End Of Day Report

Thursday, March 31, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Al Qaeda Says “Thank You!”

Reasonable people can disagree about America’s military intervention in Libya, and polls show the country is divided on the subject. But while people of good will in the West debate the effects that the uprisings in the Middle East will have on America, it is instructive to take into account the views of our enemies as well.

Consider the latest edition of Al Qaeda’s propaganda magazine Inspire. Under the headline “The Tsunami of Change,” radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, Al Qaeda’s second-in-command, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, and other Islamic extremists, extoll the uprisings — aided by the West — as tremendous opportunities for Islamofascists.

Al-Awlaki writes: “Our mujahideen brothers in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and the rest of the Muslim world will get a chance to breathe again after three decades of suffocation. … For the scholars and activists of Egypt to be able to speak again freely, it would represent a great leap forward for the mujahideen.” By “scholars and activists of Egypt,” al-Awlaki means the extremists in the Muslim Brotherhood, which was banned under the Mubarak regime.

Al-Zawahiri writes about some “characteristics” for achieving short and long-term goals after the protests. Of course, jihad is a key characteristic. Consider the following excerpt:
“The third characteristic: force must be an element in change… whether this force will be put into practice in the form of a military coup, or in the form of a mass popular uprising or mass public disobedience … or in the form of guerilla warfare, or in the form of armed political resistance, or in other forms. Whatever its form, method and means, force remains a necessary element for bringing about change…”
Of the revolutions sweeping the Middle East, Inspire’s editor, Yahya Ibrahim, writes, “We are very optimistic and have great expectations of what is to come.” As today’s Washington Times notes, “The al Qaeda leadership hasn’t been this excited since Sept. 10, 2001.”

Tea Party In D.C.

Tea Party activists came to Capitol Hill today for a “Continuing Revolution” rally to pressure Congress to make deeper cuts in the budget. Unfortunately, the weather didn’t cooperate. It’s been a cold, dreary day. I hope the Tea Party activists had more success inside Capitol Hill than outside.

I’m glad the Tea Party came to town. It’s always good to have pressure from the right to counterbalance the left. But I hope these activists spent most of their time lobbying Senate Democrats. I will keep saying this until I am blue in the face: The problem in Washington is not House Republicans.

As Rep. Mike Pence told the crowd, House Republicans passed a bill to repeal ObamaCare. They defunded Planned Parenthood. They passed a budget that cut $60 billion in spending. Then they ran head-long into Harry Reid and the Democrat Senate, which killed each item. If we can’t get them to agree to $60 billion in cuts, how are we supposed to get them to agree to $100 billion or more in cuts?

I also encourage Tea Party activists to carry signs with messages about jobs, not just spending cuts. As fiscal conservatives, we understand the danger posed by the federal deficit. But the average guy on Main Street is more concerned about his family’s deficit. He needs a job. He needs policies that will grow the economy and expand opportunities for his family. Conservatives need to speak to the concerns of average Americans, but that is hard to do effectively when you speak like accountants.

Defund Planned Parenthood

There are lots of places in the federal budget where politicians can make cuts. At the top of the list should be Planned Parenthood. Dr. Alveda King and I have an op-ed today at FoxNews.com making the case for defunding the nation’s largest abortion business.

Planned Parenthood is getting desperate as it tries to keep your tax dollars flowing. Recently, Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood’s CEO, claimed that if it lost federal funding, many women would go without basic services like mammograms. There’s just one problem: most Planned Parenthood centers don’t provide mammograms. But don’t take my word for it. Watch this video, which exposes Planned Parenthood’s deception.

Obama Bundlers Get Big Benefits

An ABC News investigative report last night asked whether stimulus funds for so-called “green energy” projects were directed to some of Obama’s biggest campaign donors. For example, in 2009 President Obama visited a solar panel manufacturing plant in California to announce the government’s backing of a $535 million loan for the company. The company said it could create 1,000 new “green energy” jobs with stimulus money. But a year later, the plant was shut down and nearly 200 workers were laid off.

As it turns out, one of the investors in the solar company was a major Obama fundraiser who “bundled” — raised campaign contributions from other people — between $50,000 and $100,000 for Obama’s 2008 campaign.

Then there is Steve Westly. Westly, a venture capitalist who previously worked in the Carter Administration, bundled more than $500,000 for Obama’s campaign. According to the Center of Public Integrity, “Since June 2009, four companies in [Westly’s] venture firm’s portfolio have received more than half a billion dollars in loans, grants or stimulus money from the Obama Energy Department.” Last year, Obama appointed Westly to an Energy Department advisory panel.

There is also John Doerr, a Democrat mega-donor whose investment firm is a major backer of the electric car company Fisker Automotive. In February 2009, Obama appointed Doerr to his Economic Recovery board. Fisker Automotive secured a Department of Energy loan for $528 million in September of that year. USA Today reports that the Fisker Karma will start at $95,900, but will be eligible for a $7,500 tax credit.

This is what happens when big government tries to pick winners and losers. Ultimately, the taxpayers are the biggest losers. Thankfully, House Republicans are investigating how stimulus grants were awarded.

