Ethics panel finds Charlie Rangel guilty of ethics violations
Tax Cheat
The House ethics committee has been investigating Charlie Rangel and his trips to the Caribbean for possible gift violations. This is only one of the possible ethics violations that Charlie Rangel may have committed; he has committed an ethics violation for living in and running a campaign headquarters out of a rent controlled apartment, he has also possibly been evading paying taxes on a rental property in the Dominican Republic when he didn’t report $75,000 in income, and he was foced to amend his prior tax returns because he “forgot” about another $1 million in income; he didn’t bother to amend these tax returns until an investigation was opened up into his shady dealings. Considering that Charlie Rangel is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee– the committee that writes the tax laws– I find these “oversights” as very concerning to say the least.
But the ethics panel has been investigating Charlie Rangel for only the first offense that I mentioned– his possible illegal gift vacations to the Caribbean– and today they found him guilty.
The Associated Press has learned that the House ethics committee has concluded that Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel knowingly accepted Caribbean trips in violation of House rules that forbid hidden financing by corporations.
I have stated in the past that Charlie Rangel should resign as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee until after the investigation was completed, but he refused to do so and nobody in congress decided to push the issue. With this news that the ethics committee has found Charlie Rangel guilty of KNOWINGLY accepting the Carribean trips as illegal gifts there can no longer be any doubt that Charlie Rangel should resign as the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and probably should resign from the House of Representatives also– effective immediately!
It will be interesting to see who calls for his resignation and who comes to his defense, we will be watching. How can the man who writes the tax laws that WE are forced to follow be allowed to remain in office when HE knowingly violated those same laws?
During the 2008 election, the Democrats promised to run the most open and honest administration in history; if we are to take the Democrats seriously on this pledge, they must call for and receive the resignation of Charlie Rangel. Any less than that would breaking a major campaign promise. After the honesty the Democrats promised to bring to Washington they have no choice– Charlie Rangel must go!
Scott Brown votes in favor of the jobs bill
As everyone knows by now, Scott Brown voted for cloture with the Democrats on Harry Reid’s $15 billion jobs bill. Being in New Hampshire and listening to Boston talk radio over the last two days, people are wondering why Scott Brown turned on them so quickly. His biggest supporters are extremely disappointed in this vote and he has been called Benedict Brown among other names.
I don’t blame them for being a little upset, but I think they are being just a little premature. One only has to remember what the alternative was. If Martha Coakley was elected, Obamacare would already have been passed and signed. She would have fallen in line with all of Barack Obama’s proposals.
Scott Brown ran as being an independent voice for Massachusetts, while Martha Coakley tried to paint Scott Brown as being in lockstep with George Bush’s policies even though as a state senator he was never in a position to vote on a Bush bill.
The biggest issue that he ran on was his opposition to the healthcare reform bill, but he also ran as a tax cutter and as being tough on terrorism– promising to fight against civilian criminal trials for terrorists. We will be watching to see if he remains true on these issues– I believe he will.
I also feel that this was a politically calculated move. The cloture vote passed 70-28, it would have passed handily even if he had opposed it. I think that he saw this as an opportunity to “prove” that he was independent and would not fall in lock step with the Republicans, keeping a campaign promise while not helping a bill pass that would have otherwise failed. This will help him when it comes to votes on the issues of healthcare reform and terrorism, the Democrats will not as easily be able to paint him as just another member of the party of no. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Republican party “authorized” him to vote in favor of this bill for these very reasons.
This is not meant to be a defense of his vote, but just my analysis of the vote. I do not agree with Scott Brown’s vote on this bill– I wish he voted against it– but I think there was more to it, and that is what I have stated above. I think that everyone who voted for Scott Brown needs to take a deep breath and realize that this vote did not change the outcome of this bill and in fact that may be why he felt it was okay to vote for it. Political gamesmanship? Yes, but it could help him down the road.
However, we will continue to watch him to make sure that he does what he promised to do. On its face, this vote is concerning and disappointing, but it is only one vote and the big votes are still to come.
Mitt Romney endorses John McCain for re-election
It was one thing when both Sarah Palin and Scott Brown endorsed John McCain in his re-election bid– the both were repaying John McCain something that they felt they owed him. John McCain was the first national Republican to endorse Scott Brown and ran campaign commercials in Massachusetts supporting Brown while Michael Steele and the rest of the national Republicans ignored him. And let’s face it, if it wasn’t for John McCain most of America wouldn’t know who the hell Sarah Palin was, she owes her current fame to him.
