Who are the Real Bad Guys Here?

My question is this: Just who is responsible for having the Wyden-Snowe Executive-Pay provision REMOVED from the stimulus bill and why?

From The Washington Independent

2/12/09 6:58 PM

The finance industry might be floundering, it might be broke, and it might be ringing the tin cup for federal help. But don’t say Wall Street has lost its sway over lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Congress agreed on a final stimulus plan yesterday, but not before stripping out a provision forcing bailed-out banks to repay 2008 bonuses. Under the provision, sponsored by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), companies receiving funding under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) would be forced to repay Washington for any 2008 bonuses in excess of $100,000, or pay a 35-percent tax on funds not returned. Wyden is vowing to continue the push to have it passed. From his statement:

Wall Street’s clout continues unabated in Washington, despite having wrecked our economy,” said Wyden. “I am unbelievably disappointed, but I want it understood that I will be back again and again to recover for taxpayers the exorbitant Wall Street bonuses paid for with TARP money.

It wasn’t supposed to play out this way.

In the wake of reports revealing that Wall Street firms doled out billions in executive bonuses — even after they’d accepted hundreds of billions of federal dollars — lawmakers had vowed to take steps to ensure that TARP funds weren’t going straight into the pockets of the same folks who’d run the banks into the ground.

Indeed, the Senate stimulus bill included several provisions — added as amendments during the floor debate — to do just that. One provision, sponsored by Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), would have capped executive compensation at $400,000. Another, sponsored by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), would have banned bonuses for the 25 highest-paid employees of companies receiving TARP funds. The Wyden-Snowe provision was included as well, but was sliced for reasons that still aren’t clear. The removal is strange, if only because the measure was expected to save the federal government more than $3 billion.

It’s unclear if the Dodd and McCaskill amendments made the cut. Apparently, a full 27 hours after a stimulus deal was announced, lawmakers are still haggling over the details of the bill.

And we sit back and allow people like Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Gary Peters, Steny Hoyer, Charles Rangel, et al openly go after the people who received their lawfully contracted bonuses by threatening to subpoena their personal information and by initiating incredible tax legislation. This  insane tax amounts to nothing more than the government stealing, yes stealing lawfully earned money. What’s next?  ( MSNBC story here)

This is outrageous.

We had better wake up and get these hypocrites out of our government while we still can.

KUHNER: Conservative disarray from The Washington Times

US to Give Gaza $900 Million in Aid

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The US government plans to offer some 900 million dollars to help rebuild the Gaza Strip following Israel’s December-January military incursion, The New York Times reported on Tuesday.

The aid will be provided through United Nations and non-governmental organizations and will not go to Hamas, the Islamist group which has ruled Gaza since June 2007, the Times reported citing unnamed administration officials.

Washington considers Hamas a terrorist organization and avoids any direct contact with the group.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will formally announce the assistance at a Palestinian donors’ conference next week in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, officials told the Times.

Asked about the aid early Tuesday at a photo opportunity before a meeting with Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos, Clinton said “we have made no decision” on the administration’s plans for the donor conference.

“We are working across the government to determine what our approach will be and I am looking forward to attending that meeting. But there is still a lot of work to do,” she told reporters.

Some of the US funds will go to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, officials told the daily.

A day after the March 2 donors’ conference Clinton is due to visit Israel and the occupied West Bank on her first official trip to the region, according to Palestinian officials.

Israel’s 22-day offensive in Gaza, aimed at halting rocket fire into Israel by Hamas militants, ended on January 18. The assault left more than 1,330 Palestinians dead and caused massive destruction throughout the tiny Palestinian territory.

$900 million, incredible. Through United Nations, even more incredible. Will not go to Hamas, completely unbelievable. There is absolutely no way that $900 million will go to Gaza and none of it ends up in the hands of Hamas.  We lost $700 billion right here in the US (remember the emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008? ). How could the bureaucrats ever  hope to account for any money once it leaves the country?

Rebel Yell: Taxpayers Revolt Against Gimme-Mania

by Michelle Malkin

There’s something in the air. It’s the smell of roasted pork. President Obama heralded the signing of the trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill in Denver and promoted his massive mortgage entitlement expansion in Mesa, Ariz., at tightly controlled campaign events. But outside the Secret Service perimeters, a raucous grassroots rebellion against Beltway spending binges has caught fire. The new Boston Tea Party is here, baby, and it’s doused in barbecue sauce.

The first revolt took place on Presidents Day in Smurf-blue Seattle, where mom-blogger Keli Carender hastily organized a downtown demonstration to oppose what they called the “stimulus rip-off.” A motley band of nearly 100 protesters — moms and their kids, college students, libertarians, taxpayer groups, GOP activists — raised their voices and dined on pulled pork (donated by yours truly). They assailed both the substance of the overstuffed stimulus package and the short-circuited, nontransparent process by which it was passed.

Some wore pig noses. Others waved Old Glory and “Don’t Tread on Me” flags. Their handmade signs read: “Say No to Generational Theft”; “Obama’$ Porkulu$ Wear$ Lip$tick”; and “I don’t want to pay for the SwindleUs! I’m only 10 years old!” The event was peaceful, save for an unhinged city-dweller who showed his tolerance by barging onto the speakers’ stage and giving a Nazi salute.

Carender, a newcomer to political activism, shared advice for other first-timers: “Basically, everyone, you just have to do it. Call up your police station or parks department and ask how you can obtain a permit, and then just start advertising. The word will spread. I am only one person, but with a little hard work this protest has become the efforts of a lot of people.”

Why bother? It’s for posterity’s sake. For the historical record. And hopefully it will spur others to move from the phones and computers to the streets. For Carender, it’s just the beginning. She gathered all the attendees’ e-mail addresses and will keep up the pressure.

“We need to show that we exist. Second, we need to show support for the Republicans and Democrats that voted against the porkulus. If they think, for one second, that they made a bad choice, we have no chance to fight. Third, it sends a message to Obama and Pelosi that we are awake and we know what’s happening and we are not going to take it lying down. It is a message saying, ‘Expect more opposition because we’re out here.’”

The anti-pork activists turned out in Denver, too. On Tuesday, while Obama cocooned himself at the city’s Museum of Nature and Science for the stimulus signing, a crowd of nearly 300 gathered on the Capitol steps on their lunch hour to flame-broil the spending bill and feast on roasted pig (also donated by yours truly). Jim Pfaff of Colorado’s fiscal conservative citizens group Americans for Prosperity condemned the “Ponzi scheme, Madoff style” stimulus and led the crowd in chants of “No more pork!” Free-market think-tank head Jon Caldara of the Independence Institute brought oversized checks representing the $30,000 stimulus debt load for American families.

On Wednesday in Mesa, local conservative talk station KFYI spearheaded a third large protest to welcome Obama as he unveiled a $100 billion to $200 billion program to bail out banks and beleaguered borrowers having trouble paying their mortgages. The entitlement theme played well last week in Florida, where Obama played Santa Claus to enraptured supporters shamelessly seeking government presents. But nearly 500 protesters in Mesa came to reject the savior-based economy with signs mocking gimme-mania.

Their posters jeered: “Give me Pelosi’s Plane”; “Annual Passes to Disneyland”; “Fund Bikini Wax Now”; “Stimulate the Economy: Give Me a Tummy Tuck”; “Free Beer for My Horses.”

And my favorite: “Give me liberty or at least a big-screen TV.”

Plans are underway for anti-stimulus-palooza protests in Overland Park, Kan., Nashville and New York — home of smug Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer. Schumer’s derisive comment on the Senate floor about the “chattering classes” who oppose reckless spending has not been forgotten or forgiven. The insult spurred central Kentucky talk show host Leland Conway to organize a pork rind drive. Angry taxpayers bombarded the senator’s office with 1,500 bags of cracklins.

Disgraced Democratic Sen. John Edwards was right about one thing: There are two Americas. One America is full of moochers, big and small, corporate and individual, trampling over themselves with their hands out demanding endless bailouts. The other America is full of disgusted, hardworking citizens getting sick of being played for chumps and punished for practicing personal responsibility.

Now is the time for all good taxpayers to turn the tables on free-lunching countrymen and their enablers in Washington. Community organizing helped propel Barack Obama to the White House. It can work for fiscal conservatism, too.

