Prosecutors on Friday night issued a memorandum recommending that former U.S. Rep. William Jefferson be sentenced to between 27 and 33 years in prison.
Jefferson, 62, will be sentenced by federal Judge T.S. Ellis III on Nov. 13.
The prosecution's sentencing memorandum suggests that Jefferson, who served 18 years in Congress, may have hidden resources and "poses a significant risk of flight,'' and ought to be immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service after sentencing at the Alexandria, Va., courthouse.
If Ellis follows the U.S. attorney's office recommendations, Jefferson would face by far the longest prison term ever imposed for congressional corruption, dwarfing the sentences meted out in such famous scandals as Abscam, Koreagate and Wedetch.
In March 2006, Former Rep. Randy ``Duke'' Cunningham of California was sentenced to eight years and four months in prison for taking $2.4 million in bribes to help military contractors win government contracts. At the time, prosecutors described the sentence as longest ever handed down for a member or former member of Congress in a corruption case. "Because Congressman Jefferson's crimes against the people of the United States were exceptional in their sheer number, length and breadth, the United States respectfully requests that this Court sentence the defendant within the applicable guideline range,'' the memorandum states. "While the guidelines sentence calculated by the Probation Office is lengthy, it is appropriate, in that Congressman Jefferson's criminal activities have surely caused or substantially added to the loss of public confidence and trust in our nation's highest levels of government.''
Later, the 25-page memorandum states, "A sentence within the guidelines range will communicate to Congressman Jefferson that his repeated attempts to sell his office were not only criminal, they were egregious. ... A severe sentence would send the message to the public that such egregious and criminal behavior will not be tolerated in our society.''
As to his flight risk, the government asserted that despite being in bankruptcy, Jefferson may have sufficient hidden resources and contacts in Africa to try to make his escape between sentencing and being remanded to prison if he has the opportunity.
According to the memorandum, "law enforcement agents learned of several wire transfers from offshore territories into U.S. financial accounts that were either controlled by the defendant or whose proceeds were made available for his benefit.''
The government's conclusion: "Given the age of the defendant, the severity of the sentence calculated by the Probation Office, the defendant's frequent travel overseas and unexplained wire transfers from overseas locations to financial accounts used by the defendant, the defendant cannot rebut the presumption at sentencing that he is a risk of flight.''
Jefferson is planning to appeal his verdict, and his attorneys may submit a reply to the government memorandum next week.
Jefferson was found guilty on Aug. 6 of 11 of 16 corruption counts, including soliciting bribes, depriving citizens of honest service in their representative, money laundering and racketeering.
Jefferson was found guilty on Aug. 6 of 11 of 16 corruption counts, including soliciting bribes, depriving citizens of honest service in their representative, money laundering and racketeering. The charges revolved around a series of schemes in which Jefferson, who took a keen interest in African affairs as a member of Congress and was on good terms with heads of state and other influential figures on the continent, sought to help American businesses secure business deals in West Africa in exchange for payments to shell companies held in the name of his wife, his daughters and his brother, Mose.
Jefferson claimed he was not acting in his official capacity as a member of Congress when he was working on those deals and therefore the payments were not bribes.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm betting 2.7 to 3.3 months, SUSPENDED, with a cookie and an "atta boy..."
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
11/08/2009 12:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You see, he did not have his official "Member of Congress" hat on, so then of course he was not officially taking bribes just payment. You understand now.
Posted by: Steven ||
11/08/2009 23:45 Comments ||
Top||
More troops may not be the answer to Nato's Afghanistan problems, a key adviser to President Barack Obama has said. National security adviser James Jones warned that extra troops could just be "swallowed up" in the deserts and mountains where troops are fighting. He was speaking as the president ponders a request to send 40,000 more soldiers to fight in the war, a decision which could prove one of the most crucial of his presidency.
In an interview published on Saturday, the German weekly magazine Der Spiegel asked Mr Jones whether he agreed with General Stanley McChrystal, the top United States and Nato commander in Afghanistan, that the troop increase was needed.
"Generals always ask for more troops," Mr Jones said.
Spoken like a Marine commandant.
