Well, there is now officially a new standard on crazy, and it was set by a highly respected, prize-winning progressive. Nobel laureate (in economics) and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman came out with quite a suggestion this week on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" dealing with the economy and what might help us climb out of the economic death spiral we find ourselves in. It was quite an eye opener, to say the least. But first, a little background.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
WHERE'S OBAMO? Updated
Call me old fashioned, but in times of national crisis I, like many Americans, take comfort from hearing words of wisdom from my president. When the world seems to be on fire or collapsing around our ears, when tragic events unfold, we have always had the calming influence of our appointed leader to guide us through the dark times.
Until now.
Until now.
Friday, July 29, 2011
THE NOOSE IS TIGHTENING FAST AND FURIOUSLY
I was going to post this as an update to my last post on Operation Fast and Furious but decided it was so important that it needed it's own post.
In testimony this week, Bill Newell, the Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office stated to investigators that he had sent an email to a longtime friend in the White House that included information on Operation Fast and Furious. Eh, no big deal, right? A low-level exchange of information between friends that never went beyond their circle of two.
In testimony this week, Bill Newell, the Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office stated to investigators that he had sent an email to a longtime friend in the White House that included information on Operation Fast and Furious. Eh, no big deal, right? A low-level exchange of information between friends that never went beyond their circle of two.
Monday, July 11, 2011
WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT: FAST AND FURIOUS EDITION Updated
Rep. Darryl Issa (R-CA) has been relentlessly attempting to unravel the Gordian Knot that is Operation Fast and Furious (aka Gunwalker) since he took over the chairmanship of the House Oversight Committee. This absolute clusterfark of an operation is utterly irredeemable. At best, it is an egregious example of how badly an operation can be mismanaged. At worst, it is a high level endeavor that allowed high powered weaponry to get in the hands of drug cartels, possibly for the sole purpose of spiking violence in order to implement stricter federal gun control laws in this country.
It is certainly a remarkable coincidence that the guns President Obama spoke of regulating back in 2009 - AK-47 type assault rifles and Barrett .50 BMG sniper rifles - are at the heart of the violent crisis on the border and are the very guns involved in Gunwalker (Pajamas Media has a great back story on this theory). In fact, this operation is such a catastrophe that the Mexican government is demanding answers. Having lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 agents to those weapons over the past eighteen months, you can't really blame them.
Initial attempts at keeping the blame limited to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) only have failed miserably. As more sun shines down on this ugly piece of business, more agencies are shown to have their fingers in the pie. It's a veritable vegetable soup - ATF, DEA, FBI, DHS and DoJ. Can you spell "C-O-L-L-U-S-I-O-N"?
The premise of the operation was simple: track weapons dealers and the path of the guns they bought over the border and into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. These sorts of stings are done frequently by law enforcement officers around the country. Because these guns were going to be tracked across the southern border the operation was put into the hands of the ATF, with oversight by the Department of Justice. Sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it?
Yeah, not so much.
First off, the "dealers" they were tracking turned out to be FBI informants already. Ooopsie. Which means the main premise for the operation was moot from the get-go. But fear not, they still poured two years, $10 million and countless man hours into the endeavor. Oh, and the life of one border patrol agent and several thousand Mexican citizens, not that they count in the grand scheme. Ah, the gentle efficiencies of the government juggernaut....
Second, for some reason no one has been able to explain, ATF was told to cease surveillance of the approximately 1,765 guns once they left the hands of the dealers. They were not to follow them on their trip across the border to their final destination, they were not to gather intel on the final buyer and they were not to work with the Mexican government on the sting. The official line is that the ATF (aka "The Scapegoat") "lost track of" the weapons. In reality, there are memos and sworn testimony that show that the ATF was instructed to cease surveillance of the weapons. ATF Director Kenneth Melson (aka "The Patsy") isn't exactly willing to take the fall, as his secret testimony shows.
