…at the White House.
The folks at the National Right to Work have put together this video emphasizing the Obama White House’s unnaturally close relationship with big labor’s bosses. This is a clear violation of the President’s campaign promise to keep lobbyists out of positions of influence in his administration. Of course, he’s already broken that promise many times over.
by Michelle Malkin at Townhall.com
There are more loopholes in President Obama’s proposed “spending freeze” than in an Olympic volleyball net. Gargantuan government entitlements (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) are exempt. A half-trillion in unspent stimulus money is exempt. Foreign aid is exempt. The Democrats’ proposed $154 billion jobs bill (Stimulus II) is exempt.
Pet federal education programs will be exempt (including $4 billion for the White House “Race to the Top” standards initiative and an additional $1.35 billion he just requested in the 2011 budget). Green jobs spending will be exempt. (Obama proposed $10 billion in new clean energy spending earlier this month.) Electorally driven tax-credit expansions will be exempt. The health care takeover plan is not included. As even The New York Times reported, the “estimated $250 billion in savings over 10 years would be less than 3 percent of the roughly $9 trillion in additional deficits the government is expected to accumulate over that time.”
Which amounts to a molecule in a drop of the ocean of red ink in which American taxpayers have been drowning.
The current Spender-in-Chief unveiled details of this lofty new work of political fiction on Monday with more fanfare than a new “Twilight” title. It was supposed to be the centerpiece of the State of the Union address. But by Tuesday morning, Obama’s illusion of fiscal discipline had been shredded left, right and center. By Tuesday afternoon, irritated White House spokesman Robert Gibbs was already downplaying the gimmickry. It’s just something Obama will “mention,” Gibbs bristled.
After campaign videos of Obama repeatedly deriding “hatchet”-wielding spending freezes spread like Kudzu across the Internet, official White House blogger Jared Bernstein tried to control the widespread hypocrisy charges:
“During the campaign, you may recall that John McCain touted option 1 — the hatchet approach of an across-the-board freeze.
“The President was critical of that approach then, …
by Ken Blackwell at Townhall.com
Dawn Johnsen is President Obama’s nominee to head the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). It’s arguably the most important office at DoJ. OLC sets policy for the entire federal government.
When not serving in government, Dawn Johnsen has spent her career promoting abortion-on-demand. She denies there is even such a thing as Partial-Birth Abortion. Even the term, she maintains, is “intentionally provocative.” She does not think that “progressives”—that’s PC-speak for liberal—should suggest that abortion is ever a tragedy.
Not for Dawn Johnsen Bill Clinton’s slippery formulation: “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.” Dismiss for the moment that Bill and Hillary Clinton did everything they could in their eight years to promote abortion world-wide. The only places they made abortion rare were on the Moon and in Antarctica.
Even the Clintons’ basic premise was flawed. If abortion is “a fundamental constitutional right,” as they said in every official document, then why should it be rare? Is there any other fundamental constitutional right we want to be rare?
Hillary once said abortion is “wrong.” (Newsweek, 31 October 1994). Only once. But she pressed governments around the world to legalize it. That’s an odd way to deal with something you think is wrong.
Dawn Johnsen doesn’t think abortion is wrong at all. She is all for it.
Two of the GOP candidates for Arkansas’ Senate seat this year have launched the first TV ads of the campaign. Col. Conrad Reynolds and Curtis Coleman both claim to be the first of the nine announced candidates to take their message to the television.
Reynold’s ad announces his upcoming campaign tour featuring Sam Wurzelbacher, aka Joe the Plumber, later this month. Coleman’s ad is titled “Conservative Comment” and takes on wasteful government spending. Both candidates keep their message positive without mentioning their Republican Challengers or Sen. Blanche Lincoln. (D-AR)
Here are the two 30 second ads followed by a poll where you can select which candidate’s ad is more effective.
You decide: Which ad is the most effective?
Yesterday, the people of Massachusetts went to the polls and voted for real “change” in Washington. And change is already coming. We, the people of these United States, would like to express our appreciation to all those Massachusetts voters who voted for Lt. Col. Scott Brown for US Senate.
