Obama's S.2433 Would Put
US Under UN Mandate
11-29-8
SENATE BILL S. 2433 THE GLOBAL POVERTY ACT
According to David Bossie, President of the group 'Citizens United for American Sovereignty', based out of Merrifield Virginia , website: http://www.citizensunited.org/
The above- mentioned Senate Bill (S. 2433) is a piece of legislation in the works that all Americans need to know about and know now!
This bill, sponsored by none other than Sen. Barack Obama, with the backing of Joe Biden on the Foreign Relations Committee, and liberal democrats in Congress, is nothing short of a massive giveaway of American wealth around the world, and a betrayal of the public trust, because, if passed, this bill would give over many aspects of our sovereignty to the United Nations.
The noble sounding name of this bill, 'The Global Poverty Act' is actually a Global Tax, payable to the United Nations, that will be required of all American taxpayers. If passed in the Senate, the House has already passed it, this bill would require the U.S. to increase our foreign aid by $65 BILLION per year, or $845 BILLION over the next 13 years! That's on top of the billions of dollars in foreign aid we already pay out!
In addition to the economic burdens this potential law would place on our precarious economy, the bill, if passed in the Senate, would also endanger our constitutionally protected rights and freedoms by obligating us to meet certain United Nations mandates.
According to Senator Obama, we should establish these United Nations' goals as benchmarks for U.S. spending. What are they?
The creation of a U.N. International Criminal Court having the power to try and convict American citizens and soldiers without any protection from the U.S. Constitution.
A standing United Nations Army forcing U.S. soldiers to serve under U.N. command.
A Gun Ban on all small arms and light weapons --which would repeal our Second Amendment right to bear arms.
The ratification of the ' Kyoto ' global warming treaty and numerous other anti-American measures.
Recently, the Senate Subcommittee on Foreign Relations (where Sen. Joe Biden sits) approved this plan by a voice vote without any discussion! Why all the secrecy? If Senators Obama and Biden are so proud of this legislation, then why don't they bring it out into the light of day and let the American people have a look at it instead of hiding it behind closed doors and sneaking it through Congress for late night votes.
It may be only a matter of time before this dangerous legislation reaches a floor vote in the full body of the Senate.
Please write or call, email your representatives, the White House, the media, or anyone you think will listen, and express your opinions regarding this Global Tax giveaway and betrayal of the American people at a time when our nation and our people are already heavily burdened with the threats to our freedoms and economic prosperity.
Please send this email to as many folks out there in your networks as you can.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s2433/text
Saturday, December 13, 2008
The D3 - Detroit 3 Automakers - Union Wages
WHAT AN EYE OPENER!!!
Subject: The D3 - Detroit 3 Automakers - Union Wages
-----
According to Forbes:
Labor cost per hour, wages and benefits for hourly workers.
Ford: $70.51 ($141,020 per year)
GM: $73.26 ($146,520 per year)
Chrysler: $75.86 ($151,720 per year)
Toyota, Honda, Nissan (in U.S.): $48.00 ($96,000 per year)
According to AAUP and IES, the average annual compensation for a college professor in 2006 was $92,973 (average salary nationally of $73,207 + 27% benefits).
Bottom Line: The average UAW worker with a high school degree earns 57.6% more compensation than the average university professor with a Ph.D., and 52.6% more than the average worker at Toyota, Honda or Nissan.
Many industry analysts say the Detroit Three, must be on par with Toyota and Honda to survive. This year's contract, they say, must be "transformational" in reducing pension and health care costs.
What would "transformational" mean? One way to think about "transformational" would mean that UAW workers, most with a high school diploma, would have to accept compensation equal to that of the average university professor with a PhD.
Then there's the "Job Bank"
When a D3 (Detroit 3 carmaker) lays an employee off, that employee continues to receive all benefits - medical, retirement, etc., etc., PLUS an hourly wage of $31/hour.
Here's a typical story....
Ken Pool is making good money. On weekdays, he shows up at 7 a.m. at Ford Motor Co.'s Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, signs in, and then starts working -- on a crossword puzzle. Pool hates the monotony, but the pay is good: more than $31 an hour, plus benefits.
"We just go in and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper," he says. "Otherwise, I just sit."
Pool is one of more than 12,000 American autoworkers who, instead of installing windshields or bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank set up by Detroit automakers as demanded by the United Auto Workers Union - UAW - as part of an extraordinary job security agreement.
Now the D3 wants Joe Taxpayer to pick up this tab in a $25 Billion bailout package - soon to be increased to $45 Billion if Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton have their way.
The "Big 3" want this money - not to build better autos. No. They want it to pay the tab for Medical and Retirement benefits for RETIRED auto workers. Not ONE PENNY would be used to make them more competitive, or to improve the quality of their cars.
We ALL have problems paying for our Medical Insurance - but the Democrat leaders in Congress now want us to pay the Medical Insurance premiums of folks who have RETIRED from Ford, GM and Chrysler.
Not a good deal for us.
How about Chapter 11 - and getting rid of these ridiculous union contracts?
=
Subject: The D3 - Detroit 3 Automakers - Union Wages
-----
According to Forbes:
Labor cost per hour, wages and benefits for hourly workers.
Ford: $70.51 ($141,020 per year)
GM: $73.26 ($146,520 per year)
Chrysler: $75.86 ($151,720 per year)
Toyota, Honda, Nissan (in U.S.): $48.00 ($96,000 per year)
According to AAUP and IES, the average annual compensation for a college professor in 2006 was $92,973 (average salary nationally of $73,207 + 27% benefits).
Bottom Line: The average UAW worker with a high school degree earns 57.6% more compensation than the average university professor with a Ph.D., and 52.6% more than the average worker at Toyota, Honda or Nissan.
Many industry analysts say the Detroit Three, must be on par with Toyota and Honda to survive. This year's contract, they say, must be "transformational" in reducing pension and health care costs.
What would "transformational" mean? One way to think about "transformational" would mean that UAW workers, most with a high school diploma, would have to accept compensation equal to that of the average university professor with a PhD.
Then there's the "Job Bank"
When a D3 (Detroit 3 carmaker) lays an employee off, that employee continues to receive all benefits - medical, retirement, etc., etc., PLUS an hourly wage of $31/hour.
Here's a typical story....
Ken Pool is making good money. On weekdays, he shows up at 7 a.m. at Ford Motor Co.'s Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, signs in, and then starts working -- on a crossword puzzle. Pool hates the monotony, but the pay is good: more than $31 an hour, plus benefits.
"We just go in and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper," he says. "Otherwise, I just sit."
Pool is one of more than 12,000 American autoworkers who, instead of installing windshields or bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank set up by Detroit automakers as demanded by the United Auto Workers Union - UAW - as part of an extraordinary job security agreement.
Now the D3 wants Joe Taxpayer to pick up this tab in a $25 Billion bailout package - soon to be increased to $45 Billion if Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton have their way.
The "Big 3" want this money - not to build better autos. No. They want it to pay the tab for Medical and Retirement benefits for RETIRED auto workers. Not ONE PENNY would be used to make them more competitive, or to improve the quality of their cars.
We ALL have problems paying for our Medical Insurance - but the Democrat leaders in Congress now want us to pay the Medical Insurance premiums of folks who have RETIRED from Ford, GM and Chrysler.
Not a good deal for us.
How about Chapter 11 - and getting rid of these ridiculous union contracts?
=
NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 15, No. 48
NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 15, No. 48 12/12/08
Ammo Ban And Registration Proposal Getting Fresh Look
Click here to take this week's poll.
Happy Holidays: Now dispose of all of your ammunition! Every last round! From now on, you will be able to buy only overpriced ammunition that will be registered to you in a government database.
Not yet--at least for now. A small company, Ammunition Accountability--which wants to help anti-gunners price and regulate the Second Amendment out of existence, profit at the expense of our rights, or both--has found radical anti-gun legislators in 18 states willing to introduce bills pushing such nonsense.
You Can't Make This Stuff Up! Anti-gun Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (D) was taken into custody this week on federal corruption charges. He has been accused of conspiring to sell or trade President-elect Barack Obama's senate seat, seeking "personal financial benefits." The evidence? U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald released a 76-page FBI affidavit detailing an investigation that includes court-authorized wiretaps that are alleged to contain conversations where Blagojevich discusses exchanging the Senate appointment he controls for:
· A salaried position with either a non-profit foundation or a labor union-affiliated organization;
· Placing his wife on paid corporate boards;
· Commitments from individuals to raise campaign funds for Blagojevich, and;
· A cabinet post or ambassadorship in the Obama Administration.
Important Information On Right-to-Carry In Our National Parks: As we announced last week, the Department of Interior has released their new regulation that will recognize Right-to-Carry in national parks in those states that allow Right-to-Carry. It is important to note, however, that the new regulations do not take effect until 30 days after their publication in the Federal Register.
The Second Amendment Book Bomb on Bill of Rights Day, December 15! Monday, December 15, marks America's Bill of Rights Day, the anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. To commemorate this event, the Second Amendment Book Bomb website has been created, a unique and powerful way to communicate the importance the Bill of Rights' Second Amendment plays in the protection of liberty. With your help, we can launch constitutional rights to the top of national book bestseller lists, making a loud and clear statement that Second Amendment rights are inalienable!
Got a New Rifle? Get a Top-Ranked Sight and Help NRA-ILA: AR-15s and similar rifles are flying off gun store shelves these days. If you're one of the buyers, here's your chance to put a top-of-the-line red dot sight on your new rifle - and at the same time, help defend all your guns against anti-gun groups and the Obama administration.
Here's how it works: Aimpoint, Inc. and MidwayUSA will donate $100 to the NRA Institute for Legislative Action for every Aimpoint CompM4 electronic red-dot sight package purchased by NRA members from MidwayUSA through the end of 2008.
This is a great opportunity to get an Aimpoint CompM4 at a special price and help NRA-ILA defend our firearms freedoms. The Aimpoint CompM4 is currently used by the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force as the M68 Close Combat Optic. It is also in service with the Navy and the Marine Corps.
Help Defend Your Gun Rights One Easy Click At A Time: We now have a revolutionary yet simple tool that will allow you to stay connected to NRA-ILA and raise valuable contributions to defend our Second Amendment rights without spending a dime!
It's the NRA-ILA Toolbar, and you can make a difference by downloading and using it.
STATE ROUNDUP (please click to see any updates on states not listed below.)
NEW JERSEY: "One-Gun-A-Month" Bill Heads to Senate Floor! On Monday, December 8, the New Jersey Law and Public Safety and Veterans' Affairs Committee passed S1774 by a 3-2 vote. This bill now moves to the Senate floor where it could be considered as early as Monday, December 15. Simply stated, S1774 would prohibit law-abiding citizens who have already undergone an extensive criminal background check from purchasing more than one handgun within a 30-day period. This bill places arbitrary limits on our Second Amendment rights and would set a dangerous precedent. If passed, this bill gives anti-gun extremists carte blanche to further hinder your right to purchase firearms. Next, it could be one rifle or shotgun per 30-day period, or even one handgun per six months or year. It is critical that this legislation be defeated. Please contact your State Senator TODAY and respectfully urge him or her to oppose this unwarranted and unjustified attack on our Second Amendment freedoms. You can find contact information for your State Senator by clicking here. Also, please contact State Senators Anthony Bucco (R-25) and Christopher Connors (R-9) to thank them for opposing S1774. Senator Bucco can be reached by phone at (973) 627-9700, and Senator Connors can be contacted at (609) 693-6700.
OREGON: Help to Allow Employees & Visitors to Transport and Store Lawfully-Owned Firearms in Motor Vehicles Parked on Certain State Properties! Send Comments in Today! Gun owners in Oregon are all too familiar with the never-ending assault on the state's firearms preemption law by state agencies, cities and counties, and local school districts. Section 166.170(1) of Oregon Revised Statutes clearly states: "Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly."
Recognizing this, Department of Administrative Services (DAS) -- the central administrative agency of Oregon government that rents, manages or operates a majority of state office buildings -- is accepting written comments and holding a public hearing on proposed rules to remedy conflicts between the state firearms preemption law and their current policies banning the possession of firearms on premises under their control. The amended rule would state that the possession of firearms on the grounds, parking lots or premises of any building under DAS control would be governed by federal and state laws. To view a copy of the proposed rules, please click here. Please submit written comments in favor of the proposed rule changes by Monday, December 22, 2008 to:
Rules Coordinator
Department of Administrative Services, Facilities Division
1225 Ferry Street SE U100
Salem, OR 97301-4082
Or by e-mail to the Rules Coordinator: yvonne.hanna@das.state.or.us
You may also provide oral or written comments in favor of the proposed rule changes at the public hearing set for Monday, December 22, 2008, at 10:00 a.m.
Location: Department of Administrative Services, Facilities Division
1225 Ferry Street SE 2nd Floor
Salem, OR 97301
Mt. Ashland Conference Room
TEXAS: Pro-Gun Bill Introduced in the Lone Star State! The pre-filing of bills for the 2009 legislative session has begun. State Representative Dennis Bonnen (R-Angleton) has introduced House Bill 267, which would allow Texans to purchase rifles and shotgun in non-contiguous states. Currently, federal law allows the interstate sales of such firearms, but a conflicting Texas law only allows residents to buy long guns in the neighboring states of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. This state law has prevented the FBI and BATFE from approving sales of rifles and shotguns in 45 other states to Texas residents. Please contact your state lawmakers and respectfully urge them to support HB 267 to bring Texas law into line with federal law. Contact information for returning State Senators and Representatives can be found at http://www.house.state.tx.us.
VIRGINIA: Update on Virginia Crime Commission Hearing On Tuesday, December 9, the Virginia Crime Commission held a hearing on possible legislation for the 2009 session. The Crime Commission's mission was to analyze the difference between Federal and State law regarding the definition of a dealer and determine if Virginia may possibly regulate the sale of firearms by private individuals. The Commission ruled that no recommendations will be voted upon, but it has set a meeting date of Tuesday, January 13, for a vote on legislative proposals. Please continue checking your email and www.NRAILA.org for any updates on this matter.
Right-to-Carry Permit Process Streamlined in Spotsylvania County! Also on Tuesday, December 9, the Spotsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to remove the fingerprinting stage of requirements to obtain a Right-to-Carry permit. The removal of this clause will not only make things easier for applicants, but it will also ease the burden on the County Sheriff due to the dramatic spike in permit applications this year. Thank you to all of the NRA members who answered the call and either contacted the Board of Supervisors or attended the hearing. Without you, this victory would not have been possible!
