Theodore's World: Government & Politics Archives

November 17, 2011

House Approves Concealed Firearm Permit Bill; Would Allow People to Carry Concealed Weapon Between States

Rep. Cliff Stearns presides over a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington. Stearns is chief co-sponsor of the concealed carry bill.

House Approves Concealed Firearm Permit Bill; Would Allow People to Carry Concealed Weapon Between States

FOX News

WASHINGTON

A state permit to carry a concealed firearm would be valid in almost every other state in the country under legislation the House passed Wednesday.

The first pro-gun bill the House has taken up this year and the first since Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., was severely injured in a gun attack in January, it had the National Rifle Association’s backing and passed by a comfortable margin. The vote was 272-154, with only seven Republicans voting against it and 43 Democrats supporting it.

The Democratic-controlled Senate has no parallel bill. But two years ago, GOP Sens. John Thune of South Dakota and David Vitter of Louisiana nearly succeeded in attaching a similar measure to a larger bill.

Under the House legislation, people with a concealed carry permit in one state could carry a concealed weapon in every other state that gives people the right to carry concealed weapons.

While states have various standards for issuing such permits, currently only Illinois and the District of Columbia prohibit the concealed carrying of weapons.

"The Second Amendment is a fundamental right to bear arms that should not be constrained by state boundary lines," said GOP Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

The bill's chief co-sponsor, Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., said states should consider concealed carry permits no differently from driver's licenses recognized by all states. He noted that many states already have reciprocity agreements with other states.

The legislation would "make it easier for law-abiding permit holders to know that they are simply in compliance with the law when they carry a firearm as they travel," he said.

Democratic opponents said the bill would constitute a "race to the bottom," with states that have strict requirements for issuing permits having to accept permits from states with far more lax standards.

"It's a situation where weaker state laws become the national law," said Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va. He noted that some states require training for permit holders, or deny permits to those under 21 or who sell drugs to minors, commit sex offenses or are involved in domestic violence.

According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the measure would allow states with tough requirements, such as New York and California, "to allow in concealed carry gun-toting people from states, such as Florida, which repeatedly have given dangerous people licenses to carry."

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., wrote President Barack Obama last week urging him to issue a veto threat against the bill. Passing the bill "would jeopardize public safety and would be an insult to states like New Jersey and New York that purposefully have strong gun ownership laws," they wrote.

The administration has not yet taken an official position on the bill.

Democrats also chided Republicans for ignoring their dedication to states' rights. "For the Republican House majority that supposedly believes in states' rights, this bill is shocking," said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.

There hasn't been much legislative action on firearms issues this year. A spending bill that the House is expected to vote on this week would bar the Justice Department from consolidating firearms sales records or maintaining information on people who have passed firearms background checks.

The chief sponsors of the concealed weapon measure, Stearns and Rep. Heath Shuler, D-N.C., said their proposal would not create a federal licensing system but merely require states to honor one another's carry permits.

People who are unable to get a permit in their home state would not be able to carry a concealed weapon in their home state by getting a permit in another state. A state's ban on carrying concealed weapons in places such as bars, sporting events or state parks would apply to nonresidents as well as residents.

Thirty-five states have "shall issue" permit laws that usually require states to issue permits to those who meet legal requirements. Ten others have "may issue" or discretionary permit laws. Vermont, Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Wild Thing's comment......

WHOO-HOO! Might not pass the Senate but it is a great indicator!

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:50 AM | Comments (2)

August 11, 2011

Republican Picks For The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (Super Committee)

Speaker Boehner Announces Appointments to Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction

The Speaker's Official Website

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) today announced his intent to appoint the following three lawmakers to represent House Republicans on the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction:

House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)

House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI)

House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI)

Speaker Boehner has tapped Chairman Hensarling to serve as a co-chair of the joint select committee. Boehner issued the following statement regarding the appointments of Chairmen Hensarling, Camp, and Upton:

“Our debt and deficits are a threat to our economy, and America cannot achieve long-term job growth until we take action to address this crisis. In the weeks ahead, a serious, bipartisan committee of lawmakers will begin the hard but necessary work of making the tough choices needed to rein in mandatory and entitlement spending, which are the drivers of our debt. The lawmakers I have appointed to serve on this joint committee are proven leaders who have earned the trust and confidence of their colleagues and constituents. They understand the gravity of our debt crisis and I appreciate their willingness to serve on this panel.

“The two parties have fundamental differences about government and its proper role in our society. Where we've been able to agree, we have acted, and in a way consistent with the American people’s desire for a smaller, less costly, and more accountable government. Still, the differences remain, and so does the urgent work of returning our economy to creating jobs and lifting the crushing burden of debt that threatens our children’s future. This joint committee presents an opportunity for both parties to bring to the table their best ideas, debate them on the merits, and ultimately come together to do what’s best for our country. With all that’s at stake, I expect that the joint select committee will conduct its work in the open and transparent manner the American people deserve.”

McConnell Appoints Kyl, Toomey, Portman, to Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction

Mitch McConnel's Official Website

U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell Wednesday announced his appointments to the 12-member Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction tasked with reducing the deficit by $1.5 trillion more than the cuts already identified in the Budget Control Act. McConnell appointed Sens. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), and Rob Portman (R-Ohio).

Sen. Jon Kyl was elected unanimously by his colleagues in 2008 to serve as Republican Whip, the second highest position in Senate Republican leadership. He is a senior member of the Finance Committee and a leading advocate of pro-growth tax policies. Kyl is in his third term in the Senate after serving four terms in the House of Representatives. He was the Senate Republicans’ lead negotiator in the deficit reduction talks led by the Vice President over the summer.

Sen. Pat Toomey is a member of the Budget, Banking, Commerce and Joint Economic Committees and has been a leader on economic, financial services, and budgetary issues. Toomey is in his first term in the Senate after serving three terms in the House of Representatives. Sen. Toomey has run a small business and served as the president of The Club for Growth.

Sen. Rob Portman will be the only former Director of the Office of Management and Budget on the Joint Committee. He is a member of the Budget Committee and serves on the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management (Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee). Sen. Portman is in his first term in the Senate. He served in the House of Representatives from 1993 to 2005 when he became the U.S. Trade Representative. While serving in the House of Representatives, he served as Vice Chair of the House Budget Committee and as a member of the House Ways & Means Committee. In 1997, Portman co-chaired the National Commission on Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service with Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska.

Wild Thing's comment....

I wish I could be excited about othis committee, but it just makes the pit of my tummy feel sick and very concerned. I just hope and pray the Republicans that will be on it will not cave to the dems.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (4)

August 07, 2011

S&P Warns Of A Second Downgrade For USA

Michele Bachmann on Fox News on FOX with Neil Cavuto. Both Neil and Bachmann point out that Obama hasn't said a word about the S&P downgrade. Bachmann says he needs to come back from Camp David.

As Neil points out at the beginning of the video.....Obama did not even mention the downgrad by S&P in his Sat. address on TV. ~ Wild Thing

S&P warns of a second downgrade

Politico

Standard & Poor’s warned Saturday that the US government could face a second downgrade if government fails to make real cuts to the debt.

One day after lowering the nation’s platinum triple-A credit rating, Standard & Poor’s analysts warned Saturday that the U.S. government could face a second downgrade if the economy continues to struggle and the government fails to make the cuts outlined in the debt ceiling agreement.

The ratings agency on Friday downgraded the nation to AA+ for the first time in history, saying partisanship in Washington is preventing dramatic deficit reduction.

S&P managing director John Chambers told reporters on a Saturday conference call that the toxic mix of a listless economy and political infighting will cause government debt to grow.

“Compared to some other highly rated governments, the U.S. government does not have the proactive ability to put public finances on a firm footing,” Chambers said.

His colleague David Beers said the partisan discord increases the risk that Washington will not achieve effective policy remedies.

“For that reason, there’s a lot of uncertainty about the future debt burden,” Beers said.

S&P: U.S. Faces Further Downgrade Beyond AA+

FOX Business News

The U.S.’s new double A+ rating “could go down more in a time frame of six months to 24 months,” to double-A, depending on government action to cut the deficit, John Chambers, managing director and chairman of Standard & Poor’s sovereign ratings committee tells FOX Business senior vice president and anchor Neil Cavuto in an interview on FOX News Saturday.

That means the U.S. government effectively has until at least February to find additional cuts to meet S&P's demand for at least $4 trillion in total deficit reductions over the next decade.

Continue article click here

Wild Thing's comment........

If they would get rid of ObamaDEATHcare that would save millions!.....Start There! And get rid of Obama - that will save trillions !!

The S&P guy responsible for the ruling was interviewed yesterday by Niel Cavuto. He was not apologetic and stood up strong for the down grade.

Niel asked if other nations had been down graded before. He answered yes.

Neil asked how long it generally took to have the rating reverted to AAA.

He answered..... well, about 9 to 18 years!

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:55 AM | Comments (4)

S&P Says It Favors Spending Cuts Over Tax Hikes To Fix Credit Rating ~ Are You Listening Obama????

S&P Says It Favors Spending Cuts Over Tax Hikes To Fix Credit Rating

The Hill

Standard & Poor’s laments the possibility cuts to entitlement programs won’t materialize and the decreasing likelihood of new tax revenues.

The decision by Standard & Poor’s to downgrade the U.S. credit rating to “AA+” at once laments the possibility that cuts to entitlement programs will not materialize and the decreasing likelihood of new tax revenues. But it appears to give more weight to the need for more spending cuts, as it warns that a further credit rating downgrade is in the cards if the U.S. does not trim spending.

In contrast, while the report indicates that new tax revenues would help mitigate the debt crisis, failing to find these revenues does not immediately put the U.S. at risk of another downgrade.

Specifically, the report warns directly that a further downgrade to “AA” status could occur within the next two years if there is “less reduction in spending” than what was agreed in the debt ceiling agreement. S&P said one factor that could lead to this second downgrade is if the minimum $1.2 trillion in spending cuts under the debt ceiling agreement does not occur.

Wild Thing's comment..........

Obama owns this, after they passed the first bill .."Cut,Cap, Balance" .....and then IF the Senate and Obama would have signed that one this would not be happening.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (1)

August 04, 2011

Congressman McClintock on Fox Business Freedom Watch Speaks About The Budget Control Act of 2011

Congressman McClintock speaks about the Budget Control Act of 2011 and how the bill "opens up a $2.5 trillion line of credit for the most spendthrift administration in the history of the country to continue to spend at unsustainable rates."

Wild Thing's comment......

This is all sickening what is happening to our great country.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (3)

August 03, 2011

Debt Deal Could Cut Defense $900B Over Next Decade ~ Hater Of Our Military Obama Must Be Thrilled!

Spc. John “Rocky” Montoya, squad automatic weapon gunner attached to Laghman Provincial Reconstruction Team, talks to the convoy commander about the security situation in the area during a quality assurance and inspection mission Aug. 1, 2011 in the Qharghyee District.

Debt deal could cut defense $900B over next decade

USA Today

Cuts to defense spending in the debt reduction bill could total nearly $1 trillion over 10 years — more than double what President Obama had proposed earlier this year — and sap American military might worldwide, say analysts and members of Congress.

Budget cutters may have to consider slashing costly defense systems like the U.S. military’s replacement fighter jet or increase health-care premiums for working-age military retirees to comply with a debt reduction deal that may cut as much as $900 billion from the U.S. military over 10 years.

“They could do this responsibly,” said Todd Harrison, a budget expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “The reality is that it will be very difficult.”

Thomas Donnelly, a military analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, said the Pentagon cuts won’t require “long knives so much as chain saws.”

Harrison estimates the reductions in defense spending could rise to $900 billion over 10 years.

The proposed cuts would force critical weapons systems to be trimmed or eliminated along with reductions in military personnel and training while at war, Donnelly said.

Wild Thing's comment......

Satan in Chief must be so excited about this, he must be dancing in the hallway of the WH.

How about laying off ALL his Secret Service people to cut back on expense then for starters. Just a thought.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:47 AM | Comments (11)

August 02, 2011

U.S. House Passes Debt Limit Agreement as Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Enters Chamber

U.S. House of Representatives passing the Debt Limit Agreement today by a 269-161 margin.

As the final votes were being cast, spontaneous applause began to echo through the House Chamber as members realized Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords had entered to cast her vote. Giffords was casting her first vote on the floor since being shot by an assailant in January. The Debt Limit Agreement now moves to the U.S. Senate for a vote tomorrow, August 2, 2011, at 12 Noon ET.

Joe Biden told reporters he joked with shooting victim about “cracked heads.” Vice President Joe Biden, with a big smile on his face, walked to the House floor and said, “I came to see Gabby, that’s why I’m here.” …When Biden was asked about what he spoke with Giffords about, he joked, “She’s now a member of the cracked head club like me.”

Wild Thing's comment.......

This is remarkable, how she has been on the road to recovery.

It is amazing how Biden just had to say the wrong thing. He was NOT shot in the head. To compare what he had to what happened to this woman, the two are apples and oranges.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM

August 01, 2011

Another Day At The Debt Ceiling Drama

Obama announced on Sunday that Democrats and Republicans leaders have reached an agreement to reduce the U.S. deficit and avoid default.

Obama said the agreement will cut about $1 trillion over 10 years.

The bipartisan plan will be presented to Congress on Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.

"Leaders from both parties and in both chambers will present this agreement to our caucuses tomorrow," Reid said on the Senate floor.

The Wall Street Journal

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) appears to be balking at the debt ceiling deal that Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has signed. Mr. Boehner is concerned about provisions in the deal that could lead to sharp cuts in military spending, say people familiar with the situation. House aides have warned that just because Mr. Reid has signed off on the deal doesn’t mean the deal is done.

House Dems 'May Not Be Able to Support' Deal : Pelosi

International Business Times

A deal to raise the federal debt ceiling and avoid the first ever U.S. default is "very close," but House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday there is a chance they may not pass it.

"We all may not be able to support it, or none us may be able to support it," Pelosi told reporters late Sunday night.

Pelosi has scheduled a Democratic caucus meeting for Monday. Both that meeting and the GOP’s noon confab will be crucial for both parties to gauge the support of their members.

“I look forward to reviewing the legislation with my caucus to see what level of support we can provide,” Pelosi said in a Sunday night statement.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver , current leader of the Black Caucus, says the debt deal is a “sugar-coated Satan sandwich.”

Roll Call

Barack Obama’s rightward lurch to reach a $3 trillion deficit reduction deal with no guarantee of additional revenues had liberals fuming and Republicans all but declaring victory Sunday afternoon.

With time running out to reach an agreement to raise the debt ceiling before Tuesday’s default deadline, Obama moved dramatically in the direction of the GOP, according to Senators and aides in both parties…

…Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said early reports of the new deal appeared to be “a sugar-coated Satan sandwich.” The Missouri Democrat said the CBC hadn’t yet made a formal declaration that the group would oppose it, “but this is a shady bill.”

Wild Thing's comment........

What a soap opera this all has been and continues to be.

Can you imagine if everyone of the elected politican in both parties, everyone of them loved our country, was NOT a socialist, communist, Marxist, racist you name it like so many we know are to the core....it would be a breeze to get this all done. It would not have happened in the first place.

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:50 AM | Comments (6)

July 20, 2011

House Approves 'Cut, Cap and Balance' Plan 234-190

Paul Ryan twas excellent as he discussed the “Cut, Cap & Balance the Budget” plan.

House Approves 'Cut, Cap and Balance' Plan

FOX News

The U.S. House of Representatives approved an bill that would increase the U.S. Debt Limit by $2.4 Trillion, accompanied by spending cuts, a cap on future expenditures and a Balanced Budget Amendment requirement. The bill passed the Republican-controlled House 234-190:

The House of Representatives has approved the GOP’s ‘Cut, Cap and Balance’ plan with a vote of 234 to 190.

The bill imposes caps on federal spending as a percentage of GDP. It also allows for an increase in the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion in exchange for both the Senate and House approving a balanced budget amendment.

House Speaker John Boehner played a muted role in public during the day, but later applauded the passage of the plan.

“House Republicans are the only ones to put forward and pass a real plan that will create a better environment for private-sector job growth by stopping Washington from spending money it doesn’t have and preventing tax hikes on families and small businesses," he said in a statement. "The White House hasn’t said what it will cut."

But nine Republicans voted no on the plan, including Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas. Five Democrats sided with Republicans.

The plan is under a veto threat by Obama amid predictions that it won't make it through the Senate.

Republicans fiercely defend the cut, cap and balance proposal, noting that they've done more than Obama in putting a plan on the table.

Wild Thing's comment.........

GOP voting NO: Bachmann, Broun (GA), Canseco, DesJarlais, Griffith (VA), Jones, Mack, (Ron) Paul, Rohrabacher.
DEM voting YES: Boren, Cooper, Matheson, McIntyre, Shuler.

Here is the complete list of votes

ROLL CALL

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:50 AM | Comments (4)

June 01, 2011

House Sends Obama Message, Rejects His Debt Increase

House Republicans dealt defeat to their own proposal for a $2.4 trillion increase in the nation's debt limit Tuesday, a political gambit designed to reinforce a demand for spending cuts to accompany any increase in government borrowing.

House overwhelmingly rejects debt limit increase, 82 Dems vote "no"

Washington Examiner

Eighty-two House Democrats joined every Republican in rejecting a bill to raise the federal debt ceiling to $16.7 trillion, and the measure failed by a vote of 97 to 318, with seven members (all Democrats) voting “present.”

The Obama administration has argued for such a “clean” vote on the debt ceiling without strings attached (such as additional legislation to reduce the debt).

Just last month, 114 Democrats signed a letter calling for a “clean” vote and Democratic Minority Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., also advocated one. But today, Hoyer announced he was advising his caucus to vote against the measure. Ultimately, just 97 Democrats voted for it, with 82 explicitly voting against it (on top of the seven “present” votes). A total of 10 members (six Democrats, four Republicans) did not vote.

No doubt, this is political gamesmanship by the GOP meant to call the Democrats bluff and show that a stand-alone vote on the debt limit has no chance of passage. But it still is another demonstration that Democrats are reluctant to vote for anything that could open them up to criticism, even when it means voting for policies for which they had previously expressed support.

Last week, zero Senate Democrats voted for President Obama’s budget, which went down 0 to 97. And Democrats in the Senate still haven’t proposed their own alternative.

Wild Thing's comment........

I love it when the dems go against obama it makes it a double slap in his face when that happens.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (4)

May 09, 2011

Obama and Senate Seeks to Create Caesar There Must Be A NO Vote On S. 679

Obama and Senate Seeks to Create Caesar

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

While all of America is distracted and focused on the death of Osama bin Laden, our President and his minions have been fast at work laying the groundwork for S. 679: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 to speed through the Senate and then make its way into the House and then to the President to sign. Yes, the other hand is quickly forming into a dictatorial fist that is about to smash our Constitution.

America is poised with this proposed bill, to morph immediately from a Republic into an empire with the privileged eunuchs of the Senate as window dressing and a dictator – the first American Caesar – at the country’s helm.

And leading the progressive charge is Chuck Schumer (D-NY). No big surprise there. Schumer is an elitist Marxist and a first class progressive who hates America almost as much as he loves power. He introduced S. 679 on March 30th, 2011. He was joined by a gaggle of progressives from the left and the right. This is something I have been warning Americans about for a long time. If we are to survive as a nation, we must rid ourselves of ALL progressives or our nation is doomed and freedom will be swept into the dustbin of history.

Schumer’s esteemed list of constitutional traitors is as follows:

■Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
■Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
■Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
■Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA)
■Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE)
■Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME)
■Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)
■Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE)
■Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
■Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT)
■Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN)
■Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
■Sen. John Reed (D-RI)
■Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)
■Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)

From The Heritage Foundation, here is a succinct explanation of the bill:

The bill reduces the number of presidential appointments that require the consent of the Senate and establishes within the executive branch a Working Group on Streamlining Paperwork for Executive Nominations. Individuals nominated to senior executive offices suffer slow and detailed background investigations and mounds of duplicative paperwork before a President sends their nominations to the Senate. After nomination, many nominees suffer time-consuming inaction or time-consuming and excruciating action as the Senate proceeds (or does not) with consideration of the nomination. The sponsors of S. 679 have identified a valid problem, but proposed the wrong solution. Congress should not enact S. 679.

In essence they want to give the President the sole power to appoint people to positions of his choosing within our government. Obama would be free to do this without the approval of the Senate. Senate approval of such positions is mandated by the U.S. Constitution in Article II, Section 2 under the “Appointments Clause”:

… shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

This bill will do away with the checks and balances that separate an American form of government from those such as Venezuela and Brazil. Already we have power mongers such as Cass Sunstein our Regulatory Czar (more commonly known as the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and more aptly titled the Office of Government Propaganda) running amok across the US using agencies such as the EPA as a weapon of regulation and control. There is not a single area in our country that Sunstein does not have his claws sunk deep into. It should scare the crap out of Americans, but all I hear are crickets. The silence of capitulation seals our fate as surely as the thunderous applause of approval – so ends the Republic.

April 17, 2011

Senator Charles Grassley Has ‘damning’ Gunrunner Documents From His Investigation Into ATF's "Fast and Furious" Operation

Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) has damning evidence that US ATF officials sanctioned or allowed the sale of assault weapons to straw purchasers. The agency was doing this on purpose. The government encouraged this. Two of the weapons ended up at the murder scene of a US border patrol agent in Arizona, Brian Terry. Obama says he and Holder knew nothing about Operation Gunrunner.

Senator Grassley spoke out on his investigation yesterday on the floor of the senate.

This is an amazing video.

Between 13 and 1,700 guns got away and that’s just what has turned up so far. Several of the guns have been connected to criminal acts. Obama’s failed stimulus plan helped fund the program.

BREAKING: Grassley has ‘damning’ Gunrunner documents – CBS News

The Washington Examiner

Devastating e-mail exchanges between a senior official with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in Phoenix, AZ and a cooperating gun shop operator have been revealed by Senator Charles Grassley in a letter sent late yesterday to Attorney General Eric Holder.

“In light of this new evidence,” Grassley tells Holder, “the Justice Department’s claim that the ATF never knowingly sanctioned or allowed the sale of assault weapons to straw purchasers is simply not credible.”

Grassley’s press release can be viewed here.

CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson is reporting that the information contained in the e-mails is “damning.”

The e-mail exchange is with David Voth, group supervisor for ATF’s Phoenix Group VII. Voth is the agent who infamously sent an e-mail to other ATF agents, goading them into participating in the Gunrunner project without question, or to find a different job.

Wild Thing's comment........

This is outright treason against the United States; attempting to undermine the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

Holder and Obama should be kicked out big time but sadly they won't. I hate how they keep getting away with everything they do!!!

Posted by Wild Thing at 12:50 AM | Comments (4)

April 16, 2011

16 Tons of American Debt As Obama Keeps Increasing Federal Debt

Just how big is our National Debt? $14,300,000,000,000. IowaHawk explains that is equal to 16 million tons of $1 Bills. He has set his explanation to the wonderful song, “16 Tons,” by Tennessee Ernie Ford.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Really well done video of this.

And the scary thing too is that from the time the video started until it was finished the debt amount has grown.

Posted by Wild Thing at 12:47 AM | Comments (2)

April 09, 2011

al-Qaeda's Man in the White House Dictator Obama ~ EPA Was Rebuffed and Obama's Baby Killing Machine Planned Parenthood was Sidetracked!

A temporary deal has been reached to avoid a Government Shutdown by passing a continuing resolution until a final agreement can be passed for the 2011 Budget next week:

Obama took credit for the talks tonight that averted a government shutdown.

He also lectured America on “living within our means.”

CNN

“Like any worthwhile compromise, both sides had to make tough decisions and give ground on issues that were important to them,” Obama said before cameras in the White House Blue Room as he acknowledged some of the cuts agreed to would be painful, with certain programs cut back and other projects encountering delays. “But beginning to live within our means is the only way to protect those investments that will help America compete for new jobs,”

Obama didn’t want to cut a dime from the budget that he increased by a trillion dollars in the last three years.

Congress Strikes a Budget Deal to Avert Shutdown, Cutting $38.5B

FOX News

Senate Passes Short-Term Funding Deal to Avert Shutdown.

House members were called into session tonight to vote on the Short Term Funding bill to keep the federal machinery running for the next several days.

They reportedly agreed to cut about $38 billion in federal spending.

Republican attempts to curtail the reach of the Environmental Protection Agency were rebuffed.

Attempts to deny federal funds to Planned Parenthood were sidetracked.

However, anti-abortion lawmakers did succeed in winning a provision to ban the use of federal or local government funds to pay for abortions in the District of Columbia.

The House passed the short term funding bill 347-70.

UPDATE:

Some facts are being revealed slowly – more victories:
“The House got an agreement out of Harry Reid and the White House to prohibit taxpayer funding for abortions in the District of Columbia, and to allow a vote in the Senate over Planned Parenthood funding (and Obamacare).”

Fox just reported, one of the things agreed to, a stand alone vote on ObamaCare in the Senate. Boehner got the dems to agree to this with 23 senate dems up for reelection next year?

Wiild Thing's comment........

BIG disappointment and that is mild as to how I feel about this. Boehner was sent up against obama, Reid and the rest of the dems and the rinos. He was not the man for the job that needed a warrior, he needed to be a man with a take no prisoner at heart attitude. Boehner is not a warrior. We are 1/3 of 1/3 of the elected in Washington. Those odds call for someone that can take on a platoon of the enemy and wipe them out , not one measily moving target.

And because of obama, America has abandoned Israel, abandoned the Constitution, and dems keep having bigger wins then Republicans and it is the Republicans whose win would be best for America.

The Democratic Party has spent years, and millions of dollars indoctrinating and aligning people in support of their “progressive” agenda. This did not happen over night so I am trying as best I can at being realistic about all of this. BUT I am nontheless disappointed.

I did peek over at KOS and they are totally upset at the vote and what was done by the democrats. So there is a small victory in that I suppose.

This was a battle with people who will literally do anything to destroy this country, its constitution and its moral principles based on the Natural Law, God. Obama can’t even use the word “God” when quoting the pledge or the constitution.

Boehner, Ryan and Cantor started at $61 Bil in cuts.

Reid and the Dem’s started at $0 cuts, then $30 Bil and them finally ended up at $39.5 in cuts.

Did the Republicans have and then relinquish the power to stop this in its tracks? – YES
Was Obamacare repealed or defunded? – NO (Major Dem talking point)
Was Planned Parenthood defunded? – NO (Major Dem talking point)
Was NPR defunded? – NO (Minor Dem talking point)
What, if any, cuts were made to programs run by ACORN or its recently formed spin-offs? – TBD, but I’m guessing “NO”.

So how do we consider $38B in cuts to a 2011 budget that was inflated by almost $1T in 2010 an “win”?

GET RID OF OBAMACARE DEFUND THE VILE THING!!!!

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:55 AM | Comments (4)

OBAMA's America! What America has Become Folks! Can't Even stand on your Property or keep a basketball hoop!

What America has Become Folks! Can't Even stand on your Property or keep a basketball hoop

Wild Thing's comment.......

The man said he followed all the process, wrote a letter made his phone calls. The woman(?) police officer flat out lies to the man when she told him he could keep it but it had to lay down in the driveway. Then she takes it. Sheesh I hate liars.

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:47 AM | Comments (3)

March 16, 2011

House of Representatives Passes 3 Week Spending Bill As 54 Conservative Republicans Vote No

This is Lou Dobbs new show and it is on Fox Business. Congratulations Lou!!!
The interview he did with Mike Pence was done the day before the vote yesterday. Unfortunately not enough Republicans voted with the ones voting NO so instead of what Pence, West and others wanted by their NO vote, the House passed the three-week spending bill .

The House of Representatives Tuesday afternoon passed the three-week spending bill to keep the government open through April 8 by a count of 271-158, but with dozens of Republicans rejecting the latest stop-gap measure, the pressure is rising on Congressional leaders to reach a compromise to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year.

While the last short-term spending bill received nearly unanimous support from the Republican Conference on March 1 (only six opposed), 54 House Republicans, including 22 GOP freshmen, peeled off in opposition to the latest short-term bill, with many conservatives taking a stand against funding the government on an incremental basis. Without support from 85 House Democrats, the bill could have failed.

“My ‘No’ vote should not be construed as my willingness for a ‘government shutdown.’ My vote is based on a simple principle that we need to complete the federal budget for 2011,” Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., said in a statement explaining his opposition to the bill. “We cannot wait any longer. The time has come to have this debate on federal spending and get our nation back on track by cutting spending for the long term economic restoration of our Republic.”

Statement for the Congressional Record on the Continuing Resolution

.by Congressman Allen West on Tuesday, March 15

Allen West Facebook page

Mr. Speaker: I rise today to take a stand, a stand that may not be popular with the Leadership of the House of Representatives, but a stand I must take because I believe we cannot kick the can down the road for even another three weeks. The American people recognize that we must no longer take these small calculated measures. Today I will vote against another short term Continuing Resolution.

In the shortest month of the year, February, the federal government had the largest deficit of $223 billion in our nation’s entire history. The American People know that we are in a fiscal crisis and have sent me to address out-of-control spending.

The Majority in the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1 which reduced spending by $61 billion for the remainder of this Fiscal Year. Even though H.R 1 only cut spending by approximately 1.5 percent of the entire requested budget for Fiscal Year 2011, H.R. 1 reversed the trend of the Democrat Majority which increased overall discretionary funding by 24% over the last two years. The United States Senate rejected this amount as too much. They believe that, after President Barack Obama and the Democrat Congress presented trillion dollar deficit budgets, a freeze is the only viable approach.

I am not a supporter of big government. However, the federal government does perform certain important functions. Many essential federal agencies cannot move forward with planning and using resources if every several weeks they are faced with the threat that they will need to close their doors until we resolve this impasse. Could any business in America function this way? Can a family household function this way?

Mr. Speaker, President Obama and the United States Congresses of the past have created the Nanny States of America. Vast segments of the American people are now dependent on our federal government and not dependent on their own ability, skills and entrepreneurial spirit to succeed in this nation.

We are in this position today because the Democrats in the last Congress failed to pass a budget. Further, the President appoints Vice President Biden as the Administration point person on the negotiations while he flies off to Europe. The Democrats failed to show leadership last year and the President is showing a lack of leadership today. I will show what I consider appropriate leadership now and vote against this Continuing Resolution.

Mr. Speaker, the American people are watching us closely. Today, with information so readily available on the internet they know the truth of our desperate economic situation. The days of Washington, D.C. double-talk no longer works.

The American people know that the federal government is collecting $2.2 trillion and spending $3.7 trillion this year. The American people know forty cents of every dollar the federal government spends is borrowed, much of it from China. The American people also know our nation is piling up new debt at the rate of $4 billion a day. So, what does $6 billion of spending cuts really buy the American people?

Further, the General Accountability Office released a 345-page report detailing the redundancies of federal programs and the $100 to $200 billion of savings that could be achieved if these programs were consolidated or eliminated.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to argue that these cuts in spending will weaken an already slow economy and contribute to an increase in the loss of jobs. I believe this is a disingenuous argument. The truth is, the spending over the last two years has not reduced the loss of jobs, but instead has contributed to the largest debt in American history which will be passed on to my children and my grandchildren.

In Wisconsin, we have seen what the unionized entitlement class can do and the pressure they can place on their elected officials. Wisconsin State Legislators running to a neighboring state to hide from making a hard vote and protestors storming the Wisconsin State Capitol are not in concert with the principles of a representative democracy.

Mr. Speaker, Madison, Wisconsin is only 700 miles from the United States Capitol.

The Founders of our nation wrote in the Declaration of Independence “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The “Pursuit” of Happiness, not the federal government’s “Guarantee” of Happiness!

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we can continue to rehash the past of how we have gotten into this situation, but I would rather focus on the future. The future is now and the place is here for us to get our nation back on track. I support the cuts in the Continuing Resolution. I support the elimination of these projects.

However, my “No” vote should not be construed as my willingness for a “government shutdown.” My “No” vote is based on a simple principle that we need to complete the federal budget for 2011. It is time to have this debate on federal spending and get our nation back on track by cutting spending for the long term economic restoration of our Republic.

Alexander the Great once stated, "Fortune favors the bold." The American people are looking for principled and bold leadership. I understand "political maneuvering" but the time has come to engage in the battle for the fiscal responsible future of America. I take my position on the frontlines.

Wild Thing's comment........

Here is the list from Roll Call.

54 Republicans who voted “nay” to the continuing resolution:

AZ-2 Franks, Trent [R]
AZ-6 Flake, Jeff [R]
CA-48 Campbell, John [R]
CO-3 Tipton, Scott [R]
CO-5 Lamborn, Doug [R]
FL-12 Ross, Dennis [R]
FL-14 Mack, Connie [R]
FL-2 Southerland, Steve [R]
FL-22 West, Allen [R]
FL-6 Stearns, Clifford [R]
GA-11 Gingrey, John [R]
GA-9 Graves, Tom [R]
IA-5 King, Steve [R]
ID-1 Labrador, Raúl [R]
IL-15 Johnson, Timothy [R]
IL-8 Walsh, Joe [R]
IN-3 Stutzman, Marlin [R]
IN-5 Burton, Dan [R]
IN-6 Pence, Mike [R]
KS-1 Huelskamp, Tim [R]
LA-3 Landry, Jeff [R]
LA-4 Fleming, John [R]
MD-1 Harris, Andy [R]
MD-6 Bartlett, Roscoe [R]
MI-1 Benishek, Dan [R]
MI-11 McCotter, Thaddeus [R]
MI-2 Huizenga, Bill [R]
MI-3 Amash, Justin [R]
MI-7 Walberg, Timothy [R]
MN-6 Bachmann, Michele [R]
MO-2 Akin, W. [R]
MO-7 Long, Billy [R]
MT-0 Rehberg, Dennis [R]
NC-3 Jones, Walter [R]
NJ-4 Smith, Christopher [R]
NJ-5 Garrett, Scott [R]
NM-2 Pearce, Steven [R]
NV-2 Heller, Dean [R]
OH-1 Chabot, Steven [R]
OH-2 Schmidt, Jean [R]
OH-4 Jordan, Jim [R]
OK-1 Sullivan, John [R]
PA-16 Pitts, Joseph [R]
SC-2 Wilson, Addison [R]
SC-3 Duncan, Jeff [R]
SC-4 Gowdy, Trey [R]
SC-5 Mulvaney, Mick [R]
TX-1 Gohmert, Louis [R]
TX-14 Paul, Ronald [R]
TX-2 Poe, Ted [R]
TX-4 Hall, Ralph [R]
TX-6 Barton, Joe [R]
UT-3 Chaffetz, Jason [R]
VA-2 Rigell, E. [R]

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (6)

America to have the highest corporate tax rate in April

The Daily Caller

The world’s superpower is about to lead the way in yet another realm. Next month, America is set to bear the distinction of having the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world.

According to a study by the Tax Foundation, America’s combined federal and state rate of 39.2 percent is only out paced by Japan’s rate of 39.5 percent – which Japan plans to lower next month. Without Japan in the lead, America’s 39.2 percent will render it the corporate tax rate leader in the developed world, aka the countries comprising the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

In recent years, many OECD nations have been lowering their corporate income tax to create more favorable environments for business. The Tax Foundation notes that since 2000 Germany, Canada, Greece, Turkey, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Iceland, and Ireland have all lowered their corporate tax rates by double-digits.

The study’s author and Tax Foundation president Scott A. Hodge said that one of America’s economic pitfalls will be the high corporate income tax.

“United States companies are now in the position of trying to compete in the 21st century world economy with a 20th century tax system,” said Ho. “Dozens of countries around the world—including many of the United States’ closest trading partners—have realized that sky-high corporate tax rates are an economic dead end. Now more than ever, Americans want to see policies that will help create increased growth, more jobs, and higher standards of living – exactly the things that a lower and more streamlined corporate tax system can help achieve.”

The Tax Foundation’s study adds fodder to a similar warning that came from the Cato Institute in February. Cato advised that the U.S. reduce its corporate tax burden by 10 percent or more.

“A growing number of policymakers are recognizing that the U.S. corporate tax system is a major barrier to economic growth,” Duanjie Chen and Jack Mintz wrote in a Cato bulletin. “The aim of corporate tax reforms should be to create a system that has a competitive rate and is neutral between different business activities.”

Wild Thing's comment........

