Thursday, September 30, 2010

us stock futures rose Jobless Claims Boost Economic Optimism

U.S. stock futures rose, signaling the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index will build on its best September rally since 1939, after government data showed the economy grew more than estimated in the second quarter and jobless claims decreased more than forecast last week.

Wabash National Corp. rose 3.5 percent as Morgan Stanley initiated coverage of the stock with an “overweight” rating. American International Group Inc. gained 11 percent after selling its Japanese subsidiaries to Prudential Financial Inc.

S&P 500 futures expiring in December climbed 0.6 percent to 1,147.3 at 9:12 a.m. in New York, wiping out earlier losses as the Irish government said it will cost as much as 50 billion euros ($68.27 billion) to bail out its banking system. Dow Jones Industrial Average futures advanced 55 points, or 0.5 percent, to 10,835.

“It shows an economy that’s continuing to improve at a very gradual rate,” said Thomas Wilson, managing director of the institutional investments and private client group at Brinker Capital, which manages about $9 billion from Berwyn, Pennsylvania. “Things are ever so slightly better from the employment standpoint, but it’s not big enough yet to start moving the needle.”

The U.S. economy grew at a 1.7 percent annual rate in the second quarter, faster than the 1.6 percent previously estimated. Initial jobless claims decreased by 16,000 to 453,000 in the week ended Sept. 25, lower than the median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News.

The S&P 500 lost 0.3 percent to 1,144.73 yesterday. The gauge, which is up 2.7 percent so far this year, has fallen 6 percent from its peak for 2010 on April 23. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 0.2 percent to 10,835.28 yesterday.

Bernanke Speech

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke will address a Senate Banking Committee hearing today amid speculation that the central bank will buy more debt to support the recovery.

Fed officials have publicly disagreed about the benefits of new monetary stimulus in a sign that Bernanke has yet to secure a consensus on whether to buy more Treasuries.

Policy makers have the tools to act and should respond “vigorously, creatively, thoughtfully and persistently” to a slow recovery, Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren said yesterday in a New York speech. Separately, Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser said in New Jersey that the central bank risks its credibility by taking actions, such as additional securities purchases, that may fail to help the labor market.

Wabash National increased 3.5 percent to $8.31 as Morgan Stanley rated the truck-trailer maker as “overweight” in new coverage.

AIG rose 11 percent to $41.50 as the bailed-out U.S. insurer agreed to sell its Japanese units Star Life Insurance and Edison Life Insurance to Prudential Financial for $4.8 billion. Prudential Financial’s shares slid 3.8 percent to $54.41 as the U.S.’s second-largest life insurer said it would raise $1.3 billion through a share sale to help fund the purchase.

GLOBAL MARKETS-Dollar drops as more monetary stimulus seen

NEW YORK, Sept 29 (Reuters) - Rising expectations central banks will step up monetary stimulus to support fragile economies drove the dollar to a five-month low against the euro on Wednesday and fed profit taking in stocks.

Investors trimmed their U.S. and European equity positions while an uncertain economic outlook kept commodity prices from rallying too strongly despite the benefit they often get from a sagging U.S. dollar.

Spot gold XAU= did edge up to fresh record high of $1,313.20 and silver XAG= set its best level in 30 years. Oil made only a modest gain on the day.

"We obviously have a negative combination for the U.S. dollar, and the Fed opening the door for potential easing has just stoked fears of dollar weakness and currency debasement generally," said Camilla Sutton, chief currency strategist at Scotia Capital in Toronto.

Wednesday's contrasting reports of Chinese [ID:nTOE68S046] and European [ID:nLDE68S0LU] economic and business sentiment advancing this month added to pressure on the greenback.

There is mounting speculation the U.S. Federal Reserve may engage in quantitative easing -- a process of buying up bonds and other assets to put fresh cash into the economy rather than through lower borrowing costs -- sooner rather than later.

Last week, the Fed said it was prepared to do just that if it were necessary to stimulate the recovery and avoid deflation. The Fed's benchmark interest rate is already at zero to 0.25 percent, leaving no room to stimulate through conventional measures.

In midday U.S. trade, the Dow Jones industrial average .DJI fell 45.45 points, or 0.42 percent, at 10,812.69. The Nasdaq Composite Index .IXIC dropped 9.69 points, or 0.41 percent, at 2,369.90.

The Standard & Poor's 500 Index .SPX lost 5.52 points, or 0.48 percent, at 1,142.18. However, for the month the index is up nearly 9 percent, its best monthly performance since May 2009 and before that the best showing since March 2000.

Hewlett-Packard Co (HPQ.N) rose 1.4 percent to $42.25 after the computer and printer maker forecast 2011 profits above estimates. For details, see [ID:nN28273797]

Marc Pado, U.S. market strategist at Cantor Fitzgerald & Co in San Francisco, said the market was technically overextended, but a recent pattern of buying on dips could re-emerge as fund managers "window dress" their portfolios.

European shares gave up earlier gains after the U.S. market opened weaker.

The FTSEurofirst 300 .FTEU3 index of top European shares was down 0.61 percent at 1070.77. Weaker retail shares after disappointing figures from Swedish fashion group Hennes & Mauritz (HMb.ST), the world's third largest clothing retailer, proved a drag on the index.


Monday, September 27, 2010

FEMA offering reimbursements in Brockton area for Hurricane Earl preparations

Even though Hurricane Earl swept through the region with barely a gust, the federal government is offering partial reimbursement to communities that spent money preparing for the potential emergency.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency will offer reimbursements of up to 75 percent because of the presidential emergency declaration that was in place when the hurricane was predicted to hit, said Peter Judge, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency.

Judge said the reimbursement will not apply to individual citizens but rather local governments, hospitals and colleges.

“It’s a way to get some money back,” Judge said. “These days, communities can use anything they can get.”

In Hanson, for example, Fire Chief Jerome A. Thompson Jr. said the department spent about $3,400 in hurricane preparations, including extra firefighters on duty.

“If indeed we did get hit, I felt we were really prepared,” he said.

Middleboro Fire Chief Lance Benjamino spent less – about $1,100, with expenses including staffing the south Middleboro fire station in case high winds felled trees and blocked roads.

Benjamino said he tracked the storm and saw that it was weakening rapidly on its approach to Massachusetts.

Bridgewater Fire Chief George W. Rogers said he spent a a few thousand dollars in preparation and will file for a reimbursement.

Bridgewater State University Police Chief David H. Tillinghast said his expenses were under the $1,000 benchmark and he will not be filing for a reimbursement.

Briefs for the reimbursement process will be held at 10 a.m. Tuesday at the Plymouth Public Library, 132 South St., and at 2 p.m. in Bridgewater at the MEMA Region II headquarters on Administration Road, off Titicut Street.


FEMA officials arrive in Minnesota to begin flood damage assessment

St. Paul, MN —The Minnesota Department of Public Safety Division of Homeland Security Emergency Management (HSEM) will meet with local and federal officials to begin preliminary damage assessments (PDA) in 35 Minnesota counties.

FEMA officials are in Minnesota and assessments should begin today (Monday, Sept. 27).

Gov. Tim Pawlenty on Friday directed HSEM to request FEMA conduct damage assessments for public assistance in 35 counties and individual assistance in nine counties. Individual assistance PDAs begin today and continue throughout the week in Blue Earth, Dodge, Faribault, Martin, Olmstead, Rice, Steele, Wabasha and Waseca counties.

Even as damage assessments begin, several areas continue to fight the flood.

• In Goodhue County, officials are keeping an eye on the Byllesby Dam.

• Highway 169 remains closed from Mankato to Henderson. For a complete list of road closures, visit the Minnesota Department of Transportation website at www.511mn.org.

• Preparations are underway in Scott and Carver counties as the Minnesota River continues to rise.

• St. Paul and Hastings are making plans to hold back high river levels (expected late this week) on the Mississippi.

President on longer school year, holding teachers accountable

Obama: Money without reform won’t fix school system

President on longer school year, holding teachers accountable


  1. ning of: Obama on education, children’s futures

    Advertisement | ad info

    >>> from nbc, this is education nation. an interview with president barack obama live from the white house . here's matt lauer .

    >> and good morning, everyone. i'm matt lauer live at the white house on this monday morning, kicking off a week long initiative here on nbc universal , we're calling education nation and i thank you for watching on all the different networks of nbc universal . it's important that we give our kids a good education and yet it seems very difficult to plich. a recent poll found that 67% of you feel that the education system in this country right now is in crisis. the most important question of course is can we fix it. i'm joined now by the president of the united states barack obama , mr. president, thank you for your time.

    >> thank you for being this program, there's nothing more important than the issue we're talking about today.

    >> a third of our opportunities in this country continue graduate. a third aren't college ready when they get their high school diploma and 35 percent of 12th graders are proficient in reading. how did it happen?