"I believe we will not solve the problem with troops alone. The minimum number is important, of course. But there is no maximum number, however.
"You can keep on putting troops in, and you could have 200,000 troops there and Afghanistan will swallow them up as it has done in the past," he said, according to comments published by the magazine's website in English and German.
How does he suggest the war be won, then?
After weeks of internal deliberations, Obama's advisers are believed to be moving towards a hybrid strategy that would combine greater protection for population centres with more drone and special operations strikes against the Taliban.
The leading options under consideration would add at least 10,000 to 15,000 U.S. troops, but an announcement is expected to be weeks away.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
#1
We told you about him, but you wouldn't listen.
#2
"Generals always ask for more troops," Mr Jones said.
"There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army: By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact it cannot obey; this is called hobbling the army. By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administrers a kingdom, being ingornant of the conditions which obtain in an army; this causes restlessness in the soldier's mind. By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military princile of adaption to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers."
- Sun Tzu, the Art of War
If we dumped 200K troops into Afghanistan the way we did in Vietnam with an emphasis on body counts, sweeps, 'search and destroy', China Beach, 'hammer and anvil' operations, and huge supply depots, then indeed, Afghanistan might swallow them up.
What matters is what you do with them.
Bambi doesn't have a plan for that, either.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/08/2009 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Bambi doesn't have a plan for that, either.
I just hope He doesn't sprain His uterus trying to come up with one.
#8
He means Obama is a girl and he's searching for a solution between his legs. I think he's partially correct about the search but it's in the posterior orifice, not the anterior.
#10
Sorry, TW. It was a cheap insult suggesting Dear Leader is weak and indecisive; more an expression of exasperation at His reluctance to make a decision than gender stereotypes. I realize Obama is whipsawed between pandering to his political base on one hand and the advice of his commanders, Petraeus and McChrystal on the other. His campaign rhetoric about Afghanistan being the 'right' war probably doesn't make it any easier, but we are getting used to Him talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Coming from the IT world where the first response to any difficulty is to throw more bodies at the problem, I find this insistence on having the exact minimum head count for military ops fascinating. There is a rough rule of thumb that you need at least 3:1 superiority for a successful attack. More is better. Skimping on people means greater losses. I hate to sound like a 70's rock song, but refusing to decide *is* making a choice.
#11
Force correlations are hard to quantify with modern forces.
You should read about the Eastern Front in WWII where the Red Army in 1942-43 in some cases enjoyed six to one sometimes nine to one superiority in men and materiel and still were defeated by the German Army through professional application of firepower and maneuver.
If you revisit the chrononogy of Obama's involvement in Afghanistan, you will notice that Obama installed his guy, Gen. Stanley McChrystal and then ordered him to change the rules of engagement, which he promptly did.
Whereupon General McChrystal told Obama if he wants to win the war he needs the real time equivalent of 10 combat brigades.
That is where we stand. NATO has been trimming the equivalent of a combat division per year from Taliban ranks since 2007, with everything in situ since the May 2009 Farah airstrikes.
I don't know if 10 more combat brigades will win it, but General McChrystal thinks it will. And with the supporting firepower available there's no reason to think that he can't...
#12
And German NCOs frequently frustrated the plans of the Russian generals, a lesson the US learned and currently demonstrated daily by our nonpareil NCOs.
#13
It was a cheap insult suggesting Dear Leader is weak and indecisive;
No apology needed, dear SteveS, I just didn't understand. My vocabulary and idiom collection have grown dramatically since I found Rantburg, which I enjoy immensely, and which periodically startles the trailing daughters who think me irredeemably innocent.
#14
ION DAWN [Pakistan] > ASIA A HUB OF GEOPOLITICS. Former Ambassador SHAMSAD AHMED KHAN. ASIA remains highly disparate + fragmented, + cannot blame the US-West in sole for all of its problems.
* WAFF > UIGHURS SEEK PASSAGE TO INDIA.
CHINA STATE MEDIAS > XINJIANG Region remains highly volatile due to its 5600-km borders wid RUSSIA in north, INDIA in south, MONGOLIA in the east, + FORMER MUSLIM SOVIET SSRS + AFPAK + INDIA again in west.
