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 "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, 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 or by this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles.Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Follow @arra Contact: email@example.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Illinois Credit Rating Worst In Nation
Illinois illustrates an example of what Democrats leadership can do to a state. by Ray Long and Monique Garcia, Clout Street - Chicago Tribune: SPRINGFIELD — Illinois fell to the bottom of all 50 states in the rankings of a major credit ratings agency Friday following the failure of Gov. Pat Quinn and lawmakers to fix the state’s hemorrhaging pension system during this month’s lame-duck session.
Standard & Poor’s Ratings Service downgraded Illinois in what is the latest fallout over the $96.8 billion debt to five state pension systems. The New York rating firm’s ranking signaled taxpayers may pay tens of millions of dollars more in interest when the state borrows money for roads and other projects.
“It’s absolutely bad news for taxpayers,” said Dan Rutherford, the Republican state treasurer. Illinois received its bottom-of-the-pack ranking when it fell from an “A” rating to “A-minus.”
That’s the same rating as California, but California has a positive outlook. ... [Read Full Story]Tags:Illinois, credit rating, Standard's and Poor, rating, worst in the nation, democrat leadershipTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
This video gives a further explanation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution in the context of the why the Bill of Rights was included along with the establishment of the Federal Government. Please share this with your friends so that they can help educate America.
Now, do you see the relationship between the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Amendment? Tags:U.S Constitution, Bill of Rights, 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 3rd Amendment right to bear arms, Gun Control for Dummies, common senseTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
An interpretation of “the Recess” that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement, giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law. The intersession interpretation of “the Recess” is the only one faithful to the Constitution’s text, structure, and history.The court further restricted legitimate recess appointments to vacancies that arise during an intersession recess:A vacancy happens, or “come[s] to pass,” only when it first arises, demonstrating that the Recess Appointments Clause requires that the relevant vacancy arise during the recess. The term “happen” connotes an event taking place — an action — and it would be plainly incorrect to say that an event happened during some period of time when in fact it happened before that time. . . .
It would have made little sense to make the primary method of appointment the cumbersome advice and consent procedure contemplated by that Clause if the secondary method would permit the President to fill up all vacancies regardless of when the vacancy arose. A President at odds with the Senate over nominations would never have to submit his nominees for confirmation. He could simply wait for a “recess” (however defined) and then fill up all vacanciesAC President Phil Kerpen issued the following statement:The D.C. Circuit is clearly correct that Obama’s illegal appointments to the NLRB – and by implication his appointment the same day of Richard Cordray to the CFPB – were attempted on a day the Senate was not in session. In fact, the Senate gaveled into session just the day before. If these illegal appointments were allowed to stand, the president would have created for himself a new unchecked power to arbitrarily circumvent the requirement of Senate advice and consent.
Tags:New term, new slogan,what difference does it make?, Obama administration, editorial cartoon, William WarrenTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The following Investor's Business Daily (IBD) editorial was shared a week ago at the referenced link in the article. ICYMI, the editorial is shared below under the Fair Use Doctrine for educational purposes. The editorial is more than "tongue in cheek." Unfortunately, we do not know which IBD staff member wrote the article, so thanks the entire staff. [Hat tip to one of our readers, Jeanette McDougal, for letting us know about this article.]
IBD Editorials - Violence: If gun-control worked, the president's hometown would be safe. Instead, gangs of fatherless youths daily kill other fatherless youths. How about an executive order endorsing marriage and intact families?
We do not know how history might have been different had the parents of Newtown shooter Adam Lanza not divorced in 2009, leaving the troubled young man with his mother in a single-parent home. But if there's a thread that links the carnage at Sandy Hook with the 500-plus murders in Chicago in 2012, it's not just the use of guns to kill. It's also the absence of an intact nuclear family.
Neither do we know if President Obama is aware of the now-canceled cable "reality" show "All My Babies' Mamas" that was dropped from Oprah Winfrey's Oxygen network after a public outcry. The show was to follow Shawty Lo, a rapper from Atlanta who fathered 11 children by 10 mothers.
We have certainly come a long way from "The Cosby Show." In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote "The Negro Family: A Case for National Action." At the time, 25% of black children were born out of wedlock, a number Moynihan called alarming. Today, 72% of black children are now born out of wedlock. In fact, 36% of white children are born out of wedlock. Of Hispanic children, 53% are born outside of marriage.
President Obama once said that if he had a son, he'd look like Trayvon Martin, the young African-American shot by a neighborhood watch volunteer in Florida. But the president failed to note that if he had a son, he would be in a home with two loving parents.
When Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton divorced in 1999, their son Trayvon was just a toddler. He lived with his mother. He was 17 when he was shot.
The consequences of fatherlessness are staggering. In such homes there is no male role model who gets up every morning, shaves, gets dressed and goes to work, then comes home to have dinner with his family. There is no male role model to restrain a young man's masculine impulses and guide him into adulthood.
The situation is made worse by the staggering unemployment among young black males that soaking the rich won't alleviate. These young men find their role models in promiscuous rappers and the leaders of street gangs.
Up to 80% of Chicago's murders and shootings are gang-related, according to police. By one estimate, the city has almost 70,000 gang members. A police audit last spring identified 59 gangs and 625 factions. Most are on the South and West sides.
As columnist Larry Elder reminds us, the solution to both crime and poverty is simple: "Finish high school, don't have a child before the age of 20 and get married before having the child." Yet of the president's 23 anti-gun crime proposals, not one deals with the documented disintegration of the American family, particularly African-American families.
We don't need another CDC study on the root causes of violence. We see it on the streets of Chicago and other heavily minority inner cities. Twenty children and six adults were killed in Newtown, Conn., last month. In the last couple of weeks in Chicago, 25 people have already been murdered. Most were young black and Hispanic men, murdered by other young black and Hispanic men.
It's not entirely true that President Obama has not done enough to promote marriage. After all, he now supports gay marriage and has ordered the Justice Department not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. But that's not the kind of marriage we should be promoting if we are to rebuild and strengthen the nuclear families needed to nurture young men into stable and productive adulthood.