Last month, the Government Accountability Office issued a report that was highly critical of loans made by the Department of Energy. The department’s inspector general told Congress this month that he has “64 open investigations” regarding stimulus funding.

End Of Day Report


Wednesday, March 30, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

The Day The World Dodged A Bullet

Thirty years ago today the United States came very close to losing the greatest president of the 20th century. That morning I had just finished briefing members of Congress on the goals of the still-new Reagan Administration.

As my car returned to the White House, a bevy of D.C. police cruisers with sirens blazing rushed up 17th Street. Moments later more headed in the same direction. Suddenly, I recalled that President Reagan was speaking that morning at the Washington Hilton hotel, located in the direction the police were headed.

Entering the Old Executive Office Building I was shocked to see men with automatic weapons positioned outside the office of the vice president. Seconds later, I heard the news — Ronald Reagan had been shot by a would-be assassin.

For hours the president’s staff gathered in various offices, huddled around TV sets, calling colleagues higher in the administration, doing everything we could to get accurate up-to-date information. There was a lot of praying. We had walked into office with a victorious Reagan only a little more than two months before, filled with dreams on how we would turn the country around after the disastrous Carter “malaise.”

Thankfully, Ronald Reagan survived, but as we know now he came incredibly close to death on that fateful day. A few weeks later, a radical Muslim, Mehmet Ali Agca, attempted to kill Pope John Paul II, who also barely survived the attempt on his life. The pontiff and the president, with the able collaboration of British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (who survived an assassination attempt in 1984), went on to lead the struggle against Soviet communism. They ultimately prevailed. Both men believed that God thwarted the assassination attempts because He had important things for them to accomplish. They were right.

Today is a good day to remind ourselves that God is in control. Our country faces massive challenges. The headlines reporting natural and manmade disasters are chilling. There is incompetence or worse in high places. But the God of Abraham, who hung the stars in the sky and knows when a sparrow falls to the ground, has promised He will not forsake us. For us it remains to be of good cheer and to fight the good fight!

Schumer Shows His Hand

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) showed his hand yesterday in the high stakes showdown over a government shutdown. Schumer, who is in charge of messaging for Senate Democrats, got on a conference call and thought he was speaking only to fellow Democrat senators when he proceeded to give them their talking points for the upcoming budget debate.

“I always use ‘extreme.’ That’s what the caucus instructed me to do the other week. ‘Extreme cuts.’ …’Extreme and draconian,'” Schumer said. He went on to instruct his fellow Democrats to drive a wedge between the House GOP and the Tea Party.

What Schumer didn’t know was that several reporters were already on the call. Evidently, a staffer interrupted him and the line went silent for a few minutes. But when the call resumed, Democrats dutifully stuck to their script. Sen. Barbara Boxer spoke first, saying, “We Senate Democrats are calling on Speaker Boehner to abandon the extreme right wing of his Republican caucus.” Boxer was followed by Sens. Carper (D-DE), Cardin (D-MD) and Blumenthal (D-CT), all of whom used “extreme” or “extremist” in their statements.

Remember, Democrats are arguing over $50 billion in spending cuts when we have a $1.5 trillion deficit. The extremists in this debate are the liberals who don’t see the problem! But it is clear from this episode that they are not serious about dealing with America’s extreme fiscal crisis.

It is also clear that they want a government shutdown because they believe they will win that debate. In fact, former Democrat National Committee chairman Howard Dean admitted as much yesterday, saying, “If I was head of the DNC, I would be quietly rooting for it … I know who’s going to get blamed – we’ve been down this road before.” I guarantee you that Schumer and other Democrats wouldn’t be agitating for a government shutdown without the blessing of the White House.

I mention this just to remind you of the difficult position House Republicans are in. They control only one-third of the budget process. The Democrat Senate and President Obama also have a say. But regardless of the fiscal liabilities on our nation’s balance sheets, they are trying to turn the GOP’s push to rein in big government into a political liability.

As I’ve said before, the Republican message needs to be jobs and growth, not just cuts. All the talk about cuts, which Democrats are using to scare voters, makes it appear as though Republicans aren’t doing anything about jobs and the economy, which are the voters’ top priorities.

How Low Can He Go?

A new Quinnipiac poll has bad news for President Obama. Forty-eight percent of registered voters disapproved of President Obama’s job performance, while 42% approved. But by a greater margin, 50%-to-41%, most voters also said Obama does not deserve reelection. According to Quinnipiac, both numbers — job approval and reelection — are all time lows for Obama.

On Libya, 47% voters polled opposed U.S. involvement, while 41% supported it. Fifty-eight percent of voters agreed that Obama “has not clearly stated U.S. goals for Libya,” while just 29% felt he had. On other issues:

  • 64% of voters disapproved of Obama’s handling of the budget deficit.
  • 60% disapproved of his handling of the economy.
  • 55% disapproved of his performance on healthcare.
  • By a margin of 47%-to-35%, voters disapproved of Obama’s handling of energy policy.


What Is Obama’s Energy Policy?

