Relax, wingnuts, those NV machines serviced by SEIU thugs are A-OK, assures the Dem Secretary of State
Who’s up for a game of “Name That Party”? You know, that’s where the MSM just so happens to omit the party affiliation when it might inconvenience their narrative. Details:
Secretary of State Ross Miller said today there have been no complaints filed with his office about suspicious voter activity despite email rumors and media accounts that at least some electronic voting machines are pre-programmed to support U.S. Senate candidate Harry Reid, D-NV.
Read the whole story. See if you can find the party affiliation of NV Sec of State Miller. I’m guessing that if people knew he is a Democrat, they might want a more objective reassurance than him telling us these auto-votes for fellow Democrat Harry Reid aren’t really happening. Questioning a Dem Sec of State? The MSM isn’t going to have any of that nonsense!
Nope…no liberal media bias!
UPDATED: Voting machines malfunction in NV and NC, and the malfunctions just so happen to benefit Democrats
UPDATES BELOW.
I’m not a conspiracy theory guy. But man, in light of Democrats stealing elections in SD in 2002, WA in 2004, and MN in 2008, is it unreasonable to think they’re up to no good in the middle of the big red tsunami of 2010?
From NV:
Some voters in Boulder City complained on Monday that their ballot had been cast before they went to the polls, raising questions about Clark County’s electronic voting machines.
Voter Joyce Ferrara said when they went to vote for Republican Sharron Angle, her Democratic opponent, Sen. Harry Reid’s name was already checked.
Ferrara said she wasn’t alone in her voting experience. She said her husband and several others voting at the same time all had the same thing happen.
“Something’s not right,” Ferrara said. “One person that’s a fluke. Two, that’s strange. But several within a five minute period of time — that’s wrong.”
From NC:
A Craven County voter says he had a near miss at the polls on Thursday when an electronic voting machine completed his straight-party ticket for the opposite of what he intended.
Sam Laughinghouse of New Bern said he pushed the button to vote Republican in all races, but the voting machine screen displayed a ballot with all Democrats checked. He cleared the screen and tried again with the same result, he said. Then he asked for and received help from election staff.
“They pushed it twice and the same thing happened,” Laughinghouse said. “That was four times in a row. The fifth time they pushed it and the Republicans came up and I voted.”
Malfunctions happen. But dude, they both benefit the Democrats? Seriously?
UPDATE (10/26/2010 – 10:30 pm EST): Well, well, well! The NV voting machine technicians are…I swear I’m not making this up…SEIU workers! Who in the blue Hell thought that was a good idea?
Murkowski launches write-in candidacy
She got beat in her primary. Then she says she’s “not a quitter” and decides to launch a long-shot write-in campaign, ignoring the fact that getting beat isn’t the same as quitting. Will she siphon off enough votes from Joe Miller to get a Democrat elected in a cherry red state during the Great Red Tsunami of 2010? Time will tell.
Joe Miller tore into her by saying that Murky’s “lifeblood is power“, and I think that’s obvious to anyone. After all, she complained that getting beat in her primary “didn’t give all Alaskans a voice” in the matter…which is the friggin’ point of a party primary, right?
Exit question (albeit one that requires a little setup here, so bear with me):
Is what Murky doing the same thing as what Lieberman did in CT in 2006? I mean, Liebs got beat in his party’s primary, then turned around and ran as an indy and won. The left tried to say that what Crist did in FL is no different than what Liebs did four years ago, to which the response is “Of course it’s different!” See, Suntan Charlie quit the party when he realized he was going to get beat, before his party’s primary. Afterwards, he disavowed everything he had ever allegedly stood for his entire political life. Joey L never did that in CT, and his voting record since then proves he is still a Democrat. I’m not saying that Liebs didn’t run as an indy for the purposes of holding onto power, as I’m sure that’s exactly why he ran.
That said, I must ask because I fancy myself as a consistent fellow: While Crist’s situation isn’t the same as Murky’s, is what Murky doing the same thing as what Lieberman did in CT in 2006?
DC Dem Congresswoman “Delegate” hits up lobbyist for campaign contribution
The Dems’ culture of corruption continues. Breitbart has the full story and transcript of the voice mail left by Norton (yes, she actually left a voice mail of the shakedown request!), as well as analysis of whether federal law and/or House ethics rules were violated. Excerpt of transcript (read the full thing):
…I was, frankly, uh, uh, surprised to see that we don’t have a record, so far as I can tell, of your having given to me despite my uh, long and deep uh, work. In fact, it’s been my major work, uh, on the committee and sub-committee it’s been essentially in your sector.
I am, I’m simply candidly calling to ask for a contribution. As the senior member of the um, committee and a sub-committee chair, we have (chuckles) obligations to raise, uh funds. And, I think it must have been me who hasn’t, frankly, uh, done my homework to ask for a contribution earlier. …
Drew already knows what the MSM narrative will be:
Why does Andrew Breitbart hate black women?
Heh.
Exit question: What will the appetite be for President Kick#ss and his party be for heaping more accusations of undue influence by lobbyists on the GOP?
DHS investigating people making Freedom of Information Act requests
Hopenchange, transparency…are you feeling it? I’m feeling it! Oh wait…that’s gas. My bad. Anywho…
For at least a year, the Homeland Security Department detoured requests for federal records to senior political advisers for highly unusual scrutiny, probing for information about the requesters and delaying disclosures deemed too politically sensitive, according to nearly 1,000 pages of internal e-mails obtained by The Associated Press.
The department abandoned the practice after AP investigated. Inspectors from the department’s Office of Inspector General quietly conducted interviews last week to determine whether political advisers acted improperly.
