About Me

Name: Defend America
Email: guy.ratki@gmail.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

This is Interesting: A Governor Decides to Freeze Spending When the State Runs Out of Money

N.J. Gov. Christie Freezes Spending

With State's Budget In 'Shambles,' New Governor Slices Into School Surpluses, NJ Transit Subsidies; Dems Furious

TRENTON (CBS) ?

The snow isn't the only thing that's causing a chill in the Garden State.

Calling New Jersey's budget a "shambles," Gov. Chris Christie announced Thursday he is immediately freezing all state spending.

Saying New Jersey is on the verge of bankruptcy, Christie declared a fiscal emergency, announcing drastic cuts. Among them, aid to school districts that have excess surpluses.

"Today we are going to act swiftly to fix problems too long ignored. Today I begin to do what I promised the people of New Jersey I would do," Christie said.

The move had Democrats in an uproar, angry the governor used his executive powers instead of working with the Legislature.

http://wcbstv.com/local/governor.christie.freezes.2.1487727.html

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Talk About Change: Rep. Patrick Kennedy to Retire

Patrick Kennedy won't seek reelection



By JOHN BRESNAHAN | 2/11/10 10:39 PM EST

Rhode Island Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy, the last member of his legendary family currently serving in Congress, will announce on Friday that he is retiring, according to Democratic insiders.

Kennedy, 42, was first elected to Congress in 1994. He did a stint as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the 1999-2000 cycle but has not served in the House Democratic leadership beyond that.

His congressional tenure was marked by repeated substance abuse problems, including a drunk-driving incident in 2006. He entered a rehab facility at that time and again in 2009.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32877.html



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'Dead Terrorists Tell No Tales'

Dead Terrorists Tell No Tales

Is Barack Obama killing too many bad guys before the U.S. can interrogate them?

BY MARC A. THIESSEN | FEBRUARY 8, 2010

The CIA reportedly succeeded in killing the head of the Pakistani Taliban -- the most recent in a flurry of drone attacks the agency has launched in South Asia and the Middle East. Another strike in Pakistan reportedly took out one of the FBI's most wanted terrorists; another in Pakistan took out a master bomb-maker for the al Qaeda affiliate in the Philippines, Abu Sayyaf; and a strike in Yemen targeted a senior military leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the group behind the Christmas Day attack (his fate has yet to be determined).

President Barack Obama's escalation of drone strikes is one area in the counterterrorism fight where he has earned plaudits from even his most vocal critics on the right. Hold the applause. Obama's escalation of the "Predator War" comes at the very same time he has eliminated the CIA's capability to capture senior terrorist leaders alive and interrogate them for information on new attacks. The Predator has become for President Obama what the cruise missile was to President Bill Clinton -- an easy way to appear like he is taking tough action against terrorists, when he is really shying away from the hard decisions needed to protect the United States.

To be sure, unmanned drones are critical in the struggle against al Qaeda. They allow the United States to reach terrorists hiding in remote regions where it would be difficult for special operations forces to reach them, or to act on perishable intelligence when the only choice is to kill a terrorist or lose him. Constantly hovering Predator (or Reaper) drones also have a psychological effect on the enemy, forcing al Qaeda leaders to live in fear and spend time focusing on self-preservation that would otherwise be used planning the next attack. All this is for the good.

The problem is that Obama is increasingly using drone strikes as a substitute for operations to bring terrorist leaders in alive for questioning -- and that is putting the country at risk. As one high-ranking CIA official explained to me, in an interview for my book Courting Disaster, "In the wake of 9/11, [the CIA] put forward a program that had a lethal component to strike back at the people who did this. But the other component was to prevent this kind of catastrophe from happening again. And for that, killing people -- especially killing senior al Qaeda leaders -- is potentially counterproductive in that we can't know or learn of future attacks. You can't kill them all, and you don't want to kill them all from an intelligence standpoint. We needed to know what they knew."

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/02/08/dead_terrorists_tell_no_tales


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'A Mistake, Not a Precedent'

A Mistake, Not a Precedent
We need not repeat the mistakes of Reid with Abdulmutallab.

Cooking the books on the number of terrorists convicted in the civilian-justice system hasn’t worked for the Obama administration. So now we’re on to the next red herring: the civilian prosecution of shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Once again, the Obama team has learned the wrong lesson from the past while setting the wrong course for the future.

On Dec. 22, 2001, while American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris was cruising toward the United States, Reid attempted to detonate explosives concealed in his shoes. He was subdued by passengers and crew. According to Politico’s Mike Allen, who has reviewed the court records, Reid was given Miranda warnings five minutes after being taken into custody by Massachusetts state police. FBI agents did not get into the act until about four hours later, and they Mirandized him too. Within a month he was indicted for attempting to blow up the plane and kill everyone aboard. In short order, he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
This, Obama’s defenders now claim, shows that the Bush administration handled a perfectly analogous case in the same way the present administration handled the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Therefore, the argument goes, conservatives’ criticism of how Obama has treated the would-be Christmas bomber is a shameful episode of politicizing our national security.

