Obama May Use Guard in Border Drug War

 

March 12, 2009

Knight Ridder

WASHINGTON - President Obama weighed in Wednesday on the escalating drug war on the U.S.-Mexico border, saying he was looking at possibly deploying National Guard troops to contain the violence, but ruling out any immediate military move.

"We're going to examine whether and if National Guard deployments would make sense and under what circumstances they would make sense," Obama said during an interview with journalists for regional papers, including a McClatchy reporter.

"I don't have a particular tipping point in mind," he said. "I think it's unacceptable if you've got drug gangs crossing our borders and killing U.S. citizens."

Already this year there have been 1,000 people killed in Mexico along the border, following 2008's death toll of 5,800, according to federal officials who credit Mexican President Felipe Calderon for a crackdown on drug cartels.

But the spillover on the border - for example, to El Paso, Texas from neighboring Ciudad Juarez - has created a political reaction.

In a recent visit to El Paso, Texas Gov. Rick Perry called for 1,000 troops to protect the border.

Obama was cautious, however. "We've got a very big border with Mexico," he said. "I'm not interested in militarizing the border."

The president praised Calderon, "who I believe is really working hard and taking some extraordinary risks under extraordinary pressure to deal with the drug cartels and the corresponding violence that's erupted along the borders." 

Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., chair of a key subcommittee on border security, will hold a hearing Thursday on Mexican border violence.

"Last week Mexico sent an additional 3,200 soldiers to the border," Sanchez said in a prepared opening statement for the hearing, "increasing the total number of Mexican soldiers combating drug cartels to more than 45,000."

Sanchez chairs the House Committee on Homeland Security's subcommittee on border, maritime and global counterterrorism.

"It should be noted that over 200 U.S. citizens have been killed in this drug war, either because they were involved in the cartels or were innocent bystanders," she said. "With those concerns in mind, it is essential that the Department of Homeland Security, along with other relevant departments, continue to pursue a contingency plan to address 'spillover' violence along our border."

At a hearing this week, Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, who visited Mexico last month as part of a congressional delegation tour, praised the so-called Merida Initiative - a drug cartel-fighting agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that provides Mexico with $1.4 billion to control drug trafficking.

"From helicopters and surveillance planes to non-intrusive inspection equipment, the U.S. investment is intended to provide the hardware necessary for the Mexican government to extend its authority to those remote and hard-to-access parts of the country ravaged by the drug trade," said Granger.

That agreement between Calderon and President George W. Bush will be updated, Obama said. 

"We expect to have a comprehensive approach to dealing with these issues of border security that will involve supporting Calderon and his efforts in a partnership, also making sure we are dealing with the flow of drug money and guns south, because it's really a two-way situation there," said Obama.

"The drugs are coming north, we're sending funds and guns south," he said. "As a consequence, these cartels have gained extraordinary power. Our expectation is to have a comprehensive policy in place in the next few months."

© Copyright 2009 Knight Ridder. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Obama Policies Feed Market Panic

Obama Policies Feed Market Panic

Thursday, March 5, 2009 4:40 PM By: Greg Brown

All week, negative headlines have competed with the slumping market ticker, including early news Thursday that General Motors might well go bankrupt despite billions in taxpayer loans. (Newsmax graphic) Since Barack Obama was sworn in as president on Jan. 20, stocks have tumbled to record lows — with investors losing an estimated $2.5 trillion in market value. The trend continued Thursday, with the Dow closing down 281 points, a 4.1 percent drop for the day. Since Inauguration Day, the Dow has fallen 20.4 percent. All week, negative headlines have competed with the slumping market ticker, including early news Thursday that General Motors might well go bankrupt despite billions in taxpayer loans. As selling sped up, Citigroup traded at one point under $1 a share, General Electric dipped under $7, and international financial names like Barclays saw declines of nearly 30 percent on the day. "Everybody is so bearish right now that you would expect to be in the midst of a counter-trend rally," Steven Goldman, market strategist at Weeden & Co, told CNNMoney. "But the implosion in the banking and insurance sectors is just overwhelming." Obama has moved aggressively on economic and fiscal policies. But investors — if the market is any indication — are giving his initiatives a chilly response. On Feb. 17, Obama signed a stimulus bill worth $787 billion — the largest spending bill in history. But the Congressional Budget Office indicates only 20 percent of the funds will be spent this year, and the nonpartisan group suggests that the package could do more economic harm than good. Obama also gave the green light to an omnibus $431 billion House Democratic spending bill laden with close to 9,000 pork-barrel spending items. Plus, Obama revealed that he plans increase marginal tax rates on those earning more than $250,000. The new taxes will yield more than $1 trillion in government revenues, but some economists believe the news of increased taxation will suck the wind out of any economic recovery. In the middle of the market meltdown Thursday, Obama spent the day talking about a massive increase in healthcare spending, including a proposal in his budget that sets aside $634 billion in a 10-year reserve fund to pay for expanded care. The drumbeat of bad news was too much for stocks, including: • U.S. bankruptcy filings surging 31 percent in 2008. • More than 600,000 Americans filing claims for jobless benefits for a fifth straight week, the worst performance since 1982. • U.S. factory orders falling for a sixth straight month in January, official data showed. • One in every eight U.S. households with mortgages ended 2008 behind on payments or in foreclosure, reported the Mortgage Bankers Association. "The auto industry is effectively being wiped out or nationalized, however you want to think about it," Rick Campagna, portfolio manager at Provident Investment Council in Pasadena, Calif., told Reuters. "Now you're talking about a good portion, if not all, of the banking sector being wiped out. It's just getting relatively dire." © 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Turning to Wikipedia for Answers?

