How much is Obama spending on his India trip?

There are plenty of speculative reports floating around about how much President Obama is spending on his trip to India. A simple online news search turns up thousands of reports pegging the bill at around $200 million per day.

The White House remains tight-lipped, saying only that most of Obama's staff will accompany him, as will the First Lady and their two children. A recent official blog post claims these reports are "wildy inflated."

Security for a trip to a known terrorist haven is understandably expensive. We'd be the first to agree that no details of Presidential security should be made public, and one of the last to complain about the cost of such arrangements.

The real question is whether or not the President truly needs to be present personally for what appears to be a massive "junket" at best, or, at worst, an Obama family vacation with a few business-related trappings tacked onto an otherwise touristy itinerary.

Whether the actual cost is $200 million a day or only $1 million for the entire trip, American citizens have a right to know how their money is being spent, and why. The White House can, and should, tell us how much this trip costs.

In an economy when nearly one in ten US citizens is unemployed and home foreclosures are displacing thousands, frugality with our tax dollars would seem a prudent trait for the President to adopt. With his continuing profilgate spending, President Obama gives the strong impression that he doesn't really care about any of this.

Good riddance, NPR

Vivian Schiller, president and CEO of National Public Radio, had the audacity to release an internal memo to NPR affiliates that was full of blatant lies about the firing of Juan Williams.

We don't really care that Schiller fired Williams. That's her affair. People are unfairly discharged by employers every day. If Williams was wrongfully dismissed (he isn't claiming that he was), he can sue, and win a substantial amount of money - maybe as much as Fox News is now paying him.

Schiller is either a typical progressive, and unable to tell the difference betweeen fact and fiction, or she is trying to cover for a stupid human resources action - or both.

Here's what she told her colleagues:

Dear AREPS,

Thank you for all of your varying feedback on the Juan Williams situation. Let me offer some further clarification about why we terminated his contract early.

First, a critical distinction has been lost in this debate. NPR News analysts have a distinctive role and set of responsibilities. This is a very different role than that of a commentator or columnist. News analysts may not take personal public positions on controversial issues; doing so undermines their credibility as analysts, and that’s what’s happened in this situation. As you all well know, we offer views of all kinds on your air every day, but those views are expressed by those we interview – not our reporters and analysts.

In fact, NPR "reporters" like Nina Totenberg make personal, partisan remarks all the time. But their comments reflect a liberal point of view, so they're in no danger of losing their job.

Second, this isn't the first time we have had serious concerns about some of Juan's public comments. Despite many conversations and warnings over the years, Juan has continued to violate this principal.

Translation: "Juan Williams isn't as far left as we'd like in his personal views."

Third, these specific comments (and others made in the past), are inconsistent with NPR's ethics code, which applies to all journalists (including contracted analysts):

"In appearing on TV or other media... NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist. They should not participate in shows... that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis."

More fundamentally, "In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based forums, NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist."

Unfortunately, Juan's comments on Fox violated our standards as well as our values and offended many in doing so.

The truth is that Juan's appearance on Fox is what violated NPR "standards." We weren't offended by the substance of his comments. Were you? Like Williams, most Americans take special notice when a visibly-Muslim person boards their plane.

We're profoundly sorry that this happened during fundraising week. Juan's comments were made Monday night and we did not feel it would be responsible to delay this action.

This was a tough decision and we appreciate your support.

Thanks,

Vivian Schiller
President & CEO, NPR

So Ms Schiller is really upset that a lot of us will no longer donate to NPR. Now that the intolerant, progressive standards of National Public Radio have been exposed, momentum is building to withdraw all public funding from the organization.

We're sure NPR will go the way of Air America. Good riddance.

The last, best hope

November is coming:

Obama's Medicare Czar can't take the heat

Human Events editor Jason Mattera attempts to question Dr. Donald Berwick in the clip below.

Why would Mattera care about Berwick? Because President Barack Obama recently appointed him to an incredibly powerful position as administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services - ground zero for ObamaCare. Congress had no opportunity to question Berwick's appointment; Obama simply appointed him to a new post as Medicare/Medicaid Czar, with a budget bigger than the Pentagon.

