Ukraine"s turmoil brings tough challenge to Putin

MOSCOW (AP) — A successful Olympics behind him, President Vladimir Putin is facing what may become the most dramatic challenge of his rule: how to respond to the turmoil in Ukraine, a country he has declared vital for Russia’s interests, which is home to millions of Russian-speakers and hosts a major Russian navy base.

Some in Ukraine’s Russian-speaking east and south already have begged the Kremlin to help protect them against what they fear could be violence by the victorious protesters who toppled Ukraine’s Moscow-backed leader. Putin has refrained from taking a public stance on Ukraine amid the Sochi Games, but the mounting tensions could quickly leave him with a stark choice: Stick to diplomacy and risk losing face at home, or open a Pandora’s box by entering the fray.

If Moscow openly backs separatist-minded groups in Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula that serves as the base for Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, it could unleash devastating hostilities that Europe hasn’t seen since the Balkan wars. And ignoring pleas for help from pro-Russian groups in Ukraine could shatter Putin’s carefully manicured image of the tough ruler eager to stand up to the West, eroding his conservative support base at home, where his foes could be encouraged by the Ukrainian example.

Facing such high risks, Putin has remained silent, weighing his options. His premier, Dmitry Medvedev, on Monday poured scorn on the new Ukrainian authorities who replaced President Viktor Yanukovych, and questioned their legitimacy. But he wouldn’t say what action Russia might take to protect its interests.

“If you consider Kalashnikov-toting people in black masks who are roaming Kiev to be the government, then it will be hard for us to work with that government,” Medvedev said.

The Russian Foreign Ministry criticized the West for turning a blind eye to what Moscow described as the opposition reneging on its agreement signed Friday to form a unity government and aiming to “suppress dissent in various regions of Ukraine with dictatorial and, sometimes, even terrorist methods.”

At the same time, NATO’s supreme allied commander in Europe, Gen. Philip Breedlove, discussed events in Ukraine with Gen. Valery Gerasimov, chief of the general staff of Russia’s armed forces, and they agreed to keep each other informed about developments in the country.

Amid spiraling tensions and increasingly tough rhetoric, Putin’s best hope for striking a peaceful compromise on Russian interests in Ukraine could paradoxically be former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, who was freed Saturday after more than 2½ years behind bars.

Tymoshenko, who narrowly lost the 2010 presidential vote to Yanukovych and landed in prison on abuse of office charges that were denounced by the West, immediately jumped to the forefront of Ukraine’s political scene. She flew to the capital after her release to speak to tens of thousands of demonstrators on Kiev’s Independence Square, known as the Maidan.

Her charisma, ambitions and unparalleled political skills would make her all but certain to win the Ukrainian presidency in early elections set for May. Putin, who had good ties with Ukraine’s fiery ex-premier in the past, could hope for striking a deal with her that would safeguard Russian interests without the need to resort to force.

“If she consolidates power, Putin will be quite happy. They understand each other perfectly well,” said Stanislav Belkovsky, a political consultant who advised the Kremlin and worked in Ukraine. “He has good ties with Tymoshenko, and her triumph would suit him.”

Tymoshenko, who comes from eastern Ukraine, could be an ideal peacemaker, restoring an uneasy balance between Ukraine’s Russian-speaking east and south, and its western regions that abhor Russian influence.

She is burdened, however, by the legacy of insider deals and corruption allegations during her business and government careers, which may challenge her campaign. She also faces the tough task of winning the trust of some of the protesters, who are suspicious of old players and want fresh faces and strong action. And she will have to walk a fine line between publicly taking an anti-Kremlin posture to win votes in western regions and assuaging residents of the east that their interests will be protected.

For Putin, she could actually make a more convenient partner than the hesitant and indecisive Yanukovych, who had tried to maneuver between Russia and the West and provoked public anger by abruptly shelving a pact with the European Union in favor of a bailout from Moscow.

Russia’s state-controlled broadcasters heaped scorn on Yanukovych, casting him as a leader who was too weak to use force to establish order and betrayed police who had stood behind him. That’s a clear sign the Kremlin sees him as a discarded asset.

Reports about Yanukovych hiding in the Crimea, which hosts Russia’s naval base, could encourage some activists in Kiev and western Ukraine to pressure the government to apprehend him. They want to put him on trial for sanctioning the use of force against protesters that resulted in scores of deaths.

Such a move could set the stage for violence in the Crimea, where most of the population speaks Russian and abhors nationalist groups from western Ukraine.

Any such clashes would in turn put pressure on Putin to intervene, and he could come under the influence of more hawkish figures in his administration who have been advocating a tough line on Ukraine to expose alleged Western plots to pry the country from Russia’s sphere of influence.

The talk about reclaiming the Crimea long has been rife in Russia’s political circles. The region fell under Russia’s control in the 18th century under Catherine the Great and only became part of Ukraine in 1954, when then-Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred it from Russian to Ukrainian administrative control.

Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor of Russia in Global Affairs magazine and head of the Council for Foreign and Defense Policies, said that for the Kremlin the key indicators would be the action by the new government regarding the Black Sea Fleet’s presence in Ukraine and authorities’ pledges to stay away from military blocs.

He said that if Moscow sees Kiev reneging on these issues, it would set off alarms in the Kremlin as a possible signal of Ukraine joining NATO.

“Ukraine in NATO has been a red line,” Lukyanov said. “If that happens, various options will come under consideration, including appeal to certain parts of Ukraine, including the Crimea.”

He warned that a violent confrontation between pro-Moscow protesters and demonstrators supporting the new Ukrainian authorities could force Russia to act.

“If clashes occur in the Crimea, Russia will start by issuing harsh statements and put the Black Sea Fleet on high alert,” Lukyanov said. “Russia couldn’t ignore it. There are all kinds of risks.”

Associated Press

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | RFID | Amazon Affiliate
Top Headlines

Ukraine"s turmoil brings tough challenge to Putin

Ukraine"s turmoil brings tough challenge to Putin

Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, shakes hands with Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych at the Olympic reception hosted by the Russian President in Sochi, Russia, Friday, Feb. 7, 2014. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service)

Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, shakes hands with Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych at the Olympic reception hosted by the Russian President in Sochi, Russia, Friday, Feb. 7, 2014. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service)

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev speaks to press after a meeting with his Armenian counterpart Tigran Sargsyan in Sochi, Russia. The statement by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev was the strongest criticism yet from Russia, which had backed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who fled the capital of Kiev after striking a deal with the opposition. The Ukrainian parliament on Saturday quickly ousted him and set new elections for May, and its new speaker has been named Ukraine’s caretaker president. (AP Photo/RIA Novosti, Dmitry Astakhov, Government Press Service)

Buy AP Photo Reprints

MOSCOW (AP) — A successful Olympics behind him, President Vladimir Putin is facing what may become the most dramatic challenge of his rule: how to respond to the turmoil in Ukraine, a country he has declared vital for Russia’s interests, which is home to millions of Russian-speakers and hosts a major Russian navy base.

