Japanese Prime minister Shinzo Abe opened up a trip to the US to meet President Barack Obama amid regional diplomatic tensions and domestic economic inconvenience.

Recently Prime minister Abe left Tokyo on his way to meet President Obama and arrived at Andrews Air Force Base outside of Washington, D.C.

Japan is currently crumbling by an ailing economy measured in terms of consistent deflation from the past 20 years, a territorial dispute with China and being disturbed by North Korean missile mission that automatically placed Japan under its axis.

PM Abe said after his White House visit at a Washington think tank, that “they (North Korea) have increased the range of their missile immensely and have attained the ability to reach even the mainland United States.”

Japan has been jammed into a dispute with China over sovereignty of islands located in the East China Sea and lost sleep over the situation as North Korean missile strength has expanded too dramatically.

Over the years, the North Korean missile program expansion became a major problem, terrifying its neighbours. During the picture session at the Oval Office with President Obama, PM Abe said, “We just cannot tolerate the actions of North Korea, such as launching missiles and conducting nuclear tests.”

President Obama’s Asia advisor, Danny Russel, said that the president “remains supportive of the peaceful efforts to diplomatic resolution to outstanding issues of territorial claims,” BBC reports.

The Japanese economy is the third largest in the world, but its currency is persistently declining in value against the US dollar.

Abe proposes to help set off the otherwise grounded economy with the help of Monetarist and Keynesian tools that may support growth in future. According to the BBC news, PM Abe has outlined two plans to revitalize the weak economy: firstly to print a lot of money and secondly to spend a lot of money. Plan A can be categorized under Monetarism and plan B is from the Keynesian School of Thought.

According to Keynesian economic thought, if the pace of economic activity is slow with falling investment rates and fading employment combined with decreasing consumer spending, then the only thing that can restart economy is public intervention through spending.

On the other hand, Monetarist believe that it is the supply of money that makes the economy move back and forth and not government spending. However, if both of these schools of thought can bring life to Japanese economy, then there may be a possibility of progress.

According to the BBC News, in an interview with the Washington Post, Abe said that improving ties with the US were at the top of his agenda and that their support is key. Both leaders are expected to discuss Trans-Pacific Partnership (Free Trade Agreement between North American, South American and Asian nations) among other issues during his visit.

The article Japan PM’s Washington Visit to Review Economy appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Zambia, together with many African countries, has welcomed the second term for the US president Barack Obama. This time there was more of a focus on learning how elections are done than in the 2008 elections. Where before it was a thrill, in this election the excitement was kept more at an observation level in Zambia

Throughout the debates, Zambian people confessed that the way issues were discussed in view of winning elections would help more people to decide who should be the next president in any country. Just like in the past election in Zambia, many people have realized that money does not buy peoples votes. Zambians have been educated about this and seeing it happen again makes the people more comfortable about it. Everyone now knows that it’s not about what you are given, but choosing the right leader with great vision will help develop the nation and meet people’s needs, and most Zambians watched attentively to the elections to see which direction it would take.

Mr. Kasangula, a local businessman in Lusaka, supposed that Obama has been given a second term, and what Africa should know, and Zambia in particular, is that Obama is the American president and he needs to deal with problems that affect the Americans first. However, it is important for him to help the African nations, including Zambia, to build their democracy and good policies, and for the opposition to consider defeat was a very good lesson for many opposition leaders in Zambia. Mr. Romney’s action could help many African baby democracy to emulate how leaders should act when defeated, which has been a problem for African countries, killing the purpose of democracy.

Most Lusaka residents when asked about the elections said it was very interesting to watch and they saw how elections can be conducted without naming each other names and showering insults on each other. The opposition, Romney, conceded defeat in good time which again gave him respect from the Zambian perspective. He portrayed himself as a selfless leader who wants to see peace and love for each other as the wish of the people prevails in the country.

Speaking to Mr. Lombe of Lusaka on whether it is a good thing to get some of the good ideas from the opposition to be incorporated in the main streams of any present government, Mr. Lombe noted that considering adopting some ideas from opposition group is a good bargain than pushing all to be irrelevant, for by doing so will help bring development in the country. In fact, leaders should be more interested in developing the country and not only to achieve personal gain, and it should be clear that being in the opposition does not mean that you are enemies, but that you disagree with some of the things that are promoted with the other group. He believed that it is a lesson for Zambian leaders.

Speaking to Lusaka high school students, they said what Obama and Romney did is a great lesson for Zambia. They said that the way they conducted themselves during the campaign and after was a great lesson, and that the debate should be seriously considered in the future to allow people to make an informed choice for who their leader should be.

Joyce Twambo, a house wife of Chawama compound, said that the other problem that Zambia faces is having too many parties that compete with each other to the end. Therefore, it is important to eliminate some of the parties before the final selections happen, as this will also help the majority to choose a good candidate of their choice, and to see the results counted and announced the same day will help stop manipulation of the results.

To add on this, Catherine Nyirenda’s article posted on November 8 in the Times of Zambia newspaper, stated that Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) chairperson, Irene Mambilima, said: “Zambian politicians should avoid character assassination and instead learn from Americans who have embraced issue-based politics Justice Mambilima was impressed with how the American electoral process was handled and said Zambia had a lot to learn.”

However, President Obama visited Ghana in 2009 and the Zambian people would like to see more visits of the US President to many African countries, not because he is of African decent, but because he is the president of America, a great nation that is able to help build strong economies and promote democracy in Africa. Hopefully in his second term, president Obama can be an advocate to many issues faced by African countries in order to make a lasting impact on the continent.

Image Courtesy : U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Zachary Bell [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

The article Zambians on Second Term for Barack Obama appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As the US election for president draws closer, dirtier the debates become. This does not only extend to President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, but to the voters themselves. Since this election is so important to the United States, people who have not previously paid much attention to politics–myself included–have been roped into the huge battle for control. The battle has now been dragged into cyberspace.

Facebook has exploded with status and picture updates about the election and who individuals support, which creates tension among friends who are supporting different candidates. I know some of my friends are hardly talking to one another strictly because of fights they have had about politics.

My family and I have an agreement to not discuss politics because we support opposing candidates, and the fights would always turn ugly when the subject came up. However, the rest of the country is letting everyone know their position for the election; political conventions and rallies are happening left and right because everyone wants to get support for their candidate. In other elections, people were not as passionate about who they planned on voting for.

Sure, the election campaigns were aired on TV and everyone was subjected to the annoying phone calls sponsoring a candidate, but friends and families were not torn apart because of politics. Meanwhile, both candidates are trying to make themselves look as saintly as possible while simultaneously trying to make their opponent seem like the anti-Christ. The presidential debates have been the most public display of this goal. The debates have caused a huge stir with voters with trying to determine who “won” the debate.

Romney had better stage presence while Obama looked like he did not want to be there. Obama kept trying to play off of Bill Clinton and emphasizing how horrible George W. Bush was while not taking ownership of any of his own shortcomings. During Obama’s reign, the country’s deficit tripled and he added more debt than any other president combined.  But none of this is his fault, only Bush’s. Obama kept twisting Romney’s plan for taxes, which Romney defended and said that Obama was purposely misleading the public.

Romney continually challenged Obama, who never really defended himself fully. Since the debates, others have tried to make excuses as to why Obama did not seem to be present and involved. However, all the debates have done is created more of a gray area while the public decides which candidate is the biggest liar.

With the debates over, political commercials are always on TV. It has gotten to the point that I refuse to watch any TV until after the election craziness is over. Neither candidate is perfect, and it gets to be very depressing watching Romney have commercials saying how horrible President Obama is while Obama projects the opposite sentiment.