WASHINGTON: Hearing to be Held on Monday, December 15 Regarding Seattle Mayor's Illegal Anti-Gun Tirade! As we have reported, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels--a member of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's anti-gun gang, Mayors Against Illegal Guns--is taking a misguided approach to curbing crime in his city by violating state law. A public hearing will be held on Monday, December 15 to discuss the issue. The hearing will be held at 5:30 p.m. in the Bertha Knight Landes Room in the Seattle City Hall located at 600 4th Avenue in Seattle. Mayor Nickels is seeking the prohibition of firearms at Seattle Center, parks, community centers, and city-owned buildings. This ban, which includes Right-to-Carry permit holders, does not require review by the City Council and directs that a plan be drawn-up in 30 days to establish the prohibition. Mayor Nickels' crusade is a clear violation of Washington State's preemption statutes that dictate that only the State Legislature can enact laws pertaining to firearms. Because of preemption, the city has no arrest power or authority to fine people under Mayor Nickel's outlandish order. The city may, however, attempt to charge any violators with trespassing. It is important that NRA members, Right-to-Carry permit holders, firearm owners, and anyone interested in the rule of law to respectfully make their voice heard against this Draconian attack on our Second Amendment freedoms. Please attend Monday's hearing to voice and show your opposition to this illegal and unwarranted attack on our Second Amendment freedoms. If you are unable to attend, please contact Mayor Nickels to respectfully voice your opposition. The Mayor can be reached by phone at (206) 684-4000 or via email by clicking here
WISCONSIN: Please Attend the Wisconsin Hunters Rights Coalition's Second Annual HRC Summit! You are cordially invited to the Wisconsin Hunters Rights Coalition's Second Annual Summit on Saturday, January 10, 2009. Come out and learn about vital tools to help support Wisconsin's proud hunting tradition. Attendees will set upcoming legislative agendas, learn to effectively influence the outcome of legislation, get the most up-to-date status of issues, and more. Activities will begin at 10:00 a.m., and admittance is $10 (for lunch). The Summit will be held at the Holiday Inn Stevens Point Convention Center, located at 1001 Amber Avenue, in Stevens Point. Please RSVP by Friday, January 2, 2009 by calling (608) 819-0150 or e-mailing info@thewelchgroup.org. We encourage all members in Wisconsin to attend this special event to further educate themselves and support their hunter's rights.
WYOMING: BLM Begins New Management Plan for Public Lands in North-Central Wyoming The Bureau of Land Management has begun the process of revising a 1985 plan that directs the management of nearly 800,000 acres of public land in Campbell, Johnson, and Sheridan counties. These lands are adjacent to the Bighorn National Forest. An integral part of developing the new plan is public involvement that includes hunters and recreational shooters who want to secure their future on these lands. For this first phase of the planning process, the agency is accepting public comments until Monday, January 5, 2009. You may e-mail comments to BRMP_Rev_WYMail@blm.gov ,or send them by U.S. Mail to: 1425 Fort Street, Buffalo, WY 82834. For more information, you may contact Linda Slone, the Project Manager, at 307-261-7520 or visit the planning website at: http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/programs/Planning/rmps/buffalo.html. If continued hunting and recreational shooting opportunities are important to you on these public lands, it is imperative that you become involved in the planning process!
www.NRAILA.org
Write Your Representative
Write The Media
Get Involved Locally
Register To Vote
Contribute
NRA-ILA call 800-392-8683.
Address: 11250 Waples Mill Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Ammo Ban And Registration Proposal Getting Fresh Look
Click here to take this week's poll.
Happy Holidays: Now dispose of all of your ammunition! Every last round! From now on, you will be able to buy only overpriced ammunition that will be registered to you in a government database.
Not yet--at least for now. A small company, Ammunition Accountability--which wants to help anti-gunners price and regulate the Second Amendment out of existence, profit at the expense of our rights, or both--has found radical anti-gun legislators in 18 states willing to introduce bills pushing such nonsense.
You Can't Make This Stuff Up! Anti-gun Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (D) was taken into custody this week on federal corruption charges. He has been accused of conspiring to sell or trade President-elect Barack Obama's senate seat, seeking "personal financial benefits." The evidence? U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald released a 76-page FBI affidavit detailing an investigation that includes court-authorized wiretaps that are alleged to contain conversations where Blagojevich discusses exchanging the Senate appointment he controls for:
· A salaried position with either a non-profit foundation or a labor union-affiliated organization;
· Placing his wife on paid corporate boards;
· Commitments from individuals to raise campaign funds for Blagojevich, and;
· A cabinet post or ambassadorship in the Obama Administration.
Important Information On Right-to-Carry In Our National Parks: As we announced last week, the Department of Interior has released their new regulation that will recognize Right-to-Carry in national parks in those states that allow Right-to-Carry. It is important to note, however, that the new regulations do not take effect until 30 days after their publication in the Federal Register.
The Second Amendment Book Bomb on Bill of Rights Day, December 15! Monday, December 15, marks America's Bill of Rights Day, the anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. To commemorate this event, the Second Amendment Book Bomb website has been created, a unique and powerful way to communicate the importance the Bill of Rights' Second Amendment plays in the protection of liberty. With your help, we can launch constitutional rights to the top of national book bestseller lists, making a loud and clear statement that Second Amendment rights are inalienable!
Got a New Rifle? Get a Top-Ranked Sight and Help NRA-ILA: AR-15s and similar rifles are flying off gun store shelves these days. If you're one of the buyers, here's your chance to put a top-of-the-line red dot sight on your new rifle - and at the same time, help defend all your guns against anti-gun groups and the Obama administration.
Here's how it works: Aimpoint, Inc. and MidwayUSA will donate $100 to the NRA Institute for Legislative Action for every Aimpoint CompM4 electronic red-dot sight package purchased by NRA members from MidwayUSA through the end of 2008.
This is a great opportunity to get an Aimpoint CompM4 at a special price and help NRA-ILA defend our firearms freedoms. The Aimpoint CompM4 is currently used by the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force as the M68 Close Combat Optic. It is also in service with the Navy and the Marine Corps.
Help Defend Your Gun Rights One Easy Click At A Time: We now have a revolutionary yet simple tool that will allow you to stay connected to NRA-ILA and raise valuable contributions to defend our Second Amendment rights without spending a dime!
It's the NRA-ILA Toolbar, and you can make a difference by downloading and using it.
STATE ROUNDUP (please click to see any updates on states not listed below.)
NEW JERSEY: "One-Gun-A-Month" Bill Heads to Senate Floor! On Monday, December 8, the New Jersey Law and Public Safety and Veterans' Affairs Committee passed S1774 by a 3-2 vote. This bill now moves to the Senate floor where it could be considered as early as Monday, December 15. Simply stated, S1774 would prohibit law-abiding citizens who have already undergone an extensive criminal background check from purchasing more than one handgun within a 30-day period. This bill places arbitrary limits on our Second Amendment rights and would set a dangerous precedent. If passed, this bill gives anti-gun extremists carte blanche to further hinder your right to purchase firearms. Next, it could be one rifle or shotgun per 30-day period, or even one handgun per six months or year. It is critical that this legislation be defeated. Please contact your State Senator TODAY and respectfully urge him or her to oppose this unwarranted and unjustified attack on our Second Amendment freedoms. You can find contact information for your State Senator by clicking here. Also, please contact State Senators Anthony Bucco (R-25) and Christopher Connors (R-9) to thank them for opposing S1774. Senator Bucco can be reached by phone at (973) 627-9700, and Senator Connors can be contacted at (609) 693-6700.
OREGON: Help to Allow Employees & Visitors to Transport and Store Lawfully-Owned Firearms in Motor Vehicles Parked on Certain State Properties! Send Comments in Today! Gun owners in Oregon are all too familiar with the never-ending assault on the state's firearms preemption law by state agencies, cities and counties, and local school districts. Section 166.170(1) of Oregon Revised Statutes clearly states: "Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly."
Recognizing this, Department of Administrative Services (DAS) -- the central administrative agency of Oregon government that rents, manages or operates a majority of state office buildings -- is accepting written comments and holding a public hearing on proposed rules to remedy conflicts between the state firearms preemption law and their current policies banning the possession of firearms on premises under their control. The amended rule would state that the possession of firearms on the grounds, parking lots or premises of any building under DAS control would be governed by federal and state laws. To view a copy of the proposed rules, please click here. Please submit written comments in favor of the proposed rule changes by Monday, December 22, 2008 to:
Rules Coordinator
Department of Administrative Services, Facilities Division
1225 Ferry Street SE U100
Salem, OR 97301-4082
Or by e-mail to the Rules Coordinator: yvonne.hanna@das.state.or.us
You may also provide oral or written comments in favor of the proposed rule changes at the public hearing set for Monday, December 22, 2008, at 10:00 a.m.
Location: Department of Administrative Services, Facilities Division
1225 Ferry Street SE 2nd Floor
Salem, OR 97301
Mt. Ashland Conference Room
TEXAS: Pro-Gun Bill Introduced in the Lone Star State! The pre-filing of bills for the 2009 legislative session has begun. State Representative Dennis Bonnen (R-Angleton) has introduced House Bill 267, which would allow Texans to purchase rifles and shotgun in non-contiguous states. Currently, federal law allows the interstate sales of such firearms, but a conflicting Texas law only allows residents to buy long guns in the neighboring states of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. This state law has prevented the FBI and BATFE from approving sales of rifles and shotguns in 45 other states to Texas residents. Please contact your state lawmakers and respectfully urge them to support HB 267 to bring Texas law into line with federal law. Contact information for returning State Senators and Representatives can be found at http://www.house.state.tx.us.
VIRGINIA: Update on Virginia Crime Commission Hearing On Tuesday, December 9, the Virginia Crime Commission held a hearing on possible legislation for the 2009 session. The Crime Commission's mission was to analyze the difference between Federal and State law regarding the definition of a dealer and determine if Virginia may possibly regulate the sale of firearms by private individuals. The Commission ruled that no recommendations will be voted upon, but it has set a meeting date of Tuesday, January 13, for a vote on legislative proposals. Please continue checking your email and www.NRAILA.org for any updates on this matter.
Right-to-Carry Permit Process Streamlined in Spotsylvania County! Also on Tuesday, December 9, the Spotsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to remove the fingerprinting stage of requirements to obtain a Right-to-Carry permit. The removal of this clause will not only make things easier for applicants, but it will also ease the burden on the County Sheriff due to the dramatic spike in permit applications this year. Thank you to all of the NRA members who answered the call and either contacted the Board of Supervisors or attended the hearing. Without you, this victory would not have been possible!
WASHINGTON: Hearing to be Held on Monday, December 15 Regarding Seattle Mayor's Illegal Anti-Gun Tirade! As we have reported, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels--a member of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's anti-gun gang, Mayors Against Illegal Guns--is taking a misguided approach to curbing crime in his city by violating state law. A public hearing will be held on Monday, December 15 to discuss the issue. The hearing will be held at 5:30 p.m. in the Bertha Knight Landes Room in the Seattle City Hall located at 600 4th Avenue in Seattle. Mayor Nickels is seeking the prohibition of firearms at Seattle Center, parks, community centers, and city-owned buildings. This ban, which includes Right-to-Carry permit holders, does not require review by the City Council and directs that a plan be drawn-up in 30 days to establish the prohibition. Mayor Nickels' crusade is a clear violation of Washington State's preemption statutes that dictate that only the State Legislature can enact laws pertaining to firearms. Because of preemption, the city has no arrest power or authority to fine people under Mayor Nickel's outlandish order. The city may, however, attempt to charge any violators with trespassing. It is important that NRA members, Right-to-Carry permit holders, firearm owners, and anyone interested in the rule of law to respectfully make their voice heard against this Draconian attack on our Second Amendment freedoms. Please attend Monday's hearing to voice and show your opposition to this illegal and unwarranted attack on our Second Amendment freedoms. If you are unable to attend, please contact Mayor Nickels to respectfully voice your opposition. The Mayor can be reached by phone at (206) 684-4000 or via email by clicking here
WISCONSIN: Please Attend the Wisconsin Hunters Rights Coalition's Second Annual HRC Summit! You are cordially invited to the Wisconsin Hunters Rights Coalition's Second Annual Summit on Saturday, January 10, 2009. Come out and learn about vital tools to help support Wisconsin's proud hunting tradition. Attendees will set upcoming legislative agendas, learn to effectively influence the outcome of legislation, get the most up-to-date status of issues, and more. Activities will begin at 10:00 a.m., and admittance is $10 (for lunch). The Summit will be held at the Holiday Inn Stevens Point Convention Center, located at 1001 Amber Avenue, in Stevens Point. Please RSVP by Friday, January 2, 2009 by calling (608) 819-0150 or e-mailing info@thewelchgroup.org. We encourage all members in Wisconsin to attend this special event to further educate themselves and support their hunter's rights.
WYOMING: BLM Begins New Management Plan for Public Lands in North-Central Wyoming The Bureau of Land Management has begun the process of revising a 1985 plan that directs the management of nearly 800,000 acres of public land in Campbell, Johnson, and Sheridan counties. These lands are adjacent to the Bighorn National Forest. An integral part of developing the new plan is public involvement that includes hunters and recreational shooters who want to secure their future on these lands. For this first phase of the planning process, the agency is accepting public comments until Monday, January 5, 2009. You may e-mail comments to BRMP_Rev_WYMail@blm.gov ,or send them by U.S. Mail to: 1425 Fort Street, Buffalo, WY 82834. For more information, you may contact Linda Slone, the Project Manager, at 307-261-7520 or visit the planning website at: http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/programs/Planning/rmps/buffalo.html. If continued hunting and recreational shooting opportunities are important to you on these public lands, it is imperative that you become involved in the planning process!
www.NRAILA.org
Write Your Representative
Write The Media
Get Involved Locally
Register To Vote
Contribute
NRA-ILA call 800-392-8683.
Address: 11250 Waples Mill Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030
HOW LONG DO WE HAVE?
thank you so much, Alice. this is ab excellent read.
Subject: Fwd: HOW LONG DO WE HAVE?
[In 1831 de Tocqueville visited America and said the same thing. ]
[The data at the bottom are Well Worth the long-read! ]
This is the most interesting thing I've read in a long t im e. The sad thing
about it, you can see it coming.
I have always heard about this democracy countdown. It is interesting to see
it in print. God help us, not that we deserve it.
How Long Do We Have?
About the t im e our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution
in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000
years earlier:
'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it s im ply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government.'
'A democracy will continue to exist up until the t im e that voters discover
they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'
'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who
promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every
democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always
followed by a dictatorship.'
'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of
history, has been about 200 years'
'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the
following sequence:
1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. from dependence back into bondage'
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul ,
Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential
election:
Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143
million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2
Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won
was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...' Olson
believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy'
phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent
of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental
dependency' phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million cr im inal
invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in
fewer than five years.
If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message. If you
are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at
stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
Thanks for reading.
Please pass this along.
Subject: Fwd: HOW LONG DO WE HAVE?
[In 1831 de Tocqueville visited America and said the same thing. ]
[The data at the bottom are Well Worth the long-read! ]
This is the most interesting thing I've read in a long t im e. The sad thing
about it, you can see it coming.
I have always heard about this democracy countdown. It is interesting to see
it in print. God help us, not that we deserve it.
How Long Do We Have?
About the t im e our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution
in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000
years earlier:
'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it s im ply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government.'
'A democracy will continue to exist up until the t im e that voters discover
they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'
'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who
promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every
democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always
followed by a dictatorship.'
'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of
history, has been about 200 years'
'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the
following sequence:
1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. from dependence back into bondage'
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul ,
Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential
election:
Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143
million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2
Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won
was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...' Olson
believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy'
phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent
of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental
dependency' phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million cr im inal
invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in
fewer than five years.
If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message. If you
are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at
stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
Thanks for reading.
Please pass this along.
Friday, December 12, 2008
The Era of White Guilt is over.
