GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

Campaign watch: Debate number two

More than 60 million Americans tuned in Tuesday night to watch the second presidential debate between two long-winded senators in Nashville, Tennessee. As already noted, only one candidate exuded confidence in and love for America, and that candidate was John McCain.

That said, early in the debate, McCain got off on the wrong foot with most conservatives with his proposal to “order the secretary of the Treasury to immediately buy up the bad… mortgages in America and renegotiate at the… diminished value of those homes and let people be able to make those… payments and stay in their homes.” He didn’t put a price tag on this proposal during the debate, but his campaign says it would run about $300 billion—money already authorized as part of the $700 billion. As The Wall Street Journal indicates, McCain’s diagnosis is correct, but his prescription is not necessarily the best. The main problem, says the Journal, is “[t]he taxpayer—not the lender or homeowner—absorbs the losses on loans that exceed the value of the home.” Worse, McCain credits Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) for some of the particulars. Frank and Dodd bear much of the responsibility for the current mess.

McCain redeemed himself on healthcare, however, with his proposal for tax credits and interstate shopping. He clearly distinguished himself from his Democrat opponent, one who “starts talking about government” whenever healthcare comes up. Barack Obama declared healthcare a “right,” while McCain called it a responsibility. Their opposing views describe a fundamentally different view of the role of government for anyone who needs an illustration.

Sen. McCain must do more of this in the next three weeks if he is to win the election. Wall Street Journal columnist Brendan Miniter wrote, “To win back the old Reagan Democrats while also reassembling the Republican coalition that has kept the GOP in power for decades, Mr. McCain needs a coherent set of principles that guide his actions and that voters can rally behind—such as shrinking government, flattening the tax burden and reforming the federal policies that have contributed to America’s health care and housing woes.”

Questions about Obama fundraising

Barack Obama has raised more money than any other presidential candidate in American history ($454 million). He has more donors than any other candidate could ever brag about (2.5 million). He has broken, established and re-established monthly fundraising records throughout the primary and general campaign seasons. If all these campaign fundraising benchmarks sound too good to be true for a man who didn’t yet register on the national radar until four years ago, then they probably are too good to be true. And as it turns out, they may be too good to be legal.

The RNC has called on the Federal Election Commission to examine the Obama campaign’s records to see if donors have contributed more than the $2,300 maximum amount allowed by law. Since there are no stipulations for recording donors who contribute small amounts such as $25 or $30, there is no way of knowing if these small contributors have donated aggregate sums over the legal limit. Newsweek, of all rags, reported that two donors each gave Obama more than $11,000 in increments of $10 and $25.

Also of interest are donations from folks like “Good Will,” who works at “Loving” and lists “You” as his occupation on the donor form. “Dahsudhu Hdusahfd of Df, Hawaii,” employed by “CZXVC/ZXVZXV” and “Uadhshgu Hduadh of Dhff, Fla.,” who works for “DASADA/SAFASE” also contributed.

Obama also appears to have a large number of foreign donors: 11,500 of them have contributed some $34 million to his campaign according to some accounts. It is against the law for any candidate to accept campaign contributions from foreign nationals, and if Obama’s campaign were found guilty, they would face stiff fines and perhaps the approbation of enough voters to change the course of the election. Unfortunately, due to the slow pace at which these legal matters travel through the courts, the election will have long since come and gone by the time it is determined whether the Obama campaign played by the rules.

As for spending those dollars, the Obama camp is negotiating the purchase of 30 minutes of primetime network airwaves on 29 October at 8 p.m. Eastern. The purchase with CBS is already complete. Obama may address the charges regarding his alliances with Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko and Jeremiah Wright without anyone to challenge him.

News from the Swamp: Attorney firing redux

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit declined to order current and former Bush administration staff to testify before a House Committee investigating the firings of nine U.S. attorneys. Now it will be up to the next Congress to decide how to proceed, if at all. The case has been delayed pending an appeal by Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten, two former White House staffers currently in the crosshairs of the Democrats’ vendetta against the Bush administration. Democrats still maintain that some sort of law was broken and that the U.S. attorneys were fired for political reasons. All this ignores the fact that the attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, and the fact that Bill Clinton fired all 93 U.S. attorneys at Justice shortly after taking office in 1993. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers vows to get to the bottom of whatever he is ultimately digging for, but it is more likely that once President George W. Bush leaves Washington, so will the witch-hunt to politically embarrass him.

