Bush Library Opens As His Approval Rating Is Up

Former first lady Laura Bush, U.S. President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama, former President George W. Bush, former President Bill Clinton and Former first lady Hillary Clinton, former President George H.W. Bush and former first lady Barbara Bush and former President Jimmy Carter attend the opening ceremony of the George W. Bush Presidential Center April 25, 2013 in Dallas, Texas. (Former living first ladies Rosalynn Carter and Nancy Reagan did not attend.)

WAPO:  George W. Bush will return to the spotlight this week for the dedication of his presidential library, an event likely to trigger fresh public debate about his eight fateful years in office. But he reemerges with a better public image than when he left Washington more than four years ago.

Since then, Bush has absented himself from both policy disputes and political battles. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll suggests that the passage of time and Bush’s relative invisibility have been beneficial to a chief executive who left office surrounded by controversy.

Days before his second term ended in 2009, Bush’s approval rating among all adults was 33 percent positive and 66 percent negative. The new poll found 47 percent saying they approve and 50 percent saying they disapprove. Among registered voters, his approval rating today is equal to President Obama’s, at 47 percent, according to the latest Post-ABC surveys.

Majorities said they still dis­approve of Bush’s performance on the Iraq war and the economy, but his economic approval numbers nearly doubled between December 2008 and today, from 24 percent to 43 percent, with 53 percent disapproving. Iraq remains the most troublesome part of his legacy. Today, 57 percent say they disapprove of his decision to invade, though that is down from 65 percent in the spring of 2008, the last time the question was asked.

Historians say it will take years, even decades, for any substantial revision of his presidency to take place. Bush has said he is content to let history judge him and told the designers of his presidential museum to present the facts and let visitors decide whether he was right. But some allies see Thursday’s official opening of the library in Dallas as an opportunity to begin to set his presidency into broader perspective.

“Obviously, it’s a big moment for him,” former British prime minister Tony Blair said in a telephone interview from London. “It’s a chance for him to explain that his political philosophy encompasses much more than the decisions he had to take after 9/11. We forget this sometimes. . . . This is a much more rounded person with many more dimensions to him than the caricature often portrays.”

Contemporary judgments of Bush’s presidency have been harsh. The war in Iraq, which he launched on the basis of faulty intelligence in the aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, left this country deeply divided. His final months in office brought a collapse of the financial system that led to the worst recession since the Great Depression. In between, his administration’s wobbly response to Hurricane Katrina damaged his image.

But Bush will return to public view at a moment when some parts of his record are being viewed more charitably. His advocacy for immigration reform and his relative success at attracting Hispanic votes, for example, are now seen as a model for a Republican Party that has awakened to its glaring deficit in the Latino community.

Thursday’s events are likely to be shorn of partisanship, though commentary around them may not be. The guest list will be topped by Obama and all living former presidents, including Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush. Blair, who stood steadfastly with Bush after the 2001 attacks and his decision to invade Iraq 18 months later, will be among the many dignitaries and Bush administration alumni who will gather on the campus of Southern Methodist University.

Karen Hughes, who served as counselor to Bush, said the former president told her that he considers the day “a joyful opportunity to give thanks” — to the other presidents for being there, to those who served in his administration, to the workers who built the architecturally handsome Bush Center.

Former advisers say no one should expect the opening of the library and museum to bring a notable change in Bush’s generally low-profile post-presidency. “It’s a little too simplistic to say this is some big coming out or that some definitive change will happen that will mark a new approach to things by Bush or his people,” said Karl Rove, who served as Bush’s chief political adviser and White House deputy chief of staff.

Still, members of Bush’s team recognize the significance of the moment and are prepared to take on some of his critics, if necessary, amid the glare of media attention this week. “Clearly some pretty significant distortions have been fostered by the current president and others,” Hughes said. “Those of us who worked for him see it [the dedication ceremony] as an opportunity to set the record straight in some cases.”

Bush advisers believe that over time, more attention will focus on aspects of his presidency that were overshadowed by the controversies of his national security and economic records. They point to his initiative to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa, which has helped save hundreds of thousands of lives; his efforts to bring accountability and higher standards to public education; and his advocacy for comprehensive immigration reform, which was rejected by his party.

Bush’s decision to stay out of the public arena in recent years reflects his humility and his belief that he owed his successor “a decent interval of silence,” as Rove called it. He played no role in the 2012 campaign, neither attending the Republican National Convention last summer nor campaigning for Mitt Romney last fall. But there was no clamor among the Republican candidates for his participation.

Instead, Bush has quietly pursued activities that grew out of his presidential agenda. Much of that work, focusing on global health, the role of women in the Middle East, education and the economy, is carried out through the Bush Institute, which was founded in 2009 and shares the 23-acre site at SMU with the presidential library and museum.

The institute and the new museum are designed to highlight the values and principles that guided Bush in office. “Freedom is really the one central axis around which everything revolves,” said Mark Langdale, president of the George W. Bush Foundation.

Bush and former first lady Laura Bush have spent time in Africa on projects related to the AIDS initiative and other health issues. The former president also spends considerable time with wounded veterans and has participated with them in vigorous mountain-biking expeditions. He has taken up painting. He and his wife recently became grandparents for the first time.

He gave 70 speeches last year and plans 60 or so this year, according to Dan Bartlett, who was counselor to Bush in the White House. The paid speeches are all off the record, but one adviser said Bush is extremely candid in the question-and-answer sessions. He and former president Bill Clinton have done a series of joint appearances.

Last week’s Boston Marathon bombing was a tragic reminder of the episode that changed Bush’s presidency. After 9/11, Bush ­implemented aggressive ­anti-
terrorism policies, many of which were embraced by the Obama administration, though not the controversial interrogation measures authorized under Bush. A recent report by the Constitution Project concluded that those policies resulted in torture of some detainees.