The Freedom of Information Act, the main tool forcing the government to be more open, is designed to be insulated from political considerations. Anyone who seeks information through the law is supposed to get it unless disclosure would hurt national security, violate personal privacy or expose confidential decision-making in certain areas.
But in July 2009, Homeland Security introduced a directive requiring a wide range of information to be vetted by political appointees for “awareness purposes,” no matter who requested it.
Career employees were ordered to provide Secretary Janet Napolitano’s political staff with information about the people who asked for records — such as where they lived, whether they were private citizens or reporters — and about the organizations where they worked.
If a member of Congress sought such documents, employees were told to specify Democrat or Republican.
Observes Ed:
The FOIA law is not an excuse to conduct investigations into active citizens expecting and deserving transparency in government. It is certainly not a dodge for political appointees to keep embarrassing data to themselves so as not to hurt their bosses. Even worse, Napolitano apparently kept Congress from getting information it needs to conduct oversight and provide a check and balance to DHS power based on the political affiliation of those asking for the data. That should be a firing offense, and it should include everyone in Napolitano’s star chamber as well as Napolitano herself.
Democrats: The Culture of Corruption.
It’s official: Obama sucks at running car companies
Considering that ObaMao hasn’t ever run so much as a lemonade stand, this comes as no real surprise:
President Obama’s auto task force pressed General Motors and Chrysler to close scores of dealerships without adequately considering the jobs that would be lost or having a firm idea of the cost savings that would be achieved, an audit of the process has concluded.
The report by Neil M. Barofsky, the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program of the Treasury Department, said both carmakers needed to shut down some underperforming dealerships. But it questioned whether the cuts should have been made so quickly, particularly during a recession. The report, released on Sunday, estimated that tens of thousands of jobs were lost as a result.
“It is not at all clear that the greatly accelerated pace of the dealership closings during one of the most severe economic downturns in our nation’s history was either necessary for the sake of the companies’ economic survival or prudent for the sake of the nation’s economic recovery,” the report said.
What kind of authority figures did President Kicking-Businesses’-#ss appoint? These kinds:
Barack Obama put Steve Rattner in charge of running his auto bailout program, a man who had just as much experience in the auto industry as Obama did: he drove a few cars. Rattner had to make a quick exit after just a few months when it became known that he was the target of a federal probe into questionable activities regarding the New York pension fund — and his replacement had just as much experience in the auto industry as Rattner did.
What was the main entry on Ron Bloom’s resume? He was a union negotiator.
Wow. It’s as if the government doesn’t know anything about business and stuff!
Quote of the day, “We have to pass it to see what’s in it, redux” edition
Not content with damning America with unintended consequences of ObamaCare’s passage, the left has apparently concluded that passing legislation they haven’t read and don’t understand is superwickedawesome. Chris Dodd (D-Corrupticut) took time out from his highly corrupt life busy schedule to weigh in on the financial reform bill that passed the Senate:
No one will know until this is actually in place how it works.
Because that worked out so darned well with the passage of ObamaCare, no?
ACORN to FBI: Yeah, we work for Democrats and commit election fraud!
I’m shocked…shocked, I tell you! For those of you on the left, the prior sentence was sarcasm. Excerpt:
The radical activist group ACORN “works” for the Democratic Party and deliberately promotes election fraud, ACORN employees told FBI investigators, according to an FBI document dump Wednesday.
The documents obtained by Judicial Watch, a watchdog group, are FBI investigators’ reports related to the 2007 investigation and arrest of eight St. Louis, Mo., workers from ACORN’s Project Vote affiliate for violation of election laws. All eight employees involved in the scandal later pleaded guilty to voter registration fraud.
Project Vote is ACORN’s voter registration arm. Project Vote continues to operate despite the reported dissolution of the national structure of ACORN.
The handwritten reports by FBI agents show that ACORN employees reported numerous irregularities in the nonprofit group’s business practices.
One employee told the FBI that ACORN headquarters is “wkg [working] for the Democratic Party.”
According to one report, an ACORN employee said the purpose of “[f]raudulent cards” was “[t]o cause confusion on election day to keep polls open longer,” “[t]o allow people who can’t vote to vote,” and “[t]o allow to vote multiple times.”
Another report quotes an employee saying, “Project Vote will pay them whether cards fake or not – whatever they had to do to get the cards was attitude.” Project Vote pays based on the number of cards and “that’s why they were so reckless,” the report says.
A report quotes an employee saying, “I don’t like our system. I don’t think we should do voter registration.” The report also notes that employees were “[c]onstantly threatened” and that the staff were “instructed on what to say to FBI.” …
In other breaking news, water is wet.
I’m sure Holder will handle this with the professionalism and competence from whom we’ve come to expect.
Obama to stump for Crist in FL Senate race?
Crist went from Republican, to RINO, to Independent…and now to Democrat? Details:
Top Democratic strategists are abandoning their party’s frontrunner in the Florida Senate race in favor of Independent Charlie Crist, who bolted the Republican party over the state party’s rightward lurch toward the Tea Party.
SKDKnickerbocker, a leading Democratic political strategy and communications firm, has agreed to work on Crist’s up-hill campaign as an independent for the U.S. Senate.
The decision will be widely viewed as a slap at Democratic frontrunner Rep. Kendrick Meek, who is trailing badly in the polls and many Democrats believe is hopeless for winning in November
Disgusting, if true, but not surprising. Crist has been all about Crist from Day One. His #1 reason for continuing his Senate run is because he wants to be in the Senate. Not to represent FL, but to represent Charlie Suntan. However, I’m thinking he may have picked a bad year to be a self-serving, “me first” politician. Plus, hand-picking and protecting Jim Greer, busted for fraud and money laundering last week, probably won’t help him, either.
