Mob Rule In D.C.
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, March 20, 2009 4:20 PM PT
The Law: Of all the alarming things going on in Washington these days nothing is as shocking, or disheartening, as the collapse in respect for the rule of law and the Constitution. Just look at the flap over AIG's bonuses.
Like most Americans, we found ourselves angry and perplexed that a company that took $173 billion in bailout aid because it had failed to run its affairs competently would hand out $165 million in "bonuses" to its top employees.
Yet, as with many things, the tale is a bit more complex than the sound bite. For one, Congress authorized the bonuses to be paid — at the direct instigation of Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who took $103,100 from AIG during the 2008 political cycle.
And while letting AIG pay some employees retention bonuses might seem wrong or even immoral to some, it wasn't illegal.
Yet Congress, which created the problem in the first place, acted with consummate cowardice by trying to "claw back" the money through a punitive, 90% retroactive tax, one specially levied on those who work at AIG. It wants to do the same thing with recipients of TARP money, too.
Why the big change? Public anger. Welcome to mob rule.
A measure to impose the 90% tax passed by more than a two-thirds majority, 328 to 93, in the House. Only problem is, it's almost certainly unconstitutional.
Our Founding Fathers, those towering thinkers who today get little but scorn from our elites for their brilliance, foresaw such shenanigans and warned against it. They knew the law could be used for political purposes, and wanted to make sure it couldn't.
That's why they put into the Constitution a provision against "bills of attainder" — attempts to legislate punishment for a specific group or person for past actions without benefit of a trial.
As James Madison wrote in the Federalist No. 44, "Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws and laws impairing the obligation of contracts are contrary to the first principles of the social compact and to every principle of sound legislation." They were explicitly made illegal by the Constitution, with Article I, Section 9 saying, "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."
The AIG tax is an ex post facto law, it is a bill of attainder and it definitely impairs the obligation of contracts. Three strikes.
We wish this was all, but it isn't. Democrats who routinely bashed President Bush for his supposed breaches of the law now show shockingly little respect for it themselves.
One sees it in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's recent comment that enforcing U.S. immigration laws is "un-American," one of the most astonishing utterances from a politician's mouth in decades.
One sees it too in the unilateral abrogation of the North American Free Trade Agreement by the White House, working in cahoots with Democrats in Congress and unions. The decision to ignore our treaty obligations by ending a NAFTA program that let a small number of Mexican trucks haul freight on U.S. roads has led Mexico to slap tariffs of up to 45% on U.S. goods, costing us 40,000 jobs.
And one sees it in the plan to take away workers' right to a secret union ballot in the Democrats' card-check legislation.
All these measures show the rest of the world that America, once a beacon of respect for the rule of law and a global leader in jurisprudence, is capable of extraordinary hypocrisy when it comes to the law.
You don't have to like or agree with the AIG bonuses to understand that Congress is doing something it shouldn't under the Constitution. Once a precedent is set, Congress will be able to go after anyone or any group, at any time, for any reason.
This bill is bad and unconstitutional. It was passed — let's face it — because Congress fears the people's wrath. The bill doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny. But then, neither does this Congress.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Promises, Promises, no action, no truth
Dear DAVID,
Washington , D.C. right now is like one of those old fashioned records that scratched and so it keeps playing the same tune over and over.
President Obama and Speaker Pelosi slam through a $787 billion “stimulus” bill to “save the economy.” Then, they pass a $410 billion omnibus spending bill with 8,500 earmarks even though Obama campaigned on a promise to end earmarks.
Let your Senator Know that a Trillion Dollar Tax Hike Deserves Proper Debate on the Senate Floor
Call the Senate Switch Board at 202-224-3121.
Working with 465,000 Americans who signed on through NoStimulus.com we fought them every step of the way and came within 1 vote of victory in the Senate. We said the “stimulus” bill had waste and abuses in it and we were right more than even we knew.
Did you see the latest outrage?
These $165 million in bonuses to the people who ran AIG into the ground and have now taken over $130 billion in taxpayer bailout money – turns out someone slipped into the 1,000 page “stimulus” bill a provision allowing these bonuses to be paid even after our taxpayer bailout money was given to the company.
That’s what happens when they pass a 1,000 page $787 billion wasteful spending bill…especially when they pass it with no oversight and little study under pressure of politicians like President Obama and Speaker Pelosi.
But now we need to make sure your Senator is aware that we will be paying attention to the truly dangerous $3.6 trillion 2010 Obama budget. Some quick numbers:
Raises taxes by a net of $1.35 TRILLION in next decade – big increases in income taxes and the death tax comes back.
Adds an estimated $1.7 TRILLION in new debt just this year – the actual budget deficit will be an estimated 12% of our total GDP (gross domestic product).
Federal Government spending will account for 27.7% of our total economy. Think about it – the federal government will be spending more than $1 in every $4 spent in the American economy under the Obama budget.
Institutes an Enery Tax on energy totaling over $1 trillion. Gasoline will go up by at least 50%. Home energy costs will skyrocket. Food costs and consumer product costs will rise. This Energy Tax is hidden in a scheme called “Cap and Trade.” This “Cap and Trade” scheme will have the government rationing energy and thus driving up the costs of energy to consumers.
For more information on Obama’s “Cap and Trade” scheme use this address http://www.americansforprosperity.org/022709-obamas-energy-tax information.
There’s more. President Obama is attempting to pass his “Cap and Trade” scheme with only 50 votes in the Senate instead of the 60 required for most legislation by using a Washington procedural trick called “reconciliation.” Click here for an article by Americans for Prosperity’s own Phil Kerpen that provides more details.
But the bottom line is simple. Unless we act now the Senate may very well use a procedural maneuver to pass this massive Energy Tax called “Cap and Trade” without proper debate and with only 50 votes instead of the 60 that should be required under Senate rules.
I’m asking you to call your Senator now at 202-224-3121 and demand that the Energy Tax vote on “Cap and Trade” be done without “reconciliation” – for a $1 trillion tax increase the Senate should have to have 60 votes instead of 50!
Address here to contact your Senator:
http://capwiz.com/americansforprosperity/issues/alert/?alertid=12951421&type=CO
That’s the message in a nutshell.
It’s hard to believe the assault our economic freedoms are under. In fact, it can get down right maddening.
But as Americans we can and must respond the way we do to every serious challenge to our freedom and prosperity – by standing up and fighting.
At Americans for Prosperity, that’s exactly what we are doing.
Tim
PS Again, I urge you to contact your Senators now and tell them that the vote on the $1 trillion Energy Tax called “Cap and Trade” must be made without “reconciliation” because the Senate should follow its rules and require 60 votes, not 50, for such a huge tax increase.
Use the address below to contact your Senator by .......
http://capwiz.com/americansforprosperity/issues/alert/?alertid=12951421&type=CO
If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.
Washington , D.C. right now is like one of those old fashioned records that scratched and so it keeps playing the same tune over and over.
President Obama and Speaker Pelosi slam through a $787 billion “stimulus” bill to “save the economy.” Then, they pass a $410 billion omnibus spending bill with 8,500 earmarks even though Obama campaigned on a promise to end earmarks.
Let your Senator Know that a Trillion Dollar Tax Hike Deserves Proper Debate on the Senate Floor
Call the Senate Switch Board at 202-224-3121.
Working with 465,000 Americans who signed on through NoStimulus.com we fought them every step of the way and came within 1 vote of victory in the Senate. We said the “stimulus” bill had waste and abuses in it and we were right more than even we knew.
Did you see the latest outrage?
These $165 million in bonuses to the people who ran AIG into the ground and have now taken over $130 billion in taxpayer bailout money – turns out someone slipped into the 1,000 page “stimulus” bill a provision allowing these bonuses to be paid even after our taxpayer bailout money was given to the company.
That’s what happens when they pass a 1,000 page $787 billion wasteful spending bill…especially when they pass it with no oversight and little study under pressure of politicians like President Obama and Speaker Pelosi.
But now we need to make sure your Senator is aware that we will be paying attention to the truly dangerous $3.6 trillion 2010 Obama budget. Some quick numbers:
Raises taxes by a net of $1.35 TRILLION in next decade – big increases in income taxes and the death tax comes back.
Adds an estimated $1.7 TRILLION in new debt just this year – the actual budget deficit will be an estimated 12% of our total GDP (gross domestic product).
Federal Government spending will account for 27.7% of our total economy. Think about it – the federal government will be spending more than $1 in every $4 spent in the American economy under the Obama budget.
Institutes an Enery Tax on energy totaling over $1 trillion. Gasoline will go up by at least 50%. Home energy costs will skyrocket. Food costs and consumer product costs will rise. This Energy Tax is hidden in a scheme called “Cap and Trade.” This “Cap and Trade” scheme will have the government rationing energy and thus driving up the costs of energy to consumers.
For more information on Obama’s “Cap and Trade” scheme use this address http://www.americansforprosperity.org/022709-obamas-energy-tax information.
There’s more. President Obama is attempting to pass his “Cap and Trade” scheme with only 50 votes in the Senate instead of the 60 required for most legislation by using a Washington procedural trick called “reconciliation.” Click here for an article by Americans for Prosperity’s own Phil Kerpen that provides more details.
But the bottom line is simple. Unless we act now the Senate may very well use a procedural maneuver to pass this massive Energy Tax called “Cap and Trade” without proper debate and with only 50 votes instead of the 60 that should be required under Senate rules.
I’m asking you to call your Senator now at 202-224-3121 and demand that the Energy Tax vote on “Cap and Trade” be done without “reconciliation” – for a $1 trillion tax increase the Senate should have to have 60 votes instead of 50!
