politicalpartypoop.com

(CNSNews.com) - Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) dismissed Democratic claims of obstructionism and expressed outrage last week over a government report that shows the majority of bills that have passed in the Democrat-controlled Senate of the 110th Congress have done so without any debate or even a vote.

“The U.S. Senate has a nine percent approval rating, because the American people believe that much of our work is done in secret with no debate, no transparency and no accountability,” Coburn told reporters at press conference Wednesday at the Capitol.

“This report shows that the reality is worse than the public’s fears. Instead of encouraging open debate, I’m disappointed that Majority Leader Reid often chooses secrecy or demagoguery,” he added.

Coburn was referring to a non-partisan study released on June 10 by the government’s Congressional Research Service (CRS), which indicates that 855 of the 911 bills passed by the Senate of the 110th Congress have been streamlined by Democratic Party leadership with a procedural tactic known as Unanimous Consent (UC), which requires no debate or even a vote.

With the Senate’s traditional August recess about to start, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has repeatedly accused Republicans, however, and especially Coburn and DeMint, of blocking UC on legislation that he says is critical to the well-being of many Americans.

Coburn and DeMint have a reputation for reading and objecting to bills that would have otherwise passed without debate or objection, Bryan Darling, director of Senate relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation, told CNSNews.com.

READ THE REST

By Mrs. Snoop

Wanted – People who have tiny brains, very flexible back-bones, and no personal integrity, to spend a lot of time talking at each other 6-9 months out of each year, pose for pictures, give interviews, kiss babies, pretend to understand written information that they haven’t even read, and do all they can to feather their own nests and serve their own personal interests, all the while making rules that everyone else – but not them - must follow. Pay, $82,000+ per year plus $200 per day extra for every day you actually show up for work. No experience needed. In fact, the more you know about real life, the less qualified for the job you will be. To apply, simply run a campaign (with the help of special interest groups) and win office to become a Kansas State Senator or Representative.

http://www.kssos.org/forms/communication/legis.pdf

Check this link out. Page 17 lists the salaries and extra payments for Kansas state lawmakers. No wonder the Legislative session lasts longer and longer every year. We give the legislators almost $200 a day EXTRA pay for every day they are in session! That’s over and above their already grossly over-inflated yearly salary over $82,000 per year.

They aren’t earning this salary. Not even close. Most of the real “work” is done by Legislative staff; they draft the bills language (according the wishes of the people who support a particular bill). They keep track of meeting times and following procedures. They come to work on time and don’t leave until after the bosses do. And the vast bulk of them are not paid as much as the politicians who barely understand what is going on around them (if at all). In addition, each year there is an increase in the number of “resolutions” – do nothing statements of policy supported by the members of a particular house (or both). Do we really want to pay people $82,000 per year to re-name highways, tell the US Congress how we feel about illegal immigration, and pass laws that allow them to by-pass the laws that apply to all other branches of government (e.g. state surplus laws, state open government laws, state conflict of interest laws…etc.)? I sure don’t.

But apparently we are so used to being bilked and buffaloed by our lawmakers that the majority of voters don’t care that these well paid Legislators are spending many millions to improve the looks of the place they work and increasing the number and value of the perks they get for having their titles, while the rest of the state budget requests are in limbo and in danger of more cuts.* While many Kansans struggle to keep their lights turned on, the state house is now lit with hand-cut, hand-blown Austrian Crystal globes. While many Kansans are cutting back on the days they eat meat, so they can afford the gas it takes to drive to work, the Legislators have given themselves a break from the state surplus laws, so they can purchase their “old” (2 years) laptops at Goodwill prices. While most Kansas employees must pay for parking if they work in Topeka, the Legislators spent millions to tunnel under the state house and give themselves free parking.

I know I’ve said it before, but I will say it again – anyone who wants to pass laws that apply to other people should only be allowed to do so if and when the laws they pass apply to them too!

Now, I want to add one more thing; anyone who works for the people should never get paid for more for work then they would pay their constituents for their jobs, and no pay at all for anything that does not actually benefit their employer (the public).

I think those yahoos across the street owe me, and every Kansan, a big fat apology for all of our time and money that they waste annually. In addition to an apology, I want a big refund. Now. How about they pay each of us for all the time they waste giving themselves extra perks or doing nothing?

There are currently 40 state senators and 125 state representatives. That is 165 people who run the state and are paid $82,000+ per year ($200 per day extra when they are actually at work). That is $13,530,000 (not counting the $200 per day bonuses). The US Census office ** reports that there are approximately 2,764,075 residents in Kansas, as of 2006. Divide that 2,764, 075 into the $13,530,00 and that means that each year we all (man woman and child) pay about $5 a year to support them.

I could use an extra $5 per year in income. Couldn’t you? I’d have a whole lot more to show for it then I get from my state representatives!

 *http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/dec/04/capitol_renovation_costs_keep_going/   for more information on the capital building renovation project.    

** http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/20000.html

By Mrs. Snoop

“Must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please. Rules, laws - always for other fellow. A murky part of us, something we had before we came down out of trees, and failed to shuck when we stood up. Because not one of those people said: Please pass this so that I won’t be able to so something I know I should stop. Nyet, tovarishchee, was always something they hated to see neighbors doing. Stop them for their own good.”

Robert Heinline The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress (1966).

