Watch on You Tube

This is the YouTube video that has generated a major buzz, allegedly showing Sarah Palin reading crib notes written on the palm of her hand.

If any techies can critique this video for us by giving us your opinion on whether or not you think it is authentic, please feel free to weigh in with your opnions in the comments section.

Never a dull minute in politics, is there? Oh, wait, I almost forgot. With the exception of Obamas speeches, when their are a multitude of dull moments.

~~John Cronin~~

Those of us who follow politics on a daily basis do so for a variety of reasons.  It is always interesting, sometimes fun, we get to make friends who are on the same page as we are and who are kindred spirits.

Sometimes it is deadly serious.  In the article I reposted from the excellent COMMENTARY MAGAZINE,  Rick Richman writes about the paper produced by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the very possible scenario it projects for the dangerous situation we see with a nuclear armed totalitarian regime in Iran and it’s threat to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

~~John Cronin~~

By: Rick Richman

In a significant paper at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Jeffrey White and Loring White discuss the results of war games on the Iranian nuclear program conducted by three think tanks — at Harvard, Tel Aviv University, and the Brookings Institute — all of which ended in defeats for the U.S. and Israel. The common results were:

* The United States did not obtain meaningful cooperation from other countries.
* Sanctions did not seem to work.
* The United States was unwilling to use military force or support Israeli   military action even after other measures failed.
* U.S.-Israeli relations deteriorated dramatically.
* Iran continued toward a nuclear weapons capability.

The paper concludes that the U.S. needs to “play” much differently in the coming months if it wants to avoid those results, and time “is running out.”

The signals sent by the State Department since the expiration of Obama’s “deadline” have only reinforced the sense that the administration has no Plan B. On January 12, the department spokesman emphasized that recourse to the “pressure track” would be “a very long process,” starting with discussions of “ideas that any of the [P-5+1] partners have on how we can get Iran to live up its international obligations.” The “discussions” have largely been phone calls, since the administration cannot get the Chinese to send their political director to a meeting.

On Friday, Assistant Secretary P.J. Crowley announced that Under Secretary William Burns had a 90-minute conference call with his P-5+1 “counterparts” that discussed “both the pressure track and the negotiation track; discussed next steps in the process, both in terms of negotiation, took stock of the recent comments by Iran, but also continue to evaluate potential actions on the pressure track as well.” His statement produced this colloquy:

QUESTION: When you said counterparts, did that include the Chinese political director, or was it, in fact, the sous chef at the Embassy? (Laughter) …

QUESTION: Did they — I’m sorry if I missed it, but did they actually agree on any additional sanctions or language regarding –

MR. CROWLEY: That wasn’t the intent of the call. … It’s hard to characterize it other than they had a detailed discussion of where we are in the process and shared ideas on both tracks.

Discussions were supposed to have occurred long before this. On April 22, 2009, Hillary Clinton assured the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that the administration was laying the groundwork for crippling sanctions if engagement failed:

BERMAN: … I can’t get away from the fact that Iran’s efforts to acquire a nuclear weapons capability keep going ahead, and — and that this engagement can’t be so-open-ended that we essentially pass the threshold that we’re seeking to avoid by virtue of the engagement. … Are we pursuing the — the default position, the — the leverage that I think will make the engagement more likely as we deal with key members of the international community and the Security Council?

CLINTON: … As the president said in his inaugural address, we’ll hold out our hand. They have to unclench their fist. But we are also laying the groundwork for the kind of very tough — I think you said crippling — sanctions that might be necessary in the event that our offers are either rejected or the process is inconclusive or unsuccessful.

Nine months past Clinton’s assurance, two months past the “deadline,” it is apparent that no groundwork has been laid. The discussions are just beginning; it will be a “very long process”; the administration is unenthusiastic about pending legislation authorizing “crippling” sanctions.

You don’t have to be part of a Harvard think tank to see where this is headed.

Read More at commentarymagazine.com

We’ve heard the line, it would be on CSPAN.  When Scott Brown was driving his truck around Massachusetts, the Democrats were behind locked doors combining the House and Senate Health Care Bills.  When talk show hosts rolled out the audio of this video from breitbart.tv (see above), all it showed was Obama breaking another campaign promise.  No big deal right?

