PAWaterCooler.com

Sometimes the best way to find out if you are on the right side of an issue is to see who lines up on the other side of it. New York Post:

A leader of the Hamas terror group yesterday jumped into the emotional debate on the plan to construct a mosque near Ground Zero — insisting Muslims “have to build” it there.

“We have to build everywhere,” said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization’s chief on the Gaza Strip.

“In every area we have, [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray, and this mosque is the only site of prayer,” he said on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on WABC.

“We have to build the mosque, as you are allowed to build the church and Israelis are building their holy places.”

Hamas, he added, “is representing the vast majority of the Arabic and Islamic world — especially the Islamic side.”

Interestingly, it seems that those outspoken proponents of building the Mosque as some sort of celebration of of this country’s tolerance seem to have nothing to say about the Hamas endorsement.

This need to “build everywhere” fits in with the Islamic idea known as “Dar al Islam,” which is defined by the MidEast Encyclopedia thusly:

Dar al Islam is the area of the world under the rule of Islam , literally, “the home of Islam” or “the home of submission.” This is often used by extremists to include areas that used to be part of the Muslim world such as Al-Andalus (Spain) as well as the Muslim world. It is not a Quranic term or used in the Hadith and it is variously interpreted Moderate Muslims except that Dar al Islam may be any place where Muslims are secure, even if it is a secular society, whereas extremists have a different view.

NRO has an excellent editorial on the mosque and Obama’s feeble response:

Obama’s embarrassing backtracking highlights a more important lesson about the mosque controversy: It doesn’t have anything to do with the free exercise of religion. As Obama spectacularly demonstrated over the last couple of days, you can be a stalwart friend of religious freedom and still not necessarily think the mosque project is a good idea. Indeed, no reasonable opponent of the project contests the right of Muslims to worship as they please in this country — the First Amendment religious rights of Muslims never have been in question, at all. The critics insist only that this particular location for a project led by these particular people — including an imam who cannot bring himself to condemn Hamas — is unseemly and ill-considered. That position in no way implies a disregard for the First Amendment.

Email LisaMossie, Join the discussion or Share This...

Once, just once, I wish this President would take a stand on something I can agree with. After months of trying to avoid the subject, yesterday Obama finally came out with his stance on the mosque at Ground Zero, and of course, its the wrong, most divisive stance he could possibly take, further alientating ordinary Americans from his hard left, elitist ideology:

Speaking at a White House dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, Obama said all Americans have the right to worship as they choose.

“That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances, Obama said. “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable.”

Reading between the lines, what Obama is really saying is that any opposition to the Ground Zero mosque is not only insensitive, but anti-American. I find it laughable that this President, who has spent much of his time in office touring the world and apologizing for America’s role in it, thinks he can lecture Americans on what it is to be an American. This would not be so offensive if he at least honestly acknowledged the concerns and objections that Americans have to this project, or if he acknowledged some of the anti-American sentiment by the project leaders, their support for Hamas, their statements that America was an accomplice to 9/11.

I think it’s important to state that while it is not the role of government to deny this project, as the leader of our country, Barack Obama could have taken this opportunity of speaking to Muslims at a Ramadan dinner, to explain why the mosque shouldn’t be built and why many Americans take offense. He could have appealed the to the so-called moderate Muslim world’s sense of decency and respect; after all, this is all part of the same religion that threatens death to anyone who so much as draws a cartoon of Muhammed, isn’t it?

Finally, there’s this from Obama’s speech:

“We must never forget those who we lost so tragically on 9/11, and we must always honor those who led our response to that attack — from the firefighters who charged up smoke-filled staircases, to our troops who are serving in Afghanistan today,” he said.

“Our enemies respect no religious freedom. Al Qaida’s cause is not Islam — it is a gross distortion of Islam. These are not religious leaders — they’re terrorists who murder innocent men, women and children. In fact, al Qaida has killed more Muslims than people of any other religion — and that list of victims includes innocent Muslims who were killed on 9/11.”

This is either grossly naive, a display of incredible cowardice or a deliberate distortion uttered so as to side-step the real issues in confronting Islamist terrorism. That “gross distortion of Islam” is a religious movement and does have followers–they were the ones who, you may recall, flew those planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. They were the ones who, you also may recall, celebrated the 3,000 deaths on September 11, 2001.