But it is another thing altogether for Mitt Romney to come out and endorse John McCain’s re-election bid, as he did yesterday.
Romney said in a statement Tuesday the Arizona senator’s “record of service and sacrifice for America is honored by all
Yes, McCain’s military service should be honored by all Americans, but on the issues facing the American people, John McCain is not part of the solution, he is part of the problem.
Perhaps Mitt Romney doesn’t grasp the depth of the anti-incumbent fever that is gripping the nation. This movement has now gone beyond Republican versus Democrat, it is now conservative versus liberal and John McCain is no conservative. The Republicans failed to grasp this during the 2008 presidential election when they nominated John McCain and they paid dearly at the polls. And this is even more of an anti-incumbent movement than it was in 2008.
Mitt Romney still has presidential aspirations but he had better learn that endorsing the old guard– especially RINOs in the Republican party– is no way for him to win support with the people who will be voting in the Republican primaries.
Mitt Romney already has one huge strike against him– he instituted the mandated healthcare coverage in Massachusetts that much of the president’s plan is predicated on, this could and probably should, kill any chance that he has of becoming president– and he can ill afford to be endorsing RINOs in the upcoming mid-term elections. The sooner he realizes this, the better off he will be.
20 House Democrats oppose Barack Obama’s healthcare plan
I wrote yesterday about Barack Obama’s healthcare plan and how there were parts of it that would alienate members of both parties. While the senate will probably be able to gain the 51 votes needed to pass the bill through reconciliation I thought that there might be enough opposition in the House to kill this bill.
It now appears as if this might be the case. The Stupak amendment– which barred the use of federal funding from abortion– has been removed from the bill and this could be a major sticking point moving forward in the House. In the original House version of the bill, Bart Stupak was able to lead a 40 member Blue Dog coalition in opposition to the bill until abortion language was added that would prohibit the federal funding of abortion. But that language has been removed and Bart Stupak is claiming that he has at least 15-20 Democrats prepared to vote against the bill, with still more of the original 40 member coalition yet to be contacted.
The original bill only passed by a 220-215 margin so this news could stop the president’s version of the healthcare bill dead in its tracks. And Stupak claims that these Democrats have more issues with the bill than just the abortion language– inlcuding the plan to tax “Cadillac” healthcare plans.
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor believes that the bill is 14 votes shy of passage in the House, which means that Stupak’s coalition holds the key to this bill’s passage. With everyone focusing their attention on the Senate and the prospect of the Democrats using reconciliation to pass the bill with a simple majority, the atmosphere in the House is being ignored. Yet it is in the House where the biggest battle still lies. Once again, the key lies with the Blue Dog Democrats. Will they hold firm? Or will they let us down?
Even the threat of reconciliation may not be enough to pass this bill but we can take no chances. We must call, write, and email our representatives and demand that they vote against this bill. The fight is not over, it is just beginning and we must continue to be heard.
Barack Obama’s new climate chief accused of suppressing climate data
Thomas Karl, the head of the Commerce Department’s new climate change division, has been accused of suppressing global warming data. His name appeared numerous times in the now infamous Climategate emails although he was not implicated in the emails as being a participant in the scandal.
While he has not been implicated directly in this Climategate scandal’s emails, he has been accused of suppressing global warming data:
Roger Pielke Sr., a climatologist affiliated with the University of Colorado who has crossed horns with Karl in the past, says his appointment was a mistake. He accused Karl of suppressing data he submitted for the IPCC’s most recent report on climate change and having a very narrow view of its causes.
The interesting fact about Pielke is, he is also a global warming alarmist, but he believes there is more to the planet’s warming problem than just man-made issues. He quit the IPCC after his report was not used– the IPCC ignored his data.
This is just the kind of person that Barack Obama wants to head a global warming committee. Barack Obama will push forward on cap and trade legislation regardless of all the controversy surrounding the issue, and the fact that a man who has been accused of suppressing global warming data is now the head of a brand new climate panel should be of no surprise to anyone.
Senator Inhofe calls for a criminal investigation into Climategate
Senator James Inhofe has asked the Obama administration to open up a criminal investigation into the Climategate scandal, calling it “the greatest scientific scandal of our generation.” It is about time that someone stood up and demanded an investigation into this scandal as America is on the verge of passing cap and trade legislation either through legislation or through the EPA.
