Hillary Fights Hard to Keep Taxpayers Funding Foreign Abortion, Pakistan, and Cuba

Ben Johnson, The White House Watch

In these times of crushing debt loads, families are cutting back and prioritizing every dollar they spend. Yet the Obama administration is lashing out in a public way against efforts by House Republicans to rein in spending on overseas abortions and foreign aid to corrupt anti-American regimes.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is aggressively lobbying Congress to drop several amendments to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which she claims would be “debilitating” to her foreign policy. Madam Secretary vowed to “recommend personally” that Obama veto the bill in a letter to Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-FL.

At the top of Hillary’s list is the bill’s provision to ban U.S. taxpayers from funding foreign organizations that perform or promote abortion overseas. Otherwise known as the Mexico City Policy, which Ronald Reagan instituted in 1984, public financing of foreign abortions has been a political football for decades: Reagan instituted the policy, which remained in effect through the George H.W. Bush administration. Bill Clinton revoked it during his first week in office. George W. Bush reinstated the policy as one of his first actions, and in his first week in office, Barack Obama again rescinded it — by executive order, naturally.

In April, John Boehner passed a budget amendment reducing the amount of taxpayer dollars sent to the United Nations Family Planning Agency (UNFPA) by $15 million (to $40 million). It spent $575 million on international “family planning” and population control, less than the $648 million Congress authorized in 2010. This caused Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards to squeal that the Republicans had opened a war against “human rights.”

The Obama administration is fighting similar attempts to defund Planned Parenthood in the United States.

Of course during a time of unbearable public indebtedness and when the nation teeters on the precipice of default, the question is why is Congress spending a dime on abortion, let alone abortions around the world?

The answer is political cronyism and out of control feminism. Obama wants to keep the taxpayer-funding spigot flowing to his political supporters and Democratic Party contributors. And Hillary has spent a lifetime opposing the most fundamental right any woman should enjoy: the right to be born.

It is not the abortion funding ban alone that irks the former first lady. The bill slashes funding for the Global Climate Change Initiative — another boondoggle for the international Green Left.

She seems eerily fixated on the possibility the bill would deny funding to corrupt or violent foreign regimes. Hillary howls that….

Read more.

As China Sells Weapons to Iran and Pakistan, Obama Bows to Beijing

Jim Emerson, FloydReports.com

New documents added to WikiLeaks leaked United States embassy cables revealed that China has been selling missiles and parts to Iran, Syria, and Pakistan in violation of its agreement with the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).

MTCR was formed in 1987 as an informal, voluntary partnership of 34 countries to prevent the export of long-range weapons of mass destruction to hostile nations. China is not a member but has assured the members it will support the group’s policy of missile non-proliferation. China has not been allowed to join the MTCR because of its non-existent export controls. China has not signed nor agreed to the UN’s “Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation.” China always says the right things but has a difficult time honoring its own words.

A September 2009 State Department cable entitled “China’s Ballistic Missile-Related Export Control Record” outlines Chinese missile export transfers to Syria and Iran. As excerpted from the cable….

Read more.

Obama: Executing Mexican Murderer/Rapist Would Do “Irreparable Harm” to U.S.

Chris McGreal, The Guardian

President Barack Obama is attempting to block the execution in Texas on Thursday of a Mexican man because it would breach an international convention and do “irreparable harm” to US interests.

The White House has asked the US supreme court to put the execution of Humberto Leal Garcia on hold while Congress passes a law that would prevent the convicted rapist and murderer from being put to death along with dozens of other foreign nationals who were denied proper access to diplomatic representation before trials for capital crimes.

The administration moved after the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, brushed aside appeals from diplomats, top judges, senior military officers, the United Nations and former president George W Bush to stay Leal’s execution because it could jeopardise American citizens arrested abroad as well as US diplomatic interests.

Leal, 38, was convicted in 1994 of the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl in San Antonio. Few question that he was responsible for the killing but the Texas authorities failed to tell Leal, who was born in Mexico and has lived in the US since the age of two, that under the Vienna convention he was entitled to contact the Mexican consulate when he was arrested.

