Nancy Pelosi's priorities??? POLITICS...she finally gets around to thanking the SEAL team AFTER kissing Obama's feet.
Boehner
Pelosi
Year two finds us in the midst of almost daily disappointments from Barry the Wonder President. From his broken campaign promises to his blatant lies from the podium, our discontent deepens. Will the next three years hold more disappointment?
The lawsuit calls Arpaio and his office's defiance "unprecedented," and said the federal government has been trying since March 2009 to get officials to comply with its probe of alleged discrimination, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and having English-only policies in his jails that discriminates against people with limited English skills.
Arpaio had been given until Aug. 17 to hand over documents it first asked for 15 months ago.Arpaio's office had said it has fully cooperated in the jail inquiry but won't hand over additional documents into the examination of the alleged unconstitutional searches because federal authorities haven't said exactly what they were investigating.
It's the latest action against Arizona by the federal government, which earlier sued to stop the state's strict new immigration law that requires police officers to question people about their immigration status.
In an interview earlier today with the South African Broadcasting Corporation to air in a few hours, President Obama disparaged al Qaeda and affiliated groups' willingness to kill Africans in a manner that White House aides say was an argument that the terrorist groups are racist.We can call them racists... but we can't call them terrorists or Islamists... that's a problem.
Speaking about the Uganda bombings, the president said, "What you've seen in some of the statements that have been made by these terrorist organizations is that they do not regard African life as valuable in and of itself. They see it as a potential place where you can carry out ideological battles that kill innocents without regard to long-term consequences for their short-term tactical gains."
Earlier today a senior administration official said the Obama administration believes that Al Shabaab carried out the attack.
Explaining the president's comment, an administration official said Mr. Obama "references the fact that both U.S. intelligence and past al Qaeda actions make clear that al Qaeda -- and the groups like al Shabaab that they inspire -- do not value African life. The actions of al Qaeda and the groups that it has inspired show a willingness to sacrifice innocent African life to reach their targets."
This can be seen, the official said, in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, when hundreds of Africans were killed and thousands wounded.
"Additionally, U.S. intelligence has indicated that al Qaeda leadership specifically targets and recruits black Africans to become suicide bombers because they believe that poor economic and social conditions make them more susceptible to recruitment than Arabs," the official said. "Al Qaeda recruits have said that al Qaeda is racist against black members from West Africa because they are only used in lower level operations."
"In short," the official said, "al Qaeda is a racist organization that treats black Africans like cannon fodder and does not value human life."
The Obama administration has come under strong criticism from Republican lawmakers and some residents and business owners in lower Manhattan for a decision by the Justice Department to try confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other suspects in civilian court.
Asked on Sunday in an interview with CBS News whether the administration still planned to hold the trial in New York City, Obama said, "I have not ruled it out."
"But I think it's important for us to take into account the practical, logistical issues involved," he added.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg originally said he supported the plan, but when costs for security reached an estimated $1billion, he said holding the trials elsewhere -- like a military base -- would make more sense. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said he was never briefed by the Justice Department about its plans to stage the trials in lower Manhattan.
"If you've got a city that is saying 'no' and a police department that's saying 'no' and a mayor that's saying 'no,' that makes it difficult," President Obama said.
Yippee - the NY Slimes is reporting that the turd sucking leaders in the DNC Congress are planning on continuing their quest for the Holy Grail after President Bush leaves office. The investigations into rumor and innuendo and tinfoil hat charges will continue...
"The Bush administration overstepped in its exertion of executive privilege, and may very well try to continue to shield information from the American people after it leaves office," said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, who sits on two committees, Judiciary and Intelligence, that are examining aspects of Mr. Bush’s policies.
Topics of open investigations include the harsh interrogation of detainees, the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, secret legal memorandums from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel and the role of the former White House aides Karl Rove and Harriet E. Miers in the firing of federal prosecutors.
Mr. Bush has used his executive powers to block Congressional requests for executive branch documents and testimony from former aides. But investigators hope that the Obama administration will open the filing cabinets and withdraw assertions of executive privilege that Bush officials have invoked to keep from testifying.
"I intend to ensure that our outstanding subpoenas and document requests relating to the U.S. attorneys matter are enforced," said Representative John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. "I am hopeful that progress can be made with the coming of the new administration."
Also, two advocacy groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First, have prepared detailed reports for the new administration calling for criminal investigations into accusations of abuse of detainees.