Democrats Determined to Reimpose Fairness Doctrine

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars 
 
It seems the Democrats are determined to reimpose the Fairness Doctrine. Earlier this week, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said she would work on bringing back the federal regulation. “I’ll work on bringing it back. I still believe in it,” Eshoo told the Daily Post in Palo Alto. Eshoo said she would recommend the doctrine be applied not only to radio and TV broadcasts, but also to cable and satellite services. “It should and will affect everyone,” she promised.

“The so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine’ would restrict free speech on the public airwaves, stifling dissent at a time when an open national dialogue about our country’s future is essential,” House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio) said in response. “The American people do not believe the federal government should be in the business of dictating or restricting the content of political speech. I’m troubled by Rep. Eshoo’s comments, and my hope is that President Obama will speak out against efforts by members of his party to use their majority power to limit free speech and dissent.”

Read the rest of this Infowars article here

Reply Letters from Sen. Jim DeMint and Rep. Joe Wilson

Earlier this month I, as did millions of other Americans, contacted my U.S.  Congressmen about the Democrats’ pork-laden socialist spending bill that they were ramming through to Obama.  Just the hypocrisy of the thing was obscene . Obama and the democrats LIED, that’s right, LIED to America when they promised transparency, no pork barrel spending, bipartisanship, and every other talking point they used. Here are two of the replies that I received….

Dear Mr. Yon,

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to H.R.1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. I share many of your concerns and appreciate having your input.

I voted against this legislation because it will add nearly $1 Trillion to our nation’s already unprecedented deficit, direct billions of taxpayer dollars to political pet projects, and further encumber future generations of American taxpayers with a punishing debt burden. Simply put, it is bad policy that will not work.  Even the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects the long-term effect of this “stimulus package” will be a slight decrease in gross domestic product.  Unfortunately, as you know, Congress approved this legislation with almost no bipartisan support and the President signed it into law on February 17.

If government spending created jobs and prosperity, we’d have the best economy in our nation’s history right now.  I believe private citizens and businesses, not politicians and bureaucrats, will turn the American economy around.  That is why I offered a common sense alternative during the Senate’s debate on this bill to have Americans keep more of their own money instead of Washington taking it to waste on inefficient government programs.  My plan for job growth and economic stability focused on decreasing taxes for all individuals and businesses to reward work, productivity, and growth.  My plan would create millions of new jobs to benefit all Americans and provide particularly important tax relief for low-income families.  Unfortunately, my alternative was not adopted by the Senate.

Please know that I will continue to fight for fiscal responsibility and smaller government.  I believe America’s best course of action to correct the ongoing financial crisis is one that nourishes small business growth, keeps hard-earned money in the hands of American taxpayers, and encourages employment and investment through lower tax rates.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future with any issue important to you or your family. It is an honor to serve you and the people of South Carolina.

Sincerely,

Jim DeMint
United States Senator

and

February 12, 2009

Mr. Robert D. Yon
3840 Overbrook Drive
Columbia, South Carolina  29205

Dear Mr. Yon,

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding H.R.1, the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.”  I appreciate your taking the time to write.

I understand your concerns and welcome your interest in this matter. On January 28, 2009, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1 by a vote of 244-188.  On February 10, 2009, the Senate passed this measure by a vote of 61-37.  The bill will now proceed to a conference between the House and the Senate to reconcile the differences with the two bills.

I originally voted against this legislation because with the South Carolina unemployment rate continuing to rise, this bill did little to create jobs and grow the economy in the immediate future.  It is clear that this spending package has become a one stop shop for every item on a spending agenda – a massive and unprecedented spending bill aimed to bypass the normal appropriations process and subsidize a broad range of existing and new government programs. It passes massive debt onto our children and could mean future tax increases on hardworking Americans as well as hyperinflation.

It is my hope that Congress can work in a bipartisan manner to bring forward legislation that will stimulate more jobs for South Carolinians.  A targeted stimulus package of tax relief and assistance for small businesses would fuel this nation’s entrepreneurial spirit and help private industry and individuals create jobs.  Our focus should be on growing the American economy-not on growing our already massive government.  Additionally, I believe Congress can promote job growth through legislation that reduces the corporate tax rate and eliminates the capital gains tax.  Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as the debate on the economic recovery package moves forward.

It is an honor to represent the people of the Second Congressional District of South Carolina, and I value your input.  If I may be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very Truly Yours,

Joe Wilson
Member of Congress

Thank you Sen. DeMint and Rep. Wilson for recognizing this thing for what it is.

Pelosi rushes vote – for European vacation

There’s not much else you can say to describe the agonizing events surrounding this craptastic spending bill other than Nancy Pelosi sucks. This time it’s because she rushed the vote on nearly 1,071 page stimulus so she can jet off to Europe. Not only have Democrats already broken their promise to give 48 hours consideration to any major bill – they are about to pass the biggest spending bill in the history of the planet, without even reading it. Glenn Beck crunches the numbers on how fast those voting would have to read the bill in order to finish before the vote and even has his voice digitally sped up to see if it’s possible to finish the bill on time. The results aren’t pretty…

The Glenn Beck Program

Dems Break Promise: Stimulus Bill to Floor Friday

In a press conference Thursday, the House Republican leadership spoke candidly about being kept out of the House-Senate conference on the Obama-Pelosi-Reid so-called “economic stimulus” bill.  They confirmed they had not yet seen the text of the bill as of 4 p.m.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he was unsure how many Democrats would vote with Republicans again on this bill but that he thought Republicans “may get a few” Democrats to side with them.  The fact that the Demos have now broken their promise to have the public able to see the bill for 48 hours may drive more Dems into the Republican camp.

“[I] don’t know, ‘cause they haven’t seen the bill either,” Boehner said.

“Around here language means a lot. Words weigh a ton and one person’s understanding of a spoken description might vary from another’s. We wanted to see it. And not only just I had to see it, I had to show it to my colleagues and my caucus. We wanted to take all the time that was necessary to make sure it was right.”

Congressional members are also exchanging barbs via the popular social network Twitter.  Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) twittered, “Don’t know when we’re going to vote. Will the no votes delay vote just because they can? Speed is important. They know that.”

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) twittered back, “Those in favor of speed over commonsense may just be afraid of letting the People know what they are ramming through.”

Obama; Saving the World, one Fry Cook at a time

This is the exchange between Julio the fry cook and Obama at the Florida town hall meeting….

QUESTION: All right, Mr. President. My name is Julio Asegueda (ph). I’m currently a student at Edison State College in my second semester.

And, OK, I’ve been at the same job, which is McDonald’s, for four-and-a-half years because of the fact that I can’t find another job. Now, with the fact that I’ve been there for as long as I’ve been there, do you have any plan or any idea of making one that has been there for a long time receive any better benefits than what they’ve already received?

OBAMA: Well, I tell you what. First of all, a couple things I’d like to say. Number one, the fact that you are working as hard as you’re working at a job that I know doesn’t always pay as well as some other jobs, I think that’s a source of pride for you. That shows that — that you’re doing the right thing.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, the second thing is, is that you will actually benefit from the tax breaks that we’re talking about, so you’ll be able to keep a little bit extra money, because we’re going to offset your payroll tax. That’s going to help.

I don’t — I assume that you’re not getting health care through your job, and so one of the things that we want to do is reform the health care system so that you will have access to health care in your job.

But the thing that I’m really interested in is — you say you’re going to school. What are you studying?

QUESTION: I’m looking to study and major in communications, hopefully being a broadcaster or a disc jockey.

OBAMA: Well, you sound like you’ve got good communication skills.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

OBAMA: So — so part of what we want to do is we want to make it easier for you to afford going to college by giving you this refundable tax credit for your tuition, because young people like Julio, who have that much enthusiasm and that much energy, we’ve got to make sure that we are giving them a pathway so that they can educate themselves and go as far as their dreams take them.

1.  In the words of John Edwards, WHY, WHY, WHY is Obama out stumping in Florida when the greatest crisis we’ve ever faced is happening and something must be done by Washington immediately? Like what some idiot in Florida says is going to make any difference? – (besides there has been a simple majority in the Senate all along. Obama doesn’t need any republican support at all – nobody was threatening a filibuster. Even if so, this thing they call  a rescue package would’ve eventually passed anyway. This was simply a PR stunt – nothing more…)

2. I really don’t want to attack Julio the fry cook in the same manner that  the liberals attacked Joe the Plumber before the election, but I’m going to do it anyway.