New & notable legislation

The Senate last week passed a bill 86-13 to open nuclear trade with India for the first time since that country’s nuclear tests more than 30 years ago. The agreement acknowledges India as a legitimate nuclear power, despite its never having signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. President Bush has pushed the deal since early in his second term, saying it will bring India’s nuclear industry under international observation. The House previously approved the bill 298-117.

The House extended unemployment benefits for seven weeks last Friday in the wake of news that 159,000 jobs were lost in September. After five years of steady job creation, a trend of shedding jobs began in January—less than a year after Democrats took control of both houses of Congress. The Senate, on the other hand, appears unlikely to take up the measure this year.

Palin email hacker indicted

David Kernell, a student at the University of Tennessee and the son of Democrat state representative Michael Kernell of Memphis, was indicted this week on one count of breaking into Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s Yahoo! e-mail account. “According to the indictment, Kernell, who used the nicknames ‘rubico’ and ‘rubico 10’ on the Internet, allegedly reset Palin’s e-mail password to ‘popcorn’ using Yahoo’s password-recovery tool on Sept. 16 by ‘researching and correctly answering a series of personal security questions’,” Fox News reports. “After changing the password, the indictment alleges he made screenshots of her e-mail directory, e-mail messages and other personal information before posting them to a public Web site. He also posted the reset password.” Kernell turned himself in but pleaded not guilty. The trial is set for 16 December. He faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Rep. Jefferson in good shape

Sometimes, corruption does pay. Or at least it doesn’t punish. Two years ago, Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) was caught with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer, and he was later indicted on 16 corruption-related charges. Yet, somehow, the Louisiana Democrat came out on top in an eight-candidate race for his House seat. He is expected to win the runoff on 4 November and move on to beat his Republican opponent on 6 December to lock up his 10th term in Congress.

Thanks to gerrymandering, Jefferson’s district in New Orleans remains majority black and two-thirds Democrat, which makes it extremely difficult for a Republican or a white Democrat to unseat him. Jefferson easily won his first eight terms but was forced into a runoff for the first time two years ago after the corruption charges emerged. In this race, his opponents raised the combined sum of $1.5 million to his $200,000, but his closest competitor, Helena Moreno, 30, a local TV reporter, only managed to finish five points behind him on Saturday and is not expected to overtake him in November. Seems like not much has changed in New Orleans.

Mayor Bloomberg ignores the will of the people

Michael Bloomberg was limited to two four-year terms as mayor of New York City, and up until a couple of weeks ago he seemed happy with the fact that he would have to find some other way to spend his time after 1 January 2010. The recent financial crisis, however, has brought on a change of heart in the Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Independent. Despite two voter referendums in 1993 and 1996 in which the public clearly and unequivocally supported a law that limited Big Apple elected officials to two terms in office, Bloomberg wants a third term as mayor. He believes that no one is better suited than he to shepherd the city through the current financial crisis. This is an arguable point, and it is reminiscent of 2001 when it was suggested that two-term Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani should stick around at least temporarily to lead the city out of the horror of September 11th. Giuliani chose to accept the will of the voters and step aside, believing that our government and our society are bigger than any one person’s desire or ability to lead.

Ron Lauder, a close friend of Bloomberg and the man who bankrolled the original voter referendum on term limits, still thinks that the limits are a good idea, but he has ultimately decided to side with the mayor in this particular situation. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a militant liberal and potential mayoral candidate for 2009, is torn, like many of her colleagues in the overwhelmingly Democrat City Council. A repeal of term limits means they don’t have to leave public office and get real jobs, but allowing Bloomberg to stay in office squelches Quinn’s designs on higher office at least for the time being. It is interesting to note that in 2001 The New York Times editorial board was against Giuliani’s sticking around, but in 2008 they think that Bloomberg’s shirking the voters’ intent is a good idea.

