Obama Flip-Flops on on Taxing Health Care Benefits - Another Tax Increase

image by rees

Obama Is Willing to Consider Move to Gain Health Reform

By Ceci Connolly
from The Washington Post
June 3, 2009

President Obama, in a pivot from some of his harshest campaign rhetoric, told Democratic senators yesterday that he is willing to consider taxing employer-sponsored health benefits to help pay for a broad expansion of coverage.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Obama expressed a willingness to consider changing the existing tax exclusion. The decision would probably anger liberal supporters such as labor unions, but such a tax change would raise enormous sums of money as Congress and the White House are struggling to find the estimated $1.2 trillion needed to pay for health-care reform over the next decade.

"Yeah, it's something that he might consider," Baucus told reporters after the meeting between Obama and Democratic lawmakers. "That was discussed. It's on the table." Obama had summoned about two dozen senators to the White House to keep up the pressure to enact a comprehensive health-care overhaul this year.

White House officials moved quickly to clarify that taxing the health insurance provided by businesses is not Obama's first choice, but aides refused to rule out the possibility.

"The president made it clear during the campaign that he has serious concerns about taxing health-care benefits, and he has introduced his own revenue proposal, which he reiterated in today's meeting," spokesman Reid Cherlin said.

Obama instead urged senators to reconsider his proposal, which would raise federal revenue by reducing itemized deductions such as charitable contributions and mortgage payments for the wealthiest Americans, according to one adviser in the meeting. Obama included that idea in his budget, reporting that it would raise $317 billion over 10 years, a sizable "down payment" on the cost of health-care reform. But Congress immediately labeled the proposal a non-starter.

Private-sector businesses spend about $518 billion a year on their workers' health insurance, benefits that are not taxed. If workers had to pay taxes on their health coverage, it would raise $246 billion in revenue each year, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

Tax treatment of employer-sponsored health care cuts across party lines: Prominent Republicans such as Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.) support imposing a tax on certain health plans, while Democrats such as Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio) say that a tax would unfairly hurt middle-class workers with good benefits.

Health analysts from across the political spectrum have pressed for changing the tax treatment, arguing in part that the exclusion provides the greatest tax relief to high-salaried workers with generous insurance plans.

Last month, Baucus said he did not support eliminating the exclusion but was eyeing a benefit cap. Experts have outlined two likely approaches: taxing health benefits for workers above a certain income level; or taxing benefits over a certain value, perhaps $14,000 a year.

Administration officials meeting with lobbyists in recent days have projected that a benefit cap might generate $35 billion a year, though Finance Committee staffers said the number could be much higher.

Nevertheless, the issue represents treacherous politics for Obama, given his attacks on Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who advocated a similar approach during the campaign.

"For the first time in American history, he wants to tax your health benefits," Obama said in September. "Apparently, Senator McCain doesn't think it's enough that your health premiums have doubled. He thinks you should have to pay taxes on them, too."

Strongly desiring to declare a health-care victory this year, Obama is now taking a more nuanced approach, aides said. "His style of leadership is to say, let's not get bogged down; let's keep moving forward," said one senior adviser who was in yesterday's meeting. "He's not ruling anybody's ideas out."

Staff writer Michael D. Shear and staff researcher Madonna Lebling contributed to this report
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

What's Keeping Obama's Approval Ratings Up?

from Real Clear Politics
June 3, 2009
By Dick Morris

The Rasmussen poll conducted over the weekend of May 30-31 asked a key question designed to give us perspective on Obama's current popularity. The question was whether the current problems "are due to the recession that began under the Bush administration or to the policies Obama has put in place since taking office." In other words, who's to blame, Bush or Obama?

By 62-27, voters say Bush is still the culprit.

As long as this opinion remains prevalent, Obama will continue to enjoy high popularity. But when it changes, as it inevitably must, we will see him begin a long, long fall.

And this is the key measurement to watch.

The real recession - dating from the stock market collapse - began four months before Bush left office. And it is now four months since Obama was inaugurated. From this vantage, it still looks to voters like Bush's recession.

But it will become increasingly obvious that the large deficit Obama has incurred while pursuing his cure for the recession is, on its own, causing more problems than it solves. As high interest rates and, most likely, inflation, begin to set in - with no relief in unemployment - it will be obvious that Obamanomics isn't working and is, in fact, aggravating the economic trouble.

Obama, recognizing the danger, has recently begun to speak out - without even cracking a guilty smile - against the huge budget deficit he created. He is trying to blame the deficit, too, on Bush. But voters will not overlook the huge spending sprees of January and February, when Obama quadrupled the 2009 deficit. They will come to see that spending as a huge mistake and will shift their blame to the new president who proposed it.

Obama now faces a choice of poisons.

He can leave taxes as they are and take the poison of high interest rates, rapid inflation and a new recession, all caused by the massive borrowing he has forced on the Treasury. If the Treasury cannot sell enough bonds at a reasonable interest rate, it will, of course "monetize the deficit" - economics-speak for printing money so that there will be enough to buy the Treasury debt at moderate interest rates. But the process of so vastly expanding the money supply (or even just leaving the current expansion in place without trying to soak up the extra money) will cause its own runaway inflation.

Or Obama can break his pledge and raise taxes on everybody. His soak-the-rich approach will not be enough to cover the deficit. Especially when one factors in his healthcare proposals, big tax increases on the middle class become an increasing likelihood. And when we consider his cap-and-trade legislation, huge increases in utility rates also loom.

Either poison will make it clear that the economy is suffering from the medicine Obama administered, rather than the original disease that started under Bush.