Are these fools just really trying to see how low they can get their approval rating before the country kicks them in the gonads? More wasted time and expense for more CodePinko inspired foolishness...
Personally I say BRING. IT. ON. I would love for a precedent to be set that will apply to ALL former Presidents especially after the 4 years of BO. Then maybe we could get the truth about his ties to Ayers, Rezko, Khalidi and even his REAL birth certificate.
While we're at it - let's include those members of Congress that have pending issues hanging over their heads. For instance, Cold Cash Jefferson, the Dodd/Frank/Emmanuel fannie mae connections, Pelosi's fundraising for her husband's business, Conyers and his wife's babysitting scam, Feinstein's husbands business development and Claire McCaskill's husband's addiction to prostitutes, etc.
So let me get this straight.... our economy is in the toilet, Barney and friends want to "chavez" our country and BO is going to make us all slaves to the government via community service projects. Meanwhile Conyers and his islamofascist supporters want to investigate the President after he leaves office. Is this part of the Hopey and Changey cult? Sounds like more of the same crap that they've been dishing out for past 2 years.
Posted by Robin at 8:27 AM
Rep. Rahm Emanuel held paid position on troubled GSE's board from 2000-2002, when Freddie Mac was accused of accounting and campaign finance irregularities.
He’s President-elect Barack Obama’s new chief of staff, according to various Nov. 6media reports, but Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., also has some baggage pertaining to the financial crisis. Will anyone in the media take note?
Emanuel, who was a senior adviser for former President Bill Clinton throughout the 1990s, was appointed to the board of Freddie Mac upon his departure from the Clinton administration.
“Clinton’s going-away gift to Emanuel was a seat on the quasi-governmental Freddie Mac board, which paid him $231,655 in director’s fees in 2001 and $31,060 in 2000,” Lynn Sweet wrote for the Chicago Sun-Times on Jan. 3, 2002.
During the time Emanuel spent on the board, Freddie Mac was plagued with scandal involving campaign contributions and accounting irregularities. Freddie Mac and its sister organization Fannie Mae were taken over by the federal government in September 2008 after years of mismanagement and scandal. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson put the two beleaguered GSEs into a conservatorship, stripping common stock shareholders of their rights to govern the companies.
In 2006, Freddie Mac was forced to pay a $3.8 million fine to the Federal Election Commission to settle allegations it illegally contributed to congressional candidates between 2000 and 2003 – while Emanuel was on the board and running for and serving in Congress.
“Freddie Mac was accused of illegally using corporate resources between 2000 and 2003 for 85 fundraisers that collected about $1.7 million for federal candidates,” an Associated Press story from April 18, 2006 said. “Much of the fundraising benefited members of the House Financial Services Committee, a panel whose decisions can affect Freddie Mac.”
And, since his successful run for the House of Representatives in 2002, Emanuel has been the beneficiary of campaign cash from Freddie Mac and its sister organization Fannie Mae – $51,750 according to the Center for Responsive Politics Web site OpenSecrets.org.
Gonna be a real messed-up four years...
A BEAR cub was shot in the head and dumped, draped in Barack Obama campaign posters, on the grounds of a US university.
Police at Western Carolina University said maintenance workers found the carcass of the 34kg bakc bear cub yesterday morning, the Asheville Citizen-Times website reported.
“It looked like it had been shot in the head as best we can tell. A couple of Obama campaign signs had been stapled together and stuck over its head,” said university police chief Tom Johnson.
“Someone evidently was wanting to draw attention to the election. If we find out who they are, we'll make sure they'll get some attention themselves,” Mr Johnson told the paper.
The university called the incident deplorable and troubling.
“We cannot speculate on the motives of the people involved nor who those people might be, said associate vice-chancellor Leila Tvedt.
Paul Cox, a spokesman for the Obama campaign in North Carolina, would not comment.
Source
Here's what we can expect if NoBama and the Scranton Scrapper get elected.
YOU want four more years of this?
Biden says criminal violations will be pursued
· Democrats have issued subpoenas to Bush aides
· 3 staffers have been held in contempt of Congress
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden said yesterday that he and running mate Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration if they are elected in November.
Biden's comments, first reported by ABC news, attracted little notice on a day dominated by the drama surrounding his Republican counterpart, Alaska governor Sarah Palin.