As part of my job duties, I have been reviewing every single bill that is being proposed by our “esteemed” state law-makers. If ever there was a good way to become deeply disgusted with our system of government, this chore would soon do the trick. And Mr. Heinline’s above quote certainly describes the vast majority of “work” being done by our elected representatives and senators. 

Just to give you a brief glimpse into the types of things that are taking up time, paper, and space in the state-house, I am going to give some links to a few bills you may want to know about. If anything really alarms you, you might even want to let your representative(s) OR THE PRESS hear from you!! Good luck not getting through the bills without getting sick or angry:

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/2008_5037.pdf would give every Kansan a Constitutional right to hunt, fish and trap. The Senate has one just like it.

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/699.pdf Gives the Legislators and their staff an amendment to the usual rules for disposal of surplus property, in this case computers. Just FYI - there are currently a lot of Legislative folks who have already obtained “new” (2 years old) lap-tops for $300 or less. Guess they need this new law to clean up the mess they made by not following the same rules that all other state employees must play by.

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/493.pdf would ban smoking indoors in most public places. http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/250.pdf would ban smoking in a car with kids. http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/544.pdf would require that all cigarettes go out on their own after a few minutes (reduced ignition propensity cigarettes).

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/311.pdf gives Legislator’s each a full time staff member. 

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/46.pdf Restricts possession of some weapons . Quite a long list.

And then there are dozens of “resolutions” - which are nothing more then a wish being expressed - taking up time and paper. For example:

http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN5039.pdf urges the restructuring of
alternative teacher licensure programs in ways that would assist in alleviating the current teacher shortage in the areas of mathematics, science and special education….

http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN1620.pdf requests the Capitol Area Plaza Authority to develop a master plan for improving the appearance and security of the Capitol area and surrounding neighborhoods, in cooperation with the City of Topeka….
http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN5032.pd urges the United States Congress to amend the Flood Control Act of 1944 and Public Law 83-780, relating to the authorized purposes of federal reservoirs in the state of Kansas, relating to Perry, Tuttle Creek, and Milford reservoirs….

http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN5009.pdf pledge the Legislature’s support for the National Bio and Agrodefense Facility (NBAF) and urge various federal agencies, the President, and the Kansas congressional delegation to consider two sites in Kansas as the location for the new federal laboratory….

http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN1616.pdf calls for the creation of a task force to study the design and implementation of an electronic motor vehicle financial security verification system for real time verification of compliance with the financial security requirements of the Kansas Automobile Injury Reparations Act….

http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN6021.pdf urges the State Board of Education to focus more specifically on the reading needs of children with dyslexia….

http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2008/SN1836.pdf Directs the Secretary of Revenue to seek a declaratory judgment in court as to whether the Tax Reform and Relief Act of 1999 and KSA 79-5040 suspended certain procedural requirements relating to the property tax levy

There are tons more of these do-nothing resolutions, if you want to look at them. What a giant waste. Personal letters written by the legislators supporting these resolutions would take less time, have as much impact, and cost the tax payers far less money then is currently being spent to pay legislative staff to draft, make hundreds of copies, and mail these things out to all the many offices receiving copies of bills. 

Just one more pet peeve, Before people start complaining about “the lawyers” who are involved in all of this - please note: The number of Lawyers who are also lawmakers is about 2% most of the time. The people who pass laws (or waste time passing resolutions) are largely business people who are using the power to get themselves (or their friends) some new advantage. 

If you have time and want to see what law-makers are “up-to” this year (or any other) just go to http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-bills/index.do You can type in a key word (or two) if you have a particular concern.

For me, I think there ought to be a rule that no lawmaker may EVER vote on a something unless it will directly impact that person (or a close relative)! That might cut down on the number of proposals always aimed at preventing someone else from doing or having something…. And maybe cut back on the number of laws that specifically exempt lawmakers from their provisions (they want everyone but them to be required to play by rules concerning things like competitive bidding, ethics, and open government laws)!! 

Meanwhile, I really wish some media person would pick up the story about the surplus computers being “scored” by the Legislative branch! 

From Michelle Malkin

The Los Angeles Times digs into Hillary’s finances and uncovers more mysterious Chinatown donors with dilapidated addresses in NYC and jobs unlikely to put them in the position of maxing out campaign contributions. They include dishwashers, waiters, contributors who deny making contributions, and another who “admitted to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” And more:

Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton’s campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown……Of 74 residents of New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx or Brooklyn that The Times called or visited, only 24 could be reached for comment.

Will Hillary accuse the Times reporters of “stalking” now?

Read the rest here

Article Link

Ottawa, Ontario (CNSNews.com) - President Bush is meeting with other world leaders in Canada this week to establish, in part, a “New World Order” that subverts national sovereignty, according to some leading American conservatives who have taken a hard stance against the president over the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP).President Bush is meeting in Quebec Monday and Tuesday with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon to discuss the SPP, which the U.S. government’s Web site describes as a cooperative effort among Canada, the United States, and Mexico to “increase security and enhance prosperity … through greater cooperation and information sharing.”Yet Howard Phillips, chairman of the Conservative Caucus, said at a news conference in Ottawa Monday that Bush is trying to develop a “New World Order” of centralized world government controlled by super-national bureaucracies. Phillips said some of the bureaucracies already exist, including the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and United Nations.

