"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents...." – James Madison
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Myth of GOP Only Tax Protest
"...the no vote is fueled by voter anger at the enormous surge in spending in the Golden State over the past decade, and by the refusal to make serious reforms in the way the state runs. The public pension problem is also beginning to come into view, and ordinary voters are shocked at the amount of spending the public employee unions have carved out of the legislature." [link]
In the land of the left there seems to be general disgust at the way the state government is ran and the cost to the taxpayers. Start digging too deeply in any one's pockets and they start turning ugly. The MSM should get their stories straight and realize that corruption and over-taxation hurts everyone and it is not just about the GOP being bitter.
In the land of the left there seems to be general disgust at the way the state government is ran and the cost to the taxpayers. Start digging too deeply in any one's pockets and they start turning ugly. The MSM should get their stories straight and realize that corruption and over-taxation hurts everyone and it is not just about the GOP being bitter.
Obama Drug Czar to End "War on Drugs"!
Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske..."rejects the formulation of the “War on Drugs” and voices an inclination to treat American drug abuse as a national health challenge: In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation’s drug issues.
“Regardless of how you try to explain to people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product,’ people see a war as a war on them. We’re not at war with people in this country.” [link]
Oh, I see now! We are just going to change what we call it, but continue on with the same strategy that has cost billions of dollars, loss of life, and has led to the drug abuse epidemic growing at an exponential rate.
Remember a few posts back about how the left loves to use wording, verbage, and political correctness to try and win support without actually changing anything of substance?
“Regardless of how you try to explain to people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product,’ people see a war as a war on them. We’re not at war with people in this country.” [link]
Oh, I see now! We are just going to change what we call it, but continue on with the same strategy that has cost billions of dollars, loss of life, and has led to the drug abuse epidemic growing at an exponential rate.
Remember a few posts back about how the left loves to use wording, verbage, and political correctness to try and win support without actually changing anything of substance?
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Quote for the Day
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." -- Thomas Jefferson
They Will Never Get It
"...The City of Chicago had suffered nearly twice as many fatalities as all American soldiers in Iraq over the same period...the City tallied over 500 homicides, 80 percent of which were caused by gunshot wounds. In total, the social costs of gun violence in Chicago are estimated at $2.5 billion. Despite the devastating impact on local communities, federal gun control has essentially been taken off the table as a valid issue due to concerns of its unpopularity in elections. To reinstate such an important and consequential dialogue, Democrats must re-frame gun control as a pro-security measure." [link]
I don't happen to see any mention anywhere in the article that gun ownership in Chicago is for all intents and purposes illegal. So wouldn't logic dictate that making something that is already illegal in an area illegal again have no effect, or would the double emphasis on being illegal make all the difference?
Also notice the strategy that has been put forth, that of "re-framing" the issue. I posted yesterday about the mastery of the left in using language as a means of winning support. They change the focus but everything else remains the same. This is a tactic that has worked for them in many areas and one that liberty and freedom minded people need to be more aware of if we wish to stop the encroachment of our liberties.
I don't happen to see any mention anywhere in the article that gun ownership in Chicago is for all intents and purposes illegal. So wouldn't logic dictate that making something that is already illegal in an area illegal again have no effect, or would the double emphasis on being illegal make all the difference?
Also notice the strategy that has been put forth, that of "re-framing" the issue. I posted yesterday about the mastery of the left in using language as a means of winning support. They change the focus but everything else remains the same. This is a tactic that has worked for them in many areas and one that liberty and freedom minded people need to be more aware of if we wish to stop the encroachment of our liberties.
Putting the Cart Before the Horse
Cart: "...Obama will announce Wednesday morning that House Democrats have pledged to pass a health care reform bill by July 31 -- a vow the White House believes will advance its goal of seeing health care legislation signed into law by year's end."
Horse: "The announcement will not describe the contents of the health care bill -- leaving key questions about funding, coverage and access for another day." [link]
Usually when people set out to solve a problem they will start looking at options available rather than to say here is our end result we will get you the details of how we solved it as soon as we figure that out.
