Tag Archives: U.S. Congress

High Noon at the UN

By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”

President Obama joins the campaign against the Palestinian UN initiative in spite of his belief that the UN is the quarterback of international relations, in defiance of his closest advisors – UN Ambassador Susan Rice, Director of Multilateral Affairs Samantha Power and Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett – and irrespective of his support of Palestinian claims and his assumption that the Palestinian issue is the root cause of Middle East turbulence and the crown jewel of Arab policy-making.

However, President Obama operates within the Federalist system which precludes an omnipotent president, and significantly constrains his maneuverability. It accords Congress – a bastion of support of the Jewish State – power equal to that of the President, domestically and internationally. The clout of Congress grows in direct correlation to the weakness of Obama, whose popularity plunged from 65% in January 2009 to 39% in August 2011. Obama is aware that House and Senate Democratic leaders, such as House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, Ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Relations Committee Howard Berman, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and former Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Robert Menendez, would suspend foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority, should the Palestinians proceed with their UN initiative. The President is cognizant of the fact that their support is critical to his reelection aspirations in November 2012.

Moreover, the US Congress constitutes the most authentic representative of the American people, who – especially upon the tenth anniversary of 9/11 – consider Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims as part of the terrorist threat, view the UN as a role-model of ingratitude and treat Israel as a special, capable, democratic and unconditional ally.

The US campaign against the Palestinian initiative at the UN is driven by the American People’s and Congress’ identification with the Jewish State, and by their mistrust of the UN and the Palestinians. According to a May 26, 2011 CNN poll, 82% of Americans consider Israel an ally and a friend, compared with 72% in 2001. 67% support Israel, while only 16% support the Palestinians, who are as unpopular as Iran (15%) and North Korea (17%). According to a February, 2011 Gallup poll, 68% consider Israel an ally; the April 2011 Rasmussen Report shows that most Americans oppose foreign aid to Arab countries but support foreign aid to Israel; a September 2010 Rasmussen Report indicates that most Americans are willing to defend militarily only five other countries – Canada, Britain, Israel, Germany and Mexico; and the April 2010 Quinnipiac Polling Institute determines that 66% expect Obama to improve treatment of Israel.

According to a February, 2011 Gallup poll, 62% of Americans think that the UN is performing poorly, compared with 30% in 1953. A February, 2011 Rasmussen Report determined that only 27% of likely US voters regard the UN as an ally of the US, while 15% consider the UN an enemy and 54% are undecided.

Congressional attitudes toward the UN reflect public resentment of anti-American bias in the UN, a home court for anti-US countries in general and Islamic and rogue regimes in particular, even though the US funds 22% of the UN budget. Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, recently introduced the United Nations Transparency, Accountability and Reform Act, which would cut off US contributions to any UN entity that grants membership, or any other upgraded status, to the Palestinian Authority. According to Ros-Lehtinen, “UN obsession with castigating Israel — from the Human Rights Council and the Goldstone Report and the Durban conferences to the multitude of UN bodies created for the sole purpose of condemning Israel — has eliminated UN credibility…. The UN’s most infamous anti-Israel act came in 1975, when the General Assembly voted to declare that ‘Zionism is racism.’”

Will Israel leverage the US attitude toward the UN and the Palestinian Authority, or will it persist in the policy of indecisiveness and retreat, which was initiated by the 1993 Oslo Accord?

This article was originally published in “Israel Hayom” Newsletter on September 12, 2011. Yoram Ettinger also publishes The Ettinger Report.

Flawed Bill to Protect Children from Child Pornography Passes From Judiciary Committee: Objections & Solutions

On July 28, the House Judiciary Committee today passed a bill to help investigators track down dangerous pedophiles and protect children from sexual exploitation. The bill passed by a vote of 19-10. The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 (H.R. 1981) directs Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to retain subscriber information for 12 months in order to assist federal law enforcement in online child pornography and child exploitation investigations. This is similar to existing federal law that requires telephone companies to retain caller information for up to 18 months.

H.R. 1981 also makes it a federal crime to financially facilitate the sale, distribution and purchase of child pornography. The bill increases the maximum penalty for certain child pornography offenses. H.R. 1981 was sponsored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.)

During a press conference, Chairman Smith commented,

“Child pornography may be the fastest growing crime in America, increasing an average of 150% per year. These disturbing images litter the Internet and pedophiles can purchase, view or exchange this material with virtual anonymity.

“This is partly because investigators do not have adequate tools to track down dangerous pedophiles that prey on the most innocent in our society. Investigators need the assistance of ISPs to identify users and distributers of online child pornography.

“When investigators develop leads that might result in saving a child or apprehending a pedophile, their efforts should not be frustrated because vital records were destroyed simply because there was no requirement to retain them. This bill requires ISPs to retain subscriber records, similar to records retained by telephone companies, to aid law enforcement officials in their fight against child sexual exploitation.

“Every piece of prematurely discarded information could be the footprint of a child predator. This bill ensures that the online footprints of predators are not erased.”

H.R. 1981 is supported by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the National Center for Victims of Crime, the National Sheriff’s Association, the Major County Sheriff’s Association, the International Union of Police Associations and the Fraternal Order of Police.

The ACLU and other organizations oppose section 4 of the bills because it will require Internet service providers to maintain records of all users and their communication for 12 months. This requirement is a threat to privacy of millions and an additional burden on Internet businesses.

One way around this problem would be for Internet companies in conjunction with government to develop software to identify, track, and store of those whose activities are suspect. This would allow authorities to investigate only suspected law-breaker while protecting the privacy of a majority of citizens using online services.

We all know, the government does this anyway. So why push an unlawful egalatarianism on the majority in the guise of protecting children? One reason could be legislatures have no common sense. Another might be they want to invade the privacy of whomsoever they want whenever they want.

