On Lou's Radar

Administration most fiscally irresponsible yet?

2010-08-27T13:24:00Z

Mort Zukerman blasts the White House for being the "most fiscally irresponsible" administration in history.

There is an instinctive conclusion among the American public that President Obama's stimulus package has failed to create a sustained recovery. Unemployment has increased, not declined; consumers have retrenched; housing starts have crashed along with mortgage applications; and there is a fear that a double-dip recession may very well be in the pipeline. The public perception, reflected in Pew Research/National Journal polls, is that the measures to combat the Great Recession have mostly helped large banks and financial institutions, and that's a view common to Republicans (75 percent) and Democrats (73 percent). Only one third of either political leaning thinks government policies have done a great deal or a fair amount for the poor.

There is another instinctive conclusion among the American people. It is that the national deficit, and the debts we have accumulated, are of critical political importance. On the national debt, the money the government has spent without the tax revenues to pay for it has produced mind-numbing numbers so large as to be disconnected from reality. Zeros from here to infinity. The sums are hard to describe; it is hard to describe an elephant, but you know one when you see one. The public knows that, shuffle the numbers as you may, the level of debt is unsustainable.

Who could be surprised since millions of voters have discovered that for themselves? As one realizes the morning after the night before, there is an unavoidable penalty for excess. It is unnerving to wake up and learn that you have a mortgage on your home that exceeds the value of the property. Or, and too often both, you have a credit card line that you cannot repay and the issuer has you on the rack for ever bigger compound interest on the debt. The lesson has been well and truly learned that debt catches up with you. Millions understand that they are just going to have to find a way to live within their means-and then still eke out some savings to pay down debt. And there are well over 14 million Americans without a paying job, so the level of discontent is very high. Just how are they going to regain control of their lives?

Click here to read more

By Mortimer B. Zuckerman - US News & World Reports

Obama's Poor Politicking

2010-08-24T13:24:00Z

The Obama hyperbole has gradually faded into reality. Said to be a brilliant politician. Said to be a great communicator. The conventional perceptions of Obama were flawed from the outset. The political class has gradually come to recognize those flaws in isolation. But enough aberrations construct a norm. The presumed exceptions become the rule. And in time, the premises themselves require reexamination.

Obama's mismanagement of the debate over Park51, the Islamic cultural center and mosque near Ground Zero, is a window into the president we have come to know. This is not a matter of man versus myth. It's man versus man. It's now plainly silly to place Obama beside the great communicators of the television age. He's no Reagan or Kennedy, in this sense. But this mosque incident, like so many incidents before it, also raises deeper questions. Does Obama simply have poor political instincts?

There is the failure to seize upon, if not lead, during defining moments. There was the cool response to the AIG bonuses early on. There was the BP disaster this summer.

There was the bad theater. The expressions of American mistakes abroad. Not said from a position of strength. But said at a time when America was confronting its own national weakness.

There were the impotent uses of power. The fruitless chase of GOP moderates on healthcare. The failed attempt to push out the New York governor. The presumptuous firing of Shirley Sherrod. The inability to manage Charlie Rangel.

For the whole piece click here.

David Paul Kuhn - Real Clear Politics

How many states will follow GA's lead?

2010-08-23T13:24:00Z

Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp reports the Justice Department has given his state the final preclearance to begin using a state system of verifying voters' identification and citizenship.

The voter verification system has been tied up in federal court since 2008 and the Justice Department has repeatedly refused to approve the process by which the state checks voter registration information against drivers license and Social Security databases.

But Kemp said Monday the federal government had signed off on the program, two months after he sued the Justice Department in federal court in search of approval. The Justice Department in 2008, then under Republican President George W. Bush, first questioned the system and said federal law required the state to verify a voter's identity, but not his or her citizenship.

Kemp indicated in a statement that the Justice Department approved the project in response to the lawsuit. Both the state and the DOJ have filed paperwork with the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

Click here for more.

By Aaron Gould Sheinin - Atlanta Journal-Constitution

GOP Uses Flight Attended Meltdown to Mock Obama & Dems

2010-08-18T13:24:00Z

Move over, Steven Slater: GOP ad shows Dems sliding off President Obama's Air Force One:

A new Republican spoof video shows congressional Democrats running from President Obama by bailing out of Air Force One - using the emergency slide.

"I'm coming to your hometowns!" a cartoon Obama says, before the bright yellow chute pops open and Democrats start to flee.

