Saturday, May 29, 2010

Another Federal Pay Raise!

Can you believe Congress voted a pay raise for themselves? With the worst deficits in our history, they have the Gaul to add more to our burden, and they don't care.

Today's blog is a pointer to a video. Michelle Bachmann (R, MN) criticises the House of Representatives for their lack of concern for the spending craze. She describes how crazy Federal pay increases are and why they shouldn't happen.

The video runs about 5 minutes and is worth listening to.

Friday, May 28, 2010

Featured Article: ObamaGate Scandal Grows...

By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

"The New York Times revealed this afternoon that anonymous sources have informed it that Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel asked former President Bill Clinton to offer Congressman Joe Sestak a high but unpaid advisory post in the Administration if he would drop out of the Senate race against Senator Arlen Specter. One post mentioned was service on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

The idea was to immunize Obama and Rahm from possible criminal prosecution by using Clinton, not a government employee, as a cut out and to keep the offer to an unpaid job in hopes of not running afoul of the federal bribery statute.

But these evasions will not blunt the force of the law. If Clinton acted at Emanuel’s request, he was Rahm’s agent and the Chief of Staff is still on the hook. And, an unpaid position is still “something of value” within the meaning of the bribery statute which prohibits the offering of something of value in return for a vote.

And, remember why they wanted Sestak out of the race. The White House needed Specter’s vote to kill filibusters and could only get it if he would switch parties, a move he conditioned on getting Sestak to drop out and assure him a clear field for the nomination of his new party. So the bribe offer to Sestak was made by an agent of a government employee, it involved something of value, and it was to procure a vote in the Senate — all the elements needed for a felony to have taken place.

In a previous column (read it at Dick and Fox News Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano suggest that Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett, now the Republican nominee for Governor, should empanel a grand jury to get to the bottom of this affair. Today’s revelation makes this ever more urgent."

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Weekly Polls

The Rasmussen Reports is an independent electronic publishing firm that specializes in public opinion polling. Here are some current results on some main issues:

Presidential Tracking Poll
This tracks how the President is doing by those surveyed.
  • Strongly Approve... 26%
  • Strongly Disapprove... 42%
  • Approval Index = ... -16

Presidential Approval Index
This chart is from

Job Approval Rating Since Election

Should we repeal ObamaCare?
  • Strongly Agree... 63%
  • Strongly Disagree... 32%
  • Don't Know... 5%

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Did Obama Commit a Crime?

Congressman Joe Sestak (D, PA) has openly stated that the White House offered him a bribe to drop out of the Senatorial Primary in Pennsylvania. They wanted Senator Arlen Spector (D, PA) to be their candidate for the US Senate. Sestak says that he refused the offer and went on to win the senate primary by defeating Arlen Spector.

On the Gretta Van Susteran TV program Sestak stated "They tried to bribe me out of the race by offering me a job." In other words, if you drop-out of the primary, we’ll give you a high profile job in this administration. Rumor says he was offered the Secretary of the Navy position. Sestak refuses to tell exactly who he spoke with about the job offer.

If his allogations are true, this is more than just another Chicago-style bit of politics. This is a violation of Federal law and an impeachable offense! A federal official cannot promise employment in the Federal government in return for a political favor or political act. Not only that, but it could also be charged that the White House was trying to “fix” the Pennsylvania elections, which is another serious charge.

Of course the White House has tried to minimize the issue. White House Secretary Robert Gibbs admitted that there were converstations, and said that “Lawyers in the White House and others have looked into converstations that were had with Congressman Sestak, and nothing inappropriate happened.” Well that’s fine for him to say, but should these people be asked to testify under oath to get the REAL TRUTH out?

So when the request for a special council to investigate was initiated, Eric Holder (AG) refused to proceed. Isn’t that like putting the fox in charge of the hen house? The Attorney General’s refusal to take action is in the very least suspicious. If the White House staff has nothing to hide, then why not proceed with the investigation? Maybe there was a crime committed. Then, we would need to know what Obama knew and when he knew it. If he was involved, it could mean impeachment. No wonder they don't want any investigation.

