OK, this is a direct reprint from a blog I consider so Anti American I read it every chance I get.  Seriously. I think the people who published this must have had a sudden Epiphany.  If they keep it up I might even decide they have decided to support the Nation I find so great.  Backsliding is in their nature though, so I am expecting little to avoid future disappointment.
|
Breaking from Newsmax.com
Obama Salutes US Troops, Condemns North Korea
SEOUL, South Korea (AP)Â Celebrating America's Veterans Day, President Barack Obama on Thursday saluted the bravery of U.S. troops who defended South Korea during its war with North Korea and condemned the communist north for continuing on a course that he says deepens its isolation from the rest of the world along with the poverty of its people.
Speaking at an Army garrison in a country where the United States keeps a presence of more than 28,000 troops, Obama said North Korea knows the path to prosperity and should take it.
"Because the Korean War ended where it began geographically, some used the phrase 'Die for a Tie' to describe the sacrifice of those who fought here," Obama said. "But as we look around at this thriving democracy and its grateful, hopeful citizens, one thing is clear: This was no tie. This was a victory.
"It was a victory then, and it is a victory today," the president said.
Obama said the Korean peninsula provides the world's clearest contrast between a society that is open and one that is closed, between a dynamic, growing nation like South Korea and a North Korea "that would rather starve its people."
"It's a contrast so stark you can see it from space, as the brilliant lights of Seoul give way to utter darkness in the north," he said, adding that it is a direct result of the path chosen by the reclusive, communist north.
Obama said the United States "will never waver" in its commitment to South Korea's security and that North Korea's continued pursuit of nuclear weapons will only lead to more isolation and less security. He urged Pyongyang to take another path, a road that he said will offer its people growing opportunity instead of crushing poverty.
© Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Notice the Copyright notice. To avoid a serious breech of the law concerning copyright, I am going to comment on the article as presented.  This act, in and of itself constitutes fair use.  Newsmax has done its readers a service I am not certain their editors are aware of.
First off, I would like to point out that the website bylines this Associated Press Article as "Breaking News from Newsmax.com.  That is sort of true, but it is breaking news from Associated Press, or South Korea, via AP, or just breaking news.  The REAL dateline is at the head of the opening paragraph. SEOUL, South Korea (AP)
If you care to read more of the AP dispatch, It was published in the Grand Junction Colorado Sentinel. Grand Junction is a nice little small town on the western edge of Colorado, The last time I was there they had a Restaurant with a fantastic deal on a Steak Dinner. The Place had the Ambiance of a Truck Stop, and food worth driving up the Rockies from Denver for.
I find it interesting that When the President praises capitalism, condemns tyranny and what has to be a criminally negligent Communist government, he gets published in Newsmax.com. But, when the President Urges Americans to adopt the South Korean Health Care system, he is called a Socialist or WORSE. To learn about the similarities between the South Korean system and the system created by the Health Security Legislation Passed this year, Read this Article from coopami.org,
Yep, the outline of the South Korean Health Care Plan, in place since December of 1963, and has undergone some changes since then.
South Korea’s healthcare security system has three arms:
The National Health Insurance Program,
Medical Aid Program,
And Long-term Care Insurance Program.
The national Health Insurance Program includes what we call an "Insurance Exchange."Â It mandates employer financed insurance, and it covers the elderly, disabled, and working poor in small companies with subsidies.
Sort of a perfect image of "Obamacare."
Tea Parties serve Kool Aid and Cookies.








Comments: 65
The last Neocon departed Washington over 2 years ago. Are you still playing Don Quixote and tilting at windmills?
Or are you imagining that the Tea Party folks are your new enemy?
Unless you want government to expand, then you see the Tea Party folks as a counter to the growth of the Obama administration..............and government in general.
So you're over the Neocon thing? LOL
Or are you putting on your battle armor and getting your lance ready?
I am afraid of the consequences of the results of inadequate funding of government.
We are nowhere near that. Government is so grossly over funded it is bankrupting our nation. The budget would have to be cut by 30% of GDP just to get back to historical levels.
WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU CONSIDER OVER FUNDING?
Or are you putting on your battle armor and getting your lance ready?" was not meant as a compliment, and it is EXTREMELY PERSONAL.
I find, in the Constitution a couple of arguments against your position, including the taxing authority, the authority of our Legislators, and some small things like Providing for the National Defense and the General Welfare. I can see you arguing that we are doing too much of either or both, but you can't drag the Constitution into the room to make your argument. IT IS ALREADY THERE.
However, I am absolutely certain of neither of those.
I see you frequently blabbering on needlessly about Neocons, as though they are still around and haunting Moon Valley. Jeez Karl - the Neocon era was over in 2008!
I think you're just upset that there's always a strong Conservative undercurrent in this country..............under one label or another. We just aren't going to go away!
I love it when government is underfunded. Why? Because from my own experience in the corporate world, when an entity receives less money in ongoing budgetary cycles, it tends to contract..............or it becomes extinct. I'm hopeful that Mr. Obama will catch the corporate hint.
SAYING THE NEOCONSERVATIVE DOCTRINE OF DOMINATION IS NOT PLAYING A PART IN OUR POLITICAL LANDSCAPE IS A FLAT OUT LIE>not to call YOU a liar.
I have no idea how you can equate a group like Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Abrams, Douglas Feith, Donald Rumsfeld, and Karl Rove with anyone in the Tea Party movement.