By the way, did I mention this wonderful $10 million program was funded by the stimulus bill (just for that extra dollop of outrage). Unfortunately this operation might possibly end up being one of the biggest job creators in that boondoggle of a bill. Just think of all the additional police, border agents, forensics personnel, nurses, doctors, paramedics, undertakers, coffin makers and gravestone carvers who saw a big jump in demand as a direct result of Fast and Furious.
Now that the scandal is starting to gain traction in the press and the investigation is gaining speed in Congress, the stench of cover-up has become strong:
The question now, as Mr. Hume so succinctly put it, was who knew what, and when? How high does this go? At this point, it looks like Attorney General Eric Holder's fingerprints are all over this - not just for his role in Gunwalker, but also his not so subtle attempts at obstructing the investigation. Primarily, though, Holder denied long-time knowledge of the program when he gave sworn testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform committee back in May, but it seems there may have been someperjury "misspeaking" going on (via CNS News):
Is that your final answer, Mr. Holder (via Big Government)?
Please note the inclusion of DEA, FBI and DHS in that 2009 speech, by Holders own admittance. Make no mistake, this thing is huge, and it's not going anywhere. If the mainstream press has a shred of investigative instincts left to them, they will start working this story. Hume's comments are right, this does have the air of a Watergate. But bigger.
So far it looks like We the People might be needing some pretty top-level positions filled in the coming months. DoJ for sure. Holder's goose is cooked, and it's only a matter of time until he is either pressured by President Obama or has a 'moment of clarity' and resigns. How high up in DHS - all the way to Napolitano? What about the FBI? Higher? As the above referenced Pajamas Media piece so aptly put it:
Does it go all the way to the top? Only time and a lot more investigation will tell. You can be sure there will have to be some pretty concrete evidence to even think of directly implicating the President in this thing (please note Owens' use of "team" when describing who fashioned Obama's rhetoric), so don't plan on DVRing an Obama "I am not a crook" moment any time soon. But there is a lesson here already, and we're no where near the end of this journey. The lesson here is that these are the policies we get when the policy makers follow the teachings of Cloward/Piven and Saul Alinsky. This is a textbook illustration of a worst-case scenario result to an "ends justify the means" method of policy decisions, right down to the innocent blood on the hands of the decision makers.
Keep your eye on this story, folks. By the time Issa is done with his investigation, the administration may never be the same.
UPDATE: And so it begins.
It is certainly a remarkable coincidence that the guns President Obama spoke of regulating back in 2009 - AK-47 type assault rifles and Barrett .50 BMG sniper rifles - are at the heart of the violent crisis on the border and are the very guns involved in Gunwalker (Pajamas Media has a great back story on this theory). In fact, this operation is such a catastrophe that the Mexican government is demanding answers. Having lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 agents to those weapons over the past eighteen months, you can't really blame them.
Initial attempts at keeping the blame limited to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) only have failed miserably. As more sun shines down on this ugly piece of business, more agencies are shown to have their fingers in the pie. It's a veritable vegetable soup - ATF, DEA, FBI, DHS and DoJ. Can you spell "C-O-L-L-U-S-I-O-N"?
The premise of the operation was simple: track weapons dealers and the path of the guns they bought over the border and into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. These sorts of stings are done frequently by law enforcement officers around the country. Because these guns were going to be tracked across the southern border the operation was put into the hands of the ATF, with oversight by the Department of Justice. Sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it?
Yeah, not so much.
First off, the "dealers" they were tracking turned out to be FBI informants already. Ooopsie. Which means the main premise for the operation was moot from the get-go. But fear not, they still poured two years, $10 million and countless man hours into the endeavor. Oh, and the life of one border patrol agent and several thousand Mexican citizens, not that they count in the grand scheme. Ah, the gentle efficiencies of the government juggernaut....