The comparison is flawed: The factual contexts of these two incidents are different in important ways. More important: We made mistakes in the Reid case, and it would be destructive to proceed as though having made an error in the past obliges us to repeat that error in the future.

http://article.nationalreview.com/424765/a-mistake-not-a-precedent/andrew-c-mccarthy
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Victory is Possible

Victory — How Quaint an Idea!
Defeating Islamic terrorism is not only definable and possible, but closer than ever before.

There is a common — and understandable — perception in the postmodern age of nuclear proliferation that victory is an obsolete concept.

Is it that too many nuclear players have provided too many eleventh-hour reprieves to the losing sides in conventional wars?

Or is it the non-uniformed status of our increasingly common terrorist enemies?
Or perhaps the “ends” of wars seem inconsequential because of the ubiquity of terrorism and unconventional tactics, the mess of post-battle reconstruction and nation-building, and the power of instant global communications that bring us unedited and unrepresentative soundbites from the front.

In reality, such pessimism discourages Western military action, and cynical postmodern societies seem to be stymied by their zealous premodern opponents.

http://article.nationalreview.com/424518/victory--how-quaint-an-idea/victor-davis-hanson
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Budget is Rigging Health Care Numbers

Obama Budget Rigs Healthcare Numbers

Friday, February 5, 2010

For the first time by any administration in memory, the Obama budget forecast rejects the Medicare Trustees’ projections for long-run healthcare cost growth. Why would the White House do this?

The Obama administration’s fiscal year 2011 budget continues a pattern of ignoring independent analysis and rigging economic assumptions to meet political goals. For the first time by any administration in memory, the Obama budget forecast rejects the Medicare Trustees’ projections for long-run healthcare cost growth. The reason: the Trustees’ projections undercut the administration’s narrative that increased federal control over private sector healthcare could painlessly reduce Medicare and Medicaid costs. The Obama budget instead assumes long-term health cost growth at twice the rate projected by the Trustees.

The White House’s assumptions are factually implausible. Worse, they threaten to politicize the Social Security and Medicare Trustees, whose process for estimating entitlement costs has until now stood out for its lack of political influence.

The budget’s long-term analysis projects Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid spending over 75 years. While past administrations have sometimes used their own productivity and interest rate assumptions, these changes generally have only minor effects. But all past administrations, and even the Obama administration in its fiscal year 2010 budget, adopted the Social Security and Medicare Trustees’ baseline program-specific assumptions, including the rate of healthcare cost growth.

These Trustees’ assumptions are generated in a process deliberately insulated from politics. While cabinet members make up four of the six Medicare and Social Security Trustees, White House staff do not attend meetings of the Trustees working group and have no say regarding economic or demographic variables. During my time at the Social Security Administration I never saw politics influence how assumptions were chosen.

The rate of health cost growth per beneficiary combines with population aging, which swells the number of beneficiaries, to raise overall Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid spending. The Medicare Trustees have for years projected that per capita health costs will grow around 1 percent faster than gross domestic product. In health experts’ lexicon, “excess cost growth” will equal “GDP plus 1 percent.”

The 2011 Obama budget, by contrast, assumes per capita health costs will grow at GDP plus 2 percent, double the Trustees’ rate. The effects of this change are staggering: the administration’s 2010 budget, which followed the Trustees assumptions, projected Medicare costs of 9.6 percent of GDP by 2080. The 2011 budget, which uses White House assumptions, projects Medicare will consume 22 percent of GDP by 2085.

http://www.american.com/archive/2010/february/obama-budget-rigs-healthcare-numbers

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Marc Thiessen Rightly Calls Out the AP and the AP Must Issue a Retraction

The AP wrote this about Binyam Mohammed:

Intelligence ties between UK and US in jeopardy



By DAVID STRINGER
The Associated Press
Thursday, February 11, 2010; 7:32 PM

LONDON -- Intelligence ties between London and Washington have been jeopardized by a British court's disclosure that a terrorism suspect was beaten and shackled in U.S. custody, diplomats and security officials said Wednesday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/11/AR2010021102939.html

The worst thing that was done to Mohamed was depriving him of sleep. Here are the facts where the seven paragraphs toward the bottom of the page detail what actually happened to Mohamed:

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=News&id=21733568



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Senator Sherrod Brown Announced a New Bill that would Tax Wall Street Bonues

Brown Announces Bill to Tax Wall Street Bonuses to Help Main Street Businesses

Bill Would Tax Bonuses at Companies Receiving TARP Funds from Taxpayers to Help Fund Small Business Lending Program

February 11, 2010

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) announced a new bill today that would tax bonuses given to executives at firms that received help from U.S. taxpayers in order to fund loans for small businesses. Brown’s bill would use revenues generated from taxing bonuses at firms who received assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to help small businesses expand operations and hire new workers.

http://brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press_releases/release/?id=D5BE8A1F-14F0-4E8A-8AB6-22F34D79B08C

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democrats Trying to Change the First Amendment

Democrats rush to curb corporate election spending before Nov. vote

By Jared Allen - 02/11/10 12:58 PM ET
Democrats are hoping to fast-track a set of sweeping new campaign finance regulations to prevent the Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United decision from affecting the November midterm elections.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Thursday unveiled the majority party's legislative response to the Citizens United case, which they and other Democrats — including President Barack Obama — have sharply criticized as one that will "open the floodgates" to corporate financing of federal elections.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/80745-dems-look-to-crack-down-on-corporate-political-spending-ahead-of-midterms
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Big Environmental Scam

Chevron Witch Trial Yields Bizarre $27 Billion ‘Environmental’ Claim

by Byron W. King

Chevron oil company is being sued in Ecuador for $27 billion. It’s a big number. The gross domestic product (GDP) of Ecuador in 2008 was $54 billion. So $27 billion is 50% of the GDP of the entire country. And the $27 billion claim is sheer fantasy. The damage claim against Chevron is based on a gigantic scam.