And, of course, while we cannot predict precisely the start date of the Obama-generated misery, it's pretty clear that it will be a long-lasting pain. Neither inflation nor the pain of higher taxes is going to go away soon. And either approach will probably kindle a new recession.

Some economists think we will have an L-shaped recession from which we do not emerge for years and years. Others think it will be a W-shaped recession (not Bush's W) in which we emerge briefly and then go back down again. But a U-shaped recession, in which we go down and then come bouncing back, probably cannot happen with Obama's deficits now firmly in place. Then it will become clear that the cure was worse than the disease.

Morris, a former political adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of "Outrage." To get all of Dick Morris’s and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by email, go to www.dickmorris.com.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

INSANITY - Current government debt per household is $546,688

from Hot Air.com
June 1, 2009
by Allahpundit

Ace despairs at the figures but I feel about this the way lefties felt when gas was more than four bucks a gallon and heading north: The higher the numbers go, the better. They figured only a full-blown meltdown would force a paradigm shift from fossil fuels to green energy; similarly, people like Robert Samuelson realize that only bankrupting Medicare and Social Security will make Congress face the fact that the two programs — which account for 81 percent of the debt load, per USA Today’s chart — will collapse under the weight of baby boomers. Everyone knows it, including and especially our chief creditor, so let’s get on with it.

China is the biggest foreign owner of U.S. Treasury bonds. U.S. data shows that it held $768 billion in Treasuries as of March, but some analysts believe China’s total U.S. dollar-denominated investments could be twice as high.

“Chinese assets are very safe,” Geithner said in response to a question after a speech at Peking University, where he studied Chinese as a student in the 1980s.

His answer drew loud laughter from his student audience, reflecting scepticism in China about the wisdom of a developing country accumulating a vast stockpile of foreign reserves instead of spending the money to raise living standards at home.

The $546K figure is based on current debt only, mind you. It doesn’t include universal health care or the fact that the FDIC’s going bust and will need to bailed out. According to some back-of-the-envelope math at the Atlantic, even with a hypothetical interest rate of 0 percent, each household now owes $22,274 per year … for the next 30 years. Average U.S. household income as of 2007: $50,233. Won’t be long now until the reckoning. Exit question: Blame Bush? Or blame Reagan?
Click to read the article and the comments

Chinese Audience Laughs At Geithner - He said their dollar assets were safe! ROFLMAO

from Reuters
By Glenn Somerville
June 1, 2009

BEIJING, June 1 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Monday reassured the Chinese government that its huge holdings of dollar assets are safe and reaffirmed his faith in a strong U.S. currency.

A major goal of Geithner's maiden visit to China as Treasury chief is to allay concerns that Washington's bulging budget deficit and ultra-loose monetary policy will fan inflation, undermining both the dollar and U.S. bonds.

China is the biggest foreign owner of U.S. Treasury bonds. U.S. data shows that it held $768 billion in Treasuries as of March, but some analysts believe China's total U.S. dollar-denominated investments could be twice as high.

"Chinese assets are very safe," Geithner said in response to a question after a speech at Peking University, where he studied Chinese as a student in the 1980s.

His answer drew loud laughter from his student audience, reflecting scepticism in China about the wisdom of a developing country accumulating a vast stockpile of foreign reserves instead of spending the money to raise living standards at home.

But later in the day, Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan said it was important for the two nations to show the world they are working together through their joint economic dialogue.

"We must through our dialogue send a clear signal that China and the U.S. are engaged in practical cooperation to address the crisis," Wang told Geithner, according to the Chinese Foreign Ministry's website (www.mfa.gov.cn).

"This is important for boosting confidence and encouraging global financial stability and economic revival," said Wang.

In his speech, Geithner renewed pledges that the Obama administration would cut its huge fiscal deficits and promised "very disciplined" future spending, possibly including reintroduction of pay-as-you-go budget rules instead of nonstop borrowing.

"We have the deepest and most liquid markets for risk-free assets in the world. We're committed to bring our fiscal deficits down over time to a sustainable level

"We believe in a strong dollar ... and we're going to make sure that we repair and reform the financial system so that we sustain confidence," he said.

Geithner, who is due to meet President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao during two days of talks, described the recession as still "powerful and dangerous" in much of the world.

Recent signs of improvement were not enough to change an International Monetary Fund prediction that world output would shrink this year for the first time in 60 years. And credit was likely to be tight for some time, Geithner said.

But he added: "The global recession seems to be losing force."

Moreover, the U.S. financial system was healing and it now seemed assured that the world would avoid financial collapse and deflation.

CHINA ROLE

Geithner offered U.S. backing for a higher-profile role for China in running global institutions including the IMF -- a controversial proposition since it raises the sensitive issue of reducing Europe's voting share in the global lender.

"The United States will fully support having China play a role in the principal cooperative arrangements that help shape the international system, a role that is commensurate with China's importance in the global economy," he said.

Geithner said he was hopeful that General Motors Corp and Chrysler would be able to stand on their own feet once they emerge from bankruptcy.

GM will file for bankruptcy on Monday, U.S. officials said, forcing the 100-year-old automaker once seen as a symbol of American economic might into a new and uncertain era of government ownership.

