News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited government, free markets, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles. Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor: Dr. Bill Smith [OzarkGuru] - email@example.com
Friday, June 25, 2010
Today in Washington, D.C. - June 25, 2010 - Troubling Times!
The House Passed the Disclose Act. The DISCLOSE Act restricts political speech and is the Democrats' response the Supreme Court's striking down of McCain-Feingold's worst provisions. The bill creates a special carve-out for large special interests like the NRA and the Sierra Club, whose support was needed in order for this bill to pass. A "NO" vote is a vote in support of limited government. The vote of 219-206, opened the door for a full Senate vote which democrats intend to muscle through by July 4th. The real purpose of the "DISCLOSE" Act (which is an acronym for Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections) is to impose restrictions on speech by corporations, nonprofit groups and others who express themselves through political campaign advertising.
Of course UNIONS would be exempt from most of the provisions of the bill since unions support Democrats almost exclusively. Read more here...Please call your US Senators and urge them to VOTE NO to their version of DISCLOSE ACT (bill # not yet assigned). We can't let this legislation slip through our fingers again! It is just another way for government to deny Americans their freedom of speech.
Congressional negotiators (Democrats from the House and Senate) approved the boldest compromoise takeover of the finance industry since the 1930s. The effort was lead by Rep. Barney Franks and Sen. Chris Dodd. The legislation was revealed after all-night negotiations and will now go to the full House and Senate for final approval next week by the Democrats who hope President Obama can sign the bill into law by July 4. Obama said Friday that he's "gratified" by the bill House and Senate negotiators worked out. Gratified is a euphemism for "Hold on to your wallets." The Democrats leaders refused to reform Government run Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae which precipitated the largest collapse in housing prices threatened to bring down the banking system which led to the first $700 Billion taxpayer bailout and a sever recession. Now these same people are on track to regulate the entire financial markets while ignoring problems with Freddie and Fannie. Welcome to government socialism! The way things are going, one could easily expect that Sen. Chris Dodd will wind up high in the bureaucratic structure overseeing the government's strings on our money thus allowing him a very large second income after his retirement from the senate.
The Washington Post reveals that "Democrats appear poised to deliver a final bill that largely reflects the administration's original blueprint unveiled almost precisely a year ago. Although it would not fundamentally alter the shape of Wall Street or break up the nation's largest firms, the legislation would establish broad new oversight of the financial system. A new consumer protection bureau housed in the Federal Reserve would have independent funding, an independent leader and near-total autonomy to write and enforce rules. The government would have broad new powers to seize and wind down large, failing financial firms and to oversee the $600 trillion derivatives market. In addition, a council of regulators, headed by the Treasury secretary, would monitor the financial landscape for potential systemic risks." Obama told reporters that the bill includes "90 percent of what I proposed."
Last night, Senate Democrats made a motion to invoke cloture on their ugly "tax extenders" bill. Sixty votes were needed to prevent the ongoing Republican filibuster. The bill would extend several tax provisions, raise certain taxes on small businesses for the first time, raise the per-barrel oil tax to 49 cents (a 612% hike!), extend unemployment benefits, and undo Medicare spending cuts. A "NO" vote is a vote in support of limited government. The motion was rejected 57-41. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid immediately filed cloture on the motion to proceed to the small business bill last night, setting up a Monday cloture vote. The Senate adjourned until 2 PM Monday.
For the third time, all 41 Senate Republicans joined together to block Democrats last night from passing their “tax extenders” bill which would have added $33 billion to the debt. Democrats simply refused to agree to a bill that extended expiring jobless benefits, tax cuts, and other provisions that didn’t include tax hikes or deficit spending. The New York Times reports, “Senate Republicans and a lone Democrat, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, joined forces to filibuster the bill in a procedural vote on Thursday. Visibly frustrated, the majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, said he would move on to other business next week because he saw little chance of winning over any Republican votes. The vote was 57 to 41, with the Democrats falling three short of the 60 votes needed to advance the measure. ‘You’ll hear a lot of excuses,’ Mr. Reid said at a news conference. ‘The bottom line is the minority just said no.’”
The Times adds, “The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has insisted that the bill not add to the deficit. Democrats argued that they had found ways to cover the entire cost of the $112 billion measure, with the exception of the $35.5 billion extension of unemployment benefits . . . .” This was Democrats’ third version of the bill. The previous two iterations of the bill would have added either $130 billion or $50 billion to the debt.
Yet Democrats never offered a version that was entirely paid for, and voted down or objected to GOP alternatives that would have paid for the bill. Just last week, every Democrat save Ben Nelson voted to kill a substitute amendment offered by Sen. John Thune (R-SD) that fully paid for extending tax credits, unemployment insurance, and the ‘doc fix’ (Medicare reimbursement rates), and even cut spending by $100 billion to save $55 billion from the deficit.
Despite this, Democrats and “Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-NV) blamed Republican intransigence for killing the measure and dismissed talk of continuing negotiations, saying the only path forward would require Republican compromise,” according to The Washington Post. Reid came to the floor again this morning and accused Republicans of not “believ[ing] that middle-class America deserves a break.” Reid didn’t stop there. He railed, “[O]ne thing my friends on the other side of the aisle should be very proud of is they protected corporate interest. They did that big time. They’re betting on our country to fail, Mr. President.”
Of course, none of that is true. As Sen. McConnell explained yesterday, “The only thing Republicans have opposed in this debate are job-killing taxes and adding to the national debt. We’ve offered ways of paying for these programs, and we’ve been eager to approve them. What we’re not willing to do is use worthwhile programs as an excuse to burden our children and our grandchildren with an even bigger national debt than we’ve already got.”
Even Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) took a dim view of Democrats’ finger-pointing, saying yesterday, “If we are serious about creating jobs, we absolutely could identify a pathway to extend the expiring tax provisions in this legislation which are important to America’s job generators, without simultaneously and inexplicably raising taxes on our small businesses--the very entities we look to in order to lead us out of this recession--in the name of increased spending and a more expansive tax extenders package. This approach simply makes no sense and lays bare the stark disconnect between Washington and the entire rest of the country.”
