Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Wanted: Sellouts and Turncoats


The eight turncoats are (via Michelle Malkin):



Bono Mack (CA) (202) 225-5330
Castle (DE) (202) 225-4165
Kirk (IL) (202) 225-4385
Lance (NJ) (202) 225-5361
LoBiondo (NJ) (202) 225-6572
McHugh (NY) (202) 225-4611
Reichert (WA) (202) 225-7761
Smith (NJ) (202) 225-3765

Robert Stacy McCain has it right when he pins this on the National Republican Congressional Commitee: "Not one red cent."

Contribute to individual, conservative Republicans and organizations. Those are the men and women who can win and make a difference.

Another interesting case is first-term Democrat Steve Driehaus who represents one of the most conservative districts in the country (the southwestern corner of Ohio). He ran as a fiscal and social conservative, reportedly omitting the very fact that he was a Democrat.

Driehaus (D-OH) (202) 225-2216

His constituents need to be made completely aware of what a sickening, San Francisco-style sycophant he really is.

We're coming after every Republican and every red-district Democrat who voted for this totalitarian bill that shreds the Constitution; that injects the federal government into every city, town, community and home owners' assocation; and that harms rich and poor, union and non-union, Democrat and Republican alike.

We're coming after you and we will defeat you in 2010.


An open letter to Dick Durbin from a constituent


Mike M. points us to a well-written letter posted by 'Serkit'.

Dear Senator Durbin:

You were kind enough to send me your views on global warming, climate change, and cap-and-trade.

After the very close vote in the House yesterday on cap-and-trade, several documents were revealed that need to be considered prior to any action on your part in the Senate. It seems that when any of these things are discussed, the argument deteriorates to name-calling, especially the term "flat earther". Well, call me what you will, but the scientific facts simply do not support the Al Gore/Leonardo DiCaprio populist theories based on non-scientific "consensus". The legislation passed in the House does not even address nuclear power, a clean resource that needs to be part of our energy independence.

Three documents came out VERY late in the game on this debate:

1) A 300+ page "manager's amendment" that was added to the bill at 3:09am the day of the House vote. Not only was this a voluminous add-on, it is a scary document. If you support it, and I hope you do not, please let me know how local governments will be able to afford the extra staff to enforce the new and very confusing laws. The bill also radically modifies international trade rules.

2) A suppressed and censored report from our own EPA exposes many problems with the theories and "consensus" of the populist (and now debunked) theory of global warming, and the true (and minimal) affect of human activity on the climate. The suppressed EPA report is linked here:

http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/25/cei-releases-global-warming-study-censored-epa

3) A report from the Chicago-based Heartland Institute summarized the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) that attempts to use scientific and rational arguments to identify exactly what is going on in the climate and the true impact of human activity. The recently released NIPCC report is found here:

http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC_final.pdf

The previous letter you sent me contains seemingly factual statements that now appear to be patently false regarding wild temperature increases in the next ten years.

Although these "facts" are wrong, the underlying research found in the suppressed EPA report, and the NIPCC report will help you politically. Why? Because the laws you are about to impose on us, if passed, will do NOTHING to improve the climate or greenhouse gases and will not change the global average temperatures, but, you WILL be able to show "progress" because the falsely increasing temperatures will NOT happen anyway - allowing you to take the credit for keeping the planet cool. It is a perfectly contrived crisis so that radical redistribution of wealth can occur on a global scale.

Now, I realize as a leader in the Senate, you will probably not be able to back off for even one second to look at the facts, and I understand that. But I felt I owed it to myself, my children, and my future grandchildren, that I did not sit idly by while, during the great recession of 2009, with the highest unemployment in my lifetime, I sat silent while this legislation was passed.

This law, and the concept of cap-and-trade, is not going to work, is not needed, and will do more harm to our already crippled economy.

All I ask is that you take an honest look at the three documents above, keep an open mind to the facts, and consider what you are doing to this and future generations.

We need a change in energy policy, but this is not one of them.

