Listen to this interview with Donald Trump on Gretta Van Susteren. Does this sound like a man who is NOT running for office?
Trump: Everything Obama Does Is a 'Campaign Speech' - Interviews - On the Record - FoxNews.com: "Look, we spent $1.3 trillion in Iraq. We should at least reimburse ourselves. I would say much more than that, but somebody else would be more modest. We get nothing. What do we get out of it? Tell you what we get out of it. Iran will take over the minute we leave. As sure as you're standing there, Iran will take over the Iraqi oil fields and Iraq as soon as we leave."
'via Blog this'
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
Lowman Henry on the State Legislature
A Tree Falls in Penn's Woods
Perzel guilty plea shows no one is above the law
By: Lowman S. Henry
The Lincoln Institute's most recent Keystone Business Climate Survey found just 16% of employers in Penn's Woods held a positive view of the state House of Representatives, only 14% thought kindly of the job being done by the state Senate. Those numbers are reflective of the low esteem in which the public at-large views the commonwealth's legislative branch.
Eight years of missing budget deadlines, a growing fiscal crisis and rampant corruption have soured citizens on state government. To its credit, the new General Assembly that took office earlier this year has balanced the budget - and done so on time. Further, the state Attorney General's office has made significant and commendable progress in cleaning up legislative corruption.
Complete validation of former Attorney General, now Governor Tom Corbett's Bonusgate and capitol corruption scandal probes came with the plea bargain entered into by former House Speaker John Perzel. Perzel was, at one time, the 800-pound gorilla of state politics. He ruled the House with an iron hand and ruthlessly destroyed, or attempted to destroy, anyone who opposed him.
He is now headed for federal prison.
Perzel and his minions have now admitted guilt in spending millions of taxpayer dollars on projects whose main purpose was to elect enough subservient Republicans to the legislature to retain a majority and preserve Perzel's power. He didn't do it alone, some 25 individuals have been charged with corruption and to date 15 have either been convicted or copped a plea. The other 10 - including former House Speaker Bill DeWeese, a Democrat - await trail.
Lord Acton said: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." That saying, first uttered in 1887 is as true today as it was then. John Perzel arrived from Philadelphia as the unlikely winner of his House seat in 1979. He would go on to serve 16 terms before losing his seat last November in what was otherwise a tidal wave election year for Republicans. Perzel rose from humble beginnings; he worked as a maître d' for a Philadelphia restaurant. He quickly lost touch with the average voter, once complaining that tattoo artists made more money than state representatives. Perzel last surfaced during the recent state budget debate, arguing for higher taxes at a time when his party was firmly against adding to the tax burden of families and businesses in the midst of an economic recession.
Perzel's story is a stunning tale of a fall from power. It should serve as a lesson to those who are in the General Assembly today. Despite the recent scandals there remain in power those who feel they are entitled to their jobs. They believe they are there to be courted, rather than to serve. While such legislators and senators are not guilty of legal corruption, they have indeed corrupted and perverted the governmental process having fallen victim to Lord Acton's admonition.
It is, however, important not to paint all members of the General Assembly with the same brush. The positive effect of Bonusgate and the capitol corruption scandals has been to bring about a house cleaning of sorts. Numerous incumbent Republicans have been defeated in primaries, and long-serving Democrats washed out in last year's wave election that favored the GOP. Most of these new lawmakers are keenly aware of the circumstances which brought them to Harrisburg and are pushing for change. But, given the leadership driven top-down nature of Pennsylvania's legislative bodies, change will be slow in coming.
But come it must. For starters, Pennsylvania should return to the part-time citizen legislature envisioned by our Founding Fathers. Forget about arguments that today's complex society requires a full-time legislature. It does not. Texas, a much larger - and more economically successful state - operates with a part-time legislature. To our south, Maryland has legislative sessions that last but 90 days each year. Truth be told, Pennsylvania's legislative sessions occupy about the same amount of time, but are spread out with two or three day work weeks and lengthy recesses. For example, the General Assembly recessed the end of June and is not scheduled to return to session until late September, almost a three month break.