Address here to contact your Senator:
http://capwiz.com/americansforprosperity/issues/alert/?alertid=12951421&type=CO
That’s the message in a nutshell.
It’s hard to believe the assault our economic freedoms are under. In fact, it can get down right maddening.
But as Americans we can and must respond the way we do to every serious challenge to our freedom and prosperity – by standing up and fighting.
At Americans for Prosperity, that’s exactly what we are doing.
Tim
PS Again, I urge you to contact your Senators now and tell them that the vote on the $1 trillion Energy Tax called “Cap and Trade” must be made without “reconciliation” because the Senate should follow its rules and require 60 votes, not 50, for such a huge tax increase.
Use the address below to contact your Senator by .......
http://capwiz.com/americansforprosperity/issues/alert/?alertid=12951421&type=CO
If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.
Imagine being a Cop in SF?
Subject: Fw: Imagine being a Cop in SF?
And you think YOUR Police Department is flakey…!!!???
Imagine being a cop in San Francisco .
Chief Heather Fong (left), the first SFPD female chief of police;
Theresa Sparks (center, former male), president of the San Francisco Police Commission, CEO of a multi million-dollar sex toy retailer, and a trans gender woman.
Sgt. Stephan Thorne (right, former female), the first transgender SFPD police officer.
Their Representative in Congress is Nancy Pelosi.
No wonder I wonder about Polisi.
And you think YOUR Police Department is flakey…!!!???
Imagine being a cop in San Francisco .
Chief Heather Fong (left), the first SFPD female chief of police;
Theresa Sparks (center, former male), president of the San Francisco Police Commission, CEO of a multi million-dollar sex toy retailer, and a trans gender woman.
Sgt. Stephan Thorne (right, former female), the first transgender SFPD police officer.
Their Representative in Congress is Nancy Pelosi.
No wonder I wonder about Polisi.
Illegal Alien Amnesty Coming Soon!
Yesterday, Obama promised Hispanic Caucus an Illegal Alien Amnesty Coming Soon!
Pelosi calls enforcement "un-American"
Help us Smash Amnesty and "re-educate" Pelosi
DEAR DAVID ANDERSON,
This is hell week for immigration enforcement. If you care about this issue, please read this entire email carefully, and then take every step we ask. Here's the update:
1. Yesterday President Obama seemed to rent out his immigration policy to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Mexican government.
2. And on Saturday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was caught on tape saying that immigration enforcement agents are "un-American" when they acted to enforce the laws.
Maybe you'll want to rub your eyes two or three times and re-read the above paragraphs.
Statements like "renting out" his foreign policy to the Mexican government are pretty alarming. We at NumbersUSA are usually careful to avoid heated rhetoric.
But read the details, and you'll see while I HAVE to let off some steam this time!
After spending the first weeks of his term engulfed by the financial mess, Obama has decided it's time to make nice with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. In a meeting with them yesterday in California, he promised to push ahead soon with the same "Immigration Reform"—i.e. Illegal Alien Amnesty—that McCain and Kennedy were promoting back in 2007.
Obama said he would soon be traveling to Mexico to meet with Mexico's President Calderon to work out immigration policy. That sounds like Obama is going to let the country responsible for sending us the most illegal aliens re-write America's immigration laws. What's next?
And did you hear about the House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi's wild statement? She called our immigration enforcement officials "un-American" for deporting illegal aliens. (This was actually caught on tape.)
Do you see where this is heading? The administration and Democratic leaders in Congress have removed all doubt about where they stand.
Amnesty for the 11-12 million illegal aliens is inevitable, unless we act now.
Please take all these actions:
1. Go to www.NumbersUSA.com. Send these faxes telling the President, Rep. Pelosi, and your members of Congress that you will never agree to Amnesty.
2. Phone the President and your members of Congress. Let's break the Congressional and White House switchboards today and tomorrow!
3. Make a gift to NumbersUSA so that we can ramp up our efforts right now, as the fight grows deadly earnest.
I need 2,000 of our members to press that Red Button and donate in the next 24 hours. Our members sent 100,000 faxes yesterday alone! Obviously, this takes money.
If this is your first donation, even better! At least 1/3 of the 2,000 donations we need in the next 24 hours must come from members who have never given before if we are to meet our goal.
We literally cannot send your faxes and maintain our lobbying efforts without funding from our members.
So please, press that red button (You will find the red button when you bring in
www.NumbersUSA.com.) and help us once again this month. We've got our perfect record on stopping illegal alien amnesties to protect. And it's time to "take the fight to the enemy!"
Remember, if you are ill, unemployed, or living on a small fixed income, please do not contribute. We only ask for help from those able to help.
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE,
Pelosi calls enforcement "un-American"
Help us Smash Amnesty and "re-educate" Pelosi
DEAR DAVID ANDERSON,
This is hell week for immigration enforcement. If you care about this issue, please read this entire email carefully, and then take every step we ask. Here's the update:
1. Yesterday President Obama seemed to rent out his immigration policy to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Mexican government.
2. And on Saturday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was caught on tape saying that immigration enforcement agents are "un-American" when they acted to enforce the laws.
Maybe you'll want to rub your eyes two or three times and re-read the above paragraphs.
Statements like "renting out" his foreign policy to the Mexican government are pretty alarming. We at NumbersUSA are usually careful to avoid heated rhetoric.
But read the details, and you'll see while I HAVE to let off some steam this time!
After spending the first weeks of his term engulfed by the financial mess, Obama has decided it's time to make nice with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. In a meeting with them yesterday in California, he promised to push ahead soon with the same "Immigration Reform"—i.e. Illegal Alien Amnesty—that McCain and Kennedy were promoting back in 2007.
Obama said he would soon be traveling to Mexico to meet with Mexico's President Calderon to work out immigration policy. That sounds like Obama is going to let the country responsible for sending us the most illegal aliens re-write America's immigration laws. What's next?
And did you hear about the House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi's wild statement? She called our immigration enforcement officials "un-American" for deporting illegal aliens. (This was actually caught on tape.)
Do you see where this is heading? The administration and Democratic leaders in Congress have removed all doubt about where they stand.
Amnesty for the 11-12 million illegal aliens is inevitable, unless we act now.
Please take all these actions:
1. Go to www.NumbersUSA.com. Send these faxes telling the President, Rep. Pelosi, and your members of Congress that you will never agree to Amnesty.
2. Phone the President and your members of Congress. Let's break the Congressional and White House switchboards today and tomorrow!
3. Make a gift to NumbersUSA so that we can ramp up our efforts right now, as the fight grows deadly earnest.
I need 2,000 of our members to press that Red Button and donate in the next 24 hours. Our members sent 100,000 faxes yesterday alone! Obviously, this takes money.
If this is your first donation, even better! At least 1/3 of the 2,000 donations we need in the next 24 hours must come from members who have never given before if we are to meet our goal.
We literally cannot send your faxes and maintain our lobbying efforts without funding from our members.
So please, press that red button (You will find the red button when you bring in
www.NumbersUSA.com.) and help us once again this month. We've got our perfect record on stopping illegal alien amnesties to protect. And it's time to "take the fight to the enemy!"
Remember, if you are ill, unemployed, or living on a small fixed income, please do not contribute. We only ask for help from those able to help.
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE,
SOLUTION & MEDICINE
THANKS GARDNER WE APPRECIATE THIS.
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
SOLUTION
This was an article from the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper on Sunday. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on "How Would You Fix the Economy?"
I thought this was the BEST idea.
I think this guy nailed it!
Dear Mr.President,
Patriotic retirement:
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force;
pay them $1 million a piece severance with stipulations:
1) They leave their jobs. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They buy NEW American cars. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed.
3) They either buy a house or pay off their mortgage- Housing Crisis fixed.
All this and it's still cheaper than the "bailout".
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
MEDICINE
MEDICINE
An Israeli doctor said to a medical conference, "Medicine in my country is
so advanced, we can take a kidney out of one person, put it into another and
have him looking for work in six weeks!"
The German doctor stood up and said, "Well medicine in my county is so
advanced, we can take a lung out of one person and put it into another and
have him looking for work on 4 weeks"
The Russian doctor got up and said "My country is even more advanced, we can
remove half a heart from one person, put it
into another and have them both looking for work in just 2 weeks!"
Not to be outdone, the American doctor stood up and addressed the
conference, "Well", he said, "My country is so far advanced in medicine, we
can take an Asshole out of Chicago , put him in the White House, and have
half the country looking for work in 24 hours!"
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
SOLUTION
This was an article from the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper on Sunday. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on "How Would You Fix the Economy?"
I thought this was the BEST idea.
I think this guy nailed it!
Dear Mr.President,
Patriotic retirement:
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force;
pay them $1 million a piece severance with stipulations:
1) They leave their jobs. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They buy NEW American cars. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed.
3) They either buy a house or pay off their mortgage- Housing Crisis fixed.
All this and it's still cheaper than the "bailout".
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
MEDICINE
MEDICINE
An Israeli doctor said to a medical conference, "Medicine in my country is
so advanced, we can take a kidney out of one person, put it into another and
have him looking for work in six weeks!"
The German doctor stood up and said, "Well medicine in my county is so
advanced, we can take a lung out of one person and put it into another and
have him looking for work on 4 weeks"
The Russian doctor got up and said "My country is even more advanced, we can
remove half a heart from one person, put it
into another and have them both looking for work in just 2 weeks!"
Not to be outdone, the American doctor stood up and addressed the
conference, "Well", he said, "My country is so far advanced in medicine, we
can take an Asshole out of Chicago , put him in the White House, and have
half the country looking for work in 24 hours!"
CLEANER. I SUPPOSE?
