Spotted on the Side of the Road…

Comments Off on Spotted on the Side of the Road…

Seen Along The Highway

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm

Advertisements

Queen Nancy has lost it….

Comments Off on Queen Nancy has lost it….

She has flipped out, even her aides say there is no way…but here she is saying she’s gonna get it through no matter what you think.  Imbecile deserves to lose her Speakership and her seat.  By the way, she’s being challenged this year by John Dennis, a Republican, that video follows….

Larry the Cable Guy on Global Warming

Comments Off on Larry the Cable Guy on Global Warming

Larry the Cable Guy was on Sean Hannity Friday night and he was so funny talking about Al Gore and Global Warming I just had to break from the seriousness of the day’s politics and show just under 4 minutes of what he said. Enjoy!

Obama Was Wrong and Alito Was Right

Comments Off on Obama Was Wrong and Alito Was Right

Well this is no surprise since Obama made so many such statements at his SOTHU  address Wednesday like this below and his comments on lobbyists. These weren’t the only two either. There’s more coming on this later.

Obama Was Wrong and Alito Was Right


Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor attend the president’s State of the Union address on Wednesday, Jan. 27, 2010. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

(CNSNews.com)President Barack Obama was wrong and Justice Samuel Alito was right.

During his first State of the Union speech on Wednesday, President Barack Obama incorrectly stated that foreign nationals and foreign entities can now contribute unlimited amounts of money to U.S. political campaigns because of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling lifting certain campaign finance restrictions.

This prompted an immediate reaction from Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who, sitting directly in front of the president, shook his head and apparently mouthed the words “not true” when Obama made his remark.

The high court’s 5-4 ruling in a First Amendment case, Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Commission (FEC), lifted restrictions for companies, unions, and other organizations to make independent expenditures in political campaigns.

The court decision, however does not allow corporations to contribute directly to a campaign or coordinate expenditures with a campaign. Nor did the ruling lift existing law that blocks foreign contributions to political campaigns.

In his speech, Obama also claimed the court reversed 100 years of law when, in fact, it overturned a 1990 decision in Austin vs. Michigan Chamber of Commerce.
Also, parts of the McCain-Feingold reform bill from 2002 that restricted independent political advertising in the closing days of an election were struck down.

“With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections,” Obama said.

“I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities,” the president said. “They should be decided by the American people. And I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.”

Under the FEC regulation 11 CFR 110.20(i): “A foreign national shall not direct, dictate, control, or directly or indirectly participate in the decision-making process of any person, such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization with regard to such person’s Federal or non-Federal election-related activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with elections for any Federal, State, or local office or decisions concerning the administration of a political committee.”

Further, federal law, under 2 USC 441-Sec. 441e, also prohibits foreign donations.

In the majority opinion in the Citizens United case, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, “We need not reach the question whether the Government has a compelling interest in preventing foreign individuals or associations from influencing our Nation’s political process.”

In a dissenting opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote, “The notion that Congress might lack the authority to distinguish foreigners from citizens in the regulation of electioneering would certainly have surprised the Framers.”

Responding to a reporter’s question Thursday, White House spokesman Bill Burton did not assert as firmly as the president that foreign corporations can contribute to U.S. political campaigns.

Former FEC Chairman Brad Smith believed the president’s comment was inappropriate.

“The President’s swipe at the Supreme Court was a breach of decorum, and represents the worst of Washington politics scapegoating ‘special interest’ bogeymen for all that ails Washington in an attempt to silence the diverse range of speakers in our democracy,” Smith, now chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics, said in a statement.

Even a posting on the liberal blog Huffington Post by Adam Winkler, a law professor at University of California-Los Angeles, partly took Alito’s side. Winkler’s piece was entitled, “Alito was rude (but right)” and further said, “Alito was right. The president was wrong about the Supreme Court decision.”

CNSNews.com

Questions About the Tea Party Convention

3 Comments

This story appeared in World Net Daily after Marsha Blackburn and Michelle Bachmann said they wouldn’t be there because of House Ethics problems.  It doesn’t sound like they DIDN’T want to be there, sounds more like some hinky stuff with the ethics committee.  Judge for yourself:

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


WND founder Joseph Farah

In the wake of Scott Brown’s stunning victory for the U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts, an energized national tea-party movement is in the final stages of mobilizing its first-ever convention targeting lawmakers deemed “tone-deaf” and unresponsive to Americans.

WND founder Joseph Farah will join former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin as speaker at the first national tea party convention from Feb. 4 to Feb. 6 at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel in Nashville, Tenn.

Former Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo also plans to attend. The event will feature prominent speakers such as WND columnist Judge Roy Moore and Phil Valentine, popular radio talk-show host and author of “The Conservative Handbook.”

The convention, hosted by Tea Party Nation, has been sold out, with a waiting list of approximately 500 people. However, some tickets to Palin’s Feb. 6 speech at an evening banquet are still available at the National Tea Party Convention website.


Sarah Palin

While the convention features a lineup of prominent speakers, the mainstream media have been buzzing with reports of canceled convention appearances by Reps. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee.

