US not to use Nuclear Weapons

The Obama Administration has decided it is best to let the world know that we will not use a Nuclear Weapon in response to an attack from a country that does not use them themselves. In other words, if any rogue country (besides N. Korea and Iran) attacked us with a Biological or Chemical weapon, we have promised NOT to use a Nuclear weapon in return. So what are we going to use? This seems to box the United States in. To say that the world "appreciates" this gesture is not a valid reason in announcing this action. And there were obvious signs that the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, had deep reservations about this policy Obama is taking on. But as any liberal President would say-- As long as it makes the New York Times happy....... Ugh!

Looking at history- What if we told the world that we wouldn't use a Nuclear weapon before WWII? Our response to Pearl Harbor would not have done the everlasting damage it against our enemy. Also, before the Gulf War in 1991, Defense Secretary George Shultz told a high ranking Iraqi official that if they used Biological or Chemical weapons on the US, we would hold the Nuclear option on the table. Many experts believe this help deterred Iraq from using these weapons against us. There's nothing like the threat of something that holds our enemy back. Apparently, Obama doesn't believe this. I'd imagine the majority of the country would disagree with him.

Media Bias

To basically all accounts, the media has a strong bias to the left. In the 08 Presidential election, it was notated that over 85% of the media supported Obama's candidacy. Because we are all human beings, our biases can't help but seep into the news articles or TV news. That's just a matter of fact. In a one month segment during the 08 campaign, positive TV coverage on Obama was around 80%, while McCain's positive press was around 35%. Do people really just think McCain was a bad guy, or didn't offer any great solutions? Or was Obama was great, he didn't deserve any media scrutiny? With the bombastic stories during the campaign of Jeremiah Wright, the association with terrorist Bill Ayers and felon Tony Rezko, along with his comments about distributing the wealth, his stand on allowing extreme uses of abortion-- it would seem like more scrutiny would head Obama's way.

One of the reasons so many on the political left throw bombs at Fox News is because they are the one source that doesn't tilt left. Do they tilt right? I would say yes. Nonetheless, when you compare Fox News against CBS News (Couric), NBC News (Williams), ABC News (Gibson), the three network news channels are extremely liberal, and have an obvious bias. In addition, if conservatives want to go to Fox News to get their "bias" news, liberals can go to MSNBC to get their liberal "bias". And when you compare Fox and MSNBC, MSNBC is far more tilted to the left, than Fox is to the right. Sure, each side has bias opinion journalists. But when a network (MSNBC) uses their opinion guys as the ones who head the news coverage, that spells trouble. In the 08 election, committed lefties Olbermann and Matthews were giving the "news" during the party conventions. And Fox News had straight down the center on his reporting Brit Hume, along with Chris Wallace. Pretty big distinction there. Beyond the TV media, the print media tilts pretty strongly to the left. You can name the largest 30 newspapers in the country, and I bet I can name on one hand the ones that have editorials that slant to the right-- Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, Las Vegas Sun Review. This, while about every other paper tilts strongly to the left.

A few more media biases to consider. Although the majority of the country believe strongly in the right to bear arms, most papers and TV stations rail on the 2nd Amendment in every related court case. Just like the 2nd Amendment, the country is now more pro-life than pro-choice. Even so, the media will roast anyone who believes in the sanctity of life. They get portrayed as illiterate, not knowing the scientific issues, etc. Same goes for the Tea Party. Even though in a recent poll, 40% were either Independent or Democrat, these journalists act as if they are all red-neck conservatives who have never seen a big city. If you don't believe this analysis, just read the New York Times over the past 2 weeks. The fact is, the majority of the Tea Party movement make over 55K a year. Hardly the caricature the mainstream media is portraying them to be.

With all of this, a Rasmussen Poll just released stated that 55% believe the media bias is of more concern than the just finished Supreme Court Case revolved around campaign givings by corporations. Pretty startling numbers.

This weeks politics

As the media and the country continue to debate the new Health Care Reform signed into law by Obama, this only hurts the Democrats and boosts Republicans. Take the following set of polls as proof:

• Republicans lead Democrats in all Congressional generic polls. Average around 3-4 points.
  
• Enthusiasm for 2010 elections is 50% very excited for Republicans; 35% very excited for Democrats. Intensity is the name of the game in midterm elections.
• 50-40 average. People against Obamacare. This is an average of all polls.
• 44-34 percent believe this bill will harm our economy, according to Gallup.
• 55-29 believe quality of care will go down, according to Gallup.
• 61-23 believe the US debt will go up from Obamacare.

The Obama Administration continues to annoy our most loyal ally in the Middle East (Israel), while walking on egg shells with rogue country's, such as Iran.

Obama agreed to open up portions of the Atlantic for oil drilling. This pissed the Mother Jones wing of his party off. However, he refused to allow opening of drilling on the Pacific, as well as Alaska (ANWR) where the oil is abundant. This pisses the conservatives off. He's really digging himself a hole. A hole that if it gets too deep, will start making him look like a Jimmy Carter, one term President... and a bad one at that.