Those guys were career politicians and total Washington insiders. The Tea Party folks are more like your neighbor down the street.
They may be more militant, but they definitely don't have the muscle that the NeoCons did. You're labeling the wrong group.
Donald Koch, who is a major financier of the TEA Party, is also a major financier of the Republican Party. The connection where the sun shines is not clear. In the Back room the two groups are inseparable.
Donald Koch is justified to fund both he believes in true conservative movements like the tea party and republicans because they are more conservative than democrats.
I know relatively little about the Tea Party folks, but what I know, I like. Ground-roots and anti-tax is how they started...........about a year ago.
I see no former known NeoCons claiming any part of the leadership, and that is encouraging, as new blood and new ideas were needed in the Conservative/Libertarian realm.
What's even more encouraging is that Liberals are having a helluva hard time countering the Tea Party folks...............as evidenced last Tuesday. Libs have no rebuttal for the TP people. If you're a Conservative then these are good times!
You'll need to be baptized now.
Go get the icicle waters of Alaska poured over your forehead by Sarah Palin.........LMAO!
I am actually laughing WITH you for a change.
Don't let this happen again - it's freaking me out.......lol.
The latest figures I could find are an international ranking of CENTRAL government expenditures as a percentage of GDP...the USA is ranked 144th, at 19.9%. The figures are from 2008. Germany ranked 41st, at 48.8%, Canada was 43rd at 48.3
Now where did you get that 44 %?
1) They had certainty of the tax structure moving forward
2) Investors could be sure their investments would not be illegally cast aside by the Obama Administration (ie bondholders in GM)
3) Obama would quit demonizing the funding source for a lot of businesses Wall Street
Business would hire if they had a need to hire because of demand. That tax structure would be absorbed into the cost of business. In addition, the incentives that Obama has proposed would reduce the burden for new hires.
Investors are always at risk, but an "illegal" confiscation of investments is not one of the risks. If you are referring to the reorganization of GM and Chrysler, that was the result, not of government intervention, but bankruptcy. Government did not Bankrupt GM...General Motors did.
Obama is NOT demonizing Wall Street, he is attempting to get it operating in a rational manner. If you have a crazy man driving the train, the demon is the crazy man, not the new engineer.
I really do like to see you thinking about this, but you need to go beyond the Beck -- O'Reilly -- Limbaugh play book and do some actual research.
Investors are always at risk, but an "illegal" confiscation of investments is not one of the risks. If you are referring to the reorganization of GM and Chrysler, that was the result, not of government intervention, but bankruptcy. Government did not Bankrupt GM...General Motors did.
You are wrong, stockholders lose everything in bankruptcy, not bondholders. The Government intervened and illegally ignored a large percentage of bondholders and gifted united autoworkers a much larger percentage of the new GM. This had never happened before and is one of the major reasons for hesitance. That is adult research and the truth. Of course obama did it to help his union friends and give them control of GM but that does not make it right.
I read facts Karl, dont listen to beck or Limbaugh, i do occasionally see an episode of O'reilly, but do not really pay that much attention. I work in the real world and have started several companies. These are real concerns and I can tell you we do not hire more people now, because we are being taxed to death. It cost so much money just to pay Social Security and Medicare. It really has become a killer government in size.
The fact is there was ABSOLUTELY no constitutional or legal violation in any part of the GM reorganization. The Facts are what they are. Your interpretation is based on Partial not complete knowledge of the facts. and Publius, I am sure of this, because if It were any different a federal Judge and a few dozen lawyers would be up on charges brought by the Politicians who are FEEDING YOU HORSE COOKIES WITH YOUR KOOL AID.
Here are two links to help you on how the bankruptcy did not follow the law
Link 1
Link 2
Is what I was talking about. I am not being fed anything by anyone. I can do research are realize a lot of things the Obama Administration are doing are not only bad for America, but a lot run afoul of the law. Just like when FDR exploited the depression to push his radical agenda. But with Rahm "let no crisis go to waste" as the original COS what could we expect. Why people thought that someone who came from the failed policies of Chicago was trustworthy is beyond me
The stock market would shoot to 20,000 inside of one week.
But we all know this isn't going to happen, don't we?
Mr. Obama's agenda is definitely in the way of progress.
Where did you get the 22 million number?
Let me help you with your economics theory lesson...........
If the stock market went up to 20,000 just about every company would be hiring. The 15 million unemployed would no longer exist. If outrageous regulation in this country was curtailed, even for a moment, you'd see an explosion of hiring.
So why can't Mr. Obama just put his agenda on hold for a while and get everyone back to work with a program like that?
Please tell me, because there's no logical reason.
44% of the US population is in some form or another an employee of the government. That's what John Maynard Keynes warned us against. He saw the rise of Socialism and defined it for future generations.
I have no doubt that Mr. Obama supports the idea of Capitalism. However, I think he enjoys using the fruits of Capitalism as his own piggy bank for the current Socialist expansion of the US government. You may not like it when I (and others) call Mr. Obama a Socialist. However, the definition was laid down years ago by one of your own. Mr. Obama's actions are what I'm judging - not his words.
"Lets shut down half that government involvement, say the half that governs big business and subsidizes it."
Do you understand that no one would be left out of a huge boom like that?
Your imaginary 22% more would be hired just like everyone else. Like I said, Mr. Obama would be hailed as a hero. The Depression would be over.
Yay Left Wing! You solved an endemic problem, for once!