manner no less shrill and desperate than their Presidential Master. When the unemployment rate increases, the media tells us that's a good thing. When the economy shrinks from 4.1 to 1.5%, the media still call it "the recovery." When an idiot in Missouri says something stupid about rape and abortion, the media launches into a week-long narrative accusing Republicans of being soft on rape.

Meanwhile, Obama supports infanticide. Romney opposes abortion except in cases of rape, incest and when the mother's life is at risk. Yesterday CNN released a poll showing 62% of the American people agree with Romney and only 32% with Obama.

This morning the media was still painting Romney-Ryan as the out-of-touch extremists on this issue.

Meanwhile, yesterday, Mitt Romney made a birth certificate quip and within thirty-minutes those few words received more media attention (and phony outrage) than the record number of American casualties currently mounting in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, as the clock runs down and campaign days grow more and more precious, three days ago, the Obama campaign felt it was a good use of the Vice President to send him to the supposedly safe state of Minnesota.

Meanwhile, yesterday, Mitt Romney was in the true blue state of Michigan.

Something is happening in this country -- something both the Obama campaign and its media cronies know is happening but won't acknowledge.

What's happening is on the ground and not yet quantifiable in polling that doesn’t yet have its sea legs. But it's out there and it's real and before the media and President Obama are forced to acknowledge it, they're spending every bit of their dignity and credibility and integrity to kill it.

Red State's Erick Erickson senses it too.

.

Image002

__,_._,___

A 12-step cure for Obamaholics

A 12-step cure for Obamaholics

Craig Karpel is a recovering addict. He says so himself. His addiction is to Barack Obama, and his recovery inspires him to write a book. He offers a 12-step program, patterned after the program that has rescued thousands of town drunks.

Image001

He’s a confirmed Obamaholic, but he doesn’t blame the president. He absolves Mr. Obama of blame for the addiction to the messiah from the south side of Chicago that turned so many healthy Americans into junkies. His book has created a bit of a buzz already.

“My name is Craig K.,” he says in the opening line of the “12-Step Guide for the Recovering Obama Voters,” published by HarperCollins Broadside Books.

“I’m an Obamaholic. Welcome to what Alcoholics Anonymous would call a ‘meeting in print.’ We’re here to admit to each other and to ourselves that the Obama presidency isn’t Obama’s fault - it’s ours. We should be impeached for having elected him.”

Though the collective stupor induced by Mr. Obama’s speechifying four years ago is finally dissolving, little by little, there’s still a lot of stupor out there. Gallup only this week said Mitt Romney has edged ahead of the president in a national poll of voters, but what is remarkable to the sober observer is that Mr. Obama is keeping it close, given the unholy mess he has made of the economy.

The president offers words, pretty enough but not much consolation to someone desperate for a job. He correctly figured in 2008 that since few voters in his left-wing base had ever been to church or heard good preaching, his own skill with words would be taken for seductive eloquence. He adopted the pitch and cadence of the black pulpit, and though there are hundreds of black (and white) pulpitmasters who can preach rings around him, the swindle worked. Addiction, particularly among those who imagine themselves the elite, blossomed like the deadly nightshade.

Only a 12-step program, writes Craig Karpel, can free the naïve and clueless from an imprisoned mind. Mr. Karpel is no rightwing zealot. His book is neither rave nor rant. He was once, like the president, a left-wing community organizer. He once wrote speeches for Abby Hoffman. He mocks the soft, gooey language of quackery, of the frauds who have turned once-sturdy verbs into the soggy language of academics, therapeutics and charlatans. “We urgently need to embark on a 12-step program that will enable us to heal.”

He argues that the election of Barack Obama was the triumph of biography over achievement, of empty promise over performance, the result of aspiring to elitism. “Outside of technical fields, proverbially brain surgery and rocket science,” he says, “academic credentials are an indication not of achievement, but of promise.” Mr. Obama posed as Harvard scholar, but since he has resolutely refused to release any evidence of student prowess we don’t know whether he was the academic genius he assures us he was, or a fraud laughing at how easy it was to fool so many people.

Only by taking 12 measured steps can voters cure themselves of addiction to the idea that there’s a solution for every problem, to the temptation to find someone to blame for frustration and disappointment, for the addiction to denial, and finally to recognize the importance of attaining what he calls voting sobriety.

