Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Kenny of Ireland Before a Bilateral Meeting

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Oval Office

10:41 A.M. EDT

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, it is a great pleasure to welcome back Taoiseach Kenny to the Oval Office, to the White House and his entire delegation.  Obviously, we cherish this opportunity once a year to reaffirm the incredible bond between the United States and Ireland.  This year, it also gives us an excuse to stretch out St. Patrick’s Day for a couple of extra days, which is always good.

This is now my fifth time to welcome the Taoiseach to the Oval Office.  I’ve had the occasion to visit Ireland as well -- one of the truly wonderful trips that I’ve taken as President of the United States.  And the reason that these meetings go so well is because of the incredible bond and history between our two countries.

Obviously, the contributions of Irish Americans to the United States is legendary.  But what is also true is that we have an incredibly strong partnership on economic issues, on security issues.  The Taoiseach has shown great leadership during difficult times in Ireland.  And we’re seeing progress in the Irish economy.  That’s good for the U.S. economy because we have a lot of trade, a lot of investment in Ireland. 

There was a story this morning about a deal between Ryanair and Boeing in which we’ll be selling a whole lot of airplanes to Ireland.  And it’s an example of how the progress that’s made in Ireland benefits jobs and businesses here in the United States.  Obviously, the Taoiseach is very interested, as well as in continuing to attract direct investment from the United States to Ireland.  So this will be a major topic of discussion.

Ireland also punches above its weight internationally when it comes to humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping.  Irish troops are in many very difficult places in the world and provide the kinds of stabilization and humanitarian efforts that make all the difference and save lives.

And so I am very much looking forward to having a good conversation.  I’m sure we will also touch on the issue of Northern Ireland in which we have continued to see progress coming out of the Good Friday agreements, but we also have to recognize that there’s a lot more work to be done before there’s true unity of effort in that country.  And I know that both in discussions with the Taoiseach as well as in talking to the ministers who are here from Northern Ireland, we’ll have an opportunity to find out how the United States can be helpful in that overall effort as well.

So, again, Taoiseach, I want to welcome you.  Thank you for giving me an excuse to break out my green tie.  (Laughter.)  And I'm sure that we'll have a wonderful lunch up on Capitol Hill and once again be able to reaffirm the incredible friendship between our peoples. 

PRIME MINISTER KENNY:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Could I to say that it’s a particular privilege to be able to come here to the White House to visit President Obama to continue this wonderful tradition that the American government over the years has shown to Ireland because of the particular and unique relationship between our countries covering many centuries.

I come here both as Taoiseach, but also as the presidency of the European Union.  I suppose I should say this because I’ll never get the chance again, it’s great to be on presidential terms here.  (Laughter.)  The President of the United States, an Irishman, and the President of Europe, an Irishman, meeting in the Oval Office.  (Laughter.) 

But I would like to say seriously, it’s an opportunity for me to brief the President on the progress being made in challenging times for the Irish government, following a very clear and strategic plan.  It's also an opportunity to brief the President on issues of the European Union and the progress being made by the European Council, with particular reference to the EU-U.S. trade -- participation and free trade, to which the President referred in his State of the Union address.  I’d like to follow that through with him.  Also, to brief the President on opportunities in respect of Northern Ireland, immigration -- undocumented Irish -- and, of course, the general perspectives both for the world economy.  And as the President is moving to the Middle East this evening, I can give him an update on the recent meeting and discussion that the European Council held there.

Besides, it’s a real opportunity to celebrate St. Patrick's Week.  I have a second tie for the President, if he so wishes.  And, of course, there is a standing open invitation to President Obama to come back to Ireland whenever is convenient and appropriate and when he so wishes.  And maybe the next time, when our economies are moving in a more positive direction, we might actually have time to take out the sticks on the golf course.  I’m looking forward to that sometime in the future.

So to First Lady Michelle, the children, Malia and Sasha, we wish the President continued success and good fortune in the very onerous responsibilities that he lay up on his shoulders as the leader of the free world.  And it's a pleasure and a privilege to be in the Oval Office.  

END 
10:46 A.M. EDT

The first stop on President Obama's trip to the Middle East marks the first time the President has visited Israel since taking office, and comes as its citizens celebrate the 65th anniversary of a free and independent State of Israel.

On the third anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, Secretary Kathleen Sebelius lays out some of the ways in which the health reform has lowered costs.

We will be posting regular updates from the road and livestreaming several of the President's events on whitehouse.gov/live

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

GOP lawmaker: Reid told me nothing would be done before election

Shorty after Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) was elected, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told Moran that the Senate would not do anything until after the 2012 presidential election.

"I was standing on the Senate floor and I was approached by Sen. Reid," Moran said during a speech Thursday hosted by the Ripon Society.  "I knew Sen. Reid from my days in the House.  Sen. Reid had a locker just a few down from me in the House gym, and we’d see each other each morning for a long number of years.  And Sen. Reid that day, in a casual conversation, asked me, ‘Jerry, how do you like the Senate?’  My response was that I’m very grateful for the opportunity that I’ve been given.  But Leader, we’re not doing anything.  Sen. Reid’s response was, ‘Jerry, you need to understand that we’re not going to do anything until after the election.’"

Moran recounted the story while he was explaining what prompted him to take a job as chairman of National Republican Senatorial Committee.

"When you get elected to public office, and there are very few elections that are easy and most of us are motivated by the desire to do something, and to be told at that stage —almost two years before the next election— that nothing was going to be done, was an eye-opening experience to me and was very troublesome," Moran said.

"And so my interest in serving in the NRSC capacity really revolves around a desire to see the Senate function, to have regular order, to have the opportunity for Americans to see their Senators have a debate, to have votes occur and to have the country see the Senate move in the direction it ought to go."

