I don't buy that it is anywhere near the same as a recess appointment. First of all, recess appointments CAN be legitimate - filling a position while the Senate is in recess. And yes, most every modern day President has used this loophole to fill positions with appointees who could most likely not get confirmed. But a few points to note: Obama has a majority in the Senate - and not only a majority, but a group of democrats who will follow his every whim. Also, this is not simply an appointment - this is placing someone in a position and then changing the job responsibility and heirarcy of command within the entire department in order to gain Presidential control by proxy through a hand-selected appointment.
This is unprecedented. You can argue all you want about GW Bush and his 171 recess appointments (btw: Clinton had 121, Obama is at 15...and counting), but this isn't about Bush - I know it's hard to understand considering how often his name is mentioned in every economic discussion, but Bush served his 2 terms and has retired to Crawford, TX. This is now about the man whom 70 million people believed would be the great savior to our nation - ushering in hope for this generation of Americans still reeling from the destruction wrought by the evil George Bush. Well guess what - he has been an abject failure - by any measure. And bringing up the former President does not and will not ever change that. This November you will begin to see a few of those 70 million stop and reverse direction...right now it's the political kiss of death to be associated with Obama on election day. In November 2012, it will be the kiss of death to BE Obama on election day.
BTW, this from the 'Congressional Record':
From November 2007 through the end of the Bush presidency, the Senate structured its recesses in a way that was intended, at least initially, to prevent the President from making recessappointments by preventing the occurrence of a recess of more than three days. On November16, 2007, the Senate majority leader (Harry Reid) announced that the Senate would “be coming in for proforma sessions during the Thanksgiving holiday to prevent recess appointments.” The Senate
recessed later that day, and pro forma meetings were convened on November 20, 23, 27, and 29, with no business conducted. The Senate next conducted business after reconvening on December 3, 2007. Similar procedures were followed during other periods, during the remainder of President Bush’s term, that would otherwise have been Senate recesses of a week or longer in duration. The President made no recess appointments between the initial pro forma sessions in
November 2007 and the end of his presidency.
I wonder what happened to make Senator Reid change his stance on the harmful effects of recess appointments.
I am still curious as to why the President feels the need to make these non-confirmed appointments - he has a majority in the Senate. Could it be that he realizes that even his Senate sheep won't agree to some of these people? Or could it be that he is trying to shelter them from the almost certain backlash in November by voters upset at the rubber stamp confirmations of unqualified and incompetent appointees who's single objective is to extend the reach of the President to the office that they hold?
About Recess Appointments:
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0DP%2BP%5CW%3B%20P%20%20%0A
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
The aftermath of Hurricane Hugo - it wasn't all bad...
September 21, 1989. At a hastily thrown together party in our freshman dorm, I first saw the cute girl who was so completely out of my league. Who would have ever guessed that 9 months, a History class, and a spoon to the side of my head later, that cute girl would go on a date with me? 21 years later...still cute,and still out of my league, I love her more than I ever have.
On Nov 2, focus on voting out - this may mean that the best candidate for the future is not the best candidate for right now.
I assure you, there is no one who wants a more down to earth, fiscally responsible government than me. And I know that continuing to elect lifelong politicians and whomever the Rep (or Dem) Party is funding is never going to get us where people like me want to ultimately get. However the ONLY way, right now, to stop the government takeover of almost every aspect of our lives, is to elect the most responsible Republicans available. This just simply isn't the time to be making sure we buy the car we want to pass down to our kids - this is the time to buy the car that can get us out of the ditch. This is a "voting out" election, and the goal should be just that. And to vote out these power hungry, out of touch, democrats who have sheepishly gone along with every single one of Obama's socialist, big government ideas (and now are running from his name as fast as they can) we have to avoid the temptation to overgrab, but instead be sensible and vote for the candidates who can win and get us through the next 2 years. Then we can talk about how to ice the cake.
In 42 days, you just have to decide what is more important: laying your head on your pillow on Nov 2 knowing you voted for the candidate who most closely reflects your values, or waking up on Nov 3 knowing that the Democrats no longer hold a majority in Congress.
Honestly, there is no wrong answer, and I could never blame anyone for choosing the former. But this time, this election, my goal is to see that the sign on the door of the Speaker of the House no longer says "Pelosi", and the sign on the door of the Senate Majority Leader no longer says "Reid".
Because that will mean that Obama can no longer use our Congress to execute the largest transfer of power from the American people to the federal government in the history of our nation, and we can begin to take back our country.