Over Bloomberg’s long career in the private sector and in public service, it has been rare that he has not gotten his way. In a city with one of the most liberal and opportunistic governments in the country, it is hard to believe that he will be rebuffed this time, either.

NATIONAL SECURITY

Warfront with Jihadistan: Studying withdrawal

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) may be out of the Senate while undergoing treatment for a brain tumor, but that hasn’t slowed his effort to force the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. With the help of fellow anti-war Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kennedy inserted a $2.4-million earmark into the 2009 defense-spending bill for an independent study on the impact of withdrawing troops from Iraq. The RAND Corporation is authorized to conduct the study, called a “phased redeployment study” —redeployment being the favorite Democrat buzz word for surrender. “RAND is a federally and state-funded research and development center and is often considered an independent research arm of the Pentagon,” reports The Hill. “The outcome of the study would not be binding, but could serve as ammunition for Democrats…” Indeed, it will likely result in a recommendation for drastic troop reductions. There are currently 146,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, a number that is close to pre-surge levels.

GOP presidential candidate John McCain has correctly warned that pulling troops out too quickly would result in lost gains made with the troop surge. Violence is down and the country is stabilizing. CNS News reports, “U.S. monthly combat casualties are down 86 percent from where they were a year ago for September, making it one of the least deadly months since the war began.”

NASA to rely on… Russia?

After dazzling the world with American technical prowess over the past 50 years, NASA celebrates its Golden Anniversary this month in a much weakened state. U.S. manned access to the high ground of space may soon be dependent upon, of all nations, Russia, whom we long ago vanquished in the Space Race. After the loss of space shuttle Columbia in February 2003, the Bush administration decided to shut down the shuttle program in 2010, while development of a new crew-rated vehicle continued. The new ship will launch U.S. astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) and, eventually, back to the moon and Mars. Unfortunately, it now appears there is going to be at least a five-year gap, maybe more, between the shuttle’s retirement and launching the new Orion crew vehicle. That will leave the United States with only one option for getting our astronauts to the ISS—via the Russian Soyuz vehicle.

Given the frosty state of the U.S./Russian relationship, this situation is unacceptable. Further deterioration in relations with Russia could result in U.S. manned access to space being cut off entirely. Our national security is highly dependent on continued access to the ultimate high ground, and never more so than now with a more aggressive Russia, a Chinese space program that is rapidly closing the technology gap, and radical states such as Iran on the verge of becoming space powers.

Regrettably, options for correcting the situation are limited. The shuttle program cannot easily be extended. Some production lines have already been shut down. Likewise, significantly speeding up development of the Orion vehicle would be difficult.

Profiles of valor: USA Sgt. Gainey

United States Army Staff Sergeant Michael Gainey was manning the gunner’s turret in his Humvee as part of a three-vehicle patrol in Baghdad in October 2007 when insurgents attacked the convoy. The enemy focused on Sgt. Gainey and his M240B machine gun, wounding him in the neck and hand. Gainey refused medical treatment, however, and continued to assist in coordinating the counterattack from his vantage point, taking out several insurgents with suppressive fire. The vehicle commander noticed that other American troops were in danger not far ahead and ordered the vehicle forward. Gainey directed progress from the turret while aiming a hail of gunfire at the enemy and eventually repelling the ambush. Because of his steadfastness under fire and effective coordination of the counterattack while wounded, Gainey was awarded the Bronze Star with Combat V for Valor.

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Income Redistribution: Bailout implemented

The systemic corruption of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was aided and abetted by the very congressional creators of these quasi-government entities who allowed them to abandon sound financial practices in favor of high-risk mortgaging practices to unqualified consumers. All this caused markets around the globe to begin wildly fluctuating and left our once-solid financial system severely damaged. Instead of allowing Fannie, Freddie and other corrupt and inefficient institutions to file for bankruptcy and clean up the mess quickly by selling their bad assets at bargain prices, the federal government essentially socialized much of our banking system. And the mainstream media failed to report this critical correlation: Stock markets plunged with each announcement of major government intervention, but each day the government did not intervene, markets rebounded. In the first four days of trading after the bailout was signed last Friday, the Dow lost nearly 1,800 points, or 20 percent.

