" This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.” - The President's own words are damning

Krauthammer is spot-on especially on this issue.

The unmitigated gall of this fool in the White House to brag to RUSSIA about what he will be able to do after he gets re-elected....it is a telling moment and speaks to his complete lack of character and honor as he says one thing to our "rivals" and another to those he serves, the citizens of the United States.

He needs to be sent on a permanent vacation and is unworthy to hold the office of President. Vote this incompetent poser out of office.


The ‘flexibility’ doctrine
By Charles Krauthammer,
March 29 - The Washington Post

“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [Vladimir Putin] to give me space. .... This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

— Barack Obama to Dmitry Medvedev, open mike, March 26

You don’t often hear an American president secretly (he thinks) assuring foreign leaders that concessions are coming their way, but they must wait because he’s seeking reelection and he dares not tell his own people.

Not at all, spun a White House aide in major gaffe-control mode. The president was merely explaining that arms control is too complicated to be dealt with in a year in which both Russia and the United States hold presidential elections.

Rubbish. First of all, to speak of Russian elections in the same breath as ours is a travesty. Theirs was a rigged, predetermined farce. Putin ruled before. Putin rules after.

Obama spoke of the difficulties of the Russian presidential “transition.” What transition? It’s a joke. It had no effect on Putin’s ability to negotiate anything.

As for the U.S. election, the problem is not that the issue is too complicated but that if people knew Obama’s intentions of flexibly caving on missile defense, they might think twice about giving him a second term.

After all, what is Obama doing negotiating on missile defense in the first place? We have no obligation to do so. The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, a relic of the Cold War, died in 2002.

We have an unmatched technological lead in this area. It’s a priceless strategic advantage that for three decades Russia has been trying to get us to yield. Why give any of it away?

To placate Putin, Obama had already in 2009 abruptly canceled the missile-defense system the Poles and Czechs had agreed to host in defiance of Russian threats. Why give away more?

It’s unfathomable. In trying to clean up the gaffe, Obama emphasized his intent to “reduce nuclear stockpiles” and “reduce reliance on nuclear weapons.” In which case, he should want to augment missile defenses, not weaken, dismantle or bargain them away. The fewer nukes you have for deterrence, the more you need nuclear defenses. If your professed goal is nuclear disarmament, as is Obama’s, eliminating defenses is completely illogical.

Nonetheless, Obama is telling the Russians not to worry, that once past “my last election” and no longer subject to any electoral accountability, he’ll show “more flexibility” on missile defense. It’s yet another accommodation to advance his cherished Russia “reset” policy.

Why? Hasn’t reset been failure enough?

Let’s do the accounting. In addition to canceling the Polish/Czech missile-defense system, Obama gave the Russians accession to the World Trade Organization, signed a START Treaty that they need and we don’t (their weapons are obsolete and deteriorating rapidly), and turned a scandalously blind eye to their violations of human rights and dismantling of democracy. Obama even gave Putin a congratulatory call for winning his phony election.

In return? Russia consistently watered down or obstructed sanctions on Iran, completed Iran’s nuclear reactor at Bushehr, provides to this day Bashar al-Assad with huge arms shipments used to massacre his own people (while rebuilding the Soviet-era naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus), conducted a virulently anti-American presidential campaign on behalf of Putin, pressured Eastern Europe and threatened Georgia.

On which of “all these issues” — Syria, Iran, Eastern Europe, Georgia, human rights — is Obama ready to offer Putin yet more flexibility as soon as he gets past his last election? Where else will he show U.S. adversaries more flexibility? Yet more aid to North Korea? More weakening of tough Senate sanctions against Iran?

Can you imagine the kind of pressure a reelected Obama will put on Israel, the kind of anxiety he will induce from Georgia to the Persian Gulf, the nervousness among our most loyal East European friends who, having been left out on a limb by Obama once before, are now wondering what new flexibility Obama will show Putin — the man who famously proclaimed that the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century was Russia’s loss of its Soviet empire?

They don’t know. We don’t know. We didn’t even know this was coming — until the mike was left open. Only Putin was to know. “I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” Medvedev assured Obama.

Added Medvedev: “I stand with you.” A nice endorsement from Putin’s puppet, enough to chill friends and allies, democrats and dissidents, all over the world.