Democrats have simply refused to pay for their torrent of new spending without adding to America’s $13 trillion debt. Republicans repeatedly offered ways to pass this extenders bill without raising taxes and without adding to our crushing debt burden. Democrats rejected every offer. In the end, Democrats said to the American people “loud and clear that their commitment to deficit spending trumps their desire to help the unemployed,” as Sen. McConnell put it. Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, US Congress, taxes, financial regulation, DISCLOSE Act, stopping free speech To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tags:Elena Kagan, Barack Obama, SCOTUS, Political Cartoons, William Warren
Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2010/06/at-least-obamas-consistent/#ixzz0rsKlhhrY To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The Foundry, Heritage Foundation: Did you know that the federal government spent $2.6 million training Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly? Were you aware that Washington is on track to spend $30,543 per household in 2010? What about a recent audit that classified nearly half of all purchases on government credit cards as improper, fraudulent, or embezzled?
The federal government is addicted to spending our money and can’t seem to kick the habit. Heritage scholar Brian Reidl has released a new paper chronicling all this spending. Our latest video highlights just some of the startling figures he uncovered and makes the case that we must get government spending under control if we want to restore America’s fiscal health.
Please take a moment to watch our video and share it with friends and family. America needs to know the scope of the problems we face.
NAME / Source:TEXT Tags:Federal spending, Heritage Foundation, video, Chinese prostitutes, debt, national debt, deficit, wasting America taxesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
By Bobby Eberle, The Loft, GOPUSA: Question for you... When is going yachting during a crisis bad but going golfing during the same crisis ok? Answer... that's an easy one... when you are Barack Obama. The White House was quick to criticize BP's chief executive for going yachting in the midst of the Gulf oil spill, but they sing a different tune when the country's chief executive goes to concerts and golf outings during the same crisis. Is Obama on the job, or what?
As noted in the Washington Post, White House spokesman Bill Burton mocked BP CEO Tony Hayward for taking his yacht out on the water, . . . But what was Obama doing this weekend? He went golfing, and according to Burton, that's ok: "I don't think that there's a person in this country that doesn't think that their president ought to have a little time to clear his mind."
A little time to clear his mind? Is he kidding me? It's "clear" from Obama's performance in office that there is nothing upstairs at all! He has no leadership skills, no management skills, and he certainly doesn't know how to connect with the American people. While others are losing their jobs and scrambling to figure out how to pay the bills, Obama is golfing because his job is just so stressful. Give me a break!
The Hill reports Saturday's golf outing was the 39th of his presidency. On Friday, Obama took off for a Major League Baseball game. A few weeks ago, he was hosting a concert by Paul McCartney. The fact is that Obama just doesn't get it. President Bush gave up golf while in office, saying "he didn't think it was appropriate that he keep playing while troops were fighting in Iraq."
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said Sunday that Obama "can no longer take his eye off the oil." Was his eye ever on it? Has he EVER stepped in and exerted leadership for the sake of leading and not just using a crisis to advance a socialist agenda?
Steele: "While it is fitting and appropriate to look at the yachting activities of the BP CEO, with incredulity, it is equally incredible that President Obama finds himself on yet another golf course as oil continues to spew into the Gulf. Until this problem is fixed, no more golf outings, no more baseball games, no more Beatle concerts, Mr. President. The stakes are too high for President Obama's lackadaisical approach to both his responsibilities and the challenges we face."
Of course, the media find a distinct difference between yachting and golfing. As noted by NewsBusters.org, the Sunday political talk shows on the various television networks all pilled on the yachting story, yet there was no outrage directed at Obama for his golfing.
Of course, no one is defending Hayward's poor public relations move here. Instead, if media are going to spend so much time on his yacht outing making the case that it shows how detached he is from his company's crisis, the same MUST be said of a President that is golfing as millions of gallons of oil slam into HIS nation's coast.
Without similar scorn, our press are just once again demonstrating their infamous double standard -- not that we're at all surprised.
Massive debt, out of control spending, continued high unemployment, a Gulf coast disaster, and on and on, while Obama lives it up. If Obama is "on the job," then I want that job! Tags:Barack Obama, golfing, oil spill, failing presidency, media biasTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Secure Arkansas While Facing Opposition by Government Agencies, Identifies Recent Crimes Committed By Illegals In Arkansas
Blogs For Borders reported the below referenced story on recent crimes in Arkansas identified by Secure Arkansas. What caught the interest of the ARRA News Service relevant to this story is the associated fact that Secure Arkansas is also canvassing Arkansas voters for signatures on a ballot initiative to amend the Arkansas Constitution with respect to stopping of the use of state funds to pay for benefits for adult non-legal residents within Arkansas. In an interview of Arkansas citizens canvassing for signatures, the ARRA News Service learned that various county governments as well as the US Postal Service in Arkansas has been acting in violation of varied laws and have been prohibiting the collections of ballot initiatives on the public sidewalks on the property controlled by the county and postal service. While crimes by illegals is very much a concern, violation of the rights of legal residents to collect signatures for a ballot initiative in Arkansas is of grave concern. Secure Arkansas has identified three known recent crimes committed in Arkansas by Illegal Aliens.
LITTLE ROCK - A driver who police say caused a wreck that killed a Faulkner County man Monday night has been charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated and negligent homicide, prosecutors said Thursday.
Guadalupe Lopez, 32, was behind the wheel of a Ford Taurus that forced a Ford van driven by 37-year-old Gary Harp off of Interstate 40 shortly after 8 p.m. near Mayflower, Arkansas State Police said. Harp reportedly over-corrected, sending his vehicle toppling off the roadway and into a ditch. He was killed after being partially ejected.
Police, who had received reports of the Taurus driving erratically, tracked it to Lopez' residence in Conway within hours of the wreck. There, police spoke with Lopez and determined he had a blood alcohol level above the legal limit, said Twentieth Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney Marcus Vaden.
Lopez made no attempt to stop, Vaden said, and a search of his car also yielded a small amount of methamphetamine.
"(Harp) was just driving down the road, minding his own business, apparently a law-abiding citizen doing a lawful activity and he was killed," Vaden said. "He virtually got the death penalty from a situation that was not an accident. It was a needless situation to occur."