Before they attempt to hash out the details let's look at some things that might work. How about doctors competing for patients via pricing? How many of you with insurance go to see a doctor and leave the office without having a clue what your bill is or what you are billed for? Some billing specialist usually bills your insurance (and boy do they bill them), and it might be months before you get a finalized bill for the remainder yourself.
What we don't need to do is set back and let congress and the administration do as they please. As we can see that approach has worked so well for Medicare and Social Security. Do you want your health care handled by the same people that have made those two programs "shining examples" of government achievement?
Horse: "The announcement will not describe the contents of the health care bill -- leaving key questions about funding, coverage and access for another day." [link]
Usually when people set out to solve a problem they will start looking at options available rather than to say here is our end result we will get you the details of how we solved it as soon as we figure that out.
Before they attempt to hash out the details let's look at some things that might work. How about doctors competing for patients via pricing? How many of you with insurance go to see a doctor and leave the office without having a clue what your bill is or what you are billed for? Some billing specialist usually bills your insurance (and boy do they bill them), and it might be months before you get a finalized bill for the remainder yourself.
What we don't need to do is set back and let congress and the administration do as they please. As we can see that approach has worked so well for Medicare and Social Security. Do you want your health care handled by the same people that have made those two programs "shining examples" of government achievement?
Is It That Far Off?
Just ran across this and it made me wonder, how far are we from scenarios like this taking place?
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
And Then They Came For Me
For years there has been a rift in the shooting sports. There are those that said "black rifles" have no sporting purpose, there have also been instances of hunters saying it does not matter, I hunt with a bolt action, single shot, etc... They can't equate that with "assault weapons" could they? Maybe they can't, but now they have decided to go after hunting anyway.
"Both petitions came from homeowners groups, one on Sugar Loaf Mountain west of Boulder and the other from Castle Pines Village south of Denver. Representatives from both groups expressed similar distress: Hunting activity is threatening their safety If the DOW were to ban hunting in the area, said attorney Susan Horner, “It would go a long way in saving us a whole lot of legal fees.” Simple as that: Ban hunting, we won’t sue." [link] It is time for all gun owners and everyone who enjoys personal responsibility and freedom to start banding together under the same banner and quit squabbling about semantics.
"We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." -- Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Just as true now as it was then.
Background info on the title of this post.
Quote for the Day
"We've gone astray from first principles. We've lost sight of the rule that individual freedom and ingenuity are at the very core of everything that we've accomplished. Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives." -- Ronald Reagan
The "Other" Side
I have been very critical of the left in Washington since I started this blog and I am sure that quite a few people think that I am a hard line Conservative/Republican. However had I started this blog during the Bush years more than likely I would have been labeled as a hard line Liberal/Democrat. The reason for this is I would have just as loudly spoken out about the corruption and demolition of rights that took place under Bush. So in dubious honor to B43 I offer you a small sampling of the liberties stripped from the American people via the un-"Patriot Act":
Let's start with that pesky 4th Amendment, you know, the one about unreasonable search and seizure. Well the un-"Patriot Act" pretty much states that, the government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
That 6th Amendment really causes a lot of problems how can that be fixed via the un-"Patriot Act"? Answer: How about by monitoring conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes, and also, Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them. US citizens (labeled "unlawful combatants") have been held incommunicado and refused attorneys.
And lastly how can the government subvert the ever deadly and dangerous 1st Amendment? Answer: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation they may also monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity.
You may find a full text of the Act here. It might also be interesting to note specifically Section 802 (B) i and ii which specifically states the definition of a domestic terrorist. I believe that by this definition both Bush and Obama would classify, along with a vast number of the members of Congress. Because when the economy started to head south, they both started with the doom and gloom projections and what would happen if the people did not "allow" the administration to act quickly.
Let's start with that pesky 4th Amendment, you know, the one about unreasonable search and seizure. Well the un-"Patriot Act" pretty much states that, the government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
That 6th Amendment really causes a lot of problems how can that be fixed via the un-"Patriot Act"? Answer: How about by monitoring conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes, and also, Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them. US citizens (labeled "unlawful combatants") have been held incommunicado and refused attorneys.
And lastly how can the government subvert the ever deadly and dangerous 1st Amendment? Answer: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation they may also monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity.