Exit question: How soon until we find out that B.O. offered Meek a job in return for bowing out and endorsing Crist?
Washington comPost tries to bail out Obama’s illegal job offers by comparing him to…Nixon?
Not sure this is the best way to help a friend out, comPost. Excerpt:
Think President Obama’s aides were the first to consider offering administration jobs to potential candidates for elected office in an effort to get them to drop out of divisive primary races?
Think again.
A never before published memo shows that President Richard Nixon’s aides had an elaborate plan to offer jobs to Republicans they believed were a “drag on the ticket” in the months leading up to the 1972 election.
The memo was penned by Nixon aide Fred Malek, now a major national Republican operative and head of a government reform panel in Virginia, and submitted to Nixon chief of staff H.R. Haldeman in 1971. In the memo, Malek dissects every congressional, senatorial and gubernatorial election that would take place in 1972, assessing whether Republicans likely to run in those races would hurt and help Nixon, who was running for reelection.
Seriously? The comPost is saying “Yeah, well, a Republican president did it, too!”, and the Republican president they reference is that paragon of virtue known as Richard Nixon? With friends like the comPost, who needs enemies?
Obama offered jobs to potential Senate challengers…twice
Most of you know that B.O.’s Chicagoland cronies offered Sestak a job in order to keep him from challenging Arlen Specter in the PA Dem primary. If true, that’s a crime.
Well, lightning sometimes strikes twice: he did the same thing in Colorado. From the AP:
The Obama administration dangled the possibility of a government job for former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff last year in hopes he would forgo a challenge to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, officials said Wednesday, just days after the White House admitted orchestrating a job offer in the Pennsylvania Senate race.
These officials declined to specify the job that was floated or the name of the administration official who approached Romanoff, and said no formal offer was ever made. They spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not cleared to discuss private conversations.
“Mr. Romanoff was recommended to the White House from Democrats in Colorado for a position in the administration,” White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said. “There were some initial conversations with him but no job was ever offered.”
I’m sure it’s just a really big coinkidink that not one, but two, Senate primary challengers were offered positions within the administration.
ObamaCare claims its first Democrat victim
Remember when the Moron-in-Chief and his buddy Axelturf said they welcomed the opportunity to run on ObamaCare this November? I say “Full speed ahead, Barry!” Details:
Democrat Alan Mollohan became the first member of the U.S. House to be ousted this spring primary season after his opponent mounted a campaign that questioned the 14-term congressman’s ethics and support for federal health care reform.
Mollohan conceded after unofficial returns showed that with 82 percent of precincts reporting, state Sen. Mike Oliverio was ahead 56 percent to 44 percent. It ends his 28 years in the House.
Mollohan was dogged by ethical questions, and the more conservative Oliverio ran an aggressive campaign portraying him as corrupt and out of touch. Conservative media rallied around Oliverio, along with anti-abortion groups angry over Mollohan’s support of health care reform.
…
Mollohan defended his record, arguing that most of his constituents wanted the reform he has championed for years. He said he worked hard to ensure no public funds are used for abortions and is confident the legislation achieved that, even though the National Right to Life Political Action Committee endorsed Oliverio.
Mollohan sounds like Stupuke and Ben(edict) Nelson with that canard about federal funds not being used for abortion under ObamaCare. With Stupunk’s amendment stripped out, and a toothless executive order afterwards, there is nothing to stop federal funds from going to insurance plans that cover abortion. These vermin are disingenuous…but then again, they’re Democrats.
Mollohan was also demonstrably corrupt, and that may have also doomed his campaign. But with his opponent having been vocally against ObamaCare, and with most Americans (including 34% of Democrats) wanting ObamaCare repealed, there’s no other reasonable way to interpret Mollohan’s defeat as anything other than a rebuke of him and his support for ObamaCare.
Reid exhibits signs of projection when it comes to Wall Street
Here’s what the soon-to-be-former-Senator from NV said yesterday:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid today accused Republicans of “making love to Wall Street” because they initially would not go along with plans to proceed with amendments to a massive financial regulatory reform bill.
Republicans, huh? Wall Street gave $10.6 million to Senators last year, $7.7 million of which went to Democrats. Goldman Sachs met with Da Prez four times and donated nearly a million bucks to his 2008 campaign (not to be confused with campaign he’s been on ever since).
So yeah, Republicans are the ones in bed with Wall Street.
HHS actuaries’ report showing ObamaCare’s crippling costs was sat on until AFTER the vote was held!
Boy, it sure is a good thing we’ve got a media in this country that is entrusted to shine the light of truth on this kind of thing, as opposed to being the dog washers of the Democrats and the administration!
The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama’s health care “reform” law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius’s staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.
“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.” (Yeah, that kind of IS the point of such a report. – Ed.)
The analysis, performed by Medicare’s Office of the Actuary, which in the past has been identified as a “nonpolitical” office, set off alarm bells when submitted. “We know a copy was sent to the White House via their legislative affairs staff,” says the HHS staffer, “and there were a number of meetings here almost right after the analysis was submitted to the secretary’s office. Everyone went into lockdown, and people here were too scared to go public with the report.”
Link to the report here (PDF file).
Liberals are impervious to facts, of course, so they didn’t need such a report giving them grief. A handful of Lap Dog Dems supported the bill under the bovine feces guise that the bill reduced costs and the deficit (parroting Oprompter’s talking points), and had this report seen the light of day before the vote, they would have had to look for a different excuse. Sure, they would have settled on a new excuse anyway, but they would have had a devil of a time explaining to their constituents why making health care and health insurance more expensive was a good thing. Why, it’s as if they had their minds made up in advance or something!