* TIMES OF INDIA > [Chief Minister BUDDHADEB MATHANCHARJEE]"BUDDHA'S" TWIN-STRATEGIES TO FIGHT MAOISTS. GOVT-ARMY controls main Urban areas + roads, but must focus on VILLAGES + FORESTS
* PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM/BHARAT RAKSHAK > INDIA: MAOISTS GETTING ARMS FROM CHINA; + INDIA: ORGANZIED HINDU EXTREMISTS/RADICAL GROUPS FEARED TO BE TARGETING CHRISTIANS [120 killed tote in Orissa region; up to 70,0000 Indian CHristians left homeless + in hiding due to fear of VIOL HINDU Radicalist backlash].
SAME > [Seymour Hersch]PAKISTAN GOVT. SIGNS DEAL WID AMERICANS/ US SECURITY FIRMS WILL GUARD PAK NUKES???
versus PAKISTAN FOREIGN OFFICE [FO]: NO DEALS WID US ON SECURITY FOR N-ARSENAL.
Rep. Jim Matheson, D-UT, announced today he plans to vote against the health care reform bill his party leaders hope to pass this weekend, saying the legislation would increase costs and fail to produce needed changes.
Matheson said in a release that he wants changes to the current health care system, but the bill currently being considered in the U.S. House is not "secure, stable and affordable."
"Putting millions of additional people into a broken system will not work," he said in the release, citing a report from the Congressional Budget Office that predicts the proposed bill would increase federal outlays for health care and the federal budgetary commitment to health care.
"The path we are on is not sustainable," he said. "Without real reform, we will continue to strain family budgets, threaten the survival of small businesses and explode our national deficits."
Matheson proposed five major amendments to the bill today before the House Rules Committee, but none were likely to pass, and Democratic leaders have said they anticipate passing the bill anyway, as early as Saturday.
Matheson opposed another health care bill earlier this year, and was later named Co-Chair of the Blue Dogs, a group of fiscally conservative congressional Democrats.
Democratic leaders in the House have said they expect the bill to pass in a close vote, without every Democrat on board.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
As Washington reels from the news of 10.2 percent unemployment, the Center for Responsive Politics is out with a new report describing the wealth of members of Congress.
Among the highlights: Two-hundred-and-thirty-seven members of Congress are millionaires. That's 44 percent of the body -- compared to about 1 percent of Americans overall.
CRP says California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa is the richest lawmaker on Capitol Hill, with a net worth estimated at about $251 million. Next in line: Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), worth about $244.7 million; Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), worth about $214.5 million; Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), worth about $209.7 million; and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), worth about $208.8 million.
All told, at least seven lawmakers have net worths greater than $100 million, according to the Center's 2008 figures.
"Many Americans probably have a sense that members of Congress aren't hurting, even if their government salary alone is in the six figures, much more than most Americans make," said CRP spokesman Dave Levinthal. "What we see through these figures is that many of them have riches well beyond that salary, supplemented with securities, stock holdings, property and other investments."
The CRP numbers are somewhat rough estimates -- lawmakers are required to report their financial information in broad ranges of figures, so it's impossible to pin down their dollars with precision. The CRP uses the mid-point in the ranges to build its estimates.
Senators' estimated median reportable worth sunk to about $1.79 million from $2.27 million in 2007. The House's median income was significantly lower and also sank, bottoming out at $622,254 from $724,258 in 2007.
But CRP's analysis suggests that some lawmakers did well for themselves between 2007 and 2008, even as many Americans lost jobs and saw their savings and their home values plummet.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) gained about $9.2 million. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) gained about $3 million, Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) had an estimated $2.6 million gain, and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) gained about $2.8 million.
Some lawmakers have profited from investments in companies that have received federal bailouts; dozens of lawmakers are invested in Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America.
Among executive branch officials, CRP says the richest is Securities and Exchange Commission Chairwoman Mary L. Schapiro, with a net worth estimated at $26 million.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is next, worth an estimated $21 million. President Barack Obama is the sixth-wealthiest, worth about an estimated $4 million. Vice President Joe Biden has often tagged himself as an original blue collar man. The CRP backs him up, putting his net worth at just $27,000.