[The] Minority Staff of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works believe the scientists involved may have violated fundamental ethical principles governing taxpayer-funded research and, in some cases, federal laws. In addition to these findings, we believe the emails and accompanying documents seriously compromise the IPCC -backed “consensus” and its central conclusion that anthropogenic emissions are inexorably leading to environmental catastrophes.
Senator Inhofe has summed it all up perfectly. Between the possible criminal activity and the ethical questions that have arisen because of this scandal, and the manipulated data that allowed these “scientists” to arrive at their “consensus,” many questions have come to light regarding this issue. It would be irresponsible and unforgivable for congress or the EPA to move forward on regulating carbon emissions. But James Inhofe didn’t stop there, he wants Al Gore to answer questions in front of congress also:
“In [Gore’s] science fiction movie, every assertion has been rebutted,” Inhofe said. He believes Vice President Gore should defend himself and his movie before Congress.
Now we are talking! Al Gore has been spouting his nonsense uncontested for far too long and it is about time that he answers questions under oath. Al Gore has made millions, and stands to make millions more on this fraud and it is about time that he is held accountable for his deception.
Climategate has thrown the global warming cause into chaos and rightfully so. Scientists have been ignoring data for years while manipulating the data they chose to use in order to ensure the taxpayer funded grant money kept flowing in, and for congress to move on any kind of cap and trade legislation now without first investigating the claims would be beyond irresponsible.
If the global warming scientists, Al Gore, Barack Obama, and the rest of the cap and trade proponents believe that no crime has been comitted than they should have no problem with holding a hearing on this issue; perhaps it would help them to gain support if they could successfully argue their point. But they will not allow this to go to a hearing because they know that these scientists have been full of shit all of these years. So they will continue to suppress this information and deny a hearing while hoping this scandal will disappear– and the media is all to willing to help make this issue disappear.
That is why it is so important for other members of the House and Senate stand up and not allow Senator Inhofe to be the lone voice crying out in the wilderness on this issue. We need others to stand up alongside James Inhofe and demand a hearing into Climategate; the stakes are too high to let such a scandal pass without a fight. But it will be up to us; we need to call, write, and email our congressmen and senators and demand a hearing into this scandal! Time is running out, the time for action is now!
Barack Obama unveils his healthcare reform plan
I honestly can no longer figure out what Barack Obama is trying to accomplish in regards to healthcare reform. Yesterday he released HIS healthcare plan and it seems to have the best worst of the Senate and House versions of the bill in it. There is both enough in this bill and left out of this bill to make people on both sides of the aisle wonder what is going on.
Included in the bill is federal funding for abortion and healthcare mandates while excluded from the bill is a public option. Barack Obama has introduced a bill that has guaranteed no Republican support in the Senate by including the healthcare mandates and federal funding for abortion, but the exclusion of the public option could cost the president the more liberal votes that he needs to gain passage of this bill. And on top of that, the abortion issue could drive away Bart Stupak and his band of 40 pro-life Blue Dog Democrats in the House.
Perhaps the commission that he is supporting that would limit the amount insurance companies can raise their rates is a backdoor opening for the eventual single payer system that the far left so desperately wants. Theoretically, the government could choke the earnings of the insurance companies down to the point where they could no longer stay in business, opening the door for a public option down the road.
The American people rejected the previous healthcare reform bill because of these issues and the sheer size of the bill, so the president’s response was to create an even bigger, bloated bill than the one that 58% of Americans already oppose. He has done this ahead of the big bipartisan healthcare summit and I honestly can’t figure out what he is trying to prove with this proposal or what he thinks it will accomplish.
Has he released this proposal as a starting point that he is willing to negotiate into a final slimmed down version of the bill? Or has he done this to ensure the Republicans oppose it in order to paint them into a corner as the party of no? It seems to me that he is not listening to the will of the majority of the people.
There seems to be no way that this bill can be pushed through congress as it is presently constituted, even using reconciliation. While he may be able to hold onto the 51 votes he needs in the Senate, I am not sure he can hold onto the needed votes in the House.
There still appears to be differences that could could prohibit this bill from becoming law and I am not sure that they will be ironed out in this bipartisan summit. This appears to be a “show trial” for lack of a better term.
I realize that this post is rambling, and I apologize, but I am trying to talk my way through this and I am not having much luck. If there is anybody out there who can lend a hand and enlighten me, please do.