Some Bush allies say Obama has gone out of his way to be critical of his predecessor and often has not acknowledged what they contend were key policies that have been helpful to him. They highlight two decisions by the former president that have proved beneficial to Obama in office: One was the troop surge in Iraq, which was highly controversial at the time but which, they contend, made it possible for Obama to end the war as quickly as he did.

The other was Bush’s decision in the fall of 2008 to press Congress to pass the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) to bail out financial institutions. That was equally controversial, especially among Bush’s fellow Republicans, but his advisers argue that it helped stabilize the financial system before Obama took office.

“Both reflected strong presidential leadership and, as we now see in retrospect, excellent judgment,” said Joshua Bolten, who served as Bush’s White House chief of staff.

Bolten also noted that spending during most years of Bush’s presidency was below 20 percent of gross domestic product, the target now established by House Republicans in their budget blueprint. No president since Richard M. Nixon, other than Clinton, can make such a claim, he said.

But on fiscal issues, Bush draws criticism from both left and right. Tea party Republicans regard him as a reckless spender. Democrats say his tax cuts and two wars that were not paid for helped create larger deficits, though Obama accepted making the bulk of those cuts permanent last December.

Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the country would be happy to have the deficit levels of Bush’s presidency, but she declined to praise his overall record. She said that his record on neither tax cuts nor spending “was particularly fiscally responsible.”

Bush has continued to bear much of the culpability for the condition of the economy. On Election Day last November, 53 percent of voters said they blamed Bush for the current economic problems, while 38 percent blamed Obama, according to exit polls.

Iraq looms larger than perhaps any other issue over Bush’s legacy, but Blair said the former president’s attitude toward his decisions has not changed. “There was never any doubt while he was in office, and there’s not any doubt now,” he said.

Blair said Bush continues to believe that the world is safer without Saddam Hussein in power and added: “When you see what is happening in Syria today, the sense of that argument is evident. . . . What it does is just make clear that these decisions are very difficult. If you intervene, it can be very tough. If you don’t intervene, it can also be very tough.”

One section of the Bush museum, known as the Decision Points Theater, focuses on four key decisions: the invasion of Iraq, the troop surge, the financial crisis and the response to Hurricane Katrina. Visitors will hear the information available to the president at the time and then choose what they would do in each case. Bush, on video, will explain his decisions.

Presidential historian Douglas Brinkley of Rice University recently toured the Bush museum; he called it “beautifully designed” but predicted that it would spark controversy. “It’s going to be mocked and trashed by liberal Democrats, and conservative Republicans are going to say what a marvelous place it is,” he said. As for Bush’s potential place in history, he said, “It’s going to be hard for him to rehabilitate fully.”

Stanford University’s David Kennedy predicted that judgments about Bush are not likely to change unless perceptions of Iraq and what triggered the financial crisis change first. Presidents are judged on foreign policy and economic policy, he said, adding: “In neither one of those areas do I see anything on the horizon that will change people’s opinion.”

But H.W. Brands, a professor of history at the University of Texas, said it’s quite possible that Bush’s legacy could undergo a genuine reworking as time passes. “The worse a president’s reputation when he leaves office, the better chance there is for revision,” he said. “Every so often there’s a new generation of historians, and they have to come along and challenge the conventional wisdom.”

Busts of presidential pets Barney and Miss Beazley are seen during a tour of the George W. Bush Presidential Center - which will house the George W Bush library.

Related:

Star-Studded Political A-List Gathers for Bush Library Unveiling

George W Bush library to open as former President's popularity soars

Busts of presidential pets Barney and Miss Beazley at George W. Bush Library

U.S. Presidential Libraries

Bush 43 Portraits Hung in White House

Technorati Tags: U.S. Presidential Libraries,George W. Bush,former presidents,43,presidential libraries,presidential pets

Totalitarian Program ‘Agenda 21′ Now in Effect!

Totalitarian Program ‘Agenda 21′ Now in Effect!  -  Written on September 13, 2011 by ralph barker

Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level. - George H. Bush

Agenda 21 isn’t coming. It is here. Most don’t know about it. They’ve never heard of it, but it is creeping in the back door right now. So, look behind you. It may already be in your backyard.

What is Agenda 21? It is a United Nation’s program presented and approved in Rio in 1992. At that time American conservatives laughed it off. “This is too crazy,” they said. “Impossible. It will never happen. Not here!” Well, it is happening. It is happening here and it is happening now. Agenda 21 is a totalitarian comprehensive environmental program that, when fully implemented, will direct where you live, how much water you can use, and how and where you can travel.

Agenda 21 is being marketed as a worldwide effort to ensure that all human beings will have access to adequate housing, health care, water and food. Of course this will require a massive redistribution of wealth from prosperous countries to poorer countries. Predictably, capitalistic countries, like the United States, will suffer lower standards of living.

It’s noteworthy that Presidents George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, through Executive Orders, have signed onto Agenda 21. Hundreds more governors, mayors, and county commissioners have also signed on.

Agenda 21 and related programs will eliminate many things we hold dear. These have been declared “unsustainable” and will be abolished. Here are some of them:

1. All private property rights (property ownership)
2. All forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer
3. Livestock production and most meat consumption
4. Privately owned vehicles and personal travel
5. Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel
6. Single family homes
7. Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting
8. Human population must be reduced to fewer than 1 billion people

It’s not coming from Washington D.C. or state legislatures for the most part. It is seeping in through local city and county governments. Agenda 21 brings with it stealthy code words, comforting words such as “smart growth,” “social justice,” “bio-diversity,” and “sustained development.” You will hear them often. Translated these terms effectively mean total environmental dictatorship and the elevation of the pagan practice of the worship of Mother Earth. Not a joke.