Moderate Muslims can, should and have denounced this mosque; yet Obama seems bent on ignoring them. There is no curiosity on the part of these elitist liberals of why, when there are more than 30 mosques in New York, that THIS mosque MUST be built HERE, on hallowed ground. There is no curiousity as to where the funds are coming from. They are hiding behind the first amendment, claiming it is tieing their hands–which is funny, since they have absolutely no problem ignoring the Constitution when it suits them, which is more often than not.

As I said earlier, it is not the role of government to stop this project. But if we must follow the letter of the law, then articulating Americans’ feelings and objections to this project and appealing to the decency of those behind the project is the job of the American President. And he has failed us again.

Email LisaMossie, Join the other 12 commenters or Share This...

The Inky is reporting on a carnival game of very questionable taste:

Because of what he now calls “an error in judgment,” a Lehigh Valley carnival operator has sparked an outcry by running at summer church carnivals and fire department fund-raisers a shooting-gallery game that featured a President Obama-like figure.

“I didn’t think it was offensive, and you know, I made the wrong judgment on it,” Irvin L. Good Jr., 68, said Wednesday. “And that’s all I can say about it. We did away with it, and I’m apologizing to everybody in the world, I think.”

Good, who has operated Goodtime Amusements in Hellertown for 26 years, said he used the Alien Attack game for about five weeks without hearing complaints.

Then, at a July 24 carnival at Our Lady of Mount Carmel in Roseto, Kathryn Chapman, there with her family, noticed that one of the win-a-prize painted targets was a black man wearing a suit with a rolled-up “health bill” in one hand – and an eagle-emblazoned belt buckle reading, “The Prez Says.”

Error in judgment my a$$; my gut says this jerk knew exactly what he was doing and why. Here’s the game:

Now in spite of the fact that the ears are all wrong on this “likeness,” I think it’s pretty clear that Irvin Good intended this to be an image of Barack Obama. This is a pretty disgusting thing to do and in no way should it be excused. Irvin Good is clearly a moron.

Regardless of whatever Good’s intent was with his carnival game, what he has actually succeeded in doing with his little stunt is inspiring all sorts of hyperventilating from the left, who have now begun to ascribe this act of colossal stupidity to all of Christianity (because the game was in use at a church fair), the Tea Party and Conservatives in general. This is how it works now: one idiot defines a movement on the right. So way to go, Irvin Good. Way to refute those ubiquitous and unfair smears of racism against an entire movement of honest, decent people. You will now be held up as proof positive of the Right’s intolerance by the unthinking, anonymous robo-trolls of the lefty blogoshpere as they perpetuate the meme. Here are some of the notable comments on the Inky’s site:

I guess that’s what “they” do for entertainment… whey they’re not clutching their bibles and assault rifles for comfort.

Ironic isn’t it, that so many that were so critical of Bush, Cheney, Palin, etc are now offended when the shoe is on the other foot. What was it that they always said? Oh, that’s right, it’s ’satire’. Pot, meet kettle!

We all know that the Allentown area has been known for years to be the capital for the KKK.

Here’s some from NBC10:

Hillbillies and bible thumpers have to take their aggressions out somehow!

Now, now Mr. Irwin Good, Jr. let’s be honest! You were well aware of who the “alien” represented and you were called on it! Saying, “I voted for him.” is like saying, “I’m not racist, my best friend is black.” Usually means you’re racist. If that is the case you are entitled but to expose children to your hatred is unacceptable.

And here’s Kathryn Chapman, the whistle-blower who sent the pictures of the game to the local newspaper, now apparently suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome:

Chapman, who said she was a third-grader at Our Lady of Mount Carmel’s school on the day President John F. Kennedy was shot, said seeing children and adults shooting at the target conjured up bad memories.

“That was incredibly disturbing to me that they would have this type of carnival game for children to be able to play,” said Chapman, now a mother living in Massachusetts. “Even little kids, third- and fourth-graders, a lot of kids know who the president of the United States is.”

Color me as outraged as anyone that this game was even in use; there is nothing remotely amusing about taking target practice at the President of the United States. However, lets not overplay this hand, shall we? The definition of bigotry cuts both ways; the right should not be defined by kooky elements of its fringe any more than the left should be defined by it’s own fringe elements. 

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

It is indeed rare when I can find common cause with our illustrious Guv, Ed Rendell, however, his comments regarding President Obama’s appearance on The View today are right on:

Rendell: I think there’s got to be a little bit of dignity to the presidency.