“George Bush and his daddy [former President George H. W. Bush] have both used the term ‘New World Order.’ It was used by Woodrow Wilson. It was used by Adolf Hitler. It was used by a number of people, and the New World Order relates to the desire of many people in the world to submerge national sovereignties to international institution.” (See Video)

Other conservatives who joined Phillips at the news conference included author and columnist Jerome Corsi; John McManus, president of the John Birch Society; Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center; and Bob Park, founder of Veterans for Secure Borders.

The SPP meetings (the fourth since 2005) have afforded little access to the media and no access to the general public except for leaders of some large corporations taking part in the concurrent North American Competitiveness Council. The secrecy has led activists on both sides of the political aisle to develop ideas about what might be happening behind closed doors.

Responding to protests staged in Ottawa Sunday by leftist, anti-government, anti-corporate activists, Phillips acknowledged a difference of approach. But, he said, “if we’re all firing in the same direction, let’s work together.”

Conservative author Jerome Corsi criticized supporters of the SPP for labeling opponents “conspiracy theorists.” (See Video)

“We’re the Internet black helicopter conspiracy theorists?” asked Corsi. “What’s going on over in Montebello behind closed doors? Is that not the real conspiracy?”

“Only to call us names does not answer the arguments we’re making,” he said. “We’re called names because those supporting the Security and Prosperity Partnership wish to keep their secret agenda being advanced in secret, and we’ve ruined the party by exposing it.”

Most recently, U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins called the opposition to the SPP “conspiracy theories.” In an editorial in the Ottawa Citizen Monday, Wilkins said that “while conspiracy theories abound, you can take it to the bank that no one involved in these discussions is interested in, or has ever proposed, a ‘North American Union,’ a ‘North American super highway’ or a ‘North American currency.’”

Wilkins further wrote that “security with prosperity remains the defining vision of the leaders’ meeting” and that “each [nation] will continue to protect its own interests, but it makes sense, as friends and neighbors, to sit down together and see what we might accomplish better together.”

Phillips responded by noting that Wilkins was appointed by Bush and represents an administration that “does not have a reputation for straight talking or accuracy … .” And it’s high time for the SPP organizers to “tear down the wall of silence and let the people see what you are scheming to do,” he said.

Promoting Daddy’s agenda

.

(Bloomberg - Link) — A small South Carolina parts supplier collected about $20.5 million over six years from the Pentagon for fraudulent shipping costs, including $998,798 for sending two 19-cent washers to an Army base in Texas, U.S. officials said.The company also billed and was paid $455,009 to ship three machine screws costing $1.31 each to Marines in Habbaniyah, Iraq, and $293,451 to ship an 89-cent split washer to Patrick Air Force Base in Cape Canaveral, Florida, Pentagon records show.The owners of C&D Distributors in Lexington, South Carolina — twin sisters — exploited a flaw in an automated Defense Department purchasing system: bills for shipping to combat areas or U.S. bases that were labeled “priority” were usually paid automatically, said Cynthia Stroot, a Pentagon investigator.

C&D and two of its officials were barred in December from receiving federal contracts. Today, a federal judge in Columbia, South Carolina, accepted the guilty plea of the company and one sister, Charlene Corley, to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to launder money, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin McDonald said.

Corley, 46, was fined $750,000. She faces a maximum prison sentence of 20 years on each count and will be sentenced soon, McDonald said in a telephone interview from Columbia. Stroot said her sibling died last year.

Corley didn’t immediately return a phone message left on her answering machine at her office in Lexington. Her attorney, Gregory Harris, didn’t immediately return a phone call placed to his office in Columbia.

Found this You Tube clip on Redstate

Sen. Byrd: “Allowing the public to actually see earmark requests…isn’t a good idea”

This is a You Tube clip that should be getting millions of views…

MERRILL, Wis. - A service station that offered discounted gas to senior citizens and people supporting youth sports has been ordered by the state to raise its prices.

Center City BP owner Raj Bhandari has been offering senior citizens a 2 cent per gallon price break and discount cards that let sports boosters pay 3 cents less per gallon.

But the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection says those deals violate Wisconsin’s Unfair Sales Act, which requires stations to sell gas for about 9.2 percent more than the wholesale price.

Bhandari said he received a letter from the state auditor last month saying the state would sue him if he did not raise his prices. The state could penalize him for each discounted gallon he sold, with the fine determined by a judge.

Bhandari, who bought the station a year ago, said he worries customers will think he stopped the discounts because he wants to make more money. About 10 percent of his customers had used the discount cards.

Dale Van Camp said he bought a $50 card to support the local youth hockey program. It would have saved him about $100 per year on gas, he said.

Yet again an anonymous Senator has placed a secret hold on legislation that would increase transparency. This time a secret hold has been placed on a bill, S. 223, that would mandate that Senators file their campaign finance reports electronically. This process would not only make these reports more readily available to the public but would also save money and resources.Yesterday this bill was blocked by an anonymous Senator who placed a secret hold on the bill. Secret holds are so looked down on these days that earlier this year the Senate itself banned the practice, although the bill containing that provision has yet to become law. But until secret holds are banished forever, we need your help in exposing the culprit who is blocking consideration of the electronic filing requirement for Senate campaign finance reports.