The fall of John Perzel and convictions in the corruption scandals are but a necessary first step in cleaning up the mess in Harrisburg. As in the aftermath of a flood, the Attorney General's office has mopped up, but the task of rebuilding and reforming lies ahead.
(Lowman S. Henry is Chairman & CEO of the Lincoln Institute and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal. His e-mail address is lhenry@lincolninstitute.org.)
Permission to reprint is granted provided author and affiliation are cited.
Perzel guilty plea shows no one is above the law
By: Lowman S. Henry
The Lincoln Institute's most recent Keystone Business Climate Survey found just 16% of employers in Penn's Woods held a positive view of the state House of Representatives, only 14% thought kindly of the job being done by the state Senate. Those numbers are reflective of the low esteem in which the public at-large views the commonwealth's legislative branch.
Eight years of missing budget deadlines, a growing fiscal crisis and rampant corruption have soured citizens on state government. To its credit, the new General Assembly that took office earlier this year has balanced the budget - and done so on time. Further, the state Attorney General's office has made significant and commendable progress in cleaning up legislative corruption.
Complete validation of former Attorney General, now Governor Tom Corbett's Bonusgate and capitol corruption scandal probes came with the plea bargain entered into by former House Speaker John Perzel. Perzel was, at one time, the 800-pound gorilla of state politics. He ruled the House with an iron hand and ruthlessly destroyed, or attempted to destroy, anyone who opposed him.
He is now headed for federal prison.
Perzel and his minions have now admitted guilt in spending millions of taxpayer dollars on projects whose main purpose was to elect enough subservient Republicans to the legislature to retain a majority and preserve Perzel's power. He didn't do it alone, some 25 individuals have been charged with corruption and to date 15 have either been convicted or copped a plea. The other 10 - including former House Speaker Bill DeWeese, a Democrat - await trail.
Lord Acton said: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." That saying, first uttered in 1887 is as true today as it was then. John Perzel arrived from Philadelphia as the unlikely winner of his House seat in 1979. He would go on to serve 16 terms before losing his seat last November in what was otherwise a tidal wave election year for Republicans. Perzel rose from humble beginnings; he worked as a maître d' for a Philadelphia restaurant. He quickly lost touch with the average voter, once complaining that tattoo artists made more money than state representatives. Perzel last surfaced during the recent state budget debate, arguing for higher taxes at a time when his party was firmly against adding to the tax burden of families and businesses in the midst of an economic recession.
Perzel's story is a stunning tale of a fall from power. It should serve as a lesson to those who are in the General Assembly today. Despite the recent scandals there remain in power those who feel they are entitled to their jobs. They believe they are there to be courted, rather than to serve. While such legislators and senators are not guilty of legal corruption, they have indeed corrupted and perverted the governmental process having fallen victim to Lord Acton's admonition.
It is, however, important not to paint all members of the General Assembly with the same brush. The positive effect of Bonusgate and the capitol corruption scandals has been to bring about a house cleaning of sorts. Numerous incumbent Republicans have been defeated in primaries, and long-serving Democrats washed out in last year's wave election that favored the GOP. Most of these new lawmakers are keenly aware of the circumstances which brought them to Harrisburg and are pushing for change. But, given the leadership driven top-down nature of Pennsylvania's legislative bodies, change will be slow in coming.
But come it must. For starters, Pennsylvania should return to the part-time citizen legislature envisioned by our Founding Fathers. Forget about arguments that today's complex society requires a full-time legislature. It does not. Texas, a much larger - and more economically successful state - operates with a part-time legislature. To our south, Maryland has legislative sessions that last but 90 days each year. Truth be told, Pennsylvania's legislative sessions occupy about the same amount of time, but are spread out with two or three day work weeks and lengthy recesses. For example, the General Assembly recessed the end of June and is not scheduled to return to session until late September, almost a three month break.