SOMETHING SOME TIMES FOR ALL OF US.
1st came the commemorative coins, then the T-shirts, then the plates, & now something for the rest of us ..
1st came the commemorative coins, then the T-shirts, then the plates, & now something for the rest of us ..
Speaker Pelosi is a saint."
THIS BIT OF HUMOR FROM MINNIE IS PASSED ON TO ALL WITH A SMILE AND A WINK.
Nancy Pelosi is now a Saint....CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS ?
On a Saturday afternoon, in Washington, D. C., House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's aide visited the Cardinal of the Catholic cathedral.
He told the Cardinal that Nancy Pelosi would be attending the next day's sermon, and he asked if the Cardinal would kindly point out Pelosi to the congregation and say a few words that would include calling Pelosi a saint.
The Cardinal replied, "No. I don't really like the woman, and there
are issues of conflict with the Catholic Church over certain of Pelosi's views." Pelosi's aide then said, "Look. I'll write a check here and now for a donation of $100,000 to your church if you'll just tell the
congregation you see Pelosi as a saint."
The Cardinal thought about it and said, "Well, the church can use the money, so I'll work your request into tomorrow's sermon." As Pelosi's aide promised, House Speaker Pelosi appeared for the Sunday sermon and seated herself prominently at the edge of the main aisle.
And, during the sermon, as promised, the Cardinal pointed out that House Speaker Pelosi was present.
Then the Cardinal went on to explain to the congregation -- "While Speaker Pelosi's presence is probably an honor to some, she is not my favorite person. Some of her views are contrary to those of the church, and she tends to flip-flop on many other views. Nancy Pelosi is a petty, self-absorbed hypocrite, a thumb sucker, and a nit-wit. Nancy Pelosi is also a serial liar, a cheat, and a thief.
Nancy Pelosi is the worst example of a Catholic I have ever personally witnessed.
She married for money and is using it to lie to the American people. She also has a reputation for shirking her Representative obligations both in Washington, and in California. She simply is not to be trusted."
The Cardinal completed his view of Pelosi with, "But, when compared to Senators Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, and John Kerry, House Speaker Pelosi is a saint."
.
Nancy Pelosi is now a Saint....CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS ?
On a Saturday afternoon, in Washington, D. C., House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's aide visited the Cardinal of the Catholic cathedral.
He told the Cardinal that Nancy Pelosi would be attending the next day's sermon, and he asked if the Cardinal would kindly point out Pelosi to the congregation and say a few words that would include calling Pelosi a saint.
The Cardinal replied, "No. I don't really like the woman, and there
are issues of conflict with the Catholic Church over certain of Pelosi's views." Pelosi's aide then said, "Look. I'll write a check here and now for a donation of $100,000 to your church if you'll just tell the
congregation you see Pelosi as a saint."
The Cardinal thought about it and said, "Well, the church can use the money, so I'll work your request into tomorrow's sermon." As Pelosi's aide promised, House Speaker Pelosi appeared for the Sunday sermon and seated herself prominently at the edge of the main aisle.
And, during the sermon, as promised, the Cardinal pointed out that House Speaker Pelosi was present.
Then the Cardinal went on to explain to the congregation -- "While Speaker Pelosi's presence is probably an honor to some, she is not my favorite person. Some of her views are contrary to those of the church, and she tends to flip-flop on many other views. Nancy Pelosi is a petty, self-absorbed hypocrite, a thumb sucker, and a nit-wit. Nancy Pelosi is also a serial liar, a cheat, and a thief.
Nancy Pelosi is the worst example of a Catholic I have ever personally witnessed.
She married for money and is using it to lie to the American people. She also has a reputation for shirking her Representative obligations both in Washington, and in California. She simply is not to be trusted."
The Cardinal completed his view of Pelosi with, "But, when compared to Senators Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, and John Kerry, House Speaker Pelosi is a saint."
.
Bush's Big Victory
Bush's Big Victory
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, March 16, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Mideast: In most ways, the news from Iraq couldn't be better. People there feel more secure, and are more committed to democracy, than ever. Is it possible that President Bush was right after all?
A poll of average Iraqis conducted by ABC News, the BBC and Japan's NHK shows significant progress on virtually all fronts. Yet, we've heard nary a peep about it from anyone.
Some 85% of respondents said their neighborhood security was "good," vs. 62% a year ago and just 43% in August of 2007. And 52% said security had gotten better in the last year — during the Bush-Petraeus "surge," which was widely ridiculed at the time as an unnecessary escalation of the Iraq War.
Support for democracy jumped to 64%, a 21-percentage-point gain since 2007, according to a report on CNSNews.com. As for how Iraqis felt about the general state of affairs in Iraq, 58% called it "very good" or "quite good," up significantly from 43% last year and 22% in 2007.
When asked what their concerns are today, Iraqis sound a lot like Americans: Jobs and prices are at the top of their list — not war, not security, not terrorism.
In short, it sounds like we not only won the war, but the peace as well. And for those who cast a skeptical eye on the idea that any Islamic country could ever be democratized, it turns out the former President Bush is winning that debate too.
With President Obama in the middle of withdrawing troops from Iraq on a schedule that looks suspiciously identical to the one that Bush had in place, it's safe to say that Obama increasingly sees the wisdom of what his predecessor tried to do in Iraq.
Maybe the rest of us should as well.
It's become de rigueur to deride Bush's "failed" policies in Iraq. No one speaks well of them — except, maybe, Iraqis.
But here are the facts, stark as they are: During his vicious 20-year reign, Saddam Hussein — remember him? — killed an estimated 5% of Iraq's population. That works out to about 5,000 people a month slaughtered by the regime.
You might disagree that Bush was right to depose this murderous thug. But in doing so, you would then have to defend the deaths of thousands of innocents.
For those who say Bush went to war in Iraq under false pretenses — you know, "Bush lied, people died" — there's this: He made a lengthy, nuanced defense of his decision to get rid of Saddam. It was reflected in Congress' own resolution in late 2002, which cited 23 reasons for removing Saddam from power.
The ideas that it was all about oil or that Congress was bamboozled on WMD are both false.
Bush, Congress and our foreign allies all saw the same intelligence, and all came to the same conclusion: Saddam had a nuclear weapons program, and intended to build one as soon as he was able. That was, and remained, true.
After being bashed relentlessly in the media and on the campaign trail, President Bush left the White House with his approval ratings low and little, except his dignity, intact.
If he is to have a Truman-like reprieve in the public eye, it will surely come as we all start to realize that on Iraq, contrary to popular and elite opinion, Bush got it right. Mission accomplished.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, March 16, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Mideast: In most ways, the news from Iraq couldn't be better. People there feel more secure, and are more committed to democracy, than ever. Is it possible that President Bush was right after all?
A poll of average Iraqis conducted by ABC News, the BBC and Japan's NHK shows significant progress on virtually all fronts. Yet, we've heard nary a peep about it from anyone.
Some 85% of respondents said their neighborhood security was "good," vs. 62% a year ago and just 43% in August of 2007. And 52% said security had gotten better in the last year — during the Bush-Petraeus "surge," which was widely ridiculed at the time as an unnecessary escalation of the Iraq War.
Support for democracy jumped to 64%, a 21-percentage-point gain since 2007, according to a report on CNSNews.com. As for how Iraqis felt about the general state of affairs in Iraq, 58% called it "very good" or "quite good," up significantly from 43% last year and 22% in 2007.
When asked what their concerns are today, Iraqis sound a lot like Americans: Jobs and prices are at the top of their list — not war, not security, not terrorism.
In short, it sounds like we not only won the war, but the peace as well. And for those who cast a skeptical eye on the idea that any Islamic country could ever be democratized, it turns out the former President Bush is winning that debate too.
With President Obama in the middle of withdrawing troops from Iraq on a schedule that looks suspiciously identical to the one that Bush had in place, it's safe to say that Obama increasingly sees the wisdom of what his predecessor tried to do in Iraq.
Maybe the rest of us should as well.
It's become de rigueur to deride Bush's "failed" policies in Iraq. No one speaks well of them — except, maybe, Iraqis.
But here are the facts, stark as they are: During his vicious 20-year reign, Saddam Hussein — remember him? — killed an estimated 5% of Iraq's population. That works out to about 5,000 people a month slaughtered by the regime.
You might disagree that Bush was right to depose this murderous thug. But in doing so, you would then have to defend the deaths of thousands of innocents.
For those who say Bush went to war in Iraq under false pretenses — you know, "Bush lied, people died" — there's this: He made a lengthy, nuanced defense of his decision to get rid of Saddam. It was reflected in Congress' own resolution in late 2002, which cited 23 reasons for removing Saddam from power.
The ideas that it was all about oil or that Congress was bamboozled on WMD are both false.
Bush, Congress and our foreign allies all saw the same intelligence, and all came to the same conclusion: Saddam had a nuclear weapons program, and intended to build one as soon as he was able. That was, and remained, true.
After being bashed relentlessly in the media and on the campaign trail, President Bush left the White House with his approval ratings low and little, except his dignity, intact.
If he is to have a Truman-like reprieve in the public eye, it will surely come as we all start to realize that on Iraq, contrary to popular and elite opinion, Bush got it right. Mission accomplished.
Email To Friend |
Billing Veterans’ Private Insurance
This, folks, is another example of what the President and the Democratic
party think of the Veteran.
When there is a need for the Veteran to put his/her body in harms way "well
that's what they get paid for" id the statement coming from the mouths of these
that would shut down the military if it were left to them.
the idea of forcing military to provide insurance for reasons of keeping the
nation from providing what it should for the rehabilitation and health care
for their wounded smacks to me of out and out treason.