With gas prices at seasonal record levels and headed higher, President Obama today delivered a major speech on energy and expressed his desire to reduce U.S. oil imports by 33% over the next ten years. That is a laudable goal. But Obama’s current policies are more likely to cut our own oil production by 33% than cut our imports by that amount.

If Obama were serious, he would end his moratorium on offshore and land-based drilling and exploration in order to boost domestic energy production. The United States has tremendous energy resources, which if tapped would create jobs and keep a lot of money from flowing to the Middle East. But that’s not what Obama has in mind. Today’s speech was more of the same from Obama — saying one thing that fits public opinion, even as he pursues far-left policies.

After going overseas to encourage offshore drilling in Brazil, Obama wants us to use more expensive, less efficient alternatives, like ethanol, which even Bill Clinton and Al Gore say is a bad idea. Obama’s bureaucrats at the EPA are furiously trying to impose a cap-and-trade scheme that will cause energy prices to skyrocket, while radical environmentalists and animal rights activists are blocking even so-called “green energy” programs.

This madness must stop. A growing, thriving economy needs energy, and the world’s superpower should not be held hostage to extremists in the Middle East or those here on the radical left.

End Of Day Report

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

The Libya Speech That Wasn’t

After watching President Obama’s speech last night defending his military intervention in Libya, I turned to my wife, Carol, and said, “That was not a Libya speech — that was an Obama speech.” Talking to members of my staff this morning, I said the same thing — that the address to the nation about Libya was a speech whose purpose was more about keeping Obama in power than about getting Qadhafi out of power.

We’ve seen this over and over again — particularly since the November elections. The polls show the public is tired of big government, so with great fanfare he announces an initiative to repeal unnecessary regulations. Meanwhile, his bureaucrats are regulating more than ever. The public sees Obama as anti-business, so he brings business leaders to the White House and spends hours getting their advice. Meanwhile, he continues to wage war on entrepreneurs, small businesses and capitalism.

And now he’s doing it on foreign policy. Recent polling shows that Obama is seen by U.S. voters as a tremendously weak commander-in-chief. Only 17% of Americans regard Obama as “decisive and strong” in that role. Last night’s speech was intended to make Obama appear decisive and presidential. I am happy to say Rush Limbaugh agrees with me. Leading off his show today, Rush said that the speech had little to do with Libya and was mostly about Obama’s future.

Obama is incredibly vulnerable on his handling of U.S. foreign policy. He has severely damaged relations with our strongest allies while kowtowing to our enemies. His Middle East policies in particular have been questionable.

He has repeatedly berated Israel, while begging Iran to negotiate with him. His insistence on Israeli concessions BEFORE negotiations with the Palestinians has given Palestinian leaders an excuse not to negotiate at all. He refuses to acknowledge the motivating force of radical Islam in the violence aimed at the U.S., Israel and the West in general. Unable to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, Obama tries to make Qadhafi sound like the big threat, when he is a sideshow.

I safely make this prediction: If the thug Qadhafi is forced to step down in the days ahead, the liberal media will report it as if Obama were a modern day Eisenhower who just liberated Europe. That is the goal of this Libyan adventure. Here are a few more comments on the speech.

  • Astonishingly, Barack Obama used the idea of American exceptionalism last night in defending American intervention in Libya, saying, “To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader … would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different.”

    This is coming from the same man who apologized to Europe for America’s “dismissive arrogance,” and who dismissed the concept of American exceptionalism when asked directly about it. At a European summit in 2009, Obama said, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the … Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” Obama was essentially saying that every country thinks it is exceptional, thus none is any better than the rest.

    What prompted his new tone? I suspect it may have something to do with internal White House polling that found Americans don’t like presidents who don’t much like America. Yet the speech was heavy with “Obama exceptionalism.” In his address last night, he referred to himself more than two dozen times!

  • To elevate himself, he took cheap shots at two past presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, contrasting his magnum opus in Libya to how they handled Bosnia and Iraq respectively. Obama has every right to disagree with the war in Iraq. He ran as the anti-war candidate in 2008 and made his opposition to Iraq a central theme in the primary against Hillary Clinton. Never mind that removing a brutal thug from power, a man who was a threat to his own people and the region, bears a striking similarity to Obama’s justification for intervention in Libya.

    But as one commentator noted, Obama moved against Qadhafi after just one U.N. resolution. Bush had five U.N. resolutions against Saddam Hussein. Obama acted with the support of 15 coalition partners. Bush had 40 nations assisting us in Iraq. And George W. Bush had something else Obama did not have: 373 votes in Congress authorizing the use of force. How many congressional votes does Obama have for what his spokesman called the “kinetic military action” in Libya? Zero.

  • As for the policy itself, President Obama justified military strikes against Qadhafi by using the dictator’s own words against him. “Qadhafi declared he would show ‘no mercy’ to his own people,” Obama said. “He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment.” Why are we not taking the words of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad more seriously? The tyrant in Tehran has repeatedly threatened to wipe one of our allies off the map while he aggressively pursues the world’s most dangerous weapons!

