Isreali settelers are also to blame

Settlers attack police dressed as Arabs | Israel | Jerusalem Post

Most people blame Isreal's military and terrorists from the west bank and the gaza strip. But with this i've found that jewish settlers are also a major problem: details below:

Reports claimed that the police had disguised themselves as Arabs to apprehend Jewish settlers known for attacking Palestinians. They did not describe the specific nature of their outfits, however.

Peleg said the settlers threw stones at the officers and damaged a Palestinian vehicle, while two others attempted to run the police over near a Jewish outpost in the West Bank.

Six people were initially arrested. One was released and the other five were placed under house arrest, he added.

So what does this mean? well for one, Arabs aren't always the bad guys, that the Jewish settlers are also at fault. So how do we fix this major racist problem (yes racist problem). Well for one, Israel pulling out of the west bank will be unacceptable, since any rockets launched from the west bank would practically ground all international flights from the international airport in Israel, as well as the fact that Jerusalem must stay as a free city to where any of the three religions can visit at will, although on a strict (though a little wide, to prevent bad traffic) path there for Arabs and Jews (Christians are less inclined to attack either side, since we technically are a bridge between the two, but why have favoritism?) to go into the city, international guards in the city to prevent riots from spreading (we might as well make Jerusalem an international city).

How would this work? i'm not sure my self, but it would ensure that no one religion lays claim to the holiest of cities, and prove that sometimes the UN can be of use, no matter how much the charter limits itself. This may seem like a liberal answer to a complicated problem, but i assure you, it's a lot better than people hating eachother.. now to take a blood test to see if there was any PCP in those brownies earlier...

Loaded questions? Of course!

Obama Town Hall Questioners Were Campaign Backers | 44 | washingtonpost.com

Ok, Below i have looked at the roots of many of our five in-person questioners and then disected the question and Obama's answer. ok, please leave a comment for me about this later, i'd appreciate some feedback that isn't fan-mail

• Sergio Salmero

  Salmeron became engaged with the Obama campaign early in 2008, writing on his blog at my.barackobama.com

  This guy is obviously a Barak Supporter, it is unacceptable to pack people who'd give him either questions he'd expect or questions he'd be happy to dance around. However, he asked a health care question:

  I want to find out about health care. In a society, a lot of times we have to step back and ask ourselves if what we're doing in principle, not in practice, is right. And so when we think about health care, I want to know from you if the things like preexisting conditions and preventive medicine, if they are a symptom of what's going on in our health care system, then what is the problem and how do you address it?
  

  Here's the important part (skiping the sob story of his mother's cancer) of Obama's answer:
  

  So this is why any reform of the health care system I think has to address this issue, and to say we are going to allow anybody to get health insurance. And if you've got a preexisting condition you're not going to be excluded but you're going to be able to obtain health insurance. And if you can't obtain it through a private plan then there is going to a public plan that is available in some way to give you insurance, or insurers are obligated to provide you with insurance in some way.
  
  Now that's a principle. What are the details of how we're going to do that? There are a lot of different approaches.
  
  We have seen some progress with the insurance companies where they have said, we are willing to take everybody in, but only if everybody is required to be in. That's the position that they're taking right now. So the idea is you combine a rule that eliminates preexisting condition exclusions with mandatory health insurance, just like auto insurance is mandatory. That's a proposal they've put forward.
  
  Now, that's progress in the sense that they've acknowledged that this preexisting condition situation is a real problem. Whether that ends up being the best mechanism -- during the campaign, I was skeptical of mandates only because my attitude was the reason people don't have health insurance is not because they don't want it, it's because they can't afford it. And if we drive down cost, then people will have it.
  

  Obama hit a point that i personally think is a good idea, which is making (at least partially), the part where eliminating pre-condition arguments. I'd propose something close to a compromise, as genetic cancers, and other genetic conditions are immune to the . and to prevent other problems is that everyone is required to o through a series of tests for any dormant conditions within 2 months of getting insurance. But my point is that it's better to keep it private, rather than force all these firms out of buisness. For the Health Care Industry, which is (mostly) corrupt, put some modest regulations which are needed in our society, as long as we don't get as bad as europe, we're fine.
  