This could be a s important as the Watergate scandal with Richard Nixon. Obama could be impeached if he is involved with this.

Doesn’t the American public have a right to know the truth? We need a special investigation.

Action To Take
Demand an investigation of these allogations. Have those involved testify under oath so we can get to the TRUTH!

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Obama is Violating the LAW

In a recent TV interview, Charles Krauthammer, a syndicated columnist
had this to say about Obama's BREACH of Federal Law:

"I think it's a perfect example of the arrogance and the near lawlessness of the administration. Look, the Constitution requires the Federal government ensure that every state have a Republican government, or a republican form of government. Last time I checked, Arizona does. There is no allegation that the law, the immigration law in Arizona, was passed in any way other than legally. There were no procedural problems with it. If the President doesn't like it, well he's got an option, he can instruct the Department of Justice to go and hava a judge strike it down. And if he likes, he can get an injunction in the mean time that will suspend it until the constitutionality is ruled upon. In the mean time, it's as legal a law as any other law in the land and for the executive but to say "we're going to ignore it" or we're going to unenforce immigration essentially in this state on account of this, is lawless. We had a civil war and a civil rights movement over the claim of the southern states that they could ignore the Federal laws on slavery and civil rights and that was struck down. Everybody from Abraham Lincoln on opposes that. And now what we have is the reverse. The Federal government this guy says well he doesn't think the Arizona law is a good way to go about it. That's not his business - not his jurisdiction. Arizona decides what its to do. And it's HIS job to enforce the Federal which he is openly saying he wouldn't do - simply because a referral comes out of a state who's laws he doesn't like."

Can we allow this behavior to continue? Should we? How far do we let this President grab power? If he's breaking the law, we need to stop it and put him in his place. We Still have checks and balances. Why not use them to control this lawless behavior. Are the actions of the President cause for impeachment? Do they constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors?" We need to challenge him and find out. This man is trying to "fundamentally Change America" and the making of an Imperial Totalatarian Presidency.

Action To Take
Notify your representatives that they need to challenge the President on his apparent violation of Federal law. Cite the arguments given by Krauthammer. They have validity and merit.

More on Impeachment tomorrow, when we investigate Obama's alleged bribery and election fixing.

Monday, May 24, 2010

Weekly Poll

The Rasmussen Reports is an independent electronic publishing firm that specializes in public opinion polling. Here are some current results on some main issues:

Presidential Tracking Poll
This tracks how the President is doing by those surveyed.
  • Strongly Approve... 25%
  • Strongly Disapprove... 43%
  • Approval Index = ... -18%
Should we repeal ObamaCare?
  • YES... 63%
  • NO... 32%
  • Don't Know... 5%

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Featured Article - More Socialism...

By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

"President Obama has taken the United States one more giant step towards socialism by ramming through the Senate his financial regulation bill.

The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury – a political appointee – to seize any financial company (bank or nonbank) simply because, in his opinion, it is too big to fail and in danger of insolvency. This power can be used for political retribution, pressure for campaign funding, or any other abuse bureaucratic whim or partisan politics can conceive. It is a power Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez would love to have!

The legislation also requires that any business that extends credit, in any form, needs to clear the loan instrument in advance with the new consumer protection agency. The backlog of pending applications will strangle consumer credit.

And the bill fails to do the one thing it must do — regulate derivatives and make them transparent. Senator Chris Dodd (D, Ct) bowed to pressure from his sponsors on Wall Street and deleted the regulatory provision and set up a commission to study the situation for two years! Senator Maria Cantwell (D,Wash) protested the cop out with a no vote against the legislation.

So how did it pass? Four Republicans sold out, that´s how! Among the RINOs were, of course, Susan Collins and Olympia Snow of Maine. But, surprisingly, Scott Brown (R, Mass), the newly elected Massachusetts Miracle defected as did the normally stalwart Chuck Grassley (R, Iowa).

Now the federal government has effectively taken over about one third of our national economy by passing Obamacare and regulatory reform in almost the same breath.

Repealing this regulatory travesty must be high on our 2011 agenda!

Despite the courageous opposition of Senator Maria Cantwell (D,Wash)."