Obama Family Spends More Than The Queen On Travel

(Western Journalism) – The Obamas are spending a billion dollars a year on luxurious travel and vacations – all paid for by hard-working Americans.

“Without precedent” is how one member of Congress described it.

Another member announced it was “nearly unbelievable.”

No, they weren’t talking about the latest Obama girls’ outing to China. They were talking of the more than $1 billion spent on travel every year by Obama and his family.

Or, as Britain’s Daily Mail reported, Obama is spending 20 times what the entire royal family spends for travel. That sort of luxury and excess would make the sovereigns of any European nation wince.

The latest trip to China includes all the must-see sights, such as the historic city of Xi’an, the southern district of Chengdu, and the home of China’s beloved panda bears. American taxpayers should be in open revolt, as they’re footing the bill for this opulence and grandeur.

Adding insult to injury is the simple fact that Michelle Obama won’t answer a single question about the entire trip. And still we’re paying the freight….

Living Large in Spite of the Times

When the Obamas travel, they never seek to lower the bill. They stay at the finest private homes, rented for top dollar, or they check into the most luxurious resorts.

Figures and details are often hard to obtain, but the Washington Post estimated that the Obama’s June 2013 sojourn to Africa cost taxpayers $60 million to $100 million. The legendary size of the entourage forced the government to pay for 4,000 “room-nights” for the single stop in Johannesburg, South Africa. They also rented a mind-boggling $2-million worth of cars – that must have been nearly every auto in town!

Back home, Obama keeps a 747 at his disposal, ready to take off at a moment’s notice. He’s used the plane so frequently that the White House had to expand the number of pilots available since Obama was elected. As Andrew Malcom reported in the L.A. Times, “At an Air Force-estimated cost of $181,757 per flight hour (not to mention the additional travel costs of Marine One, Secret Service, logistics and local police overtime), that’s a lot of frequent flier dollars going into the president’s carbon footprint.”

The perks of the office don’t end with a plane, either. Not only does the White House have a theater; they have a projectionist available on standby 24 hours a day. Chefs, gardeners, and personal trainers are available for any family member at a moment’s notice.

Bored with the movies? How about a party? The Obamas have thrown the most ostentatious parties in White House history, including Michelle Obama’s infamous 50th birthday party. Beyoncé headlined the party, but it included musicians like John Legend, Stevie Wonder, Smokey Robinson, Jennifer Hudson, James Taylor, Gladys Knight, and Mary J. Blige. Celebrities lined up to attend, including Magic Johnson, Samuel L. Jackson, Rachel Ray, Billie Jean King, and Al Roker.

Meanwhile, our defense budget and foreign policy are in shambles. Our economy has sputtered and sank while Obama has been in office. Deficits are out of sight. Obamacare is on the ropes. Yet our First Family parties and lives large, passing the cost off to hard-working Americans.

It’s no wonder that Obama’s popularity is in the toilet.

[H/T WesternJournalism: Floyd Brown]

Obama’s Internet surrender threatens freedom, says… Bill Clinton

(Breitbart) – To date, nearly all of the politicians criticizing the Obama Administration’s plan to hand over supervision of Internet domains to some sort of international organization next year have been Republicans.  Now there’s a very notable exception: former President Bill Clinton.

Clinton’s not a mild critic, either.  Appearing with Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, he told an audience at Arizona State University, “I understand in theory why we should have a multi-stakeholder process.  I just know that a lot of these so-called stakeholders are really governments that want to gag people, and restrict access to the Internet.”

For the record, Wales also pronounced himself “very worried” about the possibility of reduced Internet freedom.  Like virtually everyone on the planet outside of the Obama Administration, they seemed to think this was all happening, to some significant degree, because of the Edward Snowden scandal, which supposedly demonstrates America is no longer a trustworthy guardian of Internet freedom, even though Snowden’s revelations had nothing whatsoever to do with U.S. government oversight of ICANN, the corporation that handles Web domain registration.

If I might take this opportunity to expand on something I said on “Breitbart News Saturday” this weekend: when Clinton says “a lot of these so-called stakeholders are really governments that want to gag people,” I think he might be alluding to the fact that many of the corporate entities that would be part of the new “multi-stakeholder” oversight regime are actually organs of repressive government.  It would be hard to imagine a multi-stakeholder system that excluded all of the huge, pseudo-“private” companies that are actually controlled by authoritarian governments such as China and Russia.  And if you let those big Internet interests into the system, you’re also admitting the oppressive regimes that stand behind them… in some cases, not very far behind them.