We need your help to find out who placed this secret hold! Call your Senators and ask them if they are the one with the secret hold on S. 223. Then report back here in the comments with your findings or contact us using this contact form. Below is a list of Senators, organized by state, and their contact info. If a Senator issues a denial we will indicate that next to their name.

Click here to find the name of your senator and call!

Maybe the era of big government isn’t over, after all.

As Americans finish their annual tax-filing flurry to meet a Tuesday deadline, it is true that tax rates are lower than they were a few years ago. But according to a different yardstick, the federal government’s reach is expanding.

Over half of all Americans – 52.6 percent – now receive significant income from government programs, according to an analysis by Gary Shilling, an economist in Springfield, N.J. That’s up from 49.4 percent in 2000 and far above the 28.3 percent of Americans in 1950. If the trend continues, the percentage could rise within ten years to pass 55 percent, where it stood in 1980 on the eve of President’s Reagan’s move to scale back the size of government.

That two-decade shrink-the-government trend now appears over, if for no other reason than demographics. The aging baby-boomer generation is poised to receive big payments from Social Security and government healthcare programs.

“New Deal programs persist,” despite the Reagan revolution and its aftermath, says James Galbraith, an economist at the University of Texas in Austin. “They persist because they are largely successful and highly popular.”

Mr. Shilling’s analysis found that about 1 in 5 Americans hold a government job or a job reliant on federal spending. A similar number receive Social Security or a government pension. About 19 million others get food stamps, 2 million get subsidized housing, and 5 million get education grants. For all these categories, Mr. Shilling counted dependents as well as the direct recipients of government income.

Many Americans, in surveys, say they don’t like the way their tax money is spent. And a majority now says, in a reversal from a year ago, that their federal income taxes are too high, according to an April Gallup poll.

Read the rest here

Story found on Sister Toldjah

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Congress is keeping Andrews Air Force base plenty busy this year ferrying lawmakers all over the globe at taxpayers’ expense. Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi took his wife, nine Democrats and two Republicans - Reps. Dan Lungren of California and Mike Rogers of Alabama - on a whirlwind tour of the Caribbean last week. After stops in Honduras and Mexico, they stopped in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the delegation stayed at the five-star Caneel Bay resort.

In a separate trip to the Caribbean last week, Rep. Eliot Engel of New York squired his wife and four Democratic members to Grenada and Trinidad.

All told, the military flew at least 13 congressional delegations to various destinations during the Easter recess — at an estimated rate of $10,000 or more per flying hour.

The congressional delegation trips, known as CODELs, are paid for by taxpayers. They are supposed to be directly related to members’ official duties, and House guidelines also stipulate that delegations include members of both parties to qualify for military planes — a requirement that Speaker Nancy Pelosi waived for Engel’s group and two other delegations.

Read the rest,  but why bother, congress will continue to rip-off the American taxpayers because frankly y’all don’t give a shit and they know it.
When Pelosi became speaker and immediately bitched and moaned about wanting a bigger aircraft to take her family around the world the flood gates opened.These corrupt politicians know that the American people are either out of touch or are too stupid to care that they take golfing trips on their dime. Bon voyage!

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has abruptly walked away from her responsibilities with the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee after a report linked her votes to the financial well-being of her husband’s companies, which received billions of dollars worth of military construction contracts she approved.

As reported in Metroactive, an online report from the Silicon Valley, Feinstein’s resignation followed six years of subcommittee work during which time her alleged conflict of interest stemmed from her husband Richard C. Blum’s ownership of Perini Corp. and URS Corp.

Feinstein, chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee, regularly reviewed and accepted contracts from her husband’s companies for not only construction work for military bases, but also addressing “quality of life” issues for the veterans of the United States military services.

“As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design,” wrote Peter Byrne in the report. “She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband’s companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp.”

He suggested perhaps Feinstein resigned “because she could not take the heat generated by metro’s expose of her ethics… Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?”

More here, but a few questions:

I wonder if Code Pink will be camping out in front of her house?
Will anti war groups throw feces at her office windows?
Will anti war protesters be carrying “Fuck Feinstein” signs in front of the Capitol?
Will anti war groups call for an investigation into her pro war money deals?

After all she is responsible for all of the dead soldiers in Iraq is she not?

Feinstein’s family has pocketed by waging global warfare while ignoring the plight of wounded American soldiers, right?

Ah shit I forgot, she’s a DEMOCRAT!

This from Michelle Malkin 

The Club for Growth puts the heat on freshmen Blue Dog Democrats:

* Nancy Boyda (KS-2): Nancy Boyda recently came out in support of the pork-stuffed Iraq supplemental bill, but her campaign website told a different story. Running against Republican Jim Ryun, she wrote “Congress must never waste a single taxpayer dime on needless spending…Wasteful spending has increased exponentially in recent years.” Does Nancy Boyda think $75 million for peanut storage is not a waste of taxpayer dollars?

* Heath Schuler (NC-11): In his race to unseat Republican Representative Charles Taylor, the former football player attacked the incumbent Republican for his “irresponsible” earmarks (Wall Street Journal, 10/11/06) and said that “the people of North Carolina deserve better” (US Fed News Service, 10/11/06). We hope he remembers those words when it comes time to vote on the Iraq spending bill.