According to a Washington Examiner report, Berwick is a key figure in Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), an international organization that in recent years has been an aggressive and dishonest critic of Israel. The PHR web site offers a press release referring to Berwick as "a board member."

With transparency like this, no wonder Democrats are about to lose both houses of Congress. It will be interesting to see what evidence of further corruption the Obama impeachment hearings produce.

Obama cedes part of Arizona to Mexico

The reconquista has begun. And it's being encouraged and enabled by the Obama Regime's weakness and inaction.

Arizona recently passed a law to protect US citizens from the devastating flood of illegal aliens and illegal alien criminals overwhelming their state. The Obama Regime's reaction? Sue the State of Arizona into submission. We still don't know whether or not President Obama, Attorney General Holder or Department of Homeland Security Secretary Napalitano - all critics of the law - have even read the legislation they detest so strongly.

And now the Federal government has actually closed a large area of land in Arizona to Americans. Why? Because there are too many dangerous, heavily-armed illegal aliens occupying the area. It would be ridiculous if it weren't an early warning sign of the disintegration of the United States of America.



What's your take? Is there anything the US Federal Government can or should do about the border chaos? And what about the State of Arizona? Is there a role for the state to play?

Who ARE you, Congressman Etheridge?

"Who ARE you?"

That's what US Congressman Bob Etheridge (D-NC) demands to know of a young man who politely asks a simple question. Watch Rep. Etheridge as he reacts like a rabid, cornered racoon:



Oh, the Congressman apologized quickly enough - as soon as he realized that this video was spreading rapidly over Twitter and other social media sites. Fox News broadcast a segment on June 14, further embarrassing Etheridge.

People who behave like this have no business serving as our leaders in Congress. There are only 435 Congressional Representatives and 100 Senators. Can anyone seriously make the argument that this man is one of the 535 best people in the entire country to fill the slot? We don't think so.

What in the world makes a public official so arrogant and angry that he would physically assault this well-dressed young man? Did he squirm because he knows his political positions are anti-American? Was it because Etheridge does, in fact, support President Obama's socialist, no-growth, high unemployment, deficit spending, energy taxing agenda? Perhaps he thinks no mortal citizen should ever question a government official? Maybe Etheridge just thought he was having a bad hair day, and was embarrassed to be on camera? No matter. His ridiculous reaction is completely unjustifiable.

Now it's your turn to ask Congressman Etheridge: Who ARE you? So take the time to make a quick phone call or send an email. Of course, be respectful.

But ask Congressman Etheridge, "Who ARE you?"

Email Contact Form (use ZIP Code 27601-2345)
Washington, DC Office: (202) 225-4531
Raleigh, NC District Office: (919) 829-9122 or (888) 262-6202 toll-free
Lillington, NC District Office: (910) 814-0335 or (866) 384-3743 toll-free
Facebook

Red China provides California school curriculum

California school officials are apparently so desperate for funding that they have accepted a Chinese language curriculum developed by The People's Republic of China. That's correct: California students are learning Chinese using a communist-produced curriculum. And it's all paid for by Red China, too.

Doesn't that sound the least little bit like a propaganda opportunity? Here's the story as reported by Fox 11 in Los Angeles:



Sounds innocent enough, until you consider a little history:

• China supports a ruthless dictatorship in Myanmar (formerly known as Burma), one of the worst human rights abusers in the world.
• During the "Great Leap Forward" in the late 1950s, it is estimated that at least 20 million Chinese starved to death as Mao Zedong's misguided economic policies failed.
• Infanticide and abortion are official Chinese policy today, often enforced against the will of women involved. Even liberal National Public Radio reports on this.
• The Chinese government also carries out an aggresive forced sterilization program. The US House of Representatives held hearings on this atrocity in 1998.
• No one knows exactly how much of the United States' national debt is owed to communist China. The public debt owned China exceeds $5 trillion, but much of our debt is held privately, and no estimates are available.

Should school districts even be allowed to accept a "free" gift of a language curriculum like this? Especially knowing that it is produced by an evil empire led by dictators who would love to see the demise of the United States?