Two weeks ago, we began urging readers across the country to volunteer on Brown’s campaign. At that time, Rasmussen Hundreds of you responded with donations of money and valuable time, and the fruit of your effort was harvested last night when Democrat Martha Coakley conceded and Brown declared victory. The significance of that victory cannot be overstated.
Your tireless efforts on behalf of the Brown campaign helped the Republican candidate win the seat formerly held by the hard left, liberal icon Ted Kennedy. Democrats practically declared Coakley the winner of the seat after her December victory in Massachusetts’ Democratic primary, and the majority of pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle believed likewise.
But Scott Brown didn’t give up. He didn’t throw in the towel because so many said he couldn’t win. And you didn’t either!
Voters in Massachusetts served as shock troops in the first battle of an offensive by the American people. An offensive to take this country back from those who campaigned as representatives of the people, but abandoned their constituents after taking office is now underway. Massachusetts will now serve as our beach head.
In the year after gaining complete control of both the Executive and Legislative branches of government, Democrats interpreted their historic victory in 2008 as a license by the American people to impose nothing less than Socialism on the electorate. Abandoning any semblance of bipartisanship, high-level Congressional Democrats met in secret with White House officials to make back room deals on every major piece of legislation crafted in Obama’s first year. Republican bills, amendments, and resolutions were ignored or voted down without serious consideration. Democrats had the power to impose their will on a resistant constituency and intended to use it.
Even as polls showed Brown gaining on Coakley and Democrats were forced to consider his victory a real possibility, Democrats continued to insist they would move forward on Obama’s health care legislation regardless of the outcome of this election. Threats to delay seating Brown or to violate long-standing Senate rules to subvert the will of the American people further alienated voters around the country.
Democrats proved just how out of touch they were.
Now the battle is on for the rest of the country. One third of the US Senate is up for grabs this fall, as is the entire House of Representatives. Republican Senator candidates in Arkansas, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Kentucky are leading their Democrat challengers by comfortable margins. In Illinois, Missouri, and California, Republican candidates are already polling closer to their Democrat opponents than Brown was to Coakley two weeks before he defeated her.
With the exception of California, these states are certainly less blue than Massachusetts. Therefore, it’s a real possibility that voters in these 11 states alone could put the Republican party back in the Senate driver’s seat. Charlie Cook of The Cook Political Report even speculated on MSNBC’s Hardball it’s possible that we might “see no Republican incumbent, House or Senate, lose” in 2010.
A Republican majority in the US Senate is now a very real possibility after the 2010 elections.
Democrat Congressmen were badly beaten up in town hall meetings throughout the summer and early fall as the push for Obama’s government takeover of the US health care system intensified. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) squeezed out a 5-vote victory for the Socialization of 1/6 of the US economy in November. It took every bit of political strength she had to twist the arms of enough Democrats from conservative districts to stand with her and the ultra-liberal wing of her party. Some of these Dems are already announcing plans not to run for re-election this year, and others who had been recruited by the DNCC to run against Republican incumbents have already dropped out of their races as well. It’s almost certain that Democrats will lose a substantial number of seats in November, but there may be an even more immediate consequence of Brown’s victory on the US House.
Pelosi may no longer be able to muster her razor thin majority to pass the reconciled bill that will come out of the secret, behind-closed-doors meetings being held to iron out the differences in the two chambers’ health care bills.
President Obama dithered on whether or not to make the trip to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley until Sunday. Finally, two days before the election, the President took Air Force One to Boston in an effort to motivate Democrats to get out the vote for Coakley. After campaigning for losing gubernatorial candidates in Virginia and New Jersey last fall, Obama had to know this was a huge gamble. All along, he has counted on his political capital to sway Democrats with conservative constituencies to vote for his left-wing policies. Virginia and New Jersey were strikes one and two, Massachusetts proved to be strike three.
Obama’s inability to secure a Coakley victory in the deep blue Bay State has greatly compromised his ability to convince nervous Democrats they’re better off voting with him than their constituents. He’s now running very low on political capital.
Chairman of the Republican National Committee Michael Steele has already sent out a fund-raising letter calling Brown’s victory “our Party’s first victory of 2010.” But in his victory speech, Scott Brown was careful not to credit the Republican party, but the independent voters of Massachusetts for his victory. “Tonight the independent majority has delivered a great victory,” Brown said.