Sincerely and respectfully,

[Name redacted]

Friday, June 26, 2009

Who voted FOR the Economy-Destroyer called Cap-and-Trade?


It was a close vote, but the Pelosi-Socialist-Democrat Party carried the day on the preliminary vote for Cap-and-Trade. It was 217 - 205 for the most massive tax increase in history, which would add $3,900 to the average family's tax bill. A bill that no one has read with last minute amendments consisting of welfare payments, payoffs to ACORN and lots of pork payoffs to fence-sitters.


The bill consists of at least 397 new regulations and 1060 new mandates. An immense bureaucracy, consisting of tens of thousands of new government jobs, will be funded by your new tax bills. Power Line published John Boehner's graphic, which describes the new bureaucracies:

Ironic, eh? You'll receive new tax bills each year for the privilege of funding bureaucrats who will lower the carbon limits annually, which will result in increased tax bills... ad infinitum.

Who are the fence-sitters?

Some of the key Democrats who voted to support the preliminary vote are the supposedly "conservative" Democrats. Call them now:

Boyd (FL) 202-225-5235 -- Voted FOR

Driehaus (OH) 202-225-2216 -- Voted FOR

Kratovil (MD) 202-225-5311 -- Voted FOR

Kanjorski (PA) 202-225-6511 -- Voted FOR

Teague (NM) 202-225-2365 -- Voted FOR

Check out the complete list of fence-sitters and make some calls now.

Stop Pelosi and her bill, which was summarized perfectly by GOP Rep. Rohrbacher, who said, "If this passes, jobs will go to China and economy will go to hell."

He's not overstating things.

And congratulations are due to the House GOP and its leadership: John Boehner and Eric Cantor. Not a single Republican voted for Pelosi's Socialist nightmare. Well done -- and keep up the good fight.


Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Democrats' "tax cut for 95 percent of all working Chinese"


Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman and similarly-inclined Democrats in the House are rushing forward with the ill-named "American Clean Energy and Security Act", better known as "Cap-and-Trade". Its target date for introduction is Friday.

The bill would "result in the most massive bureaucratic intrusion into the lives of Americans since the creation of the Internal Revenue Service."

It grants the Environmental Protection Agency extraordinary new regulatory powers over every business and individual in the United States. The EPA, an unelected and unaccountable cadre of bureaucrats, would become a fourth branch of government.


The bill would cost every working family in America over $3,900 annually. It would hurt seniors, the urban poor and the unemployed hardest. So much for a "tax cut for 95% of working Americans". In fact, the new taxes are so outrageous that Democrats hope to use the "Stimulus" approach: slam a 1,000-page document on the desk and rush the bill through before it's even been read.

Both sides of the aisle are disgusted with the approach. Liberal blogger Matt Stoller ("The Cap-and-Trade Scam") complains that a similar system, used in Europe, is an utter failure.

Given these numerous drawbacks, cap-and-trade’s principal justification appears to its political feasibility. Many environmental activists assume that a global cap-and-trade program is more achievable politically than global carbon taxes, because most of the world agreed to Kyoto and most people resist higher taxes...

...numerous analyses of Kyoto have found that it would have very little effect on climate change even over a 60-year period; and the first effort to apply it in an enforceable way, the European Emissions Trading Scheme, is expected to have virtually no effect on emissions.

Furthermore, the bill ignores the real polluters. The federal government is effectively punishing its own citizens -- already among the cleanest of industrialized countries -- and forcing its businesses offshore.

The Democrat Tax-and-Kill proposal does nothing to address the real air pollution issues, which are global in scope.


Satellite data indicates that Beijing, China is the "air pollution capital of the world."


The World Bank has warned China is home to 16 of the Earth's 20 most air-polluted cities.


The World Resources Institute reports that, "air pollution in some Chinese cities is among the highest ever recorded, averaging more than ten times the standard proposed by the World Health Organization... In Beijing, 40 percent of autos surveyed and 70 percent of taxis failed to meet the most basic emission standards."


