GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

News from the Swamp: Congressional update

Congress may be headed for another lame-duck session, which should come as no surprise to anyone outside the Swamp. Every election year in recent memory has seen Congress returning after the break for a short session to wrap up business that for one reason or another couldn’t be completed during the previous 180 days. The reason behind this year’s tardiness has to do with the overtime posturing and underachieving leadership of the dynamic Democrat duo of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). They have spent so much time trying to surrender in Iraq and investigate every member of the Bush administration that little items like funding the government for fiscal 2009 seem to have slipped their minds. The new fiscal year begins 1 October, and there has yet to be a single budget resolution brought to a vote. (Some would consider this wonderful news.) In the waning days and hours, Democrats figure on funding the government at least through next February as well as addressing energy proposals, defense policy measures, and a potential second economic “stimulus” plan—because the first one worked so well.

Reid is also taking another crack at getting his omnibus package passed—the same one that Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) sank six weeks ago. The 35-bill omnibus consists of a number of smaller earmarks and assorted legislative bric-a-brac that any fiscal conservative would find wasteful. Reid was irate at losing to Coburn, but this time around he has Oprah Winfrey on his side. Winfrey, who has become a reliable Democrat media heavyweight, called on her 44 million viewers to support S. 1738, the Combating Child Exploitation Act, which is part of the omnibus. She has done her best to frame the fiscally responsible Coburn as an ogre for not supporting the measure.

A closer look at the bill reveals a great deal of wasteful spending. Coburn wants a Republican amendment that would grant law enforcement greater access to the online records of suspected sexual predators. Democrats are against this for two reasons: First, this provision is against the broad civil liberties they want to maintain for the nation’s criminals. Second, it is a provision that was advanced by Sen. John McCain, and what Democrat wants to give him a legislative victory? Rather than meet Coburn halfway, Reid will try to get the bill passed in the classic liberal fashion—allow no debate and call a voice vote.

In the House: Rangel fights to hang on

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) is refusing to accede to subtle suggestions from Speaker Nancy Pelosi and senior Democrat colleagues to step down as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee while he is being investigated for a number of ethical lapses. Publicly, however, Speaker Pelosi backs Rangel, despite her vow to clean up Congress. “I see no reason why Mr. Rangel should step down,” she said. Last week, Rangel admitted to playing fast and loose with reporting and paying taxes on at least $75,000 in rental income on a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic. He is also being examined for below-market rentals on several New York City apartments and engaging in fundraising on congressional stationery for an academic center named after him. Rangel is reluctant to step aside, but even Democrats see the double standard here, since they are always bent on having Republicans relinquish their leadership posts during ethics investigations. Rangel still has the full-throated support of his Harlem district, but his actions could taint Democrat races across the board in November, including Barack Obama’s presidential run.

Perhaps it’s time McCain called on Obama to ask for Rangel’s resignation. While Obama is unlikely to embrace this “Sister Souljah” moment, it would be fun to watch him squirm.

New & notable legislation

The House voted 266-152 Wednesday to repeal the District of Columbia’s continued ban on guns. After the Supreme Court affirmed the meaning of the Second Amendment in June, the District had thumbed its nose at the Court, maintaining its ban on semi-automatic handguns while allowing registered revolvers that were kept unloaded and with a trigger lock. The House bill takes away DC’s ability to write its own gun laws. However, it faces a stiff challenge in the Senate. “If this bill comes to the floor of the United States Senate, I will do everything in my power to stop it,” said gun-grabbing Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).

The Senate is working on several appropriations bills this week, including one for defense. The interesting thing about this bill is that Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) managed to secure $215 million in earmarks in the legislation, up from $195 million last year. That’s quite a trick for a guy who’s been indicted on corruption charges and is currently standing trial.

Campaign watch: Show me the money

Despite worries earlier this month of slowing financial support, Barack Obama continues to break presidential campaign fundraising records. He broke the previous monthly fundraising record that he had established earlier this year by raising $66 million in August. His campaign claims thousands of new donors, but a $28,500-a-plate dinner with Barbra Streisand and the Who’s Who of Hollywood’s useful idiots last week didn’t hurt, bringing in $9 million. As late-night comedian Jay Leno quipped, “To be fair, it did include an all-you-can-eat salad buffet.” Obama’s unprecedented fundraising brings his total to $440 million so far.