Heavy-handed White House tactics used against reporters
From Politico:
Police chased reporters away from the White House and closed Lafayette Park today in response to a gay rights protest in which several service members in full uniform handcuffed themselves to the White House gate to protest “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Well, maybe it was just a security precaution. Oh, wait…
People who have covered the White House for years tell me that’s an extremely unusual thing to do in an area that regularly features protests.
In fairness to the White House, this was done by the police. But were the cops asked to do this? Considering the light-skinned…er, I mean “thin-skinned” Chicago thug machine running the show right now, it isn’t far-fetched to draw the conclusion, now is it?
New White House slogan: Transparency is for suckas!
An amazing analogy regarding ObamaCare
Doctor Zero absolutely nails this one out of the park. Here’s an excerpt, but do yourself a favor (unless you want to suck) and read it all:
Imagine a large condominium complex is meeting to consider a package deal with a cable TV company. Over eighty percent of the condo owners have their own satellite dishes, and are quite happy with the service. Some of them don’t bother to watch television at all, preferring to rent movies from Blockbuster or Netflix for entertainment. However, the condominium Board of Directors says they’re getting a lot of complaints from the residents who don’t have satellite dishes, demanding the condo association purchase a cable TV package, and fold its cost into the monthly homeowner dues.
The homeowners already pay extremely high dues, and they’re not happy with the quality of service they receive. They also notice that most of the people clamoring for cable television aren’t even homeowners – they’re renters, so they don’t pay the association fees directly. The condo owners already host regular movie nights at the clubhouse, which also has a well-stocked library, so no one is truly starved for entertainment. Still, the owners feel guilty that anyone has to make do without TV service in their home, so they invite a cable company to give them a sales pitch.
The cable company, BFD Communications, produces an incredibly complicated plan for providing cable television service to the community. The plan is thousands of pages long, and no one even claims to have read the whole thing. They spend the weeks leading up to the big board meeting pestering all of the residents with relentless advertising for their services, covering doorknobs and windshields with brochures. Their presentation at the board meeting is several hours long.
BFD Communications explains that purchasing their service will require a lifetime contract, which can never be broken. The condo residents will be required to deal exclusively with BFD for their entertainment needs – all satellite dishes must go, and even the library will fall under their control. The contract will include funding for a large corporate security force, which will ensure compliance by issuing fines for illegal satellite dishes, or attempts to smuggle rented movies into the development. As this feature of the contract is being explained to the homeowners, a large screen behind the BFD representatives is flashing slogans like “BFD Enhances Competition!” and “BFD Saves You Money!”
The cable TV contract will be fantastically expensive. Curiously, while it is a lifetime contract, the company refuses to discuss the fee schedule beyond the first ten years. An intrepid homeowner studies the contract and discovers the costs double after ten years… and this assessment was prepared by CBO Auditing, a firm which has underestimated the cost of every contract it has ever reviewed. The condo Board rules that only the ten-year projections matter, and the intrepid homeowner is asked to leave the meeting. …
Brilliant! Read it all.
Stupak traded his 100% lifetime pro-life rating for pork?
I’m sure this is all a huge coinkdink.
Supposed pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak may well have been bribed in order to buy his vote to support Barack Obama’s health care “reform.” // Late Sunday, meticulous research by accountability-minded bloggers first brought to light a stealthy press release from Stupak’s own office this past Friday. The release announced a US Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration grant in the value of $726 409 for three airports in northern Michigan, meant to go to maintenance and improvements; Stupak represents Michigan’s 1st district. Suspicions have only increased with greater fervor since Stupak represented the so-called “pro-life” bloc of Democrat holdouts who wanted greater protections against abortion provisions included in the Senate version of Obamacare when it went to the House. Yet Stupak sold out on Sunday when offered a legally meaningless “executive order” that will be overruled by judges anyway, as the pro-abortion language in the bill carries more weight. If true, Stupak sold his soul for very little; after all, at least Mary Landrieu got $300 million for her state in the Louisiana Purchase.
What makes Stupak look really guilty in this matter is the very fishy timing of his sudden about-face, especially when you consider the recent timeline of his public statements on his stand on abortion language in the bill. As late as this past Friday, the 19th, Stupak was a firm “no,” even going and speaking to FNC’s Greta Van Susteren in reiterating his unreliably pro-life bloc of Democrats’ opposition to Obamacare. Then, though, came the press release later in the day, but also on Friday about how his northern Michigan district would get a cool $726,409 for airport improvements.
Now, fast forward to Saturday when Stupak wasn’t that vocal anymore—as he had consistently been in the days before his bribe, er, I mean, “grant” for his district—on how he’d vote. Finally, that brings us to Sunday when he revealed how he’d sell his soul for a mere, useless piece of paper, an “executive order,” strengthening limits on abortion. As the National Right to Life Committee reasoned so very convincingly, the order doesn’t overturn any of the pro-abortion language in the bill, and courts will enforce a bill over an executive order. …
He’s totally against federal funding for the slaughter of unborn babies. Unless his district can get some new goodies, in which case, what’s a few more fetal carcasses, right? Good luck selling that one at the Pearly Gates, Stupork.
Two Indiana Democrats commit political suicide for ObamaCare
Congressman Brad Ellsworth, into his second term as a House member from a red district, isn’t running for re-election. That would explain his vote for ObamaCare, since the electorate couldn’t retaliate against him in November.
Oh, but they can…and they will. He’s running for the U.S. Senate, the seat being vacated by Evan Bayh (who also told Indianans to s#ck it and voted for ObamaCare in the Senate). How’s President Hopenchange working out for Ellsworth? Not too well. Details:
Two of the three top Republican hopefuls for the U.S. Senate in Indiana continue to hold double-digit leads over Democratic Congressman Brad Ellsworth. Ellsworth supported President Obama’s health care plan in a state where opposition to the legislation is higher than it is nationally.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state finds former Congressman John Hostettler with a 50% to 32% lead over Ellsworth, a current House member who voted with most other Democrats on Sunday to pass the health care plan. The survey was taken last Wednesday and Thursday nights. Fifteen percent (15%) remain undecided in that match-up.
