Nancy Pelosi To Reverse House Fairness Rules

From Human Events.

Nancy Pelosi is planning to re-write the House rules today ensuring that the Republican minority in congress is unable to have any influence. The fairness rules were originally written by Republican speaker of the house, Newt Gingrich, when he enacted his "Contract With America".

Changes to the House rules would make it nearly impossible for Republicans to offer alternative bills, amend Democrat bills or even the guarantee of open debate accessible by motions to recommit for any piece of legislation during the entire 111th Congress. The retraction of the rules will also greatly reduce the transparency in Congress and politician's personal accountability.

In reaction to Pelosi's effort Republican House leaders is sending an objection letter to Pelosi.

"January 5, 2009

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House
H-232, U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Madame Speaker,

We hope you and your family had a joyful holiday season, and as we begin a new year and a new Congress, we look forward to working with you, our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and President-elect Obama in tackling the many challenges facing our nation.

President Obama has pledged to lead a government that is open and transparent. With that in mind, we are deeply troubled by media reports indicating that the Democratic leadership is poised to repeal reforms put in place in 1995 that were intended to help restore Americans’ trust and confidence in the People’s House. Specifically, these reports note that the Majority, as part of its rules package governing the new Congress, will end six-year term limits for Committee chairs and further restrict the opportunity for all members to offer alternative legislation. This does not represent change; it is reverting back to the undemocratic one-party rule and backroom deals that the American people rejected more than a decade ago. And it has grave implications for the American people and their freedom, coming at a time when an unprecedented expansion of federal power and spending is being hastily planned by a single party behind closed doors. Republicans will vigorously oppose repealing these reforms if they are brought to a vote on the House floor.

As you know, after Republicans gained the majority in the House in 1995, our chamber adopted rules to limit the terms of all committee chairs to three terms in order to reward new ideas, innovation, and merit rather than the strict longevity that determined chairmanships in the past. This reform was intended to help restore the faith and trust of the American people in their government – a theme central to President-elect Obama’s campaign last year. He promoted a message of “change,” but Madame Speaker, abolishing term limit reform is the opposite of “change.” Instead, it will entrench a handful of Members of the House in positions of permanent power, with little regard for its impact on the American people.

The American people also stand to pay a price if the Majority further shuts down free and open debate on the House floor by refusing to allow all members the opportunity to offer substantive alternatives to important legislation -- the same opportunities that Republicans guaranteed to Democrats as motions to recommit during their 12 years in the Minority. The Majority’s record in the last Congress was the worst in history when it came to having a free and open debate on the issues.

This proposed change also would prevent Members from exposing and offering proposals to eliminate tax increases hidden by the Democratic Majority in larger pieces of legislation. This is not the kind of openness and transparency that President-elect Obama promised. This change would deprive tens of millions of Americans the opportunity to have a voice in the most important policy decisions facing our country.

Madame Speaker, we urge you to reconsider the decision to repeal these reforms, which could come up for a vote as early as tomorrow. Just as a new year brings fresh feelings of optimism and renewal for the American people, so too should a new Congress. Changing the House rules in the manner highlighted by recent media reports would have the opposite effect: further breaching the trust between our nation’s elected representatives and the men and women who send them to Washington to serve their interests and protect their freedom.

Sincerely,

Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), Republican Leader
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), Republican Whip
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), Conference Chairman
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), Policy Committee Chairman
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wyo.), Conference Vice-Chair
Rep. John Carter (R-Texas), Conference Secretary
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), NRCC Chairman
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), Chief Deputy Whip
Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), Rules Committee Ranking Republican"


Please call and e-mail your representatives as soon as you can and let them know exactly how you feel about the voices of Conservatives all over this country being drowned out by a Democratic majority. These rule changes must be voted on and it is important that you let your congressperson know exactly how their constituents feel about this.