Maybe President Obama can have Vice President Biden form a task force on the subject. Tags:Barack Obama, danger of, Father-Free Zones, IBD, Investment Business Daily, editorialTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Federal Court Rules NLRB Recess Appointments Are Unconstitutional
One of the three NLRB members, Richard Griffin, is enmeshed in controversy over his former role as general counsel of the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE). ... Griffin was recently named as a defendant in a federal racketeering lawsuit. According toThe Wall Street Journal, the complaint “describes a ‘scheme to defraud [the local] out of revenue, cost savings and membership,’ by means of kickbacks, bribery, violent threats and extortion. The suit names dozens of IUOE officials as defendants, and Mr. Griffin is highlighted in a section describing embezzlement and its subsequent hush-up. ~ op-ed by Fred Wszolek
President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.
Obama claims he acted properly in the case of the NLRB appointments because the Senate was away for the holidays on a 20-day recess. But the three-judge panel ruled that the Senate technically stayed in session when it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called "pro forma" sessions.
Tom Donohue, U.S. Chamber President and CEO was happy with the decision:
We are pleased with the D.C. Circuit’s ruling that the President’s recess appointments to the NLRB were unconstitutional. We warned last year that by appointing these members to the NLRB in such a controversial fashion, the President placed a cloud of uncertainty over the agency and its work. The D.C. Circuit’s historic decision has confirmed our concerns. The U.S. Chamber has been proud to stand with our member Noel Canning from the beginning, and they will continue to enjoy our full support and backing.
[H/t Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.] Tags:Federal Court, ruling, NLRB, National Labor Relations Board, recess appointment, unconstitutionalTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Battles are ugly when women fight. But societies that send their women off to war are even uglier. ~ C.S. Lewis
Tony Perkins, FRC Washington Update:: In another triumph of political correctness over common sense, the Pentagon is lifting its ban on women in combat and direct combat units. Senior officials leaked the news yesterday during the House's Benghazi hearings, making the timing even more suspect. If Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was hoping to distract the country from Hillary Clinton's Libyan testimony, he succeeded. According to leaders, even Congress wasn't warned. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), one of the many politicians taken by surprise, was stunned by the policy's lack of vetting. "Congress should be consulted about that," he said. "I think that's a historic policy of the Department of Defense. There are physical differences of the sexes... It's a major decision and I'd like to see how they came to it, what their recommendations are, and who makes it."
No one is suggesting that women are not capable or have not served their country with distinction. They are and have. But much like the plan to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the risks [pdf] of this integration (physical stamina and injury, emotional stress, sexual assault, pregnancy, adultery, unit readiness, family breakdown) seem secondary to the administration's liberal agenda. How much national security is our President willing to forgo to promote this kind of progressive feminism? While liberals celebrate the decision--and the military's desk workers advise it--some active-duty women in sist the change wasn't something they asked for. "Who is driving this agenda?" asked Marine Captain and combat-tested Katie Petronio. "I am not personally hearing female Marines, enlisted or officer, pounding on the doors of Congress claiming their inability to serve in the infantry violates their right to equality. Shockingly this isn't even a congressional agenda." In fact, she said, "it's very surprising to see that none of the [decision-makers] are on active duty or have any recent combat or relevant operational experience relating to the issue they are attempting to change."
In an incredibly compelling article for the Marine Corps Gazette, Capt. Petronio says that while she was extremely successful during both combat tours, she is a shell of her former self. (And based on the nightmarish conditions Ryan Smith shares in the Wall Street Journal, it's no wonder.) "Five years later, I am physically not the woman I once was," (including a diagnosis of deployment-induced polycystic ovarian syndrome), "and my views have greatly changed on the possibility of women having successful long careers while serving in the infantry. I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion... that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females." Like us, she appreciates what the Pentagon is trying to do but believes that diversity is not a military necessity. "Let's embrace our differences to further hone in on the Corps' success instead of dismantling who we are to achieve a political agenda," she pleads.
Senior officials said yesterday the military's goal is "to provide a level, gender-neutral playing field." But as America's defense, shouldn't the goal be to have the most lethal fighting force in the world? The military isn't--and should never be--the great societal equalizer. Under this administration, Pentagon bureaucrats have engaged in social experiments with our troops on a massive scale--and risked the lives of countless soldiers in the process. And what of the young girls who don't want to go to war? Will they have a choice? Joe Carter, a Marine veteran and former FRC employee, lamented this on First Things."Of course when the government begins to draft our daughters for combat roles -- and that day will certainly come -- the children and grandchildren of the egalitarian elite will be the ones to get deferrals. Most of the men and women championing a woman's right to choose combat have never served in the military and would certainly not want their own daughters to join the infantry. They are concerned only with choice and equality in the pristine abstract, rather than in the bloody, concrete world of warfare... Men were created to be self-sacrificial protectors of the family, and by extension, of the nation. Forcing women into that role will not lead to more freedom but rather to less equality, more violence toward women, and a general degradation of humanity. As C.S. Lewis said, battles are ugly when women fight. But societies that send their women off to war are even uglier.In the last thirty years, we have watched as the world has desperately tried to redefine the genders, gender roles, and even marriage. But in the end, nothing humanity does--through medicine or policy -- can alter that fundamental truth: "male and female He created them." Tags:GI Jane, women in combat, liberal agenda, cost to society, Tony Perkins, Family Research CenterTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Teresa Oelke, interim Americans for Prosperity (AFP) VP of State Operations: Throughout the 2013 legislative session, expect Americans for Prosperity to have a presence under the dome in Little Rock. We will work on your behalf to support common-sense legislation that promotes jobs and opportunities, a lower tax burden, and efficient and effective government. We'll also let you know when it's important to contact your legislator, and we'll give you the tools to do so through our action alerts.
Our legislative agenda includes:
Opposing President Obama's expansion of Medicaid. It is irresponsible to discuss expanding a program when you cannot meet your current funding obligations to those in the most need. Currently Arkansas has a $300 million Medicaid deficit that must be fixed.
Lowering the tax burden on all Arkansans.
Improving the oversight of charter schools to help children trapped in failing schools.
Stopping the "spend every penny we take in" approach of Arkansas state government.