By Tom Adkins
Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I'm virtually euphoric. Don't get me wrong. I'm not thrilled with America 's flirtation with neo socialism. But there is a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barak Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America : The Era of White Guilt is over.
This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn't give a fluff about skin color, and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barak Obama their leader. Therefore, as of Nov 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.
For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barak Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.
So today, I'm feeling a little "uppity," if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO. And it's time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright's "God Damn America ," Al Sharpton's Church of Perpetual Victimization , or Jesse Jackson's rainbow racism. Cornell West? You're a fraud. Go home. All those "black studies" programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And I want that on the final.
Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I'm waiting.
Gangsta rappers? Start praising America . Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please…no more ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah…pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid.
To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America ? I'm still waiting for the first black French President.
And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I've always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You're poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watchin' butt on the couch and complain "Da Man is keepin' me down," allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses.
No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone's great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to, and personally revile.
It's time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful…don't trip on streaking. There ya go, don't be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. It's filthy.
In fact, Obama's ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, Like a delicious O'Henry tale, Obama's spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it's own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama's election has validated American conservatism!
So, listen carefully…Wham!!!
That's the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.
However, despite my glee, there's apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn't that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it's time to start spreading the guilt around.
Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I'm virtually euphoric. Don't get me wrong. I'm not thrilled with America 's flirtation with neo socialism. But there is a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barak Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America : The Era of White Guilt is over.
This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn't give a fluff about skin color, and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barak Obama their leader. Therefore, as of Nov 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.
For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barak Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.
So today, I'm feeling a little "uppity," if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO. And it's time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright's "God Damn America ," Al Sharpton's Church of Perpetual Victimization , or Jesse Jackson's rainbow racism. Cornell West? You're a fraud. Go home. All those "black studies" programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And I want that on the final.
Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I'm waiting.
Gangsta rappers? Start praising America . Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please…no more ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah…pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid.
To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America ? I'm still waiting for the first black French President.
And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I've always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You're poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watchin' butt on the couch and complain "Da Man is keepin' me down," allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses.
No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone's great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to, and personally revile.
It's time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful…don't trip on streaking. There ya go, don't be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. It's filthy.
In fact, Obama's ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, Like a delicious O'Henry tale, Obama's spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it's own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama's election has validated American conservatism!
So, listen carefully…Wham!!!
That's the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.
However, despite my glee, there's apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn't that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it's time to start spreading the guilt around.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Obama Should Not Fire Patrick Fitzgerald
Obama Should Not Fire Patrick Fitzgerald
Thursday, December 11, 2008 10:32 AM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
When Bill Clinton took office in January 1993, he was hearing the foot steps of Little Rock U.S. Attorney Charles Banks, who was hot on his heels as he probed charges of corruption that swirled around the Whitewater land deal.
President Clinton decided, in one of his first acts, to fire all 93 U.S. attorneys — claiming he wanted a clean slate.
Many insiders suspected that the other 92 bodies were a cover for firing Banks and replacing him with Paula Casey, a Clinton ally.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's indictment of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich raises a similar question as President-elect Barack Obama prepares to take office: Will the new president fire Fitzgerald?
In view of the often-close relationship between Blagojevich, Obama, and other key members of the incoming administration, it would be a travesty were Fitzgerald's head to roll now:
Fitzgerald has already indicted and convicted Antoin Rezko, Obama's friend and key financial backer, who may have arranged for the then-state-senator to acquire his home and adjoining property on advantageous terms.
Obama and incoming Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel were among an intimate circle of Blagojevich advisers when Blagojevich first ran for governor in 2002. Emanuel says that he, Obama, and others "participated in a small group that met weekly when Rod was running for governor. We basically laid out the general election, Barack and I and these two."
Obama adviser and media guru David Axelrod worked for Blagojevich in his races for Congress before he ran for governor, although Axelrod (a consultant of uncommon integrity) refused to work for Blagojevich when he ran for governor.
Even though Fitzgerald had already made it clear that he was investigating the governor, following up "very serious allegations of endemic hiring fraud" and noted that he had "a number of credible witnesses," Obama vigorously backed Blagojevich for re-election in 2006.
At the Illinois State Fair that August, ABC's Jake Tapper reported that Obama told the crowd, "We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois."
Fitzgerald has clearly signaled that his probe doesn't involve Obama, but who knows if it might lead to other Illinois Democrats in the new president's coterie of aides?
If Fitzgerald stays on the job, we can be sure the investigation will be pursued honestly and thoroughly. His Inspector Javert-like pursuit of the Valerie Plame scandal, aimed at the heart of the Bush administration, should be more than enough proof of his nonpolitical credentials.
Obama shouldn't hesitate to replace Fitzgerald once his work is done. But if he removes the Illinois U.S. attorney right off the bat, we'll be left wondering if he did so to cover something up.
Join Dick Morris on a Special Cruise! Newsmax will be hosting its 10th Anniversary Cruise in June of 2009 and you are invited! Join Newsmax writers Dick Morris, Ronald Kessler, Christopher Ruddy, Dr. Russell Blaylock, Dr. David Brownstein, and many others on an incredible cruise of the Mediterranean. For full info — Click Here Now.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 11, 2008 10:32 AM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
When Bill Clinton took office in January 1993, he was hearing the foot steps of Little Rock U.S. Attorney Charles Banks, who was hot on his heels as he probed charges of corruption that swirled around the Whitewater land deal.
President Clinton decided, in one of his first acts, to fire all 93 U.S. attorneys — claiming he wanted a clean slate.
Many insiders suspected that the other 92 bodies were a cover for firing Banks and replacing him with Paula Casey, a Clinton ally.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's indictment of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich raises a similar question as President-elect Barack Obama prepares to take office: Will the new president fire Fitzgerald?
In view of the often-close relationship between Blagojevich, Obama, and other key members of the incoming administration, it would be a travesty were Fitzgerald's head to roll now:
Fitzgerald has already indicted and convicted Antoin Rezko, Obama's friend and key financial backer, who may have arranged for the then-state-senator to acquire his home and adjoining property on advantageous terms.
Obama and incoming Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel were among an intimate circle of Blagojevich advisers when Blagojevich first ran for governor in 2002. Emanuel says that he, Obama, and others "participated in a small group that met weekly when Rod was running for governor. We basically laid out the general election, Barack and I and these two."
Obama adviser and media guru David Axelrod worked for Blagojevich in his races for Congress before he ran for governor, although Axelrod (a consultant of uncommon integrity) refused to work for Blagojevich when he ran for governor.
Even though Fitzgerald had already made it clear that he was investigating the governor, following up "very serious allegations of endemic hiring fraud" and noted that he had "a number of credible witnesses," Obama vigorously backed Blagojevich for re-election in 2006.
At the Illinois State Fair that August, ABC's Jake Tapper reported that Obama told the crowd, "We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois."
Fitzgerald has clearly signaled that his probe doesn't involve Obama, but who knows if it might lead to other Illinois Democrats in the new president's coterie of aides?
If Fitzgerald stays on the job, we can be sure the investigation will be pursued honestly and thoroughly. His Inspector Javert-like pursuit of the Valerie Plame scandal, aimed at the heart of the Bush administration, should be more than enough proof of his nonpolitical credentials.
Obama shouldn't hesitate to replace Fitzgerald once his work is done. But if he removes the Illinois U.S. attorney right off the bat, we'll be left wondering if he did so to cover something up.
Join Dick Morris on a Special Cruise! Newsmax will be hosting its 10th Anniversary Cruise in June of 2009 and you are invited! Join Newsmax writers Dick Morris, Ronald Kessler, Christopher Ruddy, Dr. Russell Blaylock, Dr. David Brownstein, and many others on an incredible cruise of the Mediterranean. For full info — Click Here Now.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Absolutely Corrupt
Absolutely Corrupt
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, December 09, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Leadership: The media had a frenzy Tuesday with the "stunning" news that Illinois Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich had been arrested on corruption charges. The only thing stunning is it doesn't happen more often.
Blagojevich and his top aide, John Harris, were both arrested early Tuesday by the FBI on federal corruption charges. Among the more serious allegations is that Blagojevich tried to put Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat up for sale.
Blagojevich was reportedly caught on a wiretap explaining that a Senate seat "is a f***ing valuable thing, you just don't give it away for nothing."
The Illinois governor also reportedly tried to get the Chicago Tribune editorial board to tone down its criticism of him in exchange for state help with selling Wrigley Field, which is owned by the newspaper's parent, Tribune Co.
The mind boggles at such cupidity and outright criminality. Yet this wasn't the only news having to do with political corruption in recent days and weeks. Indeed, our political system is brimming with scandals, large and small.
Take last week, when a virtually unknown GOP challenger, Anh Cao, upset Louisiana Democratic Rep. William Jefferson in an election. Jefferson held a safe, gerrymandered district. Yet his constituents threw him out. Why? He'd been accused of accepting bribes, and federal agents later found thousands of dollars of suspicious cash stashed in his home freezer.
Fact is, America's political culture is in deep crisis. Hardly a day goes by without hearing about someone at the state or local level implicated in some sort of corrupt behavior. Literally dozens of our nation's 535 congressmen and women have been accused or found guilty of misconduct or misdeeds of various stripes.
Examples abound: Rep. Charles Rangel (taxes). Sen. Larry Craig ("wide stance" in a public bathroom). Sen. Chris Dodd (sweetheart mortgage deal, contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). Rep. Alcee Hastings (impeached as a judge for corruption and perjury and since elected to the House in Florida).
And these just scratch the surface.
What does all this have to do with Blagojevich? Plenty. Blagojevich's case goes far beyond Illinois borders in its implications for the American political system.
For years, Illinois' state legislature has been controlled by one party, the Democrats — just as Washington will be in January. As Lord Acton said, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We hope one-party control of Washington won't bring a new wave of political crimes and corruption.
President-elect Obama emerged from the rough-and-tumble Illinois and Chicago political milieus. He knew Blagojevich well. He also knew convicted felon and political fixer Tony Rezko. So he no doubt knows too how corrosive this kind of malfeasance can be to a democratic system such as ours.
We hope he'll set an example and show zero tolerance for this kind of corruption in his new administration. Because people are fallible, corruption is perhaps inevitable. But that's no reason to tolerate it.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, December 09, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Leadership: The media had a frenzy Tuesday with the "stunning" news that Illinois Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich had been arrested on corruption charges. The only thing stunning is it doesn't happen more often.
Blagojevich and his top aide, John Harris, were both arrested early Tuesday by the FBI on federal corruption charges. Among the more serious allegations is that Blagojevich tried to put Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat up for sale.
Blagojevich was reportedly caught on a wiretap explaining that a Senate seat "is a f***ing valuable thing, you just don't give it away for nothing."
The Illinois governor also reportedly tried to get the Chicago Tribune editorial board to tone down its criticism of him in exchange for state help with selling Wrigley Field, which is owned by the newspaper's parent, Tribune Co.
The mind boggles at such cupidity and outright criminality. Yet this wasn't the only news having to do with political corruption in recent days and weeks. Indeed, our political system is brimming with scandals, large and small.
Take last week, when a virtually unknown GOP challenger, Anh Cao, upset Louisiana Democratic Rep. William Jefferson in an election. Jefferson held a safe, gerrymandered district. Yet his constituents threw him out. Why? He'd been accused of accepting bribes, and federal agents later found thousands of dollars of suspicious cash stashed in his home freezer.
Fact is, America's political culture is in deep crisis. Hardly a day goes by without hearing about someone at the state or local level implicated in some sort of corrupt behavior. Literally dozens of our nation's 535 congressmen and women have been accused or found guilty of misconduct or misdeeds of various stripes.
Examples abound: Rep. Charles Rangel (taxes). Sen. Larry Craig ("wide stance" in a public bathroom). Sen. Chris Dodd (sweetheart mortgage deal, contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). Rep. Alcee Hastings (impeached as a judge for corruption and perjury and since elected to the House in Florida).
And these just scratch the surface.
What does all this have to do with Blagojevich? Plenty. Blagojevich's case goes far beyond Illinois borders in its implications for the American political system.
For years, Illinois' state legislature has been controlled by one party, the Democrats — just as Washington will be in January. As Lord Acton said, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We hope one-party control of Washington won't bring a new wave of political crimes and corruption.
President-elect Obama emerged from the rough-and-tumble Illinois and Chicago political milieus. He knew Blagojevich well. He also knew convicted felon and political fixer Tony Rezko. So he no doubt knows too how corrosive this kind of malfeasance can be to a democratic system such as ours.
We hope he'll set an example and show zero tolerance for this kind of corruption in his new administration. Because people are fallible, corruption is perhaps inevitable. But that's no reason to tolerate it.
Email To Friend |
Military Losses, 1980-2007
Military Losses, 1980-2007
The annual fatalities, by any cause, of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006:
1980 2,392 (Carter)
1981 2,380 (Reagan)
1984 1,999 (Reagan)
1988 1,819 (Reagan)
1989 1,636 (George H W)
1990 1,508 (George H W)
1991 1,787 (George H W)
1992 1,293 (George H W)
1993 1,213 (Clinton)
1994 1,075 (Clinton)
1995 2,465 (Clinton)
1996 2,318 (Clinton)
1997 817 (Clinton)
1998 2,252 (Clinton)
1999 1,984 (Clinton)
2000 1,983 (Clinton)
2001 890 (George W)
2002 1,007 (George W)
2003 1,410 (George W)
2004 1,887 (George W)
2005 919 (George W)
2006 920 (George W)
2007 899 (George W)
GHW Bush Years (1989-1992): 6,224 deaths
Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,107 deaths
George W years (2001-2007): 7,932 deaths
These figures indicate the loss from the two latest Middle East conflicts are less than the loss of military personnel during Clinton's presidency when America wasn't even involved in a war--unless you include Bosnia and Mogadishu, Somalia.
Many members of our media and politicians pick and choose the information on which they report.
They present only those "facts" that support their agenda.
The latest census of Americans shows the following distribution of citizens by race:
European descent 69.12 percent
Hispanic 12.50 percent
Black 12.30 percent
Asian 3.70 percent
Native American 1.00 percent
Other 2.60 percent
Members of the media lead us to believe the military death ratio is off balance compared to the distribution by race in America.
Here are the fatalities by race over the past three years in Iraq.
European descent 74.31 percent
Hispanic 10.74 percent
Black 9.67 percent
Asian 1.81 percent
Native American 1.09 percent
Other 0.33 percent
These statistics came from the Congressional Research Service and may be confirmed at: www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
"History does not entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid."
--- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The annual fatalities, by any cause, of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006:
1980 2,392 (Carter)
1981 2,380 (Reagan)
1984 1,999 (Reagan)
1988 1,819 (Reagan)
1989 1,636 (George H W)
1990 1,508 (George H W)
1991 1,787 (George H W)
1992 1,293 (George H W)
1993 1,213 (Clinton)
1994 1,075 (Clinton)
1995 2,465 (Clinton)
1996 2,318 (Clinton)
1997 817 (Clinton)
1998 2,252 (Clinton)
1999 1,984 (Clinton)
2000 1,983 (Clinton)
2001 890 (George W)
2002 1,007 (George W)
2003 1,410 (George W)
2004 1,887 (George W)
2005 919 (George W)
2006 920 (George W)
2007 899 (George W)
GHW Bush Years (1989-1992): 6,224 deaths
Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,107 deaths
George W years (2001-2007): 7,932 deaths
These figures indicate the loss from the two latest Middle East conflicts are less than the loss of military personnel during Clinton's presidency when America wasn't even involved in a war--unless you include Bosnia and Mogadishu, Somalia.
