Aaron Klein, World Net Daily

First the Palestinians, now the Chinese

President Obama’s nominee for a top intelligence post sits on the board of a major oil company owned by the Chinese government that is widely seen as conducting business deals meant to expand China’s influence worldwide, WND has learned.

Charles “Chas” Freeman, the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf War, is slated to head the U.S. National Intelligence Council. The NIC is a crucial component of the U.S. intelligence apparatus, serving as the center for midterm and long-term strategic thinking within the American intelligence community. It provides intelligence briefs for Obama and key U.S. agencies and produces reports that help determine American policy on crucial issues, such as Iran’s nuclear program.

Freeman is on the board of the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, or CNOOC, which in 2005 tried to purchase the ninth largest oil firm in the U.S. while he was a member. The merger was halted following bipartisan congressional opposition amid fears the deal would harm American national security interests.

The Chinese oil firm also has been accused of multiple human rights violations.

Read More:

Pete Winn, CNS News

Obama wants to force doctors to prescribe contraceptives

The Obama administration announced Friday that it is “reviewing” the conscience clause that was implemented in the last months of the Bush administration – the first step toward rescinding the rule altogether.

The Health and Human Services regulation reinforces the right of health care workers to refuse to provide abortion and contraception if it violates their conscience or moral precepts.

The new administration’s move came at the request of several groups, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which last fall called on Obama to rescind the regulation when he took office. The ACOG did not speak to CNSNews.com before press time. 

Larry Kudlow, CNBC

Obama wants to redistribute your wealth

Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.

He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.

That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all — either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy’s long-run potential to grow.

Michelle Malkin, TownHall.Com

Gary Locke brings his ethical lapses to the Obama administration

Liberal media outlets are doing their best to boost former Washington Gov. Gary Locke, President Obama’s third pick for the beleaguered Commerce Secretary job. “Obama’s New Commerce Pick Has Clean Reputation,” declared National Public Radio’s Tom Banse. The Democrat possesses “a largely scandal-free resume” reported The New York Times. He is a “safe choice,” the Washington Post asserted, because of his “strait-laced reputation.”

But repeating the Mr. Clean claim doesn’t make it so. Those in his home state who know Locke best paint a far grimier picture of a crony politician with a serial habit of skirting campaign finance laws and conflict-of-interest rules. In other words: Locke’s “Do As I Say, Not as I Do” record makes him a good fit for the ethically impaired Obama administration.

The left-leaning Seattle Weekly newspaper notes that Locke presided over a $3.2 billion tax break for Boeing while “never disclosing he paid $715,000 to — and relied on the advice of — Boeing’s own private consultant and outside auditor.” Then there’s the tainted matter of Locke’s “favors for his brother-in-law (who lived in the governor’s mansion), including a tax break for his relative’s company, personal intervention in a company dispute, and Locke’s signature on a federal loan application for the company.” Locke’s laces ain’t so straight.

Floyd & Mary Beth Brown

Obama wants you to bailout your neighbor

In his inaugural address, President Obama heralded the arrival of a “new era of responsibility.” Apparently, this was a slip of the tongue, really meaning an “era of irresponsibility.” By his actions, Obama is pushing irresponsibility by picking winners and losers, punishing those who have worked hard and saved, while rewarding those who bought houses they could not afford and made bad business decisions. In other words, President Obama is an enabler.

An enabler is a person who makes it easier for people to continue their bad behavior by rescuing them. He protects other from their responsibilities. “The term codependency,” says Darlene Albury, LMSW, “refers to a relationship where one or both parties enable the other to act in certain maladaptive ways.” They make excuses for the other person’s destructive behavior. The enabler allows the other person’s wrong behavior to continue and to worsen.

Power and the need to be in control go hand-in-hand with the nurturing of dependency. This is what Obama is trying to do with his huge government programs which help those who have been irresponsible.

It’s a fact: people respond to incentives and disincentives. We work because we get paid, or don’t speed because we fear a ticket. People will act either responsibly or irresponsibly depending on the consequences. Obama’s bailout plans remove negative consequences to bad decisions.