Investigators say Lopez, who was also driving without a license and without insurance, is an illegal immigrant. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement has reportedly begun a deportation process on him.
"This is a tragic case and on behalf of my office I want to express my deepest sympathies to the family of the victim," Vaden said in a statement. "While I am pleased the deportation process is proceeding, it is important to note that the State of Arkansas has every intention of prosecuting and punishing Mr. Lopez before he leaves this country." Lopez is being held in the Faulkner County Detention Center in lieu of a $50,000 bond.
ROGERS - Police are searching for several suspects in the fatal stabbing of a Rogers man early Friday.
Samuel Little, 28, was stabbed to death during an altercation shortly after midnight, according to a news release issued by the Rogers police. His brother, Christian Little, 34, also of Rogers, was stabbed during the same fight. He is in critical condition at Mercy Medical Center in Rogers, according to the statement.
Friday morning, what appeared to be blood was splattered across the front door, the front walkway and the driveway at 1712 S. H St., where the fight occurred. A dog looked out the front window of the home while a television news crew knocked on the door. An inoperable vehicle, along with children's toys, acooler and toolbox, were in the front yard.
Neighbors said they didn't see the stabbing but saw the swarm of police cars parked near the home after the killing. A neighbor who did not want to give his name described the household as "rowdy," and said he sees a lot of people coming and going from the home. The neighbor said he did not know how many people lived at the house.
The suspects were described as a Hispanic male, about 5-feet-8, and "multiple other Hispanic males" who fled the scene prior to the arrival of the police, according to the release.
Rogers police said officers responded to a midnight disturbance at the residence. According to the news release, two residents were standing outside the home when three men arrived. One of them urinated in the yard and a fight ensued.
Around 12:42 a.m., police responded to another call at the residence. Police discovered the Little brothers had been stabbed, according to the release. The Littles were taken to Mercy, where the younger brother was pronounced dead.
A traffic stop last week led to the arrest of three illegal aliens on drug charges, 20th Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney Marcus Vaden said in a news release. Officers from the Van Buren County sheriff's office, Arkansas State Police and the 20th Judicial District Drug Task Force found methamphetamine during the Friday traffic stop, Vaden said.
David F. Tinajero, 30, and passenger Luis Lopez-Sanabia, 29, were taken into custody after the stop on U.S. 65, north of Bee Branch in Van Buren County. Search warrants were then obtained for their Mount Vernon home and for the El Indio Mexican store in Rose Bud.
At the home, agents said they found more methamphetamine, a handgun and a stolen motorcycle. Methamphetamine was also found at the store, along with another handgun and about $5,000 in cash, the news release said. The store owner, Jose "Carlos" Montalvan, 51, was also taken into custody. Tinajero, Lopez-Sanabia and Montalvan face Class Y felony drug charges, which are punishable by 10 to 40 years to life in prison, Vaden said in the release. Bail for each man was set at $1 million, Vaden said in a second news release.
Tags:canvassing for signatures, ballot initiative, US Postal Service, county government, news stories, Blogs For Borders, Arkansas, crimes, illegal aliens, Secure ArkansasTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - June 24, 2010 - Kagan's Work As Political Adviser Gives Rise To Questions About Her Impariality
The House today will debate the Iran sanctions conference report and Democrats’ partisan election advantage campaign finance restriction bill, H.R. 5175, DISCLOSE Act. The Democrats’ unconstitutional DISCLOSE Act designed to silence their political opponents
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement “The First Amendment says ‘Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.’ It’s first for a reason. Freedom of speech is the basis of our democracy. The purpose of this bill, plain and simple, is to allow Democrats to use their Majority in this House to silence their political opponents. This is a backroom deal to shred our Constitution for raw, ugly, partisan gain.
“With this misguided bill, Democrats would restrict free speech and violate the First Amendment. But not for everyone. This bill would muzzle small businesses but protect labor unions. It allows the Humane Society to speak freely, but not the Farm Bureau. It would protect the rights, but not 60-Plus. And lastly it would protect the National Rifle Association but not the National Right to Life. The NRA is carved out and gets a special deal in this bill. The NRA is all about protecting the Second Amendment, but apparently its leaders don’t care about protecting the First Amendment. That’s very disappointing.
“Since the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the First Amendment, Democrats have maintained their bill would ‘apply equally across the board’ to corporations, labor unions and advocacy organizations alike. Instead, they produced a bill full of loopholes designed to help their friends while silencing their political opponents. We in this House take an oath to ‘preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution. A vote for this bill violates that oath.”
The Senate resumes consideration of the House message to accompany H.R. 4213, the debt-extending “tax extenders bill.” Senate Democrats have put forward a third substitute amendment, since the first two could not get 60 votes and a cloture vote on it could come as early as tonight. The problem with the latest version, though, is that it still adds $33 billion to the debt. Yesterday, the Senate voted 57-40 to table a motion from Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) to refer the bill back to the Finance Committee and return it with language that would make the 2003 capital gains tax cuts permanent.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he plans to take up the conference report on the Iran sanctions bill (H.R. 2194) today.
The New York Times reported yesterday, “[Sen.] Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, on Wednesday questioned the ability of Elena Kagan to serve impartially as a Supreme Court justice, seizing on notes . . . that suggested she supported changes in campaign finance laws that would hamstring Republicans but not Democrats. Ms. Kagan, who is President Obama’s second nominee to the high court, worked in the Clinton administration from 1995 to 1999, first as associate White House counsel, and later as deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy and deputy director of the Domestic Policy Council. 'The recent release of documents relating to Ms. Kagan’s work in the Clinton White House reveals a woman who was committed to advancing a political agenda - a woman who was less concerned about objectively analyzing the law than the ways in which the law could be used to advance a political goal . . . In other words, these memos and notes reveal a woman whose approach to the law was as a political advocate - the very opposite of what the American people expect in a judge.'”