Many members of our media and politicians pick and choose the information on which they report.
They present only those "facts" that support their agenda.
The latest census of Americans shows the following distribution of citizens by race:
European descent 69.12 percent
Hispanic 12.50 percent
Black 12.30 percent
Asian 3.70 percent
Native American 1.00 percent
Other 2.60 percent
Members of the media lead us to believe the military death ratio is off balance compared to the distribution by race in America.
Here are the fatalities by race over the past three years in Iraq.
European descent 74.31 percent
Hispanic 10.74 percent
Black 9.67 percent
Asian 1.81 percent
Native American 1.09 percent
Other 0.33 percent
These statistics came from the Congressional Research Service and may be confirmed at: www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
"History does not entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid."
--- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Subj: Statistics on Recent Election
Subj: Statistics on Recent Election
Wow, how depressing
>
> Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law,
> St. Paul, Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the
> Presidential election:
> Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
> Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
> Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143
> million
> Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2
> Republicans: 2.1
> Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican
> won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.
> Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
> government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government
> welfare..." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the
> "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of
> democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having
> reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
> If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal
> invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the
> USA in fewer than five years
> If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.
> If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much
> is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
Wow, how depressing
>
> Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law,
> St. Paul, Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the
> Presidential election:
> Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
> Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
> Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143
> million
> Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2
> Republicans: 2.1
> Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican
> won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.
> Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
> government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government
> welfare..." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the
> "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of
> democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having
> reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
> If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal
> invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the
> USA in fewer than five years
> If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.
> If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much
> is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
OPINION
Top 10 Poorest Cities
What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common?
Detroit, MI(1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961;
Buffalo, NY(2nd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954;
Cincinnati, OH(3rd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984;
Cleveland, OH(4th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989;
Miami, FL(5th) has never had a Republican mayor;
St. Louis, MO(6th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949;
El Paso, TX(7th) has never had a Republican mayor;
Milwaukee, WI(8th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908;
Philadelphia, PA(9th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952;
Newark, NJ(10th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907.
Pittsburgh, PA(11) ... No Republican held ANY office in Pittsburgh for 65 years until two were elected in 1995.
Einstein once said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
It is the disadvantaged (define that however you will) who habitually elect Democrats --- yet they are still disadvantaged after all these years! Imagine that.
Like Charles Barkley said: "The poor have been voting for Democrats for 50 year s and they are still poor" !!!!!!
What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common?
Detroit, MI(1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961;
Buffalo, NY(2nd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954;
Cincinnati, OH(3rd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984;
Cleveland, OH(4th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989;
Miami, FL(5th) has never had a Republican mayor;
St. Louis, MO(6th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949;
El Paso, TX(7th) has never had a Republican mayor;
Milwaukee, WI(8th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908;
Philadelphia, PA(9th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952;
Newark, NJ(10th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907.
Pittsburgh, PA(11) ... No Republican held ANY office in Pittsburgh for 65 years until two were elected in 1995.
Einstein once said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
It is the disadvantaged (define that however you will) who habitually elect Democrats --- yet they are still disadvantaged after all these years! Imagine that.
Like Charles Barkley said: "The poor have been voting for Democrats for 50 year s and they are still poor" !!!!!!
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Blagojevich Scandal: What Did Obama Know, and When Did He Know It?
Blagojevich Scandal: What Did Obama Know, and When Did He Know It?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 7:04 PM
By: David A. Patten
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich wanted “something big” from the Obama administration in return for naming its preferred candidate to fill Obama’s Senate seat — and he delivered an expletive-filled tirade when Obama’s representatives apparently refused to go along.
Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested Tuesday on charges that they tried to “sell” the U.S. Senate seat that Obama recently vacated. Under Illinois law, naming a replacement falls to Blagojevich.
The FBI says it taped Blagojevich complaining that Obama advisers were telling him that he had to “suck it up . . . and give this mother----er [the President-elect]] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Obama briefly addressed the arrests Tuesday afternoon, telling the media, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening. It’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”
The criminal complaint was announced Tuesday by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who came to national prominence during the investigation that led to the conviction of Scooter Libby on charges related to the Valerie Plame case.
Fitzgerald stated Tuesday that “there is no allegation in the complaint that the president-elect was aware of it and that is all I can say,” according to ABCNews.com.
The 76-page criminal complaint refers to the president-elect and his representatives at least 40 times, however.
Item No. 99 in the document states that Blagojevich and Harris spoke on Nov. 7 with “Adviser B,” a Washington, D.C.-based consultant presumably working on behalf of the Obama transition team.
During the call, Blagojevich indicated that he would appoint a person the complaint identifies only as “Senate Candidate 1” -- presumably a candidate preferred by the Obama administration -- in return for Blagojevich being appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services by Obama.
Candidate 1 is generally believed to be Obama insider Valerie Jarrett, who has been mentioned as among the favorites to replace Obama in the Senate.
Harris stated “we wanted our [request] to be reasonable and rather than . . . make it look like some sort of selfish grab for a quid pro quo.
During the call, Blagojevich stated he was hurting “financially.” And Harris said the “financial security” of the Blagojevich family was an issue. At one point, Blagojevich stated outright, “I want to make money,” according to the indictment.
Also discussed during that conference call was a “three-way deal” between the SEIU union, Blagojevich, and Obama. The deal was that Blagojevich would appoint Obama’s preferred candidate, and in return Obama would help Blagojevich win the SEIU appointment to head an organization called “Change to Win.”
ChangetoWin.org describes itself as an organization created by “seven unions and six million workers” to “restore the American Dream of the 21st Century.”
Harris said the three-way deal would give Obama a “buffer so there is no obvious quid pro quo for [the appointment of Senate Candidate 1]. The criminal complaint states, “Adviser B said that he liked the idea of the three-way deal.”
Three days later, the indictment said, Blagojevich told Harris it was unlikely that Obama would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services, or appoint him to be an ambassador, due to the investigation looming over him.
The complaint states that Adviser B and another consultant are believed to have participated in a call during which Blagojevich said they were telling him to “suck it up” for two years, and give this “motherf---er [the President-elect] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Next, states the complaint, Blagojevich says he would appoint another candidate, Senate Candidate 4, “before I just give f---ing [Senate Candidate 1] a f---ing Senate seat and I don’t get anything.”
Senate Candidate 4, the complaint states, is a deputy governor of the State of Illinois. Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee, and Louanner Peters currently serve as deputy governors.
During the conversations with Obama’s representatives, Blagojevich repeatedly made it clear he would not agree to name “Senate Candidate 1” to fill the position without a quid pro quo from the White House, if only indirectly, according to the complaint. Blagojevich stated he wanted to make $250,000 to $300,000 annually.
The criminal complaint indicates Blagojevich and his staff were confident they could exact something from at least one candidate for the seat, Senate Candidate 5. Senate Candidate 5 is not identified.
Based on the complaint, it remains unclear whether any close Obama associate knew that Blagojevich was seeking monetary gain in return for the Senate appointment. It is possible that having such knowledge without reporting it to authorities in a timely way could raise serious legal issues.
If nothing else, the complaints represent an embarrassment to Obama given his support for Blagojevich’s gubernatorial reelection bid.
The RNC responded to the indictments in part by circulating an Associated Press report from August 2006 in which Obama stated, “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois.”
Also, RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan released a statement calling Obama’s reaction to the arrests “insufficient at best.”
He added, “Given the President-elect’s history of supporting and advising Gov. Blagojevich, he has a responsibility to speak out and fully address the issue.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 7:04 PM
By: David A. Patten
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich wanted “something big” from the Obama administration in return for naming its preferred candidate to fill Obama’s Senate seat — and he delivered an expletive-filled tirade when Obama’s representatives apparently refused to go along.
Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested Tuesday on charges that they tried to “sell” the U.S. Senate seat that Obama recently vacated. Under Illinois law, naming a replacement falls to Blagojevich.
The FBI says it taped Blagojevich complaining that Obama advisers were telling him that he had to “suck it up . . . and give this mother----er [the President-elect]] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Obama briefly addressed the arrests Tuesday afternoon, telling the media, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening. It’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”
The criminal complaint was announced Tuesday by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who came to national prominence during the investigation that led to the conviction of Scooter Libby on charges related to the Valerie Plame case.
Fitzgerald stated Tuesday that “there is no allegation in the complaint that the president-elect was aware of it and that is all I can say,” according to ABCNews.com.
The 76-page criminal complaint refers to the president-elect and his representatives at least 40 times, however.
Item No. 99 in the document states that Blagojevich and Harris spoke on Nov. 7 with “Adviser B,” a Washington, D.C.-based consultant presumably working on behalf of the Obama transition team.
During the call, Blagojevich indicated that he would appoint a person the complaint identifies only as “Senate Candidate 1” -- presumably a candidate preferred by the Obama administration -- in return for Blagojevich being appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services by Obama.
Candidate 1 is generally believed to be Obama insider Valerie Jarrett, who has been mentioned as among the favorites to replace Obama in the Senate.
Harris stated “we wanted our [request] to be reasonable and rather than . . . make it look like some sort of selfish grab for a quid pro quo.
During the call, Blagojevich stated he was hurting “financially.” And Harris said the “financial security” of the Blagojevich family was an issue. At one point, Blagojevich stated outright, “I want to make money,” according to the indictment.
Also discussed during that conference call was a “three-way deal” between the SEIU union, Blagojevich, and Obama. The deal was that Blagojevich would appoint Obama’s preferred candidate, and in return Obama would help Blagojevich win the SEIU appointment to head an organization called “Change to Win.”
ChangetoWin.org describes itself as an organization created by “seven unions and six million workers” to “restore the American Dream of the 21st Century.”
Harris said the three-way deal would give Obama a “buffer so there is no obvious quid pro quo for [the appointment of Senate Candidate 1]. The criminal complaint states, “Adviser B said that he liked the idea of the three-way deal.”
Three days later, the indictment said, Blagojevich told Harris it was unlikely that Obama would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services, or appoint him to be an ambassador, due to the investigation looming over him.
The complaint states that Adviser B and another consultant are believed to have participated in a call during which Blagojevich said they were telling him to “suck it up” for two years, and give this “motherf---er [the President-elect] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Next, states the complaint, Blagojevich says he would appoint another candidate, Senate Candidate 4, “before I just give f---ing [Senate Candidate 1] a f---ing Senate seat and I don’t get anything.”
Senate Candidate 4, the complaint states, is a deputy governor of the State of Illinois. Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee, and Louanner Peters currently serve as deputy governors.
During the conversations with Obama’s representatives, Blagojevich repeatedly made it clear he would not agree to name “Senate Candidate 1” to fill the position without a quid pro quo from the White House, if only indirectly, according to the complaint. Blagojevich stated he wanted to make $250,000 to $300,000 annually.
The criminal complaint indicates Blagojevich and his staff were confident they could exact something from at least one candidate for the seat, Senate Candidate 5. Senate Candidate 5 is not identified.
Based on the complaint, it remains unclear whether any close Obama associate knew that Blagojevich was seeking monetary gain in return for the Senate appointment. It is possible that having such knowledge without reporting it to authorities in a timely way could raise serious legal issues.
If nothing else, the complaints represent an embarrassment to Obama given his support for Blagojevich’s gubernatorial reelection bid.
The RNC responded to the indictments in part by circulating an Associated Press report from August 2006 in which Obama stated, “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois.”
Also, RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan released a statement calling Obama’s reaction to the arrests “insufficient at best.”
He added, “Given the President-elect’s history of supporting and advising Gov. Blagojevich, he has a responsibility to speak out and fully address the issue.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Rezko Tie Links Obama and Blagojevich
Rezko Tie Links Obama and Blagojevich
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 3:36 PM
By: David A. Patten
President-elect Barack Obama’s ties to arrested Illinois Democratic Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich run primarily through Chicago slum lord and felon Tony Rezko.
Rezko served as the political godfather for both Blagojevich and Obama, helping both to rise in Chicago and Illinois politics. Obama himself has credited Rezko with helping to his political career.
Rezko raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for both politicians.
A 76-page FBI affidavit released today after the arrest of Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, says Blagojevich conspired “to sell” the Illinois Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald called the effort to barter the seat the “most sinister and appalling” of a long list of accusations against Blagojevich. Blagojevich, as governor, is responsible for naming Obama’s replacement.
Rezko has had extensive ties to both men:
Rezko’s Ties to Obama
According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the two met in 1990 while Obama was still attending Harvard Law School. Rezko offered Obama a job, but Obama declined.
In 1995, Obama billed 32 hours for work done on behalf of Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp., a company involved in a low-income housing partnership with Rezko. He also wrote letters supporting the proposed development.
Rezko was Obama’s second largest individual contributor when he began his run for an Illinois state Senate seat in 1995. Two Rezko companies contributed $2,000 to Obama’s campaign, and Rezko and wife Rita reportedly worked on Obama’s campaign.
In the first half of 1997, according to a report by Newsmax Contributing Editor Kenneth R. Timmerman, two Rezko companies contributed $2,000 to Obama’s ongoing political operation.
In the first half of 1998, Rezko provided Obama’s campaign food worth an estimated $457.70 as an “in-kind contribution.”
Rezko was one of Obama’s biggest contributors when he ran for U.S. Senate in 2003 and 2004, and Rezko was a member of Obama’s campaign finance committee, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.
In June 2003, Rezko held a ritzy fund-raiser for Obama at his tony Wilmette mansion. Obama later said, “Rezko was not my largest fundraiser but a significant fundraiser.” According to Reuters, Obama said Rezko raised as much as $250,000.
In 2005, as news began to spread that federal authorities were investigating Rezko, Obama bought a house in Chicago’s Kenwood neighborhood for $1.65 million. Rezko’s wife, Rita, paid $625,000 for a lot adjacent to Obama’s new home, and the two deals closed on the same day.
Seven months later, Rezko’s wife sold one-sixth of her lot – a 10-foot strip of a 60-foot lot -- to Obama for $104,500.
In December 2006, Obama told the Washington Post the deal was a “boneheaded” mistake. “There’s no doubt I should have seen some red flags in terms of me purchasing a piece of property from him,” Obama said.
The Post reports Rezko and Obama later “collaborated” to construct a fence to divide the two properties, which Obama said was required by city code. Obama paid for lawn maintenance for both properties.
In March 2008, Obama said Rezko had raised up to $250,000 to help underwrite his prior campaigns in Illinois – a much higher figure than had previously been reported.
Rezko helped Obama’s presidential campaign raise over $150,000. The campaign later donated Rezko’s contributions to charity.
Rezko Ties to Blagojevich
The FBI says between June 2001 and August 2004 Rezko raised over $1.4 million for Blagojevich’s political campaigns, according to the Los Angeles Times. (Blagojevich was elected governor of Illinois in 2002, and reelected in 2006.)
Rezko hosted Blagojevich’s first post-election party at his mansion. Although he had no official role in the Blagojevich administration, he reportedly participated in several Blagojevich strategy retreats.
