EXCLUSIVE: The top Republican member of the New York state Senate blasted Democratic lawmakers for pushing a gas stove ban, saying it would drive prices higher and hurt consumers.

In an interview with Fox News Digital, New York Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt criticized the policy which he said was part of a broader energy policy that drives employers and residents alike to depart the state. He also said federal Democratic lawmakers from New York — such as Sen. Chuck Schumer and Reps. Hakeem Jeffries and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — are largely driving state policy.

"I think it's ridiculous and I think the danger is that it almost seems comedic and so people can take it, you know, maybe not as seriously as they should," Ortt told Fox News Digital. "It is going to increase people's utility rates in the state of New York, it is going to decrease energy reliability in the state of New York and it will do nothing to fight climate change." 

"If we think that gas stoves are the reason for climate change — that's just that's ridiculous," he added. "We're not going to stop the polar ice caps from melting because my mom has to use an electric stove."

SOCIALISTS CHEER DEM STATE’S CLIMATE BILL MANDATING FOSSIL FUEL SHUTDOWN: ‘WILL TRANSFORM NEW YORK’

Ortt's comments come as New York lawmakers and Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul continue negotiations on a fiscal year 2024 budget package that is due March 31. The package is reportedly slated to include a bill banning gas stoves and other natural gas-powered appliances from being installed in new buildings and new residential construction.

While the exact language of the bill is unknown, New York Democrats have endorsed prohibitions on water heaters, furnaces, clothes dryers and stoves that are powered by natural gas. And Hochul called for all new construction to be zero-emission beginning in 2025 during her State of the State Address in January.

"I’m proposing a plan to end the sale of any new fossil-fuel-powered heating equipment by 2030," she remarked. "We are taking these actions because climate change remains the greatest threat to our planet, and to our children and grandchildren."

CALIFORNIA'S GRID FACES COLLAPSE AS LEADERS PUSH RENEWABLES, ELECTRIC VEHICLES, EXPERTS SAY

In 2021, about 60% of all New York households relied on natural gas for heating while another 20% used heating oil, according to the Energy Information Administration. Additionally, just 14% of households in the state were heated with electricity, the vast majority of which was generated by natural gas power plants. 

Ortt noted that state Democrats have pursued a broader climate agenda that extends beyond gas stoves.

"It is much bigger than just gas stoves," Ortt continued. "This is an attack on energy diversification, it's an attack on working people who pay utility rates. It's going to increase their rates, it's going to drive out employers, it's going to drive people out of the state. And we're going to have nothing environmentally to show for it."

"All we're going to have is less people living here, higher taxes, less energy reliability," he said. "Our policy here in New York for a long time has been to export jobs and import energy. That is the New York energy policy. And, obviously, it's been a bad one."

NEW SWEEPING ANALYSIS DEBUNKS REPORTS BLAMING GAS STOVES FOR RESPIRATORY ILLNESS

If the state passes the gas stove ban legislation, it would be the first state to take such a drastic measure. Several Democratic-led cities including New York City have implemented gas appliance restrictions while some states like California have tackled the issue through modified building codes.

The federal Consumer Product Safety Commission is currently accepting public feedback on the health impacts of gas stoves, but has denied that it intends to ban the appliance. A member of the commission said in January that he wouldn't rule out a federal ban, sparking outcry from Republicans and ultimately forcing the White House to say it wouldn't support such an action.

"There are climate alarmists out there — certainly here in New York and in Albany, and in Washington, D.C.," Ortt told Fox News Digital. "I think we have to be able to push back as Republicans and people across the country to say we can have a responsible energy policy and one that's environmentally responsible and one that is responsible from a state management standpoint."

"When you're in an emergency, there's no such thing as bad energy that you don't want to have. Whether it's nuclear, natural gas, wind, solar, electric, you want as diversified an approach as possible. That's going to keep costs down and that's what's going to keep reliability up and it's what's going to keep people safe and keep people here in New York and keep companies investing in New York."

Ortt added that New York residents can expect a late budget based on the status of negotiations. He said energy policy is a factor in the delay, but that the main holdup is criminal justice and public safety issues. 