But I digress, it is the hatred spilling from the soul of the President and
his followers, socialist communists all. I am afraid that what we sow is
what we will reap. President Obama has sown the seeds of socialism and this
in turn flourishes as communism.
CNSNews.com
Pelosi: Obama Scraps Idea of Billing Veterans’ Private Insurance for Treating Service-Related Injuries
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
By Fred Lucas and Michael Chapman
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) (AP Photo) (CNSNews.com) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced on Wednesday afternoon that President Barack Obama is shelving a controversial proposal that would have forced the private health insurance of veterans to pay for their war- and service-related injuries.
“President Obama listened to the genuine concerns expressed by the veteran service organizations regarding the option of billing service-connected injuries to veterans’ insurance companies,” said Pelosi. “Based on the respect President Obama has for veterans and the principle concerns of our veteran leaders, the president made the decision that combat wounds should not be billed through their insurance policies.”
Pelosi made her comments at a meeting with veterans’ service organizations at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. After her announcement, the group gave her a standing ovation.
The proposal, which was discussed in recent hearings of the Veterans Affairs committees in the House and Senate and in the House Budget Committee, would have shifted more of the cost for service-related injuries from the government--through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)--to the private, third-party insurance plans held by many veterans.
Currently, the VA covers the full cost of medical ailments related to military service and bills third-party insurers only for non-service related ailments.
For example, if an injured veteran is treated for the flu, the veteran’s personal insurance is billed. If the injured veteran is treated for a service-related injury and requires hearing aids or prosthetics, for example, the VA covers the cost. The proposal Obama has decided to abandon would have shifted the expense of treating service-related injuries and illnesses from the VA to private insurance companies.
Last week, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed to the House and Senate committees on veterans’ affairs that the idea to bill veterans’ private individual insurance was being considered by the administration but was not yet a formal proposal.
“It is a consideration. It is not in the budget, but it is a consideration, and I'll be sure that your concerns are delivered,” Shinseki told the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. “And again, we’re talking--in health care--the two aspects of this are delivery of health care and the financing of it. This is about the financing. I want to assure you that there should be no concern about the delivery.”
But the idea had already generated strong opposition from veterans’ groups and members of Congress, and the veterans’ service organizations were making their concerns known to the White House.
Also last week, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, said, “I believe that veterans with service-connected injuries have already paid by putting their lives on the line for our safety. When our troops are injured while serving this country, we should take care of those injuries completely. We shouldn’t nickel and dime them with their care.”
House Veterans Affairs Committee Rep. Michael Michaud (D-Me.) told Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki during the Mar. 10 hearing, “If that [third-party payment proposal] is in the budget, I will not be supporting the budget. It is unconscionable and is an insult to our veterans who've been hurt overseas. So hopefully, you will give that message to OMB as it relates to third-party collections for disabled veterans, which is just unbelievable that anyone would ever think of doing that in this budget.”
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, also expressed opposition. “If this proposal reaches the Senate, I will strongly oppose it,” Burr told CNSNews.com in a statement Monday.
“The VA was created for the purpose of caring for those who have fought and sacrificed for our country, and the care for injuries sustained while serving is our responsibility.”
On Wednesday, before Pelosi announced that Obama was scrapping the proposal, a couple members of Congress spoke with CNSNews.com about the issue.
"I'm for keeping the veterans organization the way it is right now," said Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa). "I look at the VA this way -- 80 years ago the VA system was set up so that people who served to defend our freedom wouldn't have to be on charity. I think the system is still very good."
In reference to U.S. veterans, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) said, " I think they've done enough. I certainly don't want them to have to pay out of their own pockets."
party think of the Veteran.
When there is a need for the Veteran to put his/her body in harms way "well
that's what they get paid for" id the statement coming from the mouths of these
that would shut down the military if it were left to them.
the idea of forcing military to provide insurance for reasons of keeping the
nation from providing what it should for the rehabilitation and health care
for their wounded smacks to me of out and out treason.
But I digress, it is the hatred spilling from the soul of the President and
his followers, socialist communists all. I am afraid that what we sow is
what we will reap. President Obama has sown the seeds of socialism and this
in turn flourishes as communism.
CNSNews.com
Pelosi: Obama Scraps Idea of Billing Veterans’ Private Insurance for Treating Service-Related Injuries
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
By Fred Lucas and Michael Chapman
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) (AP Photo) (CNSNews.com) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced on Wednesday afternoon that President Barack Obama is shelving a controversial proposal that would have forced the private health insurance of veterans to pay for their war- and service-related injuries.
“President Obama listened to the genuine concerns expressed by the veteran service organizations regarding the option of billing service-connected injuries to veterans’ insurance companies,” said Pelosi. “Based on the respect President Obama has for veterans and the principle concerns of our veteran leaders, the president made the decision that combat wounds should not be billed through their insurance policies.”
Pelosi made her comments at a meeting with veterans’ service organizations at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. After her announcement, the group gave her a standing ovation.
The proposal, which was discussed in recent hearings of the Veterans Affairs committees in the House and Senate and in the House Budget Committee, would have shifted more of the cost for service-related injuries from the government--through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)--to the private, third-party insurance plans held by many veterans.
Currently, the VA covers the full cost of medical ailments related to military service and bills third-party insurers only for non-service related ailments.
For example, if an injured veteran is treated for the flu, the veteran’s personal insurance is billed. If the injured veteran is treated for a service-related injury and requires hearing aids or prosthetics, for example, the VA covers the cost. The proposal Obama has decided to abandon would have shifted the expense of treating service-related injuries and illnesses from the VA to private insurance companies.
Last week, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed to the House and Senate committees on veterans’ affairs that the idea to bill veterans’ private individual insurance was being considered by the administration but was not yet a formal proposal.
“It is a consideration. It is not in the budget, but it is a consideration, and I'll be sure that your concerns are delivered,” Shinseki told the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. “And again, we’re talking--in health care--the two aspects of this are delivery of health care and the financing of it. This is about the financing. I want to assure you that there should be no concern about the delivery.”
But the idea had already generated strong opposition from veterans’ groups and members of Congress, and the veterans’ service organizations were making their concerns known to the White House.
Also last week, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, said, “I believe that veterans with service-connected injuries have already paid by putting their lives on the line for our safety. When our troops are injured while serving this country, we should take care of those injuries completely. We shouldn’t nickel and dime them with their care.”
House Veterans Affairs Committee Rep. Michael Michaud (D-Me.) told Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki during the Mar. 10 hearing, “If that [third-party payment proposal] is in the budget, I will not be supporting the budget. It is unconscionable and is an insult to our veterans who've been hurt overseas. So hopefully, you will give that message to OMB as it relates to third-party collections for disabled veterans, which is just unbelievable that anyone would ever think of doing that in this budget.”
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, also expressed opposition. “If this proposal reaches the Senate, I will strongly oppose it,” Burr told CNSNews.com in a statement Monday.
“The VA was created for the purpose of caring for those who have fought and sacrificed for our country, and the care for injuries sustained while serving is our responsibility.”
On Wednesday, before Pelosi announced that Obama was scrapping the proposal, a couple members of Congress spoke with CNSNews.com about the issue.
"I'm for keeping the veterans organization the way it is right now," said Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa). "I look at the VA this way -- 80 years ago the VA system was set up so that people who served to defend our freedom wouldn't have to be on charity. I think the system is still very good."
In reference to U.S. veterans, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) said, " I think they've done enough. I certainly don't want them to have to pay out of their own pockets."
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Goodbye Farmer's Market.
Goodbye Farmer's Market.
OBAMA STRIKES AGAIN!! KILL THE GARDENERS!!9
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:42:44 -0500
> Subject: OBAMA STRIKES AGAIN!! KILL THE GARDENERS!!9 (pleasse read this)
>
> I am writing you today to URGE you to contact your Congressmen and
> Senators, and urge them to oppose Bill HR 875 in its current form.
>
> In the guise of ensuring "FOOD SAFETY", President Obama is pushing
> through a law that will make the ONLY "Federally-sanctioned" as 'safe'
> food, or seeds, those supplied by LARGE COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURAL OUTFITS
> like Monsanto, and will OUTLAW BACKYARD VEGETABLE GARDENS. I know this
> sounds ridiculous, but I have read the text of the law, and NO WHERE IN
> IT ARE ANY EXCEPTIONS FROM THE LAW MADE FOR SMALL BACKYARD VEGETABLE
> GARDENS OR SMALL FARMS. Under the provisions of this law, as written,
> you could NOT, legally, buy heirloom seed and then harvest and re-use
> your own seed; you could ONLY legally purchase "govenment - approved"
> seed. You could NOT, under this law, raise your own vegetables and
> fruits and then sell -- or even GIVE--them to your neighbor. You would
> no longer be able to take your kids down to the local "pick-your-own"
> blueberry or strawberry farms, or buy from the roadside backyard grower
> of garden vegetables, or even grow your own vegetable plants, fruit
> trees, or nut trees, for your own consumption. Under this new law, ANY
> of these acts would be ILLEGAL without first having obtained "government
> approval" that your product is "safe"---BUT, the legal red tape and
> paperwork and INSPECTIONS required, to OBTAIN this "approval", would
> make the expense so great that only the LARGEST agricultural monopolies
> would be able to meet the costs.
>
> I know this isn't the "intent" of the Bill, but there's no language in
> it "exempting" small gardeners or small farmers. The Bill is ANOTHER
> example of the "law of unintended consequences" (just like the recent
> "lead" laws), in that it imposes a "one-size-fits-all" rule regarding
> seed propagation and purchasing, and food propagation, that backyard
> gardeners and small farmers will NOT be able to comply with.