* Nick Lampson (TX-22): Nick Lampson campaigned on fiscal responsibility and took a harsh stand against congressional pork on his campaign website: “We have terrible waste in our government that can be addressed right now. We shouldn’t be spending on pork projects like bridges to nowhere in Alaska and a tea pot museum in North Carolina. We must set priorities and stick to them.” By that standard, Rep. Lampson should cast a “no” vote on the Iraq war spending bill.

* Tim Mahoney (FL-22): According to his campaign website, Rep. Tim Mahoney campaigned on wide-sweeping ethics reform that included a platform to “Cut the Pork.” Interestingly, the supplemental bill includes money for citrus growers in Rep. Mahoney’s district. Could that possibly have something to do with Tim Mahoney’s support for the Iraq supplemental bill?

* Harry Mitchell (AZ-5): Rep. Mitchell beat the fiscal responsibility drum on his campaign website: “Unfortunately, fiscal irresponsibility and pork-barrel spending has Washington swimming in red ink . . . In Congress, I will promote fiscal policy that is both responsible and accountable, just as I did at the local level.” Now that his own Democratic leadership is the one doing the drowning, will Rep. Mitchell have the courage to just say no?

Meanwhile, Citizens Against Government Waste puts pressure on Congress to keep the pork out of the emergency spending bill.

Go here site to check out the list of the most egregious and irrelevant special-interest goodies in the Senate supplemental.

(CNSNews.com) - Some conservatives don’t mind that Republicans have been under fire for legal, ethical and moral mishaps, but they are concerned that Democrats may be getting away with the same types of misconduct.

“Corruption is bipartisan, always has been,” Kenneth Boehm, national chairman of the government watchdog National Legal and Policy Center, told Cybercast News Service. “The real issue is there ought to be one way to deal with every offender.”

Last month’s conviction of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, for perjury and obstruction of justice brought back memories of an earlier incident involving a senior aide on national security.

Sandy Berger, the national security advisor for President Bill Clinton, admitted to stealing classified documents and even hid some under a trailer at a construction site near the National Archives.

He copped a plea, and a federal judge ordered him to pay a $50,000 fine, serve two years’ probation, perform 100 hours of community service and submit to a polygraph “lie detector” test. He has yet to have the polygraph.

In comparing the Libby and Berger cases, David Bossie, president of the conservative group Citizens United, argued that the Libby case “came down to the old saw that the cover-up is worse than the alleged crime, whereas the latter [Berger case] amounted to one of the most brazen violations of classified material in our lifetime.”

Read more here

“Whereas Libby is now awaiting sentencing and faces up to three years in prison,” Bossie noted, “Berger is a free man.”

I LOVE THIS CAR!!

 By Andrea Estes, Boston Globe Staff 

Governor Deval Patrick (Democrat Negro/Mass) unabashedly defended his use of a $46,000 Cadillac DeVille for state business, saying yesterday that he abandoned the more customary and less expensive Crown Victoria used by former governor Mitt Romney because “they don’t make it anymore.”

Crown Victorias are still being made, they said, but do not meet security standards mandated by State Police.

A State Police spokesman said the new Crown Victoria’s side airbags interfered with special security equipment that would be installed in the governor’s car. He would not describe the equipment.

As the focus intensified on the new governor’s spending habits, the administration also found itself fielding questions about hiring a $72,000-a-year aide to handle scheduling and interview requests for Patrick’s wife, Diane, a law partner at Ropes & Gray. The new aide, Amy Gorin of Wellesley, and her husband, Norm, led the governor’s fund-raising committee.

Patrick is the first governor since Michael S. Dukakis, who left office in 1990, to hire a staff member for a spouse.

“Mrs. Patrick has a full-time job as a practicing attorney, so staff assistance relative to her official duties as first lady is necessary, ” said Patrick spokesman Kyle Sullivan.

In appearances and interviews yesterday, Patrick gave a series of defenses for his use of the luxury DeVille.

He said that in conjunction with State Police, he made the decision that the $1,166-a-month car was “useful and appropriate,” and that he was too busy with state financial issues to focus too much on which car he used.

Read the rest

Hey if I were some high ranking dude, I would be driving a BMW or Mercedes not a piece of shit Cadillac, I don’t give a shit how broke my state was or how many people bitched about it. There I said it!!

Found on the blog: Political Pit Bull, this is amazing, but I am not surprised. 

After being videotaped accepting a $100,000 cash bribe by the FBI and busted with $90,000 worth of loot in his freezer, Democratic Congressman William Jefferson–currently facing an ongoing federal corruption probe–is being awarded a seat on the House Homeland Security Committee.

The appointment will be announced Friday, according to one aide who requested anonymity because the decision isn’t yet official.

[…]

Other lawmakers were angling for the seat on Homeland Security, which was the last slot available on the panel, according to another Democratic aide.

The committee oversees the Homeland Security Department and its web of agencies designed to protect against terrorism on U.S. soil.

The committee has oversight of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which was widely panned for its response to Hurricane Katrina in Jefferson’s hometown of New Orleans.

As a member of the committee, Jefferson will not have direct oversight of the FBI or the Justice Department.

A former Jefferson aide has already pleaded guilty to corruption in the ongoing investigation, as has a businessman who alleged in his plea agreement that he bribed Jefferson in order to win contracts with African nations.

The most honest, ethical, and open Congress in history indeed!

Update: Congressional Quarterly has confirmed Paul Kane’s scoop linked above.