3. Julio the fry cook couldn’t find a job in 4 1/2 years? liar – he didn’t look.

4. What’s wrong with Asst. Manager? I’m sure that position probably pays a little more. Granted, it’s still at McDonald’s, but if Julio’s not going to get up off of his ass and go get a real job, Asst. Mgr. might suit him. I don’t know – maybe he has to wake up before 3pm for that job.

5. Obama says ” were gonna offset your payroll tax”. What does that come to? ( no state income tax in Fl by the way ) according to Julio in the CBS interview, he makes $7.85 an hour . $15,072 / year – $3650 standard deduction = $11,422. At 15% tax rate (according to Federal tax brackets) comes to $1312. Thats about $27.00 per week. Don’t spend all that extra money in one place there Julio…

6. Julio the fry cook already has access to health care benefits. Notice Obama is careful to not say ” We’re going to pay for your health care” or “ You won’t have to pay for health care”. Obama only says “one of the things that we want to do is reform the health care system so that you will have access to health care in your job.”

7. Why is Obama interested that Julio is going to school? because that’s where LIBERAL CONDITIONING takes place. Kids learn to be good liberals at the college level.

8. I think it’s funny that Obama, the great communicator, tells Julio the fry cook that he has “good communication skills”. This coming from a person who says”uh” repeatedly in every sentence, and needs a teleprompter at a press conference. Go back and read julio’s question – just read it…

9. Why does Obama tell Julio the fry cook that he’s doing the “right thing ” by staying in a dead end job? It’s what EVERY liberal bureaucrat wants, more people to depend on the government for everything. Remember Michelle Obama telling women “Don’t Go Into Corporate America” ?

These are the type of people who got Obama elected. This is what we’re dealing with. This is the world they live in.

Evidence that the Obama Rescue Package is BAD.

Liberal Group Praises Crossover Republicans as Minority Leaders Balk at Partisanship
Americans United for Change has drawn up ads thanking Republican Sens. Snowe, Collins and Specter for crossing the aisle and backing an economic recovery plan that GOPers roundly oppose as wasteful spending.
Usually, Americans United for Change buys ads to lambaste Republicans for opposing issues backed by the liberal, union-supported issue advocacy group initially founded in 2005 to rally against President Bush’s Social Security reform plan. But when three Republicans crossed the aisle over the weekend to say they will support a compromise economic recovery plan opposed by every other Senate minority Republican, Americans United for Change bought up radio time urging voters to call and thank Sens. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Arlen Specter for “providing the leadership we need to get the job done.” “Senators Snowe and Collins have worked with President Obama and other senators to reach agreement on a plan that has support from a broad range of groups, including the US Chamber of Commerce and organized labor,” says the new ad out in the senators’ state of Maine Sunday. “Call Senators Snowe and Collins today at 202-224-3121. Thank them for their leadership and tell them to keep fighting for a plan to get our economy moving again.”

Read the entire story here

This is really all the evidence that we need …..

and this……

 

 

Pelosi, No Math Wiz

Pelosi said “500,000,000 people will lose their jobs each month until we have an economic package.” Chris Wallace corrected her saying – “you mean 500,000 each month” but then a few days later she says the very same thing. If Sarah Palin had made this mistake we would never hear the end of it.

Just so you know the current US population is 305,762,839 .

What was on her mind when she made these references?

1. new people they plan to let in to the country when they pass the new immigration laws

2. the new folks ACORN has discovered and registered to vote

3. the couple of hundred million people that we don’t know about in those extra 7 states that Obama campaigned in..

4. hundred -thousand, million, gozillion whats the difference?

5. now how much do I need to raise for re-election?

6. the commoners know not anyway, so let them eat cake…

Obama’s Hypocrisy Continues

 U.S. Rep. Hilda L. Solis, Obama’s choice for Labor secretary, faced new obstacles after lawmakers who were expected to vote on her confirmation Thursday abruptly canceled the hearing amid reports of back taxes owed by her husband.

Solis, a Democrat from El Monte, is at least the fourth Obama nominee whose confirmation has been complicated by tax troubles.

Public records show that since 1993, two state and 14 Los Angeles County tax liens totaling about $11,640 have been lodged against Sayyad and his business, Sam’s Foreign and Domestic Auto Center.

The documents indicate that $6,468 in county liens remained unresolved until Wednesday, when Sayyad paid off the balance, according to the Los Angeles County treasurer and tax collector’s office.

Solis’ nomination had already faced snags. In her appearance before the Senate committee last month, she appeared evasive in certain answers, leaving some GOP members unimpressed.

Then Republican senators suggested that her ties to a tax-exempt group that promotes unionization might pose a conflict of interest. Solis has denied any conflict and says she is within her rights to serve as an unpaid board member and treasurer of the group, American Rights at Work.

The group is a strong proponent of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill that would make it easier for workers to form bargaining units. As a congresswoman, Solis has been a co-sponsor of the bill.

’nuff said.

 

Obama: If Stimulus Fails, I’m Out in 4 Years

Obama promised on Monday to establish a review board to oversee the government’s $700 billion rescue package aimed at averting a financial meltdown, declaring that some of the nation’s banks would have to write down bad debts, while other banks may fail.

Obama said he was taking full responsibility for rescuing the U.S. economy, in its worst downturn in 80 years.

“If I don’t have this done in three years then there’s gonna be a one-term proposition,” Obama said, already looking ahead to the 2012 presidential election.

Heh, heh, heh…

Then there’s this. We all know that the voters responsible for Obama’s win couldn’t care less about about what he does or doesn’t do. They voted in the first black pres., made history, blah, blah, blah. Very few of them had any idea what any of his plans were. Most of them thought that they were voting Bush out of office, not knowing that he couldn’t run again. Not getting this pork bill passed probably wont affect Obama’s re-election bid at all.

We also know that the democrats are not going to let Obama take the blame for this. It’s too easy to just blame Bush. They’ve been doing that since this thing began anyway.

Thank You, House Republicans

Final passage of the nearly $820 billion package came on a 244-188 vote with no Republicans supporting the bill. This was a far cry from the bipartisan showing Obama had hoped for, but he remains  in command and Senate Republicans now concede that the president is likely to prevail there as well, with no reason to fear a protracted filibuster fight.

The reason Obama wants Republican support for his gigantic pork bill is that he has his doubts that it will do anything other  than plunge the country deeper into debt, not to show bi-partisan unity. True bi-partisan unity would be giving the Republicans their tax cuts in the bill.

Tangent: Where are all of these people who relentlessly criticized Sarah Palin for taking federal money to improve Alaska’s highways? Remember the whole “pork barrel spending” argument against her ? Why are they not outraged by this bill, the mother of all pork bills ?

If the plan fails, which it will most likely do, Obama would be able to at least split the blame. If he truly knows and believes the plan will work, then he does not have to give the evil Republicans any credit for anything, which has been democrat SOP (standard operating procedure). He never needed their support for any of this garbage. As it is now, this is Obama’s and the Democrats’ baby. Hopefully Senate Republicans will show party unity and put this whole damn thing on the Democrat’s shoulders.

Maybe in a few years, when people are still unemployed and have more debt, when tax rates are higher, when the economy is even worse, when someone figures out that printing all of this money didn’t actually work, just maybe we can get rid of these hypocrites.

Obama’s Letter to Iran

Officials in Obama’s administration have drafted a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing US-Iranian relations and opening the way for face-to-face talks.

The US state department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected on 4 November last year. It is in reply to a lengthy letter of congratulations sent by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on 6 November.

Diplomats said Obama’s letter would be a symbolic gesture to mark a change in tone from the hostile one adopted by the Bush administration, which portrayed Iran as part of an “axis of evil”.

It would be intended to allay the ­suspicions of Iran’s leaders and pave the way for Obama to engage them directly, a break with past policy.

read the entire disturbing development here

The Obama 2012 presidential re-election campaign continues

Final score :

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 1

the American people – 0 (again)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 6

the terrorists – 5

the American people – 0

Obama Continues Assault on American Auto Industry

President Obama signed an executive order Monday requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider an application by California to set more stringent auto emissions and fuel-efficiency standards than required by federal law. If the EPA grants a waiver allowing California to set its own emissions standards, the nation’s largest state will be allowed to require automakers to produce trucks and cars that get better mileage than what is required under the current national standard. Thirteen other states could take similar action.

