Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Regulatory Commissars: They Knew Drilling Ban Would Kill Jobs

August 28, 2010

With unemployment hovering at 9.5 percent — real total unemployment, called U6, is much higher — what’s another 23,000 jobs lost? Apparently, not much to Barack Obama. Previously unreleased documents show that his administration issued the federal moratorium on deepwater drilling despite knowing the ban would kill thousands of jobs. According to The Wall Street Journal, the documents reveal that Michael Bromwich, the head regulator of offshore oil exploration, told Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar that the temporary ban “would result in ‘lost direct employment’ affecting approximately 9,450 workers and ‘lost jobs from indirect and induced effects’ affecting about 13,797 more.”

Also, regardless of confirmation from the region of the moratorium’s devastating impact, the government says the ban will continue. That’s right — the beatings will continue until morale improves. Reflecting its typical “we know best” disdain for the peasants, the administration has even claimed the impact wasn’t as bad as industry experts said. Try telling that to those 23,000 former workers.

In related news, House Republican Leader John Boehner has called on Obama to fire Treasury Secretary Tim “Tax Cheat” Geithner, National Economic Council Head Larry Summers, and the rest of the White House economic team. (Senior Economic Adviser Christina Romer and Budget Director Peter Orszag have already abandoned ship.) Pointing to “job-killing tax hike[s],” skyrocketing spending and a penchant for new regulations, Boehner said, “We’ve tried 19 months of government-as-community organizer. It hasn’t worked.” A political chess move to be sure, but we won’t argue that government-as-community organizer is getting rather expensive.

SOURCE

Epic fail obama:Obama administration continued its apology tour…

August 28, 2010

Administration Hammers U.S. on Human Rights

The Obama administration continued its apology tour last Friday when it submitted a 29-page report to the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, offering a critique of the state of human rights in the U.S. The report is part of the UN Human Rights Council’s “Universal Periodic Review” — the part of the show where nations grade their own records on human rights. Of course, the fact that such virtuous champions of human rights as China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Cuba occupy seats on the Council exposes this as a farce.

The administration laments, “We are not satisfied with a situation where the unemployment rate for African Americans is 15.8%, for Hispanics 12.4%, and for whites 8.8%.” Is anyone satisfied with that? On the other hand, the report lauds the election of our nation’s first black president; the passage of ObamaCare, which “makes great strides toward the goal that all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care”; and the financial overhaul, which addresses “predatory” and “discriminatory” lending. If he does say so himself!

The report also praises its author’s intentions of closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay and ending the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. So the only things Obama finds worth lauding are the passage of leftist agenda items and the personality cult surrounding his own election. For the first time in his life, it seems, he’s actually proud to be an American. Sort of.

SOURCE

TEA Party Shell Groups

August 28, 2010

The Tea Party has been so successful this election year that Democrats are resorting to political trickery. We’re shocked — shocked! A day before the primary in the Florida governor’s race, GOP candidate Rick Scott touted the endorsement of the “TEA Party.” As it turns out, the “TEA Party” was a shell group set up by leftists and funded in part by Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL). The group ran its own candidates state-wide in an effort to siphon votes away from conservatives. “This is a new low for the fake political TEA party,” said Tea Party activist Don Hensarling. But upon learning the real story, Scott rejected the endorsement — and went on to win the primary against state Attorney General Bill McCollum. Similar Democrat political stunts have been uncovered in Nevada and Michigan, so be warned.

Tuesday’s Primaries and the Core Debate

August 28, 2010

Tuesday’s primaries in Arizona and Alaska pitted well funded and entrenched incumbent Republicans against upstart Tea Party-backed challengers. The Arizona incumbent survived, but the Alaska incumbent is left hoping to make up ground in absentee ballots.

First Arizona. Sen. John McCain, the GOP’s 2008 presidential nominee, faced the fight of his political career against former congressman J.D. Hayworth. Unfortunately, Hayworth turned out to be a weak candidate and McCain’s $21 million media blitz was too much for him to overcome. In the end, the race wasn’t even close, with McCain outspending Hayworth 7-1 and winning nearly 2-1.