The Republican National Committee ad pokes fun at Democrats afraid that Obama's declining popularity will hurt their reelection chances. It flashes quotes from nervous Dems who are afraid to appear with Obama.

For the whole story click here.
By Adam Lisberg - The New York Daily News

Obama Compared to Putney Swope

2010-08-17T13:24:00Z

Polls about Sen. Barack Obama's presidential chances remind me of "Putney Swope," the brazenly irreverent 1969 comedy about the first black man to be elected the head of a major advertising agency's board.

Swope was not elected because he was the favorite candidate. Quite the opposite, all of the board's other members voted for him because each was convinced that none of the others members would vote for him.

That lampoon of liberal gestures came to mind as I read a Newsweek poll that accompanies a cover story on Obama this week. It asks whether the respondent would vote for a woman, a Hispanic, a Mormon or an African-American for president. It also asks, "Do you think the rest of America would?"

In each case a healthy majority say they'd do it, compared with a smaller percentage who believe their fellow Americans would. An overwhelming 85 percent, for example, say they'd vote for a woman, compared with only 58 percent who think the rest of the country would.

We know he has to reach out to white voters and others for whom race as an issue falls way behind Iraq, terrorism, jobs, schools, immigration or countless others that I could name.

That's Obama's dilemma. The Illinois senator needs to excite black voters enough to lure them away from Sen. Hillary Clinton, whose husband was The Great Connector with black folks.

Yet he can't risk turning off other voters by sounding too much like the two reverends, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who preceded him on the presidential stump.

With that in mind, I am hardly the only observer to notice that Obama seemed to be containing himself as an orator during the recent Democratic candidates' forum at historically black Howard University. He seemed deliberately avoiding the soaring oratory, rhythmic cadence or targeted appeals to black grievance that would spark applause from the mostly black audience.

To read the whole article click here. By Clarence Page - Real Clear Politics

Gardiner: Why Obama's failing

2010-08-13T13:24:00Z

The last few weeks have been a nightmare for President Obama, in a summer of discontent in the United States which has deeply unsettled the ruling liberal elites, so much so that even the Left has begun to turn against the White House. While the anti-establishment Tea Party movement has gained significant ground and is now a rising and powerful political force to be reckoned with, many of the president's own supporters as well as independents are rapidly losing faith in Barack Obama, with open warfare breaking out between the White House and the left-wing of the Democratic Party. While conservatism in America grows stronger by the day, the forces of liberalism are growing increasingly weaker and divided.

Against this backdrop, the president's approval ratings have been sliding dramatically all summer, with the latest Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll of US voters dropping to minus 22 points, the lowest point so far for Barack Obama since taking office. While just 24 per cent of American voters strongly approve of the president's job performance, almost twice that number, 46 per cent, strongly disapprove. According to Rasmussen, 65 per cent of voters believe the United States is going down the wrong track, including 70 per cent of independents.

There are an array of reasons behind the stunning decline and political fall of President Obama, chief among them fears over the current state of the US economy, with widespread concern over high levels of unemployment, the unstable housing market, and above all the towering budget deficit. Americans are increasingly rejecting President Obama's big government solutions to America's economic woes, which many fear will lead to the United States sharing the same fate as Greece.

Growing disillusionment with the Obama administration's handling of the economy as well as health care and immigration has gone hand in hand with mounting unhappiness with the President's aloof and imperial style of leadership, and a growing perception that he is out of touch with ordinary Americans, especially at a time of significant economic pain. Barack Obama's striking absence of natural leadership ability (and blatant lack of experience) has played a big part in undermining his credibility with the US public, with his lacklustre handling of the Gulf oil spill coming under particularly intense fire.

Here are some of the key reasons why the Obama presidency is in serious trouble, and why its prospects are unlikely to improve between now and the November mid-terms.

The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people

Most Americans don't have confidence in the president's leadership

Obama fails to inspire

Obama's Big Government message is falling flat

Obama doesn't believe in American greatness

To read the whole list click here
By Nile Gardiner - Telegraph.co.uk

Gibbs Attacks the "Professional Left"

2010-08-10T13:24:00Z

During an interview with The Hill in his West Wing office, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs blasted liberal naysayers, whom he said would never regard anything the president did as good enough.

"I hear these people saying he's like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested," Gibbs said. "I mean, it's crazy."