What does this mean? It means that the environmentalist wackos won out over unionized labor. Obama has  just put more nails in Detroit’s and the Big Three Automaker’s coffins.

With the automakers struggling to build cars that they’re having trouble selling now, to stay in business they will be forced to upgrade and retool manufacturing facilities. The price of American cars is going to skyrocket, fewer will sell, and the industry will flounder and die.

What about all of those employees, union members no doubt, who voted For Obama and the democrats? For it was he, Obama, who was destined to save their livlihood. What is going to happen to the blue city of  Detroit, where they aspire to name streets and parks after their president?

Well Detroit and union workers, it appears that after getting into bed with both you and the environmentalists, Obama has decided to kick you out of bed and keep the other girl. I hope that you find the money that you ponied up during the campaign to be very well spent. I’ll bet you guys wish you had Bush back now.

The Obama 2012 presidential re-election campaign continues

Final score :

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 0

the American people – 0 (again)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 5

the terrorists – 4

the American people – 0

Karl Rove Subpoenaed

WASHINGTON – The House Judiciary Committee chairman subpoenaed former White House adviser Karl Rove on Monday to testify about the Bush administration’s firing of nine U.S. attorneys and its prosecution of a former Democrat governor.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said the ongoing legal battle to get Rove and other former Bush administration aides to testify may have success with a new president in the White House.

Former President George W. Bush upheld Rove and two other senior aides who asserted they did not have to testify before Congress about their actions in the White House.

The legal dispute between the executive and legislative branches of government is before a federal appeals court.

Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, did not return phone messages seeking comment.

The subpoena commanded Rove to appear on Feb. 2 for a deposition on the U.S. attorney firings and the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, a Democrat.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey named a special prosecutor in September to investigate whether former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, other Bush administration officials or Republicans in Congress should face criminal charges in the firings of the U.S. attorneys.

The inquiry followed the recommendation of internal Justice Department investigators who concluded that, despite administration denials, political considerations played a part in the firings of as many as four of the federal prosecutors. Conyers wants to know what role Rove played in the dismissals.

Siegelman has alleged his prosecution was pushed by Republicans, including Rove. The former governor was convicted on bribery and other charges and was sentenced to more than seven years in prison. He was released early, when a federal appeals court ruled his appeal raised “substantial questions.”

Conyers said in a statement that times have changed.

He said Bush’s position of “absolute immunity” was “rejected by U.S. District Judge John Bates and President Obama has previously dismissed the claim as ‘completely misguided,’” Conyers said.

“I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court, and today’s action is an important step along the way.

“Change has come to Washington, and I hope Karl Rove is ready for it. After two years of stonewalling, it’s time for him to talk.”

Last July, Bates rejected Bush’s contention that senior White House advisers are immune from subpoenas, siding with Congress’ power to investigate the executive branch.

Conyers also has sought testimony from former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, and ex-White House chief of staff Josh Bolten — although only Rove was named in the new subpoena.

TITLE 28 > PART II > CHAPTER 35 > § 541

§ 541. United States attorneys

(a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, a United States attorney for each judicial district.
(b) Each United States attorney shall be appointed for a term of four years. On the expiration of his term, a United States attorney shall continue to perform the duties of his office until his successor is appointed and qualifies.
(c) Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.

It’s amazing that we have people like Democrat Charles Rangel, and Democrat Timothy Geitner Committing crimes against the American taxpayer in broad daylight and nothing at all is being done. Then we have a President who exercises his authority under Title 28 of the US Code and Democrat John Conyers vows to investigate until he can create evidence of illegal activity. Even worse, Democrat Conyers is not squeaky clean, dismissing his own violations as a “lack of clarity of communication”. He’s not fooling anyone.  Conyers is just as dirty as the rest of them.  Just another one.

In letters sent separately to the House Ethics Committee, the FBI, and the US Attorney’s office by two former aides of Conyers, they alleged that Conyers used his staff to work on several local and state campaigns and forced them to baby-sit and chauffeur his children.[8] In late December 2006, Conyers “accepted responsibility” for possibly violating House rules. A statement issued December 29, 2006 by the House Ethics Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) and Ranking Minority Member Howard Berman (D-Calif.), said that Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a “lack of clarity” in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. In deciding to drop the matter, Hastings and Berman state: After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff.

Obama v Limbaugh

Limbaugh Responds to Obama   [Byron York]

According to an account in the New York Post, President Barack Obama yesterday told Republican leaders, “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.”  With George W. Bush now off the stage, it may be that Obama and some of his fellow Democrats view Limbaugh, and not John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, or any other elected official, as the true leader of the Republican opposition.  This morning I asked Rush for his thoughts on all this, and here is his response:

There are two things going on here. One prong of the Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. He is hoping that these Republicans will also publicly denounce me and thus marginalize me. And who knows? Are ideological and philosophical ties enough to keep the GOP loyal to their voters? Meanwhile, the effort to foist all blame for this mess on the private sector continues unabated when most of the blame for this current debacle can be laid at the feet of the Congress and a couple of former presidents. And there is a strategic reason for this.

Secondly, here is a combo quote from the meeting:

“If we don’t get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can’t let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That’s how things don’t get done in this town.”

To make the argument about me instead of his plan makes sense from his perspective.  Obama’s plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR’s New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would also simultaneously seriously damage any hope of future tax cuts.  It would allow a majority of American voters to guarantee no taxes for themselves going forward.  It would burden the private sector and put the public sector in permanent and firm control of the economy. Put simply, I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing “eternal” power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy. If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of this TRILLION dollar debacle.

Obama was angry that Merrill Lynch used $1.2 million of TARP money to remodel an executive suite. Excuse me, but didn’t Merrill have to hire a decorator and contractor? Didn’t they have to buy the new furnishings? What’s the difference in that and Merrill loaning that money to a decorator, contractor and goods supplier to remodel Warren Buffet’s office? Either way, stimulus in the private sector occurs. Are we really at the point where the bad PR of Merrill getting a redecorated office in the process is reason to smear them? How much money will the Obamas spend redecorating the White House residence? Whose money will be spent? I have no problem with the Obamas redoing the place. It is tradition. 600 private jets flown by rich Democrats flew into the Inauguration. That’s fine but the auto execs using theirs is a crime? In both instances, the people on those jets arrived in Washington wanting something from Washington, not just good will.

If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of the trillion dollar debacle.

One more thing, Byron. Your publication and website have documented Obama’s ties to the teachings of Saul Alinksy while he was community organizing in Chicago. Here is Rule 13 of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals:

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

Obama’s Executive Orders Day3

2012 Obama presidential re-election campaign day 3. Obama reverses abortion-funds policy and funds Embryonic Stem Cell Research with American Tax dollars.

Obama has signed an executive order ending the ban on federal funds for international groups that perform abortions or provide information on the option.

Liberal groups welcomed the decision while abortion rights foes criticized the president. Known as the “Mexico City policy,” the ban has been reinstated and then reversed by Republican and Democratic presidents since GOP President Ronald Reagan established it in 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.

Obama signed it quietly, without coverage by the media, late on Friday afternoon, a contrast to the midday signings with fanfare of executive orders on other subjects earlier in the week.
Conservatives had concerns about Obama’s views on Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research but thought that any change would have to be approved by Congress.  Not the case as Obama has stated that one of his first acts as President will by by executive order.  He will fund Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research with American Tax dollars.  Americans who have moral issues will be forced to fund these programs.

The Authority of the President to issue executive orders is wholly based on Article II of the U.S. Constitution.  The President’s power is limited by Article II.  The President’s authority to issue an executive order cannot interfere with any other branch of Governments authority.  Funding the government and it’s programs through taxation are left for Congress and Congress only.  Obama may meet his first Constitutional law issue.

I have no intention of getting an abortion debate started.  That’s one that will never be won by any side. The issue at hand here is Obama’s willingness to throw more revenue away only to promote his agenda and to blatantly pander to the left. It’s no secret that he and his team plan to reverse approximately 200 Bush executive orders. That’s fine, he won the election, and conservatives have to suffer the consequences, but pretty soon even the left has to start wondering when he’s going to save everyone.

Final score day 3:

Obama – 2

the terrorists – 0

the American people – 0 (again)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 4

the terrorists – 4

the American people – 0

Obama’s Executive Orders Day Two – America Still Losing

On his second full day in office, Obama took a series of steps overturning some of his predecessor’s most contentious war-on-terrorism policies.

