Darrell Issa will likely call for a special investigation into the White House/Joe Sestak scandal
Representative Darrell Issa had set a deadline of March 18th for the White House to respond to a letter regarding the issue of Joe Sestak’s allegation that the White House tampered in the Pennsylvania primary by offering Joe Sestak a high ranking position in the administration in return for his promise not to run against Arlen Specter. If the White House did not meet his deadline, Darrell Issa was prepared to call for a special investigation into the accusations.
The March 18th deadline was missed but the deadline was extended and still the White House has not provided Darrell Issa with the answers to the questions that he has asked for. Darrell Issa is now stating that he will give the White house one more week to respond and if they don’t he will call for a special investigation into the matter.
If the allegations are true than a federal crime has been committed and the American people need and deserve to know the truth about this issue one way or the other. I believe that Joe Sestak is telling the truth, but I also was of the belief that he had no proof of these allegations, after all nobody in the White House would be stupid enough to leave a paper trail on something like this. I believe that this type of deal– while wrong– is made all of the time by both parties. Joe Sestak just happens to be the first person to go public with such claims.
Arlen Specter said that in light of the accusations of a federal crime, Joe Sestak should provide the congress with the names of the people who committed said crimes. I agree with Arlen Specter. Joe Sestak’s response? There was none, he stopped making the accusations. Joe Sestak’s sudden silence when challenged by Arlen Specter is what led me to believe that he had opened his mouth without thinking, and that although he may have been telling the truth, he could not prove it.
But then Darrell Issa’s deadline comes and goes and there is no response from the White House and I am wondering why. If the White House had nothing to hide than why wouldn’t they provide Darrell Issa with the answers to his questions? Why drag out this issue if they could end it once and for all?
Either Joe Sestak is lying, or the White House is lying. Those are the only two options. I want to get to the bottom of this issue and I think that the American people deserve to know who is lying to them. If that means that Darrell Issa needs to call for a special investigation than I am all for it.
Someone is not telling the truth, the question is who?
All of you people who believed Barack Obama when he promised that he was only going to raise taxes on the people who made over $250,000 could be in for a rude awakening because according to this article, Paul Volcker– a top adviser in the Obama administration– is suggesting that the answer to the soaring deficits that Barack Obama has burdened the American people and their children with is introducing a value added tax (VAT).
For those of you who do not know what a VAT is; it is a tax that is levied on businesses during the production of a product at each stage that the value of that product is increased. Once the tax is passed on to the consumer of that product– and it will be passed on– what you end up with is an indirect national sales tax on the consumer on all products that the VAT applies to.
A value added tax will be a cost increase to the businesses that manufacture products and that cost increase will be passed on to all consumers whether you make $250,000 or not. I guess that the hope of the people who support a VAT is that, as the costs of these products rise, the people will blame the manufacturers for the increase without realizing that it is actually a tax they are paying and that they will leave the government blameless for what amounts to a tax increase on goods purchased. The tax will be hidden in the price of the affected product and is thus an indirect tax on the American consumer.
This is a White House adviser that said this; this was not a random thought that was thrown out to the crowd that he was talking to without there being prior thought about it. In my opinion, there has been talk between Barack Obama and his advisers on this issue. Perhaps this was a trial balloon floated out there by Paul Volcker to gauge public reaction.
We have a government that is out of control in regards to spending and the question that is always asked is, “how can we raise more revenue?” But the question should be, “how can we cut our spending?” We are facing growing deficits even as I write this and the best way to get them out of control is to stop spending money that we do not have. It seems like a simple enough solution to me. But here is what Paul Volcker had to say about getting the deficit under control:
If at the end of the day we need to raise taxes, we should raise taxes
This man is advising the president, what do you think is going to happen?
It appears as if the RNC has found their fall guy for the $2000 party that was held at the expense of the RNC at a bondage sex club, and unfortunately it is RNC Chief of Staff Ken McKay and not Michael Steele.
It appears as though– although it is not confirmed– that Ken McKay was forced out, but whether or not he was forced out this move was directly related to last week’s embarrassing revelations about the Voyeur Club party that was expensed to the RNC.
The Republicans held their bid to take back at least on house of congress in their own hands, it was there for the taking. At a time when Democrats were reeling in the aftermath of passing the hugely unpopular healthcare reform bill– and doing it in such an underhanded manner– the republicans held all of the cards, but now the focus is back on the ineptitude of the RNC. Republicans are on the verge of blowing what was a near certain outcome in the November election, and while I am glad to see that someone is being held accountable for this debacle I will not be happy until I read the news that Michael Steele has also been removed or resigned.
If the Republicans blow the election in November and fail to take back at least one house of congress, they will have nobody to blame but themselves– and Michael Steele. Maybe then they will do the right thing and remove Michael Steele from his position at the head of the RNC. Unfortunately it will be too late by that time and Barack Obama will have at least two more years to pass his radical agenda.