The Republican money machine has its work cut out for it, but so far it is meeting the challenge. John McCain raised $47 million in August, a personal record, and his adherence to public financing will give him $84 million to spend throughout the general election. While these figures are eclipsed by Obama’s, McCain can count on solid backing from the RNC, which raised $6 million more than its Democrat counterpart last month. Obama is not so fortunate. Campaign finance analysis indicates that Democrats are not reaping financial rewards en masse. It also suggests that Republicans are spending their money more wisely than the Democrats. Imagine that.

Obama, however, will be getting more than mere money on the campaign trail in the ensuing weeks. He has added a teleprompter to his entourage, even for outdoor venues. Sure, all politicians frequently operate from prepared texts and often repeat the same speech over and over again on the campaign trail, but imagine seeing a teleprompter at a casual political rally. Supporters in Pueblo, Colorado, saw what should now be dubbed the “Obamaprompter” in action in the middle of an outdoor rodeo ring. Such foolishness may prevent the Great Orator from making stupid “lipstick-on-a-pig” statements, but it will only reinforce the fact that he cannot think on his feet and is helpless without a prepared text. The upcoming debate next Friday should be interesting.

Palin’s email cracked

The Associated Press reports, “Hackers broke into the Yahoo! e-mail account that Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin used for official business as Alaska’s governor, revealing as evidence a few inconsequential personal messages she has received since John McCain selected her as his running mate.” The FBI and Secret Service are on the case, hoping to catch the Leftist yahoo who illegally obtained access to Palin’s account. The Left has been fit to be tied since John McCain chose Palin as his running mate in August, looking under every rock and pebble for something to bring her down. So far, though, it’s only made them look bad.

One final detail: When asked by the Secret Service for copies of the “leaked” emails, the AP “did not comply,” claiming First Amendment rights. First of all, the emails weren’t “leaked,” they were stolen. Furthermore, the AP is in possession of illegally obtained material that doesn’t belong to them, but they will not turn over said material because they have a right to keep it. So that’s how the First Amendment works. We wonder how eager to comply the AP would have been if it had been Joe Biden’s e-mail that had been hacked.

Income Redistribution: Patriotic taxes

“We want to take money [from the wealthy] and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Democrat vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden said in an interview this week on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” Talking about the “fundamental differences” between Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin, Biden said that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more taxes. “It’s time to be patriotic… time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

Memo to Joe: The forced redistribution of wealth is socialism, not patriotism. Also, your memory must be failing you. Bill Clinton raised taxes, resulting in lower federal revenue, while George W. Bush lowered taxes, resulting in higher federal revenue. As Barack Obama said in April, however, he wouldn’t raise taxes to increase revenue, but “for the purposes of fairness.” By which he means sticking it to “the rich,” a category that includes most of the small-business owners who generate the majority of our nation’s jobs.

Biden released his tax returns this week. The unfortunate man is one of the poorest members of the Senate, having claimed a paltry $248,754 in income in 2007. What is likely more important is that his donations to charity average out to less than $20 per week. Compared to the charitable giving of McCain (27 percent) and even Obama (five percent), Biden comes off as a cheapskate—at least with his money. Strange, but this story has somehow escaped Leftmedia analysis. Predictably, they just spit out some of Biden’s income numbers and then turned on GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, who has not disclosed her income tax returns.

At least Biden’s $995 in charitable giving last year was more than Al Gore’s $353 in 1997. Liberals just walking the walk…

This week’s ‘Braying Jenny’ award

“Barack Obama has made an intelligent choice for the vice-presidency. How so very different this is from that bucket of fluff that the Republican candidates have chosen for the same position.” —Obama supporter Barbara Theaker introducing Joe Biden at a rally this week

