The day’s top political news:
Dems see agenda slipping
There is a growing sense among Democrats that they will not be able to accomplish the entire agenda leaders set for 2009, pushing major policy debates into the midterm election year.
Concerns over the cost of overhauling the nation’s healthcare system have served as a wake-up call to lawmakers.
They had planned for a busy summer of healthcare and climate change debate, a dozen spending bills, a defense authorization and hearings on President Obama’s first Supreme Court nominee. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) even promised to add a sweeping overhaul of immigration to that list.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dems-see-agenda-slipping-2009-06-24.html
Mississppi Governor, Haley Barbour takes over RGA
The Republican Governors Association announces Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour -- already "in line" to take the chairmanship of the RGA -- has assumed it.
Barbour replaces S Carolina governor Sanford who resigned as had of the RGA (Republican Governor’s Association) after admitting having an affair.
Barbour is also a 2012 contender and former National GOP Chairman.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Barbour_takes_over_RGA.html
Gore to Talk up His Climate Chang Scam With House Democrats
Senior Democrat leaders are whipping and cajoling skeptical lawmakers to side with them to approve the measure that could have significant economic impact on the energy bills of many Americans and even drive up the price of food.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is rolling the dice with her plan to lug the bill to the House floor without the full confidence that the legislation will pass.
Gore is well-known for his environmental scam. He's authored books on climate change and produced the Academy Award-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" in 2005
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/24/gore-talk-climate-change-house-democrats-thursday/
Opinion:
Liberals are staging an all out assault on Normal America these days.
I’ts going to be a rugged several days ahead…at least for normal America ns fearful liberal Democrats will be successful in a string of measures that are offensive and expensive while being hidden beneath labels intentionally designed to hide their true impact or reason.
Take the infamous “Cap and Trade” bill. Democrat liberals are working overtime to hide the fact the bill is actually a new tax that will cost almost all Americans a ton of money. For the record, Democrat proposal of that tax represents a direct violation of Obama’s pledge in which he solemnly promised that no American making less than $250,000 a year will see a dime in additional taxes.
We can assume Obama will defend his lie by claiming his bill wont result in “a dime” more in taxation – but a whole lot more! Obama lack of logic at work again.
Of course liberals claim this is an energy bill. It DOES cost coal companies and those using coal more money – but those companies will have to pass those new costs along to customers. If that’s not a tax, it will do until one comes along.
Of course, breaking promises and campaign pledges matters little to liberal Democrat politicians and they dominate things on Capitol Hill and the White House these days.
As a result, normal Americans have little with which to oppose the Democrat juggernaut. Supreme court nominee Sotomayor is a case in point – she is clearly racist, but it doesn’t matter. Obama dominates the Senate and can get anyone he nominates confirmed. Besides, even if Sotomayor was rejected, her replacement would be no better, maybe even worse from the standpoint of normal Americans.
Meanwhile, the ominous healthcare conspiracy over shadows Congress. Make no mistake about it, the issue in that debate is a question of quality healthcare versus healthcare on the cheap.
If you or a loved one falls seriously ill, only the very best quality care is “good enough” – under the Obama/Democrat plan, “the very best quality care” will not be available.
As an aside, it’s a certainty any Obama healthcare scheme will be another violation of his “not a dime in increased taxes” pledge to the American people. Obama even suggests there may be a tax imposed on healthcare benefits, with the exception of the benefits of union members.
Union members were major supporters of Obama in his campaign. Campaign corruption at play? Hush your mouth!!!
Liberal Democrats have the votes to destroy our healthcare system and impose new taxes on us all, but they are not finished. They are also threatening immigration reform.
Bet on amnesty being a major provision of any such plan…a pathway to make it easy for illegal aliens who have chosen to sneak into this country illegally – thus choosing to make themselves criminals the moment their feet hit US soil – to become citizens.
Guess how Obama expects the 12 million illegal immigrants already here to vote.
The amnesty bill conspiracy is simply one more politically-motivated scheme to getting more Democrat voters on the rolls. Of course, Obama has made his corrupt ACORN organization a key group within the census process.