FIRST ON FOX: Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley will visit the southern border in Texas next week, Fox News Digital has learned -- as the former governor is unveiling her plan to handle the ongoing migrant crisis now into its third year.

Haley will become the first presidential candidate to visit the border when she travels to Texas on April 3. She will be accompanied by Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, and will make several stops between San Antonio and Eagle Pass. The area has seen some of the heaviest migrant traffic along the border in recent years as authorities have been besieged by the historic crisis.

There were over 1.7 million encounters at the southern border in FY 2021, and more than 2.3 million in FY 2022. FY 2023 has been on pace to eclipse those numbers, although numbers have dipped in January and February.

NIKKI HALEY UNLOADS ON BIDEN PROJECTING ‘AMERICAN WEAKNESS’ ON WORLD STAGE: ‘WE HAVE TO WAKE UP’

Republicans have attributed the crisis to the policies of the Biden administration -- specifically the rolling back of Trump-era border protections, and an increase in "catch-and-release" of migrants into the U.S. The White House has attributed the crisis to a hemisphere-wide challenge and has called on Republicans to provide additional funding.

Haley, who is a daughter of legal immigrants, has been rolling out her plan to secure the border and tackle illegal immigration. That plan would see the recent funding for up to 87,000 IRS staff scrapped in favor of 25,000 new Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

The plan would also mandate that businesses use E-Verify -- which verifies a worker’s citizenship and immigration status -- in their hiring processes. As governor of South Carolina, Haley had signed a bill requiring all businesses in the state to use the tool.

Additionally, a Haley administration would cut funding to states that have been used to give money to illegal immigrants -- such as the billions used by New York to cut checks to illegal immigrant workers who lost their jobs during the pandemic.

Her plan would also restore the Trump-era "Remain-in-Mexico" policy -- which kept migrants in Mexico while their immigration hearings proceeded, instead of releasing them into the U.S. Republicans have credited that policy with reducing the pull factors which drew migrants north. Haley is also promising to end the "catch-and-release" practices of the Biden administration.

"We fix [the border crisis] by going back to Remain-in-Mexico, we fix it by stopping catch and release, we fix it by putting up an actual wall and closing our border," she said earlier this month on "One Nation with Brian Kilmeade." 

"But we do it by doing what I did in South Carolina as governor," she said. "We did a mandatory E-Verify program that said none of our businesses could hire anyone that was in this country illegally. That is what got them out of South Carolina because there were no jobs for them to come to, that's what will get them out of this country, we've got to make sure none of our businesses hire anyone that is here in the country illegally, and we've got to start taking this seriously. Every state is a border state."

BIDEN ANNOUNCES NEW NORTHERN BORDER DEAL, FENTANYL COALITION WITH CANADA AS IMMIGRATION CRISIS RAGES

In addition to mandating E-Verify, the legislation she signed as governor also required police to check the immigration status of anyone they stop who they suspected may be in the U.S. illegally -- following similar legislation in states like Arizona.

That bill also created an illegal immigration enforcement unit, made it illegal to transport or harbor illegal immigrants, made it a felony to sell fake IDs to illegal immigrants and barred illegal immigrants from state or local benefits. The bill faced significant pushback from immigration activists.

"Illegal immigration is not welcome in South Carolina," Haley said in 2011 when she signed the bill.

As governor, she also declined to accept Syrian refugees over concerns about vetting, and in 2014 said that South Carolina would not be accepting illegal immigrant minors in order to focus on children already in the state. When she served as U.N. ambassador during the Trump administration, the U.S. withdrew from the global compact on migration in part due to concerns that it would have restricted U.S. policy and impinged on U.S. sovereignty.

Illegal immigration and border security are likely to remain top topics in both the Republican primary season and the 2024 general election.

Former President Trump, who has announced his own 2024 bid, made tackling illegal immigration a key part of his administration. Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis -- who has not announced a bid but is widely expected to run -- sparked outrage from Democrats last year when he flew illegal immigrants into Martha’s Vineyard. 

FIRST ON FOX – Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., is introducing a war powers resolution that calls for the removal of United States armed forces from Somalia, excluding those assigned to protect the U.S. Embassy.