The point I keep returning to is that, contrary to the comforting illusions of globalists, nobody else in the world is as committed to free expression as the United States; and, taken as a combined entity, the rest of The World is considerably more comfortable with the idea of restricting Internet access for ideological reasons.  I always qualify that statement by sadly noting that America is growing more comfortable with the ideological restriction of free expression, too.

Let me augment that point by making a similar one about free enterprise: the rest of The World is a lot more comfortable with the idea of “private” corporations that are actually organs of the State or its ruling Party… and that’s another perversion the American people are learning to accept, to their great cost.

[H/T Breitbart: John Hayward]

Gov. Scott Walker refuses to take down religious tweet

(Fox News) – Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker believes he can do all things through Christ, but an atheist group charges that he cannot do all things through Christ on his official social media platforms.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation has demanded Walker remove posts from his official Facebook and Twitter feeds that read, “Philippians 4:13.”

“I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me,” the verse reads.

The atheist outrage over the governor’s beliefs seems almost unbelievable.

“This braggadocio verse coming from a public official is rather disturbing,” FFRF co-presidents Annie Laurie Gaylor and Dan Baker wrote in a letter to the governor. “To say, ‘I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me,’ seems more like a threat, or the utterance of a theocratic dictator, than a duly elected civil servant.”

They accused the governor of misusing his authority to “promote not just religion over non-religion, but one religion over another in a manner that makes many Wisconsin citizens uncomfortable.”

The atheist outrage over the governor’s beliefs seems almost unbelievable.

I reached out to Walker’s office, and his staff told me the governor has absolutely no plans to remove anything.

“Governor Walker will not remove the post on his social media,” press secretary Laurel Patrick told me. “The verse was part of a devotional he read that morning, which inspired him, and he chose to share it.”

I can’t seem to recall a tweet generating such histrionics from an atheist group. Normally, they reserve that sort of faux fury for the Baby Jesus or a high school football prayer.

The FFRF said Walker has a responsibility to “uphold the entirely godless and secular U.S. Constitution.”

“It is improper for a state employee, much less for the chief executive officer of the state, to use the machinery of the State of Wisconsin to promote personal religious views,” they wrote. The governor’s office clearly disagrees.

“While he frequently uses his social media to engage with Wisconsinites on matters of public policy, he also uses it to give them a sense of who he is,” Patrick said. “This does just that – it was a reflection of his thoughts for the day.”

So in that spirit, here’s my thought for the day. Perhaps the next time the FFRF finds itself aggrieved it could post its outrage on Facebook or Twitter. I’m sure there’s an emoticon to express disbelief.

[H/T FoxNews: Todd Starnes]

U.S., other powers kick Russia out of G8

The Hague, Netherlands (CNN) — President Barack Obama and other world leaders have decided to end Russia’s role in the group of leading industrialized nations, the White House said Monday.

The move to suspend Russia’s membership in the G8 is the latest direct response from major countries allied against Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

“International law prohibits the acquisition of part or all of another state’s territory through coercion or force,” the statement said. “To do so violates the principles upon which the international system is built. We condemn the illegal referendum held in Crimea in violation of Ukraine’s constitution.

“We also strongly condemn Russia’s illegal attempt to annex Crimea in contravention of international law and specific international obligations.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said earlier in the day that being kicked out of G8 would be no big deal.

“G8 is an informal organization that does not give out any membership cards and, by its definition, cannot remove anyone,” he said during a news conference. ” All the economic and financial questions are decided in G20, and G8 has the purpose of existence as the forum of dialogue between the leading Western countries and Russia.”

Lavrov added that Russia was “not attached to this format and we don’t see a great misfortune if it will not gather. Maybe, for a year or two, it will be an experiment for us to see how we live without it.”

Ukraine orders Crimea troop withdrawal

In a nod to political and economic reforms, the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, and Italy added Russia to their group in 1998 — transforming it from the G7 to the G8.