By ordering shut the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, closing any remaining CIA secret prisons overseas and banning harsh interrogation practices, Obama said he hoped to signal that the U.S. would wage its struggle against terrorism and violence in a manner “consistent with our values and our ideals.”

It’s amazing that with all that’s wrong with the country, all of the people who need to be saved, and all of the business and industry that need bailing out, Obama has spent his first two days in office doing things to benefit terrorists. Who else is seeing this?

This concludes day 2 of the 2012 Obama presidential re-election campaign.

Final score day 2:

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 3

the American people – 0 (zero, zip, zilch, nada)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 2

the terrorists – 4

the American people – 0

 

Caroline Kennedy Ends Senate Seat Bid

Caroline Kennedy tonight withdrew her name from consideration to replace Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate after learning that Gov. David Paterson wasn’t going to choose her.

Kennedy’s decision removes the highest-profile name in the ring to step into Clinton’s now-vacant seat, as she departs after getting confirmed today as  Secretary of State.

Sources said the reason Paterson had decided not to tap the daughter of John F. Kennedy was her poor performances in media interviews and in private sessions with various officials.

Aides to Kennedy couldn’t be reached for comment.

Paterson has said he is not yet sure who he will select, but plans to announce his pick by this weekend – and an announcement is expected either Friday or Saturday.

For the first time on Tuesday, shortly after Obama was inaugurated, Paterson acknowledged publicly that he is considering state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo for the slot.

Cuomo, who has soared in public polls over Kennedy in the past two weeks in popularity for the seat, has not said whether he’s interested in the job, but has not tamped down speculation that he’s making a play for it.

Kennedy’s entrance into the bidding for Clinton’s seat was intended to have the effect of clearing the field, and forcing other contenders to see her as the inevitable choice for the post once held Robert F. Kennedy.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg privately backed her and publicly praised her abilities, and his top deputy, Kevin Sheekey, worked the phones aggressively on Kennedy’s behalf, and set her up with powerhouse consulting firm Knickerbocker SKD.

But her rollout received stiff criticism, as she ducked press questions during her first trip upstate, fared poorly in her initial round of media interviews – and several critics said she had a lack of a clear rationale for her candidacy.

The decision to appoint Clinton’s successor is solely Paterson’s, and he has offered conflicting comments about where he is in the process over the past few days – suggesting almost simultaneously that he’d made up his mind, and then that he hadn’t.

The surprise decision leaves a crowded field of about 15 people, mostly elected officials, to replace Clinton – including Long Island Rep. Steve Israel, Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, upstate Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, Rep. Carolyn Maloney and teachers union head Randi Weingarten.

Kennedy’s brief foray into politics lasted just under a month, from the time she roiled New York politics shortly before Christmas to say she was interested in being picked for the seat to today.

So it looks like Paterson is trading Kennedy’s fundraising ability for Cuomo’s popularity. The timing of this news is interesting indeed, the day after Ted Kennedy has an episode. This move will put Caroline Kennedy in a prime position for Ted Kennedy’s seat.

Obama’s First Executive Orders – the American People Lose Again

In the first hours of his presidency, Obama directed an immediate halt to the Bush administration’s military commissions system for prosecuting detainees at the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Notice of the decision came in a legal filing in Guantánamo by military prosecutors just before midnight Tuesday. The decision, which had been expected as part of Obama’s pledge to close the detention camp, was described as a pause in all war-crimes proceedings there so that the new administration can evaluate how to proceed with prosecutions.

Among other cases, the decision will temporarily stop the prosecution of five detainees charged as the coordinators of the Sept. 11 attacks, including the case against the self-described mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Later this week, the new administration is expected to issue an executive order that is to start what could be a long process of closing the detention camp, where about 245 detainees remain.

That’s right, put the well-being of these murdering, oppressive, fascist, dirtbags before that of the the American people…

Also…

Obama is bringing some belt-tightening to the White House. In one of his first official acts, Obama announced an immediate pay freeze at current levels for senior White House officials. According to the A.P., the freeze would apply to about 100 aides earning over $100,000 a year.

“This will enable the White House to stretch its budget to get more done for the country. The Obama and his staff recognize that in these austere times, everyone must do more with less, and the White House is no exception,” the White House press office announced in a statement.

Seeking to make good on his campaign pledge to limit the influence of lobbyists on his administration, Obama also signed an executive order banning executive branch employees from accepting gifts from lobbyists, as well as tightening restrictions for lobbyists seeking jobs in his administration, and for administration officials who may leave to lobby.

So, the 2012 presidential campaign has begun. Right off, this sounds good until you think about what he says. Who cares what these people make? I do not know anyone whose financial condition will improve because these folks are not paid – besides there’s nothing mentioned about per-diem

Day One Final score:

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 1

the American people – 0 (zero baby!)

Pelosi draws her lines with Obama

Two days before Obama’s Inauguration, the speaker showed off a new move — using the media to keep even a Democrat president from wandering onto her turf.

Pelosi used a Fox News appearance Sunday to break with Obama on two key issues: the fate of President George W. Bush’s tax cuts for families earning $250,000 or more and the possibility of congressional investigations into the actions of Bush administration officials.

While Pelosi’s words showed that she and Obama don’t always agree on matters of policy, the signal they sent was more important: Yes, you can use the media to speak straight to the public.

But so can I — and I will when you’re invading my turf.

“She trusts him greatly because they share the same agenda and vision, but she always keeps the interests of the caucus in mind,” said a top House Democratic aide. “She has to move the process forward and is extremely strategic.”

The speaker, Democratic aides say, is committed to pushing Obama’s broad agenda and isn’t looking to pick a fight. Nonetheless, she needs to retain leverage in upcoming negotiations with Obama, and she wants to defend her members’ interests in upcoming battles over the details of the massive stimulus package — and how to disengage the U.S. from Iraq.

This is starting sooner than I thought it would, the thing with Pelosi and Obama, that is. Don’t you know Obama’s already looking forward to 4 years of Pelosi and her garbage?

Heh, heh, heh.

read more here @ The Politico

New York Senate Seat Vacancy Drama

DESPITE claims that he’s still undecided, Gov. Paterson is “certain” to pick Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the US Senate, several unhappy contenders for the job have told friends and associates in recent days.

The contenders based their conclusion on the view that Paterson, after nearly two months of indecision, would “greatly embarrass” and “entirely humiliate” Kennedy, anger her prominent political family and even offend President-elect Barack Obama by picking someone other than President John F. Kennedy’s daughter.

As for the governor’s claim to be weighing a last-minute finalist, the contenders agree with a close Paterson friend who said, “It’s clear David is just trying to play mind games with the press.”

Some of the contenders warned, however, that the unelected Paterson, who must face the voters next year, could face a serious backlash from Democratic activists by choosing Kennedy, whose standing with the public, and with Democrats in particular, has been sliding in recent weeks.

US Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan, a would-be Clinton replacement who is backed by several women’s organizations, was the most publicly adamant in saying the fix was in, citing a scenario – first outlined in last week’s Village Voice – under which Paterson, in a deal with Mayor Bloomberg, a Kennedy friend, selects Kennedy in exchange for help for his own election bid next year.

Another potential candidate told The Post that he was convinced that Kennedy would get the job because Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, – who polls show is the public’s favorite to succeed Clinton – failed to line up the right replacement at the AG’s office.

“Andrew just couldn’t assure the governor that he could arrange for [Assembly Speaker Sheldon] Silver to provide an acceptable successor,” said the contender.

A third potential candidate claimed that Paterson’s repeated contention – told to the media in private – that there is no front-runner is “baloney.”

“It’s been a done deal from the start,” said the would-be candidate.

“David goes with Caroline with the understanding that Caroline, and her family and its resources, go with David next year. This stuff with Paterson saying he’s looking at other people is a crock,” the source continued.

Meanwhile, several Democrats pointed to Paterson’s already-declining public-opinion poll numbers to warn that selecting Kennedy could worsen his chances to be elected next year.

“The polls show Kennedy is not who the public wants, and every upstate newspaper has come out against her,” noted a longtime Democratic operative.

“Picking Caroline could turn into a disaster for Paterson,” he continued.

A little-noticed Marist College poll last week showed Paterson, who became governor last March after Eliot Spitzer resigned amid a hooker scandal, with a rapidly declining job-approval rating.