Notice how all the bad things our country is getting to be number one with and all the good things America meant to the world and especially we the people ( since obama got his brubby hands on our country) have turned upside down and backward. sheesh

The more this destruction keeps up there will be a day when another devastation like the one in Japan happens and we will not be able to help at all. The shining light on the hill Reagan spoke of will exist in our hearts but not as a country to the world. We have GOT to take our country back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Corp Taxes benefit no one but the Government. It destroys our nations ability to compete in the World Market.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:45 AM | Comments (4)

January 09, 2011

U.S. House of Representatives Postpones All Legislative Business Next Week

Healthcare vote postponed due to shooting - Cantor

Reuters

The House of Representatives will postpone next week's vote to repeal President Barack Obama's healthcare reform legislation due to the shooting of Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords, House Republican Leader Eric Cantor said on Saturday.

"All legislation currently scheduled to be considered by the House of Representatives next week is being postponed so that we can take whatever actions may be necessary in light of today's tragedy," Cantor said in a prepared statement.

Wild Thing's comment.........

So that means no vote on January 12th, I wanted to let you all know about this.

Also I forgot to share this the other day so I will just put it here.

"Reading the Constitution, out loud, on the floor? The Democrats must feel like they are being waterboarded" - Rush

I laughed so hard when he said this. LOL hahhaaha

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:45 AM | Comments (3)

January 07, 2011

Republicans Introduce Bill To Eliminate Presidential 'czars'

Republicans introduce bill to eliminate presidential 'czars'

The Hill

A group of House Republicans introduced a bill on Wednesday to rein in the various "czars" in the Obama administration.

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and 28 other House Republicans introduced legislation to do away with the informal, paid advisers President Obama has employed over the past two years.

The legislation, which was introduced in the last Congress but was not allowed to advance under Democratic control, would do away with the 39 czars Obama has employed during his administration.

The bill defines a czar as "a head of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President, or similar office established by or at the direction of the President" who is appointed to a position that would otherwise require Senate confirmation.

Republicans had complained about the president's use of czars to help advance his agenda in Congress. In particular, the GOP had harped about the personal history of Van Jones, the president's czar for "green jobs," over past comments Jones had made about Fox News came to light. Jones eventually resigned.

Another prominent czar over the past year was Carol Browner, the president's energy and environmental adviser. She helped head up efforts in response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and the ultimately unsuccessful effort for an energy and climate bill from Congress.

Republicans introduced several bills to eliminate czars in the last Congress, but similar legislation could conceivably advance in the House now that the GOP controls the chamber.

"We haven’t gotten an indication of an exact timeline for committee action, considering that the bill was just filed yesterday," said Scalise spokesman Stephen Bell. "We hope to have this discussion in the near future as the congressman works to pursue all the bills he has introduced in the 112th Congress."

Wild Thing's comment........

GOOD, GREAT! Beautiful. And the Republicans can claim this as a cost cutting measure. I’d like the see the RATS try and defend these Czars. That will be interesting.

Keep it up, 112th! Even if it gets nowhere, you can at least help us have something to smile about once in awhile for the next 2 years. This is a great one! And, as Rush has suggested, introduce a new bill to repeal Obamacare every week. Keep the ‘Rats so busy playing defense that they can’t inflict as much harm during this session.

We must all remember too, to give them the kudos and continued encouragement. It is up to us to cheer them on and let them know that we appreciate everything they’re doing. We need to write, call, e-mail our kudos and agreement every time they do us proud. That will go a long way to build up their resolve and keep them on the right track. It’s going to be mind-boggling what the MSM and the Democrats are going to throw at these people. They need encouragement daily!!!!

Say goodbye...........

Source of information below.......

Obama has moved swiftly to concentrate power in the White House, bypassing the review of our elected representatives in Congress in most of the posts listed above. Even though cabinet positions are part of the executive branch, the cabinet secretaries must be approved by Congress, they are funded by Congress, and they can be called before Congress to testify. Most of these czars, on the other hand, are appointed by Obama at his sole discretion, and are answerable only to him. If subpoenaed by Congress, they can claim executive privilege.

1. Herbert Allison Jr., bailout czar, [replaced Bush bailout czar Neel Kashkari, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability confirmed by Senate]

2. Alan Bersin, border czar

3. Dennis Blair, intelligence czar [Director of National Intelligence, a Senate confirmed position]

4. John Brennan, counterterrorism czar

5. Carol Browner, energy czar

6. Adolfo Carrion, urban affairs czar

7. Ashton Carter, weapons czar [actually Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and so subject to Senate confirmation]

8. Aneesh Chopra, technology czar

9. Jeffrey Crowley, [openly gay white man] AIDS czar

10. Cameron Davis, Great Lakes czar

11. Nancy-Ann DeParle, health czar

12. Earl Devaney, stimulus oversight czar

13. Joshua DuBois, religion czar, aka God czar

14. Arne Duncan, education czar

15. Kenneth Feinberg, pay czar

16. Daniel Fried, Guantanamo closure czar

17. J. Scott Gration, Sudan czar

18. Melissa Hathaway, [soon to be] cybersecurity czar

19. David J. Hayes, water czar [a Deputy Interior Secretary and therefore subject to Senate oversight]

20. Richard Holbrooke, Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) czar...Died last month)

21. John Holdren, science czar

22. Kevin Jennings, safe schools czar [nominated to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, a newly created post; openly gay founder of an organization dedicated to promoting pro-homosexual clubs and curricula in public schools]

23. Van Jones, green jobs czar

24. Gil Kerlikowske, drug czar

25. Ron Kirk, trade czar

26. Vivek Kundra, infotech czar [Shoplifted four shirts, worth $33.50 each, from J.C. Penney in 1996 (source)]

27. Douglas Lute, war czar [retained from Bush administration, married to Jane Holl Lute, currently a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security]

28. George Mitchell, Mideast peace czar

29. Ed Montgomery, car czar [replacing Steve Rattner, who stepped down amid controversy over his former firm’s role in a possible kickback scandal]

30. Lynn Rosenthal, domestic violence czar

31. Dennis Ross, Mideast policy czar

32. Gary Samore, weapons of mass destruction czar

33. Todd Stern, climate change czar

34. Cass Sunstein, regulatory czar

35. Larry Summers, economic czar

36. Michael Taylor, food czar

37. Arturo Valenzuela, Latin-American czar (nominee) [although this post is referred to as a czar, he is nominated to be Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and so is subject to Senate confirmation]

38. Paul Volcker, economic czar number two

39. Elizabeth Warren, TARP czar [chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for the Trouble Assets Relief Program; note that Herb Allison is more frequently called the TARP czar]

40. Jeffrey Zients, government performance czar [replaced original nominee Nancy Killefer who withdrew her name after issues with her personal income tax filings surfaced]

Positions established but not yet filled:

41. behavioral science czar

42. copyright czar

Positions being planned:

1. income redistribution czar
2. land-use czar
3. consumer financial protection czar, aka mortgage czar (source)
4. radio-internet fairness czar
5. student loan czar, to oversee a program of mandatory service in return for college money (source)
6. voter list czar
7. zoning czar

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:55 AM | Comments (7)

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Lamar Smith Issues First DOJ Oversight Letter

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Lamar Smith issues first DOJ oversight letter

The Washington Post

Right Turn sectrioin
By Jennifer Rubin

Right Turn has obtained the first oversight letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) issued to the Justice Department. While he was in the minority, Smith labored, largely unsuccessfully, on the committee to convince the Democratic chairman to investigate a range of issues, including detainee policy and New Black Panther Party case. He now has the authority to schedule hearings, call witnesses and subpoena documents.

In a five-page letter, Smith notes that there has been "little oversight" as to how the civil rights division has used its budget increases ($22 million in FYI 2010 and $17 million requested in FYI 2011) and why the need for some 164 new positions.

He then gets to the heart of the matter. As I and other outlets have reported, he notes that in the New Black Panther Party case investigation, it came to light that a political appointee, Julie Fernandes, directed Justice Department attorneys "not to bring cases against black defendants for the benefit of white victims."

Smith then details allegations by former Justice Department attorney J. Christian Adams that the department declined to enforce the National Voter Registration Act and its provisions relating to "voter integrity."

After reciting the evidence concerning Fernandes's statements and her expressed hostility toward enforcing the NVRA, Smith concludes:

"Allegations that the Civil Rights Division has engaged in a practice of race-biased enforcement of voting rights law must be investigated by the Committee." He then gives Holder until January 21 to respond to a list of questions, including whether Fernandes did, in fact, "explicitly or implicitly direct Voting Section staff not to enforce any section of any federal rights statute" or "not to enforce Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act." He demands all documents that relate to the department's enforcement practices under the Voting Rights Act.

The letter is noteworthy on a number of levels.

First, administration flacks and liberal bloggers have insisted that the New Black Panther Party case is much to do about nothing. But as Smith has correctly discerned, the issue of enforcement or non-enforcement of civil rights laws based on a non-colorblind view of those laws is serious and a potentially explosive issue for this administration.

Second, Holder's strategy of stonewalling during the first two years of Obama's term may have backfired. Had he been forthcoming while Democrats were in the majority, he might have been able to soften the blows; Smith is not about to pull his punches.

And finally, Smith is demonstrating the sort of restraint and big-picture focus that is essential for the Republicans if they are to remain credible and demonstrate their capacity for governance.

That took less than 24 hours. Jennifer Rubin has the exclusive news at the Washington Post. Lamar Smith is demanding answers. The speed in which this demand came out of the New Congress sends a message.

UPDATE TWO: A further review of Chairman Smith's letter reveals that Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes is also on Smith's radar. It is clear that she is now in the cross-hairs of the House Judiciary Committee, and that is a very unwelcome place to be in Washington D.C. One saw how Democrats running the House and Senate Judiciary Committee handled the DOJ in 2006-2008. Fernandes is the one who refuses to enforce Section 8 of Motor Voter to remove ineligible voters from the rolls.

Wild Thing's comment.........

Heck Yesssssss ! Yahoooooooo!

It's good to read the news today.

Can't wait to see DOJ officials in front of committee under oath. This should be interesting. The issue of whether the Black Panther case should have been prosecuted is obvious to the seeing person.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:50 AM | Comments (3)

House Republican Introduces Bill to Block FCC’s ‘Internet Grab’

Rep. Marsha Blackburn introduced legislation Wednesday to deny the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulatory oversight over the Internet, which the Tennessee Republican insisted was the “sole prerogative of Congress” to administer.

“I agree that the Internet faces a number of challenge, ” Blackburn said in a release. “Only Congress can address those challenges without compounding them. Until we do, the FCC and other federal bureaucracies should keep their hands off the ‘net.”

According to Rep. Blackburn’s office, the “Internet Freedom Act” has the support of more than 60 House members, including a majority of GOP’ers on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The legislation already has bipartisan support, counting among its endorsers Blue Dog Democrat Dan Boren of Oklahoma.

“The only sector of our economy showing growth is online,” Blackburn said. “In these times, for an unelected bureaucracy with dubious jurisdiction and misplaced motives to unilaterally regulate that growth is intolerable.”

But Blackburn, who filed similar legislation in 2009, said:

"the measure is an “intermediate step” to counter the FCC’s recent adoption of Net neutrality rules. By way of a more immediate enforcement countermeasure, her office says she supports invoking the Congressional Review Act, which empowers legislators to invalidate noxious regulatory frameworks developed by federal agencies.

Wild Thing's comment........

This is great! Each step they take some small some will be huge will have an effect. Keep up the momentum and we will keep supporting you.

The left took 60 years to make it possible to seat a Usurping Marxist as president. The damage will not be corrected over night. Therefore every opportunity must be taken to provoke public discussion and debate.

Our crusade is eminently doable because conservatives can say unabashedly what we believe in and why. The left on the other hand must lie, cheat, steal and trick or murder its way into power.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:48 AM | Comments (3)

January 06, 2011

God Bless You Speaker Boehner

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivering her seemingly never-ending exit speech as she prepared to hand the gavel over to new House Speaker John Boehner. Pelosi seemed to use her remarks to boast about what she considered her accomplishments, sounding much more like a campaign speech than a graceful stepping aside. Eventually, she got around to John Boehner, praising him as a “skilled legislator” and a servant of the people, and then handed him the gavel as Speaker of the House.

There was visible tension in the GOP section of the floor when Pelosi read out a litany of the bills passed by the 111th Congress...even a few soft goans.

Almost no Republicans applauded when Pelosi mentioned the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There was a lot of smiling-through-annoyance, and a slightly smaller level of document-checking and cell phone-checking.

House Speaker John Boehner receiving the gavel from Nancy Pelosi, and then delivering his remarks on assuming leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Boehner promised more openness, saying all bills will be posted online for three days for Americans will have a chance to read them before they are voted on, and he said there will be renewed focus on doing the “People’s business.” “It’s not about us,” Boehner said.

Wild Thing's comment........

I thought she would never shut up AUGH! She will be known in history as the worst Speaker of the House our country has ever had. No one ever did what she has done with turning the lights off on everyone, locking the door and not allowing the Republicans in and putting security guards at that door to make sure they did not get in. I will never forget that video Eric Cantor made that day that I posted here. He did it to show proof of how they were locked out.

The 112th was sent to save our Republic, they will need our prayers as they will be attacked big time by the media and the democrats. 2010 was only the beginning. 20 years of “Patriot focused” elections will get the train back on track.

Posted by Wild Thing at 01:55 AM | Comments (7)

Harry Reid Says: The American People LOVE BIG Government ~ What A LIAR He Is!

Wild Thing's comment........

LOL oh sure, that is why even the polls taken show this democrat run government is the least trusted, the least liked ever.

Trust me Harry, size DOES matter when it comes to our government and bigger is NOT better. No go sit down Harry and keep looking like you have not gone to the bathroom for 50 yesrs.

Posted by Wild Thing at 01:47 AM | Comments (4)

December 22, 2010

START Treaty Clears Last Senate Hurdle Before Ratification

FOX News

The Senate on Tuesday voted to limit debate on ratification of a major arms control accord with Russia, setting the stage for a final vote on the so-called START treaty.

The Senate voted 67-28 to advance the legislation, easily exceeding the 60 votes required.

The Senate is expected to ratify the treaty some time on Wednesday in what would be the latest in a string of legislative victories for President Obama after his party was soundly beaten in the midterm elections last month.

Earlier, Republicans senators expressed outrage as Obama secured enough votes for ratification.

At least 10 Republicans publicly announced their support for the accord, including Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, putting it on a virtual glidepath to ratification by Wednesday night.

Republicans Isakson, Corker, Bennet, Brown and Lamar Alexander will support the nuclear treaty with Russia.

At a GOP news conference, Republicans who oppose the treaty warned of the consequences.

"Well this is a joke," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., adding that he believes the administration gave up too much to the Russians to negotiate the treaty.

"When you want zero nukes in the world, you're not an effective negotiator," he said.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said it's clear the administration is checking the box on many issues without any substance behind the box.

"We join millions of Americans who are outraged," he said, adding that it is being crammed under the cover of Christmas.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, also oppose the START agreement.

Treaty backers were heartened as several Republicans broke ranks, voting against three Republican amendments that would have effectively killed the treaty.

Alexander said he is "convinced that the plan's implementation will make giant steps toward modernization of those facilities so that we -- and our allies and adversaries -- can be assured that the weapons will work if needed."

"The president's statement that he will ask for these funds and the support of senior members of the Senate Appropriations Committee means that the plan is more likely to become a reality," he said on the Senate floor. "This will make sure the United States is not left with a collection of wet matches."

Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., said: "Only through setting the example, without giving in or capitulating a thing, do we give hope to the future that my grandchildren and yours can live in a world that will not be free of nukes but will be secure; that loose nukes are not in the hands of bad people; and we have transparency and accountability while still having the capability to secure ourselves both offensively and defensively to ensure the security of the people of the United States of America."

The treaty specifically would limit each country's strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, down from the current ceiling of 2,200.

It also would establish a system for monitoring and verification. U.S. weapons inspections ended a year ago with the expiration of a 1991 treaty.

AP: Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona says the Obama administration has not negotiated the START arms reduction treaty in good faith. He and other colleagues want to slow the effort down to study issues with the US-Russia arms pact. (Dec. 21)

Republican Jon Kyl Blasts START Treaty Negotiations: "Lets Hurry Up and Get This Over With -Is the Attitude"

Wild Thing's comment........

Here is the Roll Call of Votes.

Whatever makes us weaker is what these people want.

Message to RINO-Republicans Isakson, Corker, Bennet, Brown and Lamar Alexander, it’s going to cost you BIG TIME. The Republican Rinos are doing Obama a favor. These Rinos Republican deserve to lose the election when their term is up. They are just like the liberal Democrats and have already broken promise to the American people. They don’t listen to the American people.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (5)

Look What Needs To Be Done Before Changes Take Effect Repealing DADT

Hold your homosexuals! Military ban not over yet .......Look what needs to be done before changes take effect ...

wnd

By Brian Fitzpatrick

America's military isn't going 'gay' quite yet.

While President Obama plans this week to sign the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy banning open homosexuality in the military, the policy must remain in force until the president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that the change will not impair combat readiness.

Before that happens the military must rewrite laws and regulations that could affect same-sex relationships, such as the Uniform Code of Military Justice ban on sodomy, and also indoctrinate soldiers, sailors and airmen to tolerate open homosexuality. The transition period is expected to take a year.

"It's important for people to know that this is not over," said Robert Knight, a leading opponent of the homosexual political agenda. "There are no permanent victories or defeats in politics. And this can be reversed at some point, in a more conservative Congress."

"Congress will have to legalize consensual sodomy, which is currently illegal under the UCMJ," said retired Army Col. Dick Black, former chief of the Army's Criminal Law Division and a Virginia state legislator. "There's a backlash brewing. This is a very serious issue for a lot of people. We're entering the presidential season, and if there's a candidate who says he will issue an executive order to ban homosexuality in the military, a lot of people would be very fired up about that."

Demonstrating that the repeal will not adversely affect the military could prove a great challenge for the president.

"We think it's going to be very damaging to readiness and recruiting," said Tommy Sears, executive director of the Center for Military Readiness. "You're going to have people currently serving, valuable, experienced individuals, refusing to continue. On the flip side, people who would have considered serving will not because this policy is going to say you must accept this open homosexuality policy. The military will not do things halfway. They will impose a zero tolerance policy for the full range of preferences and rights for homosexuals."

As Obama prepares to sign the repeal of DADT, opponents are preparing on several fronts to block implementation of the repeal.

On the legislative front, congressional Republicans, who will take control the House Armed Services Committee in January, will be pressured to block the policy change by defunding it.

"It's up to the new Congress to decide whether this is in the best interest of the country. They can make major obstacles in the implementation of this new policy if they choose to," said retired Army Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis, now a national security expert at the Family Research Council. "There's no obligation for Congress to fund any of this."

"Congress has a voice here. They are the ones who set the rules and regulations for the military. This will depend on how much they follow the text of the Constitution," Maginnis added. "Their primary obligation is to protect the armed forces … If they fail to, the consequences in terms of retention and recruiting could be devastating to the country."

"We believe they've slapped the military in the face and have betrayed the men and women in the service by using the military to push the homosexual agenda," said Mat Staver, spokesman for the Freedom Federation, a coalition of more than 100 political organizations. "We will ask the House to refuse to fund the repeal, which will take millions of dollars to fund."

On the state level, a prominent Virginia state legislator, Delegate Bob Marshall, announced on Saturday he is writing a bill that would ban homosexuals in the Virginia National Guard.

"According to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, the state has power over recruitment in the Virginia National Guard," Marshall told WND. "Even when they are called up, the state still has authority over the selection and training of officers."

Marshall was the author of a Virginia bill challenging the constitutionality of Obama's national health care legislation, which led the way to a series of challenges by other states.

On the legal front, the Alliance Defense Fund is preparing to defend the religious liberty of chaplains and service members.

"Our concern is that chaplains and others will find their ability to work in the military will depend on their ability to censor themselves," said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Daniel Blomberg.

"We're concerned whether chaplains can express their religious beliefs and sexual ethics without being punished or having reports written up against them," Blomberg added, pointing out that chaplains in foreign militaries have been "ostracized and marginalized" and threatened with discrimination complaints for raising Christian values in private counseling sessions.

On the political front, politicians who supported the DADT repeal can expect zealous opposition in the next election.

"We will mobilize our constituents to make those who betrayed our military and the national interest pay for what they've done on the eve of Christmas," said Staver.

"The findings of the Pentagon report were not scrutinized the way they should have been," said Elaine Donnelly, founder of the Center for Military Readiness, who alleged that several senators who voted for the bill "went back on their word" to vet the repeal thoroughly and may pay the price at the ballot box.

"Sen. [James] Webb (D-Va.), a Marine, said there needed to be time to consider the ramifications of this vote. Thirty percent of active Marines said they would leave, and 16 percent said they might leave. Sen. Webb is up for reelection next time, and the voters will have to evaluate that," said Donnelly.

Wild Thing's comment........

I’m so tired of the military being used as a social engineering lab. And I’m tired of the rest of us being used as a social engineering lab as well!

Soldiers and Marines on the battlefield have already had to become more afraid the Monday morning quarterbacking of the court system than they are of the enemy.

I wonder if there’s any possibility of reversing this before it goes into effect.

Ever read any of Sen. James Webb (D-Va.), stuff? His supporters have been denying all along that he's rather over the line ~ but I don't think they can do this anymore since he voted for cloture on the DADT legislation.He's simply heavily closeted.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:48 AM | Comments (5)

Political Impact of New Census Numbers

FOX News

Republican-leaning states all across the South and West will gain congressional seats based on the results of the 2010 Census, according to population counts released Tuesday.

The Census Bureau announced that eight states will gain a total of 12 seats, while 10 states — mostly in the Northeast and Midwest — will lose seats.

The population shift sets the stage for potential GOP gains in Congress in 2012, while changing the political landscape ahead of a presidential race which in some respects is already starting.

Revealing initial results from the Census, Director Robert Groves also announced that the official U.S. population as of April 2010 is 308,745,538. The number represents a 9.7 percent increase from a decade earlier.

But the regional population shifts are what matter to lawmakers looking to boost their party's numbers in Washington. The Census is used to shape state legislative seats and allocate the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. With growth in the South and West averaging about 14 percent, states in those regions are set to gain the most additional representation in Congress.

Texas, continuing seven consecutive decades of growth, will gain the most seats with four more House members in 2012. Florida gains two, while Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington each gain one.

States losing seats include Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania. All those states lost one seat apiece, save for New York and Ohio, which lost two each.

Wild Thing's comment........

Liberal policies can eventually ruin even the state with the most and best of just about everything; from ports, to agriculture, to tourism, to computer industry, to entertainment industry, to the weather – you name it – Calilfornia has it.

It has every advantage, and liberalism is bringing California down.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:47 AM | Comments (4)

December 21, 2010

Democratic FCC Regulators Throw Support Behind Net Neutrality Rules

The Democrats moved one step closer today in their push to control the internet.

Liberal FCC officials are supposed to vote today on sweeping new internet regulations.

It’s official: the path has been cleared for Tuesday’s historic vote at the Federal Communications Commission approving sweeping new “network neutrality” rules designed to ensure that the Internet remains an open platform that doesn’t favor dominant telecommunications and cable companies.

Democratic FCC regulator Michael Copps just issued a statement in which he explains that he will “concur” on the proposed rules, meaning he supports their adoption but doesn’t agree with everything in them.

Senior officials have also confirmed that all three Democrats on the five-member commission will support the rules, providing FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski with the support he needed for the plan. Copps and fellow Democratic regulator Mignon Clyburn have been fighting for stronger provisions to better protect consumers and smaller competitors.

Wireless carriers have also endorsed (albeit grudgingly) the net neutrality plan, offering Genachowski critical industry support that can help dampen congressional criticism. They insist they need maximum flexibility in operating their networks due to capacity constraints, and won’t block competitors.

From The Blaze

Critics of the proposal dismiss it as unnecessary government intervention that seeks to correct marketplace problems that do not exist.

Republicans are working to block the Democrats’ proposal, re-introducing an amendment that would ban the FCC from using government funding to adopt or implement any net neutrality regulations. In addition, the two sitting Republican FCC members have questioned whether new neutrality regulations are even necessary.

“We are concerned that both factual and legal conclusions may have been drawn before the process has begun,” they said, adding that the Commission should not adopt rules “in an effort to alleviate the political pressures of the day, if the facts do not clearly demonstrate that a problem needs to be remedied.”

Wild Thing's comment........

So-called “net neutrality” has been a controversial campaign pledge the Obama administration has worked to implement.

Less government means more freedom, whether it’s freedom for companies to compete for customers or freedom for websites to contain the content they choose. Anything else is the government seeking more control of our lives.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:40 AM | Comments (2)

December 20, 2010

In Sunday-evening Surprise, Senate Unanimously Passes Food Safety Bill

In Sunday-evening surprise, Senate unanimously passes food safety bill

The Hill

The Senate unexpectedly approved food safety legislation by unanimous consent Sunday evening, rescuing a bill that floated in limbo for weeks because of a clerical error.

The Senate passed the Food Safety and Modernization Act on Nov. 30 by a vote of 73-25. But the bill was later invalidated by a technical objection because it was a revenue-raising measure that did not originate in the House — Senate staff had failed to substitute the food safety language into a House-originated bill.

A coalition of groups supporting the bill sent a letter Sunday to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) calling for action on food safety.

“Our organizations are writing to support attaching S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, to the Senate's proposed short-term continuing resolution,” the groups wrote. “Strong food-safety legislation will reduce the risk of contamination and provide FDA with the resources and authorities the agency needs to help make prevention the focus of our food safety strategies.”

The American Public Health Association, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union and other groups signed the letter.

Democrats first attempted to attach the food safety bill to the two-and-a-half-month spending measure but Republicans balked because they wanted to keep that measure clean, according to Senate aides.

Republicans, however, later agreed to pass it by unanimous consent.

Reid announced he would send the legislation — this time properly attached to a House-originated measure — back to the lower chamber for final approval.

“Our food safety system has not been updated in almost a century. Families in Nevada and across America should never have to worry about whether the food they put on their table is safe," Reid said in a statement. "This is a common-sense issue with broad bipartisan support.

"Tonight we unanimously passed a measure to improve on our current food safety system by giving the FDA the resources it needs to keep up with advances in food production and marketing, without unduly burdening farmers and food producers,” he said.

The legislation is a high priority for Reid and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

Reid’s staff earlier in the day had told a coalition of groups supporting the legislation that it had a chance of passing but the prospects appeared to dim as Sunday wore on. The swift approval by unanimous consent caught some aides and lobbyists working on it by surprise.

Sen. Tom Coburn, the outspoken conservative Republican from Oklahoma, had been blocking the legislation. He lifted his objection at the final moment.

Top ten lies about Senate Bill 510

Wild Thing's comment.........

What happened, this is horrible!!!! Are we citizens or subjects??!!

This is going to be horrible for small farmers too.

But negotiations went on through the weekend and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., worked out a deal to let the bill move forward.

Once the House approves it, President Barack Obama is expected to sign it.

The legislation would give the federal government much wider authority to set and enforce safety standards for farmers and food processors, affecting all whole and processed foods except meat, poultry and some egg products already regulated by the Agriculture Department.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, proclaimed it a “critical victory” that would “give Americans one of the best holiday gifts they can receive this year — the assurance the foods they are eating are safer

Oh thank God, there won’t be any more thousands and thousands of people dying every week,
killed by their food!!!!!

This session of congresscreeps will have cost us more freedoms and money than probably any other congressional session in all recorded government history. Lord, save us.

But negotiations went on through the weekend and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., worked out a deal to let the bill move forward.

Negotiations:

Reid: Mitch here's what I'm going to do.
McConnell: Okey-dokey.

End of negotiations.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:50 AM | Comments (7)

December 14, 2010

Obama's $858 Billion Pork Filled Tax Package

In a 83-15 vote.....A vote on final passage could happen as soon as Tuesday if opponents agree to waive the 30 hours that must elapse after a vote to end a filibuster.

Given Monday’s lopsided vote, the package is expected to win final passage easily, which one Democratic leadership aide predicted would “likely” happen on Wednesday.

Obama said he understands members of both parties are "unhappy" with the compromise, but he said the package is "first and foremost" a "substantial victory" for middle-class families.

5 Republicans voted NO

Sens. Tom Coburn (Okla.)
Jim DeMint (S.C.)
Jeff Sessions (Ala.)
John Ensign (Nev.)
George Voinovich (Ohio) (voted against the bill because he thinks everybody's taxes should go up)

US Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

In a nutshell Republicans who vote for this are voting for two years of temporary release from a tax increase in exchange for massively increasing the Federal debt even though Republicans will have the numbers after the lame duck session to pass a much more favorable tax bill that Obama probably won’t have the balls to veto and if he does will damage himself and the Democrats politically whether the economy goes further south or not.

From Rush Limbaugh:

If you don't know anything else about the tax deal, just listen to this. "Senators on opposite sides of the battle over ethanol subsidies said Thursday an extension of key ethanol tax credits appears to be a part of the emerging Capitol Hill deal on the Bush-era tax cuts. Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who supports the corn-based fuel, told reporters that an extension of the credit for blending ethanol into gasoline is included. 'I believe it will be in there...based on some discussions.'" Chuck Grassley says, yep, it's gonna be in there. Tom Harkin says, yep, it's gonna be in there. This is Washington as we've always known it. This is nothing more than pork. Both senators, both sides of the aisle throwing in a subsidy here, this is more pork spending. This is not representative of anybody having heard the results of the election or not getting the point of the election, and what's being lost in all this, this word "stimulus."

As we've pointed out all week, there's nothing stimulative about tax rates staying the same. That stimulus has already occurred within the immediate years after taxes were cut back in 2001 and 2003. There's no new stimulus that's gonna come from extending. There's no stimulus associated with a one-year, 2% tax rate cut in the payroll tax. There's no stimulus in the estate tax being raised from zero to 35%. So where is the stimulus? Why does Obama keep talking about stimulus? Well, take a look at all the spending in this bill. This ethanol is just the tip of the iceberg. They're loading all kinds of spending into this bill, and that's why Obama's calling it stimulus. Effectively what he's getting here is a second stimulus bill. The Republicans are going along with this notion of keeping tax rates the same. Taxes ought to be cut. As such, they are going up. At the end of the day, if you take everything into account here, taxes are going up. What with the tax credit continuing for people that don't even pay taxes, the death tax going from zero to 35%, this tax deal is becoming a Christmas tree and they're putting all these pork deals on as ornaments and presents underneath it.

~snipet ~

That's not what the election was about. They could go a long way helping themselves making it clear they're not gonna buy a two-year deal with a certain tax increase in 2013 for hundreds of billions of dollars including new ethanol subsidies. What kind of deal is this? "Okay, yeah, we'll take it," say the Republicans, "We'll take two years of the same tax rates and then we'll take increasing tax rates in 2013 and the ethanol subsidies, yeah, what else do you want?" It's hard to break old habits, folks, especially in Washington. Even the Republican leaders have been part of this system for decades. False deadlines, foolish deals, they become the rule. And it need not be. I now hope this deal fails. I say it directly and officially. If the deal fails, the Democrats are in control, so it is they who will be raising taxes. Let the tax rates go up on January 1st. Let 'em go up. Wait for our cavalry to show up and deal with this the right way. They had two years to deal with this. They've had the two years of Obama's presidency to deal with this and they haven't, on purpose. They want the tax rates to go up. We're selling for nothing. Really, it isn't any great shakes that we agreed to two years of the tax rates not changing.

From The Heritage Foundation:

Any piece of legislation must be both constitutional and improve the condition of the American people. When President Obama and Congressional Republicans first announced their tax deal early last week, our reaction was to hold our noses against its bad elements; on balance, we thought the extension of the current tax rates was laudable. Now, however, the full text of the bill has been released and we see all the bad things that were in the original deal. Meanwhile, liberals in Congress are walking away even from that deal, and are holding the country hostage to their hatred of those they call “the rich.” The tax cut deal, we now know, has been so freighted with liberal special interest tax giveaways that true conservatives cannot support it in good faith.

Wild Thing's comment......

Deepest of sighs! The freaking democrats have to add their trash to everything they touch!!!!!!

"Losers compromise. We don't. That's what this election in November was all about." ~ Rush Limbaugh

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (5)

December 11, 2010

"A REPUBLIC MADAME, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT!"

Wild Thing's comment........

This is good, excellent.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:47 AM | Comments (4)

December 01, 2010

Fantastic Rep. Steve King (R-IA) Speaks Out About The Pigford II Settlement

Breitbart

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) will have the leftists howling racism with this speech on the House floor. But, it’s absolutely true. The Pigford II Settlement is pure and complete fraud on the American public.

“We’re not going to pay slavery reparations.”

.."We are not going to pay slavery reparations in the United States Congress. That war’s been fought… There are no reparations for the blood that paid for the sin of slavery, no one’s filing that claim.”

Even after all was said.............

The Pelosi democrats passed Pigford II today. More than 92,000 “black farmers” have signed up for reparations from the Obama USDA after the Pigford case was extended this past year. That’s five times the number of blacks who were actually farming during the time period in question.

And, democrats just approved the legislation.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Refreshing to hear a representative of the people actually tell the truth! Bravo and keep up the good work, Mr. King!

Rep. King is absolutely correct; reparations-in-kind to people with a “grievance”, some of whom are not even farmers. This really is an example of the entitlement minded, “look at poor me-me”, “you owe me-me” segment of society taking advantage of the politically correct, out of control federal govt.

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:49 AM | Comments (4)

September 28, 2010

Obama Signs $30B small business Lending Bill BUT Small Business Says Tax Cuts Needed to Support Small Business

Obama signs $30B small business lending bill

BUT let's look at the truth if the banks want this and what small business thinks about Obama's agenda! ~ Wild Thing

Small biz, banks may spurn Obama's $30B program

NEW YORK

Barack Obama's $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it's supposed to help don't want it.

The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president's signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

It seems like a simple effort to unclog a credit pipeline that has been blocked since the financial meltdown two years ago. But interviews with seven community bankers, as well as small business owners, show a reluctance to participate.

"People in my constituency can't get credit, and this will get money out to small businesses, who are the engine of job creation for this country," said Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida, who co-authored the amendment that created the lending program.

Bank executives say their customers don't want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn't worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight.

"We have taken a strategic decision not to have our primary regulator, the government, also be a partner in our bank," said William Chase Jr., CEO of Triumph Bank in Memphis.

Chase said the bank already has enough capital to meet the paltry demand for loans. "Our business customers are mired in uncertainty and are reluctant to invest in their businesses," Chase said.

Ninety-one percent of small business owners surveyed in August by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) said all their credit needs were met. Only 4 percent cited a lack of financing as their top business problem. Plans for capital spending were at a 35-year low.

Jack Rajala just laughs when asked if he wants to take out a loan today. He's in a fight to save his family's lumber business that has been buffeted by the recession and housing meltdown.

"I've seen many ups and downs; this is unquestionably the toughest," said the 71-year-old Rajala, the third-generation owner of Rajala Companies of Deer River, Minn. Since 2008, his company closed two factories and halved the number of employees to less than 100 as orders plummeted for windows, floors and door frames. Annual revenue is down 50 percent since 2008 to $5 million, and the company is losing money.

Rajala is symbolic of the challenges faced by Obama's small business lending initiative. The $30 billion fund will be run by the Treasury Department, and money will be awarded to banks deemed strong by regulators. Banks that have less than $10 billion in assets are eligible.

"It will provide incentives to invest and create jobs for 4 million small businesses," Obama said at a news conference Sept. 10. "It will more than double the amount some small business owners can borrow to grow their companies."

Obama has to bridge the gulf between money that's available and the needs of businesses. The NFIB survey found businesses don't intend to borrow until they have more customers.

Community banks will have to pay an annual dividend of 5 percent to the U.S. Treasury. However, when banks increase their lending to small businesses, their dividend rate declines on a sliding scale. So, if a bank increases its small-business lending portfolio by 2.5 percent, the dividend payment goes down to 4 percent and so on, said Paul Merski, chief economist at the Independent Community Bankers of America, the lobbying group for small banks.

The dividend payment increases to 7 percent if banks don't lend to small businesses.