Governor Bill Richardson Scandal Heating Up As He Withdraws From Obama Cabinet

On December 15, 2008, I published a story about Bill Richardson's "pay-to-play" scheme involving a federal investigation into donations made to California-based CDR Financial Products Inc. The investigation comes after the company made a $75,000 donation to Richardson's campaign and was then rewarded with a $1 billion contract for a transportation system with the state of New Mexico, the state Richardson governs.

It seems the scandal may really be heating up as Richardson has just announced the withdrawal of his name as Secretary of Commerce in Obama's cabinet. Richardson said he is withdrawing because "I have concluded that the ongoing investigation also would have forced an untenable delay in the confirmation process. Given the gravity of the economic situation the nation is facing, I could not in good conscience ask the president-elect and his administration to delay for one day the important work that needs to be done."

Obama has said about Richardson's withdrawal "Governor Richardson is an outstanding public servant and would have brought to the job of Commerce Secretary and our economic team great insights accumulated through an extraordinary career in federal and state office. It is a measure of his willingness to put the nation first that he has removed himself as a candidate for the Cabinet to avoid any delay in filling this important economic post at this critical time. Although we must move quickly to fill the void left by Governor Richardson's decision, I look forward to his future service to our country and in my administration."


Put the nation first? If this is what Obama thinks is putting the nation first I feel we may be in for a very bumpy 4-8 year ride

Team Sarah Trolls Revealed!

Thanks to the The RedState for breaking this story.

A week or two ago, The Huffington Post ran a story about racist remarks on the Team Sarah website. What I found most interesting about the story that it highlighted maybe 10 accounts of racism on a very active site with 63,723 members at my last count, negligable in my mind to say the least. But whatever, it's the HuffPo and as previously stated, they are all a bunch of "c-words".

But the RedState has uncovered, and has proof, that many of the racism coming from Team Sarah is actually Obama trolls posing as Sarah supporters, posting racist and hateful comments and then alerting the HuffPo.

The Red state has done its research and has traced down some of the offending posters to YAforObama, DemocraticUnderground


Team Sarah administrators supposedly have over 15 pages of information on the trolls and proof of thier invasions. We can only hope that HuffPo will write a retracton of the story. But something tells me they probably will not.

Atheist Group Files Suit Against Prayer at 2009 Presidential Inauguration

Twenty eight member of the group Freedom From Religion, have joined forces with Michael Newdow(that wacky atheist who tried to have the words "under god" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance), in a lawsuit to remove the words "so help me God" from the Presidential oath of office.

"We're hoping to stop prayer and religious rituals at governmental functions, especially at the inauguration," Barker told FOX News.

Reverends Rick Warren and Joe Lowrey, who will be participating in the inauguration ceremony have been named defendants in the suit. "Those people who do pray do believe in God and they are in fact trying to use the government to pick sides. In America we are free to disagree. We can disagree with Rev. Rick Warren but we're not free to ask our government to settle the argument," Barker said, adding that government causes harm when it takes on "the mantel of religion and expresses religion as an official governmental function.

Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council, said it's Obama's decision whether to include a prayer, not the government's. Sprigg also told Fox News that ""These atheists who are suing to prevent prayer at the inauguration are showing a fundamental misunderstanding of what the First Amendment is all about. The establishment of religion that is forbidden by the First Amendment means the official declaration of an official national church. It doesn't mean that public ceremonies can not include prayers or acknowledgement of the existence of God,"

Sprigg and I agree that this lawsuit will probably go nowhere. Seriously Atheists. Freedom of religion means that we can not be persecuted for believing what we wish to believe, or not believe. It does not make God a dirty word. If the word God is hated so much by Atheists, I think they should do the noble thing and start boycotting U.S currency. After all, that nasty little evil word is printed on it. Come on Atheists, put your money where your mouth is. Literally.

I'm fine with you not believing in God, its whatever floats your boat. But it's about time that atheists stop trying to bully the rest of the population out of their rights to say the word God.