Mika Brzezinski: What are you saying, Ed?

Willie Geist: What a horrible insult to “The View.”

Rendell: I think there are some shows. I wouldn’t put him on “Jerry Springer,” too, right? … I think the president of the United States has to go on serious shows. And “The View” is, you can make a case that it’s a serious show, but it also rocks and rolls a little bit. I’m not sure he has to go on “The View” to be open to questions.

As Jim Geraghty points out in yesterday’s Morning Jolt, since becoming President, Obama has appeared on the following programs:

The Tonight Show with Jay Leno
The Late Show with David Letterman
Taped a question-and-answer promoting Conan O’Brien’s transition to The Tonight Show
taped a promotion for George Lopez
taped a video for The Colbert Report
taped a prime-time special with Oprah
been the subject of an NBC News prime-time special
been the subject of an HBO documentary,
grilled with Food Network star Bobby Flay,
popped up in commercials during Thanksgiving football,
filled out his NCAA basketball tournament picks on ESPN,
and now gone on American Idol. (Again.)

Appearing on The View, however, is not beneath the dignity of the office, according to Katie Couric.

“It’s not beneath the President, or any politician to try to reach out to all Americans, especially when our nation is facing so many challenges. Pennsylvania’s Governor Ed Rendell said the President should stick to ’serious shows,’ but it isn’t about Whoopi’s banter or Joy’s barbs, it’s about the audience. At a time when unemployment is near 10% and consumer confidence is falling, daytime television viewers may be exactly who President Obama needs to reach.”

Yeah. Because Obama’s absence from the airwaves has been such a notable drain on the morale of the country. As James W. Ceasar writes in this week’s Weekly Standard, the longer President Obama holds office, the more he diminishes in stature. He has resorted to divisive populism:

With the peculiar magic of his presidential campaign now a faded memory, Obama is shoring up support by the cruder method of divisive appeals. Long before the current (already hugely extended) campaign season began, Obama made it a practice to target opposition symbols (“the insurance industry,” “speculators,” “a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street,” the oil companies), call out and assail individual opponents (Rush Limbaugh, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner), and refer disparagingly to the Tea Party movement and Republicans in general (“this crowd”). More than a half-year before the midterm elections, he tried to revive his electoral base of “young people, African Americans, Latinos, and women” by taking a page from Al Gore’s 2000 campaign and embracing the shop-worn slogan, “I won’t stop fighting for you.”

And then there’s this piece by Democrat consultants Patrick Caddell and Doug Schoen that appeared in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal:

The president had a unique opportunity to focus on overarching issues of importance to whites and blacks. He has failed to address the critical challenges. He has not used his bully pulpit to emphasize the importance of racial unity and the common interest of poor whites and blacks who need training, job opportunities, and the possibility of realizing the American Dream. He hasn’t done enough to address youth unemployment—which in the white community is 23.2% and in the black community is 39.9%.

Mr. Obama has also cynically divided the country on class lines. He has taken to playing the populist card time and time again. He bashes Wall Street and insurance companies whenever convenient to advance his programs, yet he has been eager to accept campaign contributions and negotiate with these very same banks and corporations behind closed doors in order to advance his political agenda.

Finally, President Obama also exacerbated partisan division, and he has made it clear that he intends to demonize the Republicans and former President George W. Bush in the fall campaign. In April, the Democratic National Committee released a video in which the president directly addressed his divide-and-conquer campaign strategy, with an appeal to: “young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women who powered our victory in 2008 [to] stand together once again.”

Ubiquitous. Common. Divisive.

Unpresidential.

Email LisaMossie, Join the other 3 commenters or Share This...

Well, isn’t that interesting.

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell predicted on Tuesday that if the president escalates America’s military involvement in Afghanistan he could very well face a primary challenger in 2012.

In an overlooked “Morning Joe” segment on Tuesday, the Pennsylvania Democrat offered his distinct brand of eccentric, conversation-driving political foresight. He couched his statement about the possibility of a primary challenge by stressing that if Obama sticks to his current plans for Afghanistan — a reduced military presence beginning in July of 2011 — there would not be political insurrection within the party.

Hillary 2012?

The outgoing Governor is looking for work after all. It’s hard to get off of the public dole he’s been living on for decades. He was an early and active Hillary supporter.