    >> it's been a long time coming. historically, when we first set up the public school systems across the country, we were leaps and bounds ahead of the vast majority of the countries around the world, that's not true anymore. they're surpassing us in math and science. it ahappened over decades. but part of the challenge is to understand that how well we do economically, whether jobs are created here, high end jobs that support families and support the future of the american people is going to depend on whether or not we can do something about these schools.

    >> when it comes to crisis in education , it's not just a money thing, but it's a money thing. can we spend our way out of it?

    >> we can't spend our way out of it. when you look at the statistics, our per pupil spending has gone up in the last few years. ev they don't have up to date textbooks, they don't have computers in the classroom. so those who say money makes no difference are wrong, on the other hand, money without reform will not fix the problem. what we have got to do is combine a very vigorous reform agenda that increases standards, helps make sure that we have got the best possible teachers inside the classroom, make sure we're clearing away some of the democratic underbrush that's keeping kids are learning.

    >> one of the ways you want to accomplish that is with your initiative called race to the top . states will compete for money that goes into their education system at the state level if they bring about reform in their communities. while some are applauding it, some have criticized it because it's a competition, it's kind of a march madness surrounding this money when we should be funding all the states .

    >> the federal government provides assistance to all states under a formula system, especially to help poorer school districts so they can buy supplies, make sure they can hire supplemental reading instructors and so forth. so that hasn't changed. but that money because it was in a formula, everybody was getting it no matter what you did, wasn't really a catalyst for reform . so what we said is let's set aside a small portion about $4 billion and let's say you've got to compete for this and you've got to compete around things that reformers know make a difference. high standards , accountability, really training teachers effectively, making sure low performing schools are being boosted up. 34 states already have changed their laws, where previously all that stuff that was stuck in state legislators , now suddenly they're starting to make changes. it's probably the most powerful reform in a century.

    >> why $4 billion sounds like a lot, but it is a fraction, why not make more federal funding dependent on the kind of reforms you just talked about.

    >> what we want to do is make sure that we're still helping poor school districts that just don't have enough money. but it turns out that $4 billion, although a small fraction of the money that we spend on school is enough to get people's attention. i'm not going to lie to you, there's going to be resistance as we move forward, a lot of members of congress say to themselves, if my state loses the competition, i don't feel as good about this, even if i initiated reforms.

    >> how do the kids feel if their state didn't compete as well as another state , they're out of luck.

    >> that's why we want to make sure that every state is getting help from the federal government . there's no state that can't win this thing is because all they have to do is say we're going to take seriously those things like making sure you've got a terrific teacher in each classroom and making sure we have got high standards and accountability, every state can accomplish that it's just getting through the resistance that often times builds up in these states .

    >> there are some good and great teachers in this country, there are also some mediocre and poor teachers in this country. can real reform take place unless you identify those mediocre and poor teachers and remove them? and when i say remove them, i don't mean shuffle them from school to school or put them in a room, i mean fire them.

    >> first of all i think everybody who looked at this said the single most important ingredient inside the classroom is the quality of the teacher and there are some terrific teachers out there. my sister teaches and when you hear stories about how hard they work when they come home from school , they're still doing lesson plans, often times in tough schools serving as mentors. one of the things i want to do is lift up the teaching profession to honor the way it needs to be honored in our society. and by the way, when i travelled to china for example and i sit down with the mayor of shanghai and he talks about the fact that teaching is considered one of the most prestigious ones and a teacher is getting paid the same as an engineer, that, i think accounts for how well they're doing in terms of boosting their education system . having said that, what is absolutely true is that if we can't identify teachers who are sub par, give them the opportunity to get better, but if they don't get better at a certain point saying these teachers should not be in the classroom, if we don't do that, then we are doing a disservice to our kids and the school system has to be designed not for the adults, it's got to be designed for the children.

    >> there's a new documentary out there right now that's called waiting for superman. they're saying that teachers iss unions are set up to protect their members and protect those mediocre and bad teachers and getting in the way of real reform . is that a fair assessment in your opinion?

    >> here's what is true, oftentimes teachers unions are designed to make sure that their membership are protected against arbitrary firings, i am a strong supporter of a notion that a union can protect its members and help be part of the solution as opposed to part of the problem. what is also true is that sometimes that means they are resistant to change when things aren't working. to their credit, you have had a lot of unions who are now working with states on his reform plans that include things like charter schools , include things like pay for performance and higher standards and accountability for teachers and so we have seen states be able to work with teachers unions to bring about reform as opposed to resist them.

    >> if you could speak to the membership of the two most powerful teachers unions right now and tell them what they must do starting today to be a legitimate partner in reform .

    >> as president i can speak to them and what i have said to them is that we want to work with you, we're not interesting in imposing changes on you because the truth of the matter is that if teachers aren't feeling god about their profession, they're not going to do a good job in the classroom, but you can't defend a status quo in which a third of our kids are dropping out, you can't defend a status quo when you've got schools across the country that are dropout factories where more than half of the kids are dropping out. in those schools you've got to have radical change and radical change is something that's in the interest of the students and ultimately in the interest of teachers. the vast majority of teachers want to do a good job, they didn't go into teaching for the money, they went into teaching because they want to make a difference. we have got to identify teachers who are going well, teachers who are not doing well, we have got to give them the support and the training to do well. and if some teachers aren't doing a good job, they've got to go.

    >> you want to identify the low lowest 5% of schools and turn them over to charter schools . that could double the number of charter schools . are you worried that you would dilute some quality in charter schools ?

    >> charter schools are not a panacea. one of the things when you're looking at school reform , it turns out there are no silver bullets here, reform is hard, it's systematic, it takes time, but we know that there are some charters who have figured out how to do a very good job in the lowest income schools with the kids who are two, three grade levels behind and yet they can achieve 95% graduation rates, boost reading scores and math scores very high. what we have got to do is to look at the success of these schools, find out how do we duplicate them and make sure that we are still holding charter schools accountable the same which we are all the schools. we shouldn't say just because a school is a charter they're an excellent school , because there are some poor performing charters. what i'm interested in and what my secretary of education is interested in is fostering these laboratories of excellence. if we lengthen the school day here, or we give them a little more home work there, or we're setting aside time for personal development for teachers here, or we're building a culture of excellence among kids at that school , that works, once we find out something works, we want to import that into every school not just charter schools .

    >> i think people are going to be talking about a documentary, they talk about the lack of choice that people, you mentioned charter schools in those very bad neighborhoods, the lack of choice that people in our poorest of neighborhoods have, if there's a low performing school and there's a charter school , the number of applicants for the few positions at that charter school can be enormous and so what happens by law is that the kids are put into a lottery and literally and figuratively they future is down to their name being drawn out of a hat.

    >> it's heart breaking and when you see these parents in the film, you are reminded that i don't care what people's income levels are, their stake in their kids, their wanting desperately to make sure their kids are able to succeed is so powerful and it's obviously difficult to watch to see these parent who is know that -- our goal is to make all schools high quality schools, make every classroom one where if a kid is showing up, taking the responsibility seriously, doing what they're supposed to do, they're going to be able to succeed, they're going to be able to read and have high math scores. what we now know is that there are schools that the work even in the toughest circumstances and once we know that, it's inexcusable that we don't make sure that every school is performing at that same level.

    >> we ask parents to give us some e-mail questions. we had bethany who wrote us, one of our biggest concerns in education is that parents are rarely held accountable for their children's education t blame for failing test scores always falls on the teacher. the responsibility of education should be shared by teachers, administrators and parents. why doesn't anyone ever hold parents accountable.

    >> there has not been a speech i have made on education over the last five years in which i haven't said the exact same thing. if the kid's coming home from school and the parents aren't checking to see if they do their home work or watch tv, that's going to be a problem. and that's by the way true here in this white house . malia and sasha are great kids and great students, but if you gave them a choice, they would be happy to sit in front of the tv all night long every night. at some point you have to say, your job right now, kid, is to learn. and i'm going to check with your teachers and i'm going to make sure that you're doing your home work and you're not doing anything else until you've done your home work and that kind of attitude, i think makes a huge difference at every level. one thing i want to point out is that there's no doubt that the schools in the toughest neighborhoods and the poorest neighborhoods are often times the ones that are poorest performing, they are in crisis. but one of the things that everybody needs to understand is that across the board, in middle class suburbs in schools that are considered actually pretty good, you are still seeing a decline in terms of math and science performance and one of the things that we are very excited about because we need to focus on math and science, my administration is announcing that we are going to specifically focus on training 10,000 new math and science teachers, we have got to boost performance in that area. we used to rank at the top, we are now 21st in science, 25th in math. that is a sign of long-term decline that has to be reversed and so we're going to be putting a big emphasis on math and science education and part of that means getting better teachers, but part of it also means parent understanding that their kids need to excel in those subjects in particular.

    >> you're going to make a lot of friends or a lot of enemies here. mr. cohn's sixth grade class in cincinnati, president obama , we understand there are discussions regarding the idea of attending school year round, do you think we should attend school year round? if so why?