The press secretary dismissed the "professional left" in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, "They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we've eliminated the Pentagon. That's not reality."

Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as healthcare reform, Gibbs said: "They wouldn't be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president."

While visibly frustrated, Gibbs did not specifically name any of the White Houses's liberal detractors by name.

Click here to read the whole piece by Sam Youngman - The Hill

Charlie Daniels - We Must Stop Illegals From Crossing the Border

2010-08-09T13:24:00Z

This is the only civilized nation in the world that allows foreigners to just walk across its borders unimpeded.

What is wrong, in my humble opinion, boils down to this:

This is not a partisan political problem because presidents of both parties have dropped the ball on this one. There are evidently longer strings being pulled from higher secret places that can control the policies of two political parties which are diametrically opposed on so many other issues

It is not fair to the rest of the world's immigrants who wait patiently and legally to become citizens of the U.S.A.

This unimpeded influx of unskilled, uneducated, non-English speaking workers will severely water down the labor pool and seriously increase the national debt as greedy, vote seeking politicians grant social entitlements to people who are not even citizens of this country.

While the majority of Hispanics who come to this country just want to be good citizens, assimilate and live in peace there is a militant fringe that is not too far from serious violence at the present and could easily be incited to destructive civil unrest.

What can we do about it?

First of all, whether you're Hispanic, Jewish, Irish, Arabic or a mongrel like me we have to be Americans first. We have to have a burning desire to protect our country from chaos and lawlessness.
It is after all everybody's country and the shape we leave it in for our children is up to us.

The first thing that has to be done is to seal the border. Nobody comes across except through a legal port of entry where his or her identification, nationality and general state of health can be determined.
The Arizona law is not an attempt to increase racial profiling, it is just common sense, and I dare say if it involved the Haitians or Algerians there would be no public outcry.

But the resistance has more to do with politics than compassion.

By implementing this kind of policy we can immediately deport the criminals and otherwise undesirables who have come across our border illegally and we can work out a path to legal citizenship for the others, giving them a place in line but not in front of those who have gone thru of citizenship ought the long process ahead of them.

We should require all employers to determine the nationality of any person they hire and work out a comprehensive guest worker program by issuing temporary visa and after that severely punish employers with undocumented workers.

Click here to read the whole piece By Charlie Daniels

AZ Sheriffs Dever & Babeu - 'Plug the Hole' in the Border

2010-08-05T15:24:00Z

"As the oil gushed out of the broken pipe in the bottom of the gulf, the public was outraged and all hands were on deck to "plug the hole." Why is it, then, that a similar flood, with national security implications, is met with such inaction by the federal government?

The breached safeguard in this case is the country's southern border, and law enforcement officers, like the Arizona sheriffs, work tirelessly to secure it from criminal activity, including illegally entering the country.

About half of all illegal immigrants come through Arizona. The porous border has drained our resources and harmed our citizens. Every day Arizona sheriffs and deputies fight against the destruction and crime that result from illegal border crossings, but we have received harsh words of criticism and little help from the federal government in response. Instead of supporting our efforts to enforce the laws that they don't, our own Justice Department sued us.

Those in Washington forget or ignore what's really happening on the ground, the danger Arizona sheriffs and their deputies face to protect their communities. Also ignored is the fact that our counties in Arizona are like the broken oil pipe, the gateway to a sea current that carries this problem to all corners of the country."

It is incredible that the Obama administration condemns Arizona Senate Bill 1070, another tool our law enforcement officers can use to combat the flood, but refuses to help in any meaningful way. They ignore the fact that the best way to stop the problem from creeping across the country is to cap the pipe at its source, i.e. Arizona and other border states.

But instead of trying to seal the border, the federal government is going after its own people to prevent us from doing our job. Even more outrageous is the American Civil Liberties Union stepping into the fray and naming individual sheriffs in its suit.

Moratoriums on offshore drilling? Sure, says the administration. Moratoriums on illegal immigration? Not even considered.

Click here to read the whole piece

By Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever and Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu

What happened to the President's promise to keep hi-tech jobs in the states?

2010-08-04T15:24:00Z

$22 million, federally-backed program aims to help outsourcers in South Asia become more fluent in areas like Java programming-and the English language.

Despite President Obama's pledge to retain more hi-tech jobs in the U.S., a federal agency run by a hand-picked Obama appointee has launched a $22 million program to train workers, including 3,000 specialists in IT and related functions, in South Asia.

