Message #162309

[Harconen]

            An April 3–4 “National Conference on Barack Obama’s Missing Birth Certificate and College Records” ends with the announcement of a boycott of Hawaii’s tourism, products, and businesses, in response to the state’s refusal to release documents relating to Obama. [2272]

            It is reported that the Obama administration has refused an offer from at least one prominent bank to return all the TARP money it received late in 2008 and which it says it does not need. There is no justification for the government’s refusal to accept the return of taxpayer cash other than the desire of the Obama administration to be able to control the bank’s executive payroll and lending practices. According to the Wall Street Journal, the bank has been “threatened with adverse consequences if its chairman persists” in trying to return the money. [2188, 2476]

            On April 5, in violation of a 2006 U.N. Security Council resolution, North Korea goes through with its threat to launch a rocket. The communist nation announces publicly that it successfully sent a communication satellite into orbit. The United States, which had been monitoring the activities, confirms there was a launch but no satellite or object made it into orbit. With a satellite in orbit or not, North Korea demonstrates that it has the ability to launch ballistic missiles, perhaps as far as 2,000 miles. That is sufficient to prompt an emergency meeting of the U. N. Security Council later the same day. (Iranian officials are reportedly present to witness the North Korean launch; Israel is well within 2,000 miles of Iran.) Obama responds to the launch by saying, “North Korea broke the rules once more by testing a rocket that could be used for a long-range missile. This provocation underscores the need for action—not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons.” It is not clear what action might be taken in retaliation, other than a strongly worded statement from Obama and the United Nations. Had Kim Jong-Il been worried about a tough response he would not have launched the missile, and North Korea still holds hostage two American journalists it had apprehended at its border with China. (The Security Council takes no action, and Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, states “any threat of sanction” against North Korea “would be counterproductive.”) [2181, 2185, 2208, 2252]

            In Prague on April 5, as Kim Jong-Il upstages him, Obama repeats his call for a world without nuclear weapons, naïvely saying “The basic bargain is sound: countries with nuclear weapons will move toward disarmament, countries without nuclear weapons will not acquire them.” He adds, “This goal will not be reached quickly, perhaps not in my lifetime,” and “(everyone) must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, ‘Yes, we can.’” (It is not clear how Obama will be able to “uninvent” nuclear weapons, or why he believes it is a good idea for America to lead the way and dismantle its nuclear weapons first… while Iran and terrorists are scrambling to obtain them and China, Israel, North Korea, Russia, Great Britain, France, India, and Pakistan will never give up theirs.) Obama says he will negotiate a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (SALT), but his odds of getting it ratified by the Senate are minimal. (Clinton’s 1999 agreement was rejected by the Senate.) Strangely, Obama suggests he would continue U.S. plans for a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, even though he has long hinted he is willing to give that up in exchange for concessions from Russia. “As long as the threat from Iran persists,” said Obama, “we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.” (Obama’s “out” may be the words, “cost-effective and proven,” which he can use as an argument against any missile defense system, and Obama can use his own criteria to determine whether Iran is a threat.) [2191, 2192, 2202, 2231, 2235]

            Although the crowd in Prague cheers Obama’s call for a world without nuclear weapons, clearly the United States does not intend to dismantle its nuclear arsenal. Even the Obama administration admits the remark was simply a sop to the masses, with White House arms control advisor Gary Samore saying, “In terms of a nuclear-free world, we recognize this is not a near-term possibility. Rather, the call was an attempt to ‘seize the moral high ground’ in order to increase pressure on countries such as North Korea and Iran.” The odds that Obama’s “let’s all play nice” remarks will have a helpful effect on North Korea or Iran are zero. As one columnist points out, Obama has replaced Teddy Roosevelt’s saying, “Speak softly and carry a big stick” with “Speak apologetically and carry a big shtick.” (The Arabs have an ancient proverb, “An army of lions led by a sheep is easily defeated by an army of sheep led by a lion.”) [2242, 2305]

            Although the crowds in Europe welcomed Obama, some in the British press are less thrilled with him than they were six months earlier. An editorial in the Telegraph remarks that Obama’s “speeches have long under-delivered, usually leaving a faintly empty sensation,” some of the answers at his press conference “were interminable, windy and not very impressive. At points there were pauses so long that it appeared he had simply lost his train of thought,” and “…I’ll wager that within a year or so he’ll be marked down as a wind-bag.” [2229]

            Hundreds of anti-abortion demonstrators attend a rally at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana to protest the school’s decision to present the pro-abortion Obama with an honorary degree and allow him to give the commencement address on May 17. The pro-abortion New York Times calls the criticism of Obama’s planned visit “high-pitched indignation” and “insulated and narrow-minded.” [2219, 2226]