Opposing President Obama's health insurance exchanges.
Increased transparency in government.
Opposing government regulation overreach.
Please check AFPArkansas.com for updates on our legislative agenda.
---------------- Teresa Oelke is founding director of Arkansas-AFP and interim VP of AFP State Operations. Tags:Arkansas, AFP Arkansas, legislative agenda, Teresa OelkeTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Phil Kerpen, Contributing Author: In his first term, President Obama passed two of the most sweeping expansions of federal power in history. The first, his federal takeover of the health care system, narrowly survived at the Supreme Court thanks to the refashioning of its mandate into a tax by Chief Justice John Roberts. The second, his federal takeover of the financial system, may not fare as well.
That law, Dodd-Frank, is being challenged in State National Bank of Big Spring v. Geithner. The lead plaintiff is a community bank that has had several of its business lines shut down by Dodd-Frank. Co-plaintiffs include the libertarian powerhouse the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the leading conservative seniors group the 60 Plus Association, and the states of South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Michigan. The case contends, correctly, that provisions of Dodd-Frank violate the separation of powers as well as the Constitution’s bankruptcy clause.
The constitutional defects of Dodd-Frank are numerous, serious, and by design. Even the New York Times acknowledged when the bill passed that it was “basically a 2,000-page missive to federal agencies, instructing regulators to address subjects ranging from derivatives trading to document retention. But it is notably short on specifics, giving regulators significant power to determine its impact.”
These vast new regulatory powers are delegated without constitutionally required checks and balances.
Consider the so-called Orderly Liquidation Authority, under which the Treasury can petition a federal district court to seize any bank (or non-bank declared systemically important) that it deems a threat to financial stability. A judge would have to decide within 24 hours not to allow the seizure or it would be automatically approved. Liquidation would then proceed with no possibility of judicial review in accordance with arbitrary procedures that could treat similarly situated creditors differently at the whim of regulators.
Neither the company being liquidated nor the creditors would have access to any legal recourse, violating the due process clause. And this process is completely different from the normal bankruptcy process, despite the constitutional requirement that Congress pass “uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies.”
C. Boyden Gray, counsel for the plaintiffs in the case, has written: “There is little precedent for this kind of unreviewable ‘Star Chamber’ proceeding, even with respect to government-supported entities; there is much less justification for applying such treatment to financial companies that are not federally regulated or supported.”
The new so-called Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, with sweeping powers to regulate nearly any consumer financial transaction in the economy, is also constructed to be outside of constitutionally required checks and balances. It is not subject to annual appropriations in Congress, instead being funded by the Federal Reserve – which is nonetheless itself prohibited from exercising oversight. All power is vested in one individual, Richard Cordray, who Obama “recess appointed” on a day the Senate considered itself not to be in recess. While the CFPB’s decisions are subject to judicial review, there is a requirement in Dodd-Frank that judges give extraordinary deference to the agency.
Dodd-Frank was created in a corrupt feeding frenzy of special interests exploiting the financial crisis to advance their own longstanding agendas. Every left-wing special interest—from the trial lawyers, to the racial grievance groups, to the unions—got a special payoff in the bill. But the whole structure of the bill rests on an unconstitutional foundation.
Senate Democrats May Finally Produce A Budget, Or At Least A Call For More Tax Hikes
Benjamin Franklin once said, “Never leave that till tomorrow which you can do today.” That’s why Congress should not raise the debt ceiling unless it includes immediate reforms today that put us on a sure path to balance, keep us in balance over time, provide for the common defense — and do not raise taxes. ~ Derrick Morgan, Heritage Foundation V.P. Economic Development
Today In Washington , D.C. - Jan. 24, 2013
The House was not in session today. The Senate reconvened today and began a period of morning business. At 10 AM, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee began a confirmation hearing on President Obama’s nomination of Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) to be Secretary of State. No action planned by the democrat leadership on the Sandy Relief bill.
It looks like after nearly four years with no budget, Senate Democrats may finally decide to create one and perhaps even vote on it. But indications are that their budget is likely to avoid the spending cuts that are needed to put our fiscal house in order and will instead return to demanding ever more tax increases.
According to Roll Call, “Three weeks ago, incoming Senate Budget Chairman Patty Murray, D-Wash., directed her staff to explore the pros and cons of actually crafting a budget resolution. . . . So when she tasked her staff to weigh the relative benefits of developing a budget, the major question she posed was whether the formal budget process was the best vehicle for Senate Democrats to ‘aggressively articulate a vision while putting us potentially on a path to bring this fiscal-debt-deficit debate to a close,’ one source said. Some sources familiar with the process said the hammering Democrats have taken for not producing a budget in more than 1,000 days did not factor into the decision, but at least one senior Democratic aide said the GOP barrage was one of three major reasons for Senate Democrats’ change of heart on the matter. . . . The other major factor, of course, was political. Senate Democratic leaders’ highest priority through 2012 was maintaining their majority as they faced what they and others believed was going to be a bruising election cycle. A budget resolution is a nonbinding measure, and leaders did not want their vulnerable members to unnecessarily cast politically risky votes in the budget ‘vote-a-rama’ that typically accompanies the Senate debate.”
Meanwhile, Politico reports that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the number three Democrat in the Senate, is spending a lot of time trying to figure out how to push even more tax hikes, including in a budget process.
This morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “It’s nice to see that, after years of playing budget peak-a-boo, Senate Democrats are finally ready to take up their most basic of responsibilities, and only a few weeks after the chairwoman of the Budget Committee indicated they might skip it, for the fourth year in a row. What’s unfortunate is that it’s required so much pressure to get them to do so. It’s a stark contrast to House Republicans, who’ve taken their duties seriously.”