They say hell knows no fury like a woman scorned, but hell hadn’t heard about public relations at that stage.  In the post-Scott Brown/State of The Union world of politics, the Obama Administration has taken on a new form of Transparency.

The first tactic of the Administration’s ’New Found Transparency’ took place the day after the State of the Union Address.  According to Politico :  “Less than 24 hours before President Barack Obama was to participate in a question-and-answer session with House Republicans at their annual retreat — the White House called Mike Pence’s office with an unexpected request. Could the event be televised?..”  (see Politico).

For anyone interested in watching one of the biggest game changers in 2010, take a view at this.

The self-inviting Obama turned into the Republican Party crasher, far beyond the likes of Tareq and Michaele Salahi.  Obama brought in the cameras, changed the focus, and forced his critics to accept his terms, and had it televised!

When Obama sat down with Katie Couric on the Superbowl pre-game show on CBS, Obama claimed he would host a televised meeting with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders on health care reform (see Politico).  Let me be the first to speculate, I don’t think he told any of the Republican congressional leaders about this plan.  If am I right, then this tactic is not transparency, this is ‘Malicious Transparency’.

How does forcing the agenda upon the Republican Party, picking the setting, and televising it ever got to be considered transparency?  It is far closer to a show trial or a court involving a hopping marsupial from Australia.

Craig Edwards

Ladies and gentlemen, we now know why CBS decided to air the Tim Tebow “Focus on the Family” Super Bowl ad: there really wasn’t that much controversy with it at all.

Abortion was never mentioned directly through the 32-second spot; instead the main focus of the ad was Pam Tebow talking about her difficult pregnancy and how happy she was now that Tim was grown-up and successful.

Did the ad have a pro-life message? Certainly so, but it also wan’t necessarily trying to shove a political agenda down your throat.

Read More at examiner.com

President Barack Obama is planning to host a televised meeting with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders on health care reform.

The Feb. 25 meeting is an attempt to reach across the aisle but not a signal that the president plans to start over, as Republicans have demanded, a White House official said.

“I want to come back [after the Presidents Day congressional recess] and have a large meeting — Republicans and Democrats — to go through, systematically, all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward,” Obama said in an interview with Katie Couric during CBS’s Super Bowl pre-game show Sunday.

Read more at politico.com

FLASHBACK:  The Last Time Obama Meet with Republicans

Prez Obama says that everybody connected with New York City and New York State saying “No” to his hare-brained idea to try KSM & Co. in lower Manhattan makes it “difficult” to have the trial there.

Here’s a more accurate word for it……”Impossible!”

~~John Cronin~~

President Barack Obama acknowledged Sunday that local opposition is likely to nix the administration’s plan to hold the trial for 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York City. “I have not ruled it out,” Obama told Katie Couric of CBS News. “But I think it’s important for us to take into account the practical, logistical issues involved. I mean, if you’ve got a city that is saying ‘no,’ and a police department that’s saying ‘no,’ and a mayor that’s saying ‘no,’ that makes it difficult.”

For further information log goto politico.com

While America sits down to watch Super Bowl XLIV, Rasmussen Reports 26% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing as President, while Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove.  Giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17. Rasmussen added, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That matches the lowest level of overall approval yet measured for this president. Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove.

It’s worth noting, Bush has a 40% approval rating going into the 2006 Mid-Terms, the same election Republicans lost control of the Senate & Congress.

Complete Poll Results at rasmussenreports.com

I have just finished watching CBS’ Katie Couric interview Obama (shown on the pre-game Super Bowl XLIV show), and still Obama pushed Health Care, now urging Republicans “to put their ideas on the table.”  When Couric pressed the topic of jobs, and how too much time was spent on Health Care Reform, Obama went on his stump speech line of how the Stimulus ‘created and saved jobs’.  It seems the folly of his first year in office, and the Scott Brown result meant nothing to him.  It’s full steam ahead for the Obamacare, the question is, will the Democrat majority in both houses follow the conga-line to defeat in November?

Craig Edwards

Was this speech worth paying Palin $100,000 to give?

COMMENTS WELCOME