Following their training, the tech workers will be placed with outsourcing vendors in the region that provide offshore IT and business services to American companies looking to take advantage of the Asian subcontinent's low labor costs.

Under director Rajiv Shah, the United States Agency for International Development will partner with private outsourcers in Sri Lanka to teach workers there advanced IT skills like Enterprise Java (Java EE) programming, as well as skills in business process outsourcing and call center support. USAID will also help the trainees brush up on their English language proficiency.

"To help fill workforce gaps in BPO and IT, USAID is teaming up with leading BPO and IT/English language training companies to establish professional IT and English skills development training centers," the U.S. Embassy in Colombo, Sri Lanka, said in a statement posted Friday on its Web site.

Click here to read more

By Paul McDougall - InformationWeek

Americans giving up their citizenship?

2010-08-03T18:24:00Z

At the US Embassy in London, there is a waiting list that none of the officials likes to discuss. On the list are Americans hoping to give up their citizenship, as they seek shelter from the Internal Revenue Service.

With many executives living away from their countries of origin, the reasons to change citizenship range from clarifying tax status, making it easier to cross borders, particularly in the case of passport holders from emerging markets who find themselves working in countries such as the US for a prolonged period of time, or discovering that over time their allegiances have changed.

While any individual will need to weigh the pros and cons of any change in status, both in terms of the hassle it can entail but also the long-term consequences, it also poses challenges for employers.

The backlog at the US Embassy, where no appointments are available until February, stems from a rise in the number of American expatriates living in the UK who have been seeking to escape paying US tax on their worldwide income and capital gains since the simplification of US tax laws in 2008.

Pros of renouncing American citizenship

●No yearly US tax filing.

●No payment of US tax on worldwide income and capital gains.

●Helps if you are looking to acquire a domicile in a country with more tax advantages.

Cons

●Exit tax must be paid on all income and gains if you have more than $2m in net assets.

●It is difficult to reverse your decision - you would be treated like all other applicants if you reapply for US citizenship.

●You face the prospect of never living or working permanently again in the US.

●Upon surrendering a US passport, UK nationals are only entitled to spend a maximum of 90 days on each visit to the US. They are also required to register with the US Department of Homeland Security.

The whole story can be read here

By Ellen Kelleher - Financial Times

Sheriff - Federal Government "Our Enemy"

2010-08-02T18:24:00Z

Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu, whose deputies patrol a county along the U.S.-Mexico border, is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

"What's very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU," Babeu said.

The sheriff was referring to the law suits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Department of Justice challenging the state's new immigration law.

"So who has partnered with the ACLU?" Babeu said in a telephone interview with CNSNews.com. "It's the president and (Attorney General) Eric Holder himself. And that's simply outrageous."

Last week, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton placed a temporary injunction on portions of the bill that allowed law enforcement personnel during the course of a criminal investigation who have probable cause to think an individual is in the country illegally to check immigration status. The state of Arizona filed an appeal on Thursday with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

"Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help," Babeu said.

Babeu and Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County Ariz., spoke by phone with CNSNews.com last week about the May 17 ACLU class-action lawsuit, which charges the law uses racial profiling and named the county attorneys and sheriffs in all 15 Arizona counties as defendants. The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit on July 6, charging the Arizona law preempted the federal government's sole right to enforce immigration law.

"If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn't even be in this position and where we're forced to take matters into our own hands," Babeu said.

Dever said the federal government's failure to secure the border and its current thwarting of Arizona's effort to control illegal immigration within its borders has implications for the entire country.

"The bigger picture is while what's going on in Arizona is critically important, what comes out of this and happens here will affect our entire nation in terms of our ability to protect our citizenry from a very serious homeland security threat," Dever said. "People who are coming across the border in my county aren't staying there. They're going everywhere USA and a lot of them are bad, bad people."

Rep. Weiner Flips Out on House Floor

2010-07-30T07:05:00Z

Why do Americans disapprove of Congress? Here's evidence. Both sides are to blame for defeating a health-care bill for 9/11 first responders. Rep. Anthony Weiner blames Republicans. Harshly.

A $11.6 billion piece of legislation called the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act would help 60,000 people, 9/11 first responders and others, sickened by exposure to toxic dust and debris at Ground Zero. Due to a Democratic parliamentary tactic, the measure needed a two-thirds vote for approval, instead of a simple majority.

