A tale of two scandals. – Tea Party Nation


A tale of two scandals. – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

Scandals are nothing new to Washington.  In fact, the City lives on scandal.  Something is wrong if another local DC politician is not indicted every few months.   Then there are the annual big scandals that come from the Federal Government.

 There are two scandals worth looking at.  One is the granddaddy of all scandals and one is unfolding right before our eyes.

 There are some huge lessons to be learned from what is happening and what happened forty years ago.

 In the long hot summer of 1972, the Democratic Headquarters at the Watergate Building was broken into.  The reasons for the break in remain vague and really unanswered.

 The results are well known.   While Richard Nixon may not have known initially what was going on, he certainly wanted to cover it up.   His cover up slowly came unraveled.  Despite the fact he crushed George McGovern in November 1972, by 1973, Watergate became a household word.

 Republicans though willing to defend Nixon initially, began to ask questions.  Many Republican would not blindly sit by and let Nixon continue his cover up.  Elliot Richardson, the Attorney General and his deputy Attorney General resigned rather than fire independent prosecutor Archibald Cox.   Nixon wanted to fire Cox because Cox would not bury the investigation.

 As House and Senate Committees lined up to investigate Watergate, the Republicans asked as many hard questions as the Democrats did.  It was Tennessee Republican Howard Baker who asked the famous question, “What did the President know and when did he know it?”

 By the summer of 1974, the Nixon Presidency was collapsing.  In early August, Republicans went to the White House and informed Nixon that there were enough votes to impeach and remove him from Office.  While the Democrats were anxious to do so, there were many Republicans who realized Nixon had violated the law and would vote to remove him.

 Now, forty years after what has been called “a third rate burglary,” what could be the largest Presidential scandal since Watergate is unfolding before our eyes.  Interestingly enough some of the legal issues are the same, including the executive privilege claim that Richard Nixon pioneered.

 But there is one huge difference.

 Unlike years earlier, where Republicans broke ranks with their President to find out what the President knew and when he knew it, Democrats are standing firm to try and make sure the American people never know what did the Attorney General know, when did he know about it and did he lie to Congress?

 Yesterday, after repeated subpoenas and demands, the House oversight committee, on a straight party line vote, voted to ask the full House to hold the Attorney General in contempt of Congress. 

 The Democrats are screaming about this.

 There is no doubt that Fast and Furious is a real scandal.   One American Border Patrol agent is dead because of it.  Potentially hundreds of Mexicans are dead because of this.

 The plan to allow guns into Mexico, which many believe was done so the Obama Regime could make an attack on our Second Amendment Rights, was possibly criminal to begin with.

 It is bad enough that people at the highest levels of the Justice Department not only knew about this botched operation but also have worked to at best mislead and stonewall Congress and at worst lie to Congress. But as Watergate taught us so many years ago, it is not the initial incident that is so bad.  It is the cover up that always gets you.

 What is also very disturbing is the underlying story here.  Fast and Furious would never have been investigated by Congress if the Democrats were still in charge.  Both Nancy Pelosi, if she were the Speaker and Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee have dismissed Fast and Furious as a scandal.   Two days ago, he said Eric Holder acted honorably. 

 The painful truth is that we now have a major political party in Washington that will do anything, say anything, bury any scandal, just so it can hold on to power.  Gone are the days when Democrats would step up for the truth for the greater good of America.

 Gone are the days when Democrats could put aside partisan bickering in the best interest of the nation.

 Gone are the days when Democrats loved this nation and could be counted on to be patriotic.

 Today, Barack Obama and Eric Holder are both symbols of the new Party of Treason.

 This is a party that must be defeated decisively while we still have the freedom left to beat them.



Obama – Modus Operandi – Tea Party Nation

Obama – Modus Operandi – Tea Party Nation.

By Marcia Wood

The Modus Operandi of Obama is as obvious as the nose on his face; we don’t have to be a World renowned detective or a high profile attorney to recognize Obama’s method of operation.  Obama considers himself a superior human being and looks on “we the people” with disdain and hatred.  He considers himself the only one worthy and intelligent enough to make decisions for the populace.  Obama believes he’s a savior to others with Godlike talents.

First of all it’s important to realize that his narcissistic personality disorder along with a false ideology makes him a very dangerous opponent.  He won’t tolerate confrontation and literally throws a tantrum if anyone questions his decisions or leadership.  His inability to hold such a prestigious office as Commander in Chief of the USA has been obvious to many since January 2009 – he’s not a leader, but a dictator who believes he is above the laws of our land and immune to the dictates of our Constitution. 

Obama’s MOP (Mode of operation) is primarily based on the “Art of Deception;” he deceived the poor, the African Americans, the Hispanics and the taxpayers in 2009 with idle promises of “hope and change.”  Next, he surrounded himself with a group of people that he considered to be “super human beings” whose job it is to direct and control the lowly sheeples.  These people don’t worship Obama but they worship his puppeteers; he’s just a mouthpiece to further their radical agenda nothing more or nothing less. 