The election is a month away, and it is sure to get much worse before the ballots are collected and tallied. November is guaranteed to be a political bloodbath.   Image Courtesy of   new-york-city

The article 2012 Presidential Election, A November Bloodbath appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York, U.S.A. — President Barack Obama announced a renewed commitment by the U.S. government to fight human trafficking through the Partnership for Freedom: Innovation Awards to Stop Human Trafficking, a public-private initiative led by Humanity United, the Department of Justice and other federal agencies, with support from the Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women initiative. The Partnership for freedom will fund innovative solutions to improve care for survivors of human trafficking and modern-day slavery.

“Trafficking survivors all too often face obstacles in accessing the comprehensive services they need to rebuild their lives,” Humanity United CEO Randy Newcomb said. “While federally-funded efforts to assist trafficking survivors have laid a strong foundation, there is still so much to be done. We can and must do better to find evidence-based models to effectively support survivors, and this initiative is a step in that direction.”

Humanity United, a foundation established by philanthropists Pierre and Pam Omidyar that is dedicated to building peace and advancing human freedom, is joining together with the federal government and with founding support from the Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women initiative to establish a $6 million challenge award.

The challenge will call upon local communities to develop collaborative and comprehensive solutions to human trafficking survivor care that can be evaluated and expanded nationally and internationally through federal policies and programs. ”We are honored to support the public-private Partnership for Freedom,” said Dina Habib Powell, president of the Goldman Sachs Foundation. “By bringing together the corporate, governmental and nonprofit sectors to fund and scale practical solutions, we believe this initiative can have a real impact in the lives of trafficking survivors.”

Purpose of the commitment

Over the next few months, Humanity United will convene leading researchers, stakeholders, community organizations and government officials to help design and administer the award. The initial round of the award, to launch in 2013, will support the most innovative approaches in three areas:

• sustainable housing and shelter solutions for all types of trafficking survivors
• comprehensive care and case management for survivors who are minors
• law enforcement engagement with survivors

The federal government, along with private donors such as the Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women initiative, will commit financial resources and technical expertise to support the award, and will offer evaluation services to determine which approaches are proven to work. The goal will be to identify promising ideas and solutions at the local and community level that can later be nationally scaled and internationally replicated.

The Partnership for Freedom will consist of three levels of support aimed at innovation, evaluation and scale:

• Community Conversation Grants will be awarded to encourage dialogue and activate local coordination.
• Challenge Grants will be awarded to innovative community-level initiatives with the most promise of being scaled.
• Scale will be achieved by pairing challenge grant winners with evaluators to identify which innovations can be expanded nationally and internationally through federal policies, practices and funding.

Community Conversation Grants

Recognizing that not all communities have existing expertise to design these innovations, Community Conversation Grants will enable a series of local stakeholder convenings to explore and establish a coordinated response to meet the needs of trafficking victims in communities around the country.

Challenge Grants

Challenge Grants will support solutions that address major challenges to survivor assistance. Paired with third-party evaluations, Challenge Grant recipients will help to build the body of knowledge for what works for survivors.

In addition to the Community Conversation Grants and Challenge Grants, the Partnership for Freedom will pair grant winners with academic researchers and program evaluators to build an evidence base of the most effective approaches. These projects will be coordinated with existing federal government efforts in order to fill key gaps in knowledge and practice, and to maximize the potential for these approaches to inform future policies and programs.

To ensure widespread commitment to this effort, an advisory board composed of a variety of stakeholders including prominent leaders in the field, advocates, senior law enforcement officials and survivors will be established to help inform the award criteria and selection process, and determine the award parameters.

Background of the proposal

Human trafficking has been identified as the fastest-growing criminal industry in the world. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimates that human trafficking generates $32 billion annually. According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), at any given moment more than 20 million people are trapped in slave-like conditions around the world. While Humanity United and many others continue to work on the root causes of this global phenomenon, this initiative will address much-needed efforts to help those who are survivors of human trafficking.

Image Courtesy of  pennstatelive

The article President Obama Announces Plan to Stop Human Trafficking appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Representatives of the DNCC, DNC and the Obama for America campaign spoke about the decision to move the last day of the Democratic National Convention to the Tima

The impressive 70,000-plus seats of Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, NC, will not be filled with excited supporters of the Democratic candidate for the 2012 US Elections, President Barack Obama. Instead, the highly anticipated Democratic National Convention speech will be delivered in the confinements of the Time Warner Cable Arena.

Representatives of the DNCC, DNC and the Obama for America campaign spoke about the decision to move the last day from the Stadium at today’s press briefing.

The move has proved a bit of a challenge for the organizers; a main issue being that the cut in seating space will affect the amount of people able to be in attendance. People with the ‘community credentials’ will not be able to attend the speech at the arena, but the organizers reiterated that they were much concerned with making sure no one felt left out. They expect that people who are in Charlotte will come together at public house parties at bars and restaurants, celebrating the nomination nonetheless.

It is too early to say how much the change in venue will impact the budget of the convention, but the organizers expect some expense on that behalf.

Disappointment was also expressed in having to move President Obama’s speech to the Arena, as delegates and representatives had hoped to re-create some of the excitement  from four years ago in Denver. Organizers told the media earlier today that there will not be enough time to arrange balloons under the roof for tonight’s event, but at the briefing, DNC representatives reassured that there will still be “lots of energy” and that the Presidents speech would provide enough excitement for the crowd.

The decision to move the speech indoors was taken yesterday after organizers feared that bad weather would come in the way of a smooth-running event.

What, then, can we expect to hear from Obama? Representatives said that the speech will be more about why the American people should support Obama rather than why they shouldn’t support the Republican candidate Mitt Romney.

They noted that while the Republican campaign has been much about re-defining Romney and pointing out the faults of the last four years, the Obama campaign has not felt it needed to define what President Obama stands for.

A representative added: “Everyone who’s been out there traveling with the President, knows that he talks about a number of [...] policy issues out on the trail and we can expect to hear the same thing from him this evening.” She hopes that the undecided voters will pay attention so they can cross-check the facts and the policies and understand what President Obama stands for and where he is different.

The Obama camp is confident in the message they are delivering and the achievements they have accomplished so far. After tonight, they hope voters will be too.

Image Courtesy of  NewsHour

The article DNC 2012: Venue Move to Affect Attendance but Not Message appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission that Killed Osama bin Laden, is set to be released under the Dutton imprint of Penguin Publishing House next month. Subtitled The Autobiography of a Navy Seal, this book will be the first direct account of the events. Articles published after bin Laden’s death were accounts from officials who had debriefed the members of SEAL Team 6, not the members of the teams themselves.

The book is written by one of the navy seals who participated in the mission firsthand, under the pseudonym Mark Owen. The author was the leader of one of the teams during the mission that killed bin Laden on May 2, 2011. For their protection, the names of all of the SEALs on the mission have been changed. Scheduled television interview will feature the author in disguise, with his voice altered.

Co-author Kevin Maurer is a journalist that has worked for the Navy SEALs six times and is the author of four books.

Penguin plans on printing 300,000 copies for the release on September 11, 2012 and continuing through the holiday season. The book is expected to be a bestseller.

So far, the book is the best kept secret of the company. While described as a “blow-by-blow narrative of the assault, beginning with the helicopter crash that could have ended Owen’s life straight through to the radio call confirming Bin Laden’s death” and “an essential piece of modern history” by the publisher, other officials were caught off guard by the announcement.

