UNREAL … Obama Secretary of State Kerry Warns Israel Could Become ‘An Apartheid State’

The Obama Administration once again treating an American ally badly … I guess this is one way of making Hillary Clinton look good.

The Daily Beast is reporting that Sec. of State John Kerry said during a closed door meeting of the Trilateral Commission on Friday that if Israel doesn’t make peace soon, it could become ‘an apartheid state,’ like the old South Africa. That’s the way John Kerry, piss off one of America’s greatest allies, that will win them over.  Hey Kerry, I must have missed which one want to eradicate Israeli’s? And who did Fatah just embrace last week … can you say Hamas. This is unbecoming of  a Secretary of State and usually a president would be asking for a resignation, but not when they are doing Obama’s foreign policy bidding.

So Barack, then I told them if they do not accept our all or nothing peace solution, Israel could become ‘An Apartheid State’.
I see John, you do realize that was not meant to be repeated publicly, right?

The secretary of state said that if Israel doesn’t make peace soon, it could become ‘an apartheid state,’ like the old South Africa. Jewish leaders are fuming over the comparison.

If there’s no two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict soon, Israel risks becoming “an apartheid state,” Secretary of State John Kerry told a room of influential world leaders in a closed-door meeting Friday.

Senior American officials have rarely, if ever, used the term “apartheid” in reference to Israel, and President Obama has previously rejected the idea that the word should apply to the Jewish state. Kerry’s use of the loaded term is already rankling Jewish leaders in America—and it could attract unwanted attention in Israel, as well.

It wasn’t the only controversial comment on the Middle East that Kerry made during his remarks to the Trilateral Commission, a recording of which was obtained by The Daily Beast. Kerry also repeated his warning that a failure of Middle East peace talks could lead to a resumption of Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens. He suggested that a change in either the Israeli or Palestinian leadership could make achieving a peace deal more feasible. He lashed out against Israeli settlement-building. And Kerry said that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders share the blame for the current impasse in the talks.

Dazed & Confused … Even Hillary Clinton is Challenged to Come Up with Her Accomplsihments

Imagine being on a job interview and asked about your accomplishments to be considered for the job and you got nothing …

Thus was the case for Hillary Clinton when Thomas Friedman asked her what do you see as your biggest accomplishment on the job as stated by Salon political writer Steve Kornacki to the MSNBC Hardball audience. Hoe is it possible that even Hillary Clinton herself was “flummoxed” when asked about her accomplishments?

“So Joan, you know, this isn’t just a case of State Department spokesperson being caught off guard one day. This is something that sounds like Hillary herself has not fully come up with a way to articulate. Republicans clearly think this is something they can hit her with in 2016.”

Hmm, how’s it going in Syria, Libya, North Korea, Iran or Russia? Maybe Hillary should have said the Russian reset button, the powder keg that now is the Middle East or Benghazi … but I guess what difference does it make.

 Hillary Clinton “Flummoxed” When Questioned About Accomplishments

State Department spokeswoman can’t name Hillary Clinton’s diplomatic achievements … and neither can Hillary Clinton!

State Department Press Secretary Jen Psaki was flummoxed, too, when asked about a 2010 State Department Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) that summarized then-Secretary Clinton’s goals and accomplishments.

‘Can you, off the top of your head, identify one tangible achievement that … resulted from the last QDDR?’ asked an Associated Press reporter during the daily briefing.

‘I am certain that those who were here at the time, who worked hard on that effort, could point out one,’ Psaki replied through a forced smile.

‘I’m sure there are a range of things that were put into place that I’m not even aware of,’ she offered moments later.

‘I won’t hold my breath,’ the reporter shot back

Rasmussen Poll Shows Many Americans Have No Concept of Free Speech … 55% Favor Government Oversight of Political Ads & Candidates’ Comments

ARE YOU INSANE … DID ANYONE TAKING THIS POLL UNDERSTAND WHAT FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS? DO YOU WANT TYRANNY?

FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE US CONSTITUTION

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

An alarming 55% if likely voters in a recent Rasmussen poll stated, “they believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy.” It gets better, they also wanted to punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. OK FOLKS … HAVE YOU COMPLETELY LOST YOUR MINDS!!! You do realize that “Freedom of Speech” is intended to prevent a tyrannical government from trampling the speech, opinions and comments of ab individuals right? I could care less what party was in power, I would never want a government to control campaign speech. It is up to the voter to inform yourself as to whether some one is fabricating the truth. If that is too difficult, don’t vote.

So 55% of clueless voters would want whatever political party was in power to review and determine whether a political ad was truthful or not? Who could see anything going wrong with that because of course political parties are not partisan of course. The American Spectator has an idea, just create more government bureaucracy and a  new agency, call it the Ministry of Political Truth, to oversee this brave new government power. Oh wait, you don’t want the government agency to do it, how about the media?