The fall of John Perzel and convictions in the corruption scandals are but a necessary first step in cleaning up the mess in Harrisburg. As in the aftermath of a flood, the Attorney General's office has mopped up, but the task of rebuilding and reforming lies ahead.
(Lowman S. Henry is Chairman & CEO of the Lincoln Institute and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal. His e-mail address is lhenry@lincolninstitute.org.)
Permission to reprint is granted provided author and affiliation are cited.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Sen. Toomey To Host Debt, Jobs and Economy Town Hall In Elk County | Pat Toomey | Senator for Pennsylvania
"WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Friday, Sept. 2 at 2:30 p.m., Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) will host a town hall in Kersey, Pa., focused on the federal debt, the economy and job creation. The town hall is open to the public and the media.
What: Debt, economy and jobs town hall
Who: U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey
When: Friday, Sept. 2, 2011
Town hall: 2:30 p.m.
Where: The Red Fern
421 Old Kersey Road
Kersey, PA 15846"
'via Blog this' Visit:
Sen. Toomey To Host Debt, Jobs and Economy Town Hall In Elk County | Pat Toomey | Senator for Pennsylvania:
What: Debt, economy and jobs town hall
Who: U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey
When: Friday, Sept. 2, 2011
Town hall: 2:30 p.m.
Where: The Red Fern
421 Old Kersey Road
Kersey, PA 15846"
'via Blog this' Visit:
Sen. Toomey To Host Debt, Jobs and Economy Town Hall In Elk County | Pat Toomey | Senator for Pennsylvania:
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
The "Not Mitt" Primary by Lowman S. Henry
The "Not Mitt" Primary
Can a newcomer win the GOP Presidential nomination?
By: Lowman S. Henry
In addition to their growing ideological divide, the two major political parties in the United States have established a completely different approach to selecting their nominees for the Presidency. The Republican nomination tends to go to a well-known, although not necessarily beloved, candidate who has run previously for national office. Democrats get swept up in the moment frequently picking a newcomer who embodies the prevailing mood of the day.
From an electoral viewpoint this has generally worked well for the Democrats. The notable misfire was the nomination of the anti-Vietnam War candidate George McGovern in 1972 who was routed by Richard Nixon in the general election. But starting with Jimmy Carter in 1976, continuing with Bill Clinton in 1992 and most recently Barack Obama in 2008, candidates rising from obscurity have resulted in Democratic electoral victories.
Republicans have rewarded persistence - but with mixed results. Ronald Reagan prevailed in 1980 after having lost to Gerald Ford in 1976; George H.W. Bush won in 1988 after having run in 1980 and then serving as Reagan's Vice President. George W. Bush won in 2000 without having previously lost, but had the built-in advantage of the Bush family name and network in claiming the nomination.
The GOP's habit of selecting a previous year's also-ran has produced some notable flops. U.S. Senator Robert Dole had lost to George H.W. Bush in 1988, but was rewarded with the party's nomination in 1996 only to lose to Bill Clinton. In 2008, the 2000 primary runner-up U.S. Senator John McCain became the Republican standard-bearer, and was run down by Barack Obama.
This brings us to the upcoming 2012 race and once again the front-runner is a losing candidate from a previous campaign cycle. The GOP race has begun to take shape over the past few months with several potential heavy weight candidates declining to run, and others making their candidacies official. Through all this former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has emerged as the front-runner. He consistently leads in national polls. More importantly, his fundraising has left the other candidates in the dust. Romney is expected to report having raked in close to $20 million in the second quarter, about four times more than any other candidate is expected to have raised.
Despite his financial showing and strong polling numbers there is unease about a Mitt Romney candidacy that permeates the party. Driven in large measure by Romney's Massachusetts health care plan, which was disturbingly similar to the reviled Obamacare, many Republicans are looking for a fresh face.