Honestly, there is no wrong answer, and I could never blame anyone for choosing the former. But this time, this election, my goal is to see that the sign on the door of the Speaker of the House no longer says "Pelosi", and the sign on the door of the Senate Majority Leader no longer says "Reid".
Because that will mean that Obama can no longer use our Congress to execute the largest transfer of power from the American people to the federal government in the history of our nation, and we can begin to take back our country.
I assure you that if democrats control Congress for the next 2 years, you will long for things to be as good as they are right now. I cannot imagine what will happen with Obama serving out what will be, most likely, his last 2 years, with a democrat majority Congress - what you have seen in the past year will pale in comparison. Again, I respectfully encourage voting to end the democrat majority and therefore making Obama's final 2 years somewhat of a stalemate. Then in 2012, I will be at the front of the line in the movement to return our nation to what made her strong - government of the people, for the people, by the people.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Concerning how evenly I criticize this President compared to GW Bush
I liked George, I still like George, and I will always consider him among our best leaders. I am comfortable debating anyone on the merits of his leadership and the content of his character. And though I can easily identify a number of things that I did not agree with, I did not elect the President of Russ Hedden. He was a President to all Americans whether they accepted it or not. He defended the freedoms of all Americans, whether they recognized or appreciated it or not. He not only loved this country, but he believed as well in the ideals and freedoms that she represents - and was willing to fight for those. And if that resulted in a war or wars or conflict abroad that you may not agree with, then I say this - better to have fought a war of questionable merit (which btw, was approved by an overwhelming congressional majority) than to have dealt with the aftermath of almost certain future attacks on our homeland. I have no problem with those who disagree with his politics or his style, or even the way he presided over this country, but hating the man is beyond my comprehension. In my opinion, the Presidential term of GW Bush saw not the freedom (which has always been there), but the willingness and the acceptance of publicly destroying a sitting President by those who disagreed with him as well as by our media. I am careful to never attack this President, because I do recognize him as my President and respect the office, but I will point out, at every opportunity and to everyone who will listen each time that another freedom is taken from the people and transferred to the imperial Federal Government at the hands of this, the worst President our country has ever elected.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Nathan Deal for Governor
Nathan Deal is the REALDEAL that Georgia desperately needs as its next Governor.
Leveraging a report consisting of “inconclusive accusations” issued by the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) – an office created by the democratic controlled Congress, Karen Handel continues to promote a “myth” surrounding Nathan Deal’s business, Gainesville Salvage Disposal. Handel’s attempts to taint Deal’s 30-year career of public service to the people of Georgia is a desperate “witch hunt” and the record needs to be set straight. Here is the Rest of the Story.
Deal owns a partnership in a salvage business, Gainesville Salvage Disposal (GSD), and like many other similar businesses did, partnered with the state of Georgia. This NO MONOPOLY, NO CONTRACT arrangement allowed state inspectors to use their facility 2 days a month to conduct vehicle inspections. These inspections were conducted as a means to ensure that rebuilt vehicles that had previously been deemed “totaled” by insurance companies were safe for resale and road use.
GSD, like other similar businesses, provided their facilities to the state inspectors at NO CHARGE. The owner/applicant requesting the inspection would pay an inspection fee for each car inspected. These fees were the only revenue and profit gained from this arrangement with the State.
Following consolidation of departments under Governor Sonny Perdue, this state inspection program was placed under the Revenue Department, headed by Commissioner Bart Graham. The program became an “after thought”, and Graham indicated it may be terminated. Following Graham’s announcement, the employees of the department; the state inspectors, began contacting Graham in an effort to get clarification about the future of the program. A concerned salvage business owner in Douglasville even posted the commissioner’s office phone number on the Internet and encouraged people to contact him directly. Graham did not respond to these requests for clarification.
Nathan Deal was approached by a number of the state inspectors and other salvage business owners requesting his assistance in gaining information from the commissioner regarding the future of the program. Nathan agreed to assist, and his Congressional Chief of Staff arranged the meeting. Since the purpose of this meeting was to inquire about the future of the program and not intended to discuss any kind of business relationship, Nathan’s staff did not view use of his Congressional e-mail account to be a “conflict of interest”.
At the meeting, Commissioner Graham said he was considering privatizing the program – allowing private companies to re-title these “totaled” cars without a state inspection. Nathan expressed concerns to the commissioner regarding the safety of these vehicles under such a privatized program, since these businesses would have a “profit motive” to simply re-title as many cars as possible. The commissioner went so far as to say that “Safety is not my concern”. In a Congressional interview Commissioner Graham stated that safety had never been taken into account under the program. In a Congressional affidavit, the state’s top official in the program stated that his boss, Commissioner Graham, was wrong and safety had always been a major concern and priority of inspectors. This same state official elected to take early retirement because of the direction Commissioner Graham was taking the program.