179 countries, including the United States, initially signed on to the Agenda in 1992. Many more have joined since then. It is already in progress in 600 U.S. cities. You can check the list of committed countries and cities at: http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=11454. You can also read the specific programs being implemented.

Agenda 21 is designed to control every aspect of human life on every square inch of planet earth. As a biblical worldview dims in the world man falls to the bottom of the food chain.

If Agenda 21 succeeds animals will become more important than man as will plants and trees. We can already see ample evidence of this process in motion today. Agenda 21’s real message is: “Man is the problem. Nature must be preserved and take precedence. Mother Earth must not be scratched.“

Agenda 21 is just another attempt by man to recreate heaven on earth. David Chilton, in his insightful book Paradise Restored, presents an important historical dynamic. Chilton submits that man, ever since he was expelled from Eden, has tried to get back in. Each time he tries, he creates another hell on earth. Agenda 21 will be no different.

Many socialistic, communistic, and liberal organizations and international leaders are behind Agenda 21 and its related programs. It will take dedication of time and effort on our part to truly understand all the implications of this pervasive program. The investment of time will be worth it.

I encourage you, no, beg you, to learn of this Agenda. Take the time. Think of the world your children will inherit if we don’t stop it and similar assaults on our freedoms.  Do not make the mistake of writing this off as some conspiracy theory. It may or may not be a conspiracy, but it is not a theory. It’s here. Look behind you.

Source:  Patriot Update

For more information on details concerning implementation of Agenda 21 please check out:

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ (Actual document-40 chapters, 294 pages)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esJY2SK_4tE (Glenn Beck)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM

http://green-agenda.com

http://vigilantcanuck.com/2010/08/22/agenda-21-reduction-of-the-worlds-population-by-80-to-90-percent/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVTGK1uYqJo

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2011/09/08/feds-accusing-nyc-suburb-segregation (Hannity-Agenda 21 in action).

Obama: The UN’s True Believer

Anything so as not to appear to be like George Bush.

That was the not-so-hidden theme of President Barack Obama’s speech on Libya last Monday. In his first crack at his predecessor, Obama defended his decision to not expand the American mission in Libya by saying “we went down that road in Iraq.” In another, an allusion to the superiority of his approach to foreign affairs over that of Bush’s, Obama stressed the fact he was acting in Libya out of humanitarian motives and on the basis of a United Nations (UN) mandate (Bush did not obtain one for his Iraq invasion).

”The Libyan opposition, and the Arab League, appealed to the world to save lives in Libya,” Obama said. “At my direction, America led an effort with our allies at the United Nations Security Council to pass an historic Resolution that authorized a No-Fly Zone to stop the regime’s attacks from the air, and further authorized all necessary measures to protect the Libyan people.”

But while Obama is priding himself on not being like George Bush, the current president’s well-known penchant for multilateral action abroad and for putting American interests and foreign policy in the hands of international bodies is turning out to be a disaster for everyone involved, especially for the Libyans. In the end, American reliance on the UN to determine its foreign policy will ultimately wind up costing more money and lives than a quick and massive, unilateral NATO invasion. At the other end of the scale, negotiations and no intervention would have even been more preferable.

Obama stated the UN established the No-Fly Zone to protect Libyans from Gaddafi and proudly said in his speech NATO warplanes prevented a massacre in Benghazi, which the Libyan dictator’s troops were poised to overrun two weeks ago. While this is true, Obama failed to mention that it took three weeks to get that mandate, during which time Gaddafi’s troops ousted most of the rebel forces from Western Libya.

Before their ouster, the rebels occupied towns and cities as close as 30 kilometres to Tripoli. A quick intervention by NATO ground troops to bolster rebel positions, or the threat to do so, would have seen Gaddafi’s small army confined to the Tripoli area. Military force is the only thing a nasty bully like Gaddafi appears to understand. George Bush’s invasion of Iraq, for example, caused the Libyan leader to give up his weapons of mass destruction program, since Gaddafi was afraid he would be next.

But during this wait for UN approval for action, the Libyan dictator captured the rebel-held areas in Western Libya, after which he sent in his secret police to hunt down rebel supporters. The resulting death toll is unknown. The hunt for rebel sympathizers continued as his forces advanced into rebel-held Eastern Libya. After their retreat, several hundred people were listed as missing by the Libyan Red Crescent. In a dozen cases, Human Rights Watch reports “government forces answered the mobile phone of the missing person.” Gaddafi’s “campaign of killing”, which Obama said the UN-mandated bombing stopped, continues.

Ironically, to end the violence and the killing, Obama’s current proposed plan entails violating the UN mandate he is so proud of having brought about. But Obama would never admit he is doing so, since the UN is sacrosanct among leftists, and he would also be acting, once again, like George Bush in his unwillingness to be bound by the UN’s restrictions (Obama has previously said he wants Gaddafi gone, but regime change is also not part of the UN mandate).

This latest mandate violation concerns the proposed plan under consideration by Obama and NATO to arm and train the rebel force, which has proven woefully inadequate in battle against Gaddafi’s troops. But Paragraph 9 of UN Resolution 1970, which establishes sanctions against Libya, unambiguously states: “… all Member States shall immediately take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply … to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Republic)… of arms and related materials of all types…”  Arming the rebels would therefore be illegal.

However, in a contortion worthy of Houdini, Hillary Clinton says Paragraph 4 of UN Resolution 1973 allows arms shipments to the rebels. But if so, this passage, which only mentions “necessary measures,” says this is to happen only if civilians are “under threat of attack.” If Gaddafi pulls back to Western Libya and allows the war to settle into a stalemate, then there is no legal justification for the Obama administration to pursue this policy. Moreover, arming and training the rebels will be very expensive and lead to more violence and death in a protracted struggle.