"The crucial questions facing business owners are does it make sense to make an investment right now, and will it generate positive returns?" Josh Lerner, professor of finance and entrepreneurial management at Harvard Business School.

Noah Wilcox, CEO of Grand Rapids State Bank, with two branches in Minnesota, said he already has more capital at his $250 million bank than he can lend out.

"Many of our clients, business owners, put their projects on ice in 2008 because their job number one is to see their company through to the other side of this economic crisis," said Wilcox.

And then there's concerns that the government money will have strings attached.

The fears stem from what happened under TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Fund, formed at the height of the financial meltdown to pump money into banks. Banks that accepted TARP money had to later cut dividends to shareholders and limit compensation to top executives. They were also penalized for early repayment.

In this new legislation, the government is taking steps to avoid the tarnish that accompanied TARP. The key part of this effort: Banks can return the money without penalty if rules governing the small business loans change.

But Chase, the bank CEO in Memphis, isn't convinced.

"The rules can be changed any time," said Chase.

Wild Thing's comment.......

What a moron. So now banks have the cash, but still businesses aren't going to take out loans. They'd be crazy too not knowing what the future holds in taxes and medical insuance.

And small banks are already saying they are going to refuse to take the money. They see the strings attached to the TARP (and banks being told they can’t repay the money, even if they want to).

One banker’s quote summed it up: “We don’t want to be business partners with the government, which is also our primary regulator.” (paraphrase)

The one thing that small businesses need more than anything else is some certainty. This Administration has removed every bit of certainty over the last 20 months. And this bill does absolutely nothing to restore that.

Today's businesses have no clue as to where tax rates will be in the coming year. They have no idea how much the addition of government mandates regarding health care will increase their labor costs. And they are helpless to make any predictions on the cost of money in the near future in light of runaway deficits and the hefty expansion in the money supply that began last year.

Our worst enemy couldn't have come up with anything nearly this effective in destroying the American economy. And here we are only a few week away from an election, and small business owners still don't know what their tax rates will be on Jan 1, 2011.

And let's guess where the $30 billion dollars came from: No new military aircraft until at least 2016? Cut off foreign aid to Israel? Shut down half the Veterans Affairs hospitals? Am I warm?

Posted by Wild Thing at 01:55 AM | Comments (4)

September 23, 2010

Diclose Act VOTE Is Today! Pro-Union bill, Card Check and Other Obama Destruction

Union-label Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has hatched a plan to ram the speech-killing "Disclose Act" through the Senate IN THE NEXT 24 HOURS. This is an emergency, so if iyou can please call and/or email your U.S. Senators IMMEDIATELY and insist they vote for free speech and against the "Disclose Act" (S. 3628).

The fact is, Big Labor's cronies on Capitol Hill are just days away from ramming the "Disclose Act" down the throats of the American people. In fact, this dangerous bill has already passed the House.

Though the so-called "Disclose Act" is being sold by Big Labor as a bill to provide greater transparency, its real intent is to harass and intimidate those who might criticize members of Congress into silence during the midterm elections and beyond.

Big Labor doesn't want us, or anyone for that matter, to be able to inform the American people which candidates stand with them -- and which ones stand with the union elite.

But, of course, like all the other insider games here in Washington, there is a big loophole.

You see, Big Labor is exempted.

They'll still be free to spend their BILLION dollar forced-dues war chest in virtually any way they see fit in complete secrecy.

If passed, the so-called "Disclose Act" -- more properly referred to as the "Incumbent Protection Act" -- would:

* Impose sweeping new regulations on organizations like the National Right to Work Committee, to keep them quiet and cripple their effectiveness during election years;

* Force grassroots organizations to publicize and release the names of their top five contributors making them vulnerable to threats, intimidation or worse from political dissidents;

* Require organizations to expose the location of their top donor's home and workplace in the disclaimer at the end of every television ad.

The union bosses know they are running out of options to save their handpicked politicians before the November Elections. That's why they are going all out to silence you and me.

The fact is opposition from freedom-oriented groups like your National Right to Work Committee had the "Disclose Act" bottled up in the House of Representatives until the National Rifle Association cut a deal with Nancy Pelosi to exempt itself and a few large liberal groups. This is all the more reason you must stand up and make your voice heard in the Senate right away.

You can Call the SENATE SWITCHBOARD -- 202-224-3121

Wild Thing's comment.......

I know we are all getting really tired of having to fight tooth and nail for our basic freedoms. sheesh. Holding the elected officials to the fire each and every time.

We have been fussing and fretting and writing and praying and campaigning and blogging and...................I could go on and on. This Administration is constantly busy trying to change America (and, certainly not for the better).. We're constantly pushing back and trying very hard to show them how we feel.

This administration is doing everything possible to wear us down. They are wrong! WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE DON'T QUIT. LIVE FREE OR DIE!

God keep all of us safe and give us the strength and courage to defend our freedoms and our country.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:49 AM | Comments (3)

September 22, 2010

Sen. Dick Durbin Vows to Keep Fighting for Passage of "The Dream Act"

Sen. Dick Durbin spoke on the Senate Floor today after a cloture vote failed 56-43 that would have brought up the Defense Authorization Bill with the “Dream Act” amendment attached to it.

Durbin vowed to continue fighting for the “Dream Act,” and challenged the “11 Republicans” who have supported it in the past to stop “cowering in the shadows” and vote for it when it is brought up again in the future.

Durbin called passage of the “Dream Act” his “highest priority.”

Wild Thing's comment........

Well I say thank you God that it did not pass.

Posted by Wild Thing at 09:47 AM | Comments (4)

Harry Reid and Blanche Lincoln Vote "NO" on Cloture for Defense Bill

This is a video of Democrat Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Harry Reid voting “no” on the cloture vote to bring up the Defense Authorization Bill, which included amendments on getting rid of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and proposing passage of the “Dream Act.”

Reid was pushing for adoption of the bill and the amendments, but if you watch the video, you will see Blanche Lincoln enter the screen at the top right. She indicates her vote “no” on bringing up the bill. She then walks around to Harry Reid and pats him on the back while saying something to him. Then, notice that Reid walks back to his desk, faces the clerk and votes “no” on the bill.

From a friend that has been keeping up with this particular bill.

"Sen. Reid had to vote “No” if he wants to move to reconsider the bill at some point in the future. Thus, his “no” vote was a parliamentary decision.."

Wild Thing's comment........

I checked around and my friend is correct. The Senate rules are that by voting no Reid retains the right to re-introduce the bill. Otherwise it would be dead.

All R’s were no votes, except Murkowski who did not vote.
Here are all the votes:

ROLL CALL:

Posted by Wild Thing at 09:45 AM | Comments (3)

September 19, 2010

Documentary Film ....OVERDOSE: The Next Financial Crisis

This movie on the causes of the financial crisis was produced in Sweden by Henrik Devell, directed by Martin Borgs, and narrated by Johan Norberg, a Senior Fellow at Cato Institute.

Here is a description of from their web site:

In times of crisis people seek strong leaders and simple solutions. But what if their solutions are identical to the mistakes that caused the very crisis? This is the story of the greatest economic crisis of our age, the one that awaits us.

When the world’s financial bubble blew, the solution was to lower interest rates and pump trillions of dollars into the sick banking system. “The solution is the problem, that’s why we had a problem in the first place”. For Economics Nobel laureate Vernon Smith, the Catch 22 is self-evident. But interest rates have been at rock bottom for years, and governments are running out of fuel to feed the economy. “The governments can save the banks, but who can save the governments?” Forecasts predict all countries’ debt will reach 100% of GDP by next year. Greece and Iceland have already crumbled, who will be next?

The storm that would rock the world, began brewing in the US when congress pushed the idea of home ownership for all, propping up those who couldn’t make the down payments. The Market even coined a term, NINA loans: “No Income, No Assets, No Problem!” Enter FannieMae and FreddieMac, privately owned, government sponsored. “Want that vacation? Wanna buy some new clothes? Use your house as a piggie bank!” Why earn money to pay for your home when you can make money just living in it? With the government covering all losses, you’d have been a fool not to borrow.

The years of growth had been a continuous party. But when the punchbowl ran dry, instead of letting investors go home to nurse their hangovers as usual, the Federal Reserve just filled it up again with phoney money. For analyst Peter Schiff, the consequence of the spending binge was crystal clear: “we’re in so much trouble now because we got drunk on all that Fed alcohol”. Yet along with other worried experts, he was mocked and derided during the boom.

Have you taken out a mortgage, invested capital or bought shares? If you have, likelihood is you lost out in the latest bust. Governments promised decisive action, the biggest financial stimulus packages in history, gargantuan bailouts: but what crazed logic is this, propping up debt with…more debt? This documentary brings an entirely fresh voice to the hottest topic of today.

Wild Thing's comment........

Of all the presidents our country has had NO one has done more damage then Obama and NO party has done more damage then the democrats. And sadly and with extreme outrage this has all mostly been done since the Dems gained the majority in both houses and then when Obama got in our White House.

.... Thank you Jim for sending this to me.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:47 AM | Comments (2)

September 18, 2010

Los Angeles Has Used $111 Million in Stimulus Cash to Create a Mere 55 Jobs

City Controller Releases Audits of how Los Angeles has used Federal Stimulus Money

$111 Million in ARRA Funds Has Only Created 55 Jobs So Far

LACP

by Wendy Greuel ........LA City Controller's Office

September 16th, 2010

Continuing her efforts to ensure that taxpayer money is spent efficiently and effectively, City Controller Wendy Greuel released two audits today of how the City of Los Angeles has used American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. The audits looked at the how the two departments that have received the largest amount of ARRA funding so far – the Department of Transportation (LADOT) and the Department of Public Works (DPW) – have used those funds and how many jobs were created. Los Angeles becomes the largest City in America to conduct an audit of how ARRA funds have been expended.

DPW has received $70.65 million and created or retained 45.46 jobs, though they are expected to create 238 jobs overall (the fraction of a job created or retained correlates to the number of actual hours works). LADOT has been awarded $40.8 million and created or retained 9 jobs, though they are expected to create 26 jobs overall. Overall, the Departments have received $111 million in federal stimulus funds out of the $594 million the City has been awarded so far and created or retained 54.46 jobs.

“I’m disappointed that we’ve only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million in ARRA funds. With our local unemployment rate over 12% we need to do a better job cutting the red tape and putting Angelenos back to work,” said City Controller Greuel. “While it doesn’t appear that any of the ARRA funds were misspent, the City needs to do a better job expediting the process and creating jobs.We’re going to continue to audit how these funds are spent, to ensure that they are expended quickly and correctly. I’m pleased that since our auditors completed their field work, the Departments have begun to implement the changes we identified to help get this money out the door faster.”

Some of the findings of the audits included:

** DPW's policies need to be strengthened in order to ensure transparent and accurate tracking of ARRA funds and related expenditures.

The Department's process for using work orders for ARRA projects makes it difficult to distinguish between ARRA-related expenditures and expenditures using City funds.

Billing costs for reimbursement are not always submitted in a timely manner and did not always include all costs. In addition, the Bureau of Sanitation's negotiated agreements for storm water projects stipulate quarterly— not monthly—billing.

** DPW's existing processes may not be sufficient to expend funds quickly and promote job creation and stimulate the economy.

Some of the Department's ARRA-funded projects have taken many months to award contracts and start construction, meaning the local economy is not impacted immediately, which was the initial goal of ARRA.

** LADOT's could improve their contracting processes to expedite ARRA funds being spent to create and retain jobs.

Some of the LADOT's ARRA-funded projects have taken many months to award contracts and start construction.For example, four of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) projects were not sent out to bid until at least seven months after they were authorized by the State/FHWA.

The Department's typical contracting processes, which follow a standard framework to comply with established Federal, State and City policies, may not be the best approach to ensure that ARRA projects have an immediate impact on local economy.

Wild Thing's comment........

OMG....LOL I am so sorry but this is soooo stupid, beyond stupid. And this is how the left thinks, that it is OK to do something like this.

Every time we may think we’ve plumbed the depths of ‘Rat incompetence, corruption, mendacity, and malfeasance they hit us with more.

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:47 AM | Comments (4)

September 06, 2010

South Carolina GOP Has FINALLY Had Enough and Censures Linidsey Graham

Aiken GOP censures Graham

South Carolina Republican Party members have had enough from progressive Senator Lindsey Graham. The Aiken County Republican Party recently approved a formal censure of the controversial senator.

Herald Online

The Aiken County Republican Party has approved a formal censure of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

The party’s executive committee took the action Thursday, joining a handful of other county parties, including Greenville’s GOP.

Committee member Pete Seaha, who also is the Aiken County Tea Party chairman, wrote the resolution and introduced it at the meeting. The resolution states in part that Graham won’t be invited to any party meetings or events.

“I don’t believe the senator is sticking to conservative Republican principles,” said Seaha. “In my mind, the senator has disrespected his constituents. He has said publicly on a talk show that he didn’t care what they thought.”

Seaha said it was his understanding that 18 people on the executive committee supported the resolution, while two opposed it and two abstained.

Kevin Bishop, a Graham spokesman, said via e-mail that while some of the senator’s friends may not want to meet with him, “his door will always be open. Sen. Graham respects those who disagree with him, but he strongly believes we need to keep an open dialogue.”

Wild Thing's comment.......

I bet his vote for Kagan sealed the deal about their decision. And there was also his relentless push for amnesty, heck there is a whole list one could mention. In the past Lindsey has publicly stated he pays little attention to the desires of his constituents.

Remember when he said this just a little while back........

“Everything I’m doing now in terms of talking about climate, talking about immigration, talking about Gitmo is completely opposite of where the tea party movement’s at,” Graham says. “The problem with the tea party, I think, is it’s just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country. It will die out.”

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:50 AM | Comments (7)

August 14, 2010

REAL or FAKE: Can you tell which of these government spending projects are real or fake?

This video is about the government’s wasteful spending. You may be surprised to hear what some of your tax dollars are helping to fund.

Joke-telling robots, expensive walking tunnels, Blackberries for smokers, and training American prostitutes to drink responsibly. What do these things have in common? They're all questionable government spending projects in a time when our economy is struggling and people can't get jobs....or, maybe we just made them up.

Put yourself to the test. See if you can outwit the Rebel Economist before she stumps you. So what is it: REAL or FAKE?

Wild Thing's comment.......

The government is out of control.

What did Dirksen say? A million here, a million there and pretty soon you are talking about real money.

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:49 AM | Comments (2)

Government Considers US Constitution "Terrorist Literature"

U.S. Government Considers US Constitution "Terrorist Literature"

The U.S. Government now officially considers people who "make numerous references to the Constitution" to be "potential terrorists"

Source for what is posted below:

Just a little context drawn from the Homeland Security intelligence briefing of April 7, 2009 (The abbreviation U/FOUO means unclassified/for official use only.):

(U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism: Current
Economic and Political Climate Fueling
Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment
7 April 2009

(U) Prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis
Division. Coordinated with the FBI.
(U)

* (U) Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or
rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

— (U//LES) Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first
African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new
members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal
through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

Wild Thing's comment..........

I wonder what America's founders would think now their beautiful Constitution they left for us to protect citizens from their government has been spit on, raped, dismantled and branded "terrorist literature" .

Communist goals #'s

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture."

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:48 AM

August 06, 2010

Portland Lemonade Stand Runs Into Health Inspectors, Needs $120 License to Operate

Seven-year-old Julie Murphy of Oregon City still smiles about her enterprise despite running afoul of county inspectors for an unlicensed lemonade stand at Last Thursday.

Portland lemonade stand runs into health inspectors, needs $120 license to operate

It's hardly unusual to hear small-business owners gripe about licensing requirements or complain that heavy-handed regulations are driving them into the red.

So when Multnomah County shut down an enterprise last week for operating without a license, you might just sigh and say, there they go again.

Except this entrepreneur was a 7-year-old named Julie Murphy. Her business was a lemonade stand at the Last Thursday monthly art fair in Northeast Portland. The government regulation she violated? Failing to get a $120 temporary restaurant license.

Turns out that kids' lemonade stands -- those constants of summertime -- are supposed to get a permit in Oregon, particularly at big events that happen to be patrolled regularly by county health inspectors.

"I understand the reason behind what they're doing and it's a neighborhood event, and they're trying to generate revenue," said Jon Kawaguchi, environmental health supervisor for the Multnomah County Health Department. "But we still need to put the public's health first."

Julie had become enamored of the idea of having a stand after watching an episode of cartoon pig Olivia running one, said her mother, Maria Fife. The two live in Oregon City, but Fife knew her daughter would get few customers if she set up her stand at home.

Plus, Fife had just attended Last Thursday along Portland's Northeast Alberta Street for the first time and loved the friendly feel and the diversity of the grass-roots event. She put the two things together and promised to take her daughter in July.

The girl worked on a sign, coloring in the letters and decorating it with a drawing of a person saying "Yummy." She made a list of supplies.

Then, with gallons of bottled water and packets of Kool-Aid, they drove up last Thursday with a friend and her daughter. They loaded a wheelbarrow that Julie steered to the corner of Northeast 26th and Alberta and settled into a space between a painter and a couple who sold handmade bags and kids' clothing.

Even before her daughter had finished making the first batch of lemonade, a man walked up to buy a 50-cent cup.

"They wanted to support a little 7-year-old to earn a little extra summer loot," she said. "People know what's going on."

Even so, Julie was careful about making the lemonade, cleaning her hands with hand sanitizer, using a scoop for the bagged ice and keeping everything covered when it wasn't in use, Fife said.

After 20 minutes, a "lady with a clipboard" came over and asked for their license. When Fife explained they didn't have one, the woman told them they would need to leave or possibly face a $500 fine.

Surprised, Fife started to pack up. The people staffing the booths next to them encouraged the two to stay, telling them the inspectors had no right to kick them out of the neighborhood gathering. They also suggested that they give away the lemonade and accept donations instead and one of them made an announcement to the crowd to support the lemonade stand.

That's when business really picked up -- and two inspectors came back, Fife said. Julie started crying, while her mother packed up and others confronted the inspectors. "It was a very big scene," Fife said.

Technically, any lemonade stand -- even one on your front lawn -- must be licensed under state law, said Eric Pippert, the food-borne illness prevention program manager for the state's public health division. But county inspectors are unlikely to go after kids selling lemonade on their front lawn unless, he conceded, their front lawn happens to be on Alberta Street during Last Thursday.

"When you go to a public event and set up shop, you're suddenly engaging in commerce," he said. "The fact that you're small-scale I don't think is relevant."

Kawaguchi, who oversees the two county inspectors involved, said they must be fair and consistent in their monitoring, no matter the age of the person. "Our role is to protect the public," he said.

The county's shutdown of the lemonade stand was publicized by Michael Franklin, the man at the booth next to Fife and her daughter. Franklin contributes to the Bottom Up Radio Network, an online anarchist site, and interviewed Fife for his show.

Franklin is also organizing a "Lemonade Revolt" for Last Thursday in August. He's calling on anarchists, neighbors and others to come early for the event and grab space for lemonade stands on Alberta between Northeast 25th and Northeast 26th.

As for Julie, the 7-year-old still tells her mother "it was a bad day." When she complains about the health inspector, Fife reminds her that the woman was just doing her job. She also promised to help her try again -- at an upcoming neighborhood garage sale.

While Fife said she does see the need for some food safety regulation, she thinks the county went too far in trying to control events as unstructured as Last Thursday.

"As far as Last Thursday is concerned, people know when they are coming there that it's more or less a free-for-all," she said. "It's gotten to the point where they need to be in all of our decisions. They don't trust us to make good choices on our own."

Wild Thing's comment.......

Welcome... to Obamaville. I don’t believe I’ve ever heard of any major health concerns stemming from a kid with a lemonade stand. Idiot(money hungry), bureaucrats.

So othey come down hard on an adorable liittle girl about a permit and they can't or won't do anything about ILLEAGALS that is OK so they can go and rape and kill and do what they want in our country. Amazing!!!

Too bad she is not an illegal, then she not only would not need a permit, but heck our government would give her free stuff.

I remember when lots of kids had lemonade stands with no problems, but that was in the early 50s, when America was the USA, not the new USSA.

As I am posting this, they just announced on FOX News on the Fox and friends show that little seven-year-old Julie Murphy will be on their show this morning. If you read this before she comes on you might want to turn it on and see what she has to say.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:49 AM | Comments (7)

August 05, 2010

New Cigarette Law Snags Cartons For Troops Too

Due to the PACT act (Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking), grandfather and retired military man Jack Gray can't send his grandson's -- Lance Cpl. Thomas Gray -- favorite type of cigarettes through the U.S. Postal service to where the 19-year-old is stationed in Afghanistan. (By Matt Stone, The Courier-Journal) Aug. 3, 2010 (CJ)

New cigarette law snags cartons for troops too

Courier Journal - Kentucky

A new federal law intended to make sure mail-order cigarette sellers don’t avoid taxes is frustrating well-meaning people who want to mail smokes, including a Louisville man who can no longer send Marlboro Menthols to his grandson, a Marine serving in Afghanistan.

“Why punish a serviceman with this act when he can’t even have a cigarette over there,” Jack Gray said. “That’s not believable.”

It’s an unintended consequence of the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act, or PACT Act as it’s known for short, said a spokeswoman for the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Herbert Kohl, D-Wisc.

Besides foiling mail-order sellers that avoid taxes, the law also seeks to prevent minors from circumventing age limits by buying cigarettes through the mail.

In response to the law, which was passed and signed by President Obama in March, the U.S. Postal Service adopted a new policy at the end of June that nearly bans mailing cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. Most exceptions require they be sent via Express Mail, which allows the post office to confirm the package is delivered to an adult.

But Express Mail isn’t available in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Gray found out about the new law recently when he went to mail a package to his grandson, which he does occasionally.

“It was a bolt out of the blue,” Gray said.

“We are working to fix it as soon as possible,” Kohl spokeswoman Dawn Schueller said Tuesday. Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican, filed a bill July 30 to create an exemption for mailing tobacco to members of the Armed Forces in combat zones. The bill has been referred to a committee.

UPS hasn’t delivered cigarettes to consumers since 2005, spokeswoman Susan Rosenberg said, adding that the decision came as various states passed restrictions. She said the postal service was the last major commercial carrier delivering cigarettes to consumers.

A FedEx spokeswoman said the company only ships tobacco products between licensed distributors.
Several national groups such as the American heart and lung associations supported the PACT Act for its restrictions on minors buying cigarettes over the Internet and the crack down on sales that avoid taxes.

But the new law has prompted frustrated discussion on a Website for parents of Marines and led to the creation of a Facebook page calling for the law to be changed.

Gray said his grandson, Lance Cpl. Thomas H. Gray, 20, a 2008 Valley High graduate, has been in Afghanistan since April. Gray said he mailed him cigarettes at least four times before the new policy.

“He can’t get the kind of cigarettes he likes over there,” Gray said, adding that he hasn’t talked to his grandson in a couple weeks, so they haven’t discussed the policy change.

Native Americans in New York, who sell cigarettes by mail-order and otherwise didn’t have to enforce state taxes, are challenging it in federal court.

“But this is not a case of trying to sell cigarettes,” Gray said of his situation. “This is a case of trying to get a cigarette to a guy that’s over there in a combat zone. He’s gonna smoke ‘em. He ain’t gonna sell ‘em.”

The bill included a provision that allows cigarettes to be mailed to individuals “who are not minors for noncommercial purposes.”

“We included that provision specifically to allow care packages to service members,” Kohl spokeswoman Schueller said, acknowledging that the Postal Service used Express Mail to verify the age of the recipient.

“We’re just following the law, said David Walton, a USPS spokesman in Louisville. “The ban is not something that we initiated. It’s a law that’s very exacting.”

As for sending the package without declaring what’s inside, Walton said packages being mailed overseas require a customs form and anyone caught lying about the contents could be prosecuted.

Denra Riley, president of the Fort Campbell Enlisted Spouses’ Club, said she’s aware of complaints about the new law, including from her husband, Sgt. First Class Christopher Riley of the 184th EOD Battalion out of Fort Campbell.

“I can’t help him out any more and it kind of does stink to be a spouse and not be able to send your husband things he” wants, she said.

“We do have a lot of soldiers complaining about it and I have heard a few spouses, myself included, that kind of don’t agree with it,” she said.

Riley said she thinks it would be a bigger issue, but “people are still going to do it. They’re just not going to put it on the forms any longer.”

But Gray said he doesn’t want to do that.

“I don’t advocate breaking the law,” he said. “But it’s just wrong, plain flat out wrong, to punish a Marine over there because of a tax law over here.”

Wild Thing's comment.......

I really don't like it when someone pushes their own agenda on others. When it comes to our troops IMO they should be able to get things they need and or want. Obama and his ilk don't get that being in the military is NOT the same as being a civilian and he keeps wanting to treat the mililtary like some kind of baby sitter in war time instead of warriors highly trained for what they do.

I will also add that I know this will never happen, but I would like to see that those serving would not have to pay for anything. Let them get pay and keep it, do whatever they want with it or blow it on something fun whatever. But they should not have to pay for anything not even toothpaste. I would rather see my tax dollars paying for things our troops need then, taking all that crap Pelosi etc. stuck in the various stimulus packages.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 08:48 AM | Comments (3)

July 26, 2010

Guess what part of the Constitution goes next!??!!

Guess what part of the Constitution goes next!

Drastic change in works to revamp whole Electoral College

wnd

Democrats have found yet another way to circumvent the U.S. Constitution: Bypass the Electoral College and elect a president by popular vote without first passing an amendment to the founding document, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.

The Massachusetts Senate has joined five other states in passing a National Popular Vote bill to do just that. It approved the legislation July 15 by a margin of 28-10.

The National Popular Vote, which already passed the Massachusetts House, is within one final "enactment vote" in the Massachusetts Senate before the measure can be ready for the governor's signature, the Boston Globe reported.

"Under the proposed law, all 12 of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally," according to the report.

"The idea is that Massachusetts will instruct its electors in the Electoral College to vote for the candidate receiving the majority of presidential election votes nationally, regardless of how the state's own voters cast their ballots," Corsi explained.

The Massachusetts National Popular Vote bill, if signed into law by Gov. Deval Patrick, will not go into effect until states possessing a majority of Electoral College votes pass similar legislation.

The movement is popularly characterized as "One Person, One Vote for President," a slogan designed to suggest the Electoral College method of counting presidential votes is "unfair" under a 14th Amendment "One Vote, One Person" definition of voter rights.

Critics fear the movement, if successful, could turn the entire nation into a potential "Florida 2000" battleground in close elections.

"Even in states where a candidate lost by a huge margin, every vote would need to be examined, a catastrophic, costly scenario," John Cork wrote in The New York Times.

"It would become possible, in a three-party race, for a candidate to fail to win even a single state but take the popular vote," he continued. "Do we really want to create a system where New York electoral votes could be determined by voters in Utah or Alaska?"

Corsi argues that a national movement to pass National Popular Vote legislation in the state legislatures has been motivated by Democrats who remain fixated on the idea that George W. Bush "stole" the 2000 presidential election, supposedly by relying on a Supreme Court decision to get Florida's electoral votes. They say the decision denied Al Gore the presidency, even though Gore got the majority of popular votes cast throughout the United States.

Once enough states possessing a majority of the electoral votes (270 of the 538 electors nationally) have enacted similar laws, the presidential candidate winning the most votes nationally would be assured a majority of the Electoral College votes, regardless of how other states vote or how their electors are distributed.

Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland and Washington have already adopted national-popular-vote bills.

These states add up to 61 electoral votes, 23 percent of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the legislation: Illinois, 20 electoral votes; New Jersey, 15 votes; Hawaii, 4 votes; Maryland, 10 votes; and Washington state, 11 votes.

The bill has passed 30 legislative chambers in 20 states, Corsi wrote. The National Popular Vote movement is already one-fourth of the way to accomplishing its goal.

"If the National Public Vote movement succeeds," he added, "the president might be chosen by the popular-vote winner in 10 or 11 of the most populous states."

Wild Thing's comment.......

The bill approved by the Senate 28-10 last week is part of a nationwide effort to secure the agreement of enough states so the winner of the national popular vote would be guaranteed to win the presidency.

The bill will not go into effect until states possessing a majority of Electoral College votes pass similar legislation. Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii and Washington state have approved the measure.

HORRIBLE! This maneuver will give the voting power to the socialist laden urban areas at the expense of the Conservative rural areas.

I bet this is all part of the mass amnesty plan. Once that happens, they’ll always win popular vote. And the republic is cooked.

This is unconstitutional!

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:48 AM | Comments (7)

July 23, 2010

Obama to Allow Tax Cuts for Wealthy to Expire

Mark Levin excoriates Geithner

White House to Allow Tax Cuts for Wealthy to Expire

WASHINGTON

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the Obama administration will allow tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to expire on schedule despite calls from a small but increasingly vocal group of Democrats to delay any tax increases.

Geithner said the White House will allow taxes on top earners to increase on Jan. 1, 2011, as part of an effort to help bring down the mounting budget deficit. He said the White House still plans to extend tax cuts for middle- and lower-income Americans and expects to undertake a broader tax overhaul next year.

"We believe it is appropriate to let those tax cuts that go to the most fortunate expire," Mr. Geithner said at a breakfast with reporters, hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

He also rejected concerns voiced by business groups and many Republicans that the administration's economic policies are creating uncertainty and holding back private investment. "Business always wants their taxes lower and always wants to live with less regulation," he said, adding that U.S. firms are "doing very well…competing around the world."

Pelosi rejects extending Bush tax cuts for wealthy

Wall Street Journal

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday rejected extending tax cuts for the wealthiest tax bracket that are set to expire at the end of the year.

Pelosi took off the table a short-term extension of those cuts floated by some lawmakers in her own party.

"No," the speaker said at her weekly press conference when asked if the cuts for the highest bracket should be extended. "Our position has been that we support middle-class tax cuts."

The cuts implemented by President George W. Bush and Republicans in Congress are set to expire at the end of the year, allowing income tax rates to spring upward. Democrats have begun exploring a potential extension of the cuts, but only for households earning less than $250,000 per year.

"I believe the high-end tax cuts did not create any jobs, increased the deficit and should be repealed," she said.

A number of Democrats in the House and Senate in recent days have said they'd favor extending all of the tax cuts, partly because of the economy and partly because they fear any tax increases would be used against them in this fall's elections.

GOP lawmakers have hammered away at Democrats over the expiring cuts, incorporating them into their election year argument that Democrats would seek to raise taxes.

One option discussed by members of the House Ways and Means Committee would be to raise tax rates on families making more than $250,000, but delaying the rate increase until 2012.

FOX News contributor Andrea Tantaros on the future of the Bush tax cuts as some Democrats begin to support an extension of those cuts.

Bush Tax Cuts Roil Democrats

Wall Street Journal

Two more Senate Democrats called for extending tax cuts for all earners—including those with the highest incomes—in what appears to be a breakdown of the party's consensus on the how to handle the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D., N.D.) said in an interview Wednesday that Congress shouldn't allow taxes on the wealthy to rise until the economy is on a sounder footing.

Sen. Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) said through a spokesman that he also supported extending all the expiring tax cuts for now, adding that he wanted to offset the impact on federal deficits as much as possible.

They are the second and third Senate Democrats to come out publicly in recent days in favor of extending all the tax breaks for the time being. Sen. Evan Bayh (D., Ind.) made similar comments last week.

"As a general rule, you don't want to be cutting spending or raising taxes in the midst of a downturn," Mr. Conrad said. "We know that very soon we've got to pivot and focus on the deficit. But it probably is too soon to cut spending or raise taxes."

The comments from the senators represent a departure from what appeared to be an emerging unified Democratic stance on the Bush tax cuts, which held that those for the wealthiest Americans should be allowed to expire.

President Barack Obama and most Democrats want to extend only the breaks benefiting taxpayers who make $250,000 or less.

Allowing breaks for higher earners to expire would push the top individual tax rate to 39.6% from 35%, and would raise rates on capital gains and dividends, too.

The breaks enacted in 2001 and 2003, which affect taxpayers of all income levels, expire at the end of this year.

Wild Thing's comment.......

The Bush tax cuts have been so demonized by the left .

The bulk of Democrats want to kick the people while they are down and then they want to keep them down. They do this in the hopes that people will believe that they can’t survive without them. That’s the problem with professional politicians........they never had a job in their life and couldn’t survive without Washington.

Now is the time for Republicans to come forward with a lot more tax cuts for the middle class - beyond just extending the Bush tax cuts. Let the Democrats go on record as opposing more tax cuts for the little people they claim to care so much about.

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:48 AM | Comments (2)

July 07, 2010

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to Block "Controversial Opinion" on the Web

TSA to Block "Controversial Opinion" on the Web

CBS news

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is blocking certain websites from the federal agency's computers, including halting access by staffers to any Internet pages that contain a "controversial opinion," according to an internal email obtained by CBS News.

The email was sent to all TSA employees from the Office of Information Technology on Friday afternoon.

It states that as of July 1, TSA employees will no longer be allowed to access five categories of websites that have been deemed "inappropriate for government access."

The categories include:

* Chat/Messaging

* Controversial opinion

* Criminal activity

* Extreme violence (including cartoon violence) and gruesome content

* Gaming

The email does not specify how the TSA will determine if a website expresses a "controversial opinion."

There is also no explanation as to why controversial opinions are being blocked, although the email stated that some of the restricted websites violate the Employee Responsibilities and Conduct policy.

The TSA did not return calls seeking comment by publication time.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Good grief. The USA is becoming a Maoist gulag is or on it's way there anyway.

This is about access from the office government computers. But private computers could be next I guess. Well then the Whitehouse.gov will be blocked. Very controversial! that one is for sure, with Obama at the helm.

I guess “Controversial” is defined as anything that does not fully embrace the propaganda of the Obamaviks.

Americans are beginning to learn what tyranny is all about. And forget Constitutional rights!

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:45 AM | Comments (2)

Texas Principals Lose in Religious Freedom Case Involving Confiscated Candy Canes

Texas principals lose in religious freedom case involving confiscated candy canes

Jewish World Review

By Anna M. Tinsley

This week, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled that the principals can be liable for not letting students in 2001 and 2003 hand out their candy canes pens with descriptions as well as pencils that read, "Jesus is the reason for the season.''

"This is a big win for the First Amendment and for millions of students nationwide,'' said Kelly Shackelford, president of the Plano-based conservative Liberty Institute, which represents the families in the lawsuit.

Josh Skinner of Dallas, attorney for principals Lynn Swanson of Thomas Elementary School and Jackie Bomchill of Rasor Elementary, said he and his clients will now decide whether to appeal to the full appeals court, the U.S. Supreme Court or both.

"We think the court is wrong,'' he said, adding that keeping the principals involved in the lawsuit personally opens them up to punitive damages of tens of thousands of dollars that someday might be awarded. "The court fails to recognize the confusion that exists in the law.''

One case involved pencils that a girl tried to distribute in 2001. Another involved a third-grade boy who tried to pass out candy canes and attached cards in 2003. The lawsuit also cited other cases of students not being allowed to hand out items with religious themes.

In 2005, the Plano school district updated rules about when students can hand out religious-themed items — before and after school, at recess, at designated tables during school hours and at three annual parties.

Those rules were upheld as constitutional last year by the appeals court, but parents in the case filed an appeal. Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the Plano parents who disagree with those rules.

In this case, though, the principals unsuccessfully sought to be pulled out of the lawsuit.

But Skinner said an appeal gives him "a good chance of explaining … how this part of the law is very confusing ... and how our clients shouldn't be held personally liable.''

Another issue in the ruling was whether elementary school students "have a First Amendment right to be free from religious-viewpoint discrimination while at school,'' according to the court document.

The judges ruled that "it has been clear for over half a century that the First Amendment protects elementary school students from religious-viewpoint discrimination.''

"This is a pretty strong ruling,'' Shackelford said. "It not only firmly establishes the First Amendment rights of students … but it says these violations are so extreme (that the judges) will hold school administrators personally liable.''

Wild Thing's comment.......

I had not heard about this case. Why can't they Christmas alone, it is Jesus birthday and they sure do hate it and Him.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:40 AM | Comments (4)

June 29, 2010

Government Must “Stop Spending, Stop Spending, Stop Spending!”

Rick Santelli on fire, speaking for the American People and shouting to the Obama Administration that they must “Stop Spending, Stop Spending, Stop Spending.”