Despite the efforts of Nathan, state inspectors, and other salvage business owners, Commissioner Graham removed all funding for the program from the state budget. Nathan stopped all efforts to see the program continued once this decision was made.
Here are some key facts to consider about these accusations:
It is difficult to argue that Nathan Deal was “bigfooting” state officials as a Congressman, since the commissioner heeded none of Nathan’s concerns or suggestions.
Under the new privatized program that Commissioner Graham implemented, Nathan and his business partner could have increased revenues significantly by re-titling cars. These revenues would have far exceeded the small amount (less than 10%) of GSD’s revenues generated under the previous inspection program.
Out of concerns about vehicle safety, Nathan and his business partner dissolved their relationship with the program. It should be noted that under Commissioner Graham’s new program, it is estimated that 18,000 rebuilt cars are put back on Georgia roads each year without proper inspections.
Nathan Deal has 30 years of public service as an elected official without any accusations of misconduct. He authored Georgia’s first ethics law while serving as a State Senator. He has a record of honesty and integrity that has been challenged by “circumstantial evidence”, bolstered by political opponents trying to win this race based on false accusations and innuendo.
Nathan Deal is the REALDEAL that Georgia desperately needs as its next Governor.
So a father helps out his daughter and son-in-law by investing in their attempt at a business. The business fails and dear old dad is left with the bill which he must sell his home to pay. Someone please tell me how this makes Mr. Deal any less qualified to lead our state? Who can you better relate to...a caring father trying to help his family or a wealthy lawyer making over a million a year?
I find it almost laughable that on one hand, old Roy wants to paint him as a fat-cat career politician who has gotten rich using his political influence, then on the other hand a bumbling financial idiot who can't manage his bills. Just proof that Roy will do/say whatever he thinks the sheep want to hear. It's a wonder Roy can do anything considering how hard he is working on running as far away as possible from Obama and that "D" at the end of his name.
Leveraging a report consisting of “inconclusive accusations” issued by the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) – an office created by the democratic controlled Congress, Karen Handel continues to promote a “myth” surrounding Nathan Deal’s business, Gainesville Salvage Disposal. Handel’s attempts to taint Deal’s 30-year career of public service to the people of Georgia is a desperate “witch hunt” and the record needs to be set straight. Here is the Rest of the Story.
Deal owns a partnership in a salvage business, Gainesville Salvage Disposal (GSD), and like many other similar businesses did, partnered with the state of Georgia. This NO MONOPOLY, NO CONTRACT arrangement allowed state inspectors to use their facility 2 days a month to conduct vehicle inspections. These inspections were conducted as a means to ensure that rebuilt vehicles that had previously been deemed “totaled” by insurance companies were safe for resale and road use.
GSD, like other similar businesses, provided their facilities to the state inspectors at NO CHARGE. The owner/applicant requesting the inspection would pay an inspection fee for each car inspected. These fees were the only revenue and profit gained from this arrangement with the State.
Following consolidation of departments under Governor Sonny Perdue, this state inspection program was placed under the Revenue Department, headed by Commissioner Bart Graham. The program became an “after thought”, and Graham indicated it may be terminated. Following Graham’s announcement, the employees of the department; the state inspectors, began contacting Graham in an effort to get clarification about the future of the program. A concerned salvage business owner in Douglasville even posted the commissioner’s office phone number on the Internet and encouraged people to contact him directly. Graham did not respond to these requests for clarification.
Nathan Deal was approached by a number of the state inspectors and other salvage business owners requesting his assistance in gaining information from the commissioner regarding the future of the program. Nathan agreed to assist, and his Congressional Chief of Staff arranged the meeting. Since the purpose of this meeting was to inquire about the future of the program and not intended to discuss any kind of business relationship, Nathan’s staff did not view use of his Congressional e-mail account to be a “conflict of interest”.
At the meeting, Commissioner Graham said he was considering privatizing the program – allowing private companies to re-title these “totaled” cars without a state inspection. Nathan expressed concerns to the commissioner regarding the safety of these vehicles under such a privatized program, since these businesses would have a “profit motive” to simply re-title as many cars as possible. The commissioner went so far as to say that “Safety is not my concern”. In a Congressional interview Commissioner Graham stated that safety had never been taken into account under the program. In a Congressional affidavit, the state’s top official in the program stated that his boss, Commissioner Graham, was wrong and safety had always been a major concern and priority of inspectors. This same state official elected to take early retirement because of the direction Commissioner Graham was taking the program.