Today Michael Steele has said that he has no intention to resign as the head of the RNC. As unfortunate as this is to the Republican party and to their fundraising attempts and election bids, it gets worse as he decided to play the race card in his defense.
When asked if he had a “slimmer margin for error” because of his skin color Michael Steele offered the following statement:
The honest answer is yes
George Stephanopoulous then asked him why he had a “slimmer margin for error. To which he replied:
It just is. Barack Obama has a slimmer margin. A lot of folks do. I mean it’s a different role for you know, for me to play and others to play. And that’s just the reality of it. But you take that as part of the nature of it. It’s more because you’re not someone they know. I’m not a Washington insider. … My view on politics is much more grass-roots-oriented. It’s not old boy network oriented and so I tend to come at it a little bit stronger, a little more streetwise if you will. That rubs some feathers the wrong way. At the end of the day I’m judged by whether I win elections and I raise the money
In the same breath that he claimed he would be judged on whether or not he won elections and raised money he also claimed that he would be judged differently because of his race.
Michael Steele is now playing the victim, while at the same time claiming that Barack Obama also has a “slimmer margin for error” because of his skin color. How is claiming that Barack Obama is being judged partially on his race– and comparing himself to Barack Obama at the same time– going to help Republican candidates in the November elections? How is claiming that the Republicans who are calling for his resignation are doing so because of his race and not because of his lack of results going to help the party that he is supposed to be representing?
Barack Obama is being judged on his record, as is Michael Steele. Yet by claiming that he and Barack Obama are being held to a different standard because of their race, he is actually fueling the left and giving them talking points that can now be used in the upcoming mid-term election.
He has now embarrassed himself more than he already was before this statement, while at the same time providing yet another opportunity for the Democrats to marginalize him. Robert Gibbs was quick to jump on Michael Steele for playing the race card when he said, “I think that is a fairly silly comment to make, I think Michael Steele’s problem isn’t the race card, it’s the credit card.”
As much as I hate to admit it, that was a great line. And it is true, that is what makes that line so effective. As head of the RNC, Michael Steele needs to take responsibility for his missteps, but instead he has decided to fall back on the time tested excuse by claiming that he is a victim because of his skin color. This should have been beneath him.
Again Michael Steele has embarrassed himself and the Republican party. There is no doubt that Michael Steele is hurting the Republican party in both image and fundraising and it is time for him to go.
New Hampshire’s two congressmen– Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter both of whom voted in favor of the healthcare reform bill– have returned home and are facing the heat for their healthcare reform votes.
There is one difference in the approach that my congressman, Carol Shea-Porter, is taking this year now that the bill has passed; last year she would not face the voters face to face in town hall meetings, preferring to do telephone town halls in an effort to face the voters without actually standing before them, while this year she is actually holding town hall meetings. I find this change in tactics very telling; last year she decided not to face the voters and defend her position while the debate was in full motion but this year now that the bill has passed and she is facing re-election she is willing to face the voters to defend her vote. This appears to be a desperate act and a political attempt to sell what she did with her healthcare vote to her constituents– most of whom opposed the position that she took. She did not dare to face the voters in person when she knew she was taking a position that her voters opposed, but now that the vote has been taken and there is nothing that we can do she is willing to face the voters in an attempt to stave of almost certain defeat.
She cowardly ducked facing the voters last year while the issue was still in doubt, but now that her re-election could be in peril she feels it necessary to face the voters in person to try to sell them on this legislation.
Much like other Democrats across the country, Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter are hoping that as time passes the opposition to healthcare reform will die down and people will come around to their side on this issue. While I don’t think that will happen I do fear that the opposition towards this bill will subside as people begin to become apathetic to the issue. I fear that people will forget the underhanded manner in which this bill was passed. Only time will tell.
Both Paul Hodes’s and Carol Shea-Porters poll numbers are very low and their seats are ripe for the picking. Paul Hodes is running for the senate to take the place of retiring Republican Judd Gregg and there are two good Republican candidates for this senate seat– Kelly Ayotte and Bill Binnie– if his approval ratings do not improve there is a good chance that either one of these candidates could keep this seat in Republican control. Currently both Republicans hold double digit leads over Paul Hodes. On a side note, I am still undecided on which candidate I will support in the primary.
If the people of New Hampshire remain engaged on this issue Paul Hodes could find it increasingly difficult to win this seat– and Democrats could find it just as difficult to hold onto the seat that he is vacating in order to run for the senate– although the wildcard here is the money that will pour in from the national Democrat party and the special interest groups.
Carol Shea-Porter currently faces long odds in her re-election bid as Republicans line up to challenge her. Again, if the people of New Hampshire remain engaged she could be on the outside looking in while the wildcard is the national money that will be siphoned into her race.