Sen. McConnell explained these documents from Kagan’s service in the Clinton administration take on added importance “because she has no judicial record, little experience as a private practitioner, and no significant writings for the last several years.” In the absence of such records, senators are forced to turn to her work as a political advisor and academic for a clue as to how Kagan might apply the law. That’s precisely why Kagan’s political advocacy is so troubling. As Sen. McConnell said, “Ms. Kagan’s notes reveal that finding ways to help Democrats over Republicans was very much on her mind.” Her notes concerning a mid-1990’s campaign finance case where the Supreme Court said the government couldn’t limit political parties’ spending on independent expenditure ads that urge a vote for or against a candidate are particularly revealing. One of Kagan’s notes shows she “seemed to delight in the prospect,” that banning soft money would “hurt Republicans and help Democrats.” She scribbled a note, “soft $ ban – affects Repubs, not Dems!” In another note, Kagan suggested “free tv” (in other words, allowing campaign commercials to run for free) as a way to counteract what Democrats saw as an advantage for Republicans.
Sen. McConnell noted that Kagan’s “advocacy and apparent glee at identifying some political harm to Republicans is, to my mind, another piece of her record that calls into question her ability to impartially apply the law to all who would come before her as a justice on our nation’s highest court.”
The New York Times points out, “Ms. Kagan, who is perhaps best known for her time as dean of Harvard Law School, has spent much of her career alternating between academia and public service. She has worked on two political campaigns, those of Elizabeth Holtzman, who ran for the Senate in 1980, and Michael S. Dukakis, who ran for president in 1988.” And Kagan herself described her tenure in the Clinton administration, saying, “Most of the time I spent in the White House, I did not serve as an attorney; I was instead a policy adviser.”
“The more we learn about Ms. Kagan’s work as a political advisor and political operative,” Sen. McConnell said yesterday, “the more questions arise about her ability to make the necessary transition from politics to neutral arbiter.” Speaking with the NYT, Sen. John Cornyn, a member of the Judiciary Committee, agreed: “Obviously the job of political adviser is very different than that of a judge — a judge can’t take sides.”
As the hearings on Elena Kagan’s confirmation begin next week, Americans will be watching to see if she “could impartially apply the law to groups with which she doesn’t agree and for which she and the Obama Administration might not empathize,” as Sen. McConnell said. Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, US Congress, taxes, SCOTUS, nomination, Elena Kagan, Disclose Act, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: After dismissing General Stan McChrystal as Deputy Commander General responsible for counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan, President Barack Obama appointed General David to assume McChrysal's position. In-other-words, Obama opted for the Commanding General to fill the roll of his deputy - General Stan McChrystal. This begs the questions: is Obama seeking to downsize Petraeus' staff, to replace him as Commanding General or to have him salvage the mess that Obama created? Obama opted to not let the matter regarding McChrystal's staff being blind sided by an embedded Rolling Stone's reporter pass. He entrusted Rolling Stone with more credibility than his own commander. He relied on a Rolling Stone stringer who did not have the dignity to focus on the war operations but instead "allegedly" reported on expressed emotions or concerns about the Obama Administration made "allegedly" by McChristal's staff members after a few drinks. Obama opted for show instead of kicking Rolling Stone to the curb.; Tells us what sources, Obama and his White House staff rely on for "important" information.
Why did President Obama seek the assistance of General Petraeus? Just a couple years ago, as a US Senator, Obama castigated Petraeus for his efforts in Iraq and joined in supporting the liberal efforts who label General Petraeus as General BetrayUs. Petraeus is a man of honor and even now when called upon is willing to return to the front lines to join his troops on the battlefield. This is something that the present Commander-in-Chief has not and would not do. Instead, Obama constantly demonstrates that he seeks only to honor for himself and to promote an agenda that is presently wrecking havoc in America.
As history has proven, it is appropriate to replace generals on occasion, but that is no reason to encourage President Obama's failure as President and as Commander-in-Chief. The arrogant inexperience that the President has displayed in his constant "jet setting" efforts to apologize for America, to bow to foreign leaders, to campaign for candidates and to push his expanded socialist agenda combined with his spending an excessive amounts of his time watching and playing sports or participating in other recreational or social activities while men and women are in harms way and while major catastrophic events in the US need attention, has proven him incapable in performing his role as Commander-in-Chief. The truth is that President Obama acts more like a dictatorial spoiled monarch focused on his own desires supported by American taxpayers.
So far, the negative record of President Obama actions have far exceeded the short comings of a few military staffers identified in Rolling Stone. Based on Obama's past rhetoric, he too would have probably been quoted in the Rolling Stone's article if he had been serving on a General's staff. Of course, that is assuming Barack Obama would have even have pasted muster to be able to serve in the military or to qualify for a position on the General's staff.
The Wall Street Journal called Obama's choice of General Petraeus a "Hail Mary" and that "Obama makes a wise choice, but the general needs more support." They add, "The larger questions now are whether the President can exert as much policy discipline over his civilian subordinates as he has on the military - and whether he's willing to make a political investment in the war commensurate with the military sacrifice." This article details critical changes needed from President Obama to assure that General Petraeus, the American and allied troops in Afghanistan, and the government and people of Afghanistan have a meaningful chance of success. We need a Commander-in-Chief who focuses on the efforts of those he commands that are in harms-way verses treating them like a "Roman legion" being sacrificed for the whim of a far off emperor (oops - American president).
Between Afghanistan, the cleanup of the oil spill, the lack of concern or assistance in other natural disasters, the expanding Federal government, the failing economy, excessive unemployment, the national debt, not securing our borders being invaded by illegals many of whom are criminals and terrorists, and much more, this president has proven to be A Failing President. While Americans are paying the price in blood, sweat, fear and tears, President Obama watches the World Cup or plays another round of golf or insults half of America. He promised change and change is what we have. God Help Us! Tags:William Warren, political cartoon, Barack Obama, failing presidency, Stan McChrystal, Army General, David Petraeus, Bill Smith, ARRA News ServiceTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
You will be the first American president that lied to the Jewish people, and the American people as well, when you said that you would defend Israel, the only Democratic state in the Middle East, against all their enemies. You have done just the opposite. You have propagandized Israel, until they look like they are everyone's enemy — and it has resonated throughout the world. You are putting Israel in harm's way, and you have promoted anti-Semitism throughout the world.