    The Associated Press fact checked Obama’s speech. Of Obama’s much-hyped transition of leadership to NATO, the AP writes: “In transferring command and control to NATO, the U.S. is turning the reins over to an organization dominated by the U.S., both militarily and politically. In essence, the U.S. runs the show that is taking over running the show.”

  • And as I predicted yesterday, Obama didn’t have much to say about the Libyan rebels on whose behalf we have gone to war, and it’s not surprising. We don’t fully know who they are, but I am fairly certain they are not avid readers of the Federalist Papers.

    Obama tried to compare them to our Founding Fathers by suggesting that our revolution for freedom is somehow comparable to what is taking place in the Middle East today. If only that were so. But as we have reported, the evidence is growing that many of the rebels are affiliated with Al Qaeda and other extreme Islamist movements.

End Of Day Report

Monday, March 28, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

President Obama To Speak Tonight

President Barack Obama will address the nation tonight from the National Defense University in Washington to explain his rationale for the “kinetic military action” in Libya. It will be interesting to hear him make the case now, more than a week after the missiles started flying. Back in 2007, then Candidate Obama insisted that the American people had a right to know “how we’re going to shift our foreign policy.”

On Meet the Press yesterday, David Gregory asked Secretary of Defense Robert Gates if Libya was in our “vital interest as a country.” Gates responded: “No. I don’t think it’s a vital interest for the United States.” At that point, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton jumped in and explained that we attacked Libya to appease France! Clinton said: “When it comes to Libya, we started hearing from the U.K., France, Italy, other of our NATO allies. This was in their vital national interest.”

And where is Joe Biden? Remember, Vice President Biden was supposed to be Obama’s “Cheney” — the one who brought foreign policy gravitas to the Oval Office to make up for Obama’s lack of experience. Why isn’t Biden making the case for the war in Libya? Some pundits are speculating that Biden agrees with Gates and disagrees with Obama.

Presumably when he speaks tonight the president will defend the war as a humanitarian mission. But that begs the question, what are the standards for intervening? Why are we not bombing the Islamic regime that is slaughtering Christians and Muslims in Sudan or other thugs and tyrants in Africa and the Middle East? As Ted Koppel said on Meet The Press Sunday, “The question hasn’t yet been answered as to why it is that Libya, of all the countries in that region, has won the humanitarian defense sweepstakes of 2011.”

But one thing I’m sure we won’t hear Obama talk about tonight is the identity of the “rebels” we are supporting. According to a report in the British media, a key rebel leader is Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi. Hasidi left Libya to fight against “the foreign invasion” of Afghanistan in 2002. In other words, he left his homeland and joined Al Qaeda to wage jihad against U.S. forces. He later recruited other jihadists to fight against us in Iraq. Hasidi said that some of those Al Qaeda terrorists “today are on the front lines in Ajdabiya (Libya).”

The president of Chad, on Libya’s southern border, is warning that Al Qaeda forces in Libya have pillaged Libyan military arsenals and seized major weapons, including surface-to-air missiles. And while Obama makes the case tonight for this intervention as a “humanitarian mission,” Al Qaeda is promising to impose its version of Islam on the country once Qadhafi is gone. If that happens, all we will have accomplished is a tremendous humanitarian disaster, while helping the Islamists achieve their goal of a Middle East caliphate.

Media Matters Declares War On Fox

The George Soros funded outfit Media Matters has declared war on Fox News. Politico reported over the weekend that the left-wing group was changing its focus from “traditional media critic” to a new campaign of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage,” according to Media Matters founder David Brock. Soros and Brock want to take down Fox because they view it as the “de facto leader of the GOP” and the “nerve center” of the conservative movement.

The Politico report should outrage anyone who believes in open debate. Media Matters is now digging for dirt “not only on Fox’s top executives but on a series of midlevel officials.” It has also retained a legal team to promote lawsuits by disgruntled employees and plans to harass advertisers on not just Glenn Beck’s show but the entire network!

They have hired top operatives from MoveOn.org to organize shareholder campaigns aimed at disrupting Rupert Murdoch’s other commercial interests worldwide. And, according to Politico, Media Matters is “looking for ways to turn regulators [government bureaucrats] in the U.S., U.K., and elsewhere against the network.”

These people are political animals, who view everything through a warped ideological perspective. Now they are bringing the slash-and-burn politics of personal destruction — just what they did to Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and other prominent conservative leaders — to bear against unknown staffers at a news agency. There is some thought that the Media Matters effort could even be illegal.

Progressives claim “tolerance” is one of their cherished values. But the opposite is often true. Media Matters’ “war” on Fox News demonstrates the left’s intolerance and its impulse to silence dissent when it starts losing a debate. For decades conservatives have put up with media bias at ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, MSNBC, etc. Yet when one news network doesn’t toe the liberal line, the left goes into fits of rage and spares no expense to shut it down.

Fighting For Our Values

As members of Congress return to Washington this week, a top priority will be funding the government for the remainder of the fiscal year. The current continuing resolution runs out April 8th. It is time for our elected representatives to get serious about the budget and to set priorities for how your hard-earned tax dollars are spent.