Obama is a strategist and a shrewd chess player who knows how to protect the King and Queen – the pawns are his scapegoats (Bush, Republicans, Conservative News Media, the wealthy etc.) and they are strategically placed to take the hits or responsibilities for all his failed policies, executive orders and radical directives. 

Obama’s agenda is very similar to Hitler’s mode of operation – Hitler spent millions on recruitment and propaganda in order to pursue his political agenda.  Obama spends millions a week recruiting the unsuspecting and helpless who are totally dependent on “Big Government.”  Obama’s propaganda machines (the Liberal News Media, Soros’s Special Interest armies, Unions, the African American civil right activists and Democratic strategists are powerful and dangerous.

Obama is akin to Stalin due to his ideology of equality and class warfare – that’s why we hear the phrases such as level playing field, fair share and redistribution.  Obama like Hitler is obsessed with an ideology based on hate stimulated by his narcissistic need for attention – Obama hates America and most Americans believing that a “New World Order” will cure all of our Nation’s ills. Obama and Michelle are in total agreement that America is in need of a Radical face lift and in less than four years our great Country is hardly recognizable. 

We’ve become a haven for the terrorists, Muslim Brotherhood, Communists, Marxists and Rothschild Zionists.  In fact like Donald Trump has said, we’re the laughing stock of the World having lost much of our nuclear and military dominance, our Triple A rating, our inability to negotiate strong trade agreements with China and other Countries. These foreign Countries have demonstrated their strength in their predatory economic trade agreements. 

Our National Deficit is over 16 trillion, so much for fiscal responsibility.  Republicans and Democrats continue collecting disgusting and disgraceful salaries and for what????   We’re paying a bunch of lackadaisical blood suckers a salary for destroying our Nation!

Obama’s personal exposure to the Chicago Machine prepared him for his run for President in 2008; he was immersed in the dirty game of fraud and political corruption making it a very easy transition to install a National Chicago Machine. The Old Republican Establishment and fence straddling Democrats who dabbled in dirty politics quickly found out the true meaning of “Dirty, Corrupt, Illegal and deadly.”  

They were no match for Obama’s Chicago Machine manned by Soros, Unions, Special Interest groups and the Liberal News Media – rather than face total annihilation they joined him, although they still do their “dog & pony” show for their constituents benefit. 

One of the most important things for Americans to remember is “we are the people” and our forefathers created the Constitution to protect us during such turbulent times.  Will we fight for our freedom or do we have other things that we value more than our freedom, our children and grandchildren’s future and our beautiful America?

A nation which makes the final sacrifice for life and freedom does not get beaten.  Kemal Ataturk

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too.    William Somerset Maugham
May God Bless America

As Always,

Little Tboca

KNIGHT: Classless warfare fails in Wisconsin – Washington Times

KNIGHT: Classless warfare fails in Wisconsin – Washington Times.

Obama seeks consolation for Midwest beat-down with Left Coast pay-up

By Robert Knight – The Washington Times

Wouldn’t it be awful if an important election hinged on some fat cats outspending the opposition? That was the liberals’ excuse for the failure of Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett to unseat Republican WisconsinGov. Scott Walker in Tuesday’s recall election.

The Washington Post’s Dan Eggen used figures from the “nonpartisan” Wisconsin Democracy Campaign to report that Mr. Walker raised $30.5 million to Mr. Barrett’s measly $3.9 million. Wow, what a spread. Too bad it’s not the whole picture, as Ben Shapiro pointed out at Breitbart.com: “As it turns out, labor unions spent an additional $21 million on the recall election.”

Instead of 7-1 or 10-1, the “spending gap” was closer to $30 million-$25 million. Also, in a recall election of several GOP Wisconsin senators in September, “Democrats outspent Republicans $23.4 million to $20.5 million.”

White House press secretary Jay Carney, who has arguably the toughest job in Washington, gamely addressed the Wisconsin debacle, saying, “I certainly wouldn’t read much into yesterday’s result beyond its effect on who’s occupying the governor’s seat in Wisconsin.” Mad magazine’s Alfred E. “What, me worry?” Neuman could not have put it better.

When a controversial Republican governor handily prevails despite a massive union campaign in a historically progressive state, why should a Democratic president in a failing economy get nervous? Also on Tuesday, California voters in San Jose and San Diego, not exactly bastions of conservatism, approved measures curbing public-employee union power. Uh-oh.

Not to worry, though. Mr. Obama still has the national media. Like an army of programmed zombies, they obediently lurched forward with the “big spending” theme in Wisconsin. CBS, NBC, ABC and MSNBC all harped on the fact that Mr. Walker’s campaign and PACs supporting it raised far more than Mr. Barrett’s supporters, the Media Research Center reported.

I don’t recall similar alarm when they reported on President Obama’s reputed goal of a $1 billion national war chest for November. But the GOP’s fundraising success in Wisconsin sure cheesed them off.