I also find it very interesting that Nancy Pelosi attended a fundraiser for Carol Shea-Porter, but the fundraiser was held in Boston Massachusetts instead of in New Hampshire. Was she so afraid of the people she represents that she did not wish to appear at a fundraiser with Nancy Pelosi in the state that she is supposed to represent?
The political climate in New Hampshire appears to be on the verge of changing and we just have to hope that the voters do not forget what our two representatives did to us on this healthcare bill. We must not forget the underhanded manner in which this bill was shoved down our throats. If this bill was as good as we are being told, the president wouldn’t have to run around the country telling us how good it is and Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter would have to rest their hopes for re-election on the wish that people will eventually come around to their position on this bill.
Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter are supposed to represent us, they are supposed to vote the way we want them to, but they think that they know better than we do what is good for us and they are basing their re-election prospects on the hope that the people will realize that they are smarter than us and know what is best for us, but that is not going to happen. We sent them to Washington to represent us but they fell in line with the Democrat party and voted to represent Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid over the people who sent them to Washington in the first place.
I do not think that voters will come around on healthcare reform, I just hope that as the voters go back to their everyday lives that they do not forget what these two people did to us and how they abandoned us in order to represent the radical agenda of the president.
At one point during a recent town hall meeting, Carol Shea-Porter reminded the people that they would have the chance to oust her in a few short months, a man replied to much applause, “and we will.”
We need to make sure this man’s words come true, if Carol Shea-Porter feels it is more important for her to represent Washington, we do not need her representing us any more. We need to find a representative that will listen to the people that he/she is supposed to represent.
It is time for Michael Steele to resign
Michael Steele has moved on from being simply incompetent and inept as the leader of the RNC to the point where he is now simply embarrassing. It is time for Michael Steele to resign as head of the RNC.
From the revelations of the accounting problems that permitted the RNC to pay $2000 to a bondage club, to the fundraising letter the RNC sent out that mistakenly provided a number to a phone sex line, the Republican party has faced embarrassing missteps in the last week, and as the head of the RNC Michael Steele has to be held accountable whether he was directly responsible or not.
In my opinion, Michael Steele has not been an effective leader, fundraising is down and Sarah Palin– whether you like her or not she is the biggest draw in the Republican party right now– has pulled out of a fundraising event in light of the recent controversies. Even the head of the Family Research Council is urging his members not to donate to the Republican party.
Before that there was Michael Steele’s failure to properly gauge the voter’s dissatisfaction with the administration to the point where he did not actively support Scott Brown in Massachusetts, sending no money to help the man who eventually won the seat in spite of the RNC. Maybe with a little help Doug Hoffman could have won New York 23.
At a time when it seems that Democrats are poised to suffer big losses in the November mid-term election, and with the president becoming more and more unpopular every day, the only thing that could derail Republican gains would be for the Republicans to implode and they appear to be on the edge of doing just that.
I had gained confidence that the Republicans would win back at least one of the houses of congress– and maybe even both– but recent events have me concerned that Republicans could be on the verge of blowing what should have been a sure thing. As head of the RNC, Michael Steele deserves to be criticized for whatever shortcomings befall the Republican party.
The Republican party had better get its act together quickly or their shortcomings will allow Barack Obama to have free reign over the country for 2-6 more years. Judging by his first year in office, the country literally cannot afford that prospect. This means that Michael Steele must step down and turn over the party to someone who is competent.
Before anyone claims that I am just looking for a scapegoat in light of Michael Steele’s latest troubles, and before anyone claims that I am just piling on Michael Steele’s woes, I would remind you that I wrote a post over one year ago in which I asked the question, is it time for Michael Steele to resign as chairman of the RNC?
In that post I asked the following question:
Do they stick with Michael Steele and hope that he gets the Republican message out there and properly articulated or do they cut their ties now before it is too late. If they are going to make a change it needs to be done immediately, to delay would only bring embarrassment down the line. Sure making a change now would also be embarrassing but at least there will be time to repair the damage.
It certainly seems as if the Republican party would be better off today if they had cut their ties with Michael Steele last year. Michael Steele has not only been ineffective as a leader and as a fundraiser, he has now turned into an embarrassment and he could possibly take down the Republican party with him.
Republicans could be on the verge of screwing the whole mid-term election up, and now I no longer have to ask the question, “is it time for Michael Steele to resign?”
It is.
Congressman Hare: “I don’t worry about the constitution”
It isn’t very often that you can get a Democrat to admit that he or she does not care about the constitution of the United States, but that is basically what Congressman Hare of Illinois has admitted in the following video when he states that he “doesn’t worry about the constitution.” He has stated what many of us believe to be the truth; there are many Democrats who simply see the constitution as a roadblock that must be overcome.