Ex-Senator Dan Coats now posts a 49% to 34% lead over Ellsworth, with 12% undecided.
Ellsworth runs best against the third GOP contender, freshman State Senator Marlin Stutzman. In that match-up, Stutzman leads by just seven points, 41% to 34%. Eighteen percent (18%) are undecided.
…
Unless there is a major shift if perception of the health care plan, Ellsworth may face a big challenge convincing voters in the state why he voted for the President’s plan. Just 35% of Indiana voters favor the plan proposed by the president and congressional Democrats, while 63% oppose it. This is well above the level of opposition found nationally. These findings include 21% who Strongly Favor the plan and 54% who Strongly Oppose it.
What a moron! “My state really, and I mean reaaaaaaaaaaallllllly, hates ObamaCare. I want to represent the entire state in the Senate. Hey, I know! I’ll vote for the bill that my fellow Indianans despise!”
As for the other Hoosier huckster, Baron Hill realizes he probably fell on his sword:
Said Representative Baron Hill, an Indiana Democrat, “I feel like I am walking the plank.”
“In the short term, it’s going to cost me,” Hill said. “It remains to be seen whether or not people will see the benefits that are in the bill 10 years out.”
Translation: My constituents loathed this bill, but I drank the Obama Kool-Aid, so I pulled the plug on my career.
Oh, well. I’m sure Barry O will hook them up with a plum administration job after their impending November defeats. Birds of a feather flock together, no?
Quote of the day, “We don’t need no stinkin’ rules!” edition
From Alcee Hastings (D-FL), member of the House Rules Committee:
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D) Florida, a member of the House Rules Committee, made one of those gaffes that is defined as speaking the truth when he really ought not to have. Hastings articulated the approach the Democrats are taking for health care reform.
“There ain’t no rules here, we’re trying to accomplish something. . . .All this talk about rules. . . .When the deal goes down . . . we make ‘em up as we go along.”
John at Powerline gives a refresher on Hastings, if you didn’t already know:
Hastings was once a federal judge, but he was impeached–it is hard to articulate what a difficult, cumbersome process that is–because he solicited bribes from criminal defendants. That is, he approached the criminals and told them that he would let them off if they paid him. That’s a little extreme, even for a Democrat. Hastings’ efforts to make himself rich in this criminal fashion came to light and he was investigated. He responded to the investigation by committing perjury.
As a result of his multiple crimes, Hastings was removed as a federal judge by the United States Senate, one of the few times in history that has happened. Here is the really astonishing thing: instead of going to jail, Alcee Hastings went to Congress! Democratic voters were not in the least concerned that he is a criminal of the most verminous sort. On the contrary, they elected him to represent them in Florida’s 23rd Congressional District! That, really, tells you all you need to know about the depravity to which the Democratic Party has sunk.
The last refuge for scoundrels? Why, the Democrat Party, of course!
Quote of the day, “Dem Congressman admits his party is a party of thieves” edition
I guess there really is, at times, honor among thieves. While meeting with constituents regarding the federal takeover of the health care industry, Tom Perriello (D-VA), a man who is likely on his way out in November, had this to say (video here):
If you don’t tie our hands, we will keep stealing.
Got that? It’s our fault that we don’t stop these generational kleptomaniacs from themselves!
UPDATE: Obama: The Louisiana Purchase helps the victims of the earthquake in…Hawaii?
UPDATES BELOW.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? What is this socialist tool talkin about? Quoth The One in his interview with FNC:
OBAMA: I am certain that we’ve made sure, for example, that any burdens on states are alleviated, when it comes to what they’re going to have to chip in to make sure that we’re giving subsidies to small businesses, and subsidies to individuals, for example.
BAIER: So the Connecticut deal is still in?
OBAMA: So that’s not — that’s not going to be something that is going to be in this final package. I think the same is true on all of these provisions. I’ll give you some exceptions though. Something that was called a special deal was for Louisiana. It was said that there were billions — millions of dollars going to Louisiana, this was a special deal. Well, in fact, that provision, which I think should remain in, said that if a state has been affected by a natural catastrophe, that has created a special health care emergency in that state, they should get help. Louisiana, obviously, went through Katrina, and they’re still trying to deal with the enormous challenges that were faced because of that. (CROSS TALK) OBAMA: That also — I’m giving you an example of one that I consider important. It also affects Hawaii, which went through an earthquake. So that’s not just a Louisiana provision. That is a provision that affects every state that is going through a natural catastrophe. Now I have said that there are certain provisions, like this Nebraska one, that don’t make sense. And they needed to be out. And we have removed those.
First of all, it’s a friggin’ lie that “we have removed” the special provisions like the Cornhusker Kickback and Gator Aid. They were vote buyoffs to get the Senate to pass ObamaCare, which it did…and now that very Senate bill is sitting in the House’s lap! Now while B.O.’s proposal may have been to eliminate those vote buyoffs, that’s irrelevant, because his bill isn’t the one that the House is considering to cram down our throats.
Now, on to the part where I make fun of this Mensa scholar…
If he was talking about Haiti instead of Hawaii, then how in the Sam Hill does passing ObamaCare or using Landrieu’s vote buyoff help the people of Haiti? I mean, unless Haiti is one of those 57 states I didn’t know about, this does jack squat for them.