He continued, “We know Senate Democrats don't like the House budgets. And we know they don't even support the President’s budgets — at least not with their votes. What we haven’t known for nearly four years is what they’re for, because they’ve refused to put their plans for the country down on paper and actually vote for them. Now, it’s my hope that the Democrats’ sudden interest in passing a budget isn’t just another attempt to raise taxes. As I’ve said repeatedly, we’re done with revenue. The President has already said that the so-called ‘rich’ are now paying their ‘fair share,’ and of course middle-income families are already on the hook for new taxes as a result of Obamacare. So the question is, who would be in the firing line this time? At what cost? Look: struggling families shouldn’t have to pick up the tab again for Washington’s inability to live within its means. We need to start solving the actual problem, which is spending, and we need to do it together.” Tags:U.S. Senate, Sandy Bill, President Obama, nomination, John Kerry,Secretary of State, budget, taxesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The below letter to the editor is by Robert "Bob" McDowell, Jr. He is a Professional Engineer and Geologist with over 50 years experience in creating drilling prospects, supervising drilling, well completion, production operation, and pipeline design for oil and gas including repair of problem wells. McDowell is a conservative and active in the Oklahoma Republican Assembly.
By Bob McDowell: Well, President Obama did not wait even until his re-inauguration to begin his destruction of the capability of the citizens of the USA to defend themselves from a want-to-be dictatorship government, with him the dictator. He has clearly laid out his agenda for the complete disarming of the population under the guise of 'protecting the innocent in schools and theaters.' This course of action was no surprise to those of us who have watched his conduct for the last four years of his first term of office. His rhetoric and conduct have telegraphed that his agenda is the subjugation of the citizens so that he could assume complete power, to the degradation of the national defense and well being of the population.
It is remembered from the words of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, as well as the large number of documents named the "Federalist Papers" that the entire purpose of the Constitution was to provide, secure, and protect those GOD given rights that were enumerated and alluded to in the Declaration. The words state that "among those are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". That clearly means that there are a number of others, perhaps many, that are implied but not enumerated. Those who would grab dictatorial power for themselves and their followers continually seek to ignore and mislead others about them.
Actually, our freedoms and rights have been eroded in the years since 1933 when the administration of F. D. Roosevelt (FDR) was inaugurated in March to the point that we have less than were enjoyed by the subjects of Imperial Rome during the time that Jesus of Nazareth was walking on Earth. One of the principals of the Israelites as a nation and religion was the right to property. Property could not even be sold in perpetuity, but reverted to the original family in what was called the "year of the jubilee" when all debts were written off, all sales of real property were reversed, and those who had sold themselves into slavery were freed.
Back to the announced 'executive orders' that, if successful, would serve to give to the administration total "regulation" over all firearms. This in total ignoring of the words, and intent, of the Second Amendment, which guarantees the "right to keep and bear arms". The bright spot seems to be the almost nationwide rush of citizens to acquire more, or the first, firearms. Media, and acquaintances of mine, confirm that the shelves in stores where guns are sold are completely, or very nearly so, devoid of guns and the ammunition to use in them.
From this it would appear that the people are finally waking up to what has been going on. One hopes that it would not be too late to reverse the plunge into slavery. Here in Oklahoma there have been a number of bills introduced into the Legislature for the upcoming session beginning on February 4 and to adjourn no later than May 31 that would serve to nullify the orders issued.
Some even would correct unconstitutional provisions of the Concealed Carry and Open Carry laws passed earlier. The Concealed Carry law passed a number of years ago carried a provision that any gun carried in a vehicle had to be unloaded, locked in the trunk with the ammunition locked in another location in the vehicle. That would provide a lot of protection in the event of being accosted by a criminal or choosing to go to the assistance of an officer in trouble with criminal elements. The Open Carry law passed in the 2012 session allows open carry ONLY by those possessing a concealed carry permit. Both provisions, in my opinion, are in blatant violation of the Second Amendment. Hopefully corrections will pass into law this year.
We should remember that the Amendment was installed to allow the citizens to protect themselves from a wayward government and vote out those who oppose it. Tags:Bob McDowell, democrat, constitution trashingTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The release dramatized the negligible progress in any investigation into the attack, which killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans on Sept. 11 last year. The feebleness of Libya's transitional government since the fall of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi has stymied any progress, despite what Benghazi residents describe as an abundance of leads.
Several Egyptian members of the squad of militants that lay bloody siege to an Algerian gas complex last week also took part in the deadly attack on the United States Mission in Libya in September, a senior Algerian official said Tuesday.
The Egyptians involved in both attacks were killed by Algerian forces during the four-day ordeal that ended in the deaths of at least 38 hostages and 29 kidnappers, the official said. But three of the militants were captured alive, and one of them described the Egyptians' role in both assaults under interrogation by the Algerian security services, the official said.
If confirmed, the link between two of the most brazen assaults in recent memory would reinforce the transborder character of the jihadist groups now striking across the Sahara. American officials have long warned that the region's volatile mix of porous borders, turbulent states, weapons and ranks of fighters with similar ideologies creates a dangerous landscape in which extremists are trying to collaborate across vast distances.
Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Clinton "pledged not only to accept all 29 of the recommendations, but to have the implementation of those recommendations well under way before her successor took over. So I think she'll want to give a status on that."
Asked for the number of State Department employees fired for their handling of Benghazi, Nuland said four people were put on administrative leave. They included Eric Boswell, who resigned from the position of assistant secretary of diplomatic security.
But Nuland declined to say if Boswell and the others still are working for the department in some capacity.
And no elected Democrat in Congress gives a hoot.
Oh, they say they care, but every time their turn came in the Clinton hearings, they shifted the topic to House Republican proposals to limit the budget, as if we hadn't just had this issue resolved, by State Department officials in October:
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA): "It has been suggested the budget cuts are responsible for lack of security in Benghazi, and I'd like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally, was there any budget consideration and lack of budget that led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?"
STATE DEPARTMENT DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS CHARLENE LAMB: "No, sir."(U.S. House Of Representatives, Oversight And Government Reform Committee, Hearing, 10/10/12)
What we did learn is that Hillary Clinton thinks it is silly or unreasonable to ask why the administration kept talking about a video for five days, when everyone and their brother could have figured that the date of September 11 was pretty a key indicator that al-Qaeda sympathizers or like-minded Islamists were out to mark the anniversary in their own murderous way.
"The fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest? Or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they'd go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?" Clinton told Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. "It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, senator."
What's astounding are the number of folks on the left who thought this was a fantastic answer.