What political impact does that scheme promote? What determines how Congressional boundaries are drawn? The Census. Expect massive Democrat gerrymandering and redrawing of district lines – lines designed to give Democrats an edge.
Shucks, all this in just Obama’s first six months!!
It’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Survival will require political activism on the part of all normal Americans. If this week on the Hill is not a call to arms for us all, there is no such thing.
Buddy
The top blogs of the day:
1.
Rushing Energy Bill Is Risky and Unnecessary
Rep. Spencer Bachus (AL)
The Democrat leadership is preventing the public from learning important details about the cap and tax plan by bypassing several key committees.
As a Ranking Member on the Financial Services Committee, I called for hearings on the bill's creation of a massive trading scheme for carbon emissions.
It sounds altogether too familiar - a brand new, hard to price, vast convoluted market of carbon derivatives. And if these warnings are correct, one that could certainly pose a systemic risk in the financial markets. In addition, this bill provides for tree-planting projects to be used as carbon offsets. But the trees could be in Brazil or Borneo. If there is a tree-planting project in Brazil, worthy as that may be, should American taxpayers pay for it? In addition, such projects, particularly in remote or developing countries, are notoriously difficult to confirm and monitor. The legal description of the land could be changed and offsets securitized many times. We found that even in the U.S., with a established rule of law and well-established regulatory system, the subprime mortgage market was subject to countless different schemes and manipulation.
(NOTE: Congressman Spencer Bachus is the top Republican on the Financial Services Committee. He is having to hold the line against his counterpart – the top Democrat on the Committee – the infamous Barney Frank.)
My committee should be given time to review "green housing" mandates that could lead to stiff fines against owners and builders. Penalties for violating the act are $100 per day. A day! What effect does such a law have on home prices, on seniors trying to sell their home in a tough market, and builders struggling to sell their inventory of unsold homes?
I am very disturbed by the repeated pattern of the House leadership in rushing expensive legislation like cap and tax, the so-called stimulus package, and appropriations bills to a vote without adequate review or debate. It’s irresponsible to fast-track legislation that puts taxpayers on the hook for literally trillions of dollars.
2.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124580784452945093.html
Barney the Underwriter
The Wall Street Journal
Telling Fannie Mae to take more credit risk. Now there's an idea.
Back when the housing mania was taking off, Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank famously said he wanted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to "roll the dice" in the name of affordable housing. That didn't turn out so well, but Mr. Frank has since only accumulated more power. And now he is returning to the scene of the calamity -- with your money. He and New York Representative Anthony Weiner have sent a letter to the heads of Fannie and Freddie exhorting them to lower lending standards for condo buyers.
You read that right. After two years of telling us how lax lending standards drove up the market and led to loans that should never have been made, Mr. Frank wants Fannie and Freddie to take more risk in condo developments with high percentages of unsold units, high delinquency rates or high concentrations of ownership within the development.
(NOTE: Barney Frank’s record during the financial crisis is hardly a good one, nor is it believable. After all, weeks before Freddie and Fannie collapsed and triggered the money emergency, Barney had assured one and all the two entities were solid. Now he’s at it agaiin.)
Fannie and Freddie have restricted loans to condo buyers in these situations because they represent a red flag that the developments -- many of which were planned and built at the height of the housing bubble -- may face financial trouble down the road. But never mind all that. Messrs. Frank and Weiner think, in all their wisdom and years of experience underwriting mortgages, that the new rules "may be too onerous."
And in a display of the wit for which Mr. Frank is famous, the letter writers slyly point out that higher lending standards won't reduce taxpayer exposure to bad loans because the Federal Housing Administration has even lower standards for condos. "While the underlying goal may be to reduce taxpayer exposure relating to the current conservatorship of the GSEs [government sponsored entities], such a goal would not have such an effect if it merely results in a shifting of loans from the GSEs to the FHA." Tougher lending standards will merely shift market share from one government program to another, so what's the point in being cautious?
Fannie and Freddie have already lost tens of billions of dollars betting on the mortgage market -- with that bill being handed to taxpayers. They face still more losses going forward, because in the wake of their nationalization last year their new "mission" has become to do whatever it takes to prop up the housing market. The last thing they need is lawmakers like Mr. Frank, who did so much to lay the groundwork for their collapse, telling them to play faster and looser with their lending standards.