In October 2006, authorities indicted Rezko for soliciting kickbacks from companies seeking state contracts that were awarded by officials under the governor’s authority. According to the Los Angeles Times and others, $20,000 that Rezko garnered from kickbacks found its way via a middleman into Obama’s Senate campaign coffers.
Rezko’s June 2008 trial on corruption strongly implicated Blagojevich. Blagojevich allegedly discussed a state job for a donor, after that donor wrote a $25,000 check for his campaign.
During the trial, prosecutors maintained that Rezko routinely arranged shakedowns while serving as a top Blagojevich adviser.
In all, prosecutors said, Rezko squeezed various companies for some $7 million in kickbacks.
Following his conviction on 16 counts of fraud, money laundering, and aiding and abetting bribery, Rezko said federal authorities tried to pressure him “to tell the wrong things” about the Obama and Blagojevich. The Sun-Times reported prosecutors pushed Rezko to cooperate in the corruption probe against Blagojevich.
It should be noted that Obama has consistently stated he never intervened on behalf of Rezko in any state or federal business. Authorities have yet to suggest any wrongdoing on the part of either Obama or his staff.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 3:36 PM
By: David A. Patten
President-elect Barack Obama’s ties to arrested Illinois Democratic Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich run primarily through Chicago slum lord and felon Tony Rezko.
Rezko served as the political godfather for both Blagojevich and Obama, helping both to rise in Chicago and Illinois politics. Obama himself has credited Rezko with helping to his political career.
Rezko raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for both politicians.
A 76-page FBI affidavit released today after the arrest of Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, says Blagojevich conspired “to sell” the Illinois Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald called the effort to barter the seat the “most sinister and appalling” of a long list of accusations against Blagojevich. Blagojevich, as governor, is responsible for naming Obama’s replacement.
Rezko has had extensive ties to both men:
Rezko’s Ties to Obama
According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the two met in 1990 while Obama was still attending Harvard Law School. Rezko offered Obama a job, but Obama declined.
In 1995, Obama billed 32 hours for work done on behalf of Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp., a company involved in a low-income housing partnership with Rezko. He also wrote letters supporting the proposed development.
Rezko was Obama’s second largest individual contributor when he began his run for an Illinois state Senate seat in 1995. Two Rezko companies contributed $2,000 to Obama’s campaign, and Rezko and wife Rita reportedly worked on Obama’s campaign.
In the first half of 1997, according to a report by Newsmax Contributing Editor Kenneth R. Timmerman, two Rezko companies contributed $2,000 to Obama’s ongoing political operation.
In the first half of 1998, Rezko provided Obama’s campaign food worth an estimated $457.70 as an “in-kind contribution.”
Rezko was one of Obama’s biggest contributors when he ran for U.S. Senate in 2003 and 2004, and Rezko was a member of Obama’s campaign finance committee, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.
In June 2003, Rezko held a ritzy fund-raiser for Obama at his tony Wilmette mansion. Obama later said, “Rezko was not my largest fundraiser but a significant fundraiser.” According to Reuters, Obama said Rezko raised as much as $250,000.
In 2005, as news began to spread that federal authorities were investigating Rezko, Obama bought a house in Chicago’s Kenwood neighborhood for $1.65 million. Rezko’s wife, Rita, paid $625,000 for a lot adjacent to Obama’s new home, and the two deals closed on the same day.
Seven months later, Rezko’s wife sold one-sixth of her lot – a 10-foot strip of a 60-foot lot -- to Obama for $104,500.
In December 2006, Obama told the Washington Post the deal was a “boneheaded” mistake. “There’s no doubt I should have seen some red flags in terms of me purchasing a piece of property from him,” Obama said.
The Post reports Rezko and Obama later “collaborated” to construct a fence to divide the two properties, which Obama said was required by city code. Obama paid for lawn maintenance for both properties.
In March 2008, Obama said Rezko had raised up to $250,000 to help underwrite his prior campaigns in Illinois – a much higher figure than had previously been reported.
Rezko helped Obama’s presidential campaign raise over $150,000. The campaign later donated Rezko’s contributions to charity.
Rezko Ties to Blagojevich
The FBI says between June 2001 and August 2004 Rezko raised over $1.4 million for Blagojevich’s political campaigns, according to the Los Angeles Times. (Blagojevich was elected governor of Illinois in 2002, and reelected in 2006.)
Rezko hosted Blagojevich’s first post-election party at his mansion. Although he had no official role in the Blagojevich administration, he reportedly participated in several Blagojevich strategy retreats.
In October 2006, authorities indicted Rezko for soliciting kickbacks from companies seeking state contracts that were awarded by officials under the governor’s authority. According to the Los Angeles Times and others, $20,000 that Rezko garnered from kickbacks found its way via a middleman into Obama’s Senate campaign coffers.
Rezko’s June 2008 trial on corruption strongly implicated Blagojevich. Blagojevich allegedly discussed a state job for a donor, after that donor wrote a $25,000 check for his campaign.
During the trial, prosecutors maintained that Rezko routinely arranged shakedowns while serving as a top Blagojevich adviser.
In all, prosecutors said, Rezko squeezed various companies for some $7 million in kickbacks.
Following his conviction on 16 counts of fraud, money laundering, and aiding and abetting bribery, Rezko said federal authorities tried to pressure him “to tell the wrong things” about the Obama and Blagojevich. The Sun-Times reported prosecutors pushed Rezko to cooperate in the corruption probe against Blagojevich.
It should be noted that Obama has consistently stated he never intervened on behalf of Rezko in any state or federal business. Authorities have yet to suggest any wrongdoing on the part of either Obama or his staff.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Jeb Bush to GOP: Don't Become 'Democrat-Lite'
Jeb Bush to GOP: Don't Become 'Democrat-Lite'
Sunday, November 30, 2008 4:20 PM
By: David A. Patten
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush tells Newsmax that the GOP must broaden its appeal to avoid becoming “the old white-guy party,” and recommends that Republicans create a “shadow government” to engage Democrats on important issues as the incoming Obama administration seeks to enact its agenda.
In a wide-ranging interview with Newsmax, the popular former governor and younger brother of President George W. Bush said the 2008 election was neither “transformational” nor a landslide. For example, he noted that Barack Obama's significant fundraising advantage over John McCain played a key role in Democratic success this year.
[To see full video, go here now]
Bush urged Republicans not to abandon their core conservative principles in favor of a "Democratic-lite" agenda. Still, the GOP does need to do some real soul-searching, he said.
“If you take the [last] two election cycles, there’s real cause for concern, no question about it,” he said.
There is good news for Republicans, Bush said: The United States remains “basically a center-right country.” He cited President-elect Barack Obama’s stance on taxes as an example.
“Who would have thought the so-called liberal candidate would be the one advocating tax cuts, and attacking the Republican candidate for tax hikes — which wasn’t true, but was effective when you consider he was outspending Sen. McCain by five to one.”
Bush, considered one of the most successful governors in modern Florida history, gives Democrats kudos for their effectiveness in registering voters. That should be a lesson to the GOP, he said.
“Go back to the blocking and tackling, and not assume that you can just pontificate,” said Bush, who frequently is mentioned as a top-tier GOP presidential prospect.
“You’ve got to do the hard work. That means grass-roots organization. It means listening to the base of the party. It means voter registration. It means turn-out operations. It means recruiting candidates that look like the population we’re trying to attract to our cause. Those things seem to have waned in the last couple years.”
Perhaps most importantly, Bush said, the party must confront the nation’s changing demographics.
“We can’t ignore large segments of our population and expect to win,” Bush said. “We can’t be the ‘old white-guy’ party. It’s just not going to work, the demographics go against us in that regard.
“Among Hispanic voters, I think we need to change the tone of the conversation as it relates to immigration. In Florida, we’ve not participated much in the chest pounding and the yelling and the screaming. I mean, it just drives me nuts when there are substantive policy differences that we can show mutual respect on, but the tone needs to change. And I think we need to recruit more candidates who share our values in the Hispanic community. In Florida we’ve done that.”
Indeed, Bush, who is fluent in Spanish and married to a Mexican-American, carried over 56 percent of the Florida’s non-Cuban Hispanic vote when he won re-election to the Florida statehouse in 2002. His popularity among GOP-leaning Cuban-Americans was even higher.
Bush’s other advice on where the GOP should go from here:
The party should establish a loyal opposition and “organize ourselves in the form of a shadow government” that would address key issues, providing the public with “a loftier debate about policy” rather than mere partisanship.
On the state and local level, Bush says the GOP should demonstrate “a passion for reform.”
The party must hold fast to its convictions. “We can’t be Democrat-lite. We can’t just ‘get along,’” he told Newsmax. “We have to actually be proposing solutions to what appear to be intractable problems as it relates to education, healthcare, infrastructure. Across the board there are ways that we can show that we are truly on the side of the people that are concerned about the future of the country, without abandoning our principles.”
Bush cited Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal as “a great example of a governor who is leading by example, and has a passion for reform. That should be the model across the country.”
Bush also offered Obama advice on one of his favorite issues, education: “Obama should defy his core constituency. He should take on the teachers’ union and be on the side of disadvantaged families who send their kids to schools that almost assure that their children will not have the same opportunities that were afforded them. That is an un-American situation, and there’s much that can be done to narrow the achievement gap.
“Part of it means we may need to restructure how we educate kids. We need to use technology. We need to pay for performance for teachers. We need to eliminate tenure. We need to focus early on the fact that we have these huge achievement gaps. We need much more accountability, we need more school choice.
“And if Senator Obama led that charge, there would be truly a transformation in education, and I for one would be a strong supporter in that regard,” Bush said.
On the economy, Bush said Obama should reconsider his plans to raise taxes.
“His advisers can’t be telling him it’s a great idea to raise taxes, it’s a great idea to raise the capital gains tax, it’s a great idea to raise marginal rates. They can’t be telling him that in this very, very perilous economic time that we’re in,” Bush said.
On a personal note, Bush told Newsmax that he wouldn’t be surprised if his father, former President H.W. Bush, jumps out of a plane when he turns 85 in June.
“He likes going fast in boats and he likes jumping out of planes,” he said of his father. “I can’t explain it, but there’s nothing I can do about it!”
Bush added, “Whenever I get a chance, I always ask him about his life, because it’s just been a spectacular life. If I could be half the man my dad has been, I would consider myself having a really privileged life.”
Sunday, November 30, 2008 4:20 PM
By: David A. Patten
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush tells Newsmax that the GOP must broaden its appeal to avoid becoming “the old white-guy party,” and recommends that Republicans create a “shadow government” to engage Democrats on important issues as the incoming Obama administration seeks to enact its agenda.
In a wide-ranging interview with Newsmax, the popular former governor and younger brother of President George W. Bush said the 2008 election was neither “transformational” nor a landslide. For example, he noted that Barack Obama's significant fundraising advantage over John McCain played a key role in Democratic success this year.
[To see full video, go here now]
Bush urged Republicans not to abandon their core conservative principles in favor of a "Democratic-lite" agenda. Still, the GOP does need to do some real soul-searching, he said.
“If you take the [last] two election cycles, there’s real cause for concern, no question about it,” he said.
There is good news for Republicans, Bush said: The United States remains “basically a center-right country.” He cited President-elect Barack Obama’s stance on taxes as an example.
“Who would have thought the so-called liberal candidate would be the one advocating tax cuts, and attacking the Republican candidate for tax hikes — which wasn’t true, but was effective when you consider he was outspending Sen. McCain by five to one.”
Bush, considered one of the most successful governors in modern Florida history, gives Democrats kudos for their effectiveness in registering voters. That should be a lesson to the GOP, he said.
“Go back to the blocking and tackling, and not assume that you can just pontificate,” said Bush, who frequently is mentioned as a top-tier GOP presidential prospect.
“You’ve got to do the hard work. That means grass-roots organization. It means listening to the base of the party. It means voter registration. It means turn-out operations. It means recruiting candidates that look like the population we’re trying to attract to our cause. Those things seem to have waned in the last couple years.”
Perhaps most importantly, Bush said, the party must confront the nation’s changing demographics.
“We can’t ignore large segments of our population and expect to win,” Bush said. “We can’t be the ‘old white-guy’ party. It’s just not going to work, the demographics go against us in that regard.
“Among Hispanic voters, I think we need to change the tone of the conversation as it relates to immigration. In Florida, we’ve not participated much in the chest pounding and the yelling and the screaming. I mean, it just drives me nuts when there are substantive policy differences that we can show mutual respect on, but the tone needs to change. And I think we need to recruit more candidates who share our values in the Hispanic community. In Florida we’ve done that.”
Indeed, Bush, who is fluent in Spanish and married to a Mexican-American, carried over 56 percent of the Florida’s non-Cuban Hispanic vote when he won re-election to the Florida statehouse in 2002. His popularity among GOP-leaning Cuban-Americans was even higher.
Bush’s other advice on where the GOP should go from here:
The party should establish a loyal opposition and “organize ourselves in the form of a shadow government” that would address key issues, providing the public with “a loftier debate about policy” rather than mere partisanship.
On the state and local level, Bush says the GOP should demonstrate “a passion for reform.”
The party must hold fast to its convictions. “We can’t be Democrat-lite. We can’t just ‘get along,’” he told Newsmax. “We have to actually be proposing solutions to what appear to be intractable problems as it relates to education, healthcare, infrastructure. Across the board there are ways that we can show that we are truly on the side of the people that are concerned about the future of the country, without abandoning our principles.”
Bush cited Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal as “a great example of a governor who is leading by example, and has a passion for reform. That should be the model across the country.”
Bush also offered Obama advice on one of his favorite issues, education: “Obama should defy his core constituency. He should take on the teachers’ union and be on the side of disadvantaged families who send their kids to schools that almost assure that their children will not have the same opportunities that were afforded them. That is an un-American situation, and there’s much that can be done to narrow the achievement gap.
“Part of it means we may need to restructure how we educate kids. We need to use technology. We need to pay for performance for teachers. We need to eliminate tenure. We need to focus early on the fact that we have these huge achievement gaps. We need much more accountability, we need more school choice.
“And if Senator Obama led that charge, there would be truly a transformation in education, and I for one would be a strong supporter in that regard,” Bush said.
On the economy, Bush said Obama should reconsider his plans to raise taxes.
“His advisers can’t be telling him it’s a great idea to raise taxes, it’s a great idea to raise the capital gains tax, it’s a great idea to raise marginal rates. They can’t be telling him that in this very, very perilous economic time that we’re in,” Bush said.
On a personal note, Bush told Newsmax that he wouldn’t be surprised if his father, former President H.W. Bush, jumps out of a plane when he turns 85 in June.
“He likes going fast in boats and he likes jumping out of planes,” he said of his father. “I can’t explain it, but there’s nothing I can do about it!”
Bush added, “Whenever I get a chance, I always ask him about his life, because it’s just been a spectacular life. If I could be half the man my dad has been, I would consider myself having a really privileged life.”