    >> we now have our kids go to school about a month less than most other advanced countries . and that month makes a difference. it means that kids are losing a lot of what they learn during the school year during the summer, it's especially severe for poorer kids who may not be -- may not see as many books in the house during the summers, aren't getting as many educational opportunities. here's an example of where you've got a good idea, make sure our kids are in school longer, that means the school is open, you've got to pay teachers, custodial staff, et cetera , but that would be money well spent.

    >> kelly burnett on our plaza, she's from nassau county , florida, kelly , good morning, what's your question for president obama ?

    >> thank you for taking my question president obama , as a father of two very delightful and seemingly very bright daughters, i wanted to know if you think that malia and sasha would get the same kind of education at a d.c. public school compared to the elite private academy that they're attending now.

    >> thanks for the question, kelly and i'll be blunt with you, the answer is no right now. the d.c. public school systems are struggling, they have made some important strides over the last several years to move in the direction of reform . there are some terrific individual schools in the d.c. system. and that's true by the way in every city across the country. there are some great public schools that are on par with any public school in the country. a lot of times you get tests in, or if the lottery pick for you to be able to get into those schools and so those options are not available for enough children. i'll be very honest with you, given my position, if i wantsed to find a great public school formal leah -- for malia and sasha to be in, we could probably maneuver to do it. but for a mom and a dad who are working hard but who don't have a bunch of connections, don't have a lot of choice in terms of where they live, they should be getting the same quality education for their kids as anybody else and we don't have that yet.

    >> kelly , thank you for your question.

    >> one more question, how do you inspire those teachers you talked about, the ones that are so important, how do you inspire a young college student who's considering going into teaching, who sees budgets being slashed, seeing teachers have to dip into their own pocket book for classroom supplies and now sees new pressure to get their kids to perform in a system that a lot of people think is broken, how do you inspire the next generation of teachers?

    >> first of all, there is nothing more important than teaching, i genuinely believe this. i don't know a teacher who can't look back and say, you know what? here are so many lives that i have touched, so many people who i have had influence over and each of us have memories of some great teacher who steered us in the right direction. what i also want to make sure is that if they go into teaching, they can stay in teaching, they can afford it which means that we have got to raise teacher pay, and to professionalize it if you want to be a master teacher , you can make more money. that's true of any profession. we have got to make sure they have a structure around them in which they can succeed and if we do those things, i think there are tons of kids who want -- the teach for america program, you see some of the smartest kids in the country applying and often times having to be on waiting lists to get in. the problem is that we can't attract great young people to go into teaching, the problem is after two or three years they start dropping out. they feel discouraged because no matter how hard they're working in the class room , they just can't afford it once they start trying to raise a family, particularly in urban area where is the cost of living is higher and they don't feel they're getting enough support from the principal and the school district .

    >> so you reform that system and they will come.

    >> they will come and anybody who's watching, we're going to have to fill about a million teaching slots around the country and i want young people to understand that there is not a more important profession for the success of our economy over the long-term than making sure that we have got great teachers in the classroom.

    >> some other topics, recently the poverty rate in this country was announced, it's at 14.3%. that means roughly 44 million americans are living at or below the poverty level . the poverty level is $22,000 a year for a family of four. so consider a family of four making $30,000 or $40,000 they're not living the dream either, they're struggling every single week. how can a president hear those numbers and not decide to declare this some sort of national emergency .

    >> we have gone through the worst recession since the great depression and although the steps my administration has taken to stem the crisis and stabilize the situation, we're still in the midst of the after effects of that, when you've got a lot of people underemployed, it means that the poverty rate is going to go up. that means taking the steps that i've been pushing for, making sure we have tax breaks for companies investing here in the united states , making sure that the small business bill that i will sign today makes sure they encourage investment, building infrastructure so we are improving our ability to perform internationally, all those things are going to make a difference because the single most important anti-poverty program we can initiate is making sure there's enough job growth out there.

    >> last time we sat down you said that the recovery would not be a jobless recovery . it seems to me i'm listening to more and more economists who don't agree with that.

    >> here's the challenge. it's not that this is a jobless recove recovery. we have seen eight months in a row of private sector job growth . we're actually seeing more job growth so far in this recovery than we did in the last recovery back in 2001 . the problem is we just lost so many jobs because of the crisis that we have got a much bigger hole to fill and that means we're going to have to accelerate job growth and we have got to do everything we can to focus on that and that means making sure that anything we do, we're spending that money wisely, and one of the major disagreements i have got with the republicans right now has to do with tax cuts for the wealthiest americans . you and me. you and i, matt, we're not likely to spend any additional tax cut because whenever we need for our families we can afford right now. what we need are tax cuts for the middle class who are struggling and if they get a tax cut , they're likely to spend it, which means that a small business is potentially going to get a customer and we're going to see job growth . so we can't spend $700 billion on a tax cut that is not going to spur job growth . we can spend money on things like infrastructure, on things like school construction, on making sure that small businesses are getting loans because those are the things that are more likely to generate the job growth we need.

    >> you remember velma hart, who was a woman who said she was one of your biggest supporters, and she was exhausted defending you. it seems to me what she was saying and i have heard others say as of late, mr. president is that there's a feeling that in some way you have lost touch with the struggles of the average person on the street. i say it with some sense of irony because you began your career in public service as a community organizer , that is all about getting in touch with people on the streets, so how can this criticism be coming up?

    >> velma i think subsequently was interviewed and she talked about the fact that she said look, the president's really trying, a lot of things i think are right, but it's just not happening fast enough. everybody's feeling that frustration right now. i feel it, acutely. and, you know, the fact of the matter is that as long as unemployment is as high as it is, as long as we haven't recovered as quickly as we should have, people are going to be hurting and even if they think that i know they're hurting, what they're asking is, when are you going to be able to do something concrete that allows me to get a job or make sure that i can pay my bills or make sure that i don't lose my house, and all i can communicate to the american people is that every single day, the thing that i wake up and the thing that i go to bed with is the fact that there are too many people out there who are doing the right thing, working hard and are having a tough time in this economy, we're doing everything we can to make sure they have an opportunity to live out the american dream .

    >> we have five weeks before the midterm election. you said in a speech recently, you said the republicans, they're treating me like a dog. former president clinton said he doesn't think that democrats and you included have been rigorous enough in pushing back against some of the republican attacks. mr. president, do you intend to change your tone or your emotion in terms of your pushing back.

    >> well, i think that you have heard me speak around the country over the last several months, i think that it's clear, i have got a very sharp difference on a lot of issues. when i say republicans, i really should say republican leadership, i think there's a lot of wonderful people out there who consider themselves republicans or independents who have maybe some criticisms of my administration, but basically recognize we have got to solve some big problems, we have got to be serious, we have got to base our decisions on facts. what i'm seeing out of the republican leadership over the last several years has been a set of policies that are just irresponsible and we saw in their pledge to america a similar set of irresponsible policies, they say they want to balance the budget, they propose $4 trillion worth of tax cuts and $16 billion in spending cuts and then they say we're going to somehow magically balance the budget, that's not a serious approach. so the question for voters over the next five weeks is who is putting forward policies that have a chance to move our country forward so that our schools have improved, so that we have world class infrastructure, so that we're serious about helping small business , we're serious about getting a handle on our spending and who's just engaging in rhetoric, and if that debate is taking place over the next five weeks, we are going to do just fine.

    >> rahm emanuel , your chief of staff is considering a run for the mayor's office in chicago. a lot of people think his time is getting short to make that decision. has he communicate his decision to you?

    >> i think that rahm will have to make a decision quickly because running for mayor in chicago is a serious enterprise.

    >> has he told you what he wants to do?

    >> he hasn't told me yet.

    >> would you support him and endorse him in that race?

    >> i have said i think he will be an excellent mayor, but until he makes

By John Springer
TODAY staff and wire
updated less than 1 minute ago

Money alone isn't the cure for America's ailing school system, President Obama says.

Speaking to TODAY's Matt Lauer in the Green Room of the White House for nearly 30 minutes, Obama said that additional funding tied to significant reforms — including a longer school year and lifting teaching as a profession — is a much-needed fix.

"We can't spend our way out of it. I think that when you look at the statistics, the fact is that our per-pupil spending has gone up during the last couple of decades even as results have gone down," explained Obama, invited to appear by NBC as the network launched its weeklong " Education Nation" initiative.

"Obviously, in some schools money plays a big factor ... ," Obama said, pointing out that schools in the poorest areas often don't have up-to-date textbooks. "On the other hand, money without reform will not fix the problem."

Obama said his administration's "reform agenda" includes increasing standards, finding and encouraging the best teachers, decreasing bureaucracy and deploying financial resources effectively. Teachers who fail to live up to expectations need to be given a chance to improve, he said, while those who do not should move on.

Story: Education reformer: 'We're in a crisis'

Longer school year?
Obama repeated his support for a longer school year after being asked about it by students from a sixth-grade class in Cincinatti, Ohio. He did not specify how long that school year should be, however he noted that U.S. students attend classes, on average, about a month less than children in most other advanced countries.