John Kirby, Navy spokesman, told the New York Times that “The author did not seek Navy support/approval for this book.”

George Little, Pentagon press Secretary, told the Times that “he had not read the book and was unaware that anyone in the department had reviewed it.”

CIA spokesman Preston Golson said “As far as we can determine, this book was not submitted for pre-publication review.”

Tommy Viater, National Security Council spokesman, said “We learned about this book today from press reports,” and added, “We haven’t reviewed it and don’t know what it says.”

It is unclear whether any legal action or attempt to stop the publication will be taken as of this time. This is indeed possible: all 10,000 copies of a book by a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer who described operations in Afghanistan were destroyed before publication because the book hadn’t been reviewed by official.

The book has the potential to impact the upcoming 2012 election, putting one of President Barack Obama’s achievements in the limelight before voters cast their ballots. According to the Washington Post, it may also raise issues on their aggressive campaign toward information leaks, while supposedly allowing the press in on many secrets.

The article Navy SEAL Writes Controversial Book about Bin Laden appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York, U.S.A. — MyGoodDeed, the prominent nonprofit which successfully advocated for the permanent establishment of the anniversary of 9/11 as a federally recognized day of charitable service and remembrance, (http://www.911day.org) has requested that the presidential campaigns of President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney agree to suspend all campaign advertising on September 11 this year.

In letters sent to both candidates on August 10, MyGoodDeed said, “We are making this request so that the families of those lost, and the nation as a whole, can dedicate 9/11 to remembering in prayer and honoring through service, the 9/11 victims, rescue and recovery workers, and the many individuals who rose to assist and defend our nation in response to the attacks.”

MyGoodDeed requested a similar moratorium on campaign advertising in 2008. Then Senators Barack Obama and John McCain each voluntarily complied with that request, and both later appeared together in a show of national unity on the evening of 9/11, attending a forum organized by ServiceNation addressing the importance of community and national service.

“We believe that the focus on 9/11 should be on honoring those lost and heroic, setting aside our political differences and coming together as Americans,” said Jay S. Winuk, co-founder of MyGoodDeed, whose brother, volunteer firefighter/EMT Glenn J. Winuk, died in the line of duty in the 9/11 attacks. “We hope and trust that our leaders will suspend their campaign activity briefly and join with the entire nation in paying tribute through expressions of unity, remembrance and service.”

Image Courtesy of   Glynnis Jones / Shutterstock.com

The article Non-Profit Asks That 9/11 Not Become Election Candy appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York, U.S.A. – AJC praised President Barack Obama for imposing additional sanctions on Iran’s energy and banking sectors.

Two Executive Orders signed this week will further restrict access to Iran’s energy and petrochemical sectors, as well as impose sanctions on China’s Bank of Kowlun and Iraq’s Elaf Islamic Bank.

“Today’s action makes it clear that we will expose any financial institution, no matter where they are located, that allows the increasingly desperate Iranian regime to retain access to the international financial system,” the White House said in an earlier statement.

The new sanctions follow measures taken earlier this year against any institution that deals with Iran’s Central Bank. They also are the latest round in increasingly punitive measures targeting companies worldwide that do business with Iran’s oil and energy businesses.

“This is no time to relent,” said AJC Executive Director David Harris. “New U.S. sanctions are essential in the global effort to convince the Iranian regime of our resolve to end its quest for nuclear-weapons capability.”

The Obama Administration’s move follows the failed P5+1 talks with Iran in Moscow, which came after similarly fruitless negotiations in Baghdad and Istanbul. No date has been set for more high-level talks between Iran and the U.S., Russia, Britain, France, China and Germany. At the same time, Tehrancontinues defiantly to proclaim progress in its nuclear program.

“The Iranian regime’s rejection of UN appeals to stop its nuclear weapons program, and fully open its existing facilities to IAEA inspectors, leaves concerned governments no choice but to impose ever-tighter sanctions,” said Harris.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress, with strong bipartisan support, is expected to approve this week another round of sanctions.

“The onus is on Iran to abide by its international obligations,” said Obama. “If the Iranian government continues its defiance, there should be no doubt that the United States and our partners will continue to hold Iran accountable.”

Image Courtesy of   spirit of america / Shutterstock.com

The article Obama Has Jewish Support on New Iran Sanctions appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

President Barack Obama announced a new government program Thursday to promote partnerships between local communities and the federal government. With the stroke of a pen the President signed an executive order establishing the White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities to ensure economic strategies are implemented at the local community level.

“Strong Cities,  Strong Communities is a remarkable initiative, one that takes innovation, a determination to cut-through the red-tape and ensure taxpayer dollars are used wisely,” said Cecilia Munoz, Director of the Domestic Policy Council and Co-Chair of Strong Cities, Strong Communities.

“The Strong Cities Council will support bottom-up solutions that break down silos within federal and local governments, and will urge the private and nonprofit sectors to come up with innovate strategies to solve challenging issues.”

Six cities – Chester, Penn.; Cleveland/Youngstown, Ohio ; Detroit, Mich.; Fresno, Calif.; Memphis, Tenn.; and New Orleans, La. – were selected as the first participants in the pilot program which was launched in June 2011.

The Council will assure technical and planning resources are available to allow communities to develop their economic vision and strategies. The council will make recommendations to the President for changing federal policies and programs to support local governments and their economic growth.

The Council will also reach out to non-profit organizations, businesses, labor organizations, school districts, and faith and community-based groups in addition to working with local and state governments.

Members of 25 different federal agencies will work together to fully establish the program’s foundation before expanding it across the country. Strong Cities, Strong Communities Council is headquartered at the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy are co-chairing the council. Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta will join other members of the President’s cabinet, including the cabinet secretaries of Treasury, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security.

Other members of the council will include the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Office of Management and Budget Director, General Services Administrator, Small Business Administration Administrator, National Endowment for the Arts Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service, Senior Advisor and Assistant to President for Intergovernmental Affairs, Assistant to the President and Cabinet Secretary, President’s Assistant on Economic Policy, the Chair on the Council on Environmental Quality and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

An executive director for Strong Cities, Strong Communities will be appointed by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. The executive director will coordinate the Council’s activities and, with instructions from the board, will support coordination and implementation efforts.

The article Obama Creates New Economic Council appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Any position that grants exposure to others results in scrutiny; U.S. presidents are no different. As they are responsible for decisions that constantly affect the lives of millions of Americans, presidents receive either praise or derision by media pundits, voters and state officials when they make decisions that run contrary to their expectations.

While most of the criticisms leveled at presidents relate to their policy decisions, their personal attributes are also vulnerable to significant mockery, sometimes even more so. For instance, ex-president Bill Clinton was derided for being a “draft dodger,” while former president George W. Bush was ridiculed for his perceived lack of intelligence on relevant issues.

Our current president, Barack Obama, is also not immune to such criticism. However, the frequency and severity of the barbs that he receives, which question everything from his lineage to his religious faith, leave one to wonder if these remarks are not borne out of more than mere policy resentment.

Bill Press, a former host of CNN’s Crossfire as well as the current host of the Bill Press Show, ruminated on this very subject, and detailed his observations in his book, titled “The Obama Hate Machine.” He appeared at Books and Books in Coral Gables on Wednesday to discuss his book along with the current political climate before an appreciative audience comprising individuals young and old.

Press started the proceedings by noting that while presidents are often the object of scorn and ridicule, the invectives hurled at our current president are unprecedented.

“We have never seen such a concerted series of attacks on a sitting president in a while,” he noted. In fact, Press noted, the only president who had to weather a comparable criticisms was Abraham Lincoln.