By Chuck Neubauer and Tom Hamburger, Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times - Link

BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz. — It’s hard to buy undeveloped land in booming northern Arizona for $166 an acre. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid effectively did just that when a longtime friend decided to sell property owned by the employee pension fund that he controlled.

In 2002, the Nevada Democrat paid $10,000 to a pension fund controlled by Clair Haycock, a Las Vegas lubricant dealer and his friend for 50 years. The payment gave the senator full control of a 160-acre parcel in Bullhead City that Reid and the pension fund had jointly owned. Reid’s price for the equivalent of 60 acres of undeveloped desert was less than one-tenth of the assessed value at the time.

If Reid were to sell the property for any of the various estimates of its value, his gain on the $10,000 investment could range from $50,000 to $290,000.

Six months after the deal closed, Reid introduced legislation to address the plight of lubricant dealers who had their supplies disrupted by the decisions of big oil companies. It was an issue the Haycock family brought to Reid’s attention in 1994, according to a source familiar with the events. Reid’s legislation was unsuccessful.

It is a potential violation of congressional ethics for a member to accept anything of value–including a real estate discount–from a person with interests before Congress.

In a statement, Reid’s spokesman Jon Summers said the transaction was not a gift and that the price was due to the property’s history and the fact that only a partial interest was sold. Reid’s action on the lubricant issue was unrelated to the sale and reflected the senator’s interest in fairness for small businesses, Summers said.

Because an employee pension fund owned the land Reid purchased, a below-market sale raises additional questions, labor law experts said. Pension fund trustees have a duty in most cases to sell assets for their market value, the experts said.

“I think this would have been considered a potentially serious issue” at the time, said Ian Lanoff, who led the Labor Department’s pension division during the Carter administration and was provided basic details of the case–though not the identity of the lawmaker. “Theoretically it’s a serious issue for the trustee who sold the property, though practically it may not be” because the plan is now closed and its obligations were met.

John Haycock said workers received all promised benefits from the Haycock Distributing Co. pension plan and were unaffected by the land transaction. Federal records confirm that.

See I know you people don’t care about this shit; United States Senators get sweetheart deals all the time.
But lets not forget, the Democrats are in charge now, I distinctly remember the Democrats saying before the 2006 elections that they were going to clean up Washington and end the culture of corruption in Washington.

Now folks I knew that was a lie, but what I also find interesting is how under reported this story is. Google News has just a handful of references to this story.

Sounds like the culture of corruption is simply being swept under the rug.

Congress limped out of town last month without having done much about the [tag]”culture of corruption”[/tag] that alternately sustains or torments members of Congress, depending on whether they’re in the majority. When Congress returns this week, say Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi and incoming Senate Majority Leader [tag]Harry Reid[/tag], that culture will change.

Voters’ patience is limited, and the new Democratic-controlled [tag]Congress[/tag] needs to move quickly to redefine the relationship between legislators and lobbyists.

In 2006, the Senate and the House took halting steps in the direction of reform, separately approving legislation to require electronic filing of lobbying reports, greater disclosure by government employees-turned-lobbyists, disclosure by members of Congress and senior staff of potentially compromising job negotiations and some restrictions on privately funded travel.

The new Congress should revisit these and other ethics issues. When in doubt, Congress should adopt the most restrictive approach to policing members’ behavior. If the new Congress wants to show it is serious about ethics, it could adopt some rules to prove it:

• No personal gifts or meals for members of Congress paid for by lobbyists. This bright-line rule is preferable to attempts to put a dollar figure on how generous a gift or meal must be to raise concerns about [tag]ethics[/tag].
• No free or reduced-cost travel or lodging provided by businesses or nonprofits that lobby Congress. If a representative or senator flies on a corporate jet, he or she must pay the full charter cost, not merely the cost of a first-class ticket. Even then, registered lobbyists may not be present. Privately funded travel must be approved in advance by the ethics committees.
• A slower “revolving door.” The cooling-off period during which former members and senior staff may not lobby Congress should be a minimum of two years for both the House and the Senate instead of the current one year.
• A new Office of Public Integrity to monitor compliance with lobbying rules and report violations to the Senate and House leadership and ethics committees. The office also would report violations of law to federal prosecutors.
• No congressional pensions for felons. After the resignation of Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-Calif., who pleaded guilty to bribery, House Republicans proposed that future members convicted of serious crimes lose their pensions. Such a rule would be a powerful deterrent to wrongdoing.

Obviously, the mere existence of rules won’t guarantee that members of Congress will act ethically. Still, rules - and, where necessary, criminal laws - establish a baseline for behavior.

Los Angeles Times

This is another example of what El Borak points out when he says there is no difference between Republicans or Democrats.

Is there a single Democrats visitor to this blog who thinks Pelosi and her gang will adopt any of these points to fight corruption in politics?
     

 Recycling today FYI, so you Democrats can remind Pelosi…

This post from Red State 

Remember the pledge for the most [tag]ethical Congress[/tag] ever? Well, not so much now.

Democratic [tag]lobbyists[/tag] are planning to take congressional staff jobs, attracted by the chance to wield real clout.

Sure, sure, the next paragraph talks about the Democrats’ full bore assault against [tag]lobbyists[/tag], once they’ve hired all the lobbyists to help write the legislation. Sure, sure, that’ll punish them.

