In the latest twist on the eighteen-month-long endeavor to discover what exactly happened in regards to Operation Fast and Furious, the House Oversight Committee voted to cite Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. It passed the committee 23-17 - on party lines - and is now headed to the floor of the House for a vote that is expected to take place some time next week (where is is expected to pass - again on a party line vote). For those not familiar with OF&F, go here and here for background.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Thursday, April 12, 2012
WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT: PROPAGANDA EDITION
Dana Milbank isn't someone I agree with often, but his article in the Washington Post today was a real eye opener for me. Mr. Milbank is (somewhat surprisingly) not very supportive of President Obama's proposed "Buffett Rule", which is supposed to reach the Senate floor for a vote next week. It's not expected to pass.
In fact, the president himself called the whole thing a "gimmick". Isn't it great that the Senate is spending its valuable time on this purely political attempt to re-elect one man instead of doing its constitutional duty and passing the first budget in more than three years? Good to know they have their priorities in line.
In fact, the president himself called the whole thing a "gimmick". Isn't it great that the Senate is spending its valuable time on this purely political attempt to re-elect one man instead of doing its constitutional duty and passing the first budget in more than three years? Good to know they have their priorities in line.
Monday, April 9, 2012
VOTER ID AND REALITY
The Department of Justice has been busily blocking various and sundry state voter ID laws recently, arguing that requiring people to show a state-approved photo ID in order to cast a vote will disenfranchise many voters - particularly in urban areas, where many citizens don't drive. The NAACP have gone so far as to argue before the UN that voter ID laws are human rights violations, even though many poor and minority voters seem to want their votes protected by ID requirements. DoJ chief Eric Holder maintains that voter ID laws suppress voter turnout. Eh, not so much.
Monday, March 19, 2012
ON CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS AND POND SCUM
At a recent fundraiser, President Obama called his republican competitors "flat earthers" in regards to his "all of the above" energy policy (via USA Today):
Yeah, yeah, we get it, conservatives are anti-science. Well, except when they're not, of course.
"If some of these folks were around when Columbus set sail," he said, "they must have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society -- they would not have believed that the world was round."
Yeah, yeah, we get it, conservatives are anti-science. Well, except when they're not, of course.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
ON NEWT, REAGAN, MUD AND MITT
Today's the big day here in Florida. While I am not a registered republican and cannot vote in the closed primary, I'm happy today is primary day because that means that hopefully tomorrow the attack ads will stop. The Romney campaign has decided to run a scorched earth campaign against Newt Gingrich, and it ain't pretty. For every Gingrich ad there are three Romney attack ads. I have to say, I'm liking candidate Romney less and less as the campaign drags on. I have no problem with attack ads, but I do require that they at least be truthful. Romney's are not.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
PROJECTION AND REVERSISM Updated
In yet another glaringly obvious case of projection, our esteemed President said a mouthful while attacking the republican agenda at yet another fundraiser last night (via the Weekly Standard):
Now, of course he was referring to the eeeeevil republican candidates destroying America as we know it. In reality, what he is trying to do is about as far from the core of what this country stands for as possible. Isn't that, in fact, what his claims to "fundamentally change" America were all about? Ostensibly, his point was that republicans won't make you your neighbor's keeper, but when was that ever the core of what this country stands for? It doesn't really jibe with our signature rugged individualism, but then, we all know how he feels about that little foible.
"The very core of what this country stands for is on the line"
Now, of course he was referring to the eeeeevil republican candidates destroying America as we know it. In reality, what he is trying to do is about as far from the core of what this country stands for as possible. Isn't that, in fact, what his claims to "fundamentally change" America were all about? Ostensibly, his point was that republicans won't make you your neighbor's keeper, but when was that ever the core of what this country stands for? It doesn't really jibe with our signature rugged individualism, but then, we all know how he feels about that little foible.
Labels:
Change,
Nancy Pelosi,
Obama,
ObamaCare,
projection,
spending
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
STUCK IN THE PAST - Updated
It seems President Obama is now attempting to channel Theodore Roosevelt. Sure, why not? It's amazing how many former presidents he (or the ever-fawning media) has tried to model himself after - it started with the comparisons to FDR and JFK, but continued with quite laughable attempts to connect him to Reagan and even Harry Truman. Now, I have to say, there is a bit of a similarity on that last one, but not the bogus "Do Nothing Congress" angle he's been working for all he's worth. No, the real similarity is that both are responsible for dropping huge bombs that crippled nations - Japan, in Truman's case, and the American economy via Porkulus, over regulation and Obamacare in Obama's. Unfortunately for President Obama, the rising consensus is that, performance-wise, he is a far closer match to Carter than any of the giants with whom he has attempted parity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)