NunoftheAbove

It comes as some consolation to conservatives who watched last year go to hell in a handbasket culminating on November 4th to watch the circus that has played out post election.  While many have watched the obstructionists of the Democratic Party hold George Bush, his appointees, and both house of Congress hostage, it now appears that those same fine folks are now turning not only on their own newly annoited leader but the other members of their party.

Roland Burris, the appointee for the vacated seat of the former junior Senator from Illinois, got no respect today when he showed up to be seated with the rest of the freshman class of 2009.  Without the proper documentation from the Illinois Secretary of State, he was cordially turned on his heel and asked to come back when a non-indicted persona sends him.  Harry Reid, Speaker of the House, has said that he would prefer to see Governor (for the moment) Blagojevich appoint Attorney General Lisa Madigan or state veterans affairs chief Tammy Duckworth over any of the three black men that had been considered.  For the interim, however, the state of Illinois will be short a senator.

And sharing that same distinction, it appears, will be the state of Minnesota in which the legal battle of the election results has kept Al Franken from finding a full time job.  Franken was the narrow loser following the original vote tallies, but the continual recounting has gone miraculously Franken’s way even to the point of receiving 171 more votes from Ramsey County than were actually case on election day.  Norm Coleman, the incumbent and currently loosing Senator, has filed a lawsuit challenging the recount.  Harry Reid, not unexpectedly, had hoped that Coleman would concede because the election cannot be certified until the litigation is settled, and foul-mouthed Franken, like Burris, could not join in with the other incoming Senators today.

While not a subject of election lawsuits or impeachment procedures, Bill Richardson has been the first  Obama appointee casualty.  Although Richardson was hoping for the Secretary of State nod which went to Hillary Clinton, he was chosen by Obama for the cabinet level post of Secretary of Commerce.  On Friday, he withdrew his name amid a flurry of controversy surrounding a federal investigation into how one of his major political contributor obtained contracts from the state of NewMexico.  Richardson denies any wrongdoing in the contract process with CDR and the CEO of the company, David Rubin who contributed $100,000 to a Richardson PAC and to a fund to help pay for Richardson’s expenses at the 2004 Democratic Convention, insists that his company was fully vetted before being awarded over $1.48 million in state fees.

And the subject of vetting is just what Senator Dianne Feinstein is questioning in the most recent Obama team announcement — that of Leon Panetta as CIA Director.  Panetta, who served as Bill Clinton’s chief of staff,  was a surprise to many, and Feinstein, who heads the Intelligence Committee, was incredulous that Obama would nominate someone without previous intelligience experience.

“My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time,” the California senator said.

In the never ending merry-go-round of Washington alliances, however, Feinstein  has been one of the few supporters of the Richard Burris appointment.

All of this discord is running amok within the Democratic Party and without any visible help from the Republicans.  And the case of Caroline Kennedy, the most highly pedigreed yet under qualified Senate nomination has yet to play out.

So to all those who said being in the minority isn’t any fun, just stick around kids — you ain’t seen nothing yet!

http://www.callbackcongress.com/

If the oil crisis is so dire that Democrats want to release oil from the Strategic Reserves, is it not dire enough for them to return to Washington an do something meaningful?

The Democratic answer to high gasoline prices?????  They call it a day and head home.  The Republicans continue to try to get relief for the taxpayers.

This is the Congress under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi not doing the work that the have demanded.

To even casual political observers, the acrimonious atmosphere that has halted any and all movement within the halls of Congress has been perfectly clear.  Old animosities and new political posturing has caused any hope of bipartisanship to be as cold as the tundra of ANWR. The “just say no” attitude of the Democrats may become a boon to the Republicans as the price of oil continues to hit American pocketbooks.  Ed Frank examines the potential affect of the obfuscation by the Dems in a recent National Review.

The Congressional Drilling Showdown

President Bush’s lifting of the executive ban on offshore drilling this week is more than a symbolic gesture. It means the only thing preventing expanded offshore oil-and-gas development is a temporary, one-year congressional ban set to expire on September 30. While Congress has a habit of re-imposing this ban each year, it has never gotten around to writing it into permanent law. This creates a key opportunity for supporters of domestic energy production, including the president, to force a showdown.

It will take an act of Congress and the president’s signature (or a veto override in both the House and Senate) to extend the current ban on new offshore drilling. And since congressional Democrats have essentially shut down the appropriations process — because they know they would lose an amendment vote that would lift the ban — they don’t want to schedule a stand-alone vote that would extend the ban.

A vote for the ban would prove disastrous in the upcoming election with polls showing that 76% of Americans support increased domestic drilling.  So what is a Democratically controlled Congress to do?

Frank predicts that they will use a tactic very often seen utilized in the last few minutes of a very basketball game:  stall.

