Jennifer Rubin’s Questions for Obama

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obama-debate-questions/2012/09/27/cf08656e-0890-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_blog.html

 

If Iran is much closer to getting a bomb than when you took office, isn’t your Iran policy a failure?

After insisting on a settlement freeze and showing more daylight between the United States and Israel, there are no bilateral talks ongoing, and the Palestinian Authority has gone to the United Nations for a unilateral declaration. So isn’t your approach to the peace process a failure? And why is it you haven’t cut off U.S. aid to the Fatah-Hamas government?

China is more aggressive in Asia and more repressive internally than four years ago, so isn’t your China policy a failure?

You told Elie Wiesel and others at the Holocaust remembrance ceremony that you would do everything possible to help the Syrians, but 20,000 are dead and Assad is still in power, so isn’t your Syria policy a failure?

After Sept. 11, 2001, there were no terrorist attacks on the United States, but during your administration there have been the jihad-inspired Fort Hood massacre and the killing of four Americans in Libya, so isn’t your anti-terror record worse than Bush’s?

A new book documents “the Obama administration’s failed effort to negotiate terms for the long-planned-for stay-behind military force” and accuses you of failing to “engage in effective personal diplomacy at crunch time” and your administration of engaging in “wild over-confidence” and “paralyzed by infighting and poisonous civil-military relations.” Wasn’t the inability to negotiate a new status of forces agreement another significant failure on your part?

Then there is domestic policy. Here, aides should be preparing Obama for these sorts of queries:

Why is the recovery under your presidency worse than any other recovery since WWII?

You had big majorities in the Congress for the first two years, yet you did not pursue immigration reform, entitlement reform or tax reform. Why?

The public, by significant majorities, doesn’t like your health-care reform, Congressional Budget Office updates show it does not adhere to your promise not to add “one dime” to the deficit, and the CBO also reports that some 6 million Americans, including those making well below $200,000, will be hit by the statute’s tax, so why shouldn’t the statute be changed or repealed?

If you can decide not to enforce all of our immigration laws or amend the welfare work laws without Congress, why couldn’t a President Romney decide not to enforce Obamacare or parts of the IRS code?

The Associated Press reports: “A survey of U.S. chief executives shows a sharp drop in the number of large companies that plan to add jobs or hire more workers. . . . CEOs are worried about the impact of budget cuts and tax increases that are set to take effect at the start of next year.” Was it a mistake not to take up Congress’s offer to deal with the fiscal cliff earlier in the year?

In 2010 you agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts when the economy was growing more than it is now. If tax hikes are anti-stimulative, why not extend the cuts again?

'"The 5-minute ENEGY Blog: OIL PRICE 'MYSTERY'"

 

Read this if you want to understand how oil is priced …

http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/aca17109-d957-4ea5-94d4-3c061b3cf723 

“Today, private sector major oil companies no longer control very much of the world’s oil production.    Many majors like Mobil and Texaco no longer even exist.  Aramco is controlled by the Saudi government.  An estimated 85% of the world’s reserves are now controlled by governments.  And, more directly applicable to oil pricing, oil prices are now determined by an open market exchange, the NYMEX.

So next time you hear about Congressional hearings, or a pin-headed commentator railing against Big Oil raising prices think “85% of the world’s reserves are controlled by governments and the price is set by the market via NYMEX” and you will know all that’s needed.  Using a major oil company as a whipping boy for price increases is about thirty years out of date. “

In Charlotte, Dems raise a prayer to Big Government

From a blog  - Washington Examiner

Democrats, Republicans and God …

 

Sometimes," Paul Ryan said last Wednesday night in Tampa, Fla., "even presidents need reminding that our rights come from nature and God, not from government."

President Obama sure could have used some of that reminding before he first signed off on the Democratic Party's 2012 platform. The Democrats eliminated any reference to God in the initial version of their official policy document. The Almighty was only restored late Wednesday after unfavorable media coverage. It came in a chaotic, controversial, and clearly undemocratic floor vote that was a last-minute effort to control public relations damage. (The vote also restored language confirming Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.) Both the dissension and the original omission are unsurprising, given how much the Democratic Party has changed in the last ten years.

In 2000, Gallup asked respondents from each party how often they went to church. Thirty-three percent of Republicans and Democrats said they attended church services weekly. Only 33 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of Democrats said they seldom or never attended.

Fast-forward to the same Gallup poll in 2011. Republican church attendance is actually up, with 40 percent attending services weekly. Democratic weekly attendance is slightly down, to 27 percent. But the percentage of Democrats who never attend church has skyrocketed. The majority of Democrats, 52 percent, told Gallup they never go to church.

Even so, the spiritual needs of non-churchgoing Democrats did not disappear into the ether. Like all humans, they still have an innate need to belong to a larger group, to submit to a higher purpose.

Hence the video that kicked off the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday, which included the line "government is the only thing we all belong to." After Mitt Romney immediately tweeted out a response, "We don't belong to government, the government belongs to us," the Obama campaign tried to disavow all knowledge of the video, claiming it was created and produced by the Charlotte host committee, not the Obama campaign or the Democratic National Committee.

But the damage was already done. The video was clearly produced by Democrats, for Democrats, and it is a perfect representation of the party's increasingly secular worldview.

If our rights come from government, not God, then government can always redefine them. As Cass Sunstein wrote in his book "The Second Bill of Rights," "Even the people who most loudly denounce government interference depend on it every day. Their own rights do not come from minimizing government, but are a product of government."

Or, as Obama put it more pithily, when lamenting small-business owners' reluctance to pay higher taxes, "You didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."