Other dangers also exist in giving the rebels weapons. A justifiable fear exists the United States would be arming hardcore Islamists among their number who would one day turn their guns against the West, which speaks against the plan. Also speaking against the plan is the fact the rebels want to kill Gaddafi and his supporters, tribal or otherwise, which is the main reason for his fierce resistance. A warning against such massacres was issued to the rebels this week, and such admonitions usually do not arise in a vacuum.

Rebel massacres with American-supplied weapons would undoubtedly not look good on the White House, especially after the UN resolution Obama sponsored to protect Libyan civilians. Such a horrific development would be particularly embarrassing for the president who said in his Monday speech: “The United States is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.” In this case, his shipping arms to the rebels may actually result in such slaughter and mass graves.

Like with Tunisia and Egypt, the Obama administration appears not to have had any prepared policy regarding an uprising in Libya, proving once again it is reactive rather than proactive and deeply over its head in the foreign affairs field. Relying on UN resolutions to determine American action in Libya is producing a worse-case scenario: a long, expensive and exhausting conflict with a large number of civilian casualties, which the “historic Resolution” and American air intervention were meant to prevent. It is a scenario that may yet require American soldiers, despite the president’s and Defense Secretary Robert Gate’s denials, if Gaddafi threatens to overrun Eastern Libya again.

---

Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com  -  URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/04/01/obama-the-un%e2%80%99s-true-believer/

Exposed:  The US-Saudi Libya Deal

Who is Barack Obama?  -  A Terrifying Analysis – Israel Commentary

U.N. Admits at Least $600G Lost on Overpriced Boat that Housed Haiti Peacekeepers

So $62,590,000 has been spent to kill people without the consent of Congress:  At least 110 Tomahawk Missiles Fired at Libya by US  -  Editor’s Note: Each Tomahawk missile costs $569,000.

Quote of the Day:  “Barack Obama has now fired more Tomahawk Cruise Missiles than all other Nobel Peace Prize winners combined!”

Zogby: Palin Person of the Year, Bush, of Decade

By Jim Meyers  -  Wednesday, 15 Dec 2010 04:33 PM  - NewsMax

Former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is the Person of the Year for 2010, according to a new survey by Zogby International, which also designated George W. Bush as Person of the Decade (2000-2010).

Palin was cited by 21 percent of the respondents, while 16 percent chose President Barack Obama. Glenn Beck and Julian Assange of WikiLeaks notoriety tied with 13 percent.

None of the other seven possible choices for Person of the Year — Gen. David Petraeus, Hillary Clinton, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Conan O’Brien, Apple’s Steve Jobs, basketball star LeBron James, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates — garnered more than 6 percent.

Democrats favored Obama with 33 percent, while Palin won among Republicans (39 percent) and independents (17 percent).

In the Person of the Decade polling, Bush was chosen by 44 percent of respondents, followed by Obama with 20 percent, and Osama bin Laden with 11 percent.

Zogby’s poll of nearly 2,000 adults found that 40 percent of respondents believe the BP oil spill is the news story of the year, with the midterm elections second at 34 percent.

The 2001 terrorist attacks is the news story of the decade, according to 73 percent of respondents.

The most significant political story of 2010 is the emergence of the tea party, Zogby found, while the most significant international news story of the year is the Haiti earthquake, and the most significant issue of the decade is the rise in terrorism.

Time Person Of The Year 2010: Mark Zuckerberg

NEW YORK -- Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been named Time magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2010, beating out a long list (100) competitors.  Julian Assange of WiliLeaks was rumored to take the award and the cover although on the official list of 100.

At 26, Zuckerberg is the youngest "Person of the Year" since the first one chosen, Charles Lindbergh; he was 25 when he was named in 1927, Time said Wednesday. Zuckerberg beat out Britain's Queen Elizabeth II by just two weeks: She was 26 when she was named in 1952.

Incidentally, Queen Elizabeth II has recently joined Zuckerberg's social networking behemoth.

Zuckerberg has put himself on the map not only as one of the world's youngest billionaires, but also as a prominent newcomer to the world of philanthropy.

Earlier this year, he pledged $100 million over five years to the Newark, N.J. school system. Now, he's in the company of media titans Carl Icahn, 74, Barry Diller, 68, and others who have joined Giving Pledge, an effort led by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and investor Warren Buffett to commit the country's wealthiest people to step up their charitable donations.

Zuckerberg owns about a quarter of Facebook's shares.

Zuckerberg has built Facebook into an international phenomenon by stretching the lines of social convention and embracing a new and far more permeable definition of community. In this new world, users are able to construct a social network well beyond what would ever be possible face-to-face.

"I'm trying to make the world a more open place," Zuckerberg says in the "bio" line of his own Facebook page.

Born in Zuckerberg's Harvard dorm room, the site has in six years grown to more than 500 million users worldwide and a dollar worth in the billions.

Facebook was the subject of director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin's film "The Social Network." It features a dark portrayal of Zuckerberg by Jesse Eisenberg, as well as the direction he's taking his company and his status as one of America's most influential figures.

The film has been picked as the best of the year by the New York Film Critics Circle, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the National Board of Review. On Tuesday, it received six Golden Globe nominations, including best picture, drama, going up against its chief rival, the British monarchy tale "The King's Speech," which led with seven nominations.

Time's "Person of the Year" is the person or thing that has most influenced the culture and the news during the past year for good or for ill.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke received the honor last year. The 2008 winner was then-President-elect Barack Obama. The 2007 winner was Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

Other previous winners have included Bono, President George W. Bush, and Amazon.com CEO and founder Jeff Bezos.

