Hundreds Arrested In Violent Iranian Protests : NPR

Hundreds Arrested In Violent Iranian ProtestsDecember 27, 2009Audio for this story from All Things Considered will be available at approx. 7:00 p.m. ET text sizeAAADecember 27, 2009Thousands of protesters took to the streets of Iran on Sunday in what eyewitnesses called the biggest and bloodiest demonstrations since Iran's contested presidential election this summer. Host Guy Raz reviews the day's events — including the arrest of hundreds of protesters.

Hundreds Arrested In Violent Iranian Protests : NPR

Blogged with the Flock Browser

RealClearPolitics - 2009: The Year of Living Fecklessly

2009: The Year of Living FecklesslyBy Charles KrauthammerWASHINGTON -- On Tuesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not just reject President Obama's latest feckless floating nuclear deadline. He spat on it, declaring that Iran "will continue resisting" until the U.S. has gotten rid of its 8,000 nuclear warheads.So ends 2009, the year of "engagement," of the extended hand, of the gratuitous apology -- and of spinning centrifuges, two-stage rockets and a secret enrichment facility that brought Iran materially closer to becoming a nuclear power.Receive news alertsSign UpCharles Krauthammer RealClearPoliticsiran foreign policyWe lost a year. But it was not just any year. It was a year of spectacularly squandered opportunity. In Iran, it was a year of revolution, beginning with a contested election and culminating this week in huge demonstrations mourning the death of the dissident Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri -- and demanding no longer a recount of the stolen election but the overthrow of the clerical dictatorship.

RealClearPolitics - 2009: The Year of Living Fecklessly

Blogged with the Flock Browser

The Great Satan Myth | The New Republic

The Great Satan MythEverything you know about U.S. involvement in Iran is wrong.

The Great Satan Myth | The New Republic

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Defiant in Tehran - Washington Times

All this goes a long way toward explaining why Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi - previously the "reformist" standard-bearers for Iran's opposition - no longer figure quite so prominently on the Iranian political scene. By now, Iranians understand full well that the goal of both longtime establishment politicians is not to end the current regime, but to preserve it, albeit in a form more palatable to the international community.It is also why Iran's ayatollahs are increasingly worried about the long-term transformative power of Iran's democratic opposition. "The gaps are being deepened because some of our elite are not careful," former parliamentarian Saeed Aboutaleb cautioned recently in an editorial in Iran's Etemaad newspaper. "This problem won't be solved as time passes; rather it will be increased."He may be right. Critical assessments of Iran's "Green" movement have tended to downplay its chances of success. Skeptics have pointed to the lack of viable opposition leaders and the rising power of the regime's ideological army, the Revolutionary Guards, as signs that the current opposition's chances for success are slim to none.But these criticisms miss a crucial point. Revolutions are not born overnight. It took the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the godfather of the Islamic Revolution, years to generate the political and ideological momentum necessary to sweep the shah from power in Tehran. A post-theocratic transition in Iran today could take just as long, or even longer.Likewise, the lack of evident leadership among the Iranian opposition is deeply worrying - but not necessarily fatal. It is useful to recall that, at its start, Poland's powerful "Solidarity" movement lacked clear and cohesive leadership. Figures such as Lech Walesa emerged over time, bringing with them the ideological cohesion and political power that helped Poland ultimately shrug off the communist yoke. At least some recent instances of grass-roots revolution, such as the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan and "Cedar" uprising in Lebanon the same year, have followed similar evolutionary paths (albeit with very different results).What is needed, in other words, is time - as well as the attention of the outside world. Today, the operative question is whether Iran's nascent democratic forces will be able to count on either. Since this summer, the regime in Tehran has become increasingly ruthless and repressive at home, a clear sign that Iran's ayatollahs no longer feel so comfortably in control. The talks now under way over Iran's nuclear program, however, have worked in favor of the status quo, signaling to Iran's leaders - and everyone else - that the international community is willing to negotiate with the tyranny it knows at the expense of more pluralistic alternatives. So Iran's opposition bides its time, hoping that it can capture the attention of the outside world before it runs out of steam.More than anything else, this means Washington. When the Obama administration launched its bid for "engagement" with the regime in Tehran this fall, it traded the promise of an Iran in ferment for the elusive prospect of a tactical accommodation with one of the world's radical regimes. In doing so, the White House consciously downplayed American support for Iran's opposition, putting itself on the wrong side of the power struggle now playing out on Iran's streets.Now, as that negotiating track draws to a close, Iran's opposition leaders once again have reason to hope that President Obama will understand at long last that, when it comes to supporting those seeking freedom, the leader of the Free World should never remain silent. Here's wishing that they will not have to wait long.