Monday, December 8, 2008
Insider Report from Newsmax.com
Insider Report from Newsmax.com
Headlines (Scroll down for complete stories):
1. Potential Obama Appointees Questioned on Guns
2. Ted Turner: KGB Was ‘Honorable’
3. Hillary Needs ‘Fix’ to Serve on Cabinet
4. Gen. James Jones: Not Pro-Israel
5. Videos Could Foil a Chris Matthews Senate Run
6. Eric Holder: No Geneva Convention Rights for Terrorists
7. We Heard: Inauguration Costs, Virginia Benefactor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Potential Obama Appointees Questioned on Guns
The National Rifle Association has denounced the Barack Obama transition team’s questionnaire asking potential appointees about their own gun ownership.
The 63-question personnel form includes this query: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”
Paul Light, professor of public service at New York University, told Politico.com that there was no such question for potential appointees when George W. Bush took office in 2000.
“It kind of sticks out there like a sore thumb,” he said.
Light hypothesized that the Obama camp might want to avoid the spectacle of a Cabinet-level or other high-ranking appointee who is found to have an unregistered handgun.
But the NRA, which spent millions in an attempt to defeat Obama, is crying foul over the question.
“Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top political official.
“It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.”
Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina also denounced the question.
“It’s very odd and very concerning to put out a question like that,” he said.
DeMint’s campaign organization sent an e-mail to supporters vowing to endorse legislation that bars federal hiring discrimination on the basis of gun ownership.
The question put to potential appointees is just the latest Obama move to irk opponents of gun control, NewsBusters contributing editor Tom Blumer pointed out.
Among other things, Obama has voted to allow lawsuits designed to bankrupt firearms firms, voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting, endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership, voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense, and supported a proposal to ban gun stores within five miles of a school or park.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Ted Turner: KGB Was ‘Honorable’
CNN founder Ted Turner said the former Soviet intelligence agency KGB was “honorable” — and equated the U.S. mission in Iraq with the U.S.S.R.’s invasion of Afghanistan.
During an appearance on last week’s “Meet the Press,” Turner — whose latest book is “Call Me Ted” — was asked by host Tom Brokaw if he believes all nuclear weapons can be eliminated if the U.S. and Russia take the lead.
Turner, co-founder of the Nuclear Threat Initiative to stem the spread of nuclear weapons, said “absolutely,” and called the Russians “very reasonable, pragmatic, practical people.”
When Brokaw mentioned Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s past with the KGB, Turner responded:
“Well, he had that background. But you know, we have an FBI, and we're not prejudiced against somebody who's worked at the FBI. It's an honorable place to work. And the KGB, I think, was an honorable place to work. And it gave people in the former Soviet Union, a communist country, an opportunity to do something important and worthwhile.”
The next exchange went like this:
Brokaw: “But in the meantime, it appears that he's very much more interested in just causing difficulty for the United States, getting in our face in a manner of speaking.”
Turner: “Well, wait. We're the ones, in my opinion, we're the ones that started that. We're the ones that started by putting the Star Wars system in Czechoslovakia and Poland when they wanted to be part of it. We've said that system is only to protect us from Iran or protect Europe from Iranian missiles. So why didn't we cooperate with the Russians? Why have we constantly been pushing on the Russians all the time?”
Brokaw: “Your friend, Jimmy Carter, tried to be friendly with Leonid Brezhnev, and for his friendliness what did Brezhnev do? … He invaded Afghanistan.”
Turner: “Well, we invaded Afghanistan, too, and it's a lot further — at least it's on the border of the Soviet Union or the former Soviet Union or Russia…”
Brokaw: “But Ted, don't try to go there in terms of justifying that … It was naked aggression on the part of the Russians at the time.”
Turner: “Well, going into Iraq was naked aggression on the part of the United States.”
Brokaw failed to challenge that assertion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Hillary Needs ‘Fix’ to Serve on Cabinet
Sen. Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Secretary of State in the Obama administration, according to the public interest group Judicial Watch.
The Ineligibility Clause of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that no member of Congress can be appointed to an office that has benefited from a salary increase during that Senator or Representative’s current term of office.
A January 2008 Executive Order signed by President George W. Bush during Hillary Clinton’s current Senate term increased the salary for Secretary of State from $186,600 to $191,300.
Specifically, Article I, section 6 of the U.S. Constitution states: “No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments (salary and benefits) whereof shall have been increased during such time.”
At the 1787 Constitutional Convention there was fear that of members of Congress might create new jobs or give raises to existing jobs, and then take those jobs for themselves.
President Richard Nixon circumvented this provision after appointing Ohio Sen. William Saxbe to the position of Attorney General. The Attorney General’s salary had been increased during Saxbe’s term, but the Nixon administration managed to push legislation through Congress to reduce the salary to its previous level.
This scheme, known thereafter as “The Saxbe Fix,” was also used to allow Sen. Lloyd Bensen to assume the position of Treasury Secretary under President Clinton.
So Hillary will require a “Saxbe Fix” to serve as Secretary of State, according to Judicial Watch. But the group asserts that the tactic “may reduce the salary of Secretary of State to previous levels, but it does not affect what is a clear constitutional prohibition.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Gen. James Jones Not Pro-Israel
Barack Obama’s appointment of retired Gen. James Jones as his national security adviser raised concerns in Israel that Jones is not a firm supporter of the Jewish state.
Jones, former supreme allied commander of NATO, served as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian security issues over the past year. During that time he was reported to have drafted a paper critical of some aspects of Israel’s security stance toward the Palestinians, according to the Jerusalem Post.
But the report, which Israeli government officials feared could cause tension between the U.S. and Israel, was never published.
However, it is known that Jones favors replacing Israeli forces in the West Bank with an international force.
He also opposes Israel’s demand that it retain extensive security control over the occupied territories even after a Palestinian state is established, the Israel newspaper Haaretz disclosed.
In discussions with the Bush administration, Israel has argued that its major population centers are vulnerable to rocket and suicide attacks from the West Bank, and control of the Jordan Valley is needed to prevent weapons smuggling into the West Bank.
Israel also wants control of border crossings, and maintains that Palestinians cannot be trusted with responsibility for security, according to Haaretz.
Jones has instead proposed a NATO-based international force that would eventually transfer control to the Palestinians.
Israeli officials maintain that an international force cannot provide the intelligence needed to ward off terrorist attacks.
As national security adviser Jones can be expected to make Israeli-Palestinian relations a top priority. In an interview with Inside the Pentagon in October, he said “nothing is more important” in the Middle East than a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Videos Could Foil a Chris Matthews Senate Run
MSNBC host Chris Matthews is mulling a run for Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter’s Senate seat in 2010 — but his candidacy could prove to be an opposition researcher’s dream thanks to some embarrassing gaffes recorded by the media.
Matthews, a former top aide to Democratic House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neil, has spoken often about his political aspirations, in particular winning a Senate seat.
Originally from the Philadelphia area, he has been shopping for a home in Pennsylvania and has discussed resigning as host of “Hardball with Chris Matthews” to prepare for a run, according to Politico.com.
A recent Rasmussen poll showed Matthews in a virtual dead heat with Specter even though Matthews has not announced his candidacy.
But the firebrand journalist — with 11 years on the air, 13 years in the print media and six books to his credit — has provided an opponent with plenty of ammunition to use against him.
Typing his name in the video-sharing Web site YouTube brings up nearly 10,000 results, The Hill newspaper reports, including a 44-second “Chris Matthews Swearing Montage” featuring clips of the TV host using foul language on the air.
Another YouTube video features Matthews’ appearance on Ellen DeGeneres’ TV show, when he danced with DeGeneres and ended up grabbing her breast.
Yet another video shows Matthews apologizing for saying on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show that Hillary Clinton got elected to the Senate because her husband “messed around.”
“Treating Hillary Clinton badly during the primary is going to come back and haunt him,” a Democratic operative told Politico.
A video showing Matthews ogling CNBC host Erin Burnett has brought accusations from bloggers that the TV host is sexist, according to The Hill.
Then there is the video of Matthews’ interview with Sen. Zell Miller at the 2004 Republican National Convention, when Matthews sought to grill Miller about his criticism of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.
Miller gave no ground as Matthews deployed his rat-a-tat rhetorical style, and even warned the pro-Kerry host that he wouldn't tolerate the same kind of treatment he gave conservative columnist Michelle Malkin the previous week when Matthews tossed her off the show for defending the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
The heated exchange ended with Miller telling Matthews: “I wished we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel. That would be pretty good.”
The interview was later parodied on several late-night comedy shows.
Sen. Specter was asked by CNN host Wolf Blitzer what he thought about a potential Matthews candidacy. Perhaps with the TV host’s gaffes in mind, Specter said: “I’ll be prepared.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Eric Holder: No Geneva Convention Rights for Terrorists
Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s choice for Attorney General, has gone on the record stating that he does not believe terrorists are entitled to prisoner of war status under the Geneva Convention.
Discussing combatants captured in the war on terror, Holder — who served as deputy attorney general in the Bill Clinton administration — said in an interview with CNN in January 2002:
“One of the things we clearly want to do with these prisoners is to have an ability to interrogate them and find out what their future plans might be, where other cells are located. Under the Geneva Convention … you are really limited in the amount of information that you can elicit from people.
“It seems to me that given the way in which they have conducted themselves, however, that they are not, in fact, people entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention. They are not prisoners of war.
“If, for instance, Mohamed Atta had survived the attack on the World Trade Center, would we now be calling him a prisoner of war? I think not. Should Zacarias Moussaoui be called a prisoner of war? Again, I think not.”
Moussaoui was charged with six conspiracy counts related to the 9/11 attacks and is now serving a life sentence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. We Heard . . .
THAT Virginia businessman Earl Stafford is shelling out $1 million so that disadvantaged people, terminally ill patients, and wounded soldiers from around the country can stay in Washington for Barack Obama’s Jan. 20 inauguration.
Stafford, founder of the technology company Unitech, will provide his guests with free lodging for three nights at the JW Marriott hotel, which offers a prime view of the Pennsylvania Avenue parade route.
He told The Washington Post that he is prepared to spend $600,000 more for a breakfast, a luncheon and two balls at the hotel.
At least 30 percent of the guests staying in Stafford’s 300 rooms and four suites are to be disadvantaged or needy in some way.
The African-American businessman said he wants to “bless those who otherwise wouldn’t have an opportunity to be part of the great celebration, the inauguration and the festivities.”
THAT the cost of the inauguration could leave financially-strapped Washington, D.C., with a record-breaking bill for services.
The bill for security and other outlays will almost certainly exceed the $15 million the federal government gives to the District of Columbia each year to defray the expense of holding events, according to the District’s congressional delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton.
In 2005, with an estimated 300,000 people in attendance, President George W. Bush’s second inauguration cost the city more than $17 million. This year, officials expect nearly five times as many people, according to the DC Examiner’s Web site.
“There will be an additional amount necessary to handle the unprecedented crowds,” said Norton.
“It’s an outrage to have costs incurred for federal events.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headlines (Scroll down for complete stories):
1. Potential Obama Appointees Questioned on Guns
2. Ted Turner: KGB Was ‘Honorable’
3. Hillary Needs ‘Fix’ to Serve on Cabinet
4. Gen. James Jones: Not Pro-Israel
5. Videos Could Foil a Chris Matthews Senate Run
6. Eric Holder: No Geneva Convention Rights for Terrorists
7. We Heard: Inauguration Costs, Virginia Benefactor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Potential Obama Appointees Questioned on Guns
The National Rifle Association has denounced the Barack Obama transition team’s questionnaire asking potential appointees about their own gun ownership.
The 63-question personnel form includes this query: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”
Paul Light, professor of public service at New York University, told Politico.com that there was no such question for potential appointees when George W. Bush took office in 2000.
“It kind of sticks out there like a sore thumb,” he said.
Light hypothesized that the Obama camp might want to avoid the spectacle of a Cabinet-level or other high-ranking appointee who is found to have an unregistered handgun.
But the NRA, which spent millions in an attempt to defeat Obama, is crying foul over the question.
“Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top political official.
“It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.”
Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina also denounced the question.
“It’s very odd and very concerning to put out a question like that,” he said.
DeMint’s campaign organization sent an e-mail to supporters vowing to endorse legislation that bars federal hiring discrimination on the basis of gun ownership.
The question put to potential appointees is just the latest Obama move to irk opponents of gun control, NewsBusters contributing editor Tom Blumer pointed out.
Among other things, Obama has voted to allow lawsuits designed to bankrupt firearms firms, voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting, endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership, voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense, and supported a proposal to ban gun stores within five miles of a school or park.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Ted Turner: KGB Was ‘Honorable’
CNN founder Ted Turner said the former Soviet intelligence agency KGB was “honorable” — and equated the U.S. mission in Iraq with the U.S.S.R.’s invasion of Afghanistan.
During an appearance on last week’s “Meet the Press,” Turner — whose latest book is “Call Me Ted” — was asked by host Tom Brokaw if he believes all nuclear weapons can be eliminated if the U.S. and Russia take the lead.
Turner, co-founder of the Nuclear Threat Initiative to stem the spread of nuclear weapons, said “absolutely,” and called the Russians “very reasonable, pragmatic, practical people.”
When Brokaw mentioned Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s past with the KGB, Turner responded:
“Well, he had that background. But you know, we have an FBI, and we're not prejudiced against somebody who's worked at the FBI. It's an honorable place to work. And the KGB, I think, was an honorable place to work. And it gave people in the former Soviet Union, a communist country, an opportunity to do something important and worthwhile.”
The next exchange went like this:
Brokaw: “But in the meantime, it appears that he's very much more interested in just causing difficulty for the United States, getting in our face in a manner of speaking.”
Turner: “Well, wait. We're the ones, in my opinion, we're the ones that started that. We're the ones that started by putting the Star Wars system in Czechoslovakia and Poland when they wanted to be part of it. We've said that system is only to protect us from Iran or protect Europe from Iranian missiles. So why didn't we cooperate with the Russians? Why have we constantly been pushing on the Russians all the time?”
Brokaw: “Your friend, Jimmy Carter, tried to be friendly with Leonid Brezhnev, and for his friendliness what did Brezhnev do? … He invaded Afghanistan.”
Turner: “Well, we invaded Afghanistan, too, and it's a lot further — at least it's on the border of the Soviet Union or the former Soviet Union or Russia…”
Brokaw: “But Ted, don't try to go there in terms of justifying that … It was naked aggression on the part of the Russians at the time.”
Turner: “Well, going into Iraq was naked aggression on the part of the United States.”
Brokaw failed to challenge that assertion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Hillary Needs ‘Fix’ to Serve on Cabinet
Sen. Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Secretary of State in the Obama administration, according to the public interest group Judicial Watch.
The Ineligibility Clause of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that no member of Congress can be appointed to an office that has benefited from a salary increase during that Senator or Representative’s current term of office.
A January 2008 Executive Order signed by President George W. Bush during Hillary Clinton’s current Senate term increased the salary for Secretary of State from $186,600 to $191,300.
Specifically, Article I, section 6 of the U.S. Constitution states: “No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments (salary and benefits) whereof shall have been increased during such time.”
At the 1787 Constitutional Convention there was fear that of members of Congress might create new jobs or give raises to existing jobs, and then take those jobs for themselves.
President Richard Nixon circumvented this provision after appointing Ohio Sen. William Saxbe to the position of Attorney General. The Attorney General’s salary had been increased during Saxbe’s term, but the Nixon administration managed to push legislation through Congress to reduce the salary to its previous level.