On election eve, Peter Alexander said on Monday’s “NBC Nightly News” that the state had “been flooded with a record $64 million in campaign spending.” He declared: “Many voters have had enough.”

They sure have. Mr. Walker won with 205,509 more votes than he got when beating Mr. Barrett back in 2010. Thirty-eight percent of union households voted for Mr. Walker, an increase of one point from 2010. Apparently, balancing the budget, reducing taxes and preventing state employee layoffs is enough dirty pool to ensure survival of a recall.

Sensing a train wreck, Mr. Obama skipped Wisconsin, leaving Mr. Barrett to twist in the Badger State winds. Mr. Obama at least flew near the state on the way to fundraisers in Minnesota before a two-day swing through San Francisco and Los Angeles, where dollars gaily flowed into his coffers like Napa Valley wine.

Following Vice President Joseph R. Biden’s lead and pretending two men are a real marriage plus refusing to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act sure opens the wallets in La-La Land. A $25,000-a-plate dinner at the Los Angeles home of “Glee” creator Ryan Murphy after an LGBT Leadership Council gala at $1,250 a ticket, plus a $35,800-per-plate luncheon and other events earlier in San Francisco helped raise at least $5.3 million.

Meanwhile, back in Wisconsin, where the GOP also retained Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch and three Senate seats, Democrats clung to the hope that a tightly contested recall of a fourth Republican state senator may swing that chamber back to Democratic control. If so, perhaps they won’t flee the state the next time a difficult vote comes up.

Democrats also took heart in exit polls that had Mr. Obama beating Mitt Romney by seven points, half the margin by which Mr. Obama beat John McCain in 2008. Like Mr. Obama, Mr. Romney skipped the Wisconsin contest.

Public-employee unions are trying to pick up the pieces, but Tuesday’s vote had to be sobering. It’s one thing for Mr. Walker and a GOP-led legislature to curb their power; it’s another for 54 percent of the electorate to say they agree.

Lots of lessons can be learned, not the least of which is that the recall system worked. Ideally, recall elections are a tool to remove corrupt or out-of-control politicians. They are not supposed to be partisan means to punish elected officials for policy differences. We have regular elections for that. Conversely, a failed recall can demonstrate public support for an incumbent’s policies and smear huge amounts of egg on certain deserving faces. For more information on all things recall, see recalltherogues.org.

According to exit polls, 6 in 10 Wisconsin voters said recall should be used only to punish “official misconduct.” Mr. Walker may be hated by the unions, but he’s not a crook, and voters acted accordingly.

Harsher elements of the political left vow revenge, of course. Mr. Walker is receiving death threats and other vitriolic tweets, as reported by The Washington Times’ 24/7 blog. Occupy Milwaukee was out in full force Thursday, calling police “pigs” and brandishing signs saying “Public jobs program now!” and “Stop the war on women.”

It’s doubtful any of this will intimidate a guy who didn’t blink when his opponents threw the kitchen sink at him.

Speaking of the unions, even if he thought the recall was a loser, Mr. Obama might at least have gone through the motions for a major Democratic constituency. Perhaps it’s more fun hanging around with celebrities.

In New York on Monday, after Mr. Obama’s Broadway fundraisers with Bill Clinton, the hapless Mr. Carney was asked if “glitzy” celebrity events might hurt Mr. Obama’s populist message. He responded that Mr. Obama has “vast numbers of small donors. … And I think that the fact that the president enjoys that kind of support speaks to what his policy priorities are. He’s out there fighting for the middle class.”

Unless you’re a middle-class union member in Wisconsin, that is.

Robert Knight is senior fellow for the American Civil Rights Union and a columnist for The Washington Times.

Scott Walker, the victory in Wisconsin and the future of America – Tea Party Nation

English: Great Seal of the state of Wisconsin

English: Great Seal of the state of Wisconsin (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Scott Walker, the victory in Wisconsin and the future of America – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

By now, almost everyone knows Scott Walker and his Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch defeated the far radical left in the recall effort in Wisconsin yesterday.  MSNBC hosts are still on suicide watch and Chris Matthews was last seen staggering down Pennsylvania Avenue wailing for the ghost of Dan Rather.

 The Tea Party won last night but what is this going to mean?  Who are the winners and the losers last night?

 Scott Walker was the winner last night.   So was Rebecca Kleefisch.  That goes without saying.  Walker took over half the vote and got more votes than he did two years ago.   Walker’s star is clearly rising in the Republican Party.   Conservatism is a big winner last night too. 

 The people of Wisconsin and other people are fed up the far left using the public treasury as the source of their funding.   The people were receptive to Walker’s message of cutting lavish union benefits and eliminating programs that were simply a huge profit center for the unions.

 The big loser last night was Barack Obama.   Obama could not force himself to go to Wisconsin and campaign.  Perhaps it was because the campaign was not about him.  Bill Clinton went and that did not help him or the Wisconsin recall.