Some in Ukraine’s Russian-speaking east and south already have begged the Kremlin to help protect them against what they fear could be violence by the victorious protesters who toppled Ukraine’s Moscow-backed leader. Putin has refrained from taking a public stance on Ukraine amid the Sochi Games, but the mounting tensions could quickly leave him with a stark choice: Stick to diplomacy and risk losing face at home, or open a Pandora’s box by entering the fray.

If Moscow openly backs separatist-minded groups in Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula that serves as the base for Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, it could unleash devastating hostilities that Europe hasn’t seen since the Balkan wars. And ignoring pleas for help from pro-Russian groups in Ukraine could shatter Putin’s carefully manicured image of the tough ruler eager to stand up to the West, eroding his conservative support base at home, where his foes could be encouraged by the Ukrainian example.

Facing such high risks, Putin has remained silent, weighing his options. His premier, Dmitry Medvedev, on Monday poured scorn on the new Ukrainian authorities who replaced President Viktor Yanukovych, and questioned their legitimacy. But he wouldn’t say what action Russia might take to protect its interests.

“If you consider Kalashnikov-toting people in black masks who are roaming Kiev to be the government, then it will be hard for us to work with that government,” Medvedev said.

The Russian Foreign Ministry criticized the West for turning a blind eye to what Moscow described as the opposition reneging on its agreement signed Friday to form a unity government and aiming to “suppress dissent in various regions of Ukraine with dictatorial and, sometimes, even terrorist methods.”

Amid spiraling tensions and increasingly tough rhetoric, Putin’s best hope for striking a peaceful compromise on Russian interests in Ukraine could paradoxically be former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, who was freed Saturday after more than 2½ years behind bars.

Tymoshenko, who narrowly lost the 2010 presidential vote to Yanukovych and landed in prison on abuse of office charges that were denounced by the West, immediately jumped to the forefront of Ukraine’s political scene. She flew to the capital immediately after her release to speak to tens of thousands of demonstrators on Kiev’s Independence Square, known as the Maidan.

Her charisma, ambitions and unparalleled political skills would make her all but certain to win the Ukrainian presidency in early elections set for May. Putin, who had good ties with Ukraine’s fiery ex-premier in the past, could hope for striking a deal with her that would safeguard Russian interests without the need to resort to force.

“If she consolidates power, Putin will be quite happy. They understand each other perfectly well,” said Stanislav Belkovsky, a political consultant who advised the Kremlin and worked in Ukraine. “He has good ties with Tymoshenko, and her triumph would suit him.”

Tymoshenko, who comes from eastern Ukraine, could be an ideal peacemaker, restoring an uneasy balance between Ukraine’s Russian-speaking east and south, and its western regions that abhor Russian influence.

She is burdened, however, by the legacy of insider deals and corruption allegations during her business and government careers, which may challenge her campaign. She also faces the tough task of winning the trust of some of the protesters, who are suspicious of old players and want fresh faces and strong action. And she will have to walk a fine line between publicly taking an anti-Kremlin posture to win votes in western regions and assuaging residents of the east that their interests will be protected.

For Putin, she could actually make a more convenient partner than the hesitant and indecisive Yanukovych, who had tried to maneuver between Russia and the West and provoked public anger by abruptly shelving a pact with the European Union in favor of a bailout from Moscow.

Russia’s state-controlled broadcasters heaped scorn on Yanukovych, casting him as a leader who was too weak to use force to establish order and betrayed police who had stood behind him. That’s a clear sign the Kremlin sees him as a discarded asset.

Reports about Yanukovych hiding in the Crimea, which hosts Russia’s naval base, could encourage some activists in Kiev and western Ukraine to pressure the government to apprehend him. They want to put him on trial for sanctioning the use of force against protesters that resulted in scores of deaths.

Such a move could set the stage for violence in the Crimea, where most of the population speaks Russian and abhors nationalist groups from western Ukraine.

Any such clashes would in turn put pressure on Putin to intervene, and he could come under the influence of more hawkish figures in his administration who have been advocating a tough line on Ukraine to expose alleged Western plots to pry the country from Russia’s sphere of influence.

The talk about reclaiming the Crimea long has been rife in Russia’s political circles. The region fell under Russia’s control in the 18th century under Catherine the Great and only became part of Ukraine in 1954, when then-Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred it from Russian to Ukrainian administrative control.

Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor of Russia in Global Affairs magazine and head of the Council for Foreign and Defense Policies, said that for the Kremlin the key indicators would be the action by the new government regarding the Black Sea Fleet’s presence in Ukraine and authorities’ pledges to stay away from military blocs.

He said that if Moscow sees Kiev reneging on these issues, it would set off alarms in the Kremlin as a possible signal of Ukraine joining NATO.

“Ukraine in NATO has been a red line,” Lukyanov said. “If that happens, various options will come under consideration, including appeal to certain parts of Ukraine, including the Crimea.”

He warned that a violent confrontation between pro-Moscow protesters and demonstrators supporting the new Ukrainian authorities could force Russia to act.

“If clashes occur in the Crimea, Russia will start by issuing harsh statements and put the Black Sea Fleet on high alert,” Lukyanov said. “Russia couldn’t ignore it. There are all kinds of risks.”

Associated Press

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Headlines

Ukraine"s turmoil brings tough challenge to Putin

Arrey bhai, it"s tough to be an Indian Olympian

NEW DELHI, India — To outsiders, India’s approach to the Sochi 2014 games looks like an Olympian-scalekludge.

Just a week or so before departing, the Indian team didn’t know if it would have enough money to buy skis, or even flights to the Russian resort.

There has also been controversy over what flag they’d compete under. 

Since December 2012, their country has been banned from the games because the Indian Olympic Association had elected “tainted” officials. The association is holding fresh elections to be held on Feb. 9. So although they’ve had more than a year to address the ban, they chose to do so two days after the opening ceremonies.

Because of this, the nation’s three athletes — slalom skier Himanshu Thakur, cross country skier Nadeem Iqbal and veteran luger Shiva Keshavan — will compete under the Olympic flag rather than the Indian one.

Even the athletes’ visas were in jeopardy. Paperwork stuck in Moscow needed to be rushed via courier to Delhi only the day before they departed for Sochi.

Cause for panic?

Not at all.  

Everything came together at the last minute.

The Indian government stepped in with a modest grant of $ 16,700 to cover airfares and skis.

Online donations worth $ 6,000 have been pledged from the US via online currency Dogecoin, a “crypto-currency” similar to Bitcoin.

The Winter Games Federation of India has arranged for skis, boots, poles and suits to be shipped directlyto Sochi.

And the visas arrived in time.

After all the suspense, India’s embattled athletes won’t be fazed by Sochi’s “yellow face water” and controversial commodes.

In fact, just-in-time improvisation is integral to the Indian way of life. There’s even a word for it — jugaad.

India’s last minute push for Sochi is “very jugaad,” says Jaideep Prahbu, a professor of business and enterprise at Cambridge University. “They are responding to harsh circumstances by improvising a good-enough solution with limited resources. It’s a good enough solution, not the best solution.”

More from GlobalPost: 20 reasons living in Delhi is awesome

The likes of China, Great Britain and the US may invest millions of dollars in tightly-planned, decade-long programs that target Olympic medals.

India actually prefers jugaad.