This scheme, known thereafter as “The Saxbe Fix,” was also used to allow Sen. Lloyd Bensen to assume the position of Treasury Secretary under President Clinton.
So Hillary will require a “Saxbe Fix” to serve as Secretary of State, according to Judicial Watch. But the group asserts that the tactic “may reduce the salary of Secretary of State to previous levels, but it does not affect what is a clear constitutional prohibition.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Gen. James Jones Not Pro-Israel
Barack Obama’s appointment of retired Gen. James Jones as his national security adviser raised concerns in Israel that Jones is not a firm supporter of the Jewish state.
Jones, former supreme allied commander of NATO, served as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian security issues over the past year. During that time he was reported to have drafted a paper critical of some aspects of Israel’s security stance toward the Palestinians, according to the Jerusalem Post.
But the report, which Israeli government officials feared could cause tension between the U.S. and Israel, was never published.
However, it is known that Jones favors replacing Israeli forces in the West Bank with an international force.
He also opposes Israel’s demand that it retain extensive security control over the occupied territories even after a Palestinian state is established, the Israel newspaper Haaretz disclosed.
In discussions with the Bush administration, Israel has argued that its major population centers are vulnerable to rocket and suicide attacks from the West Bank, and control of the Jordan Valley is needed to prevent weapons smuggling into the West Bank.
Israel also wants control of border crossings, and maintains that Palestinians cannot be trusted with responsibility for security, according to Haaretz.
Jones has instead proposed a NATO-based international force that would eventually transfer control to the Palestinians.
Israeli officials maintain that an international force cannot provide the intelligence needed to ward off terrorist attacks.
As national security adviser Jones can be expected to make Israeli-Palestinian relations a top priority. In an interview with Inside the Pentagon in October, he said “nothing is more important” in the Middle East than a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Videos Could Foil a Chris Matthews Senate Run
MSNBC host Chris Matthews is mulling a run for Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter’s Senate seat in 2010 — but his candidacy could prove to be an opposition researcher’s dream thanks to some embarrassing gaffes recorded by the media.
Matthews, a former top aide to Democratic House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neil, has spoken often about his political aspirations, in particular winning a Senate seat.
Originally from the Philadelphia area, he has been shopping for a home in Pennsylvania and has discussed resigning as host of “Hardball with Chris Matthews” to prepare for a run, according to Politico.com.
A recent Rasmussen poll showed Matthews in a virtual dead heat with Specter even though Matthews has not announced his candidacy.
But the firebrand journalist — with 11 years on the air, 13 years in the print media and six books to his credit — has provided an opponent with plenty of ammunition to use against him.
Typing his name in the video-sharing Web site YouTube brings up nearly 10,000 results, The Hill newspaper reports, including a 44-second “Chris Matthews Swearing Montage” featuring clips of the TV host using foul language on the air.
Another YouTube video features Matthews’ appearance on Ellen DeGeneres’ TV show, when he danced with DeGeneres and ended up grabbing her breast.
Yet another video shows Matthews apologizing for saying on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show that Hillary Clinton got elected to the Senate because her husband “messed around.”
“Treating Hillary Clinton badly during the primary is going to come back and haunt him,” a Democratic operative told Politico.
A video showing Matthews ogling CNBC host Erin Burnett has brought accusations from bloggers that the TV host is sexist, according to The Hill.
Then there is the video of Matthews’ interview with Sen. Zell Miller at the 2004 Republican National Convention, when Matthews sought to grill Miller about his criticism of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.
Miller gave no ground as Matthews deployed his rat-a-tat rhetorical style, and even warned the pro-Kerry host that he wouldn't tolerate the same kind of treatment he gave conservative columnist Michelle Malkin the previous week when Matthews tossed her off the show for defending the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
The heated exchange ended with Miller telling Matthews: “I wished we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel. That would be pretty good.”
The interview was later parodied on several late-night comedy shows.
Sen. Specter was asked by CNN host Wolf Blitzer what he thought about a potential Matthews candidacy. Perhaps with the TV host’s gaffes in mind, Specter said: “I’ll be prepared.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Eric Holder: No Geneva Convention Rights for Terrorists
Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s choice for Attorney General, has gone on the record stating that he does not believe terrorists are entitled to prisoner of war status under the Geneva Convention.
Discussing combatants captured in the war on terror, Holder — who served as deputy attorney general in the Bill Clinton administration — said in an interview with CNN in January 2002:
“One of the things we clearly want to do with these prisoners is to have an ability to interrogate them and find out what their future plans might be, where other cells are located. Under the Geneva Convention … you are really limited in the amount of information that you can elicit from people.
“It seems to me that given the way in which they have conducted themselves, however, that they are not, in fact, people entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention. They are not prisoners of war.
“If, for instance, Mohamed Atta had survived the attack on the World Trade Center, would we now be calling him a prisoner of war? I think not. Should Zacarias Moussaoui be called a prisoner of war? Again, I think not.”
Moussaoui was charged with six conspiracy counts related to the 9/11 attacks and is now serving a life sentence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. We Heard . . .
THAT Virginia businessman Earl Stafford is shelling out $1 million so that disadvantaged people, terminally ill patients, and wounded soldiers from around the country can stay in Washington for Barack Obama’s Jan. 20 inauguration.
Stafford, founder of the technology company Unitech, will provide his guests with free lodging for three nights at the JW Marriott hotel, which offers a prime view of the Pennsylvania Avenue parade route.
He told The Washington Post that he is prepared to spend $600,000 more for a breakfast, a luncheon and two balls at the hotel.
At least 30 percent of the guests staying in Stafford’s 300 rooms and four suites are to be disadvantaged or needy in some way.
The African-American businessman said he wants to “bless those who otherwise wouldn’t have an opportunity to be part of the great celebration, the inauguration and the festivities.”
THAT the cost of the inauguration could leave financially-strapped Washington, D.C., with a record-breaking bill for services.
The bill for security and other outlays will almost certainly exceed the $15 million the federal government gives to the District of Columbia each year to defray the expense of holding events, according to the District’s congressional delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton.
In 2005, with an estimated 300,000 people in attendance, President George W. Bush’s second inauguration cost the city more than $17 million. This year, officials expect nearly five times as many people, according to the DC Examiner’s Web site.
“There will be an additional amount necessary to handle the unprecedented crowds,” said Norton.
“It’s an outrage to have costs incurred for federal events.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDITORIAL FOR DEC 8 2008
IN THE COURSE OF A LIFE TIME RARELY DOES ONE GET TO SEE THAT ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY OF ELECTED OFFICIALS. BUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST MONTH IS FAR BEYOND ANALYSIS OR DESCRIPTION OF ANYTHING NEAR SANITY.
THE IDEA OF A BAILOUT FOR THE THREE US AUTO COMPANIES IS THE END OF ANY SANITY IN WASHINGTON DC. I BASE MY IDEOLOGY OM SOME 250 YEARS OF THE MAKING OF AMERICA AND WHAT MADE HER WORK THE WAY IT HAS IN THE PAST.
WHEN IN THE COURSE OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IN ANYTHING PRIVATE (STEEL, COAL, AUTO MANUFACTURING, HEALTH, ETC.), BE IT CALLED OVERSIGHT, SAFETY REGULATION, OR WHAT EVER. THE NET RESULT IS CHAOS. AND TRUST ME FOLKS CHAOS AT GOVERNMENT HANDS IS LIKENED TO HELL ON EARTH.
WITH GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT YOU HAVE DEMANDS ON THE GOVERNED BODY TO MEET STANDARDS PRESCRIBED BY SOME WACKO IN WASHINGTON WHO IS IN ALL CERTAINLY ONLY SEEKING RE-ELECTION (HILLARY, SCHUMER, OBAMA, DINGLE, AND DON'T FORGET THE CORRUPT ONES ALREADY CONVICTED, ROSTENKOWSKY, STEVENS, CUNNINGHAM, ETAL, THESE SOCALLED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE ARE NOT NOW OR EVER HAVE BEEN HONEST WITH THE PEOPLE THAT SENT THEM THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I ASK YOU CAN WE EXPECT TO HAVE AND EFFICIENT RUNNING AUTO DESIGNED BY THE BLEEPS IN WASHINGTON, CERTAINLY NOT, YET THESE SAME FOLKS ARE PASSING LEGISLATION THAT IS TELLING THE MANUFACTURERS WHAT STANDARDS MUST BE MET. THESE RULES AND DEFINITIONSS OF MUST-HAVES FOR EACH OF THE THOUSANDS OF INDUSTRIES IN AMERICA LAY IN THE HANDS OF THE LIKES OF THOSE CONVICTED FELONS AFORE MENTIONED AND THE JESSE JACKSON JRS AND THIER ILK IN BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS.
NOW THE BAILOUT OF THE BANKING, HOUSING AND AUTO INDUSTRY IS TAKING PLACE WITH OPEN ARMS BY THE NUTS IN WASHINGTON. AND IT IS BEING DONE DESPITE THE WARNING OF THE PUBLIC THAT THEY DID NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. IN THE PAST IF A BUSINESS FAILED THEN IT WAS LEFT TO THAT BUSINESS TO ARRANGE ITS EMERGAMCE AS A VIABLE ENTITY.
LE TOURNEAU EQUITMENT FAILED AND EMERGED STRONGER AND HEALTHIER THAN WHEN IT FAIILED. BUT REMEMBER WHERE GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE COMES THEN FAILURE SURELY FOLLOWS, CHECK OUT COAL, STEEL, FARMING AS SIMPLE EXAMPLES.
THOUGH MY THOUGHTS MAY BE JUMBLED I AM SURE YOU WILL UNDERSTAND MY FRUSTRATON.
AMERICAN CAR COMPANIES FAIL GET HELP FROM THE PUBLIC TAZ FARM, FOREIGN AUTO COMPANIES PLOG ON WITH BARELY A SHORT STOP AND NO ASKING FOR HELP. MAYBE I NEED TO BE ENLIGHTENED.
I AM DAVE ANDERSON AND THIS IS MY OPINION.
THE IDEA OF A BAILOUT FOR THE THREE US AUTO COMPANIES IS THE END OF ANY SANITY IN WASHINGTON DC. I BASE MY IDEOLOGY OM SOME 250 YEARS OF THE MAKING OF AMERICA AND WHAT MADE HER WORK THE WAY IT HAS IN THE PAST.
WHEN IN THE COURSE OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IN ANYTHING PRIVATE (STEEL, COAL, AUTO MANUFACTURING, HEALTH, ETC.), BE IT CALLED OVERSIGHT, SAFETY REGULATION, OR WHAT EVER. THE NET RESULT IS CHAOS. AND TRUST ME FOLKS CHAOS AT GOVERNMENT HANDS IS LIKENED TO HELL ON EARTH.
WITH GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT YOU HAVE DEMANDS ON THE GOVERNED BODY TO MEET STANDARDS PRESCRIBED BY SOME WACKO IN WASHINGTON WHO IS IN ALL CERTAINLY ONLY SEEKING RE-ELECTION (HILLARY, SCHUMER, OBAMA, DINGLE, AND DON'T FORGET THE CORRUPT ONES ALREADY CONVICTED, ROSTENKOWSKY, STEVENS, CUNNINGHAM, ETAL, THESE SOCALLED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE ARE NOT NOW OR EVER HAVE BEEN HONEST WITH THE PEOPLE THAT SENT THEM THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I ASK YOU CAN WE EXPECT TO HAVE AND EFFICIENT RUNNING AUTO DESIGNED BY THE BLEEPS IN WASHINGTON, CERTAINLY NOT, YET THESE SAME FOLKS ARE PASSING LEGISLATION THAT IS TELLING THE MANUFACTURERS WHAT STANDARDS MUST BE MET. THESE RULES AND DEFINITIONSS OF MUST-HAVES FOR EACH OF THE THOUSANDS OF INDUSTRIES IN AMERICA LAY IN THE HANDS OF THE LIKES OF THOSE CONVICTED FELONS AFORE MENTIONED AND THE JESSE JACKSON JRS AND THIER ILK IN BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS.
NOW THE BAILOUT OF THE BANKING, HOUSING AND AUTO INDUSTRY IS TAKING PLACE WITH OPEN ARMS BY THE NUTS IN WASHINGTON. AND IT IS BEING DONE DESPITE THE WARNING OF THE PUBLIC THAT THEY DID NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. IN THE PAST IF A BUSINESS FAILED THEN IT WAS LEFT TO THAT BUSINESS TO ARRANGE ITS EMERGAMCE AS A VIABLE ENTITY.
LE TOURNEAU EQUITMENT FAILED AND EMERGED STRONGER AND HEALTHIER THAN WHEN IT FAIILED. BUT REMEMBER WHERE GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE COMES THEN FAILURE SURELY FOLLOWS, CHECK OUT COAL, STEEL, FARMING AS SIMPLE EXAMPLES.
THOUGH MY THOUGHTS MAY BE JUMBLED I AM SURE YOU WILL UNDERSTAND MY FRUSTRATON.
AMERICAN CAR COMPANIES FAIL GET HELP FROM THE PUBLIC TAZ FARM, FOREIGN AUTO COMPANIES PLOG ON WITH BARELY A SHORT STOP AND NO ASKING FOR HELP. MAYBE I NEED TO BE ENLIGHTENED.
I AM DAVE ANDERSON AND THIS IS MY OPINION.
Prepackaged Failure
Prepackaged Failure
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, December 05, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Bailout: GM, Ford, Chrysler and Congress seem to be inching toward some sort of bailout that would give Washington unprecedented control over these major American companies. This is no way to help Detroit.
Congressional Democrats are desperate to bail out the Big Three — but even more desperate to bail out the automakers' unions. After all,the UAW spent more than $11 million in the last election cycle to elect Democrats. They're owed.
In recent days, talk of a "prepackaged" bankruptcy has come to the fore. In such a case, the parties involved — shareholders, management, unions, creditors — would negotiate a kind of working settlement. The idea is to avoid a liquidation, while also getting access to the $34 billion in bailout funds the industry says it needs.
It's not the worst idea. But it doesn't stand a chance because the unions reject it out of hand. As UAW President Ron Gettelfinger put it, prepackaged bankruptcy is "not a viable option." Translation: Unions would have to make big, and permanent, concessions.
That leaves the latest bright idea from Congress: a broad, federally mandated restructuring of the Big Three in exchange for financial help. Congress would in essence become the Big Three's uber-manager, telling them how to become profitable again.
Excuse us, but are we supposed to believe that the same Congress responsible for next year's estimated $1 trillion deficit can profitably run a market-sensitive company like a car manufacturer?
Or that the same Congress that sat on its hands as the financial meltdown unfolded and helped create the mess will know how to financially restructure America's highly complex auto business?
Or that the people who just last year imposed $85 billion in new "efficiency" standards on a teetering industry will be savvy enough to run them anywhere but further into the ground?
These are not rhetorical questions. Preliminary results from our latest IBD/TIPP Poll show sentiment running 62% against a bailout for the automakers. With its own favorability at a subterranean 9%, lowest in history, Congress might want to think twice about it.