  


• Tom Sawner (you gotta be kidding me, is acorn the one responsible for this guy? well i guess not)
  

  According to Federal Election Commission records, Sawner made a $250 donation to Obama's campaign on Oct. 27, 2008
  Sawner's no stranger to the White House, either; he attended President Bush's Feb. 2008 signing ceremony for that year's economic stimulus package -- another Chamber of Commerce invite. And in April 2008, he even became an anecdote in one of Bush's speeches.

  
  Ok, this one seems to be an acceptable person there, even if he is a supporter of Barrack, he seems down to earth, he is a vet. after all. and his question is a respectable and obviously controversial one, he asked the president:

  could you please help small businesses by allowing, some way, somehow, money we pay to the bank in principle to not count against our income, and put us in the "richest" before we ever seem a dime, and allow us to invest in this huge engine to drive economic recovery?
  (white house transcript)

  A perfectly understandable (if troubled) question, with a perfectly unclear answer. How are you supposed to tax people who may or may not re-invest into their business. Obama took this question up and said he'd try to fix it, but that would only complicate the tax code. the easiest way to make sure he gets taxed less ('cause that is what would happen) is to raise the tax code's definition of 'richest' above a one million a year, rather than lower it to below half of a million a year, putting many small business owners out of that $250 grand cap that Obama has placed on people. Obama put himself into a corner by accepting this question, he either has to keep a promise that got him elected, or choose the lesser of two evils (according to him and his ideology, it's an evil) and choose the economy over his idiotic promises. Obama announced that in his budget (the pig that is likely to be butchered by the congressional democrats) has a capital gains tax elimination (why would you put that in a budget? A budget is what you spend on not what you put a tax cut into, you put tax policies into bills to be passed by senate (the stimulus act should have also been put into many different pieces)
  


• Carlos Del Toro
  

  In 2007, Del Toro stood as a Democratic candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates, but did not win. A supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primaries, he backed Obama against McCain in the general, endorsing him in an Oct. 24, 2008 op-ed in the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star.

  
  This guy is a Vet who isn't acceptable, as he has ties to many people he shouldn't have, giving him a special privilege over many other people
  

  In 2008, he donated $2,750 to Virginia Democratic candidates for office, according to the Center for Responsive Politics; in 2006, he gave $1000 to the campaign of now Sen. Jim Webb (Va.), FEC records show.
  He also has ties to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Small Business Council.

  
  Anyways, ignoring the qualifications, his question follows

  My question is, one of the things that I have experienced over the last four years as a small business trying to do business in the federal procurement business, essentially, as a small engineering company, is the challenge of the bundling of contracts, which has made it increasingly difficult for service-disabled businesses -- all small businesses across the nation -- to compete basically within the federal procurement system. I know that you believe in fair and open competition on a broad basis. I would suggest to you, and my question to you is, will your administration look at this issue and try to unbundle these contracts that make it more competitive for small businesses to work in the federal marketplace?

  This is where Obama's answer scares me... He almost says that any bid that the government is going to do is going to be divvied up and anybody has a products will be able to. If this includes government contractors for the defence sector, we're going to have a lot of problems in our military soon, even though we're going to be modernizing our armed forces to include technology savvy things like robots and special forces computers must be made by the same company to prevent software bugs and problems in the communication.
  



• Linda Bock

  Bock, along with her chapter of the SEIU and her son and daughter, helped campaign and canvass for Obama, she said. After Obama was elected, she wrote in the Landover, Md., 1199 SEIU nurses' newsletter: "Now we have our work cut out for us -to hold our elected officials accountable. And I hope they hold us accountable too. We all have work to do to make the changes needed to restore our reputation, to heal the wounds of war, to repair our earth and regulate its resources; and, to secure our economic future. It will take sacrifice and service. It will take prayer and the grace of God. Now we have hope. We have President-elect Barack Obama. God bless America."

  
  I'm not sure what t say about this one, she doesn't have any outstanding good qualities, nor does she have anything hue against her. her question, wasn't one, i saw no way that could have been a question, all she said was that she HOPES that they can say that not every bruise is worth an E-room treatment. she's probably one of the women who'd mouth 'i love you' in the background at a speech. She isn't even worth the block quote for he 'question'. Obama's response basically said, nurses are in short supply, and that nurses are always going to be part of the process.
  