For starters, if your assessment of why an attack happened is wrong, doesn't that make it less likely you'll be able to prevent another one?
No matter your view of the media's role in Benghazi; no matter your take on whether U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice leveled with the country on the Sept. 16 talk shows; no matter your view of Fox News's Benghazi campaign, it surely does make a difference whether it was "because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they'd go kill some Americans." It makes a difference to the media, the public, the government, everyone.
The trustworthiness of the administration's version of events — even the early one — makes a difference. Whether it was hard-core terrorism or a spontaneous attack or something else — that makes a difference too, with strong implications for intelligence accountability. Goodness gracious, in her very own statement, Clinton herself even seems to acknowledge that it makes a difference, when she says, "It is our job to figure out what happened …"
Pardon me a comparison that may seem frivolous or silly, but I was reminded of a quite furious response from screenwriter Terry Rossio after he saw the 2006 movie Superman Returns. To say Rossio hated the movie was an understatement; on his website, he laid out all the different ways in which the movie simply didn't "work" given the characters and concepts the creators chose to begin with, and made it clear that as a professional, as someone who believes in aiming for the best in his craft, it deeply offended him that the movie could be made the way it did, with such disregard for quality and respect for the audience, and that the movie's success illustrated something profound to him:
Okay, here's the part about the profound effect it had on me. First off, I just felt really, really good that I worked on Pirates and had nothing to do with that movie. I know crap-plus-one is a mistake, but on an emotional level, I just felt genuine relief and contentment to bear no responsibility for that film.
But here was the epiphany. From Superman Returns on, I realized that there are truly no standards any more.
The film got better reviews than Pirates, it got made, it's going to make $190 million dollars.
There are actually people in the world who enjoyed it.
The next time I get notes on a screenplay (''I think this main relationship doesn't work,' 'this ending isn't clear, etc.') I can just point to Superman and say, "You may be right but so what? It's better than Superman Returns." It's the ultimate, "Keep your notes to yourself and just tell me if you're making the film" movie.
Why would anyone, anywhere, even bother to attend a creative meeting on any project -- after seeing that film?
Ultimately, stuff goes up on screen because somebody wanted it up there, not for any other reason. So it might as well be me who decides -- right?
When we look at how our government has responded to the night of September 11 in Benghazi, Libya, we see there are truly no standards any more.
If the decision making before, during, and after the Benghazi attack is insufficient to get anyone fired, what decision in government will ever warrant that consequence? If Democrats on Capitol Hill can't take off their partisan blinders for one day to attempt to hold people accountable for decision-making that resulted in American deaths at the hands of extremists, and then lying to the public about it, then when will they ever? If Hillary Clinton can exclaim that it doesn't matter that the administration spent five days talking about a video when the video had nothing to do with it, and everyone on her side applauds, why should she or anyone else ever respond to an accusation with anything but audacious defiance?
This is it, folks. This is the government we have, and the lack of a public outcry about Benghazi ensures this is the government we will have for the foreseeable future.
Tags:U.S. Senate, Benghazi hearings, end of accountability, Hillary Clinton, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finally testified on Capitol Hill concerning what she knew about the murderous attack that took the lives of four brave Americans at our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. As expected, there were no major revelations from Clinton who, while admitting she was "responsible," denied she should be blamed.
Secretary Clinton did admit that she never read the repeated requests for additional security at the consulate. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested Clinton should have been relieved of her duties for not reading the cables.
Senator John McCain (R-AZ) expressed his frustration with Clinton's lack of clear answers, saying, "Here we are, four months later, and we still don't have the basic information. The American people deserve to know answers and they certainly don't deserve false answers."
Clinton insisted she was not involved in producing the inaccurate talking points used by Ambassador Susan Rice on five major talk shows claiming the attacks were due to protests about an anti-Islamic film. When pressed by Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) about the administration's shifting explanations for the attacks, Secretary Clinton lost her temper and shouted, "What difference would it make?"
Let's answer her question. The difference is that when the administration blamed a film it was suggested that Americans died because of our First Amendment rights. Our liberty is not the problem, Mrs. Clinton. When you tell the truth -- that it was because of Al Qaeda-linked extremists -- you educate the American people about the real enemy and the evil agenda of radical Islam.
------------- Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families where his articles are also shared. Tags:Hillary Clinton, testimony, US Senate, murdered, ambassador, Benghazi, Libya, Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working FamiliesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Public Notice: Today, the House passed, a measure that would suspend the debt ceiling until May 19th. The legislation would allow the president to continue to borrow money to fund the government operations.
The U.S. has already reached the debt ceiling, but is currently undertaking “extraordinary measures” to continue to meet its financial obligations.
While there are many who will argue whether or not we should raise the debt ceiling, delaying this debate gives Washington an opportunity to have a frank discussion about our budget and what our priorities should be over the next year.
o At its core, this isn’t a debt ceiling issue – it’s a spending issue.
o Our spending problem won’t solve itself. We need a plan now that will put our spending back on a sustainable path.
o If we make the necessary spending cuts now, we won’t be forced to consistently have this debate.
o Washington has a renewed opportunity to discuss serious spending cuts in an environment that is not bogged down with the politics of the debt ceiling.
o This has to happen now. Congress must begin to work together and stop playing politics with our bottom line.
A Fresh Start:
The president just started his second term. The House is poised to suspend the debt ceiling debate. The sequester is set to take effect in two months. The stage is set for a serious discussion on the primary drivers of our debt.
o We spend a lot of money on defense and entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security – millions of Americans rely on these programs.
o But we need to make sure every dollar we spend is being used as efficiently and effectively as possible so that we strengthen these programs for those who need them now and preserve them for future generations.
o The only thing that will reduce the debt and put our economy back on a firm foundation is reforming the programs on which wespend the most money.
The bill also includes a stipulation that members of Congress would have their pay withheld until each chamber passes a budget.
o It’s been four years since the Congress has met its most fundamental responsibility: passing a budget.
o This is simply unacceptable. Washington must pass and operate within a budget that cuts spending and puts our economy back on the road to recovery.