If, however, he actually meant his “birth state” (and no, I’m not referring to Kenya, which I think is not the 57th state…yet), then Gateway Pundit finds a slight problem with his statement:
In 1868 there was a major earthquake in Hawaii that killed 77 people. In 1975 an earthquake in Hawaii killed 2 people.
Seriously…what in the blue Hades is this guy talking about???
Also, as Gateway Pundit mentions, B.O. said in this interview that “that provision, which I think should remain in, said that if a state has been affected by a natural catastrophe, that has created a special health care emergency in that state, they should get help.” Yet another damnable lie. Texas and Mississippi were states that were both affected by hurricanes (i.e. “natural catastrophes”) and declared to be major disaster areas…yet neither were covered by this provision of which he speaks. The provision refers to one state and one state alone: Louisiana. And why not? Louisiana was the only state along the Gulf coast who had a Senator ripe for a buyoff. Sens. Cornyn and Hutchison (TX), as well as Wicker and Cochran (MS) were firm opponents on ObamaCare. But not Landrieu.
Anywho, do you ever get the feeling that maybe, just maybe, our President doesn’t exactly adhere to the truth very often?
UPDATE (03/18/2010 – 2:30 PM): Reader C-Note (lurks, doesn’t comment) sent me an e-mail reminding me of the 2006 earthquake in Hawaii that registered a 6.7 on the Richter scale. Since I’m not Dan Rather, I’m not going to pretend I’m not wrong. However, if that’s what B.O. was talking about, he’s either wrong or lying about the Louisiana Purchase covering Hawaii. See, the LA Purchase’s language says that a state where “every county or parish in the State warrant individual and public assistance or public assistance from the Federal Government under such Act” qualifies. Not every county in HI received federal assistance, so the LA Purchase does not cover HI.
Quote of the day, “Self-executing rules SUCK!” edition
Which right-wing nutjob said this on the floor of the House?
I have said on this Floor before when you did not allow us to offer substitutes that you didn’t have the courage of your convictions.
I have said on this Floor before when you didn’t allow us to offer amendments that you didn’t have the courage of your convictions.
Now you not only don’t allow us to offer a substitute, you don’t allow us to offer amendments, you don’t even have the courage to PUT YOUR OWN BILL ON THE FLOOR.
The public probably doesn’t understand that. THIS IS A RULE, NOT THE BILL. We’re not debating the bill…
Why? To muzzle us, and to muzzle their folks who they don’t rely on to vote on the substance of this bill but HOPE AND PRAY they’ll get enough of their people on the procedural end of this bill to carry the day.
That’s unfortunate. Eighty-two billion dollars of deficit that Americans are going to have to pay for. My children are going to have to pay for. My grandchildren are going to have to pay for. And we don’t even have the courage to PUT THE BILL ON THE FLOOR, but this rule roosts…
That would be…Steny Hoyer (D-MD). In 2003. When the GOP majority used it for a routine (yet, in my view, still reprehensible) and bipartisan manner related to an increase in the child tax credit. Hoyer was bellowing (rightly so, in my view) about the procedure being used to usher in $82 billion of tax credits…a pittance compared to the $1 trillion+ spending being crammed down our throats by he and his ilk today.
Anywho, what does Hoyer say about this tactic today?
“It is consistent with the rules,” Mr. Hoyer said. “It is consistent with former practice.”
Fargin’ hypocrite.
Slaughter solution bitterly opposed in 2005…by Slaughter!
She fought it in 2005 with San Fran Nan when the GOP was busy using the Constitution as Charmin. But today? Not so much.
But put aside the present for the moment and step into my time machine. Dial the date selector back to 2005 when the Republican majority in Congress approved a national debt limit increase using a self-executing rule similar to the Slaughter Solution.
Guess who went to federal court to challenge the constitutionality of the move? The Ralph Nader-backed Public Citizen legal activists. Here’s the argument they made:
“Article I of the United States Constitution requires that before proposed legislation may “become[] a Law,” U.S. CONST. art. I, § 7, cl. 2, “(1) a bill containing its exact text [must be] approved by a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives; (2) the Senate [must] approve[] precisely the same text; and (3) that text [must be] signed into law by the President,” Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 448, 118 S.Ct. 2091, 141 L.Ed.2d 393 (1998).
“Public Citizen, a not-for-profit consumer advocacy organization, filed suit in District Court claiming that the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Pub.L. No. 109-171, 120 Stat. 4 (2006) (“DRA” or “Act”), is invalid because the bill that was presented to the President did not first pass both chambers of Congress in the exact same form. In particular, Public Citizen contends that the statute’s enactment did not comport with the bicameral passage requirement of Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, because the version of the legislation that was presented to the House contained a clerk’s error with respect to one term, so the House and Senate voted on slightly different versions of the bill and the President signed the version passed by the Senate.
“Public Citizen asserts that it is irrelevant that the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate both signed a version of the proposed legislation identical to the version signed by the President. Nor does it matter, Public Citizen argues, that the congressional leaders’ signatures attest that indistinguishable legislative text passed both houses.” (Emphasis added)
And now for the kicker, guess who joined Public Citizen in that suit with amicus briefs:
- Nancy Pelosi
- Henry Waxman
- Louise Slaughter
If the Pelosi/Slaughter/Waxman argument against using a self-executing rule against a debt limit increase measure sounds familiar, it should because it’s the same argument now being used by Republicans to oppose the Slaughter Solution for moving Obamacare through the House.
Hey, I’m not saying she’s a hypocrite or anything! I’m just saying that she acts one way when it suits her fancy, then acts the opposite way when she suits her fancy. OK, now that you mention it, that does make her a stark raving moonbatty hypocrite.
House Dems to be screwed by Senate Dems and Obama?