Reid's office did not respond to a request for comment.

Moran was appointed chairman of the NRSC in late 2012 and immediately named Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio) as vice chairmen.

View Comments

View the original article here

Remarks by President Obama and President Napolitano Before Bilateral Meeting

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Oval Office

10:10 A.M. EST

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, I want to extend the warmest greetings to my good friend, President Napolitano, on a return visit to the White House.  I think it’s entirely appropriate the day after Valentine’s Day, since we know that St. Valentine was associated with Italy, that we had a chance to express our love for the Italian people and my high regard for President Napolitano.

He has been an extraordinary leader not just in Italy but also in Europe.  We’ve had occasion to meet many times in which we have expressed again and again the importance of the transatlantic relationship, and the deep and abiding friendship and connection and bond between the Italian people and the American people.

And obviously, we have constantly talked about the extraordinary connection that derives from the tradition of Italian-Americans making enormous contributions to the United States.  President Napolitano has been so gracious in talking about his memories of the role that America played in liberating Europe and instituting the kinds of democratic practices and traditions that have served both sides of the Atlantic so well for so many years.

I want to thank the people of Italy for their enormous contributions to the NATO Alliance.  Italy is one of our biggest contributors in Afghanistan, and makes enormous sacrifices.  They welcome and host our troops on Italian soil.  The economic bonds between our two countries are very significant.  And in all this, President Napolitano has shown himself to be a visionary leader who has helped to guide and steer Europe towards greater unification, but always with a strong transatlantic relationship in mind.

The last point I would make is that President Napolitano has also just been a good personal friend, a tremendous host to my family when they visited Italy.  You should know, Mr. President, that one of the few things that my daughters asked me after I was reelected was, does this mean we can go back to Italy again?  (Laughter.)  So I confirmed to them that any excuse we can find to visit Italy, we shall return hopefully. 

And this will give us an opportunity to not only visit but also to talk about some important issues, including the world economy.  I announced at the State of the Union this week my interest and intention in pursuing a U.S.-European Union free trade agreement, which I know is something of great interest to the President.  I’ll be interested in hearing from him how he anticipates the elections and government formation in Italy and what implications that has for the larger European project.  And I’m sure we’ll have a chance to talk about some national security issues as well. 

But my main message is to say thank you for your extraordinary service, and I’m so glad that we had an opportunity to visit once again before you move onto even better things -- I assume they’re at least having more fun than politics.

PRESIDENT NAPOLITANO:  Thank you very much.  I don’t need to say how deeply touched I am by the generous appreciation we just had of my long public service in the interest of Italy, of our alliance, of our common goals.  And I am grateful to President Obama for inviting me to pay a farewell visit at the White House, and for giving me the opportunity of an exchange of ideas before I complete my presidential mandate.

I am sure that we will be able today to express a common sense of confidence in the future of Italy and of U.S.-Italy relations; more generally speaking, in the future of our joint commitment to advance global peace, democracy, and human rights.

Italy has made remarkable progress in the past 14 months -- the Italian government, with parliamentary support of different and even opposite political forces, and with the comprehension of different social groups and of all citizens.  While this progress must and will continue and be developed because Italy needs it, Europe needs it, and I think the world as a whole needs it.  

The announcement which has been made -- just made in Brussels and in Washington was significant because I was impressed by the words we, the leaders of the European Union and of the United States towards a beautiful incipit.  And as well, I think that trade -- the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, which will be realized -- now we are the opening talks -- but I am sure about also the conclusion can represent a relevant contribution for promoting a new wave of development of technologic advancement of social justice on both shores of the Atlantic.  And I think it can represent even something more.  It is to say a new historic stage in relations between Europe and the United States -- not only economically, but also from a political and moral point of view. 

My conviction is that the effect that a shift has been taking place in the center of gravity of the world development of international relations doesn’t cancel at all the crucial importance of transatlantic alliance, of transatlantic relations.  On the contrary -- it represents a new stimulus for us to make such a framework of relation more active, more competitive.  It is absolutely necessary for a better world to have our common heritage of values and experiences be a decisive factor also in the course of globalization in the next future.

It is the spirit in which I adhere to testify once more my personal friendship and my admiration for President Obama, only deploring that the visit of the President and his family in Rome was so short, and expecting a new visit also in my new capacity.  I be in another palace, but I be there to welcome you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  That’s great.  Thank you. 

END               
10:18 A.M. EST

The two leaders discussed the world economy and President Obama's plan to pursue a U.S.-European Union free trade agreement, which was mentioned in his State of the Union address earlier this week.

Here’s a quick glimpse at what happened this week on WhiteHouse.gov.

Cecilia Muñoz, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, answers questions from the public about immigration reform and President Obama's State of the Union Address in an “Open for Questions” session moderated by Elianne Ramos from LATISM.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Saving Syria before it's too late