That's what we want! Stop spending," Rick Santelli yelled from the floor of the Chicago Board of Traders.

"Go back to Russia where you understand the state and the citizen," Santelli told CNBC analyst Steve Liesman after he argued against the benefits of tax cuts.

Rick Santelli hammering his colleague, and liberal economist Steve Liesman for advocating high government spending as opposed cutting taxes to help the economy. Santelli said it’s time for government to be more prudent, and Liesman challenged him by asking, “When are we going to do that?” Santelli responded with “November 2. November 2 is the day.” He was referring to Election Day, November 2, as the moment when America can turn back from the radical course of the Obama Administration.

Hotel owner Steve Wynn describes this administration and Congress's policies. As he says repeatedly, it is a combination of the insane spending and regulatory policies of the Democrats and the complete uncertainty this creates for business.

And also this from American Thinker:

by James Simpson

Nothing discourages business more than uncertainty, and the Obama administration has introduced a climate of uncertainty in this country that is unprecedented in our history. Even during war, no American ever seriously believed anyone would come along and attempt to change the fundamental structure of our society. But it is happening now before our eyes!

The corruption of this administration, the fraud occupying the White House and the revolting, despicable scumbags running Congress, defy description. They are corrupt, subhuman slugs.

Wild Thing's comment........

God bless Rick Santelli and Steve Wynn.

How long before biden calls Santelli and Steve Wynn a “smartass”?

After what Obama did to Las Vegas, it is unforgivable how he destroyed it's economy with his comments and threats.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:47 AM | Comments (2)

June 28, 2010

Financial De-form

Financial Deform

Investors Business Daily

Regulation: The financial reform bill that's about to be passed is reform in name only. It does little to correct the problems that led to our meltdown, and may do more harm by giving people a false sense of security.

The media have called this "compromise" legislation the most sweeping change in U.S. financial regulation since the 1930s. Which is saying a lot.

The two sponsors, Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd, are as much responsible for the financial crisis as any two people in America. Yet, we're now supposed to believe that they, and their flailing party, which can't even meet its legal obligation to produce a budget, have now fixed our financial system.

President Obama crowed about it in the press, and planned to use the bill as leverage in negotiations with his European counterparts at the G-20 meeting. Obama hopes to sign the bill by July 4.

Before you get too excited, you should know the "compromise" in Dodd-Frank isn't between Republicans and Democrats, but between Democrats and Democrats. In short, it's the left's idea of how to regulate Wall Street. And while some things in the bill aren't bad, most of it is.

We won't go into everything the bill would do, since the 2,000-page tome can't be distilled into a few easy-to-digest bullet points. But what we can tell you is what it doesn't do, which is plenty. In fact, the bill fails to address any of the key issues raised by the 2007-08 market meltdown, while imposing onerous new restrictions on both banks and consumers.

For instance: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were inarguably at the heart of the financial crisis, and which have already cost U.S. taxpayers $146 billion (with hundreds of billions more on the way), aren't addressed in this bill at all.

This is insane, given the role these two government-sponsored enterprises played both in encouraging lending to poor, unqualified homebuyers and repackaging those securitized loans for resale to banks and investors around the world.

Worse, the bill does nothing to amend the "too-big-to-fail" doctrine that has guided U.S. banking policy for decades. Any bank that runs into trouble can still walk up to Uncle Sam's borrowing window and, hand outstretched, ask for money. And if the bank is politically connected or very large, it will get it.

This puts every small bank, investor or lender at a huge disadvantage, since they're most certainly not "too big to fail." This is a big reason why the biggest U.S. banks didn't squawk too much about the legislation. As bad as it is, it gives them a competitive edge.

The bill also gives federal regulators sweeping new powers to seize and break up financial firms. Good idea, you say? Remember: The government also gets to decide what is a "financial" firm. Does GM, which makes loans, fall into that category? How about Wal-Mart, which issues its own credit cards?

In effect, this lets the government seize and dismantle the assets of almost any company — and then force others to pay for it.

The bill also creates a new agency inside the Federal Reserve that will have extensive power over consumer lenders. Hold the applause, because likely new limits on checking account fees and interest on credit cards will mean less access to credit, not more.

Another part of the bill, and one that's gotten little attention, makes changes to the amount of capital banks must keep to back up their loans. Banks eventually will be forced to raise more capital, or to reduce their lending. It also gives the government oversight over the $600 trillion derivatives market, without telling us what the rules will be. That, no doubt, will be left to bureaucrats.

We've just scratched the surface here. We'll have more to say in coming weeks as we plow through this monster of a bill that appears to reform little but harm a lot.

Lawmakers guide Dodd-Frank bill for Wall Street reform into homestretch

The Washington Post

Nearly two years after tremors on Wall Street set off a historic economic downturn, congressional leaders greenlighted a bill early Friday that would leave the financial industry largely intact but facing a more powerful network of regulators who could impose limits on risky activities.

The final bill took shape after a 20-hour marathon negotiation between House and Senate leaders seeking to reconcile their separate versions. The legislation puts a lot of faith in the watchful eye of regulators to prevent another financial crisis. New agencies would police consumer lending, the invention of financial products and the trading of exotic securities known as derivatives. Bank supervisors would have the power to seize large, troubled financial firms whose collapse could threaten the entire system. The bill calls for banks to hold more money in reserve to weather economic storms but leaves the details to regulators.

The House and Senate are set to vote on the legislation next week, and administration officials said President Obama could sign it into law before July 4.

(snipet)

The bill's final passage would set off a rush of activity. Two long-standing bank regulators would be combined, and regulators would have to launch more than 20 studies on controversial topics such as limiting the risky activities of big financial firms and setting precise capital reserve standards for banks.

Some administration officials acknowledged that leaving so much decision-making in the hands of regulators could open the process to lobbying by the financial industry. Many bank supervisors, in fact, work inside the headquarters of the biggest financial firms and have close relationships with the executives of the companies they regulate.

Among the first tasks for the administration would be to set up a new consumer protection bureau that would monitor credit card companies, mortgage brokers and banks to make sure consumers have clear information about financial products.

The new agency, while housed in the Federal Reserve, would have its own budget and director appointed by the president and would have wide authority to write consumer protection rules and enforce them with civil penalties. It could, for instance, force mortgage lenders to be more upfront about possible interest increases in adjustable-rate loans. During the crisis, many borrowers were caught off guard by the rise in rates on such loans.

(snipet)

"It's a great moment. I'm proud to have been here," said a teary-eyed Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee led the effort in the Senate. "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we've done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done."

Wild Thing's comment........

Kiss individual freedom good-bye and kiss capitalism good-bye.

Soros has been pushing this, wants more global controls on US and our economy.

Look at this that Chris Dodd said sheesh! ......"“It’s a great moment. I’m proud to have been here,” said a teary-eyed Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee led the effort in the Senate. “No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we’ve done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done.”

.... Thank you Jim for sending this to me.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:48 AM | Comments (4)

June 14, 2010

Obama Pushes New $80 Billion Stimulus Adding to $1.6 Trillion Deficit

BOEHNER ON WASHINGTON DEMOCRATS' BUDGET FAILURE:

"This appears to be the first time, in the modern era, that the House is not even going to consider a budget. ... Every family knows that in a tough time, it's more important to have a budget, not less. If you think that they're going to move a budget on Capitol Hill, you must obviously believe that Elvis is still alive. ... That's why I gave the President a letter this week with 100 economists saying that cutting spending now will, in fact, help get the economy moving again and get jobs back to the country."

BOEHNER ON PRESIDENT OBAMA'S FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE 'STIMULUS' BAILOUT:

"Listen, I'm concerned about the plight of teachers, firemen, policemen who face the real possibility that they may be laid off. But to send this letter up here on a Saturday night with no opportunity to cut spending elsewhere in a budget strikes me as a little different. ... The fact is the spending spree in Washington is continuing to run unabated. The American people are screaming at the top of their lungs, 'stop!' And to move this, without finding other offsets in spending, I think is irresponsible. It's just putting more debt on the backs of our kids and grandkids. And it really begs the question, why don't we have a budget this year?"

BOEHNER SAYS THAT BP MUST BE HELD FULLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR COSTS OF GULF OIL SPILL:

"The American people want this oil leak stopped now. They want to know what happened. They want the Gulf cleaned up, and they want it all done now. And I just think that BP ought to be held responsible for all of the costs that are involved in this. I said that right from the beginning, and I continue to believe that. I'm not sure that the federal government, though, was -- isn't also responsible. The laws that were in place, the materials that should have been in place for a spill this size, were not. And the reaction, I think, on the part of the Administration has been slow. But having said that, it's time to get this thing stopped now."

"I said from the beginning, BP needs to pay for the entire cost of this. But ... this is a failure of government. Government is there to protect our shores, to protect our environment. And there's been a real failure here. We've been asking for 55 days, where are the inspection reports from this rig? The Administration won't give them to us."

BOEHNER ON ISRAEL'S BLOCKADE OF GAZA:

"I think the Israelis have a clear right to defend themselves. When you look at this Flotilla that came over, the first five ships that were inspected, there was no problem at all. It's pretty clear to many of us who looked into this, that this last ship was intended to be a problem, intended to cause a conflict. And this is part of a much bigger problem that we see with the Administration, where we've coddled our enemies, and pushed our friends aside in the process, raising a lot of doubts around the world, including the people of Israel, who are having serious doubts about our commitment to them, our closest ally in the Middle East."

BOEHNER ON THE 2010 ELECTIONS:

"Our goal is to take the majority in the House. We've got 100 seats in play, we have a real shot at winning the Majority, so that we can put a check on this Administration and all of the spending that's out of control here in Washington, D.C."

Obama Pushes New $80 Billion Stimulus Adding to $1.6 Trillion Deficit

newsmax

Obama Pushes New $80 Billion Stimulus Adding to $1.6 Trillion Deficit– President Barack Obama and his aides are stepping up a push for further government spending to boost the economy as signs grow of the recovery's fragility.

The White House is calling for Congress to urgently pass measures to extend jobless benefits, aid cash-strapped states and provide targeted tax breaks to encourage research and development by businesses.

Obama's Democratic allies, facing congressional elections in November, have grown cautious about additional spending. Seizing on voter anxiety about deficits, Republicans have cast the administration's policies as fiscally reckless as they seek to challenge Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.

"People are suffering out there. We want to keep this economy growing faster. We want to see an acceleration of job creation. And we have to take some steps to continue in that direction," top White House adviser David Axelrod told NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday.

His comments came a day after Obama wrote to congressional leaders, urging them to move swiftly to approve new measures to "spur job creation and build momentum toward recovery."

Senate Democrats have introduced legislation that would renew expiring unemployment benefits, and extend business and individual tax breaks. They would offset some of the bill's costs by raising taxes on hedge fund managers and other steps.

The bill complements one passed in the House of Representatives last month, which would authorize about $80 billion in new spending and add $31 billion to the deficit. The cost of the Senate version has not been estimated yet.

Obama also backs a separate measure that would provide cash to states to prevent teacher layoffs but a $23 billion version of that legislation recently failed in the Senate.

"What the president is saying is, we need to expend additional dollars to make sure that we don't have significant layoffs," House of Representatives Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Democrat, told ABC's "This Week."

SPENDING FATIGUE

But Hoyer acknowledged growing concern about the U.S. deficit, which reached $1.4 trillion in 2009 and which the White House projects will hit $1.6 trillion in 2010.

"I think it's accurate that there's spending fatigue, not only on Capitol Hill, but around the country. People are concerned about the debt level, and we are, as well," Hoyer said. "But clearly, you cannot not continue to stimulate an economy that is still struggling to get out of the deep ditch that we found it in about 18 months ago."

In his letter to lawmakers, Obama said last year's $863 billion stimulus halted a freefall in the U.S. economy after the worst financial crisis since the 1930s Great Depression.

The jobless aid and many of the other steps under consideration would extend provisions in last year's stimulus package, which Republicans have derided as a wasteful, big-government approach to economic policymaking.

The letter went to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, both Democrats, along with House Republican leader John Boehner and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

Obama warned that without additional aid, states could be forced to enact "massive layoffs" of teachers, firefighters and other employees.

Last week, state governors pressed Congress to extend a measure that temporarily increased the funds the federal government sends them for Medicaid, the healthcare program for the poor that eats up 20 percent of state budgets on average.

Without the six-month extension, estimated to cost $24 billion, states would be forced to lay off thousands of workers, the governors said. The extension was stripped from the jobs bill passed in the House but is included in the Senate bill.

"I'm concerned about the plight of teachers, firemen, policemen who face the real possibility that they may be laid off," Boehner said on "This Week" but he added such spending needed to be offset.

Boehner criticized what he said was a "spending spree in Washington" that has "run unabated."

Adding to concerns about the tepid recovery, the government reported on Friday that retail sales unexpectedly fell in May for the first time in eight months.

A week earlier, the May employment report showed businesses scaling back on hiring after a spurt in the prior two months. Private-sector payrolls grew only by 41,000 after expanding by 218,000 in April. Unemployment fell to 9.7 percent from 9.9 percent in April.

Economists fear the U.S. recovery could be further dampened by fallout from the European crisis that began in Greece.

"We don't take anything for granted. We have to keep pushing forward and we should not be careless about pulling out of our stimulative efforts too quickly," Axelrod said.

He raised the example of Japan's economic stagnation and deflation in the 1990s to warn of the dangers the United States could face if it allows the stimulus to lapse too quickly.

Wild Thing's comment........

Obama NO! NO!....HELL NO!

STOP the spending!!!

If the teachers didn’t pay so much to the unions, they wouldn’t need as much. This is nothing but another special interest bailout.

Can you believe these idiots are still wanting to spend MORE to solve the mess the democRATS created?
It is insanity. Obama is hell bent on destroying the economy.

This is a clear bailout for SEIU and other government workers unions. Amd the SEIU spends this money on donating to campaigns of democrats........ such as the November election coming up. We have topay for THIER side to freaking win?????? DAMN these people and DAMN obama!

He is working on all fronts to destroy us and it is obvious that he takes pleasure in each situation that he causes in which sane people say “What the F are you doing???!!”

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:48 AM | Comments (2)

June 11, 2010

Obama's Goal Is Economic Collapse.....Tax Hikes and the 2011 Economic Collapse

Tax Hikes and the 2011 Economic Collapse

Today's corporate profits reflect an income shift into 2010. These profits will tumble next year, preceded most likely by the stock market.

The Wall Street Journal

People can change the volume, the location and the composition of their income, and they can do so in response to changes in government policies.

It shouldn't surprise anyone that the nine states without an income tax are growing far faster and attracting more people than are the nine states with the highest income tax rates. People and businesses change the location of income based on incentives.

Likewise, who is gobsmacked when they are told that the two wealthiest Americans—Bill Gates and Warren Buffett—hold the bulk of their wealth in the nontaxed form of unrealized capital gains? The composition of wealth also responds to incentives. And it's also simple enough for most people to understand that if the government taxes people who work and pays people not to work, fewer people will work. Incentives matter.

People can also change the timing of when they earn and receive their income in response to government policies.

According to a 2004 U.S. Treasury report, "high income taxpayers accelerated the receipt of wages and year-end bonuses from 1993 to 1992—over $15 billion—in order to avoid the effects of the anticipated increase in the top rate from 31% to 39.6%. At the end of 1993, taxpayers shifted wages and bonuses yet again to avoid the increase in Medicare taxes that went into effect beginning 1994."

Just remember what happened to auto sales when the cash for clunkers program ended. Or how about new housing sales when the $8,000 tax credit ended? It isn't rocket surgery, as the Ivy League professor said.

On or about Jan. 1, 2011, federal, state and local tax rates are scheduled to rise quite sharply. President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire on that date, meaning that the highest federal personal income tax rate will go 39.6% from 35%, the highest federal dividend tax rate pops up to 39.6% from 15%, the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 15%, and the estate tax rate to 55% from zero. Lots and lots of other changes will also occur as a result of the sunset provision in the Bush tax cuts.

Tax rates have been and will be raised on income earned from off-shore investments. Payroll taxes are already scheduled to rise in 2013 and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will be digging deeper and deeper into middle-income taxpayers. And there's always the celebrated tax increase on Cadillac health care plans. State and local tax rates are also going up in 2011 as they did in 2010. Tax rate increases next year are everywhere.

Now, if people know tax rates will be higher next year than they are this year, what will those people do this year? They will shift production and income out of next year into this year to the extent possible. As a result, income this year has already been inflated above where it otherwise should be and next year, 2011, income will be lower than it otherwise should be.

Also, the prospect of rising prices, higher interest rates and more regulations next year will further entice demand and supply to be shifted from 2011 into 2010. In my view, this shift of income and demand is a major reason that the economy in 2010 has appeared as strong as it has. When we pass the tax boundary of Jan. 1, 2011, my best guess is that the train goes off the tracks and we get our worst nightmare of a severe "double dip" recession.

In 1981, Ronald Reagan—with bipartisan support—began the first phase in a series of tax cuts passed under the Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA), whereby the bulk of the tax cuts didn't take effect until Jan. 1, 1983. Reagan's delayed tax cuts were the mirror image of President Barack Obama's delayed tax rate increases. For 1981 and 1982 people deferred so much economic activity that real GDP was basically flat (i.e., no growth), and the unemployment rate rose to well over 10%.

But at the tax boundary of Jan. 1, 1983 the economy took off like a rocket, with average real growth reaching 7.5% in 1983 and 5.5% in 1984. It has always amazed me how tax cuts don't work until they take effect. Mr. Obama's experience with deferred tax rate increases will be the reverse. The economy will collapse in 2011.

Consider corporate profits as a share of GDP. Today, corporate profits as a share of GDP are way too high given the state of the U.S. economy. These high profits reflect the shift in income into 2010 from 2011. These profits will tumble in 2011, preceded most likely by the stock market.

In 2010, without any prepayment penalties, people can cash in their Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), Keough deferred income accounts and 401(k) deferred income accounts. After paying their taxes, these deferred income accounts can be rolled into Roth IRAs that provide after-tax income to their owners into the future. Given what's going to happen to tax rates, this conversion seems like a no-brainer.

The result will be a crash in tax receipts once the surge is past. If you thought deficits and unemployment have been bad lately, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Wild Thing's comment........

THEY ARE PUSHING US OVER THE CLIFF!!! An economic collapse is exactly what Obama wants to have happen.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 08:50 AM | Comments (2)

June 10, 2010

America Hating Wilder Publications Under Fire for Putting Warning Label on Constitution

Publishing Company Under Fire for Putting Warning Label on Constitution

FOX News

A small publishing company is under fire after putting warning labels on copies of the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence and other historical documents.

Wilder Publications warns readers of its reprints of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, Common Sense, the Articles of Confederation, and the Federalist Papers, among others, that....

“This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today.”

The disclaimer goes on to tell parents that they "might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work."

Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, says the company may be trying to ensure that oversensitive people don't pull its works off bookstore or library shelves.

"Any idea that’s 100 years old will probably offend someone or other," Olson told FoxNews.com. "…But if there’s anything that you ought to be able to take at a first gulp for yourself and then ask your parents if you're wondering about this or that strange thing, it should be the founding documents of American history."

The warning seems to be offending more people than the documents themselves.

Amazon.com’s customer reviews of Wilder’s copy of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation show an overwhelming number of people speaking out against the disclaimer, describing it as “insulting,” “sickening” and “frankly, horrifying.”

Another review for Wilder’s edition of the Federalist Papers calls for an all-out boycott of the publisher, sarcastically pointing out the "dangerous ideas" it’s trying to protect children from: "limited government, checks and balances, constrained judicial review, dual sovereignty of states and federal government, and deliberative democracy."

And though warning labels are usually posted to protect a company from potential lawsuits, constitutional attorney Noel Francisco says this disclaimer has no legal benefits.

"Would it ever be a legal concern that selling the Constitution would expose you to some kind of liability? No. Never,” Francisco told FoxNews.com. "The Constitution is the founding document of the country, an operative legal document."

As for the idea that this warning label might help keep these works from being yanked off bookshelves, Francisco says it is more likely to have the opposite effect: people not carrying the book because it has the disclaimer.

"By putting on the warning, you’re making controversial something that’s not controversial: our Constitution, our Declaration of Independence," he said.

Amazon customers appear to agree. Almost all of the reviews discussing the disclaimer end with the same thought: don't buy from this publisher.

Efforts to reach the publisher were unsuccessful.

Wild Thing's comment.........

If our founding fathers were alive, they would be preparing a new revolution.

“This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today.”

BULL SH*T! These values ARE the same values needed (and believed on today); these publishers are out of step of reality*!

This is their address:

A & D Publishing
PO Box 3005
Radford,Va 24143-3005

or contact: Wilder Publications

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:49 AM | Comments (4)

June 09, 2010

Super Tuesday Primaries Some Good, Some BAD and Some....God Help Us!

Voters Angry Over Government Spending

Pro-Obamacare Senator Blanche Lincoln (Democrat ) wins a close primary race in Arkansas. Blanche Lincoln's victory in Arkansas shows signs of weakness in her State for the SEIU and the far-left MoveOn.org crowd who sunk a lot of money trying to beat her.

American hero Joe “You Lie!” Wilson won his primary in South Carolina.

The tea-party pick Sharron Angle defeated more established rivals and appeared on track to win the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Nevada—which would give incumbent Democratic Sen. Harry Reid the opponent he had hoped to face. She has received endorsements from the Tea Party Express, Gun Owners of America and Mark Levin. She favors drastically reduced government. She’d like to do away with the IRS and the Department of Education.

State Attorney General Jerry Brown won the Democratic nomination for governor and Meg Whitman (the former eBay chief executive) won the Republican nomination .

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina has won California's GOP primary for U.S. Senate, setting up a general election battle this fall with three-term Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer. Fiorina was the top vote-getter in Tuesday's primary election in a Republican field that included former Rep. Tom Campbell and conservative Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R-Irvine). Sarah Palin endorsed Carly Fiorina.

So it will be Meg Whitman vs. Jerry Brown, Carly Fiorina vs. Barbara Boxer In November in California.

State Rep. Nikki Haley pushed ahead of three rivals in the Republican gubernatorial race in South Carolina. She will face Rep. Gresham Barrett in a June 22 runoff.

>br>

This is VERY bad.....especialy in States like Ca. where the majority is democrat. This could spread to other States as well ~ Wild Thing

From Breitbart

California voters approve open primaries measure

California Proposition 14, Top Two Primaries Act (June 2010)

A California Top Two Primaries Act ballot proposition is on the June 8, 2010 ballot in California as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment.

If approved by voters, the proposal will require that candidates run in a single primary open to all registered voters, with the top two vote-getters meeting in a runoff. The new system would take effect in the 2012 elections.

Specifically, it would provide for a "voter-nominated primary election" for each state elective office and congressional office in California. Voters could vote in the primary election for any candidate for a congressional or state elective office without regard to the political party affiliations of either the candidate or the voter. Candidates could choose whether or not to have their political party affiliation displayed on the ballot.

The proposition also prohibits political parties from nominating candidates in a primary, although political parties would be allowed to endorse, support or oppose candidates. Elections for presidential candidates, and for members of political party committees and party central steering committees would not fall under the "top two" system.

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:47 AM | Comments (3)

June 08, 2010

Super Tuesday Primary Election-11 States Today

Harry Reid and Michelle Obama exercising????

Twelve states are holding primary contests Tuesday

FOX news

Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln faces off against Lt. Gov. Bill Halter in a Democratic primary runoff, while in Nevada Harry Reid will finally get an opponent in the Republican race to challenge the Senate majority leader.

California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is potentially endangered, will learn her challenger as voters in the state also decide who will win the Democratic and Republican nominations for the seat being vacated by term-limited two-term Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Democrat state Attorney General Jerry Brown, the former governor, wants his old job back. He will face either former eBay CEO Meg Whitman or state Assemblyman Steve Poizner.

In Nevada, three viable Republican candidates are hoping to take on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle has surged of late against businessman Danny Tarkanian and former state lawmaker Sue Lowden.

In the race for South Carolina governor, nothing is out of bounds, as months of attacks in the Republican primary have led up to a last-minute scandal throwing the race into chaos.

Establishment favorites also are challenged in primaries for House seats in Montana, New Jersey and Virginia. Also holding contests are Iowa, Maine, North Dakota and South Dakota.

A special election runoff is also being held in Georgia to fill the seat of Rep. Nathan Deal, who quit to focus on his Republican primary for governor, being held July 20.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Prayers for our cuontry. I pray Conservatives get out and vote more then ever before, and Conservatives win.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:48 AM | Comments (2)

June 07, 2010

U.S.'s $13 Trillion Debt Poised to Overtake GDP

Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) explaining how over 90% of all bills passed by the senate are passed without being read, without being scored by the CBO, without being voted on, and totally in secret

“You don’t get thirteen trillion dollars into debt by doing things right,” he says.

Barack Obama is poised to increase the U.S. debt to a level that exceeds the value of the nation’s annual economic output, a step toward what Bill Gross called a “debt super cycle.”

The CHART OF THE DAY tracks U.S. gross domestic product and the government’s total debt, which rose past $13 trillion for the first time this month. The amount owed will surpass GDP in 2012, based on forecasts by the International Monetary Fund. The lower panel shows U.S. annual GDP growth as tracked by the IMF, which projects the world’s largest economy to expand at a slower pace than the 3.2 percent average during the past five decades.

“Over the long term, interest rates on government debt will likely have to rise to attract investors,” said Hiroki Shimazu, a market economist in Tokyo at Nikko Cordial Securities Inc., a unit of Japan’s third-largest publicly traded bank. “That will be a big burden on the government and the people.”

Gross, who runs the world’s largest mutual fund at Pacific Investment Management Co. in Newport Beach, California, said in his June outlook report that “the debt super cycle trend” suggests U.S. economic growth won’t be enough to support the borrowings “if real interest rates were ever to go up instead of down.”

Dan Fuss, who manages the Loomis Sayles Bond Fund, which beat 94 percent of competitors the past year, said last week that he sold all of his Treasury bonds because of prospects interest rates will rise as the U.S. borrows unprecedented amounts. Obama is borrowing record amounts to fund spending programs to help the economy recover from its longest recession since the 1930s.

“The incremental borrower of funds in the U.S. capital markets is rapidly becoming the U.S. Treasury,” Boston-based Fuss said. “Do you really want to buy the debt of the biggest issuer?”

Wild Thing's comment.......

Just a passing thought but can you imagine a DeMint/Christie or Christie/DeMint ticket and Bachmann land Speaker of the House. heh heh

Jim DeMint is one of a handful that I think would do a great job in leading us to the restoration of our country.

Senator DeMint on the Bailout

We have seen this Government socialize our education system and make our schools among the worst in the world. We have seen this Government take over most of our health care system, making private insurance less and less affordable. We have seen this Government socialize our energy resources and bring our Nation to its knees by cutting the development of our own oil and natural gas supplies. And now we see this Congress yielding its constitutional obligations to a Federal bureaucracy, giving it the power to control virtually our entire financial system. Americans understand this and they are angry. They are our judge and our jury. They are watching what we are doing, and they will render their verdict based on our actions.

If we were honest with the American people and explained the failures that have led to this financial crisis, we might have the credibility to ask our citizens to allow us to borrow another $700 billion in their name to try to fix this problem. But we are not being honest. This problem was not created by our free enterprise system. It was created by us, the Congress and the Federal Government

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:45 AM | Comments (2)

June 03, 2010

Congressional Candidate Marine Corp Veteran, Rick Barber Forces a Run Off!

His opponent is a RINO!

On June 1st, after being outspent 7 to 1, Marine Corp Veteran Rick barber forces a Run off! 1 by the establishment-GOP’s chosen candidate .....Marine Corps veteran and tea party candidate Rick Barber forced a runoff election for the 2nd District’s Republican nomination.

“This experience has been thrilling, overwhelming, exhilarating, but, most of all, humbling,” said Rick Barber after learning that his campaign was going to be extended until July 13th.

“When I entered this race, nearly all of the pundits were saying that I had no chance. To force a runoff with an opponent who had national endorsements behind her is just amazing.”

Rick Barber has never run for elected office before. In 2009, he became a prominent tea party leader in Montgomery and the surrounding areas. He held tea party events at his place of business, spoke at several rallies, marched on Washington on 9/12, and even campaigned for Scott Brown in January to help the Massachusetts Senator win the 41st filibuster vote for the GOP.

“Throughout the campaign, we’ve been broke,” added Barber. “There were moments when we thought we couldn’t continue for another week, but around every corner there’s been a miracle. Tonight was just the latest and greatest miracle.”

The Rick Barber for Congress campaign now has six weeks to turn the tide in district 2 away from the handpicked GOP favorite Martha Roby who has spent more than $500,000 thus far in her bid to take the nomination.

“We’re not intimidated by Martha’s money,” said Barber.

“Our message has been the strength of our campaign from the start. We believe in limited government, lower taxes, the right to life and the US Constitution.”

“We’re not planning on deviating from a winning message.”

The runoff election will be held on July 13th, but, for the moment, the Barber campaign is enjoying its accomplishment. Being outspent 7 – 1, Rick Barber managed to force a runoff.

Wild Thing's comment.........

I LOVE his hard hitting ad!!!

Rick Barber is a Republican candidate for Alabama's Second Congressional District (southeast corner of the state).

His website...click HERE

Rick Barber at Facebook

This November, We The People must take America back!!!

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:45 AM | Comments (4)

May 29, 2010

Obama to Snatch Up to 75% of Your Income

Obama to snatch up to 75% of your income

wnd

If President Obama repeals the Bush tax cuts and imposes a 20 percent value added tax, or VAT, on the U.S., Americans may be facing tax rates where more than half of everything earned is confiscated by the federal government in the form of income taxes, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.

Add Social Security taxes and the tax burden quickly advances to more than 60 percent.

"Adding state property and income taxes to the burden, the amount government confiscates could be in the 75 percent range before Americans have a chance to vote Obama out of office in 2012," Corsi wrote. "Are Americans willing to be taxed 75 percent of every dollar earned?"

In a five-day work week, will Americans be willing to work four days for the government?" Corsi asked.

He said as Obama moves the U.S. in the direction of becoming a European-style social welfare state, it is important to consider taxation levels typical in Europe.

Corsi noted that even high levels of taxation are not sufficient in Europe to prevent debt levels from rising to crisis proportions, as has been seen in Greece and is looming on the horizon in Portugal, Spain and Italy.

"These are the real costs of income redistribution, as taxpayers are made to bear the taxation costs of generous pension plans for government employees at all levels of government – federal, state and local – as well as funding Social Security, paying for Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare and funding welfare, including educating the children of illegal immigrants in Spanish in public schools," he wrote. "There is no limit to generosity when it comes to socialist states providing social welfare benefits to increasingly government dependent populations."

Wild Thing's comment.......

A simple and easy to follow guide of our current circumstances:

The Road to Serfdom in Cartoons...

http://mises.org/books/TRTS/

These peple are nuts. If they keep taking more from us, well I guess what they want is for everyone to be broke and then put us all on government help which is a way to rule our lives once more..... obama agenda 101.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:55 AM | Comments (6)

Good For Rep. Michele Bachmann As She Blasts Democrats for Voting to Allow Another Federal Pay Raise!

Rep. Michele Bachmann blasts Democrats for voting to allow another federal pay raise!

From the floor of the U.S. House: Ms. Bachmann explains how both sides of the aisle are responsible for Government's out of control spending! Now Democrats are voting to allow themselves yet another federal pay raise!

Dems again brush off cuts sought by GOP's online initiative

By Michael O'Brien

The Hill

The House dismissed on Friday a Republican-led effort to freeze wages for non-military federal employees.

The House voted 227-183 to table a motion to recommit a defense authorization bill to kill a 1.4 percent pay raise for civilian federal employees proposed by the Obama administration.

The cuts were picked under the GOP's "YouCut" initiative, and was offered by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). Republicans said the cuts would have saved $30 billion over 10 years.

Three Republicans voted to keep the pay raises in place, while 18 Democrats joined the GOP in calling for the cut.

This vote was the second time Democrats brushed aside a GOP vote forced under the "YouCut" program, where online visitors and other supporters can vote on proposed spending cuts.

Democrats needled the GOP on Friday by submitting an item for next week's vote that would cut the funding for House Republicans' "America Speaking Out" initiative.

Wild Thing's comment........

A democrat steals from the productive and provides free services to the non-productive.

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:48 AM | Comments (2)

May 25, 2010

The Next Bailout: $165B for Unions

The Next Bailout: $165B for Unions

FOX Business

Taxpayers could be on the hook for another $165 billion if a bill to bail out private union pension funds makes it through Congress.

Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) wants taxpayers to fork over $165 billion to bailout the troubled union pension funds.

A Democratic senator is introducing legislation for a bailout of troubled union pension funds. If passed, the bill could put another $165 billion in liabilities on the shoulders of American taxpayers.

The bill, which would put the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation behind struggling pensions for union workers, is being introduced by Senator Bob Casey, (D-Pa.), who says it will save jobs and help people.

As FOX Business Network’s Gerri Willis reported Monday, these pensions are in bad shape; as of 2006, well before the market dropped and recession began, only 6% of these funds were doing well.

Although right now taxpayers could possibly be on the hook for $165 billion, the liability could essentially be unlimited because these pensions have to be paid out until the workers die.

Wild Thing's comment.......

For God's sake where does it stop. God save America from these communists.

So the unions raid the pensions and use the money to get politicians elected , then the politicians raid the treasury to bail out the unions, affectively stealing from the taxpayers. Some scam that is sheesh!

Look at this:

Unions to spend $100M in 2010 campaign to save Dem majorities

At least two influential unions will spend close to $100 million on the 2010 election, with most of those funds going to protect incumbents.
Union officials told The Hill they plan to help endangered members — particularly freshmen — who made politically difficult votes in a year during which an anti-incumbent mood has filled the country.
And the number will be even higher since the AFL-CIO declined to give its figures.
While the labor movement has displayed an aggressive tack in Democratic primaries, including supporting some challengers over incumbents, it remains concerned about the party retaining its congressional majorities.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (6)

May 21, 2010

Obama Continues His Destruction Of America As Sweeping Wall Street Reform Bill Advances

Dr. Coburn on Fox with Neil Cavuto Discussing the Financial Reform Bill

Scott Brown Key to Wall St. Bill Passage

The Senate voted 60-40 to end debate on the bill as U.S. stocks fell sharply. Barney Frank, the Democratic head of a key House committee, told CNBC television news it is important to get financial reform approved quickly to ease market uncertainty. He said he expected Obama could sign a bill into law well before July 4.

Politico

In January, he broke the Democrats’ lock on the Senate.

On Thursday, he gave it back.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) effectively became the 60th vote to cut off debate on Wall Street reform Thursday – a far cry from when Republicans were hailing him as the 41st GOPer who was going to stand up to the Democrats’ agenda. Brown also voted "yes" on final passage.

Brown’s vote allowed Democrats to move swiftly toward final passage of one of President Barack Obama’s top legislative priorities, a day after he was accused of breaking his word by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who said Brown had promised to vote yes Wednesday.

By Thursday, though, Brown switched from no to yes, after a talk with Reid and a full-on sales-pitch from Democrats in the Massachusetts delegation, including Sen. John Kerry, who made the pitch that the bill is good for the state. Brown met Kerry at the Democrat's Georgetown home at 6 a.m. Thursday for a bike ride where they discussed the pending bill extensively, Brown said.

“I spoke at length over a 40 mile bike-ride with Senator Kerry about it,” Brown said exiting the floor after casting his vote Thursday. “It was this morning, and he’s a very good athlete.”

Kerry, who had hip replacement surgery in January, rode with Brown all the way to Great Falls, Md., an aide to the Democrat confirmed to POLITICO.

House Financial Service Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) also talked to Brown – telling him that his concerns about the impact on home-state financial firms such as Fidelity and State Street would be addressed.

It wasn’t simply home-state pride. Democrats needed Brown when it became clear that the ‘no’ votes of Democratic senators Maria Cantwell of Washington and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin couldn’t be flipped.

The vote – and perhaps even his long conversation with Kerry – seem sure to give Brown trouble with the government-wary Tea Party movement that backed his candidacy to take Sen. Ted Kennedy’s seat. Grassroots supporters who once heralded Brown responded to the senator's vote immediately on social media such as Facebook and Twitter, accusing him of being a "liar" and "Republican in name only."