"The American people have extremely low confidence in our military leaders and their ability to assess their own efficacy. How do they expect Americans to believe their justification of occupying Somalia when they can’t even determine who in their own training programs will lead a violent coup afterwards?" Gaetz said in a statement.

"While the Congressional War Machine has decided to rage on in Syria, they must explain how continuing the occupation of Somalia best serves the interests of the American people at home. If they cannot, it is incumbent upon the Congress to bring our troops home from Somalia," the congressman said.

The war powers resolution would force a vote in the House of Representatives within 18 days of the resolution's introduction. It would also mandate the removal of U.S. armed forces from Somalia no later than 365 days after the resolution's adoption.

MATT GAETZ WANTS ALL US TROOPS PULLED FROM SYRIA, CLAIMS BIDEN LIED ABOUT MILITARY PRESENCE

"When the House debated my resolution to withdraw troops from Syria, both Republicans and Democrats argued the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force against Afghanistan serves as a global permission slip for every neocon fantasy. They will argue the same for Somalia," Gaetz said.

House GOP and Democrat members teamed up last week to kill a similar resolution from Gaetz that would require the U.S. to remove roughly 900 service members stationed in Syria, who some argue are beating back terrorists who could threaten the U.S. homeland if left unchecked.

The resolution ultimately failed in a 321-103 vote that split both parties; Republicans opposed it in a 171-47 vote, and Democrats rejected it 150-56.

GAETZ INTRODUCES RESOLUTION TO END MILITARY AND FINANCIAL AID TO UKRAINE, URGE PEACE DEAL

Those against placing a small force in Syria argue that force is there without any authorization from Congress. The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) is used as justification for such a move, with the argument that the resolution authorizes action against those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks.

Gaetz and others members argue that Congress needs a more current authority to send troops abroad than one that was passed more than 20 years ago. Proponents for removing the service members also said the U.S. needs to stop acting as a "global police force" and should remove itself from Syria despite warnings that the country could play a determining role in the strength of ISIS and other terrorist groups.

MATT GAETZ CALLS FOR INVESTIGATION INTO FBI'S RELIANCE ON SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER

"I do not believe that what stands between a caliphate and not a caliphate are the 900 Americans who have been sent to this hellscape with no definition of victory, with no clear objective and purely existing as a vestige to the regime change failed foreign policies of multiple former presidents," Gaetz said.

Gaetz, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, filed that resolution in late February following a Feb. 17 report from U.S. Central Command that four U.S. service members were wounded during a U.S. and Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) helicopter raid in northeastern Syria that killed a senior ISIS leader.

Fox News' Peter Kasperowicz contributed to this report.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York, took to Twitter on Monday to criticize Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis amid ongoing tensions with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his invasion of Ukraine.

The Democrat said DeSantis and other members of the "Hard Right" were to blame for being "more comfortable excusing Putin rather than condemning him."

"This isn’t hard: Putin is a threat to American national security and democracy," Schumer wrote in a tweet that quoted DeSantis as previously referring to the Russia-Ukraine conflict as a "territorial dispute."

Schumer’s tweet came after Putin announced he would be moving tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus by the summer as the war in Ukraine, which crossed the one-year milestone last month, continues. 

PUTIN SAYS RUSSIA WILL STATION TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN BELARUS AS WARNING TO WEST

DeSantis previously described ongoing fighting in the eastern Donbas region as a regional conflict and seemingly downplayed its significance to U.S. national security.

The Republican's remark was made in a written response to Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who sent questions to declared and potential GOP presidential candidates.

​"While the U.S. has many vital national interests — securing our borders, addressing the crisis of readiness within our military, achieving energy security and independence, and checking the economic, cultural, and military power of the Chinese Communist Party — becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them," DeSantis wrote in his answer.

PUTIN ALLY SAYS RUSSIA HAS 'WEAPONS CAPABLE OF DESTROYING ANY ADVERSARY, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES'

The governor has since walked back the comment, following criticism by fellow Republicans and supporters, clarifying during an interview with Piers Morgan on Fox Nation that Russia did not have a right to Ukraine and that he should have been "more clear" in his initial answer.