Hayworth, now a radio talk-show host, staffed his campaign with Tea Party activists and tried to run to the right of McCain. While in Congress, however, Hayworth had a penchant for earmarks and, after losing re-election in 2006, he participated as a pitchman in a video offering advice on how to get “free money grants” from the federal government. One could argue that earmarks are just part of the game and congressman should fight to get their constituents’ money directed to their own district, but after numerous silly projects have been highlighted over the years, voters are souring on the idea. And pitching “free money”? Not exactly the Tea Party’s core message.

McCain successfully countered Hayworth by running to the right himself. He has been remarkably frugal on earmarks through the years, offsetting any advantage Hayworth might have had on fiscal issues. The senator also moved right on immigration, going so far as to do a commercial along the border in which he called on the federal government to “complete the danged fence.” Of course, McCain’s lifetime American Conservative Union (ACU) rating of 82 is nothing to write home about, and now he’ll be in the Senate for another six years.

In Alaska, incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski trailed upstart Joe Miller by more than 1,600 votes as we went to press. Several thousand absentee ballots remain uncounted, but those are mostly military voters who may lean to Miller. The count may stretch into September.

The Murkowski family has dominated Alaska politics for decades. Lisa’s father, Frank, held one of Alaska’s Senate seats for three terms before winning the governor’s mansion. He then appointed his daughter to fill his seat. Joe Miller, the heavily outspent challenger, is a West Point grad, decorated Gulf War vet and a federal magistrate backed by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. If he pulls off the upset, it would count as the second major knockout of the Murkowski clan for Palin, who beat Frank Murkowski in the GOP primary for governor in 2006.

To put it in generous terms, Murkowski is a moderate. Her lifetime ACU rating is a paltry 70 and 2009 only brought that lower. She half-heartedly opposed ObamaCare but refused to rule out a government-run system. She declared in a debate with Miller that the nation could suffer if the government funded only those things enumerated in the Constitution.

That sums up the debate: Are we a nation under the Rule of Law, or the rule of men? Is government limited by the Constitution, or can it, in the words of Rep. Pete Stark, “do most anything in this country.” We know that the debate is over in the Democrat party — to them, government can do anything a majority can pass. Republicans like Lisa Murkowski and John McCain all too often agree. This primary season and the upcoming election, however, provide an opportunity for constitutional conservatives to begin righting the ship.

SOURCE

He is BIG! He is BAD! He is in a Jihad!

August 22, 2010

Seems as though the runt that runs Iran has a rather serious “short guy” attitude to me. The Iranian’s unveiled a “long range bomber” that won’t fly as far as a Piper Cub, and, as usual, only exposes his own inferiority. Hum? Unless Iran has well trained pilots by the handfuls that are stupid enough to engage in Kamikaze tactics? The range is effectively some whopping 310 miles?

Now, Iran is suing the United States in that oh so even handed World Court because we (The United States of America) stopped producing one hell of a great fighter jet. The F-14 Tomcat, which, stupidly with the benefit of hindsight we had sold to a rather pathetic dictator.. The Shah of Iran… And then the people of Iran (Which prior to that I personally held in great regard having known many people from Iran.) Allowed themselves to be enslaved yet again! But I digress…

The F-14 Tomcat is / would still be the premier Navel launch-able Fighter Aircraft in the world. Most especially if armed with the Phoenix Missile System… Hell, the go fast Boy’s tell me that within range limitations it can indeed pick a fight, and have a decent chance of winning against the F-15E!

That Ladies and Gentlemen, is saying something. So then, we as in our LEADERS decided that the best course of action was to stop production of this magnificent aircraft. This is a bitter pill to swallow, but I agree. An F-14 will kick an F-16’s ass out of the sky according to those that know, and put their asses in the air on the line.

* I might be getting my numbers mixed up here, and fast movers feel free to correct me.*

Iran has F-14’s. Enough said as far as I am concerned.

Let them fall apart. In the sky as they fly toward American or Israeli’s. If they do indeed make it to the battlefield? An American or, most probably an Israli F-16 will end the threat on the cheap!