Dems’ idea of sharing sacrifice

By Michelle Malkin
Monday, January 19, 2009

“Everybody’s going to have to give,” President-elect Barack Obama has warned. And some people will have to give more than others — starting with low-income smokers.

Democrats are rushing to impose massive tax hikes of at least 61 cents on every cigarette pack sold in America, in addition to new increases on other tobacco products. The money will fund a long-plotted federal expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

Yes, this is Dr. Big Nanny’s prescription for recession: punitive tax increases on the poor to feed a universal health-care Trojan horse.

Obama and his liberal Democrat colleagues sure have a funny way of demonstrating “progressive” values, don’t they? Health surveys show that smokers are more likely to be blue-collar workers, minorities and have less than a high-school education. The National Taxpayers Union noted that tobacco taxes take a 50 times larger share of income from those earning less than $20,000 than from those earning more than $200,000.

And what will that money buy? SCHIP, you’ll recall, is the joint federal-state program that covers health insurance for children and families at or near the poverty line. During the last two years, President Bush and the Republicans took a rare fiscally conservative stand against widening eligibility criteria far beyond the working poor. Democrats wanted to be able to enroll families with incomes at 300 or 400 percent of the poverty level — adding an estimated $35 billion over five years to the existing SCHIP funding costs.

Opponents of this push were lambasted as cruel child-haters for arguing that the program should not be extended to include well-off families, illegal aliens and single adults. They were attacked as heartless penny-pinchers for questioning the wisdom of subsidizing the SCHIP expansion with a dwindling and unstable funding source (smoking is on the decline and cigarette tax revenues are shrinking).

But if these do-gooders truly cared about children, they’d be cursing mightily over the squandering of current SCHIP funds and the cheating of the very children the program was intended to help. State data analyzed by the Department of Health and Human Services reveal that 13 states spent more than 44 percent of their SCHIP funds in 2008 on people who are neither children nor pregnant women.

In New Jersey, people earning as much as $295,000 were enrolled in its SCHIP program, dubbed “NJ FamilyCare.” Like many states, New Jersey failed to check eligibility for all program enrollees and refuses to conduct stringent assets tests.

As I’ve noted before, the refusal to do assets tests on federal health insurance programs is why federal entitlements are exploding and government keeps expanding. After an audit found that the New Jersey program had paid $43.1 million to participants without knowing whether they were eligible, Republican Assemblyman Richard Merkt observed that it “called into serious question the state’s competence to run health insurance programs.” Multiply that by 50 states.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Democrats plan to lift decade-old restrictions to allow legal immigrant children to tap into SCHIP. But there’s no word on whether citizenship eligibility requirements will be strengthened.

What I can tell you for sure is that the SCHIP expansion is a rest stop on the road to a universal health insurance entitlement built on the backs of overtaxed low-income workers. Welcome to the era of “shared sacrifice.”

Michelle Malkin is author of “Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild.”

The First Socialist Act of 2009

New SCHIP Bill—Federal Cigar Tax to Be Capped at 40 Cents

Posted: Tuesday, January 13, 2009

By David Savona

The House Ways and Means Committee introduced the newest incarnation of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) today. The International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers Association (IPCPR) reported in an email that the legislation would impose a revised federal excise tax on large cigars—52.4 percent, with a maximum tax cap of 40 cents per cigar.

It was feared throughout the cigar industry that the cap would be much higher. The original version called for a $10 cap, and earlier versions had a cap of $3 per cigar. The tax is currently capped at five cents.

The bill, which seeks to fund an expansion of SCHIP with higher tobacco taxes, is expected to pass given the new Democratic leadership in Washington. Last year, Congress attempted to pass the expansion, but President Bush vetoed the legislation two times, most recently in December.

“Our industry came together to aggressively challenge the disastrous, proposed $3 tax cap,” wrote Chris McCalla, legislative director of the IPCPR, in the email.
The new legislation also does not have a floor tax on cigars, although certain other tobacco products would be subject to the floor tax.

Pelosi Open to Prosecution of Bush Administration Officials

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is receptive to the idea of prosecuting some Bush administration officials, while letting others who are accused of misdeeds leave office without prosecution, she told Chris Wallace in an interview on “FOX News Sunday.”

“I think you look at each item and see what is a violation of the law and do we even have a right to ignore it,” the California Democrat said. “And other things that are maybe time that is spent better looking to the future rather than to the past.”

Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced Friday he wants to set up a commission to look into whether the Bush administration broke the law by taking the nation to war against Iraq and instituting aggressive anti-terror initiatives. The Michigan Democrat called for an “independent criminal probe into whether any laws were broken in connection with these activities.”
Obama has not closed off the possibility of prosecutions, but hinted he does not favor them.

“I don’t believe that anybody is above the law,” he told ABC News a week ago. “On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”

Pelosi, during the interview in her ceremonial office, said there is merit in both arguments.

“I don’t think that Mr. Obama and Mr. Conyers are that far apart,” she said. “There are different subjects and you treat them differently.”

She hinted that the law might compel Democrats to press forth on some prosecutions, even if they are politically unpopular, adding: “That’s not up to us to say that doesn’t matter anymore.”

“We cannot let the politicizing of, for example, the Justice Department to go unreviewed,” she added. “I want to see the truth come forth.”

It’s funny how they want the truth, unless it is that the democrats are guilty. What Pelosi wants is four years of costly, wasteful, hearings and testimony to distract the nation from the real criminals, the liberals. Why hasn’t any of them called for hearings on Frank, Dodd, and the others? I think that more Americans have suffered because of them than The Bush Administration.

Sarah Palin Interview Addresses Couric, Fey, and Others

John Zeigler interview with Governor Palin addresses the liberal media’s attacks on her and her family during the 2008 campaign. I think it’s funny that liberals, who incidentally consider themselves to be compassionate and caring, still demonstrtate hatred toward the Governor. The campaign is over, their guy was selected, so why all the hate? What are they so scared of? (other than losing in 2010 and 2012) .

See the video here. Be sure to read the comment s following the video.

Democrats Try to Lower Expectations

Even as they depict a massive stimulus package as indispensable to turning the economy around, Democrat leaders are aggressively lowering expectations that the package will yield dramatic accomplishments quickly.

Rep. David Obey, who is playing a key role in assembling the stimulus plan, which is expected to approach $800 billion, said recently that an infusion of federal spending is “the only game in town.” But the Wisconsin Democrat, who is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, was careful to add: “The downward momentum appears too strong to end the recession anytime soon.”

 House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s office said recently that “Congress needs to pass an economic recovery package to prevent any further decline in the economy” — but cautioned, “recovery will not be immediate.”

The expectations game is always tricky in politics. To win power, candidates promise to enact sweeping change. But once victory is in hand, they often scramble to lower those expectations so they won’t be perceived as falling short.

Democrats are facing an especially precarious version of that dilemma. In crafting a package that will sink hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into the economy, they are apprehensive about the fallout if the economy merely continues sputtering along for several years.

And lawmakers are already mindful of how they will face voters less than two years from now. The ruling party almost always loses seats in midterm elections, and that trend could be exacerbated for the Democrats if voters think they threw billions of dollars at the economy with little to show for it.

“Elections are run in two-year cycles, and we’re in an economic cycle that we can’t turn around in two years,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.). “It’s a political problem. But I don’t know that there is a way out of it.”

One aspect of the Democrats’ strategy is to stress that the recession was the Bush administration’s fault, not theirs. “President Bush will leave behind a legacy of debt, transforming the biggest surpluses in history into the biggest deficits and affecting our ability to confront the current economic crisis,” Rep. Hoyer’s office said recently.

They take some hope in that regard from the performance of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to whom they are increasingly looking as a role model. Mr. Roosevelt didn’t rapidly end the Great Depression, but voters supported him because he seemed to care so deeply, taking aggressive action and trying everything at his disposal.

That’s what this is really all about isn’t it? Roosevelt’s plan kept the democrats in power for 54 years. The primary reason for anything that the democrats do is to give themselves a little more power and to hold on to that power. If something good does come out of it, then that’s a plus.

ONE PLUS ONE EQUALS 20 EXTRA VOTES FOR FRANKEN

by Ann Coulter
December 17, 2008

It’s bad enough that the Republican Party can’t prevent Democrats from voting in its primaries and saddling us with The New York Times’ favorite Republican as our presidential nominee. If the Republican Party can’t protect an election won by the incumbent U.S. senator in Minnesota, there is no point in donating to the Republican Party.