Saving Syria before it's too late - The Hill's Congress Blog @import "/plugins/content/jw_disqus/tmpl/css/template.css"; li.item435,li.item437,li.item439,li.item441,li.item443,li.item497,li.item499,li.item501,li.item503,li.item605,li.item689,li.item691,li.item693,li.item695,li.item697,li.item683,li.item685{display: none;} var _comscore = _comscore || []; _comscore.push({ c1: "2", c2: "10314615" }); (function() { var s = document.createElement("script"), el = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.async = true; s.src = (document.location.protocol == "https:" ? "https://sb" : "http://b") + ".scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js"; el.parentNode.insertBefore(s, el); })(); function getURLParameter(name) { return decodeURI( (RegExp(name + '=' + '(.+?)(&|$)').exec(location.search)||[,null])[1] );}(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=369058349794205"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); if (getURLParameter("set_fb_var") == '1') { jQuery.cookie('set_fb_var', 'true', { expires: 7, path: '/' }); return true; } if (!jQuery.cookie('set_fb_var') && d.referrer.match(/facebook.com/i)) { window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({ appId : '340094652706297', status: true, xfbml: true, cookie: true, oauth: true }); }; }}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));if((navigator.userAgent.match(/iPhone/i)) || (navigator.userAgent.match(/iPod/i))) {document.write('');}if(navigator.userAgent.match(/iPad/i)) {document.write('');}if(navigator.userAgent.match(/Android/i)) {document.write('');} Follow!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Advanced Search Options » Home/NewsSenateHouseAdministrationCampaignPollsBusiness & LobbyingSunday Talk ShowsCampaignBusiness & LobbyingK Street InsidersLobbying ContractsLobbying HiresLobbying RevenueOpinionColumnistsEditorialsLettersOp-EdWeyants WorldCapital LivingCover StoriesFood & DrinkNew Member of the Week20 QuestionsMy 5 Min. W/ObamaAnnouncementsMeet the LawmakerJobsVideoGossip: In The Know Briefing RoomRegWatchHillicon ValleyE2-WireFloor ActionOn The MoneyHealthwatchTransportationDEFCON HillGlobal AffairsCongressBallot BoxGOP12In The KnowPunditsTwitter Room HomeSenateHouseAdministrationCampaignPollsBusiness & LobbyingSunday Talk ShowsBlogsBriefing RoomRegWatchHillicon ValleyE2-WireFloor ActionOn The MoneyHealthwatchTransportationDEFCON HillGlobal AffairsCongressBallot BoxGOP12In The KnowPunditsTwitter RoomOpinionA.B. StoddardBrent BudowskyLanny DavisDavid HillCheri JacobusMark MellmanDick MorrisMarkos Moulitsas (Kos)Robin BronkEditorialsLettersOp-EdsJuan WilliamsJudd GreggChristian HeinzeKaren FinneyJohn FeeheryCapital LivingCover StoriesFood & DrinkAnnouncementsNew Member of the WeekMy 5 Min. W/ObamaAll Capital LivingVideoHillTubeEventsVideoClassifiedsJobsClassifiedsResourcesMobile SiteiPhoneAndroidiPadLawmaker RatingsWhite PapersOrder ReprintsLast 6 IssuesOutside LinksRSS FeedsContact UsAdvertiseReach UsSubmitting LettersSubmitting Op-edsSubscriptions   Saving Syria before it's too lateBy Mindy Ko, American University-02/13/13 03:00 PM ET Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");

This month marks two years since the start of the Syrian crisis. The civil war has claimed at least 60,000 lives and sent 755,000 refugees fleeing to neighboring Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey. Nearly half of the refugees in Jordan are younger than twelve years old, and women outnumber men two to one. Over two million Syrians are internally displaced and unable to cross borders. The United Nations reports that more than four million Syrians are in urgent need of assistance. President Bashar al-Assad’s “iron fist” has responded to global condemnation and the rise of opposition forces with increased violence and overwhelming force.

Last week, the World Health Organization reported outbreaks of Hepatitis A in Syria, particularly among the internally displaced. Doctors Without Borders stated that leishmaniasis, a parasitic disease, is endemic in and around Aleppo. Water and sanitation conditions throughout Syria have deteriorated, as public water is being rationed and sanitation conditions across the country have broken down. Fleeing civilians must struggle not only with harsh winter conditions, but also lack of proper medical care, overcrowded camps, and a critical shortage of medicine. More than half of Syria’s public hospitals have closed, with some overtaken by the Syrian regime and rebel opposition forces as torture centers and staging grounds. Ambulances have been impounded for use in combat. As doctors and medical staff flee the country, Syrian civilians are left in an increasingly fragile position that demands international attention beyond humanitarian aid.
 
President Obama has repeatedly issued statements hinting at deeper intervention in Syria following his re-election, but his administration has done little besides increase humanitarian and non-lethal aid. How beneficial are medical and food supplies if the country is engulfed in such violence that these supplies are unable to reach those in particularly volatile conflict zones? The cautious leadership of the U.S. has stalled for far too long, and the violence in Syria has now escalated to the level of genocide, defined by the Genocide Convention as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy…a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group such as: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) imposing measure intended to prevent births within the group; and (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.” The Syrian regime and opposition forces are both guilty of at least three (a, b, and c) of these violations.?

The U.S. is well aware that the international community looks to it for the green light in intervention in Syria. Political debates about the regime’s ties to Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as the threat of chemical warfare and warnings of a regional war were the U.S. to take action, have stymied U.S. intervention in Syria. The crisis in Syria has reached a point where it can only deteriorate: without further intervention, the sectarian conflict will spill across borders and conditions of refugee camps will deteriorate. Chemical weapons could fall into the hands of Islamist extremists or Hezbollah. Cities and villages across Syria are collapsing as the recently formed National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces has proven to be largely ineffective. Neighborhood shellings occur on a daily basis, and the exodus of police forces and medical staff have left civilians increasingly vulnerable.
 
Now more than ever, the Obama administration needs to place Syria at the top of its agenda. In yesterday’s State of the Union address, President Obama declared that “[the United States] has a huge stake in the outcome [of Syria]…we will support policies that lead to strong and stable democracies and open markets, because tyranny is no match for liberty.” The problem is, President Obama, tyranny in Syria by the Assad regime has proven – for two years – to be a match for liberty. Continued cautious leadership and failure by the U.S. to effectively intervene may very well lead to policymakers’ worst fears: threats of Al Qaeda or other extremists coming to power, a regional war, and tens of thousands more lives lost at the hands of delayed intervention.  
Ko is a graduate student at American University's School of International Service. She served in the Peace Corps in Jordan from 2006-2008 and is currently studying international human rights.

Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=369058349794205"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); View Comments Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/282913-saving-syria-before-its-too-lateThe contents of this site are © 2013 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc. The Hill Archives: Senate | House | Administration | Campaign | Business & Lobbying | Capital Living | OpinionView News by Subject:
Defense & Homeland Security | Energy & Environment | Healthcare | Finance & Economy | Technology | Foreign Policy | Labor | Transportation & InfrastructureGO TO THE HILL HOME » More Videos »

Congress Blog
Most Popular StoriesMost ViewedIt's not unprecedented to filibuster cabinet nomineesObama, 'Gang of Eight' duck the hardest questionHouse can no longer ignore violence against LGBT communityWhen the climate crisis merits civil disobedienceHow sequestration will hurt patientsEmailedAsian American priorities for immigration reformHow sequestration will hurt patientsComprehensive immigration reform is consistent with our values and greatnessFalse trade-off on BahrainWhen the climate crisis merits civil disobedienceDiscussedFalse trade-off on BahrainWhen the climate crisis merits civil disobedienceBlog Home »Most Viewed RSS Feed »  More Foreign Policy HeadlinesPreventing future attacks on foreign service personnelFalse trade-off on BahrainBias against Palestinians on display at hearingMore Foreign Policy Headlines » Foreign Policy News RSS feed »  Congress Blog Topics Campaign » Cardoza's Corner » Civil Rights » Economy & Budget » Education » Energy & Environment » Foreign Policy » Healthcare » Homeland Security » Judicial » Labor » Lawmaker News » Politics » Presidential Campaign » Religious Rights » Technology » The Administration »Briefing RoomPresident, top Senate Democrats huddle on immigration reformGraham tells president to stop 'cheerleading' for new gun lawsRalph Nader pans Obama call for higher minimum wage as ‘too little, too late’
More Briefing Room »Congress BlogReform CFPB to save itSaving Syria before it's too lateHouse can no longer ignore violence against LGBT community
More Congress Blog »Pundits BlogTed Cruz slanders war hero, embarrasses Texas and violates Armed Services Committee tradition Obama's fundamental change?Partisan, forgettable State of the Union by an overly confident president
More Pundits Blog »Twitter RoomRep. Polis discusses pot, drug laws on RedditHouse Republican caucus launches Spanish-language Twitter feedGOP looks to link Obama to cuts with social media push
More Twitter Room »Hillicon ValleyOVERNIGHT TECH: House to restart cybersecurity debateSenate Judiciary hearing highlights call for high-skilled immigration reformIntel chairman: Obama's cybersecurity order paves the way for CISPA
More Hillicon Valley »E2-Wire (Energy)OVERNIGHT ENERGY: Climate advocates seek post-SOTU momentum, House looks at energy costsHydropower bill sails through House Obama and Murkowski back green tech cash – with one huge difference
More E2-Wire (Energy) »Ballot BoxPoll: McConnell leads Judd for Kentucky Senate, but still vulnerablePoll: N.H. Sen. Shaheen popular, but Rep. Shea-Porter vulnerable in 2014Poll: Jindal popularity drops, Landrieu leads all Republicans
More Ballot Box »On The MoneyWhite House opposes, but will not veto, bill to extend pay freezeWays and Means unveils tax reform working groupsWarren: GOP senators 'fundamentally wrong' on consumer bureau
More On The Money »HealthwatchOVERNIGHT HEALTH: Walker rejects Medicaid expansionScott Walker rejects Medicaid expansionDems: Postal schedule must protect Rx deliveries
More Healthwatch »Floor ActionReid files cloture on Hagel-vote after Inhofe blocks the nominationGOP senators offer alternative immigration enforcement reformsSenate votes to approve judicial nomination
More Floor Action »TransportationReport: American Airlines, U.S. Airways agree to merger LaHood praises Obama State of the Union transportation pushRendell: Gas tax increase 'inescapable'
More Transportation »DEFCON HillFeinstein delays Brennan confirmation vote until after recessOVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Senate showdown over Hagel set for FridayPanetta: Broken bonds with Congress my biggest disappointment
More DEFCON Hill »Global AffairsKerry says he's weighing new options against Syria's AssadObama renews national emergency with respect to Libya Rubio, Risch demand information on Benghazi suspect
More Global Affairs »In The KnowPoland Spring rep: Rubio 'seemed very natural'Rubio prefers Poland Spring; Jackson Lee likes Deer ParkMichelle Obama welcomes young Oscar nominee to White House
More In The Know »RegWatch Panel chairman aims to spotlight Obama overstepsReport: Fake drugs pose threat to USUnion chief: White House delay on silica rule ‘inexcusable, heartless’
More RegWatch » Blogs News FeedCongress Blog RollCapital GamesDaily KosDCCCDNCDrudge ReportDSCCJudicial WatchNRCCNRSCPolitical AnimalRNCThe ChamberPostThe CornerThe Huffington PostThe NoteThe Plank COLUMNISTSMarkos Moulitsas2016 the year for ClintonDick MorrisCapturing Reagan's centerMore Columnists »

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.

Home/NewsNews by SubjectBlogsBusiness & LobbyingOpinionCapital LivingSpecial ReportsJobsVideo Home | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Contact | Advertise | RSS | Subscriptions

The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006 | 202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

The contents of this site are © 2013 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.

View the original article here

Michigan GOP Would Force Women To Undergo Invasive Ultrasounds Before Getting An Abortion

Example of a transvaginal probe

Michigan Republicans introduced a mandatory ultrasound bill this week with a carefully-worded clause that threatens to stir up controversy that first erupted during the height of last year’s “War on Women.” By stipulating that the ultrasounds must use the “most technologically advanced equipment on site,” Michigan lawmakers would require women seeking abortions to undergo an invasive transvaginal probe.