"What I’m referring to is where the fighting is going on now, which is that eastern border region Donbas, and then Crimea, and you have a situation where Russia has had that. I don’t think legitimately, but they had," DeSantis said during an interview that aired Thursday. "There’s a lot of ethnic Russians there. So, that’s some difficult fighting, and that’s what I was referring to, and so it wasn’t that I thought Russia had a right to that, and so if I should have made that more clear, I could have done it."

Schumer’s tweet failed to point out that DeSantis walked back the comment.

His tweet also did not point out the criticism he received from Republicans, who principally disagreed.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio suggested DeSantis was inexperienced with international relations, saying he "doesn’t deal with foreign policy every day as governor." 

"Foreign policy is all about nuance," he added.

DESANTIS ON POSSIBLY JOINING TRUMP IN 2024: 'I'M PROBABLY MORE OF AN EXECUTIVE GUY'

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina told Fox News that DeSantis "is basically taking the Chinese position when it comes to Russia’s invasion."

Schumer’s tweet also does not mention that Democrats are actually in control of the White House and the U.S. Senate — and can impact foreign policy while DeSantis cannot. 

Democrats were also in control of the White House and the U.S. Senate when Putin annexed Crimea in 2014. 

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

When Republicans gained control of the White House, under former President Donald Trump between 2016 and 2020, Putin did not invade Ukrainian territory. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, is leading an effort to amend the controversial Respect for Marriage Act, a law aimed at protecting same-sex marriages that was passed with bipartisan support last summer, in order to include new protections for religious observers that weren't included.

In a Tuesday letter reviewed exclusively by Fox News Digital, Roy and 23 other House Republicans asked the House Appropriations Committee leadership to include these new protections in a spending bill for the next fiscal year.

The Respect for Marriage Act requires the federal government and states to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where they are legal. The law includes language that was aimed at ensuring people and organizations who don't support same-sex marriage aren't subject to retaliation, but Roy says those protections are not enough, and that these groups could still be at risk of losing them unless the law is strengthened.

Specifically, Roy wants to add language that prohibits the federal government from taking "any discriminatory action against a person, wholly or partially, on the basis that such person speaks, or acts, in accordance with a sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction, that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman."

PROGRESSIVES GRUMBLE AS RESPECT FOR MARRIAGE ACT ADVANCES: ‘I HATE THE SENATE BILL’

The House Republicans want to define "discriminatory action" to include altering any federal tax treatment, withholding federal government benefit or access to federal property or educational institution otherwise publicly available, among other things.

"Without this language, we fear that the federal government will begin to systematically discriminate against religious schools, faith-based organizations, and other non-profits by barring their participation in federal programs, and removing their tax-exempt status, for their views on marriage," the letter said.

"The First Amendment is sacred. It secures the right to write, pray, think, speak, and associate as one pleases. These fundamental rights are uncontroversial and must be protected," it said.

BIDEN TO SIGN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE BILL DESPITE CONCERNS BY SOME PROGRESSIVES

The law was passed after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which returned the question of abortion rights back to the states. Democrats then worried that another case that created a federal right to same-sex marriage might be overturned, which prompted passage of the Respect for Marriage Act.

When the law was being considered in the Senate, Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., wrote an amendment aimed at adding religious liberty protections that the Senate approved. But some Republicans and conservative groups said at the time that this amendment didn't go far enough to protect people who fear litigation or government retaliation for their belief in traditional marriage.

Roy says his amendment "ensures that the free exercise rights of millions of Americans and nonprofit organizations will not face punishment and discrimination from the federal government for their beliefs."

PELOSI REJOICES OVER RESPECT FOR MARRIAGE ACT VICTORY, CALLS IT A TOOL TO FIGHT ‘RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS'

"Such organizations care for the poor, mentor at-risk-youth, feed the hungry, rebuild homes after natural disasters, minister to soldiers and first responders, visit those in prison, educate children and manufacture millions of good, civic-minded citizens each year," Roy said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

"To weaponize the power of the federal government against them is un-American and would do a tremendous disservice to not just these organizations but to this Republic and the fundamental rights which it protects," he said.