The day after the November election, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman had won his re-election to the U.S. Senate, beating challenger Al Franken by 725 votes.

Then one heavily Democratic town miraculously discovered 100 missing ballots. And, in another marvel, they were all for Al Franken! It was like a completely evil version of a Christmas miracle.

As strange as it was that all 100 post-election, “discovered” ballots would be for one candidate, it was even stranger that the official time stamp for the miracle ballots printed out by the voting machine on the miracle ballots showed that the votes had been cast on Nov. 2 — two days before the election.

Democratic election officials in the miracle-ballot county simply announced that their voting machine must have been broken. Don’t worry about it — they were sure those 100 votes for Franken were legit.

Then another 400-odd statistically improbable “corrections” were made in other Democratic strongholds until — by the end of election week — Coleman’s lead had been whittled down to a mere 215 votes.

Since then, highly irregular counting methods have added to Franken’s total bit by bit, to the point that Coleman is now ahead by only 188 votes.

As long as Coleman maintains any lead at all, Republicans don’t seem to care that Coleman’s advantage is being shrunk by laughable ballot “discoveries” and disreputable standard-switching from precinct to precinct — depending on which method of counting ballots is most advantageous to Franken.

Consider a few other chilling examples of Democrats thieving their way to victory over the years.

In 1974, Republican Louis Wyman won his race for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire, beating Democrat John Durkin by 355 votes. Durkin demanded a recount — which went back and forth by a handful of votes until the state’s Ballot Law Commission concluded that Wyman had indeed won by (at least) two votes.

Wyman was certified the winner by the New Hampshire secretary of state and was on his way to Washington when … the overwhelmingly Democratic U.S. Senate refused to seat Wyman.

Despite New Hampshire’s certification of Wyman as the winner of the election, this was the post-Watergate Senate, when Democrats could get away with anything — up to and including a prank known as “President Jimmy Carter.”

The U.S. Senate spent months examining disputed ballots from the New Hampshire election. Unable to come up with a method to declare the Democrat the winner that didn’t require a guillotine, the Senate forced New Hampshire to hold another election.

It was a breathtaking abuse of power. New Hampshire had certified a winner of its Senate election, but it was a Republican, so the Democratic Senate simply ordered a new election.

Demoralized Republicans stayed away from the race and, this time, the Democrat won the re-vote.

Even more egregious was the Indiana House race in 1984. On election night, the incumbent Democrat Frank McCloskey appeared to have won a narrow victory of 72 votes. But after a correction was made in one county, it turned out his Republican opponent, Richard McIntyre, had won by 34 votes.

McIntyre was certified the winner — which is when the trouble usually starts for a Republican.

Again, a majority Democrat House refused to seat the certified winner in a close election. I’m sure it was just a coincidence that the winner was a Republican.

Consequently, Indiana performed yet another recount of the entire district, which again showed that Republican McIntyre was the winner — this time by 418 votes. Now he was really asking for it. The nerve of this guy! Hey, buddy, do you mind? We’re trying to throw an election over here!

As The Washington Post reported at the time: There were “no allegations of fraud” in the recount and 90 percent of ballot disqualifications had been agreed to “by election commissions dominated by Democrats.”

So naturally the House refused to seat the Republican even though he had received the most votes (hereinafter referred to as “the winner”). The House proceeded to conduct its own recount. (If you haven’t detected a pattern by this point, please ask your doctor if Prilosec is right for you.)

This time, instead of ordering the district to hold another election, the Democratic House saved all concerned a lot of time and money by simply declaring Democrat Frank McCloskey the winner by four votes.

The vote-theft most like Minnesota this year was the infamous 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State. The Republican won the race on election night, but ballots favoring the Democrat kept being “discovered” until the Democrat finally eked out a majority. At that point, the recount was immediately halted and the Democrat declared the victor.

You would have to go back to Reconstruction to find an election that was stolen by the Republicans this way, but it’s all in a day’s work for the Democrats.

That’s why they were so testy about the 2000 Florida election. It was the one time in the last century Republicans wouldn’t let Democrats steal an election they lost by less than a thousand votes.

No matter how many times Democrats steal elections, Republicans keep thinking the next time will be different. Minnesota is famously clean, isn’t it? It must be different. It’s not different. It’s still the Democrats.

COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

Car Czar’ Could Dictate Models and Prices of U.S. Automakers

The House-passed $14-billion bailout bill for U.S. automakers would give a presidential “designee” the potential power to tell the automakers what cars they could make and the price at which they could sell them.

The bill–formally titled the Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act–passed the House Wednesday, but appeared stalled in the Senate yesterday. The act would grant sweeping powers to a federal “Car Czar” — an individual the bill merely refers to as “the President’s Designee.”

The designee would be solely responsible for carrying out the provisions of the auto bailout, including overseeing the negotiations for and approving the restructuring plans the automakers must produce under the proposal by a March 31 deadline.

The bill directs the automakers to negotiate restructuring plans and submit them to the designee by that date.  If the automakers successfully negotiate a restructuring plan, the designee will evaluate whether the plans meet each of six conditions required by Congress.

Meeting the ‘requirements.’

Section 6 of the bill–titled “Submission of Plans”–states:

“The president’s designee shall approve the restructuring plan if the president’s designee determines that the plan will result in,” meeting a set of requirements.

Among those requirements: a provision that automakers have “a product mix and cost structure that is competitive in the United States market.”

This requirement would mean that the federal Car Czar could determine which cars and trucks the automaker could produce, according to a Senate Banking Committee staffer, because the “designee” would determine what would and what would not be competitive.

If the designee deemed that the company’s proposed product line and pricing structure would not be competitive, the company would have to change its plan–or have its federal financial assistance revoked.

“If an evaluation by the president’s designee demonstrates that . . . the eligible automobile manufacturer . . . fails to submit an acceptable restructuring plan,” the bill says, “[t]he repayment of any loan may be accelerated . . .  and any other financial assistance may be cancelled by the president’s designee.”

If the Car Czar believes that the automakers are not making sufficient progress toward negotiating restructuring plans to his liking, he is specifically called upon to ask Congress for additional powers to give him the authority to make them do so.

“At any such time as the president’s designee determines that action is necessary to avoid disruption to the economy or to achieve a negotiated plan,” the bill says, “the president’s designee shall submit to Congress a report outlining any additional powers and authorities necessary to facilitate the completion of a negotiated plan.”

There is no definition in the bill outlining what these powers might be, but the bill further authorizes the Car Czar to substitute his own plan for restructuring the auto industry if he believes the automakers have failed to come up with an adequate plan of their own.

Under the bill, the Car Czar’s plan could take the form of extended negotiations between the automakers and other interested parties, forcing the automakers into Chapter 11, or presenting his own plan to Congress in the form of new legislation that would–by federal law–tell the car companies what models they could make and what they could charge for them.

“The president’s designee shall provide to Congress a plan that represents the judgment of the president’s designee as to the steps necessary to achieve long-term viability…including through a negotiated plan, a plan to be implemented by legislation, or a (bankruptcy) reorganization,” the bill says.

Another condition the restructuring plans must meet is a mandate to produce “advanced technology vehicles”–including hybrids and other fuel efficient vehicles.

Anybody remember the Soviet era Volga? You could get any kind of car you wanted as long as it was a black sedan? что, Вы не любите черный седан?(what, you do not like black sedan?) comrade?

Emmanuel – Death Threats?

Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said today he wouldn’t go to the Chicago presidential transition offices in order to avoid reporters trying to ask him whether he had contact with Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich about the Senate seat vacated by Obama’s election.

A spokesman for Emanuel said he later showed up at the office, apparently able to sneak out of the house without being seen by reporters waiting to ask him questions.

Meanwhile, late today a spokesperson for Emanuel confirmed in an email that an Associated Press story saying that he is not a target of the investigation is “accurate.” Questions remain, however, over his contacts with Blagojevich and his staff, and Emanuel has still not said whether or not he’s been contacted by the FBI for questioning.

Emanuel has refused to comment as to whether he is the un-named presidential adviser cited in the FBI affidavit filed in the Blagojevich case. “You’re wasting your time,” Emanuel told a Chicago Sun Times reporter . “I’m not going to say a word to you. “

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald says there is “nothing in the complaint” that implicates Obama but the affidavit suggests someone from the Obama camp was in touch with Blagojevich or his aides.