At the heart of the debate was a procedural maneuver made by Democrats to suspend the rules before consideration of the Zadroga bill. The tactic allowed the Democratic leadership to block potential Republican amendments to the measure -- there was a fear that Republicans would attach partisan amendments in hopes that it could pass on the otherwise popular bill.

When the final vote came down, 255 representatives voted for the measure, 159 against it. The defeat of the bill, which would have provided free health care to those affected during the 9/11 rescue and recovery, probably means that the court system will have to settle compensation issues. Both sides couldn't get this done?

Rep. Peter King called the Democrats' procedural move a cruel hoax and a charade. King said: "This bill should be more important than a campaign talking point. You could have passed it any time during the past three and a half years, but you want political cover."

That's when Rep. Anthony Weiner took to the floor and let loose. Watch this video:

It's no wonder why nothing important gets done in the House. Partisan politics are everyone's enemy.

Here's some more information from BusinessWeek: "The legislation is named for James Zadroga, a police detective who died at age 34. His case is indicative of some of the uncertainties surrounding the proposal, which would create massive new spending on 9/11-related illnesses that are still something of a scientific mystery. Doctors have linked trade center dust to a variety of health problems, including breathing ailments with symptoms similar to asthma. Thousands of people have been diagnosed with at least mild respiratory problems, or reduced lung function, and a smaller group has suffered from more serious, life-threatening ailments. Thousands of the police officers, firefighters and construction workers who spent time on the trade center cleanup have also been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Yet, doctors have had a difficult time saying how many of the other health problems being experienced by ground zero workers are actually related to the dust -- especially deadly illnesses like cancer. City medical boards and a coroner in New Jersey initially held that Zadroga had died from a respiratory disease caused by particles from the trade center lodged in his lungs. But New York City's medical examiner later said those particles were the residue of prescription pills that had been improperly ground up and injected. The debate over whether Zadroga died from a dust-related ailment, or prescription drug abuse, still rages."

Mexican Flags Fly at Arizona Protest

2010-07-30T07:04:00Z

There's nothing more jarring than the image of ethnocentric protestors waving Mexican flags at an amnesty protest. If you really want American citizenship and rights, why wave a foreign flag?

Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law took effect at midnight on Wednesday, despite the fact that Judge Susan Bolton gutted the law of four key sections that make sense to all of us who believe in the rule of law in this country.

But the protests went on anyway, despite the ideological ruling from Judge Bolton. Hundreds gathered at the offices of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Protesters there blocked an entrance to the Maricopa County facility, prompting the arrests of 23 people after they refused to move. At least two journalists covering the event were detained by the Sheriff's Office, but both were later released and not charged.

Perhaps the strangest part of the scene, however, came when protestors waved oversized Mexican flags in the crowd. How does that make any sense? Take a look:

Wouldn't it make more sense to wave the American flag?

Justified Outrage in Bell, California

2010-07-28T07:05:00Z

We've been talking about the outrage in a Los Angeles suburb after it came to light that city officials/crooks were being paid enormous sums of money to run a poor city. Check out the protests that ensued.

Last week Lou brought to light the awful situation in Bell, California: The city's personal income was $24,800 per capita in 2008. That compares with an average of $32,819 nationwide. Bell debt has risen to nearly $2,000 per capita in 2009 from $600 in 2004. It's a mostly Hispanic city of 38,000, about 10 miles Southeast of Los Angeles.

But hundreds of residents came out in full force and full throat to a pack City Council meeting, the first council meeting since the Los Angeles Times reported July 15 that Chief Administrative Officer Robert Rizzo earns $787,637 -- with annual 12 percent raises -- and that Bell pays its police chief Randy Adams $457,000, 50% more than Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck makes in a city of 3.8 million people. Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia makes nearly $400K. Four out of five Bell city council members earn almost $100,000 for part-time work.

After the city nearly rioted, those three grossly overpaid city officials will resign: City Manager Robert Rizzo, Police Chief Randy Adams and Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia will not receive severance packages. Rizzo will step down at the end of August and Spaccia will leave at the end of September. Adams will also leave at the end of August, after completing an evaluation of the Police Department.

The crowd erupted in applause after the announcement but immediately yelled out questions about what would happen to the council members. Four of the five are paid close to $100,000 annually. When their questions were not answered, they shouted, "Recall!" More protests ensued.