• Bonnee L. Breese

  Breese has not donated a reportable amount to Obama, according to the FEC. She is a member of the 11,626-person Pennsylvania for Obama page on Facebook.

  This teacher is different from the other supporters, there is no record as to weather she had any part in being an Obama supporter, except on facebook (why do teachers have a facebook anyways? aren't they supposed to be unsocial anyways?) her question is as follows:
  

  Definitions of charter schools and definitions of effective teachers -- how do you plan to define those two categories? And are you willing to have teachers on the platform, in the committees, as a part of developing those plans?

  Is this a question? i mean all she asked was to define and if teachers can be part of the planning. Obama's answer was that schools across the country are experimenting on our children (ok, YOUR children)! Oama adresses the problem, which is that the curiculum in many public schools is not to give students intrest in the areas everyone needs to be versed in, (math, science, history, ect.) but that it's all based on grades. That is one thing that the president can't do, and the Teacher's Union needs to loosen it's grip on it's teachers, to allow teachers to be good teachers, and to make them spark intrest into their student's studies, rather than give grades out, bring back the museaum trips! (my high school basicly outlawed all out-of-school trips, making school even more dreary than it already was)
  

As everyone knows, Thursday's Town Hall Questioners were his allies and friends. And all of the questions he was asked were quite soft and indirect. I've addressed my concerns with each and every one of in person questioners, so i'll allow you to make judgement

Iran now a nulear power!

Early Saturday morning, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian 'president', has declared that Iran is now a nuclear and space power. it became a 'space power' when it launched into orbit a research satellite early February. He admitted that if we directly intervened in his space and nuclear programs then it would not have been possible. Personally,if i was in power of any government, i would have rallied to directly intervened to prevent Iranian control. Now it is too late, Iran is a nuclear power capable of hitting both Israel and most of the western world.

More comments in his speech was a reassurance that the peaceful actions of the UN and Americans were all in vain. What we need to do now is to literally invade Iran and destroy these weapons (sorry i mean dispose), and imprison anyone who were essential in making the nuclear bombs and the ballistic missile technology. At our current power, we can invade Iran on three sides. and since most of the actual nuclear sites are closer to Iraq it would be much easier to invade primarily through iraq.

Overall we would keep most of the current infrastructure in place (since it is mostly democratic) but slightly re-write their constitution to guarantee opposition parties a voice. The main difference of many other nations is the right to free speech, and almost no one other than America (and possibly Israel) has that basic right to question the government, if only people had the free speech that we do, then civil wars and general populous discontent would be at a much lower level. Not to mention that everywhere would be a more conservative place full of debates on what the consequences are of any 'change' that may happen

RIA Novosti - World - Iranian president declares his country a space and nuclear power

Obama Denies 'Russian Deal'

The past few days I have seen many reports on a suggested missile defence plan for former soviet states to be scrapped to gather support for Russia to pressure Iran to prevent them from getting a nuclear bomb. Of course this is an INSANE move. Obama, now proving to be anti-Israel despite the support that many people had for it's right to exist which Hamas, the ruling party in Gaza, denies. Personally i believe we should sell this pure defensive weapon, a solid missile which destroys any missile completely (though not tested on a nuclear missile would undoubtedly produce the same results temporaraly until the many nations confinsate nuclear materials). All we need to do is set up these defence systems, which are operational (see the show future weapons for the proof that they are tried and true methods of shooting down rockets).

Now, Obama claims that he does not think that the reports were correct for what was inside the letter. This contradicts what the Russian president has said, claiming to be unwilling to 'hale' when it comes to issues on Iran. Why is that? Wouldn't Russia have everything to gain from a politically destroyed Iran as it has from Iraq (such as an increased oil price?). The answer is no, Russia, a now (re)growing power in europe/asia, is in need of allies, strong allies who place themselves against the US and the western civilized world. The biggest enemies of ours come from a extremist (also Islamic) group of terrorist organizations which also run the government of various countries. The most prominent of these is Iran, who's influence has exponentally grown in the area since the fall of Sadam Hussien's Dictatorship.