NATIONAL SECURITY

Barack Obama, Surge-Suppressor

We note with bittersweet reverence the passing of the torch for Multi-National Force Iraq from Gen. David Petraeus to Gen. Ray Odierno. Gen. Petraeus’ outstanding leadership has been a regular part of these pages. Indeed, who can forget the remarkable counterinsurgency strategy he devised and executed—the so-called “surge” —rescuing Iraq from the brink of all-out civil war? In little more than 18 months, Gen. Petraeus transformed Iraq from a would-be haven of chaos and despair into a nascent foothold of freedom in the Middle East. Even so, he cautioned that insurgent extremists—though greatly weakened—still had not yet been entirely defeated. Petraeus also described his replacement as “the perfect man for the job.” We certainly hope so. Petraeus’ surge arrived not a moment too soon. Thanks to its success, discussions of “drawdowns” and “transitioning missions” can now be made with a straight face, as Iraqi forces shoulder increasing responsibility for countering the ever-weakening insurgency. Why can’t we find such people to run our government?

Evidently, however, drawdown discussions should be tabled—at least, that is, until “President Obama” assumes office. The New York Post is reporting that while publicly campaigning for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has privately attempted to convince Iraqi leaders to delay any drawdown agreement until after a new U.S. administration arrives (read: his). The Post cited Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, who stated that Obama’s demand for a delay was a central topic of discussions with Iraqi leaders in July. “He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the U.S. elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said. Why a delay? So Obama can take credit for pulling U.S. forces out of Iraq, of course. Nothing to see here, folks… just move along.

A study in contrasts: John McCain said, “I’d rather lose an election than lose a war.” Barack Obama says, “I’d rather lose a war than lose an election.”

Pakistan: Friend or Foe?

Recent U.S. and NATO cross-border raids and missile strikes in the mountainous Pakistani tribal areas along the Afghanistan border are starting to strain U.S./Pakistani relations, leading to orders for Pakistani troops to fire on U.S. troops caught in Pakistani territory. Allegedly, warning shots were fired toward U.S. troops on Monday as they crossed from Afghanistan while pursuing Taliban insurgents. At least, that’s the “official” version being fed to the public. The orders were given Tuesday in response to a 3 September ground attack by U.S. commandos inside Pakistan against Taliban and al-Qa’ida forces. American officials have confirmed that U.S. forces carried out the 3 September raid near the town of Angoor Ada, but few details have been released. Meanwhile, U.S. missile strikes, including one on Wednesday, have sent at least two senior al-Qa’ida commanders and many more jihadis to “paradise.”

While there is little doubt that the raids are stirring up the Pakistani population that is sympathetic to the Taliban, the official reaction from Islamabad may be little more than a PR smokescreen designed to show that Islamabad will protect Pakistan’s sovereignty. Behind the scenes, Pakistan’s military has won praise from the U.S. for a recent offensive in the tribal region that killed about 700 insurgents. And on Tuesday, Pakistani troops backed by air strikes killed eight insurgents. Pakistan’s new civilian leadership, which has taken a much harder line against Islamic militants since President Pervez Musharraf resigned last month, has said that Pakistan must resolve tensions with the U.S. through diplomatic channels, another indication that the “shoot first” order is intended more to soothe public anger rather than truly confront American troops. As Pakistani Major General Athar Abbas said, Pakistani officials must consider public opinion, which carries a lot of sympathy for rebels fighting in the name of Islam. Here’s hoping the smokescreen works, as both U.S. and Pakistani forces continue to root out additional terrorists.

U.S. Air Force Birthday

Born of the desire to defend liberty and spread its flame, the United States Air Force celebrated its 61st birthday on 18 September. The Air Force began life as the Army Air Corps but became a separate Armed Services Branch when the Department of the Air Force was created by the National Security Act of 1947. On 18 September 1947, W. Stuart Symington became the first Secretary of the Air Force. In wishing a happy birthday to the Air Force, Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, quoted Leonardo da Vinci: “Once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.” He added, “When Americans look up, they see thousands of contrails carrying freedom and hope across the globe. And when Americans look up, they see the greatest Air Force the world has ever known!” As the U.S. Air Force continues its critical role in “The Long War” against Jihadistan, we ask that you pray for these brave Patriots standing in harm’s way and for the families awaiting their safe return.