I’m pleased to report that my non-profit organization, American Values, has teamed up with the Susan B. Anthony List and Catholic Advocate to run a TV ad in Washington, D.C., exposing Planned Parenthood’s obsession with abortion. The ad features Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood clinic director, who was pressured to perform more abortions at her clinic. You can view the ad here.

We are also fighting other important battles, including efforts to redefine marriage. Please don’t forget to tune in to Dr. Dobson’s Family Talk radio show today and tomorrow. I am a guest on the show along with my good friends Tony Perkins, Dr. Ken Hutcherson, Pastor Jim Garlow and Bishop Harry Jackson.

You can find station listings for Family Talk in your area here. Click this link to listen online.

Winning Muslim Hearts And Minds At DOJ

For a President who lectures his fellow citizens on the importance of math and science education, Barack Obama’s defense of a math teacher who abandoned her students to take a vacation seems inexplicable. But as I write in my Human Events column today, the more one learns about the case of Safoorah Khan, the clearer it becomes that, under Obama, the scales of justice may have been tipped in favor of the Muslim community. You can read my column at www.humanevents.com.

End Of Day Report

Friday, March 25, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Egypt Falling To The Islamofascists

We warned about this when the crisis first erupted. We wondered whether the administration had any plan to make sure democratic forces prevailed. We criticized the media for staying in one place and ignoring what was happening in the rest of the country. Now, just eight weeks later, even the New York Times admits that the Muslim Brotherhood is calling the shots in Egypt.

In a front page story today, the Times reports: “The Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group once banned by the state, is at the forefront, transformed into a tacit partner with the military government that many fear will thwart fundamental changes. It is also clear that the young, educated secular activists who initially propelled the non-ideological revolution are no longer the driving political force…”

It may very well be that the democracy movement in Egypt peaked the moment that 200 men sexually assaulted CBS reporter Lara Logan, while yelling “Jew, Jew, Jew,” as she covered the celebration in Tahrir Square that followed Hosni Mubarak’s decision to step down.

The problem with this whole “democratization movement” is that we are dealing with people who are rooted in Islamic extremism. Don’t take my word for it. Read what some Egyptian women had to endure during the demonstrations in Tahrir Square.

Egypt should serve as a cautionary tale for those in the West who think that our default position should be to support the revolutionaries in the Middle East.

The Obama Administration was eager to call on Mubarak to step down, despite obvious concerns that the Muslim Brotherhood could take over. We know Al Qaeda supports the uprising against Qadhafi. But as we saw in Gaza and now in Egypt, democracy does not always mean freedom.

Meanwhile, the boil that needs to be lanced in the Middle East is Iran. Yet, when protests took place there, Obama couldn’t be bothered to speak up. And what is really disturbing, as you will read next, is that we are using our foreign policy failures as an excuse to force more concessions from Israel.

U.S. Warns Israel About Populism

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates arrived in Israel yesterday, bringing advice for the Israeli government from Barack Obama. His visit comes at a difficult time for Israel. In recent weeks, an Israeli family was brutally murdered in their beds by Palestinian thugs, rocket barrages were fired into Israel from Hamas-controlled Gaza, and a terrorist bomb exploded at a Jerusalem bus station.

A senior U.S. defense official briefed reporters ahead of the trip to explain exactly what wisdom Obama wants Gates to share with Israel. According to the official, who insisted on anonymity, Gates will tell Israeli leaders that they “have a very deep strategic interest in getting out in front of the wave of populism that’s sweeping” the Middle East.

The U.S. official added, “There’s some (in Israel) who…are kind of in a little bit of a defense crouch and a risk adverse posture as it related to the Middle East peace… I think our administration sees things a little differently.”

The Obama Administration plumbs new depths of stupidity daily. “Populists” did not sever the head of the Israeli baby who was killed with her family a few weeks ago. “Populists” aren’t lobbing rockets into Israeli cities and blowing up Israelis as they wait for a bus.

These things are done by the Islamists in Hamas, Hezbollah and their sympathizers who have dedicated themselves to the destruction of Israel. They are encouraged by regimes like the one in Iran whose leaders passionately want a second Holocaust. Just how is Israel supposed to get “out in front” of that wave?

A real populist uprising in Gaza and Judea/Samaria would be a wonderful thing. Such an uprising would target not Israel, but Hamas, Hezbollah and the Palestinian Authority, which have all shown, in spite of billions of our foreign aid dollars, incapable of creating jobs, educating their people or doing anything that normal governments are expected to do. The only things Palestinian leaders effectively produce are hatred for Jews and Christians and suicide bombers.

If I were Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, I would be tempted to put Secretary Gates back on his plane, and tell him to deliver his lectures about taking risks for peace somewhere else.

“The Professor’s War”

As you know, I lack enthusiasm for this Libyan whatever is. And I’m not being sarcastic. Even liberal reporters are now mocking the administration’s lack of specificity.

In today’s Washington Post Karen Tumulty writes, “Of all the decisions that a president must make, none calls for more clarity than the one to go to war. Thus far, President Obama’s move to join other nations in intervening militarily in Libya appears to have generated confusion instead… But on even the most basic question — is this war? — the White House has strained for an answer.”