This has created a second tier of candidacies vying in the "not Mitt" primary. In recent weeks Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, a favorite of the tea party movement, has emerged as the leading challenger to Romney moving into a statistical tie with him in the crucial first caucus state of Iowa. Georgia businessman and talk show host Herman Cain, another grassroots darling, is also showing viability.
But evidence of the degree to which the race remains unsettled is the continued pining for additional candidates to enter the race. A delegation of power brokers from Iowa paid a visit to Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey in an effort to entice him to run. He declined. Currently, the most talked about non-candidate is Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is by all accounts seriously considering jumping into the fray.
If Perry decides to run the dynamics of the contest would dramatically change. Although he would start out behind, the sitting Texas governor would quickly be able to compete with Romney financially. Perry's persona and policies also appeal to the conservative base of the party, giving him a shot at winning over those currently supporting Bachmann and Cain.
Perry has the potential to quickly emerge as the leading "not Mitt" candidate. The big question then would be: can Perry or any fresh face convince the broad spectrum of Republican voters to abandon their historic tendency to nominate the known quantity and take a chance on a national newcomer?
In 2010, as the tea party movement swept the nation, we learned that the old rules of politics no longer necessarily apply. As the economy continues to sputter and foreign wars drag on voters are going to be looking for fresh faces and new ideas.
Thus the stage is set for historic and current trends to collide. Will the GOP again nominate an also-ran, or will it be more like the Democrats and go with a fresh face that captures the national mood. The answer to that question will ultimately determine whether Mitt Romney or the "not Mitt" ends up as the 2012 Republican nominee for President of the United States.
(Lowman S. Henry is Chairman & CEO of the Lincoln Institute and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal. His email address is lhenry@lincolninstitute.org.)
Permission to reprint is granted provided author and affiliation are cited.
Can a newcomer win the GOP Presidential nomination?
By: Lowman S. Henry
In addition to their growing ideological divide, the two major political parties in the United States have established a completely different approach to selecting their nominees for the Presidency. The Republican nomination tends to go to a well-known, although not necessarily beloved, candidate who has run previously for national office. Democrats get swept up in the moment frequently picking a newcomer who embodies the prevailing mood of the day.
From an electoral viewpoint this has generally worked well for the Democrats. The notable misfire was the nomination of the anti-Vietnam War candidate George McGovern in 1972 who was routed by Richard Nixon in the general election. But starting with Jimmy Carter in 1976, continuing with Bill Clinton in 1992 and most recently Barack Obama in 2008, candidates rising from obscurity have resulted in Democratic electoral victories.
Republicans have rewarded persistence - but with mixed results. Ronald Reagan prevailed in 1980 after having lost to Gerald Ford in 1976; George H.W. Bush won in 1988 after having run in 1980 and then serving as Reagan's Vice President. George W. Bush won in 2000 without having previously lost, but had the built-in advantage of the Bush family name and network in claiming the nomination.
The GOP's habit of selecting a previous year's also-ran has produced some notable flops. U.S. Senator Robert Dole had lost to George H.W. Bush in 1988, but was rewarded with the party's nomination in 1996 only to lose to Bill Clinton. In 2008, the 2000 primary runner-up U.S. Senator John McCain became the Republican standard-bearer, and was run down by Barack Obama.
This brings us to the upcoming 2012 race and once again the front-runner is a losing candidate from a previous campaign cycle. The GOP race has begun to take shape over the past few months with several potential heavy weight candidates declining to run, and others making their candidacies official. Through all this former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has emerged as the front-runner. He consistently leads in national polls. More importantly, his fundraising has left the other candidates in the dust. Romney is expected to report having raked in close to $20 million in the second quarter, about four times more than any other candidate is expected to have raised.
Despite his financial showing and strong polling numbers there is unease about a Mitt Romney candidacy that permeates the party. Driven in large measure by Romney's Massachusetts health care plan, which was disturbingly similar to the reviled Obamacare, many Republicans are looking for a fresh face.