The letter earned praise from religious and conservative special interest groups like Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America and Catholic Vote.

"We applaud Rep. Roy for responding quickly to the despicable 2022 law that allows the federal government to target those who believe in marriage," Catholic Vote President Brian Burch told Fox News Digital.

"In every civilization, marriage has always been privileged because it binds a father and mother together to raise the next generation of citizens on behalf of the nation. No government should allow activist legislation to target citizens who honor that definition," the group added.

Other signatories to the letter include Reps., Kat Cammack, R-Fla., Jim Banks, R-Ind., Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-S.C. and Lauren Boebert, R-Colo.

White House works to ease Iran proposal in Congress
The Obama administration fears tough U.S. sanctions against companies doing business in Iran would anger foreign allies.
By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times

June 11, 2010

Reporting from Washington


The Obama administration, which labored for months to impose tough new United Nations sanctions against Iran, now is pushing in the opposite direction against Congress as it crafts U.S. sanctions that the White House fears may go too far.

Administration officials have begun negotiations with congressional leaders, who are working on versions of House and Senate bills that would punish companies that sell refined petroleum products to Iran or help the country's oil industry.

Unlike the U.N. measures, congressional action would pertain only to U.S. policies and agencies and would not be binding on other countries. Other countries and groups of nations also are considering adopting measures to augment the U.N. action.

The sanctions are aimed at forcing Iran to giving up its nuclear program, which Western nations fear is geared toward developing nuclear weapons. Iran insists it is only interested in peaceful energy projects.

U.S. sanctions have strong support in Congress, and the administration backs them in principle as a way to strengthen the mild strictures adopted on Wednesday by the U.N. Security Council.

But the administration fears that the legislation also could damage relations with Europe, Russia and China, all of whom cooperated with U.S. efforts on the U.N. sanctions.

To avoid that possibility, the administration wants authority to waive U.S. punishment against companies from countries that have cooperated on Iran.

Many lawmakers are wary. Some say the Obama administration, like its predecessors, has been lax in enforcing existing Iran sanctions out of concern for good relations with other world powers.

"The administration doesn't carry out the laws that are on the books, and they want the new law to be as weak and loophole-ridden as possible," said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), who has been pushing for years for such legislation.

Republicans have been ratcheting up their demands for Congress to hang tough, arguing that the U.N. resolution fell short of what was needed.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, the senior Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called the U.N. sanctions a "goose egg" and demanded that Congress impose "crippling sanctions against Iran."

Russia already has warned that penalizing Russian companies "could lead to retaliatory measures."

Russia said Thursday that it intends to go ahead with sales to Iran of a highly sophisticated surface-to-air missile that has been a source of U.S. concern.

There are serious issues with Europe, as well. Catherine Ashton, the European Union foreign policy chief, reminded Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in a recent letter that U.S. officials agreed in 1998 not to hit European companies with sanctions for doing business with Iran.

The pending legislation presents other difficulties for the administration. Since a petroleum cutoff would strike broadly at the Iranian population, such sanctions would be seen as undermining the Obama administration's argument that it supports only those sanctions that focus narrowly on the Iranian leadership, said Peter Crail of the Arms Control Assn., a Washington-based advocacy group.

Meanwhile, U.S. business groups have been complaining that the legislation could punish them by barring U.S. firms from doing business with any foreign firms that have commercial ties to Iran.

Many oil and trading companies already have halted sales to Iran because of the looming threat of sanctions. But some that still could be penalized are Shell, Total and China Oil, said Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute based in Washington.

BP, which is facing public relations problems because of the gulf oil spill in April, stopped selling gasoline to Iran in 2008, he said.

paul.richter@latimes.com

Times staff writer Sergei L. Loiko in Moscow contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

FAIR PLAY FOR ISRAEL RALLY!