So why shouldn't we start towards a new cold war? the Russians are covertly setting it's trap, while we (sorry, I mean Obama) ignore what CIA reports about growing Russian power. What we need to do now is to head them off and place these proven and effective anti-ballistic missiles in key locations like Iraq, Iran and our NATO ally's territories before it is too late.

Below is a Politico Video to Obama's conference with Prime Minister Brown (Prime minister of Great Britain) where he talks about what he meant, but he also talks A LOT about the economy.

Housing crisis takes a new step downward

Today, March 3rd, January reports from the NAR of home sales DROPPED 7.7% to 80.4, the lowest since 2001, where pending home sales went down 6.4%. This was double what economists were predicting. But what are we supposed to do about this? Well, Obama and congress is planning to buy mortgages from bad banks based on the troubled assets relief program (the abandoned TARP program that originally was conceived by Geitner in the last quarter of last year). So what should we do? wait? No, what we need to do is A. stop trying to buy off these mortgages which people don't want, let the fail if the people took out loans they 1, didn't know what would happen if they took out these loans, or 2, knew what would happen and took it out anyways. The next step we should do is encourage people to buy up foreclosed homes and fix them up. Why do i sugest that? Because many people know that this is a VERY profitable trade and not only does it improve the forclosed home's value, it gets rid of the problems of the houses AROUND the now previously foreclosed houses.

So how do we get around doing this? How about we cut the property taxes, if we get rid of the tax i'm sure we'll save thousands on every home. This would also reduce the crime rate as many foreclosed homes are broken into (one funny story where a foreclosed house was broken into and a party broke out, was heard last week). As long as there are people wanting to buy (a massive amount of people who buy the foreclosed houses and re-sell them are sure to find other people who want to buy them, like their workers?) this 'bubble' will be stable, and not only that but this would get 'credit' flowing again, as the housing crisis was the cause of the credit freeze. This is essentially a cure-all for all of the root problems of the current economic climate. Now that is climate change

Taxes just don't count for Obama

On March 2ed, while the north east is buried under at least a half foot of snow, Barrack Obama has yet another person in his nominees that has had tax paying problems. Former Dallas Mayor Ron Kirk failed to pay almost $10,000 in back taxes, on basketball tickets (that's a lot of games to see), of course this guy is supposed to be the TRADE representative nominee. Though this is the fifth time this has happened, the white house STILL wants this man to be in. This is after the problems of Geitner, Dachle, Nancy Killefer (for a token position), Hilda Solis (Secretary of Labor), and of course other non-tax-related problems. This man doesn't get it that paying taxes are 'patriotic' and that it's also something you want to keep clear in case

Let's compare the stumbling fool George Bush to President Obama. Bush's first term breed only one problem with his nominees. Bush's one problem was Linda Chavez, Nominee for Labor Secretary (now a columnist for Townhall.com), who 'employed' an illegal Guatemalan immigrant by giving her a house and money to live in. Quite unbefitting for a labor secretary. Of course low and behold Tom Dachle provided a lot of criticism calling it insane for a labor secretary to, knowingly or not, hire an illegal immigrant, though I still believe that what the record for everyone else during his first term.

In comparison, Bush's appointments were a nothing compared to what Obama's appointments have looked liked. Bill Richardson withdrew himself because he was honorable and stepped down when some vague connections to a federal investigation was shown. Judd Greg removed his name just because party lines didn't stretch that far left for him. And of course Hillary who, though technically not eligible nor was she without fault, through her husband's charity. And of course there are the big four (now five) who have had their tax problems. Geitner didn't pay almost $35,000 in self-employment taxes as he was being confirmed as treasury secretary. Tom Dachle, who was paid almost 16 million for listening to health care lobbyists, as well as some, failed back tax records. Hilda Solis who faced questions on her husband’s business taxes, as well as Nancy Killefer who withdrew over some vague tax issues.

Why do I bring this up? Well for one to point out that though bush was an idiot when it came to many things, at least he controlled himself when he tried to pick friends and enemies for his cabinet positions, making sure that his bill was clean as far as he could figure while Obama made mistakes that are beyond amateur and showed just how unprepared he was for this office.