Tip to Allahpundit who adds:

Never happen. There’s no draft and no real risk of catastrophic battlefield defeat, so there’s nothing to galvanize widespread support for an insurgent peacenik Democrat. If Obama stays the course, we’re likely to just keep muddling through, and while no one’s thrilled with that idea, it ain’t enough for a Hillary 2012 campaign when progressives are already wetting themselves about losing the White House to the GOP. The racial politics would be poisonous too, of course. George Bush got reelected in 2004 while muddling through in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and yet Democrats are going to bounce the first black president after a single term for doing the same — when he’s already committed to some sort of token drawdown next summer? Not a chance.

If there were a primary challenge, it wouldn’t be on the war… but on competence. Something Hillary could credibly do. Of course the war would be a part of that, but not the main part.

Rendell must’ve heard something and dropped it by accident.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Oh the hypocrisy.

Ever since Arizona passed its controversial law allowing police to check a suspect’s immigration status, the federal government had been intimating that it would file suit to stop the measure. 

Which it finally did.  (Although, in a moment of utter embarrassment, Attorney General Eric Holder testified of his intention to file suit despite his admission that he’d NEVER READ the ten page Arizona law!) 

And the results of the lawsuit?  Wholly predictable.

The Right is furious, the Left satiated, and, as always, common sense people are still out in the cold.

Fact is, the Arizona law, signed by a Republican Governor and a red-meat issue to the GOP base, is 100% meaningless.  Beyond providing fiery agenda-driven rhetoric — for both sides —, it’s just the latest futile attempt to solve America’s out-of-control illegal invader problem.

Why the hypocrisy? Because instead of focusing on the real issues, like building a border wall and cracking down on employers who hire illegals, the Administration is trying to score political points by hoping the Republican position alienates Latino voters.

If Obama and the Congress were really concerned about reigning in a state for doing its own thing — against the wishes of the federal government —perhaps a better lawsuit would be one against those who are in flagrant violation of federation immigration law. After all, these states are the biggest obstacle to sound immigration policy.

New Mexico would be a good start.

*****

After we get through the white noise of Arizona’s law being one that harasses the good illegals who have broken America’s laws to get here, or conversely, that such a measure is mandatory to protect our citizens from the invaders, it would be nice to stop and actually ask the most basic question:

How, exactly, are the police supposed to check the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally? What document proving citizenship will they be seeking?

There is no national ID card, and probably about six people nationwide even know where their Social Security card is, so, for the most part, that leaves the driver’s license.

Granted, not everyone drives, but it would be a good starting place. 

Well, except for one small thing.

Several states still issue drivers licenses to illegal invaders.  States like….New Mexico, which just so happens to border Arizona.

(This practice does not comply with Federal Real ID Act requirements.  The Act mandates that, in order for a license to be recognized by the U.S. Government, states may issue licenses only after determining “proof of identity and lawful status of an applicant” and “verification of the source documents provided by an applicant.”)

So when Juan Valdez is pulled over for a traffic stop, on suspicion that he is an illegal, he will be required to prove his status as a citizen or legal immigrant.

As he whips out his license from New Mexico, Utah or Washington, or any of the eight other states that until recently issued licenses to known illegals, along with car insurance (because you can’t get car insurance without a license), a sly smile will creep across his face. There will be no deportation this night.  God Bless America!

Of course, it doesn’t stop with licenses….

Read more at Philly Mag’s Philly Post and post a comment:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/07/27/arizonas-immigration-law-well-intentioned-but-meaningless/

About Chris Freind:

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”

Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes numerous other television and radio appearances.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

When you sit in a traffic jam caused by an Obama busywork project that seemingly has no end in sight (ahem 422), perhaps you think about the people it is employing to calm your fury at the constant inconvenience. Perhaps you kid yourself that hiring people to dig holes and then hiring other people to fill them in is meaningful job creation.

Here’s something else to think about while your commute is extended:

As the midterm election season approaches, new road signs are popping up everywhere – millions of dollars worth of signs touting “The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act” and reminding passers-by that the program is “Putting America Back to Work.”

On the road leading to Dulles Airport outside Washington, DC there’s a 10′ x 11′ road sign touting a runway improvement project funded by the federal stimulus. The project cost nearly $15 million and has created 17 jobs, according to recovery.gov.

However, there’s another number that caught the eye of ABC News: $10,000. That’s how much money the Washington Airports Authority tells ABC News it spent to make and install the sign – a single sign – announcing that the project is “Funded by The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act” and is “Putting America Back to Work.” The money for the sign was taken out of the budget for the runway improvement project.