There is more to jugaad than what foreigners might consider to be poor foresight.

You see, Indians hold considerable pride in the philosophy that every problem has a frugal, impromptu solution.

A well-known commercialized example is the MittiCool fridge, which needs no electricity. It is based on clay water pots, which are popular in Gujarat. The water evaporates through the clay pores, producing the cooling effect. The inventor, Manshuk Prajabati, built a pot with a compartment beneath the water which can keep vegetables fresh for up to five days.

Other examples include: heating a saucepan on a clothes iron; mixing drinks in a washing machine; cooling soft drinks in front of an air conditioner; and improvising a truck by cobbling together a pushcart and a water pump engine.

Professor Prabhu, the author of Jugaad Innovation, said “There is a sense in India that the whole system is so complex and unpredictable that there’s no point in planning ahead because things are out of control.”

Almost everything about winter sports in India depends on such shoe-string ingenuity, even though there’s plenty of world-class winter here. The Himalayan mountains at the country’s northern edge are home to hundreds of villages where children delight in the winter snow.

A $ 600 set of skis is beyond the means of most Indians. The country’s average salary in 2013 was 68,747 rupees or about $ 1,100 a year.

So homemade skis are the only option for mountain children. They tend to be made from carved wood, with hacksaw blades stuck on the sides to provide edges. Ski boots are galoshes tied to the ski with twine.

“They have to walk up the mountain so it means they lose a lot of energy up the hill,” said Roshan Lal Thakur, the secretary of the Winter Games Federation of India. “We walk for two hours for 10 minutes of sliding down. But if you see all the talents that are in the mountains, all the kids who have started skiing very young, then you know that much more is possible if we had the facilities.”

India has about 700 competitive skiers, Thakur said, out of up to 50,000 who have learned the basic techniques. That’s not many considering the population of 1.2 billion.

There are three resorts in north India, which lack basic equipment such as machines to groom the slopes.

And if facilities are scarce for skiers, they are non-existent for luger Shiva Keshavan.

He learned to luge at a camp near his school in Manali, Himachal Pradesh. The sport usually requires an ice track, but his first taste of the sport was on a street luge: a sled with wheels.

The 32-year-old is India’s best known winter athlete, having competed in four Olympics so far, and he has built up a network of sponsors that enables him to travel to qualification competitions.

But even he uses jugaad to compete with the Swiss, Italian, British and American lugers who are backed by Formula One racing teams like McLaren and Ferrari, and major corporations such as Dow Chemicals.

The top lugers spend time in a wind tunnel to check their body positions so they produce the least possible drag when sliding down the track at 90 mph.

“Shiva has had no such access to wind tunnel testing,” his wife and manager Namita told GlobalPost. “His equipment lacks mainly in technology which other teams have. It seems that India would have the technology needed, it is just about using it now.”

Keshavan’s approach has been to assemble a volunteer research team, headed by his brother-in-law Nalin Agarwal, to modify an off-the-shelf sled.

“Some of the things Shiva Keshawan has been doing seem to be jugaad,” Professor Prabhu said. “He doesn’t have access to the ideal solution. He doesn’t have McLaren to work with or Mercedes Benz. It’s good enough to get him to the Olympics, but it’s probably not going to break records.”

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/india/140205/indian-olympics-sochi-jugaad-chaos

GlobalPost – Home

Arrey bhai, it"s tough to be an Indian Olympian

Ukraine responds to mass protests by passing tough anti-protests laws

Ukraine’s pro-government lawmakers on Thursday pushed through parliament tough legislation in an apparent bid to suppress protests against President Viktor Yanukovych.

The opposition, which has been spearheading nearly two months of rallies against Yanukovych over his decision to ditch a key pact with the European Union, branded the vote “a power grab.”

According to the new legislation backed by 235 out of 450 lawmakers, a blockade of public buildings would be punishable by up to five years in prison.

The legislation also simplified a procedure to prosecute lawmakers.

According to the new law, protesters wearing masks or helmets will face a fine or an administrative arrest.

Dissemination of slander on the Internet was also banned and would be punishable by a fine or corrective labor of up to one year.

The sweeping legislation caused an outcry among opposition leaders who fear that the government would use the new legislation to prosecute them and break up the protest movement.

More from GlobalPost: Ukraine’s Greek Catholic Church stares down government, and wins

“The regime of Viktor Yanukovych and the Regions Party have completely destroyed state power in Ukraine,” said Arseniy Yatsenyuk, leader of Batkivshchyna (Fatherland) party.

“This is nothing else but an overthrow of the constitutional system and a power grab in Ukraine.”

Last month, hundreds of thousands took to the streets in the capital Kyiv and western Ukraine after Yanukovych decided to scrap key political and trade agreements with the EU.

The protests have since dwindled but the opposition maintains a protest camp on Kyiv’s central Independence Square known locally as the Maidan.

Opposition lawmakers sought to disrupt the vote but pro-Yanukovych parliament members voted by a show of hands, provoking concern from foreign officials.

“I am concerned about the way some laws were voted in parliament today. Norms should be adopted through proper procedures,” said the EU’s ambassador to Ukraine, Jan Tombinski.

“Otherwise the credibility of democratic institutions and of the legal system is at stake.”

“I am concerned about the way some laws were voted on in parliament today,” US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt added on Twitter.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/140116/ukraine-responds-mass-protests-passing-tough-anti-protests-laws

GlobalPost – Home

Ukraine responds to mass protests by passing tough anti-protests laws

Quant macro fund QFS shuts down, cites tough conditions

Quant macro fund QFS shuts down, cites tough conditions
http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-89EKCgBk8MZdE.gif

BOSTON Tue Jan 14, 2014 2:50pm EST

BOSTON Jan 14 (Reuters) – QFS Asset Management, which used a quantitative approach to global macro investing, said that it is shutting down after 26 years in the business, citing difficult market conditions.

The Greenwich, Connecticut-based firm, founded by economist Sandy Grossman, said in news release on Tuesday that it will return nearly $ 1 billion to clients by the end of the month.

“The current market environment does not offer adequate risk adjusted opportunities for fundamentally-driven quant macro strategies, and that is unlikely to change for the foreseeable future,” QFS Chief Executive Officer Karlheinz Muhr said in a statement. Muhr joined the firm as part of a merger in 2011.

QFS becomes one of the new year’s first hedge fund industry casualties after a difficult 2013 marked by generally lackluster returns. The Hedge Fund Research Inc’s Macro index dipped 0.3 percent last year, making for a third consecutive year of declines. Macro funds bet on interest rate movements, currencies, and broad economic trends.

At its heyday just before the financial crisis, QFS oversaw $ 3.6 billion in assets. Assets have shrunk despite some strong returns, people familiar with the fund said.

QFS isn’t alone in complaining about uncertain economic conditions and what managers perceive as a more difficult investing environment.