Checking the several blogs on the GOP’s website, not one article appears promoting Brown’s candidacy in the past two weeks. Not one article asking supporters to help elect a Republican candidate to Ted Kennedy’s old seat. Even RNC press releases over the last couple of weeks make no mention of the critical race. But now that Brown won, Steele hopes to siphon off some of the energy to convert it to funds for the RNC.
Brown realizes his victory was not an endorsement of the Republican establishment, but a rejection of the Democrat establishment. Michael Steele and the RNC haven’t yet figured that out.
Although the Republican party did little to help make Brown’s victory possible, conservative activists across the nation did, especially on the internet. Practically every conservative activist site we keep tabs on was consistently and continuously promoting Brown’s candidacy. Participants on these sites form the core of the rallies and town halls that slowed down Obama’s wave of Socialism when the Republican party could not. These are the people who participate in the Tea Parties and organize protests against Congressmen and Senators who refused to listen to their constituents.
The Tea Party movement has established itself as a force to be reckoned with in the upcoming congressional elections. The GOP better be careful not to take these conservative activists’ votes for granted, but must instead make concessions to once again win their trust.
In summary, Democrats with conservative constituencies have now been put on notice. The American people demand to be represented and not ruled! The Republican hierarchy will be tempted to believe they achieved this victory and seek to exploit it when in fact, the GOP can take very little credit for Brown’s victory. Tea Party activists should pat themselves on the back and congratulate themselves for a job well don. But don’t get too comfortable.
Our challenge now will be two-fold. First, to continue the fight to remove those representatives who have refused to represent their constituents. But we must also now be careful to hold the Republican party accountable, and avoid being used by the establishment. The establishment led us into the abyss from which we’ve fought so hard to extract ourselves these past few months. Those of us who’ve participated in and believe in the Tea Party movement must continue to fight for reform in the Republican party.
For now though, congratulations. We’ve fought long and hard to achieve this victory.
Many thanks to all who made this possible. To Scott Brown. To the Massachusetts voters. And to all of those across the country who donated their time and money to help achieve this victory!
Twenty Congressmen and Congresswomen, under the watchful eye of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), took so many staff and family members with them to the Global Warming Climate Change conference in Copenhagen last month. The delegation, which included Democrats and Republicans, was chosen by Pelosi.
Though she promised to “drain the swamp” in the US House, Pelosi refuses to answer any questions regarding the costs of the trip. Costs that you, the American taxpayer, will bear.
Jack Cafferty on CNN condemns Pelosi on the liberal network, referring to her as a “horrible woman”.
Hat Tip: ARRA News Service
On his radio show January 15, Ed Schultz encouraged Massachusetts voters to “vote 10 times if they could” in order to defeat Republican Scott Brown who’s challenging Democrat Martha Coakley for the Massachusetts Senate seat vacated when long-time Senator Ted “Lady Killer” Kennedy died last year. Referring to Brown and other Republicans as “these Bastards,” Schultz demonstrated the liberal bias prevalent at MSNBC that has led to the left-wing network’s plummeting ratings.
By Debra J. Saunders at Townhall.com
Former U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell announced Thursday that he is dropping out of the California GOP gubernatorial primary and instead will run against Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Last year, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom bowed out of the Democratic gubernatorial primary, leaving former governor and current Attorney General Jerry Brown as the only Democrat in the race — and he has yet to announce that he is running.
Come to think of it, former Lt. Gov. John Garamendi also dropped out of the Democratic gubernatorial primary to run for (and win) Rep. Ellen Tauscher’s vacated seat. The governor’s race is starting to look like an Agatha Christie story, where all the characters get bumped off one by one. Call it: “And Then There Were None.”
Campbell knows that some supporters are disappointed that he won’t remain in the governor’s race. Some had this fantasy that he would best the two moneybags in the race, much as Gray Davis beat Democrat richies Al Checchi and Jane Harman in 1998.
Sorry, Campbell explained, he was “not within hailing distance” of winning because he raised only about $1 million last year. By contrast, the two gazillionaires each tossed $19 million into their campaign coffers as if it were tip money.
As Democratic political guru Darry Sragow noted, people forget “in the telling of the story, Gray did have enough money to make his presence felt.” Campbell wasn’t in Davis’ fundraising league.