Second, for some reason no one has been able to explain, ATF was told to cease surveillance of the approximately 1,765 guns once they left the hands of the dealers. They were not to follow them on their trip across the border to their final destination, they were not to gather intel on the final buyer and they were not to work with the Mexican government on the sting. The official line is that the ATF (aka "The Scapegoat") "lost track of" the weapons. In reality, there are memos and sworn testimony that show that the ATF was instructed to cease surveillance of the weapons. ATF Director Kenneth Melson (aka "The Patsy") isn't exactly willing to take the fall, as his secret testimony shows.
By the way, did I mention this wonderful $10 million program was funded by the stimulus bill (just for that extra dollop of outrage). Unfortunately this operation might possibly end up being one of the biggest job creators in that boondoggle of a bill. Just think of all the additional police, border agents, forensics personnel, nurses, doctors, paramedics, undertakers, coffin makers and gravestone carvers who saw a big jump in demand as a direct result of Fast and Furious.
Now that the scandal is starting to gain traction in the press and the investigation is gaining speed in Congress, the stench of cover-up has become strong:
The question now, as Mr. Hume so succinctly put it, was who knew what, and when? How high does this go? At this point, it looks like Attorney General Eric Holder's fingerprints are all over this - not just for his role in Gunwalker, but also his not so subtle attempts at obstructing the investigation. Primarily, though, Holder denied long-time knowledge of the program when he gave sworn testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform committee back in May, but it seems there may have been some
At the May 3 Judiciary Committee hearing, Issa asked Holder: “When did you first know about the program officially, I believe, called Fast and Furious? To the best of your knowledge, what date?”
Holder responded: “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”
Is that your final answer, Mr. Holder (via Big Government)?
(...) the problem with Holder’s feigned ignorance is that he gave a speech in Cuernavaca, Mexico, on April 2, 2009, in which he boasted about Operation “Gunrunner” and told Mexican authorities of everything he was doing to insure its success.
Holder told the audience:
Last week, our administration launched a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels. My department is committing 100 new ATF personnel to the Southwest border in the next 100 days to supplement our ongoing Project Gunrunner, DEA is adding 16 new positions on the border, as well as mobile enforcement teams, and the FBI is creating a new intelligence group focusing on kidnapping and extortion.
Please note the inclusion of DEA, FBI and DHS in that 2009 speech, by Holders own admittance. Make no mistake, this thing is huge, and it's not going anywhere. If the mainstream press has a shred of investigative instincts left to them, they will start working this story. Hume's comments are right, this does have the air of a Watergate. But bigger.
So far it looks like We the People might be needing some pretty top-level positions filled in the coming months. DoJ for sure. Holder's goose is cooked, and it's only a matter of time until he is either pressured by President Obama or has a 'moment of clarity' and resigns. How high up in DHS - all the way to Napolitano? What about the FBI? Higher? As the above referenced Pajamas Media piece so aptly put it:
At the same time in 2009 that federal law enforcement agencies (the ATF, the DOJ, and presumably Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security) were creating the operation that led to the executive branch being the largest gun smuggler in the Southwest, the president’s team was crafting the rhetoric to sell the crisis they were creating.
On television, in various news outlets, and even in a joint appearance with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, Obama pushed the 90 percent lie, implying that 90% of the guns recovered in Mexican cartel violence came from U.S. gun shops.
At the same time they were damning gun dealers in public, the administration was secretly forcing them to provide weapons to the cartels, by the armful and without oversight. More than one gun industry insider suggests that the administration extorted cooperation and silence from these gun shops. As the ATF has the power to summarily shut dealers down for the most minor of offenses, that is very, very possible.
Does it go all the way to the top? Only time and a lot more investigation will tell. You can be sure there will have to be some pretty concrete evidence to even think of directly implicating the President in this thing (please note Owens' use of "team" when describing who fashioned Obama's rhetoric), so don't plan on DVRing an Obama "I am not a crook" moment any time soon. But there is a lesson here already, and we're no where near the end of this journey. The lesson here is that these are the policies we get when the policy makers follow the teachings of Cloward/Piven and Saul Alinsky. This is a textbook illustration of a worst-case scenario result to an "ends justify the means" method of policy decisions, right down to the innocent blood on the hands of the decision makers.