>
> Here's the info on the bill---PLEASE help get the word out, and contact
> your representatives! If the government has total control of the food
> supply--SO THAT WE CAN'T EVEN BE FOOD-INDEPENDENT, BUT MUST RELY ON
> GOVT.-APPROVED SOURCES FOR ALL OUR FOOD--then what's to prevent what
> happened to the Ukraine under Stalin, from happening here?
>
> The info and links on the Bill:
>
> Fight HR 875 - Say good-bye to homegrown Gardens!
>
>
> PLEASE GET ACQUAINTED WITH HR 875 (THE FOOD SAFETY MODERNIZATION ACT OF
> 2009), which is currently under consideration by Congress. The proposed
> bill is in response to the many recent episodes of contaminated food
> problems (i.e. salmonella and peanuts). Like many laws, it is well
> intended, but will have disastrous outcomes:
>
> DO YOU LIKE YOUR HEIRLOOM TOMATOES?........DO YOU APPRECIATE SHARING
> HOME GROWN VEGETABLES WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS?.....do you support local
> farmers.....local farmer's markets.....organic farming practices? ENJOY
> IT WHILE YOU CAN.....THIS BILL HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CRIMINALIZE SHARING
> OR DISTRIBUTING FOOD OR SEEDS THAT ARE NOT SANCTIONED BY THE FEDERAL
> GOVERNMENT.
>
> The bill has the potential to lead to such strict control of the food
> supply, that only the BIG GROWERS will have the facilities and finances
> to conform to the new regulations.
>
> The act can force farmers to use chemicals and genetically modified
> seeds (purchased from the major agricultural companies) in order to make
> the food "safe". The penalties for not using the "safe" seeds and plants
> are so severe (up to $500,000) that it would put local, back yard and
> organic farmers out of business. Seed banks and heirloom plants could be
> forbidden because they could be viewed as a potential source of
> contamination.
>
> HERE IS A LINK TO THE TEXT AND STATUS OF THE BILL. IT IS PENDING A VOTE
> BY THE HOUSE AND SENATE:
>
> http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-875
>
> THE LEGISLATION IS ON A 'FAST TRACK' FOR APPROVAL:
>
> http://ecochildsplay.com/2009/03/10/could-the-food-safety-modernization-act-of-2009-be-the-end-to-farmers-markets-and-organic-farms/
>
>
> I have contacted my Senators and Representative and I ask you to do the
> same. Please contact your congressman and speak out against HR 875 in
> its current form.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.
OBAMA STRIKES AGAIN!! KILL THE GARDENERS!!9
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:42:44 -0500
> Subject: OBAMA STRIKES AGAIN!! KILL THE GARDENERS!!9 (pleasse read this)
>
> I am writing you today to URGE you to contact your Congressmen and
> Senators, and urge them to oppose Bill HR 875 in its current form.
>
> In the guise of ensuring "FOOD SAFETY", President Obama is pushing
> through a law that will make the ONLY "Federally-sanctioned" as 'safe'
> food, or seeds, those supplied by LARGE COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURAL OUTFITS
> like Monsanto, and will OUTLAW BACKYARD VEGETABLE GARDENS. I know this
> sounds ridiculous, but I have read the text of the law, and NO WHERE IN
> IT ARE ANY EXCEPTIONS FROM THE LAW MADE FOR SMALL BACKYARD VEGETABLE
> GARDENS OR SMALL FARMS. Under the provisions of this law, as written,
> you could NOT, legally, buy heirloom seed and then harvest and re-use
> your own seed; you could ONLY legally purchase "govenment - approved"
> seed. You could NOT, under this law, raise your own vegetables and
> fruits and then sell -- or even GIVE--them to your neighbor. You would
> no longer be able to take your kids down to the local "pick-your-own"
> blueberry or strawberry farms, or buy from the roadside backyard grower
> of garden vegetables, or even grow your own vegetable plants, fruit
> trees, or nut trees, for your own consumption. Under this new law, ANY
> of these acts would be ILLEGAL without first having obtained "government
> approval" that your product is "safe"---BUT, the legal red tape and
> paperwork and INSPECTIONS required, to OBTAIN this "approval", would
> make the expense so great that only the LARGEST agricultural monopolies
> would be able to meet the costs.
>
> I know this isn't the "intent" of the Bill, but there's no language in
> it "exempting" small gardeners or small farmers. The Bill is ANOTHER
> example of the "law of unintended consequences" (just like the recent
> "lead" laws), in that it imposes a "one-size-fits-all" rule regarding
> seed propagation and purchasing, and food propagation, that backyard
> gardeners and small farmers will NOT be able to comply with.
>
> Here's the info on the bill---PLEASE help get the word out, and contact
> your representatives! If the government has total control of the food
> supply--SO THAT WE CAN'T EVEN BE FOOD-INDEPENDENT, BUT MUST RELY ON
> GOVT.-APPROVED SOURCES FOR ALL OUR FOOD--then what's to prevent what
> happened to the Ukraine under Stalin, from happening here?
>
> The info and links on the Bill:
>
> Fight HR 875 - Say good-bye to homegrown Gardens!
>
>
> PLEASE GET ACQUAINTED WITH HR 875 (THE FOOD SAFETY MODERNIZATION ACT OF
> 2009), which is currently under consideration by Congress. The proposed
> bill is in response to the many recent episodes of contaminated food
> problems (i.e. salmonella and peanuts). Like many laws, it is well
> intended, but will have disastrous outcomes:
>
> DO YOU LIKE YOUR HEIRLOOM TOMATOES?........DO YOU APPRECIATE SHARING
> HOME GROWN VEGETABLES WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS?.....do you support local
> farmers.....local farmer's markets.....organic farming practices? ENJOY
> IT WHILE YOU CAN.....THIS BILL HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CRIMINALIZE SHARING
> OR DISTRIBUTING FOOD OR SEEDS THAT ARE NOT SANCTIONED BY THE FEDERAL
> GOVERNMENT.
>
> The bill has the potential to lead to such strict control of the food
> supply, that only the BIG GROWERS will have the facilities and finances
> to conform to the new regulations.
>
> The act can force farmers to use chemicals and genetically modified
> seeds (purchased from the major agricultural companies) in order to make
> the food "safe". The penalties for not using the "safe" seeds and plants
> are so severe (up to $500,000) that it would put local, back yard and
> organic farmers out of business. Seed banks and heirloom plants could be
> forbidden because they could be viewed as a potential source of
> contamination.
>
> HERE IS A LINK TO THE TEXT AND STATUS OF THE BILL. IT IS PENDING A VOTE
> BY THE HOUSE AND SENATE:
>
> http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-875
>
> THE LEGISLATION IS ON A 'FAST TRACK' FOR APPROVAL:
>
> http://ecochildsplay.com/2009/03/10/could-the-food-safety-modernization-act-of-2009-be-the-end-to-farmers-markets-and-organic-farms/
>
>
> I have contacted my Senators and Representative and I ask you to do the
> same. Please contact your congressman and speak out against HR 875 in
> its current form.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.
A democrat's confession
I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now
marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.
I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies'
profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the
government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.
I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a
better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I voted Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long
as nobody is offended by it.
I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust
that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because
they now think we're good people.
I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to
own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to
protect me from murderers and thieves.
I voted Democrat because I believe that people who
can't tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that
the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I
don't start driving a Prius.
I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned about the
slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death
row inmates alive.
I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not
be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to
break even and give the rest away to the government for
redistribution as THEY see fit.
I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to
rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe
kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my
rectum that it is unlikely that I'll ever have another
point of view.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away
everything they don't own."
"The problem with Socialism is that you
eventually run out of other peoples's
money". Margaret Thatcher
I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now
marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.
I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies'
profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the
government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.
I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a
better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I voted Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long
as nobody is offended by it.
I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust
that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because
they now think we're good people.
I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to
own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to
protect me from murderers and thieves.
I voted Democrat because I believe that people who
can't tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that
the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I
don't start driving a Prius.
I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned about the
slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death
row inmates alive.
I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not
be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to
break even and give the rest away to the government for
redistribution as THEY see fit.
I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to
rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe
kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my
rectum that it is unlikely that I'll ever have another
point of view.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away
everything they don't own."
"The problem with Socialism is that you
eventually run out of other peoples's
money". Margaret Thatcher
Economic terms we should all know..
Economic terms we should all know..
1. Recession: when your neighbor loses his job.
2. Depression: when you lose yours..
3. Recovery: when Obama loses his.
____________________________________________________________
1. Recession: when your neighbor loses his job.
2. Depression: when you lose yours..
3. Recovery: when Obama loses his.
____________________________________________________________
Sunday, March 15, 2009
AN OPINION FROM THE EDITOR
THIS IS YOUR EDITOR VENTING SOME THOUGHTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELEVANT TO TODAY'S FOULED AS USUAL SO CALLED LEADERS AND THUSLY OUR COUNTRY.
AGAIN TODAY THERE ARE READINGS, CLIPS OF READINGS, IN THE NEWS AND ON THE TUBE ABOUT THE NEED FOR A 'PRIVATE' CIVILIAN ARMY. A LA THE BROWN SHIRTS OF 1920 TO 1945 GERMANY AND THE BEGINNING OF THE NAZI PARTY.
THE REASON THAT OBAMA WANTS A CIVILIAN POLICE FORCE IS FOR THE EVENTUAL USE . REMEMBER IF YOU WILL (THOSE WHO WERE AROUND AT THAT TIME, AND THOSE THAT WERE TAUGHT IN THE PAST REAL SCHOOLS OF RIGHTEOUS EDUCATION) THAT THE COLLAPSE OF THE MARK AND THE LOSS OF JOBS CREATED THE RIPE TIMING FOR THE REAL POLITICAL DISCORD THAT HITLER WANTED.