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments this week in a case aimed at overturning an Ohio law that makes it a crime to make false statements in a political campaign. But most voters favor government policing of the truthfulness of campaign ads and statements.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy and punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 31% oppose such government oversight. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Presently we have a president in Barack Obama who thumbs his nose at the US Constitution, you would actually give him the power to control political speech for campaign speech, REALLY?  WAKE UP AMERICA, many brave souls fought and died to bring freedoms and independence to the colonies and form a United States. Act like it!

Rasmussen: 61% of Americans Support the XL Keystone Pipeline as Obama Panders to Enviro-Wackos and Delays Decision Until After 2014 Midterm Elections

WHO IS OUT OF TOUCH WITH AMERICA AND PANDERS TO AN EXTREMIST MINORITY FOR POLITICAL REASONS?

A recent Rasmussen poll has support for the XL Keystone Pipeline at all time highs. Sixty-one percent of Americans now support the building of the oil pipeline from Canada to Texas, while only 27% are opposed. Also, 62% of likely voters also say that the pipeline is good for the economy. However, the anti-fossil fuel Obama would rather pander to the environmental wacko minority and continues to dither and delay the decision on the construction. Just last week Barack Obama once again delayed his decision to go forward on its construction as he pushed it back until after the 2014 midterm elections putting Democrat party politics ahead of jobs for Americans. But of course we were told that Obama’s delay had nothing to do with politics from Debbie Wasserman-Schiltz. Of course not.  Also reported in the poll was that 57% of voters say the pipeline is at least somewhat important to how they will vote in the next congressional election, with 23% who say it is Very Important.Democrats better be careful in 2014, there is no way that 57% are all Republicans.

I don’t care what a majority of the American people think, you are stuck with me. I do not work for you.

Support for building the Keystone XL pipeline is now at its highest level ever.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 61% of Likely U.S. Voters now at least somewhat favor building the major oil pipeline from Canada to Texas, while just 27% are opposed. This includes 37% who Strongly Favor the project and 10% who Strongly Oppose it. Thirteen percent (13%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Support for building the pipeline is up four points from 57% in January and now has edged above the previous high of 60% found in November 2011 when President Obama first delayed the project for further environmental study.

It is Democrats and the MSM that always claim that the GOP panders to the radical Tea Party, Americans just might want to take a look at who Obama is taking his orders from.

Oh by the way, this weeks jobless claims jump 24,000 this week to 329,000 as Obama refuses to approve a project that would automatically create jobs in the private sector with no tax paid for stimulus.

The number of Americans filing for new unemployment benefits jumped last week, a sign layoffs have increased since touching a seven-year low earlier this month.

Initial claims for jobless benefits, a measure of layoffs, rose by 24,000 to a seasonally adjusted 329,000 in the week ended April 19, the Labor Department said Thursday. The weekly gain was the largest since December.

Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal expected 315,000 new claims last week. Claims for the prior week were revised up by 1,000 to 305,000.

Ooops … Federal Govt Study Concludes Biofuels From Corn Waste Not Better Than Gas

It’s settled science … bio-fuels made from corn worse than gas in emitting greenhouse gases …

What say you Barack Obama, Al Gore and the rest? According to a federal government paid for study, bio-fuels made from leftovers of harvested corn plants release 7% more greenhouse gases as compared to conventional, evil gasoline. Let me repeat that, this was a paid for federal government study. So not only are we creating a fuel that is more harmful, as they say, to the environment, they are taking the food source away from human and animal usage.

Biofuels made from the leftovers of harvested corn plants are worse than gasoline for global warming in the short term, a study shows, challenging the Obama administration’s conclusions that they are a much cleaner oil alternative and will help combat climate change.

A $500,000 study paid for by the federal government and released Sunday in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change concludes that biofuels made with corn residue release 7 percent more greenhouse gases in the early years compared with conventional gasoline.

While biofuels are better in the long run, the study says they won’t meet a standard set in a 2007 energy law to qualify as renewable fuel.

If I build subsidies it, it will fail …

Hate it when that happens, eh environmental wackos? Here comes the priceless part, the LEFT and Obama admin officials is criticizing the study as flawed. HAHAHA!!! What’s the matter, don’t like it when the results that you paid for don’t fit your liberal agenda? These are the people that demonize those that do not believe that man is responsible for global warming, oh sorry what do they call it these days, climate change.

The conclusions deal a blow to what are known as cellulosic biofuels, which have received more than a billion dollars in federal support but have struggled to meet volume targets mandated by law. About half of the initial market in cellulosics is expected to be derived from corn residue.

The biofuel industry and administration officials immediately criticized the research as flawed. They said it was too simplistic in its analysis of carbon loss from soil, which can vary over a single field, and vastly overestimated how much residue farmers actually would remove once the market gets underway.

It’s Final — Corn Ethanol Is Of No Use.

OK, can we please stop pretending biofuel made from corn is helping the planet and the environment? With huge subsidies for ethanol in gasoline, with all States now selling gasoline having some ethanol blend, and a general misconception that these biofuels are green, corn ethanol has taken on a $30 billion/yr life of its own.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released two of its Working Group reports at the end of last month (WGI and WGIII), and their short discussion of biofuels has ignited a fierce debate as to whether they’re of any environmental benefit at all.