ACORN to dissolve as a national structure?
Word is now coming out that the corrupt organization known as ACORN is being “dissolved as a national structure,” or at least it is in the process of dissolving as a national structure. So, is this the end of ACORN as a corrupt liberal political force? Hardly.
All this means is that ACORN is renaming its state offices to appear to disassociate itself with itself, if that makes any sense. ACORN will be conducting business as usual, just under different names in different states.
ACORN is fighting a losing battle and they know it, the American people understand what this organization has been up to. ACORN can no longer defend its actions so they are attempting to disappear from the political scene but in truth they are going nowhere. They will still be active under new names all across the country and nothing will change. By changing their name and dissociating themselves with the national ACORN organization local factions of this organization are hoping to keep the money rolling in from congress.
Barack Obama and the Democrats in congress will be all too willing to keep up this charade also. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
John McCain tries to distance himself from the bailout bill
With his conservative credentials in doubt and faced with a primary opponent that stands a good chance of beating him, John McCain is trying to distance himself from the bailout bill that he supported.
John McCain agreed with the bailout bill, he voted for it, but now that it has become politically toxic he is trying to claim that he was misled about the bill. He claims that Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke assured him the TARP funds would be used only to shore up the housing market but “obviously, that didn’t happen.”
He continued:
Something had to be done because the world’s financial system was on the verge of collapse,” he said. “Any economist, liberal or conservative, would agree with that. The action they took, I don’t agree with
Senator McCain is now trying to remove himself from any guilt associated with voting for the bailout bill but the fact is, he is guilty as charged. When he found it politically expedient to support this bill he actually suspended his presidential campaign to head back to Washington to work on this effort to shore up the housing market but now that it is a political disaster he is trying to claim that he opposes it.
The bottom line is, John McCain voted for this bill, his vote authorized the actions taken and he simply cannot walk away from the role he played in this bills passage just because he is facing serious competition in the upcoming primary. John McCain is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
John McCain will have to face the voters of Arizona and pay the price for his vote on the bailout bill and he can try to deflect the blame all that he wants, but the voters will not be fooled. John McCain you will be NEXT! Consider yourself teabagged!
Climategate: IPCC withdraws claims on rising sea levels
Here we have yet another example of the IPCC using faulty data to predict the effects of global warming. In this case the IPCC has withdrawn its prediction of rising sea levels, claiming that the data used from a journal that they used to confirm their predictions of the rising sea levels was incomplete and should be discarded.
Some “scientists” have claimed that the IPCC’s estimates of rising seal levels has actually not gone far enough and believe that the sea levels will rise even faster than the IPCC has predicted, while other scientists believe that the sea levels aren’t rising nearly as fast as stated, if at all. The IPCC has declined to state to the public whether the sea level estimates that they have been predicting are too high or too low based on this data, admitting only that the data is incomplete.
I would guess, based on the alarmism that is the global warming movement, that the sea level estimates are much too high, not too low. Here is my reasoning: If the IPCC estimates were too low and the sea levels were rising faster than they predicted, they would not simply withdraw this data so that more research could be done. They would release this information to the public to refute all of the Climategate scandals that have arisen in the past few weeks in order to push forward their agenda and keep it alive and credible. They would tell the world either directly, or they would let this data leak out, that the sea levels were rising faster than predicted and would claim that more strict action was needed right away, delay would be catastrophic. They would claim that in light of the new evidence there would be no time to delay acting against the rising sea levels.
But they are not doing that. They are admitting that the data was incomplete and are simply withdrawing the evidence of sea level increases, claiming that more study needs to be done. This lack of urgency on the IPCC’s part to take further action, and to simply remove the faulty data in the guise of doing more research, is proof to me that they have overstated their prediction on the rising sea levels.
That is what I believe the incomplete data shows; much like the IPCC was forced to admit that the Himalayan glaciers aren’t melting nearly as fast as they claimed– the sea levels aren’t rising nearly as fast as claimed and so they will remove this data quietly and tell the people more research needs to be done. We have already seen how they conduct research, Climategate has taught us that the IPCC reached its conclusion first and they blatantly tried to manipulate the data to confirm their conclusion. Now they expect us to trust them to do more studying on the rising sea levels? On data that they now admit was faulty also. I don’t think so.
The global warming argument is falling apart all around them and people are beginning to realize that the global warming alarmists, and their research, cannot be trusted.
America's Watchtower 