Leal’s lawyers argue that the lack of consular access played a role in the death penalty being applied because the Mexican national incriminated himself in statements made during “non-custodial interviews” with the police on the day of the murder. Had Leal had access to the Mexican consulate it would have been likely to have arranged a lawyer who would have advised the accused man to limit his statements to the police. As it was, the Mexican authorities were never informed of his arrest.

In a 30-page brief to the supreme court, the administration said that the carrying out of the execution “would place the United States in irreparable breach of its international law obligation” under the convention.

The White House said it was in the US’s interests to meet its treaty obligations.

Read more.

Video: Obama’s Amnesty Already Putting Illegals Back on the Streets

Obama’s amnesty-by-fiat is marching forward. We have reported how Obama is exploring various ways to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. Since the American people are not going along with his plan, he is implementing it by top-down executive powers. John Morton, the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), recently released new prosecutorial discretion guidelines encouraging agents to release most illegals. In the video below, we see just one case, in which one of the people who gets a pass was recently released from prison for committing manslaughter. When amnesty passes, the Democrat-Progressive-SEIU axis will enjoy an enormous influx of new voters, roughly the size of the state of Illinois, and that covers a multitude of sins.

Obama’s apologists will whine that all administrations have to use priorities in choosing which people to prosecute. We simply don’t have the money and resources, they claim, to prosecute every illegal alien arrested. Yet the administration has plenty of money to sue the state of Arizona over its immigration law, the state of Indiana to pay back its allies in the abortion industry, and Boeing for having the audacity to give non-unionized laborers a job. And, of course, there is plenty of money to bail out the Big Labor-Big Business alliance, bomb Libya, and fund the United Nations.

Watch the video below to see how Obama’s plans are giving up on deportation and bringing dangerous illegal aliens to a neighborhood near you.

Obama: The Lester Maddox of Gay Marriage

Ben Johnson, The White House Watch

Although he has grown Washington more than any president in a generation, Barack Obama is talking like a Jeffersonian states rights champion — in the one night, in the one state, on the one issue that would promote his top-down rejection of traditional morality. As Barack Obama prepares to attend a sold out, $1,250-per-plate campaign fundraiser before a large homosexual group in New York (the “Gala with the Gay Community”), the state legislature in Albany seems poised to pass a bill approving same-sex marriage. Some speculate this evening Obama will endorse marriage destruction. But Obama’s handlers are rolling out a new and, for him, novel tactic: wrap himself in states rights. An unnamed White House official told The Huffington Post, “Although the president believes that this is an issue best addressed by the states, he also firmly believes that committed gay and lesbian couples should receive equal protection under the law.” (Emphasis added.)

(Update: Here’s video of the speech. Obama has done precisely as I reported. Story continues following the video.)

At last, Barack Obama has discovered states rights, which constitutes a significant act of rhetorical hypocrisy even by his standards. Obama’s left-wing allies have equated a belief in the Founders’ view of government with “racism” and derided those who believe in states’ rights as “Tenthers.”

The Obama administration is suing Indiana on behalf of Planned Parenthood, since that state prohibited tax dollars from funding abortion providers. The showdown could cost the state $4.3 billion. Obama not only sued but hauled the state of Arizona before the UN Human Rights Council over its immigration law. He sent 400 federal agents to harass poll watchers enforcing state election laws during the 2010 midterms. (It didn’t help, much.) His National Labor Relations Board is suing (see a trend?) Boeing, because it planned to build one plant in South Carolina, a state that has chosen to adopt “Right to Work” laws. ObamaCare marks his largest legislative trampling of states rights. Now that Republicans control the House, Obama is increasingly ruling by executive fiat.

But allow a blue state to consider redefining the fundamental building block of society, and suddenly Barack Obama is the Lester Maddox of gay marriage. (Both constituencies have significant experience bicycling backwards.)

The move is a down payment on the debt Obama owes this voting bloc. The LGBT lobby has been a pillar of his re-election fundraising. As 2012 draws closer, Obama has hinted his views on same-sex marriage will “evolve.” White House spokesman Jay Carney followed this line when pressed for clarification on Monday. Obama “was very clear in the campaign,” when he claimed to oppose it, Carney said. “He’s very clear about the fact that his position is evolving.”

For those who are confused, Obama’s position on same-sex marriage is simple….

Read more.