Despite the efforts of Nathan, state inspectors, and other salvage business owners, Commissioner Graham removed all funding for the program from the state budget. Nathan stopped all efforts to see the program continued once this decision was made.
Here are some key facts to consider about these accusations:
It is difficult to argue that Nathan Deal was “bigfooting” state officials as a Congressman, since the commissioner heeded none of Nathan’s concerns or suggestions.
Under the new privatized program that Commissioner Graham implemented, Nathan and his business partner could have increased revenues significantly by re-titling cars. These revenues would have far exceeded the small amount (less than 10%) of GSD’s revenues generated under the previous inspection program.
Out of concerns about vehicle safety, Nathan and his business partner dissolved their relationship with the program. It should be noted that under Commissioner Graham’s new program, it is estimated that 18,000 rebuilt cars are put back on Georgia roads each year without proper inspections.
Nathan Deal has 30 years of public service as an elected official without any accusations of misconduct. He authored Georgia’s first ethics law while serving as a State Senator. He has a record of honesty and integrity that has been challenged by “circumstantial evidence”, bolstered by political opponents trying to win this race based on false accusations and innuendo.
Nathan Deal is the REALDEAL that Georgia desperately needs as its next Governor.
So a father helps out his daughter and son-in-law by investing in their attempt at a business. The business fails and dear old dad is left with the bill which he must sell his home to pay. Someone please tell me how this makes Mr. Deal any less qualified to lead our state? Who can you better relate to...a caring father trying to help his family or a wealthy lawyer making over a million a year?
I find it almost laughable that on one hand, old Roy wants to paint him as a fat-cat career politician who has gotten rich using his political influence, then on the other hand a bumbling financial idiot who can't manage his bills. Just proof that Roy will do/say whatever he thinks the sheep want to hear. It's a wonder Roy can do anything considering how hard he is working on running as far away as possible from Obama and that "D" at the end of his name.
Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act...
Competition is the only way to make something a)more affordable, or b)better quality. An attempt to force affordability (aside from being completely against the economic system that our country was founded upon) will create a false economy that cannot be sustained. For a nice reference, see the housing industry...anyone want to rethink making houses "affordable" for even those who can't afford them? Also, any attempt to force quality on a marketplace will create non market-driven price increases that result in a loss of affordability (see above...) There are no shortcuts to making healthcare (or anything else) affordable and of better quality.
Thanks to this new piece of crap law, our health insurance isn't just going up at renewal, but now it will go up everytime they are mandated to add another ridiculous benefit or cover another uninsurable or free-loader group. So much for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - just another form of welfare and vote-buying.
I can confidently say that if you believe that this legislation will do a single thing to "protect" anyone (and by "anyone", I mean an actual taxpayer), or make healthcare more affordable, you are an idiot.
Friday, September 10, 2010
To those who always mention McVeigh as an example of "Christian" extremism...
WHAT? Are you seriously comparing McVeigh with the Sept 11 terrorists?
I will respectfully add to the always intelligent words of my wife...
Every so often, someone will, after a Google search and a quick perusal of Wikipedia, run with the "McVeigh was raised Catholic" statement. That may be true, but he never once stated that religion was even a minor motivation. Sept 11 was a planned attack against America and her ideals by radical Muslims who did and continue to profess their hatred for all who do not share their beliefs. What does it matter that Mcveigh was raised Catholic? Hell, so was Madonna. I don't dislike radical muslims because they are radical muslims or because they do not share my love of Jesus Christ. I dislike them because they flew airplanes into 3 buildings in my beloved America. My dislike extends from the the actual 911 terrorists to all radical muslims who condone, celebrate, and continue to plan such attacks.
I challenge anyone to show a single word from McVeigh asserting the fact that he acted for any reason other than to gain revenge against the federal government for the Waco raid, which BTW happened 2 years to the day before the OK City bombing. His stated intention was to cause a revolt against the gov't. From his arrest in 1995 to his execution in 2001, he never once mentioned the Bible.
The day before he was executed, in a letter to a Buffalo newspaper, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife.
Furthermore, his last words consisted of a reading of the poem "Invictus", which ends (and thus his final words were)
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
Those don't sound like the words of a highly religious, and certainly not Christian, man.
I will respectfully add to the always intelligent words of my wife...
Every so often, someone will, after a Google search and a quick perusal of Wikipedia, run with the "McVeigh was raised Catholic" statement. That may be true, but he never once stated that religion was even a minor motivation. Sept 11 was a planned attack against America and her ideals by radical Muslims who did and continue to profess their hatred for all who do not share their beliefs. What does it matter that Mcveigh was raised Catholic? Hell, so was Madonna. I don't dislike radical muslims because they are radical muslims or because they do not share my love of Jesus Christ. I dislike them because they flew airplanes into 3 buildings in my beloved America. My dislike extends from the the actual 911 terrorists to all radical muslims who condone, celebrate, and continue to plan such attacks.