Transvaginal ultrasound bills, which require doctors to insert a wand into a woman’s vagina before proceeding with an abortion procedure, were introduced last year in Virginia and Alabama. Widespread public outcry — including considerable derision from the national media — forced GOP lawmakers to back away from the extreme legislation, but Talking Points Memo reports that Michigan lawmakers are now ready to revive the fight:

The bill requires the use of ultrasound equipment “providing the most visibly clear image of the gross anatomical development of the fetus and the most audible fetal heartbeat.” As a practical matter, that requires transvaginal ultrasounds, said Donna Crane, the policy director of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

“It does lay bare that the real motive is to make abortion providers continue to acquire more and more and more equipment before they’re even eligible to perform an abortion,” Crane told TPM. “They’re trying to make it harder for doctors to do their jobs.” [...]

Crane said NARAL and its allies are prepared to fight to sink the legislation.

“Women should be up in arms over these types of laws,” she said. “Unfortunately they’re not new. But the fact that politicians just went through an election cycle and got spanked over how they treat women and reproductive freedoms and still introduce bills like this really boggles the mind. It’s not clear that the sponsors haven’t been living under rocks since November.”

But unfortunately for the women in Michigan, this is hardly the only recent attack on their reproductive rights. Their lawmakers already capitalized on the lame duck session at the end of last year to push through extreme anti-abortion legislation that limits abortion access for women who live in rural areas, requires doctors to prove that mentally competent women haven’t been “coerced” into their decision to have the procedure, and enacts unnecessary, complicated rules for abortion clinics and providers.

Abortion opponents often use mandatory ultrasounds as a tactic to impose additional barriers to reproductive care, as well as convince women to change their minds about having an abortion. But they don’t work. Studies have shown that nearly 90 percent of women feel “very confident” about their decision to have an abortion before they approach a doctor, and forcing them to look at an ultrasound doesn’t change their mind.

View the original article here

The One Question Congress Must Ask Before Confirming Obama’s CIA Director

The Senate Intelligence Committee will hold a hearing tomorrow on the confirmation of President Obama’s nominee for Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan. There are a number of questions Brennan should and needs to answer but the hearing presents the perfect opportunity to get the current top Obama administration counterterrorism official perhaps most closely involved in the targeted killing program against al Qaeda to answer the fundamental question about it: when does it end?

Since his first bid to direct the Agency fizzled in 2008 after questions were raised about his role in the CIA torture program during the Bush years, Brennan has filled an at times more vital role in the Obama administration. Acting as the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, serving under the National Security Adviser, Brennan has advised the President on counterterrorism for the past four years. As such, his access to the President to weigh in on security matters domestic and international has been almost unparalleled. In the aftermath of the failed Christmas Day bombing in 2009, Brennan authored a scathing review of what was then U.S. counterterrorism policy. While the Newtown tragedy was still ongoing last December, it was Brennan who first briefed Obama about the school shooting.

Brennan’s most controversial role has been his front-and-center position in the Administration’s military campaign against al-Qaeda and its affiliates. The use of targeted killings — most famously executed with drones — against individuals and groups suspect of connection to terrorist groups off the battlefield is by far the most visible outcome of those discussions. In a profile written in the Washington Post, Brennan is identified as the primary supporter of codifying the rules regarding when and where armed drone strikes could be carried out into what’s now called “the playbook” and the benign-sounding disposition matrix that identifies targets for strikes.

So Brennan, then, is ideally positioned to answer the fundamental question that needs to be answered to get a hold on America’s targeted killing program:

What role do targeted killings play in the broader U.S. counter-terrorism strategy and under what circumstances might we cease to employ them?

The question goes beyond the tactic of drone strikes to the conditions that cause them to be used in the first place. As a tactic, drone strikes have garnered significant opposition due to the potential for blowback among the populations where they are utilized, as well as the secrecy that surrounds the CIA’s classified program in Pakistan and moral questions about the serious harm cost in civilian lives the program carries with it. However, whether the program is achieving the ends that the Obama administration seeks, or even an explanation of what those ends are, is often left out of the debate and questioning of government officials.

Getting Brennan to explain what the Administration’s end game is is the most important step towards getting a handle on the program. Were the program to continue indefinitely, without any clear guidelines as to what sufficient success to cease killings might look like, all of the associated problems — blowback, civilian casualties, and undermining international law — would likely be exacerbated, as even a tightly regulated program would invariably carry the risks of unintended consequences. Moreover, a failure to give a clear account of the reasons why the Administration believes targeted killings are effectively degrading al-Qaeda and integrating that strategy into a legal understanding of when that degradation is enough to justify ending the program risks allowing targeted killings to continue well after they’ve become counterproductive. There’s also something intrinsically dangerous about a war without a clearly defined endpoint.

Defining what strategic victory looks like would also help get a handle on the thorny legal problems surrounding killing suspected American al-Qaeda members. According to the Department of Justice white paper released Monday night, much of the Administration’s justification for the killing of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki stemmed from the Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF) against al-Qaeda after 9/11. An account of when the AUMF might no longer permit targeted killings would also provide a basic benchmark for judging when the Administration’s claimed power to kill Americans would expire on its own terms.

The Administration has clearly thought about these matters. Former Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson hinted that there was “a tipping point at which so many of the leaders and operatives of al-Qaeda and its affiliates have been killed or captured…that al-Qaeda as we know it, the organization that our Congress authorized the military to pursue in 2001, has been effectively destroyed.” Retiring Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta similarly said that targeted killings are “not something that we’re going to have to continue to use forever.” Getting Brennan to clarify Johnson and Panetta’s remarks would go a long way towards providing some needed oversight for the targeted killing program.