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Economic turmoil

The recent series of worsening banking crises sent shivers through most Americans this week. Mortgage behemoths Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the Fed last week, followed this week by the failure of the investment firm Lehman Brothers. What caught most people off guard, however, was the sudden distress and rescue of insurance giant American International Group (AIG), or, as an Obama press release referred to the company earlier this week, “the American Insurance Group.” The Federal Reserve agreed to the bailout for AIG to the tune of $85 billion after the company failed to get a bank loan to prevent bankruptcy. The federal government now effectively controls the company. Unlike the trouble at Lehman Brothers, if AIG had collapsed, the ripple effect would have been catastrophic. As The New York Times reports, “The complexity of A.I.G.’s business, and the fact that it does business with thousands of companies around the globe, make its survival crucial at a time when there is stress throughout the financial system worldwide.” Indeed, AIG is a brick among dominoes.

Naturally, Democrats are attacking Republicans for the continuing slide in the financial markets. Sen. Joe Biden declared this week that John McCain’s domestic policies mirrored those of President Bush, who is “firmly in the corner of the wealthy and well connected.” After making these comments, he shamelessly joined “The One” at the aforementioned $28,500-per-plate dinner with Barbra Streisand and the rest of Hollywood’s wealthy and well connected.

Obama, Biden and other Democrats believe the current slide can be stopped only by increased regulatory oversight. Talk about “more of the same.” Banking and securities is not exactly a field bereft of regulatory oversight. The average community bank has no fewer than two regulatory agencies reviewing its operations and its underwriting procedures at a transactional level. Additionally, most community banks also have an independent audit conducted annually. With the possible exception of the medical field, banking is the most examined of all professions.

Jerry Bowyer, chief economist at Benchmark Financial Network, faults regulations themselves for the mess: “Large financial institutions like Lehman Brothers built their balance sheets under certain sets of rules. But then those rules were changed. In the wake of the Enron scandal, numerous regulations were modified in ways that guarded against future attempts to make corporate earnings appear to be higher than they really were.” Bowyer continued, “These companies built their balance sheets over many decades under what were then the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Did we think that changing those rules in a flurry of legislative retribution would not have tremendously disruptive effects on those balance sheets? Did our legislators think about the effects at all? Apparently not.”

Regulatory Commissars: Drilling and refining

Thanks to government restrictions passed by congressional Democrats, American oil and energy production has been rendered more vulnerable to hurricanes because Congress chose to concentrate our energy production in Hurricane Alley. The federal government restricts offshore oil exploration and production largely to the central and western Gulf of Mexico. Adding to the bureaucratic-induced vulnerability, Congress has concentrated the majority of our refineries in the Gulf, while 64 percent of our imported oil enters through Gulf ports.

Concentrating vulnerable energy production facilities in hurricane territory causes price spikes at the gas pump whenever one of the frequent storms visits the region. The Petroleum Institute reports less than 20 percent of the area on the federal Outer Continental Shelf is open to exploration and development, although there is a total of 115 billion barrels of oil available in the U.S. In addition, offshore Alaska’s coast holds some 27 billion barrels of crude, while waters near California may hold 11 billion barrels. The Atlantic coastline will yield an estimated four billion barrels of black gold as well. Despite the oil’s accessibility, this energy bounty is available only to foreign exploitation thanks to House Speaker Pelosi’s vow to “save the planet” by inhibiting oil exploration.

Until limousine liberals like Speaker Pelosi realize that their personal jihad to save the planet from imaginary threats is only punishing the Average Joe, taxpayers will continue to bear the brunt of Green extremism.

So, on Tuesday, the Democrat-ruled House passed the American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act by a vote of 263-189. Characterized by the MSM as repealing the ban on offshore drilling, the bill would open coastal waters only beyond 100 miles from shore, unless the adjacent state allows drilling 50 miles offshore. Oddly enough, most known deposits of oil are found within the 50-mile limit. CNS News reports, “In addition, the bill retains a ban in parts of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico until 2022, bans any drilling within 125 miles of the Florida coastline, and permanently blocks drilling in all national marine monuments and national marine sanctuaries.” In other words, Democrats want to look as if they are doing something while still doing nothing.

Meanwhile, President Bush has promised to veto the bill, which would not only keep the new ban from being enacted, but leave the current ban to expire.