Judge to Hear Arguments on Whether Congress had Constitutional Authority to Enact ObamaCare

Federal District Court Judge George C. Steeh, agreeing “that a prompt resolution of the constitutional issue would serve the public interest, ” will hear oral arguments on the merits of the case challenging ObamaCare.

Judge Steeh ordered the consolidation of the Thomas More Law Center’s motion for a Preliminary Injunction to prevent enforcement of ObamaCare with trial on the merits.

“The significance of this court hearing cannot be overstated, ” said Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center. The hearing will take place in Judge Steeh’s courtroom located in the Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse in Detroit.

Moments after President Obama signed the health care bill into law (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), on March 23, 2010, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and co-counsel Washington, D.C. lawyer David Yerushalmi filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Law Center and four Michigan residents who object to being forced by the federal government to purchase health care or face a federal penalty. The basis for the lawsuit and the motion is that Congress exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause by mandating that private citizens purchase health care coverage or face a penalty.

Presenting arguments in support of the motion for Preliminary Injunction will be the Law Center’s Senior Trial Counsel Rob Muise and co-counsel David Yerushalmi.

Liberals Memorial Weekend Assault On America’s Military

On the eve of the weekend that we honor members of the military who have served and those who have fallen to protect our nation, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to use our military for social engineering to benefit the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) political agenda.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi only gave Member of Congress a total of 10 minutes to debate the overturning of a 1993 law that bans homosexuals from openly serving in the military. Congress spends more debate time naming Post Offices than they gave to this historic policy shift in how our military functions.

This will fundamentally change our military – yet Pelosi thought it was so unimportant that she only gave five minutes for supporters of the ban and five minutes to the opponents of the ban to debate this issue. This is an outrage of immense proportions! Now the Senate will attempt to ram the repeal through when they return in two weeks.

The liberal controlled House of Representatives added an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill that overturns the 1993 ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Isn’t our military worth more than 10 minutes of debate? Not to liberals.

The failure to permit an honest debate on this amendment is an affront to every soldier, sailor and marine who has ever fought and died to protect this nation from foreign and domestic threats.

The rush to pass this measure is evidence that liberals know their time is short to impose LGBT social engineering upon our military before the mid-term election. The overturning of the 1993 ban is simply Obama’s way of paying back his LGBT supporters who helped get him elected. It has nothing to do with concern for military readiness, morale or unit cohesion.

The men and women we honor this weekend didn’t give their lives so that a zero tolerance program could be instituted in the Armed Forces to silence criticism of homosexual conduct – or to force our military into sensitivity training sessions to affirm gay, bisexual, lesbian and transgender sexual behaviors. Yet, this is apparently what our leftist “Representatives” think.

Federal courts have upheld the constitutionality of the law banning homosexuals in the military. The 1993 law states “there is no constitutional right to serve,” and the military is a “specialized society” that is “fundamentally different from civilian life.” In living conditions offering little or no privacy, homosexuality presents an “unacceptable risk” to good order, discipline, morale and unit cohesion—qualities essential for combat readiness.

Legalizing homosexual conduct in the military will inevitably lead to the destruction of our all-volunteer forces and potentially bring back the draft. Why? Because heterosexual warriors and patriots know instinctively that homosexual sex is abnormal and threatens to create all sorts of problems within the Armed Forces.

In 2008, the Military Times reported the results of a poll regarding lifting the ban on gays in the military. It showed that 10% of our military will not re-enlist or extend their service if the ban is overturned; another 14% said they would consider not re-enlisting or extending their service. In essence, this could result in a loss of up to 323,000 men and women from the service.

This loss of hundreds of thousands of patriotic soldiers will threaten our national security, yet liberals don’t care.

This Memorial Day let’s remember our fallen soldiers, but also remember that our current soldiers face a domestic enemy in our Congress and among lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender activist groups who seek to exploit the military for their political gain.

We must put an end to the liberal-gay dominance of our Congress this November. The future of our national security depends on it. Remember this: Our soldiers can’t defend themselves in the political realm. We must do it for them. They’re willing to die for you; are you willing to protect them from social engineering by LGBT zealots?

Source: Traditional Values Coalition, email newsletter, May 28, 2010.

Rep. Austria on Immigration Reform

Last month, the state of Arizona passed a new, sweeping immigration reform law, which immediately received national attention due to its stringency. The new law would, among other things, allow local law enforcement officials to enforce existing federal laws regarding the verification of a person’s immigration status, given there is reasonable cause to do so. Supporters of the law argue that the federal government was not doing its job to enforce the current illegal immigration laws and secure our nation’s borders. Opponents of the new law claim that only the federal government has jurisdiction over immigration laws, and numerous law suits have already been filed against the state of Arizona.

It is unclear whether Congress will consider a comprehensive immigration reform bill this year. As a Member of the House of Representatives’ Homeland Security Committee, I recognize that this problem continues to plague our nation and it must be taken seriously and addressed. It is important that we ensure our border patrol and local law enforcement have the resources and tools necessary to secure our borders and adequately enforce our existing immigration laws.

Transparency in the Health Care Reform Debate

By Rep. Steve Austria

House and Senate Democratic leadership continue to negotiate health care reform in an attempt to reconcile the differences between the house-passed and senate-passed versions. Recently, the President of C-SPAN, Brian Lamb, sent a letter to House and Senate leaders requesting that they be allowed to televise the current negotiations, which will decide the ultimate fate of the legislation. House and Senate Democratic leadership largely denied the request.

The potential passage of health care reform has widespread implications for all Americans and it is imperative that these negotiations are not done behind closed doors. The American people and Members of Congress need to have access to the talks so they can adequately evaluate the merits of the bill.