ReasonTV went down to the scene to chronicle the story, and here's what their report found:

Produced by Ted Balaker and Tim Cavanaugh, who also hosts. Camera by Zach Weissmueller and Sam Corcos. Edited by Weissmueller.

Reid: U.S. Better Off With Democrats

2010-07-26T07:05:00Z

Speaking to the leftists at Netroots Nation this weekend, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made it clear to the left wing of this country that we are all much better off with the Democrats in charge.

Sen. Reid told Netroots Nation: "I know there are times, I'm told, that I get on your nerves. And I'm here to tell you, you get on my nerves sometimes. But let's all understand this country would be in a lot more trouble if we weren't around."

Trillions in spending, an unpopular government-run ObamaCare law, a toothless financial overhaul law, a potential amnesty bill, Cap & Tax, higher taxes across the board...do you believe this country's better off with the Democrats at the helm?

Obama Flashback on Lockerbie Bomber

2010-07-26T07:04:00Z

Barack Obama and new British Prime Minister David Cameron last week both seemed to publicly criticize the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi 11 months ago, and the Scottish government the challenged the U.S. to open its files on the case of the Lockerbie bomber. Uh oh!

A report in the Times of London this past weekend has discovered why Scotland urged for this transparency. Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, apparently gave a green light to Megrahi's release, and he even insisted on a "compassionate" parole rather than simply a prisoner transfer.

In the letter, sent on August 12th last year to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and justice officials, LeBaron wrote that the United States wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime. But the note added: "Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose."

LeBaron added that freeing the bomber and making him live in Scotland "would mitigate a number of the strong concerns we have expressed with regard to Megrahi's release."

Obama, at the time of the release, called it a "mistake": "We have been in contact with the Scottish government, indicating that we objected to this. And we thought it was a mistake. We're now in contact with the Libyan government, and want to make sure that if in fact this transfer has taken place, that he's not welcomed back in some way, but instead should be under house arrest. We've also obviously been in contact with the families of the Pan Am victims, and indicated to them that we don't think this was appropriate."

So if it was a mistake, and if it was inappropriate, then how does the Obama administration explain this exchange?

Gates: Sherrod is "Teachable Moment"

2010-07-22T07:05:00Z

Too-cute-by-half press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he doesn't "know who the teacher is. I don't think the teacher is necessarily the President." Oh really? We didn't exactly need that heads up to figure that out.

Before we get to the always-absurd comments from Gibbs, listen to what Lou had to say about the sad and tragic firing of Shirley Sherrod and why the White House, the rest of the Obama administration and the NAACP are the real cowards when it comes to race.

During the press briefing on Wednesday, the White House offered a sincere apology to Sherrod, and the Agriculture Department eventually offered her a new job within the agency. Gibbs also called it a "teachable moment," but added "I don't think -- I don't know who the teacher is. I don't think the teacher is necessarily the President."

We don't think a single one of us thought President Obama was the teacher in this case. Our Supreme Leader showed that he's learned nothing from the time he said the Cambridge Police "acted stupidly" before knowing all the facts. This administration needs a whole lot of teachers.

Know-Nothings: Harry Reid Strikes Again

2010-07-22T07:04:00Z

Last we left the Senate Majority Leader he was insisting no illegal immigrants worked in the Nevada construction industry. Now he's saying Ford wouldn't be around without the government. Check your facts.

Ford Motor Company didn't take a dime from the federal government when this administration stepped in to take over the auto industry in this country. So where does he get off saying this: "Isn't it a good thing today in America that we have an automobile manufacturing sector? If it had been up to them [Republicans], General Motors would be gone. If it were up to them, Ford Motor Company would probably be gone.
Chrysler definitely would be gone."

If this man is re-elected in the fall, we all have some explaining to do!

Sherrod Responds, Full Video Emerges

2010-07-21T07:05:00Z

Context matters, and as Lou said, Shirley Sherrod shouldn't have been forced to resign by the cowardly USDA and Obama administration. Here's what she said responding to the charges of racism.

Sherrod spoke directly to CNN and explained her side of the story:

After she spoke, the quick-to-judge NAACP backtracked on its condemnation of Sherrod. After seeing the full video, the NAACP said that it had been "snookered" into believing Ms. Sherrod had acted with bias. "We are in a moment where there is heightened sensitivity and concern, including within the N.A.A.C.P., about discrimination against white people," said Benjamin T. Jealous, the group's president. He said the NAACP wanted "to be clear that there's a single yardstick by which civil rights are judged."