This has created a second tier of candidacies vying in the "not Mitt" primary. In recent weeks Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, a favorite of the tea party movement, has emerged as the leading challenger to Romney moving into a statistical tie with him in the crucial first caucus state of Iowa. Georgia businessman and talk show host Herman Cain, another grassroots darling, is also showing viability.
But evidence of the degree to which the race remains unsettled is the continued pining for additional candidates to enter the race. A delegation of power brokers from Iowa paid a visit to Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey in an effort to entice him to run. He declined. Currently, the most talked about non-candidate is Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is by all accounts seriously considering jumping into the fray.
If Perry decides to run the dynamics of the contest would dramatically change. Although he would start out behind, the sitting Texas governor would quickly be able to compete with Romney financially. Perry's persona and policies also appeal to the conservative base of the party, giving him a shot at winning over those currently supporting Bachmann and Cain.
Perry has the potential to quickly emerge as the leading "not Mitt" candidate. The big question then would be: can Perry or any fresh face convince the broad spectrum of Republican voters to abandon their historic tendency to nominate the known quantity and take a chance on a national newcomer?
In 2010, as the tea party movement swept the nation, we learned that the old rules of politics no longer necessarily apply. As the economy continues to sputter and foreign wars drag on voters are going to be looking for fresh faces and new ideas.
Thus the stage is set for historic and current trends to collide. Will the GOP again nominate an also-ran, or will it be more like the Democrats and go with a fresh face that captures the national mood. The answer to that question will ultimately determine whether Mitt Romney or the "not Mitt" ends up as the 2012 Republican nominee for President of the United States.
(Lowman S. Henry is Chairman & CEO of the Lincoln Institute and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal. His email address is lhenry@lincolninstitute.org.)
Permission to reprint is granted provided author and affiliation are cited.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Commonwealth Foundation - Education Failure Costs PA Taxpayers and Businesses
"According to the National Center for Education Statistics, nearly 45 percent of community college students and 27 percent of four-year college students have taken at least one remedial course."Commonwealth Foundation - Education Failure Costs PA Taxpayers and Businesses:
Friday, June 10, 2011
A Press Release from James Bopp
PRESS RELEASE
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Contact: James Bopp, Jr.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
9th Circuit: Parties May Contribute To Candidates; No Limit for IE Contributions
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today issued a ruling vindicating the political speech and association rights of corporations and political parties. The ruling affirmed a lower court’s decision to enjoin certain San Diego campaign finance laws. This decision upheld the right of political parties to make contributions to their candidates, and the right of individuals, associations, and corporations to make unlimited contributions to committees making independent expenditures.
James Bopp, Jr., counsel for the plaintiffs, commented, “One of the important purposes of political parties is to elect their candidates to office. It is absurd to forbid them from giving money to support their candidates. The Ninth Circuit understood that the First Amendment gives citizens the right to band together in political parties, and that political parties have a First Amendment right to financially support their candidates.” About the independent expenditure ruling, Mr. Bopp said, “The Supreme Court has ruled that there is no permissible reason for the government to limit independent expenditures themselves. This is true even when the expenditures are made by corporations. It naturally follows that if the expenditures cannot be limited, then money to groups making expenditures cannot be limited either, even when the money comes from associations and corporations.”
The Ninth Circuit’s decision also ruled that San Diego’s laws banning direct corporate contributions to candidates, and preventing candidates from accepting contributions more than a year before the primary, are likely constitutional. Mr. Bopp disagreed with the Court, explaining, “Both these bans are bans on political speech and association. And the Supreme Court has said that while limits may be acceptable, bans are not.” Mr. Bopp said that these rulings may yet be overturned by subsequent litigation in this case.
The case is known as Thalheimer v. City of San Diego. The Ninth Circuit’s decision is availably athttp://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/files/2011/06/Dkt-76-1-OPINION.pdf. The other documents from this case are athttp://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/06-09-2011/486/.