A number of large hedge funds, including Seth Klarman’s Baupost Group and Daniel Loeb’s Third Point, have given back some money to clients last year to guard against becoming too large and running out of investment ideas. (Reporting by Svea Herbst-Bayliss; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

• Link this


• Share this


• Digg this


• Email


• Print


• Reprints

Reuters: Financial Services and Real Estate

Read more about Quant macro fund QFS shuts down, cites tough conditions and other interesting subjects concerning Real Estate at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Sean Hannity, Brent Bozell Flunk Chris Matthews for Failing to Ask the President Tough Obamacare Questions

On Thursday night’s Media Mash on Fox News Channel, Sean Hannity and MRC president Brent Bozell were quick off the mark, denouncing Chris Matthews for failing to press Barack Obama about the broken promises and lies of Obamacare.

Both men lined up questions they would have asked. “Let’s say little old Sean Hannity gets to interview the president. What, at this moment, you have an audience of kids, what are the main questions that you think, that you would ask the president?” (Video, transcript below)

HANNITY:  I’ll give you my list off the top. What do you say to those people you promised if they liked their plan, they keep their plan, but lost their plan? What do you say to those people who liked their doctor, lost their doctor, when you said they can keep their doctor? What do you say to those people, those families that you promised would save on average $ 2500 per family per year? What do you say to the country about you said it would be $ 900 billion and now it’s $ 2.7-or-8 trillion. Did you know that people wouldn’t be able to keep their plan, but say it anyway? Were those questions asked, Brent Bozell? No. What other questions?

BOZELL: No, no, another one. How about just asking the question, Mr. President, just yesterday you spoke to a national audience and you lied. You said the republicans have no [health] plans. The Republicans have been putting out one plan after another since 2009. It was just sheerly dishonest. No, Chris Matthews is not going to ask him any serious questions. What is going on here is the president is now in full community organizer mode. You are seeing it with the chest thumping rhetoric, you’re seeing it with the ugly accusations, you’re seeing it with the lying. And he’s looking for the most comfortable venue that will be most sympathetic to him, and that’s why he’s on MSNBC with Chris Matthews.

HANNITY: Frankly, Noah Rothman over at Mediaite had a good line. I think it’s a desperate move by the president to do this, and frankly, fairly pathetic, because I don’t think he can answer [tough Obamacare] questions in a way that would be credible to the American people.

Scott Whitlock reported that on a show still mysteriously called “Hardball,” sympathetic Matthews could only ask Obama about how he would like to encourage the twentysomethings to sign up:

MATTHEWS: You have a great audience here of– college age– people and some graduate students and faculty. There’s some resistance out there among young people– We’ve seen it in the polls– to, to enrolling in the– in the exchanges and to get involved in taking responsibility for their health care. What’s your argument why they should do that?

After listing their questions, Hannity turned to a funny clip of Matthews trying to say Obamacare is a great theme, but the president had bad spelling and handwriting on it:

MATTHEWS: I think I would compare it [the ObamaCare fiasco], Andrea, to a brilliant writer, perhaps, with a great theme who turns in a paper with a lot of misspellings, or bad handwriting. It’s a bad way to roll out something. With all the great strengths, potentially, of a national health care system along these lines, the way it was rolled out has hurt it. It hurt its reputation. It’s given the other side a lot of talking points to use against the President generally in terms of his competence.

Hannity called that “hero worship.” Bozell just tried to keep from laughing through an answer:

BOZELL: When they’re down to this, it’s time to punt the ball and go to something else! When you’re going to [laughs] — when you’re going to say the reason Obamacare isn’t working, bad handwriting! [Laughs] . I mean, you’ve to say, you’ve run out of excuses here! It’s time to move on to another subject. This isn’t selling, but again, in community organizer mode, you go to your  base and try to mobilize your base. The minority base. That’s what he’s down to. It is panic mode for this administration.

NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Sean Hannity, Brent Bozell Flunk Chris Matthews for Failing to Ask the President Tough Obamacare Questions

Americans Follow Their Leaders and Hang Tough

President Obama wants the House to vote on a “clean” spending bill that would reopen the government. Speaker John Boehner insists there aren’t enough votes in the House to pass such a measure. To which Obama says let’s have the vote and see who’s right.

The rest of the country is no less petulant. A fresh national survey by the Pew Research Center paints a polarized citizenry. A total of 44 percent of Americans want the Republicans to give ground, but nearly as many — 42 percent — say it is the president who should make the first move by agreeing to changes in his signature healthcare law.

Obama said that the reason Boehner hasn’t called a vote is “because he doesn’t apparently want to see the government shutdown end” unless “he’s able to extract concessions that don’t have anything to do with the budget,” according to The New York Times.

The two leaders are speaking past one another. “We’re not going to pass a clean debt limit increase,” Boehner told ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday. 

“My goal here is not to have the United States default on their debt. My goal here is to have a serious conversation about those things that are driving the deficit and driving the debt up. And the president’s refusal to sit down and have a conversation about this is putting our nation at risk of default.”

The Speaker has no plans to schedule that vote, and Congressional Republicans are holding firm, The Hill reported.
 
Even if a bipartisan majority does exist, as some media reports speculate, for now it is unlikely centrist Republicans will defect to join with Democrats in forcing a vote on a clean continuing resolution, The Hill said.

Across America, in principle, there is broad support for compromise. In practice, partisanship is entrenched. Pew found that — even if it were the only way to resolve the shutdown — a majority of Democrats do not want Obama to delay the Affordable Care Act. Similarly, a majority of Republicans oppose any deal that does not target Obamacare.

Forty-seven percent say it is “absolutely essential that the federal debt limit be raised to avoid an economic crisis” looming as early as Oct. 17, while 39 percent believe “the country can go past the deadline for raising the debt limit without major economic problems,” Pew found.

Related Stories:

Boehner: No ‘Clean’ Bill Unless Obama, Democrats Make Cuts

Rand Paul: Democrats’ Stubbornness Keeping Government Closed

© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Newsmax – America

Americans Follow Their Leaders and Hang Tough

Newtown to Navy Yard: Gun Laws Still a Tough Sell

A handful of lawmakers are urging their colleagues to renew the debate about gun violence after Monday’s mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard. But even Congress’ top advocates of stricter laws know the prospects of any reprised legislation are as dim as ever.

Monday’s tragedy literally hit close to home for those on Capitol Hill, given the proximity of the massacre that claimed 13 lives (including that of the alleged gunman). Discussion in the Senate — which was under a brief lockdown after the shooting — inevitably turned to guns. But it doesn’t figure to last long.

Several lawmakers remarked that the news of a shooter storming into a supposedly secure facility and killing more than a dozen people is unfortunately too familiar. But they surmise that if the Newtown, Conn., attack that left 20 first-graders dead didn’t sway enough members of the Democratic-controlled Senate, what else could?

Sen. Joe Manchin was virtually speechless when asked that question before meeting his colleagues for lunch Tuesday. The West Virginia Democrat’s background-check bill, co-authored by fellow NRA “A-rated” Sen. Pat Toomey, a Republican from Pennsylvania, fell short by six votes last spring.

Manchin said he hopes his bill, or one like it, reaches the upper chamber floor again. But “unless there is desire for a change and people want to change” their votes, there won’t be much movement. The first-term senator and others said they would continue to talk to their colleagues, but noted they are still in the early stages of learning more about the shooter and the possible causes of attack.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he would like to bring back the failed legislation — which would have expanded background checks to gun show and Internet sales, but wouldn’t require them for personal sales or loans — but noted that the votes still aren’t there.