Bristol Palin Welcomes Her First Child. Sarah Palin is a Grandma!

I think its about time we take a moment away from all the seriousness and congratulate Sarah Palin on welcoming her first grandchild into the world.

Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston welcomed their 7 pound, 4 ounce son, Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston earlier today.

The Palin's wish to keep the matter private, but you can bet the MSM won't let that happen. We will see their pictures splattered all over the tabloids by the weekend I can guarantee it.

But in the spirit of this joyous event, my biggest congrats go out to the proud mommy and grandma and the entire Palin family.

Arianna Huffington is a Cunt

For Arianna Huffington's latest article titled "Laissez-Faire Capitalism Should Be as Dead as Soviet Communism", I have decided that Ms. Huffington has transcended the ranks from political wing nut hack, to a full and total cunt. I hate using that word, I really do, but I can see no other title fitting.

The opening stinger of Huffington's article is this
"The collapse of Communism as a political system sounded the death knell for Marxism as an ideology. But while laissez-faire capitalism has been a monumental failure in practice, and soundly defeated at the polls, the ideology is still alive and kicking."

Apparently Huffington does not realize that America does not have a laissez-faire capitalistic economy. We never have. According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, laissez-faire is defined as:
1 : a doctrine opposing governmental interference in economic affairs beyond the minimum necessary for the maintenance of peace and property rights
2 : a philosophy or practice characterized by a usually deliberate abstention from direction or interference especially with individual freedom of choice and action"

Republicans argue we should move more in that direction. Libertarians, my economic philosophy of choice, argue that there is no other way to achieve economic success.

The U.S economy is nothing close to laissez-faire. The government mandates what we can sell, who we can sell it to and where we will sell it. The government tells businesses how many people need to work for them, how much the workers need to be paid, and even what color their skin should be and what reproductive parts they should have. The government tells business owners what kind of building the must have and where that building must be located.

Maybe if the U.S economy were a bit more laissez-faire, we wouldn't be in the boondoggle we are in. Maybe the banks would not have been forced to make bad loans had the government not told them that they must serve the poor and underprivileged. Maybe "The Big 3" would not be asking for a bailout and would have stayed competitive with their foreign counterparts, had the government not regulated what they produced to government specifications, when it was not economically feasible for them to do so.

I'm not quite sure if Huffington did any kind of real research for her article or if she just started spouting off all the misinformation inside that tiny little head of her's. Regardless, she is a cunt for being such a dolt. Its no wonder that the Cuntington Post news rag has been accused of plagiarism so many times, with a genius like that at the helm.

Sarah Palin named Conservative of the Year by Human Events

Sarah Palin has been named Conservative of the Year by Human Events.

According to Ann Coulter, Palin was bestowed the award because
"Sarah Palin wins HUMAN EVENTS’ prestigious “Conservative of the Year” Award for 2008 for her genius at annoying all the right people. The last woman to get liberals this hot under the collar would have been … let's see now … oh, yeah: Me!"...

...Like most Democrats, both Obama and Biden boasted of their humble beginnings, while having fully adopted the attitudes, pomposity and style of the elites.

Meanwhile, Palin is the sort of genuine American that brings out the worst, most egregious pomposity of liberals. For weeks, Carl Bernstein was showing up on TV to announce: “We still don’t have the date of first issuance of her passport.” Members of the establishment would be astonished to learn that more Americans have guns than passports.

Liberals were angry at Palin because they thought she should look and act like Kay Bailey Hutchinson: Upper crust, prissy and stiff.

Palin had a husband in the Steelworkers Union, a sister and brother-in-law who owned a gas station, and five attractive children -- one headed for Iraq, one a Down’s syndrome baby and one the cutest little girl anyone had ever seen.

In a nutshell, Palin was everything Democrats are always pretending to be, but never are."