This is what Americans want. According to Public Notice’s new poll:
o 74% say the amount of federal government spending is too high.
o 74% also disagree with President Obama’s recent statement that we do not have a spending problem.
o 81% oppose the lack of spending cuts in the recent fiscal cliff deal.
o 61% say the national debt has a negative impact on them personally.
The bottom line
Last July, when discussing the debt ceiling, President Obama said: "There are a lot of crises in the world that we can’t always predict or avoid – hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, terrorist attacks. This isn’t one of those crises. The power to solve this is in our hands."
o We couldn’t agree more. We must act now to control the irresponsible spending that has piled trillions of dollars in debt on our economy.
o This one of the most avoidable crises our nation has ever faced. By keeping their campaign promises of fiscal responsibility and simply not spending more than we take in, lawmakers can bring our economy back from the brink.
What Washington needs is honest leadership – not more empty rhetoric. The American people want and deserve a responsible government that ends the politics-as-usual approach of budget gimmicks, accounting tricks, and empty promises.
------------------- Public Noticeis an independent non-profit dedicated to providing facts and insight on the economy and how government policy affects Americans’ financial well-being. Tags:debt ceiling, polls, responsive government, not politics as usual To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Boozman: Approve a Budget or Withhold Congressional Salaries
WASHINGTON D.C. – U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) today helped introduce No Budget, No Pay, legislation in the Senate that would prohibit members of Congress from being paid if they do not pass a long-term budget and all appropriations bills each fiscal year.
"I am proud to be joining my colleagues in the Senate as a cosponsor of the No Budget, No Pay legislation. This will prevent our nation from continuously operating on a three or four month basis with the threat of a looming government shutdown every few months. Instead, Congress will pass a budget for the entire fiscal year and all appropriations bills or not receive a paycheck as a consequence. This piece of legislation is not just a good thing for our nation’s fiscal health; it’s simply the right thing to do.”
By law, the Senate is required to adopt a budget resolution, but the chamber has failed to adopt a binding budget resolution in nearly four years. Since 2007, Congress has passed numerous omnibus spending bills and continuing resolutions which punts the difficult spending and budget decisions to a later date. Not one of the 12 appropriations bills for the current fiscal year has been signed into law.
“It’s been 1,365 days since the Senate passed a binding federal budget resolution and while we are required to adopt a budget, there is no penalty for failing to do so. No Budget, No Pay is necessary to get our fiscal house in order while setting our nation’s budget priorities each fiscal year. This legislation holds Members of Congress accountable for passing a budget in a responsible manner, and not just resorting to a business as usual approach to addressing our nation’s budgetary issues,” Boozman said.
The legislation introduced by Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) has bipartisan support. Similar legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives.
“Families are stretching their dollars and fighting to make ends meet in this economic environment. They are planning their budgets in a responsible manner and their elected officials should be doing the same. Arkansans have the right to know how their money is being spent. Passing a budget is the accountability they deserve,” Boozman said. Tags:John Boozman, US Senate, Cosponsor, No Budget No Pay bill To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Jan 23, 2013
Today the House passed the No Budget, No Pay legislation with bi-partisan support. The bill, H.R. 325 passed 285-144 with the stated purpose "To ensure the complete and timely payment of the obligations of the United States Government until May 19, 2013. The bill also requires the House and Senate each to pass a budget, and Member pay will be withheld9in escrow) if they fail. The principle is simple: no budget, no pay. It's time for the Senate to act. It has been almost four years since the Democratic-controlled Senate passed a budget, while our national debt has skyrocketed by over $5 trillion.
Prior to its passage. Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) went to the House floor and urged support for the bill which will force Senate Democrats to finally pass a budget, which they have refused to do in almost four years. He and others are putting their own money / salaries at risk. Speaker Boehner reiterated that the No Budget, No Pay Act is just a first step toward a long-term plan that balances the budget over the next 10 years, and addresses the fiscal crisis that threatens our economy and future generations.
Speaker Boehner’s said,“You know, the premise here is pretty simple. It says that there should be no long-term increase in the debt limit until there’s a long-term plan to deal with the fiscal crisis that faces our country. Every hardworking taxpayer in America knows that they have to do a budget. Every hardworking taxpayer understands that you can’t continue to spend money that you don’t have.
“We are committed to continue to do a budget every year. And if you think about this, it’s not just that we’ve done a budget the last two years that addresses our fiscal crisis, even when the Democrats had control in the two years before that, you all did a budget. And yet for four years – nearly four years – the United States Senate has not done a budget.
“And so this bill before us is real simple. It says, ‘Congress, if you don’t do a budget you don’t get paid.’ I have no doubt that we’re going to do our work. We’re committed to doing a budget and a ten-year plan to solve our budget crisis and to balance our budget. And frankly, I think it’s time for the Senate, and the White House, to produce a budget that will balance over the next 10 years.
“You know, most Americans would look up and go, ‘Wait a minute, why do they need 10 years to balance the budget?’ But we know with baby boomers retiring and the fact that it wasn’t prepared for – it’s going to take a little more time. But my goodness, we ought to be able to balance the budget in the next 10 years.
“Balancing the budget over the next 10 years means that we save the future for our kids and our grandkids. It also means that we strengthen programs like Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid that can’t continue to exist in their current form without some kind of controls. It’s time for Congress to get serious about this and this is the first step in an effort to bring real fiscal responsibility to Washington. It’s real simple: no budget, no pay.”
The Senate the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on the attacks in Benghazi, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testifying. Not impressed by Sec. Clinton's presentations and comments. However, Clinton made it very clear that she did not pick Ambassador Rice to go on the networks and to blame the attacks on a video. She called it a terrorist attack from the beginning.
The Senate is in session, however,Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated he expects to take up the bill sent from the House making supplemental appropriations for Hurricane Sandy disaster relief later in the week. Why is Reid dragging his feet? Senate Democrat leadership has done everything but move quickly to aid in funding relief for the victims of Hurricane Sandy.
In a speech on the Senate floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell once again stressed that the key to the country’s debt crisis is getting unsustainable spending under control. “[T]he President spent nearly his entire first term arguing that we needed to tax the so-called ‘rich’ to solve our fiscal woes. He harangued Congress about it. He argued for it in rallies and debates. He threatened to push us over the cliff if he didn’t get his way. . . . Given how much time he devoted to that one topic, you’d think his tax hike would have closed the deficit, eliminated the entire national debt, and left us with extra cash to spare. . . . It doesn’t even come close to solving the problem. . . .
