Will Obama and Hillary allow Chavez to invade Honduras to put his communist ally back in power? And how do they feel about being on his side?

Although from a reliable ally website, Pitney’s yeoman’s efforts at in blogging events in Iran are legitimate. His question was poignant and summative. The President’s response certainly provided no comfort to the murderous regime and in fact clearly created seperated them from worldwide norms. The question will be whether or not he will create a consensus with political foes in the US by the strengthening of his message for Iran.

“Mousavi has no plans to hold a rally tomorrow or the day after tomorrow and if he decides to hold a rally it will be announced on his website,” the ally said.

Is this strategic? Not giving Gaurd Units and Barsji any certain location could be sound. The protestors remarkably could be using Tet Offensive principles.

UPDATE: Or are they?

“I don’t think anybody wants to dictate to an ally what they have to do in their own national security interests,” said Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), who said he thinks there’s “room for compromise.”

“I have to hear specifically from the administration exactly how they define their terms and is there room for defining the terms,” he said, referring to the terms “settlement” and “natural growth.”

Ackerman comes from a Long Island area that includes Port Washington, Manhasset and Great Neck on Long Isalnd. Its a Dem stronghold yet one with conservative values. Its pro-Israel and will not take kindly to Obama’s clear defection from his assurances otherwise. Ackerman’s public quotes reflect concerns of his constituents.

It’s easy to lose sight of these wrong and costly choices in the turmoil of the immediate crisis. But it is these decisions of today that are preparing the crisis of tomorrow.

Robbing Peter to pay all those Pauls. Dems are paying off their allies, their ACORNS, while putting a downpayment on their grip on power. That power is not about what’s best for America, its about, well, their power.

How much longer will American continue to be mesmerized by the charlatan?

Making Exxon surrender money that is now falling into its lap would not necessarily affect its longer-term plans or incentives. Indeed, some of Big Oil’s “windfall” already will go to the government: The more profit the companies earn, the more corporate income tax they pay. But to add a five-year tax increase on top of that to pay for a one-year gift to voters would, indeed, increase the cost of doing business. That cost would be passed along in forgone investment in new production, lower dividends for pension funds and other shareholders, and higher prices at the pump — thus socking it to the consumers whom the plan is supposed to help. If oil prices fall, there might be no windfall profits to tax. Then the Obama rebate would have to be paid for through spending cuts, taxes on something else or borrowing.

The Post does a wonderful job of telling its readers why increasing taxes on oil companies will backfire on everyone. Dems continued use of “Big Oil” as a demonizing mantra is archaic. The Post editorial writers seemed to even mock its use.

So the Dems are attempting to demonize their way out of this with a an outdated populist message that is falling on more deaf ears all the time. Speaker Pelosi’s line in the sand on drilling continues to be a drag on Dem credibility on energy as Republican’s in Congress stayed in Washington to grandstand in a way thats kept the issue burning. They’ve lost a reliable ally in the Post, too.