MIAMI

SUNDAY, JUNE 6 ; 2PM

TORCH OF FRIENDSHIPBISCAYNE BLVD (NEAR THE AA ARENA)


We the good citizens of the great State of Florida, having found disfavor in the abandonment of the State of Israel, and the mistreatment of her prime minister at the hands of our federal administration, do hereby and hereunto declare the following:

Whereas, Israel has proven itself to be the United States’ most steadfast and consistent ally in the world, and thus worthy of our respect, loyalty and admiration; and

Whereas Israel has partnered with the United States in making a myriad of advances in technology, science and medicine benefiting not only both countries, but the world at large; and

Whereas Israel has joined the United States in providing life-saving emergency aid to grief-stricken peoples all over the world; and

Whereas Israel has constantly been and continues to be beset by hostile Arab and Muslim enemies, some of whom deny the Holocaust, and all of whom prepare for another one; and

Whereas Israel has always possessed the technical means to annihilate all its enemies but has never even thought to do so; and

Whereas, Israel stands at the front-line of the radical Muslim onslaught dedicated to the elimination of Western Civilization, should ever it acquire the technical means to do so; and

Whereas Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Israelite race and Jewish State, and Judaea and Samaria the historic bedrock of Jewish civilization; and

Whereas Israel has repeatedly outstretched her hand to her Arab neighbors in peace only to be met with the fist of war:

We the people demand and insist that the Obama administration CEASE AND DESIST from pressuring Israel to give up more land, rights and privileges to its enemies while its enemies, chiefly Iran, plan her destruction.

For all these reasons, and it having been that this great nation of ours was founded on the principles of truth, justice, fairness and reciprocity, We the People STAND UP for the State of Israel and demand that the Obama administration do the same!

By Lou Pritchett, Procter & Gamble

A LETTER FROM A PROCTER AND GAMBLE EXECUTIVE TO THE PRESIDENT

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management.. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.


AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA
Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.
You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail..
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America ' crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.
You scare me because you want to replace our health car system with a government controlled one.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent an omniscient.
You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaugh's, Hannitys, O'Reillys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

Obama's Plan to Destroy Israel
May 10
by Daniel Greenfield(Israelnationalnews.com)