"[H]ere’s the reality the President needs to face, and quickly: there is no realistic way to raise taxes high enough to even begin to address this problem. That’s why Republicans are saying that we need to start controlling spending now. And that’s why, if the President wants to do something good right now, he should put aside the liberal wish-list, put aside the character attacks, and join us in this great task. What the President laid out Monday was the liberal dream. What I’ve just presented – what this chart shows – is the reality.”
It’s long past time for Democrats to acknowledge that reality and begin to control out unsustainable spending that has resulted in four straight years of deficits greater than $1 trillion. In an editorial, USA Today praises a bill House Republicans are putting forward today because it “puts the pressure back where it belongs: on the White House and the Democrat-controlled Senate to control spending.” The paper points out that President Obama now “has one less excuse for not working harder to defuse the time bomb of unsustainable spending on entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.” <USA Today editors conclude, “[I]t is up to Obama and the Democrats to demonstrate some flexibility. Debt-ceiling fight or no, the economy cannot flourish with trillion dollar deficits and ever increasing portions of the nation's resources being directed into health care and retirement.”
As Leader McConnell explained, “[T]he President has a choice. He can paint himself as a warrior of the left and charge into battle with failed ideas we’ve already tried before. He can demean and blame the opposition for his own failure to lead. He can indulge his supporters in a bitter, never-ending campaign that will only divide our country further. Or, he can take the responsible road. He can help his base come to terms with mathematical realities. He can reach out to leaders in both parties and negotiate in good faith. . . . [W]e can’t waste any more time denying the reality that’s staring each of us in the face.” Tags:Washington, D.C., House, no budget, no pay, Senate, federal spending, Senate Democrats dealy Sandy billTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Politico: "President Obama Dodges 'Hard Choices' On Entitlements"; McConnell On Spending And Debt: ‘If We Don’t Get A Handle On That, Nothing Else Matters'
Today in Washington D.C. - Jan 22, 2012
With the president sworn in on Sunday and inaugurated on Monday, the Senate returned today. the House has been back in session for a couple of days last week.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated he expects to take up the bill approved by the House (H.R. 219 ) eight days agothat provided supplemental appropriations for Hurricane Sandy disaster relief later in the week. Why are the Democrats waiting? The House has made it easy. Sen. Reid should forget pursuing more pork and get this bill to the floor and approved and on to the President for signature.
Today, the House passed H.R. 307 (395-29) "To reauthorize certain programs under the Public Health Service Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to public health security and all-hazards preparedness and response, and for other purposes."
Previously, on Jan 14, the House passed H.R. 219 (403-0)— "To improve and streamline disaster assistance for Hurricane Sandy, and for other purposes."
Then on Jan 15, the House passed HR 152 supplemental appropriation with a bit of of give and take as detailed below:H. Res. 23 (367-52) "Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 152) making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes." Mulvaney (SC), McClintock (CA), Duncan (SC), Lummis (WY) Amendment - Offsets the $17 billion in emergency in the Rogers’ amendment with a 1.63% across the board cut to all regular discretionary appropriations for FY2013. – REJECTED 162 - 258 Rogers (KY) Substitute Amendment - Provides $17 billion in emergency funding to address the immediate needs of victims and communities affected by Hurricane Sandy. – ADOPTED 327 - 91 Runyan (NJ) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Clarifies that the fisheries disaster money in the Frelinghuysen amendment is intended for states that were impacted both by Hurricane Sandy and suffered a fisheries disaster in 2012. – ADOPTED BY VOICE Blumenauer (OR), Campbell (CA) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Clarifies that Corps of Engineers cost-share provisions in this legislation only apply to funds provided by this bill. – ADOPTED BY VOICE Velázquez (NY) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment (Revised) - Increases the Community Development Fund appropriation amount by $25 million offset by reductions elsewhere in the bill. – WITHDRAWN Huelskamp (KS) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Requires FEMA to disclose all disaster relief grants, not just those over $1 million. – ADOPTED BY VOICE Velázquez (NY) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment (Revised) - Increases the funding to the National Cemetery Administration by $1 million for the purposes of repairing veterans’ cemeteries damaged by Hurricane Sandy. – ADOPTED BY VOICE Flores (TX) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Strikes $150 million to stop funding for the President's Executive Order 13547 regarding ocean zoning. – ADOPTED 221 - 197 Broun (GA) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Strikes $13,000,000 in funding to “accelerate the National Weather Service ground readiness project.” – REJECTED 206 - 214 Duncan (SC) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Strikes the additional $1M for Legal Services Corporation (LSC). – REJECTED 202 - 217 Fleming (LA) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Cuts $9,800,000 from the Fish & Wildlife Service for rebuilding seawalls and buildings on uninhabited islands in the Steward McKinney National Wildlife Refuge in Connecticut. – ADOPTED 216 - 205 Benishek (MI) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment - Strikes the proviso on line 20, restoring the requirement that local investments are required in Historic Preservation Grants. – REJECTED 208 – 212 Bishop (UT) Amendment to Frelinghuysen Amendment (Revised) - Prohibits the Secretaries of the Interior or Agriculture from acquiring any more federal land using funds provided under this emergency supplemental appropriations bill for Hurricane Sandy relief. – ADOPTED 223 - 198 Frelinghuysen (NJ) Amendment (Revised) - Provides an additional $33.677 billion in total spending to cover current and anticipated needs of the victims and communities affected by Hurricane Sandy. This funding is in addition to the substitute amendment submitted by Chairman Rogers (KY). – ADOPTED 228 - 192 Final Passage of H.R. 152 (241-180) — "Making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes."Speaking on the Senate floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “Inauguration Day is also a time for new beginnings, a chance to learn from the mistakes and missed opportunities of the past as we re-engage in some vitally important debates about our future. Too often over the past four years, political considerations have trumped the need to put our country on a sound financial footing and a path to prosperity. . . . And we should start with spending and debt; because if we don’t get a handle on that, nothing else matters. If we don’t work together to strengthen our entitlement programs, they will go bankrupt. . . . And if we don’t work together to control the debt, then the cost of our interest payments alone will eventually crowd out funding for things we all agree on — from defense, to infrastructure and assistance for those who need it most. In short, the debate we’re now engaged in over the growing federal debt is about much more than numbers on a page. It’s about the cost of inaction in terms of promises broken, jobs lost, and dreams deferred. And that’s why there’s simply no more time to waste.”