An aide to British Prime Minister David Cameron confirmed to CNN that a group summit initially planned for June in Sochi, Russia, where the Winter Olympics were just held, is now off.

The United States and its allies in Europe are “united in imposing a cost on Russia for its actions so far,” Obama said earlier in the Netherlands where he attended a nuclear security summit with other world leaders.

Western powers have imposed sanctions and other penalties against specific people in Russia close to President Vladimir Putin.

A senior Obama administration official, not speaking for full attribution, said Obama and other leaders agreed that further steps to punish Russian President Vladimir Putin could include sanctions on energy, banking and defense sectors — all areas where Europe is deeply engaged economically with Russia.

Those additional sanctions could be prompted if Russia further escalates its incursion into Ukraine, which the official defined as sending troops beyond Crimea into the southern or eastern parts of the country. Violence in the contested peninsula could also trigger further sanctions.

While the official said further penetration of Ukraine by Russian troops remains the most immediate source of concern for the United States, other potential land grabs also worry the United States and its allies.

NATO has expressed concern Russia could attempt to reclaim a region of Moldova with Russian sympathies.

Obama has said a military incursion in Ukraine is off the table, and his advisers are hesitant to even frame the crisis in Ukraine as a bad ’80s flashback — Obama in one corner, Putin in the other. It’s not “Rocky IV,” as Secretary of State John Kerry said.

White House officials don’t care to publicly muse about Putin’s intentions.

National Security Adviser Susan Rice said the Russian President’s actions speak for themselves.

The White House emphasis throughout the Russian occupation of Crimea has been “de-escalation.”

Asked whether the United States will provide military aid to Ukraine’s woefully underfunded armed forces, administration officials cautioned that such assistance could inflame tensions.

“Our focus has been and remains on the economic and diplomatic instruments at this point,” Rice said. “Our interest is not in seeing the situation escalate and devolve into hot conflict.”

Lavrov met with Kerry on Monday and said Russia’s action in Crimea was necessary.

“It was the necessity to protect Russians who live there and who lived there for centuries,” he said in the news conference. “And when our partners compare Crimea to Kosovo, because in Kosovo a lot of blood was shed then its independence was proclaimed. So we have a question then: Is it necessary for the blood to be shed in Crimea to agree on the right of the people in Crimea for self-determination?”

While Democratic and Republican lawmakers in the United States are stepping up their calls to provide Ukraine with light arms and other military aid, administration officials have argued that sanctions put in place so far must be given time to take hold.

With an estimated 20,000 Russian troops on Ukraine’s border, the question is whether Obama’s use of soft power will deter Putin.

With little resistance, the Russian President could easily move into eastern Ukraine even as Obama seeks to isolate Moscow in meetings with European allies. It’s a possibility not lost on senior administration officials.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican, argued the Russian leader is likely eying more opportunities in the coming days.

“(Putin) has put all the military units he would need to move into Ukraine on its eastern border and is doing exercises. We see him moving forces in the south in a position where they could take the southern region over to Moldova,” Rogers said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

There are other approaches. Obama’s former ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, urged the administration to intensify its policy of isolating Putin.

“Mr. Putin’s Russia has no real allies. We must keep it that way,” McFaul wrote in an op-ed in the New York Times.

[H/T CNN: Jim Acosta]

Obama to Kill Tomahawk, Hellfire Missile Programs

(Free Beacon) – President Barack Obama is seeking to abolish two highly successful missile programs that experts say has helped the U.S. Navy maintain military superiority for the past several decades.

The Tomahawk missile program—known as “the world’s most advanced cruise missile”—is set to be cut by $128 million under Obama’s fiscal year 2015 budget proposal and completely eliminated by fiscal year 2016, according to budget documents released by the Navy.

In addition to the monetary cuts to the program, the number of actual Tomahawk missiles acquired by the United States would drop significantly—from 196 last year to just 100 in 2015. The number will then drop to zero in 2016.

The Navy will also be forced to cancel its acquisition of the well-regarded and highly effective Hellfire missiles in 2015, according to Obama’s proposal.

The proposed elimination of these missile programs came as a shock to lawmakers and military experts, who warned ending cutting these missiles would significantly erode America’s ability to deter enemy forces.