ABC News has reached out to a number of states about spending on stimulus signs and learned the state of Illinois has spent $650,000 on about 950 signs and Pennsylvania has spent $157,000 on 70 signs.

70 signs for $157,000 works out to $2,242.86 per sign. Figures were not immediately available for how many jobs created or saved by sign production. Rest assured, however, that only about $5 million of taxpayer money has been spent on signs advertising Barack Obama. ABC further reports:

At the center of the controversy are a series of guidelines provided to stimulus recipients. In the letter, Rep. Issa cites what he calls “perhaps the most overly political guidance on stimulus advertising” involving the Department of Housing and Urban Development and a stimulus recipient. According to investigators from the oversight committee, HUD provided the Office of Native American Programs with information on “signage requirements.” The document suggested a sign template informing the public the projects had been, “Funded By: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Barack Obama, President.”

In response to ABC’s questions, Jill Zuckman of the Department of Transportation demonstrates out-of-touch government arrogance at it’s best:

“The best estimate is that states have spent about $5 million of the $28 billion spent on road projects on signs – or less than .02 percent of overall project spending.”

Only $5 Million? Your average American’s tax bill runs in the thousands and takes a big chunk out of their potential qualtiy of life. These thousand page bills, labyrinthine bureaucracies and trillions in spending have had the effect of numbing those spending our money to the real consequences that the absence of this money causes to the people who have actually earned it: the taxpayers. If I had an extra $5 million laying around, or even an extra $2,246.86, I could certainly find a better use for that money than on a sign announcing that the reason I am again late for dinner is because my tax money has been carelessly misspent.

Again.

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

I suppose anyone who disagrees with this is either a racist, a theocrat, or a misogynist. Or maybe all three?

Obama Administration OKs First Tax-Funded Abortions Under Health Care Law

The Obama Administration will give Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new “high-risk” insurance program under a provision of the federal health care legislation enacted in March.

It has quietly approved a plan submitted by an appointee of pro-abortion Governor Edward Rendell under which the new program will cover any abortion that is legal in Pennsylvania.

The high-risk pool program is one of the new programs created by the sweeping health care legislation, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, President Obama signed into law on March 23. The law authorizes $5 billion in federal funds for the program, which will cover as many as 400,000 people when it is implemented nationwide.

“The Obama Administration will give Pennsylvania $160 million in federal tax funds, which we’ve discovered will pay for insurance plans that cover any legal abortion,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee.

All of this made possible by “pro-life Democrats” pretending that ObamaCare didn’t fund abortions in order to justify voting for it. All of Neptune’s ocean won’t wash this blood from your hands, Bart Stupak.

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Just got an email to this link from Obama’s goon squad:

Voter Registration in Bloomfield (Raise Your Vote: Voter Registration Event)
We’ll host Voter Registration on Saturday, July 17th in front of the Crazy Mocha in Bloomfield, located at:

4525 Liberty Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15224

From 10:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m.

I decided to répondez s’il vous plaît with the following:

Will you attend: No, I will not attend.
How many attendees total: (incl. yourself) 0
Add a comment: (optional)

Sorry, can’t make it. I’ll be busy working this weekend, paying my taxes which fund “community organizers” who are working to destroy my way of life. I’m sure, however, that you’ll be able to gather plenty of people who lack the ambition to find employment at your event, however, and you can all bow down and worship the great Obama, with all his empty promises.

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Nice guy.

Watch it all.

Tip to Larry O’Connor @ Big Government

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Nice fellow, this guy.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

John Fund in the Wall Street Journal:

President Obama’s Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped the voter intimidation case, which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and former publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen.” Mr. Bull and others witnessed one Black Panther pointing his billy club at voters and making racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell: “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!”

Nonetheless, the Justice Department moved to dismiss most of the charges a month after winning a default judgment against the Black Panthers when the party failed to appear in federal court. The move came after Justice secured an agreement from one Black Panther member not to carry a “deadly weapon” near a polling place until 2012. In a written statement, the Justice Department now says it acted in good faith, adding: “It is regrettable when a former department attorney distorts the facts and makes baseless allegations to promote his or her agenda.”