I challenge anyone to show a single word from McVeigh asserting the fact that he acted for any reason other than to gain revenge against the federal government for the Waco raid, which BTW happened 2 years to the day before the OK City bombing. His stated intention was to cause a revolt against the gov't. From his arrest in 1995 to his execution in 2001, he never once mentioned the Bible.
The day before he was executed, in a letter to a Buffalo newspaper, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife.
Furthermore, his last words consisted of a reading of the poem "Invictus", which ends (and thus his final words were)
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
Those don't sound like the words of a highly religious, and certainly not Christian, man.
"Omnipotence at home, impotence abroad."
This should be the title of the chapter in all history books covering the period of this Presidency.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem_print.html
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem_print.html
Another GW hater...
"I know bush jr. created a mess and we are all suffering for it."
If by suffering, you mean the 9 years+ that I laid my head down at night knowing that our nation was safer because of the resolve of both our President and our military, then yes I suffered.
I'm really not up for a "why I love GW and why , despite the media claims otherwise, he was a great President" discussion, but I will say this...Bush loved this country in a way that Obama can not fathom. He was an honest and sincere man who was dealt a hand not dealt to many US Presidents. But instead of blaming the previous administration or hanging out with interns while Al Qaeda planned the attacks, he took responsibility and stood up to the enemy. And he never waivered. GW saw the enemy in the Middle East and chose to fight them there. This President sees the enemy right here in our United States - in the person of anyone with ambition and a desire to live outside of the government's control. As determined as Bush was to defeat Al Qaeda, Obama seems more determined to defeat the free market and the global strength of our Nation.
If by suffering, you mean the 9 years+ that I laid my head down at night knowing that our nation was safer because of the resolve of both our President and our military, then yes I suffered.
I'm really not up for a "why I love GW and why , despite the media claims otherwise, he was a great President" discussion, but I will say this...Bush loved this country in a way that Obama can not fathom. He was an honest and sincere man who was dealt a hand not dealt to many US Presidents. But instead of blaming the previous administration or hanging out with interns while Al Qaeda planned the attacks, he took responsibility and stood up to the enemy. And he never waivered. GW saw the enemy in the Middle East and chose to fight them there. This President sees the enemy right here in our United States - in the person of anyone with ambition and a desire to live outside of the government's control. As determined as Bush was to defeat Al Qaeda, Obama seems more determined to defeat the free market and the global strength of our Nation.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Insurers Pin Rate Hikes on Health Law
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720004575478200948908976.html?mod=WSJ_hps_MIDDLETopStories#printMode
"The White House says insurers are using the law as an excuse to raise rates and predicts that state regulators will block some of the large increases."
Seriously? It is more accurate to say that the White House is using the law as an excuse to invade our private lives and take control of what we as Americans hold most valuable...our health. This isn't healthcare legislation meant to improve the quality or affordability of care. This is socialized health legislation intended to place the burden of healthcare to everyone on the backs of those of us already paying more than our fair share. Additionally, it only solidifies this administration's legacy of overseeing/orchestrating the largest transfer of power from the people to the Federal Government in the history of America.
"The White House says insurers are using the law as an excuse to raise rates and predicts that state regulators will block some of the large increases."
Seriously? It is more accurate to say that the White House is using the law as an excuse to invade our private lives and take control of what we as Americans hold most valuable...our health. This isn't healthcare legislation meant to improve the quality or affordability of care. This is socialized health legislation intended to place the burden of healthcare to everyone on the backs of those of us already paying more than our fair share. Additionally, it only solidifies this administration's legacy of overseeing/orchestrating the largest transfer of power from the people to the Federal Government in the history of America.
Bush vs. Obama: War
GW, no matter his faults, loved this country and sent her men to war for a cause that he believed in with all his heart. I truly believe that and that is ...the history that my kids and anyone else who listens to me will hear. To me, as a President, you have 2 ways to handle an enemy that must be fought: you can take the fight to them and hit your knees every night and pray that you have done the right thing today and that you will make the right decisions tomorrow; or you can ignore it. Sept 11 showed what happens when you ignore it (Pres. Clinton). Every day after Sept 11 shows what happens when you take the fight to the enemy. I just hope that our 20 month apology tour has not given rise to a renewed determination by our enemies in the Middle East.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