This idiot, the President of Iran is leading the world towards the war that will make World War One, as well as Two, look like kids playing Soldiers with toys…

Perhaps the Maya’s thing about 2012 is believable? Perhaps, just saying? Iran is perhaps about to experience the full fury of the people of the United States of America? Perhaps the last days as told by Paul are coming. Perhaps Mister I’m in a Jihad? You spit into the wind..?


These statements are just the tip of the iceberg…

August 22, 2010

Right before I left the biggest issue on the block was Elena Kagan. While the outcome was pretty much written in stone well before the confirmation vote took place it was an eye opener when it comes to just who really supports liberty and freedom in the Senate.

Dare we call it treason?

GOA scores victories for liberty and freedom!

August 22, 2010

Granted this is a little late folks. I’m still playing catch up. Contrast this with my earlier post about Matt Mead here in Wyoming.

GOA Scores Another Win in Tuesday’s Primaries

— Colorado’s Ken Buck Joins Growing List of Pro-gun Candidates
Wednesday, August 11, 2010

As we inch closer to the all-important 2010 general election, Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund added one more name to the list of candidates who will come to Washington to slam the brakes on the Obama/Pelosi/Reid gun control agenda.

In Tuesday’s Republican primary in Colorado, Ken Buck won a hard fought victory with 52% of the vote.

Late in the campaign, Buck’s opponent criticized him for standing up for the rights of gun dealers when he worked as a federal prosecutor.  In 1999, a U.S. Attorney appointed by President Clinton engaged in politically motivated prosecutions of several Colorado gun dealers.  Buck took a bold stand to protect these businessmen and their Second Amendment rights in the aftermath of the horrific Columbine shooting.

Ken Buck’s victory is the latest in a string of wins for GOA-endorsed candidates.

In May, GOA-PVF supported Rand Paul in a primary against the hand-picked candidate of the Washington Republican establishment.  Paul coasted to victory, defeating his opponent by more than twenty percentage points.

Dr. Paul, an eye surgeon, faces Democrat career politician Jack Conway.

GOA-PVF also opposed the reelection of long-time incumbent Senator Bob Bennett of Utah.  Bennett went down in defeat at a Republican Party state convention in May.  Solid pro-gunner Mike Lee is favored to win the general election.

Another GOA-PVF candidate, Marco Rubio of Florida, avoided a primary altogether when his opponent dropped out of the Republican primary to run as an Independent.

And in what is the most watched, and maybe most important race in the country, GOA-PVF candidate Sharron Angle emerged victorious from a grueling three-way primary.  Mrs. Angle, a staunch, conservative pro-gun former state legislator, will take on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in November.

There are still several more Senate primaries to go before November.  J.D. Hayworth in Arizona and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware is running against one of the most anti-gun members of Congress, Mike Castle.

GOA-PVF is also supporting Carly Fiorina, who is running against Sen. Barbara Boxer — one of the most anti-gun members of the U.S. Senate.

The 2010 elections may be the most important votes we cast in our lifetimes.  To learn more about all of the candidates GOA-PVF is supporting, please visit www.goapvf.org.

U.S. Firearm Production Soars

August 22, 2010

Anti-Gun Group Shows Why The American
Way Is Better, As U.S. Firearm Production Soars

Anyone who traveled behind the Iron Curtain back in those days probably didn’t have to look very hard to find groups of “workers” sitting around doing pretty much nothing, except collecting a taxpayer-funded government paycheck.

The American way is better. Anti-gun group employees can still sit around doing pretty much nothing and collect a paycheck, but the money—lots of it—comes from donations, from foundations and individuals who share their ideals. While the rest of us have to contend with anything tangible they might produce, at least we don’t have to pay for it, most of the time.

Take the latest from the so-called Legal Community Against Violence (LCAV), a handful of gun-hater lawyers operating out of an office in San Francisco, California. Mimicking the Brady Campaign—probably not a good business plan, given that Brady Campaign is not exactly a thriving enterprise these days—LCAV is now ranking the states according to how “strong” their gun laws are.

If by any chance you are unfamiliar with the word “ludicrous,” now would be a good time to look it up in your dictionary. On the other hand, never mind, because once you go over LCAV’s pseudo-scientific poppycock, you’ll be able to write a good definition yourself.