USA Today reports that, "[d]ecades of... pollution have allowed industrial poisons to leach into groundwater, contaminating drinking supplies and leading to a rash of cancers, residents say. In this village, where the air has a distinctive sour odor, the rate of cancer is more than 18 times the national average. In nearby Liukuaizhuang, it's 30 times the national figure..."


AFP discovered that an internal Chinese government report found that nearly half a million persons die per year from pollution. Experts believe that, "China's rapid industrialization is leading to increasing environmental damage, with air pollution likely to rise five-fold in 15 years at the current rate."

In fact, China is building two or more coal plants per week. Any cuts that the U.S. government would inflict on its helpless citizens would be minuscule in comparison to China's growth using fundamentally dirty and unregulated technologies.


Iran is another interesting case. Its pollution problems are visible throughout the capital city of Tehran.


In a single year, 10,000 people have died from pollution-related causes in that city alone.

These cold, hard facts beg the question: why "Cap-and-Trade" if its effects would be meaningless? Consider the beneficiaries of this massive new tax -- the largest single tax program in world history.

Ms. Boxer expects to scoop up auction revenues of some $3.32 trillion by 2050. Yes, that's trillion. Her friends in Congress are already salivating over this new pot of gold. The way Congress works, the most vicious floor fights won't be over whether this is a useful tax to create, but over who gets what portion of the spoils. In a conference call with reporters last Thursday, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry explained that he was disturbed by the effects of global warming on "crustaceans" and so would be pursuing changes to ensure that New England lobsters benefit from some of the loot.

...$802 billion would go for "relief" for low-income taxpayers... There's also $190 billion to fund training for "green-collar jobs," which are supposed to replace the jobs that will be lost in carbon-emitting industries. Another $288 billion would go to "wildlife adaptation," whatever that means, and another $237 billion to the states for the same goal. Some $342 billion would be spent on international aid, $171 billion for mass transit, and untold billions for alternative energy and research – and we're just starting.

Ms. Boxer would only auction about half of the carbon allowances; she reserves the rest for politically favored supplicants. These groups might be Indian tribes (big campaign donors!), or states rewarded for "taking the lead" on emissions reductions like Ms. Boxer's California. Those lucky winners would be able to sell those allowances for cash. The Senator estimates that the value of the handouts totals $3.42 trillion. For those keeping track, that's more than $6.7 trillion in revenue handouts so far.

The bill also tries to buy off businesses that might otherwise try to defeat the legislation. Thus carbon-heavy manufacturers like steel and cement will get $213 billion "to help them adjust," while fossil-fuel utilities will get $307 billion in "transition assistance." No less than $34 billion is headed to oil refiners. Given that all of these folks have powerful Senate friends, they will probably extract a larger ransom if cap and trade ever does become law.

In these turbulent economic times, Democrats and Barack Obama will propose to increase the price of gas, outsource millions of jobs to overseas providers, and create a massive new bureaucracy funded by your (additional) tax dollars.

The American Consumer (PDF) summarizes the scam known as "Cap-and-Trade".

By creating tradable financial assets worth tens of billions of dollars for governments to distribute among their industries and plants and then monitor, a global cap-and-trade program also introduces powerful incentives to cheat by corrupt and radical governments. Corrupt governments will almost certainly distribute permits in ways that favor their business supporters and understate their actual energy use and emissions.

Meanwhile, the world's worst polluters continue choking the atmosphere with toxic fumes and poisons.

"Cap-and-Trade" is sheer lunacy. Or, in the words of the UK's Telegraph: it is "economic suicide". Waxman-Markey's Cap-and-Trade bill must be stopped.

Call Your Representative Now

Call (202) 224-3121 and tell your representative to reject cap-and-trade or you will ensure he or she is voted out next year. The election is little more than 15 months away. Call now, later tonight, tomorrow and on Friday.

The stakes are too high to ignore.




Update: Washington Times: "EXCLUSIVE: Climate bill gives billions to foreign foliage".

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Edison and Ford meet Waxman and Pelosi


The committee calls Thomas Edison to testify. Please swear him in.