 The far left and the Unions lost and were the biggest losers last night.   The people of Wisconsin spoke loudly last night.  They were tired of simply being cash donors for the unions and were tired of the union tactics.

 The power of the left, namely their ability to extract public money to fund their activities has been severely diminished.

 As we celebrate this win for the Tea Party and Conservatism last night, we need to look ahead at the dark clouds on the horizon.

 Had Scott Walker lost last night, conservatives would have said they were disappointed and perhaps there would have been some accusations fraud, if there were some facts to support it.

 What happened when Walker won?

 The left went nuts.  No longer do we have a situation where one side gracefully concedes and then starts to work on the next election.  Leftists got on Twitter calling for Scott Walker’s death.   These were not one or two tweets but a lot of them.  Radical leftists yesterday were caught on video, which was on Breitbart.com saying they hoped Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch would die from colon cancer.  Kleefisch, the mother of young children, is a cancer survivor. 

 We are seeing a serious breakdown in the fabric of American society.  The far left, which is basically anyone in the Democrat Party, does not believe in free and fair elections anymore.  They do not believe in listening to the will of the people. 

 The far left loves power.  It is what they crave.  They do not care about minor issues like liberty and freedom.  When they are losing power they go crazy.

 Unfortunately now, they are becoming more and more unhinged and it is now only a matter of time before we see serious violence from the far left.

 Yesterday, the Pew Research Center released a report showing that there is a major and almost un-crossable divide between real Americans and the far left.   Americans have become more and more polarized.  

 For the left, they only want power.  Their goal of obtaining power will destroy the American dreams of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 There can be no compromise with the left now.  All we can do is go to the people, win and totally defeat the far left.

 While we still can.

Romney: Obama had little to lose in Solyndra – Washington Times

Image representing Solyndra as depicted in Cru...

Image via CrunchBase

Romney: Obama had little to lose in Solyndra – Washington Times.

‘It’s the taxpayers that get stuck’

By Seth McLaughlinThe Washington Times

Standing outside the shuttered California headquarters of Solyndra on Thursday, Mitt Romney said President Obama must answer to voters for the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars he gambled on the politically connected solar technology company, which went belly-up in 2011.

Across the country in Boston, Mr. Obama’s top campaign strategist charged that Mr. Romney, the Republicans‘ presumptive presidential nominee, failed to help a struggling economy in Massachusetts when he served one term as governor from 2003 to 2007.

In an election that is being billed as a referendum on Mr. Obama’s handling of the economy and federal spending, Mr. Romney and congressional Republicans have accused Mr. Obama of being more interested in using taxpayer money to reward his allies and push his ideology — even as Democrats have argued that Mr. Romney’s job-creating credentials fall short of the smart businessman’s image he is trying to portray.

“If the business had done spectacularly well, the shareholders — his friends — would have done very, very well, but the taxpayers would have just gotten their money back,” Mr. Romney said. “On the other hand, of course, if the business failed, as it did, it’s the taxpayers that get stuck with losing a half a billion dollars. So it’s heads and his cronies win, and tails and the taxpayers lose.”

With deep ties to the White House, Solyndra was awarded $535 million in government-backed loan guarantees, even as some staffers in the administration warned that it was a worrisome gamble and cautioned the president and his advisers against the plan.

Mr. Obama toured the solar panel facility in 2010, holding it up as one of the success stories to come out of the $831 billion in federal stimulus spending. At the event, he called companies like Solyndra “the true engine of economic growth.”

“Well, you can see that it’s a symbol of something very different today. It’s a symbol not of success, but of failure,” Mr. Romney said Thursday, arguing that the way the administration handed out the federal grants sent the wrong message to companies “that the best way to get ahead is not with the best ideas and the best technology and the best people and the best marketing, but instead with the best lobbyists.”

“That is not the nature of how America works,” he said.

David M. Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s top strategist, looked to deliver a different message in Massachusetts, where he opened his remarks, just steps away from the Statehouse that Mr. Romney used to occupy, by saying, “It is great to be in Massachusetts — Obama country.”

He painted the Republican as a political huckster, saying that Mr. Romney is once again peddling the false narrative that his experience as a “corporate buyout specialist” has given him special insight into how to jump-start the economy and get Americans back to work.

“After selling himself to Massachusetts as an economic savior, the Massachusetts record was alarmingly weak,” he said. “As you’ve heard, under Gov. Romney, the state was 47th in job creation — fourth from the bottom.”

Manufacturing jobs, he said, vanished at twice the national rate, household income fell, the size of the state government grew and Mr. Romney raised more fees than any other governor in the country — including for marriage licenses and home sales.

He also held up a 2007 study from Northeastern University that he said showed that on key labor market measures, the state often ranked near or at the bottom when compared with other states.