Some examples serve to make the point. LCAV ranks California best in the nation, though its firearm-related death rate is higher than those of 16 other states, including Vermont, the gun owner-friendly laws of which LCAV ranks third worst in the nation. LCAV ranks Maryland 7th-best, just ahead of New York and Rhode Island, the firearm-related deaths rates of which are only 42 percent and 29 percent that of Maryland. Joining the declaration of ideological war by some in California against neighboring Arizona, LCAV ranks the Grand Canyon State worst in the nation.

And it goes on from there, with no correlation between LCAV’s ranking and the states’ widely divergent firearm-related death rates, no recognition of the fact that most firearm-related deaths are suicides, the frequency of which cannot be restrained by any gun control law, and no recognition of the fact that the world is still waiting for any evidence that any gun control law on the planet has ever prevented individuals or regimes from committing crime.

LCAV’s point structure for the various gun laws doesn’t even make sense. LCAV gives states four points (the maximum for any gun law) for requiring registration of all guns. We get that, since we know that gun control supporters consider registration indispensable, for purposes of enforcing a subsequent gun confiscation law. But LCAV gives almost as many points (three) for banning .50 caliber rifles (which are probably the type of gun least frequently involved in firearm deaths, or darned close), three points for requiring a dealer to be licensed (even though federal law requires that in every state anyway), and . . . well, you get the idea.

Similar to Violence to Policy Center, LCAV is especially apoplectic about “assault weapons” (three points for a ban), standard self-defense magazines that hold more than 10 rounds (three points for a ban), and anything at all to do with carrying a firearm for protection. Relative to the latter, a state gets a minus-1 point for a “shall issue” carry permit law, minus-1 for open carry without a permit, and minus-two points for concealed carry without a permit. All this malarky, with the number of carry states at an all-time high and the nation’s violent crime rate at a 35-year low.

We’re not sure how often LCAV will have the opportunity to repeat its state ranking exercise, though. One bad gun law at a time, NRA, its members, and their friends elected to state office have been eliminating gun control laws left and right for the last two decades in most states. And, Americans have responded by exercising their right to acquire arms in record numbers.

Some evidence to that effect was put forward by the BATFE recently, in the form of its report on U.S. firearm manufacturing in the first half of 2009. In the first half of 2009, U.S. manufacturers produced more rifles, more pistols, more revolvers and more shotguns, than in all of 2008. Coupled with increases in NICS checks of 11 percent between 2006 and 2007, another 14 percent between 2007 and 2008, and another 10 percent between 2008 and 2009, the evidence is pretty clear that the gun control laws LCAV wants have been on the wane, while the ones it most despises have become the norm.

SOURCE

Uniting in Wyoming..?

August 22, 2010

Already we are hearing about Republicans uniting behind Matt Mead for the Governorship in November. While he most certainly is better than his Democrat opponent Wyomingites need to remember that Matt Mead has some pretty serious flaws.

Mister Mead is anything but a supporter of limited government, or states rights. Those are two very big issues here in the Cowboy State. His positions regarding gun control are abominable, and no, his NRA membership and rating mean very little.

I have to wonder what Matt Mead’s positions, as a former U. S. Attorney are on things like Ex Post Facto Law, and unfunded mandates from the Federal Government? On economic sustainability as opposed to federal handouts? On taxation in general?

Hat tip to

Anthony Bouchard

Another episode of “Their back…”

August 20, 2010

The forces of anti freedom and liberty are back yet again pursuing their ultimate goal of submission of the masses to their agenda.

Read it here.

The shear stupidity of these people just never fails to astound those that think in a rational manner.

WEIS: It’s just common sense legislation. I don’t see how anyone could say this is restrictive when we’re simply asking for a background check if you’re going to buy a weapon. This is pretty simple to understand.

Thirty-three states, including Indiana, allow private dealers to sell guns to anyone without a background check.

They answer their own statement. There is a reason that thirty-three states do not agree. They also lie because if it is at a gun show, you have to be approved to exercise a “right.” This is about the outlawing of guns, and especially private sales or gifts. Hell, as it already is, I can’t “give” a firearm to my grandson legally…