The formula for passing any type of legislation related to guns has eluded this Congress, despite political capital spent on the issue by President Obama shortly after his re-election, the push for legislation by some unlikely sources in Congress, supportive polling data on public attitudes, and the passionate lobbying of Newtown families on Capitol Hill and beyond.

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has pushed for an assault weapons ban, acknowledged the challenge. “We need 60 votes,” she told reporters outside the Senate chamber. “And to go through it all again, it’s a very emotional discussion because it involves human life — innocent life — and to not be able to succeed is hard.”

After the Navy Yard shooting, the talk on Capitol Hill centered on legislative responses related to mental health and security clearances.

Monday’s alleged shooter reportedly had a history of mental illness and sought treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Aaron Alexis, a former Navy reservist, was previously arrested for gun-related incidents: once for shooting out the tires of someone’s vehicle with a Glock pistol in Seattle and another for shooting a gun inside his apartment in Fort Worth, Texas. He was not charged in either case. He was honorably discharged from the U.S. Navy Reserve in 2011. Officials determined Alexis bought the shotgun he was armed with in Monday’s killings in Lorton, Va., and reportedly had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Lawmakers are questioning how Alexis obtained a security clearance, given his past. “When you shoot a guy’s tires out because you’re mad at him, you’re a good candidate to not work in the federal government,” Sen. Lindsey Graham said. “The fact that it never got reported in the system is deeply troubling.” In March, the South Carolina Republican and other lawmakers offered a background check bill dealing with mentally ill potential buyers, but it did not advance. That is the bigger issue, said Graham, who noted, “I don’t think anything has changed on guns.”

The time lapse between Newtown and Navy Yard has revealed several challenges facing advocates of stricter gun laws, in addition to the failure of legislation earlier this year.

A recent blow to their efforts came in Colorado. Earlier in the year, as a response to the Newtown massacre, the state legislature approved a bill requiring universal background checks and banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. Emboldened gun rights supporters gathered enough signatures to recall two legislators who supported the measure, state Senate President Dan Morse and Sen. Angela Giron.

Although gun control advocates outspent recall proponents by a 6-1 margin, Morse and Giron were recalled from their heavily Democratic districts by two and 12 percentage points, respectively. Barack Obama earned nearly 60 percent of the vote in both districts last fall, but enthusiastic turnout from gun rights supporters enabled the recall victories.

Another challenge is time. “Guns have always been very ephemeral for people,” says Lanae Erickson Hatalsky, the director of social policy and politics at Third Way, a center-left think tank that has been tracking the legislation.

“Public attention gets paid to it [after shootings] but then it goes back down. Attention to Newtown lasted longer because of the sheer horrifying nature of the bloodshed. But it’s a fact in politics that people pay attention for a bit, then move on to other issues.”

Erickson Hatalsky pointed out that it took a dozen years to pass the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act, a 1994 law named for President Ronald Reagan’s press secretary who was shot during a 1981 assassination attempt. “I’m not sure there is anything else that the president or others can do about it except for continuing to make the case that we should keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them.”

Cultivating support is made complicated by the full plate of other issues lawmakers are facing — chief among them passing a budget resolution and lifting the debt ceiling by Sept. 30 and mid-October, respectively. A push for a vote on military action in Syria, which was later placed on hold, took up legislative time and political energy. The House will take up the second part of the Farm Bill this week. The Senate is examining energy legislation. Meanwhile, immigration reform remains stalled.

There may be an avenue for extra scrutiny for concealed-carry laws, Erickson Hatalsky said. Alexis reportedly had a permit to carry a weapon that was honored in Texas but not in the District of Columbia. The National Rifle Association has been pushing to expand permits, as the laws widely vary from state to state. An NRA-backed “concealed carry reciprocity” amendment to the background check bill failed by three votes, but if passed it would have required that other states’ concealed-weapons permit laws be honored everywhere.

Notably, though, action on gun issues has taken place only in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The GOP-led House is a different story. Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer said he doesn’t expect to have a vote on any proposals, pointing to the Senate’s failed efforts in April.

The House’s No. 2 Democrat told reporters: “If the past is prologue, our prologue is not very hopeful.”

RealClearPolitics – Articles

Newtown to Navy Yard: Gun Laws Still a Tough Sell

Tough Hill vote on Syria fades

A tentative agreement lets Congress focus now on pressing fiscal issues. | AP Photo

Congress looks increasingly unlikely to take a tough vote on an unpopular authorization of the use of military force in Syria anytime soon.

The preliminary agreement between the United States and Russia on turning over Syria’s chemical weapons by mid-2014 sets a November timetable for international inspectors to enter the embattled Middle Eastern country, allowing Capitol Hill to more immediately confront looming fiscal issues like government funding and raising the debt ceiling rather than take the plunge on Syria, which members of both parties were reluctant to support.

Continue Reading

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) temporarily pulled a limited, 90-day strike on Syria on Wednesday from the floor of the Senate. A GOP aide said Saturday that any renewed effort in the upper chamber would likely necessitate another direct ask from President Barack Obama, who told Reid to temporarily shelve the measure when he visited the Capitol on Tuesday.

(Also on POLITICO: Pols react to U.S.-Russia deal)

In the immediate aftermath of the tentative deal, senators indicated an overall wariness dealing with Russia while the hawkish Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) blasted the agreement as “meaningless” and argued for more help for the Syrian opposition.

“Assad will use the months and months afforded to him to delay and deceive the world using every trick in Saddam Hussein’s playbook. It requires a willful suspension of disbelief to see this agreement as anything other than the start of a diplomatic blind alley, and the Obama Administration is being led into it by Bashar Assad and Vladimir Putin,” the senators said in a joint statement.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) panned the agreement for being “unclear” on how to hold Syrian President Bashar Assad accountable without a continue threat of military force, which Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said needs to remain on the table. Obama said on Saturday that “if diplomacy fails, the United States remains prepared to act.”

(Also on POLITICO: Obama to Assad: Keep your promises)

“Just as the credible threat of a strike against Syria’s chemical capability made this framework agreement possible, we must maintain that credible threat to ensure that Assad fully complies with the agreement,” Levin said.

One strategy that no senator called for on Saturday: For Congress to again be tasked with a vote on military force in Syria, as it had been preparing to do much of the past two weeks.

POLITICO – Congress

Tough Hill vote on Syria fades

Tough Hill vote on Syria fades

A tentative agreement lets Congress focus now on pressing fiscal issues. | AP Photo

Congress looks increasingly unlikely to take a tough vote on an unpopular authorization of the use of military force in Syria anytime soon.

The preliminary agreement between the United States and Russia on turning over Syria’s chemical weapons by mid-2014 sets a November timetable for international inspectors to enter the embattled Middle Eastern country, allowing Capitol Hill to more immediately confront looming fiscal issues like government funding and raising the debt ceiling rather than take the plunge on Syria, which members of both parties were reluctant to support.