    1. Schools not making the grade, poll shows

      A majority of Americans are pessimistic about the public education system with nearly six out of 10 saying schools need either major changes or a complete overhaul, according to a new NBC News/WallStreet Journal poll.

    2. Visit the NBC News ‘Learning Plaza’ in NYC
    3. Complete coverage of Education Nation
    4. Are teachers under attack?
    5. Education reformer: 'We're in a crisis'

"That month makes a difference. It means students are losing a lot of what they learn during the school year during the summer ... The idea of a longer school year, I think, makes sense," Obama said. "Now, that's going to cost some money ..., but I think that would be money well spent."

Vote: Do you support a longer school year?

The 20 students in Matt Cohen's class at Roll Hill Elementary School were so thrilled that President Obama answered their question about extending the school year that Cohen had to reply his answer three times.

"They were excited," said Cohen, who submitted the question online on the students' behalf. "Some of the students think that we should not have an extended school year because their brains need time to rest — that's what they said. Others think it is good ... it keeps them busy and out of trouble."

Role of teachers
Obama says his administration's Race to the Top initiative has been one of the "most powerful tools for reform" in many years. Through the program, states compete for $4 billion in funding by highlighting their plans for reform.

NBC News
President Barack Obama spoke to TODAY's Matt Lauer about education reform.

The president said he wants to work with teachers' unions, and he embraced the role of defending their members. But he said unions cannot and should not defend a status quo in which one-third of children are dropping out. He urged them not to be resistant to change, particularly in schools which he said have become "dropout factories."

"The vast majority of teachers want to do a good job ... We have to be able to identify teachers who are doing well," the president said. "Teachers who are not doing well, we have to give them the support and the training to do well. And ultimately, if some teachers are not doing a good job, they've gotta go."

While the nation’s poorer schools are of immediate concern, Obama said his administration is also concerned about the decline in math and science scores in middle-class districts, and hiring teachers is key to reversing that trend.

“My administration is announcing that we are going to specifically focus on training 10,000 new math and science teachers," he said. "We have to boost performance in that area. We used to rank at the top; we are now 21st in science, 25th in math. That is a sign of long-term decline that has to be reversed.”

Advertisement | ad info

Reforms linked to economy
During the interview, the president returned several times to a discussion of the economy, job creation and the staggering unemployment rate that has hurt tax revenues at every level of government.

Story: Obama blasts GOP pledge as 'irresponsible'

"It's not that this is a jobless recovery. We've seen eight months in a row of private sector job growth ... The problem is that we just lost so many jobs because of the crisis that we've got a much bigger hole to fill," Obama said.

Asked if he was aware that some Americans think he is out of touch when it comes to jobs, Obama assured Lauer that the economy is forefront on his mind.

  1. More from TODAYshow.com
    1. Obama: Money without reform won’t fix schools

      Speaking to TODAY's Matt Lauer in the Green Room of the White House for nearly 30 minutes, President Obama said that additional funding tied to significant reforms — including a longer school year and lifting teaching as a profession — is a much-needed fix.

    2. Future dollars: Is it time to rebrand the buck?
    3. Owner who dyed pet cat pink would do it again
    4. Program gives new meaning to ‘prep’ school
    5. Timeline: Moments that changed public education

"The fact of the matter is, as long as unemployment is as high as it is, as long as we haven't recovered as quickly as we should have, people are going to be be hurting," Obama said. "All I can communicate to the American people is that every single day, the thing that I wake up with and the thing I go to bed with is the fact that too many Americans are out there who are doing the right thing, working hard, taking the responsibilities seriously, and are still having a tough time in this economy."

Parental accountability
Obama reminded Lauer that he is a parent of school-age children, although his daughters, Sasha, 9, and Malia, 12, are both enrolled in private schools that Obama acknowledged are much better than the public schools in Washington, D.C.

Parents can and should do more to foster learning by introducing good study habits at home, he said.

"No matter how good the teacher, if the kid's coming home from school, and the parent isn't checking to see if they are doing their homework or watching TV, that's going to be a problem," he said. "And that, by the way, is true here in this White House. Malia and Sasha are great kids, and great students. But if you gave them a choice, they'd be happy to sit in front of the TV all night long, every night. At some point you have to say, ‘Your job, kid, right now, is to learn.’ ”

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Monday, September 13, 2010

All-clear given at Capitol Building

Update: At 1 p.m., Schneider said the "all-clear" sign had been given. "Nothing hazardous was found," she said.

Original post: The House chamber and the areas immediately surrounding it were evacuated Monday after a powdery substance was seen on the chamber’s floor.

“It’s a powdery substance that was discovered just before noon,” said Sgt. Kimberly Schneider, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Capitol Police.

As of 12:50 p.m., Schneider said, the area that was restricted included the chamber itself, the galleries for reporters and visitors and some adjoining hallways. The Capitol building remains open for business. Schneider said tests were being run on the substance.

“We’ll have that immediate area restricted until it’s clear,” she said.

The House returns from its August recess Tuesday, and only pages were present in the chamber when the substance was spotted.

-- Ben Pershing

Homeland Security to test iris scanners

Sunday, September 12, 2010

hillery clitton surander us constutushen to the un

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/austria_retreat_papers.pdf


Born in Chicago on October 26, 1947, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton has been the junior U.S. Senator from New York since her election in 2000. Re-elected in 2006, she is currently a member of ten Senate Committees and Subcommittees. Immediately prior to holding elected office, she was the First Lady of the United States from 1993 to 2001, during the presidency of her husband, Bill Clinton. She is the author of three books: Living History (2003); An Invitation to the White House: At Home with History (2000); and It Takes a Village: and Other Lessons Children Teach Us (1996).

Hillary Rodham grew up in Park Ridge, Illinois, a solidly Republican suburb of Chicago. In 1964 she supported Republican conservative Barry Goldwater for U.S. President. The following year, she enrolled at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, where her political views would undergo a radical transformation.

Rodham was deeply influenced by a 1966 article titled "Change or Containment" that appeared in Motive, a magazine for college-age Methodists. Authored by the Marxist/Maoist theoretician Carl Oglesby, who was a leader of the radical Students for a Democratic Society, this piece defended Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, and Maoist tactics of violence. Its thesis was that "certain cultural settings" (most notably American capitalism) were inherently inequitable and oppressive, and thus caused people to feel "pain and rage" that sometimes erupted into violence -- like that of "the rioters in Watts or Harlem" -- which was "reactive and provoked" rather than evil or malicious. Hillary later said that the Motive article had played a key role in her metamorphosis from Goldwater Republican in 1964 to leftist Democrat in 1968. During her years as First Lady of the United States, Mrs. Clinton would tell a Newsweek reporter that she still treasured the Oglesby piece.[1]

Following the June 1968 assassination of Democratic presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy, Hillary Rodham ended her affiliation with the Wellesley campus Young Republicans and volunteered in New Hampshire to work on the presidential campaign of antiwar candidate Eugene McCarthy. When McCarthy later dropped out of the Democratic primary, Hillary threw her support behind the Party's eventual nominee, Hubert Humphrey. From that point forward, wrote Barbara Olson in her 1999 book Hell to Pay, "Republicans were the enemy and the enemy was allied with evil -- the evils of war, racism, sexism, and poverty."[2]

While attending Wellesley, Hillary Rodham participated in a number of antiwar marches in the Boston area.

In 1969 she wrote her 92-page senior thesis on the theories of radical Chicago organizer Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals (1971) and Reveille for Radicals (1947). A great admirer of Alinsky's ruthless activist tactics, Hillary personally interviewed the famed author for her project. She concluded her thesis by stating: "Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared -- just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. President] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths -- democracy."

Hillary would maintain her allegiance to Alinsky's teachings throughout her adult life. According to a March 2007 Washington Post report, "As first lady, Clinton occasionally lent her name to projects endorsed by the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF), the Alinsky group that had offered her a job in 1968. She raised money and attended two events organized by the Washington Interfaith Network, an IAF affiliate."

Ultimately, Hillary's investigation of Alinsky's methods and ideals led her to conclude that the Lyndon Johnson-era federal antipoverty programs did not go far enough in redistributing wealth among the American people, and did not give sufficient power to the poor.

When Hillary graduated from Wellesley in 1969, she was offered a job with Alinsky's new training institute in Chicago. She opted instead to enroll at Yale Law School.

At Yale, she was strongly influenced by the radical theoretician Duncan Kennedy, founder of the academic movement known as critical legal studies, which, drawing on the works of the Frankfurt School, viewed law as a "social construct" that a corrupt power structure exploits as an instrument of oppression to protect and promote its own bourgeois values at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised. Advocates of critical legal studies were interested in revolutionary change and the building of a new society founded on Marxist principles.