Does Congress have the know-how to do this? We looked up the background of the majority Democrat members on the Senate Banking Committee who grilled Big Three CEOs last Thursday, and who will decide the outlines of any bailout plan. Out of 11 members, just one — Montana's Jon Tester, a farmer and former manager of a butcher shop — had any real business experience.
None of the rest, from committee chairman Chris Dodd on down, has any private-sector experience to speak of, apart from brief stints at law firms. Fact is, Congress isn't equipped to run anything.
The Big Three are burning through $6 billion a month, so $34 billion won't last long. Chapter 11 bankruptcy, or something like it, would at least let them get out from under costly union contracts.
Given union opposition, this is highly unlikely. But as Lynn Lopucki, a bankruptcy law expert who teaches at Harvard and UCLA, told Bloomberg, about 77% of all billion-dollar companies survive bankruptcy. Others just sell their businesses.
Those are better odds than congressional mismanagement would offer. Chapter 11 would also force the automakers to change their business model and maybe even fire their CEOs. Best of all, it would keep Congress from meddling further in the marketplace.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, December 05, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Bailout: GM, Ford, Chrysler and Congress seem to be inching toward some sort of bailout that would give Washington unprecedented control over these major American companies. This is no way to help Detroit.
Congressional Democrats are desperate to bail out the Big Three — but even more desperate to bail out the automakers' unions. After all,the UAW spent more than $11 million in the last election cycle to elect Democrats. They're owed.
In recent days, talk of a "prepackaged" bankruptcy has come to the fore. In such a case, the parties involved — shareholders, management, unions, creditors — would negotiate a kind of working settlement. The idea is to avoid a liquidation, while also getting access to the $34 billion in bailout funds the industry says it needs.
It's not the worst idea. But it doesn't stand a chance because the unions reject it out of hand. As UAW President Ron Gettelfinger put it, prepackaged bankruptcy is "not a viable option." Translation: Unions would have to make big, and permanent, concessions.
That leaves the latest bright idea from Congress: a broad, federally mandated restructuring of the Big Three in exchange for financial help. Congress would in essence become the Big Three's uber-manager, telling them how to become profitable again.
Excuse us, but are we supposed to believe that the same Congress responsible for next year's estimated $1 trillion deficit can profitably run a market-sensitive company like a car manufacturer?
Or that the same Congress that sat on its hands as the financial meltdown unfolded and helped create the mess will know how to financially restructure America's highly complex auto business?
Or that the people who just last year imposed $85 billion in new "efficiency" standards on a teetering industry will be savvy enough to run them anywhere but further into the ground?
These are not rhetorical questions. Preliminary results from our latest IBD/TIPP Poll show sentiment running 62% against a bailout for the automakers. With its own favorability at a subterranean 9%, lowest in history, Congress might want to think twice about it.
Does Congress have the know-how to do this? We looked up the background of the majority Democrat members on the Senate Banking Committee who grilled Big Three CEOs last Thursday, and who will decide the outlines of any bailout plan. Out of 11 members, just one — Montana's Jon Tester, a farmer and former manager of a butcher shop — had any real business experience.
None of the rest, from committee chairman Chris Dodd on down, has any private-sector experience to speak of, apart from brief stints at law firms. Fact is, Congress isn't equipped to run anything.
The Big Three are burning through $6 billion a month, so $34 billion won't last long. Chapter 11 bankruptcy, or something like it, would at least let them get out from under costly union contracts.
Given union opposition, this is highly unlikely. But as Lynn Lopucki, a bankruptcy law expert who teaches at Harvard and UCLA, told Bloomberg, about 77% of all billion-dollar companies survive bankruptcy. Others just sell their businesses.
Those are better odds than congressional mismanagement would offer. Chapter 11 would also force the automakers to change their business model and maybe even fire their CEOs. Best of all, it would keep Congress from meddling further in the marketplace.
Email To Friend |
Sunday, December 7, 2008
The Cost Of Green
The Cost Of Green
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, December 03, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Economy: Stimulating the economy with massive new investments in "green" infrastructure seems to be a popular idea, and President-elect Obama has made it a centerpiece of his program. Will it work? We doubt it.
Both Obama and congressional Democrats believe we can move to a new carbon-free future by "investing" in "green" technologies and infrastructure, while creating millions of new jobs.
As it stands, Obama is eyeing $100 billion in "green stimulus" as part of a much bigger package — as much as $700 billion or more — of conventional stimulus. He reckons this will create up to five million "green-collar jobs" and "jolt" the economy back to life.
"Clean energy is going to be a foundation for rebuilding the American economy," says Bracken Hendricks of the liberal Center for American Progress and a member of Obama's transition team.
How will the money be spent? "School repairs," according to a Bloomberg report, "could be required to meet green building standards, including low-energy boilers and weatherization. Transportation spending could emphasize public transit, and support for new power sources such as wind . . . could go hand in hand with spending on an efficient electricity superhighway."
Sounds great. But it'll take money — plus new regulations that will make it more expensive to do anything with oil, even if there are no reasonable alternatives.
Nowhere is it mentioned that these "green-collar jobs" would be terribly costly, and that the planned "investments" are really just subsidies. And, as we know, things that require subsidies aren't competitive in the market, and thus aren't profitable.
Claims that such "investments" will create five million jobs are false. It's likely more jobs will be killed than created due to higher costs and increased inefficiency of the U.S. economy. A recent report from the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation found that limiting CO2 emissions under recent proposed legislation would destroy 900,000 net jobs.
Spending money on projects where costs exceed benefits simply to "create jobs" is a bad idea. Taking capital from productive uses and redeploying it to politically popular but nonproductive uses lowers productivity by paying those with "green jobs" more than their output is worth. It's not welfare, it's "greenfare."
This, by the way, was the make-work model followed during the Great Depression. It didn't work then, and it won't work now.
These ideas aren't new — they were thoroughly debunked 158 years ago by pioneering French economist Frederic Bastiat, who wrote about the "broken window fallacy."
It goes like this: Most people agree that when someone breaks a store window, it's a tragedy for the shopkeeper. But many also believe the overall economy actually benefits, because the shopkeeper now must buy a new window, a kind of "stimulus."
This logic, of course, makes no sense. Yet it's the basic idea behind all government stimulus plans. The money for the window comes out of the shopkeeper's pocket. Instead of carrying more stock in his store, or hiring a clerk, he must spend his money instead on a window. So the "stimulus" is really zero — or negative.
"The 'broken windows' in this case," notes American Enterprise Institute analyst Kenneth Green, "would be lost jobs and lost capital in the coal, oil, gas, nuclear and automobile industries." They together employ more than 1 million people. But millions of other jobs would also be at risk because, as with the shopkeeper, money spent on green projects can't be spent elsewhere.
What was true in Bastiat's time is certainly true today. The weak productivity report Wednesday, showing a tepid 1.3% gain in nonfarm output per hour, should be warning enough.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, December 03, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Economy: Stimulating the economy with massive new investments in "green" infrastructure seems to be a popular idea, and President-elect Obama has made it a centerpiece of his program. Will it work? We doubt it.
Both Obama and congressional Democrats believe we can move to a new carbon-free future by "investing" in "green" technologies and infrastructure, while creating millions of new jobs.
As it stands, Obama is eyeing $100 billion in "green stimulus" as part of a much bigger package — as much as $700 billion or more — of conventional stimulus. He reckons this will create up to five million "green-collar jobs" and "jolt" the economy back to life.
"Clean energy is going to be a foundation for rebuilding the American economy," says Bracken Hendricks of the liberal Center for American Progress and a member of Obama's transition team.
How will the money be spent? "School repairs," according to a Bloomberg report, "could be required to meet green building standards, including low-energy boilers and weatherization. Transportation spending could emphasize public transit, and support for new power sources such as wind . . . could go hand in hand with spending on an efficient electricity superhighway."
Sounds great. But it'll take money — plus new regulations that will make it more expensive to do anything with oil, even if there are no reasonable alternatives.
Nowhere is it mentioned that these "green-collar jobs" would be terribly costly, and that the planned "investments" are really just subsidies. And, as we know, things that require subsidies aren't competitive in the market, and thus aren't profitable.
Claims that such "investments" will create five million jobs are false. It's likely more jobs will be killed than created due to higher costs and increased inefficiency of the U.S. economy. A recent report from the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation found that limiting CO2 emissions under recent proposed legislation would destroy 900,000 net jobs.
Spending money on projects where costs exceed benefits simply to "create jobs" is a bad idea. Taking capital from productive uses and redeploying it to politically popular but nonproductive uses lowers productivity by paying those with "green jobs" more than their output is worth. It's not welfare, it's "greenfare."
This, by the way, was the make-work model followed during the Great Depression. It didn't work then, and it won't work now.
These ideas aren't new — they were thoroughly debunked 158 years ago by pioneering French economist Frederic Bastiat, who wrote about the "broken window fallacy."
It goes like this: Most people agree that when someone breaks a store window, it's a tragedy for the shopkeeper. But many also believe the overall economy actually benefits, because the shopkeeper now must buy a new window, a kind of "stimulus."
This logic, of course, makes no sense. Yet it's the basic idea behind all government stimulus plans. The money for the window comes out of the shopkeeper's pocket. Instead of carrying more stock in his store, or hiring a clerk, he must spend his money instead on a window. So the "stimulus" is really zero — or negative.
"The 'broken windows' in this case," notes American Enterprise Institute analyst Kenneth Green, "would be lost jobs and lost capital in the coal, oil, gas, nuclear and automobile industries." They together employ more than 1 million people. But millions of other jobs would also be at risk because, as with the shopkeeper, money spent on green projects can't be spent elsewhere.
What was true in Bastiat's time is certainly true today. The weak productivity report Wednesday, showing a tepid 1.3% gain in nonfarm output per hour, should be warning enough.
Email To Friend |
Bail Out Bill Or Bail Out Joe?
Bail Out Bill Or Bail Out Joe?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, December 04, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Taxation: While Speaker Pelosi prepares another massive bailout package for President Obama's desk come January, an upstart congressman from Texas has an intriguing idea — bail out the taxpayers instead.
Speaking before the nation's governors on Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi talked up the idea of yet another bailout bill in the neighborhood of $500 billion to be ready for President Obama's signature on Jan. 20. This will come on top of the $700 billion rescue package already enacted, $350 billion of which has been left for Obama to disburse at his discretion.
Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has come up with an idea of what to do with that $350 billion, and it involves not rescuing those who have gummed up the works, but relieving the burden on those who have been trying to pull the wagon — suspend FICA and income taxes for two months starting in January 2009.
Rather than send out a $600 check to people who don't pay taxes — which will evaporate like the morning dew — or spend more billions for banks to buy other banks, Gohmert would declare a tax holiday for FICA (Social Security and Medicare) and income taxes. FICA is the most regressive of taxes. It would be the middle-class tax cut Obama has promised.
Former speaker Newt Gingrich and his group, American Solutions, calculate that Americans pay over $101 billion in income taxes and another $66.5 billion in FICA taxes each month. Two months' worth is around $332 billion. The employer's portion of FICA would also be suspended, giving businesses large and small $65 billion in tax relief to expand and hire more workers.
As Gingrich notes, the remaining $350 billion the government was going to send to Wall Street would simply be used to cover the revenue losses in the Treasury, so Social Security and Medicare would not lose a penny.
He says it would be a dramatic increase in take-home pay for the working poor and middle class, and would save more homeowners from bankruptcy than anything the new administration could think of. And since a majority of small-business owners file as individuals, it would also be a boon to job creation.
Tax cuts are what stimulates economic activity, more consumer spending, saving and investment.
President Kennedy knew that. So did President Reagan and President Bush. Whatever can be said of the Bush administration's management of the economy, it cannot be said his tax cuts caused the mortgage meltdown or stock market collapse.
Most American taxpayers pay an average of 25% of their income in federal taxes, plus another 7.25% for FICA. For an average American family making about $50,000 a year, that translates into an additional $2,000 in take-home pay.
We believe that individuals sitting around their dinner table are the best arbiters of how their money should be spent (rather than the bureaucrats who take it from them). They would be surprised to discover just how much the government that has failed them costs.
Gohmert's plan would give them a clearer picture of the difference between what they make and what government lets them keep.
Government long ago learned what car salesmen know, that installment buyers could be induced to pay more because they didn't look at their total debt but only at their monthly payments. For government, the advantage was that resistance to a growing tax burden would be lessened because people would be paying most of their taxes with money they had never seen.
Bailouts are like using one credit card to pay another, or drilling a hole in the other end to let the water out. Gohmert's plan is as good as any we've seen so far. Trusting people with their own money is not another risky loan.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, December 04, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Taxation: While Speaker Pelosi prepares another massive bailout package for President Obama's desk come January, an upstart congressman from Texas has an intriguing idea — bail out the taxpayers instead.
Speaking before the nation's governors on Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi talked up the idea of yet another bailout bill in the neighborhood of $500 billion to be ready for President Obama's signature on Jan. 20. This will come on top of the $700 billion rescue package already enacted, $350 billion of which has been left for Obama to disburse at his discretion.
Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has come up with an idea of what to do with that $350 billion, and it involves not rescuing those who have gummed up the works, but relieving the burden on those who have been trying to pull the wagon — suspend FICA and income taxes for two months starting in January 2009.
Rather than send out a $600 check to people who don't pay taxes — which will evaporate like the morning dew — or spend more billions for banks to buy other banks, Gohmert would declare a tax holiday for FICA (Social Security and Medicare) and income taxes. FICA is the most regressive of taxes. It would be the middle-class tax cut Obama has promised.
Former speaker Newt Gingrich and his group, American Solutions, calculate that Americans pay over $101 billion in income taxes and another $66.5 billion in FICA taxes each month. Two months' worth is around $332 billion. The employer's portion of FICA would also be suspended, giving businesses large and small $65 billion in tax relief to expand and hire more workers.
As Gingrich notes, the remaining $350 billion the government was going to send to Wall Street would simply be used to cover the revenue losses in the Treasury, so Social Security and Medicare would not lose a penny.
He says it would be a dramatic increase in take-home pay for the working poor and middle class, and would save more homeowners from bankruptcy than anything the new administration could think of. And since a majority of small-business owners file as individuals, it would also be a boon to job creation.
Tax cuts are what stimulates economic activity, more consumer spending, saving and investment.
President Kennedy knew that. So did President Reagan and President Bush. Whatever can be said of the Bush administration's management of the economy, it cannot be said his tax cuts caused the mortgage meltdown or stock market collapse.
Most American taxpayers pay an average of 25% of their income in federal taxes, plus another 7.25% for FICA. For an average American family making about $50,000 a year, that translates into an additional $2,000 in take-home pay.
We believe that individuals sitting around their dinner table are the best arbiters of how their money should be spent (rather than the bureaucrats who take it from them). They would be surprised to discover just how much the government that has failed them costs.
Gohmert's plan would give them a clearer picture of the difference between what they make and what government lets them keep.
Government long ago learned what car salesmen know, that installment buyers could be induced to pay more because they didn't look at their total debt but only at their monthly payments. For government, the advantage was that resistance to a growing tax burden would be lessened because people would be paying most of their taxes with money they had never seen.
Bailouts are like using one credit card to pay another, or drilling a hole in the other end to let the water out. Gohmert's plan is as good as any we've seen so far. Trusting people with their own money is not another risky loan.
Email To Friend |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)