If it was intended to scare other tyrants in the Middle East or provide some stability, it isn’t working. In fact, it seems to be fomenting unrest in Bahrain and other Arab states. If anything, the mission in Libya seems to be demonstrating the weakness of our current commander-in-chief.

For example, why would a U.S. president be so eager to prove that he’s not in control? That is the message Obama is sending with his desperate attempts to hand over control of the mission to NATO, even though many NATO members don’t want ownership of this endeavor.

Whether you support the mission or not, consider Charles Krauthammer’s column today, entitled “The Professor’s War.” Krauthammer has a theory that explains Obama’s behavior:

“The president is obsessed with pretending that we are not running the operation — a dismaying expression of Obama’s view that his country is so tainted by its various sins that it lacks the moral legitimacy to … what? Save Third World people from massacre? …

“Never modest about himself, Obama is supremely modest about his country. America should be merely ‘one of the partners among many,’ he said Monday. … Even the Clinton administration spoke of America as the indispensable nation. And it remains so.”
If your worldview tells you that America is generally not a force for good, and if you believe your mission is to “fundamentally transform” America, then it makes sense that America should not be in the lead.

Fox News reports that thousands of Christians in Ethiopia are fleeing their villages as Muslim mobs are torching churches and homes. Why am I confident that we won’t be hearing Secretary of State Clinton or President Obama calling for a no-fly zone or humanitarian mission to protect Ethiopian Christians?

Fighting To Preserve Marriage

Please tune in to Family Talk with Dr. James Dobson on Monday, March 28th and Tuesday, March 29th. I will be a guest on Dr. Dobson’s show, along with Tony Perkins, Dr. Ken Hutcherson, Pastor Jim Garlow and Bishop Harry Jackson. Our topic for both days is the fight to preserve traditional marriage.

This is an important battle, my friends. If the Defense of Marriage Act is struck down by the courts, the definition of marriage will be open to any and every interpretation imaginable. As I have often argued, the failure to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman will lead to polygamy and worse.

Every argument that is made in support of men “marrying” other men can and is being made to justify polygamy or the “love” of a father for his adult daughter. You can read more about that here.

Please do not miss Dr. Dobson’s show next week. You can find station listings for Family Talk in your area here. Or you can listen live online here.

End Of Day Report

Thursday, March 24, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

America Not Sold On Obama’s “Kinetic Military Action”

The Obama Administration won’t say that the mission in Libya is a war. But what, then, is it exactly? Yesterday, during a briefing to reporters on Air Force One, Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes described our involvement as a “kinetic military action.” Whatever you want to call it, most Americans aren’t sold on it.

A Gallup poll released yesterday found that 47% of Americans approve of the “current military action against Libya,” while 37% disapprove. But here is the most significant finding: According to Gallup, the 47% approval rating is the lowest measure of support for any U.S. military campaign in recent decades.

For example, when President Ronald Reagan bombed Libyan targets in 1986, 71% of Americans approved and 21% disapproved. When George H. W. Bush bombed Iraqi military installations in 1993, 83% of Americans approved, while just 9% disapproved. When George W. Bush invaded Afghanistan in 2001, 90% of American supported the effort, while 5% did not. And when President Bush invaded Iraq in March 2003, 76% of Americans supported the war, while 20% did not.

That only 47% of Americans support the mission suggests at a minimum that President Obama has failed to adequately explain the mission. More troubling for the White House is a new Reuters poll that found only 17% of Americans view Obama as a “strong and decisive” commander-in-chief.

By the way, if you don’t think there is any confusion at the White House over Libya, consider this: Fox News reports that just 30 days ago, the White House asked Congress for nearly $2 million in additional foreign aid for Libya. Why? To “train military officers, improve its air force, secure its borders and to counter terrorism.” 

Good News: Pro-Life Laws Sweeping States

This week South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard signed into law a bill requiring a 72-hour waiting period and counseling for women seeking abortions. Other states are taking similar actions. The Associated Press reports today that dozens of pro-life bills are “advancing through statehouses nationwide.”

Five states are considering legislation modeled after Nebraska’s law that bans abortions after 20 weeks. In Ohio, a bill would ban abortions after the “first medically detectable heartbeat.”

More than 20 states are considering limitations on insurance coverage of abortions. Much of this legislation is in reaction to ObamaCare, which requires state health insurance exchanges to cover abortions unless states pass legislation to opt out of ObamaCare’s abortion mandate. Apparently many Americans don’t like their hard-earned tax money being spent to pay for abortions!

A spokeswoman for the radically pro-abortion group NARAL complained, “This is having a transformational effect on the insurance industry and the way abortion is viewed.” NARAL was all for ObamaCare’s “transformational effect” on the insurance industry when it thought it would lead to more abortions. But many states evidently don’t view the destruction of innocent life in the womb as healthcare. And NARAL is having fits.