If there's one thing that the Carter Administration can be given credit for, it's creating the new wave of Islamist terrorism, both Sunni, operating out of Afghanistan, and Shiite, operating out of Iran. The Carter Administration cracked down on Israel and put its "faith" in Muslim terrorists, who then went on to wage war on America, even while Carter was in office. 28 years after Carter was removed from office, we're in reruns again with the Obama Administration, which is not only following the Carter line, but whose plans greatly exceed it.28 years ago, Wahhabi Sunni and Shiite terrorists were generally an afterthought when compared to the standardIran is to be our new best friend under this arrangement, Israel is to be our new best enemy. USSR backed Marxist terrorist groups, such as the PLO.Today, thanks in part to the Carter Administration, they control several countries and have designs on several more. From Pakistan to Afghanistan, from Gaza to Lebanon, from the Middle East to Southeast Asia, the threat is very real and bigger than ever particularly as the race by both Sunni and Shiite groups to build and deploy nuclear weapons continues.Like Carter before him, Obama has chosen to cut backdoor deals with the Mullahs in Iran, offering them power over Iraq and Afghanistan, in exchange for quieting things down enough to let him hang up a Mission Accomplished banner and pull the troops out. "Peace with honor", preferably before the next election. The rape law for Shiites in Afghanistan, the push for a US funded Hamas/Fatah Unity government in the territories and the rising expansion of the Taliban are all fruits of this arrangement.If Iran is to be our new best friend under this arrangement, Israel is to be our new best enemy.Obama stacked the deck by deploying Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State in a position that gave her an important title, but absolutely no power to go with it, while stacking the National Security Council and even the Pentagon with oil appointees in the pockets of the Saudis or his own left wing radical friends.Israel electing a conservative government really put the ball into play, freeing up even more resources for attacking Israel. The strategy runs something like this.The Obama Administration has broken down the Israel problem into two subsections, Israel itself, and American Jews.Obama's people have studied the problem and understand where Carter went wrong. Obama does not want to have the same image problems as Carter in the Jewish community. Should that happen, the Beloved Leader and his lapdog press are fully prepared to unleash a Chavez style hate-on targeting American Jews. But that would be inconvenient and messy. Even with the changing face of America, there are significant differences between the average American and European or Venezuelan, and what kind of ugliness they are willing to tolerate. So Obama's people have split their attention in handling the two factors as two different problems.American Jews - Obama has been clever about putting his Jewish appointees front and center. Like many minorities, some American Jews suffer from self-esteem problems that are soothed when they see a seeming acceptance. Of course what they fail to realize is that exploitation is not acceptance. And that Obama's appointees are creatures of his backers, Nazi collaborators like Soros, who have nothing but contempt for Jews, individually or collectively.While outwardly courting Jews, Obama's people have also been quietly shoving Jewish organizations and their leaders into a corner. Within the Jewish organizational world there has been a silent but deadly takeover of major Jewish groups by left wing radicals. Former alumni of the far left wing and anti-Israel groups like Breira or Coname in the 70's have been elevated to key positions in such organizations as the UJA Federation. Behind the scenes any Jewish leaders who expressed even doubts about Obama during the primariesThe Beloved Leader and his lapdog press are fully prepared to unleash a Chavez style hate-on targeting American Jews. were intimidated and silenced.Much as with conservatives, a list has been drawn up of those figures who can be won over, and those who cannot. The ones who can be won over are described as "moderates", the ones who cannot be won over are described as "extremists".Meanwhile a bevvy of left wing Jewish In Name Only groups have been organized to play their part. Key among them is the Soros funded J Street, a group created as an anti-Israel lobby meant to eventually replace AIPAC. Meanwhile AIPAC itself has been kept on the ropes with such things as the well timed Harman leak. The message once again is fairly clear, cooperate and keep quiet, or we'll destroy you.The multi-layered approach to American Jews can then be summed up as follows;1.) Co-opt existing Jewish organizations and swing them to the left using old school 70's leftists.2.) Create new "progressive" organizations to appeal to a younger generation of ethnically Jewish youth detached from any actual identity. Have these organizations generate attacks on the Israeli government and pro-Israel Jews, while creating phony polls indicating that most American Jews are behind them and Obama.3.) Silence and intimidate remaining Jewish organizations and leaders behind the scenes.The overall idea is to keep a happy face pasted on American Jewry while the knives are out in the dark.Israel - The basic understanding in the Obama Administration is that Israel Must Go. In the worldview of the more moderate Obama appointees, Israel is a destabilizing factor in the Middle East. To the more left wing Obama advisors, Israel is a Western imperialist colonialist state that must be destroyed in the name of revolutionary justice. To the Islamist mindset, Israel is a Kufir state that has no right to exist in the Dar Al Islam.While intractably hostile to Israel, the Obama Administration wants to avoid the kind of public confrontations that marked the Carter and Bush Sr administrations. Instead they would much rather model the way that the Clinton Administration waged a quiet war against Israel, removing one government, and forcing extensive concessions to terrorists, all the while keeping a happy face pasted on the whole affair.On the one hand that means avoiding harsh public attacks on Israel, but keeping the pressure up for Israel to make extensive far reaching one sided concessions, to accept Saudi and Arab League "peace plans", to legitimize Hamas as the new government of the Palestinian Authority, and to insure that Israel does not reply to any rocket or terrorist attacks.There are two forms of quiet leverage that the United States has on Israel, the first is financial and the second is military.On the financial side, the goal will be to bring down the Netanyahu government coalition by destabilizing Israel economically. This is the surest and most direct path to bringing down Israel's conservative government and replacing it with a left of center coalition. The Obama Administration has a wide variety of tactics at its disposal for doing so, from the overt, such as targeting Israeli exports and imports, to the covert, that would involve targeting the Shekel. Additionally fundraising in the US could be investigated and groups such as the Jewish National Fund, prevented from raising money in the US. All of these have been in play before at one time or another.On the military side, Obama's people will make their non-existent efforts to stop Iran's nukes conditional on more concessions to terrorists. Since Israel will never be able to make enough concessions and since Obama is working with Iran, rather than working to stop Iran's nukes, this is a hollow charade.Furthermore while Israel has already been locked out of the military technology pipeline for anything cutting edge, it still remains dependent on US military equipment for parts and supplies. The decades of US foreign aid have also served to create dependency. Unlike many other countries, including even Sweden, Israel does not have its own jet fighter. Israel's Air Force is heavily dependent on US weapons, parts and equipment. Cutting Israel off, would leave the Israeli military dangerously vulnerable in the case of a war. This is an effective chokehold that has been used before to prevent Israel from attacking Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War, as well as preventing Israel from carrying out a preemptive strike against its enemies before the Yom Kippur War.The overall Obama policy will be to push Israel to the brink, using financial and military blackmail against the Netanyahu government, while maintaining control over American Jews to prevent any protests or backtalk....American Jewish groups will support Obama... some because they were created precisely for that purpose, and others because they have been hijacked, cowed or subverted.The more Israel will offer, the more the Obama Administration will tighten the screws. No offer will be good enough, and Israel will be blamed for every breakdown in talks and every bit of violence that takes place. The media will portray Israel and particularly Netanyahu as extremist and intransigent. Hamas will be slowly whitewashed in the media, the same way that Arafat's goons were, (assuming that they prove more willing to cooperate in creating a positive media image of themselves than Ahmadinejad is.)The plan is to destroy Israel, and to do it by pushing Israel to the edge of the cliff and then over the cliff. Israel's enemies will be getting top of the line US military equipment. Israel will not. Israel will be squeezed economically until the Netanyahu government collapses, leaving a weak left wing leader like Livni in charge of Israel, and in charge of acceding to the new Pharaoh's demands.Meanwhile so-called American Jewish groups will support Obama all the way, some because they were created precisely for that purpose, e.g. J-Street, and others because they have been hijacked, cowed or subverted. That is the game plan and some of it's coming. The rest is already here.
www.IsraelNationalNews.com© Copyright IsraelNationalNews.com