I do not agree with Ann Coulter very often, but her observations are almost lock step with my own. Palin is everything the Liberals say they stand for, but secretly despise. Liberals love to tell the working man that they are on their side, but at the same time they make sure the working man thinks that he is powerless without his unions and his special interest groups and democratic politicians on his side.

Women's issues?? Liberal Democrats believe that allowing a woman to choose, is allowing her to make bad decisions for herself and then correct a "mess", instead of teaching a woman how to make better decisions. Choice is so much more than vacuuming out a womb.

Sarah Palin shows women and the common man that special interest groups are not needed. All that is needed in America is a dream and a lot of hard work and you can do whatever your little heart desires.

So weird that this is happening twice in one article but Coulter and I agree on one more thing. Sarah Palin has a lot of potential to be a future leader of the GOP, but she need not rush the process. She should take the time needed to be at the top of her game. 2012 may not be her year, but the GOP shouldn't pluck her until she is right.

"Perhaps Palin’s year is 2012, but I would recommend that she take a little more time to become older and wiser. She ought to spend the next decade being a good governor, tending to her children so none of them turn out like Ron Reagan Jr., and reading everything Phyllis Schlafly, Thomas Sowell, Ronald Reagan and “Publius” have ever written. (She also might keep in mind that HUMAN EVENTS was Ronald Reagan’s favorite newspaper!)

Report Absolving Rahm Emmanuel From Blagojevich Scandal Due Out Tuesday

According to Politico

President-elect Barack Obama’s aides plan to release a report Tuesday absolving incoming chief of staff Rahm Emanuel of any impropriety in his contacts with the disgraced Illinois governor’s office, Democratic sources tell Politico.

In related news, after my own extensive research on the subject, I plan to release a report tomorrow naming myself as the World's Best Lover.

Sarah Palin Rejects Salary Increase

From KTUU in Alaska:
Gov. Sarah Palin says she would not accept a raise recommended by the State Officers Compensation Commission.

Palin spokesman Bill McAllister said Wednesday that if the Legislature submits legislation for a raise, Palin will not accept the money.

Instead, if the raise is approved, she will subtract the difference from her current salary and donate it to charity or find a way to redirect the funds for the benefit of others, McAllister said.

The comment comes in response to reports Tuesday that the State Officers Compensation Commission is recommending the governor's annual salary be increased from $125,000 to $150,000.

McAllister says Palin never asked for a raise and that the review of top salaries is mandated by a recently passed state law.

The commission is also recommending that all lawmakers be paid $50,000. That standard would replace a variable compensation range and eliminate long-term per diem payments.

Of course, the blood thirsty Liberals are already claiming this is nothing but a political move on Palin's part. They very well may be right, but would a politician that does what her constituents want and what is in their best interest really such a bad thing after all?? Maybe she should take a hint from Liberals like Blago and Richardson and make sure to see the money first before she tries to serve the people.

Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture. Yet Another Corrupt "Pay to Player" On Team Obama?

I just saw it pop up on the newswire. Obama taps Vilsack for Secretary of Agriculture. I quickly run to the Google homepage. I type in "Vilsack Corrupt". The first hit I get is this little beaut from MSNBC, entitled IS CLINTON HELPING VILSACK WITH HIS DEBT?, from March of 2007.

It's a priceless little gem that explains that after Vilsack's failed Presidential bid, he was left with mounds of debt. When Vilsack dropped out of the race and endorsed Hillary, Clinton said that she would help him take care of his bills. But being the strong, upstanding, law abiding former Governor that Vilsack is, he said "Thanks but no thanks there, Hil."

Vilsack then goes on to say he is taking out personal loans to pay off his debt, but then goes on to say that he has friend's in the state who are strong Hillary supporters that will help him financially.

Umm. Tom Vilsack. Your confusing me. Personal Loans? Money from the Hill-ster? Or money from your Hill-ster supporting friends?

God I wish politicians could keep their lies straight for more than 10 seconds as not to confuse me so.