Keep your eye on this story, folks. By the time Issa is done with his investigation, the administration may never be the same.
UPDATE: And so it begins.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
WHAT'S THE PLAN, STAN?
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently said (via the L.A. Times):
Let me repeat that last bit: "It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage". Really? The Senate has not passed a budget in over 750 days - more than two years. Isn't that a bit foolish, Sen. Reid? Passing a budget is essential for the economic health of this country. Not doing so would mean a repeat of the squabbling over bi-weekly continuing resolutions from earlier in the year, something we can ill afford to do again.
What Reid is willing to do is finally bring the House-passed 2012 Ryan budget proposal up for a vote, where it was voted down 57-40. Why, all of a sudden, was he ready to bring the bill to the floor after letting it languish for more than a month? He was striking while the political iron was hot, of course. The NY-26 special election republican loss is being spun as a referendum against Rep. Paul Ryan's budget, particularly his take on Medicare reform. Reid's only motive is to get republicans on record as voting for the budget so it can be used against them in the wider mediscare campaign democrats are going to embark on in the coming months in a desperate effort to keep their majority. It's all about politicking, not the well-being of the nation.
Reid also brought President Obama's original budget proposal introduced back in February to the floor for a vote shortly after the vote on the Ryan plan, where it was defeated 97-0. In fact, the Senate voted down not two but four budget proposals that day, without offering up even the merest hint of a plan of their own. And try as they might to paint Rep. Ryan's proposal as "radical", it still fared a heck of a lot better than Obama's. You'll be shocked - shocked - to learn there is zero media coverage of the complete repudiation of Obama's fiscal plans for 2012 - only the failure on party lines of the extremely extreme, radically radical Ryan proposal.
Now that Senate democrats have put the kybosh on those budget proposals, one would expect them to introduce one of their own. That's normally how things work. It's really the heart of the negotiating process. Obama's own fiscal commission cautioned against exactly what is going on right now in the preamble to their report:
So what does Reid offer in place of the budgets he just voted down? Nothing. Squat. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. Well, aside from the usual demagoguing, of course. Demagoguery is rather like jello for left-wingers - there's always room for some. Unfortunately, it makes it seem like the welfare of this country and it's people is not at the top of the list of priorities for this administration. The agenda must be implemented, no matter how much pain it inflicts (or how vehemently it is rejected).
It's tempting to make the case for incompetence as an excuse for this bizarre budgetary inaction in the face of a potential double-dip recession. The thing is, who's going to buy that almost an entire administration is incompetent? It then begs the question: Does incompetency on such a grand scale deserve to be in power?
President Obama's own fiscal commission co-chair, Erskine Bowles, has called the coming fiscal collapse:
And yet, even now, this administration refuses to make any serious proposals, or even tap the brakes on the runaway spending. Obama's 2012 budget proposal, introduced well after the fiscal commission gave it's recommendations to bring down spending and fast, actually increased spending by $200 billion over the most recent budget democrats passed - for FY 2010. Yup, his own commission strongly recommended immediate, deep spending cuts - including entitlement spending - and Obama's response was to increase spending in his budget proposal. Incompetence or willful negligence?
Steny Hoyer is on the record saying we are not broke and Harry Reid is lamenting the possible loss of funding for such vital necessities as cowboy poetry at the hands of those mean-spirited old republican meanie-heads. President Obama is jetting around the globe shaking hands, kissing babies and ignoring such petty details as debt ceilings and budgets in favor of promising aid we can't afford. In fact - and this is a longstanding issue that predates Obama but which has only increased under his administration - it turns out that there is quite a circle jerk going on with foreign aid. We give financial aid to wealthy nations and then ask to borrow back ten times as much. Talk about insanity! Wall Street is faltering (if a 279 point one-day drop and the longest slump since 2004 can be called something as mild as 'faltering'), house prices continue to tumble, inflation has caused Memorial Day celebrations to cost an estimated 29% more this year than last, gas is still over $3.60 per gallon, unemployment is back up to 9.1%, manufacturing is down, consumer confidence is dropping and experts are starting to talk about a double-dip recession again - even liberal ones.