It goes back a while. Between 1965 and 1990, the old Texaco company developed oil concessions in Ecuador. (Texaco merged with Chevron in 2001, hence Chevron is now in the dock.) Between 1977 and 1990, Ecuador progressively nationalized Texaco assets, and transferred them to the state oil firm, Petroecuador.

In the early 1990s, Texaco and Petroecuador agreed to clean up a number of oil sites. Texaco kept its side of the bargain, and in 1998 the government of Ecuador certified that Texaco successfully cleaned up its share of the operations.

Nonetheless, in 1994 a group of U.S. attorneys sued Texaco in the U.S. They made novel legal claims for “environmental justice.” Eventually, the case was dismissed in the United States and a new case was filed against Chevron in Ecuador.

The Ecuadorean court appointed an “expert witness” to make factual findings and to calculate damages. Turns out that the “expert” is a mining engineer named Richard Cabrera, who has direct financial ties to the plaintiffs and as we learned this week, hidden ties to Petroecuador.

http://biggovernment.com/bwking/2010/02/11/chevron-witch-trial-yields-bizarre-27-billion-environmental-claim/#more-73614

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Another Promise Down the Drain

Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

By Rich Miller

Feb. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama said he is “agnostic” about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.

Obama, in a Feb. 9 Oval Office interview, said that a presidential commission on the budget needs to consider all options for reducing the deficit, including tax increases and cuts in spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

“The whole point of it is to make sure that all ideas are on the table,” the president said in the interview with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. “So what I want to do is to be completely agnostic, in terms of solutions.”

Obama repeatedly vowed during the 2008 presidential election campaign that he would not raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 and households earning less than $250,000 a year. When senior White House economic adviser Lawrence H. Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner suggested in August that the administration might be open to going back on that pledge, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs quickly reiterated the president’s promise.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-11/obama-agnostic-on-deficit-cuts-won-t-prejudge-tax-increases.html

Tags: obama   tax  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Only Point of this Would be to Demonize those CEOs

Dems Want CEOS On-Camera in Corporate-Financed Political Ads

February 11, 2010 2:16 PM

ABC's Z. Byron Wolf reports: Democrats have an answer to the Supreme Court’s decision that corporations have the same right to free speech as individuals, overturning generations of campaign finance law and allowing more corporate money to be spent closer to elections – force CEOs on-camera to endorse political ads sponsored by corporations.

Instead of the candidate sponsoring an ad saying “I’m X and I approved this message,” commercials on TV paid for by corporations or unions would instead feature the CEO or leader of that company saying he or she was sponsoring it. If the ad was paid for by a group taking a certain amount of contributions from a corporate donor, the corporate donor would still have to appear on-screen. Opposing viewpoints would get the cheapest possible ad rate to rebut corporate and union-financed ads.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/02/dems-want-ceos-oncamera-in-corporatefinanced-political-ads.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Everytime Baucus Writes a Bill, Reid Overrules Him

Reid overrules Baucus, narrows jobs bill focus

By Alexander Bolton - 02/11/10 02:57 PM ET
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is rewriting a jobs bill after Democrats complained of too many concessions to Republicans.  
 
Reid announced Thursday that he would cut back on the jobs bill Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) introduced only hours earlier, essentially overruling the powerful chairman. 

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/80787-reid-overrules-baucus-chops-jobs-bill
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bill Clinton Hospitalized

  • Bill Clinton Hospitalized

    URGENT: Former president in 'good spirits' after heart procedure at New York hospital, lawyer says

Tags: clinton  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Rep. Paul Ryan Voted for TARP?

Ryan said his vote for the bailout was influenced by Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism, a popular book among conservatives that argues that Nazism and other fascist movements were actually left wing in origin, and his belief that a second Depression would threaten capitalism—and rescue Obama's presidency.

"I'm a limited-government, free-enterprise guy, but TARP... represented a moment where we had no good options and we were about to fall into a deflationary spiral," he said. "I believe Obama would not only have won, but would have been able to sweep through a huge statist agenda very quickly because there would have been no support for the free-market system."

He couched his support for the auto bailout in similar terms, saying that he feared the bill's failure would have led the Obama administration to use TARP funds in order to rescue the industry with less congressional oversight instead.

“A lot of these votes are defensive votes," he said. "A lot of them are not votes you want to take but under the circumstances they're the best path forward."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-02-10/paul-ryans-sacred-cow-slaughter/2/

Tags: Ryan   Bailout  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1234Next »