But the Washington Times has reported that six career lawyers at Justice, including Christopher Coates, former chief of the Justice Department’s voting section, also favored pursuing the case. One of the career attorneys, Appellate Chief Diana Flynn, had urged in an internal memo that a judgment be pressed against the defendants to “prevent the paramilitary style intimidation of voters” in the future.

All of the career attorneys were overruled by Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an Obama appointee.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

The Weekly Standard has a new story posted about the case….

The case is straightforward. On Election Day 2008, two members of the New Black Panther party (NBPP) dressed in military garb were captured on videotape at a Philadelphia polling place spouting racial epithets and menacing voters. One, Minister King Samir Shabazz, wielded a nightstick. It was a textbook case of voter intimidation and clearly covered under the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

A Department of Justice trial team was assigned to investigate. They gathered affidavits from witnesses—one of the poll watchers was called a “white devil” and a “cracker.” A Panther told him he would be “ruled by the black man.” The trial team, all career Justice attorneys and headed by voting section chief Chris Coates, filed a case against the two Panthers caught on tape. Malik Zulu Shabazz, head of the national NBPP, and the party itself were also named based on evidence the party had planned the deployment of 300 members on Election Day and on statements after the incident in which the NBPP endorsed the intimidation at the Philadelphia polling station.

The trial team quickly obtained a default judgment—meaning it had won the case because the New Black Panther party failed to defend itself. Yet in May 2009, Obama Justice Department lawyers, appointed temporarily to fill top positions in the civil rights division, ordered the case against the NBPP dismissed. An administration that has pledged itself to stepping-up civil rights enforcement dropped the case and, for over a year, has prevented the trial team lawyers from telling their story.

Lots of inside baseball here. It’s long, so grab a cup of coffee and read it all.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Looking at the internals of this PPP poll showing Toomey and Sestak tied, I was disheartened by this:

The youngsters still approve of Obama. What does the guy have to do to lose their sympathy?

I’ve never been so proud to be part of the 30-45 bracket.

By the way, I’m really not putting a lot of stock in this poll as far as the headline Senate race “tie” goes. The “voted for McCain” is way too high, and they kinda screwed the pooch on the PA-12 special election. (As did a lot of other polls.)

Email Joe Collins, Join the discussion or Share This...

Obama And More Offshore Drilling: The Opportunity Of A Lifetime

They say timing is everything.      

And they are right.

If not for perfect timing, and a near impossible confluence of events, Barack Obama would most certainly not be President.

But he is, and once again, timing has played a huge role in his life.

The question now is whether he possesses true leadership — the internal fire that pushes a man to do great things against almost impossible odds — to turn the largest environmental disaster in American history into one of the greatest opportunities ever to come before a President.

Will Obama have the strength and will to seize this opportunity? If so, he will, more than any other President, free this nation of its dependency on foreign oil, bolster the economy and substantially increase our national security.

*****

The BP oil spill has had tragic consequences, but none greater than the calls to stop drilling, and instead concentrate on “alternative” energy sources.

That would be a huge mistake.

As Freindly Fire noted in a 2008 column:

“Investing in alternative energy is important, to be sure…wind, hydro and solar power initiatives are key, as are battery and electric powered vehicles and machinery. But many of these technologies will require trillions of both public and private funding, and realistically, all are many years away from making a substantial difference. They are all longer-term solutions, and, to be honest, are unproven in how effective their widespread use will be….”

Fact is, we live in something called The Real World, where a tremendous amount of oil is used, with more and more consumed every year. That won’t change, period.

So while “green” solutions are nice, black gold still rules the day.

The quicker we recognize that and focus our primary energies on domestic oil production, the better off we’ll be.

*****

Which national leader innately understands this? 

Would it be the oilman George W. Bush or his Halliburton-affiliated sidekick Dick Cheyney?  Or is it the patriarch of the Bush family, George Herbert Walker Bush?

None of the above.

Ironically, it is Barack Obama.

*****

The elder Bush signed the moratorium on offshore drilling.  His son left it in place for SEVEN years, despite having sizable majorities in both Houses of Congress.  Only after fuel costs skyrocketed to over $4.50/gallon did W. call for the lifting of the moratorium.

Too little, too late. And it never happened.

What could have prevented those crippling spikes at the pump?

Offshore drilling — both off the continental shelves and in ANWR (the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) — and the construction of new refineries, given that the last one was built in 1976.

And what better time to have pushed it through than right after the September 11 attacks.