The scope of these attacks, Press reasoned, aim to make President Obama out to be “the other,” focusing on the fact that he is foreign and not like us. In stating this point, he referenced the frequency in which individuals on the Right describe President Obama as a Socialist, Muslim or a Communist. He also mentioned the situation where those on the Right, particularly Donald Trump, questioned the legitimacy of the President’s birth certificate.

The chief operators of the ‘Obama Hate Machine,’ Press noted, are Charles and David Koch, known by many as the Koch brothers. These brothers, who Press notes are the third and fourth richest men in America, earn this distinction through their monetary influence in the political process. He mentioned how these two use their considerable financial power to fund Republican campaigns as well as advertisements that deride the President and his achievements.

Of course, while members of the Right should shoulder most of the blame, Press also held the media accountable, mainly for their inability and unwillingness to combat the charges levied by the Right.

At that moment, Press recalled the words of Walter Cronkite, one of the most highly regarded journalists in history. Media individuals regard Cronkite’s impartiality in delivering news highly, to the point where many wish that same lack of bias existed today.

“Cronkite regretted that in his attempts to establish strong standards in the media, he was unable to make those standards stick,” the author stated to the audience.

Press then concluded by encouraging greater civility in political discourse.

“During my time at Crossfire, we had a rule that you always gave it your best on the show, but you never got personal,” he said. “We need to get back to that in Washington.”

Press then took questions from the audience. The queries raised by members of the audience ranged from whether the Citizens United decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court would see a challenge, to whether it was possible to ban products made by the Koch brothers.

Press said no to the latter question, mainly due to them being so pervasive and necessary to the daily lives of many Americans. He expressed more optimism toward the former query, noting that the GOP is seeing the decision backfire on them, and even mentioning Sen. Russ Feingold’s belief that even people on the Supreme Court are having second thoughts about the decision.

A poignant question wondered if political moderates would be extinct, referencing the departure of Olympia Snowe.

“I fear that more people like her will choose to walk away from the political climate rather than try to fix it,” Press lamented.

In lamenting the death of political moderates, he noted that politics reached its toxic high point once Newt Gingrich ascended to the position of House Speaker. That, to him, resulted in the death of compromise.

Despite this sudden death, Press still held out hope that political discourse can become civil once again. In fact, he praised President Obama for withstanding these negative attacks.

“I am amazed at how thick-skinned he is,” he said.

“While I wish that he would express anger, I think he knows that it would be a mistake on his part.”

The president leaves that to us, Press noted, and we should embrace that responsibility. “It is up to me and you to refute the lies of the Right,” he said.

“I have been doing it for three years, and I love it!”

The article Bill Press Details What Comprises The “Obama Hate Machine” appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Anthony Delmedico, founder and CEO of Del Visionaries, gave a speech titled E2 at the White House during the recent Future of Entrepreneurship Education (FEE) Summit.  E2 =  Entrepreneurship Education as core curriculum in our K-12 schools.  Anthony is demanding that Congress, state governor boards, President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan mandate entrepreneurship education as part of core curriculum for all public schools.

Fueled by the speech he gave at the Future Entrepreneurship Education Summit, Delmedico says he is launching an online digital petition to create awareness to the plight of America’s future and garnish the support of millions to the importance of entrepreneurship to empower the next generation of America’s youth to become entrepreneurs that is job creators versus job seekers.

During Delmedico’s speech, he gave factual statistics to highlight on how the lack of an entrepreneurial education has a negative effect on America’s youth and the American economy. ”While the nation’s unemployment rate wavers close to 10%, for young adults 16 to 30, the unemployment is closer to 26 percent, and in some cities in our nation close to 40%,” said Delmedico.

“For those fortunate enough to earn a high school or college degree, very few are prepared for today’s new economy, and the job market of today.  Currently there are 2.4M college graduates whom cannot find jobs in their fields of study, that’s 80%.  They are in debt up to their eyeballs and they are disappointed,” says Delmedico.

“According to a recent report by the McKinsley Global Institute, America will need to create a net 21M new jobs by 2020 in order to return to full employment.  Currently we have a job deficit in this country.  75% of all new jobs come from entrepreneurs, not large corporations.  So if we are serious about creating 21M new jobs in the next 8 years, we need to create an army of entrepreneurs. This Army is sitting in our K-12 school system today.

We must launch E2 (entrepreneurship education) as required core curriculum in our schools, starting in the 4th grade and advancing to the 12th grade.  And we must do this by 2013.  This will create an army of job creators versus job seekers and change the face of the American economy within 8 years,” says Delmedico.

In 2009, Delmedico authored an interactive workbook, Kids in business around the World, that teaches kids (8 to 14) how to start their own business.  Knowing that kids would need more than just a book or academic experience he also invented a mobile business stand branded the Little Green Money Machine.

Kids pick a kid business template from the book, design their own advertising banners, and sell products/services in their neighborhoods and communities. This revolutionary interactive learning system is now helping kids, tweens, and teens learn how to set goals, set-up their first business, and lays the foundation of financial literacy and social entrepreneurship.

“If Entrepreneurship is the engine of the American economy, why isn’t the same emphasis placed on it in our K-12 schools as Math, English, and Science?  If we are serious about creating jobs, and putting the American economy back on track, this is a no brainer.  We need to create an army of entrepreneurs!  We need to teach it in our schools!” Delmedico demands passionately during his speech to his DC audience.

The article Entrepreneurial Education to Be Added to Core Curriculum in America appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The U.S. Citizens Association, a non-profit member organization based in Akron, Ohio called for the immediate release of the Federal Election Commission’s findings into the questionable fundraising practices conducted by the Obama 2008 Presidential campaign.

The first red flag regarding Obama’s 2008 fundraising came when the Washington Post reported that the “Obama campaign was allowing donors to use largely untraceable pre-paid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity.”

The problem with these pre-paid cards is that is makes it impossible to determine if foreign nationals are contributing to a campaign, or if single donors are giving multiple small donations, thus exceeding the contribution limits, or even if an outside group is purchasing these cards for individual donors to evade the reporting requirements.

It is also known that the Obama campaign received 47% of its donations from donors giving less than the$200 limit that would require automatic reporting. In comparison, John McCain’s 2008 Presidential campaign received 26% of his donations from less than $200 donors.

According to multiple press outlets and the U.S. Citizens Association independent investigations, the Obama 2008 Presidential campaign failed to identify the sources of millions of dollars of campaign contributions that appear to have been illegally accepted by the campaign. Various media reports have pointed to the unknown sources as having illegally come from outside the United States and exceeded the contribution limits that would require reporting donor information to the Federal Election Commission.

The FEC launched an audit of the Obama 2008 campaign in April of 2011, but no results of the investigation have been released to the public. According to reports in Roll Call, during the 2010 cycle, the Obama campaign led all organizations when it came to sending refunds to individual donors. Following the election, it disclosed disbursement transactions totaling more than $5.7 million in refunds.

“The FEC claims these audits take three to four years, or even longer to complete. That’s unacceptable,” said Lance Davis, Executive Director of U.S. Citizens Association. “President Obama has been in full campaign mode for at least the last year. We’re in 2012 now. Is the Obama campaign still accepting questionable contributions and where are they coming from?” Mr. Davis continued.

“The last thing the American people need is to find out in 2013, that Barack Obama’s campaign did receive illegal campaign contributions from foreign nationals in 2008 and 2012, and hid it from the voting public. At that point the hay’s in the barn, there’s nothing that can be done. Maybe that’s what they’re hoping for,” said Mr. Davis.