But his statements represent the Democrats' strongest vow so far this year to investigate alleged misdeeds committed during the Bush years.
"If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued," Biden said during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, according to ABC.
"[N]ot out of vengeance, not out of retribution," he added, "out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president -- no one is above the law."
Obama sounded a similar note in April, vowing that if elected, he would ask his attorney general to initiate a prompt review of Bush-era actions to distinguish between possible "genuine crimes" and "really bad policies".
"[i]f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," Obama told the Philadelphia Daily News. "You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve."
Congressional Democrats have issued a flurry of subpoenas this year to senior Bush administration aides as part of a broad inquiry into the authorisation of torturous interrogation tactics used at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.
Three veterans of the Bush White House have been held in criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to respond to subpoenas: former counsel Harriet Miers, former political adviser Karl Rove, and current chief of staff Josh Bolten. The contempt battle is currently before a federal court.
The Democratic National Committee is calling for a full investigation by the Federal Election Commission of Sen. John McCain’s withdrawal from the public matching funds program.
FEC commissioners are meeting Thursday to consider a staff recommendation that McCain (Ariz.), the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, was within his rights to withdraw from the program. The DNC filed a complaint in February this year, arguing that McCain was not allowed to do so because he never formally asked the commission if he could withdraw.
“The American people have a right to know whether the John McCain who once championed himself as a reformer saved his campaign by breaking the laws he helped craft. We are calling on the FEC to promptly conduct and conclude an investigation into the complaint we filed four months ago so that this issue can be resolved in the appropriate manner,” Sandler said.
Democrats argue that McCain secured a loan that helped save his campaign by offering federal matching funds as collateral. The FEC certified McCain for the program in December and the Arizona senator, had he accepted the matching funds, would have been bound to a spending cap of $54 million for his primary run until the Republican Party’s convention in St. Paul, Minn.
By February 2008, after primary victories in New Hampshire and South Carolina, McCain had withdrawn from the program. That removed the spending cap, and the senator’s campaign proceeded to spend above the cap.
The saga continues.
1) Obama’s tax code, support of big government programs and redistribution of income, and subservience to UN directives delight the European masses—especially at a time when their own governments are trying to cut taxes, government, seek closer relations with the US, and ask a petulant, pampered public to grow up.
2) He offers Euros a sort of cheap assuagement of guilt—in classic liberal style. When Obama says falsely that he does not look like other Americans who have addressed Germans (cf. Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice who have represented US foreign policy abroad the last 7 years), Europeans feel especially progressive—and therefore need not worry that no one of African ancestry would ever become a European Prime- or Foreign-Minister.
3) Europe is weak militarily and won’t invest in its own defense. But with Obama, they believe the US will subject its enormous military strength to international organizations—usually run by utopian Europeans. So they will play a thinking-man’s Athens to our muscular Rome. They especially lap up Obama’s historical revisionism in which he lectures about the world’s effort to feed Berlin or tear down the communist wall, never the solitary, lonely efforts of a Harry Truman or Ronald Reagan to confront the evils of communism when almost everyone else preferred not to.
4) Style, style, style. Remember socialist Europe is where we get our designer eyeglass frames, Gucci bags, and French fashions. Instead of a strutting, Bible-quoting Texan, replete with southern accent and ‘smoke-em’ out lingo, they get an athletic, young, JFK-ish metrosexual, whose rhetoric is as empty as it is soothing. The English-only Obama lectures America on its need to emulate polyglot Europe; while a Spanish-speaking George Bush is hopelessly cast as a Texas yokel.
5) Obama reassures Europeans that they, not American right-wingers, “won” the classical debates of the 1990s over economics, foreign policy, and government. He is a world citizen, who buys into human-created massive global warming, wind and solar over nuclear and clean coal, high taxes, and cradle-to-grave entitlements, and resentments of the rich. There is a certain European “We told you so” that comes with his election. In short, we elect a world citizen with a European view, and put behind us the embarrassments of a Texan or cowboy actor.
The final irony?
The hated George Bush is still around; Chirac, Schroeder, Villapin et al. are history. Iraq is secure. Iran is becoming isolated. North Korea supposedly is denuked. And America is reassuring a jittery Europe that we will stick by them in a world of bullying Russians and Chinese.
A Modest Prediction
In 5 years, Europeans will prefer George Bush to a “We are right behind you” Obama.