The World's Most Influential People

In our annual TIME 100 issue we name the people who most affect our world More »

America by Heart : Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag

Decision Points

The Social Network (Two-Disc Collector's Edition)

The Social Network [Blu-ray]

Related:

The Audacity of American Exceptionalism

Fear Factor: Palin Derangement Syndrome

Obama Honors Bush-Bashing Beatle While Oil Hits Coast

Sir Paul McCartney has been honoured by Barack Obama at the White House - even though he risked "getting punched out" by the US President.

Mr Obama presented Sir Paul with the Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song in a star-studded ceremony in the East Room of the White House.

And Macca celebrated by serenading First Lady Michelle Obama with the classic Beatles love ballad "Michelle" - and then joked: "I could be the first ever guy to be punched out by a President."

The former Beatle was part of a concert in his honour featuring Stevie Wonder, Elvis Costello, Herbie Hancock, The Jonas Brothers, Faith Hill and Emmylou Harris.

Mr Obama said: "By its very definition pop music is fleeting. Rarely is it composed with an eye toward standing the test of time, and that's what makes Paul's career so legendary.

"It's hard to believe that it's been nearly half a century since four lads from Liverpool first landed on our shores, and changed everything overnight."The 67-year-old McCartney had said he was "slightly nervous" about performing just three feet in front of the Obamas.He said receiving the honour was special enough but receiving it from Mr Obama added significance.He told the President: "I know there is a lot you are dealing with but there are billions of us rooting for you."

The truth is people say 'go on, do that one' but I have no idea how it goes.

Paul McCartney

He also had a dig at former president George W Bush, saying: "After the last eight years it is great to have a President who knows what a library is."

Earlier in the week, McCartney had defended Mr Obama for his handling of the Gulf Coast oil crisis. "He's a great guy so lay off him," he said.

The evening ended with McCartney being joined on stage by the entire First Family for a rendition of Hey Jude.

The Gershwin Prize - Washington's highest music award - is named after song-writing brothers George and Ira Gershwin, whose collections are housed at the library.

Sir Paul said the award, which has been given to stars like Wonder and Paul Simon in the past, was special because he had grown up listening to the Gershwins' music.

Librarian of Congress James Billington said McCartney had made an impact beyond music - "symbolising and humanising the global soundscape" - and with his activism around the world.

This is McCartney's first major lifetime achievement award from the US government.

He was due to receive the Kennedy Centre Honour, the country's top prize for performing artists, in 2002 but backed out because of a scheduling conflict.

He was awarded a Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award 10 years ago.
After hearing McCartney's remarks... I threw away my entire collection of Beatles albums.  Then I heard someone earlier say that her heard one of McCartney's songs on the radio earlier and he wanted to gag.  Hopefully more patriotic Americans have that reaction!
And for God sake... doesn't anyone have an original thought... let's stop with the Bush bashing already.  The comment wasn't funny and was absolutely absurd!!
And maybe Obama should spend as much time with friendly heads of state as he does did with McCartney and playing golf!

Visit From the President

No fanfare, no press called, not looking for votes - just shows up. Kind of reminds me of the time he "showed up" in Iraq serving meals at Thanksgiving wasn't it and even his mother didn't know he was there!

Class shows up...

The doctor had his TV on in his office when the news of the military base shootings came on. The husband of one of his employees was stationed there.

He called her into his office and as he told her what had happened, she got a text message from her husband saying, "I am okay." Her cell phone rang right after she read the message. It was an ER nurse,” I’m the one who just sent you a text, not your husband. I thought it would be comforting but I was mistaken in doing so. I am sorry to tell you this, but your husband has been shot 4 times and he is in surgery."

The soldier's wife left Southern Clinic in Dothan and drove all night to Ft. Hood. When she arrived, she found out her husband was out of surgery and would be OK. She rushed to his room and found that he already had visitors there to comfort him. He was just waking up and found his wife and the visitors by his side. The nurse took this picture.

What? No news crews and cameras? This is how people with class respond and pay respect to those in uniform.

I sent my cousin in Fayetteville, N.C. (Retired from Special Forces) that picture of Geo W. visiting the wounded at Ft. Hood. I got this reply:

What is even better is the fact George W. Bush heard about Fort Hood, got in his car without any escort, apparently they did not have time to react, and drove to Fort Hood. He was stopped at the gate and the guard could not believe who he had just stopped. Bush only asks for directions to the hospital then drove on. The gate guard called that "The president is on Fort Hood and driving to the hospital." The base went bananas looking for Obama. When they found it was Bush they immediately offered escort and Bush simply told them to shut up and let him visit the wounded and the dependents of the dead. He stayed at Fort Hood for over six hours and was finally asked to leave by a message from the White House. Obama flew in days later and held a "photo" session in a gym and did not even go to the hospital. All this I picked up from two soldiers here who happened to be at Fort Hood when it happened.

This Busy/Obama/Ft. Hood story is something that should be sent to every voter in the US.

'Miss Me Yet?' Billboard With Photo Of Bush Is Real; Not An Internet Trick

'Miss Me Yet?' Billboard With Photo of George Bush is Real by burghnews

Who paid for it? We have a partial answer. (By Bob Collins/Minnesota Public Radio)

By Mark Memmott

Internet chatter had led to speculation that it might be an urban myth -- nothing more than clever digital trickery spreading via the Web.

But our friend Bob Collins at Minnesota Public Radio assures us he's seen it with his own eyes:

There is a billboard along I-35 near Wyoming, Minn., with a huge photo of former president George W. Bush and this question: "Miss Me Yet?"

Now, the push is on to find out who paid to have it put up.

Bob says there's no readily apparent claim of ownership on the billboard, so he's heading back to the scene to see if he can find out who's behind the message. He's also got some local politicos looking into it. He'll keep us posted.