Demagoguing the issue will only be tolerated for so long; certainly not all the way up to the election . Even some liberal talking heads are starting to remark on the lack of a fiscal plan from the left. It's time for Harry Reid and President Obama to get serious and put up a plan for getting us out of this mess instead of just attacking others. What sounds like great politicking inside the beltway looks like a complete disregard for the economy and the people suffering under it outside the beltway.
It's time for a democratic plan that can be compared to the republican's offerings. Negotiation requires that both parties bring something to the table. What is going on now is nothing more than fiddling while Rome burns. It is said that Nero allowed Rome to burn so that he could rebuild it to his specifications. Sound familiar?
"There's no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion," Reid said in an interview Thursday. "It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage."
Let me repeat that last bit: "It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage". Really? The Senate has not passed a budget in over 750 days - more than two years. Isn't that a bit foolish, Sen. Reid? Passing a budget is essential for the economic health of this country. Not doing so would mean a repeat of the squabbling over bi-weekly continuing resolutions from earlier in the year, something we can ill afford to do again.
What Reid is willing to do is finally bring the House-passed 2012 Ryan budget proposal up for a vote, where it was voted down 57-40. Why, all of a sudden, was he ready to bring the bill to the floor after letting it languish for more than a month? He was striking while the political iron was hot, of course. The NY-26 special election republican loss is being spun as a referendum against Rep. Paul Ryan's budget, particularly his take on Medicare reform. Reid's only motive is to get republicans on record as voting for the budget so it can be used against them in the wider mediscare campaign democrats are going to embark on in the coming months in a desperate effort to keep their majority. It's all about politicking, not the well-being of the nation.
Reid also brought President Obama's original budget proposal introduced back in February to the floor for a vote shortly after the vote on the Ryan plan, where it was defeated 97-0. In fact, the Senate voted down not two but four budget proposals that day, without offering up even the merest hint of a plan of their own. And try as they might to paint Rep. Ryan's proposal as "radical", it still fared a heck of a lot better than Obama's. You'll be shocked - shocked - to learn there is zero media coverage of the complete repudiation of Obama's fiscal plans for 2012 - only the failure on party lines of the extremely extreme, radically radical Ryan proposal.
Now that Senate democrats have put the kybosh on those budget proposals, one would expect them to introduce one of their own. That's normally how things work. It's really the heart of the negotiating process. Obama's own fiscal commission cautioned against exactly what is going on right now in the preamble to their report:
"Don’t shoot down an idea without offering a better idea in its place."
So what does Reid offer in place of the budgets he just voted down? Nothing. Squat. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. Well, aside from the usual demagoguing, of course. Demagoguery is rather like jello for left-wingers - there's always room for some. Unfortunately, it makes it seem like the welfare of this country and it's people is not at the top of the list of priorities for this administration. The agenda must be implemented, no matter how much pain it inflicts (or how vehemently it is rejected).
It's tempting to make the case for incompetence as an excuse for this bizarre budgetary inaction in the face of a potential double-dip recession. The thing is, who's going to buy that almost an entire administration is incompetent? It then begs the question: Does incompetency on such a grand scale deserve to be in power?
President Obama's own fiscal commission co-chair, Erskine Bowles, has called the coming fiscal collapse:
“the most predictable economic crisis in history.”