“It wasn’t happenstance that Massachusetts stumbled under Gov. Romney,” Mr. Axelrod said. “He brought the orientation of a financial engineer, whose career has not been about generating jobs, it has been about generating short-term profit. Not about generating long-term growth, or building for the future, but about taking what he can when he can.”

The news conference, though, was largely overshadowed by a boisterous group of Romney supporters who crashed the event after word of it leaked overnight.

While Mr. Axelrod and local Democratic leaders spoke, the pro-Romney forces booed and taunted them with noisemakers and chants, including “Where are the jobs?” and, perhaps fittingly, “Solyndra, Solyndra.”

Clearly rattled, Mr. Axelrod tried to silence them early on, but to no avail.

“You can shout down speakers, my friends, but it is hard to Etch-a-Sketch the truth away,” he said.

The punch-counterpunch came less than 24 hours after Mr. Obama phoned Mr. Romney to congratulate him on clinching the Republican nomination Tuesday, following his strong showing in the Texas primary.

Five months from Election Day, polls show the race is basically a dead heat, with Mr. Obama running a couple of points ahead of Mr. Romney in the latest Realclearpolitics.com average of polls.

Most of the same polls, though, also show that while Mr. Obama is the more likable of two candidates, voters tend to side with Mr. Romney when they are asked whom they trust more to strengthen the economy.

The Party of Yes – Tea Party Nation



The Party of Yes – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

As we sail through the Great Obama Depression, the Democrats are doing nothing except trying to brand the Republicans, the Tea Party and conservatism in general as the “Party of No.”

 We are in fact the “Party of yes.”

 Why are we the “Party of yes?”

 We have the answer to the Great Obama Depression.  We know how to say yes to the ideas that will solve the problem.

 Obama does not want us to say yes, because he does not want to see a recovery.  His vision of America is not of a rich and prosperous America.  In fact, his vision of America is just the opposite.  His vision of America is of a poor, almost impoverished nation that is not an economic superpower. 

 We conservatives want to say yes to the greatness of America.

 How do we get America back on the path of economic greatness?

 It actually would take two steps to get it started.

 The first step is major tax cuts across the board.  Abolish the capital gains tax.  Liberals shriek when you say that.  “How will you pay for the tax cuts?”  They wail. 

 The answer is, tax cuts are not something that is paid for.  The money belongs to the people.  A new building is something that is paid for.

 However, the reality of life is that every time taxes are cut, tax revenues go up.  Why?  Because tax cuts stimulates economic activity.  Tax cuts work and they work every time.  Kennedy cut taxes.  The economy boomed.  Reagan cut taxes and the economy boomed.  Bush cut taxes and does anyone remember six years ago when unemployment was 4.6%?   Does anyone remember the Republicans’ last budget?  The deficits had been steadily shrinking and the deficit for 2007, their last budget year was only $161 billion. 

 Why eliminate the capital gains tax?  Again that is another one that is fun to throw out just because it will make liberal’s heads explode.   Cutting the capital gains tax encourages investment.  Investment creates new jobs.  This is a concept so simple, even a liberal should be able to figure it out.  The fact that liberals cannot figure this one simple point of economics out should be enough proof to disqualify them from any decision more significant than deciding what is going to be on the TV tonight. 

 The second step is equally simple.  Cut spending.

 Cutting spending is easier said than done.  It is even tough with allegedly conservative Republicans stepping up to protect their turf and their favorite projects. 

 For the last few weeks, I have repeatedly blogged about an idea from Louisiana Congressman John Fleming.  It is his Federal Realignment and Closure Commission.    Spending can be cut by eliminating wasteful programs.  We can break the mechanism career politicians use to protect their programs with the FRCC.

 This worked with the military.  For years, the Pentagon could not close bases they did not even need or want because Congressmen protected bases in their district.  The Base Realignment and Closure Commission prevented Congressmen, even those with massive seniority and those who were powerful committee chairs from stopping closures.  The same thing can and should be done with the Federal Government.

 Last year, the GOA identified hundreds of billions of dollars in fraud, waste and duplicated services.  These programs need to be cut.

 Economists tell us that once debt hits about 80% of a nation’s GDP, it becomes a drag on the economy.  We are already over 100%.  We are following the route of most of the European nations.  Their plight should be a warning to us that this is not the way to go.

 If six friends of yours jump from a twenty-foot wall and break their legs, what makes you think you will have any different result?  This is what the Obama Regime either does not get or the willfully want America to fail. 

 If we cut taxes to stimulate our economy, thus growing revenue and cutting our spending, we can start to get our debt under control and pull out of the economic death spiral Barack Obama and the Party of Treason want to put us in.

Obama Headed For Defeat in Pipeline Fight – Byron York – Townhall Conservative Columnists

keystone pipeline

keystone pipeline (Photo credit: shannonpatrick17)

Obama Headed For Defeat in Pipeline Fight – Byron York – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

To hear the White House tell it, Barack Obama might be the most pipeline-friendly president ever to occupy the Oval Office.