WITH DISCORD COMES HATE AND WITH HATE COMES DESPAIR. THIS FURTHER AGGRAVATES THE RIOTOUS SITUATION AND LAYS BIRTH FOR THE ACTION OF IMPLEMENTING THE BROWN SHIRTS.
I DIGRESS FOR A MOMENT TO LAY OUT WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW TODAY IN OUR OWN COUNTRY THANKS TO THE SELF PROCLAIMED MESSIAH.
1. Origins and early existence: 1918-1923 GERMANY 2008 TO ???? USA
IN A MERE 5 YEARS HITLER WAS ABLE TO CAUSE ENOUGH DISCORD
HATE AND POVERTY THAT THE RECRUITMENT OF THE BROWN
SHIRTS WAS SIMPLIFIED BY THE PROMISES THAT BY JOINING THE
PEOPLE WOULD RISE TO POWER AND AGAIN DOMINATE THEIR
FUTURE.
IF IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS (ENDING WITH A POSSIBLE
REELECTION OF OBAMA) WE DO NOT REACT IN A POSITIVE WAY
WE WILL HAVE THE BROWN SHIRTS OF AMERICA FACING US MUCH
THE SAME WAY THE GERMAN PEOPLE DID BY 1923.
THIS ECONOMIC DISASTER, FOR THE MAJOR PART, CAN BE LAID
AT THE FEET OBAMA, FRANK, DODD, BIDEN, PELOSI, REED AND
REST OF THE DEMOCRATS THAT ARE SELF-SERVING USERS OF
TAX MONEY TO RETAIN POWER. AS POWER IS ALL THEY KNOW.
OBAMA IS USING THE ECONOMIC CRISIS TO FORWARD HIS
AGENDA OF HAVING A 'CIVILIAN ARMY'. AND TO WHAT END IS
THE GOAL. IT CAN ONLY BE THE SUPPRESSION OF THE PEOPLES
RIGHTS.
THUS THE ORIGIN OF OBAMA'S RISE FROM THE DEPTHS.
2 Rise to power: 1925-1933
HITLER USED THE RIOTS AND CLASHES AND THE JEWISH
SITUATION TO SOLIDIFY HIS POWER AND IT BECAME ABSOLUTE
BY SEPT. 1933.
THE FEDERAL (GERMAN) ELECTIONS RESULTED IN HIS FINAL
RISE .
DOES OBAMA HAVE THAT MANY YEARS TO SOLIDIFY HIS
POSITION? AT THE RATE HE IS GOING IT WILL BE SOONER
THAN YOU THINK.
CONSIDER THIS, IT TOOK MINIMUM TIME A BIT OVER 143 DAYS
ACTING AS A SENATOR AND THEN MERE MONTHS WITH THE
HELP OF A MESMERIZED MEDIA TO BECOME THE CANDIDATE
OF CHOICE (NOT MINE THO) AND THEN TO WIN THE ELECTION.
THUS HIS RISE TO POWER. AND NOTE IT WAS WITH FEDERAL
ELECTION. IRONIC YES
3 In power: 1933-1945
HITLER WAS ABLE TO RETAIN POWER FOR AS LONG AS DID BY
VIRTUE OF FEAR (GESTOPO AND SS). BUT THE TIME WAS NOT WHAT
WAS PLANED FOR A 1000 YEAR REIFH. BUT GREED AND DISTRUST
REARED ITS UGLY HEAD AND HITLER HAD MANY OF HIS BEST
GENERALS LILLED MANY OTHERS JUST FLAT GAVE UP. AND IN
THE END THE COLLAPSE CAME.
OBAMA ON THE OTHER HAND MUST FACE REELECTION THAT IS
IF OUR GOVERNMENT THEN IS STILL FREE. THIS MIGHT LIMIT
TENURE AGAIN IF WE ARE STILL ABLE TO EXERCISE OUR SECRET
VOTE (THAT IS NOT LIKE THE PROPOSED UNION VOTE -
OPEN) AND WITH OUT THE BROWN SHIRTS HELPING MAKE
OUR MARK.
4 War and eclipse
AS THE WARS HITLER WAS FIGHTING WERE GOING AWRY
AND HIS GENERALS BEING KILLED AT HIS ORDER OR DIS-
OBEYING FULTILE ORDERS HIS DEMISE WAS INEVITABLE
AND RATHER THAN FACE FAULT HE CHOSE TO END HIS LIFE.
THUS WAR AND ECLIPSE FOR THE DEMON OF OUR TIME.
AS FOR THE CURRENT IDIOT IN CHARGE WE FACE WAR
WITH ANY NUMBER OF ARAB NATIONS THAT TOTALLY HATE
US FOR THE SOLE REASON WE ARE'FREE'
MILIITARY STRENGTH IS NOT TO RUN ROUGH SHOD OVER
ANOTHER BUT RATHER SERVE NOTICE THAT
TRANSGRESSIONS AGAINST US WILL NOT SERVE THE
PERPETRATOR WELL. AND THERE IN IS THE PROBLEM I
HAVE. AFTER EVERY WAR THE IS PAID FOR IN AMERICAN
BLOOD THE PEACENICS COME TO THE FRONT AND CARVE
UP THE MILITARY. AND AT THE SAME TIME THEY BEGIN TO
THE BUILD UP OF CROOKED MEMBERSHIP IN ANY
NUMBER OF BOGUS ENTITIES THAT BECOME A PART OF
SPEARHEAD TO DESTROY THE COUNTRY. ONE WAY OR
ANOTHER. STRIKES (BREAK THE COMPANY), SLOWDOWNS,
TC.
HOW THIS IS HAPPENING NOW IS THE MEDIA IS STILL
PREACHING THE GODLINESS OF OBAMA. YET TRUTH IS
THIS COMMUNIST IS THE CAUSE OF ONE THIRD OF THE
NATIONS WEALTH GOING DOWN THE TUBES, AND ALL OF
WITH THE PLEASURE OF A BUNCH OF CRONIES IN THE
HOUSE AND SENATE.
THUS THE ECLIPSE OF A STRONG MILITARY AND THE
SHADOW IS ABOUT THERE.
5. Recuitment and enlistment.
SAY NO TO ANY ATTEMPT TO CREATE A CIVILIAN FORCE.
ITS CHARTER WOULD SURELY BE TO AID IN DESTROYING
AND FRACTURING THE NATION,
BEFORE JOINING SOMETHING FIND OUT WHO, WHAT,
WHY. THEN MAKE YOUR DECISION.
DO NOT LET YOURSELF BE TALKED OR LURED INTO THAT
WHICH YOU KNOW IS WRONG. IF IT IS WRONG FOR ONE
IT IS WRONG PERIOD.
IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR CRITICS AND YOUR OPINIONS, I AM DAVE ANDERSON OAD@ALASAKA.NET
AGAIN TODAY THERE ARE READINGS, CLIPS OF READINGS, IN THE NEWS AND ON THE TUBE ABOUT THE NEED FOR A 'PRIVATE' CIVILIAN ARMY. A LA THE BROWN SHIRTS OF 1920 TO 1945 GERMANY AND THE BEGINNING OF THE NAZI PARTY.
THE REASON THAT OBAMA WANTS A CIVILIAN POLICE FORCE IS FOR THE EVENTUAL USE . REMEMBER IF YOU WILL (THOSE WHO WERE AROUND AT THAT TIME, AND THOSE THAT WERE TAUGHT IN THE PAST REAL SCHOOLS OF RIGHTEOUS EDUCATION) THAT THE COLLAPSE OF THE MARK AND THE LOSS OF JOBS CREATED THE RIPE TIMING FOR THE REAL POLITICAL DISCORD THAT HITLER WANTED.
WITH DISCORD COMES HATE AND WITH HATE COMES DESPAIR. THIS FURTHER AGGRAVATES THE RIOTOUS SITUATION AND LAYS BIRTH FOR THE ACTION OF IMPLEMENTING THE BROWN SHIRTS.
I DIGRESS FOR A MOMENT TO LAY OUT WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW TODAY IN OUR OWN COUNTRY THANKS TO THE SELF PROCLAIMED MESSIAH.
1. Origins and early existence: 1918-1923 GERMANY 2008 TO ???? USA
IN A MERE 5 YEARS HITLER WAS ABLE TO CAUSE ENOUGH DISCORD
HATE AND POVERTY THAT THE RECRUITMENT OF THE BROWN
SHIRTS WAS SIMPLIFIED BY THE PROMISES THAT BY JOINING THE
PEOPLE WOULD RISE TO POWER AND AGAIN DOMINATE THEIR
FUTURE.
IF IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS (ENDING WITH A POSSIBLE
REELECTION OF OBAMA) WE DO NOT REACT IN A POSITIVE WAY
WE WILL HAVE THE BROWN SHIRTS OF AMERICA FACING US MUCH
THE SAME WAY THE GERMAN PEOPLE DID BY 1923.
THIS ECONOMIC DISASTER, FOR THE MAJOR PART, CAN BE LAID
AT THE FEET OBAMA, FRANK, DODD, BIDEN, PELOSI, REED AND
REST OF THE DEMOCRATS THAT ARE SELF-SERVING USERS OF
TAX MONEY TO RETAIN POWER. AS POWER IS ALL THEY KNOW.
OBAMA IS USING THE ECONOMIC CRISIS TO FORWARD HIS
AGENDA OF HAVING A 'CIVILIAN ARMY'. AND TO WHAT END IS
THE GOAL. IT CAN ONLY BE THE SUPPRESSION OF THE PEOPLES
RIGHTS.