And yet, even now, this administration refuses to make any serious proposals, or even tap the brakes on the runaway spending. Obama's 2012 budget proposal, introduced well after the fiscal commission gave it's recommendations to bring down spending and fast, actually increased spending by $200 billion over the most recent budget democrats passed - for FY 2010. Yup, his own commission strongly recommended immediate, deep spending cuts - including entitlement spending - and Obama's response was to increase spending in his budget proposal. Incompetence or willful negligence?
Steny Hoyer is on the record saying we are not broke and Harry Reid is lamenting the possible loss of funding for such vital necessities as cowboy poetry at the hands of those mean-spirited old republican meanie-heads. President Obama is jetting around the globe shaking hands, kissing babies and ignoring such petty details as debt ceilings and budgets in favor of promising aid we can't afford. In fact - and this is a longstanding issue that predates Obama but which has only increased under his administration - it turns out that there is quite a circle jerk going on with foreign aid. We give financial aid to wealthy nations and then ask to borrow back ten times as much. Talk about insanity! Wall Street is faltering (if a 279 point one-day drop and the longest slump since 2004 can be called something as mild as 'faltering'), house prices continue to tumble, inflation has caused Memorial Day celebrations to cost an estimated 29% more this year than last, gas is still over $3.60 per gallon, unemployment is back up to 9.1%, manufacturing is down, consumer confidence is dropping and experts are starting to talk about a double-dip recession again - even liberal ones.
Demagoguing the issue will only be tolerated for so long; certainly not all the way up to the election . Even some liberal talking heads are starting to remark on the lack of a fiscal plan from the left. It's time for Harry Reid and President Obama to get serious and put up a plan for getting us out of this mess instead of just attacking others. What sounds like great politicking inside the beltway looks like a complete disregard for the economy and the people suffering under it outside the beltway.
It's time for a democratic plan that can be compared to the republican's offerings. Negotiation requires that both parties bring something to the table. What is going on now is nothing more than fiddling while Rome burns. It is said that Nero allowed Rome to burn so that he could rebuild it to his specifications. Sound familiar?
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
SAN FRANCISCO SAVORS THE GOURMET WAIVER FAVORS
Two hundred and four new Obamacare waivers were issued by the Obama Administration last month, for a grand total of more than thirteen hundred waivers. Of those 204, thirty-eight - nearly twenty percent - went to Nancy Pelosi's home district, namely to high-end establishments like TRU Spa - the "best day spa in San Francisco" - posh restaurants boasting $50+ entrees, luxury hotels and nightclubs. These latest waiver recipients join quite a long list of previous waiver winners, a majority of which seem to be comprised predominantly of labor unions and democrat supporters (but I repeat myself).
This is bad optics on two levels. First, it once again illustrates how deeply the corruption and cronyism goes in this administration. Considering we are entering what is sure to be a contentious election cycle, exempting businesses in her district make it look like Pelosi is doing favors in return for local support. Whether that assertion is true or not is moot - perception is reality, and this looks really bad. You can rest assured, though, that conservatives will be watching those businesses during the election cycle to see what level of financial support they offer her campaign. There will also most likely be increased scrutiny (and lots of google mapping) of waiver winners to find other potentially advantageous groupings elsewhere.
Second, it illustrates what a mess the healthcare legislation really is - it was supposed to bring down costs and provide access to coverage for everyone but instead costs have continued to rise and people who currently have insurance now find it threatened. Even staunch supporters are looking for an escape hatch.
Pelosi's response is that criticism of the waivers is "pathetic" (please note the usual Alinskyesque derision):
What is really pathetic is her spin on this issue. It almost sounds like she is slamming her own legislation - "It is pathetic that there are those who would be cheering for Americans to lose their minimum health coverage or see their premiums increase for political purposes." That line could also be used to describe the jubilation with which she celebrated the passage of that horrible bill. Her attempt to make her critics look bad in reality only makes her signature piece of legislation look like what it is - an over-reaching, unsustainable jumble of crippling regulations that is so bad that it requires exemption. Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) said the waivers constitute:
And to think this 'historically bad legislation' is the thing in which this administration is most proud. Now that's pathetic.