You have brought this to a people who have given the world the Ten Commandments and most laws we live by today. The Jewish people have given the world our greatest scientists and philosophers, and the cures for many diseases, and now you play a very dangerous game so you can look like a true martyr to what you see and say are the underdogs. But the underdogs you defend are murderers and criminals who want Israel eradicated.
You have brought to Arizona a civil war, once again defending the criminals and illegals, creating a meltdown for good, loyal, law-abiding citizens. Your destruction of this country may never be remedied, and we may never recover. I pray to God you stop, and I hope the people in this great country realize your agenda is not for the betterment of mankind, but for the betterment of your politics.
With heartfelt and deep concern for America and Israel,
Tags:Jon Voight, Open letter, President Barack Obama, Israel, TEA PartiesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
This kind of thinking might be okay for a political advisor. But there’s a place for politics and for advocating for one’s party, and that place is not on the Supreme Court. A political advisor may be expected to seek political advantage, but judges have a different task.’
Below are the remarks made by U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell today on the Senate floor. Regardless, of the comments, McConnell's past history reveals he almost always voted for person nominated for SCOTUS based on a self-imposed belief that a President should have his nominees approved barring criminal or other major legal impairment. However, Sen McConnell evidenced a major shift one year ago when he addressed the SCOTUS Nomination of Judge Sotamayor. Recommend reading: Judge Sotomayor Does Not Meet the Test in addition to McConnell's statement concerning SCOTUS Nominee Kagan. It is critical that conservative Senators don't accept this nomination as just one liberal replacing another liberal.
by U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky): “On Monday, the Senate will begin the confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. And I think it’s safe to say most Americans don’t know all that much about her.
“But a fuller picture of this nominee is beginning to emerge.
“The recent release of documents relating to Ms. Kagan’s work in the Clinton White House reveals a woman who was committed to advancing a political agenda — a woman who was less concerned about objectively analyzing the law than the ways in which the law could be used to advance a political goal.
“In other words, these memos and notes reveal a woman whose approach to the law was as a political advocate — the very opposite of what the American people expect in a judge.
“This is the kind of thinking behind the current Democrat effort to pass the so-called DISCLOSE ACT — a bill designed to respond to the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United that they think puts them at a political disadvantage in the fall. That’s why the bill was written by the chairman of their campaign committee.
“And this is also the kind of thinking that seems to have motivated the Clinton White House to seek a similar legislative response the last time the Supreme Court issued a decision in this area that Democrats thought put them at a political disadvantage.
“I’m referring here to the case of Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC, a case in which the Supreme Court essentially said that the federal government couldn’t limit political parties from spending money on campaign ads called “independent expenditures” that said things like, ‘Vote against Smith,’ or ‘Vote for Jones.’
“This was not an especially controversial decision, as evidenced by the fact that it was written by Justice Breyer, one of the court’s most prominent liberals. But the decision put Democrats at a political disadvantage. So the Clinton Administration did the same thing then that the Obama Administration is trying to do today. They considered proposals to lessen its impact — and to benefit Democrats over Republicans. And Elena Kagan worked to advance that goal as part of President Clinton’s campaign finance task force.
“Ms. Kagan’s notes reveal that finding ways to help Democrats over Republicans was very much on her mind. According to one of her notes, she wrote, and here I quote:
‘Free TV as balance to independent expenditures? Clearly on mind of Dems — need a way to balance this.’
“The ‘balance’ Ms. Kagan is referring to here was a way for Democrats to balance what they viewed as the Republicans’ advantage in helping their candidates with independent expenditures. And ‘free TV,’ well, that’s a reference to Democrats wanting free television to help them out in their campaigns. Providing free TV would be a ‘significant benefit,’ Ms. Kagan wrote. It was also something the Clinton administration could bring about, she suggested, by simply having the FCC issue a new regulation, or by adding such a provision to legislation the White House was helping to craft.
“But this wasn’t the only way in which Ms. Kagan thought about stacking the deck to help Democrats over Republicans at the time. Another note reveals her approach to the issue of soft money — the money political parties used to spend outside of federal elections. Ms. Kagan’s notes show that she thought banning it would hurt Republicans and help Democrats. She even seemed to delight in the prospect of finding ways to disadvantage Republicans. Here’s what she wrote in her notes: ‘Soft [money] ban – affects Repubs, not Dems!’
“And if I had this quote up on a chart, you’d see that she punctuated this sentence with an exclamation point.
“So let me repeat that quote one more time:
‘Soft [money] ban – affects Repubs, not Dems’— punctuated with an exclamation point.
We already knew that Ms. Kagan and her office argued to the Supreme Court at different points in the Citizens United case that the federal government had the power to ban political speech in videos, books and pamphlets if it didn’t like the speaker.
“Then we learned she went out of her way to prevent lawyers at the Justice Department from officially noting their serious legal concerns with campaign finance legislation in order to help the Clinton Administration achieve its political goals.
“Now we learn that she thought about drafting such legislation in ways to help Democrats and hurt Republicans. And her advocacy and apparent glee at identifying some political harm to Republicans is, to my mind, another piece of her record that calls into question her ability to impartially apply the law to all who would come before her as a justice on our nation’s highest court. The more we learn about Ms. Kagan’s work as a political advisor and political operative, the more questions arise about her ability to make the necessary transition from politics to neutral arbiter. As Ms. Kagan herself once noted, during her years in the Clinton administration, she spent ‘most’ of her time not serving ‘as an attorney’ but as a policy advisor. And her notes and memoranda reveal that all too often her policy advice and actions were based, first and foremost, on what was good for Democrats.
“This kind of thinking might be okay for a political advisor. But there’s a place for politics and for advocating for one’s party, and that place is not on the Supreme Court. A political advisor may be expected to seek political advantage, but judges have a different task.
“We don’t know how Elena Kagan will apply the law because she has no judicial record, little experience as a private practitioner, and no significant writings for the last several years. So the question before the Senate is whether, given Ms. Kagan’s background as a political advisor and academic, we believe she could impartially apply the law to groups with which she doesn’t agree and for which she and the Obama Administration might not empathize. So far, I don’t have that confidence.
“As the hearings process, we’ll know better whether Ms. Kagan could `administer justice without respect to persons,’ as the judicial oath requires.”