A picture paints a thousand words....

Obama to the Russians, " After My Election I Have More Flexibility.."- REALLY ?? I don't think so...you will not be getting reelected.

This is one of the BEST reasons why NO ONE should want to reelect the idiot who is keeping the seat warm at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

He tells the Russians, " After My Election I Have More Flexibility.."-

REALLY ?

Really ??? Are you f%^king kidding me ? Why not just hand over all the secret info they want why you're at it ?? The Russians are not someone we want to be loosy-goosy with especially as they don't want us to maintain a tough defense....we would like to work with them but first and foremost is the defense of our nation and our allies in the West. Sending signals like this to Putin is NOT what our President should be doing.

I don't want to give OBAMA the "flexibility" he'll have after getting reelected as he will have NO ACCOUNTABILITY to anyone.

This is a Prima Faci case of why he SHOULD NOT BE REELECTED.

What happened to " Protect, preserve and defend the Constitution of the United States ??" His statement speaks to someone who has no care what he does once he is reelected....this is dangerous for anyone who believes in our country.

I have said it before, and I will say it now -

OMG - Obama MUST GO. Vote this idiot out of office. Really.


President Obama Asks Medvedev for ‘Space’ on Missile Defense — "After My Election I Have More Flexibility" - ABC NEWS

SEOUL, South Korea — At the tail end of his 90 minute meeting with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev Monday, President Obama said that he would have “more flexibility” to deal with controversial issues such as missile defense, but incoming Russian President Vladimir Putin needs to give him “space.”

The exchange was picked up by microphones as reporters were let into the room for remarks by the two leaders.

The exchange:

President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.

President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…

President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

When asked to explain what President Obama meant, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications Ben Rhodes told ABC News that there is room for the U.S. and Russia to reach an accommodation, but “there is a lot of rhetoric around this issue — there always is — in both countries.

A senior administration official tells ABC News: “this is a political year in which the Russians just had an election, we’re about to have a presidential and congressional elections — this is not the kind of year in which we’re going to resolve incredibly complicated issue like this. So there’s an advantage to pulling back and letting the technical experts work on this as the president has been saying.”

-Jake Tapper

"Then it's your problem.." - Doctors who are retiring see Obamacare as a losing strategy for healthcare

Obamacare will cost double what was forecast and it is highly likely that Obama and his cohorts in the Democratic Congress knew this when they jammed it through on the American people.

Throwing money at an issue is NOT a solution.

Here is a more informed POV. The Supreme Court needs to reverse this travesty. We have the best healthcare system in the world and subjecting to one person's political views is wrong. There is need for improvement but this will be the ruin of the superior care we all recieve.

ObamaCare Still a Disaster -- No Matter How the Supreme Court Decides
By Larry Elder

"I am a refugee," my anesthesiologist told me after I had awakened from my third surgery in 12 years — one to repair a muscle tear in my left shoulder and two for the same disc in my lower back. "I am part of the British 'brain drain' of the late '60s. Doctors could not make any money. So I left." Britain's loss, my gain. The same surgery 12 years ago required a two-day stay in a hospital. Last week, after a two-hour surgery, I left the same day as an outpatient.

But under ObamaCare, we can expect a loss of talent and a decline in quality of care. Thousands of us, the doctor explained, abandoned England to practice medicine in America. "So, how's this?" my doctor said. "I left the U.K. to get away from the government telling me how to practice, what to charge — and now we are getting the same thing. ObamaCare stinks, and the people will regret it. What happened to the docs there will happen here."

Great Britain began practicing socialized medicine through the taxpayer-funded National Health Services in 1948. And indeed, one of the first U.K. studies on the emigration of their native-born physicians, "British Doctors at Home and Abroad," published in 1964, noted that, beginning in the 1950s, their docs were leaving for "high-income" countries at an alarming rate: "Many of them stressed the wider field of work they could undertake in general practice abroad and criticized the limited role of the general practitioner in England." And nearly half a century later, Britain's "brain drain" continues.