Bachmann and Blackburn said appearing at the convention might conflict with House ethics rules.

“Marsha was kind enough to call me this morning and reiterate her support for the convention,” Tea Party Nation President Judson Phillips said. “She said they had to run it back through the ethics committee, and the ethics committee would not sign off on it. Because of that, she could not come.”

According to reports, the lawmakers sought the advice of the House Ethics Committee and received “conflicting advice” based on the for-profit status of Tea Party Nation. Critics contend that the Tea Party Nation should have filed for nonprofit status. But Phillips said the nonprofit model would have meant the organization would rely almost entirely on regular donations to serve its mission.

“My personal opinion is that nonprofits are among the most abused structures out there,” he said. “We do not have a big office. We don’t send people out on trips. We don’t do anything like that. There are some nonprofits that have big offices, send people on trips, pay exorbitant salaries. Most of our folks are volunteers. We’ve compensated a few sales people with commissions, and that’s pretty much it.”

//

Phillips said the idea of sending out letters to supporters and telling them, “The world is ending, but for $50 we can put it off for a couple of weeks,” didn’t sit well with him.

“My vision for Tea Party Nation was to use the capitalist system to support our activities,” he said. “The whole idea of begging for bucks is absolutely repugnant to me. I’m not saying people who have nonprofits and seek donations are bad people or anything like that. I’m just saying, for our group, I don’t like it.”

Because Tea Party Nation is a for-profit entity, it will be required to pay taxes.

“As soon as we’re done with this, we have to see what kind of tax liability we have. We need to make sure we’re squared away on all of our taxes,” Phillips said. “Once that’s done, we’ve got a board of advisers, and we’re going to sit down with the board of advisers, start looking at the numbers and see what we can do to support various causes that we believe in.”

At that point Tea Party Nation’s accountant will determine whether there’s anything left to give. He said, if there are any funds left over, the board will ask, “What can we do to help the tea-party movement?”

“At this point, based on where we are, we’re going to be in the black, but it’s not going to be by a lot,” he said. “Ultimately, we ended up calling some of the numbers amazingly close.”


Gaylord Opryland Hotel in Nashville, Tenn.

For critics who suggest Phillips might turn a substantial profit on the convention, he had these words: “That’s not why I started this. It’s not true. I haven’t quit my day job, nor do I anticipate quitting my day job.”

He joked, “I think we’re going to have just enough to take a few of the volunteers out for a lunch on the dollar menu.”

As for Bachmann and Blackburn’s speaking slots, Phillips said he is already receiving numerous calls from potential speakers vying for the positions.

Meanwhile, some tea partiers have rejected Phillip’s efforts to solidify the movement with a convention.

“We, as conservatives, have a golden opportunity,” he said. “We’re really riled up right now. With the bickering in the tea-party movement, we may screw this up. If not work together, let’s at least not work against each other, and we can have control of the Senate and the House this year.”

Phillips said he has three main goals for the national convention:

    1. Organizers plan to equip attendees with information, effective tools and techniques they can bring back to their groups.2. The convention will help tea-party leaders from across the nation network and make connections with people in the movement.

    3. The event is intended to provide some unity within the tea-party movement so leaders may work together toward a common goal.

“We’ve got to work together in 2010 because if we want to beat Obama, Pelosi and Reid this year, we cannot be divided,” Phillips said. “That’s the biggest thing I want to see come out of this convention – folks getting to know one another and working together, as opposed to some of the regrettable splits we’ve seen over the last few months.”

Phillips said the convention is an opportunity for grass-roots groups to unite because he believes the movement is set to explode this year.

He said, “I think the tea-party movement will be huge in this upcoming election.”

Where’s Your Tax Money going you ask?

2 Comments

From World Net Daily, Pelosi now on Top 10 list of most corrupt politicians because of her need for entitlement:

Taxpayers pay $101,000 for Pelosi’s in-flight ‘food, booze’

Speaker’s trips ‘are more about partying than anything else’


Posted: January 29, 2010
12:20 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


Part of the tab for alcoholic drinks on a congressional trip arranged by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

It reads like a dream order for a wild frat party: Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer.

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for “in-flight services” – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That’s almost $1,000 per week.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time.

“Speaker Pelosi has a history of wasting taxpayer funds with her boorish demands for military travel,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said today. “And these documents suggest the Speaker’s congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else.”

Pelosi, D-Calif., recently joined President Obama on a Judicial Watch list of Top 10 corrupt politicians because of her “sense of entitlement,” the group said.

“Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline,” the evaluation said.

//

And WND reported almost a year ago that Pelosi was shown to have been erratically canceling and rescheduling flights, as one would with an on-call taxi service.

“We have … folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets etc,” said one Department of Defense e-mail then.

Another official sent an e-mail questioning a series of Pelosi’s requests for aircraft.

“Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi’s team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?” it stated. “[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case’…”

The e-mail noted that the speaker’s office had “a history of canceling many of their past requests.”