At first glance, it would seem to be from some person or group who isn't thrilled by President Barack Obama's performance so far -- unless it's a more ironic message from those who didn't think too much of Bush and want to remind voters about him.

Anyone out there know anything about where it came from? Tell us and we'll pass the word to Bob. As he says, we could do a little crowd-sourcing.

There are a lot of things about Bush that the American people didn’t like, especially toward the end. But after a year of Obama, his sure looking a lot better to a lot of people!!

Secret Service Secrets: Obama Threats Up 400 Percent

A new book by Newsmax Chief Washington Correspondent Ronald Kessler features startling revelations about current and former U.S. presidents, including Barack Obama.

"In the President's Secret Service: Behind the Scenes With Agents in the Line of Fire and the Presidents They Protect," released Tuesday, discloses that threats against the president have increased dramatically — by a staggering 400 percent since Obama entered the White House.

Kessler is the first journalist to penetrate the wall of secrecy that surrounds the U.S. Secret Service, and his book is based on interviews with more than 100 current and former agents.

See Video: Ron Kessler Details Obama, Bush Secrets, More - Click Here Now

The book not only offers intriguing stories about presidents from JFK to George W. Bush but also provides an inside look at the current White House resident, including the fact that, despite his iffy denials, Obama is still smoking cigarettes.

Kessler also reveals that Obama and his wife, Michelle, are well-liked by the Secret Service agents who protect them. Kessler's book reveals that on April 4, 2008, just before Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, spoke at the National Press Club, Obama secretly met with Wright at the pastor's home. So that they would not be noticed, agents made a point of driving Obama in a minivan instead of the usual Suburban. They parked their other vehicles a block away. Obama spent an hour with Wright and then left.

During Wright's Press Club speech, he confirmed that he thought America created the AIDS virus to kill off blacks. After that, Obama claimed to have severed ties with him.

Once Obama entered the White House, the Secret Service experienced a 400 percent increase in the number of threats against the president, in comparison with his predecessor George Bush. While most of the threats were not credible, each had to be checked out and adjudicated.

"Because the Secret Service thinks calling attention to threats gives people ideas and generates more threats, the agency never publicly characterized their frequency," Kessler observes.

Agents told Kessler that both Barack Obama — code-named Renegade — and wife Michelle — code-named Renaissance — treat them with respect, as does Vice President Joe Biden. Still, agents were shocked when Biden revealed the location of the “undisclosed location” — or safe house for the vice president and president. If they had done the same, they would have been fired.

Obama invited agents to dinner twice, including a party for relatives at his home, and the Bidens buy agents food.

Contrary to Obama's repeated claims that he is quitting smoking, he has continued to smoke regularly, agents say. A week after being sworn in as president, Obama told CNN's Anderson Cooper that he hadn't had a cigarette on the White House grounds. That left open the possibility that he smokes on the Truman Balcony and in the White House residence and West Wing.

Agents say he smokes outside the White House as well.

Among the many other disclosures in Kessler's book In the President's Secret Service:

George W. Bush's daughters Barbara and Jenna gave their Secret Service details a hard time and would try to lose the agents assigned to them.

To this day, agents, including Chuck Taylor, who was on the Kennedy detail the day JFK was assassinated, believe they could have saved the president's life if they had been stationed on the back running boards of his car. But Kennedy told agents he didn't want them to ride on the rear running boards.

Lyndon Johnson would walk around naked in the presence of his daughters; his wife, Lady Bird; and female secretaries. He was quite well endowed in the testicles, so everyone started calling him bull nuts. He found out about that and was very disturbed.

Johnson was angry when a guest was served rare roast beef on Air Force One, and threatened to send the two stewards to Vietnam if they ever served "raw" meat again.

Agents say Richard Nixon was the strangest president they ever protected. He had no relationship with his wife and did not sleep with her. He also would walk on the beach wearing a blue suit and dress shoes. Even in the summer he would insist on having a fire burning in the fireplace.

Gerald Ford's code name was Passkey. He was considered very cheap. Caddies at a golf club in California usually receive $25 tips, but Ford gave a dollar, if anything at all.

Ford was, indeed, a klutz. The day after he left office, he was driving an electric golf cart in Palm Springs, Calif., when he accidentally crashed into an electric panel hanging on the wall of a shack for golf carts.

Agents considered Jimmy Carter sanctimonious and a phony. The former peanut farmer pretended to be one of the people but actually had little regard for the “little people,” agents say.

Ronald Reagan was folksy, and agents loved him. But they feared Nancy Reagan, and many saw her as cold and calculating.

The White House "is a character crucible," Bertram S. Brown, M.D., a psychiatrist who formerly headed the National Institute of Mental Health and was an aide to President Kennedy, told Kessler.

"It either creates or distorts character. Few decent people want to subject themselves to the kind of grueling abuse candidates take when they run in the first place."

Brown, who has seen many top Washington politicians and White House aides in his practice, added: "Many of those who run crave superficial celebrity. They are hollow people who have no principles and simply want to be elected.

"Even if an individual is balanced, once someone becomes president, how does one solve the conundrum of staying real and somewhat humble when one is surrounded by the most powerful office in the land, and from becoming overwhelmed by an at times pathological environment that treats you every day as an emperor?

"Here is where the true strength of the character of the person, not his past accomplishments, will determine whether his presidency ends in accomplishment or failure."