In some ways, Brown was only facing the challenge many predicted he might:

Would he be the champion of the conservative causes that swept him into the national spotlight? Or would he find himself ideologically aligned with the traditionally Democratic state of Massachusetts?

By breaking with his party, Brown joined fellow New England Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine as the vote that pushed Democrats over the top and continued to cement himself as a key player for Democrats who lost their filibuster-proof 60-vote majority with his election.

When Brown arrived to Washington in January, he received a hero's welcome from a Republican party still reeling from huge defeats in 2008. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) even went so far as to dub Brown "41."

But as Thursday's vote demonstrated, perhaps the filibuster-boosting moniker was a bit premature. In statements made throughout the voting process on Wall Street reform, Brown has chosen to emphasize Massachusetts first.

“I supported moving the financial bill forward today because I received assurances from Senator Reid and his leadership team that the issues related to Massachusetts in the financial reform bill will be fixed before it is signed into law," Brown said in a statement.

“I will continue working with Senator Kerry and the rest of the Massachusetts delegation to ensure that businesses in our state can continue to operate as they have been doing for decades — creating jobs and helping grow the economy.”

Brown was already in the spotlight this week, viewed a likely Republican “yes” vote all along. On Wednesday night, Reid took a shot at Brown, saying "a senator broke his word with me" just minutes after the Massachusetts Republican told reporters he initially said to Reid he would be a "yes" on cloture.

Brown insisted that he had not broken his promise — that his vote was contingent on the resolution of issues he saw with Volcker Rule language in the bill — but Reid's focus on the Republican, both in front of reporters and on the Senate floor, were indicative of Brown's relative importance to the majority leader.

“When he told me that I let him down, I told him straight-up that I certainly felt badly about it but the bottom line is that representations were made, these issues were not resolved, and here we are," Brown said Wednesday. "Him saying what he said — I never take any of this personally. I know he's under a lot of pressure."

Wild Thing's comment........

This is the WORST bill, it literally will destroy the entire concept of "America" as we know it. The Finance Reform Bill attacking Wall Street and much much more of course.

Jim Demint called this the "worst bill that's ever been in the Senate."

It's the financial regulations bill that basically turns control of every single little aspect of the private sector over to Obama. He now has more power than Castro.

I just can't believe the vacant souls on the Hill. What are they thinking? One man speaking for 300 million people and not with the voice of the majority. What are they thinking?

THREE Republicans: Brown, Snowe, and Collins vote for Cloture.

It will be hard for any law to exceed the damage that will eventually be done by ObamaCare, but this ill-conceived monstrosity, aka the Financial Reform Bill, will ultimately be right up there with socialized healthcare when it comes to contributing to the destruction of America as we have known it.

It will be known as the Mother-of-All-Unintended-Consequences Bill. This is the one that allows them to track each and every financial transaction. every credit card, debit card, check, deposit and withdrawal.

And the consequences will not be good.

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:55 AM | Comments (6)

May 19, 2010

Primaries Yesterday Rand Paul Takes Kentucky – Sestak Beats Specter – Burns Concedes

Rand Paul: We Have Come To Take Our Government Back

ARLEN SPECTER GOES DOWN TO ANTIWAR LIB DEM SESTAK in Pennsylvania

The AP

Political novice Rand Paul rode support from tea party activists to a rout in Kentucky’s Republican Senate primary Tuesday night, jolting the GOP establishment. Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter lost his struggle for political survival in Pennsylvania, a five-term incumbent offering experience to voters clamoring for change.

Another Democratic incumbent, Sen. Blanche Lincoln, led narrowly in early returns in her race for nomination to a third term in Arkansas, but she risked being thrown into a costly run-off.

Sestak will face former GOP Rep. Pat Toomey in the fall in what expected to be a hotly contested race.

Elsewhere, Kentucky Republicans chose Paul — the son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul, whose 2008 presidential candidacy sparked legions of followers — as their nominee for the Senate seat being vacated by retiring Republican Sen. Jim Bunning. Tea party activists lifted Paul to victory over Secretary of State Trey Grayson, who was the favored candidate of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Celebrating his triumph, Paul — a 47-year-old eye surgeon making his first run for office — said, "I have a message, a message from the tea party, a message that is loud and clear and does not mince words: We have come to take our government back."

Tim Burns concedes in Pennsylvania 12 Special Election (Murtha's District)

Tim's race was difficult to win. The Dems outnumber the GOP in this district that belonged to vile Murtha.
Murtha died 2-8-10 and had been in office since 1974. There wasn’t a lot of time to build a good GOP political machine .
It had to be hard to overcome the Democrat machine, especially on relatively short notice. Let us hope they do better by November.

David Madeira run for Congress did not win. He is such a good man, I feel really badly about this one.
Democrat Christopher Carney in PA’s 10th Congressional Race

In unofficial results, with complete reports not in from five counties, Marino secured 22,848 votes, Madeira tallied 16,989 and Derk had 15,908.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:48 AM | Comments (6)

May 18, 2010

Tim Burns is Running for Congress in Pennsylvania ~ Go get them PA-12!

The special election to replace John Murtha . William Russell polled very close to Murtha right up until Election Day; Murtha won with 58% of the vote.. So pray and keep your fingers crossed on this one today. ~ Wild Thing

From the person that made this video:

"Tim Burns is running for congress in Pennsylvania. He's campaigning to take back the people's seat formerly held by Murtha.

Tim is NOT a politician. He's been a businessman and created hundreds of jobs in Pennsylvania. He has never secured pork-barrel money. He planst to work to reduce government spending, balance the budget, end government corruption, and grow the economy.

I created this video as part of my own personal tea party. I'm doing what I can to help out those who are making moves to reinstitute the constitutional debate back into government.

This video is an expression of my personal opinion and not paid for or endorsed by the Tim Burns campaign.

Obama's 'Bitter Clinger' Comments Haunt PA-12 Race

PR Newswire reported:

“President Obama’s deep disdain for Pennsylvania has been a matter of record for some time. In fact, at a wine and cheese party among Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco neighbors during the last election, Obama revealed exactly what he thinks of small town Pennsylvanians when he labeled them, ‘bitter,’ and asserted that they needed to ‘cling to their guns and religion,’” said Scott Wheeler, Executive Director of the National Republican Trust PAC. “It was a shocking display of elitist arrogance, but it seems consistent with Obama’s world view.”

“During this special election to fill Jack Murtha’s seat, it’s been less than surprising to see the mainstream media failing to remind Pennsylvanians just how disdainful is their President towards them, even as he has avoided traveling to the region, lest he sink Mark Critz’s campaign ship with his own ballast-filled approval rating. So, as a service to Western Pennsylvanians – and to encourage the excellent candidacy of Tim Burns – we thought we’d educate the voters about the real issues in this campaign, hence our radio spots about Obama’s ‘bitter clinger’ comments,” continued Wheeler.

“It comes down to this: Mark Critz is a hand-picked, Washington insider, a pawn of Obama and Pelosi. Tim Burns is NOT a career politician, but instead, a smart and articulate fiscal conservative, a champion of efficient, limited government, and a pro free market business veteran that has spent his life running a company and creating jobs in Pennsylvania. It’s a pretty compelling choice. We have faith that on Tuesday, Western Pennsylvanians will be voting for Tim Burns…and the ONLY THING they’ll be clinging to is our country!”

Also a new radio ad in support of Republican Tim Burns points to Barack Obama’s disdain for Pennsylvania gun-toting, Bible-thumping bitter clingers.

The 60-second Radio ad, entitled, "Bitter Clinger," can be listened to here:

www.nationalrepublicantrust.com.

Obama has ridiculed voters in rural districts like this Western Pennsylvania Dstrict calling them “bitter” and stating they “cling to their guns and religion.” He has even labeled these hardworking taxpayers as racist. Now he has the audacity to ask these proud Americans to vote for one of his , Washington insider, career politician cronies.

Wild Thing's comment........

EVERY win for us is a HUGE loss for them. We need to do all in our power to make it so.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (3)

May 12, 2010

Outrage: Obama Administration Targets Military for Pay Reductions

Barack Obama — who came to power with the help of government employee unions across the nation and has lavished on them hundreds of billions in stimulus funds to keep them on federal, state and local payrolls with no strings attached — is moving to cut spending on salaries for military personnel.

This weekend The Washington Post headlined story, "Pentagon Asking Congress to Hold Back on Generous Increases in Troop Pay,” disclosed that the Obama administration is “pleading” with Congress to give military personnel a much smaller increase in pay than lawmakers have proposed.

The Pentagon contends that Congress simply has been too generous with troops during the past decade.

In fact, lawmakers have lavished so much money on troops, according to the Post, that service members are now better compensated than workers in the private sector with similar experience and education levels.

For example, the military brass claims that an average sergeant in the Army with four years of service and one dependent would receive $52,589 in annual compensation, according to the paper. This figure includes basic pay, housing, and subsistence allowances, as well as tax benefits.

Meanwhile, a U.S. postal letter carrier, with no supervisory or hazardous duty, makes approximately $80,000 a year when all benefits are factored in.

Critics of the Obama administration’s efforts to cut soldier’s pay say America’s security has been strengthened by higher pay rates, as qualified veterans are re-enlisting at record rates, reversing the problem the military witnessed just a few years ago.

"Any attempt to link rising military personnel costs with shrinking military readiness is total nonsense," said Thomas J. Tradewell Sr., who leads the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the largest and oldest major combat veterans organization.

"If the Defense Department needs a larger budget for personnel programs, then let the VFW carry that message to Congress. Just don't pin the budget blame on service members and military retirees."

Tradewell's ire was targeted this past week at Clifford L. Stanley, the Defense undersecretary of personnel and readiness, who said during recent testimony before the personnel subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee: "Rising personnel costs could dramatically affect the readiness of the department."

"What's hurtful," said Tradewell, a combat-wounded Vietnam veteran from Sussex, Wis., "is a continuing perception that DoD is more concerned about the budget than they are about recruiting and retaining a professional volunteer force that's been at war now for more than eight years."

According to Stanley, last year was the military's most successful recruiting year since the establishment of the all-volunteer force in 1973.

Although advocates for military families argue that the decade-long spending spree reverses severe cuts that the military suffered in the 1990s, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and other military brass fear that the spending will threaten security in the years to come. That will mean less money to buy weapons and maintain aging equipment.

On Saturday, Gates told reporters that massive deficits can impact how the president and policy makers confront emerging threats like Iran.

Lawmakers consistently have overruled the Pentagon and mandated more-generous pay raises than requested by both the Bush and Obama administrations. Congress has also rejected attempts by the Pentagon to slow soaring healthcare costs, which Gates told reporters are "eating us alive," by raising co-pays or premiums.

The military admits the improving compensation for troops is helping retention.

For example, improvements in pay and benefits have made it more likely that sailors will stick around longer, Vice Adm. Mark E. Ferguson III, the chief of naval personnel, told the Post.

A Navy survey last year found that about 60 percent of spouses wanted their sailors to make a career of Navy life, meaning a stint of at least 20 years. In 2005, only about 20 percent of spouses felt the same way.

"I think pay was previously a concern, but it's started to change," Ferguson said. Congress had been "extremely generous" but rising personnel costs were already influencing what the Navy spends to operate, maintain and modernize its fleet, he added.

The Pentagon wants a pay raise of 1.4 percent for service members next year, an increase based on the Employment Cost Index, which the Labor Department uses to measure private-sector salary increases.

Congress, as it has for the past several years, has indicated it favors a slightly bigger bump, of 1.9 percent.

Although that extra half of a percent may not seem like much, one expert told the Post that it would accrue annually and cost about $3.5 billion over the next decade.

But congressional supporters of the men and women in the Armed Services are questioning why they are being singled out for future pay cutbacks when other government agencies and unions are not.

The U.S. Postal Service, for example, is slated to give letter carriers an increase of 1.9 percent this coming year.

And postal employees are considered to be grossly overpaid compared with their private counterparts. A postal supervisor, for example, can make $70,000 or year or more, plus significant benefits.

Last year, Congress had to help fill a $3.8 billion deficit at the federally backed agency, but there has been no discussion of salary cuts for postal employees. Instead, postal officials have focused on reducing service, including Saturday delivery.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Just when I think there is no way I can despise the SOB-in-chief any more than I already do, I find out that I really can. What a worthless glob of flesh!!!!!!

When Clinton was inaugurated, two of his first initiatives where allowing gays in the military (the backlash caused him to fall back to “don’t ask, don’t tell) and and order for no pay raise for the military. The armed forces were already angry about his draft dodging and “loathe the military letter”, but the rest of his actions made them despise him.

Obama has been way outdoing Clinton.

Obama knows the military hate him, and rightly so, the alien moron.

This is terrible.

If they do it to the military how about cutting all of Congress’ wages too?

And Obama’s?

And the cabinet members?

And the White House staff’s?

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:49 AM | Comments (5)

May 08, 2010

OMG Look At This ...."Should the American Flag Be Banned -- in America?"

Should the American Flag Be Banned -- in America?

FOX News

Should the display of an American flag be banned, even if a school administrator feels that display could lead to fights?

It is a freaking survey at THIS LINK at FOX.

My head is going to explode I swear. To even ask this question OMG!

Posted by Wild Thing at 07:55 AM | Comments (8)

May 06, 2010

U.S. Marines Boot Recruits with Confederate Tattoos

U.S.Marines hoists Confederate flag during WW11

VIetnam war heroes hoist Confederate flag

U.S. Marines boot recruits with Confederate tattoos

You won't believe what military thinks of historic Southern symbol

wnd

A widely regarded Southern symbol of pride and states' rights is standing in the way of would-be Marines in their quest to serve their country – a Confederate battle flag.

Straight out of high school, one 18-year-old Tennessee man was determined to serve his country as a Marine. His friend said he passed the pre-enlistment tests and physical exams and looked forward with excitement to the day he would ship out to boot camp.

But there would be no shouting drill instructors, no rigorous physical training and no action-packed stories for the aspiring Marine to share with his family.

Shortly before he was scheduled to leave Nashville for boot camp, the Marine Corps rejected him.

Now, the young man, who wishes to remain unnamed and declined to be interviewed, has chosen to return to school and is no longer an aspiring Marine.

"I think he just wants to let it go," said former Marine 1st Lt. Gene Andrews, a friend of the man and patriotic Southerner who served in Vietnam from 1968 through 1971. Andrews is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, a group of male descendents of Confederate soldiers. He counseled the young man when he decided to become a Marine.

"He had been talking to me, and he was all fired up about joining," he told WND. "He asked my opinion of it, and I just tried to tell him the truth, good points and bad points."

When the young recruit didn't go to boot camp, Andrews learned of his rejection based on his tattoo of the Confederate battle flag on his shoulder.

'Right now, it's a flat-out denial'

Current Marine Corps tattoo policy states, "Tattoos/brands that are sexist (express nudity), racist, eccentric or offensive in nature, express an association with conduct or substances prohibited by the Marine Corps drug policy and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to include tattoos associated with illegal drugs, drug usage or paraphernalia, are prohibited. Tattoos/brands that depict vulgar or anti-American content, bring possible discredit to the Marine Corps, or associate the applicant/Marine with any extremist group or organization are prohibited."

WND contacted the Tennessee recruiting station, and a Marine sergeant explained, "The policy is if a tattoo can be construed by anyone as being gang-related or racially biased, then we can't accept them."

While some extremist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan Nations have reportedly embraced the Confederate flag in the past, the KKK has also adopted the U.S. flag and Christian crosses as symbols. However, many Southerners do not consider the flag an expression of racism or indicator of membership in extremist groups. They regard the Confederate flag as a symbol of state sovereignty and an honorable tribute to the men who fought and died to protect their homeland from invasion by the federalist North.

Asked whether an exception might be made for a Marine recruit who could provide a full explanation on the meaning of his tattoo as an expression of Southern pride, the recruiter explained, "At this point in time, no. If it can be construed by anyone as being racially biased, then right now it's a flat-out denial."

He acknowledged that the tattoo is quite popular in the South and that recruitment has been impacted by the ban on Confederate-flag tattoos, but he explained that the policy has been set by Headquarters Marine Corps.

Headquarters Marine Corps has not responded to WND's requests for clarification of the policy.

However, the U.S. Marine Corps "Guidebook for Tattoo Screening, Volume VII," a manual that outlines procedures for enlisted recruiting and officer procurement operations, explains, "Users of this guidebook should keep in mind, however, that few symbols ever just represent one idea or are used exclusively by one group. For example, the confederate flag is a symbol that is frequently used by white supremacists but which also has been used by people and groups that are not racist. To some it may signify pride in one's heritage, but to others it suggests slavery or white supremacy."

'We've seen this before'

Other service members and recruits have dealt with similar issues concerning Confederate flag tattoos and military policy.

The Southern Legal Resource Center, or SLRC, is a nonprofit legal foundation that has handled a number of legal cases involving the Confederate battle flag.

"We've seen this before," SLRC Chief Trial Counsel Kirk Lyons told WND. "This is not a unique situation. We have had instances where people have called who were hassled by Marine military police for having a small Confederate battle flag sticker on their vehicle. We had a Navy recruit who was turned away for having a Confederate battle flag tattoo on his forearm. There was one more incident a couple of years ago where another Marine recruit was refused enlistment because of a battle flag tattoo."

Lyons said the case of the Marine with a Confederate flag bumper sticker was resolved without legal action because the base commander decided to leave it alone. However, he said most enlistees and recruits don't pursue legal action or complaints, so the policy is never challenged.

"If a family is not willing to make an issue of it and push it, there's really nothing we can do because we have to have standing," he explained.

On the other hand, enlistees often cooperate so their careers don't suffer, Lyons said.

"They've got to keep their mouths shut because they're very career-oriented," he said. "You either get with the program, or you're going to destroy your career. The military is going to fight it tooth and nail. In a lot of cases like this, there's nobody to support these guys. They're on their own."

He added, "Somebody's got to stand up and say, 'I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore.' If people surrender their rights and just go on, there's not much we can do."

'This is an insult to us'

As for Andrews, he walked into the local Marine recruiting station in Madison, Tenn., that had turned the recruit away. He met a staff sergeant and informed him of his family's defense of Tennessee during the Civil War and his own service in Vietnam.

"I had thought about it, and the more I thought about it, the more I felt like this is just not right," he said. "I thought, if we just sit here, we're going to be slapped around and stepped on forever."

In a recent commentary posted on numerous blogs, Andrews recounted his experience:

"I informed the young sergeant that my family had defended the state of Tennessee (also his home state) against a sadistic invasion under that flag and to call our sacred flag of honor a 'hate symbol' was an insult to all southerners, but especially to those southerners who had risked or even given their lives in service to the Marine Corps. Southerners had served at Belleau Woods, at Tarawa and Iwo Jima, at Inchon and the Chosin Reservoir, and at Khe Sanh and Hue City, but now we are no longer wanted in the politically correct, don't-offend-any-minorities military?"

The sergeant politely explained that the policy was handed down by headquarters.

Andrews continued, "I asked the sergeant if he had taken out the trash yet. He replied that he hadn't.

"I then said, 'Please add these to the day's garbage,' and returned my lieutenant's bars, my gold and silver Marine Corps emblem from my dress blues, my shooting badges and my Vietnam ribbons.

"I, like many of you, have always been told, 'Once a Marine, always a Marine,' and 'There are no ex-Marines, only former Marines,' but for me that is no longer true."

Andrews told WND he was born in the South, raised in the South and will always be a Southerner.

"This is an insult to us," he said. "We've laid our lives on the line in the Marine Corps since there was a Marine Corps. We fought in every campaign that the Marine Corps has been involved in. When I was in Vietnam, there were Confederate flags at every base, every fire-support base over there. Nobody said anything about it. There were state flags, Confederate flags, and it was no big deal."

Andrews said he is not angry. Rather, he is disappointed in the Marine Corps.

"I thought if it had been a bunch of political hacks or a school board or a local government or some municipality that was pretty spineless anyway, I really wouldn't have been surprised," he said. "That happens all the time. But I felt that the Marine Corps had a little more backbone and a little more character than that."

Asked what he would say to people who believe the Confederate flag represents racism and slavery, he responded, "I'd say they don't know much about history. Slavery existed under the United States flag much longer than it ever did under the Confederate flag."

He added, "It's pitiful to bring up historical topics to some of our young people today. They just stare at you like you're from outer space. If you're going to be led around by the nose in this country by the government, if you can't figure out what's true and what's not and what kind of propaganda they're giving you, that's a sad situation."

Confederate flag: Symbol of 'terrorism' or independence?

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, or NAACP, recently fought to ban the Confederate flag from the South Carolina Statehouse. NAACP leaders have said the Confederate flag "supports the evils of slavery" and "represents terrorism."

However, in his 1999 commentary, columnist Walter Williams argued, "It must be ignorance, an ignorance I once shared. The NAACP crowd sees the Confederate battle flag as a flag of slavery. If that's so, the United States flag is even more so. Slavery thrived under the United States flag from 1776 to 1865, while under the Confederate flag a mere four years."

He explained, "The birth of both flags had little or nothing to do with slavery. Both flags saw their birth in a violent and proud struggle for independence and self-governance."

Williams noted that the flag naturally symbolizes resentment for those individuals who see the War for Southern Independence solely or chiefly as a struggle for slavery.

"The idea that President Abraham Lincoln waged war against the South to abolish slavery is fiction created by the victors," he explained. "Here's an oft-repeated sentiment by President Lincoln: 'I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.' Slavery simply emerged as a moral front for northern aggression."

Williams explained that significant factors that led to the war included states' rights and tariffs Congress enacted to protect Northern manufacturing interests. He also cited professor Edward Smith, director of American studies at American University, who has calculated that between 60,000 and 93,000 blacks served the Confederacy.

"These black Confederate soldiers no more fought to preserve slavery than their successors fought in WWI and WWII to preserve Jim Crow and segregation," Williams wrote. "They fought because their homeland was attacked and fought in the hope that the future would be better and they'd be rewarded for their patriotism."

Williams then suggested the NAACP make an effort to memorialize and honor black Confederate soldiers.

Meanwhile, a May 9, 2000, survey by Gallup Poll News Service posed this question to Americans, "Do you, yourself, see the Confederate flag more as a symbol of Southern pride, or more as a symbol of racism?"

A full 59 percent of all respondents said they believe it is a symbol of Southern pride, while only 28 percent saw it as a symbol of racism.

"It's kind of a hot topic for us right now," the Tennessee Marine recruiter said of the Marine Corps policy on Confederate flag tattoos. "Personally, I don't have any problems with it. I have friends, both white and black, who don't have any problems with it. But there are also those out there who do see it as being racially biased."

Wild Thing's comment........

I am seeing this "if anyone can be offended" or "if someone says he or she might be un-comfortable" crap more and more. It takes away a persons right to explain him or herself and lets others ruin him or her. All because someone else can , at a whim, say "oh... i am offended or frightened" instead of having a dialogue between responsible individuals. These policies are all anti-individual.

This is a historic Flag and is a part of the history of our country.

A little history for an example:

The USS Columbia (CL-56) flew a Confederate Navy Ensign as a battle flag throughout combat in the South Pacific in World War II. This was done in honor of Columbia, the ship's namesake and the capital city of South Carolina, the first state to secede from the Union. Some soldiers carried Confederate flags into battle. After the Battle of Okinawa a Confederate flag was raised over Shuri Castle by a Marine from the self-styled "Rebel Company" (Company A of the 1st Battalion, 5th Marines).

....Thank you JohnE U.S. Army for sending this to me.

Soldier/Generator Mechanic
Companies: 288TH Q.M. Co

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:49 AM | Comments (3)

May 04, 2010

America’s Bloodless Coup d’etat!

By Ron Ewart

CFP

“The essence of Government is power, and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.” James Madison

And it came to pass, on the 4th day of November, in the year of Our Lord 2008, a cabal of devious con men were elevated to power over all the people. Behind closed doors, under the cover of night and the veil of deceit, aided and abetted by a willing majority in a spineless Congress, most of academia and the lion’s share of the news media, they plotted the overthrow of a once-free America, from within.

Using the crises of a faltering economy, rising health care costs and the myth that is man-caused global warming, they put the wheels of their scheme into motion.

First, they nationalized the banks and the car companies.

Second, they nationalized the entire health care industry.

Third, they had already taken control of all American land, public and private, through the implementation of the United Nations’ Agenda 21 policy of social justice and radical environmental protection. Constitutionally protected property rights are now meaningless.

Fourth, they plan to put a stranglehold on industry and nationalize the means of energy exploration and production through the scam of buying and selling puffs of air containing carbon dioxide (CO2), using the so-called Cap and Trade legislation. The vehicle for this massive theft of our energy and our wealth, will be by criminal racketeering under the dubious name of the Chicago Climate Exchange. Costs of just about everything will skyrocket.

Fifth, in their quest for absolute power, they mean to grant amnesty to illegal aliens, thereby creating a block of socialist votes that will keep them in perpetual control of America, blocking any hopes of a conservative resurgence.

Finally, to complete their plan, they will be putting in place draconian regulations to bring Wall Street to its knees.

Their plan is almost complete.

The essence of their diabolical plan is the utter destruction of American freedom and the final subjugation of the American people under Marxist rule and the transfer of their wealth to pay for massive entitlement programs, “..... from those with the greatest capability, to those with the greatest need.” Karl Marx

There are two ways to conquer a nation. The first way is by the force of arms ..... war. The second way is much less bloody, simply buy off the people with money or favors and then wrap the recipients of the money and favors in chains, through the force of law. The former is open and notorious, with no doubt of the aggressor’s objectives. The latter is much more devious and easy to camouflage with propaganda, hype, distortion and lies. Either way, the end result is the same.

If a Hitler or the current Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, wanted to conquer America, either one could not have come up with a more complete scheme to render the U. S. Constitution impotent, institute a police state, destroy our means of production, bankrupt our economy, take control of all land, food, water, energy and health care, replace freedom and liberty with the iron grip of a totalitarian state and turn the American people into nothing more than cattle with RFID chips in their ears, with their every move being monitored by an ever-watchful, intrusive government. That is of course, unless millions of Americans become wise to their plan before it is too late and rise up in defiant opposition to that scheme.

America is neck deep in a bloodless coup d’etat and the perpetrators of this coup hold three of the four aces in the deck. Millions of free Americans had better come up with four-of-a-kind pretty damn quick, or the perpetrators’ three aces are going to win the pot, as well as the game. After the game is lost, there will only be one more alternative to secure America’s freedom and that alternative is the least attractive of all other alternatives, with no guarantee of a positive outcome.

So don’t just sit there in a cesspool of anger and frustration. Get off the damn couch! Join a freedom group! Join a tea party! Get involved in local politics! Help a conservative politician get elected and hold that politician’s feet to the fire of conservative principles. Join with millions of Americans in the 9-12 March on Washington on the 9th through the 12th of September, 2010. Log onto their website at marchondc.org. For God’s sake, don’t let the perpetrators of this diabolical bloodless coup d’etat win, or it’s going to be your hands and feet and your children’s hands and feet that will be in chains.

Ask yourself one question. How far is it from Marxism, to fascism, to a dictatorship? The answer is plain for everyone to see. It is burned into the pages of 20th Century history, painted in deep red crimson. If we let it, history is about to repeat itself.

Wild Thing's comment.......

It’s Obama’s “two-year coup plan.”........How to Hugo Chavez-ize America.

The more court appointments he gets through the more permanent his agenda becomes.

There are bold truths in the article, peowe also need to recognize the efforts of Ron Ewart, the author, and heed his message.

We can make a difference - WE ARE MAKING A DIFFERENCE.The Tea Parties, Townhalls, phone calls, emails etc. all added up have been happening more and more. But, we must keep it up!.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (5)

April 15, 2010

More Threats From Obama ~ Obama Dares GOP to Fight Wall St. Bill

From USA Today

Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate banking committee, slammed Republicans today for characterizing Democrats' attempts to regulate Wall Street as a bank bailout.

He also threatened to break off talks with the GOP on the bill if they continue what he described as a campaign to spread "falsehoods" that come "straight from the Wall Street special interest playbook."

Sen. Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking panel, today criticized Republicans for calling his financial legislation a bank bailout. He talks about the bill in this March file photo.

Dodd's angry speech on the Senate floor came a day after Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate's top Republican, described the bill as allowing "endless taxpayer-funded bailouts."

It's also an argument that House Republican leaders made in talking points they distributed today in advance of a White House meeting on the legislation with President Obama.

Obama dares GOP to fight Wall St. bill

Politico

For weeks, the White House strategy on financial regulatory reform remained an open question: Would President Barack Obama water down his bill just to get something passed — the way he did on health care?

A Palinesque “Hell no!” was the answer coming from the White House on Wednesday as the president, his senior aides and his allies on Capitol Hill issued an ultimatum to Republicans fighting Democrats’ plans to overhaul financial oversight.

“For the president, you have to be willing to accept a strong bill,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, after Obama emerged from a contentious meeting with GOP congressional leaders.

“If the effort to get this close is simply to take steps to weaken that legislation, that’s not what the president is interested in.”

Democrats are so emboldened that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is prepared to bring the Banking Committee bill to the floor with no major concessions to Republicans and essentially dare them to vote against the measure, senior leadership aides said.

At a time when Wall Street is as reviled as government, Democrats are willing to gamble that at least one Republican — and maybe as many as a half-dozen — will break ranks. At the same time, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell is betting he can hold his caucus together to deny Democrats even a single vote.

“It’s been two and a half years since this crisis started, more than a year since we first laid out a comprehensive set of reforms,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said during a rare appearance at the White House daily briefing alongside Gibbs.

“I think we know what we need to know. ... It’s just time to decide and time to move,” he added.

From Rush Limbaugh

Regime Runs Against Free Market, Seeks Horrific Regulatory Powers

Obama and his regime were soon to revive blaming Wall Street for all of our economic ills as a means of advancing support for a financial regulatory reform bill that would give him unilateral power to shut down or fire any of the board of directors or executive officers of any financial institution he wanted, based on any arbitrary feeling he had that they posed a threat.

They're going to ramp up and they're going to start running against Wall Street, as they push for this legislation. We mentioned last week that Chris Van Hollen, running the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee, said (paraphrased), "Yeah, we're going to run against Reagan. We're going to run, we're going to say we run for seats in November. We're going to say, 'We cannot continue these policies of the past.'"

If the financial regulation bill that passed the House last year becomes law, President Obama and his Treasury Secretary will acquire the right to take over any financial institution they wish to, provided that, in their sole opinion, it is both “too big to fail” and on the brink of insolvency. The House bill provides for no judicial review and does not require any objective evidence of imminent failure to trigger the takeover provisions." It just allows the president and Geithner to take over any financial institution they want even if they have to make up some threat that it's about to become insolvent. They can fire the board of directors, they can fire management (snapping fingers) Like that, folks! Just like that.

If they get all this stuff done, one of these days a Republican is going to be elected president and is going to have all these powers at his disposal and that's what the Drive-Bys will call him a dictator. That's when the Drive-Bys will say that we have a dictatorship. "Once the government takes over such a company, it will acquire the right to replace the entire board of directors, fire the management of the company, wipe out stockholder equity and even sell off divisions of the company. Essentially, this bill permits the government to launch an unfriendly takeover of any financial institution it wishes without risk and with no poison pill or other counter-measures possible. This legislation, essentially, confers on the federal government police powers that, under our system, are the exclusive preserve of state and local government.

"The blank check the bill gives the Feds to take over any financial institution is really more of an exercise of eminent domain than it is an extension of traditional federal regulatory power." There's no other way to describe this. This is fascism. This is the government taking over companies. The companies will continue to be run like GM and Chrysler are by so-called private citizens, but they're owned by the government. That's not fascism. Command-and-control is what it is. Fascism was privately-owned, government-run. This is government's going to own it all! Any financial institution it wants it can just take over

Already, there is considerable evidence ... that Goldman profited handsomely from the decision of its former CEO -- Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson -- to allow Lehman Brothers to fail. Now that the Treasury secretary will have the takeover power, might it not be used as irresponsibly and with as many bad consequences as Paulson used his power in the Lehman crisis? While the focus on the regulatory bill has been on the consumer protection provisions, which I tend to support, there has been far less scrutiny on these horrific expansions of federal power," and they are horrific. Dick Morris concludes: "Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez could only dream of this power." We are a nation hanging by a thread here, folks -- and this has passed the House. Financial regulatory reform has passed Pelosi's House.

None of this that Dick Morris says is untrue. Obama and Geithner can take over any company they want for any reason under the guise that they are protecting it from going belly up or because its board of directors is corrupt or because the management's making mistakes or simply because they don't like them. They'll never say that's the reason. There is not a process to appeal if your company is targeted. There is no judicial review, Mr. Snerdley. There is zero judicial review of anything in this regulatory bill. This is essentially a death penalty for companies if they don't behave as Obama wants them to in every way, shape, manner, or form: From their political donations to the work they do for Obama's friends versus enemies. Dick Morris did not lightly use the word "totalitarian" when describing the financial regulatory reform bill.

See, this is also how Obama will blunt a recent Supreme Court ruling which allows corporations to donate directly to political campaigns.

They want this done now to blunt the Supreme Court ruling. They know how hated and despised they are right now. They know. They can read their own polling data. They know it's bad. They know it's a bloodbath happening in November. They want to get as much of this stuff done before November as they can.

Wild Thing's comment..........

This is NATIONALIZING ALL BUSINESS and believe me, it will NOT INCLUDE JUST WALL STREET LABELS...it will INCLUDE ALL SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES that are fluid and succeeding.

HORRIFIC. IT WILL KILL AMERICAN SPIRIT in the BUSINESS WORLD. sorry about all the caps , but Obama's hate for the American dream, for all things about America is beyond limits..... it is stunning.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (5)

April 14, 2010

RINO Charlie Crist Travels With A Fan ~ LOL

West Palm Beach CBS revealed Tuesday (4-13-10) that Gov. Charlie Crist travels everywhere with a fan to keep him cool during interviews.LMAO Say what??? At first I thought they were talking about the guy standing near Crist, but they are talking about the fan the black bxo looking thing on the floor near Charlies chair. hahahahha ~ Wild Thing

Charlie Crist on the Stimulus
A compilation of Charlie Crist's public remarks in support of President Obama's $787 billion stimulus.

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:40 AM

April 11, 2010

Rino Charlie Crist's Shows Up Un-Announced At Rubio Campaign

Here is some of the news footage of Charlie's unannounced visit to the "The Villages" of Florida.

Then Charlie "tweets" today" "Had a great day at The Villages & Seaplane/BBQ Fest in Tavares, FL - thanks for the great turnout!"
LOL what a LIAR he is!

Charlie Crist's Pathetic Campaign Stunt Backfires

In an obvious attempt to circumvent the "announced" and scheduled arrival of Marco Rubio at an event at "The Villages, Gov Charlie Crist shows up unexpectedly with reporters in tow.

For Charlie, his visit was not well received. Most of the Villagers interviewed supported Marco Rubio. Rubio's appearance has been scheduled for weeks and will coincide with his four day bus tour throughout the state. Rubio will be joining talk show radio host and FOX news celebrity Sean Hannity for the event on April 13th.

This is such a desperate and pathetic move by Crist that one wonders what his campaign advisors hoped to achieve. It is pointed out several times by the Villagers that they had no idea Crist was going to be there. Charlie tried to hijack an existing crowd in a popular Square at the Villages and started handing out stickers. One resident voiced his opinion of Crist:

But not everyone at The Villages was convinced that Crist was the stronger Republican candidate. Villages resident Jo Tripaldi, 63, an independent, said she believed Rubio was more of a conservative candidate fit for the Republican Party.

"I believe he's not as conservative. I think what Charlie is doing is he is flip-flopping," Tripaldi said about Crist after she met him and placed a Crist sticker on her shirt. "He was very friendly. I had no idea he was going to be here. He's going to have such a terrific crowd and it had nothing to do with him."

Charlie Cridt has no message and cant decide where he stands on any issue except that he is glad he endorsed Obama's stimulus bill.

Kisses of death. ROFL

Wild Thing's comment.......

What an incredible bum! This is a Hussein type tactic..utterly shameless and disgraceful.

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:40 AM | Comments (4)

April 05, 2010

Survery: Four in 10 Tea Party Members are Either Democrats or Independents

Survey: Four in 10 Tea Party members are Dems or independents

The Hill

The findings provide one of the most detailed portraits to date of the grassroots movement that started last year.