Many of the groups that received waivers were some of the biggest, most vocal supporters of the legislation - particularly the labor unions. The fact that they are now getting waivers is no surprise, however. After all, they already got one heck of a concession before the bill was ever even passed. This was after a failed attempt to exempt them from the law altogether. But fear not, union cronies - this administration is adept at making end runs around things they find inconvenient. Since they couldn't exempt them directly in the legislation, they will simply hand out waivers instead. That waivers are now being given at this level begs the question, who really is yoked to this harness? So far, it seems only those opposed to the law are being forced to comply - almost like a punishment.
The waivers are for only one year! supporters will cry. But congress just loooooves to extend things, like debt ceilings, the Patriot Act, and Pelosi's personal favorite, continuing resolutions - CRs must be her favorite, since she seemed to prefer them to passing an actual budget last year. This desire to continue things ad infinitum is evident in their deep and abiding affection for tenure (or is perhaps an explanation for it). The waivers are only available in yearly increments until 2014, but, if past experience is any indication, that date, too, will be extended.
What is becoming more and more evident is that under the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate, there are two laws of the land - one for the average Joe, and another for the administration and their supporters.
This is bad optics on two levels. First, it once again illustrates how deeply the corruption and cronyism goes in this administration. Considering we are entering what is sure to be a contentious election cycle, exempting businesses in her district make it look like Pelosi is doing favors in return for local support. Whether that assertion is true or not is moot - perception is reality, and this looks really bad. You can rest assured, though, that conservatives will be watching those businesses during the election cycle to see what level of financial support they offer her campaign. There will also most likely be increased scrutiny (and lots of google mapping) of waiver winners to find other potentially advantageous groupings elsewhere.
Second, it illustrates what a mess the healthcare legislation really is - it was supposed to bring down costs and provide access to coverage for everyone but instead costs have continued to rise and people who currently have insurance now find it threatened. Even staunch supporters are looking for an escape hatch.
Pelosi's response is that criticism of the waivers is "pathetic" (please note the usual Alinskyesque derision):
"It is pathetic that there are those who would be cheering for Americans to lose their minimum health coverage or see their premiums increase for political purposes. These waivers are reviewed and granted solely by the Administration in an open and transparent process so workers currently enrolled in 'mini-med' policies like those in San Francisco and across the country will not be punished and lose the minimum coverage they already have. These waivers will be eliminated in 2014 when Americans will have an opportunity to shop for affordable coverage on the health exchanges and will no longer be at the mercy of insurance companies placing coverage limits on policies.
The complaints coming from this crowd that supports ending Medicare is just another example of putting politics first."
What is really pathetic is her spin on this issue. It almost sounds like she is slamming her own legislation - "It is pathetic that there are those who would be cheering for Americans to lose their minimum health coverage or see their premiums increase for political purposes." That line could also be used to describe the jubilation with which she celebrated the passage of that horrible bill. Her attempt to make her critics look bad in reality only makes her signature piece of legislation look like what it is - an over-reaching, unsustainable jumble of crippling regulations that is so bad that it requires exemption. Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) said the waivers constitute:
..."tacit admission that the health care law is fundamentally flawed."
"Despite the president's promise, it appears that just because you like your health care plan does not mean that the administration will allow you to keep it," Upton said.
And to think this 'historic
Many of the groups that received waivers were some of the biggest, most vocal supporters of the legislation - particularly the labor unions. The fact that they are now getting waivers is no surprise, however. After all, they already got one heck of a concession before the bill was ever even passed. This was after a failed attempt to exempt them from the law altogether. But fear not, union cronies - this administration is adept at making end runs around things they find inconvenient. Since they couldn't exempt them directly in the legislation, they will simply hand out waivers instead. That waivers are now being given at this level begs the question, who really is yoked to this harness? So far, it seems only those opposed to the law are being forced to comply - almost like a punishment.