In addition to having a Republican congress and nearly 100% of the nation behind him, Bush had the world’s goodwill in his corner. 

Instead, this nation’s reliance on foreign oil — which is a kind way of saying we are pumping petro dollars into the coffers of some who are hellbent on destroying us — has only increased.

*****

Earlier this year, before the BP spill, Obama proposed that we expand our offshore drilling ventures, and freed up millions of acres of coastal water for exploration and development.  In addition, he called for an increase in nuclear power plants across America.

Since Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party, that move took guts.

Most Democrats oppose both initiatives, and some of the Party’s most powerful constituencies, such as the environmental lobby, are stridently supporting their position with millions of dollars and votes.

Nonetheless, Obama pressed on, fighting for issues generally associated with Republicans.

The response from the GOP?   They attacked him.

And why? …..

Read more at http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/06/22/barack-obamas-opportunity-of-a-lifetime/

Email Chris Freind, Join the discussion or Share This...

From my email inbox:

As the father of two young daughters, I know that being a father is one of the most important jobs any man can have.

Unless he doesn’t want the job, then it’s a punishment.

My own father left my family when I was two years old. I was raised by a heroic mother and wonderful grandparents who provided the support, discipline and love that helped me get to where I am today, but I still felt the weight of that absence throughout my childhood.

Obama was raised by his white mother and his white grandparents while his black father abandoned him. If you’re white, the next time some mindless race-baiter calls you a racist for opposing Obama, remind them of that fact. Normally I wouldn’t resort to such vulgarity, but these people deserve it.

It’s something that leaves a hole no government can fill.

This statement is amazing, for two reasons. It’s amazing first because Obama is admitting that there is something that government cannot do, and it’s amazing because Obama feels the need to tell us that there is something that government cannot do.

What’s the real object of this email? Obama’s revealing another bureaucracy, of course:

Tomorrow, I’ll make an announcement about the next phase of our efforts to help fathers fulfill their responsibilities as parents — The President’s Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative. You can learn more at www.fatherhood.gov.

Yeah, because we don’t have enough government spending yet. Why do I have the feeling that if someone like Rick Santorum proposed something like this, they would be calling him a theocratic nutjob?

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

And it looks like “Get out of the way’ is the best option:

Regarding these “homemade” barges that Louisiana launched, Reuters reports:

Last week, the U.S. Coast Guard shut down 16 vacuum barges that were sucking up crude from Louisiana marshes. The units, which consist of trucks and tanks on barges that suck up thousands of gallons of crude, needed to be checked for stability and if they had life jackets and fire extinguishers.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal had asked officials to inspect them quickly without bringing them back to dock. But the units sat idle for 24 hours before being allowed to travel back to oil-fouled Barataria Bay, Bay Jimmy and Pass A Loutre.

After 24 hours, the barges went back to work, and according to media reports, no inspections were performed.

Then there is that damnable Jones Act:

Some critics of the Obama administration cite offers by the Netherlands in April to supply sophisticated skimmers and dredging devices, and the administration’s failure to accept the offer. The issue is as murky as the oil slick now threatening regional beaches.

A Houston-based company is now cleaning oil off surface water in the Gulf of Mexico using sweeping arms that attach to a boat and help gather large amounts of oil. These sophisticated devices were provided by a Dutch company with years of experience in such operations, but instead of using the Dutch ships and crews immediately, when The Netherlands offered help in April, the operation was delayed until U.S. crews could be trained.

The Obama administration declined the Dutch offer partly because of the Jones Act, which restricts foreign ships from certain activities in U.S. waters. During the Hurricane Katrina crisis five years ago, the Bush administration waived the Jones Act in order to facilitate some foreign assistance, but such a waiver was not given in this case.

The Dutch also offered assistance with building sand berms (barriers) along the coast of Louisiana to protect sensitive marshlands, but that offer was also rejected, even though Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal had been requesting such protective barriers.

For those of you keeping score, Bush waived the Jones Act during the Hurrican Katrina clean-up.

So let’s be absolutely clear here: The BP oil spill is NOT Obama’s fault. But the Federal government’s response to it most certainly is. And even conservatives can probably forgive a little government incompetence, because conservatives expect federal government incompetence. Those of us on the right have been making the case against the sloth-like inefficiency of bloated big government for years.

But this? The actual hindering of clean-up operations? This goes beyond mere incompetence and into the realm of not only contributing to the problem, but exacerbating the problem. It is as compelling a case for small, locally controlled government as there ever was.