Our capitalistic system is based on the concept of risk and rewards. People take risks in making investments and acquiring capital and then are free to reap the rewards and bear the burdens of their choices. In this manner successful businesses — and individuals — are rewarded, and they profit and reinvest that profit and grow. Ineffective businesses, which are taking up capital, go out of business or are bought up by the more successful companies, and scarce capital is used most effectively. Now this equation is being thrown off kilter by government intervention. First we had the bank bailouts, and the government choosing to allow Lehman Brothers to go broke while bailing out AIG. This is the era of irresponsibility. Once risk becomes unhinged from failure, and the government will bail out anyone who takes a risk and fails, there is no responsibility. The American system is then fundamentally altered.

When government attempts to redistribute wealth, this incentive structure is thrown on its head. In the Auto and Bank Bailout the government gave money to those who were failing, effectively propping up the losers and allowing them to stay in business to the detriment of those institutions that were wiser stewards of resources. The same thing happened in the economic stimulus. The tax cuts predominantly went to those who weren’t paying taxes in the first place. The real middle class gets $8 a week while the bulk of the $787 billion goes to pet pork projects of congressional leaders, or to those who are already receiving assistance from the government. Our incentive structure is out of whack. Rather than rewarding those who are working hard just barely staying afloat, we pass over them and help those who are already being helped.

This exactly what is happening in Obama’s new mortgage plan that is expected to cost around $275 billion, and to which CNBC host Rick Santelli succinctly asked, “Why should the 92 percent of responsible people bear the burden of the 8 percent that were irresponsible?”

Essentially the Obama administration is spending our money to bail out and assist the roughly 9 million Americans who are currently facing foreclosure. They are trying to artificially prop up the housing bubble and reward people who acted irresponsibly. While some people were working hard and scrapping by, the question is if this actually serves to help those people. For the vast majority of them, the answer is no. This bill takes from those who made wise decisions and worked hard, and gives to those who lived behind their means. It punishes responsibility while pushing irresponsibility.

Our market economy rewards those who work hard and make good decisions. And as John F. Kennedy believed, “A rising tide lifts all ships.” Meaning, when people are free to be productive and prosper, the pie is growing and we are all better off. The liberal view, and Obama’s view, is that the economic pie is fixed and we need to rob Peter to pay for Paul’s mortgage. This is simply not the case. America was founded and has become the most prosperous nation on earth based on the principles of free enterprise and capitalism, allowing people to bear the fruits of their labor.

Obama is simply an enabler to those who made poor, irresponsible decisions. One reason Obama is doing this is for power and control, the other is because he wants people to like him and be dependant on him.

If Obama is allowed to continue to push his socialistic agenda, our wealth and prosperity will disappear. It is time for a taxpayer revolt. As Rick Santelli said, it is time for a “new tea party.”

By JASON RYAN, ABC News

Obama wants your guns

The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

“As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons,” Holder told reporters.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

By GEOFF EARLE, New York Post

Obama likes to spend your money, and raise taxes

Big government is back – and so are big taxes.

President Obama unveiled a mammoth, $3.6 trillion budget yesterday that would dramatically boost federal spending almost across the board – and pay for it with tax hikes of $1 trillion on individuals and businesses over the next decade.

Experts immediately tagged the new president’s supersized spending plan the most sweeping government overhaul since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society in the 1960s.

Marty Regalia, the chief economist at the US Chamber of Commerce, called it “the biggest return to the welfare state that we’ve seen in decades.”

Marcia Kramer, CBS

Hillary abandons Israelis, sides with Palestinians

In a swift about face from her views as New York’s senator, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now hammering Israel over its treatment of Palestinians in Gaza. 

As First Lady, Clinton raised eyebrows when she kissed Suha Arafat. 

Since she was then seeking a Senate seat the resulting brouhaha caused her to “re-think” her positions. 

“I’m a very strong supporter of Israel,” Clinton said back in February 2000. 

On Thursday, as Secretary of State she had yet another about face in the form of angry messages demanding Israel speed up aid to Gaza. Jewish leaders are furious.