The NAACP has released a 43:15 clip of Shirley Sherrod's speech at a local chapter banquet. A description of the video says: "The video of Shirley Sherrod released by Andrew Brietbart's Big Government Blog on July 19 didn't tell the full story. It was selectively edited to cast her in a negative light. Here is the video, shot by the local NAACP unit that hosted Ms. Sherrod. Watch the video, and judge for yourself."

This video tells us more about the cowardice of the NAACP, the USDA and the Obama administration than anything else.

Sherrod Story Shows Off WH Cowardice

2010-07-19T07:05:00Z

Lou says the USDA and Obama administration made the wrong decision to force Sherrod to resign from her post. Remember when Attorney General Eric Holder said we are essentially a "nation of cowards?" Given everything that's happened the past few weeks, it's this administration that turned out to be the cowards on race.

You've heard the shouts from NAACP head Benjamin Jealous and VP Hillary Shelton. You've heard the speeches at last week's convention in Kansas City. You've heard about the controversial resolution they passed at the convention. And you've heard the national liberal, lazy, lamestream media parrot these claims and advance the narrative that the Tea Party is racist. But that's all about to change.

All of that's been manufactured for political gain. On his BigGovernment website, Andrew Breitbart posted a video showing real racism coming from a government employee and lauded at an NAACP banquet.

Breitbart writes "We are in possession of a video from in which Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, speaks at the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia. In her meandering speech to what appears to be an all-black audience, this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions. In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn't do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from 'one of his own kind.' She refers him to a white lawyer. Sherrod's racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups' racial tolerance."

Take a look for yourself:

And that's not all. In the same speech, Sherrod points out what we already know: that government workers don't ever lose their jobs!

The Agriculture Department has announced that Sherrod had resigned. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a written statement: "There is zero tolerance for discrimination at USDA, and I strongly condemn any act of discrimination against any person...We have been working hard through the past 18 months to reverse the checkered civil rights history at the department and take the issue of fairness and equality very seriously."

The NAACP released a statement late Monday condemning Sherrod's admission. "We are appalled by her actions, just as we are with abuses of power against farmers of color and female farmers...Her actions were shameful. While she went on to explain in the story that she ultimately realized her mistake, as well as the common predicament of working people of all races, she gave no indication she had attempted to right the wrong she had done to this man."

In an interview with the Atlanta Journal Constitution, "Sherrod said what online viewers weren't told in reports posted throughout the day Monday was that the tale she told at the banquet happened 24 years ago-- before she got the USDA job -- when she worked with the Georgia field office for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund. Sherrod said the short video clip excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with him and his wife."

Sherrod said: "And I went on to work with many more white farmers...The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it's about the people who have and the people who don't. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race."

So what do you think? Is this a frightening double standard from the NAACP and the US government?

Mr. Greene Wants To Go To Washington

2010-07-19T07:04:00Z

The left wants Alvin Greene to go away, but Lou still believes in a country where an unemployed war veteran with no political stink on him can run for high political office and make a change.

He's the man who shook up South Carolina politics, and given the state's recent checkered history, that's saying something. The Democrats desperately wants Greene to go away, but he's here to stay. And Lou admires the everyman appeal of the man who wants to put it all on the line for South Carolina.

Greene made his first official speech this weekend, addressing the crowd for six and a half minutes at the local NAACP's monthly meeting. Here's what he said...he even got a joke in there:

Lou on Financial Reform Bill Passage

2010-07-16T07:05:00Z

Think this is a victory for Main Street, as the Democrats want you to believe? Nope. Lou says this is yet another step towards absolute socialism, and it's state sponsorship of our national economy.

Lou said this on the July 15th broadcast: "We have taken a step today, and with the signature of the president, towards absolute socialism. And this is not regulation, folks, this is state sponsorship, this is pure statism. And it is not about a market, it is not about regulation, it is about defining the transactions that can take place within an economy that is now managed by the state. This is a disaster, and the disaster will be clear in the weeks and the months ahead as we watch the regulators take over from here."

He added: "No one has made the case that these derivatives are a necessary product to have in the marketplace. But they spent, those financial institutions, hundreds of millions of dollars to lobby Congress and the Senate, and by God, they got their payoff. Because what this legislation is about is pure cosmetics and folly."

