According to Fox News: “White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod suggested Sunday that President Obama will intervene to make sure a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion coverage is stripped from final health care reform legislation…’The president has said repeatedly, and he said in his speech to Congress, that he doesn't believe that this bill should change the status quo as it relates to the issue of abortion,’ Axelrod said.”

But it is okay to change the status quo regarding everything else about healthcare?

Except in defense of a life, no one should be allowed to take a life. Healthcare should not include allowing anyone to electively take a life through abortion.

Now don’t get me wrong, my mother gets Social Security, so I have heard first hand that there will be no cost of living increase for the first time in decades.

Supposedly to make up for that, President Obama wants to give $250 to 50 million people. That is $12.5 billion.

$12.5 billion may be chump change in Washington, especially the way Mr. Obama and the Congress have been borrowing money lately. But, in case no one in DC noticed, America’s credit cards are overdrawn – we don’t have any money.

All of which makes me think:

Where is the money these seniors will be getting going to come from? Their children and grandchildren. But, not just their personal children and grandchildren, because some of them won’t be able to pay it. So, it will come from other members of those generations.

So how about this for a suggestion: Let the children or grandchildren give their parents or grandparents $250 or how ever much they want. Many are probably doing it already. That would be the personally responsible thing to do. But, liberals like the President, are not at all interested in personal responsibility; their motto is no one is responsible so let the government do it.

More cynically, it just seems like old style Chicago politics – buying votes. Seniors are concerned about Mr. Obama’s healthcare program cutting into their benefits. A simple solution, try to buy them off with $250.

I miss the George Bush presidency. Now, don’t jump down my throat, there was a great deal about President Bush’s rhetoric, policy and actions that I felt was just plain wrong. What is miss is, at least until near the end of his presidency, you knew where everyone stood. The liberals and Democrats hated anything related to Bush; the right and Republicans loved (almost) everything.

So now we have a (very) liberal Democratic president and everything is up in the air. Just a few recent examples:

 “A narrow counterterrorism mission sounds like a win-win. One problem: It won’t work.” on Afghanistan, from USA Today (usually part of the OMN – Obama Media Network)

“Lots of People Love Obama, But Does Anyone in the World Really Fear Him?” from The Australian, a country not generally inclined to be pro-Bush.

“President is beginning to look out of his depth.” from London’s conservative but usually pro-American The Daily Telegraph.

“There was, however, one large gap. Mr. Obama said almost nothing about Afghanistan, which just a month ago he called a ‘war of necessity,’ fundamental to American security and to the broader fight against terrorism.” from the flagship of the OMN, The New York Times.

“The Obama Administration plans to give $400,000 in funding to a Libyan charity run by the Gadhafi family…” from CBS, another OMN affiliate.

What will become of America if the liberal media ever so slightly does not tow the complete liberal line?

“Speak softly and carry a big stick” -- Theodore Roosevelt

This seems to sum up President Obama’s foreign policy. Apparently, he believes/hopes that by speaking softly he will bring more nations together to oppose those who threaten the world. So far we have repeatedly heard him speaking softly (Cairo comes to mind), but we have yet to see any evidence that he is carrying that big stick. 

Of course, all US presidents have a “big stick” at their disposal, the US military. But, having a big stick in the closet is different than carrying it. When you take it out of the closet and walk with it on your shoulder, there is at a minimum the implication that you are prepared to use the stick.

Foreign policy, like almost everything else, really comes down to personal relationships -- how the leader of one nation perceives the leader of another. Neville Chamberlain was seen as weak – Hitler attacked. Nikita Khrushchev thought JFK was young, inexperienced and weak – the Cuban missile crisis. Saddam Hussein thought George Bush was bluffing – the Iraq War.

History is littered with corpses of people who paid the price for the perception that their leader was unwilling to use the big stick. We can only pray that speaking softly will carry the day.

With the healthcare debate it might be important to note a few key words from the Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America, otherwise known as the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

First: “endowed by their Creator” -- American values spring forth not from Congress, the President, the Courts, or even the people; the rights of Americans come from God.

Second: “among these” -- This is not a complete list of those rights.

By any unbiased understanding of the God as perceived by a vast majority of Americans, there is a moral obligation to, as the U.S. Constitution puts it: “promote the general Welfare”. Everyone who is in America has a God-given right to healthcare. The level of such care should be debated, but not the concept that all should have the care.

Having pushed through an unread “stimulus” bill, increased the debit and deficit, burdened future generations of Americans with the bill, and having tried but failed to force health care reform down American’s throats, President Obama is now planning to address a joint session of Congress on the matter.

I realize Democrats do not answer questions from people who disagree, but I would like to see him start by answering one simple question: “What problem/problems are you trying to solve?”

According to the President, there are 46 million uninsured people in this country. According to one estimate, 9.7 million are not U.S. citizens and 14 million already qualify for Medicaid or other programs. That leaves some 23 million people truly uncovered out of a population of 307 million.