Medical advances require research and development. And as much as government spends on health care and medical research, the private sector spends much more. But ObamaCare places a tax on medical equipment manufacturers, to raise $20 billion for the federal coffers when it goes into full effect in 2013. As a result, some medical device manufacturers are already closing up shop or downsizing to reflect lower profits under ObamaCare. Some canceled plans for new U.S. plants, looking to other parts of the world. Many manufacturers have already announced significant layoffs, and most also look to other alternatives, including cutting research and development, and passing along the tax's costs to the patients.

In addition to the excise tax on medical device manufacturers, ObamaCare imposes many more taxes, including the following: an individual mandate excise tax for adults who don't purchase "qualifying" health insurance; an employer mandate tax for those companies who don't offer health coverage; and a surtax on investment income — making the rate as high as 43.4 percent on gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents and passive income for families making more than $250,000. Given this, will we see the same private-sector investments in the health care field, as ObamaCare imposes ever more regulations designed at increasing "accessibility" and "controlling costs"?

What about costs?

Obama promised that ObamaCare would "bend the cost curve" down. The Congressional Budget Office just released new figures on the 10-year cost of ObamaCare. Starting in 2010, government began taxing for ObamaCare to build up revenues. So for the first four years, ObamaCare takes in tax money but does not start spending in any significant amount until 2014. This was a tactic designed to make ObamaCare seem more "affordable."

But even with this gimmick, the CBO just doubled its original projections for the cost of ObamaCare. Now, the CBO pegs the cost to taxpayers at $1.76 trillion over the next decade. And, critics point out, this price tag is only for the cost of insurance subsidies, Medicaid and CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program). It doesn't include implementation or other costs, which will likely send the taxpayers' bill soaring past $2 trillion.

Obama said his plan would save American families $2,500 a year on their insurance premiums. The new CBO report says premiums will rise 10 to 13 percent, and that up to 20 million people could lose their employer-provided health insurance every year from 2019 to 2022, a sharp revisal of its previous estimate of up to 3 million.

Oh, it all seems so lovely on paper, doesn't it?

Sen. Obama said that if he were "starting from scratch," he'd have a single-payer system. This is what they have in Canada. But when a high-ranking member of the Canadian government — and proponent of the Canadian health care system — needed surgery, he did not stay home. After having his 2010 heart surgery performed in Miami, Canadian Premier Danny Williams told reporters: "This was my heart, my choice, and my health. I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics."

Consider what the then-incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association said about their single-payer health care system: "(Our) system is imploding." Consider what the outgoing president said: "Competition should be welcomed, not feared."

My doctor remains cheerful. "I retire in a few years," he said. "Then it's your problem."

Larry Elder is a best-selling author and radio talk-show host.

www.LarryElder.com.

44% of the USMC NCOs view the President as a failure - Marine Corps Times

An interesting cover story in the MARINE CORPS TIMES.....Very Interesting based on how things are going politically....Obama is lining up the military for major cuts and that is NOT sitting well with the troops.

Here is a clip of what the article says:

Sgt. Gary Stein might be saying things about President Obama that a lot of Marines think, but some are saying he took it too far.

Stein has come under fire for stating on Facebook that he wouldn’t follow certain orders given by his commander in chief. And Marines say Stein’s not alone in his disapproval. More anti-Obama talk is being heard in the workplace and new Military Times poll data shows declining approval among military service members for the president’s job as commander in chief.

The Marine Corps depends its chain of command structure, especially in a time of war. Some Marines say Stein and other vocal Marines like him are undermining that system.

Two Commenters responded to the article in unique fashion -

One posted this -

" That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” - Declaration of independence

Many feel that things have gotten worse for personal liberties under Obama, and that drives this sentiment...I understand and see the point this reader makes especially when the troops and the USMC pays for our liberty by sacrificing their lives.


The 2nd one posted this -

UCMJ Article 88: “Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Funny but the article focuses on NCOs not commissioned officers....still having public dissent with the chain of command is problematic.

I understand and agree with the 44% of the USMC NCOs as the President is a failure and a disgrace. He & his wife spent their adult lives dumping on the military and now "act" supportive. Obama has spent billions on the stimulus fiasco which will now mean drastic cuts in the defense department.

You ask why Marines are upset ? Colonel Jessup stated it eloquently in " A Few Good Men ":

" You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use them as the backbone of a life trying to defend something. You use them as a punchline.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.."