There is also a nostalgia element to the switch. In 1992, Campbell lost the GOP primary to Bruce Herschensohn, who then lost the general election to Boxer. According to conventional lore, if the more moderate Campbell had won the primary, Boxer never would have won her Senate seat.
After a year of listening to our President blame the United States for all the troubles in the world, a year of watching him bow and grovel at the feet of foreign potentates, a year of watching him embrace enemies of America like Hugo Chavez, a year of watching him destroy our way of life in the name of “fixing” it, I received an email with nothing but a link to the video below.
As you listen, think about the $100 million the United States immediately pledged to ease the suffering and help in reconstructing Haiti after the devastating earthquake that left the country in shambles. And ask yourself how much foreign aid the US received when hurricane Katrina destroyed New Orleans.
Almost 40 years ago, a respected Canadian recognized what our President and so many of his followers can’t seem to see. The United States has long been the most generous, most charitable of all the nations in the world.
The following is a recording of Tex Ritter reciting the remarks first uttered by Canadian broadcaster Gordon Sinclair on June 15, 1973. A time when anti-war sentiment ran high in the streets of America. When our sailors, soldiers, airmen, and Marines were spat upon when they returned from the jungles of Southeast Asia. Rampant inflation, rising debt, and political scandal tore at the fabric of American society.
The parallels of now and then make Sinclair’s words as appropriate today as they were in 1973. Our nation is locked in a prolonged war that has our nation divided along ideological lines. Over the past decade, floods, tornadoes, wildfires, and hurricanes have scarred our landscape, our cities, and our towns. The political crevasse separating the right and left has never been so wide, and so deep.
Liberals and conservatives will join in the Haitian relief efforts, donating time, money, and material to help rebuild a country in ruins. And we will once again heal from the wounds inflicted by foreign and domestic enemies of our way of life.
And, just like the 1980s, we’ll be stronger than ever.
For now, we pray for our own nation and that God will have mercy on those suffering in Haiti.
For those who have trouble loading videos, the text of Sinclair’s remarks follows.
“The United States dollar has taken another pounding on German, French, and British exchanges, hitting the lowest point ever known in West Germany. It has declined there by 41% since 1971 and this Canadian thinks it’s time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people in all the Earth.
“As long as 60 years ago, when I first started to read newspapers, I read of floods on the Yellow River and the Yangtze. Who rushed in with men and money to help? The Americans did, that’s who.
“They’ve helped control floods on the Nile, the Amazon, the Ganges, and the Niger. Today the rich bottomland of the Mississippi is underwater and no foreign land has sent a dollar to help. Germany, Japan, and to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of those countries is paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.
“When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.
“When distant cities were hit by earthquakes, it’s the United States that hurries in to help. Managua, Nicaragua was one of the most recent examples. So far this spring, 59 American communities have been flattened by tornadoes. Nobody has helped.
“The Marshall Plan, the Truman policies, all pumped billions upon billions into discouraged countries. And now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplanes.
“Now c’mon, let’s hear it.
“Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing jumbo jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas 10. If so, why don’t they fly ‘em? Why do all international lines except Russia fly American planes?
“Why does no other land on Earth consider putting a man, or a woman, on the moon?
“Talk about Japanese technocracy and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy and you find men on the moon. Not once, but several times. And, safely home again.
“You talk about scandals and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at.
“Even the draft dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They’re right here on our streets in Toronto. Most of them, unless they’re breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from Mom and Dad at home to spend here in Canada.
“When the Americans get out of this bind, as they will, who could blame them if they said, ‘The Hell with the rest of the world. Let someone else build or repair foreign dams, or design foreign buildings that won’t shake apart in earthquakes.’
“When the railways of France, Germany, and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.
“I can name you five-thousand times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the help of the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.
“Our neighbors have faced it alone and I’m one Canadian who’s damned tired of hearing them kicked around.
“They will come out of this thing with their flag high and when they do, they’re entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles.
“I hope Canada is not one of these.
“And another thing. Recently the American Red Cross was told at its 48th annual meeting in New Orleans that it was broke. This year’s disasters, with the year less than half over, has taken it all and nobody, but nobody has helped!”