View the original article here

Five Reasons Why Fewer People Trust Fox News Than Ever Before

A poll released Wednesday by Public Policy Polling shows that fewer people than ever trust Fox News as a source for accurate news and reporting. Just 41 percent expressed trust in the network — down from 49 four years ago — while 46 percent said they distrust Fox. There’s an obvious reason why: Fox misrepresents facts and fudges its data to advance the conservative agenda. Indeed, it’s nothing like the “fair and balanced” network it claims to be. And, it seems, voters are catching on.

Here are just five recent examples of how Fox skews the news:

1. They misrepresented the unemployment rate. Fox News ran this chart showing the unemployment rate, but managed to somehow make an unemployment rate of 8.6 percent look higher than 8.9:

2. They misinformed viewers about Benghazi. When Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsay Graham (R-SC), and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) were trying their hardest to smear President Obama and former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton over Benghazi, Fox ran an “exclusive” report saying that the CIA had denied a diplomat permission to fend off an attack on the embassy. That never happened, and details later confirmed that the report — and the other conspiracy theories Fox ran alongside it — was totally unfounded.

3. They blamed non-existent ‘massive layoffs’ on Obama. Fox News runs frequent segments covering Obama’s supposed ‘War on Coal’ and the website Fox Nation even ran this glaring headline blaming the election for huge layoffs in the coal industry. But there were not massive layoffs. Just one business owner in Utah laid off employees. Under Obama, the industry on the whole has actually continued to grow tremendously.

4. They got almost all of their climate coverage wrong. An analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists revealed that a full 93 percent of Fox News coverage on the topic global climate change was ‘misleading.’ Here’s the breakdown of how Fox covered the climate issue:

5. They don’t cover big stories. While the rest of the country discussed senatorial candidate Todd Akin’s ‘legitimate rape’ comments, Fox News hardly covered the controversy. They similarly ignored the conflict surrounding the death of teenager Trayvon Martin, and of New York’s same-sex marriage law’s passage.

The list of areas where Fox falls down on the job is too extensive to enumerate. But what is clear is that Fox’s method of dodging the truth and giving convenient facts won’t keep working, if they can’t gain the public’s trust.

View the original article here

Hagel: ‘I Think It’s Always Wise To Try To Talk To People Before You Go To War’

One of the main themes senators on the Senate Armed Services Committee committed themselves to today during Chuck Hagel’s confirmation hearing to be the next Secretary of Defense was — not wondering whether Hagel fully supports a diplomatic approach to Iran’s nuclear program, as most Americans do — but rather, whether the former Republican senator is willing to take this nation into another war in the Middle East if necessary.

Senator after senator, both Republican and Democrat, repeatedly sought Hagel’s reassurance that he is committed to starting a war with Iran — as if the last 10 years of a disastrous war in Iraq had never happened.

Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) was one of those senators. During one series of questions in which Ayotte wondered if Iran was “responsible” enough to deal with, Hagel explained that his priority is diplomacy. “I think it’s always wise to try to talk to people before you get into war,” he said:

AYOTTE: Because here we have a regime that doesn’t respond to in a responsible or sane behavior as a state-sponsor of terrorism and why that would be an appropriate manner for us to address them?

HAGEL: Well first I said engagement and I think we should talk, we actually are indirectly in the P5 plus one, we have been. I think that’s responsible. I think it’s always responsible to try to talk first. North Korea. I don’t consider North Korea a responsible, sane administration but we’re talking to North Korea. We’ve been talking bilaterally to North Korea. We are talking with the party of six to North Korea. I think that’s wise. I think it’s always wise to try to talk to people before you get into war.

Ayotte continued to badger Hagel about his past support for talks with Iran. “I’ve always thought that that’s smarter and wiser” to push countries into international organizations, Hagel said, adding:

HAGEL: Because when they go in to world bodies they have to comply with some semblance of international behavior it doesn’t mean they always will, they won’t, they cheat. But I think we’re smarter to do that. I’ve never thought engagement is weakness. I’ve never thought it was surrender. I never thought it was appeasement. I think it’s clearly in our interests. If that doesn’t work then I think the President’s position and his strategy has been exactly right. Get the United Nations behind you. Get the international sanctions behind you. Keep military options on the table. If the military option is the only option, it’s the only option.

Watch the clip:

“At Hagel hearing,” the Washington Post’s Rajiv Chandrasekaran observed on Twitter, “136 mentions of Israel and 135 of Iran. Only 27 refs to Afghanistan. 2 for Al Qaida. 1 for Mali.” Indeed, the neocons aren’t dead, yet — at least not in the Senate.

(Photo: Bloomberg via Getty Images)

View the original article here

Remarks by the President Before Meeting with Law Enforcement Officials

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Roosevelt Room

11:28 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, Vice President Biden and I just want to thank the police chiefs and sheriffs who are here today representing law enforcement officials all across the country who obviously share our deep concern about issues of gun safety and how we can protect our communities and keep our kids safe.

A couple of weeks ago, I appeared along with Joe to present the administration's ideas in terms of steps that we have to take.  And I issued a number of executive actions that should be taken unilaterally in order to improve our collection of data to make sure that we're coordinating more effectively with state and local governments, and to do everything that we could to improve the issue of gun safety and to make our communities safer.

But, as we've indicated before, the only way that we're going to be able to do everything that needs to be done is with the cooperation of Congress.  And that means passing serious laws that restrict the access and availability of assault weapons and magazine clips that aren't necessary for hunters and sportsmen and those responsible gun owners who are out there.  It means that we are serious about universal background checks.  It means that we take seriously issues mental health and school safety.