James Bopp, Jr. has a national federal and state election law practice. He is an attorney with Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom and General Counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech. He is also a former Co-Chairman of the Election Law Subcommittee of the Federalist Society.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Contact: James Bopp, Jr.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
9th Circuit: Parties May Contribute To Candidates; No Limit for IE Contributions
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today issued a ruling vindicating the political speech and association rights of corporations and political parties. The ruling affirmed a lower court’s decision to enjoin certain San Diego campaign finance laws. This decision upheld the right of political parties to make contributions to their candidates, and the right of individuals, associations, and corporations to make unlimited contributions to committees making independent expenditures.
James Bopp, Jr., counsel for the plaintiffs, commented, “One of the important purposes of political parties is to elect their candidates to office. It is absurd to forbid them from giving money to support their candidates. The Ninth Circuit understood that the First Amendment gives citizens the right to band together in political parties, and that political parties have a First Amendment right to financially support their candidates.” About the independent expenditure ruling, Mr. Bopp said, “The Supreme Court has ruled that there is no permissible reason for the government to limit independent expenditures themselves. This is true even when the expenditures are made by corporations. It naturally follows that if the expenditures cannot be limited, then money to groups making expenditures cannot be limited either, even when the money comes from associations and corporations.”
The Ninth Circuit’s decision also ruled that San Diego’s laws banning direct corporate contributions to candidates, and preventing candidates from accepting contributions more than a year before the primary, are likely constitutional. Mr. Bopp disagreed with the Court, explaining, “Both these bans are bans on political speech and association. And the Supreme Court has said that while limits may be acceptable, bans are not.” Mr. Bopp said that these rulings may yet be overturned by subsequent litigation in this case.
The case is known as Thalheimer v. City of San Diego. The Ninth Circuit’s decision is availably athttp://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/files/2011/06/Dkt-76-1-OPINION.pdf. The other documents from this case are athttp://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/06-09-2011/486/.
James Bopp, Jr. has a national federal and state election law practice. He is an attorney with Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom and General Counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech. He is also a former Co-Chairman of the Election Law Subcommittee of the Federalist Society.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Commonwealth Foundation - SB1 for Smarties
"Will SB1 force school districts to raise taxes or reduce funding for local schools? NO. In fact, school districts should be more capable of lowering their taxes. Here's why: The Harrisburg School District spends approximately $17,675 per student. Under SB1, a low-income student trapped in a chronically underperforming school would be eligible to utilize a state-funded voucher of approximately $8,828 to attend an alternative public or private school. Where does the remaining $8,847 go? It stays in the district effectively increasing the amount of money per student for t" Visit:Commonwealth Foundation - SB1 for Smarties:
Congressman Barletts - Standing with Israel
Congressman Lou Barletta in his May 25th e-mail message wrote:
"Yesterday, I had the privilege of being part of a Joint Session of Congress to hear Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speak on the challenges facing his country and the important partnership between our two democratic nations. I’m proud to stand with Israel in their struggle for democracy, freedom, and security."
Congressman Barletta quotes Prime Minister Netanyahu,
“Israel has no better friend than America. And America has no better friend than Israel. We stand together to defend democracy. We stand together to advance peace. We stand together to fight terrorism.”
Congressman Barletta wrote he was "upset to hear President Obama advocating for a smaller Israel" in his speech at the State Department. "Israelis deserve security... Israel has an absolute right to exist."
"Yesterday, I had the privilege of being part of a Joint Session of Congress to hear Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speak on the challenges facing his country and the important partnership between our two democratic nations. I’m proud to stand with Israel in their struggle for democracy, freedom, and security."
Congressman Barletta quotes Prime Minister Netanyahu,
“Israel has no better friend than America. And America has no better friend than Israel. We stand together to defend democracy. We stand together to advance peace. We stand together to fight terrorism.”
Congressman Barletta wrote he was "upset to hear President Obama advocating for a smaller Israel" in his speech at the State Department. "Israelis deserve security... Israel has an absolute right to exist."