“The administration’s proposed budget dramatically under-resources our investments in munitions and leaves the Defense Department with dangerous gaps in key areas, like Tomahawk and Hellfire missiles,” said Rep. Randy Forbes (R., Va.), a member of House Armed Services Committee.

“Increasing our investment in munitions and retaining our technological edge in research and development should be a key component of any serious defense strategy,” he said.

The U.S. Navy relied heavily on them during the 2011 military incursion into Libya, where some 220 Tomahawks were used during the fight.

Nearly 100 of these missiles are used each year on average, meaning that the sharp cuts will cause the Tomahawk stock to be completely depleted by around 2018. This is particularly concerning to defense experts because the Pentagon does not have a replacement missile ready to take the Tomahawk’s place.

“It doesn’t make sense,” said Seth Cropsey, director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for American Seapower. “This really moves the U.S. away from a position of influence and military dominance.”

Cropsey said that if someone were trying to “reduce the U.S. ability to shape events” in the world, “they couldn’t find a better way than depriving the U.S. fleet of Tomahawks. It’s breathtaking.”

The Navy has used various incarnations of the Tomahawk with great success over the past 30 years, employing them during Desert Storm and its battle zones from Iraq and Afghanistan to the Balkans.

While the military as a whole is seeing its budgets reduced and equipment scaled back, the Tomahawk cuts do not appear to be due to a lack of funds.

The administration seems to be taking the millions typically spent on the Tomahawk program and investing it in an experimental missile program that experts say will not be battle ready for at least 10 years.

“It is definitely short-sighted given the value of the Tomahawk as a workhorse,” said Mackenzie Eaglen, a former Pentagon staffer who analyzes military readiness. “The opening days of the U.S. lead-from-behind, ‘no-fly zone’ operation over Libya showcased how important this inventory of weapons is still today.”

Overall, the Navy has essentially cut in half its weapons procurement plan, impacting a wide range of tactical weapons and missiles.

Navy experts and retired officials fear that the elimination of the Tomahawk and Hellfire systems—and the lack of a battle-ready replacement—will jeopardize the U.S. Navy’s supremacy as it faces increasingly advanced militaries from North Korea to the Middle East.

The cuts are “like running a white flag up on a very tall flag pole and saying, ‘We are ready to be walked on,’” Cropsey said.

Retired Army Lt. Col. Steve Russell called the cuts to the Tomahawk program devastating for multiple reasons.

“We run a huge risk because so much of our national policy for immediate response is contingent on our national security team threatening with Tomahawk missiles,” said Russell, who is currently running for Congress.

“The very instrument we will often use and cite, we’re now cutting the program,” Russell said. “There was a finite number [of Tomahawk’s] made and they’re not being replenished.”

“If our national policy is contingent on an immediate response with these missile and we’re not replacing them, then what are we going do?” Russell asked.

North Korea, for instance, has successfully tested multi-stage rockets and other ballistic missiles in recent months. Experts say this is a sign that the Navy’s defensive capabilities will become all the more important in the Pacific in the years to come.

Meanwhile, the experimental anti-ship cruise missile meant to replace the Tomahawk program will not be battle ready for at least 10 years, according to some experts.

The Long Range Anti Ship Missile has suffered from extremely expensive development costs and has underperformed when tested.

“You have to ask yourself: An anti-ship missile is not going to be something we can drive into a cave in Tora Bora,” Russell said. “To replace it with something not needed as badly, and invest in something not even capable of passing basic tests, that causes real concern.”

The Pentagon did not return requests for comment.

[H/T Freebeacon: Adam Kredo]

Sharpton unveils race-baiting scheme for increasing 2014 midterm turnout

(Allen B. West) – You want to know how Democrats plan to boost voter turnout for the 2014 midterm elections? Just follow the charlatan Al Sharpton.

According to Cincinnati.com, The Rev. Al Sharpton was busy revving up the crowd Thursday night in Ohio to support an Ohio Voters Bill of rights. In typical fashion, Sharpton told the crowd at World Deliverance Church, Republicans’ efforts to try and suppress the vote “is all a scheme to dis-empower and disenfranchise the vote in Ohio.” And silly me, I thought liberal progressives wanted a separation between church and state, i.e. politics. Oops, there I go again, expecting hypocrisy won’t be a part of the liberal socialist playbook.