Hillary served as one of nine editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action, where she worked collaboratively with Mickey Kantor (who, more than two decades later, would serve as U.S. Trade Representative and U.S. Commerce Secretary under President Bill Clinton) and Robert Reich (who would serve as Bill Clinton's Labor Secretary from 1993 to 1997). "For too long," said the Yale Review, "legal issues have been defined and discussed in terms of academic doctrine rather than strategies for social change." The publication was replete with articles by or about such radicals as William Kunstler, Charles Reich (author of The Greening of America); Jerry Rubin (who wrote a Yale Review piece exhorting parents to "get high with our seven-year-olds," and urging students to "kill our parents"); and Charles Garry (the civil rights attorney who defended Black Panther members accused of murder). The Fall and Winter 1970 editions of the Yale Review, on which Hillary worked as associate editor, focused heavily on the trials of Black Panther members who had been charged with murder. Numerous cartoons in those issues depicted police officers as hominid pigs.[3]

One of Hillary's Yale professors, Thomas Emerson (known as "Tommy the Commie"), introduced her to Charles Garry, who helped her get personally involved in the defense of several Black Panthers (including the notorious Bobby Seale) who were then being tried in New Haven, Connecticut for the torture, murder, and mutilation of one of their own members. Though evidence of the defendants' guilt was overwhelming, Hillary -- as part of her coursework for Professor Emerson -- attended the Panther trials and arranged for shifts of fellow students to likewise monitor court proceedings and report on any civil rights abuses allegedly suffered by the defendants. Striving to neutralize what she considered the pervasive racism of the American legal system, "Hillary was," as Barbara Olson observed in Hell to Pay, "a budding Leninist."[4]

Hillary's work for the Panthers earned her a summer internship at the Berkeley, California office of the hardline Stalinist attorney Robert Treuhaft in 1972. According to historian Stephen Schwartz, "Treuhaft is a man who dedicated his entire legal career to advancing the agenda of the Soviet Communist Party and the KGB."

During her time at Yale, Hillary became a prominent figure in the campus protest movement. She wore a black armband in remembrance of the students killed at Kent State in May 1970; she led demonstrations against the Vietnam War; and she led rallies demanding that tampons be made available in the women's rest rooms on campus.

In 1972 Hillary worked on George McGovern's presidential campaign and led a voter registration drive in San Antonio, Texas.

Also in the early 1970s, Hillary developed a close acquaintanceship with Robert Borosage, who would later become a major figure in such leftist organizations as the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), Campaign for America's Future, and Institute for America's Future. Hillary herself (along with Bill Clinton) would go on to develop close political ties with IPS; moreover, she would give that organization a great deal of money to further its cause.

In the early 1970s as well, Hillary started what would become her lifelong friendship with Marian Wright Edelman, founder of the Children's Defense Fund (CDF). After graduating from Yale Law School in 1973, Hillary moved to Washington and took a full-time position as a staff lawyer with CDF.

Edelman helped Hillary secure a coveted research position with the Carnegie Council on Children, where the young attorney assisted Yale psychology professor Kenneth Keniston in the production of a report titled All Our Children, which advocated a dramatic expansion of social welfare entitlements and a national guaranteed income -- all in the name of children's rights. Moreover, the report maintained that the traditional nuclear family was not inherently better than any other family structure, and that society had an obligation to honor, encourage, and support alternate family structures such as single-parent households. What really mattered, said the Council, was the network of professionals -- teachers, pediatricians, social workers, and day-care workers -- who would collectively play the most vital role in raising children properly. In short, the Carnegie Council preached that childrearing was less a parental matter than a societal task to be overseen by "public advocates" -- judges, bureaucrats, social workers and other "experts" in childrearing -- who could intervene between parents and children on the latter's behalf. According to the report, the role of parents should be subordinate to the role of these experts.[5]

Viewing America as an authoritarian, patriarchal, male-dominated society that tended to oppress women, children, and minorities, Hillary wrote a November 1973 article for the Harvard Educational Review advocating the liberation of children from "the empire of the father." She claimed that the traditional nuclear family structure often undermined the best interests of children, who "consequently need social institutions specifically designed to safeguard their position." "Along with the family," she elaborated, "past and present examples of such arrangements include marriage, slavery, and the Indian Reservation system." She added: "Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment, and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly affect a child's future should not be made unilaterally by parents."[6]

Decades later, Hillary would take up these themes again with the 1996 publication of her book It Takes a Village, which stressed the importance of the larger community of adults -- many of whom are paid caretakers whose labors are funded by American taxpayers -- in childrearing.

In 1973 Hillary became one of the key inside members of a legal team consisting of more than forty attorneys working for the impeachment of President Richard Nixon. With single-minded zealotry, she worked on the investigation anywhere from twelve to twenty-four hours per day, seven days a week.[7]

In October 1975 Hillary married Bill Clinton, who she had met during her student days at Yale Law School.

In 1976 Mrs. Clinton worked for Jimmy Carter's successful presidential campaign. Soon thereafter, she found employment as an attorney with the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas, where she would continue to work until 1992.

In 1978 President Carter appointed Mrs. Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), a federally funded nonprofit organization that functioned primarily as a vehicle for expanding the social welfare state and broadening the mandate for social welfare spending. Under Mrs. Clinton's leadership, LSC's annual budget more than tripled, from $90 million to $321 million. LSC used these taxpayer funds in a variety of ways, most notably to print political training manuals showing "how community organizations and public interest groups can win political power and resources," and to finance training programs that taught political activists how to harass their opposition. On one occasion, LSC contributed money to a mayor's political campaign in Georgia on the pretext that those funds were being spent on "a project to educate clients about their rights and the legislative process."[8]

During Hillary Clinton's years on the LSC board, the Corporation also worked to defeat a California referendum that would have cut state income taxes in half; called for the U.S. government to give two-thirds of the state of Maine to American Indians; paid Marxist orators and folk singers in a campaign against the Louisiana Wildlife Commission; joined a Michigan campaign to recognize "Black English" as an official language; and sought to force the New York City Transit Authority to hire former heroin addicts so as to avoid "discriminat[ing]" against "minorities" who were "handicapped."[9]

As the 1980 presidential election drew near, and it became clear that Ronald Reagan might defeat the incumbent Jimmy Carter, LSC redirected massive amounts of its public funding into an anti-Reagan letter-writing campaign by indigent clients. After Reagan was elected in November 1980, LSC immediately laundered its money -- some $260 million -- into state-level agencies and private groups so as to keep it away from the board that Reagan would eventually appoint. Hillary Clinton left LSC in 1981. [10]

Bill Clinton served as Governor of Arkansas from 1978 to 1980, and again from 1982 to 1992. Thus Hillary spent a total of twelve years as Arkansas's First Lady. During those years, she continued her legal practice as a partner in the Rose Law Firm. In 1978 she became a Board member of the Children's Defense Fund (CDF), and from 1986 to 1992 she served as Chairwoman of the CDF Board.

From 1982 to 1988 Hillary also chaired the New World Foundation, which had helped launch CDF in 1973. During her years at the helm of New World, the Foundation made grants to such organizations as the National Lawyers Guild; the Institute for Policy Studies; the Christic Institute; Grassroots International (which had ties to Yasser Arafat's PLO); the Committees in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (which sought to foment a communist revolution in Central America); and groups with ties to the most extreme elements of the African National Congress.

When Bill Clinton became U.S. President in 1993, the Clintons asked Wellesley College to hide Hillary Rodham's aforementioned senior thesis (about Saul Alinsky) from the public. In compliance, Wellesley President Nannerl Overholser Keohane approved a policy that would make the senior thesis of every Wellesley alumna available in the college archives for anyone to read -- except for those written by either a "president or first lady of the United States."

In 1993 Mrs. Clinton latched onto the phrase "the politics of meaning," an opaque concept coined by Michael Lerner that blended radical politics with New Ageish human potentialism. She invited Lerner to the White House, briefly making him her "guru" until the ridicule this caused made her retreat from the connection. (In her autobiography, Mrs. Clinton strenuously avoids any mention of Lerner, or of Lerner's Tikkun Magazine, at all.)

During her early years as America's First Lady (a title she held from 1993-2001), Mrs. Clinton was put in charge of the 500-member Health Care Task Force which tried, in secret meetings and by stealth, to socialize medical care in the United States, a sector that represented approximately one-seventh of the U.S. economy. This modus operandi was in violation of so-called "sunshine laws," which forbid such secret meetings from taking place when non-government employees are present. Hillary was sued by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons for these violations. The trial judge, U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth, ultimately ruled against Hillary and the Clinton administration. In December 1997 Lamberth issued a 19-page report condemning as "reprehensible" the duplicity exhibited by Mrs. Clinton's Task Force. "The Executive Branch of the government, working in tandem, was dishonest with this court, and the government must now face the consequences of its misconduct," said Lamberth. "It is clear," he added, "that the decisions here were made at the highest levels of government. There were no rogue lawyers here misleading the court."

A few days after rumors of Bill Clinton's extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky first made headlines in January 1998, Hillary made a January 27 appearance on NBC's Today Show, where she told interviewer Matt Lauer that the charges had been fabricated by "this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced [that he would run] for President." Hillary would echo this theme numerous times thereafter. In a June 8, 2003 interview with Barbara Walters, for instance, she characterized the Republicans who had led the 1998 impeachment of her husband as "a right-wing network" that "was after his presidency" and had resorted to "perverting the Constitution."