"We want a quick, clean exit as soon as conditions permit," Geithner said. "We're very optimistic these firms will emerge (from restructuring) without further government assistance."
(Reporting by Glenn Somerville; Editing by Alan Wheatley/Toby Chopra)
Click to read the article and the comments

Pelosi promises an “inventory” of every American’s carbon footprint

Video: Inventorying Pelosi
from Hot Air.com
May 29,2009
by Ed Morrissey

It’s an interesting time when an American political leader goes to China — and winds up sounding more authoritarian than the government in Beijing. Nancy Pelosi managed it while discussing the way green policies will be enforced in the Democratic regime in Washington DC. When pressed on specifics, Pelosi promised an “inventory” of every American’s carbon footprint (via Say Anything):

In answering a question from a student about how Pelosi was going to get Americans to cut back on their carbon emissions, the leading Democratic lawmaker said it was important to educate children on how to conserve energy and for citizens to build more environmentally friendly homes.

“We have so much room for improvement,” she said. “Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory … of how we are taking responsibility.”

Hmmm …. and who would conduct these “inventories”? A YouTube video speculates on that question:



Make no mistake about it. The climate-change activists want state control of energy production and use, which will allow the government control over every aspect of our lives. It’s the lifelong dream of utopian elitists. This only counts as a gaffe under the definition of the term as “the accidental telling of an embarrassing truth by a politician”.

Click to read the article and the comments

China gets tough on climate talks - You cut, we won't

By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing
and Fiona Harvey in London
from The Financial Times
Published: May 22 2009

China adopted a hard line yesterday ahead of climate change negotiations, calling on rich countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40 per cent by 2020 from 1990 levels and help pay for reduction schemes in poorer countries.

Beijing reiterated its belief that developing countries, including China, should curb emissions on a voluntary basis, and only if the cuts "accord with their national situations and sustainable development strategies".

It also demanded that developed countries be bound to give at least 0.5-1.0 per cent of their annual economic worth to help poorer countries, including China, to cut their greenhouse gas emissions and cope with global warming

Although it only spells out China's initial bargaining position, the strident stance will encourage other developing nations to take tougher positions.

It will not be welcomed in Washington and Brussels, where policymakers yesterday made tackling climate change a central theme in bilateral talks with Beijing.

China's proposals are one of a series of demands made by developing countries as part of this year's crucial climate change talks.

Formal negotiations begin officially on June 1 in Bonn, with three or more meetings to follow before the final summit in Copenhagen in December to forge a successor to the Kyoto protocol.

Other developing nations have asked for higher percentages of the rich world's GDP to be transferred to poorer countries and have demanded emissions cuts of up to 80 per cent by 2020 from certain rich nations.

Officials in Europe and the US privately dismissed the Chinese demands as posturing. "They're hoping that if you ask for 1 per cent, you may get a small fraction of a per cent," said one.

China had taken a more helpful stance at the negotiating table - by discussing the many measures the Chinese government had taken - and had promised to take on improving energy efficiency and expanding renewable energy.

Rich countries accept that China, India and other emerging economies will not agree to absolute cuts in emissions in the medium term. But before they agree to finance packages to help poor countries tackle global warming, they want commitments from those countries to curb their emissions so that they do not rise to the levels they would reach under "business as usual".

China's unwillingness to offer early concessions could signal a tough road ahead for policymakers who hoped progress on this issue could lead to breakthroughs on other topics, such as trade, human rights and the military build up in Asia.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

North Korea thumbs its nose at Obama

N. Korea tells the U.S. to change policy

from The Korea Herald
May 17, 2009

North Korea will not come back to the negotiation table unless the United States and South Korea give up their "hostile policy" toward the communist nation, North Korean state media said Sunday, according to Yonhap News.

"No matter what nonsense the Lee group may say under the clutches of the U.S., the DPRK remains unchanged in its determination and declaration made to protect the dignity and sovereignty of the nation," North Korea's Cabinet newspaper, the Minju Joson, said in a commentary carried by the Korean Central News Agency.

It also said the North will never attend the six-party talks aiming to end Pyongyang's nuclear program, and will strengthen its nuclear power no matter what other nations have agreed in the six-party talks that also include the U.S., China and South Korea.

Since its rocket launch last month, the North has pledged to carry out its second nuclear test despite U.N. sanctions. It has also threatened to shut down an industrial complex run jointly with the South, a symbol of inter-Korean reconciliation achieved by former liberal South Korean governments.
Click to go to the article

China continues challenging Navy ships in Yellow Sea - No response from White House

Well, it's happening again. I posted an article regarding the previous South China Sea dust-up between the two countries. At that time, our ship was just getting ready to return back to port. I figured that once our replacement ship arrived on the scene, that China would want to resume pushing the envelope with Obama. Apparently, Obama has no envelope, as there has been no response from the White House.

Hey Obama, thanks for being on top of your job Mr. Commander-In-Chief!

What's that sound I hear in the background? Oh no, is that Obama cowering in the corner, repeating over and over, "please make those mean Chinese go away. "
Rees

China continues challenging Navy ships in Yellow Sea

from Hot Air.com
posted May 6, 2009
by Ed Morrissey

The provocations from China have continued, but you may not know it.

According to the AP, the Obama administration has started playing down these challenges to the US Navy. The latest incident occurred yesterday, involving two Chinese vessels who came within 30 yards of a ship conducting a sub hunt:

The Pentagon Tuesday played down a confrontation between Chinese vessels and one of its Navy surveillance ships, taking a decidedly more low-key tone than during similar incidents two months ago.