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Barletta back in immigration fight - News - Standard Speaker
"The newly elected congressman and former mayor of Hazleton is drafting his first piece of legislation, which will crack down on so-called 'sanctuary cities,' or places where elected officials choose not to enforce immigration policy.
Barletta said he is also creating the new 112th Congress Immigration Reform Caucus, which will closely examine American immigration policy" Visit:
Barletta back in immigration fight - News - Standard Speaker:
Barletta said he is also creating the new 112th Congress Immigration Reform Caucus, which will closely examine American immigration policy" Visit:
Barletta back in immigration fight - News - Standard Speaker:
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Time for the U.S. to Get Out of NATO | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary
"We got dragged into Libya by our NATO allies, who aren't competent to run a proper airwar against a crumbling Third-World autocracy, and are now complaining that we're not doing more to bail them out." Visit:
Time for the U.S. to Get Out of NATO | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary:
Time for the U.S. to Get Out of NATO | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary:
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Just for fun:
Top 10 Rejected Obama Mission Names
Apparently the White House tossed out a number of perfectly good names before arriving at "Operation Odyssey Dawn":
10.Operation Nine Months In The Senate Didn't Prepare Me For This
9. Operation Organizing for Libya
8. Operation Double Standard
7. Operation FINE! I'll Do Something
6. Operation Enduring Narcissism
5. Operation So That's What the Red Button Does
4. Operation France Backed Me Into A Corner
3. Operation Start Without Me
2. Operation Unlike Bush Wars This One Is Justified Because Hey Look A Squirrel
1. Operation Aimless Fury
How about Operation Impeach Obama?
Apparently the White House tossed out a number of perfectly good names before arriving at "Operation Odyssey Dawn":
10.Operation Nine Months In The Senate Didn't Prepare Me For This
9. Operation Organizing for Libya
8. Operation Double Standard
7. Operation FINE! I'll Do Something
6. Operation Enduring Narcissism
5. Operation So That's What the Red Button Does
4. Operation France Backed Me Into A Corner
3. Operation Start Without Me
2. Operation Unlike Bush Wars This One Is Justified Because Hey Look A Squirrel
1. Operation Aimless Fury
How about Operation Impeach Obama?
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Port Arthur Housing Authority violated competitive bidding, other stimulus rules, must return $725K federal stimulus grant
Port Arthur Housing Authority violated competitive bidding, other stimulus rules, must return $725K federal stimulus grant: "By Mark Lisheron
The housing authority in Port Arthur will lose the balance of a $725,546 federal stimulus grant for its mishandling of two low-income development projects.
In a report issued late last week, Gerald R. Kirkland, regional inspector general for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in Fort Worth, is asking that the Housing Authority return $67,640 the authority already spent on the project." Don't hold your breath.
The housing authority in Port Arthur will lose the balance of a $725,546 federal stimulus grant for its mishandling of two low-income development projects.
In a report issued late last week, Gerald R. Kirkland, regional inspector general for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in Fort Worth, is asking that the Housing Authority return $67,640 the authority already spent on the project." Don't hold your breath.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
MinnPost - Bachmann's big night: reaction to her SOTU response
Michelle Bachmanns Tea Party Response to State of the Union Address talk's about health care. Visit to view her video address: MinnPost - Bachmann's big night: reaction to her SOTU response
Friday, January 14, 2011
American Radio Journal
American Radio Journal: "January 15, 2011 - January 21, 2011) This week on American Radio Journal: Lowman Henry interviews Dr. Jamie Glazov of www.FrontPageMag.com and author of the new book Showdown With Evil: Our Struggle Against Tyranny and Terror about the ongoing war against terror; Andy Roth of the Club for Growth has the Real Story on the congress' upcoming agenda; And, Col. Frank Ryan, USMC (Ret.) has an Amerian Radio Journal commentary on America's vulnerability to economic warfare."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)