No wonder Obama cheerleaders like Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman and Howard Finemann are disappointed: if Obama goes down, so too do their dreams of central planning; of a country run by the brightest minds, of the permanent placement of the academic class in a leadership role. As Peggy Noonan notes,

No reason to join the pile on, but some small points. Two growing weaknesses showed up in small phrases. The president said he had consulted among others “experts in academia” on what to do about the calamity. This while noting, again, that his energy secretary has a Nobel Prize. There is a growing meme that Mr. Obama is too impressed by credentialism, by the meritocracy, by those who hold forth in the faculty lounge, and too strongly identifies with them. He should be more impressed by those with real-world experience. It was the “small people” in the shrimp boats who laid the boom.

And when speaking of why proper precautions and safety measures were not in place, the president sternly declared, “I want to know why.” But two months in he should know. And he should be telling us. Such empty sternness is . . . empty.

Are you comforted to know that these same “top men” will be working on your health care? Your energy needs? Your economy?

Email LisaMossie, Join the discussion or Share This...

Our friends at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette don’t want this crisis to go to waste:

In his speech, the president also promised to avoid a repeat of the disaster at the Deepwater Horizon rig, in part by reforming the failed U.S. regulatory mechanism, the Minerals Management Service, which has been cozy with oil companies.

He then tackled the root of the environmental and economic horror festering in the Gulf, America’s addiction to fossil fuels, which has led to ever-riskier offshore deep drilling. Mr. Obama vowed to dedicate his administration to a clean energy future for the United States and said that inaction was the only outcome he would not accept.

Actually, the cause of “ever-riskier offshore deep drilling” is government regulations which push oil companies many miles out to sea rather than allowing them to drill where they don’t have to go through so much water to reach the seabed.

Obama and the PG propose “clean energy” to stop disasters like this. What kind of clean energy?

Nuclear? Sure, there are never disasters from nuclear power plants. Just ask anyone who lives in Chernobyl.

Hydrogen power, maybe? Ever heard of the Hindenburg?

Solar? Doesn’t produce nearly enough output to maintain modern civilization.

Wind? Hydroelectric? Again, these don’t generate nearly enough power.

There’s always the “electric car”. Except that advocates of said car always seem to forget that the electricity used to power it is created by burning coal, and that has its own hazards associated with it, environmental and otherwise.

I would like Obama to shut up about how he’s going to kick BP’s ass, and how he’s going to somehow magically stop disasters in the future. I would also like him to actually do something about fixing this oil spill, such as waiving Jones Act, which Bush did after hurricane Katrina.

It’s unbelievable how partisan this country has become. This morning I heard a liberal call up the Quinn & Rose radio show and explain to Quinn that Bush’s reaction to Katrina was terrible while Obama’s reaction to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill is great. Other than threatening to kick someone’s ass and picking up a few tar balls off the beach, has Obama actually done anything?

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Eight years of leadership gets you this…

Gov. Ed Rendell says layoffs of teachers and state and local government employees will result if Pennsylvania doesn’t get $850 million in budget help from the federal government.

Rendell said Wednesday layoffs will begin in July if Congress doesn’t approve additional subsidies helping states weather the recession and a severe downturn in tax collections.

Rendell didn’t give a specific number of state employees who would lose their jobs, but says government employees at all levels would be laid off.

Naturally, it’s teachers that are definitely on the chopping block… why didn’t he throw in fire fighters or police officers to make it that much more dramatic?

I swear we’ve gone through this before.

Email AlexC, Join the discussion or Share This...

Let’s not lose sight of the fact that the $75m liability cap is actually a governmental market-fixing mechanism. Without that cap incentives for risky behavior would not be as attractive, and energy companies might be far more likely to restrain themselves from activities that would result in catastrophic accidents.

I concur that our President, and the government, do not have the legal authority to require BP to put that $20B in an escrow account, of course. But, contrariwise, there’s no good reason for them not to do it voluntarily. The ethics of the situation are pretty clear. They broke it, they bought it.

This ethical logic should have informed our actions when putting in this anti-market liability cap. Hopefully similar logic will prevail as we move forward extracting energy from the Marcellus. The environmental costs associated with energy extraction should absolutely be a part of the market price of that energy. If it were, alternative energy sources may start becoming more attractive in the marketplace.

Email KarlBucus, Start the discussion or Share This...