Sharpton went on to state (stupidly), “Nobody gave us the right to vote and nobody is going to give it to us now. We fought for it and we’re going to fight for our right to keep it.”

Sharpton is under the misconception that possessing an ID to vote is disenfranchisement. If that be the case, then the entire airline industry is based on disenfranchisement as well.

Instead of promoting the integrity of our electoral system — something I’ve experienced – he’s received his Obama administration marching orders to stir up angst. What is amazing to me is that the same liar who gave us the Tawana Brawley hoax is passing himself off as a credible individual. Are his followers in the black community just that delusional?

The amendment would allow online registration; maintain current identification options and expand them to include student identification; maintain the 35-day early voting period and forbid a ballot from being rejected due to poll worker error. The goal: End partisan input into voting laws. Riiight.

However, if the goal was to end partisan input into voting laws and to guarantee integrity, then why did the Rev. Bobby Hilton, president of the Cincinnati chapter of the National Action Network call Melowese Richardson to the stage to welcome her home. You all remember Ms. Richardson, right? Ms. Richardson was the Hamilton County (Cincinnati, Ohio) poll worker convicted of voter fraud for voting on behalf of friends and family –seven times actually, but who’s counting — and was recently released early from a five-year prison sentence.

Hilton and the National Action Network worked to free Richardson, saying the sentence was racially motivated. Also, Rev Hilton referred in his rhetoric to one Hamilton County Juvenile Court Judge Tracie Hunter as an example of why the Voters Bill of Rights is needed. Hunter, who is facing eight criminal charges and is suspended from her job, recently faced a long-contested election over provisional ballots before she was finally declared the election’s winner.

I just wonder if the black community will ever realize no one is taking them seriously when they support petty usurpers and law-breakers. They do more harm to their cause than good — actually, they don’t really have a cause, but they certainly have an effect.

Why doesn’t the right Rev. Sharpton take on Mayor de Blasio who’s closing down charter schools in Harlem? Why not address the issue of school choice in the black community? Perhaps join forces with Senator Rand Paul and assess means by which capital investment could be unleashed in the inner city in order to spur on small business development and economic growth? Nah, it is better to play simpleton political games at the bidding of his massa’ the Democrat party and President Obama.

And I’m the sellout? Get real.

[H/T AllenBWest]

Belgian Newspaper Depicts Barack and Michelle Obama as Apes Ahead of President’s Visit

(Breitbart) – Belgian newspaper De Morgen has published pictures of US President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama depicted as apes, days ahead of Obama’s expected visit to the country this coming week.

The mainstream paper, which was founded in 1978, published a section in its Saturday edition entitled ‘The Obama Herald’.

The section was a satirical look at what translates roughly as ‘the news even before it happened, unless it’s already happened, of course’. It features potential future tweets from the US President, as well as an ‘interview’ with Sasha Obama claiming that she “hates Beyonce” and “that ugly man of hers too”.

But one section in particular may cause controversy for the paper: a picture of Barack and Michelle Obama with monkey faces.

The picture was published under the ‘Opinion’ section of the paper under the guise of being sent in by Russian President Vladimir Putin. It qualifies the pictures, satirically stating: Vladimir Putin is the president of Russia. He sent us this attachment at our request, and chose to sent pictures instead of text ‘because he doesn’t have a lot of time'”.

Users of the social networking site Reddit gave mixed responses when presented with the image, with some lauding the press freedom in Belgium, and others rightly noting the cartoon’s vulgar and racist overtones.

One commenter noted: “White people are also portrayed as apes, look at recent pictures of George W. Bush. If you find it racist to portray people with black skin as suchs [sic] but have no problem with portraying people of other skin color like that, then I’d have to point out your hypocrisy”, white another shot back, “Yeah, but Bush is compared to apes because he’s stupid, not because he’s white. The caption here is specifically mentions race- the photo is directly implying that black people are comparable to apes, and is therefore racist. Geddit?”

The incident isn’t the first time a publication has presented Obama as an ape, with similar controversies arising from a cartoon from last year, and a New York Post cartoon from 2009.

De Morgen‘s switchboard was closed for calls today, therefore Breitbart London was unable to obtain a comment.

[H/T Breitbart: Raheem Kassam]