In what has become almost a routine cat-and-mouse game on the seas, there have been four incidents in the past month in which Chinese-flagged fishing vessels maneuvered too close to two unarmed ships crewed by civilians and used by the Pentagon to do underwater surveillance and submarine hunting missions, two defense officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss some of the incidents and details that the Pentagon has not yet released, adding that they fear such maneuvers are not just dangerous in themselves but could lead to escalated incidents. …

The Victorious crew sounded its alarm and shot water from its fire hoses to try to deter the vessels in an hour-long incident, one official said. The vessels didn’t leave until the Victorious radioed a nearby Chinese military vessel for help, said Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman.

After incidents in March that included similar though apparently more aggressive Chinese maneuvers, the Pentagon protested to Beijing officials and issued a strong public statement calling the Chinese actions harassment.

But on Tuesday, Whitman declined to characterize what the Chinese vessels were trying to do, saying only that their actions were “unsafe and dangerous.”

The lack of protest probably told Beijing all they need to know about Obama. If you challenge him often enough, he’ll back down. That seems to be the case here, in which Chinese “fishing vessels” harrassed warships for an hour in international waters, and the US has nothing to say about it except for safety concerns. What’s next, a PSA for life preservers?

The White House wasn’t the only group downplaying the incident, either. No national media except the AP carried the story. The New York Times, an AP partner, didn’t even carry this report. In fact, they didn’t report on it at all, and the latest story on the Yellow Sea was an accident involving a Chinese submarine from May 3rd — which would have provided an interesting springboard for this story.

With China expanding its blue-water navy and almost certainly expanding its submarine assets, the kind of exercise the Navy was conducting in the Yellow Sea is critical to our defense against Chinese aggression in the Pacific. If Beijing has continued harassing American Navy ships in international waters, that’s important to know, and it’s equally important to maintain public criticism of China for doing it. The AP apparently understands this, but it seems that they’re among the few.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Absolute Must Read: Romney Says Obama Has Been A Timid Advocate of Freedom

President Obama has failed his early foreign-policy tests.
By Mitt Romney
from The National Review
April 21, 2009

At last week’s Summit of the Americas, President Obama acquiesced to a 50-minute attack on America as terroristic, expansionist, and interventionist from Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega. His response to Ortega’s denunciation of our effort to free Cuba from Castro’s dictatorship was that he shouldn’t be blamed “for things that happened when I was three months old.” Blamed? Hundreds of men, including Americans, bravely fought and died for Cuba’s freedom, heeding the call from newly elected president John F. Kennedy. But last week, even as American soldiers sacrificed blood in Afghanistan and Iraq to defend liberty, President Obama shrank from defending liberty here in the Americas.

In his first press interview as president, he confessed to Arabic television that America had “dictated” to other nations. No, Mr. President, America has fought to free other nations from dictators. And in Strasbourg, the president further claimed that America has “showed arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” London’s Daily Telegraph observed that President Obama “went further than any United States president in history in criticizing his own country’s action while standing on foreign soil.” Of course, it was not just the Daily Telegraph that was listening: People around the world who yearn for freedom, who count on America’s resolve and support, heard him as well. He was heard in China, in Tibet, in Sudan, in Burma, and, yes, in Cuba.

The words spoken by the leader of the free world can expand the frontiers of freedom or shrink them. When Ronald Reagan called on Gorbachev to “tear down this wall,” a surge of confidence rose that would ultimately breach the bounds of the evil empire. It was the same confidence that had been ignited decades earlier when John F. Kennedy declared to a people surrounded by Communism that they were not alone. “We are all Berliners,” he said, because “freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.” Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s confident commitment, spoken as he led us into the war that would free millions in Europe, inspired not only Americans but freedom fighters around the globe: “The American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.” Such words of solidarity, of confidence, and of unwavering conviction that America is indeed “the last best hope on earth” are what freedom’s friends would have expected to hear from our president when our nation was slandered. Instead he offered silence, smiles, and a handshake.

Even more troubling than what he has or has not said is what he has not done. Kim Jong Il launched a long-range missile on the very day President Obama addressed the world about the peril of nuclear proliferation. As one of the world’s most oppressive and tyrannical regimes is on the brink of securing the “game changing” capability to reach American shores with a nuclear weapon, the president shrinks from action: no seizure of North Korean funds, no severance of banking access, no blockade.

Not to be outdone by Kim Jong Il, President Ahmadinejad announced that his nation has successfully mastered every step necessary to enrich uranium, violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it has signed. So, like North Korea, Iran will have changed the world’s equation for peace and security: It will be capable of devastating Europe and America, and of annihilating Israel. And as with North Korea, the Obama administration chooses inaction — no new severe sanctions, no hint of military options. Ahmadinejad can act with confidence that the forceful options once on our proverbial table have been shelved.

Vice President Biden was right that the new president would be tested early in his administration. What the world learned was not good news for freedom and democracy. The leader of the free world has been a timid advocate of freedom at best. And bold action to blunt the advances of tyrants has been wholly lacking. We are still very early in the Obama years — the president will have ample opportunity to defend America and freedom, and to deter nuclear brinkmanship. I am hoping for change.
Click to read the article

North Korea Expelling Nuclear Inspectors

from Sky News
Tuesday April 14, 2009

North Korea is expelling the UN's nuclear inspectors and has vowed to reactivate its nuclear reactor, the International Atomic Energy Agency has said

Pyongyang told the monitors to remove seals and cameras from the Yongbyon site, which makes bomb-grade plutonium, and leave the country as quickly as possible.

It also said it was ceasing all cooperation with the energy agency, which is the UN's nuclear watchdog.

North Korea's move came after it declared it would leave six-party talks on scrapping its nuclear programme.

The communist state has faced heavy criticism after recently launching a long-range rocket which some believe was a disguised ballistic missile test.