You may find a full text of the Act here. It might also be interesting to note specifically Section 802 (B) i and ii which specifically states the definition of a domestic terrorist. I believe that by this definition both Bush and Obama would classify, along with a vast number of the members of Congress. Because when the economy started to head south, they both started with the doom and gloom projections and what would happen if the people did not "allow" the administration to act quickly.
Money Well Spent, Don't You Think?
I really had to roll my eyes at this one. I honestly cannot think of one single reason, even with my imagination in overdrive for spending U.S. Taxpayer dollars on this.
"The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job...The grant, made last November, refers to prostitutes as "female sex workers"--or FSW--and their handlers as "gatekeepers." [link]
One thing to keep in mind, notice how there is a change in language and noun usage to keep people from summoning mental images. "FSW" and "gatekeeper" what images would come to mind with whore and pimp. Doubt they would have been given $2.6 million if they would have used those terms.
The left excels at this practice. Using "assault weapon" instead of battle rifle or AR-15. "Automatic weapons" instead of the true label of semi-auto. "Extremists" rather than family oriented, deeply religious, or defenders of the Constitution.
They make it a word game and how they can shine whatever type of light on it they want to as long as they light they use benefits them or their agenda. Keep this in mind when you hear them speak and write. Look at how they use words and phrases. Be ever vigilant.
"The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job...The grant, made last November, refers to prostitutes as "female sex workers"--or FSW--and their handlers as "gatekeepers." [link]
One thing to keep in mind, notice how there is a change in language and noun usage to keep people from summoning mental images. "FSW" and "gatekeeper" what images would come to mind with whore and pimp. Doubt they would have been given $2.6 million if they would have used those terms.
The left excels at this practice. Using "assault weapon" instead of battle rifle or AR-15. "Automatic weapons" instead of the true label of semi-auto. "Extremists" rather than family oriented, deeply religious, or defenders of the Constitution.
They make it a word game and how they can shine whatever type of light on it they want to as long as they light they use benefits them or their agenda. Keep this in mind when you hear them speak and write. Look at how they use words and phrases. Be ever vigilant.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Guess The BATFE Doesn't Want "Transparency
From today's Gun Rights Examiner column. Exploring the strange way the BATFE posted their seized property notices. Go to the Examiner Column to read it yourself.
Quote for the Day
"It is my belief that there are `absolutes' in our Bill of Rights, and that they were put there on purpose by men who knew what words meant, and meant their prohibitions to be `absolutes'." -- Justice Hugo Black, The Bill of Rights, 35 NYU L.R. 865, 1970
Dangerous Legislation: Goodbye Due Process
"A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans as potential “threats,” could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others – any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential “extremism.”
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159...permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any “known or suspected dangerous terrorist.” The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is “appropriately suspected”...
Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill’s language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person’s Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being “dangerous.” [link]
This should scare the pants off anyone. Just imagine the government being allowed to curtail rights based on legislation that is based on loose interpretations. I am all for not letting known terrorist own weapons, the question needs to be asked though, if they are a known terrorist what are they doing running around free?
When you try to pass legislation based on fear you get..."The Patriot Act" (anything but), the massive "porkulus" bill, the bailout (can you say bankruptcy for 2 of the Big 3). These actions make no sense to start with, but start talking doom and gloom and straight to the presidents desk for the signature.
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159...permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any “known or suspected dangerous terrorist.” The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is “appropriately suspected”...
Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill’s language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person’s Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being “dangerous.” [link]
This should scare the pants off anyone. Just imagine the government being allowed to curtail rights based on legislation that is based on loose interpretations. I am all for not letting known terrorist own weapons, the question needs to be asked though, if they are a known terrorist what are they doing running around free?
When you try to pass legislation based on fear you get..."The Patriot Act" (anything but), the massive "porkulus" bill, the bailout (can you say bankruptcy for 2 of the Big 3). These actions make no sense to start with, but start talking doom and gloom and straight to the presidents desk for the signature.
Did You Really Think This Wouldn't Happen?
"Counties suffering the most from job losses stand to receive the least help from President Barack Obama's plan to spend billions of stimulus dollars on roads and bridges, an Associated Press analysis has found.