By: Jim Meyers - Monday, August 3, 2009 7:23 PM

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

Related Resources:

• U.S. Presidential Libraries
• Jeffrey Bell: Kemp Brought America Back from 1970s
• Ronald Reagan - The Evil Empire Speech

On Torture and War Criminals

Jon Stewart says Truman was a ‘War Criminal’ because he ordered the use of the atomic bomb against Japan.  Forget that it saved hundreds of thousands of American soldiers who didn’t have to die during a land invasion of Japan.  America killed it’s enemies, and now that’s wrong.  Apparently...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Cliff May Unedited Interview Pt. 2
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis First 100 Days

As Allah notes, “Behold the face of mindless anti-torture absolutism." Like what you see?

For the record, during the debates, both Obama and Hillary listed Truman as among their most admired Presidents.  Who knew that Obama condoned war crimes?

But now that Obama and the liberal Democratic Congress have opened the door to the notion that like a Banana Republic the United States should retroactively judge and prosecute former leaders and administrations instead of being the shining example that we have always been of  the smooth and perfect transfer of power after a civilized election… people like Jon Stewart think it is acceptable to judge and disparage a former wartime president that has always been praised by his peers and for generations since, for his courage and decisiveness at a time when we needed it:

Cliff May was a guest on the Daily Show and posed a series of interesting questions to host Jon Stewart regarding interrogation, war and war crimes.  It comes at about the 5:50 mark. Cliff May asks Stewart whether Truman's use of the atomic bomb was a war crime, Stewart ruminates and then responds with an unequivocal "yes." He's certainly not the only American who would take that view, but it's a useful reminder that the most vocal and popular criticism of the Bush administration's war on terror policies comes from people who, if they were being as honest as Stewart, would also judge Lincoln (suspension of habeas), FDR (internment), and Truman (use of nuclear weapons) as war criminals or tyrants or worse.

Stewart repeats the charge again later in the interview, but you have to wonder whether this was one of the rare times that he just got outmaneuvered on his own show. Serious people have debated Truman's decision for 60 years, but even those who disagree with that decision rarely describe it as "criminal." And if it was criminal, whatever crimes the left alleges of President Bush seem pretty trivial in comparison.

See Video:  Cliff May Unedited Interview Pt. 2

“Hundreds of thousands of lives were saved by averting a U.S. invasion of the Japanese home islands, and all ‘this tool’ can do is point a finger and mumble ‘yes’ in response to whether Truman’s a war criminal or not.”

As always, it is hard to tell whether Stewart's clown nose is off or on, but it appeared to be off at that moment -- that is, he was giving a serious answer, not one intended to get laughs.

The rapid end to the War in the Pacific was a blessing to many Americans.

I don't believe that President Truman was a "war criminal" and the rapid end to the War in the Pacific was a blessing to many Americans.  You can bet that neither Jon Stewart’s mindless comment nor the clip will make it to the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri.

Torture? No. Except...

WASHINGTON -- Torture is an impermissible evil. Except under two circumstances. The first is the ticking time bomb. An innocent's life is at stake. The bad guy you have captured possesses information that could save this life. He refuses to divulge. In such a case, the choice is easy. Even John McCain, the most admirable and estimable torture opponent, says openly that in such circumstances, "You do what you have to do." And then take the responsibility.

Some people, however, believe you never torture. Ever. They are akin to conscientious objectors who will never fight in any war under any circumstances, and for whom we correctly show respect by exempting from war duty. But we would never make one of them Centcom commander. Private principles are fine, but you don't entrust such a person with the military decisions upon which hinges the safety of the nation. It is similarly imprudent to have a person who would abjure torture in all circumstances making national security decisions upon which depends the protection of 300 million countrymen.

The second exception to the no-torture rule is the extraction of information from a high-value enemy in possession of high-value information likely to save lives. This case lacks the black-and-white clarity of the ticking time bomb scenario. We know less about the length of the fuse or the nature of the next attack. But we do know the danger is great. We know we must act but have no idea where or how -- and we can't know that until we have information. Catch-22.

Under those circumstances, you do what you have to do. And that includes waterboarding.

Did it work? The current evidence is fairly compelling. George Tenet said that the "enhanced interrogation" program alone yielded more information than everything gotten from "the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together."

Michael Hayden, CIA director after waterboarding had been discontinued, writes (with former Attorney General Michael Mukasey) that "as late as 2006 ... fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of al-Qaeda came from those interrogations." Even Dennis Blair, Obama's director of national intelligence, concurs that these interrogations yielded "high value information." So much for the lazy, mindless assertion that torture never works.

Asserts Blair's predecessor, Mike McConnell, "We have people walking around in this country that are alive today because this process happened." Of course, the morality of torture hinges on whether at the time the information was important enough, the danger great enough and our blindness about the enemy's plans severe enough to justify an exception to the moral injunction against torture.

Judging by Nancy Pelosi and other members of Congress who were informed at the time, the answer seems to be yes. In December 2007, after a Washington Post report that she had knowledge of these procedures and did not object, she admitted that she'd been "briefed on interrogation techniques the administration was considering using in the future."

Today Pelosi protests "we were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any other of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used." She imagines that this distinction between past and present, Clintonian in its parsing, is exonerating.

On the contrary. It is self-indicting. If you are told about torture that has already occurred, you might justify silence on the grounds that what's done is done and you are simply being used in a post-facto exercise to cover the CIA's rear end. The time to protest torture, if you really are as outraged as you now pretend to be, is when the CIA tells you what it is planning to do "in the future."

But Pelosi did nothing. No protest. No move to cut off funding. No letter to the president or the CIA chief or anyone else saying "Don't do it."

On the contrary, notes Porter Goss, then chairman of the House Intelligence Committee: The members briefed on these techniques did not just refrain from objecting, "on a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda."

More support, mind you. Which makes the current spectacle of self-righteous condemnation not just cowardly but hollow. It is one thing to have disagreed at the time and said so. It is utterly contemptible, however, to have been silent then and to rise now "on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009" (the words are Blair's) to excoriate those who kept us safe these harrowing last eight years.