Pyongyang said the rocket was carrying a satellite and the mission was peaceful.

After news of the expulsions, the United States called on North Korea to "cease its provocative threats" and respect the will of the international community by honouring its international commitments.

North Korea's leader Kim Jong-Il

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Pyongyang's vow to restart its nuclear reactor and boycott international disarmament talks is a serious step in the wrong direction.

Britain's Foreign Office said North Korea's decision to cease co-operation with the watchdog was "completely unjustified".

It urged the country not to pull out of the so-called six-party talks with the US, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan.

On Monday, the UN Security Council unanimously condemned the rocket firing on April 5. It said it contravened a UN ban and demanded enforcement of existing sanctions against the country.

UN nuclear watchdog spokesman, Marc Vidricaire, said the small inspection team had been ordered out of the country "at the earliest possible time".

He said: "The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has today informed IAEA inspectors in the Yongbyon facility that it is immediately ceasing all cooperation with the IAEA.

"It has requested the removal of all containment and surveillance equipment, following which IAEA inspectors will no longer be provided access to the facility."

He added: "The (North) also informed the IAEA that it has decided to reactivate all facilities and go ahead with the reprocessing of spent fuel."
Click to read the article

OBAMA NO MATCH FOR COMMITTED ENEMIES

image from The Real World
article from The Real World
Saturday, April 11, 2009

The article that follows records one of the ever growing number of examples of how international state players opposed to American interests are manipulating and playing Barack Obama. To date, the President is no match in the game.

The United Nations is a fully corrupted, anti-American organization that stalls or opposes virtually anything that the United States brings forward that would accrue to the benefit of not only our nation but legitimate democratic nations around the globe.

The bad actors amongst the international community know exactly how to play the UN game. Naive political idealists like Obama have no chance to makeover such a failed institution into a force for the benefit of those who need it's support. Yet he wastes his political capital along with American power on an organization that is no longer meaningful or relevant.

The fact is that the UN has morphed into less of a force for good and more of a vehicle for malfeasance and unsavory agenda driven outcomes. The forces of evil are far more influential there on the shores of the Hudson than the interests of the greater good.

Obama is stuck in 1960's doctrine relative to the usefulness of such an awful institution. He cannot reinvent it and it will not respond positively to any American advocacy. The President is lost as often is the case in foreign affairs.

North Korea, Iran, Russia, China and a host of others will smile in his face while urinating on his shoes. Obama and his team are Utopians who are being played by state realists. He will not succeed.


North Korea Crisis Tests Obama's Reliance on U.N.
By JOE LAURIA

UNITED NATIONS -- The Security Council stalemate over North Korea's rocket launch is turning into an early test of the Obama administration's U.N.-focused multilateralism.
Six days after U.S. President Barack Obama called for swift punishment of North Korea, the Security Council hasn't acted.

While Japan is pressing for a quick response, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice has tried to downplay expectations of immediate progress.

China and Russia have resisted a draft Security Council resolution, put forth by the U.S. and Japan, that would at a minimum enforce military and financial sanctions imposed on North Korea after its underground nuclear weapons test in October 2006.

The sanctions were never fully implemented in deference to six-party talks among Russia, China, the U.S., Japan and the two Koreas to dismantle Pyongyang's nuclear-weapons program. China and Russia say reviving the talks is the ultimate goal -- which shouldn't be jeopardized by punishment for the launch.

Pyongyang says its launch was an attempt to launch a satellite and not a U.N.-banned ballistic missile test as Washington contends. Before the launch, North Korea warned it wouldn't resume the six-party talks -- on hold since December -- if the Security Council acts against the country.
Japan's foreign minister arrived in New York on Thursday, saying he will join the U.N. negotiations for as long as necessary to break the stalemate.

For Mr. Obama, who pledged renewed reliance on the U.N. during his presidential campaign, the North Korean crisis presents hard choices, analysts say.

Among the possible scenarios they suggest are walking away from the U.N. and six-party talks, and working with Congress to punish North Korea with more U.S.-only sanctions. Or, President Obama might consider forcing Russia and China to veto or abstain on a resolution -- and risk Pyongyang abandoning negotiations. The president also could compromise with a watered-down U.N. statement that could save the talks but lose face.

U.S. officials declined to comment on the administration's thinking or on details of U.N. talks with Russia and China.

Joseph Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a liberal think tank, said Mr. Obama's foreign-policy team had "no illusions about how long this would take" with Russia and China. "They are looking for sustained collective action, not an immediate slap on the wrist," he said.

Ted Galen Carpenter, an analyst at the conservative Cato Institute, sees U.S. foreign policy reverting to "the style of the Clinton administration," which believed in operating multilaterally when possible and unilaterally when necessary. "For the Bush administration it was exactly the opposite," he added.

Bush-administration unilateralists, some analysts say, regarded the U.N. as an obstacle to American foreign policy.

Although thwarted in seeking U.N. backing for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration proceeded anyway. But on North Korea, Bush officials went from a rejection of the six-party talks to a decision that multilateral participation was the only way to end Pyongyang's nuclear-weapons ambition.
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Click to read the article and comments

Thailand declares emergency, cancels Asian summit

By MICHAEL CASEY
from the Associated Press
April 11, 2009

PATTAYA, Thailand – Thailand declared a state of emergency in the city hosting a summit of Asian leaders and canceled the event for security reasons Saturday after more than 1,000 anti-government protesters stormed the venue.