In advance of Obama’s March 22 visit to Cushing, Okla, the White House released a fact sheet detailing the president’s support for oil pipeline projects. “The need for pipeline infrastructure is urgent, because rising American oil production is outpacing the capacity of pipelines to deliver oil to refineries,” the White House wrote. “It is critical that we make pipeline infrastructure a top priority.”

When the president appeared in Cushing, White House image-makers positioned him in front of huge stockpiles of pipe — tons and tons of pipe. Message: Obama loves pipelines. “Under my administration,” the president said, “we’ve added enough new oil and gas pipeline to encircle the Earth and then some.”

But Obama wasn’t in Cushing because he has approved so much new pipeline. He was there because he is facing bipartisan opposition, in Congress and across the country, for blocking the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would bring about 700,000 barrels of oil from Canada to refineries in Texas every day, creating thousands of new jobs in the process. The opposition appears to be growing, and there’s good reason to believe Obama will be forced to reverse himself in the next few months.

A new Gallup poll shows that 57 percent of Americans say the government should approve building Keystone. That number includes 81 percent of Republicans, 51 percent of independents and 44 percent (a plurality) of Democrats. The only good news for the White House is that most Americans aren’t following the issue very closely, at least not yet.

In Cushing, the president announced he will expedite approval of the relatively short southern portion of the Keystone project, known as the Cushing pipeline, which will take oil that is already in Oklahoma down to the Texas refineries. “I’m directing my administration to cut through the red tape, break through the bureaucratic hurdles and make this project a priority,” Obama said.

But Republicans quickly pointed out that a) presidential approval wasn’t necessary for that portion of the pipeline, since it is all domestic, and b) it was Obama’s agencies that were responsible for the red tape and bureaucratic hurdles in the first place. “He’s out in Oklahoma trying to take credit for a part of the pipeline that doesn’t even require his approval,” said House Speaker John Boehner.

The GOP has also pointed out that there are many, many pipelines already crisscrossing the United States, including some that cross the Canadian border. In fact, Republicans say, Obama is the first president to deny a permit for a cross-border pipeline.

In addition, GOP lawmakers cite maps showing there are already pipelines over the Ogallala Aquifer, the giant underground water table that stretches below Nebraska and several other heartland states and is the reason environmentalists cite for opposing the Keystone project. “America either should install Keystone XL, with all of its benefits, or — if such pipelines really are as dangerous as Democrats argue — yank out all these pipelines that could destroy Ogallala,” writes conservative commentator Deroy Murdock, who has argued strongly in favor of the pipeline.

Recently, Senate Republicans forced a vote on a proposal to approve Keystone. The final vote was 56 – 42, with 11 Democrats breaking with the president to vote in favor of the pipeline. The only reason it didn’t pass was that the Democratic leadership filibustered the measure, requiring 60 votes for passage. (Liberal critics of the filibuster, so angry when Republicans used it to block Democratic measures, were uncharacteristically silent after the vote.)

If Obama has already lost 11 Democratic votes, with the election still several months away, it’s likely he is going to lose more in the future. “Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said after the last vote that the issue would not be going away,” says a Senate GOP source. “There is strong bipartisan support, and we’ll have more shots at this.”

In coming months, Republicans can likely count on the support of more and more Americans who are more and more angry about rising gas prices. As the general election campaign begins, Obama will face determined arguments from Republicans that in his desire to promote green energy — Obama will hear the word “Solyndra” many, many times this fall — he is standing in the way of making America more self-sufficient in oil and gas. It won’t matter how many photo-ops he stages in front of piles of pipes. In the end, he’ll have to say yes to Keystone.

Liberal Opposition to Ryan Plan Is Delusional Demagoguery – David Limbaugh – Townhall Conservative Columnists

speaking at CPAC in Washington D.C. on Februar...

speaking at CPAC in Washington D.C. on February 10, 2011. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Liberal Opposition to Ryan Plan Is Delusional Demagoguery – David Limbaugh – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

It’s one thing for good-faith conservative Republicans to challenge the Ryan plan from the right if they believe its cuts are too small and too slow, but these liberal attacks are something else again.

How catastrophic would the nation’s fiscal condition have to be before liberals recognized its urgency? Is there any scenario under which they’d consider setting aside their partisan populism to come to the nation’s rescue? Are they capable of even temporarily setting aside their redistributionist myopia long enough meaningfully to address the main drivers of the national debt?

As we know, President Obama hasn’t addressed and won’t address our financial problems. He has never presented a budget plan that even pretends to rein in entitlement spending or comes anywhere close to reducing our annual deficits to less than shocking numbers, much less reversing the debt picture.

When Paul Ryan presented his plan in April 2011, Obama mocked, ridiculed and demonized him and Republicans as wanting to inflict pain on the elderly and autistic, among other sympathetic groups. Yet when Obama’s treasury secretary appeared before the House and the Senate, he admitted the administration’s plan wholly fails to address the long-term debt issue and said only that the administration doesn’t like the way Ryan’s plan approaches it.