He's hardly the worst off.
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.), freshman Rep. Harry Teague (D-N.M.), Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.), Rep. John Salazar (D-Colo.) and Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) each a net worth of less than zero, CRP says.
One caveat on those numbers: Federal financial disclosure laws don't require members to list the value of their personal residences. That information could alter the net worth picture for many lawmakers.
Even so, Levinthal said, "It is clear that some members are struggling financially.
"Over a calendar year, one's wealth can change drastically. Many peoples' investments took a nose dive over night in the last year," he said.
A number of lawmakers are estimated to have suffered double-digit percentage lossed in their net worth from 2007 to 2008. The biggest losers include Kerry, who lost a whopping $127.4 million; Warner lost about $28.1 million; Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) lost about $11.8 million; and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) lost about $10.1 million.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
President Barack Obama is the sixth-wealthiest, worth about an estimated $4 million
#2
How long does it take to get vested in their pensions? If you count the value of their pension plans, aren't they all millionaires?
And what about the value of their campaign contributions war chests - don't those become their personal assets if they choose not to continue in office? And after a year or three of ZimbObama inflation, won't we all be millionaires?
#3
Issa was CEO of Direct Electronics - a Vista, CA company that makes car electronics (like the Viper car alarm), and as of 2004, was the largest aftermarket car electronics firm. He divested when he was elected. IOW - unlike Chollie Rangel, et al, he earned his money before congress
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/08/2009 10:26 Comments ||
Top||
Governor Charlie Crist stood next to President Obama in February and hailed the economic stimulus plan as beneficial for a state that is reeling from job losses and budget gaps. "We know that it's important that we pass this stimulus package," Crist said at the time .
But Crist now has joined a chorus of conservatives who are bashing the bill. Crist says he only supported the $787 billion in "concept," and that he did not support the actual bill. "The concept, I thought and still believe, was important, was necessary, and has helped Florida," the governor said Friday.
During an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer this week, Crist said, "I didn't endorse it; I didn't even have a vote on the darned thing."
Appearing in Tampa, Governor Crist said he did not misspeak during the CNN interview. He stands by his characterization that he did not endorse the specific bill. "I think the question posed to me was: did you endorse this specific bill," he said. Crist denied he is having it both ways.
Crist, who is running for a seat in the U.S. Senate, is facing swift scrutiny following the CNN interview. His GOP opponent, Marco Rubio, posted a video on YouTube highlighting the governor's seemingly contradictory statements.
The Club for Growth group, which says it "endorses Republican candidates who support limited government and lower taxes," also produced a video sharply critical of the governor. "Charlie Crist helped pass Barack Obama's spending program," it says, before citing statistics about rising unemployment and increased debt.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Uou can tell that i'm not lying because I am telling you I am not lying. It's just that simple.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
11/08/2009 9:28 Comments ||
Top||
More proof has emerged of White House political director Patrick Gaspard's ties to the radical advocacy group ACORN.
Gaspard, a longtime operative for ACORN and one of its partisan arms, New York's Working Families Party, currently holds the title of White House political affairs director, the same title Karl Rove held in President Bush's White House.
Internal ACORN documents show that Gaspard gave ACORN $40,000 over the past two years. Specifically, while Gaspard worked as an executive vice president of Service Employees International Union Local 1199 in New York he gave ACORN $15,000 in 2007 and $25,000 in 2008.
That's an awfully large tithe for someone who made $111,894 in 2007 and who has a wife and two children. The $111,894 figure comes from SEIU 1199's most recent publicly available tax return. (If salary and deferred benefits are combined the total is $151,869.)
Moreover, Gaspard hails from New York which has a crushing tax burden, especially for individuals earning six-figure salaries -- and he lived in the upscale neighborhood of Park Slope, Brooklyn. It was unclear at press time if Gaspard's wife contributes to the family fisc.
It is also entirely possible that the $40,000 Gaspard handed over to ACORN was SEIU money.
And in the scheme of things it really doesn't matter whether the lefty lucre belonged to Gaspard or SEIU. What matters is the fact that Gaspard handed over the money to ACORN. This is yet more proof of his closeness to the radical group.