By: Charles Krauthammer - a 1987 Pulitzer Prize winner, 1984 National Magazine Award winner, and a columnist for The Washington Post since 1985.

Related Articles:

• Muslims: 'We Do That On First Dates'
  
• The West Coast Plot: An "Inconvenient Truth"
  
• Hoekstra: Congress Knew About Memos
  
• U.S. Presidential Libraries

U.S. Presidential Libraries

     There are 13 Presidential Libraries and one Museum in the U.S. Presidential Library System, administered by the Office of Presidential Libraries, representing the 13 most recent presidents in U.S. history: Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, William J. Clinton and George W. Bush. Gerald Ford’s Library and Museum are in two separate cities in Michigan, Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids. They are all operated and overseen by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The George W. Bush Presidential Library, which is temporarily located in Lewisville, Texas, is number 13. The permanent Presidential Center, still under construction, will be located on the campus of Southern Methodist University (SMU) in Dallas, Texas, the alma mater of First Lady Laura Bush. Both the Kennedy and the Carter libraries are slated for upgrades and facelifts.

     And although not officially sanctioned and maintained by NARA, libraries have been organized for several Presidents who preceded the official start of the Presidential Library Office. They are operated by private foundations, historical societies, or state governments, including the William McKinley, Rutherford Hayes, Calvin Coolidge, Abraham Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson libraries. For example, the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum is owned and operated by the State of Illinois. The homes of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams have been preserved as museums or historical sites as well. Thomas Jefferson’s home Monticello, which Jefferson designed, along with nearby University of Virginia was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1987, as well as being a U.S. National Historical Landmark. The Adams National Historical Park in Quincy, Massachusetts, preserves the home of Presidents of the United States John Adams and John Quincy Adams, of U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain Charles Francis Adams, Sr., and of the writers and historians Henry Adams and Brooks Adams.

The national historical park's eleven historic structures tell the story of five generations of the Adams family (from 1720 to 1927) including Presidents, First Ladies, U.S. Ministers, historians, writers, and family members who supported and contributed to their success. In addition to "Peacefield," home to four generations of the Adams family and also called the “Old House”, the park's main historic features include: John Adams birthplace (October 30, 1735), the nearby John Quincy Adams birthplace (July 11, 1767); the Stone Library (built in 1870 to house the books of John Quincy Adams and believed to be the first presidential library) containing more than 14,000 historic volumes. United First Parish Church, where both Presidents and the First Ladies are entombed in the Adams Crypt are not now nor have they ever been administered by the National Park service. The Church is owned by the active congregation of Unitarian Universalists. The congregation has used its own resources including its endowments to preserve the building. In the past 10 years the congregation has invested almost $2 million to preserve the building for the next several generations of citizens and members of the congregation.

     The Richard Nixon Library and Birthplace was not originally part of the presidential library system. The Nixon Presidential Materials Staff, which administers the Nixon presidential materials under the terms of the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act, was part of NARA; the Richard Nixon Library & Birthplace was run by a private foundation. In January 2004, Congress passed legislation that provided for the establishment of a federally operated Richard Nixon Presidential Library in Yorba Linda, CA. In March 2005, the Archivist of the United States and John Taylor, the director of the Richard Nixon Library & Birthplace Foundation, exchanged letters on the requirements to allow the Nixon Library to become the twelfth federally funded Presidential library to be operated by the NARA, by 2007.

On October 16, 2006, Dr. Timothy Naftali began his tenure as the first federal director of the Richard Nixon Library and Birthplace, and in the winter of 2006 NARA began transferring the 30,000 presidential gifts from the Nixon Presidential Materials Staff in College Park, Maryland to Yorba Linda, California. On July 11, 2007, the Nixon Foundation deeded the Library and Birthplace to the government of the United States. On the same day, the newly-renamed federal Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum officially opened.

     Presidential Libraries can be found across the country. Visiting one gives you, your family or your students the opportunity to explore the rich history of our nation and the leaders who helped shape our society. At Presidential Libraries you will find an array of things including museums with interactive exhibits, information on a large variety public programs, important educational and historical events and vast archives and artifacts of our country’s history. The Museum at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library and the LBJ Presidential Library and Museum, in partnership with NASA's Johnson Space Center and Space Center Houston, tell the story of America's exploration into space, the final frontier. The Reagan Library exhibits his retired Air Force One and movie memorabilia from Ronald Reagan and first lady Nancy Davis Reagan’s Hollywood years as well as artifacts and archives from Reagan’s years as Governor of California and President of the United States. The John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library contains historical information highlighting the careers of Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, Senator Edward M. Kennedy and U.S. Ambassador to England Joseph P. Kennedy as well as the lives of President Kennedy and First Lady Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy.

     If you live close to a presidential library or museum it is worth a yearly trip or visits for special events. If you don’t live close to one it is a worthwhile vacation destination or should at least be a major stop on your vacation trip. Local schools would all benefit from a visit to any of the libraries or museums while studying U.S. History and especially the president whose library they are near. Online visits are also helpful to students.

     With the exception of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Jimmy Carter, every American president since Hoover is or has chosen to be buried at their presidential library. Kennedy is buried at Arlington National Cemetery; Johnson is buried at his ranch in the hill country of Texas, west of Austin; Carter plans to be buried near his home in Plains, Georgia.

     Having had the privilege to visit several of these wonderful libraries and sites it would be my hope that every American visits at least one. It would also be my hope that national government would sponsor a general all encompassing Presidential Library highlighting those presidents who do not have individual libraries.

The greatest teacher and guarantee against repeated failure is a good understanding of the past!

By Marion Algier/Ask Marion

Ezine Author

Source:  Daily Thought Pad