Continue Reading

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) temporarily pulled a limited, 90-day strike on Syria on Wednesday from the floor of the Senate. A GOP aide said Saturday that any renewed effort in the upper chamber would likely necessitate another direct ask from President Barack Obama, who told Reid to temporarily shelve the measure when he visited the Capitol on Tuesday.

(Also on POLITICO: Pols react to U.S.-Russia deal)

In the immediate aftermath of the tentative deal, senators indicated an overall wariness dealing with Russia while the hawkish Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) blasted the agreement as “meaningless” and argued for more help for the Syrian opposition.

“Assad will use the months and months afforded to him to delay and deceive the world using every trick in Saddam Hussein’s playbook. It requires a willful suspension of disbelief to see this agreement as anything other than the start of a diplomatic blind alley, and the Obama Administration is being led into it by Bashar Assad and Vladimir Putin,” the senators said in a joint statement.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) panned the agreement for being “unclear” on how to hold Syrian President Bashar Assad accountable without a continue threat of military force, which Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said needs to remain on the table. Obama said on Saturday that “if diplomacy fails, the United States remains prepared to act.”

(Also on POLITICO: Obama to Assad: Keep your promises)

“Just as the credible threat of a strike against Syria’s chemical capability made this framework agreement possible, we must maintain that credible threat to ensure that Assad fully complies with the agreement,” Levin said.

One strategy that no senator called for on Saturday: For Congress to again be tasked with a vote on military force in Syria, as it had been preparing to do much of the past two weeks.

POLITICO – Congress

Tough Hill vote on Syria fades

The World Is a Tough Town

President Barack Obama is back on his heels and that is a dangerous place to be.

The more foreign leaders he met with, the more made it clear they were not going to be helpful in Syria. The more White House staff he sent to the Hill, the fewer Members and Senators were convinced. The more everyone talked about going to war in Syria – no matter how small that war – the lower the support among regular Americans.

Secretary of State John Kerry after giving an impassioned speech from the State Department on why going to war was not just the right course, but the only course; a week later said that any attack would be “incredibly small.”

Vladimir Putin, playing Grandmaster Chess while the U.S. government was playing amateur Chinese Checkers, saw the opening and drove a rhetorical truck through it by offering to get Syria to give up the chemical weapons that Bashir al Assad had previously denied even having.

The White House not only embraced the Russian proposal but almost fell over weeping with happiness. 

Russia immediately said it would not allow any Security Council Resolution that included even a threat of a use of force against Syria. The White House wiped away its tears of joy.

On Tuesday night, President Obama gave a speech that lasted about 17 minutes in which the only news was he would ask Congress to put aside the resolution allowing him to go to war – a resolution he was absolutely going to lose on a bi-partisan vote in the House, and might well have lost in the Senate.

At the end of his speech, Mr. Obama said that while we cannot be the world’s policeman,

“When, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act. That’s what makes us exceptional.”

On Thursday, Vladimir Putin, gave the President and, by extension the nation, a tongue-lashing with his op-ed in the New York Times. Returning to his “each according to his ability; each according to his needs” Communist theology, Putin turned that notion of American exceptionalism back on Obama at the end of his essay:

“It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.”

This, in sophisticated foreign service circles, is known as the “nanny-nanny-boo-boo” gambit.

Meanwhile, no one – NO ONE – is suggesting that Assad be held criminally liable for killing (or permitting to be killed) more than 1,400 people. Giving his CWs to Russia apparently wipes the slate clean.

Thus, after more than three weeks of bluster and hand wringing President Obama successfully maneuvered the world into a place where Syria is negotiating not with the U.S. or the UN, but with one of its strongest allies: Russia.

The United States has been reduced to the equivalent of sitting at the kids’ table during Thanksgiving dinner pretending to, in the words of Paul Simon, “speak of things that matter, with words that must be said.”

Our President is seen as weak and, if not confused, at least indecisive. That means the United States is seen as, at best, tired and bewildered.

If it were just not having the capacity to lead in complex and difficult circumstances, that would be bad enough. But, it appears we have no ability to react to events even after they’ve occurred.

We can snicker and – as Conservatives – even gloat, over the glaring insufficiencies of President Obama in foreign affairs, but we must realize that North Korea and Iran; the Taliban and the Pakistanis; and places in Africa, Asia and South America that we haven’t even thought about may see this as their opportunity to strike at their neighbors, or at the United States. Or both.

If America has thrown its badge into the dust, then it is a dangerous world without its only sheriff.

The world is a tough town.

RealClearPolitics – Articles

The World Is a Tough Town

1912 8th Grade Test Too Tough For Today’s Students

Have you ever seen the television show, ‘Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?’  Hosted by comedian Jeff Foxworthy, the show challenges the knowledge of adults using questions that come from first through fifth grade textbooks.  Sometimes the results are quite embarrassing for the adults and the kids are made to look really smart, but are they?

It seems that someone donated an 8^th grade test from 1912 to the Bullitt County History Museum in Shepherdsville, Kentucky.  The test was from the rural Bullitt County Schools prepared a century ago.  At that time, 8^th grade was the culmination for many rural and farm kids’ education.  Those whose family had the means managed to send them on to high school, but many in an area like did not have the means.  The test that the museum received was given to students and those who did well enough sometimes received a scholarship which would allow them to attend high school.

Many of today’s 8^th graders and probably many high schoolers would find the test to be quite difficult, and leaving them to feel as inadequate as the adults on Foxworthy’s show.  It also demonstrates how today’s public education system has abandoned many of the basic aspects of learning.  Today’s students find it difficult to answer questions like define the borders of the four different time zones, or compare the functions of arteries and veins.  Listening to high school graduates and college athletes, I’m sure that many of them have no clue what the different parts of speech are, other than mumbling, cursing and yelling.

My father-in-law was born and educated on the island of Barbados in the West Indies.  He was born in 1903 and back in his day, students were compelled to learn and retain their lessons.  His high school used an Oxford College curriculum.  In order to graduate from high school, every student had to take a comprehensive oral exam that covered all four years of high school.  Even the math was oral; no pencil or paper was allowed.  You had to do your algebra and all the math in your head.  That education stayed with him his entire life.  Even at 80 years of age, when he went shopping for groceries or anything else, he always had the total with tax calculated in his head before reaching the checkout.

Today, a great many young people can’t add or subtract without a calculator to do it for them.  They aren’t learning the geography or the true history of our country either.  From what I’ve seen and from things like the 100 year old test from a rural Kentucky school, today’s public education is not teaching our kids, rather they are too occupied with indoctrinating them with their socialistic anti-God and anti-America ideology.

Godfather Politics

1912 8th Grade Test Too Tough For Today’s Students

CBS Concedes ObamaCare May Be "Tough Sell" Even in Blue Oregon

On Sunday’s CBS Evening News, Anna Werner surprisingly acknowledged that ObamaCare may be a “tough sell” even among the left-leaning population of Oregon. Werner’s report on a hokey multi-million dollar campaign trying to get young people to sign up for the West Coast state’s health care marketplace came three days after CBS reported that the controversial law’s approval rating is at an all-time low. [video below]

While the correspondent featured two pro-ObamaCare talking heads, she also played soundbites from a 20-year-old who denounced the law: “As much as you can have an ad campaign that, sort of, inspires people, at the end of the day, the government is in Washington, DC, and has never met you.”