We are witnessing the end results of liberal policies on a wide variety of issues — from health care to the economy to the national debt — yet liberals can’t give them up. Instead of acknowledging that their utopian dreams haven’t delivered, they are shaking their fists at Republicans and conservatives, as if it were our fault that reality doesn’t conform to their fantasies. They’d be much better off reading Mark Levin‘s “Ameritopia,” but I won’t hold my breath.

In The New Republic, Jonathan Cohn rails against “the stunning immorality of Paul Ryan’s budget.” The Washington Post’s editorial board denounces “Paul Ryan’s dangerous, and intentionally vague, budget plan.”

Cohn, obviously not given to hyperbole, suggests that no politician would ever boast about a plan that would rob health insurance from tens of millions and “effectively eliminate the federal government except for entitlements and defense spending” — “except Paul Ryan just did.”

It’s not as though “tens of millions” have anything desirable with Obamacare, and whatever they do have costs multiples of what it was advertised and will also wreck the quality of our health care and greatly diminish our freedoms. So how about instead of the cherry-picking we get a little more of the whole picture?

Cohn obviously resents any proposals that would deprive liberals of the Monopoly money they use to effectuate their social planning schemes, even though extending the status quo would guarantee national insolvency and the disastrous consequences it would bring. How do they figure government dependents would fare if that were to occur?

Instead of contributing something — anything — toward long-term solutions to the problems they largely caused, Cohn and his fellow liberal finger-pointers are scapegoating Ryan and Republicans for offering a reasonable plan to navigate us out of this mess.

The Washington Post’s editors are no better. They lead with what they pretend is a self-evident truth but what is no more accurate than their Keynesian maxim that deficit spending stimulates the economy. “There is no credible path to deficit reduction,” they write, “without a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases.”

Sorry, but after a certain point, tax rate increases yield diminishing marginal returns for the revenue ledger, which we’ve seen throughout our history at both the macro (entire economy) and micro (luxury tax) levels. No matter how high they jack up the tax rates, they’re not going to produce a significant fraction of the additional revenue needed to balance the budget, let alone begin to reduce the national debt.

Try a simple exercise: Compare the Bush budgets with the Obama budgets, and see the startling amount of difference economic growth makes on the generation of revenue. We’re talking hundreds of billions of dollars.

I don’t believe that Ryan is proposing tax cuts primarily because he believes we pay too much in taxes. I think he did so because of the practical reality that we can’t ultimately balance the budget — even with substantial spending cuts — unless we have a growing economy that yields a bigger pie to generate sufficient revenue.

The painful truth is that Ryan’s plan is modest and moderate, not grandiose and extreme. If you want to criticize it, do so on the basis that the country could use an even bigger fiscal diet, not that it is too severe.

Democrats and their liberal helpmates are stoking the flames of the fire that threatens the republic; Ryan and others are driving the firetrucks and are merely debating over how big the hoses should be.

In a saner and less polarized nation, Obama would be ousted in a historic landslide in November. He very well may be.

The Myth of “Middle-Class” Uncle Joe – Michelle Malkin – Townhall Conservative Columnists

Senator Biden gives his opening statement and ...

Image via Wikipedia

The Myth of “Middle-Class” Uncle Joe – Michelle Malkin – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

This has got to be the bazooka of all Joe Biden blowhardisms. The nation’s vice campaigner in chief went on the attack against Republicans this week, clad in full populist armor. “These guys don’t have a sense of the average folks out there,” said The Everyman. “They don’t know what it means to be middle class.” But who was his audience?

Nope, not blue-collar workers in Allentown, Pa. Biden was speaking to an exclusive club of $10,000-per-couple campaign donors gathered at the home of the Senate’s $200 million man, Democratic Mass. Sen. John Kerry, in Georgetown, D.C.

That’s smack dab in the middle of Beltway America, where they like a twist of cognitive dissonance with their aperitifs.
The White House is once again drawing on the fantastical myth of middle-class Joe to portray Republicans as out-of-touch elitists. A Washington Post headline described Biden “digging back into his roots to move Obama forward.” But the administration’s leading populist poster child is a wretched symbol of entrenched Washington power. And his fables are getting oldy-moldy.

At another campaign event in Ohio, Regular Joe rolled up his sleeves and pumped out the common-man colloquialisms. “It’s good to have a dad in the automobile business, man,” he said. Yeah, man. Preach it, man. Oh, hey, weren’t you the man who savaged average-guy Joe “the Plumber” Wurzelbacher in Ohio four years ago by lying about his income and mocking his American dream to own a small business? Man.