Mr. Edison, describe for the committee the nature of your "light bulb" invention.

Distinguished representatives and guests, while the idea of electric lighting is not a new one, neither had it been a practical matter until we produced our new incandescent light bulb.

It uses a lower current of electricity and is both safe and economical.

So this electric light bulb that your firm invented: do you agree that demand for affordable lighting will skyrocket and that more and more electricity will need to be produced? Have you considered the impact on carbon emissions into the atmosphere -- the inevitable result of lighting all of these "bulbs"?

No, sir. We were simply trying to create a useful product for consumers, one that enhances safety and society as a whole.

Have you considered alternative lighting mechanisms that would consume less electricity? How many "green collar" scientists are working in your laboratories? Have you considered the impact of your invention on climate change?

No, sir -- I'll admit we were simply trying to create a functional light bulb.

And this phonograph you've invented, Mr. Edison, have you evaluated how its production could skyrocket due to high demand for musical recordings? Have you produced an assessment for the EPA and state regulators as to its impact on the environment? Production of tin, vinyl and other substances could explode!

Ah, never mind.

The committee calls Henry Ford.

Here.

Please explain this "invention" of yours: this "mass-produced" automobile.

Ladies and gentlemen, one day it struck me. We could produce cheaper goods, without compromising quality, by standardizing designs and assembly processes. We created an "assembly line" that helps us mass-produce vehicles...

These "cars" of yours are reproducing like locusts! Virtually everyone is driving them! And where do you think you'll get the fuel, the gas for these --

Distinguished Representative, America's natural resources are plentiful and there is no shortage of oil. Furthermore, our new processes are a significant improvement because automobiles can be produced more efficiently and consistently.

Mr. Ford. Mr. Edison. The conclusions of this committee are clear. The U.S. government cannot tolerate out-of-control corporate entities run by super-wealthy individuals such as yourselves. We must confiscate your factories and laboratories until they can be unionized; vetted by federal, state and local regulators; and certified as "green".

In short, we must call a halt to your outrageous activities. You and Mr. Edison are dismissed.


Saturday, May 23, 2009

Which is it, Nancy: Ignorance or Incompetence?

Earlier this month, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that the CIA misled her and other Congressional intelligence committee members on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs).

Pelosi also claimed that, when it came to everything that occurred in Iraq, as well as the use of EITs, the Bush administration misled her and the rest of Congress.

In fact, the very day George W. Bush left office in January, Pelosi excoriated the 43rd president, saying that he completely misled her and all Americans in explaining why the U.S. should go to war in Iraq.

In 2007, the now nearly bankrupt New York Times backed up Pelosi's assertions, claiming that Bush and his aides conducted "a systematic campaign to mislead Congress, the American people and the world..."

In 2004, Pelosi pilloried the Bush administration for misleading Congress about Iraq, stating that the "war has been a grotesque mistake that has diminished our reputation in the world and has not made America safer."

Of course, Pelosi contradicted herself when it made political sense to do so. In 1998, she stated, "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."


If Pelosi truly is consistently misled this easily -- on the very topics upon which she has been repeatedly briefed -- then she is either ignorant or incompetent.

And in either case, she must resign as Speaker of the House.



Update: Emily Littela Pelosi.

Friday, May 22, 2009

An unexpected contest for supremacy


Fausta points us to this Theo Spark post:

Pinocchio, Snow White, and Superman are out for a stroll in town one day. As they walked, they come across a sign: "Beauty contest for the most beautiful woman in the world."

"I am entering!" said Snow White. After half an hour she comes out and they ask her, "Well, how'd ya do?"

"First Place!" said Snow White.

They continue walking and they see a sign: "Contest for the strongest man in the world."

"I'm entering," says Superman. After half an hour, he returns and they ask him, "How did you make out?"

"First Place," answers Superman. "Did you ever doubt?"

They continue walking when they see a sign: "Contest! Who is the greatest liar in the world?" Pinocchio enters.

After half an hour he returns with tears in his eyes.

"What happened?" they asked.