Gaspard was previously revealed to be political director for ACORN's New York operation. Although the source of this information, ACORN founder Wade Rathke, has since feigned senility and claimed he was mistaken, evidence of Gaspard's ties to ACORN remains plentiful, as demonstrated by Stanley Kurtz, Trevor Loudon, Erick Erickson, and Moe Lane.
When I reported Sept. 28 that Gaspard was ACORN's man in the White House, the Obama administration promptly went into damage control mode and reflexively denied the report. Although the White House lied, various gullible reporters accepted the denial at face value, doing little or no research on their own.
Particularly risible was the research done by PolitiFact. Its attempt at debunking the story included information provided by less than credible Alinskyite sources for whom truth is a relative concept: ACORN spokesmen Brian Kettenring and Scott Levenson and disgraced ACORN founder Wade Rathke who covered up his brother's million-dollar embezzlement from the group for eight years.
Incidentally, one thing that journalists don't get about ACORN, which used to employ President Obama himself, is that it is a strange, complex creature with tentacles that reach into the highest levels of the United States government, the Democratic Party, corporate America, the labor movement, the nonprofit world, the media, foreign governments, and academia.
ACORN has a confusing structure with its network of who-knows-how-many taxpayer-funded tax-exempt nonprofit affiliates. As I've written ad nauseam, this is deliberate. ACORN identifies its affiliates as ACORN affiliates when it is convenient and claims the same entities are not ACORN affiliates when it is not. This game of nonprofit musical chairs is standard operating procedure at ACORN whenever things get hot.
Gaspard previously worked for the Working Families Party, which is an integral part of ACORN's far-flung empire of radical activism -- as is SEIU, although the left-wing union is now trying to distance itself from ACORN. ACORN's chief organizer Bertha Lewis co-founded the Working Families Party. ACORN notes on its website that in 1998 "ACORN members spearhead[ed] formation of the Working Families Party, the first community-labor party with official ballot status in New York state in more than 50 years." ACORN and the party share office space in Brooklyn.
Even though he's working in the White House now, Gaspard can't tear himself away from New York politics. He reportedly helped persuade leftist Republican Dede Scozzafava, who had been endorsed by the Working Families Party in previous elections, to endorse the Democratic candidate in the special election in New York's 23rd congressional district after she dropped out of the race. On Tuesday Democrat Bill Owens beat Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.
Given Gaspard's longstanding links to ACORN, it's not at all surprising that Scott Levenson, a lobbyist and spokesman for ACORN, dropped by the White House in March to visit with his former co-worker. The purpose of the meeting was not disclosed.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Back in June, pollster David Petts was the man with the answers.
His candidate, Virginia Democrat Creigh Deeds, had just won a thumping, come-from-behind primary victory to capture his party's nomination for governor. Petts sent a memo laying out in cool, confident language the strategy for him to win the general election.
The advice: Go negative on the Republican nominee, capitalize on his natural advantage with independents, and be wary of two fellow Democrats--incumbent Gov. Tim Kaine and President Barack Obama.
Deeds ultimately followed many of the recommendations laid out at the end of the 24-page strategy document, obtained by POLITICO.
The Democrat's 17-point loss to Republican Bob McDonnell was the worst blow-out in a gubernatorial election in nearly a half-century. And few people regard Petts as the man with the answers in 2009.
Instead, Deeds's once-promising campaign is now being dissected on the autopsy table by journalists and operatives for evidence of what candidates should not do as they approach the treacherous politics of 2010. It's clear that Deed's punches on McDonnell barely bruised him, he got crushed among independents, and his clumsy, toe-stubbing dance around Obama helped depress Democratic turnout.
In an interview, Petts dismissed much of what his memo said as "dated" and noted that the Deeds campaign made strategic shifts in the months that followed.
Indeed, what is notable about Petts's memo is not that it is an especially bad example of campaign advice but that it is entirely characteristic of the genre.
Written casually but with an air of authority, filled with jargon of the sort consultants use, it is little different than thousands of such memos that will be churned out over the next twelve months by the political-advice industry.
They are written with the assumption that politics is a science--influenced by variables that can be measured and producing outcomes that can be forecast--with victory a matter of method.