The leaders were being evacuated by helicopter from the seaside city of Pattaya to a nearby military airport, a security official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The red-shirted protesters, who are calling for the resignation of Thai Prime Abhisit Vejjajiva, smashed through the glass doors of the convention hall and ran through the building, overturning tables, blowing horns, waving Thai flags and screaming, "Abhisit get out!

All the leaders were safe, said Foreign Ministry spokesman Tharit Charungvat. Nine leaders from Southeast Asian nations were in a nearby hotel on the convention grounds at the time the protesters broke in.

"The meeting cannot go on. We have to consider the security of the leaders," government spokesman Supachai Jaisamuth said. "The situation is too violent and it is a security concern for the leaders."

The chaos dealt a major blow to Abhisit, who has been trying to project an image of calm and normality since taking power in a parliamentary vote four months ago after a court dissolved the previous government for election fraud.

It also scuttles a chance for the 16 regional leaders, including those from China, Japan and South Korea, to confer on ways to combat the global slump that has battered Asia's export-oriented economies. North Korea's recent rocket launch also was to be discussed at the weekend summit.

The protesters are supporters of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was deposed in a 2006 military coup. They say Abhisit was not elected by the people and should step down so new elections can be held.

"We want to tell Abhisit himself that this meeting cannot go on," protest leader Arisman Pongreungrong said after leading the mob into the convention hall.

Abhisit, who has repeatedly refused to step down, went on national television and declared a state of emergency in the area surrounding the summit.

"I am using my power as the prime minister to declare a state of emergency in the area of Pattaya and Chonburi," he said.

The decree gives the military the right to restore order, allows authorities to suspend civil liberties, bans public gatherings of more than five people and bars the media from reporting news that "causes panic."

Earlier, organizers said all morning meetings at the summit had been delayed after protesters blocked traffic around the hotels where delegates were staying and amid clashes between anti- and pro-government groups. There were unconfirmed reports of protesters carrying guns.

Government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn said two or three people were injured in the clashes and that authorities were investigating reports of shots fired and an explosion.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao was scheduled to meet with the leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations on Saturday morning. That was to be followed by meetings between ASEAN leaders and the president of South Korea, and later with Japan's prime minister.

A breakfast meeting of the foreign ministers from Japan, China and South Korea was also canceled.

After the protesters broke into the convention hall, a reporter saw at least three people with cuts from the glass and blood on the floor.

Panitan said protesters have been warned that "very tough standards will be applied to them very soon."
Click to read the article

North Korea Better Watch It or Obama Will, Well He'll, You know...

President Pantywaist - there is a new surrender monkey on the block…

from Don Surber
April 10, 2009

Gerald Warner of the Times of London: “Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block…”

Maybe it is just me, but I don’t think Warner is too impressed with President Obama’s performance in Europe.

In fact, Warner pointed out that the world leaders in public lavished praise on the young president — and then did nothing for him in private.

Help in Afghanistan?

Warner wrote: “The One retired triumphant, having secured a massive contribution of 5,000 extra troops — all of them non-combatant, of course — which must really have put the wind up the Taliban, at the prospect of 5,000 more infidel cooks and bottle-washers swarming into the less hazardous regions of Afghanistan.”

That does free our troops from having to pull KP duty, I suppose.

But Warner’s real point is our president’s reaction to the North Korean missile launch was decidedly wanting: “President Pantywaist is hopping mad and he has a strategy to cut Kim down to size: he is going to slice $1.4bn off America’s missile defence programme, presumably on the calculation that Kim would feel it unsporting to hit a sitting duck, so that will spoil his fun.”

I let Warner use the British newspaper stylebook.

I must agree that at a time when we are squandering trillions on stimulus packages that are spooking investors, cutting any spending in Washington is like emptying the ocean by the spoonful.

President Pantywaist.

Wrote Garner: “Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride.”
His column is here.
Click to go to Don Surber article

Hey Obama! Laura Ling & Euna Lee are still being held in N. Korea

Obama, it's been 3 weeks!

Please don't forget about Laura Ling and Euna Lee. You know, the two American Journalists that were kidnapped by North Korea.

I know you don't want to deal with their situation because it might force you to make a decision and actually state your position regarding an issue.

Obama, just as you've demanded, you are the man! Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Stephen Bosworth and whoever else may be associated with foreign policy regarding North Korea, can only respond based on your direction. Well give them some!!!

And one more thing. Where is Al Gore? Ling and Lee work for former Vice President Al Gore's media venture 'Current TV'. I haven't heard one peep from him about this.
Rees

Lisa Ling's Sister Facing Trial in North Korea
from People.com
By Champ Clark
Originally posted Tuesday March 31, 2009

While the United States engages in delicate diplomatic moves, the situation in North Korea for Lisa Ling's sister and another journalist is becoming worse.

Preparations for an indictment are already underway, with Laura Ling and Euna Lee headed for a trial on the basis of "already confirmed suspicions," according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency.

"The illegal entry of U.S. reporters into the DPRK and their suspected hostile acts have been confirmed by evidence and their statements," the news agency said. Ling and Lee, who work for former Vice President Al Gore's media venture Current TV, were captured by a North Korean military patrol on March 17 near the North Korea/China border. The journalists were in China filming a documentary on North Korean defectors who reside there.
Click to read the rest of the article

N. Korea to indict detained 2 American reporters
BEIJING, March 31
KYODO

North Korea said Tuesday it is preparing to indict two American reporters it detained earlier this month on suspicion of illegally entering the country.