Investing in nuclear power

It’s not often that a liberal and conservative think tank unite behind a single issue, but the conservative Heritage Foundation and the liberal Third Way have found a goal they share: expanding nuclear power in the United States. According to a joint study entitled “American Jobs and the Nuclear Renaissance” and conducted for the think tanks by Oxford Economics, USA, the construction of 53 new nuclear plants would create jobs, cut domestic demand for fossil fuels and save the United States as much as $9 billion in annual energy imports. Even France has figured that out.

Opposing government investment in nuclear power, however, is the libertarian Cato Institute, whose senior fellow Jerry Taylor points to the private sector’s refusal to invest in and insure nuclear energy. “It’s very risky to loan money to nuclear power,” Taylor says. “That’s a market verdict that I think ought to be respected.”

Taylor’s view is warranted when discussing bio fuels or embryonic stem cell research, but not nuclear power. What Taylor is missing in the nuclear discussion is that investors don’t fear nuclear energy itself but rather the government overregulation that has all but stifled the industry over the last 30 years. In all likelihood, the free market would rush to invest in nuclear energy—if government would deregulate it.

CULTURE

Climate change this week: Palin on warming

The Leftmedia and their accomplices in political circles… er, maybe that’s the other way around. We get confused. Regardless, liberals have been gleefully criticizing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for “changing” her stance on global warming to sync with her running mate, John McCain, in her interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson. On the subject, Gibson asked, “Do you still believe that global warming is not man made?” Palin responded, “I believe that man’s activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming, climate change,” but it could also be natural planetary “warming and cooling trends.”

The exchange quickly became more intense. Gibson replied, “Yes, but isn’t it critical as to whether or not it’s man-made because what you do about it depends on whether it’s man-made.” After he added, “Color me a cynic, but I hear a little bit of change in your policy there… It sounds to me like you’re adapting your position to Sen. McCain’s,” Palin shot back, “I think you are a cynic because show me where I have ever said that there’s absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any affect, or no affect, on climate change.”

Indeed, Palin’s position has not changed and it is essentially the position we in our humble shop have espoused for some time. The climate may be getting warmer and man may have something to do with it (though we doubt that part), but there is little that we consider conclusive proof of either assertion—assertions usually made by Leftists who are simply aiming for more government regulation.

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File

According to the Associated Press, Cubans, by virtue of living under a communist dictatorship, are pros when it comes to evacuating from deadly hurricanes. It is true that they keep the (natural) death toll to a minimum—in the past decade, only 23 people in Cuba have died as a result of hurricanes. Or so that’s what the Cuban government would have us believe.

The AP outlines the sophisticated evacuation procedures employed by Cuba during the recent onslaught of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, such as passing out evacuation plans in plenty of time before the storm hits, using schools and government buildings as shelters, and employing volunteers and police to ensure that everyone is safe. Evacuation occurs in a nice, orderly fashion, the article states, as opposed to those disorganized Americans who clog highways and try to get on crowded flights. It’s so much easier in Cuba, after all, where most people do not own automobiles.

The article points out that the Cubans must be innovative in their planning, because the U.S. embargo has robbed Cuba of the money to build hurricane-proof buildings. But that’s okay, because the Cuban government, which controls most of the island’s resources, does not have to buy supplies and services from private contractors and is, therefore, much more efficient.

The AP reporter left no stone unturned in her paean to the Castro regime. “And because police keep a close eye on evacuated areas,” the article states, “and because most Cubans have few possessions of value anyway—looting isn’t a major concern.”

Let us thank the Leftmedia for once again pointing out what an albatross we have around our necks, living here in our free capitalist society.

And last…

This just in: Eating veggies can be harmful to your health. At least eating only veggies. Oxford University scientists have discovered that people on a meat-free diet are six times more likely to suffer brain shrinkage, anemia and inflammation of the nervous system. Vegans and vegetarians are the most likely to be vitamin B12 deficient, which causes said afflictions, because meat, fish and milk are the best sources of the vitamin. The question, if readers will forgive the metaphor, is this: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? For if one completely rejects meat, there must already have been some prior brain shrinkage. Furthermore, vegetarians and vegans are more likely to be liberal, which could account for the anemia and nervous system inflammation. Perhaps these scientists simply have the report backwards.

Veritas vos Liberabit—Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot’s editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families—especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)