This pretense is more reassuring to the candidates paying for the advice than what is often the reality: voters are fickle, the factors that motivate them are ephemeral, political operatives are often winging it, and even the shrewdest advice often can't compensate for a weak candidate running in a harsh environment.
All these realities turned out to be on vivid display in Virginia.
But that was not so obvious back in June.
The recommendations in the memo were gleaned from an internal poll conducted in mid-June by Deeds's polling team of Bennett, Petts & Normington and listed in bullet-point fashion under a header of "Conclusions." The survey showed Deeds, enjoying a post-primary bounce, leading McDonnell 48 to 44 among likely voters, according a source familiar with the findings.
Told by Petts that his convincing primary win positioned him well with the Democratic base -- core Democrats, northern Virginians and African-Americans -- Deeds was advised: "The battleground now appears to be for independents outside the DC media market."
That media market would be the population center of the state, where a third of all voters call home.
Deeds' advisers had reason for optimism about the vote-rich Washington suburbs. Their candidate had just defeated two local candidates there in the primary and Democrats had surged in the region in recent elections, carrying Fairfax County with 60% of the vote in three consecutive statewide races.
But Deeds, a native of Bath County along the West Virginia border, hardly had northern Virginia locked up. Facing a Republican who grew up in the area before moving to the Hampton Roads region, the Democrat lost the Washington suburbs. He was even was edged out in Fairfax County, which both parties assumed would ne an anchor of the Democrats' coalition this year.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Instead, Deeds's once-promising campaign is now being dissected on the autopsy table by journalists and operatives for evidence of what candidates should not do as they approach the treacherous politics of 2010.
"journalists and operatives" - the only difference being who the paymaster is.
Can it be? Another Republican leader taking on Rush Limbaugh? Apparently so. And that leader is Virginia's Eric Cantor, the second-highest-ranking GOP member in the House.
But first a little history. Earlier this year Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, labeled Limbaugh's talk show "incendiary" and "ugly." After Limbaugh and his many listeners expressed their displeasure, Steele apologized--and pretty quickly, too.
Which makes today's comments by Cantor all the more interesting. In a segment on "Political Capital with Al Hunt" being aired today, he touches on Limbaugh comments that have been, shall we say, less than inclusionary.
He also suggested that harsh rhetoric from party members might harm the GOP in the long run:
"The Republican Party in its root is a party of inclusion and we ought to be promoting that and making sure that voices are heard."
This bit of news comes from Bloomberg, in an article about Cantor's comments on the show, which airs on Bloomberg Television. As the article states:
"His comments about Limbaugh and other members of his party put him at odds with some party leaders. Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, also took issue with Limbaugh's comments, then relented.
"Cantor was critical of Republicans such as Representative Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, who called the Democratic health plan a greater threat to America than terrorists and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who took fellow Republican Olympia Snowe to task for voting with Democrats. Pawlenty later said the Maine senator is 'absolutely welcome' in the party."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
WHY is Rush Limbaugh so popular he has a Talk Show of his own?
Does any Lefty have a Talk Show of comparability?
WHY is Rush Limbaugh so POPULAR everybody listens to him and everybody knows his name. Does he need any introduction? Is anyone here uninformed of his views, or doesnt recognize exactly his message?
Do people PAY ( good money) to listen to Rush Limbaugh? Money talks, as they say. And there are so MANY people who DO LISTEN to Rush Limbaugh that he can face down Senators and make them grab their ankles. HOW does he GET that kind of power?
Ask yourself HOW Rush Limbaugh gets that kind of Voice and that kind of Power.
A whole LOT of people AGREE with what Rush Limbaugh has to say. And they VOTE. And he has more MEANING, real genuine visceral grass roots willing to pay and play Power than any one GOP individual. Am I lying to you?
Knowing all this ( you may not like it , but you do have to recognize it) what is the GOP going to do to accommodate Rush Limbaugh and his CONSTITUENCY? Shut his up? HOW? Ignore him? HOW?
Rush Limbaugh is an ENGINE...Rush Limbaugh speaks the gut and marrow of the mean street which will PAY money and get the Vote. The GOP would do well to harness that power or find someway to steal it. Because its NOT going to go away.