''The illegal entry of U.S. reporters into the DPRK and their suspected hostile acts have been confirmed by evidence and their statements,'' North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency reported, referring to the results of its investigations into the incident. The DPRK, or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, is North Korea's official name.

2 U.S. journalists detained in N. Korea: reports
SEOUL, March 19
KYODO

Two U.S. journalists and their guide were detained by North Korean soldiers while on a reporting trip earlier in the week near the country's border with China, the Associated Press reported Thursday, quoting a missionary who spoke to them earlier in the week.

Rev. Chun Ki Won of the Seoul-based Doorihana Mission told the AP by telephone from Washington he was informed that Laura Ling and Euna Kim, reporters for the California-based online media outlet Current TV, were taken into North Korean custody on Tuesday with a guide hired in China to assist them.

Laura Ling's Father: 'I Worry Quite A Bit'
Carmichael Native, Sister Of Lisa Ling Detained In North Korea

Laura Ling, 32, was born and raised in Carmichael and is a graduate of Del Campo High School.
She currently works for San Francisco-based online media outlet Current TV and is the sister of TV journalist Lisa Ling, often seen on "The Oprah Winfrey Show." More On Ling: Ling At Current TV

Ling and her colleague Euna Lee were seized along the Chinese-North Korea border two days ago, according to news reports and an activist with ties to the reports said Thursday. They had reportedly ignored warnings to stop shooting footage of the reclusive country. A third colleague managed to elude capture.

57% Wanted a Military Response to North Korea Missile Launch

57% Wanted Military Response to North Korea Missile Launch - It's too bad 52% decided to elect a coward for Commander in Chief!

from Rasmussen Reports

Sunday, April 05, 2009

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of U.S. voters nationwide favor a military response to eliminate North Korea’s missile launching capability. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 15% of voters oppose a military response while 28% are not sure.

North Korea defied international pressure and launched a missile last night. Officials from that country claim a satellite was placed in orbit. U.S. defense officials confirm that a missile was launched but that no object was placed in orbit.

"With this provocative act, North Korea has ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint, and further isolated itself from the community of nations,” President Obama said. (But he did NOTHING!)

The telephone survey was conducted Friday and Saturday, April 3-4, the two days immediately prior to North Korea’s launch. The question asked about a military response if North Korea actually did launch a long-range missile.

Support for a military response comes from 66% of Republicans, 52% of Democrats and 54% of those not affiliated with either major political party. There is no gender gap on the issue as a military response is favored by 57% of men and 57% of women.

Overall, 75% of voters say they’ve been closely following news stories about the possible launch. That figure includes 40% who’ve followed the news Very Closely.

Seventy-three percent (73%) are at least somewhat concerned that North Korea will use nuclear weapons against the United States. That’s up just a few points from 69% who held that view in October 2006. Prior to that survey, North Korea had successfully conducted an underground nuclear test.

Currently, 39% are Very Concerned about a possible nuclear attack from North Korea.
Just three percent (3%) of voters view North Korea as an ally while 46% say it’s an enemy.

Click to read the article

Satellite launch sparks conflicting claims

By Wang Linyan (China Daily)

2009-04-06

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) said on Sunday it launched a satellite into orbit which was circling the Earth transmitting songs - but the United States and the Republic of Korea (ROK) said it had failed to enter orbit.

The "Taepodong-2" rocket was launched at 11:20 am local time (0220 GMT) from the East Sea Launch Ground in the east coast of the country, the DPRK's Korean Central News Agency said.

The "Kwangmyongsong-2" satellite was sent into orbit at 11:29 am local time (0229 GMT), the agency said.

But North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and US Northern Command officials issued a statement disputing any success.

"Stage one of the missile fell into the Sea of Japan," the statement said. "The remaining stages along with the payload itself landed in the Pacific Ocean. No object entered orbit and no debris fell on Japan."

ROK Defense Minister Lee Sang-hee said that Seoul had judged that the DPRK had failed to put its satellite launched into orbit, Japan's Kyodo news agency reported.

"Based on our judgment made so far, all first, second and third (stage) rockets fell into the ocean, and thus nothing has been put into orbit," Kyodo quoted Lee as telling a parliamentary session in Seoul.

US, ROK and Japanese officials - who monitored the launch from nearby warships and high-resolution spy satellite cameras - have said they suspect the DPRK was testing long-range ballistic missile technology that could be used to carry a nuclear warhead to Alaska or beyond.

The US insisted it was a missile launch, but the ROK, in a U-turn, said it was a satellite. Japan used "flying object" to describe it.

Click to read the article

World War III or World War 3 - whichever way you prefer it...

As always, telling it like it really is...with an attitude to get your attention!

Gates: U.S. Not Prepared to Respond to North Korea Missile Launch

Photo of U.S. THAAD Missile Defense System

Why would the Secretary of Defense even say something like that?

Is it that 'we're not prepared to respond' or that 'Obama lacks the will to do so?' Which is it?

GATES SHOULD SUMBIT HIS RESIGNATION IMMEDIATELY

The defense secretary told "FOX News Sunday" that the United States can do nothing to stop North Korea from thumbing its nose at the international community by test-firing a long-range missile.

The United States can do nothing to stop North Korea from breaking international law in the next 10 days by firing a missile that is unlikely to be shot down by the U.S. or its allies, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday.

Appearing on "FOX News Sunday," Gates said North Korea "probably will" fire the missile, prompting host Chris Wallace to ask: "And there's nothing we can do about it?"

"No," Gates answered, adding, "I would say we're not prepared to do anything about it."

Last week, Admiral Timothy Keating, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, said the U.S. is "fully prepared" to shoot down the missile. But Gates said such a response is unlikely.