Obama asks the military to go through hell for the country and then guts it with the budget pen when it suits him politically. The military vote has been historically supportive of the GOP and based on the President's failures to do the job, Marines are not happy. They strive for excellence and the President is the king of mediocrity.

I'll stand with the USMC as I served side by side with them in Iraq and other difficult places.....As a Seabee, I saw the USMC at their best. The idiot in the Oval Office is a fraud, failure and it shows.

As for the USMC, they are respected by all who know them.....As someone once said, No Better Friend, No worse enemy.

SEMPER FI.

FED JUDGE - "Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void"

AWWWW - The White House gets another message from the Judiciary that YOU CANNOT compel people to purchase a commercial product they don't want to buy....Basically, OBAMACARE is UNCONSTITUTIONAL......Game Over OBOTS.....

In ruling against President Obama‘s health care law, federal Judge Roger Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s own position from the 2008 campaign against him, arguing that there are other ways to tackle health care short of requiring every American to purchase insurance.

“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.


You were stupid to force this stuff on the American public with PELOSI saying things like " We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it.." ARE YOU F^&king kidding me???? What rational person could support any law that the lawmakers have not reviewed the law before it is passed????

I am glad that the "checks & balances" worked......awesome news.

Now, how long before this rulling is carried over to the State of Massachusetts and the State Law gets over turned also.......How's that " Hope & Changey thing" working for you now ????


US judge deals new blow to Obama health reform
By Lucile Malandain (AFP) 01/31/11

WASHINGTON — A second US federal judge Monday declared President Barack Obama's health care law unconstitutional, sparking a fierce new showdown with Republicans who vow to repeal the historic reform act.

The Obama administration immediately pledged to appeal and branded the ruling by a Florida judge as an "outlier" from the judicial mainstream, warning that health care costs would soar if it was allowed to stand.

But Republicans crowed that the ruling was one step closer to the outright repeal of a law that has been a Democratic dream for decades but that conservatives say will explode the deficit and kill jobs.

US District Judge Roger Vinson said a key provision of the law known as the "individual mandate" exceeds Congress's regulatory powers by requiring Americans to either purchase health insurance by 2014 or pay a fine.

"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void," Vinson said in his ruling, the latest step of a twisting legal battle likely to end up in the US Supreme Court.

"This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications."

Vinson agreed with governors and attorneys general from 26 US states that consider the provision unconstitutional.

But the Justice Department quickly said it would appeal Vinson's ruling, and consider all options -- including a stay of the verdict pending appeal -- to ensure the health care law can go into force.

The health care law, which passed last year, is the most sweeping piece of social legislation since the 1960s, reins in insurance company abuses and brings America as close as it has ever been to universal coverage.

"Today's ruling... is a plain case of judicial overreaching," Stephanie Cutter, a senior political assistant to Obama, said in a White House blog post.

"The judge's decision puts all of the new benefits, cost savings and patient protections that were included in the law at risk."

In December, Judge Henry Hudson of the Eastern District Court in Richmond, Virginia, found that the mandate usurps federal authority and violates the Commerce Clause, a key component of the US Constitution.

Some 12 federal judges have already struck down challenges to the law, and two have upheld the legislation.

Republicans pounced on the latest ruling, seeking fuel for their campaign to overturn the reform -- a vain hope for now, as Obama could wield a presidential veto in the unlikely event a repeal law cleared Congress.

Senate Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said the court's decision proved the health care law was a "massive overreach" and exceeded congressional authority.

"We should repeal this health spending bill and replace it with commonsense reforms that will actually lower costs, prevent unsustainable entitlement promises and make it easier for employers to start hiring again," he added.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus called the ruling a "major victory for the American people and job-creators all across the country."

Obama's Republican foes have claimed the health care law includes rationing for end of life care, would add to the massive deficit and will kill jobs as employers struggle to pay for what they say will be rising premiums.

The new Republican-led House of Representatives has already voted to repeal the health reform law, which reins in insurance firms and seeks to offer near-universal care to Americans for the first time.

Opinion polls have found the US public deeply divided over the health law, with roughly one in five in favor of outright repeal and the rest divided between strengthening the law and rolling back parts of it.

Copyright © 2011 AFP.