Four in 10 Tea Party members are either Democrats or Independents, according to a new national survey.

The findings provide one of the most detailed portraits to date of the grassroots movement that started last year.

The national breakdown of the Tea Party composition is 57 percent Republican, 28 percent Independent and 13 percent Democratic, according to three national polls by the Winston Group, a Republican-leaning firm that conducted the surveys on behalf of an education advocacy group. Two-thirds of the group call themselves conservative, 26 are moderate and 8 percent say they are liberal.

The Winston Group conducted three national telephone surveys of 1,000 registered voters between December and February. Of those polled, 17 percent – more than 500 people — said they were “part of the Tea Party movement.”

“It’s a good sample size,” said David Winston, the polling firm’s director. “It will certainly give us an initial base to follow where these folks are.”

The group is united around two issues – the economy/jobs and reducing the deficit. They believe that cutting spending is the key to job creation and favor tax cuts as the best way to stimulate the economy. That said 61 percent of Tea Party members believe infrastructure spending creates jobs. Moreover, given the choice Tea Party members favor 63-32 reducing unemployment to 5 percent over balancing the budget.

The group has a favorable view of Republicans generally but that drops from 71 to 57 percent if they’re asked about Congressional Republicans. Congressional Democrats are viewed very unfavorably by 75 percent of Tea Party members – a uniquely strong antipathy. An overwhelming 95 percent said “Democrats are taxing, spending, and borrowing too much.”

The group also vehemently dislikes President Barack Obama – even more so than those who called themselves Republicans in the survey. Over 80 percent of Tea Party members disapprove of the job he’s doing as president, whereas 77 percent of Republican respondents said they disapprove of Obama. The Tea Party members are also strongly opposed to the Democrats’ healthcare plan, with 82 percent saying they oppose it -- only 48 percent of respondents overall were opposed.

Wild Thing's comment........

When Americans are angry we come from all political arenas. Don’t mess with the Constitution!!!

Now everyone knows why the commie media is going after the TEA party movement. It's huge, it's diverse and growing stronger everyday.

This is just more proof how wrong the liberals/progressives really are.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (4)

March 18, 2010

Biden Mistakenly Blesses Irish Leader's Mother ~ Biden Gaffeaholic

Biden Mistakenly Blesses Irish Leader's Mother

Joe Biden asked for God's blessing for the late mother of Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen during a White House celebration of St. Patrick's Day — except the elderly lady is very much alive.

"God rest her soul," Biden said Wednesday night as he introduced Cowen and President Barack Obama. He quickly caught himself and noted that it's Cowen's father who is no longer living. Of the prime minister's mother, Biden said, "God bless her soul."

Biden then cited the Irish proverb that "a silent mouth is sweet to hear" and yielded the podium to the president.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Another “Stand Up Chuck!” moment from Rimshot Joe.

LOL Biden couldn’t organize a 2 car funeral..

Our entire country should be embarassed to have Biden and Obama in power.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:42 AM | Comments (1)

March 17, 2010

IRS Visits Sacramento Carwash In Pursuit Of 4 Cents

A midtown fixture for years, Harv's Car Wash was a target for the Internal Revenue service for a delinquent tax bill of 4 cents

IRS visits Sacramento carwash in pursuit of 4 cents

The Sacramento Bee

It was every businessperson's nightmare.

Arriving at Harv's Metro Car Wash in midtown Wednesday afternoon were two dark-suited IRS agents demanding payment of delinquent taxes. "They were deadly serious, very aggressive, very condescending," says Harv's owner, Aaron Zeff.

The really odd part of this: The letter that was hand-delivered to Zeff's on-site manager showed the amount of money owed to the feds was ... 4 cents.

Inexplicably, penalties and taxes accruing on the debt – stemming from the 2006 tax year – were listed as $202.31, leaving Harv's with an obligation of $202.35.

Zeff, who also owns local parking lots and is the president of the Midtown Business Association, finds the situation a bit comical.

"It's hilarious," he says, "that two people hopped in a car and came down here for just 4 cents. I think (the IRS) may have a problem with priorities."

Now he's trying to figure out how penalties and interest could climb so high on such a small debt. He says he's never been told he owes any taxes or that he's ever incurred any late-payment penalties in the four years he's owned Harv's.

In fact, he provided us with an Oct. 22, 2009, letter from the IRS that states Harv's "has filed all required returns and addressed any balances due."

IRS spokesman Jesse Weller isn't commenting "due to privacy and disclosure laws."

Zeff says he's as offended as much as anything else by what he considers rude behavior by the IRS guys. While at Harv's, he sniffs, "they didn't even get a car wash."

One of a Kind Government Employees ( RAC also sent me this along with the link and story above. It goes so perfectly with the article you just read. )

A father walks into a restaurant with his young son..

He gives the young boy 3 nickels to play with to keep him occupied.

Suddenly, the boy starts choking, going blue in the face..

The father realizes the boy has swallowed the nickels and starts slapping him on the back..

The boy coughs up 2 of the nickels, but keeps choking. Looking at his son, the father is panicking, shouting for help.

A well dressed, attractive, and serious looking woman, in a blue business suit is sitting at a coffee bar reading a newspaper and sipping a cup of coffee. At the sound of the commotion, she looks up, puts her coffee cup down, neatly folds the newspaper and places it on the counter, gets up from her seat and makes her way, unhurried, across the restaurant.

Reaching the boy, the woman carefully drops his pants; takes hold of the boy's' testicles and starts to squeeze and twist, gently at first and then ever so firmly.. After a few seconds the boy convulses violently and coughs up the last nickel, which the woman deftly catches in her free hand.

Releasing the boy's testicles, the woman hands the nickel to the father and walks back to her seat at the coffee bar without saying a word.

As soon as he is sure that his son has suffered no ill effects, the father rushes over to the woman and starts thanking her saying,"I've never seen anybody do anything like that before, it was fantastic. Are you a doctor? "

'No,' the woman replied. I'm with The IRS

Wiild Thing's comment........

And then they didn't bother any of those people in Obama's administration that did NOT pay their taxes. GRRRRRRR

This would be comical if it wasn't so damn frightening.

......Thank you RAC for sending this to me.

RAC has a website that is awesome. 336th Assault Helicopter Company

13th Combat Aviation Battalion - 1st Aviation Brigade - Soc Trang, Republic of Vietnam

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:45 AM | Comments (4)

March 14, 2010

Banished! City Forbids Bible Studies In Homes

Banished! City forbids Bible studies in homes

wnd

The city of Gilbert, Ariz., has ordered a group of seven adults to stop gathering for Bible studies in a private home because such meetings are forbidden by the city's zoning codes.

The issue was brought to a head when city officials wrote a letter to a pastor and his wife informing them they had 10 days to quit having the meetings in their private home.

The ban, however, prompted a response from the Alliance Defense Fund, which filed an appeal with the city as the first step in its campaign to overturn a provision it describes as illegal.

"The interpretation and enforcement of the town's code is clearly unconstitutional, " said Daniel Blomberg, a member of the litigation team for ADF. "It bans 200,000 Gilbert residents from meeting in their private homes for organized religious purposes – an activity encouraged in the Bible, practiced for thousands of years, and protected by the First Amendment."

The appeal was filed on behalf of the members, all seven, of the Oasis of Truth Church.

Pastor Joe Sutherland had been told in a letter from code compliance officer Steve Wallace that the people were not allowed to meet in a home for church activities under the city's Land Development Code.

There had been no complaints about the meetings, which had been rotating among members' homes before the officer wrote the letter and ordered the group to "terminate all religious meetings … regardless of their size, nature or frequency," because he noticed signs about the meetings.

The town interprets its law so that "churches within its borders cannot have any home meetings of any size, including Bible studies, three-person church leadership meetings and potluck dinners," ADF said.

A city letter confirmed, "Given that the church is considered to be religious assembly, and given the LDC provisions prohibiting that use on Local streets without Use Permits and prohibiting it in single family residential structures, it follows that the church meetings cannot be held in the home."

"The assembly activities associated with the church, including Bible studies, church leadership meetings and church fellowship activities are not permitted," wrote Mike Milillo, the city's senior planner.

"This ban is defended based upon traffic, parking, and building safety concerns. However, nothing in its zoning code prevents weekly Cub Scouts meetings, Monday Night Football parties with numerous attendees or large business parties from being held on a regular basis in private homes," the ADF said.

The few adults in the church had met for a few hours weekly in members' homes.

The ADF argues such bans violate the Constitution's free-exercise clause, and even the state's Free Exercise of Religion Act protects such meetings.

Further, the restrictions imposed by the city violate the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which grants significant authority for churches to pursue their ministry goals.

Finally, Blomberg said, "the First Amendment's free-speech clause prevents the town from stopping the church from holding its meetings on the public sidewalk outside the pastor's home, yet the town won't allow him to hold the same meetings just a few feet away in the privacy of his own living room."

The small church has been forced to halt its regular meetings. It meets now in a local school but only can afford the rental once a week.

A spokeswoman for the city of Gilbert told WND city officials were aware of the concern and planned to address it.

Vice Mayor Linda Abbott told WND the code apparently was adopted years earlier, and there was considerable concern on the city council because of the current issues.

"I'm not in favor of that code. That is something we would want revisited," she said.

Wild Thing's comment........

Sorry, this “law” is a direct violation of the 1st amendment, which is man’s law that coincides with God’s. This one should be tossed in a heartbeat.

It seems these stories pop up every day, with greater and greater frequency... how much longer is it going to take for people to finally say “enough”?

The town interprets its law so that "churches within its borders cannot have any home meetings of any size, including Bible studies, three-person church leadership meetings and potluck dinners," ADF said.

So let me get this straight if a group of people are gathering to share a dinner and it is for a religious reason, it is illegal.

Wonder if they ever heard of Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter.

Is the government aware that the same was true in Soviet Russia, Communist China, the old East Germany, Cuba and some other dictatorial countries??

When we lived in Calif. there was a Bible study that we went to in a home. It was mostly all actors/actresses, stuntmen and women and entertainers. These Bible studies are all over our country. I went one when I lived in Dallas too years ago. But never have I seen this happening to these Bible studies until the last few years. Kind of in the same time frame as the ACLU and other groups against Christmas and taking God out of things.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:49 AM | Comments (13)

March 10, 2010

Chief Justice Roberts on Obama's court criticism to joint session of Congress ~ " Very Troubling"

LA Times

Some firm and unequivocal pushback today by Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. to President Obama's court criticism in January.

It is not at all unusual in American history for the executive branch of the federal government (the White House, under the control of either party) to disagree with the judicial branch (Supreme Court).

What is considerably more unusual is for the chief executive of the executive branch (Barack Obama) to look down on the members of said Supreme Court in public at a joint session of Congress and to their faces denounce their independent actions.

And then to receive a resounding ovation from fellow Democrats standing to applaud and cheer Obama as the surrounded justices sat mute, motionless and unable to respond.

That, of course, is what Obama did in his first State of the Union address Jan. 27, objecting to a court decision allowing corporations to donate political funds like individuals as a matter of free speech.

Speaking today at the University of Alabama law school in Tuscaloosa, Chief Justice Roberts called the president's actions "very troubling."

Speaking in response to a law student's question, Roberts said anyone could criticize the court and, indeed, our governmental system of separation of powers encourages such opinionated diversity. Then, the chief justice added:

I have no problems with that. On the other hand, there is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum.

The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court — according to the requirements of protocol — has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling.

Justices are not required to attend the annual joint sessions but have traditionally done so as a sign of mutual respect for the president and legislative branch. In January, six justices attended, including Roberts. But it sounds now like that judicial thinking might be changing.

Roberts added: "I'm not sure why we're there."

Wild Thing's comment........

Well said by Chief Justice Roberts.

Obama has absolutely NO class at all. Past Presidents showed respect even if they disagreed with the Judges.

Obama delights in baiting anyone who he disagrees with and indirectly gives the green light for his team of hacks to do their dirty work. The White House has become an International embarrasment.

I am THRILLED that the Chief Justice and Alioto actually expressed displeasure with this despot.

It is so shocking and strange that a man who couldn’t pass the background check to be a janitor in the Supreme Court building is now POTUS.

Posted by Wild Thing at 02:45 AM | Comments (8)

February 27, 2010

Obama vs. Our Constitution

Battle of the 'booklets': Obama-made-easy vs. Constitution

Dramatic response to White House adviser's attempt to 'educate' tea partiers

wnd

First, top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett suggested last week that if the White House would produce a little booklet explaining the president's health care and economic policies in "very simple," easy-to-follow language, it might help tea party members better understand White House initiatives – and perhaps stop being what she called so "extreme" and "anti-government."

In response, Joseph Farah, founder of online news giant WorldNetDaily, says, "I have an even better idea. You see, we already have a simple little booklet that explains in easy-to-follow language how the U.S. government works: It's called the Constitution of the United States. I propose that thousands of Americans send this document – which is so scandalously ignored in Washington – to Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Just maybe, it will help them understand how American government is really supposed to work."

Jarrett, who blasted the tea party movement as extremist and thriving on scare tactics, made the comments at a John F. Kennedy School of Government forum.

A video of Jarrett's comments has been posted at Breitbart.com.

"Even if they are in favor of, let's say, a different form of health care insurance reform, fine; but what's happening is it's an anti-government – I mean, that's the tea party. They really are, um, are, uh, trying to rebel against government at all. And I think that that's ... again, it's an extreme. … And it's always a lot easier, again, to scare people and to get them angry when they're already scared, and they're already uncertain. And I think that's what the tea party is trying to capture."

Meanwhile, WND, after heading up the massive "pink-slips campaign" – which famously drowned Washington in 9 million pink slips, putting every member of Congress on notice that voting against liberty and responsibility would result in their expulsion from office this November – is now leading the charge on an even more direct and "easy-to-understand" message to America's current crop of leaders.

"Apparently that action was too subtle," said Farah. "Congress didn't get the message – and continued on with its profligate spending and attacks on freedom."

"Even if they are in favor of, let's say, a different form of health care insurance reform, fine; but what's happening is it's an anti-government – I mean, that's the tea party. They really are, um, are, uh, trying to rebel against government at all. And I think that that's ... again, it's an extreme. … And it's always a lot easier, again, to scare people and to get them angry when they're already scared, and they're already uncertain. And I think that's what the tea party is trying to capture."

"Apparently that action was too subtle," said Farah. "Congress didn't get the message – and continued on with its profligate spending and attacks on freedom."

WND is offering readers the opportunity to send exquisitely designed and bound copies of the Constitution to Barack Obama and the leaders of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

For only $9.99, including FedEx shipping, you can deliver to Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid copies of the nation's founding document so they will have no excuses as to the legal limitations on their power. Already, they've been bombarded with Constitutions over 2,000 times in the short time of this campaign.

An accompanying note will also explain how they have already exceeded their constitutional authority and ask them to distribute the extra copies to their colleagues and staffs.

"This is a clear way of stating why you object to their official actions over the last year," said Farah. "It's because they are illegitimate. They are rogue actions. They are not just unpopular, they are unauthorized and illegal."

Farah said it can never hurt to have tens of thousands of extra copies of the Constitution circulating in Washington.

"Apparently, it's been a long time since most of our elected officials have bothered to open this little book," he said. "Maybe this will give them something to think about."

Farah says the campaign represents more than a way for citizens to vent their frustrations over skyrocketing deficits, bailouts of banks and multinational corporations, taxpayer rip-offs, pork-laden budgets and attacks on individual liberty.

"This is a way to focus the public's attention on the real issue – the strict limits on federal power prescribed in our Constitution," said Farah. "There's a fundamental disconnect in Washington and even around the country when it comes to the proper and legitimate role of the federal government in American life. That's the point. It's not just a matter of Americans objecting to this piece of legislation or that executive order. It's time we insist that Washington limit its activities to the enumerated powers of the Constitution and leave the rest to the state and individuals."

"He may feel insulated from the accountability of this year's midterm congressional elections," Farah said. "But he is not insulated from the accountability of the rule of law. He claims to be a constitutional scholar. But a simple layman's reading of the Constitution illustrates he is either ignorant of its straightforward limits on power or, worse, blindly contemptuous of them."

Wild Thing's comment.......

Thank God our forefathers understood how government would demand more and more powers, give them an inch, they will take a mile!

The Constitution indeed limits the power of government. But our problem today is that the sitting government in Washington is bypassing some of those limits.

And we must keep ever-vigilant to be sure our representatives don’t forget who they work for.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:49 AM | Comments (3)

February 25, 2010

Half Of America Blames Obama For Loss Of Rights

Half of America blames Obama for loss of rights

'That's after a month where almost nothing happened in Washington'

wnd

A new poll reveals Americans believe their freedoms are continuing to slip away under President Obama, with more than 49 percent reporting decreases in their personal freedoms under his leadership this month.

The WND Freedom Index poll from Wenzel Strategies shows even one in 10 Democrats believes there's been a big decrease in freedoms.

"One month into his second year as president, Barack Obama finds himself saddled with some heavy political baggage," said Fritz Wenzel, president of the polling company. "Two out of three likely voting respondents to the latest WorldNetDaily/Wenzel Strategies poll think the country is headed in the wrong direction, less than half give him positive job approval ratings, and half think that he is responsible for a reduction in freedom in America.

"And that's after a month where almost nothing happened in Washington," he said.

The WND/Wenzel telephone survey was conducted Feb. 18–20 using an automated telephone technology calling a random sampling of listed telephone numbers nationwide. The survey included 30 questions and carries a 95 percent confidence interval. It included 747 likely voters. It carries a margin of error of plus or minus 3.56 percentage points.

The Freedom Index, an assessment on Americans' perspectives on a basketful of liberties, tipped downward for February, coming in at 47.2. It had been 46.3 in December, its lowest point ever, and it moved up only slightly, to 47.5, for January.

Wenzel said as things begin moving in Washington again, especially with this week's renewed push for Obama's plans for nationalized health care, "those numbers may well get even worse."

It was during the heavy political battling over health care legislation in November that Obama took big hits to his approval numbers, and he has spent most of the political capital in his war chest," Wenzel said.

"Given that his efforts to help Democratic candidates in tough races in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts had all failed, some on his side of the political aisle may be wondering if his political capital is overvalued."

"The WorldNetDaily.com Freedom Index continues to show that more likely voting Americans nationwide than not believe that, under the Obama administration, they are seeing a reduction in their constitutional freedoms. About half – 49 percent – said so in our February polling, compared to 32 percent who said they thought Obama was causing freedoms to increase," Wenzel said.

The poll showed that 36 percent of respondents, including nearly 60 percent of the GOP, 40 percent of independents and even 10 percent of Democrats, said there has been a big decrease in personal freedoms. Another 13.1 percent said there had been some decrease.

On other individual freedom issues, the poll revealed 32 percent of Americans believe they are not very free or not free at all to speak their minds without fear of punishment, penalty or retribution.

A smaller number, 18 percent, feel there could be punishment or at least investigations based on the manner they choose to worship. But the numbers rocketed to nearly 45 percent when people were asked if there was some or great intrusion because of the government's use of cameras, scanners and other electronic monitors.

Nearly one person in five had concerns over the ramifications from placing a bumper sticker on their vehicle, and about the same number said they find themselves self-censoring thoughts because "of fear of harm, punishment, social rejection, or some other penalty."

"It appears as if the nation, much of which felt a real threat to their freedoms by the health care reform proposal and other Democratic initiatives, may have taken a collective sigh of relief [during January] with the election of Republican Scott Brown as senator from Massachusetts," Wenzel said. "Brown's presence in the U.S. Senate means Democrats no longer have unchecked power to make sweeping changes to federal law and society, and voters appear to have taken notice.

Wild Thing's comment.......

"Freedom Index poll from Wenzel Strategies shows even one in 10 Democrats believes there's been a big decrease in freedoms. "

Even the Democrats polled can tell what is happening. Welll not all but it is a start anyway.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (5)

Pelosi Renews Dispute With CIA Over Interrogation Techniques

FOX News
Prodded by the release of dozens of declassified CIA documents, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi renewed her long-running dispute with the Central Intelligence Agency about the use of harsh interrogation practices.

"I have never been briefed by the CIA or anyone else on the subject of those interrogations, to the extent that they were being used," the California Democrat told reporters Tuesday. "We were only briefed that there were lawyers in the Justice Department that thought they were legal, period."

The comments marked Pelosi's first foray into the controversy in nine months that pitted the top House Democrat against the nation's premier spy agency. Responding to a lawsuit filed by Amnesty International and two other human rights watchdog groups, the CIA released several dozen documents detailing how the CIA handled suspected terrorism suspects and briefed lawmakers about it.

The documents show Pelosi was briefed about "ongoing interrogations of Abu Zubaydah" on April 24, 2002, just weeks after the top Al Qaeda suspect was captured in Pakistan.

Only 10% Say Pelosi's Heavy Democrat Congress Doing A Good Job

The Pelosi-Reid Swamp reached a grim milestone today with the lowest approval rating ever recorded for a Congress in Rasmussen history.

Rasmussen

Voter unhappiness with Congress has reached the highest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports as 71% now say the legislature is doing a poor job.

That’s up ten points from the previous high of 61% reached a month ago.

Only 10% of voters say Congress is doing a good or excellent job.

Nearly half of Democratic voters (48%) now give Congress a poor rating, up 17 points since January. The vast majority of Republicans and voters not affiliated with either party also give Congress poor ratings.

Seventy percent (70%) of voters say Congress has not passed any legislation that would significantly improve life for Americans, up 10 points over the past month and the highest level of dissatisfaction measured in regular tracking in over three years. Only 15% say Congress has passed such legislation.

Forty percent (40%) of voters nationwide now say it is at least somewhat likely Congress will seriously address the most important issues facing the nation. That’s down from 59% last March. Only 9% say it is Very Likely Congress will address these issues.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Nancy just can't stop messing with the truth. She is a total liar! Facts prove she lies and yet she won't stop.

Cruel interrogation would mean sending Nancy Pelosi to do the waterboarding. heh heh

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (2)

February 21, 2010

Shocker! Ron Paul Wins CPAC10 Straw Poll

FOX News

Paul, a Republican congressman from Texas known for his libertarian views, ran for president in 2008 but was never a serious contender for the GOP nomination.

Romney, former Massachusetts governor and also a 2008 GOP candidate, has won the last three presidential straw polls at the annual conference. This year, he came in second, with 22 percent.

Sarah Palin, who didn't attend the conference, was a distant third in the straw poll, with 7 percent, followed by Tim Pawlenty, the Minnesota governor, and Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana.

The straw poll is not binding -- and not necessarily a good forecaster, given that in 2008, John McCain went on to take the party's nomination over Romney.

Boos as Ron Paul wins CPAC straw poll

Politico

Paul's victory renders a straw poll that was already lightly contested among the likely 2012 GOP hopefuls all but irrelevant as the 74-year-old Texan is unlikely to be a serious contender for his party's nomination.

CPAC organizers were plainly embarrassed by the results, which could reduce the perceived impact of a contest that was once thought to offer a window into which White House hopefuls were favored by movement conservatives.

A spokesman for the conference rushed over to reporters following the announcement to make sure they had heard the unmistakable boos when the screen first showed Paul had won the straw poll.

2,935 votes were cast in the straw poll, the most in the history of the 37-year conference, but a fraction of the approximately 10,000 people who attended CPAC

Forty-eight percent of those who participated in the contest indicated that they were students and the divergent reaction to the results reflected the outcome.

Wild Thing's comment..........

According to Fox, about 10,000 present, but just 2400 voted.

Ron Paul is an isolationist, antisemitic, racist peacecreep. Ron Paul was booed when it was announced he won.

One good thing is this vote of theirs does not count in the real election, thank GOD!

Ann Coulter mentioned the place was full of college students, and now we know why.

Vote breakdown:

31% Ron Paul
22% Mitt Romney
7% Sarah Palin
6% Tim Pawlenty
5% Mike Pence
4% Newt Gingrich
4% Mike Huckabee
2% Mitch Daniels
2% Rick Santorum
2% John Thune
1% Haley Barbour
5% Other
6% Undecided

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:55 AM | Comments (11)

February 15, 2010

Dictator Obama Making Plans to Use More Executive Power

Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power

NY Times

With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.

Obama has not given up hope of progress on Capitol Hill, aides said, and has scheduled a session with Republican leaders on health care later this month. But in the aftermath of a special election in Massachusetts that cost Democrats unilateral control of the Senate, the White House is getting ready to act on its own in the face of partisan gridlock heading into the midterm campaign.

“We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.

Any president has vast authority to influence policy even without legislation, through executive orders, agency rule-making and administrative fiat. And Mr. Obama’s success this week in pressuring the Senate to confirm 27 nominations by threatening to use his recess appointment power demonstrated that executive authority can also be leveraged to force action by Congress.

Mr. Obama has already decided to create a bipartisan budget commission under his own authority after Congress refused to do so. His administration has signaled that it plans to use its discretion to soften enforcement of the ban on openly gay men and lesbians serving in the military, even as Congress considers repealing the law. And the Environmental Protection Agency is moving forward with possible regulations on heat-trapping gases blamed for climate change, while a bill to cap such emissions languishes in the Senate.

In an effort to demonstrate forward momentum, the White House is also drawing more attention to the sorts of actions taken regularly by cabinet departments without much fanfare. The White House heavily promoted an export initiative announced by Commerce Secretary Gary Locke last week and nearly $1 billion in health care technology grants announced on Friday by Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, and Hilda L. Solis, the labor secretary.

White House officials said the increased focus on executive authority reflected a natural evolution from the first year to the second year of any presidency.

“The challenges we had to address in 2009 ensured that the center of action would be in Congress,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “In 2010, executive actions will also play a key role in advancing the agenda.”

The use of executive authority during times of legislative inertia is hardly new; former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush turned to such powers at various moments in their presidencies, and Mr. Emanuel was in the thick of carrying out the strategy during his days as a top official in the Clinton White House.

But Mr. Obama has to be careful how he proceeds because he has been critical of both Mr. Clinton’s penchant for expending presidential capital on small-bore initiatives, like school uniforms, and Mr. Bush’s expansive assertions of executive authority, like the secret program of wiretapping without warrants.

Already, Mr. Obama has had to reconcile his campaign-trail criticism of Mr. Bush for excessive use of so-called signing statements to bypass parts of legislation with his own use of such tactics. After a bipartisan furor in Congress last year, Mr. Obama stopped issuing such signing statements, but aides said last month that he still reserves the right to ignore sections of bills he considers unconstitutional if objections have been lodged previously by the executive branch.

Another drawback of the executive power strategy is that actions taken unilaterally by the executive branch may not be as enduring as decisions made through acts of Congress signed into law by a president. For instance, while the E.P.A. has been determined to have the authority to regulate carbon emissions, the administration would rather have a market-based system of pollution permits, called cap and trade, that requires legislation.

Still, presidents have logged significant accomplishments through the stroke of a pen. In 1996, on his own authority, Mr. Clinton turned a 2,600-square-mile section of southern Utah into the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, in what was called at the time his boldest environmental move. Mr. Bush followed suit in 2006 by designating a 140,000-square-mile stretch of islands and ocean near Hawaii as the largest protected marine reserve in the world, in what some see as his most lasting environmental achievement.

The use of executive power came to a head this week when Mr. Obama confronted Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, about nominations held up in the Senate. In a meeting with Congressional leaders at the White House on Tuesday, Mr. Obama turned to Mr. McConnell and vowed to use his power to appoint officials during Senate recesses if his nominations were not cleared.

By Thursday, the Senate had voted to confirm 27 of 63 nominations that had been held up, and the White House declared victory. Two administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Friday that the White House had drafted a list of about a dozen nominees for the president to appoint during the recess that just began, but most were among those cleared.

Mr. McConnell’s office denied that the president’s threat had anything to do with the confirmations, pointing out that the Senate regularly passes a batch of nominees before going on recess.

“All presidents get frustrated with the pace of nominations, and all Congresses say they’re doing their best, so it’s not a surprise,” said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Mr. McConnell. “But the fact is nominees are being confirmed, particularly those nominated since December.”

The recess appointment power stems from the days when lawmakers were in session only part of the year, but in modern times presidents have used it to circumvent opposition in the Senate. Mr. Clinton made 139 recess appointments, 95 of them to full-time positions, while Mr. Bush made 171, with 99 to full-time jobs. Mr. Obama has yet to make any.

Those given such appointments can serve until the end of the next Congressional session. As a senator, Mr. Obama was less enamored with recess appointments. When Mr. Bush used the power to install John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Obama called Mr. Bolton “damaged goods.”

But the White House argued that Mr. Obama’s choices have been held up more than Mr. Bush’s and left open the prospect of giving recess appointments to some of those still held up, including Craig Becker, a labor lawyer whose nomination for a seat on the National Labor Relations Board has been blocked.

“If the stalling tactics continue,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, “he’s not ruling out using recess appointments for anybody that he’s nominated.”

Wild Thing's comment........

Liberty is at stake and the clock is ticking.

Basically declaring that he needs not Congress nor Senate nor even countrymen to run his country. Even screwball Dems in Congress don’t take kindly to having their authority usurped by...the usurper-in-chief.

Obama knows that he loses and his Marxist dreams will end in the 2010 elections! He will bare his fangs and he will go nuclear on this country. It has begun!!

The White House is unraveling exponentially. The events of the last year, especially the last month, are wearing on Obama. . You can see it in his face, hear it in his voice. . The Narcissistic Rage is fomenting and imho our country is in danger from within. Who is Obama and What is he going to do as things spiral out of control? Daily more and more people understand his background, his history, his Marxist mentors, his communist mole background.

Obama has the psychological capacity to go insane fighting the interests aligned against him. He believed the messiah bullsh*t but he lacks the political and executive skills necessary to change course and save "his" presidency. This Marxist Obama is going to hit the wall and millions of American lives are at serious risk.

Obama signed 38 Executive Order's in 2009.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/2009-obama.html

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:55 AM | Comments (4)

Judge Finds Grounds to Sanction Arizona Sheriff's Office

FOX News

A federal judge has found grounds for sanctioning an Arizona sheriff's office for its acknowledged destruction of records in a lawsuit that accuses deputies of racially profiling countless Hispanics in immigration patrols.

U.S. District Judge Murray Snow held off on imposing the sanctions against the office of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in the Friday ruling, but indicted he would do so at a later date once related issues were ironed out.

Since early 2008, Arpaio has run 13 immigration and crimes sweeps consisting of deputies and posse volunteers who flood an area of a city — in some cases heavily Latino areas — to seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders.

The handful of Latinos who filed the lawsuit against Arpaio's office alleged that officers based some traffic stops on the race of Hispanics who were in vehicles, had no probable cause to pull them over and made the stops so they could inquire about their immigration status.

Arpaio is known for tough jail policies, including housing inmates in canvas tents, and pushing the bounds for how local law enforcement agencies can confront illegal immigration.

The U.S. Justice Department said it's investigating his office for alleged discrimination and for unconstitutional searches and seizures, but won't provide any details of its examination. The sheriff believes the inquiry is focused on his immigration efforts.

Arpaio has repeatedly denied the racial profiling allegations, saying people pulled over in the sweeps were approached because deputies had probable cause to believe they had committed crimes. It was only afterward that deputies found many of them were illegal immigrants, he has said.

Some sheriff's officials have acknowledged deleting their e-mails about the patrols and throwing away and shredding officers' records of traffic stops made during the sweeps.

Snow said the sheriff's office was negligent for not holding onto the documents and that the failure to preserve them is enough to justify sanctions. The judge asked plaintiff's attorneys to suggest unspecified "adverse inferences" that could be drawn from the destruction of officers' records of traffic stops made during the sweeps.

Peter Kozinets, one of those attorneys, said Saturday that the document destruction deprived his clients of records that would have shown deputies were selective in whom they approached during the sweeps.

The sheriff's office said the destruction was an honest error that sprung from a top official not telling others in his office to preserve the documents.

The office also said the traffic-stop records were thrown away after supervisors tabulated statistics from them and that thousands of other documents have been handed over.

"We thought the ruling was extremely fair and we are pleased to cooperate," said Dave Hendershott, chief deputy of the sheriff's office. "It clearly shows that the judge understood that it was an unintentional oversight. We are very pleased with the ruling."

Snow also said that plaintiff's attorneys can again depose Arpaio to question him about his own 800-page immigration file, which was covered by a documents request but wasn't handed over before his first deposition in mid-December.

Blogs 4 Borders interviewed Sheriff Joe awhile back.

Wild Thing's comment.........

The U.S. Justice Department said it's investigating his office for alleged discrimination and for unconstitutional searches and seizures, but won't provide any details of its examination.

Holder's office

Any Police organization that tries to uphold this Republic's laws against illegal immigration seems to find itself on the wrong side of the Obama administration.

Sheriff Joe is a great person and a great Patriot! If anyone can do it Sheriff Joe can. He is the type of man we need in every city state an county to turn this country around.

We have a lot to thank Sheriff Joe for.

He is leading the way back to SANITY.

God Bless Sheriff Joe!

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 06:47 AM | Comments (6)

February 12, 2010

Cue Twilight Zone Music: Texas Candidate Debra Medina is a 9/11 Truther

Debra Medina imploded today on the Glenn Beck radio show. The Republcian candidate for governor is a 9-11 Truther.

She said questions still remain.

Trail Blazers

TV and radio commentator Glenn Beck dismissed the candidacy of Debra Medina when she left open the door to a conspiracy fringe group that believe the U.S. government might have been behind the 9-11 destruction of the World Trade Center.

Beck, a leading personality for conservatives, asked her point blank if she believed such a theory.

“I don’t have all the evidence there, Glenn,” Medina replied. “So I’m not in a place – I have not been out publicly questioning that. I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard. There’s some very good arguments and I think the American people have not seen all the evidence there so I’ve not taken a position there.”

He then asked if she would disavow people on her campaign team that held such a theory.

“I’m certainly not into mind control or thought policing people,” Medina said. “I don’t see us having a team of radical individuals, if you will.”

When she signed off the program, Beck let out a long Oooh.

Statement from Gov. Rick Perry:

"Today's comments were an insult to the thousands of Americans who lost loved ones on 9/11 and the military men and women who are overseas protecting our country. President Bush worked tirelessly to protect our nation from additional terrorist attacks and anyone who would suggest 9/11 is a conspiracy involving the Bush administration should be ashamed."

Statement From Kay Bailey Hutchison Regarding Medina 9/11 Comments

"I know exactly who was responsible for the horrific attacks on September 11th - Al Qaeda terrorists who declared war on America. To suggest otherwise is an affront to the men and women who are sacrificing their lives to root out the terrorists in Afghanistan and around globe. Ever since that tragic day, I have fought tirelessly to ensure that we hunted down the Islamic extremists who target our nation. No one stood closer to President Bush and Vice President Cheney in their efforts to defeat the terrorist threat to our freedom."

Wild Thing's comment.........

She was always a nutjob ... Beck just exposed her. She is incompetent, and unqualified.

She's a Ron Paul acolyte. She couldn't answer Glenn's question because she was worried about offending the large contingent of "Troofers" in her support base.

Then when it hits the fan, she backpedaled.

I wasn't buying her garbage before and I'm certainly not buying it now.

Posted by Wild Thing at 02:48 AM | Comments (3)

Feds Push for Tracking Cell Phones

CNET news

Two years ago, when the FBI was stymied by a band of armed robbers known as the "Scarecrow Bandits" that had robbed more than 20 Texas banks, it came up with a novel method of locating the thieves.

FBI agents obtained logs from mobile phone companies corresponding to what their cellular towers had recorded at the time of a dozen different bank robberies in the Dallas area. The voluminous records showed that two phones had made calls around the time of all 12 heists, and that those phones belonged to men named Tony Hewitt and Corey Duffey. A jury eventually convicted the duo of multiple bank robbery and weapons charges.

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls.

Those claims have alarmed the ACLU and other civil liberties groups, which have opposed the Justice Department's request and plan to tell the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia that Americans' privacy deserves more protection and judicial oversight than what the administration has proposed.

"This is a critical question for privacy in the 21st century," says Kevin Bankston, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who will be arguing on Friday. "If the courts do side with the government, that means that everywhere we go, in the real world and online, will be an open book to the government unprotected by the Fourth Amendment."