“Even when we realized this president was incompetent,” he writes, “we were in denial about our own incompetence as voters.”

Mr. Carpel, eager though he is to repent and make amends, may well be embarked on a fool’s errand. The elites are unlikely to see their practiced error in judgment; how can anyone with a Ph.D be so wrong when he’s so sincere? But there may be hope for enough of the rest of us.

Obamania, in this view, has the classic features of addiction: the buzz, the rush, the flush, the high, the euphoric contentment. “And now we’re experiencing the inevitable comedown: the crash, the craving when the addiction isn’t satisfying, the misery of withdrawal.”

Only with recovery can addicts begin to cast sober ballots. No more dream of being delivered into a fairytale kingdom of Arthurian legend. “The president’s job isn’t to pull a sword out of a stone. It’s to manage the nation’s government and to inspire Americans to be their best selves.”

Mr. Carpel is correct that we’ve become a culture addicted to wishes and dreams, where celebrity reigns and entertainment is all. The circus is fun, and addiction feels good for a little while. But there may be hope for change. Who wants to be the town drunk forever?

__._,_.___

__,_._,___

Underwater debris field found in latest Earhart expedition

Underwater debris field found in latest Earhart expedition

The latest expedition to recover possible evidence of Amelia Earhart’s Lockheed Model 10 Electra has video footage that shows man-made objects in deep water off the uninhabited atoll where she is believed to have landed.

The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) said last week that a review of high-definition underwater video footage taken during its July expedition has revealed “a scattering of man-made objects on the reef slope off the west end of Nikumaroro.” TIGHAR sailed from Hawaii to Nikumaroro to investigate a clue spotted in an original negative of a photo of the western shoreline of the atoll. The negative showed a protrusion from a reef that appears to resemble an aircraft landing gear.

Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, disappeared July 2, 1937, during an attempt to fly around the world. At the time of their disappearance, Earhart was trying to find Howland Island, an atoll 356 nautical miles north of Nikumaroro that been equipped as a refueling station.

The debris field is in deep water offshore the location where an object “thought to be Lockheed Electra landing gear appears in a photo taken three months after Amelia Earhart disappeared,” TIGHAR said on its website. “Items in the debris field appear to be consistent with the object in the 1937 photo.”

TIGHAR’s announcement preceded the Aug. 19 airing of a Discovery Channel documentary on the most recent expedition to Nikumaroro, “Finding Amelia Earhart: Mystery Solved?”

The organization admitted in July that its initial findings were not conclusive, but said that forensic specialists would be analyzing the sonar data and high-definition footage obtained through the use of an autonomous underwater vehicle and a remotely operated vehicle. TIGHAR Executive Director Ric Gillespie told Discovery News that he believes early media reports “rushed to judgment in saying that the expedition didn’t find anything.” He said the “severe underwater environment” at Nikumaroro indicated that “we would be looking for debris from an airplane that had been torn to pieces 75 years ago.”

TIGHAR’s forensic experts will continue to analyze the video. According to Discovery News, forensic imaging specialist Jeff Glickman has reviewed less than 30 percent of the footage. If further analysis continues to support the hypothesis that TIGHAR has indeed found the object that appears in the 1937 photo, “we’ll certainly want to recover it,” Gillespie told Discovery News.

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group

Like SNOPES.

B

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group

posted 8/27/2012 11:14:20 AM |

2 kudos

    report abuse

 

DiamondRain
Untitled_attachment_00124

If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact."

That is exactly what Web sites like To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama.


Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
http://www.matchdoctor.com/blog_141905/Factcheck_org_--_A_Fraudulent_Fact_Check_Site_Funded_By_Biased_Political_Group.html

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Where is all that government spending

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/27/wheres-all-that-government-spending-really-going/?iid=SF_F_River

August 27, 2012: 12:01 PM ET

Where's all that government spending really going?

You might be surprised how the math actually adds up.

FORTUNE -- It's well-known that government spending has grown rapidly in the three-and-a-half years since Barack Obama succeeded George W. Bush as president. It's also clear that since GDP hit bottom in early 2009, economic growth has proven exceedingly weak compared with the rapid ascent from past downturns.

Now, a debate is raging over whether the big jump in outlays filled a hole that saved economy from a cataclysm, as everyone from columnist-economist Paul Krugman and Obama himself argue, or merely stunted the "recovery" by diverting job-creating, growth-enhancing capital from America's businesses.