By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
Washington Post Staff Writer

The Democrats’ takeover of Congress this month has turned official [tag]Washington[/tag] upside down.

Labor and environmental representatives, once also-rans in congressional influence, are meeting frequently with Capitol Hill’s incoming [tag]Democratic leaders[/tag]. Corporations that once boasted about their Republican ties are busily hiring Democratic lobbyists. And industries worried about reprisals from the new Democrats-in-charge, especially the pharmaceutical industry, are sending out woe-is-me memos and hoping their GOP connections will protect them in the crunch.

“Change is in the air,” said Melinda Pierce, a senior lobbyist for the Sierra Club. She had never even been invited to meet with Republican House leaders, but since Election Day, Democrats have welcomed her advice.

Read the rest here

President Bill Clinton signed a letter authorizing former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger’s access to classified documents that later came up missing, according to a newly released investigation report by the National Archives and Records Administration.

The sensitive drafts of the National Security Council’s “Millennium After Action Review” on the Clinton administration’s handling of the al-Qaida terror threats in December 1999 suspiciously disappeared after Berger said he intended to “determine if Executive Privilege needed to be exerted prior to documents being provided to the 9/11 Commission.” Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft testified before the 9-11 commission about the millennium report, urging the panel to ask why the document’s warnings and “blueprint” to thwart al-Qaida’s plans to target the U.S. were ignored by the Clinton administration and not shared with the incoming Bush security staff.

The NARA investigation report said Clinton signed an April 12, 2002, letter designating Berger – and another person whose named is redacted – as “agents on his behalf to review relevant NSC documents regarding Osama Bin Laden/Al Qaeda, Sudan and Presidential correspondence from or to (Sudanese President) Omar Bashir, contained in the Clinton Presidential records.” A subsequent letter from a National Security Council official, May 14, 2002, said Berger repeatedly was briefed that “he was not allowed to remove any documentation from NARA.”

Last year, Berger plea bargained a criminal sentence on the charge of unlawfully removing and retaining classified documents. A judge gave him no prison time, a $50,000 fine, 100 hours of community service and a ban from access to classified material for three years.

READ THE REST

By Walter E. Williams - Human Events 

Not that many complimentary things are said about politicians. When a problem arises, people say, “Government ought to do something.” They seem to have forgotten that it’s the politicians who are running the government. Many think things can be changed by electing different politicians, but I ask: Given the incentives politicians face, why should we expect one politician to differ significantly from another? We should focus less on personalities and more on rules.

The kind of rules we should have are the kind that we’d make if our worst enemy were in charge. My mother created a mini-version of such a rule. Sometimes she would ask either me or my sister to evenly divide the last piece of cake or pie to share between us. More times than not, an argument ensued about the fairness of the division. Those arguments ended with Mom’s rule: Whoever cuts the cake lets the other take the first piece. As if by magic or divine intervention, fairness emerged and arguments ended. No matter who did the cutting, there was an even division.

By creating and enforcing neutral rules, we minimize conflict. Consider one area of ruthless competition — sports. In Super Bowl XL, the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Seattle Seahawks had a lot on the line. Specifically, there’s the $73,000 payment per man, contract enrichment and other benefits to the winners. Despite a bitterly fought contest and all that was at stake, the game ended peacefully and winners and losers were civil to one another.

How is it that players with conflicting interests and reasons for winning can play a game, agree with the outcome and walk away as good sports? It’s a minor miracle of sorts. That “miracle” is that it is far easier to reach agreement about the game’s rules than the game’s outcome. The rules are known and durable, and the referee’s only job is their evenhanded enforcement. Even football teams with losing records would find their long-run interests lie in known, durable and evenhandedly applied rules. They can more adequately devise a winning strategy because predictability is enhanced.

Suppose the game rules were flexible and referees played a role in determining the game’s outcome. In other words, imagine the referees were more interested in what they saw as justice than enforcement of neutral rules. What might one predict about team behavior? Instead of trying to raise team productivity, owners would allocate resources to influence-peddling in the form of lobbying or bribing the referees.

In the case of last year’s Super Bowl, the referees might have argued that since the Pittsburgh Steelers won four previous Super Bowl championships, justice demands that the game be rigged in favor of the Seattle Seahawks, who have never won a Super Bowl. It’s easy to imagine all the conflict that would arise — team owners bringing lawsuits for what they see as biased referee decisions, and games ending in rancor and fights. There would be a reduction in the skill and fitness of all players and a lower overall quality of the sport. After all, if the outcome is determined by how well the team influences the referees, why spend resources recruiting and training superior players? It’s better to use those resources for lobbying and bribes.

We have a set of rules that are known, neutral and intended to be durable. Those rules were created by our founders and embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Those rules have been weakened by a Congress of both parties that picks winners and losers in the game of life. The U.S. Supreme Court, which was intended to be a neutral referee, has forsaken that role and become a participant. All of this means we can expect a future of bitterly fought elections and enhanced conflict.

Via the Blog Ankle Biting Pundits. Where is El Borak!? These sound like fightin’ words… :-)  

Next time some libertarian friend of yours tells you that there isn’t a dime’s worth of different between liberal Democrats and “big government conservative” Republicans, slap him upside the head.