That seems to be a prevailing theory/scenario floating around the blogosphere and punditry. Jeff Anderson at the Weekly Standard has a great piece on the leverage that swing-district House Dems and why they should really think through voting for ObamaCare.
Here’s the thinking:
In order for ObamaCare to become law, the House has to approve the Senate bill as is. Most wavering House Dems (both “moderate” and liberal Dems) don’t like the Senate bill for a variety of reasons. For the Lap Dog Dems, the federal funding of abortions is a bitter pill to swallow. For the libs, it’s the absence of the government-run insurance plan. For both, the inclusion of the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, and the South Florida Medicare Advantage Exception are all hated.
Normally, in most legislation, this is where a joint House-Senate conference committee would occur. They would get together, see what a final bill that could possibly pass both chambers would look like, then craft one and send it to the House. Once it passes the House, then the Senate would vote on it. However, the Senate minority could filibuster it at that point. Given that this is a 100% certainty to occur in the Senate, the only thing that could prevent such a filibuster is for the House to approve the exact same Senate bill, without changes, as is. Because if there is even a slight change, it is technically a new bill and must go back to the Senate…where it will meet its end due to the filibuster.
Anywho, what Pelosi and Obama are trying to do is to convince wavering House Dems to vote for the Senate bill, and then for the Senate to pass, via the nuclear option, any and all “fixes” that the House wants. With the nuclear option, these “fixes” would be passed with 51 votes, despite the fact that they are not budgetary matters but are strictly legislative and policy matters (which the nuclear option is not meant for, but will be used for anyway).
But here’s the thing: If the House does pass the Senate bill, with the belief that the Senate Dems will pass their “fixes” after the fact, what incentive does the Senate (or Obama) have to do that? After all, once the House passes the Senate bill, Obama will sign it into law…voila ObamaCare! The House can bellyache and scream all they want about how the Senate Dems didn’t follow through, but there will be two things they can do about it: jack and squat. Reid and the Senate Dems, and Obama, will blame the lack of a “fix pack” on the Republicans, tell the House Dems “Hey, we tried! Sorry ’bout that!”, and that will be the end of it. Thus, the wavering House Dems (who would have gotten promises for a public option, Stupak aboriton-funding ban, removal of the corrupt vote buys, etc.) will have diddly to show for their betrayal of the public and their loyalty to their party over their country and constituents.
Anywho, read the column. There’s more than just this theory, and it’s insightful reading.
Obama selling judgeship for vote on ObamaCare?
I’m sure this is just a mighty big coinkdink, and in no way indicative of corrupt Chicago-style politics:
Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he’s obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson’s brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
If Matheson votes “Yes” on ObamaCare, after having voted “No” before, isn’t it obvious that his “Yes” vote was purchased as a gift to his brother?
End of days: CNN’s Jack Cafferty accuses Obama and the Dems of being…gasp!…liars!
No way!
Way.
How dare they? President Obama, Democratic leaders have decided to bypass a formal House and Senate conference committee in order to reconcile those two health care bills. Instead, White House and Democratic leaders will hold informal — that’s another word for secret — negotiations, meant to shut Republicans and the public out of the process.
What a far cry from the election, when then candidate Obama pledged to — quote — “broadcast health care negotiations on C-SPAN, so that the American people can see what the choices are” — unquote.
President Obama hasn’t even made a token effort to keep his campaign promises of more openness and transparency in government. It was all just another lie that was told in order to get elected. …
…The Democrats insist this is all on the up-and-up, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying — quote — “There’s never been a more open process for any legislation.” — unquote.
Really? This is the same Nancy Pelosi who you may recall, after becoming speaker in 2006, promised the Democrats would have — quote — “the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history” — unquote.
Here’s hoping the voters remember some of this crap when the midterm elections roll around later this year.
Those geniuses (genii?) at CNN sure have a nose for the obvious, don’t they? That journalism school edyookashun really paid off, huh?
In related news, Hell freezes over.
Snow in Florida this weekend and Cafferty shaking off the B.O. Kool Aid? Strange days, indeed. I blame global warming.
Pelosi: Of course Obama was lying during the campaign! He had to get elected, didn’t he?
Speaker Botox LOLing about what a shameless liar B.O. was during the campaign:
Or is it Pelosi having the gall to dismiss The One’s C-SPAN campaign promise with a blithe, chuckling, “There are a number of things he was for during the campaign!” Don’t blink or you’ll miss it, but it’s there. The Democratic Speaker of the House, laughing out loud — at a press conference — at what a shameless liar Bambi had to be to get elected. There’s a Change moment if ever there was one.
The Clinton years proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Dems are totally content with pathological liars in their party, so long as the agenda is advanced. Dishonor is cool, kids, and don’tcha forget it!
Night and Day, “Harry Reid on the importance of House-Senate conferences” edition
Reid and his leftist cohorts in 2006:
The conference process in the 108th Congress is a case study in how the Republican leadership abused the Rules of the House to block Members, both Republicans and Democrats, from legislating in an informed and thoughtful manner. House-Senate conferences are a critical part of the deliberative process because they produce the final legislative product that will become the law of the land.
Reid and his leftist cohorts today:
According to a pair of senior Capitol Hill staffers, one from each chamber, House and Senate Democrats are “almost certain” to negotiate informally rather than convene a formal conference committee. Doing so would allow Democrats to avoid a series of procedural steps–not least among them, a series of special motions in the Senate, each requiring a vote with full debate–that Republicans could use to stall deliberations, just as they did in November and December.
“There will almost certainly be full negotiations but no formal conference,” the House staffer says. “There are too many procedural hurdles to go the formal conference route in the Senate.”
Video link here.
Hypocrisy: It’s what’s for dinner.