The Obama administration has signaled it wants to scale back the deployment of a missile defense system that was initiated by former President George W. Bush. The White House is also talking about dropping plans for missile defense facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Gates lamented the futility of diplomatic efforts toward North Korea and Iran, another nation with nuclear ambitions. Despite the Obama administration's talk of ramping up diplomatic overtures toward Tehran, Gates was pessimistic about that strategy.

"Frankly, from my perspective, the opportunity for success is probably more in economic sanctions in both places than it is in diplomacy," Gates said. "What gets them to the table is economic sanctions."

Click to read the rest of the article

Mr. Obama: Shoot That Missile Down!

North Korea launch threatens to undo disarmament talks (as if they weren't already dead in the water)


from Yahoo News
By JEAN H. LEE, Associated Press Writer

SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea's plans to launch a rocket as early as this week in defiance of warnings threatens to undo years of fitful negotiations toward dismantling the regime's nuclear program.

The U.S., South Korea and Japan have told the North that any rocket launch — whether it's a satellite or a long-range missile — would violate a 2006 U.N. Security Council Resolution prohibiting Pyongyang from any ballistic activity, and could draw sanctions.

North Korea said sanctions would violate the spirit of disarmament agreements, and said it would treat the pacts as null and void if punished for exercising its sovereign right to send a satellite into space.

"Even a single word critical of the launch" from the Security Council will be regarded as a "blatant hostile act," a spokesman with North Korea's foreign ministry said Thursday, according the North's state-run Korean Central News Agency. "All the processes for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, which have been pushed forward so far, will be brought back to what used to be before their start and necessary strong measures will be taken."

That would be a sharp reversal from June 2008 when the North made a promising move toward disarmament, dramatically blowing up a cooling reactor at its main Yongbyon nuclear complex.
But the regime routinely backtracks on agreements, refuses to abide by international rules and wields its nuclear program like a weapon when it needs to win concessions from Washington or Seoul, analysts say.

"History has shown them that the more provocative they are, the more attention they get. The more attention they get, the more they're offered," Peter M. Beck, a Korean affairs expert who teaches at American University in Washington and Yonsei University in Seoul, said Sunday.

Despite years of negotiations and impoverished North Korea's growing need for outside help, it's clear the talks have done little to curb the regime's drive to build — and sell — its atomic arsenal, experts say.

"If this is Kim Jong Il's welcoming present to a new president, launching a missile like this and threatening to have a nuclear test, I think it says a lot about the imperviousness of this regime in North Korea to any kind of diplomatic overtures," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an interview broadcast on "Fox News Sunday."

North Korea, a notoriously secretive country, has been challenging the international community with its atomic ambitions since 1993, when the regime briefly quit the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty amid suspicions it was secretly developing atomic weapons.

In 1994, North Korea and the U.S. worked out an agreement that promised Pyongyang oil and two light water nuclear reactors if the country would give up its nuclear ambitions. The power-generating reactors cannot be easily used to make bombs.

Four years later, North Korea fired a multistage Taepodong-1 missile over Japan and into the Pacific Ocean. The North pledged in 1999 to freeze long-range missile tests, but later threatened to restart its nuclear program and resume testing missiles amid delays in construction of the reactors.

In 2002, Pyongyang admitted to a secret nuclear weapons program in violation of the 1994 agreement, prompting the U.S., Japan and South Korea to halt oil supplies promised as part of the pact. The North withdrew again from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 2003, and announced it had reactivated its nuclear power facilities.

That August, six nations — the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the U.S. — began negotiations on disarmament now known as the "six-party talks," eventually resulting in a landmark accord on Sept. 19, 2005. The agreement called for North Korea to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for economic aid, diplomatic recognition and a security guarantee from Washington.

As the talks continued in fits and starts, the North in 2006 carried out a surprise 5 a.m. test-fire of six missiles, including its Taepodong-2 long-range missile, which U.S. and South Korean officials believe has the potential to strike Alaska.

The rocket fizzled just 42 seconds after takeoff but the launch, denounced as "provocative" by Washington, angered even North Korea's longtime ally and main donor, China, which agreed to a U.S.-sponsored U.N. Resolution 1695 condemning the move.

Later that year, an underground nuclear test prompted U.N. Resolution 1718, which bans the North from any ballistic activity. The U.S., South Korea and Japan say that sending satellites into space since the technology for launching a satellite and a missile are virtually the same.
By February, Pyongyang agreed to concrete steps toward disarmament: disabling its main nuclear facilities in exchange for the equivalent of 1 million tons of energy aid and other concessions. Disablement began that November.

But the North halted the process in 2008 amid a dispute with Washington over how to verify its 18,000-page account of past atomic activities. The last round of talks — in December 2008, weeks before President Barack Obama moved into the White House — made little apparent progress.

Analysts speculated that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il was holding out for talks with Obama. But in forming its North Korea policy, the fledgling Obama administration has made it clear it will work through the six-party process.

The rocket launch scheduled for April 4-8, at a time when Pyongyang has custody of two American reporters detained March 17 at North Korea's border with China, could provide the opening North Korea needs to force direct talks with Washington, analysts said.

"The timing couldn't be better for North Korea. It strengthens the North's bargaining position with the U.S. in dealing with the nuclear issue. They can try to link these two issues in some way," said Daniel Pinkston of the International Crisis Group.

Associated Press writers Hyung-jin Kim and Kwang-tae Kim contributed to this report.
Click to read the rest of the article