The word around Washington is that the Democrats plan to pass a long-term continuing resolution or omnibus spending bill that would fund government operations between October 1 and the inauguration of a new president in January. (Obviously, they’re hoping for a President Obama.) You can bet any final spending package will come with an extension of the offshore drilling ban. Democrats will assume that Republicans will go along with a deal to wrap up business and get home to campaign — daring them to oppose it.

And that is just what Republicans should do.  With public sentiment behind the Republicans on the drilling issue and the continuation of bad economic news caused by the high price of oil, the Democrats will be forced to try to defend a very unpopular issue.

This is a political fight the free-market guys actually can win. Americans will hear the message loud and clear: “Congressional Democrats are shutting down government because they stubbornly refuse to increase domestic energy production, keeping us dependent on foreign oil from Hugo Chavez and the Middle East and forcing the price of gasoline unnecessarily high.”

The Democrats have been speaking in contradictions about the cause and solution for the oil crisis.  Nancy Pelosi has called for President Bush to open up the Strategic Oil Reseves while at the same time claim that additional supply is not the answer to the oil crisis.

These conflicting positions underscore just how vulnerable Speaker Pelosi and her allies are on this simple issue of supply and demand. This may be the only potent political issue to favor free-market conservatives this year, and they should take every opportunity to use it to their advantage. President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress should draw a line in the sand and refuse to pass any appropriations bill or final spending package that re-imposes the ban on offshore drilling.

This issue and the Democratic response to it could be one of the few winning points that the Republicans will have this fall going into a national election.  This is an opportunity that the GOP can not afford to squander.

A Hillary Clinton campaign ad asserts that “Health care is a right, not a privilege.” Barack Obama has a plan to cover all Americans. So what can be learned from the plans already in effect in Britain and Massachusetts? The truth isn’t pretty or likely to be converted into a democratic campaign ad any time soon.

The Perils of Socialized Healthcare

The problems with medical coverage in the US are significant and important. The one solution, however, is not to turn it over to the a federal government that will only add more waste and bureaucracy to an already sick industry.

Manipulation is one of the greatest tools in politician’s arsenal. Formulating a sentence exactly right so that the precise meaning can be changed depending on the differing circumstances and future events is always helpful. There is even a term for this reinvention of past inconvenient promises or reality: spin. The level to which HRC can get away with tweaking the truth is yet to be determined.

In an effort to be more crucial players in the nomination process, Florida and Michigan moved up their primaries in violation of the Democratic National Convention 2008 bylaws. Despite warning from the DNC, the states decided to continue with the primaries and were taken to the woodshed by the committee who are now refusing to seat the states’ delegates at the National Convention in Denver, Colorado.

After Florida moved its primary up to Tuesday in an attempt to play a bigger role in choosing the presidential nominees, the Democratic National Committee said it would refuse to seat the state’s delegation at the national convention in late August. But it is expected that the eventual nominee will try to reverse that decision because of Florida’s crucial role in the general election.

Read more here

After the DNC’s decision to ostracize Florida, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards all agreed not to campaign in Michigan and Florida. Edwards and Obama had their names removed from the Michigan primary, but Hillary did not making her the unopposed winner in the January 25th primary. Despite her pledge, Hillary held two private fund raising events on Sunday and plans to campaign appearances after the polls close on Tuesday.

Now she is protesting the earlier decision to strip the non-compliant states of their delegate arguing that it is unfair to punish the voters of those states. With her diminishing polls numbers and upsets in many “safe” states, perhaps her promise to abide by the DNC decision may seem regrettable and even relative. The states of Florida and Michigan hold delegates that she may need to put her over the top at the convention and she may consider taking on her own party hierarchy a risk she is willing to take in her quest to establish a political dynasty.

There is a difference between what is legal and what is ethical. Reneging on a promise may not be a criminal act, but it is a good indicator of the moral compass of the transgressor. This is just another example of ambition being an overriding factor to shallow ethics.

I felt like we spoke from our own hearts…

Now, let’s give America the kind of comeback that New Hampshire has just given me.” Hillary Rodham Clinton, January 8, 2008.

CONSIDER THIS FAIR WARNING, AMERICA…SHE’S BACK!!!!!

I felt like we spoke from our own hearts…

Now, let’s give America the kind of comeback that New Hampshire has just given me.” Hillary Rodham Clinton, January 8, 2008.

CONSIDER THIS FAIR WARNING, AMERICA…SHE’S BACK!!!!!

It appears that Hillary “found religion” after Huckabee’s resounding win in Iowa, and her less than divine showing. And don’t get so mesmerized by the cross images that you fail to note the subliminal messages in the appearance of a gun in her outstretched hand and the scepter clutched in her other. All the symbols of power wrapped into one subjectively illuminating visual.