Although it's impossible to settle the issue definitively, it is enlightening to examine where all that new spending is going. In crunching the numbers, I was amazed that most of the increase isn't flowing into goods and services the government provides, and nor is it fulfilling the fabled priority for building and upgrading our roads, tunnels and bridges.

So where are the new trillions in spending really going? To find out, let's start with the total increase in outlays. Since the fourth quarter of 2008, total government spending -- federal, state and local -- has risen by 17.8%, to $6.3 trillion. That's 12.6% adjusted for inflation. In those 11 quarters, outlays have swelled from 37.9% to 40.3% of GDP, the highest number since the mid-1940s.

The official GDP accounts, assembled by the government's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), show how much of that almost $1 trillion increase actually flowed into government services and investments. It's important to recognize that the government spending included in GDP is not total spending, but the expenditures on two categories. The first is called "government consumption," consisting of payments that provide such products and services as education and national defense, and encompassing everything from salaries for teachers, to pay for soldiers to costs for running state DMVs.

The second category is "government investment," mainly comprising outlays on construction and maintenance of America's infrastructure from federal, state and county highways to school facilities to dams. From late 2008 until today, spending on government goods and services rose just .1% annually, adjusted for inflation. The real shocker is investment: It dropped 3.71% a year in real terms. So the almost 18% rise in spending failed to provide substantially more government services, and furnished a lot less money for the highly touted necessity of rebuilding America's infrastructure.

The extra spending -- the difference between the total and the shrinking share going to services plus investment -- went to an explosive category called "transfer payments." Government transfer payments are defined as expenditures for which no good, service or upgrade in infrastructure is expected in return. The government collects the money in the form of taxes and new borrowing, then writes the checks to consumers and, to a lesser extent, companies in the form of subsidies. Naturally, all of the money funding the rise in transfer payments has come from new borrowing, since the U.S. is running gigantic deficits.

By the way, the transfer payments do get counted indirectly in GDP, chiefly as "personal consumption" of cars, TVs, restaurant meals and sundry other expenditures by the folks who get the checks.

Since late 2008, transfer payments have ballooned by 34% or almost $800 billion a year, rising from 17.3% to 20.1% of GDP. Remember, we're not counting programs that were part of the Obama "stimulus" and have since expired, such as the Making Work Pay program. We're looking at the net of what's been added and subtracted since 2008, and it's a big positive. The largest category of transfer payments, of course, consists of the three major entitlements: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Indeed, they rose in total by 28% since the fourth quarter of 2008. What's surprising is that other transfer payments, all told, rose even faster, by 38%, and accounted for over half of the total increase.

Among the fast-growing categories: unemployment insurance and food stamps, which together expanded by 120% to $211 billion, and environmental and energy spending, including subsidies for solar panels, windmills, ethanol and other green products, which grew 76% combined to $61 billion. Job training, housing subsidies and many other line items also saw rapid increases.

The big question is whether all the new spending on transfer payments made the economy grow faster than if that spending had been far more modest. Two leading economists are highly skeptical, John Cochrane of the University of Chicago, and John Taylor of Stanford. "The Keynesians will tell you that except for the 'multiplier magic' of all the spending, the private economy would have been even worse," says Cochrane. He counters that the money for those transfer payments had to come from somewhere else, specifically by shrinking the savings available for private companies. "To do all that spending, the government has to borrow the money, and the people who bought government bonds would otherwise have provided companies with more capital for expansion by purchasing their bonds or stocks."

The GDP accounts give credence to his argument. Private investment is lagging. Since the start of the downturn in 2008, spending on plant and equipment fallen by 6.3% adjusted for inflation. The most recent CBO report concludes that "net investment as a fraction of GDP remains unusually low."

Taylor agrees that "all the borrowing is crowding out private investment." But he cites a second, generally overlooked problem as well: the damaging impact on public investment. "It's clear that budget constraints on state and local governments are squeezing the amount available for investment," states Taylor. "The result is that both private and public investment is getting crowded out by government spending." Among the transfer payments hammering state and local budgets are public pensions, which once again, provide neither government services nor improvements to roads or tunnels.

Taylor insists that "the economy would be growing a lot faster without all the spending." It's certain that America is now swamped with the debt that financed that spending, without getting much extra torque in return. Was the great splurge worth it? The voters will register their opinion on November 6th.