What a difference a year makes!
A little more than a year ago most Americans—and nearly all the Democratic opposition in Congress—opposed the surge of troops into Iraq and Gen. David Petraeus’s change of tactics.
The conventional wisdom after four long years of war was that we were stuck in the middle of a hopeless civil war. There was no American military solution to quell the violence. The Iraq government was not only incompetent, but proof that democratic government itself was incompatible with Middle Eastern culture and religion.
Pundits were advocating trisecting the country into separate Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish enclaves. Our presence in Iraq caused us to have taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, while empowering Iran, and helping al Qaedi to gain new recruits in a new theater of operations. Democratic presidential candidates were hammering each other over Iraq and demanding that those who had voted to authorize the invasion apologize for their vote. Barack Obama wanted all American troops out by March 2008.
A New Political Reality
And now? July is closing with the fewest number of American combat fatalities since the war started. There is no civil war. The Maliki government has put down Shiite militias and won back Sunnis into the elected administration, and, as an autonomous and confident government, is in tense negotiations with the US over future basing of American troops. Al Qaeda has been humiliated and routed from Iraq. American troops, versed in counterinsurgency, are being redeployed to Afghanistan to reapply what worked against jihadists in Iraq. Iranian-backed militias are being disbanded or have fled back into Iran. The additional surge troops are now out of Iraq. Democratic opponents suddenly concede that the withdrawal of American troops should be predicated on conditions on the ground. Anti-war activists critique Iraq more as a possibly successful war not worth the human and material costs rather than an effort long ago lost.
What Happened?
So what happened in the last twelve months to cause such a radical turn-about in Iraq and here at home? The surge added some needed troops, but more importantly sent the symbolic message that the United States was not leaving, but determined—militarily—to defeat terrorists and give the Iraqi government critical time to consolidate its authority.
The so-called Anbar awakening in which Sunni tribal leaders turned on al Qaeda and joined forces with us was not caused directly by the surge, but would have failed without the confidence more Americans were on the way to support their fight against al Qaeda. Americans began to turn from counter-terrorism to counterinsurgency tactics that meant dispersing combat troops out of compounds and into Iraqi neighborhoods where they could protect Iraqis who resisted terrorism.
Don’t Forget …
Two critical developments are relatively unappreciated, but likewise proved critical. The first was the continual growth and improvement in the Iraqi security forces that now include many veteran units that have learned to confront and defeat terrorists.
Second, between 2003-7 American forces took an enormous toll on jihadists. We have heard mostly how many Americans have been lost, rarely how many of the enemy they have killed or wounded—but the aggregate number is in the tens of thousands. Even in postmodern wars, there are finite numbers of skilled combatants—and many of them simply did not survive their encounter with American troops.
Nothing New
None of this volatility is new in American military history. The American Revolutionary War ebbed and flowed for nine years, variously pronounced won, lost, and won again. The Union thought it had won, then had lost, and finally won the Civil War during the last 16 months of the conflict. The Philippine insurrection, in various phases, lasted 14 years, often praised as won and condemned as lost. No war was more mercurial than the Korean between 1950-53, in which the American public was convinced the war was hopeless before it ended in1953 with the preservation of South Korea.
In most of these struggles, the efforts of just a few rare individuals—a Washington, Grant, Sherman, Ridgway—proved crucial. We remember their names, not the thousands of pundits who declared them incompetent and their wars lost. Long after a Seymour Hersh, Moveon.org, Code Pink, Cindy Sheehan, Harry Reid and others are forgotten, Americans will still remember what David Petraeus did for our country. Amen to that!
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday urged President Bush to release crude oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to combat high prices, a call Republicans used to bolster their push to increase domestic production with more drilling in environmentally sensitive areas.
The Department of Energy plans to suspend this delivery of the 70,000 barrels of oil per day currently going into the SPR - per a law Congress passed in May that required the suspension until the end of 2008. But many Democrats want Bush to go further.
Pelosi sent a letter asking the president "to draw down a small portion" of the SPR's more than 700 million barrels of oil "to help reduce record prices that are helping push the economy toward recession."
"Releasing oil from the Reserve is a tool to manage our national and economic security, and when judiciously used will in no way jeopardize national security," the California Democrat wrote.