GOPUSA - The Loft: "Turning to Wikipedia for Answers?

Posted by Bobby Eberle
March 10, 2009 at 6:58 am


The Internet has been around for quite a while, but until the spread of web browsers in the 1990s, the collection of computers and networks was primarily used by the government and academia. The web browser brought the power of the Internet to 'regular' people, and a whole era was launched. Shopping online? Even the word 'online' didn't exist a few years ago.

In addition to shopping, social networking, e-mail checking, and on and on, actual, real work can be performed as well. There are many new sources of information which are quickly replacing the 'old school' standbys such as the set of encyclopedias. But... how accurate is this information, and does it come with a 'spin?' Rather than 'just the facts,' are we also getting someone's political ideology? Let's look at the popular Wikipedia as an example...

Wikipedia is an online 'encyclopedia' which is produced, edited, and updated by Internet users. Everyday, people turn to Wikipedia for information on every topic under the sun. Of course, since it is written by online users, the facts may not always be accurate, and unfortunately, the left-wing spin comes into play.

As noted in a story by World Net Daily, information critical of Barack Obama has been disappearing from the president's Wikipedia page within minutes of being published.

A perusal through Obama's current Wikipedia entry finds a heavily guarded, mostly glowing biography about the U.S. president. Some of Obama's most controversial past affiliations, including with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former Weathermen terrorist Bill Ayers, are not once mentioned, even though those associations received much news media attention and served as dominant themes during the presidential elections last year.

Also completely lacking is any mention of the well-publicized concerns surrounding Obama's eligibility to serve as commander-in-chief.

In Obama's presidential campaign, the associations with Ayers and Wright were not only news-worthy, they were an integral part of the campaign. A valid way of getting to know someone who is new to the national scene is to see who his friends and associates are. Despite the fact that Ayers was an acknowledged domestic terrorist and Wright would use the pulpit to spew anti-American hatred, neither is mentioned.

World Net Daily also points out the controversy regarding Obama's proof of citizenship. Whether you believe the stories or not, the issue is certainly legitimate and has been in the news. There have even been several courts cases regarding the citizenship issue. But, as World Net Daily reports:

In one example, one Wikipedia user added the following to Obama's page:

'There have been some doubts about whether Obama was born in the U.S. after the politician refused to release to the public a carbon copy of his birth certificate and amid claims from his relatives he may have been born in Kenya. Numerous lawsuits have been filed petitioning Obama to release his birth certificate, but most suits have been thrown out by the courts.'

As is required on the online encyclopedia, that entry was backed up by third-party media articles, citing the Chicago Tribune and WorldNetDaily.com

The entry was posted on Feb. 24, at 6:16 p.m. EST. Just three minutes later, the entry was removed by a Wikipedia administrator, claiming the posting violated the websites rules against 'fringe' material.

But according to Wikipedia's own rules, a 'fringe theory can be considered notable if it has been referenced extensively, and in a serious manner, in at least one major publication, or by a notable group or individual that is independent of the theory.' Numerous stories have filed on the Obama citizenship issue, so it certainly should not have been removed from the site.

Contrast these actions to the information found on the George W. Bush Wikipedia page. Scanning that page you'll read:

# As a college senior, Bush became a member of the secretive Skull and Bones society.

# In May 1968, Bush was commissioned into the Texas Air National Guard.[23] After training, he was assigned to duty in Houston, flying Convair F-102s out of Ellington Air Force Base.[24] Critics allege that Bush was favorably treated due to his father's political standing, citing his selection as a pilot and his irregular attendance.
# Under the 'Marriage and Family' section, there is this entry: Prior to his marriage, Bush had multiple episodes of alcohol abuse.[29] In one instance, on September 4, 1976, he was arrested near his family's summer home in Kennebunkport, Maine for driving under the influence of alcohol. He pleaded guilty, was fined $150 and had his Maine driver's license suspended until 1978.
# Bush served on the board of directors for Harken.[33] Questions of possible insider trading involving Harken arose, but the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) investigation concluded that the information Bush had at the time of his stock sale was not sufficient to constitute insider trading.
# In considering the current economic conditions, Wikipedia produces this entry: In September 2008, the crisis became much more serious beginning with the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac followed by the collapse of Lehman Brothers. and a federal bailout of American International Group for $85 billion. Many economists and world governments determined that the situation became the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. (I guess people forget about the unemployment, inflation, gas lines, etc. of the Carter years)

In my scanning of the Obama page, I did find one entry regarding his acknowledged drug use as a youth, but as WND stated, the bio is rather glowing.

The point to keep in mind is that all information sources must be met with a critical eye. When it comes to talk radio or political commentary, readers generally know that there is a party angle or philosophy associated with the writings. However, many don't bring that same critical review to bear when examining information sources such as Wikipedia or FactCheck. The time to be most vigilant is when sources, such as the main stream media, present information as fact when it is clearly opinion. Unfortunately, as we saw in the last campaign, putting our faith in the main stream media to get it right is like banging your head against a wall."