Now, obviously, those people need health care/insurance, but what would it take to do that?

There are also other problems to solve.

Most health insurance is tied to your job, lose your job and you lose your health insurance. Mr. Obama, provide a suggested solution to that problem, perhaps health unemployment insurance.

Then there are all those “unnecessary” tests. I would guess some of the tests are done to make money. Many more are probably done by doctors who are concerned that if they do not do every possible test, and something goes wrong, the doctor will be sued. The first group of test is fraud and there are already laws on the books for that – just enforce them. As for the second, tort reform – perhaps an independent arbitration board.

There are other issues – but until Mr. Obama lists the problems he wants to solve, Americans should not support any so-call solutions, no matter how well packaged.

Pakistan's nuclear facilities have already been attacked at least thrice by its home-grown extremists and terrorists in little reported incidents over the last two years, even as the world remains divided over the safety and security of the nuclear weapons in the troubled country, according to western analysts.

The incidents, tracked by Shaun Gregory, a professor at Bradford University in UK, include an attack on the nuclear missile storage facility at Sargodha on November 1, 2007, an attack on Pakistan's nuclear airbase at Kamra by a suicide bomber on December 10, 2007, and perhaps most significantly the August 20, 2008 attack when Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers blew up several entry points to one of the armament complexes at the Wah cantonment, considered one of Pakistan's main nuclear weapons assembly.

This is certainly an under reported story in the USA and a very, very scary scenario. It is one of the nightmares facing the USA, the West, Israel, India and others. 

Count me among those who think that all this hoopla over President Obama’s birth certificate is a bunch of animal waste. Those pursuing this should investigate something much more critical and dangerous, like the Piltdown man.

However, according to the AP:

State officials again are confirming that President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said Monday she has seen the original birth records that verify Obama was born in Hawaii, and is a "natural-born American citizen."

Fukino made the announcement in hopes of ending any lingering rumors about Obama's citizenship. She issued a similar press release Oct. 31.

State law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest.

Excuse me, if the citizens of the United States do not have a “tangible interest” in their president’s birth certificate, one of the requirements to be president – who does.

According to Reuters:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Flight Operations Unit, carrying out a policy begun under former President George W. Bush, has moved an average of 4,200 unauthorized migrants a week this year, up from 3,700 last year.

Wonder what liberals and Democrats (is there any other kind of Democrat?) would say if a Republican president had increased the number of illegal aliens deported?

“States like these [Iran, Iraq and North Korea], and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.”

President George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, January 29, 2002

In the years since President Bush labeled the “axis of evil”, liberals and Democrats have made much fun out of this “rhetoric” and Mr. Bush’s cowboy foreign policy.

Today, Iran is pursuing atomic weapons and killing its people in the streets. A U.S. navy vessel is tracking a North Korean ship which maybe carrying nuclear materials (perhaps to Iran) and North Korea is threatening nuclear war.

Decades ago when I was a young lad in school, all the boys always had a fascination for the “new girl in school”. Who knows why, perhaps she was just something different.

In 2008 Barack Obama ran on a big government, huge social program, and immense spending platform. Some 69,500,000 people or almost 53% of those who voted, voted for Mr. Obama for president.

Today, according to the liberal Los Angeles Times:

Currently, 90% of Americans are worried to some degree about the exploding federal spending deficit, a galactic number certain to gain politicians' attention on both sides.

I know Mr. Obama was different, charismatic and promising change. But, what did everyone think he was going to do?

Buyer’s remorse is when you buy something, perhaps on the spur of the moment or to wanting to have the latest, and then realizing that you overpaid or the item was not what you expected.

Although Mr. Obama’s popularity is down, it is still pretty high, so I suspect buyer’s remorse has not set in – yet.

But, now that the new girl in school has been in class for a couple of months I think many of the “boys” realize she is not really all that different from all the other girls.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, George Bush said: “I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say, ‘This is the way it's got to be.’”

He was right. 

Unfortunately, driven by 9-11, President Bush adopted the policy of nation building.

President Obama, in Cairo, spoke of his “unyielding belief” in a set of universal principles, including “the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed, confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice, government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people, the freedom to live as you choose”.

Unfortunately, as with his predecessor, reality bites.

When it comes to the suppression of the protests in Iran, Mr. Obama seems unwilling to speak out for the protester’s rights to speak their minds and have a say in how they are governed, or confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice.

There is not always an American solution to every problem in the world. Certainly, America should not try to impose solutions.

So you objected to the U.S. acting alone on international matters, you wanted America to work in a multi-nation coalition.

Now is the time for your multi-nation diplomacy to pay off.

France has a navy (# 3 worldwide), so do Russia (#4), China (#5), Germany (#7) and Italy (#8).

How about using some of that multi-national magic to get some of those navies to stop, board and inspect ships coming out of North Korea?