Tags:Mitch McConnell, SCOTUS, nomination, Elena KaganTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - June 23, 2010 - Dems Poised To Break Obama's Promise On Middle Class Tax Hikes
The pending business in the Senate is the debt-extending “tax extenders bill,” the House message to accompany H.R. 4213. Democrats are likely to offer a new substitute amendment to the bill today, but it remains to be seen if they can get 60 votes to move forward. Two previous attempts have failed.
Today, the House Rules Committee is expected to send the so-called DISCLOSE Act to the floor of the House for an expected vote tomorrow. House Democrats have done nothing to remove controversial campaign speech restrictions against corporations and not-for-profit organizations to endorse candidates without regulation.
Bill Wilson, Americans for Limited Government has responded that: "The First Amendment is supposed to extend to all individuals and groups of individuals, but instead Congress continues with its curious interpretation of freedom of speech and of the press where certain, politically-favored groups, including media, are completely protected from regulation, and others are not. . . . The Constitution only provides for one, consistent application of the First Amendment, that Congress shall make no law abridging speech under any circumstances. Yet Congress persists in attempting to do just that, and uses exemptions to their unconstitutional regulations to buy off support, whether from media or certain non-profit organizations."
A week in Washington these days isn’t really complete without a news story exposing another broken promise from Democrats. The twist this week is that it isn’t about the health care bill, but it is about one of President Obama’s key promises: that he wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class. During his campaign Obama pledged, “If you make under $250,000, you will not see your taxes increased by a single dime. Not your income tax. Not your payroll tax. Not your capital gains tax. No tax.” Asked about this promise last summer, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, “The president was clear during the campaign about his commitment on not raising taxes on middle-class families. . . . I don’t think any economist would believe that, in the environment that we're in, that raising taxes on middle-class families would make any sense.”
The White House might want to spend a little more time talking to Democrats in Congress, since The Hill reports that Democrats in both chambers are looking at raising taxes, violating Obama’s promise. In the Senate, “Democrats are looking at the possibility of raising taxes on families below the $250,000-a-year threshold promised by President Barack Obama during the election. The majority party on Capitol Hill does not feel bound by that pledge, saying the threshold for tax hikes will depend on several factors, such as the revenue differences between setting the threshold at $200,000 and setting it at $250,000.” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) added, “You could go lower, too — why not $200,000? . . . With the debt and deficit we have, you can’t make promises to people. This is a very serious situation.”
In the House, The Hill reported, “In a speech before the progressive think tank The Third Way, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) on Tuesday left the door open to reigning in middle class tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush.” Hoyer said, “[A]s the House and Senate debate what to do with the expiring Bush tax cuts in the coming weeks, we need to have a serious discussion about their implications for our fiscal outlook, including whether we can afford to permanently extend them before we have a real plan for long-term deficit reduction.”
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell wasn’t enamored of this line of thinking yesterday when he spoke on the Senate floor. “The House Majority Leader in a speech today warns that in order to do anything about the debt crisis Republicans have been speaking about on the Senate floor in recent weeks, President Obama will have no choice but to break his campaign pledge of no new taxes for millions of American families.” Instead, McConnell offered, “Here’s another idea Democrats should consider, one that Americans have been proposing loudly and clearly: stop spending money you don’t have.”
Rather than raising taxes on middle class Americans in the midst of a severe recession and 9.7% unemployment, Democrats might want to consider spending less. Americans aren’t crying out to Congress that the government taxes to little, but that it spends too much. Democrats have shown that Americans can’t trust them to keep their promises, and raising taxes is just the latest example. The American people deserve better from their government. Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, US Congress, DISCLOSE Act, taxes, middle-class, broken promises To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Mexico asks court to reject Arizona immigration law
Paul Davenport of the Phoenix AP reports that: Mexico is asking a federal court in Arizona to declare the state's new immigration law unconstitutional. Lawyers for Mexico on Tuesday submitted a legal brief in support of a lawsuit challenging the law.
The law generally requires police investigating another incident or crime to ask people about their immigration status if there's a "reasonable suspicion" they're in the country illegally. It also makes being in Arizona illegally a misdemeanor, and it prohibits seeking day-labor work along the state's streets.
Mexico says its interest is in having consistent relations with the United States shouldn't be frustrated by one state. Mexico also says it has a legitimate interest in defending its citizens' rights and that the law would lead to racial profiling.
-------------- Bill Smith, Editor: When did Mexican officials become so brazen that they believe they have a right to interfere in matters between the Sovereign State of Arizona and the United States? While President Obama is busy being offended by a Rolling stones article, he yields to the effrontery of Mexico claiming all Hispanics in the United States as it's citizens.
The legal citizen's of the United States who just happen to be of Mexican heritage are not residents of Mexico. Those who are citizens by naturalization have taken an oath of allegiance to the United States of America. As for those here legally on work permits or temporary visa, they have nothing to fear from the United States but may well be in fear their home country - Mexico - where people are terrorized in their homes by drug cartels and at times by the their government.
As for those Mexican citizens who are in the U.S. illegally, it is very clear that neither the President of Mexico nor the Mexican government has been able to stop them from leaving (often fleeing) Mexico. In fact, the Mexican president has called all Mexicans living outside of Mexico migrants (unless they work for their government). The Mexican Government relies on the money being sent back to Mexico by illegals (and even legal residents) to their extended families. Mexico has been unable to provide jobs, protection and resources for Mexican citizens in Mexico. In addition, the Mexican government has not controlled the drug cartels in Mexico and the government is often seen as being in support of these cartels.
We hope the Federal Judge will see Mexico's legal brief for what it is 1) of no merit and 2) interference in the sovereign affairs of the Arizona and the United States. Tags:Mexico, Arizona, State sovereignty, illegal immigrants, news, court caseTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
DISCLOSE ACT back on the calendar for tomorrow June 23, 2010! TEA Party Patriot's Alert: We must stop this 1st Amendment killing legislation. They are trying to stop our voices! Please call these Congressmen and tell them to Vote No on DISCLOSE ACT! Speaker Pelosi and the House Majority Leadership are making it a priority to pass this bill. This bill is designed to take away the influence of Tea Party and other conservative groups in the upcoming November election. We feel like this bill will be successfully challenged in the courts, but the ruling will not come before the November election. An exemption has been carved out for the Labor Unions and other leftist advocacy groups.