Fannie and Freddie have always been political creatures under the best circumstances. But we don't remember anyone electing Mr. Frank underwriter-in-chief of the United States.
3.
HEAT OF THE MOMENT
EPA's own research expert 'shut up' on climate change
Government analyst silenced after he critiques CO2 findings
Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Environmental Protection Agency officials have silenced one of their own senior researchers after the 38-year employee issued an internal critique of the EPA's climate change position.
Alan Carlin, senior operations research analyst at the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics, or NCEE, submitted his research on the agency's greenhouse gases endangerment findings and offered a fundamental critique on the EPA's approach to combating CO2 emissions. But officials refused to share his conclusion in an open internal discussion, claiming his research would have "a very negative impact on our office."
His study was barred from circulation within the EPA and was never disclosed to the public for political reasons, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, or CEI, a group that has accessed four internal e-mails on the subject.
CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman told WND, "His boss basically told him, 'No, I'm not going to send your study further up. It's going to stay within this bureau.'"
A March 12 e-mail to Carlin warned him not to have "any direct communication with anyone outside NCEE on endangerment."
Carlin, a researcher who earned his doctorate in economics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an undergraduate degree in physics from California Institute of Technology, informed officials that two-thirds of his references were from peer-reviewed publications and defended his inclusion of new research on the topic.
"It is also my view that the critical attribute of good science is its correspondence to observable data rather than where it appears in the technical literature," he wrote. "I believe my comments are valid, significant and contain references to significant new research … They are significant because they present information critical to justification (or lack thereof) for the proposed [greenhouse gas] endangerment finding."
After nearly one week of discussion, NCEE Director Al McGartland informed Carlin on March 17 that he would not include the research in the internal EPA discussion.
"Alan, I decided not to forward your comments," he wrote. "… The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. … I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."
In yet another e-mail sent only minutes following the previous one, McGartland wrote, "With the endangerment findings nearly final, you need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc, at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate."
CEI charges that suppression of Carlin's study denied public access to important agency information, as court rulings have indicated that both "the evidence relied upon [by the agency] and the evidence discarded" must be included in the rulemaking record.
"They could come up with reasons to reject it, as I'm sure they're going to come up with reasons to reject the scientific objections that are coming in now from outside parties in the general public and from skeptical scientists," Kazman told WND. "But I'd say the real issue here is that this critique is coming from a career EPA insider, so it can't be dismissed as the work of someone in the pay of the coal-burning fossil-fuel industry. The fact that someone within the EPA was taking this approach is something that would be naturally embarrassing to the agency."
CEI also said the incident violated the EPA's commitment to transparency and scientific honesty.
Prior to taking office, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson declared, "As Administrator, I will ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and programs, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency."
Likewise, CEI reminds the EPA of President Obama's April 27 speech to the National Academy of Sciences in which he stated, "[U]nder my administration, the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over."
In a memo to the EPA, Kazman wrote, "Because of ideology, however, it was this back seat to which Mr. Carlin's study was relegated; more precisely, it was booted out of the car entirely."
"The irony of the president and Administrator Jackson talking about EPA's new transparency and commitment to scientific integrity, that's really incredible," Kazman said.
CEI is asking the agency to make Carlin's study public, extend or reopen the comment period to allow public response to his research and publicly declare that there will be no reprisals against Carlin for his research.
Kazman said the issue is "coming to a head" because the EPA's internal commentary period just closed, and the 1,200-page Waxman-Markey climate bill to cap greenhouse gas emissions is scheduled to come to a vote Friday on the House floor.
He believes Carlin's study could have implications on how lawmakers feel about the allegedly solid research behind the climate bill – especially if objecting analysts within the agency are being silenced.
"Any right-minded administrator would have said, 'Fine, put it in and we'll give our reasons for why we reject his contentions," Kazman said. "But instead, they shut the guy up."
Who's funding the Obamacare campaign? (OneNewsNow.com)
Who's funding the Obamacare campaign?