"Who the hell is this Nancy Pelosi?" asked Pinocchio.

Funny... and true.


Thursday, May 14, 2009

Exclusive: Nancy Pelosi's Address to CIA Employees


Junior Cub Reporter Biff Spackle secured an exclusive copy of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's speech to CIA employees.

People, we live in a world that has rules and those rules need to be enforced by Members of Congress and their staffers . Who's gonna do it? You? You, DCI Panetta? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom.

You weep for the victims of 9/11 and curse the terrorists; you have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that those victims' deaths, while tragic, probably saved lives and that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves terrorists from illegal torture.

You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties you want me in Congress, you need me in Congress.

We use words like tax, spend, entitlement and "investment". We use them as the backbone of a life trying to keep our power. You use them as a punchline.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to men and women who rise and sleep under the blanket of the very money I provide and then question the manner in which I provide it.

I would rather you just said "thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a ballot and cast a vote. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

We can't handle the truth.



Linked by: Sheikh. Thanks!

Monday, May 11, 2009

Pelosi called for others to resign for lying, she should too


In April 2007, Nancy Pelosi publicly excoriated then-AG Alberto Gonzales for allegedly fibbing about the administration's firings of eight U.S. attorneys. Let's ignore for the moment the actual issue of the attorneys -- i.e., that Bill Clinton fired all 93 attorneys simultaneously in 1993 and that any such appointee serves at the pleasure of the president. Never mind all that -- those facts are tangential to the political ends Pelosi hoped to achieve by calling Gonzales dishonest.

At the time, she stated, "The nation cannot have a chief law enforcement officer whose candor and judgment are in serious question... The president should restore credibility to the office of the attorney general. Alberto Gonzales must resign."

Gonzales was then under significant pressure over the termination of the eight attorneys in 2006. Many critics, including Pelosi, accused him of dishonesty regarding the reasons for the firings. After months of incessant and blatantly partisan bickering, Gonzales resigned in September, 2007, his career effectively "Borked" by the Democrats and their public relations department at The New York Times.

Fast forward to 2009, when Nancy Pelosi was caught in a far more damaging series of lies related to the use of enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs). In the wake of 9/11, Pelosi, along with dozens of other Congressional representatives and staffers, were briefed on the use of EITs on three high-value terrorists. She didn't complain; she didn't document her concerns; she didn't write to the President.

In fact, some representatives -- perhaps Pelosi among them -- asked CIA officials whether more could be done. More, not less.

I'm calling for the Speaker to resign. That's right, I said it. Resign, you partisan embarrassment! Here's a search-and-replace Politico post so you get the message.

I used your own words (except for the part about plastic surgery). Why should Gonzales be held to a higher standard than you?

Resign, Pelosi, before you're impeached in 2010.


Hat tip: Rusty.

Saturday, May 09, 2009

Waterboarding Pelosi


Waterboarding -- as a field interrogation technique -- has been used by American troops since the Spanish-American War.

According to National Public Radio, U.S. troops in the Philippines employed it over a period of decades.

Contrary to President Obama's assertions, the British used it extensively.

The U.S. also used enhanced interrogation in Vietnam.


As part of their training, American special forces and naval aviators are waterboarded as a matter of course during SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape) school.


As ABC reports, Nancy Pelosi and dozens of other members and staffers of Congress were briefed repeatedly on the use of waterboarding on three high-value suspects shortly after the 9/11 attacks.


At that time, of course, there were widespread fears of biological, chemical and/or nuclear attacks on American cities among various leaders in government.


Waterboarding revealed much, as was admitted by four current and former heads of national intelligence agencies.


Put simply, the Democrat members of Congress briefed on this topic, who claim now to object to the practice, are liars -- plain and simple. They have politicized, in every way possible, the defense of this country.

My wife says we should waterboard Pelosi to get to the bottom of this.

There's a good reason for not waterboarding Pelosi, however. Any one of a number of surgical enhancements might rupture, causing severe emotional distress for the interrogators.



Linked by: Gateway Pundit. Thanks!