Today in Washington, D.C. - June 22, 2010 - Dems Say No Congressional Budget This Year - Full Speed Ahead for Government Debt , Bailouts and Expanding Government
The Senate will likely later today resume consideration of the debt-extending “tax extenders bill,” the House message to accompany H.R. 4213. Also the SCOTUS nomination of Elana Kagan is being pressed to Senate members who have been waiting for information from the Clinton Library regarding Kagan.
But. the big news is from the US House this morning. Democrat House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced that the House of Representatives will not pass a budget this year. According to The Hill, “The House has never failed to pass an annual budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974.” Apparently, House Democrats will instead pass a “budget enforcement resolution,” which The Hill refers to as a “deeming” resolution, which won’t actually budget for anything, but will simply endorse the goals of President Obama’s fiscal commission.
The truth is that all the members of Congress wishing to remain in office are on the ballot this November and even those not running for office are concerned at the repercussions at the polls. The Democrats who control the agenda in the US House do not want to propose a budget and to have their remarks and votes used against them by the voters in their districts. They are like employees refusing to work but still getting paid to work. Needless to say, this is simply the latest example of Democrats’ fiscal recklessness and irresponsibility. Democrats began 2009 by passing their massive $862 billion stimulus bill, which has failed to live up to its promises of keeping unemployment around 8% and then followed it up by passing a $410 billion omnibus spending bill. The 2009 omnibus featured “an across-the-board 8 percent increase in spending over  — twice the rate of inflation,” as Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell described it at the time. A year later, President Obama signed into law his unpopular health care spending bill, which could cost as much as $2.5 trillion. Far from reducing government health care spending as Democrats promised, the law will save almost nothing, and the Obama administration’s own Medicare actuary says it will increase government spending. Meanwhile, adding some context to the reports that Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orzag is expected to step down next month, CBS News reporter Mark Knoller pointed out, “On Orszag's watch, the National Debt has so far soared $2.4-trillion dollars to an all time high over $13-trillion.”
And now, we receive confirmation that the House Democrats won’t pass a budget because they can’t get the votes and don’t want to highlight their spending binge in an election year.
Providing the leadership on jobs and the economy that Americans say is sorely lacking
Protecting our kids and grandkids from the enormous debt burden Washington has placed on them
We reserve the right to notify you of additional consequences that may arise in light of this budget failure, which is unprecedented in the modern era. In the interim, please brace for more spending, more debt, more tax hikes, more broken promises.
For families and small businesses looking for a government that listens to the people it serves and respects their hard-earned money, House Republicans are offering better solutions to cut spending now and help small businesses put people back to work.
Sen. McConnell said yesterday, “[T]he kind of spending and debt Democrats are engaged in and which they’re committed to continue year after year is like nothing this country has ever seen. And it threatens not only the livelihoods of our children; it threatens our national security, and the very safety net Democrats claim they want to protect. The fact is, the longer we wait to address this debt in a serious manner, the more that safety net frays—and the harder this crisis will be to address. At some point, a choice has to be made. And that point is now.”
Rep. Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, said: “House Democrats are making history again, but for all the wrong reasons. Last year they were responsible for adding $1.9 trillion to the national debt. This year they won’t even propose an annual budget resolution, marking the first time that has happened since the current budget rules were established in 1974. This is an historic failure of leadership. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer once said, ‘The most basic responsibility of governing’ is ‘enacting a budget.’ He now admits that his party, with its overwhelming majority in the House, will shirk that responsibility this year. But that won’t stop Democrats from their out of control spending. Through the first eight months of the current fiscal year, the federal government amassed $935 billion in deficit spending. The American people are tired of the Democrats’ habit of taxing, spending, and borrowing too much. Without a budget blueprint, those dangerous trends will grow worse and will pile massive debt on our children and grandchildren.” Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, US Congress, expanding government, no budget, congressional budgetTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
HeritageForAmerica — The health care bill can be repealed. Urge your Member of Congress to sign the discharge petition to force Nancy Pelosi to bring the bill back up for consideration. Join Heritage Action for America at http://heritageforamerica.org and take action. [Video]
Tags:Repeal Obamacare, US House, Discharge petition, Heritage Foundation, videoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
NEWSMAX: A majority of Americans do not think President Barack Obama should win re-election, according to a new Gallup poll. Gallup says that 51 percent of the registered voters surveyed say "no," 46 percent say "yes" and 3 percent don't know.
While those numbers haven't changed much in recent months, there’s plenty to worry the administration.
Fifty-three percent of self-described independents say Obama should not win another term in 2012, compared to 43 percent who say he should. That's almost a complete reversal of where independents stood on Obama's election in 2008, when swing vote moderates were the pivotal voting bloc that helped send Obama to the White House . . . . [Full Story at Gallup.com] Tags:Gallup Poll, Barack ObamaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Corruption Continues - ACORN's American Institute for Social Justice - #stopacorn
Kevin Mooney, Big Government: Despite its recent setbacks, the renamed ACORN network remains well positioned to receive support from left-leaning foundations, corporations, unions and the federal government, according to a whistleblower group comprised of former board members. Moreover, the existing financial apparatus that made it possible to transfer public money away from their stated purpose and into partisan political efforts remains intact.
The American Institute of Social Justice (AISJ), one of four national affiliates, deserves greater scrutiny and attention in this area. Over $53 million was transferred between ACORN and AISJ from 2000-2004, according to a report from the House Oversight Committee. ACORN was also on the receiving end of a $4,952,288 grant from AISJ, according to the Institute’s 990 tax form for 2006. This is instructive because AISJ itself received almost $4 million from ACORN Housing Corp. (AHC) between 2000 and 2006, tax documents show.
“The money flowing to AISJ from ACORN Housing should be a huge red flag for investigators because almost all the federal money that the ACORN network receives goes into its housing affiliate,” Matthew Vadum, a senior editor with the Capital Research Center (CRC) observes. “So it’s entirely possible that when money was being transferred to the national ACORN organization from AISJ, taxpayer money designated for nonpartisan purposes might have been used for blatantly partisan purposes. These transfers are extremely suspicious. This is the type of financial activity that we see with organized crime and it should be investigated.”