The waivers are for only one year! supporters will cry. But congress just loooooves to extend things, like debt ceilings, the Patriot Act, and Pelosi's personal favorite, continuing resolutions - CRs must be her favorite, since she seemed to prefer them to passing an actual budget last year. This desire to continue things ad infinitum is evident in their deep and abiding affection for tenure (or is perhaps an explanation for it). The waivers are only available in yearly increments until 2014, but, if past experience is any indication, that date, too, will be extended.
What is becoming more and more evident is that under the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate, there are two laws of the land - one for the average Joe, and another for the administration and their supporters.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE
Well, it's now been two days since Osama bin Laden was sent off to meet his 72 virgins, which, of course, means the politicization is really racheting up. Democrats are, naturally, trying to give the credit to President Obama. Republicans are reminding them that without the interrogation policies set up under President Bush, none of this would have happened. Quite a tug of war, and each side has a point.
The Washington bubble is a remarkable thing, isn't it? You'd almost think Obama fast-roped himself out of the chopper and double-tapped Osama personally - after GWB ushered him personally into the compound.
No, the real heroes responsible for this awesome get are the nameless, faceless men and women of our intelligence and military forces. Bush gave the order to collect and disseminate intelligence, and Obama gave the order to go into Abbottabad. But everything else that has happened over the course of the past 4-6 years, particularly what happened in that compound, was due entirely to career intelligence and military personnel. Period.
This isn't a victory for Obama or the democrats, and it isn't a victory for Bush and republicans. It's a victory for the American people. It was our sons and daughters, our sisters and brothers, husbands and wives, who put together the information, geared up and went in to do what needed to be done.
It's all well and good that our Commanders-in-Chief gave some orders, but words aren't what got it done. Deeds are, and those deeds were done by Navy SEALs and CIA intelligence officers.
To those fine men and women, I offer my deepest, most heartfelt thanks and gratitude. Without their tireless, non-partisan efforts over a period of several years, we wouldn't be out in the streets shouting our relief to the heavens. Aside from a few college students in front of the White House Sunday night who were chanting "Four more years", the majority of Americans were chanting "U-S-A!" because it was a victory for all of us. This jockeying for credit in DC is an embarrassment. True heroes decline to take credit for the deeds they've done, or at the very least attempt to spread the accolades around.
But then, why in the world would I expect heroic behavior from the denizens of DC? Silly me.
The Washington bubble is a remarkable thing, isn't it? You'd almost think Obama fast-roped himself out of the chopper and double-tapped Osama personally - after GWB ushered him personally into the compound.
No, the real heroes responsible for this awesome get are the nameless, faceless men and women of our intelligence and military forces. Bush gave the order to collect and disseminate intelligence, and Obama gave the order to go into Abbottabad. But everything else that has happened over the course of the past 4-6 years, particularly what happened in that compound, was due entirely to career intelligence and military personnel. Period.
This isn't a victory for Obama or the democrats, and it isn't a victory for Bush and republicans. It's a victory for the American people. It was our sons and daughters, our sisters and brothers, husbands and wives, who put together the information, geared up and went in to do what needed to be done.
It's all well and good that our Commanders-in-Chief gave some orders, but words aren't what got it done. Deeds are, and those deeds were done by Navy SEALs and CIA intelligence officers.
To those fine men and women, I offer my deepest, most heartfelt thanks and gratitude. Without their tireless, non-partisan efforts over a period of several years, we wouldn't be out in the streets shouting our relief to the heavens. Aside from a few college students in front of the White House Sunday night who were chanting "Four more years", the majority of Americans were chanting "U-S-A!" because it was a victory for all of us. This jockeying for credit in DC is an embarrassment. True heroes decline to take credit for the deeds they've done, or at the very least attempt to spread the accolades around.
But then, why in the world would I expect heroic behavior from the denizens of DC? Silly me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)