Anchor Jeff Glor introduced Werner’s report by echoing colleague Norah O’Donnell’s slanted explanation about the Affordable Care Act’s unpopularity: “Oregon is one of the states trying to clear up widespread confusion about ObamaCare by launching an advertising campaign that is unusual.” The CBS journalist continued by playing a clip of the ad that, in her words, “may look a bit like a college film project, but it’s actually part of a high stakes $ 10 million dollar ad campaign.”

Werner then played three straight clips from a supporter of the Oregon health care marketplace, who trumpeted the program. Before turning to the chief operating officer of the marketplace, the correspondent did feature two clips from Ben Nanke, who “doesn’t like the government forcing him to pay for health insurance, even though he’s about to be bumped off his parents’ health plan.”

Later in the segment, the correspondent pointed out that state-run health care program “may be a tough sell”, and played two more soundbites from Nanke, a “self-described libertarian”, according to a July 23, 2013 report on The Oregonian‘s website.

The full transcript of Anna Werner’s report from Sunday’s CBS Evening News:

JEFF GLOR: On October 1, the marketplace opens for individual policies mandated by the Affordable Care Act. Oregon is one of the states trying to clear up widespread confusion about ObamaCare by launching an advertising campaign that is unusual. Here’s Anna Werner.

ANNA WERNER (voice-over): (clip of “Cover Oregon” ad) This commercial may look a bit like a college film project, but it’s actually part of a high stakes $ 10 million dollar ad campaign, designed to get younger residents to buy health insurance from the state’s new health care marketplace called Cover Oregon.

The catchy tune definitely got the attention of 26-year-old Lillian Karabaic.

LILLIAN KARABAIC: I even posted a video on my Facebook, and a lot of my friends were like, ‘Great! Thanks! I was wondering where I could look up how I could get insurance.’

WERNER: The state aims to sign up many younger people like Karabaic, who don’t have insurance. Her two part-time non-profit jobs don’t offer benefits.

KARABAIC: I work at places that can’t afford to insure me.

WERNER: She went to Cover Oregon’s website, and found she’d pay $ 110 a month.

KARABAIC: Which is actually affordable to me – like, I am totally willing to pay that much for health insurance.

WERNER: Twenty-year-old Ben Nanke saw the ad, too.

BEN NANKE: And I would wake up in the morning and that’d be stuck in my head. I’d be la, la, la, la, la.

WERNER: But he doesn’t like the government forcing him to pay for health insurance, even though he’s about to be bumped off his parents’ health plan.

NANKE: There’s a concern there. But, at the same time, I value my independence.

WERNER: For the health care law to work, the state needs to sign up more than 200,000 people, and enough younger, healthier people to balance out the older, sicker residents in the insurance pool.

TRIZ DE LAS ROSA, COVER OREGON CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER: Everybody’s watching. It’s challenging to be first. It’s challenging to be in the limelight.

WERNER: Cover Oregon chief operating officer Triz de las Rosa.

DE LAS ROSA: Whatever it takes to get them there – so whether it’s a woman – you know, strumming a guitar, or whether it’s a rap. And hopefully, that message is there.

WERNER: It may be a tough sell.

NANKE: As much as you can have an ad campaign that, sort of, inspires people, at the end of the day, the government is in Washington, DC, and has never met you.

WERNER: Although the ad did inspire Nanke to create his own video and song. (clip of Nanke singing)

WERNER: Those who do want to enroll in Oregon’s plan can start doing so October 1. Anna Werner, CBS News.

— Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.

BiasAlerts

CBS Concedes ObamaCare May Be "Tough Sell" Even in Blue Oregon

Israel"s Netanyahu says peace talks will be tough

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel’s prime minister says he expects recently announced peace talks with the Palestinians to be tough, and that any agreement reached would have to be ratified in a national Israeli referendum.

Benjamin Netanyahu spoke Sunday at his weekly Cabinet meeting, his first on-camera remarks since U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced the resumption of peace talks over the weekend — ending a five year deadlock.

Netanyahu said his main guiding principles will be to maintain a Jewish majority in Israel and to avoid a future Palestinian state becoming an Iranian-backed “terror state.”

Final status negotiations aim to reach a deal on the core issues of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including borders, the fate of Palestinian refugees and security arrangements. The Palestinians say talks will be based on Israel’s pre-1967 borders.

Associated Press

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Headlines

Israel"s Netanyahu says peace talks will be tough

Australia Adopts Tough Measures to Curb Asylum Seekers

SYDNEY, Australia — Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of Australia moved Friday to curtail the record number of people attempting the dangerous boat journey to claim asylum, pledging that no one who arrives in Australia by boat without a visa will ever be granted permission to settle here.

Under the tough new policy, all asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat would be sent to a refugee-processing center in nearby Papua New Guinea, which like Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Refugee Conventions. If they are found to be genuine refugees, they will be resettled in that country but forfeit any right to asylum in Australia.

Thousands of asylum seekers fly into Indonesia every year, where they pay smugglers to ferry them in often unsafe, overcrowded vessels to Christmas Island, a remote Australian territory in the Indian Ocean that is its nearest point to Indonesia. Accidents at sea have killed more than 600 people since late 2009, and a long-term solution has bedeviled successive Australian governments going back more than a decade.

Mr. Rudd, who is facing a hotly contested federal election within weeks, acknowledged that the policy was harsh and likely to face legal challenges. But he said that something had to be done to protect the lives of asylum seekers and restore the integrity of the country’s borders.

“Australians have had enough of seeing people drowning in the waters to our north,” Mr. Rudd said at a news conference. “Our country has had enough of people smugglers exploiting asylum seekers and seeing them drown on the high seas.”

“As of today asylum seekers who come here by boat without a visa will never be settled in Australia,” he said.

No issue looms as large over Australian politics as how do deal with asylum seekers, and the crossings involving fatalities have continued without any sign of abatement. On Wednesday the government announced that a boat carrying around 150 asylum seekers had capsized in the Indian Ocean, killing four people. An infant was killed in a similar accident the previous week.

Under the so-called Pacific Solution of former Prime Minister John Howard a decade ago, asylum seekers were transported to nearby island nations like Papua New Guinea and Nauru for lengthy processing meant to remove the incentive for claiming asylum on Australia’s shores. The policy, which was roundly criticized by human rights advocates, was abandoned when Mr. Rudd became prime minister for the first time in 2007.

But Mr. Rudd’s policy has backfired, leading to an explosion in the number of arrivals from 161 asylum seekers in 2008 to 11,599 in just the first three quarters of 2012-13, the latest period for which official statistics have been published. The majority of arrivals are from Iran, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka.

In 2012, former Prime Minister Julia Gillard effectively revived the Pacific Solution, opening offshore detention centers in Nauru and on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea. The number of spots at those two centers, however, was not nearly adequate to hold the steady stream of new arrivals, and Australia is now facing a backlog of some 20,000 people awaiting processing.