Michelle Malkin - Syndicated Columnist - 6/24/2009 9:40:00 AM
If you believe the White House, there are 30 million Americans who support a government healthcare takeover. But if you look at the funding behind the Obamacare campaign, it's the same few leftist billionaires, union bosses and partisan community organizers pushing the socialized medicine agenda. Let's connect the dots.
On Thursday, a national "grassroots" coalition called Health Care for America Now (HCAN) will march on Capitol Hill to demand universal healthcare. The ground troops won't have to march very far. HCAN, you see, is no heartland network. It is headquartered at 1825 K Street in Washington, DC -- smack dab in the middle of Beltway lobby land.
In fact, 1825 K Street is Ground Zero for a plethora of "progressive" groups subsidized by anti-war, anti-Republican, Big Nanny special interests. Around Washington, the office complex is known as "The Other K Street." The Washington Post noted in 2007 that "its most prominent tenants form an abbreviated who's who of well-funded allies of the Democratic Party....Big money from unions such as the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, as well as the Internet-fueled MoveOn, has provided groups like those at 1825 K Street the wherewithal to mount huge campaigns."
MoveOn, of course, is the recreational political vehicle of radical liberal sugar daddy George Soros. The magnate's financial fingerprints are all over the HCAN coalition, which includes MoveOn, the action fund of the Center for American Progress (a Soros think tank), and the Campaign for America's Future (a pro-welfare state lobbying outfit).
(NOTE: Normal America must remain vigilant in the face of the continued conspiracies financed by George Soros. Soros is showing what bottomless political chests can accomplish. His intent certainly does not seem pro American.)
HCAN has a $40 million budget, with $10 million pitched in by The Atlantic Philanthropies -- a Bermuda-based organization fronted by Soros acolyte Gara LaMarche. Also in the money mix:
Notorious Democratic donors Herb and Marion Sandler, the left-wing moguls who made billions selling subprime mortgages and helped Soros fund his vast network of left-wing activist satellites. By their side is billionaire Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance, whose "Progressive Future" youth group has dispatched clueless volunteers armed with clipboards and literature bashing Rush Limbaugh and Fox News to scare up support for Obamacare.
And two more left-wing heavyweights are joining the HCAN parade: the corruption-plagued SEIU (which has battled numerous embezzlement scandals among its chapters across the country while crusading for consumer and patients' rights), and Obama's old chums at fraud-riddled ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
ACORN and HCAN are linked by left-wing philanthropist Drummond Pike, who heads the nonprofit Tides Foundation/Tides Center. As the tax disclaimer for HCAN discloses, "HCAN is related to Health Care for America Education Fund, a project of The Tides Center, a section 501(c)(3) public charity." For decades, the Tides Center and its parent organization, the Tides Foundation, have seeded some of the country's most radical activist groups of the left, including the communist-friendly United for Peace and Justice, the jihadist-friendly National Lawyers Guild and the grievance-mongering Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Pike is the same philanthropist who assisted ACORN founder Wade Rathke after his brother, Dale, was caught embezzling nearly $1 million from the group. Wade Rathke sits on the Tides Foundation board of directors. In a conspiracy to cover up Dale Rathke's massive theft of funds, Pike volunteered to buy a promissory note worth $800,000 to cover the debt. These are the populist do-gooders supposedly looking out for you and your health.
Why do they want Obamacare? An internal ACORN memo I obtained from August 2008 makes the motives clear: "Over our 38 years, health care organizing has never been a major focus either nationally or locally for ACORN," wrote ACORN Philadelphia regional director Craig Robbins. "But increasingly, ACORN offices around the country are doing work on health care." The goal: "Building ACORN Power."
The memo outlines the ACORN/HCAN partnership and their strategy of opposing any programs that rely on "unregulated private insurance" -- and then parlaying political victory on government-run healthcare "to move our ACORN agenda (or at least part of it) with key electeds that we might otherwise not be able to pull off."
The objective, in other words, is to piggyback and exploit Obamacare to improve and protect their political health. The "grassroots" movement is not about representing Main Street. It's about peddling influence and power at 1825 K Street.
Michelle Malkin (malkinblog@gmail.com) is author of the forthcoming "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009).
Comments