Defiant in Tehran - Washington Times

Blogged with the Flock Browser

EDITORIAL: Iran's perfect storm - Washington Times

EDITORIAL: Iran's perfect storm

EDITORIAL: Iran's perfect storm - Washington Times

Blogged with the Flock Browser

O’s unwise silence - NYPOST.com

O’s unwise silence

O’s unwise silence - NYPOST.com

Blogged with the Flock Browser

What we should do next to fight Obamacare

So now that the Senate has passed the bill where do we go from here.
What's more,where does the bill,or rather,the bills,go from here.
Some of the people who  are reading this may be newcomers to all of this
,& even some of those who have been following this may not know how the
the process works,so I want to fill them in.
Now that The House & The Senate have each passed their respective bills,the 2 bills must be reconciled. This is normally done through a House-Senate Conference,but as Fox News explains:


“Reid had wanted to assign conferees to meet with House negotiators on a compromise between the two versions of the bill. Democrats had hoped to begin negotiations as early as next week, though the House doesn't return officially until Jan. 12 and the Senate until Jan. 19.
But Reid's effort was dashed by Republicans who put the leader on notice that they would object to the appointment of conferees, and that would have delayed the Senate's recess, something no one wanted on Christmas eve.
House and Senate Democrats do have parliamentary avenues to get around the objection. The House and Senate can play ping-pong with the bill, where the Senate pings the bill over to the House and it makes changes and then the House pongs it back over to the Senate for another round.
This congressional table tennis continues until both bodies have adopted the same piece of legislation. That, however, could take longer than the administration had hoped.”
Republicans Look for Mechanisms to Halt Health Insurance bill 12-24-09


This is part of a plan conceived by Dan  Perrin, & which he presented in detail in his article:
The Extraordinary Measures Needed to Kill the Bill — Updated with Vote Numbers

And  followed up with:
The Best Christmas Present Ever: Senator DeMint Objects to the Appointment of the Conferees

In  essence he argues for using procedural maneuvers,(already being done,see above),to make it as difficult as possible to reconcile the bills,while working w/ Leftists in the House to insert “poison pill” provisions into the House bill.
As He explains it:
“So, first, conservatives force two votes in the House, by preventing the appointment of the conferees,and therefore, preventing a House-Senate Conference.

Second, the left will focus on three separate issues to kill the bill in the House. The object of these issues is not to support these policies per say, but to add items to the House bill that will be so objectionable that when the bill goes back over to the Senate, that the Dems lose one or more of their 60 votes.”
The three issues are:
The Public  Option
Killing the Nebraska & Vermont sweetheart deals,(& I would add the Louisiana Purchase that bought off Landrieu).
And Abortion:(Both Pro-Choice & Pro-Life Congressmen reject the Ben  Nelson compromise reached in the Senate bill)
Perrin again:
“Pro-Life and Pro-Abortion Forces: In short, have at it. Given the Stupak amendment majority in the House, the pro-lifers must stick Stupak back on the bill, so that when it is sent back to the Senate, the pro-abortion majority can pull Stupak back off. When the bill goes back to the Senate, the pro-abortion forces can remove Stupak, just as they did a couple of weeks ago. Once Stupak is pulled again from the Senate it must go back to the House to be amended, or die there.”

The idea of  a temporary alliance of convenience with the Left has also been put forward by Robert Trancinski in “ Letter to a Sincere Leftist: Let's Smash the State Power of the Corporations “

What we must now do if this  bill is  to  stopped:

1.If you know  any  Liberals  urge them to  pursue this  strategy.
2.Do everything  you  can  to discredit the  thesis, put  forward  by  the Obama Administration that failure to pass this bill will do more harm  to the Democratic Party then  passing it will.This is the argument that they have been using to sell the bill in spite of the obvious,overwhelming public opposition to the bill. Further:"opposition to the bill will subside once people get to know what's in it”.Indeed Sen.Chuck Schumer cheerfully boasted  that: “Mitch Mcconnell said on the floor that we're going to go home & hear our constituents rail against this bill, I don't believe that,I believe that the negativity that leader Mcconnell & others have continually displayed on the floor has peaked...”1.
3..We must show them,by direct,but peaceful confrontation,by continually calling faxing & e-mailing them,that they are wrong. While no individual call will make a difference,showing them that we will not go away,will belie their spin. Equally important,is the fact that any slackening off will be taken as  vindication of their fantasies.Indeed we must turn UP the pressure.We must find out who their largest campaign donors are,& stage boycotts of them. Protest at every,fundraiser,townhall,& speech that they give. Protest at every public relations event .Contact your local teaparty group,Republican Party meeting,even the  anti-bill Liberals. But you argue,the Liberals just want to put the Public  Option back in?True,they hope to get the Public  Option put back in,but even if they cannot,they believe that no bill is better than this bill.(They  believe the bill is a giveaway to the Insurance Companies,since it requires people to buy private insurance).
4.Finally & most importantly,keep spreading the ideas of Freedom,Individual Rights,& the value of Free-Market Economics,to your friends,neighbors,co-workers,to everyone,everywhere,where appropriate,so as to make a principled opposition to Socialized Medicine.

What we should do next to fight obamacare by Robert Reed Daly is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Based on a work at theneointellectual.typepad.com.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://theneointellectual.typepad.com/blog/.