Unfortunately, in his Inaugural Address, President Obama said little to nothing about the way forward in reining in this country’s excessive spending and debt and reforming entitlement programs.The AP noted, “In keeping with the objective of inaugural addresses, Obama chose to draw attention to the aspirations he hopes will define him rather than the conflicts that have characterized his relations with a divided Congress. He conceded that ‘outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time,’ but forged ahead with a call for training more math and science teachers, for building roads and even for funding more research labs. If there was a way to reconcile such spending with demands to stabilize the nation's debt, he didn't mention it.”
And in a story titled, “President Obama dodges ‘hard choices’ on entitlements,”Politico writes, “President Barack Obama insisted four years ago that the nation must make ‘hard decisions’ to preserve entitlement programs. But on Monday, the ‘hard choices’ he spoke of on health care and the deficit came with a major caveat: He’s not willing to give up much. . . . His inaugural address promised an ambitious progressive agenda — and laid bare Obama’s deeply conflicted relationship with entitlement reform. . . . The president has never precisely defined what hard choices he would be willing to make on Medicare and Social Security. It’s not even clear what he would do if he had the power to remake the programs on his own, without worrying about opposition from Republicans or Democrats.
“And though Obama has talked about shared sacrifice from both parties, he has not gotten to the point in deficit negotiations at which he’s had to pressure rank-and-file Democratic lawmakers to cross their red line on the sacred issues . . . . Unless Obama seizes the opportunity in the next few months, entitlement reform will hang over his second term, lurking like a legacy-killer if he hands off the task to the next president, deficit hawks warn. ‘Either you get a handle on health care and Social Security solvency or he will have a failed presidency,’ said Alan Simpson, co-chairman of the president’s fiscal commission and a former Republican senator from Wyoming. ‘It is that simple. I don’t think he ran for reelection to have a failed presidency.’”
As Leader McConnell said, “Over the past four years, while the President focused on re-election and too many Senate Democrats focused on avoiding tough decisions, the debt grew by more than six trillion dollars. We saw the President blast House Republicans for doing their job and passing a budget while Senate Democrats didn’t even propose one. And rather than work with us to save existing entitlements, we saw the President team up with Democrats in Congress to force through a brand new entitlement that will make it even harder to cover the cost of programs that we already have. In short, Democrats have put off all the hard stuff until now. And our problems have only gotten worse. But that was the first term. . . . We can do better. I know my constituents expect better than what they’ve been getting from Congress in recent years. So should we.” Tags:Washington, D.C. White House, Congress, entitlements, spending, debt, Sandy Bill, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
After Nebraska Approval, President Should Say Yes to Keystone
WASHINGTON, DC – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) today responded to Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman’s announcement that he has approved a route for the Keystone XL pipeline by calling on President Obama to immediately approve the project:“Nebraska’s approval of a new Keystone XL pipeline route means there is no bureaucratic excuse, hurdle, or catch President Obama can use to delay this project any further. He and he alone stands in the way of tens of thousands of new jobs and energy security. Every state along the proposed route supports this project, as does a bipartisan coalition in Congress and a majority of Americans. I recognize all the political pressure the president faces, but with our energy security at stake and many jobs in limbo, he should find a way to say yes.”WASHINGTON, D.C.–U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell released the following statement today calling on the President to approve completion of the Keystone XL pipeline: “Today’s welcome announcement that Nebraska officials have approved a new route for the Keystone XL pipeline eliminates an excuse the President has used for holding up the pipeline’s completion. The President rejected Keystone last year because he didn’t want to offend his environmentalist base in a political year, but the election is over. With this hurdle now cleared, the President should give the green light to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, which would create thousands of good jobs as well as help make our nation more energy independent. The President says he’s for an all of the above approach to energy and now it’s time for him to live up to it. Nebraska has taken care of the issues the President raised when he denied the permit so there’s no more room for excuses or delays and it should be expeditiously approved.”Tags:Keystone pipeline, Nebraska, Governor, okays plans, Speaker Boehner, House Minority Leader McConnellTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Dr. Bill Smith, Editor: Having protested, written about, prayed and even cried over the killing of our innocent children, I cannot fathom much more to say today about the 55 million children killed (murdered) since Roe v. Wade decision 40 years ago. The following picture says it well. Our government at all levels and thus most of its leaders across the board who have not decried and done something to stop this mass murder of innocents in the womb or on the abortionists tables have proven themselves unconscionable. And, the supposed people of faith, regardless of religion, who say they believe in a God and are moved by the tragedies of a school shooting but have in realty ignored, sanctioned or supported abortion in America which has condemned innocents to death for convenience and a multitude of other false reasoning have in truth proven their own lack of faith or belief in God. With a seared soul, they will also not be there and not able to decry the killing (euthanasia) of the infirmed and the elderly.
Greater Fitchburg For Life - CatholicVote.org: Today's solemn marking of the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade leaves us with few words. So instead of a long letter, we produced the graphic below to share with your email lists and to inspire your continued dedication to the cause of life. May the prayers and sacrifices of the millions that make up the pro-life movement around the world be a source of great hope. May God have mercy on our nation. And may God be with us in the fight that presses on.
Tags:40 years, 55 million souls, babies dead, abortion, Roe V. Wade, Catholic Vote orgTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru
#Conservative #Constitution #NRA #GunRights #military 22 yr #veteran #professor #Christian #ProLife #TCOT #SGP #CCOT #schoolchoice #fairtax Married-50+yrs #MAGA
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting the beliefs associated with the ARRA, this blog/site is not controlled by nor funded by the ARRA. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
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.