THUS THE ORIGIN OF OBAMA'S RISE FROM THE DEPTHS.
2 Rise to power: 1925-1933
HITLER USED THE RIOTS AND CLASHES AND THE JEWISH
SITUATION TO SOLIDIFY HIS POWER AND IT BECAME ABSOLUTE
BY SEPT. 1933.
THE FEDERAL (GERMAN) ELECTIONS RESULTED IN HIS FINAL
RISE .
DOES OBAMA HAVE THAT MANY YEARS TO SOLIDIFY HIS
POSITION? AT THE RATE HE IS GOING IT WILL BE SOONER
THAN YOU THINK.
CONSIDER THIS, IT TOOK MINIMUM TIME A BIT OVER 143 DAYS
ACTING AS A SENATOR AND THEN MERE MONTHS WITH THE
HELP OF A MESMERIZED MEDIA TO BECOME THE CANDIDATE
OF CHOICE (NOT MINE THO) AND THEN TO WIN THE ELECTION.
THUS HIS RISE TO POWER. AND NOTE IT WAS WITH FEDERAL
ELECTION. IRONIC YES
3 In power: 1933-1945
HITLER WAS ABLE TO RETAIN POWER FOR AS LONG AS DID BY
VIRTUE OF FEAR (GESTOPO AND SS). BUT THE TIME WAS NOT WHAT
WAS PLANED FOR A 1000 YEAR REIFH. BUT GREED AND DISTRUST
REARED ITS UGLY HEAD AND HITLER HAD MANY OF HIS BEST
GENERALS LILLED MANY OTHERS JUST FLAT GAVE UP. AND IN
THE END THE COLLAPSE CAME.
OBAMA ON THE OTHER HAND MUST FACE REELECTION THAT IS
IF OUR GOVERNMENT THEN IS STILL FREE. THIS MIGHT LIMIT
TENURE AGAIN IF WE ARE STILL ABLE TO EXERCISE OUR SECRET
VOTE (THAT IS NOT LIKE THE PROPOSED UNION VOTE -
OPEN) AND WITH OUT THE BROWN SHIRTS HELPING MAKE
OUR MARK.
4 War and eclipse
AS THE WARS HITLER WAS FIGHTING WERE GOING AWRY
AND HIS GENERALS BEING KILLED AT HIS ORDER OR DIS-
OBEYING FULTILE ORDERS HIS DEMISE WAS INEVITABLE
AND RATHER THAN FACE FAULT HE CHOSE TO END HIS LIFE.
THUS WAR AND ECLIPSE FOR THE DEMON OF OUR TIME.
AS FOR THE CURRENT IDIOT IN CHARGE WE FACE WAR
WITH ANY NUMBER OF ARAB NATIONS THAT TOTALLY HATE
US FOR THE SOLE REASON WE ARE'FREE'
MILIITARY STRENGTH IS NOT TO RUN ROUGH SHOD OVER
ANOTHER BUT RATHER SERVE NOTICE THAT
TRANSGRESSIONS AGAINST US WILL NOT SERVE THE
PERPETRATOR WELL. AND THERE IN IS THE PROBLEM I
HAVE. AFTER EVERY WAR THE IS PAID FOR IN AMERICAN
BLOOD THE PEACENICS COME TO THE FRONT AND CARVE
UP THE MILITARY. AND AT THE SAME TIME THEY BEGIN TO
THE BUILD UP OF CROOKED MEMBERSHIP IN ANY
NUMBER OF BOGUS ENTITIES THAT BECOME A PART OF
SPEARHEAD TO DESTROY THE COUNTRY. ONE WAY OR
ANOTHER. STRIKES (BREAK THE COMPANY), SLOWDOWNS,
TC.
HOW THIS IS HAPPENING NOW IS THE MEDIA IS STILL
PREACHING THE GODLINESS OF OBAMA. YET TRUTH IS
THIS COMMUNIST IS THE CAUSE OF ONE THIRD OF THE
NATIONS WEALTH GOING DOWN THE TUBES, AND ALL OF
WITH THE PLEASURE OF A BUNCH OF CRONIES IN THE
HOUSE AND SENATE.
THUS THE ECLIPSE OF A STRONG MILITARY AND THE
SHADOW IS ABOUT THERE.
5. Recuitment and enlistment.
SAY NO TO ANY ATTEMPT TO CREATE A CIVILIAN FORCE.
ITS CHARTER WOULD SURELY BE TO AID IN DESTROYING
AND FRACTURING THE NATION,
BEFORE JOINING SOMETHING FIND OUT WHO, WHAT,
WHY. THEN MAKE YOUR DECISION.
DO NOT LET YOURSELF BE TALKED OR LURED INTO THAT
WHICH YOU KNOW IS WRONG. IF IT IS WRONG FOR ONE
IT IS WRONG PERIOD.
IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR CRITICS AND YOUR OPINIONS, I AM DAVE ANDERSON OAD@ALASAKA.NET
Trouble in Mexico?
Those groups of people wanting to disarm our country must have lost all association with reality, Unarmed Masses are ripe for plucking, Remember how the German nation was taken from the internal revolt that was in the beginning a way to overturn the government, and being unarmed those opposed to the the take over were
unable to fight the SS, Gestapo and the the Brown shirts, Unarmed is an invitation to destruction of the free nation,
Our internal traitors (starting with Obama0 will use any and all means to disarm us and turn us into a slave state. Beware of the ides of March for the Traitor is
acting now. I am Dave Anderson oad@alaska.net comments please.
Trouble in Mexico? Anti-Gunners Say, "Blame America."
Friday, March 13, 2009
Over the past few weeks, the number of stories in the press regarding the escalating violence in Mexico has dramatically increased. Now, hardly a day goes by when another story describing the atrocities committed by violent drug cartels cannot be found in an American newspaper or on a cable news channel.
Gun owners need to pay attention to these stories, because the opponents of our Second Amendment rights are starting to use this situation as a pretext to push their gun ban agenda here in the United States.
New Attorney General Eric Holder is the first Administration official to cite Mexican drug cartel killings as an excuse to reinstate the semi-auto ban. And now some in Congress have jumped on the bandwagon.
Just this week, two House subcommittees held hearings on the issue. The Subcommittee on Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism of the House Homeland Security Committee had a hearing entitled "Border Violence: An Examination of DHS Strategies and Resources," while the House subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs held a hearing entitled "Money, Guns, and Drugs: Are U.S. Inputs Fueling Violence on the U.S.-Mexico Border." At the latter hearing, leading anti-gun absolutist Tom Diaz (senior policy analyst at the Violence Policy Center) testified, calling for a litany of new gun laws including the reinstatement of the 1994 "assault weapons" and magazine ban. Andrew Selee, Director of the Woodrow Wilson Center's Mexico Institute echoed the call for more gun laws.
Fortunately, Arizona State Senator Jonathon Paton (R-AZ) also testified but noted that new gun laws were not the answer. Paton correctly stated that securing our borders, increased local federal cooperation and enforcing our existing gun laws is the right approach. NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox also provided written testimony to the subcommittee that you can read here.
But don't count on the gun ban crowd to get that message. They see an opportunity to use fear created by the violence in Mexico to advance their domestic anti-gun agenda.
The Senate Judiciary Committee's Crime and Drugs subcommittee and the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control have already set a hearing for next Tuesday, March 17. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) is expected to use that forum to blame American gun owners and American gun laws for the violence in Mexico. Her solution, once again, will almost certainly be to restrict the rights of law-abiding Americans. We can once again expect Senator "Mr. and Mrs. American, turn them in" to call for a new gun ban. And on March 25, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on U.S.—Mexico Border Violence.
Gun owners know that restricting our rights will not stop Mexican drug lords from arming themselves. More U.S. gun laws will not stop these mass murderers who are already armed with military hardware such as grenades, anti-tank missiles, and mortars--weapons that are certainly not generally available to American gun buyers.
Just as they have so many times before, the gun ban crowd is blaming criminal violence—this time in a foreign country—on American gun owners. If we are to prevail and stop them from dismantling our rights, we have to be vigilant. NRA will continue to monitor these hearings and report to you on their content.
To read additional testimony and opening remarks from the House subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs hearing, please use the following links:
http://nationalsecurity.oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2343
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ushousehearings/031209/MemobytheMajorityStaff.pdf
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ushousehearings/031209/OpeningStmntJeffFlake.pdf
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ushousehearings/031209/TestimonyMichaelABraun.pdf
Copyright 2009, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy
Links to Congress
The U.S. Senate
U.S. House of Representatives
Senate Schedule
House schedule today
Search THOMAS
New Jersey Assembly Passes Two Pro-Hunting Measures!
Connecticut: “Micro-Stamping” Bill Heard Yesterday in Hartford
Your Help is Needed Today to Protect Arkansas’ Hunting Heritage!
South Dakota: Governor Signs Bill Repealing Waiting Period!
New Hampshire: Join GO-NH for Their Free “Round-Up” on Tuesday, March 17!
MORE >>
Voter Information
Grass Roots Activism
Volunteers Needed In Phoenix For 2009 NRA Annual Meetings
Redesigned NRA T-Shirt Available NOW!
"I'm A Bitter Gun Owner And I Vote!" Yard Signs Available Now
Another Way To Get Involved And Make A Difference
Time Is Running Out To Register To Vote!
National Park Service Calls For Lead Ammo Ban: The National Park Service (NPS) has announced its intention to ban traditional ammunition containing lead in all its parks. The move would needlessly push hunters to use more costly bullets made of tungsten, copper, and steel. The restrictions, set to take effect by the end of 2010, were announced without regard to science and without soliciting feedback from sportsmens' groups.