Davis continued, “Roll Call reports that as of the end of March (2011), Obama for America had spent nearly $3 million on legal fees since the 2008 election. In all, the president’s campaign spent three times more on lawyers after Election Day than in the two years preceding it. That alone should give the American people pause.”

The FEC has compiled a separate database of potentially questionable overseas donations that contains more than 11,500 contributions totaling $3.38 Million. More than 520 listed their “state” as “IR”, which the FEC often uses as an abbreviation for “information requested.” Another 63 listed it as “UK”, the United Kingdom.

But others came from places as far afield as Abu Dhabi, Addis Ababa, Beijing, Fallujah,Florence, Italy, and a wide selection of towns and cities in France. The Washington Post reported in 2008 that “the Obama Campaign allowed donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity…”

“Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign also chose not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.”

Mr. Davis says this practice of disabling security measures could lead to single donors being able to give multiple donations of $199 without being reported. “In fact, almost half of the money Obama raised in 2008, almost $200 Million came from donors giving less than $200, twice the number of John McCain.

But the research indicates that one donor in particular, who listed his name as ‘Good Will’, his employer as ‘Loving’ and his occupation as ‘You’ donated more than 1,000 times for a total of $17,375. The Obama campaign did nothing until notified by the FEC. Who knows who this person and thousands of other Obama donors really are or where they are from?” Davis says.

Mr. Davis sites reports from the Obama 2012 campaign that they plan to raise One Billion Dollars for the President’s re-election. “If they reach that number, how much of it will come from legal American donors and how much will be from illegal foreign sources or those donating over the legal limits?

We are demanding the FEC release the results of its audit now so all Americans have the full story of Obama’s so-called ‘record setting’ fundraising. The American people can then decide if they want deep pocketed foreigners picking our President.”

mistydawnphoto / Shutterstock.com

The article Research and Results of Questionable Obama Fundraising Sources appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

President Obama unveiled his deficit reduction plan on Monday and his tone was widely different. Gone were the days of Obama holding out an olive branch to the Republicans. Obama, finally, took aim and fired.

In his plan, Obama clearly stated that millionaires and billionaires would have to begin to pay their fair share of taxes. He promised to veto any legislation proposed by the super congress that cut Medicare and did not include raising taxes for the wealthy. “This is not class warfare.

It’s math,” Obama declared, anticipating Republican criticism. He also called out Speaker John Boehner for his approach in earlier Bush tax cut debate. Boehner had stated that Obama would have to make some concessions. After concession after concession, Boehner and his party refused to budge, taking the same approach that they criticized Obama for taking.

The president’s proposal would focus on upper-income taxpayers, called the “Buffet Rule” after billionaire Warren Buffet has vocalized his low tax rate. The plan would also target tax loopholes and subsidies. Most of the cuts in Medicare would hit health care providers and not beneficiaries.

Although some benefit programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, however far less cuts that the GOP proposes. His cuts also include $1 trillion over ten years from the troop withdrawal in the Middle East.

The deficit-reduction plan represents Obama’s longer-term follow-up to the $447 billion in tax cuts and new public works spending that he has proposed as a short-term measure to stimulate the economy. The new proposal also inserts the president’s voice into the legislative discussions of a joint congressional “supercommittee” charged with recommending deficit reductions of up to $1.5 trillion.

Defending his emphasis on new taxes rather than only spending reductions, Obama said: “We can’t just cut our way out of this hole.” Republicans reacted exactly as expected. They used talking points about tax increases destroying jobs, but did not provide any real substance. Boehner said exactly as Obama thought so, calling it “class warfare.”

“Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth or even meaningful deficit reduction,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell. “The good news is that the Joint Committee is taking this issue far more seriously than the White House.”

Sounds nice from the right, but it is wrong. There are easy charts and facts that show when we had a higher tax rate; we had a hell of a lot more jobs. So, I am not sure why Republicans keep up with this myth, but so many people believe it. Trust me—in the words of George Bush—read my lips—taxing the rich will NOT cause any job loss.

The rich have had this awesome tax cuts for 10 years, and we have just lost jobs. So, this rationale is illogical.

Alan Freed / Shutterstock.com

The article Obama Unveils Deficit Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

According to the bureau of Labor statistics, the American economy added a shocking “zero” number of jobs in the month of August. This makes it the worst monthly job report this year, fueling doubts about economic recovery and increasing the pressure on President Obama.

Despite a big effort by the Obama administration to design a simulative fiscal policy in the recent past, the overall picture is still very negative. The greatest impact of this may be the Democrats’ ability to contest elections in 2012; in effect, the presidential approval index fell to the lowest of its time in office.

In August people who strongly approved of Obama’s performance fell 3 percent from 24 percent to 21 percent. On the other hand the number of people who strongly disapprove of the President’s performance rose to 42 percent from 38 percent.

Variations in this index show to what degree voters are satisfied with the performance of the President; if there is a rise in approval rating it shows that people’s concerns are being taken care of, or they feel happy. Likewise, if there is a fall in this index then voters are unhappy with the President.

The essential idea is that the President is in the midst of an uncertain economy and the political crisis will have major bearing on his hopes for a return to the White House in 2012. Everything depends on what the President has in store this time, but it will be far less ambitious than the $825 billion stimulus package of 2009.

Economists in the U.S. who advocated for government intervention call for a package of at least $300 billion to avoid backsliding of the economy. Overall unemployment rates are steady at 9.1 percent; anything less than 100,000 jobs a month would be catastrophic for the democratic campaign in 2012.

Economists estimated that the economy needs 150,000 jobs per month in order to keep pace with the growth rate of the population. But to reduce unemployment to below 8 percent, the economy needs to create more than 275,000 jobs in one month.

Initially President Obama had agreed to deliver the speech on his new job proposal on September 7, but incidentally (or intentionally) the Republican Party chose the same date to hold a televised debate. Just like with the debt deal, this incident became a platform for conflict between democrats and republicans, but the White House said it was just a matter of coincidence.

The Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, asked Obama to rescheduled his speech on September 8 and the White House agreed. This shows the basic idea that even in dire economic condition and undeniable uncertainty over the future of U.S economy, Republicans are enjoying their play in politics.

But all in all, the campaigning for 2012 is firing up. From the President to the presidential candidates — everyone is preparing to roll out thier agendas in order to cement their chances. They are very much concerned with what voters are concerned with, and of utmost importantly: Jobs, jobs, and jobs.

The political environment in the U.S. is driven by the unemployment agenda because ultimately it will determine the destiny of the front-runners for 2012. Everything depends on how well they sail the American citizens out of this mess.

The article Are The Democrats Losing Ground for 2012 Election? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Congressman Joe Walsh (the Eagles Joe Walsh must hate this guy) sort of apologized for calling President Barack Obama “idiotic.” This is the first time Walsh has said something offensive and he has only been in office for nine months.

On Friday, Walsh criticized the President for calling a joint session of Congress to lay out a jobs plan. “He is abusing his position,” Walsh said on MSNBC. “We reserve that for heads of state and visiting dignitaries, presidents in moments of crisis.”

“This is a political exercise. This is political theater.”

Earlier in the year, Walsh suggested that voters elected Obama because he was black in an interview with Slate. “Why was he elected? Again, it comes back to who he was. He was black, he was historic. And there’s nothing racist about this. It is what it is. If he had been a dynamic, white, state senator elected to Congress he wouldn’t have gotten in the game this fast.