Not long ago, the concept of tracking cell phones would have been the stuff of spy movies. In 1998's "Enemy of the State," Gene Hackman warned that the National Security Agency has "been in bed with the entire telecommunications industry since the '40s--they've infected everything."

"The biggest issue at stake is whether or not courts are going to accept the government's minimal view of what is protected by the Fourth Amendment," says EFF's Bankston. "The government is arguing that based on precedents from the 1970s, any record held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is not protected by the Fourth Amendment."

Wild Thing's comment.......

This from the bunch that wants our medical records on a national database.

Track ordinary Americans, but not terrorist cells is more like it from this administration we have now. Remember last year Obama was talking about bringing up charges against Bush for tapping TERRORIST phones...now he wants to do it to Americans.

I am not a big cell phone user. Nick wants to me have one when I drive so I have it for emergencies, just in case. It does make me feel safer when I leave the house. But I use it so like LOL the cell phone account I have has me on as little as 100 minutes or something like that for the whole month. The lady I talked to about setting it up said I was her first to have such low usage on a cell phone. hahaha That is just me, I am just not big on being on the phone much at all. I asked the lady how many minutes I had for the month and she said..... heh heh..... a total of 27. Then we both laughed.

The biggest way I use it is for my clients at the gym, so they can reach me if they need to cancel or move their appointment.

It is funny though how Obama was soooo against this and now is in favor of it.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 02:44 AM | Comments (1)

February 09, 2010

Obama's Budget Eliminates Boeing C-17 Program

FOX News

There's concern about Boeing's C-17 aircraft. President Obama's budget proposal calls for cutting several weapons programs, including the C-17. Eliminating the C-17 program could mean eliminating jobs in the Gateway City.

When unveiling his budget, President Obama said, "We save money by eliminating unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us safe. One example is the 2.5 billion dollars that were spending to build C-17 transport aircraft."

C-17s have been used extensively in flying supplies and troops to earthquake ravaged Haiti. Senator Kit Bond says they're desperately needed.

Four years ago, the Defense Department decided to stop production of the C-17 because it had acquired the 180 it requested.

"Yet every year since, congress has provided unrequested money for more C-17s the Pentagon doesn't want or need. It's waste pure and simple," says the President.

The C-17 is one of Boeing's premiere aircraft. It supports a thousand jobs in St. Louis, jobs that could be cut, if the program is cancelled.

Senator Kit Bond said," The president's mixed up spending priorities also threatens workers right here in St. Louis and our nation's air lift capacity."

You may recall, the government tried to eliminate the C-17 program in 2009, but lawmakers saved it. Bond says he'll fight for it again this year especially since the Pentagon now has the ability to retire C-5As.

Sen. Bond says," They need the C-17s to replace those aircraft. I'm going to make that point very loudly in the appropriations process. We'll see whether we're successful."

U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill says she will also fight to save the C-17 program. She released the following statement:

We have known for years now that the c-17 has been flying into a strong headwind. Over the last three years, secretaries of defense and presidents from both political parties have uniformly sought to end its production. Since coming to the senate, i have fought side by side with my colleagues against these recommendations and we have successfully prevented an end of production. At a time when the c-17s first-rate capabilities are in increasing demand around the world, i will once again fight for this plane. I will be looking particularly closely at the substantial readiness problems with the c-5, the only other strategic airlifter. It seems long overdue that we should retire the oldest c-5 planes that arent working and replace them with the c-17, a plane that we know works and is produced at a fair cost.

Boeing released the following statement reacting to the proposed defense budget cuts:

"What we have been able to see so far of the proposed DOD budget and the QDR raise key public policy issues that will be discussed in the days, weeks, and months ahead.Critically important among these issues are the future of America's defense industrial base and maintaining healthy competition in the defense industry. As a matter of public policy and defense doctrine, America has invested in developing and maintaining a national defense industrial base that meets the evolving needs of the military while providing the best value for the taxpayer. It is a true national asset - built over many years by investing in highly-skilled engineering and a high-tech manufacturing workforce and by developing best-of-industry practices. The Congress now begins its work towards passing the overall budget and the DOD segment. We will continue to study the budget proposals being made for potential impact to Boeing, the industry, its industrial base, and to its workers, as well as important policy debates in other critical areas such as healthcare, energy, the environment and education. Meanwhile, the men and women of The Boeing Company will continue to perform at the highest possible level to deliver the best value to our customers and to the taxpayer."

Wild Thing's comment.......

Obama is sooooo stupid and his hate for our military shows in alll of his decisions like this one. Everything he does fails, everything he messes with in our country gets ruined. He is so vile, so horrible!!!!

....Thank you Darth for sending this to me.

Darth
U.S. Airforce
C-5 loadmaster
84-97

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:48 AM | Comments (8)

Obamanomics = Dow Jones Industrial Average Closed Below 10,000 For The First Time In Three Months

The Dow Jones industrial average closed below 10,000 for the first time in three months Monday on nagging concerns about debt loads in Europe.

Shares of big banks pulled the market lower, extending a slump that has led to four straight weekly losses.

Rising deficits in weaker European economies including Greece, Portugal and Spain have raised questions about the health of the global financial system.

Wild Thing's comment.......

A down market is a bad grade that the Obama administration has earned. The market bounced, and then dropped, the blame Bush thing won’t work well here.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:44 AM | Comments (5)

February 05, 2010

House Votes For OBAMA's $1.9 TRILLION More Debt To Our Country

Sens. Jim DeMint, Lindsay Graham, John McCain hold a press conference to announce support for a one-year earmark moratorium and a Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment. The senators believe this is the best way for Congress to prove it is serious about cracking down on wasteful spending.

Demint: "We have a situation now that's just too serious to continue to handle that way, it's not an exaggeration to say that our country is on the edge of a financial cliff, with the level of debt we have at $12 trillion dollars now, the President's budget projects another $1.6 trillion this year and with the entitlements coming due, we're looking at $100 trillion in unfunded liability...One is a small step, it's a moratoruim on earmarks...If we have a balance budget requirement, then everything we propose that increases spending will have to be matched by a proposal to cut it"

House agrees to $1.9 trillion more debt (up to 14.3 Trillion ceiling)

The House on Thursday voted to allow the government to go $1.9 trillion deeper in debt — an increase of about $6,000 more for every U.S. resident that provided a vivid election-year reminder of the nation's perilous financial condition.

The huge debt increase, approved 217-212, is only enough to keep the government afloat for about another year as it borrows more than 40 cents of every dollar it spends on programs like defense, health care, feeding the poor and protecting the environment. The budget tops $3.7 trillion this year and the deficit's approaching $1.6 trillion under the budget submitted by President Barack Obama this week.

The huge increase — to $14.3 trillion — in the cap on federal borrowing was designed by Democratic leaders to ensure that the rank and file won't have to vote again to run up another increase before facing voters increasingly angry over government spending and debt in the November midterm elections.

Already, the accumulated debt amounts to roughly $40,000 per person.

"This debt is being piled on the backs of our kids and grandkids with no relief in sight," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said.

Economists warn that the rapidly-rising debt could force interest rates higher and, if left unchecked, could have even worse consequences for the economy.

Thirty-seven Democrats, mostly from GOP-leaning districts, voted against the measure. So did every Republican.

Obama issued a statement praising passage of the statutory pay-as-you-go rules, but skipped any mention of the debt limit increase.

"It is no coincidence that when we last had statutory paygo, during the 1990s, we turned deficits into surpluses," Obama said. "The passage of statutory paygo today will help usher out an era of irresponsibility and begin putting the country back on a fiscally sustainable path."

But Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, said: "In place of real fiscal discipline, it offers a phony pay-as-you-go rule that is more loopholes and exceptions and does nothing to tackle our government's long-term structural deficit." Skeptics say lawmakers also will find ways around the new rules fairly easily. For example, Congress can declare some spending an "emergency" — a likely scenario for votes later this month to extend jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed.

And MORE Spending by Obama the FREAK!

FOX News

Obama's $2.5 Million Tax Payer Funded Super Bowl Commercial

Hold on to your wallets tight, The Government will be dipping into them again very soon. This Sunday the government will shell out 2.5 million taxpayer dollars to fund a 30 second Super Bowl Commercial to inform Americans about the 2010 census.

The 30 ad will feature actor and environmental activist Ed Begley, Jr. urging Americans to “stand up and be counted” for the 2010 US census. Rest assured, this money that is being stolen from you will be put to good use by informing football fans all across the nation that they need to fill out a 10 question survey. This unnecessary expenditure predictable, coming from an administration that spends money like its going out of style; yet it is somehow ironic given that it comes on the heals of Obama’s speech where he lectured American’s about wasting money, saying:

When times are tough, you — you tighten your belts. You don’t go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don’t blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you’re trying to save for college.

Wild Thing's comment........

Unfunded ‘mandates’ total out at near 100 trillion dollars. And a commerical???? OMG!

We have amad man in the White House.

When they showed the vote on TV......Did you see the democrats actually cheering when the final vote total was announced to increase the debt?

Cheering to put us more in debt?

Unbelievable !

And yesterday the stock market just barely avoided closing under 10,000 .

And get this, GRRRRR, ABC will be having Katie Couric interview Obama live during Sunday's Super Bowl pre-game show, according to the network.

LEAVE US ALONE OBAMA AND GET OUT OF OUR FACE!

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:50 AM | Comments (4)

February 04, 2010

Behind Obama's Phony Deficit Numbers

This goes along with the article below so well so I am putting it here. ~ Wild Thing

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) Read the Riot Act to Obama Budget Director!

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) responds to White House budget director Peter Orszag in a Hill hearing this morning over what to do with the remainder of the original bailout, or the $700 billion TARP.

A fiery Judd Gregg, the senior Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, blasted the White House budget director today over his boss' plan to use bailout funds for a new business credit.

While President Obama was visiting Nashua, Gregg's birthplace, the three-term senator was on Capitol Hill skewering Peter Orszag over their plan to tap $30 billion from the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Gregg exploded as Orszag spoke of lingering problems in financial markets due to access to credit for small businesses.

"No! No! No!" he yelled out. "You can't make that type of statement with any legitimacy. You cannot make that statement." Gregg then held up a guideline for the TARP, which he helped write last year to keep the country from further economic collapse.

"This is the law," he said. "Let me tell you what the law says. Let me read to you again because you don't appear to understand the law. The law is very clear. The monies recouped from the TARP shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury for the reduction of the public debt. It's not for a piggy bank because you're concerned about lending to small businesses and you want to get a political event, when you go out and make a speech in Nashua, N.H."

Behind Obama's Phony Deficit Numbers

by Dick Morris

President Obama is being disingenuous when he says that the budget deficit he faced "when I walked in the door" of the White House was $1.3 trillion. He went on to say that he only increased it to $1.4 trillion in 2009 and was raising it to $1.6 trillion in 2010.

Congressman Joe Wilson might have said "you lie," but we'll settle for "you distort."

(As Mark Twain once said, there are three kinds of lies: "lies, damn lies, and statistics.")

Here are the facts:

In 2008, Bush ran a deficit of $485 billion. By the time the fiscal year started on October 1, 2008, it had gone up by another $100 billion due to increased recession-related spending and depressed revenues. So it was about $600 billion at the start of the fiscal crisis. That was the real Bush deficit.

But when the fiscal crisis hit, Bush had to pass TARP in the final months of his presidency which cost $700 billion. Under the federal budget rules, a loan and a grant are treated the same. So the $700 billion pushed the deficit -- officially -- up to $1.3 trillion. But not really. The $700 billion was a short term loan. $500 billion of it has already been repaid.

So what was the real deficit Obama inherited? The $600 billion deficit Bush was running plus the $200 billion of TARP money that probably won't be repaid (mainly AIG and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). That totals $800 billion. That was the real deficit Obama inherited.

Then...he added $300 billion in his stimulus package, bringing the deficit to $1.1 trillion. This $300 billion was, of course, totally qualitatively different from the TARP money in that it was spending not lending. It would never be paid back. Once it was out the door, it was gone. Other spending and falling revenues due to the recession pushed the final numbers for Obama's 2009 deficit up to $1.4 trillion.

So, effectively, Obama came close to doubling the deficit.

Obama seems not to understand that the deficit is the jobs problem. To add to the deficit in the hope of creating more jobs is an oxymoron. Additional deficit spending just crowds out small businesses trying to borrow money to create jobs and consumers seeking credit to buy cars and homes.

Soon, when the Fed stops printing money and we have to borrow real funds from real lenders, the high deficit will send interest rates soaring, further retarding growth and creating a cost-push inflation.

The interest rate we are now paying for the debt -- about 3.5% -- is totally artificial and based on the massive injection of money supply created by the purchase of mortgage backed securities by an obliging Federal Reserve. Once these injections of currency/heroin stop, the rate will more than double, sending our debt service spending into the stratosphere. Once we had to choose between guns and butter. Now we will have to choose between guns and butter on the one hand and paying our debt service on the other.

Obama's program of fiscal austerity in this new budget is a joke. He freezes very selected budget items while he shovels out new spending in his stimulus packages. If he wanted to lower the deficit, here's what he could do:

1. Cancel the remaining $500 billion of stimulus spending and

2. Cancel the $300 billion of spending in stimulus II.

Those are the real numbers. Or, as Al Gore would have it, "the inconvenient truth."

Wild Thing's comment........

Dick Morris nailed it. Dick Morris takes the lie apart piece by piece!!! Obam inherited a Bush recession deficit of 600-700 Billion (bad enough) with TARP added on in the last quarter.

A TARP fully supported by Obama. And furthermore the Pelosi-democrats INSISTED in Dec 2008 that Bush request the entire $700 Billion TARP on his watch and use $350 Billion of it to bail out the auto unions, which was never part of the original TARP bill. And Bush caved to Pelosi.

So Obama stepped into office on Jan 20th with a huge slush fund for his union buddies.

The lie about Obama inheriting a Bush “$1.3 trillion deficit” needs to be confronted right at the moment it is uttered, not in next day's editorial.

Obama signed the most massive spending bills EVER shortly after becoming President in 2009, yet he tries to blame the deficit on President Bush.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:48 AM | Comments (4)

January 30, 2010

Liar Obama Meets With House Republicans And Goes On Attack

Barack Obama is accusing Republicans of portraying health care overhaul legislation as a "Bolshevik plot."

VERY angry Barack Obama met with House Republicans today at their retreat in Baltimore and attacked them for voting against his very radical and failed plans for restructuring America. To their credit not one single House Republican voted for the gigantic Stimulus Bill, the record Omnibus Bill, and the Son of Stimulus Bill. And, only 5 voted for the democrat’s business-busting cap-and-tax bill and only one voted for Obamacare. Today Obama let them know what he thought about their lack of support for his radical agenda.

Look at how ANGRY he is while speaking to the House Republicans.

He called his health care bill “centrist.” …They got a kick out of that.

In a face-to-face encounter, President Barack Obama chastised Republican lawmakers Friday for opposing him on health care, economic stimulus and other major issues.

Republicans pushed back on taxes and spending, and accused Obama of not taking their ideas seriously.

Obama, attending the House Republicans’ retreat in Baltimore, began with conciliatory remarks but soon became more pointed. He said a GOP-driven “politics of no” was blocking action on bills that could help Americans obtain jobs and health care.

In a sometimes-barbed exchange, he said some in the audience have attended ribbon-cutting ceremonies for projects funded by the stimulus package they voted against. Obama also questioned why Republicans have overwhelmingly opposed his tax-cut policies, which he said have benefited 95 percent of American families.

“The notion that this was a radical package is just not true,” Obama said. “I am not an ideologue.”

GOP lawmakers pressed the president to pledge to support a line-item veto for spending bills and across-the-board tax cuts. Obama demurred, saying billionaires don’t need new tax cuts.

Obama defended his failed Stimulus plan.

Wild Thing's comment.......

I saw this whilei it was going on and it was disgusting. He said again if they don’t go along HE will do what he wants ANYWAY. He was very angry and the GOP did good with it and they did speak up to him. That part was GREAT to see.

He also said there were NO EARMARKS in the Recovery Act,, OMG, the WHOLE thing was an earmark.

Classic Democrat strategy; accuse your enemies of the very things you are doing.

I look at it as a Republican fight against a “Bolshevik plot.” Didn’t the Bolsheviks take over the whole country? Isn’t Obama trying to take over as much of the country as he can? Sounds Bolshevik to me. I hope his Bolshevik comment will come back to haunt him.

Obama is SO EVIL!

Our Founding Fathers ache in their graves over this idiot.

And what the heck?! “I AM NOT A IDEOLOGUE.” ...Obama said. He is an insane, America hating Ideologue.

This idiot lies to the People and the Court to their face. His “community organizing” background does not work when diversity is in the equation. He will fail on all cylinders because his octane is gone.

“IF you look at this bill you’ll find it’s pretty CENTRIST”...

HE IS INSANE.

Then DOCTOR Tom Price nailed Obama and then Obama tried to to correct him. But Price came back and corrected Obama again.

The Obama could not or would not answer Price's question! What do we tell our people who know we have proposed legislation but you Admin. constintantly says we have not!Price has asked him twice and he still will not answer!!!!!!

Oh and one last thing, did Obama give them the finger????

Everytime Obama does this, it's always when he's talking about political opponents..

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:55 AM | Comments (9)

January 28, 2010

Executive Order By Obama For States To Adopt Laws Limiting Use Of National Guard Units...

States' rights rebellion over National Guard

Lawmakers fight to keep governors, not president, in control of troops

wnd

Responding to an executive order by President Obama, a new push is under way for states to adopt laws limiting the use of their National Guard units unless there is an invasion, insurrection or other limited circumstance.

As WND reported, Obama's order establishes a new "Council of Governors" designated to advise on the "synchronization and integration of state and federal military activities in the United States."

The recent order, posted on the White House website, was accompanied by the explanation that the group is to work "to protect our nation against all types of hazards." It comes just weeks after the president issued a similarly obscure order vastly expanding INTERPOL's privileges in the U.S.

The White House said the new council is to include governors and administration officials to review "such matters as involving the National Guard of the various states; homeland defense, civil support; synchronization and integration of state and federal military activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities."

However, there was no definition of the group's authority. Can the council recommend "military activities" and can the governors, who already are in command of their own state guard units, mandate activities outside of their areas of jurisdiction? The White House did not respond to WND questions on the issue.

Now the Tenth Amendment Center is recommending a model legislation that states can use to limit the activities of their own National Guard members.

The model legislation states: "The governor shall withhold or withdraw approval of the transfer of the National Guard to federal control in the absence of: a) A military invasion of the United States, or b) An insurrection, or c) A calling forth of the guard by the federal government in a manner provided for by Congress to execute the laws of the union, provided that said laws were made in pursuance of the delegated powers in the Constitution of the United States, or d) A formal declaration of war from Congress."

The organization said the requests to state legislatures already have begun with a letter on the issue dispatched by Walt Garlington, founder of the Louisiana State Sovereignty Committee, to state Rep. Brett F. Geymann.

"I ask you to once again take up the cause of states' rights and protect Louisiana from this latest unconstitutional action coming from Washington, D.C.," the letter said. "Please introduce a bill reasserting the governor's power over Louisiana's National Guard to counteract the EO issued by Pres. Obama."

The model legislation proposed by the Tenth Amendment Center says the law is, "For the purpose of requiring the governor to withhold or withdraw approval of the transfer of this state's National Guard to federal control in the absence of an explicit authorization adopted by the federal government in pursuance of the powers delegated to the federal government in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the U.S. Constitution."

It cites U.S. Constitution provisions that Congress has the power to provide for "calling forth the militia" to "execute the laws of the union," or to suppress insurrections or repel invasions.

The proposal cites Daniel Webster's statement in 1814 to Congress, "It will be the solemn duty of the state governments to protect their own authority over their own militia, and to interpose between their citizens and arbitrary power. These are among the objects for which the state governments exist."

The White House said the new panel was called for in the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act and will include 10 governors picked by the president as well as the Coast Guard commandant and other officials from the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies.

The White House announcement said the council "will provide an invaluable senior administration forum for exchanging views with state and local officials on strengthening our national resilience and the homeland defense and civil support challenges facing our nation today and in the future."

Wild Thing's comment.......

There sure is a lot going on behind the scenes. Federal government telling the States what to do. I don't think this will stand up to any level of judicial scrutiny. It is unConstitutional and a perversion of what States Rights are. Tyranny is on the table.

I might be wrong ,but I thought the National Guard has not been under the States control since at least WWII.

I hope some conservatives are keeping track of all of the directives that will need to be reversed when this guy gets thrown out.

Our National Guard is made up of some of the finest patriots in the country. If these idiots on the Left think that these brave men and women would do their nefarious bidding, they have another think coming.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:48 AM | Comments (10)

Rep. Stephen Lynch ( Democrat - Mass.) Blasts Tim Geithner

Rep. Stephen Lynch ( Democrat - Mass.) blasts Tim Geithner during a session of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

A little history about this:

Geithner had AIG hide details about payments to banks

Houston Chronicle

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, then led by Timothy Geithner, told American International Group Inc. to withhold details from the public about the bailed-out insurer's payments to banks during the depths of the financial crisis, e-mails between the company and its regulator show.

AIG said in a draft of a regulatory filing that the insurer paid banks, which included Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA, 100 cents on the dollar for credit-default swaps they bought from the firm. The New York Fed crossed out the reference, according to the e-mails, and AIG excluded the language when the filing was made public on Dec. 24, 2008. The e-mails were obtained by Representative Darrell Issa, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The New York Fed took over negotiations between AIG and the banks in November 2008 as losses on the swaps, which were contracts tied to subprime home loans, threatened to swamp the insurer weeks after its taxpayer-funded rescue. The regulator decided that Goldman Sachs and more than a dozen banks would be fully repaid for $62.1 billion of the swaps, prompting lawmakers to call the AIG rescue a “backdoor bailout” of financial firms.

“It appears that the New York Fed deliberately pressured AIG to restrict and delay the disclosure of important information,” said Issa, a California Republican. Taxpayers “deserve full and complete disclosure under our nation's securities laws, not the withholding of politically inconvenient information.” President Barack Obama selected Geithner as Treasury secretary, a post he took last year.

Wild Thing's comment.......

The most corrupt administration we have ever seen. This administration is criminal. This conduct makes Enron look like child’s play.

The way I understand it, AIG was the designated patsy. They were demonized. Their bonuses were cursed. They had ACORN sent after their executives to mount protests.

Meantime, all they were really doing was to pass the money THROUGH AIG to Goldman Sachs, J. P. Morgan, and a couple of other banks who were their political donors. Goldman Sachs made huge profits, not only on all the money passed through, but also on shorting AIG.

What they presumably told AIG was, “You play the patsy, or you’re going bankrupt and will spend the rest of your lives in jail.” So AIG rolled over and agreed to be demonized.

This wasn’t just Geithner. Obama was in it well before he became President. He was the second biggest recipient of donations from Goldman Sachs, after Chris Dodd.

All of this reminds me of a movie called , "The International".

Just one more thing of interest, Timmy Geithner’s dad, Peter, was Stanley Ann Dunham's boss. Stanley Ann Dunham is Barack Hussein 0bama's mother.

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:40 AM | Comments (4)

January 27, 2010

Charles Krauthammer on President Obama’s Proposed Budget Cuts

Obama to seek freeze on part of budget

WASHINGTON

Facing voter anger over mounting budget deficits, President Barack Obama will ask Congress to freeze spending for some domestic programs for three years beginning in 2011, administration officials said Monday. Separately, Obama unveiled plans to help a middle class "under assault" pay its bills, save for retirement and care for kids and aging parents.

The spending freeze would apply to a relatively small portion of the federal budget, affecting a $477 billion pot of money available for domestic agencies whose budgets are approved by Congress each year. Some of those agencies could get increases, others would have to face cuts; such programs got an almost 10 percent increase this year. The federal budget total was $3.5 trillion.

Charles Krauthammer on President Obama’s proposed budget cuts:

“It’s not a hatchet. It’s not a scalpel. It’s a Q-tip. It’s a fraud. This is a minuscule amount. Remember it excludes defense, homeland security, veteran’s affairs. It excludes all of the entitlements which are 60% of the budget. And, it excludes stimuli past and future, the nearly two-thirds of the trillion dollar stimulus that has not been spent. All of that is excluded. It excludes the trillion that would have been spent on health care if it would have been passed. What it is is a $15 billion reduction in a year 2011 in which the CBO has just announced we’re going to have a deficit of $1.35 trillion. It’s a rounding error. It’s lunch money.”

Krauthammer:

"What he doesn't tell you is that last year, their first year in office when they had a free ride in spending, they ratcheted up the spending for all of these departments astronomically an average of the last half of fiscal '09 and all of fiscal '10 an average about 20%, now that's huge 'cause normally year over year you increase a department's spending 3% or 4% especially with low inflation.

So for example, last year alone, they increased the EPA budget by 35%, so if you're instituting a freeze, what you're doing, you're ratcheting in, you're locking in the higher spending that Obama slid in last year...So what the freeze is doing essentially is the opposite of what it looks like, instead of reducing the spending, it's locking in these huge increases that were instituted last year"

Wild Thing's comment........

This is a joke. They guy really thinks people are THAT stupid. He will save a few billion while working to borrow and spending another trillion....hello????

Is the whole DemoRAT party going to walk off the cliff with this “Carter-FDR hybrid on steroids”?

More lies, prevarication, and sleight of hand. The Hope N Change express keeps on rolling. More like the Hypocrisy Express!

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:40 AM | Comments (5)

January 25, 2010

Robert Gibbs Joins Obama - Says Massachusetts' Vote Was Not Against Obama's Radical Agenda

Chris Wallace: It wasn’t the same thing that swept Barack Obama into office. Scott Brown explicitly campaigned against the Obama agenda. His approval rating among that electorate was 61%. Their enthusiasm for Republican policies among that electorate was 40%.

Chris Wallace: But your not suggesting that this was a mandate for Barack Obama?

Robert Gibbs: No. Of course not. But I’m also not suggesting that what you said a minute ago meets the truth test either.

Chris Wallace: You don’t think that when they voted for Scott Brown they were voting against Obama’s policies?

Robert Gibbs: That’s not what they told pollsters. No.

Robert Gibbs on Scott Brown’s win: That may be what he campaigned on but that’s not what the voters in Massachusetts said in the Washington Post poll… They did a poll of voters who participated in why they voted. Right. More people voted express their support for Barack Obama than to oppose him.

Now over at CBS this is what they were discussing.
The loss of a Democratic Senate seat in Massachusetts has made the White House worry about lack of support. As Bill Plante reports, advisors deny rumors of a White House staff shakeup.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Oh my gosh, all Sunday morning on TV it was one democrat after the other LYING about what happened in Mass. and why. It was almost shocking to see. Dems can lie right to our face. If it was pouring rain and a person was standing in the rain with one of these people, they would say NO it is a sunny day and they actually think the rest of the people would believe them. LOL amazing.....the sad thing is there are still people in our country that sit there and nod yessss when they hear all the lies from the left. Now that is scary.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:50 AM | Comments (8)

January 23, 2010

Obama Seen as Anti-Business By 77% of Investors ~ So True!

Obama Seen as Anti-Business By 77% of Investors

Bloomberg

U.S. investors overwhelmingly see President Barack Obama as anti-business and question his ability to manage a financial crisis, according to a Bloomberg survey.

The global quarterly poll of investors and analysts who are Bloomberg subscribers finds that 77 percent of U.S. respondents believe Obama is too anti-business and four-out-of-five are only somewhat confident or not confident of his ability to handle a financial emergency.

The poll also finds a decline in Obama’s overall favorability rating one year after taking office. He is viewed favorably by 27 percent of U.S. investors. In an October poll, 32 percent in the U.S. held a positive impression.

“Investors no longer feel they can trust their instincts to take risks,” said poll respondent David Young, a managing director for a broker dealer in New York. Young cited Obama’s efforts to trim bonuses and earnings, make health care his top priority over jobs and plans to tax “the rich or advantaged.”

Obama spooked the market on Thursday with talk of new government regulations on financial companies.

Stock futures falling; market set to resume slide

My Way

January 22,2010

President Barack Obama spooked the market Thursday, after asking Congress for limits on how large big banks can be and to end some of the risky trading large financial companies have used in recent quarters to boost profits.

The market could be re-entering a period of uncertainty that defined the financial crisis and sent it cratering nearly a year ago before its 10-month rally.

Large financial firms, including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America Corp. all plummeted Thursday. The three big banks, which have prominent consumer and investment banking operations, would likely be the hardest hit by Obama's new regulations. Shares of each all declined more than 5 percent.

Meanwhile, bond prices dipped Friday morning. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, which moves opposite its price, rose to 3.61 percent from 3.59 percent late Thursday.

The dollar fell against other major currencies, while gold prices also declined.

Wild Thing's comment........

Obama is trying to destroy american exceptionalism and is succeeding.

The remaining 23% must have photos of Kim Jong Il in their offices. Fools!

Obama has held our country back for a year. Somehow he has got to be kicked out of office, oh how I wish that was possible.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:48 AM | Comments (5)

White House, Democratic Lawmakers Cut Deal on Deficit Commission

White House, Democratic lawmakers cut deal on deficit commission

Washington Post

Faced with growing alarm over the nation's soaring debt, the White House and congressional Democrats tentatively agreed Tuesday to create an independent budget commission and to put its recommendations for fiscal solvency to a vote in Congress by the end of this year.

Under the agreement, President Obama would issue an executive order to create an 18-member panel that would be granted broad authority to propose changes in the tax code and in the massive federal entitlement programs -- including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security -- that threaten to drive the nation's debt to levels not seen since World War II.

The accord comes a week before Obama is scheduled to deliver his first State of the Union address to a nation increasingly concerned about his stewardship of the economy and the federal budget. After a year in which he advocated spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a huge economic stimulus package and a far-reaching overhaul of the health-care system, Obama has pledged to redouble his effort to rein in record budget deficits even as he has come under withering Republican attack.

The commission would deliver its recommendations after this fall's congressional elections, postponing potentially painful decisions about the nation's fiscal future until after Democrats face the voters. But if the commission approves a deficit-reduction plan, Congress would have to act on it quickly under the agreement, forged late Tuesday in a meeting with Vice President Biden, White House budget director Peter R. Orszag, and Democratic lawmakers led by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.).

Government spending to bail out the troubled financial sector and to stimulate economic activity have combined with sagging tax collections to push last year's budget deficit to a record $1.4 trillion. The budget gap is projected to be just as large this year and to hover close to $1 trillion a year for much of the next decade.

Deficit spending, in turn, has caused the nation's accumulated debt to swell to dangerous levels. Last month, Congress voted to increase the legal debt limit to $12.4 trillion, a record figure that the Treasury expects to exceed early this year. The deal on the budget commission clears the way for Congress to approve an even larger increase in the legal limit on borrowing, to well over $13 trillion, a figure that Democrats hope will see the Treasury through the rest of 2010.

The Senate is expected to open debate Wednesday on the debt limit.

Republican commission advocates remain skeptical that a presidentially appointed panel would have the clout to tackle the nation's toughest fiscal problems. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), a sponsor with Conrad of legislation to create a budget commission by law, called a presidentially appointed panel "a fraud" designed to do little more than give Democrats political cover.

"It's a fraud among anyone interested in fiscal responsibility to claim an executive order could structure something that would actually lead to action," Gregg said.

Some Democrats, particularly in the House, where leaders have long resisted relinquishing their authority over taxes and spending, are also less than optimistic. Under the agreement, the commission would have 18 members, including six lawmakers appointed by congressional Democrats and six lawmakers appointed by congressional Republicans. Obama would appoint six others, only four of whom could be Democrats.

Wild Thing's comment.......

Place locks on the front doors of Congress. Problem solved!

Panel this Obama! You pompous twit. Can one get any dumber than this guy? He knows why because he helped accelerate and create it.

So typical of Hussein Obama...so far this is his governing style, create panels, hold summits, talk, talk, talk...and then do nothing. No tangible results. Try and convince the people you are doing something when really, you are doing nothing but playing golf.

.... Thank you Jim for sending this to me.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (4)

January 16, 2010

Democrats 'plan to steal the vote' In Future Elections

Democrats 'plan to steal the vote'

If you thought health-care bill was scary, check out universal-registration scheme

wnd

A political correspondent is making waves with his stern warning that Democrats are scheming to manipulate the electoral process this election year by implementing a federal mandate to involuntarily register millions of people to vote – making the system ripe for unprecedented fraud and abuse.

"Democrats were very rattled by the Nov. 3 election results," Wall Street Journal reporter and political commentator John Fund told a crowd in November 2009, at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum. "What do liberals do when they lose elections? They change the rules."

'Definitely introducing a bill'

Fund is warning that Sen. Charles Schumer, D.-N.Y., and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., plan to propose universal voter-registration legislation – possibly within weeks.

"Schumer is definitely introducing a bill," Fund told WND. "It's not public yet, but he's definitely going to do so."

A congressional staffer confirmed Schumer's involvement.

"What we know from statements from advocacy groups that support universal voter registration is that they have been working with Sen. Schumer's office since approximately last spring to create a bill," the staffer told WND. "We don't know exactly when he will introduce it, but it has been predicted to be introduced in the near future for several months now. Schumer definitely has been, and seems to be, the point person on this."

While Schumer has yet to publicly share the plans, the staffer said advocacy groups have published materials calling for the use of a wide range of government lists and databases to add people to voter registration rolls.

Fund said the health-care reform negotiations are lasting longer than expected, so he anticipates the universal voter registration legislation may be introduced in February or later. The congressional staffer said he believes a bill passed this year would probably take effect in time for the 2012 election.

Fund discusses the topic in his November 2009 book, "How the Obama Administration Threatens to Undermine Our Elections."

"The idea, embraced by Barack Obama when he was a presidential candidate, is to shift responsibility for registering to vote from the individual to the federal government," Fund writes in his book. "All eligible citizens would automatically be registered to vote, which existing lists such as DMV records, income-tax returns, welfare rolls and unemployment lists being used to enroll everyone. Once registered, individuals would stay on the federal rolls, even if they move to another state or district."

Illegal immigrant registration

Fund warns that the government databases contain names of non-citizens, mentally incompetent individuals and felons – factors that would usually disqualify a person from voting in most states.

"One main concern that has been raised is that most of these databases don't indicate citizenship status," the staffer said. "It's not clear that there is any available way to determine whether the people being added to the rolls are or are not citizens."

Fund notes that many people own property in more than one location and pay taxes to numerous government entities.

"[U]niversal voter registration would automatically register them in more than one location, allowing them to vote more than once – either in person or by mail," Fund explains.

He said the plan would destroy the integrity of the registration process, much as widespread registration drives by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, were reportedly rife with criminal actions, including people registered multiple times under fraudulent names and addresses. The "community organizing" group deployed thousands of get-out-the-vote workers in 2008 and purportedly provided them with registration quotas. Larry Lomax, registrar of voters in Las Vegas, Nev., told the Wall Street Journal he believed 48 percent of ACORN's forms had been "clearly fraudulent." In the 2008 election, ACORN's practices led to investigation in more than a dozen states.

"Now they will sell this very cleverly," Fund explained at the forum. "They will say, well, OK, ACORN did have some problems with voter registration. We shouldn't have these third-party rogue groups out there. So, let's put ACORN out of business, and let's register everybody."

Please continue the rest of the article HERE, thank you so much.

Wild Thing's comment........

Normally I would say, this WILL NEVER pass constitutional muster - based on the 9th and 10th Amendments .

BUT things have changed since Obama became Dictator and his band of ugly corrupt Democrats, Pelosi, Reid, Shummer, etc.

It's not enough that Unions don't have to pay some taxes now this group of crooks are trying to make more unconstitutional law for voting. ENOUGH!!!!

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:47 AM | Comments (5)

January 15, 2010

Obama To Meddle With Your Retirement Accounts?

Obama to meddle with your retirement account?

Administration considers forcing investors into Treasury debt

wnd

The Obama administration appears to have come up with a novel way of financing trillion-dollar budget deficits – demanding IRA and 401(k) holders buy trillions of dollars in Treasury bonds.

With the Treasury needing this year to see another $1 trillion in debt to finance the anticipated federal budget deficit, and the Federal Reserve about to discontinue its 2009 program of buying Treasury bonds for the Fed’s asset portfolio, the Obama administration is scrambling to find ways to sell government debt without having to raise interest rates.