Volunteers Needed In Phoenix For 2009 NRA Annual Meetings: The 2009 NRA Annual Meetings & Exhibits will be an exciting weekend, as thousands of NRA members will come together May 15-17, 2009, in Phoenix, AZ. You can contribute to the success of our meeting by participating as an Annual Meeting Volunteer.
What Should We Expect Now from the White House? Update for the Second Amendment Book Bomb: With Attorney General Eric Holder indicating his intent to reinstate the ban on the sale of "assault weapons," Independent Institute Research Fellow Stephen P. Halbrook was recently interviewed by Lou Dobbs on CNN on the new threats of gun control.
unable to fight the SS, Gestapo and the the Brown shirts, Unarmed is an invitation to destruction of the free nation,
Our internal traitors (starting with Obama0 will use any and all means to disarm us and turn us into a slave state. Beware of the ides of March for the Traitor is
acting now. I am Dave Anderson oad@alaska.net comments please.
Trouble in Mexico? Anti-Gunners Say, "Blame America."
Friday, March 13, 2009
Over the past few weeks, the number of stories in the press regarding the escalating violence in Mexico has dramatically increased. Now, hardly a day goes by when another story describing the atrocities committed by violent drug cartels cannot be found in an American newspaper or on a cable news channel.
Gun owners need to pay attention to these stories, because the opponents of our Second Amendment rights are starting to use this situation as a pretext to push their gun ban agenda here in the United States.
New Attorney General Eric Holder is the first Administration official to cite Mexican drug cartel killings as an excuse to reinstate the semi-auto ban. And now some in Congress have jumped on the bandwagon.
Just this week, two House subcommittees held hearings on the issue. The Subcommittee on Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism of the House Homeland Security Committee had a hearing entitled "Border Violence: An Examination of DHS Strategies and Resources," while the House subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs held a hearing entitled "Money, Guns, and Drugs: Are U.S. Inputs Fueling Violence on the U.S.-Mexico Border." At the latter hearing, leading anti-gun absolutist Tom Diaz (senior policy analyst at the Violence Policy Center) testified, calling for a litany of new gun laws including the reinstatement of the 1994 "assault weapons" and magazine ban. Andrew Selee, Director of the Woodrow Wilson Center's Mexico Institute echoed the call for more gun laws.
Fortunately, Arizona State Senator Jonathon Paton (R-AZ) also testified but noted that new gun laws were not the answer. Paton correctly stated that securing our borders, increased local federal cooperation and enforcing our existing gun laws is the right approach. NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox also provided written testimony to the subcommittee that you can read here.
But don't count on the gun ban crowd to get that message. They see an opportunity to use fear created by the violence in Mexico to advance their domestic anti-gun agenda.
The Senate Judiciary Committee's Crime and Drugs subcommittee and the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control have already set a hearing for next Tuesday, March 17. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) is expected to use that forum to blame American gun owners and American gun laws for the violence in Mexico. Her solution, once again, will almost certainly be to restrict the rights of law-abiding Americans. We can once again expect Senator "Mr. and Mrs. American, turn them in" to call for a new gun ban. And on March 25, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on U.S.—Mexico Border Violence.
Gun owners know that restricting our rights will not stop Mexican drug lords from arming themselves. More U.S. gun laws will not stop these mass murderers who are already armed with military hardware such as grenades, anti-tank missiles, and mortars--weapons that are certainly not generally available to American gun buyers.
Just as they have so many times before, the gun ban crowd is blaming criminal violence—this time in a foreign country—on American gun owners. If we are to prevail and stop them from dismantling our rights, we have to be vigilant. NRA will continue to monitor these hearings and report to you on their content.
To read additional testimony and opening remarks from the House subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs hearing, please use the following links:
http://nationalsecurity.oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2343
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ushousehearings/031209/MemobytheMajorityStaff.pdf
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ushousehearings/031209/OpeningStmntJeffFlake.pdf
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ushousehearings/031209/TestimonyMichaelABraun.pdf
Copyright 2009, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy
Links to Congress
The U.S. Senate
U.S. House of Representatives
Senate Schedule
House schedule today
Search THOMAS
New Jersey Assembly Passes Two Pro-Hunting Measures!
Connecticut: “Micro-Stamping” Bill Heard Yesterday in Hartford
Your Help is Needed Today to Protect Arkansas’ Hunting Heritage!
South Dakota: Governor Signs Bill Repealing Waiting Period!
New Hampshire: Join GO-NH for Their Free “Round-Up” on Tuesday, March 17!
MORE >>
Voter Information
Grass Roots Activism
Volunteers Needed In Phoenix For 2009 NRA Annual Meetings
Redesigned NRA T-Shirt Available NOW!
"I'm A Bitter Gun Owner And I Vote!" Yard Signs Available Now
Another Way To Get Involved And Make A Difference
Time Is Running Out To Register To Vote!
National Park Service Calls For Lead Ammo Ban: The National Park Service (NPS) has announced its intention to ban traditional ammunition containing lead in all its parks. The move would needlessly push hunters to use more costly bullets made of tungsten, copper, and steel. The restrictions, set to take effect by the end of 2010, were announced without regard to science and without soliciting feedback from sportsmens' groups.
Volunteers Needed In Phoenix For 2009 NRA Annual Meetings: The 2009 NRA Annual Meetings & Exhibits will be an exciting weekend, as thousands of NRA members will come together May 15-17, 2009, in Phoenix, AZ. You can contribute to the success of our meeting by participating as an Annual Meeting Volunteer.
What Should We Expect Now from the White House? Update for the Second Amendment Book Bomb: With Attorney General Eric Holder indicating his intent to reinstate the ban on the sale of "assault weapons," Independent Institute Research Fellow Stephen P. Halbrook was recently interviewed by Lou Dobbs on CNN on the new threats of gun control.
Fourth Nominee Withdraws From Treasury's Roster
Fourth Nominee Withdraws From Treasury's Roster
By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 13, 2009; Page D01
H. Rodgin Cohen, chairman of the New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, has withdrawn his name from consideration for deputy Treasury secretary, becoming the fourth pick for a prominent Treasury Department post to pull out in recent weeks.
A prominent attorney who has advised many of the top Wall Street firms, Cohen dropped out after the White House found an issue during his vetting process, two sources familiar with the matter said. The sources declined to identify the reason. Cohen did not respond to messages seeking comment.
Though the Treasury is filling its lower-level positions, the thin ranks on the senior levels are taking a toll on the department's ability to deal with a financial crisis that continues to deepen in scope and complexity, government and industry officials say.
Gus O'Donnell, Cabinet Secretary for the British government, was quoted this week in British news reports saying it has been "unbelievably difficult" to talk to people at the U.S. Treasury: "There is nobody there."
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Wednesday during a briefing with reporters that he was "a little surprised" when told of the comments. He added that he has been working closely with British officials and had not heard of any communication problems.
Treasury officials say the staffing shortage has not hindered their ability to address the financial crisis. In just over a month, the department has announced a "stress test" to capitalize banks in case the economy worsens, a plan to aid homeowners and an initiative to restart the consumer lending markets. Treasury officials also played a key role on the federal budget announced last month and are working on a plan to tackle the toxic assets clogging the books of banks as well as a plan to overhaul financial regulation.
Others who removed themselves from consideration in recent weeks include Annette Nazareth, an attorney who was being considered for the deputy post; Lee Sachs, a former Treasury official in the Clinton administration, who was expected to be the under secretary for domestic finance; and International Monetary Fund official Caroline Atkinson, who was in line for under secretary for international affairs.
Lael Brainard, deputy national economic adviser under Clinton who was set to take a post at the State Department, instead is expected to be nominated as Treasury under secretary for international affairs, administration officials have said.
By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 13, 2009; Page D01
H. Rodgin Cohen, chairman of the New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, has withdrawn his name from consideration for deputy Treasury secretary, becoming the fourth pick for a prominent Treasury Department post to pull out in recent weeks.
A prominent attorney who has advised many of the top Wall Street firms, Cohen dropped out after the White House found an issue during his vetting process, two sources familiar with the matter said. The sources declined to identify the reason. Cohen did not respond to messages seeking comment.
Though the Treasury is filling its lower-level positions, the thin ranks on the senior levels are taking a toll on the department's ability to deal with a financial crisis that continues to deepen in scope and complexity, government and industry officials say.
Gus O'Donnell, Cabinet Secretary for the British government, was quoted this week in British news reports saying it has been "unbelievably difficult" to talk to people at the U.S. Treasury: "There is nobody there."
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Wednesday during a briefing with reporters that he was "a little surprised" when told of the comments. He added that he has been working closely with British officials and had not heard of any communication problems.
Treasury officials say the staffing shortage has not hindered their ability to address the financial crisis. In just over a month, the department has announced a "stress test" to capitalize banks in case the economy worsens, a plan to aid homeowners and an initiative to restart the consumer lending markets. Treasury officials also played a key role on the federal budget announced last month and are working on a plan to tackle the toxic assets clogging the books of banks as well as a plan to overhaul financial regulation.
Others who removed themselves from consideration in recent weeks include Annette Nazareth, an attorney who was being considered for the deputy post; Lee Sachs, a former Treasury official in the Clinton administration, who was expected to be the under secretary for domestic finance; and International Monetary Fund official Caroline Atkinson, who was in line for under secretary for international affairs.
Lael Brainard, deputy national economic adviser under Clinton who was set to take a post at the State Department, instead is expected to be nominated as Treasury under secretary for international affairs, administration officials have said.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)