This is what made him different. That, combined with the fact that your profession, not you, but your profession, was just absolutely compliant. They made up their minds early that they were in love with him.

They were in love with him because they thought he was a good liberal guy and they were in love with him because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal, the whole white guilt, all of that.”

He has since tried to distance himself from those assertions, although not very far. “I think we elected this president because of who he was,” Walsh told MSNBC host Martin Bashir. “He was a historic figure. It made this country feel good to elect him.”

“We did not vet him,” Walsh continued. “Your profession did not vet him as much we should.” At an Illinois gathering earlier this week, Walsh called the president “idiotic” and said he “destroyed job creation systematically for three years.”

Walsh told Bashir that he apologized for the statement at a town hall meeting on Thursday, saying he meant to call Obama’s plan to present a jobs speech “idiotic,” rather than the president himself. “I did not mean to say that,” Walsh told Bashir. “That was over the line.”

Walsh has stated he will not be attending the President’s job speech in a public statement released last week. “The president needs to stop the speeches, get out of his office and away from all the White House academics and start talking to real people out there,” Walsh said in a statement issued Thursday.

“They’re the ones who are going to create the jobs, not White House paper-pushers and bureaucrats,” the statement read in part.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article Congressman Joe Walsh Apologized for Obama Comments appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Obama announced this past week that the Department of Homeland Security will review roughly 300,000 immigration cases to see if these individuals are qualified for citizenship.

Controversy over these changes brings up the topic of what the leading GOP presidential candidates of 2012, Bachmann, Romney, and Perry think about this matter. Immigration reform and border control are vital issues for these candidates. They face losing valuable support from Hispanic voters in fundamental swing states such as New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Florida if they do not have a plan that can accommodate them.

Rick Perry, governor of Texas, is no stranger to immigration, living right along the Mexican border. He has already provided in-state tuition to illegal immigrants to offer them the opportunity to gain citizenship through education.

He also supports citizenship through military participation. His primary focus, although dealing with many illegal immigrants already, is to secure the border first and secondly work on immigration reform.

Perry demonstrated his views on Immigration earlier this week in South Carolina, as he discussed the problems the federal government has in handling immigration. His explanation for this was that in Texas alone, he has spent 400 million dollars on border patrol, which is the responsibility of the government and not the state.

His campaign has also focused the issue of border patrol around protecting American citizens against violence spreading north of Mexico, and how securing the borders are the most important way to secure America’s defence. Perry has focused on the importance of border patrol to not only discontinue illegal immigrants but also to prevent gun and drug trafficking as well.

Romney, a candidate who also ran in the 2008 election advocated a different approach to illegal immigration. He took the stance of adopting biometrically-enabled identification cards, so illegal immigrants could be identified and prohibited to work. He also frowned upon McCain’s policy to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants in 2008, stating, “illegal immigration has got to end and any form of citizenship amnesty is troublesome.”

In his campaign in 2012, Romney will focus more on the responsibility of employers who were hiring illegal immigrants. He thinks that punishment directed at the employers of illegal immigrants, would improve job creation being taken away from citizens. When it comes down to the issue of how to handle immigrants who are in America illegally, Romney believes that they are not qualified for citizenship.

Bachmann, another leading GOP presidential candidate, advocates the full and speedy citizenship of immigrants that have entered the United States legally, but is intolerant on those who have come to America illegally.

She refers back to the bill passed in 1986, in which congress granted amnesty to over three million immigrants that entered the country illegally. The government has not made major changes since then and Bachmann proposes that congress should enforce the laws put in place, as well as stricter border patrol.

Bachmann, in 2008, dealt with the death of four children that were killed by an illegal immigrant in Minnesota, her hometown, and it will be fascinating to see how this impacts her position on illegal immigrants with criminal records.

The main focus surrounding Bachmann’s campaign ultimately welcomes legal immigrants, but she follows the laws of the land in making sure that immigrants that have come to the United States illegally are not rewarded or given a free pass.

This difficult and complex issue effecting millions throughout America will play a critical part in gaining support. It will be interesting to see how this taxing issue plays out within the next year throughout each candidates campaign and if policies will be modified to achieve the Hispanic vote in swing states.

The article Obama’s Immigration Reform: Perry, Romney & Bachmann in Spotlight appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Obama Campaign may be fighting back against the Tea Party Republicans who have hijacked any sort of meaningful dialogue. An Obama adviser went on the offensive on a television appearance while the President had a heated exchange with a tea party activist.

Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs went on MSNBC on Tuesday. Gibbs, who now serves as a re-election advisor for the president, criticized Republicans, saying that they must decide whether they’re going to “swear allegiance to the tea party” or work with Democrats to create jobs.

He advised Congress to “pay attention to creating jobs again.” He also suggested that some Republicans “do not want to see this economy get better” because they know continuing misery will likely improve their election prospects.

Gibbs says Obama favors a number of moves to help businesses step up hiring. He says “the president is not focused on keeping his job, most of all. He’s focused on creating jobs for the American people.” He reported that Congress likely will be asked to continue payroll tax relief.

Looking ahead to 2012, Gibbs said, “We’re not running against George W. Bush.” He added, “But many of the policies that got us into the mess that we’re trying to dig out of now, are the same policies that the frontrunners for the Republican nomination seek to go back to.”

Meanwhile in Iowa, the tea party confronted Obama about vice president Joe Biden’s remarks earlier in the month comparing the tea party to terrorists. “He said we were acting like terrorists,” Iowa Tea Party activist Ryan Rhodes said, confronting the president after the Decorah town hall as Obama worked a rope line of audience members. “What we stand for is limited government and a balanced budget,” Rhodes continued.

“First of all, in fairness to this gentleman who raised a question, I absolutely agree that everybody needs to try to tone down the rhetoric. Now, in fairness, since I’ve been called a socialist who wasn’t born in this country, who is destroying America and taking away its freedoms because I passed a health care bill, I’m all for lowering the rhetoric.”

Obama later countered that Biden was making the point that almost failing to raise the debt ceiling was irresponsible. “He wasn’t objecting to the balanced budget amendment, he was objecting to us almost defaulting,” Obama said. As Rhodes persisted, and Obama continued to shake hands, the president added, “It doesn’t sound like you are interested in listening.”

The article Obama Fights Back, Kind Of appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A panel of medical experts recommended that all insurance plans be legally required to provide birth control for free, marking a huge advancement for women’s rights. The Obama Administration commissioned the non-partisan Institute of Medicine (IOM) to recommend what preventative health services should be fully covered by health insurance.

Along with birth control, the IOM reports suggested that HPV testing, contraceptive and lactation counseling, HIV screening and breast-feeding equipment be paid for by insurers.

Women’s rights groups were excited by the report. “As someone who has worked on women’s rights for nearly 30 years, I can say that today’s news marks one of the biggest advances for women’s health in a generation,” said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

“Currently, nearly one in three women finds it difficult to pay for birth control, and that’s why the United States has a far higher unintended-pregnancy rate than other industrialized countries. Making family-planning services available at no cost will help millions of women prevent unintended pregnancy and thereby reduce the need for abortion.”

Keenan added she was “confident that the Obama administration will adopt the IOM’s science-based recommendation and thus make affordability of contraception a reality for all women.”

The report by the IOM stated that nearly half of pregnancies in 2001 were unintended. The report noted that women who have unintended pregnancies are more likely to receive delayed or no prenatal care, smoke, drink alcohol, experience depression and live with domestic violence during a pregnancy. A recent study by the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research and advocacy group, estimates that unintended pregnancies cost $11.1 billion dollars each year.