We recognize that this is an issue that elicits a lot of passion all across the country.  And Joe and my Cabinet members who have been involved in this have been on a listening session over the last several months.  No group is more important for us to listen to than our law enforcement officials.  They are where the rubber hits the road.

And so I welcome this opportunity to work with them; to hear their views in terms of what will make the biggest difference to prevent something like Newtown or Oak Creek from happening again.  But many of them also recognize that it's not only the high-profile mass shootings that are of concern here, it's also what happens on a day-in-day-out basis in places like Chicago or Philadelphia, where young people are victims of gun violence every single day.  That’s why part of the conversation that we're going to be having today relates not only to the issue of new laws or better enforcement of our gun laws, it also means what are we doing to make sure that we've got the strongest possible law enforcement teams on the ground?  What are we doing to hire more cops?  What are we doing to make sure that they're getting the training that they need?  What are we doing to make sure our sheriff's offices in rural counties have access to some of the resources that some of the big cities do in order to deal with some of these emergencies? 

So I'm looking forward to a robust conversation.  I know that this is not a shy group, mainly because they're dealing with life-and-death situations every single day.  But I'm very grateful to them for their participation.  This is a representative group.  It comes from a wide cross-section of communities across the country.  And hopefully, if law enforcement officials who are dealing with this stuff every single day can come to some basic consensus in terms of steps that we need to take, Congress is going to be paying attention to them and we'll be able to make progress.

All right?  Thank you very much, everybody. 

END               
11:32 A.M. EST

On Thursday, January 31 at 1:00 p.m. ET, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council Cecilia Muñoz will join the latest "Fireside Hangout" for a conversation about immigration reform.

President Obama speak from Las Vegas about creating a fair and effective immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

President Obama announced today that he has approved a new round of humanitarian assistance, an additional $155 million to provide for the urgent and pressing needs of civilians in Syria and refugees forced to flee the violence of the Assad regime. This brings America’s contribution to date to $365 million, making the United States the largest single donor of humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Before Calling 911, Sheriff Tells Residents To Get ‘In The Game’ With A Gun

Wisconsin County Sheriff David Clarke is facing backlash for telling Milwaukee, Wisconsin residents to get a gun for emergencies, rather than call 911. In a radio ad, Clarke claims personal and public safety is no longer a “spectator sport,” and urges civilians to “get in the game” before police arrive to a scene:

I’m Sheriff David Clarke, and I want to talk to you about something personal…your safety. It’s no longer a spectator sport; I need you in the game, but are you ready?

With officers laid-off and furloughed, simply calling 9-1-1 and waiting is no longer your best option. You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back; but are you prepared? Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there. You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We’re partners now. Can I count on you?

Clarke told the Associated Press he chose to get “creative” about facing “fewer and fewer resources” in his department. “After sitting down and thinking about this, I’m thinking ‘Hey, I’ve got an untapped reserve over here, and it’s the public,’” he said.

While it is true police departments have thinned — thanks to Republican public sector budget cuts — Clarke has an absurd expectation that citizens could act as interim police officers, with minimal firearm training. Armed citizens usually do not stop violent crime, and their intervention only increases the danger and bloodshed, “given that civilian shooters are less likely to hit their targets than police in these circumstances.”

View the original article here

How Some States Are Rolling Back The Clock To A Time Before Roe v. Wade

Before the 1973 Supreme Court decision that guaranteed women’s right to legal abortion services — a decision that was handed down 40 years ago this Tuesday — reproductive freedom was sharply divided along racial and socioeconomic lines. And as anti-choice politicians slowly chip away at women’s abortion rights at a state level, some areas of the country aren’t too far away from returning women to that era of inequality.

By the early 1970s, about 20 states had passed state laws regarding abortion, and the procedure was legal in a handful of states. If a woman was lucky enough to be born privileged, she had a better chance of having the resources to travel to one of the areas of the country where she could safely obtain an abortion — if not, she was forced to join the estimated 1.2 million women who resorted to illegal abortion each year. And since women of color were more likely to be economically disadvantaged four decades ago, they were also much more likely to turn to illegal abortion procedures than their white counterparts. In the South, black women’s mortality rate from illegal abortions was fourteen times higher than white women’s. In New York City, more than 90 percent of the women who died from illegal abortions were black and Latina.

Today, abortion remains inextricably linked to issues of race and class. Blacks and Latinas have the highest rates of unintended pregnancy and, subsequently, the highest rates of abortions — 40 percent for African-American women and 29 percent for Hispanic women. Forty two percent of the women who have abortions fall below the federal poverty line, partly because poorer women still struggle to access affordable and reliable contraception. And denying women the opportunity to have a legal abortion greatly increases their risk of falling into poverty.

But that doesn’t stop anti-choice lawmakers from attempting to roll back abortion rights state by state, slowly bringing the country back to the time when legal reproductive services varied widely across regions, and ultimately exacerbating racial and economic inequality. According to nationwide abortion data extrapolated by researchers at Yale, allowing states to eliminate access to legal abortion still disproportionately hurts the low-income, non-white women who are forced to struggle — just as they did in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s — to get the resources they need to safely terminate a pregnancy.

In states like Mississippi and North Dakota, where the sole remaining abortion clinics are on the brink of being shut down, GOP lawmakers are threatening to transport women back to a time when reproductive freedom was reserved for the privileged, just as it was before Roe v. Wade. In the 20 states where employers and insurers are permitted to deny women access to affordable contraception by refusing to comply with Obamacare’s birth control provision, low-income women may be left with few preventative options, just as they were before the Supreme Court legalized the use of birth control for unmarried women in 1972. In states across the country, lawmakers hostile to reproductive rights are slowly passing abortion restrictions, shutting down women’s health clinics, targeting abortion providers, and inching the country backwards — erasing some of the progress that Roe made, all while the court’s decision technically still stands.