Bloomberg reported Friday that Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Mark Iwry are planning to stage a public comment period before implementing regulations that would require private investors to structure IRA and 401(k) accounts into what could amount to a U.S. Treasury debt-backed government annuity.

CNBC’s Rick Santelli broadcast the rumor the same day from the trading floor during CNBC’s "Power Lunch" show.

Spokesmen from both the U.S. Treasury and Department of Labor confirmed to WND that the federal agencies about to enter a pre-regulation public comment phase on the proposed rule change.

continue article HERE

Wild Thing's comment.......

Seniors, baby boomers and post boomers are going to get mega screwed but many voted for this.

Americans are being held up at gunpoint, and there's not a sheriff in sight.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 03:49 AM | Comments (7)

January 07, 2010

Thought Control on the American Campus~ Sheesh!

Think What We Think...Or Else: Thought Control on the American Campus

Texas teachers warned against being 'heterosexist'

'We must help people to become committed to social change'

wnd

Candidates for certification to teach in public schools in Texas are being told that they will be held accountable for any "heterosexist" leanings and must become agents working to change society, according to one candidate who was alarmed by the demands.

The applicant, who requested anonymity for fear of repercussions, told WND part of the teachings on multiculturalism required him to read several online postings about the issue inside the education industry.

One warns that "teachers and administrators must be held accountable for practices deemed to be racist, sexist, heterosexist, classist, or in any other way discriminatory." And a second warned that educators must not define education as the basic skills.

"How do we create a better world? How do we do more than simply survive? As educators, we must help people to become committed to social change," the article demanded.

The teacher candidate told WND the studies were mandated by the Region 10 service center for the public school educators' program.

The center had a recording that it was closed throughout the holidays and officials could not be reached by WND.

But spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe at the Texas Education Agency said the state rules require teacher preparation programs to cover 17 curriculum topics, but not multiculturalism.

Although the training should address educating special populations such as English language learners and children with disabilities," she added.

"While we establish the broad rules that are to be followed, we do not write or approve a training program's curriculum," she said.

She said the articles, if part of the program, were chosen at the region level.

One of the articles was on the EdChange Multicultural Pavilion and discussed defining "multicultural education."

There it states that there are several focuses for such programs, including those that insist "on education change as part of a larger societal transformation in which we more closely explore and criticize the oppressive foundations of society and how education serves to maintain the status quo – foundations such as white supremacy, capitalism, global socioeconomic situations, and exploitation."

The article demands, "Schools must be active participants in ending oppression of all types, first by ending oppression within their own walls, then by producing socially and critically active and aware students."

"The underlying goal of multicultural education is to affect social change. The pathway toward this goal incorporates three strands of transformation: 1. The transformation of self; 2. The transformation of schools and schooling; and 3. The transformation of society," the teaching material said.

The traditional teaching approaches, it continued, "must be deconstructed to examine how they are contributing to and supporting institutional systems of oppression."

It demands that the "transformation of society" be part of a school's goals.

"It is not enough to continue working within an ailing, oppressive, and outdated system to make changes, when the problems in education are themselves symptoms of a system that continues to be controlled by the economic elite."

In Minnesota, among the issues discussed in the plans, are requirements that teachers would be able to instruct students on the "myth of meritocracy" in the United States, "the history of demands for assimilation to white, middle-class, Christian meanings and values," and the "history of white racism."

Those demands appeared to be similar to those promoted earlier at the University of Delaware.

As WND reported, the Delaware university's office of residential life was caught requiring students to participate in a program that taught "all whites are racist."

School officials immediately defended the teaching, but in the face of a backlash from alumni and publicity about its work, the school decided to drop the curriculum, although some factions later suggested its revival.

FIRE, which challenged the Delaware plan, later produced a video explaining how the institution of the university pushed for the teachings, was caught and later backed off:

Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten said the Minnesota plan would have required teachers to "embrace – and be prepared to teach our state's kids – the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic."

She wrote, "The first step toward 'cultural competence,' says the task group, is for future teachers to recognize – and confess – their own bigotry. Anyone familiar with the re-education camps of China's Cultural Revolution will recognize the modus operandi.

"What if some aspiring teachers resist this effort at thought control and object to parroting back an ideological line as a condition of future employment?" she posed. "The task group has Orwellian plans for such rebels: The U, it says, must 'develop clear steps and procedures for working with nonperforming students, including a remediation plan.'"

Wild Thing's comment.......

Even if we could stop this , right now, it will still take 10-20 years to undo the crap they have already instilled in our society.

Let's file one complaint after another alleging discrimination against conservatives, Christians, etc.

The Demonrats keep adding to the list of non-problems.

AGW, racism, now it’s “heterosexist”, an entirely new creation from the laboratries of Hell. The Liberal cancer continues to consume our Republic.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 02:45 AM | Comments (4)

January 05, 2010

Republican Scott Brown from MA Will Fight The Fight the SEIU & Demcare Corruption

Scott Brown is the Republican candidate for the vacant U.S. Senate seat from Massachusetts. Brown announced his candidacy on September 12, 2009, following the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy.

Currently, Scott Brown represents the Norfolk, Bristol, and Middlesex District, in the Massachusetts Senate, where he is his third term.

Previously, Senator Brown served three terms in the Massachusetts House of Representatives from the 9th Norfolk District. Prior to his election to the House in 1998, Brown had served as a Wrentham Selectman and town Assessor.

Senator Brown is a graduate of Wakefield High School, Tufts University, and Boston College Law School. He is a practicing attorney, and a 30 -year member of the Massachusetts National Guard, where he currently holds the rank of Lt. Colonel in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps. Brown was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service in homeland security after the attacks of September 11, 2001.

From Scott Brown’s campaign office:

"Scott is a conservative. In fact, he will be the most conservative Senator elected from MA since . . . Senator John F. Kennedy, who nowadays would be denounced by liberals as "a dangerous right-winger." JFK loved our country, and he knew that in a recession you don't raise taxes -- instead, you cut them. And as a man with chronic ailments, JFK had no desire to our health system into one resembling Bulgaria's.

"Scott Brown is committed to voting to repeal the health care monstrosity Reid and Pelosi are busy hatching. He's against the Cap-and-Tax legislation. He's in favor of reducing our taxes. And, unlike Obama, he's not afraid to use the phrase "war on terror."

There is a special election in Massachusetts on January 19th to fill the late Ted Kennedy’s seat.

If you live in Massachusetts, remember to vote on January 19, 2010 – rain, sleet or snow! This is already an historic race as Coakley could be the first woman from Mass. in the Senate and Brown is a Republican vying for Kennedy’s seat that was Democratic for decades.

Republican Scott Brown is a regular guy who drives a truck with nearly 200,000 miles on it. He says the truck has brought him closer to the people as he's traveled around Massachusetts during the special election to replace the late Ted Kennedy in the U.S. Senate. He says people tell him that spending is out of control in Washington and they are concerned about the path our country is on. He says he wants to be a voice for the people and end business as usual in Washington. The ad ends with his daughter, Arianna, greeting him with a "Hey, Dad" as he returns home from another long day of campaigning.

H/T Michelle Malkin blog

Last month, I noted how Massachusetts Senate GOP candidate Scott Brown called out rival Democrat candidate Martha Coakley’s SEIU thug pals.

The Purple Shirts continue to “pull out all the stops” to install Coakley in Teddy Kennedy’s seat. The special election will be held January 19.

SEIU endorsed her in October, poured $214,000 into a radio ad buy for her in December, and are pouring all available “resources and clout” into her bid. As she prattles on about “economic justice,” Coakley now boasts a total campaign treasury of more than $5 million:

Attorney General Martha Coakley raised more than $1 million over the past six weeks for her US Senate campaign, bringing her total haul for the race to $5.2 million, her campaign reported yesterday. The campaign of her rival, state Senator Scott Brown, said it raised $700,000 during the same period, much of it on the Internet, for a total of $1.2 million.

Coakley, who faced three opponents in the Democratic primary, started the special election campaign with less than $500,000 in her campaign account, compared with about $300,000 for Brown, a Republican of Wrentham.

Coakley raised the $1 million between Nov. 20 and Dec. 31. The campaign did not release donor lists, say how much money the campaign spent over that period, or reveal how much it has in the bank to begin the new year. Those details must be included in information that has to be submitted next week to the Federal Election Commission.

Where’s the GOP establishment?

Yes, once again, it’s up to grass-roots conservatives and independents to help a GOP candidate fight the Big Labor-backed corruptocrat. Demcare hangs in the balance. Yet, Brown received a measly $50,000 from the national GOP and NRSC compared to the nearly $1 million that radical leftist Dede Scozzafava raked in.

Sean Trende crunches the numbers and will be “stunned if Brown wins.” But Patrick Ruffini sees “evidence Scott Brown is within single digits.” And William Jacobson reports on the grass-roots conservative groundswell for underdog Brown:

Three things have happened in the last three weeks to make this election competitive:

1. Coakley’s “read my lips” moment: During the campaign, Coakley promised as a matter of “principle” not to support the Senate health bill if it contained restrictions on abortion. This promise was a prime fundraising tool. Just days after the primary, Coakley went back on this promise, and now is in the Harry Reid/Ben Nelson camp, to the anger of the left-wing base.

2. Obamacare is sinking in popularity: Harry Reid and the Democrats in the Senate demonstrated, in the weeks leading up to Christmas eve, the absolute moral corruption in Washington, D.C., by legally bribing Senators to vote for the health care bill. By supporting these efforts, Coakley has shown herself to be just more of the same (and her own maneuvers around the campaign finance laws drive that point home). At a time when the country is facing monumental deficits and national debt, Coakley handed Brown the central issue in the campaign – Democratic efforts to force through a health care bill which is unpopular and economically ruinous. Had Coakley stood by her “principles” she would not be in this position.

3. Brown has gone viral: Largely shunned by the Republican establishment, Brown has utilized an online strategy which has ignited a grassroots campaign to get Brown elected. Do a Google search of blogs, and you will see that Brown is the talk of the internet, and most posts about Coakley are negative. While the mainstream media still holds great sway, Brown is seen as rising and Coakley as more of the same. Brown is winning the online battle.

Moe Lane at RedState underscores that most of Coakley’s cash was spent securing the Dem nomination:

You see, most of that money Coakley raised got spent fighting for the nomination. William Jacobson’s all over this topic: while he and I both think that she’s got more money in the bank right now than Brown, it’s not the 5-to-1 advantage she’s hyping. At best, it’s 3-to-2. She’s also facing the problem that her public retreat on abortion language in the bill is going to depress enthusiasm in the progressive netroots; and that Republican activists at least have noted that flipping Massachusetts could – could! – possibly derail the health care rationing bill, and are contributing accordingly…

Pro-lifers in Massachusetts are also rallying around Brown. LifeNews reports:

In a state known for its left-leaning and pro-abortion politics, Brown has an uphill battle but he enjoys the support of Massachusetts Citizens for Life. Jack Rowe, chairman of the MCFL PAC, emailed LifeNews.com today to say that he is seeing movement in Brown’s direction. “People are terribly upset about health care and asking what to do. Here is the very exciting part. We in Massachusetts can actually save the whole country from this awful health care. Our PAC has been supporting Scott Brown because he will be a pro-life vote in the Senate. Scott Brown will also vote against the health care bill. After the compromise bill comes out of conference, it must be approved again by each house. Brown will vote against the bill. That means there will not be 60 votes in the Senate. That means the bill will be defeated.” That’s a lofty goal but Rowe is encouraging pro-life advocates in Massachusetts to get involved in the special election. “Can we do it? We certainly can! Turn-out will be very small,” he said — adding that the pr-life movement could change the dynamics of the race of it gets mobilized.

This is . Brown’s campaign site is here.

You can learn more about Scott Brown by visiting his website: www.brownforussenate.com

Wild Thing's comment.........

Can we imagine 41 votes on the Republican side, which means filibuster, which means No cloture, which means No ObamaCare, ObamaDontCare, ReidPelosiCare, or WhatevertheHellCare they call it?

This is Scott Brown's page at FACEBOOK

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:40 AM | Comments (6)

January 04, 2010

DeMint:TSA Nominee Erroll Southers Isn't Qualified, And Shouldn't Be Confirmed"

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC)

DeMint: TSA nominee isn't qualified, shouldn't be confirmed

Washington Examiner

Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, who has been the target of much Democratic criticism for his efforts to slow down Senate confirmation of Erroll Southers, the Obama White House's nominee to head the Transportation Security Administration, now says Southers should not be confirmed.

DeMint has been critical of Southers for refusing to answer questions about whether Southers would work toward unionizing the TSA. But in demanding that there be a Senate debate and roll-call vote on Southers--Majority Leader Harry Reid had wanted to confirm Southers by unanimous consent--DeMint has stopped short of calling Southers unqualified. Now, however, referring to a news report that Southers misled the Senate about an incident 20 years ago in which Southers improperly accessed a government criminal database, DeMint says flatly that Southers is not qualified and does not deserve confirmation. This is a new statement from the senator:

Erroll Southers has not been forthcoming about whether he'll give union bosses control of our airport security, which is one of the most important decisions he'll make as head of the TSA. Mr. Southers' unwillingness to form a position on collective bargaining seriously calls into question his judgment, because it weakens security and has already been rejected by the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, Coast Guard, and by every previous TSA administrator.
And now we learn that he misled Congress in sworn testimony about accessing confidential records. The TSA is one of the most critical security agencies in the War on Terror, and the Senate must carefully vet this nominee. If Mr. Southers is unwilling to put security ahead of politics and if he can't tell the truth, then he's not qualified and should not be confirmed.

Although Democrats are now complaining about Republican "obstruction" of the Southers nomination, nearly all of the delay in the process has been the work of Democrats

The White House did not send Southers' nomination to the Senate until September 10, 2009 -- 243 days into the Obama administration. The nomination was then in committee -- controlled entirely by Democrats -- for more than two months, finally coming to the Senate floor on November 20, when Reid proposed that Southers be confirmed by unanimous consent. That way, no senator would have to cast a specific vote in favor or against Southers; in addition, a unanimous consent vote would be quicker than a debate and roll-call tally for a Democratic leadership racing to pass a national health care bill. That's when DeMint stepped in, demanding a debate, even if it were just a few hours, and a vote.

At the time, the dispute was about unionization of the TSA, and whether Southers was sufficiently forthcoming about his intentions in that regard. Then, after the Christmas Day terrorist incident in Detroit, it became about alleged Republican "obstruction" of the Southers nomination. Now, with word that Southers misled the Senate, the focus has turned back to the nominee. Democrats have the majority needed to confirm Southers, but DeMint is going to force them to do it on the record, with a roll call vote.

Wild Thing's comment......

God Bless DeMint, he’s absolutely right.

He was an FBI agent who served with no distinction except he broke the law himself. That kind of fits-in with many of Obama's nominations; breaking the law seems to be the distinguishing qualification to be nominated for critical positions with Obama. And lest we forget: Southers breaking the law as he has admitted would keep him from being accepted with the FBI in 2010, but it's OK for him to head the TSA? Go figure America.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at 02:45 AM | Comments (4)

January 03, 2010

Obama's TSA Nominee Southers LIED To Congress About Accessing Confidential Records

TSA nominee misled Congress about accessing confidential records

The Washington Post

Southers’s admission that he was involved in a questionable use of law enforcement background data has been a source of concern among civil libertarians, who believe the TSA performs a delicate balancing act in tapping into passenger information to find terrorists while also protecting citizens’ privacy.

Southers first described the episode in his October affidavit, telling the Senate panel that two decades ago he asked a San Diego Police Department employee to access confidential criminal records about the boyfriend. Southers said he had been censured by superiors at the FBI. He described the incident as isolated and expressed regrets about it.

The committee approved his nomination Nov. 19. One day later, Southers wrote to Lieberman and Collins saying his first account was incorrect. After reviewing documents, he wrote, he recalled that he had twice conducted the database searches himself, downloaded confidential law enforcement records about his wife’s boyfriend and passed information on to the police department employee, the letter said.

It is a violation of the federal Privacy Act to access such information without proper cause. The law says that "any person who knowingly and willfully requests or obtains any record concerning an individual from an agency under false pretenses shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000."

Though two Senate committees have endorsed him, and he received recommendations from other law enforcement officials, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) recently held up his approval because of concerns that Southers would support the unionization of TSA workers.

A spokesman said Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) will work quickly to overcome DeMint's procedural block and force a vote when the Senate reconvenes this month.

In questioning before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Southers has said he understands the need to balance security and privacy.

Said Collins: "You have taken responsibility for your actions. You've acknowledged your mistake in the personal conversation that we had in my office. It is important that the public have confidence that government officials will not misuse the authority that they have."

She added: "If you're confirmed, you're going to have the access to databases that have personal information on many, many individuals, such as through the secure flight program, and it's going to be important for the public to have confidence that you would not, in any way, misuse your access to the personal information in those databases. So, let me first ask you: Have you ever in the past misused your access to databases that the government maintains, other than this one incident that led to this censure?"

"No, Senator, I have not," Southers replied.

Wild Thing's comment........

Amazing, this offense would automatically and permanently disqualify him for a regular GS type job, but he is able to be considered for a Cabinet position. IN fact of all the people in Obama's cabinet, administration and his freaking CZAR's. not a single nominee for any position, has been a person of integrity, intelligence, or courage to do the right thing. They are all corrupt individuals with nefarious goals.

Even more amazing, someone with absolutely no leadership experience and a background that is the antithesis of everything America supposedly stands for can be elected president! It STILL boggles my mind.

On the VERY POSITIVE side, every crisis, Obama creeps ever more closely to a nervous breakdown. I don't think he ever was really connected to reality in the first place. The world simply doesn’t work like he thinks. Sitting in an ivory tower, it’s easy to imagine a bold new world. But national abasement and negotiation does not bring world peace, and producers won’t long support “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.”

It’s a great tribute to this country that we have survived such reckless leadership for as long as we have. How long before an American city is reduced to ashes or our economic system collapses outright
He is amazingly disconnected from reality at this point and apparently fearful of returning to Washington to face questions much less criticism.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (6)

December 31, 2009

Top 10 Ridiculous Stimulus Programs

10. $427,824 Research Grant for Seniors citizens video games

9. Funding of a Dartmouth College study involving “sexual arousal in anesthetized female rats” ($9,870).

8. Funding of a $168,300 SBA loan to the Escape Massage parlor in Midlothian, VA.

7. Funding a $447,492 Univ. of North Carolina study on the development and use of “African American English” amongst 70 adolescents.

6. $10,346 for a heating and cooling company to provide “escort services” for other companies performing a laser scanning survey at a courthouse in Honolulu, Hawaii.

5. An academic study comparing outcomes of the concurrent and separate use of malt liquor and marijuana ($389,357).

4. A $225,000 study at Ohio State University on the relative and combined impacts of air pollution and a high fat diet on obesity development.

3. A $712,883 research grant to develop “machine-generated humor“. Project will design artificially intelligent “comedic performance agents”, and will “deploy them both on and off-line for the enjoyment and illumination of everyday citizens”.

2. A $54 million project to relocate one bridge for the Napa Valley Wine Train (!) in order to mitigate the possible impact of a “100 year storm event”.

1. $9.3 million to fund the design and development of a “coordinated colony of robotic bees“!

H/T Verum Serum

On the basis that they have created jobs, let me add that a grand total of 19.79 jobs were reported to have been created as a result of this spending. That’s 19.79 jobs for $65.7 million in federal spending, or roughly $3.3 million per job. This calculation comes from the job totals reported to Recovery.gov by the recipients, although it does not include any possible jobs created from the SBA loan to the massage parlor (apparently SBA loan recipients aren’t required to report this). It also includes 2 jobs which were reported as having been created for the “escort” boondoggle to Hawaii, which were apparently generated by a grant of only $10K.

Wild Thing's comment.........

White House projections in February claimed the $789 billion in spending would "create or save 3.5 million jobs over the next two years" and that over 90 percent of those jobs would be in the private sector. We knew that was BS back then and it still is.

Obama is just buying votes.

Posted by Wild Thing at 05:40 AM | Comments (4)

December 30, 2009

"Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians" for 2009

Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington's "Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians" for 2009

1. Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT): This marks two years in a row for Senator Dodd, who made the 2008 "Ten Most Corrupt" list for his corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial, a scandal which still dogs him. In 2009, the scandals kept coming for the Connecticut Democrat. In 2009, Judicial Watch filed a Senate ethics complaint against Dodd for undervaluing a property he owns in Ireland on his Senate Financial Disclosure forms. Judicial Watch's complaint forced Dodd to amend the forms. However, press reports suggest the property to this day remains undervalued. Judicial Watch also alleges in the complaint that Dodd obtained a sweetheart deal for the property in exchange for his assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon (during the Clinton administration) and other favors for a long-time friend and business associate. The false financial disclosure forms were part of the cover-up. Dodd remains the head the Senate Banking Committee.

2. Senator John Ensign (R-NV): A number of scandals popped up in 2009 involving public officials who conducted illicit affairs, and then attempted to cover them up with hush payments and favors, an obvious abuse of power. The year's worst offender might just be Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign. Ensign admitted in June to an extramarital affair with the wife of one of his staff members, who then allegedly obtained special favors from the Nevada Republican in exchange for his silence. According to The New York Times: "The Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee are expected to conduct preliminary inquiries into whether Senator John Ensign violated federal law or ethics rules as part of an effort to conceal an affair with the wife of an aide..." The former staffer, Douglas Hampton, began to lobby Mr. Ensign's office immediately upon leaving his congressional job, despite the fact that he was subject to a one-year lobbying ban. Ensign seems to have ignored the law and allowed Hampton lobbying access to his office as a payment for his silence about the affair. (These are potentially criminal offenses.) It looks as if Ensign misused his public office (and taxpayer resources) to cover up his sexual shenanigans.

3. Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): Judicial Watch is investigating a $12 million TARP cash injection provided to the Boston-based OneUnited Bank at the urging of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank. As reported in the January 22, 2009, edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Treasury Department indicated it would only provide funds to healthy banks to jump-start lending. Not only was OneUnited Bank in massive financial turmoil, but it was also "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives' use." Rep. Frank admitted he spoke to a "federal regulator," and Treasury granted the funds. (The bank continues to flounder despite Frank's intervention for federal dollars.) Moreover, Judicial Watch uncovered documents in 2009 that showed that members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues, even as liberals led by Rep. Frank continued to block attempts to rein in the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs). For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated: "I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate. I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury." Frank received $42,350 in campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 1989 and 2008. Frank also engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae Executive while serving on the House Banking Committee, which has jurisdiction over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

4. Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner: In 2009, Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner admitted that he failed to pay $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes from 2001-2004 on his lucrative salary at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an organization with 185 member countries that oversees the global financial system. (Did we mention Geithner now runs the IRS?) It wasn't until President Obama tapped Geithner to head the Treasury Department that he paid back most of the money, although the IRS kindly waived the hefty penalties. In March 2009, Geithner also came under fire for his handling of the AIG bonus scandal, where the company used $165 million of its bailout funds to pay out executive bonuses, resulting in a massive public backlash. Of course as head of the New York Federal Reserve, Geithner helped craft the AIG deal in September 2008. However, when the AIG scandal broke, Geithner claimed he knew nothing of the bonuses until March 10, 2009. The timing is important. According to CNN: "Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28. That is ten days before Treasury staffers say they first learned 'full details' of the bonus plan, and three days before the [Obama] Administration launched a new $30 billion infusion of cash for AIG." Throw in another embarrassing disclosure in 2009 that Geithner employed "household help" ineligible to work in the United States, and it becomes clear why the Treasury Secretary has earned a spot on the "Ten Most Corrupt Politicians in Washington" list.

5. Attorney General Eric Holder: Tim Geithner can be sure he won't be hounded about his tax-dodging by his colleague Eric Holder, US Attorney General. Judicial Watch strongly opposed Holder because of his terrible ethics record, which includes: obstructing an FBI investigation of the theft of nuclear secrets from Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory; rejecting multiple requests for an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by then-Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton White House; undermining the criminal investigation of President Clinton by Kenneth Starr in the midst of the Lewinsky investigation; and planning the violent raid to seize then-six-year-old Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint in order to return him to Castro's Cuba. Moreover, there is his soft record on terrorism. Holder bypassed Justice Department procedures to push through Bill Clinton's scandalous presidential pardons and commutations, including for 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group that orchestrated approximately 120 bombings in the United States, killing at least six people and permanently maiming dozens of others, including law enforcement officers. His record in the current administration is no better. As he did during the Clinton administration, Holder continues to ignore serious incidents of corruption that could impact his political bosses at the White House. For example, Holder has refused to investigate charges that the Obama political machine traded VIP access to the White House in exchange for campaign contributions -- a scheme eerily similar to one hatched by Holder's former boss, Bill Clinton in the 1990s. The Holder Justice Department also came under fire for dropping a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. On Election Day 2008, Black Panthers dressed in paramilitary garb threatened voters as they approached polling stations. Holder has also failed to initiate a comprehensive Justice investigation of the notorious organization ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which is closely tied to President Obama. There were allegedly more than 400,000 fraudulent ACORN voter registrations in the 2008 campaign. And then there were the journalist videos catching ACORN Housing workers advising undercover reporters on how to evade tax, immigration, and child prostitution laws. Holder's controversial decisions on new rights for terrorists and his attacks on previous efforts to combat terrorism remind many of the fact that his former law firm has provided and continues to provide pro bono representation to terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Holder's politicization of the Justice Department makes one long for the days of Alberto Gonzales.

6. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)/ Senator Roland Burris (D-IL): One of the most serious scandals of 2009 involved a scheme by former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to sell President Obama's then-vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder. Two men caught smack dab in the middle of the scandal: Senator Roland Burris, who ultimately got the job, and Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, emissaries for Jesse Jackson Jr., named "Senate Candidate A" in the Blagojevich indictment, reportedly offered $1.5 million to Blagojevich during a fundraiser if he named Jackson Jr. to Obama's seat. Three days later federal authorities arrested Blagojevich. Burris, for his part, apparently lied about his contacts with Blagojevich, who was arrested in December 2008 for trying to sell Obama's Senate seat. According to Reuters: "Roland Burris came under fresh scrutiny... after disclosing he tried to raise money for the disgraced former Illinois governor who named him to the U.S. Senate seat once held by President Barack Obama... In the latest of those admissions, Burris said he looked into mounting a fundraiser for Rod Blagojevich -- later charged with trying to sell Obama's Senate seat -- at the same time he was expressing interest to the then-governor's aides about his desire to be appointed." Burris changed his story five times regarding his contacts with Blagojevich prior to the Illinois governor appointing him to the U.S. Senate. Three of those changing explanations came under oath.

7. President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. Consider just a few Obama administration "lowlights" from year one: Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's scheme to sell the President's former Senate seat to the highest bidder. (Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.) Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability. President Obama boldly proclaimed that "transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade "artists" to promote the Obama agenda. According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation. President Obama has installed a record number of "czars" in positions of power. Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president. And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions). Under the President's bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control -- through fiat and threats -- large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write: "The administration's central activity -- the political allocation of wealth and opportunity -- is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption." Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors -- this is Obama's "ethics" record -- and we haven't even gotten through the first year of his presidency.

8. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): At the heart of the corruption problem in Washington is a sense of entitlement. Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline. These documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, include internal Pentagon email correspondence detailing attempts by Pentagon staff to accommodate Pelosi's numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker's 11th hour cancellations and changes. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also came under fire in April 2009, when she claimed she was never briefed about the CIA's use of the waterboarding technique during terrorism investigations. The CIA produced a report documenting a briefing with Pelosi on September 4, 2002, that suggests otherwise. Judicial Watch also obtained documents, including a CIA Inspector General report, which further confirmed that Congress was fully briefed on the enhanced interrogation techniques. Aside from her own personal transgressions, Nancy Pelosi has ignored serious incidents of corruption within her own party, including many of the individuals on this list. (See Rangel, Murtha, Jesse Jackson, Jr., etc.)

9. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and the rest of the PMA Seven: Rep. John Murtha made headlines in 2009 for all the wrong reasons. The Pennsylvania congressman is under federal investigation for his corrupt relationship with the now-defunct defense lobbyist PMA Group. PMA, founded by a former Murtha associate, has been the congressman's largest campaign contributor. Since 2002, Murtha has raised $1.7 million from PMA and its clients. And what did PMA and its clients receive from Murtha in return for their generosity? Earmarks -- tens of millions of dollars in earmarks. In fact, even with all of the attention surrounding his alleged influence peddling, Murtha kept at it. Following an FBI raid of PMA's offices earlier in 2009, Murtha continued to seek congressional earmarks for PMA clients, while also hitting them up for campaign contributions. According to The Hill, in April, "Murtha reported receiving contributions from three former PMA clients for whom he requested earmarks in the pending appropriations bills." When it comes to the PMA scandal, Murtha is not alone. As many as six other Members of Congress are currently under scrutiny according to The Washington Post. They include: Peter J. Visclosky (D-IN.), James P. Moran Jr. (D-VA), Norm Dicks (D-WA.), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), C.W. Bill Young (R-FL.) and Todd Tiahrt (R-KS.). Of course rather than investigate this serious scandal, according to Roll Call House Democrats circled the wagons, "cobbling together a defense to offer political cover to their rank and file." The Washington Post also reported in 2009 that Murtha's nephew received $4 million in Defense Department no-bid contracts: "Newly obtained documents...show Robert Murtha mentioning his influential family connection as leverage in his business dealings and holding unusual power with the military."

10. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): Rangel, the man in charge of writing tax policy for the entire country, has yet to adequately explain how he could possibly "forget" to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned from his off-shore rental property. He also faces allegations that he improperly used his influence to maintain ownership of highly coveted rent-controlled apartments in Harlem, and misused his congressional office to fundraise for his private Rangel Center by preserving a tax loophole for an oil drilling company in exchange for funding. On top of all that, Rangel recently amended his financial disclosure reports, which doubled his reported wealth. (He somehow "forgot" about $1 million in assets.) And what did he do when the House Ethics Committee started looking into all of this? He apparently resorted to making "campaign contributions" to dig his way out of trouble. According to WCBS TV, a New York CBS affiliate: "The reigning member of Congress' top tax committee is apparently 'wrangling' other politicos to get him out of his own financial and tax troubles... Since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him." Charlie Rangel should not be allowed to remain in Congress, let alone serve as Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, and he knows it. That's why he felt the need to disburse campaign contributions to Ethics Committee members and other congressional colleagues.

Wild Thing's comment..........

This is a short list. There are 535 in congress, 45 Czars and hundreds in the Obama/Chicago gang.

1 Republican, 9 Rats. And frankly, it was stretching it to put Ensign on the list. I can easily think of another 10 Dems who are more corrupt than he is. But they wanted to make an effort to be fair and balanced, no doubt. Ensign is a mere pissant of corruption compared to his Nevada Senate colleague Harry Reid, or another one Chuck Schumer.

.... Thank you Jim for sending this to me.

Posted by Wild Thing at 04:45 AM | Comments (4)

December 18, 2009

Boehner Releases List of 222 Economists That Say Obama's Federal Spending Has Got To STOP!

Check out the latest web video from the Republican Study Committee and its Chairman Tom Price (R-GA) on President Obama’s job killing agenda. It asks a question Republicans have been asking all year long amidst the Democrats’ massive spending binge: Where are the jobs?

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) released a list of 222 economists who believe that getting federal spending under control is the only way to create jobs and return America to economic prosperity. Contrary to President Obama and his supporters, these economists believe that additional stimulus spending can only further America's economic woes.

The statement supported by 222 economists from across the country reads:

list of 222 here at gopleader.gov

The country’s economic future depends on Congress’ ability to rein in the growth of federal spending. Failing to restrict spending growth will further balloon the national debt, impede economic growth, and threaten the long-term economic health of our Nation. Controlling spending growth to reverse our dangerous debt accumulation can be done without endangering the near-term economic recovery, and will prove beneficial over the longer horizon.

The 2009 near-term “stimulus” has proven to be an inefficient spur to job creation and does not merit repeating. Any further policy efforts should be focused on opening borders to free trade, cutting burdensome regulations, and providing necessary tax relief to employers and

Theodore's World

The PC Free Zone Gazette is American first and Conservative second. It is never anti-American!

November 17, 2011

House Approves Concealed Firearm Permit Bill; Would Allow People to Carry Concealed Weapon Between States

August 11, 2011

Republican Picks For The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (Super Committee)

August 07, 2011

S&P Warns Of A Second Downgrade For USA

S&P Says It Favors Spending Cuts Over Tax Hikes To Fix Credit Rating ~ Are You Listening Obama????

August 04, 2011

Congressman McClintock on Fox Business Freedom Watch Speaks About The Budget Control Act of 2011

August 03, 2011

Debt Deal Could Cut Defense $900B Over Next Decade ~ Hater Of Our Military Obama Must Be Thrilled!

August 02, 2011

U.S. House Passes Debt Limit Agreement as Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Enters Chamber

August 01, 2011

Another Day At The Debt Ceiling Drama

July 20, 2011

House Approves 'Cut, Cap and Balance' Plan 234-190

June 01, 2011

House Sends Obama Message, Rejects His Debt Increase

May 09, 2011

Obama and Senate Seeks to Create Caesar There Must Be A NO Vote On S. 679

April 17, 2011

Senator Charles Grassley Has ‘damning’ Gunrunner Documents From His Investigation Into ATF's "Fast and Furious" Operation

April 16, 2011

16 Tons of American Debt As Obama Keeps Increasing Federal Debt

April 09, 2011

al-Qaeda's Man in the White House Dictator Obama ~ EPA Was Rebuffed and Obama's Baby Killing Machine Planned Parenthood was Sidetracked!

OBAMA's America! What America has Become Folks! Can't Even stand on your Property or keep a basketball hoop!

March 16, 2011

House of Representatives Passes 3 Week Spending Bill As 54 Conservative Republicans Vote No

America to have the highest corporate tax rate in April

January 09, 2011

U.S. House of Representatives Postpones All Legislative Business Next Week

January 07, 2011

Republicans Introduce Bill To Eliminate Presidential 'czars'

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Lamar Smith Issues First DOJ Oversight Letter

House Republican Introduces Bill to Block FCC’s ‘Internet Grab’

January 06, 2011

God Bless You Speaker Boehner

Harry Reid Says: The American People LOVE BIG Government ~ What A LIAR He Is!

December 22, 2010

START Treaty Clears Last Senate Hurdle Before Ratification

Look What Needs To Be Done Before Changes Take Effect Repealing DADT

Political Impact of New Census Numbers

December 21, 2010

Democratic FCC Regulators Throw Support Behind Net Neutrality Rules

December 20, 2010

In Sunday-evening Surprise, Senate Unanimously Passes Food Safety Bill

December 14, 2010

Obama's $858 Billion Pork Filled Tax Package

December 11, 2010

"A REPUBLIC MADAME, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT!"

December 01, 2010

Fantastic Rep. Steve King (R-IA) Speaks Out About The Pigford II Settlement

September 28, 2010

Obama Signs $30B small business Lending Bill BUT Small Business Says Tax Cuts Needed to Support Small Business

September 23, 2010

Diclose Act VOTE Is Today! Pro-Union bill, Card Check and Other Obama Destruction

September 22, 2010

Sen. Dick Durbin Vows to Keep Fighting for Passage of "The Dream Act"

Harry Reid and Blanche Lincoln Vote "NO" on Cloture for Defense Bill

September 19, 2010

Documentary Film ....OVERDOSE: The Next Financial Crisis

September 18, 2010

Los Angeles Has Used $111 Million in Stimulus Cash to Create a Mere 55 Jobs

September 06, 2010

South Carolina GOP Has FINALLY Had Enough and Censures Linidsey Graham

August 14, 2010

REAL or FAKE: Can you tell which of these government spending projects are real or fake?

Government Considers US Constitution "Terrorist Literature"

August 06, 2010

Portland Lemonade Stand Runs Into Health Inspectors, Needs $120 License to Operate

August 05, 2010

New Cigarette Law Snags Cartons For Troops Too

July 26, 2010

Guess what part of the Constitution goes next!??!!

July 23, 2010

Obama to Allow Tax Cuts for Wealthy to Expire