Irwin M. Stelzer has a rundown in the Daily Standard of some of the delightful things the new Democratic Congress will treat them (and us) to. They include: a minimum wage hike; pharmaceutical price controls; tax increases, protectionism, and lots and lots of frivolous investigations into corporate “price gouging.”

But hey, those damned Republicans tried to keep that girl in Florida alive, so screw them, too, right?

El Borak’s Response…

Apparently the Ankle-biters are not paying very close attention to those they wish to slap, because the areas they point the finger at the Dems for are precisely the areas the libertarians are pointing the fingers at them:

First, a minimum wage hike. Of course it’s stupid economics, as are all price controls, and yet I note that it is an this area where the current GOP President has already signed on with the Dems. True, Bush is not “all Republicans” or even most of them, yet the lack of distinction lies not in how high each party wants to set it but the fact they wish to set one at all. I note the complete absence (despite 6 years of GOP rule) of a move to eliminate government mandated wages, so while the GOP may think raising the current arbitrary level is bad - depending upon how high and how fast it’s raised - they are perfectly willing to live with the current badness. It’s like the old joke that if the Dems wanted to burn down the Library of Congress, the GOP would insist that it be phased in over three years.

Second, pharmaceutical price controls. Yes, the Dems want to do that, yet I remind the ankle-biters that the GOP is the party that last implemented price controls. And is not the socialization of pharmaceuticals via Medicare Part D, wherein the government contracts with the company to provide medicines free of charge to the user, any different in result than direct price controls? If it is, the distinction is very minor. Under the Democratic plan, the shareholders get screwed, under the GOP one, it’s the taxpayers.

Third, tax increases. The Ankle Biters studiously ignore the fact that there is no such thing as a free lunch. So the Dems want to pay for their spending binges via taxation (theft) while the GOP pays for theirs via inflation (theft). The real problem is the spending, not how it’s paid for.

Fourth, protectionism: Yes, the Dems are protectionist and that ultimately hurts consumers to the benefit of government and politically-connected companies. Yet the GOP does the same thing when they need votes. I hope the move backfires on the Dems as it did on Bush, but let’s not pretend the Republicans are paragons of free trade. If one wants free trade, all one has to do - all one can truly do - is remove one’s own tariffs. I note that we have yet to do so.

And last but not least, frivolous investigations. Like this one, I suppose.

In each case, the Democrats are wrong, but the GOP is a party that does the same things, just to a lesser extent. If the argument is an argument over extent - as it appears to be for the ankle biters - then the GOP is quite distinct from the Dems. But if the argument is over whether we ought to have price controls, investigations, protectionism, wages mandated by law, or trillions in government spending in the first place, then there is no significant difference between the parties, all the yapping of the ankle-biters notwithstanding.

 Found on the blog Protein Wisdom

Via Terry Hastings comes this, from Opinion Journal:

Wilson Goes Quiet

“Former ambassador [tagJoseph[/tag] Wilson asked a federal judge Wednesday not to force him to testify in the CIA leak case and accused former White House aide I. [tag]Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby[/tag] of trying to harass him on the witness stand,” the Associated Press reports from Washington:

“Mr. Libby should not be permitted to compel Mr. Wilson’s testimony at trial either for the purpose of harassing Mr. Wilson or to gain an advantage in the civil case,” Wilson’s attorneys wrote

.Hmm, for a guy who burst onto the scene three years ago as the most garrulous figure since Ted Turner, and who then wrote a book called “The Politics of Truth,” Wilson is awfully averse to testifying under oath.

Here is some of the ballad:

Oh, Yellowcake Joe, Yellowcake Joe, went to Niger don’t you know?
Yellowcake Joe, Yellowcake Joe went there on a mission.

There once was a great ambassador by the name of Yellowcake Joe,
A kind of travelling minstrel in a one-man mistrel show.
His wife was a secret agent who was secretive and sly,
The vice-pres wants someone to go, my husband is the guy.

He knows the folks in Niger land who know the story well,
If Saddam’s sought uranium then surely Joe they’ll tell.
He knows the local customs and he drinks a lot of tea,
So tell Dick Cheney that he’ll go, I ask on bended knee.

Oh, Yellowcake Joe, Yellowcake Joe, went to Niger, don’t you know?
Yellowcake Joe, Yellowcake Joe, did a little fishin’.

The minstrel went to Niger land and sat in the cafe,
And interviewed the folks at hand and chatted all the day.
He came back to the USA and gave us his report,
That Saddam probably had conspired the substance to import.

Read the rest here, good stuff

Businessman charges ex-secretary of state used middleman to ’sell out’ Israel for profit  

RAMAT HASHARON, Israel – The law firm at which former Secretary of State James Baker is a senior partner used an Israeli middleman to bypass U.S. sanctions on Iraq and push through a multimillion-dollar collection effort involving the regime of Saddam Hussein, according to a businessman here who said he mediated the deal.

Nir Gouaz, president of Caesar Global Securities in Israel, told WND that Baker’s firm, Houston-based Baker Botts, made about $30 million collecting funds owed to a South Korean company by the Iraqi government at the peak of American sanctions imposed against Baghdad.

He claimed Baker was directly involved in the deal.

Gouaz told WND he decided to come forward with details of the alleged transactions after the release earlier this month of a report by the Iraq Study Group, a commission headed by Baker that recommended an eventual U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and dialogue with Iran and Syria.

Read the rest here