Additionally, the media failed to report the connection between greater federal regulation and bankrupt institutions. Before the calamity spilled over to other enterprises, the only entities that needed a bailout were the institutions most heavily regulated by the federal government.

Nevertheless, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi thinks the $700-billion bailout is not enough—she is floating another $150 billion “stimulus” package similar to the one enacted in May. Pelosi said, “We may have to go back into session before the next Congress” to make it happen. And why not? The budget deficit only hit a record $438 billion last year.

Stunningly, even though America is much worse off since the Democrats took control of Congress, and Congress is the keeper of the federal checkbook, it appears that voters may hand the Democrats an even larger majority. (For one of the most realistic looks at who is responsible for the mess—and it’s not often we would recommend the show—see this recent “Saturday Night Live” skit.)

Sadly, there is more. The Associated Press reports, “The economy isn’t the only thing that’s sagging—so are faces, breasts and bellies as would-be cosmetic surgery patients increasingly opt against costly nips and tucks because of tough financial times.” Horrors. But all is not lost. Reuters reports, “A slowdown in the world economy may give the planet a breather from the excessively high carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions responsible for climate change.” Boy, are we relieved.

AIG retreats after bailout

Executives for American International Group (AIG) are justly under fire this week for spending $440,000 on a retreat to a California resort. The tab included more than $23,000 in spa treatments. If the name AIG sounds familiar, it should. The federal government stepped in last month to bail the insurance giant out of trouble with $85 billion. AIG executives defended the lavish spending by saying that no one from the financial products division, which is most responsible for recent financial woes, went on the retreat. It was for independent contractors and only a handful of actual AIG executives. Well, then, no problem. And really, what’s $440,000 compared to $85 billion? After several congressmen and the White House upbraided AIG, the Federal Reserve decided to offer another $38 billion in federal loans to the company. That’ll teach ‘em.

Bailout it’s not just for banks anymore

Having just created over $800 billion out of whole cloth to “rescue” the financial system (along with arrow manufacturers, citizens of American Samoa and employees who ride bicycles to work, among others), Congress now finds state governments next in line.

This week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-INO) had his hand out for $7 billion from the federal coffers to cover school funding. A spokesperson for the state noted that a “perfect storm” of circumstances including lower-than-expected revenues and a late budget has led to the state’s fiscal crisis. Schwarzenegger subsequently modified his request, saying, California may not need the money after all, because the federal bailout “appear[s] to be improving liquidity.”

Similarly, Massachusetts State Treasurer Timothy Cahill came begging for the same deal that Congress gave to banks in an effort to put his state’s financial house in order. Once again, sagging tax revenues are blamed for the state’s cash shortage.

While other states aren’t public about it (yet), the majority of them are staring at budget deficits for the next fiscal year because collections from sales and property taxes aren’t keeping up with the states’ appetite for spending. With federal supplements already making up a large share of state budgets, bean counters look to the one entity that can print money for their salvation. In what may be seen by future historians as the “Era of the Bailout,” states reluctant to make unpopular budget cuts are seeking their place at the bailout trough.

CULTURE

Judicial Benchmarks: Guns in New Orleans

In the halls of justice on the right… The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) reached an agreement with the City of New Orleans in a federal lawsuit filed by the SAF and the NRA after the city confiscated legally owned firearms following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Under the agreement, which awaits the seal of a judge, the city would return the guns to their rightful owners and submit to a permanent injunction requiring New Orleans officials to renounce ever again taking lawfully owned firearms from residents.

Apparently, that June Supreme Court decision affirming that the Second Amendment means what it says about “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” finally persuaded New Orleans officials that they could no longer sustain their thievery and their disarmament of residents. “While we are delighted that this case is now settled,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “it should never have been necessary. When a disaster strikes, no government entity or official should arbitrarily decide that citizens must be disarmed and left defenseless, and that is what happened in New Orleans. These gun seizures were conducted without legal authority, under color of law and often at gunpoint, and that must never be allowed to happen again anywhere on American soil.”