On April 1, ACORN’s leadership announced it was dissolving its national network, but in reality the national affiliates and their many state level counterparts are simply remarketing and rebranding themselves, former insiders have warned. ACORN Housing Corp., for example, the national affiliate at the epicenter of last year’s videotape scandal, has renamed itself Affordable Housing Centers of America. Several state entities have also followed suit reorganizing under generic sounding names that avoid the ACORN label.
ACORN 8, the whistleblower group named for the eight board members blocked from investigating an embezzlement scandal, cautions against media reports that suggest the national organization known in full as the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) has been permanently set back. "Always note the date, April 1.” Marcel Reid, the ACORN 8 chairwoman, said in an interview. “ACORN is not dissolving, it may be morphing, but it is still is in business and it is still in a position to receive funding, although it may be done under different names.”
In fact, it may become easier over the long for donors to reactive their support for “community organizers” who are no longer burdened by the tarnished ACORN name, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has observed. “ACORN’s cover has been blown and its true identity has been revealed but it remains a viable entity beneath different names with the same patrons and same funding sources,” she explained in an interview. “I don’t see a tremendous change in the structure that called itself ACORN.” . . .
Ron Sykes, a former treasurer with the Washington D.C. branch, and an ACORN 8 activist, has identified the Citizens Consulting Inc. (CCI) affiliate as a major conduit for the comingling and misappropriation of funds. Tax documents do show links between CCI and other affiliates. “ACORN did not want its local people to have any control over the finances,” he has previously explained. “There were many accounts by CCI had control over all of it.”
Reid, the ACORN 8 chair, recalls how the funding schemes worked to the disadvantage of rank and file members who sought support for community initiatives. “You could make a tax-deductible donation to ACORN if you were a foundation,” she explained. “You made it through AISJ, then the money was funneled through CSI (Citizens Consulting Inc.) and then the money was kicked back to ACORN – that’s the loop.”
The future of Citizens Consulting remains uncertain and it’s not clear that the affiliate remains in operation. Consequently, AISJ appears to be the main vehicle through which financial contributions can be diverted away from their stated purpose. The national affiliate has attracted little press attention and deserves greater attention and scrutiny as ACORN activists gear up for the 2010 elections.
Tags:ACORN, American Institute of Social Justice, AISJ, corruption, Kevin Mooney, Big GovernmentTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - June 21, 2010 - Obama's Prior Gov't Expansions Don't Inspire Confidence - Don't Tread on Me!
The Senate will reconvene this afternoon at 2 AM today and begin consideration of 3 district court nominees. Around 6 PM, the Senate is scheduled to begin a series of up to 3 roll call votes on the nominations. Later this week, the Senate will return to the debt-extending “tax extenders bill” (H.R. 4213).
Appearing on Fox News Sunday yesterday, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell commented , “[T]he President has been advocating expansion of government across the board in virtually every area. If you are going to advocate expansion of the government, then you look not so good when the government you're already in charge of doesn't function very well.”
Believe it or not, liberal New York Times columnist Frank Rich made a similar point yesterday. Rich wrote, in this crisis, “[I]t’s not just the future of the gulf coast, energy policy or [Obama’s] presidency that’s in jeopardy. What’s also being tarred daily by the gushing oil is the very notion that government can accomplish anything. The current crisis in that faith predates this disaster. In the short history of the Obama White House, two of its most urgent projects, reducing unemployment and pacifying Afghanistan, have yet to yield persuasive results. The dividends on the third, health care reform, won’t be in the mail for years.”
Rich is right to identify the administration’s shortcomings on unemployment, but doesn’t mention the White House’s key initiative there, the $862 billion stimulus bill. At the time this massive bill was passed, Americans were assured that passage of the bill would result in 3-4 million jobs “saved or created” and that the unemployment rate wouldn’t exceed 8%. Instead the unemployment rate is still 9.7% and hasn’t even been close to 8% since early last year.
And while Rich says the results of the unpopular health care bill won’t really be measurable for years, there are many indicators that the bill isn’t functioning very wel and in fact may never function well.. Not only has the health care bill violated nearly every major promise made by President Obama and Democrats in their sales pitch, many of the unintended consequences are undermining what little confidence there was in the legislation to begin with. We’ve seen that the health care law won’t control costs, could harm Medicare beneficiaries through $500 billion in cuts, raises taxes, will almost certainly increase premiums, and is going to cost jobs. Meanwhile, Americans are also finding out that two of the most heavily promoted provisions of the bill, help for small businesses to get their employees health insurance and allowing adult children to stay on their parents’ health insurance aren’t likely to meet the expectations created about them.
And now the President and Democrats are looking to use the crisis in the Gulf to sell their national energy tax, which is a massive expansion of government. Yet with the track record the Obama administration has just on their signature government expansions, the stimulus and health care bills, Americans should not only be skeptical of any assurances of competence on implementing a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, they should be very afraid of this governments desire to take over all aspects of American lives and limit freedoms. Reflect and ask yourself two questions, 1) would our founding fathers have taken us down this past and 2) where in the Constitution does it give Congress and the Executive Branch authority to do what they are continuing to do with respect to redistribution of wealth and limitation of free choice and free speech and more. Our government is becoming like King George and it is time to raise the Don't Tread on Me flag! Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, US Congress, expanding government, Obama's failures, cap-and-trade, crisis mismanagement, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Why? Well, banks have been giving free checking accounts, but then charging irresponsible check holders overdraft fees for drawing more money out their accounts than is there. In other words, only the spendthrifts pay.
But Congress now says banks cannot charge overdraft fees without first getting the consumer’s permission. Fat chance that will happen. So banks are going to start charging fees merely to have a checking account.
This is not an unintended consequence. This was quite foreseeable except to Democrats. Tags:Democrats, checking accounts, banking, Erick Erickson, Bank NationalizationTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tags:Founders, Father's Day, 2010, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin FranklinTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Comments by contributors or sources do not necessarily reflect the position of ARRA, its Officers, memberships or the Editors.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.