Mr. Rudd said that there would be no cap on the number of people who could be sent to Papua New Guinea under the new agreement, but that the policy would be re-examined after one year. It was not immediately clear how much it would cost to build adequate facilities in Papua New Guinea, nor did Mr. Rudd say how much of that cost burden would be shouldered by Australia.

But many have been highly critical of conditions at the Manus Island camp, and the announcement immediately drew the ire of rights groups. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees issued a damning report last month that called conditions there “below international standards for the reception and treatment of asylum-seekers” and warned about the “harsh” living arrangements for men in particular.

“The new plans to resettle all asylum seekers that are found to be refugees in PNG shows not only a complete disregard for asylum seekers but absolute contempt for legal and moral obligations,” Graeme McGregor, Amnesty International Australia’s refugee campaign coordinator, said in a news release.

“Mark this day in history as the day Australia decided to turn its back on the world’s most vulnerable people, closed the door and threw away the key,” he said.

NYT > Global Home

Australia Adopts Tough Measures to Curb Asylum Seekers

Texas Senate on track to pass tough abortion rules

Lt. Governor David Dewhurst strikes the gavel as the Senate adjourns, Thursday, July 11, 2013, in Austin, Texas. A Senate committee on Thursday pushed through new abortion restrictions, setting up a Senate vote before the weekend to send it to Gov. Rick Perry. The bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, only allow abortions in surgical centers, dictate when abortion pills are taken and ban abortions after 20 weeks. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Lt. Governor David Dewhurst strikes the gavel as the Senate adjourns, Thursday, July 11, 2013, in Austin, Texas. A Senate committee on Thursday pushed through new abortion restrictions, setting up a Senate vote before the weekend to send it to Gov. Rick Perry. The bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, only allow abortions in surgical centers, dictate when abortion pills are taken and ban abortions after 20 weeks. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Sen. Wendy Davis, D-FortWorth, looks over papers in the Senate Chambers, Thursday, July 11, 2013, in Austin, Texas. A Senate committee on Thursday pushed through new abortion restrictions, setting up a Senate vote before the weekend to send it to Gov. Rick Perry. The bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, only allow abortions in surgical centers, dictate when abortion pills are taken and ban abortions after 20 weeks. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, center, poses for a photo with Sen. Donna Campbell, R- New Braunfels, right, and Sen. Ken Paxton, R-McKinney, left, in the Senate Chambers, Thursday, July 11, 2013, in Austin, Texas. A Senate committee on Thursday pushed through new abortion restrictions, setting up a Senate vote before the weekend to send it to Gov. Rick Perry. The bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, only allow abortions in surgical centers, dictate when abortion pills are taken and ban abortions after 20 weeks. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Sen. Wendy Davis, D-FortWorth, left, talks with fellow senators in the Senate Chambers, Thursday, July 11, 2013, in Austin, Texas. A Senate committee on Thursday pushed through new abortion restrictions, setting up a Senate vote before the weekend to send it to Gov. Rick Perry. The bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, only allow abortions in surgical centers, dictate when abortion pills are taken and ban abortions after 20 weeks. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, center, stands with Texas lawmakers as speaks during a news conference outside the Senate Chambers, Thursday, July 11, 2013, in Austin, Texas. A Senate committee on Thursday pushed through new abortion restrictions, setting up a Senate vote before the weekend to send it to Gov. Rick Perry. The bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, only allow abortions in surgical centers, dictate when abortion pills are taken and ban abortions after 20 weeks. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Buy AP Photo Reprints

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — This time when the Texas Senate takes up tough new abortion restrictions, the chamber’s top Republican is determined not to let anything — or anyone — derail a vote.

The Senate’s leader, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, has scheduled a vote for Friday on the same restrictions on when, where and how women may obtain abortions in Texas that failed to become law after a Democratic filibuster and raucous protesters were able to run out the clock out on an earlier special session.

But when protesters arrive at the state Capitol on Friday, dozens of extra police officers will be waiting for them, guarding the gallery and lining the hallways. For those who break the rules, the Texas Constitution gives Dewhurst the authority to jail them for up to 48 hours, no court necessary.

“We’re going to have strict enforcement. If there are any demonstrations, we are going to clear the gallery,” Dewhurst said Thursday. “I hope we don’t get to that point but if we do, we do. This is a democracy and we will not be interrupted from doing the people’s work by an unruly mob.”

Every person who enters the gallery will be issued a copy of the “rules of decorum” that stipulate there can be no demonstrations or attempts to disrupt the chamber’s work. Dewhurst plans to have more police on stand-by in case things get out of control.

For Dewhurst, who lost control of the Senate to what he called an “unruly mob” during abortion debate two weeks ago, his political survival relies on passing House Bill 2. Once considered a formidable politician, Dewhurst bid goodbye to his Senate colleagues in 2011 expecting to easily win a U.S. Senate seat. But tea party favorite Ted Cruz painted him as a moderate, and now he has three challengers in the Republican primary.

As for the GOP, the restrictions are a top priority of the Christian conservative voters who make a majority of Texas Republican voters and want abortions banned. Democrats, however, see in the protests an opportunity that could help them break a 20-year losing streak for statewide office.

The measures under consideration Friday mirror restrictions passed in Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, Alabama, Wisconsin and Arizona, but passing them in the nation’s second-most populous state would be a major victory for the anti-abortion movement.

The Texas bill would require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, allow abortions only in surgical centers, limit where and women may take abortion-inducing pills and ban abortions after 20 weeks. Only 37 out of 42 existing abortion clinics in Texas qualify as ambulatory surgical centers, and clinic owners say they can’t afford to upgrade or relocate their facilities.

Republicans insist the restrictions would guarantee better health care for women and fetuses. But critics see it as a way of regulating all Texas abortion clinics out of business and more than 5,000 people swarmed the Capitol last week to oppose the bill.

Democrats successfully defeated the bill in the regular legislative session. Then, during the first special session, the Senate didn’t take up the bill until the final day. That allowed Fort Worth Sen. Wendy Davis to use a filibuster to delay a vote. When Republicans rushed to try to pass the bill in the session’s final 15 minutes, angry protesters began shouting and screaming from the gallery. Dewhurst could only watch with frustration as a half-dozen state troopers tried to remove more than 400 people.

This time, though, Dewhurst has scheduled a vote early enough in the session that Republicans have plenty of time to pass the restrictions. Democrats see no way of stopping the bill from reaching Republican Gov. Rick Perry, for whom it is a top priority.

“We do not have the numbers to stop it,” said Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas.

But Democrats’ hope that Republicans will have hurt themselves in the long term, that they have overreached in trying to appease their Christian conservative base and have alienated suburban women, a constituency that helped President Barack Obama win re-election. Democrats have helped organize the recent protests and top lawmakers have toured the state as part of Planned Parenthood’s Stand With Texas Women campaign to raise awareness about the new law.

Republicans, though, insist they are on solid ground.

The one thing both sides can agree on is that abortion-rights groups will file a federal lawsuit as soon as Perry signs the bill into law. Judges elsewhere have stopped enforcement of similar laws while they work their way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

___

Follow Chris Tomlinson on Twitter at http://twitter.com/cltomlinson

Associated Press

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

U.S. Headlines

Texas Senate on track to pass tough abortion rules