Altogether, the government is set to spend 50 percent more per person in areas with the lowest unemployment than it will in communities with the highest." [link]
Really doesn't make much since, when jobs are promised via the stimulus to give money to the areas where the jobs are needed least. Of course, no one thought that the government would actually get it right did they?
Altogether, the government is set to spend 50 percent more per person in areas with the lowest unemployment than it will in communities with the highest." [link]
Really doesn't make much since, when jobs are promised via the stimulus to give money to the areas where the jobs are needed least. Of course, no one thought that the government would actually get it right did they?
You Can Buy These Without a Permit?!
"The wildfire that has scorched 13 square miles and destroyed dozens of homes in the hills above this scenic coastal city was apparently sparked by a power tool being used to clear brush, investigators said Sunday." [link]
So even though this tool can cause this much destruction (and at times death) we are going to allow anyone to buy one without a permit? What about special training? How about a waiting period, or a limit of only one purchase a month? I mean nobody would need to buy more than one of these a month would they?
So even though this tool can cause this much destruction (and at times death) we are going to allow anyone to buy one without a permit? What about special training? How about a waiting period, or a limit of only one purchase a month? I mean nobody would need to buy more than one of these a month would they?
Friday, May 8, 2009
Quote for the Day
"Because you were unprepared when evil visited you, you want to make sure the rest of us are unprepared. The most vile instrument of death isn't a gun, it is government wielded by "do-gooders" that know what's best for the masses." -- Unknown
More Spin From the Violence Policy Center
"The Violence Policy Center says each of the states with a high death rate has lax gun laws and higher gun ownership rates. The report defined states with "weak" gun laws as those that add little or nothing to federal restrictions and have permissive laws allowing civilians to carry concealed handguns." [link]
So I am assuming by this logic, that Washington DC should have virtually no gun related deaths? Right... [go here]. I wouldn't trust the VPC as far as I could throw them.
How then would they rank Vermont where any law abiding citizen may carry concealed without a permit, training, etc...they actually rated Vermont in their 1996 study 38th with only 5 homicides which correlates to a rate of .89 per 100,000 for that state in 1996.
They also fail to mention that the national average has dropped even thought more states have adopted concealed carry laws and relaxed federal firearm laws. In fact according to the article national gun related deaths are 10.3 per 100,000, while in 1996 according to a VPC report they were 12.94 per 100,000. How do they account for this? [source]
So I am assuming by this logic, that Washington DC should have virtually no gun related deaths? Right... [go here]. I wouldn't trust the VPC as far as I could throw them.
How then would they rank Vermont where any law abiding citizen may carry concealed without a permit, training, etc...they actually rated Vermont in their 1996 study 38th with only 5 homicides which correlates to a rate of .89 per 100,000 for that state in 1996.
They also fail to mention that the national average has dropped even thought more states have adopted concealed carry laws and relaxed federal firearm laws. In fact according to the article national gun related deaths are 10.3 per 100,000, while in 1996 according to a VPC report they were 12.94 per 100,000. How do they account for this? [source]
Powered by ScribeFire.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Quote for the Day
“We can’t be so fixated on the desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans.” --Bill Clinton March 11, 1993
State Defies Federal Gun Laws Via Legislation!
"The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts." [link]
This is big and this very important. We will have to wait and see. In the mean time, I tip my hat to you Montanans and wish my Governor and state legislature had the guts you all do.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts." [link]
This is big and this very important. We will have to wait and see. In the mean time, I tip my hat to you Montanans and wish my Governor and state legislature had the guts you all do.
This is Transparency in Government?
"The White House is refusing to release the controversial photos of Air Force One flying over the Manhattan skyline last week that triggered panic among New Yorkers and an internal review in the Obama administration.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday that there was no need to release them.
"I've watched CNN," he said, noting the considerable coverage from amateur footage. "I didn't notice a lack of archival material from that flight." [link]
Now this I find strange. WE the taxpayers shell out $328K [source] for this unique photo-op and probably several heart attacks, strokes, stress related illnesses, etc... in the New York metro area. Don't you think that we should be allowed to see these wonderful pictures. Maybe the White House could even blow them up as posters and sell them to tourists, wouldn't that be a wonderful way to generate money for the government? Instead of taking it by force let the people pay to own such a wonderful piece of history.