The SPR was established in the aftermath of the oil embargo in the early 1970s and is intended for use in case of a disruption in oil supplies. Suspending or drawing down supplies from the reserve is not typically done to regulate prices, but Pelosi noted that crude prices have dropped when the United States has opened the spigot on the SPR in the past.
Still, the White House rejected the speaker's call, saying that using the reserve to manipulate prices was "ineffective."
"It's unfortunate that the only place Democrats in Congress can find to explore for more resources is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve," said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel. "It is time to put aside these politically-motivated band-aids offered by the Democrats and do something that will improve our energy security in the future like expanding access to American energy in" the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
Without directly opposing her proposal, House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio said that Pelosi's call to release supplies from the SPR meant that she "is admitting yet again that increasing the supply of oil will help reduce the price of gasoline."
"I agree, and so do my House Republican colleagues who have been arguing for decades in favor of more American energy production," he said.
House Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam, R-Florida, and House Republican Whip Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, have pledged to force a vote on bills to allow offshore drilling and exploration in ANWR before Congress leaves for its month long August break.
Democrats have repeatedly driven back attempts to open ANWR and the OCS for oil drilling, arguing that any help for skyrocketing prices would be years away and miniscule. Republicans argue that increased exploration for domestic oil sources would signal that the United States is intended to take care of its own energy needs and would drive down costs.
New drilling in the OCS - shallow ocean areas just off the coast that slope for miles into deep sea - was banned in 1991 after the disastrous Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The Energy Department has estimated that 86 billion barrels of oil may be present in areas currently off limits to drilling.
The Energy Department has estimated that ANWR could produce as much as 1.45 million barrels of oil per day within 20 years after it is opened for exploration. The United States currently consumes about 21 million barrels of oil per day.
Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami noted that Democrats support a bill that would require oil companies that hold existing federal leases for oil drilling to begin exploration or lose the rights to those leases.
"(Republicans) are ignoring the fact that 68 million acres on shore and offshore could be drilled at this moment," he said. "Providing oil companies with additional public lands would not lower the price of gas and would not provide relief to American families."
Nearly 10,000 such leases are open. Republicans say it takes time to develop such leases and that if older leases are not currently in production, it's because it's not financially viable to do so.
Putnam and Blount admitted their options for forcing the ANWR/OCS issue in the House of Representatives are limited, but Putnam predicted the issue could be "potentially a game changer" for Republican prospects in the November election.
Regardless of the back-and-forth on oil supplies, experts are divided on whether increasing supplies would mean lower gasoline prices. Noting that the SPR holds crude oil and not refined gasoline, Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer Federation of America, told a Congressional hearing in April that the oil industry has failed to add refinery capacity to keep up with demand.
"By failing to expand production capacity to meet demand and provide a reasonable reserve in an industry with very low supply and demand elasticities that is prone to accidents and disruptions, the markets became tight and volatile," he told members of the House Select Subcommittee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, adding "Crude oil will not do much good without the ability to refine it."
Cooper testified that putting SPR's 70,000 barrels per day back into an 85 million barrels per day market would have "little if any impact on prices." But he told the representatives that the current SPR policy should be overhauled, noting that the Bush administration had failed to fill the reserve when prices were low and now objects to stopping the fill with prices at record highs.
Melanie Kenderdine, associate director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Initiative and former oil policy analyst for the Department of Energy, testified at the same hearing that the SPR has been "inconsistently" used.
Kenderdine noted that drawdowns from the reserve were not triggered with the loss of more than 2 million barrels per day at the start of the Iraq war but were used with the loss of less than a million barrels per day after Hurricane Katrina disrupted refineries in the Gulf Coast. In that instance, crude oil from the reserve was traded for refined product from Europe.
She also said that the sale of crude oil from the reserve, currently at an average cost of less than $30 per barrel, could dramatically reduce gasoline prices and also could provide needed funding for research and development into alternative energy sources - ultimately the only way to eliminate the country's dependence on fossil fuels.
"An outright sale of 40 million barrels of oil from the SPR would generate almost $4.5 billion in new revenues," she testified. "This would have the added benefit of lowering prices to consumers.
"For those who say we would diminish our energy security by so doing, I would point out that this would reduce the amount of oil in the SPR to around 660 million barrels, roughly 60 million barrels more than was in the reserve when we invaded Iraq when, presumably, this level of oil insurance was deemed sufficient to protect our energy security interests during a war in the Middle East."
CNN's Deidre Walsh contributed to this report.