After a one-year hiatus, following our site being hacked and all of our blog entries erased by Obama's radical left-wing thugs, AnyoneButObama.org is back, and bigger and better than ever! We are now coded in such a way so that leftist hackers would have to destroy most of Google to take down this site. Furthermore we have added more robust solutions and features such as online real-time polls and petitions. Our Top Ten Reasons never to vote for Obama as well as our top Obama You Tubes are now much easier to navigate. Please check out our Cafe Press store for a plethora of new and unique AnyoneButObama branded merchandise.

Let the record show that our site was the most successful anti-Obama site during the 2008 election year. In just 6 months and with only $1,800 in capital we built a well researched site that attracted over 300,000 visitors. If only the national McCain campaign could boast such a low cost/visit ratio! With your help, we will sell enough AnyoneButObama merchandise to be fully self-sufficient going forward. Rest assured, every dollar you spend on this site brings us closer to our goal of making Obama a one-term president. On behalf of America, we thank you for your support!

Welcome to AnyoneButObama.org -- the site and organization that will educate the masses and save America from Barrack Hussein Obama! AnyoneButObama.org is a coalition of Democrats, Republicans and Independents who, having done thorough research on the background and politics of Barack Obama, have decided to vote for anyone but Obama and to convince as many fellow Americans as possible to do the same. Our site is designed to be the most concise yet thorough resource for exposing the truth about Obama and educating the hood-winked masses on the myriad of reasons not to vote for Obama.

If you give this site just 60 minutes of your time, we guarantee you, whatever your political inclination and proclivity, that you will NOT vote for Barrack Obama again, nor will you vote for any of the lackeys who support him. This challenge goes to even the most ardent Obama supporters. Please spend the first 30 minutes going through the best Obama youtubes on the right column of our homepage. Then, spend the next 30 minutes going through the Top Ten Reasons Not to Vote for Obama. By time you recover from your shock, after witnessing the truth the main-stream media has deprived you of for so long, you may notice that you have spent much more than 60 minutes on this site and have a hunger to discover so much more. If we have convinced you, and we will, please forward a link to our site to everyone you know. America’s future, and that of the Western World, depends on it.

Thank You!

Founder, AnyoneButObama.org