You’ll never guess who voted for the DeMint amendment to prohibit vote-buying with earmarks
Predictably, the amendment failed, 53-46. There were seven Dem senators who voted for DeMint’s amendment.
The most hilarious Dem vote? Ben Nelson!
Since the amendment would not have applied to the current health care bill and would have instead applied to future bills, Nelson was in essence saying “I’ll take the pork payoff now, but I promise I won’t take anymore later.”
Senator DeMint’s reaction to Nelson’s vote?
Senator Nelson, unfortunately, is trying to have it both ways, he was for trading his vote for earmarks before he was against it.
Heh.
Obama’s closed-door meeting on openness and transparency
Irony: it’s not just for breakfast anymore. Opening paragraph of AP story:
It’s hardly the image of transparency the Obama administration wants to project: A workshop on government openness is closed to the public.
This is just adorable:
The event Monday for federal employees is a fitting symbol of President Barack Obama’s uneven record so far on the Freedom of Information Act, a big part of keeping his campaign promise to make his administration the most transparent ever. As Obama’s first year in office ends, the government’s actions when the public and press seek information are not yet matching up with the president’s words.
You know, if I didn’t know any better, I’d swear that a lot of what this guy says doesn’t exactly square with what he does. It’s almost as if he’s lying or something. I mean, I don’t want to call him a “liar” or anything, but he is kinda fast and loose with the truth…which, come to think of it, does pretty much make him a liar.
-
Archives
- May 2012 (15)
- April 2012 (20)
- March 2012 (11)
- February 2012 (17)
- January 2012 (19)
- December 2011 (25)
- November 2011 (41)
- October 2011 (38)
- September 2011 (32)
- August 2011 (39)
- July 2011 (28)
- June 2011 (43)
-
Categories
- "art"
- "hate crimes"
- 9/11 Commission
- abortion
- ACLU
- ACORN
- affirmative action
- Afghanistan
- Ahmanutjob
- Air America
- al franken
- Al Sharpton
- ambulance chasers
- Andrew Sullivan
- animal rights wackos
- Ann Coulter
- Anthony Weiner
- anti-Semitism
- Arizona shooting
- Arlen Specter
- atheists
- Australia
- autism
- Barney Frank
- Beeb
- Biden
- big government
- bigotry
- Bill Clinton
- Bill Richardson
- bizarre
- Blagojevich
- Blog Talk Radio
- Bloomberg
- Bobby Jindal
- CAIR
- California
- Canada
- Canucks
- capital punishment
- capitalism
- Caroline Kennedy
- Carter
- Castro
- Catholics
- Charlie Crist
- Cheney
- Chicago
- China
- Chris Christie
- Christianity
- Chuck Schumer
- CLOWNS
- CNN
- conservatism
- Constitution
- corruption
- Cuba
- D.C.
- Dan Rather
- Darfur
- Debbie Wasserman Schultz
- defeatism
- Detroit
- dhimmitude
- Dodd
- drugs
- Duke lacrosse
- economic ignorance
- Egypt
- eminent domain
- energy
- environuts
- Episcopalians
- Eric Cantor
- Euros
- Fair Tax
- Fairness Doctrine
- Farrakhan
- fauxtography
- feminism
- Florida
- Fort Dix Six
- Fox News
- France
- freaky deaky
- Fred Thompson
- Ft. Hood
- gay
- Germany
- global warming
- Godwin's Law
- Gore
- Grayson
- gun rights
- Halliburton
- headlines
- health care
- Herman Cain
- Hillary
- Holder
- Hollyweirdos
- homeless
- Howard Dean
- Huckabee
- Hugo Chavez
- humor
- hurricanes
- hypocrisy
- illegal immigration
- Imus
- intelligence
- Iran
- Iraq
- irony
- Israel
- Janet Napolitano
- Japan
- Jena
- Jesse Jackson
- John Boehner
- John Edwards
- Jose Padilla
- judiciary
- karma
- Kennedrunk
- Kerry
- Larry Craig
- Leahy
- Libby
- libertarian
- Libya
- Lieberman
- Lindsey Graham
- Lott
- Louisiana
- Marco Rubio
- Mark Sanford
- Massachusetts
- McCain
- McClellan
- media bias
- Mel Martinez
- Memphis
- Mexico
- Michael Moore
- Michael Steele
- Michelle Bachmann
- military
- minimum wage
- Minnesota
- moonbats
- MSNBC
- Mugabe
- Murtha
- NAACP
- New Jersey
- New York
- news bytes
- Newt Gingrich
- Night and Day
- Ninth Circus Court
- non-political
- North Korea
- Obama
- Occupy Wall Street
- oil
- Olbermann
- Operation Fast and Furious
- Osama bin Laden
- Palin
- Pelosi
- photoshop
- Plamegate
- political correctness
- polls
- Pope
- pork
- privacy
- property rights
- public education
- public service announcement
- Putin
- quote of the day
- Reid
- religion of peace
- Rick Perry
- Rick Santorum
- Rick Scott
- Robert Byrd
- Roman Polanski
- Romney
- Ron Paul
- Rudy
- Rush
- Russia
- San Francisco
- satire
- Seattle
- separated at birth
- shameful
- Shehag
- smoking
- Social Security
- socialism
- Solyndra
- Soros
- Spitzer
- Supreme Court
- swine flu
- taxes
- Tea Party
- Texas
- The Memphis Posse
- Tim Geithner
- Tim Pawlenty
- tolerance
- TOTUS
- treason
- Uncategorized
- unions
- United Nations
- vandalism
- Vermont
- vote fraud
- Wal-Mart
- Wall Street
- Ward Churchill
- Warren Buffett
- Webb
- wingnuts
- Wisconsin
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