After New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's 1998 announcement that he planned to retire from public life in 2000, Hillary prepared to run for the seat Moynihan would be vacating. In October 1999 she and Bill Clinton bought a house in Chappaqua, New York. They would later be embarrassed by public revelations that their $1.35 million mortgage had been secured by Democratic fundraiser Terry McAuliffe.

In 2000 Mrs. Clinton defeated Republican Rick Lazio in the New York Senate race by a 55 percent to 43 percent margin. Clinton carried the heavily Democratic New York City by 74 percent to 25 percent, which was more than enough to compensate for her losses in the suburbs (by 53 percent to 45 percent) and upstate (by 50 percent to 47 percent).

In 2001 Senator Clinton voted in support of the anti-terrorism measure known as the USA Patriot Act. Four years later, when the Act was up for renewal, she expressed concerns over its possible infringements on civil liberties and voted against it in December 2005. Ultimately, in March 2006, she voted in favor of renewal after some compromises had been made on the bill's wording.

As a member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Senator Clinton strongly supported U.S. military action in Afghanistan as a means of simultaneously combating terrorism and improving the lives of Afghan women who had been oppressed by the radical Islamist Taliban government that had been complicit in Osama bin Laden's activities leading up to 9/11.

On September 12, 2001, Senator Clinton joined President Bush in condemning the previous day's terrorist attacks. On May 16, 2002, however, she went to the Senate floor to charge that Bush had known in advance about a possible 9/11-type plot but had done nothing to prevent it. "We have learned that President Bush had been informed last year, before September 11, of a possible plot by those associated with Osama bin Laden to hijack a U.S. airliner," said Mrs. Clinton.

In October 2002, Senator Clinton voted in favor of the Iraq Resolution which authorized President Bush to use military measures, if necessary, to force Saddam Hussein to comply with a United Nations Security Council Resolution to disarm. She was firm in her belief that Saddam posed a clear and serious threat to American national security, both in terms of his weapons programs and his affiliations with terrorists. On October 10, 2002, she said from the Senate floor:

"Today we are asked whether to give the President of the United States authority to use force in Iraq should diplomatic efforts fail to dismantle Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons and his nuclear program. ... I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. ... In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security. Now this much is undisputed. ... This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction. ... Over eleven years have passed since the UN called on Saddam Hussein to rid himself of weapons of mass destruction as a condition of returning to the world community. Time and time again he has frustrated and denied these conditions. This matter cannot be left hanging forever with consequences we would all live to regret."

In September 2003, six months after the U.S. had routed Saddam's forces on the battlefield, Hillary proudly defended her vote for the Iraq Resolution. According to a Washington Times report: "she said the intelligence she saw leading up to the war was consistent with intelligence from previous administrations and she checked out information with trusted Clinton administration officials." Moreover, Senator Clinton credited her husband for having bequeathed to President Bush the military that had so swiftly deposed Saddam Hussein.[11]

But a month later, as the U.S. struggled to suppress a ferocious insurgency in Iraq, Senator Clinton condemned George W. Bush's foreign policy as "aggressive unilateralism" that the President had carried out "as a first resort against perceived threats and not as a necessary final resort."[12] With ever-increasing stridency, she began to charge that Bush had misled her, the Congress, and the American people about the extent of the threat posed by Saddam. In November 2005 she wrote an open letter to her constituents, which stated, in part:

"In October 2002, I voted for the resolution to authorize the Administration to use force in Iraq. I voted for it on the basis of the evidence presented by the Administration, assurances they gave that they would first seek to resolve the issue of weapons of mass destruction peacefully through United Nations sponsored inspections, and the argument that the resolution was needed because Saddam Hussein never did anything to comply with his obligations that he was not forced to do.

"Their assurances turned out to be empty ones, as the Administration refused repeated requests from the U.N. inspectors to finish their work. And the 'evidence' of weapons of mass destruction and links to al Qaeda turned out to be false.

"Based on the information that we have today, Congress never would have been asked to give the President authority to use force against Iraq. And if Congress had been asked, based on what we know now, we never would have agreed, given the lack of a long-term plan, paltry international support, the proven absence of weapons of mass destruction, and the reallocation of troops and resources that might have been used in Afghanistan to eliminate Bin Laden and al Qaeda, and fully uproot the Taliban."

But Mrs. Clinton's claim that she had been deceived into supporting the war, and that she had turned against it only upon subsequently becoming aware of that deception, was untrue. As David Horowitz explains:

"Starting in July 2003 ... the Democratic National Committee ran a national TV ad whose message was: 'Read his lips: President Bush Deceives the American People.' This was the beginning of a five-year, unrelenting campaign to persuade Americans and their allies that 'Bush lied, people died,' that the war was 'unnecessary' and 'Iraq was no threat.' In other words,... the leaders of the Democratic Party have been telling Americans, America's allies and America's enemies that their country was an aggressor nation, which had violated international law, and was in effect the 'bad guy' in the war with the Saddam Hussein regime....

"The one saving grace for Democrats would be if their charges were true -- if they were deceived into supporting the war, and if they had turned against it only because they realized their mistake. But this charge is demonstrably false.

"In fact, the claim that Bush lied in order to dupe Democrats into supporting the war is itself the biggest lie of the war. Every Democratic Senator who voted for the war had on his or her desk before the vote a 100-page report, called 'The National Intelligence Estimate,' which summarized all America's intelligence on Iraq that was used to justify the war. We live in a democracy; consequently, the opposition party has access to all our secrets. Democrats sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which oversees all of America's intelligence agencies. If any Democrat on that committee ... had requested any intelligence information Iraq, he or she would have had that information on his or [her] desk within 24 hours. The self-justifying claim that Bush lied to hoodwink the Democrats is a fraudulent charge with no basis in reality."

In June 2007, New York Times reporters Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta, Jr., authors of Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton, wrote that Mrs. Clinton refused to say whether she had ever read the complete NIE report, which was made available to all 100 senators ten days before the October 10, 2002 Senate vote, and which included caveats about Saddam's weaponry and doubts about any alliance he may have had with terror groups like al Qaeda.

On domestic policy, Senator Clinton described the Bush administration as "radical," bent on dismantling the "central pillars of progress in our country during the 20th century," and seeking "to undo the New Deal" with policies that are "making America less free, less fair, less strong and smart than it deserves to be in a dangerous world."

During her years in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton consistently voted against the income tax cuts introduced by President Bush -- most notably the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 -- depicting them as fiscally irresponsible measures that were designed to help only the wealthy. At a fundraiser in 2004, she told a crowd of financial donors: "Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you ... We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Senator Clinton also repeatedly opposed cuts in capital gains taxes. On May 21, 2001, she voted against a temporary reduction of the maximum capital gains rate. On November 17, 2005, she voted to raise capital gains taxes on wealthy individuals. On February 2, 2006, she voted to repeal an extension of reduced tax rates for capital gains and dividends. And on February 13, 2006, she voted to allow the capital gains tax cuts to expire.[13]

After the passage of Bush's tax cuts in 2001, Senator Clinton often stated that they harmed the U.S. economy. In April 2003, for example, she claimed, "there is no escaping the wrongheaded very destructive economic policies that this administration has chosen to inflict on our country." The following month, she told the U.S. Senate: "We are in danger of being the first generation of Americans to leave our children worse off than we were."[14]

Contrary to her claims, however, the post-tax cut U.S. economy immediately produced federal tax revenues of unprecedented heights. As Steve Forbes said on March 20, 2006: "In 2003 ... those tax cuts ... set off the boom that we are having today, strong economy. We're the largest growing economy among large economies in the world. We've created ... nearly five million jobs and we've had a 4 percent-plus growth rate. That would not have happened without the tax cuts." Similarly, CNBC's Larry Kudlow said in February 2006: "[T]he reality is that the Bush tax-cut incentives continue to propel economic growth."

During her years in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton cast numerous important votes on the issue of immigration:

* In March 2002 she co-sponsored a bill to extend the deadlines by which illegal aliens living in the United States would be required to obtain visas. "This is good news indeed," she said of the bill's passage. "Instead of being forced to return to their home country to apply for permanent residence status, many immigrants will be able to seek permanent resident status while working in the U.S."[15]

* In October 2003 she favored granting temporary protected status to illegal Haitian immigrants.

* In September 2004 she co-sponsored an agricultural jobs bill offering illegal farmworkers a speedy path to citizenship.

* In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, she co-signed a September 2005 letter asking Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to prevent the deportation of any illegal aliens whose immigration status came to the government's attention "after they [had] sought assistance" from the American taxpayers.[16]

* In 2005 she opposed the REAL ID Act, which stipulated that all driver's license and photo ID applicants must be able to verify they are legal residents of the United States, and that the documents they present to prove their identity must be genuine. It also contained provisions to prevent terrorists from abusing asylum laws, and to streamline the deportation of immigrants convicted of terrorism-related offenses.