As bad as it is that this congressman admits that he doesn’t worry about the constitution, he continues on and his full ignorance on the constitution is displayed when he tries to defend his statement by saying, “I believe it says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” When it is quickly pointed out to him that the words he just quoted are in the Declaration of Independence and not in the constitution he claims, “it doesn’t matter to me, either one.”
At least he eventually admits that he doesn’t know where the constitution gives the government the right to force the American people to buy healthcare insurance.
And this is a person that swore to uphold the constitution, yet he has no idea what is in the constitution. Is it any wonder that people are growing more cynical about the government every day? And, on a side note, is it surprising to anyone that this man represents the same state that the man who signed the healthcare legislation into law comes from?
Rhode Island flood victims miffed at Barack Obama’s snub
Barack Obama was in Maine last night stumping for his healthcare reform legislation– I find it telling that he still has to sell this to the American people even after he has signed it, but that is not the topic of this post– and on his way to Maine he made an unscheduled stop in Framingham Massachusetts to meet with FEMA about the flooding in Massachusetts after the recent storms. It just so happens that the governor of Massachusetts is a long time associate of Barack Obama.
Meanwhile Rhode Island residents were hoping that the president might pay a visit to their flood ravaged state to survey the damage done by the worst flooding in Rhode Island in over 200 years and offer a few words of encouragement to help keep their spirits high. After all, he did stop in Massachusetts, and the flooding in Rhode Island dwarfs the flood damage of Massachusetts; Rhode Island was the hardest hit New England state. It seemed likely to the residents of Rhode Island that the man they gave their electoral votes to would at least make an appearance there.
They were wrong and many are disappointed at what they consider a snub by Barack Obama.
Barack Obama flew over the flooded state but apparently he was too busy to actually stop and show a little sympathy to those that are suffering so much right now. Needless to say, this has angered and bewildered many Rhode Island residents. They don’t understand why he couldn’t find a couple of hours to tour their state when he was already in the area to begin with.
“I don’t see why the president wouldn’t come,” added Jessica Lamourux. “Just to let people know that something is on the way, and something is being done”
That is a sentiment that is being repeated by many residents of Rhode Island.
Barack Obama found it more important to try to persuade the residents of Maine that the healthcare reform law is a good law, and he thought that it was more important to attend two $30,000 a ticket fundraisers, than actually touring a state where so many people ares struggling in the wake of a natural disaster.
But this public relations nightmare gets even worse for the president, during his campaign healthcare reform speech in Maine he actually had the audacity to say, “I looked up at the sky to see if asteroids were coming. I looked at the ground to see if cracks had opened up in the earth. You know what, it turned out it was a pretty nice day.” And he said this while the pictures below show what some people are going through not all that far away.
Is it any wonder that the residents of Rhode Island are a little perturbed at the president? He didn’t seem to find them worthy of a presidential visit, or at least as worthy of a visit as the fundraisers that he found so important.
Congressman Hank Johnson worries that Guam will tip over
Usually when we are in need of a little levity we can turn to the gaffe prone Joe Biden to provide it for us but today it comes courtesy of Hank Johnson in the following video where he voices his concern that if America sends more troops to Guam it may tip over.
Is he being serious? Or is he using absurdity to illustrate a point? He certainly seems serious to me. The response by the admiral is priceless; after a delay he finally states, “we don’t anticipate this happening” and he manages to say it in all seriousness while inside he must be wondering what the hell is going on.
And these are the people representing us?
We can now add Verizon to the list of companies who are taking a non cash charge in order to offset the costs they will incur because of the healthcare reform law. AT&T has already announced they will take a $1 billion charge and several other large companies are doing likewise on a smaller level.
The unintended consequences– or are they intended– of the healthcare reform law are already beginning to take shape as these charges mean that these companies are going to be faced with cost cutting measures. Whether it be cutting benefits to employees or just cutting employees, the effects of this legislation could be wide ranging.
In a way I would like to think that this administration was just too short-sighted to see this happening, but part of me wonders if this was part of the plan all along. With these companies being forced to either cut benefits to their employees or possibly lay off employees to make up for the added costs of doing business it means that more people will be dependent on the government to provide them what their employers once did. I find it hard to believe that nobody in the administration saw this coming so I have to believe that this is what they intended and hoped would happen.
These non cash charges are being taken out in order to offset the loss of a tax deduction that these companies received before the healthcare reform law went into effect. While those on the left may be happy that the big, bad corporations are finally getting screwed by losing their tax exemptions, they would probably be surprised to learn that these companies received these deductions as a form of subsidy to keep retired employees healthcare insurance benefits so that the government would not have to incur the costs of putting these people on Medicare.
It appears as if the same government that once helped employers keep people off of the government programs is now more interested in getting as many people as possible onto those very same government programs. I don’t believe that this was accidental.
America's Watchtower 