What has the pro-abortion movement so panicked this year is not the volume of pro-life laws under consideration. Pro-life legislators have been fighting for these ideas for many years. What is different now, as the AP notes, is “the fact that many of the toughest, most substantive measures have a good chance of passage due to gains by conservative Republicans in the last year’s legislative and gubernatorial elections.”

The Left Just Doesn’t Get It

Earlier this week, I wrote about the Left’s ignorance when it comes to jobs created by America’s energy companies. Today’s Washington Post features an op-ed by Randy Stilley, president of Seahawk Drilling, a shallow-water drilling company that operates in the Gulf of Mexico. Last month, Seahwak Drilling declared bankruptcy.

Stilley lays the blame for his company’s demise and the loss of 500 jobs squarely at Obama’s feet, writing, “In the 11 months after the Deepwater Horizon accident, it became clear that Seahawk’s greatest rival was no longer our industry competitors, but the U.S. government. The government’s drastic slowdown in the issuance of permits for shallow-water drilling operations … has all but crippled the industry.” You can read the rest of Stilley’s op-ed here.

So while American oil companies are going bankrupt and jobs are being lost, Obama is promoting oil drilling and job creation in Brazil. When it comes to securing America’s energy needs and the jobs that could be created here, the Obama Administration is either clueless or contemptuous. I believe the unemployment rate would be significantly lower if Obama were not president.

Reality Check

I want to respond to several themes that have appeared in recent emails from End of Day readers. I can certainly sense the anger and frustration among many conservatives with this administration, especially as it pursues its agenda through non-legislative means. But I would like to point out that we are making progress.

Today’s political environment is vastly improved from the previous two years in which Obama got virtually everything he wanted from a heavily liberal Democrat Congress. House conservatives are preventing the worst liberal legislation from being enacted. Just try to imagine what Washington would be like if Nancy Pelosi were still Speaker, rubber-stamping everything that Obama sent to Capitol Hill.

That said, we need to be realistic about our expectations. We are limited in our ability to roll back legislation we don’t like because Democrats still control the Senate. Remember, the Republican House voted to repeal ObamaCare, but the Democrat Senate voted to keep it. What we have in Washington today is a stalemate. But, thankfully, the Obama steamroller has been stopped.

At the same time, many folks have expressed frustration that Barack Obama is not being impeached. My friends, impeachment is not a real option. It is a two-part process that begins with an “indictment” from the House and ends with a trial in the Senate. Barack Obama is not going to be impeached in Harry Reid’s Senate.

Not only that, the last time Republicans tried to impeach a Democrat president (Bill Clinton) all we accomplished was to energize the left-wing base (remember MoveOn.org?), boost his approval ratings, and lose GOP seats in the next election.

Sadly, half of the country still supports Obama. The surest way to boost his standing would be to take our focus off of jobs and other important issues to pursue an extremely partisan effort that is doomed to fail.

I also sense a growing dissatisfaction with the House GOP leadership, as if somehow the “bad guys” in Washington are Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor. I don’t agree with the leadership on everything, but Boehner and Cantor do not run the federal government, and they aren’t the problem.

Some emails I receive give the impression that the House alone decides what is funded. That is not true. The House initiates spending bills, but the Senate must also approve them. If the House votes to defund ObamaCare in the next spending bill, for example, Harry Reid will simply put the funding back in. If the House and Senate can’t reach a compromise, then you have a government shutdown.

That may seem like a good idea to many people, but there are many good conservatives who are against a shutdown, not because they are wimps or sellouts, but because of history. The last time we tried it, like the last time we tried impeachment, it was a public relations disaster for us. In fact, the evidence is strong that the Democrats want a shutdown because they are convinced they will win that battle. A compliant media will blame it on conservatives and parrot the Democrat line.

But I’m not so sure the left will win this time. I am inclined to support a shutdown provided we use the opportunity to thoroughly educate the American people about just how severe the fiscal crisis really is. That will be a massive undertaking and the liberal media will be against us the entire time. But Boehner and Cantor are not the enemy, my friends. We want the same things. We are merely having a disagreement over strategy.

Let me conclude by stating the obvious: The last election was good and it gave us hope that the worst was over. But it was not great. We won the House and closed a big gap in the Senate. But we did not win the Senate, and Obama is still president.

Rather than bashing Boehner, what we all need to do is to work hard every day to make sure that we win the November 2012 elections, just 20 months away from now, and that Harry Reid is no longer Senate Majority Leader and that Barack Obama is no longer in the White House. That is what CWF is working to accomplish.

If we win the Senate and White House we can start making the necessary changes to get America back on track. If we lose because we wasted precious time and resources fighting one another, then the damage to our country may be impossible to reverse.

End Of Day Report

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Call Your Congressmen Now

Yesterday, Richard Fisher, president of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, warned that the United States was approaching bankruptcy. “If we continue down on the path on which the fiscal authorities put us, we will become insolvent,” Fisher said. “The question is when. …I look at this as a tipping point.”

A coalition of fiscally conservative and socially conservative groups is putting pressure on members of Congress to get serious about cutting the budget. Congress must set priorities for our limited tax dollars. We are asking congressmen to do just that, and to start by defunding Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion business.

Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to having their hard-earned tax dollars used to subsidize abortions. It is a bad idea even in good economic times. But these are not good economic times. With annual deficits of $1.5 trillion, America is in a fiscal crisis. Now is the time to make your voice heard.

Members of Congress are back home this week for a district work period. Call your representative and senators at their district and state offices today. Tell them that you don’t your tax dollars subsidizing the abortion industry. Use our online Congressional Directory to find local contact information for your members of Congress. Please call today! For more information, watch this brief video from Lila Rose, who recently exposed Planned Parenthood’s willingness to cover up child sex trafficking.

Coalition Crackup

It must be hard to be president. Just look at the world Barack Obama has to deal with. Consider these headlines from the foreign media:

“Tensions With Britain As Gates Rebukes U.K. Government Over Suggestion Gaddafi Could Be Assassinated”

“French Propose A New Political ‘Committee’ To Oversee Operations”

“Germany Pulls Equipment Out Of NATO Coalition Over Disagreement Over Campaign’s Direction”

“U.K. Ministers Say War Could Last ’30 Years'”

“Italy To ‘Take Back Control’ Of Bases Used By Allies Unless NATO Leadership Put In Charge Of The Mission”
After reluctantly engaging U.S. forces in Libya, President Obama said this week that the United States will turn over control of the mission in Libya “within days” to NATO. But several NATO members are refusing to go along, and without U.S. leadership Obama’s “coalition of the unwilling” is cracking up.

We were told that Obama, with his post-American worldview, would restore sanity to our foreign policy after eight disastrous years of that cowboy Bush. Obama was loved overseas. Remember the adoring crowds in Berlin?

It has been noted that Bush had twice as many coalition partners for the war in Iraq than Obama put together for this “humanitarian” mission in Libya. And Bush’s coalition held together for more than a few days.

Escalating Violence Against Israel

I recently told you about the brutal murders of five members of a Jewish family in Samaria. Since then, dozens of mortar shells and rockets have been launched at Israeli civilians from Gaza. Today, a bomb exploded at a Jerusalem bus station, killing a 60 year-old woman and wounding 39 others.

Has anyone else noticed the irony that as we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to help rebels in Libya, even though we don’t know if they are on our side, we are sending hundreds of millions of dollars to an enemy that is attacking Israel, our only reliable ally in the Middle East?

Is Hajj Now A Civil Right?

The front page of today’s Washington Post features an unbelievable account of just how far the Obama Administration will go to appease Muslims. The Justice Department is suing the small Chicago suburb of Berkeley, Illinois, for religious discrimination because the town denied the request of a Muslim teacher to take three weeks off for the hajj pilgrimage to Mecca.

Here are some of the facts of the case: Safoorah Khan had been on the job for only nine months and was the school district’s only math lab instructor. Khan’s request for three weeks off came at the crucial end-of-semester testing period. Under these circumstances, school officials denied the request. Khan quit her job and went anyway. Now the Obama Justice Department is suing, claiming that the small town violated Khan’s civil rights.

Does anyone think the Justice Department would intervene if a Jew asked for three weeks off to visit Jerusalem or if a Christian wanted three weeks off to visit the Vatican? Of course not. But the same Justice Department that will not defend normal marriage evidently thinks the hajj is a civil right whenever a Muslim demands to take it.

Believe it or not, even the Washington Post seemed incredulous, writing, “As the case moves forward in federal court in Chicago, it has triggered debate over whether the Justice Department was following a purely legal path or whether suing on Khan’s behalf was part of a broader Obama administration campaign to reach out to Muslims.” From the New Black Panther case to its abandonment of the Defense of Marriage Act, this is just more evidence that Obama’s Justice Department has been hijacked by political hacks.

ACTION ITEM: Contact the Justice Department and tell it to stop accommodating special interest groups. You can call the Department’s comment line at 202-353-1555 or click this link to send an email.

But wait…there’s more! In protest of Rep. Peter King’s (R-NY) hearings on Muslim radicalization, Senate liberals led by Dick Durbin (IL) will hold hearings to examine the so-called “spike in anti-Muslim bigotry in the last year.” Durbin is a good choice to lead these hearings. You may recall that he once compared our military police at GITMO to Nazis.

ObamaCare’s First Anniversary — Unpopular As Ever

It was on this day in 2010 that President Obama signed his socialized medicine scheme into law. It was overwhelmingly unpopular then, but as Nancy Pelosi famously said, “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” Liberals tried to comfort themselves in the belief that over time we would grow to love it. It hasn’t worked out that way.

In fact, according to a CNN poll released today, ObamaCare has lost support. In March 2010, 59% of Americans opposed ObamaCare, while 39% supported it. Today, 59% of American still oppose ObamaCare, but just 37% support it.

You can include the CEO of Starbucks to the growing list of the disenchanted. Howard Schultz recently told the Seattle Times, “I was very supportive of the president’s plan… [But] I think as the bill is currently written and if it was going to land in 2014 under the current guidelines, the pressure on small businesses, because of the mandate, is too great.”