Yet another e-mail exchange at that time revealed Pelosi’s demand that jets pick her up at Travis Air Force Base rather than San Francisco’s airport.

“She lives about 1.5 hours from SFO and much closer to Travis. … Whether it is the best use of assets is not the question. But instead is it worth upsetting the speaker. …”

Said another, “This is a battle that we are bound to lose if we tell the speaker(‘s) office. In the end, this is what will happen. I wish that I could say this is a one-time request, but we know it will probably happen again in the future.”

Yet another indicated a deep level of frustration:

“Here is the laydown: there are five G5s. Two are broke. Two off on CODELS. One slated for priority White House… we should keep on G-III for now for Tuesday afternoon and start sacrificing goats and chickens.”

Judicial Watch said the newly obtained 2,000 pages of documentation show Pelosi’s military travel cost the U.S. Air Force $2,100,744.59 over two years – including $101,429.14 for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol.

Among the newest highlights revealed:

  • Pelosi used Air Force aircraft to travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,210.51 per flight. Of 103 Pelosi-led congressional delegations (CODEL), 31 trips included members of the House speaker’s family.
  • One CODEL traveling from Washington, D.C., through Tel Aviv, Israel, to Baghdad, Iraq, May 15-20, 2008, “to discuss matters of mutual concern with government leaders” included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. This flight included the purchase of the long list of alcoholic drinks.
  • According to a “Memo for Record” from a March 29-April 7, 2007, CODEL that involved a stop in Israel, “CODEL could only bring kosher items into the hotel. Kosher alcohol for mixing beverages in the delegation room was purchased on the local economy i.e. bourbon, whiskey, scotch, vodka, gin, triple sec, tequila, etc.

Pelosi’s office could not be reached for comment. The answering machine said the office would be closed until Monday, and the mailbox was full, so no messages could be left.

Judicial Watch Inc. describes itself as a constitutionally conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

The Liberals Obviously want to Go Out In Flames!

3 Comments

I just can’t believe that fresh out of being blasted out of Massachusetts, these idiots would once again push for that piece of crap called Obamacare, but yet, here comes Pelosi and gang. My Highlights in Red...from Reuters:

By John Whitesides

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democratic congressional leaders said on Thursday they would keep pushing for a stalled healthcare overhaul and would explore all options to pass it, but acknowledged the process would not move quickly.

The day after President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address to the U.S. Congress, leaders in the Senate and the House of Representatives said they would not abandon the bill despite sharp Democratic divisions on how to proceed.

“We will move on many fronts — any front we can,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said of the overhaul, mired in legislative gridlock since last week’s Republican win in Massachusetts cost Democrats their crucial 60th vote in the Senate.

We must take whatever time it takes to do it,” she told reporters. “But we are going to get healthcare reform passed for the American people.”

In his speech, Obama urged lawmakers to push ahead with healthcare reform this year but he focused more heavily on his job creation and economic agenda, putting a lower priority on healthcare ahead of November’s congressional elections.

Obama gave lawmakers no guidance on how to proceed, but told them to let “temperatures cool” and then take a fresh look at his healthcare plan.

Many congressional Democrats are anxious to turn to job issues and put aside the unpopular healthcare bill, which would extend coverage to tens of millions of Americans and more sharply regulate insurers.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid reiterated there was no rush to pass the healthcare overhaul, the object of more than six months of intense political brawling in Congress.

“This is not a one-year Congress. It’s a two-year Congress,” Reid told reporters. “We’re going to do healthcare reform this year. The question is at this stage procedurally how do we get where we need to go?”

Democrats have scrambled over the past week to come up with a new strategy to pass the healthcare overhaul, which was nearing final passage before it was derailed by the election. An afternoon meeting of Senate leaders produced no consensus.

STAY AGGRESSIVE

“We will move forward even more aggressively,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said, although there is no easy path ahead.

The shift in focus and the likelihood that the bill could be pared down sent shares of health insurance companies higher in early trading. The stocks drifted down later, but still outperformed the overall market.

“Healthcare investors are breathing a sigh of relief,” said Leerink Swann Research analyst John Sullivan.

The S&P Managed Health Care closed almost flat after moving up nearly 2 percent in morning trade. The Morgan Stanley Healthcare Payor Index closed down less than 1 percent.

House Democrats are exploring which healthcare issues could be passed separately, with a repeal of the federal antitrust exemption for insurers and other industry regulations being considered.

“Some things we can do on the side which may not fit into a bigger plan. That does not mean that is a substitute for doing comprehensive,” Pelosi told reporters.

“When we are ready, we will bring them to the floor. Right now, we want to see where the Senate will go on its legislation,” she said.

One plan would be for the House to pass the Senate health bill, eliminating the need for another Senate vote, and both chambers then to pass House-sought changes to the Senate bill through a process called reconciliation.

(This is the one that made folks so angry, because they weren’t listening to the call of the people.)

That parliamentary procedure would require a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate, but risk a possible political backlash by bypassing unified Republican opposition.

“It’s one of the options obviously,” Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said of reconciliation.

Older Entries