Anti-abortion rights and anti-contraception groups are calling for the Obama Administration to reject the IOM’s recommendations because they believe that some emergency contraceptives function as “abortion pills.”

“This is a question of whether the government should mandate every health plan to cover these drugs free of cost,” said Jeanne Monahan, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity. “Whatever one’s position is on the issues of contraceptives, abortifacients and such, it does not matter whether proponents of such drugs do not care about the effect on human embryos.

The point is that many Americans do care, and many religious health plans would care, and that they should not be forced to violate their conscience.

This morality crap has gone too far. Really, birth control is bad now too??? I think every insurance plan already pays for a portion of birth control so I don’t really get the debate.

The article Birth Control May Soon Be Free Under Your Insurance Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As the United States is hurling closer to the point of no return on the debt ceiling, President Obama addressed the nation on Monday evening calling the partisan politics a “dangerous game.” Obama criticized the temporary Republicans plan and urged Congress to raise the debt ceiling before the quickly-approaching August 2^nd deadline.

“The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn’t vote for a dysfunctional government,” the president said in a hastily arranged prime-time speech. He appealed to the public to contact lawmakers and demand “a balanced approach” to reducing federal deficits. “It is a dangerous game we’ve never played before,” Obama said, “and we can’t afford to play it now.”

Obama discussed the importance of raising the debt ceiling and the consequences if the ceiling is not raised in time. “Republican House members have essentially said that the only way they’ll vote to prevent America’s first-ever default is if the rest of us agree to their deep, spending cuts-only approach,” Obama said. “If that happens, and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills – bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits, and the government contracts we’ve signed with thousands of businesses.”

The president suggested that Republicans consider raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. He pointed out that it is not fair to ask for average American families to deal with deep spending cuts while the wealthiest Americans get off scot-free. “Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get,” the President stated.

“How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for?”

Arguing that Republican leaders were acting outside of the interests of their constituents, President Obama called on voters to “make your voice heard.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) unveiled a plan earlier on Monday that would raise the debt ceiling temporarily for six months. Obama addressed the plan stating, “In other words, it doesn’t solve the problem,” he said. Speaker Boehner issued his own rebuttal speech immediately following Obama’s address.

The article Obama Calls the Debt Ceiling Debate a “Dangerous Game” appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, gained one large supporter on Tuesday- President Obama. The president has “long called for a legislative appeal for the so-called Defense of Marriage Act which continues to have a real impact on families,” White House spokesman Jay Carney announced Tuesday.

The Obama administration announced in February that it believes the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal ban on same-sex marriage, is unconstitutional and would no longer defend it in court. At that time, Obama stated he was still “grappling” with same-sex marriage but always personally opposed the Defense of Marriage Act as unfair.

“I think eyes have opened. More and more people across this land know people who are gay, who want to have a lasting relationship, who look at marriage as an economic agreement as well as an emotional agreement,” said Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), one of 14 senators who voted against the Defense of Marriage Act and sponsor of the new bill.

A hearing will be held this week in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and allow lawmakers to hear accounts from married same-sex couples. The couples will talk about how they are ineligible for many federal benefits afforded to heterosexual couples. Even gay couples who have married legally in states that recognize the same sex marriage are unable to file joint federal income taxes, receive spousal benefits under Social Security, among other federal advantages.

Feinstein’s legislation has 27 co-sponsors, but not a single Republican. With the GOP in control of the House, she understands the political realities of repealing the bill anytime soon.”If we don’t succeed this session, we will try again next session,” she said. “Believe me, we will continue this effort until the battle is won.”

Feinstein spoke at the National Press Club on Tuesday along with three same-sex couples. The couples spoke about the disadvantages they experience because of the Defense of Marriage Act. For example, Beth Coderre and Beth Vorro of Rhode Island have to purchase individual health insurance instead of as a family, costing them thousands of dollars extra each year.

“I think, as Rosa Parks might say, it’s time to get up from the back of the bus and assume our seats among the rest of our fellow human beings,” Coderre said.

The article Obama Supports Respect for Marriage Act appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Republicans “Cut, Cap and Balance” plan will get nowhere. President Obama has vowed to veto the plan if it makes it to his desk. The plan would condition a debt ceiling hike on a constitutional amendment requiring the federal government to balance its balance each year. The proposal would also demand significant spending cuts and a spending cap in order to raise the debt ceiling.

President Obama released a statement on Monday threatening to veto the bill. “Neither setting arbitrary spending levels nor amending the Constitution is necessary to restore fiscal responsibility,” reads the statement released by the White House. “The bill … would set unrealistic spending caps that could result in significant cuts to education, research and development, and other programs critical to growing our economy and winning the future. It could also lead to severe cuts in Medicare and Social Security, which are growing to accommodate the retirement of the baby boomers, and put at risk the retirement security for tens of millions of Americans.”

The proposal also “sets out a false and unacceptable choice between the Federal Government defaulting on its obligations now or, alternatively, passing a Balanced Budget Amendment that, in the years ahead, will likely leave the Nation unable to meet its core commitment of ensuring dignity in retirement,” the statement continues.

Ultimately, the bill “is inconsistent with this responsible framework to restore fiscal responsibility and is not an appropriate method of reducing the Nation’s deficits and debt,” it concludes.

The White House and Congress continue to try to find a compromise in order to raise the debt ceiling by the fast approaching deadline. Republicans are using this opportunity to try to force Obama and the Democrats to make drastic cuts to spending while refusing to raise taxes on the wealthy. A strange position to be in, for sure. The Republicans don’t see it that way though. Incredulously.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Obama’s veto threat is “disappointing.”
“While American families have to set priorities and balance their books, this White House obviously isn’t serious about making the same tough choices,” Boehner said in a statement. “This unfortunate veto threat should make clear that the issue is not congressional inaction, but rather the President’s unwillingness to cut spending and restrain the future growth of our government.”

“The House will proceed as planned with its vote on the Cut, Cap and Balance Act,” Boehner added.

The article Obama Vows to Veto GOP Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As of now, no major candidate has publicly decided to challenge Barack Obama to be the next president of the United States.  However, there is buzz surrounding numerous GOP hard hitters, suggesting that they may try to capture the GOP nomination in 2012.  There are so many possibilities, that this has turned into a series of articles.  In part one, we discussed Palin, Bachmann, Huckabee, and Gingrich.  In the second part, we focused on Gov. Haley Barbour, Gov. Mitch Daniels, and Jon Huntsman.  In part three, there are even more possibilities.

Would it be a real list without mentioning Mitt Romney?  The former Governor of Massachusetts may be the front runner in the list of potential candidates.  He is part of the establishment, sure, but many Republican voters are still fans.  He has a better track record, keeps his mouth shut and doesn’t embarrass himself the way most of the other likely GOP contenders do.  But, Romney has one large problem.  The Commonwealth Care reform that gave the state of Massachusetts health care for practically all is very similar to the Affordable Care Act that Republicans hate.   That will pose the biggest hurdle for Romney.  Other problems could be that he is too “elite,” he is from New England, and he is Mormon—all things that the Republican base doesn’t really like.

Also, the list must include Donald Trump.  That is right, The Donald is pretending he might run.  Trump recently spoke at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference suggesting that if he ran and won, “America would be respected again.”  Trump, like so many others in this wide open field, says he will make his decision in June. In a March WSJ/NBC poll, Trump had “an approval rating higher than better-known political quantities Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty.”  That makes two reality stars possible GOP contenders.