While Biden’s family came from humble beginnings, the wheeler-dealer politician and his family (including two lobbyist sons) have reaped the benefits of public office for nearly a half-century. The entrenched senior senator from Delaware amassed wealthy donors and crooked cronies over six Senate terms. These are some of the stories, reported in my book “Culture of Corruption,” that have been whitewashed out of the loquacious veep’s campaign folklore:

–Biden’s custom-built house in Delaware’s ritziest Chateau Country neighborhood, assessed at $2.5 million four years ago, is the Bidens’ most valuable asset. He secured the estate with the help of a corporate executive who worked for Biden’s top campaign donor, credit card giant MBNA. In 1996, Biden sold his previous mansion to MBNA Vice Chairman John Cochran. The asking price was $1.2 million. Cochran forked over the full sum. Biden then paid $350,000 in cash to real estate developer Keith Stoltz for a 4.2-acre lakefront lot. Stoltz had paid that same amount five years earlier for the undeveloped property.

–Among Pal Joey’s dearest old pals: campaign finance “rainmaker” William Oldaker, who showered generous benefits on both the elder Biden and his lobbyist son, Hunter; Baltimore-based Peter Angelos, whose law firm gave Biden $156,250; Wilmington-based Young Conaway Stargatt and Taylor, which kicked in $127, 979; and Pachulski Stang Zielhl and Jones, which donated $145,625, according to The American Lawyer.

–Disgraced trial lawyer Richard Scruggs donated $11,500 to Biden in 2008. After Scruggs was convicted of attempting to bribe a federal judge, Biden tried to show his ethical bona fides by donating the money to a worthy charity. But Biden couldn’t steer clear of nepotism. The money ended up with the National Prostate Cancer Coalition — a charity where, The American Lawyer pointed out, Biden’s son Hunter sits on the board of directors.

–Another Biden family pal in the trial lawyers’ community: Jeff Cooper. With his partner, John Simmons, the 39-year-old Cooper built one of the biggest asbestos litigation firms in the country. SimmonsCooper, based in Madison County, Ill., has donated a whopping $196,050 to Biden’s campaigns since 2003, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics in Washington, D.C. In that same time frame, the firm poured $6.5 million into lobbying against a key tort reform bill — which Sen. Biden worked hard to defeat. Without a hint of irony, Cooper extolled Biden’s anti-tort reform stance: “He understands the plight of the little guy and is against huge corporate interest.” But what Biden did was help fuel lucrative business for the tort bar. When courts in SimmonsCooper’s home base in Illinois finally started cracking down on what had become “America’s No. 1 judicial hellhole” for filing out-of-control tort claims, the firm turned East. And in Joe Biden’s Delaware, they created a new sanctuary.

Back on Obama 2012 Fantasy Island, Biden insists on marketing himself as the humble “son of an automobile man.” Give him this: He spins like a used-car salesman. His lot’s full of lemons. And “bamboozle” is his middle name.

New Polling Data Shows How to Fight Obama’s Class Warfare – Daniel J. Mitchell – Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary


taxes (Photo credit: 401K)

New Polling Data Shows How to Fight Obama’s Class Warfare – Daniel J. Mitchell – Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary.

Since starting this blog, I’ve periodically shared polling data that gives me hope. Highlights include:

o More than two-to-one support for personal retirement accounts.

o Recognition that big government is the greatest danger to America’s future.

o An increasingly negative view of the federal government.

o More than eight-to-one support for less spending rather than higher taxes.

o Strong support for bureaucrat layoffs and/or entitlement reforms instead of higher taxes.

o And my favorite poll results are the ones showing that voters understand that the goal is less spending, not lower deficits.

Now there’s some new research that is both encouraging and educational. Here’s part of the report from The Hill.

Three-quarters of likely voters believe the nation’s top earners should pay lower, not higher, tax rates, according to a new poll for The Hill. The big majority opted for a lower tax bill when asked to choose specific rates; precisely 75 percent said the right level for top earners was 30 percent or below. The current rate for top earners is 35 percent. Only 4 percent thought it was appropriate to take 40 percent, which is approximately the level that President Obama is seeking from January 2013 onward. The Hill Poll also found that 73 percent of likely voters believe corporations should pay a lower rate than the current 35 percent… Republicans were more likely than Democrats to support lower tax rates for the wealthy, but voters in both parties solidly supported lower rates compared to current law. Eighty-one percent of Republicans favored tax rates below current levels, compared to 70 percent of Democrats. The Hill Poll, conducted by Pulse Opinion Research of 1,000 likely voters, also found broad support for lower rates across income groups. The group most supportive of lowering tax rates on the wealthy below current rates made between $20,000 and $40,000 a year; 81 percent supported tax rates of 30 percent or lower.

This data is important because it shows the value of framing an issue. Instead of defensively responding to Obama’s class warfare, proponents of good tax policy should be making a philosophical/economic point that “nobody in America, no matter how rich or how poor, should have to pay more than one-fourth of their income to government.”

And proponents of class warfare should be put on the spot and asked “what do you think is the maximum tax rate anyone should pay?”

Last but not least, friends of liberty should make the key point that higher tax rates on the so-called rich are merely precursors for higher tax rates on everyone else – as even the New York Times recently admitted.