* In June 2007, she voted against a bill that would have prohibited illegal aliens convicted of serious crimes from gaining legal status.

* That same month, she voted in favor of a bill to establish restrictions on admission into the United States for immigrants who have previously been convicted of criminal gang activity, child abuse, human trafficking, obstruction of justice, domestic violence, or a felony count of driving under the influence.

* Also in June 2007, she voted in favor of the Immigration Reform Act of 2007, which would have provided a path to legalization for all illegal aliens residing in the United States.


In 2005 Senator Clinton gave a speech to members of the National Council of La Raza, an organization that supports open borders as well as expanded rights and amnesty for illegal aliens. She told them: "You are doing your part to make sure that every child in every American family has access to the tools necessary to live out their dreams, to a have piece of the American dream, but I don't know that your government is doing its part, right now -- I'm not sure we are doing everything to make your job easier, to make sure the opportunities and society are alive and well for everyone." She further expressed her support for the Dream Act, legislation that would allow illegal aliens to attend college at in-state tuition rates -- which are much lower than those paid by out-of-state U.S. citizens. "We need to open the doors of college to immigrant children who came here did well and deserved to go on with their education," she said.[17]

In 2006 Senator Clinton appeared with Senators Kennedy, McCain, and Schumer before a group of illegal Irish immigrants who had come to Capitol Hill to lobby the U.S. government for amnesty. "It is so heartening to see you here," she told them. "You are really here on behalf of what America means, America's values, Americans' hopes."[18]

On issues other than immigration, two particular votes cast by Mrs. Clinton during her first Senate term give insight into her agendas and values:

* In 2001 she voted in favor of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, more commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act, which opened the floodgates for "soft-money" campaign contributions to so-called "527 organizations" engaged in stealth electioneering on behalf of Democrats.

* In October 2003 she voted against the Partial Birth Abortion Act, which bans that procedure in all cases except when the mother's life would be endangered by not performing it. In 2007 she condemned a Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of the 2003 Act.

Depicting herself and fellow leftists as the champions of the underdog, Mrs. Clinton has often characterized Republicans and conservatives as being inclined toward racism and discrimination. At a Martin Luther King Day celebration in January 2006, for example, she told a black audience at Harlem's Canaan Baptist Church: "When you look at the way the [Republican-controlled] House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation. And you know what I'm talking about. It has been run in a way so that nobody with a contrary view has had a chance to present legislation, to make an argument, to be heard." She went on to condemn Republicans' "constant exploitation of race." Al Sharpton later praised her comments.

Throughout her adult life, Mrs. Clinton has embraced the worldviews and ideals of radical feminism. Following the February 2006 death of Betty Friedan, the longtime communist who co-founded the National Organization for Women, Mrs. Clinton said that Friedan's activism and writing had "opened doors and minds, breaking down barriers for women and enlarging opportunities for women and men for generations to come. We are all the beneficiaries of her vision."

Also in February 2006, Senator Clinton spoke at the South Bronx Overall Economic Development Corporation, where she criticized the concept of school vouchers: "First family that comes and says 'I want to send my daughter to St. Peter's Roman Catholic School' and you say 'Great, wonderful school, here's your voucher.' Next parent that comes and says, 'I want to send my child to the school of the Church of the White Supremacist ...' The parent says, 'The way that I read Genesis, Cain was marked, therefore I believe in white supremacy...You gave it to a Catholic parent, you gave it to a Jewish parent, under the Constitution, you can't discriminate against me...' So what if the next parent comes and says, 'I want to send my child to the School of the Jihad?...' I won't stand for it."

In the election cycles of 2002, 2004, and 2006, Senator Clinton's political action committee, HILLPAC, made more than 170 contributions to the campaigns of other political candidates, all of them Democrats. Among the beneficiaries were: Barbara Boxer, Max Cleland, Dick Durbin, Tom Harkin, Frank Lautenberg, Walter Mondale, Jay Rockefeller, Paul Wellstone, Tammy Baldwin, Lane Evans, Maurice Hinchey, Nita Lowey, Carolyn McCarthy, Jerrold Nadler, Major Owens, Charles Rangel, Jose Serrano, Louise Slaughter, Nydia Velazquez, Evan Bayh, Tom Daschle, Russell Feingold, Barack Obama, Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, and Ted Kennedy.

As November 2006 approached, Senator Clinton campaigned for re-election to the U.S. Senate. During her 2000 campaign, she had pledged to bring 200,000 new jobs to New York State. By late 2006, however, New York had lost 112,000 jobs and its jobless rate had risen by 0.7 percent. Nonetheless, Mrs. Clinton won the 2006 election by a wide margin over a weak Republican opponent, John Spencer.

In January 2007, two months after her re-election to a six-year term in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton announced that she would run for U.S. President in 2008.

On the campaign trail, candidate Clinton said that to restore "fiscal responsibility to government," she would like to return "high-income tax rates to the 1990s levels."

In April 2007 Mrs. Clinton spoke at an event held by Al Sharpton's National Action Network, where she stated that her own presidential bid was possible only because of the dedicated work of longtime civil rights leaders who had fought on behalf of those traditionally excluded from power positions in American life. She specifically cited Jesse Jackson and Children's Defense Fund founder Marian Wright Edelman (both of whom were on the dais that day). "I have enjoyed a long and positive relationship with Reverend Al Sharpton and National Action Network," said Mrs. Clinton, "and I don't ever remember saying 'no' to them and I intend to remain their partner in civil rights as I clean the dirt from under the carpet in the Oval Office when I am elected President."

That same month, Senator Clinton appointed Raul Yzaguirre, who served as President and CEO of the National Council of La Raza from 1974 to 2004, to co-chair her 2008 presidential campaign and to direct her outreach efforts to Hispanic voters.

Another notable co-chair of Mrs. Clinton's campaign was Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, supporter of the radical Chicano student organization MEChA.

In May 2007, Clinton outlined an economic vision of "shared prosperity" that would focus on the redistribution of wealth by raising the incomes of, and benefits for, lower earners. She lamented the "economic policy dynamics [that] are generating rising income inequality," and expressed her desire to make "corporations pay their fair share of taxes." She did not note that corporate taxes in the U.S. are already among the highest for OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries. Moreover, her claim that "the percentage of taxes paid by corporations have fallen" was incorrect. In fact, the percentage of taxes paid by corporations was 11.5 percent in 2006, considerably higher than the 8.2 percent figure for 2000, the last year of Bill Clinton's presidency.

Also in May 2007, Senator Clinton declared that she deemed it vital to replace the conservative notion of an "ownership society" with one based on communal responsibility and prosperity. She lamented that the contemporary American economy leaves "it all up to the individual" in "the 'on your own' society" that increases the income gap between the "rich" and the "poor." Though Mrs. Clinton depicted the American middle class as a shrinking entity, Democratic economist Stephen Rose notes (in his 2007 book, Social Stratification in the United States) that once people outside their prime working years - i.e., the elderly and the young -- are excluded from the equation, the median income of American families is approximately $63,000.

At a June 4, 2007 event hosted by Sojourners, the Jim Wallis-founded evangelical Christian ministry that preaches radical leftwing politics and has long championed communist causes, Mrs. Clinton said, "...I certainly think the free market has failed. We've all failed." She further said she would repeal the Bush tax cuts to help finance universal, government-funded health care.

In July 2007, Senator Clinton voiced her opposition to a new Supreme Court ruling that public school systems may not achieve or preserve racial integration through measures -- such as busing or quotas -- that take explicit account of students' racial backgrounds. According to Clinton, this decision "turned the clock back" on the history of hard-won gains in the realm of civil rights; it represented "a setback for all of us who are on the long march toward racial equality and the building of a stronger, more unified America"; and it demonstrated the John Roberts-led Supreme Court's "willingness to erode core constitutional guarantees."

Mrs. Clinton added that "all students benefit from racially diverse classrooms," and that "[r]ecent evidence shows that integrated schools promote minority academic achievement and can help close the achievement gap." Her claims are contradicted, however, by the scholarship of Thomas Sowell, who has found that "[n]ot only is there no hard evidence that mixing and matching black and white kids in school produces either educational or social benefits, there have been a number of studies of all-black schools whose educational performances equal or exceed the national average"; that black students who have been bussed into white schools have seen no discernible rise in their standardized test scores -- "not even after decades of busing"; and that "[n]ot only is there no hard evidence" for the dogma "that there needs to be a 'critical mass' of black students in a given school or college in order for them to perform up to standard," but "such hard evidence as there is points in the opposite direction."

On June 5, 2008, after a hotly contested race with Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton dropped out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, as it had become apparent that Obama's lead was insurmountable.