For my part I think I will request the photos via a FOIA request. Here is how you can request them to.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday that there was no need to release them.
"I've watched CNN," he said, noting the considerable coverage from amateur footage. "I didn't notice a lack of archival material from that flight." [link]
Now this I find strange. WE the taxpayers shell out $328K [source] for this unique photo-op and probably several heart attacks, strokes, stress related illnesses, etc... in the New York metro area. Don't you think that we should be allowed to see these wonderful pictures. Maybe the White House could even blow them up as posters and sell them to tourists, wouldn't that be a wonderful way to generate money for the government? Instead of taking it by force let the people pay to own such a wonderful piece of history.
For my part I think I will request the photos via a FOIA request. Here is how you can request them to.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Quote for the Day
"The real democratic American ideal is, not that every man shall be on a level with every other man, but that every man shall have liberty to be what God made him, without hindrance." -- Henry Ward Beecher
A Model of Political/Financial Systems: Using Cows
I wish that I could take credit for this witty (scarily true) post. I have to print it in its entirety it is so good. Hope you all enjoy this as much as I did.
[source]
SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows. You give one to your neighbor.
COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.
FASCISM
You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.
NAZISM
You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.
BUREAUCRACY
You have 2 cows. The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away…
TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.
SURREALISM
You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow has dropped dead.
ENRON VENTURE CAPITALISM
You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States , leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.
A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows. You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You then create a clever cow cartoon image called ‘Cowkimon’ and market it worldwide.
A GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows. You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don’t know where they are. You decide to have lunch.
A RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 2 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.
A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you. You charge the owners for storing them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity. You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows. You worship them.
A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows. Both are mad.
AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows. You tell them that you have none. No-one believes you, so they bomb you and invade your country. You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of a Democracy…
AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows. Business seems pretty good. You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.
OBAMANOMICS
You have 2 cows both are sick, you spend $787 billion on Pork, and wonder why the cows died. But you still own 2 failing auto manufacturers, a busted insurance firm, and a bunch of banks. You can do this only because you won the election![source]
If the Shoe Were on the Other Foot
It happened once already. That is how the Democrats gained control of Congress. However after all the corruption that was brought to light in the Republican party let us now take a look at issues going on in the Democratic party:
"Barack Obama, who vowed he'd provide a transparent administration staffed with disinterested public servants...appointed an admitted tax cheat to run the Treasury Department -- and he's hardly the only one in the administration." [link]
Charles Rangle, Chairman of House Ways and Means Committee: Under investigation for failing to report income from his Caribbean villa.
Chris Dodd, Chairman of Senate Banking Committee: Got special deals from sub prime lender Countrywide, has yet to explain million plus dollar "cottage" in Ireland which could possibly have come as a favor for helping to get a pardon granted for a felon under Clinton.
Jack Murtha, Rep. Pennsylvania: How much federal money has he diverted to cronies and lobbyists?
John Edwards, ex-presidential candidate: Being investigated for misuse of campaign funds that were funneled to his then mistress and her company.
This is just a sampling of what is going on within the Democratic party. Imagine all the corruption that has not made it into the public yet. Sort of like an iceberg I like to think we have only seen the 10% that is above the waterline.
"Barack Obama, who vowed he'd provide a transparent administration staffed with disinterested public servants...appointed an admitted tax cheat to run the Treasury Department -- and he's hardly the only one in the administration." [link]
Charles Rangle, Chairman of House Ways and Means Committee: Under investigation for failing to report income from his Caribbean villa.
Chris Dodd, Chairman of Senate Banking Committee: Got special deals from sub prime lender Countrywide, has yet to explain million plus dollar "cottage" in Ireland which could possibly have come as a favor for helping to get a pardon granted for a felon under Clinton.
Jack Murtha, Rep. Pennsylvania: How much federal money has he diverted to cronies and lobbyists?
John Edwards, ex-presidential candidate: Being investigated for misuse of campaign funds that were funneled to his then mistress and her company.
This is just a sampling of what is going on within the Democratic party. Imagine all the corruption that has not made it into the public yet. Sort of like an iceberg I like to think we have only seen the 10% that is above the waterline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