Back at his home, Emanuel appeared “beet-red,” according to an ABC News cameraman.”I’m getting regular death threats. You’ve put my home address on national television. I’m pissed at the networks. You’ve intruded too much, ” Emanuel said, according to the cameraman.

An aide for Emanuel said late Friday afternoon that Emanuel did not make any remarks about receiving death threats. “While we appreciate this camera man’s active imagination, this report is inaccurate,” said Sarah Feinberg. Responding to Emanuel’s comments, ABC News went back and double-checked with the camera man and stands by the story.

It’s apparent that the Obama camp has circled their wagons and are not saying anything until the full transcript is released. This is a common tactic used by intelligent criminals to give them time to get their stories straight. They’re waiting to see who’s named and what they said, then they will start talking. Do not be surprised when everything they say at that point appears to to fit in or be overly consistent.

Illinois Gov. Blagojevich, thrown under bus, can still fill Obama’s seat

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich could still appoint someone to fill Obama’s U.S. Senate seat despite charges that he tried to barter it away for cash or a plum job in what prosecutors call “a political corruption crime spree.”

But it would take a lot of nerve and Blagojevich would have to hurry because state lawmakers are racing to snatch away his power to appoint a new senator and put it in the hands of voters.

“No appointment by this governor, under these circumstances, could produce a credible replacement,” U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin said Tuesday after the governor was arrested on charges of conspiring to commit fraud and soliciting bribery.

Until state lawmakers call a special election, though, Blagojevich still has the power to fill the Senate seat left vacant by the Obama.

“He is still the sitting governor of Illinois today, now, and that is not something we have any say in or control of,” U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said in unveiling corruption charges against the 52-year-old governor.

Obama was not accused of any wrongdoing. “I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so I was not aware of what was happening,” the president-elect said.

Prosecutors stepped in and had the governor arrested because he was on “what can only be called a political corruption crime spree,” Fitzgerald said.

Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, said he is prepared to call the Illinois House into session as early as Monday to set a special election to fill the seat. Illinois Senate President Emil Jones said he had something similar in mind.

In Washington, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., made it plain he didn’t want to seat anyone under such a cloud, saying the charges “are appalling and represent as serious a breach of the public trust as I have ever heard.”

Reid , Durbin, Obama – way to go, just throw the guy under the bus. Keep on talking. This guy’s already shown that he has lot of nerve, now that you’ve disowned him why should he stay loyal to you, the democrats? I hope he appoints a republican for that seat – just to show that he can do it.

Hillary and the Constitution

What’s a little matter like the Constitution among friends? That’s a question a few legal eagles are asking as they note that Hillary Clinton can’t become Secretary of State thanks to something called the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. Under that clause of Article I, a Member of Congress who has been in office while a pay raise was passed for a federal job may not then be appointed to the job at the higher salary. Mrs. Clinton was a Senator this January when President Bush passed an executive order increasing the Secretary of State’s pay to $191,300 from $186,600. As a legal matter, that should disqualify her.

Senate Democrats are hoping to finesse the problem with the so-called “Saxbe fix,” whereby the salary raise for Secretary of State would return to its previous level. Democrats point out this was used by Richard Nixon to make Ohio Senator William Saxbe Attorney General, and again for Lloyd Bentsen to become Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration.

The Founders wrote the Emoluments Clause to prevent Members from enriching themselves by setting up plum assignments and then maneuvering into the jobs. If Congress is able to ignore language expressly written to curtail its power, the clause is effectively a dead letter. As Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute points out, 10 Democratic Senators objected to the Saxbe fix in Mr. Bentsen’s case.

To our knowledge, Senator Clinton played no role in the salary raise, and she clearly had grander ambitions than Secretary of State when the law was signed. But while the issue will strike some as trivial, it is no small matter to ignore the Constitution’s direct words. Giving Mrs. Clinton a pay cut is a minimum gesture of deference required to the document that Mr. Obama will soon swear an oath to preserve, protect and defend.

Democrats First 100 Days

It looks like over $550 Billion in new spending by the democrats in ‘09. The first two were bad ideas the first time they came up. Now the dems plan to slide them through without resistance. The third item is an entirely new program. How do they plan to pay for these? The money has to come from somewhere – my guess is tax increases. Is this what Obama meant when he said “It can’t happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.”?

 

$ 35 BILLION – Two proposals passed by Congress in 2007 to reauthorize and expand SCHIP from an average of $5 billion yearly to approx $12 billion yearly over the next five years were vetoed by President George W.Bush

 

$ 17 BILLION- February 28, 2008 -  The House approved a bill to extend more than $17 billion in tax credits and other incentives to encourage the production of energy from solar, wind and other renewable sources, and to promote energy conservation. The bill would be financed by ending tax incentives for oil and natural gas producers. Similar legislation has failed to pass the Senate on three occasions over the last year, including an effort in December when the package of tax credits for renewable energy fell just one vote short of the 60 needed to advance it.

 

$150 BILLION and as much as $500 BILLION  – on temporary measures aimed at stimulating economic activity

 

 

Democrats Plot Series of Quick Legislative Victories

WASHINGTON — Democratic congressional leaders, eager to trumpet that change has come to Washington, are looking to enact quickly a series of popular bills in January in such areas as renewable energy, children’s health care and embryonic stem-cell research.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for stem-cell and children’s health bills after Election Day.

The top priority remains an economic stimulus package. But Democrats also want to tackle rapidly an array of bills they consider “low-hanging fruit.” Those measures won considerable bipartisan support in the last Congress, but were vetoed, filibustered or otherwise blocked by Republicans.

The goal is to send a message to voters that Democrats have delivered on the change they promised. Congress’s approval ratings have been at historic lows, and Democratic leaders are aware that if they do not show major achievements quickly, they risk losing a large number of seats in the next election.

“The American people will judge us by how we govern,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), part of the House leadership. “The first indicator, the first test, will be the 2010 midterm elections…. That will be the first time the American people get to express their opinion on the direction we are taking the country.”

Discussions are under way among Senate leaders, House leaders and the Obama transition team over how to package and time the Democrats’ first few initiatives. Some measures, for example, could be inserted into sweeping economic, health and energy bills. But passing them as stand-alone measures could earn bigger headlines and political benefits.

Sen. Jeff Bingaman plans to introduce a measure requiring utilities to derive 15% of energy from renewable sources.

Meanwhile, Senate leaders are still learning where some of their new members stand on key issues. It has been years since Democrats have had to factor in the views of senators from places like Alaska, but the election of Mark Begich makes that a necessity.

“One of the things that is being coordinated with leaders and committees, and with the transition folks, is which of the low-hanging fruit to do,” said a Democratic leadership aide. “One of the questions is, ‘How do the Obama folks want to do this as part of their first 100 days?’ That is still being nailed down.”

Democrats also believe that a series of early wins would establish their power and make it easier to push through more controversial items later.

One candidate is a measure requiring that electric utilities derive 15% of their energy from renewable sources by the year 2020. The House passed such a bill in August 2007, and the Senate has passed similar bills three times, though not last year.

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D., N.M.), who chairs the Senate Energy and Environment Committee, plans to introduce this Renewable Electricity Standard early on, though it’s not clear whether it would stand alone or be inserted into more sweeping stimulus or energy bills.

Advocates say they have gained four votes in the Senate, and possibly more, from the last election, and are confident of passage. “We are very optimistic,” said Marchant Wentworth, legislative representative for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen hopes early votes will set up the party in 2010.

Equally central to Democrats’ efforts to depict themselves as forward-looking are an expansion of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and an increase in the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP.

Both are popular measures, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi cited them as top priorities in a press conference after Election Day.

Congress passed a bill to loosen federal funding restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research in 2006 and again in 2007. Many prominent Republicans, including former first lady Nancy Reagan, supported the measures, but President George W. Bush vetoed them.

Similarly, at the end of 2007, President Bush twice vetoed a plan to expand SCHIP by $35 billion over five years, describing the proposal as a first step toward socialized medicine. The program’s funding expires at the end of March 2009, so Congress has to act by then.

With bigger Democratic majorities, these bills are likely to pass, and Obama is expected to sign them. “There is a large degree of consensus to move quickly to demonstrate that change has come to Washington,” Mr. Van Hollen said.