Hillary Clinton was endorsed by the Working Families Party (WFP), which was created in 1998 to help push the Democratic Party ideologically toward the left. WFP is a front group for ACORN, whose voter-registration campaigns have been repeatedly implicated in fraud and corruption. When Mrs. Clinton ran for the Senate in 2000, she was listed on both the Democratic Party ticket and the WFP ticket. During the 2000 campaign, she spoke at numerous WFP events, most memorably at the party's debut convention in March 2000 -- an event which the Communist newspaper People's Weekly World approvingly called "a turning point in New York politics." After receiving WFP's endorsement, Clinton vowed to wage a "people's grassroots campaign." "[T]here have been few candidates in history more supportive of our issues than Al Gore and Hillary Clinton," said WFP campaign literature.

Mrs. Clinton has close ties to the billionaire financier George Soros and his so-called "Shadow Democratic Party," or Shadow Party. This term refers to a nationwide network of unions, non-profit activist groups, and think tanks that actively campaign for the Democrats and leftist causes. The Shadow Party was conceived and organized principally by Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Harold McEwan Ickes -- all identified with the Democratic Party left. And, as Richard Poe has revealed, other key players included:

  • Morton H. Halperin: Director of Soros' Open Society Institute
  • John Podesta: Democrat strategist and former chief of staff for Bill Clinton
  • Jeremy Rosner: Democrat strategist and pollster, ex-foreign policy speechwriter for Bill Clinton
  • Robert Boorstin: Democrat strategist and pollster, ex-national security speechwriter for Bill Clinton
  • Carl Pope: Co-founder of America Coming Together, Democrat strategist, and Sierra Club Executive Director
  • Steve Rosenthal: Labor leader, CEO of America Coming Together, and former chief advisor on union matters to Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich
  • Peter Lewis: Major Democrat donor and insurance entrepreneur
  • Rob Glaser: Major Democrat donor and Silicon Valley pioneer
  • Ellen Malcolm: Co-founder and President of America Coming Together, and founder of EMILY's List
  • Rob McKay: Major Democrat donor, Taco Bell heir, and McKay Family Foundation President
  • Lewis and Dorothy Cullman: Major Democrat donors

A New York hedge fund manager with a personal fortune estimated at about $7.2 billion (aside from the billions of dollars in investor assets controlled by his management company), Soros is one of the world's wealthiest and most powerful individuals. Since 1979, his foundation network -- whose flagship is the Open Society Institute (OSI) -- has given an estimated $5 billion in grants to a multitude of organizations whose objectives are consistent with those of Soros. OSI alone donates scores of millions of dollars annually to these various groups, whose major agendas can be summarized as follows:

  • promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States
  • promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws
  • promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes
  • promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens
  • financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left
  • promoting socialized medicine in the United States
  • promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism
  • promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike

Hillary Clinton shares each of the foregoing Soros agendas.

At a 2004 "Take Back America" conference in Washington, DC, Mrs. Clinton introduced Soros with these words: "Now, among the many people who have stood up and said, 'I cannot sit by and let this happen to the country I love,' is George Soros, and I have known George Soros for a long time now, and I first came across his work in the former Soviet Union, in Eastern Europe, when I was privileged to travel there, both on my own and with my husband on behalf of our country. ... [W]e need people like George Soros, who is fearless, and willing to step up when it counts."[19]

Mrs. Clinton also has particularly close ties to a vital think tank called the Center for American Progress (CAP), which was founded jointly by George Soros, Morton Halperin, and John Podesta. Soros and Halperin first proposed CAP's creation in 2002 to promote generally the cause of the Left and the Democratic Party. But CAP's overarching objective is considerably more specific than that: As an inside source told reporter Christian Bourge of United Press International, CAP is in fact "the official Hillary Clinton think tank."

Another key ally of Mrs. Clinton is the organization Media Matters for America, headed by David Brock. Media Matters is financed, in part, by the Soros-funded Democracy Alliance, whose goal is to raise money to drive a leftwing political movement and Democratic electoral victories.

Like Media Matters, Hillary Clinton supports the re-establishment of the so-called Fairness Doctrine (which was repealed by Congress in 1987), just as she did during her years as First Lady. This Doctrine would dilute, restrict, or limit the message of influential conservative broadcasters and, consequently, influence the thinking and the voting decisions of the American people.

Hillary Clinton is a former Board of Advisors member of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.

David Horowitz has provided the following incisive analysis of Hillary Clinton's broad agendas and the tactics she employs in pursuit of them:

"It is possible to be a socialist, and radical in one's agendas, and yet moderate in the means one regards as practical to achieve them. To change the world, it is first necessary to acquire cultural and political power. And these transitional goals may often be accomplished by indirection and deception even more effectively than by frontal assault. ... New Left progressives [such as] Hillary Clinton ... [share the] intoxicating vision of a social redemption achieved by Them ... For these self-appointed social redeemers, the goal -- 'social justice' -- is not about rectifying particular injustices, which would be practical and modest, and therefore conservative. Their crusade is about rectifying injustice in the very order of things. 'Social Justice' for them is about a world reborn, a world in which prejudice and violence are absent, in which everyone is equal and equally advantaged and without fundamentally conflicting desires. It is a world that could only come into being through a re-structuring of human nature and of society itself. ... In other words, a world in which human consciousness is changed, human relations refashioned, social institutions transformed, and in which 'social justice' prevails. ... In short, the transformation of the world requires the permanent entrenchment of the saints in power. Therefore, everything is justified that serves to achieve the continuance of Them. ... The focus of Hillary Clinton's ambition ... is the vision of a world that can only be achieved when the Chosen accumulate enough power to change this one."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

On December 1, 2008, President-elect Barack Obama named Hillary Clinton to be the Secretary of State in his forthcoming administration. According to the public interest organization Judicial Watch, however, Mrs. Clinton was technically ineligible for this post because of a stipulation in the Ineligibility Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That clause prohibits any active member of Congress from being appointed to an office that has benefited from a salary increase during that legislator's current term in either the Senate or the House of Representatives. An Executive Order increasing the salary for Secretary of State had been indeed signed by President Bush in January 2008, when Clinton was in the early stages of her second Senate term.

In March 2009, Mrs. Clinton suggested that Mexico's drug war was, in large measure, the fault of the United States. "Our [America's] inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police, of soldiers and civilians," said Clinton. She contended that illegal drugs had been coming from Mexico into the U.S. to feed "our insatiable demand" for such substances, and in exchange American weapons had been flowing south.

In reality, however, the Mexican drug cartels acquire their weaponry not from the U.S. but rather from the black market, from such nations as Venezuela and Iran, and from Hezbollah-type terror groups wishing to destabilize North America. Moreover, in many cases they simply "procure" their weapons from less-than-savory elements within the Mexican military—weapons which in all likelihood did come from the U.S. through legal channels.

In a March 26, 2009 television interview, Fox News reporter Greta Van Susteren questioned Mrs. Clinton about North Korea's recent announcement that it would soon be test-launching a communications satellite, a launch that regional powers believed was actually intended to test a long-range missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. "What are we going to do about North Korea?" Susteren asked. Clinton responded:

"... I have been very clear, President Obama has been very clear, we would like to get back to the kind of talks that led to the initial steps in their de-nuclearization. The six-party framework that involves all of the neighbors, each of whom have a stake in what happens in North Korea -- we have offered that. I sent word that we would like to have our special envoy for North Korean policy go to Pyongyang. They didn't want him to come.

"So we're working hard. And if they're watching you [on TV], I'm sure that since you were there [Susteren had visited North Korea], you made a big impression, went to a karaoke bar in Pyongyang. (laughter) They probably still remember you. If they're watching -- if anybody from North Korea is watching this program with you, Greta ... You know, we'd love for them to begin to talk about what we can do together to fulfill the framework of the six-party talks."

In a May 2010 speech to the Brookings Institution, Mrs. Clinton spoke about the virtues of high taxation rates: "The rich are not paying their fair share in any nation that is facing the kind of employment issues [America currently does] — whether it's individual, corporate or whatever [form of] taxation forms." She went on to cite Brazil as a model: "Brazil has the highest tax-to-GDP rate in the Western Hemisphere and guess what — they're growing like crazy. And the rich are getting richer, but they're pulling people out of poverty."


Most of this profile is adapted from the article "Hillary Rodham Clinton: Her Career and Agendas," written by John Perazzo and published by FrontPageMagazine.com on July 20, 2007.


Notes:

[1] Barbara Olson, Hell to Pay (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 1999), pp. 59-59.

[2] Ibid., p. 37.

[3] Ibid., pp. 59-61.

[4] Ibid., pp. 56, 62.

[5] Ibid., pp. 102-104.

[6] Ibid., pp. 105-107.

[7] Ibid., pp. 120-122.

[8] Ibid., p. 128.

[9] Ibid., pp. 128-129.

[10] Ibid., pp. 129-130.

[11] Amanda B. Carpenter, Dossier on Hillary Clinton (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2006), p. 162.

[12] Ibid., pp. 162-163.

[13] Ibid., p. 53.

[14] Ibid., p. 56.

[15] Ibid., p. 125.

[16] Ibid., p. 126.

[17] Ibid., p. 131.

[18] Ibid., pp. 131-132.

[19] Cited in David Horowitz and Richard Poe, The Shadow Party, p. 53.