Speaking of Tim Pawlenty, the former governor of Minnesota is also on the long list of possible presidential GOP nominations.  Pawlenty, like the others, has given no indication either way whether he will run or not, but he may be closer than most.  Just this week, he announced his intention to form an exploratory committee.  His website also has Pawlenty for 2012 all over it. He did not seek a third term for governor of Minnesota, leading many to speculate that he will mount a presidential bid.  In January 2011, Pawlenty told the College Republicans group at The George Washington University “If I decide to run it would be for president, not vice president.”  Pawlenty has been making some trips to Iowa, also leading more to believe he will likely run for president.  Pawlenty, like Romney, is good at not making headlines.  The biggest problem with Pawlenty is that he is boring.  No one is excited about him.  The party may settle for him, but no one is enthusiastic about his candidacy.  That doesn’t count him out though.  No one was very excited about McCain either.

There are still even more possible candidates.  Check out part four in this series for other primary potentials.

The article Presidential Election 2012 – Possible GOP Runners appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The soldier Bradley Manning, who was accused by leaking more than 260,000 diplomatic cables, thousands of reports and one military attack video known as “Collateral Murder”. To Wikileaks, has been recently transferred from Quantico, which is a base of the Marine infantry to a military jail in  (Kansas).

The conditions the soldier faced at Quantico had been criticized by the congress, and for many civil rights groups. The Pentagon’s lawyer “ Jeh Johnson announced that Manning’s movement should not be interpret as an acceptance of the critics, since this “is not the case”. The detention conditions of Manning had been adjusted to all the legal standards, in each aspect”. Nevertheless, the Pentagon considers that the installations at Kansas are “ more appropriated for his continuous preventive detention”, Johnson claimed.

Due to the fact that the young soldier of 23 years old, has faced preventive detention from around 10 months, Manning lawyer, has solicited for manning to be submitted into an evaluation in order to determine and analyze if he has the appropriate “mental capability” to affront the trial.

Organization like International Amnesty, human rights organizations have criticize the detainment conditions, which Manning had to experience. Manning’s lawyers denounced by the beginning of March that the soldier had been receiving “inappropriate treatments in Quantico. Manning’s conditions were tough; he had to be in the cell 23 hours a day. The cell was not well equipped. He did not count with a pillow, sheets, and personal objects.

He was obligated to sleep naked, supposedly to guarantee his safety and lower the risk of suicidal attempt. According to the New York Times: President Obama and other administration officials have defended Private Manning’s treatment at Quantico, but Philip J. Crowley resigned as the State Department spokesman last month after publicly criticizing the Pentagon as “’ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid” in its treatment of him.

The new installations at Fort Leavenworth appear to be more suitable and appropriate. Lt. Col. Dawn Hilton, who is the garrison commander at Fort Leavenworth said: “ I encourage you to come out and see how wonderful our facility is,” she told reporters.

She also made clear, that once Manning arrived Leavenworth, he would be conducting an assessment by the mental health professionals at Leavenworth. Once verifying that the chances of him being a threat to himself and others, he would eat three meals a day in a group dining hall, also he will count with recreational time, indoors and out, during three hours per day. Finally he will also be allowed to interact with other prisoners.

The article Private Manning, Taken From Quantico to Leavenworth appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The GOP playing field is wide open.  There is plenty of speculation and many Republicans have provided hints or expressed the possibility of running against Barack Obama in 2012, but no one has officially made any type of announcement yet.  In Part I, we discussed possible candidates, Palin, Bachmann, Gingrich, and Huckabee.  Here are some more of the potential candidates.

The beltway press has speculated that Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour would run for president days after Obama was sworn in.  And Barbour has never denied his ambitions.  In March, Barbour’s political action committee made an important hire– former RNC communications director Jim Dyke.  Dyke will serve in an adviser role on communications for the PAC and many experts believe this hire is a clear intention of Barbour’s ambition.  Barbour has also long told reporters to judge his political ambitions by his weight.  Unsure of exactly what that means, it is interesting to note that Barbour appears to be losing weight.  Good or bad, I am not sure.  Barbour has made some controversial remarks about growing up during the civil rights era, which he described as “not that bad.”  Although most minorities don’t vote for Republicans, his comments still could pose a problem.

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels has also been flirting with the idea of a potential presidential run.  Daniels has stated he is considering a bid for the GOP presidential nomination and will announce his decision before the end of April unless he has to call the Indiana General Assembly back for a special session.  A poll of “political insiders” has suggested that Daniels is the frontrunner.  Maybe the insiders think he is awesome, but many people in his own state want him out.  Thousands of workers have gathered at the Indiana capital to protest Indiana’s version of a union busting bill, chanting catchy slogans like “Ditch Mitch.”  Does anyone really believe this man has a shot at the White House?

Finally, we have Jon Huntsman—the man you have likely never heard of.  Huntsman, a former Utah governor and current U.S. ambassador to China, is leaving his ambassador role on April 30^th.  Huntsman has hinted about a possible presidential bid earlier in the year and many feel he could be a strong challenger to Obama if he got past the primaries.  Of course, Huntsman would have a huge uphill climb if he were to mount a presidential bid.  He served under the enemy—the Obama administration.  President Obama has also sung Huntsman’s praises, which would not look good to the hard core right.  And Obama knows that.  “I’m sure that him having worked so well with me will be a great asset in any Republican primary,” Obama joked in January during a joint news conference with Chinese President Hu Jintao.

We still have more.  Check out the next part in our series for even more possible Republican challengers.

The article Will Haley Barbour Run for President in 2012? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Obama administration is investigating ways to change the nation’s gun laws by circumventing Congress and using executive action.  The current Congress, led by Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), has been adamantly pro-guns and dismiss any suggestions of limited an individual’s gun rights.

The Department of Justice held a meeting with a group of stakeholders in the ongoing gun-policy debates in March. Administration officials suggested that part of the discussion was expected to center around the White House’s options for changing gun control policy on its own or through its agencies and departments.  The administration has proposed changes on far-reaching issues ranging from beefing up background checks to encouraging better data-sharing between agencies.

Officials admit that executive orders are one of many options that the President and his advisors are considering.  “The purpose of these discussions is to be a productive exchange of good ideas from folks across the spectrum,” one official said. “We think that’s a good place to start.”

House Democrats, in the meantime, have introduced legislation that would make essential changes to the nation’s background check for gun purchases.  At a press conference announcing the legislation, the bill’s sponsor Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) joined with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to drum up support for the measure.  “Too often, any serious discussion about guns devolves into ideological arguments that have nothing to do with the real problem,” Bloomberg, a co-founder of the coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns, told reporters at a press event outside the Capitol. “Our coalition strongly believes in the Second Amendment. We also know from experience that we can keep guns away from dangerous people without imposing burdens on law-abiding gun owners.”

President Obama began the gun debate earlier in the month when he wrote an op-ed column for the Arizona Daily Star. In his piece, Obama outlined his ideas for gun control reform, including stronger state-to-state coordination, expedited background checks and greater enforcement of the laws already on the books.  Not surprisingly, the National Rifle Association immediately responded to Obama’s article with criticism.  Past administrations and lawmakers have always acted out of fear of the powerful lobbying group.  Even suggesting in the wake of the Arizona shooting that firearm access should be restricted was met with a quick and harsh response from the NRA.

The Obama administration is now acting and trying to change the ridiculous laws still on the books that allow citizens nearly as much firepower as the military, despite the protests from the NRA.  The meeting today is the first of a series of meetings about possible options to reverse lax gun laws.

The article Obama Attempts Gun Control Legislation appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.