View the original article here

January 23 News: U.S. Warned About Multiple Nuclear Meltdowns Years Before Fukushima

Four years before the accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission was warned about the possibility of a plant suffering simultaneous meltdowns due to a natural disaster. [NYTimes]

The accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant in 2011 alerted the American nuclear industry and its regulators to the possibility that operators at plants with more than one reactor might have to deal with more than one meltdown at a time in a flood, earthquake or other catastrophe. Officials are now working to assure that they could master that situation.

But documents uncovered by a group that is critical of nuclear safety show that a high-level safety analyst at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission posed the possibility to his superiors in July 2007, about four years before the earthquake and tsunami that led to three simultaneous meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi. The documents also show that in August 2008, the commission staff formally acknowledged the issue.

But until Japan’s disaster, progress in the American nuclear industry was glacial….

The warning, which now seems prophetic, predicted “common cause failures,’’ meaning single events that disable different pieces of equipment that are supposedly independent and nearly invulnerable to failing simultaneously on their own. The risk analyst, Richard Sherry, wrote that flooding or earthquakes could disrupt both normal grid power and emergency backup power.

China is trying to get a leg up on clean energy transportation by getting into the patent wars. The country has filed over 2,000 patent applications — 8 percent of the world’s total — placing China third globally. [ChinaDaily]

Greenpeace released a report yesterday warning of various fossil fuel projects around the world that could serve as “carbon bombs,” driving the planet still closer to disastrous levels of global warming. China and Australia topped the list. [The Guardian]

A global and legally-binding agreement to reduce mercury emissions was reached in Geneva over the weekend. But it still faces ratification by over 140 countries, even as studies show mercury levels around the world continue to rise. [LA Times]

The unusually cold temperatures across America’s northern Plains and New England could be due to a combination of a warming event in the upper atmosphere over the Arctic, and fluctuations in a natural cycle of tropical rainfall near the equator. [ClimateCentral]

Ikea will double its investment in renewable energy — including wind farms and solar parks — to $4 billion by 2020, as part of an effort to bring down costs for more cash-strapped consumers. [Bloomberg]

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery('#comment_submit').click(function(){if(jQuery('#comment_check:checked').length

View the original article here

Rep. Van Hollen: Better than '50-50 chance' of deal before midnight

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) estimates there's a better than even chance that Congress will find a "fiscal cliff" agreement just ahead of the midnight deadline on Monday.

"I think there is some good news. I mean the conversations continued late into the night. I think now there's a better than 50-50 chance that we will avoid the fiscal cliff by midnight tonight," Van Hollen, the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Monday morning on CNN's "Starting Point."

But the window for legislators to prevent the looming spending cuts and tax-rate increases is closing fast.

On Sunday, the parties raced to finalize a deal, as Republicans dropped a demand to reduce Social Security benefits and Democrats showed flexibility on tax rates. But both sides are still split on the estate tax and how to pay for offsetting the sequester.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Vice President Biden continued negotiations late into the night, according to the senator’s office.

Like Van Hollen, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) made a similar prediction on Sunday saying that chances are "a little higher" than 50-50 that legislators would reach a deal. 

View Comments

View the original article here

Obama Was Against Disavowing. Before He Was For It.

You have to love the era of YouTube. Nothing gets past us these days because it’s all on tape! Although somehow people are still questioning what someone said even when it is on tape.

Either way, it makes for great moments in campaign years. Take for instance this little diddy that took place on the Romney trail.

For the video impaired, a woman had some not too kind words to say about President Obama.

Via Huffpo:

“We have a president right now that is operating outside the structure of our Constitution,” the audience member said to applause. “And I want to know — yeah, I do agree he should be tried for treason — but I want to know what you would be able to do to restore balance between the three branches of government and what you are going to be able to do to restore our Constitution in this country.”Romney didn’t correct the woman, choosing instead to address the question she posed.

“Well, as I’m sure you do, I happen to believe the Constitution was not just brilliant but probably inspired. I happen to believe the same thing about the Declaration of Independence,” said Romney. “I would respect the different branches of government if I am fortunate enough to become president.”

Apparently the White House is very upset that Romney didn’t immediately punch this woman in the face and arrest her for sedition.

“We saw what a weak leader Romney was in the whole [Richard] Grenell mess,” DNC Communications Director Brad Woodhouse said, in reference to the openly gay foreign policy spokesman who left the Romney campaign last week. “Not surprised he didn’t push back on the treason remark.”

Choice words from the party of Joe Biden, a man who was just smacked down for offering his own opinion on gay marriage that stood in stark contrast to the view of the President.

But Obama’s people weren’t done yet.

“Time after time in this campaign, Mitt Romney has had the opportunity to show that he has the fortitude to stand up to hateful and over-the-line rhetoric and time after time, he has failed to do so. If this is the ‘leadership’ he has shown on the campaign trail, what can the American people expect of him as commander-in-chief?”

So there you have it. There is absolutely nothing worse than a man of Governor Romney’s stature staying quiet while awful things are said about his opponent. This is something that Obama would never find himself on the wrong end of. Unless of course when he was exactly on the other end of it just last year.

From Buzzfeed:

Democrats are capitalizing on comments made at town hall by a woman asking a question who said President Obama should be tried for treason, comments not immediately disavowed by Mitt Romney. In 2011, during a Labor Day rally with Obama rally, Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa said Democrats should “take these [Republican] sons of bitches out”. WH Advisor Daniel Pfeiffer responded in an interview with AM 630 that officials shouldn’t be responsible for everything said and don’t have to serve as the “speech police.”

(emphasis mine)

Here’s the audio:

And I thought Romney was supposed to be the flip flopper.

Follow @BenHowe

View the original article here