Frontiers of Junk Science: Carbon offsets

One might say it is a commentary on American innovation that, just as Wall Street is on the verge of economic panic, others are making piles of money selling peace of mind in the nebulous form of “carbon offsets.” In order to assuage their environmental guilt, corporations and individuals are paying vendors across the country big bucks to erase their carbon footprints.

Erasing one’s carbon footprint is apparently quite easy. First, the guilty party tallies up their harmful emissions; these are accumulated by engaging in driving, flying and other environmentally threatening activities. Then the transgressor pays a vendor to offset that footprint by funding projects that prevent or remove harmful emissions, such as mass tree plantings.

Many corporations are using these purchases to enhance their “green” image. They are also preparing for the possibility that the government may regulate their emissions and require them to pay for their pollution.

It is unclear whether these offsets are actually making a difference. The results are often hard to calculate, with funds regularly going to projects that would have been undertaken anyway. For example, one Virginia landfill has embarked on a project that reduces the harmful effects of methane by burning it in an orange flare. In a few short months, the landfill’s operators have made $43,000 selling offsets on the Chicago Climate Exchange. According to the regional authority that runs the landfill, however, they would have done this even if there were no such thing as carbon offsets. The money “is gravy to us right now,” said Alan Cummins, the authority’s executive director. “Even without it, we would always continue to flare.”

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File

“Comedienne” Sandra Bernhard is now denying her incendiary comments that have caused a national outrage. During a recent performance at a Washington, DC, theater, Bernhard was quoted as saying that Sarah Palin “would be gang-raped by my big black brothers” if she steps foot in Manhattan. After the comments became public, Rosie’s Place, a Boston women’s shelter, cancelled Bernhard’s engagement at their upcoming fundraiser—not surprising, as the shelter’s mission is to protect women from violence.

Bernhard, who could not seem to remember her exact words, is saying she did not use the words “gang” or “rape.” When the New York Daily News called to confirm the statement, however, she did not deny it; instead, she sought to justify it as part of a witty commentary on racism, women’s rights and “the extreme views of Governor Sarah Palin.” Oh, now it’s funny!

In explaining why she had not earlier denied the remarks, Bernhard claimed she normally does not respond to “ill-informed critics” who comment on her lack of taste and talent. She attributes her recent denial to her concern for Rosie’s Place, saying, “Once this caused collateral damage to an innocent charity which does great work, I needed to correct things for the record.” The only collateral damage Bernhard is really worried about is that which she caused to her own career. Or what’s left of it.

And last…

“A man told today how he was shot three times in a London street for wearing a Barack Obama T-shirt,” reports the Daily Mail of London. Sounds like the American presidential election is causing fairly heated exchanges even in Europe. Let’s read on. The man “was buying a mobile telephone top-up card in [a local shop] when the gunman confronted him and glared at [his shirt], which carries an image of the Democrat US presidential candidate underneath the legend ‘Believe’.” The perturbed man left the store, but the encounter soon took a horrifying twist. When the Obama supporter emerged from the store, “the attacker was waiting for him in broad daylight with a threatening-looking dog and holding a gun behind his back. Realising what had sparked the increasingly violent assault, the terrified [man] zipped up his jacket to cover the image of Mr Obama and walked to his car.” But the angry white man followed him. “The attacker then fired the gas-powered ball-bearing pistol three times, hitting the civil servant in the face, hand and shoulder.” Wait a minute. “Gas-powered ball-bearing pistol”? Here in America, we’re not so pretentious—it’s a BB gun. The story was accompanied by a photo of the wounded man with a Band-Aid on his hand. What’s worse, the Mail didn’t stop, alleging, “The potentially lethal weapons are often converted by criminals to fire real bullets.” Real bullets powered by a four-inch CO2 canister? Now that’s British ingenuity—and probably more than a President Obama would allow.

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.)