Rush Limbaugh is the Id of the GOP. You cant deny the Id.
#2
Is this about RL's response to Pelosi's Hitler reference several months back? If so, that would be pretty lame.
Posted by: Black Bart ||
11/08/2009 7:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
WTF? Sometimes the Republicans remind me of that famous photo of the Buddist monk immolating himself in Viet Nam. Boys, you've been losing me for a long time.
With just hours remaining until an historic vote on a sweeping health-care reform measure Saturday evening, at least 32 Democrats have said they will vote against the bill as of 7:15 p.m., according to a POLITICO analysis.
Just eight more "no" votes would be enough to sink the bill if Republicans maintain, as expected, a solid front of opposition. Still, Democratic sources are signaling that they have secured the majority of the caucus and expect to pass the bill tonight.
Just eight more "no" votes would be enough to sink the bill if Republicans maintain, as expected, a solid front of opposition. Still, Democratic sources are signaling that they have secured the majority of the caucus and expect to pass the bill tonight.
While the reasons these Democrats have offered for opposing the $1.2 trillion bill vary, they nearly all share a common trait--they are among the most politically vulnerable incumbents in the House, and they tend to represent conservative-minded seats that John McCain won in 2008.
Of the 32 no votes, 26 are members who represent seats carried by McCain--including all 11 Democratic members who hail from districts where McCain won 60 percent or more of the vote. Three of the remaining six are freshmen Democrats sitting in seats that were Republican-held until 2008.
At least three committee chairmen--Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) and Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.)--have also said they said they do not support the bill. "While the House bill does take some positive steps toward increasing coverage and reforming insurance regulations, it simply falls short when it comes to lowering healthcare costs for North Florida families and businesses," said Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) in a statement Saturday explaining why he would vote "no."
"Given the huge federal deficits facing our nation, I believe there is too much new spending in this bill," said Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Texas) in a statement explaining his opposition to the bill. "Throughout this debate I have heard two extremes. Some on the far left would like to see the federal government run a socialized health care system. Some on the far right would get the government completely out of health care, which would mean the elimination of Medicare and Medicaid. I think both extremes are wrong."
Boyd's North Florida-based seat gave 54 percent of the vote to McCain in 2008 while Edwards's Waco-based seat delivered 67 percent of the vote to the GOP presidential nominee.
The Saturday afternoon House passage of the rule allowing the debate to move forward suggested the number of no votes could grow--four of the 15 Democrats voting no on the rule aren't included on POLITICO's list of no votes.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We need to remember who voted yes AND who voted no in 2010.
NYT, so I'll avoid the fluff:
Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit Democratic voters and it will encourage the extremists.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/08/2009 09:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Soon we will be called criminals....
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
11/08/2009 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
..."anti-government people" ... Does this make Major Hassan a "teabagger"? Bambi has absolutely NO CLASS to show.
#7
Though I've only gone to one tea party, I wear the label of 'teabagger' with pride. An obvious attempt to slander can be turned around and become a symbol of pride. The British slandered the colonysts rebels by by calling them 'Yankee Doodles' and composing a song set to a tavern tune. We know how that turned out. I am going to change my posting name to 'Oregon Doodle' after submitting this.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
11/08/2009 21:06 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Prosecutors on Friday night issued a memorandum recommending that former U.S. Rep. William Jefferson be sentenced to between 27 and 33 years in prison.
Rep. Jim Matheson, D-UT, announced today he plans to vote against the health care reform bill his party leaders hope to pass this weekend, saying the legislation would increase costs and fail to produce needed changes.
Talk about bad timing. 
Governor Charlie Crist stood next to President Obama in February and hailed the economic stimulus plan as beneficial for a state that is reeling from job losses and budget gaps. "We know that it's important that we pass this stimulus package," Crist said at the time .
More proof has emerged of White House political director Patrick Gaspard's ties to the radical advocacy group ACORN. 
Can it be? Another Republican leader taking on Rush Limbaugh? Apparently so. And that leader is Virginia's Eric Cantor, the second-highest-ranking GOP member in the House. 