Listen to Lou's full thoughts on the passage of this so-called reform bill:

Agree with Lou? Disagree with Lou? Call 877-55-DOBBS and make your voice heard.

Rep. Jackson-Lee Flunks History

2010-07-16T07:04:00Z

In what can only be characterized as a bizarre misreading of history and geography, Texas Democrat Sheila Jackson-Lee took to the floor to discuss the situation in North and South Vietnam. Um, what?

At the NAACP convention this week, Rep, Jackson-Lee joined her race-focused friends by slandering the Tea Party. She said: "I'm going to be engaging you with those very powerful numbers that you have offered on what the tea party recognizes, uh, or is recognized as. Might I add my own P.S.? All those who wore sheets a long time ago have now lifted them off and started wearing], uh, clothing, uh, with a name, say, I am part of the tea party. Don't you be fooled. Those who used to wear sheets are now being able to walk down the aisle and speak as a patriot because you will not speak loudly about the lack of integrity of this movement. Don't let anybody tell you that those who spit on us as we were walking to vote on a health care bill for all of America or those who said Congresswoman Jackson-Lee's braids were too tight in her hair had anything to do with justice and equality and empowerment of the American people. Don't let them fool you on that."

But that's not the strangest thing she said this week. Rep. Jackson-Lee stood before the House of Representatives to stand up and ask her colleagues and recognize the valiant and excellent service of our troops in Vietnam. Admirable! But then she said "Today we have two Vietnams, side by side, north and south, exchanging and working. We may not agree with all that North Vietnam is doing, but they are living in peace. I would look for a better human rights record for North Vietnam, but they're living side by side, because that was a civil war."

This is what gerrymandering does: It sends the best and brightest to Congress year after year!

Dobbs Interviews Rep. Lamar Smith

2010-07-15T07:05:00Z

Lou talks to the author of a key 1996 immigration law about the Justice Department's curious decision not to prosecute so-called sanctuary cities while it goes after Arizona.

The world is upside down. We've got an administration that refuses to go after so-called sanctuary cities at a time when it's suing Arizona for encroaching federal immigration law. It's unbelievable.

Lou was the first person out there to ask the question on the same day the Justice Department filed its outrageous lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law. Lou asked "If the Justice Department is suing the state of Arizona for encroaching federal immigration law, do you find it curious it is not suing the more than 70 sanctuary cities for overriding federal immigration law?

After a week, we finally we received an answer. And it's exactly the answer you'd expect from this highly partisan administration. Tracy Schmaler, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., told The Washington Times: "There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law. That's what Arizona did in this case."

So Lou invited Rep. Lamar Smith to the show to talk about this decision. It's worth your time:

Reid's Illegal Immigration Delusion

2010-07-14T07:05:00Z

Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid is either blinded by partisan ideology or delusional. Or both! He tried to claim to a local reporter that illegal immigrants don't work in the Nevada construction industry.

This job would be so much more difficult if there was any competence, transparency or integrity coming from the leadership of the Democratic Party and the White House. If they only did their jobs, if they only served to represent their constituents, then we might all be out of our jobs here! But these Democrats are doing everything they can to lie, deceive and be utterly duplicitous.

Take Harry Reid. The local CBS News in Nevada ran a special report about how U.S. citizens who work in the construction industry are suffering because the federal government refuses to enforce our immigration laws. So they set out to find out why E-Verify was never passed, which would do just that, to ensure citizens have jobs over illegal workers hired by illegal employers. Reporter Nathan Baca tracked down Harry Reid, and his answer for why he doesn't want E-Verify centered around some nonsense about why we need comprehensive immigration reform. Then, this INCREDIBLE exchange between Baca and
Reid:

Reporter Nathan Baca: "When you go to the unemployment office there's many U.S. citizens who are unemployed construction workers and they don't have jobs because right now, some of those construction companies find it easier to hire undocumented workers."

Harry Reid: "I think that any information you have in that regard is absolutely without foundation."

Then Baca lays some facts on him:

Ladies and gentlemen, the Democratic leadership at work! Ain't it grand?

Bill Press: Americans are "Spoiled"

2010-07-14T07:04:00Z

A new poll showed more than 60% of Americans have lost confidence in Our Supreme Leader. So how did liberal Bill Press react? By sticking up for Pres. Obama and saying Americans are spoiled.

On Press' left-wing radio show he made the case for why Americans should be happy with what Obama's "accomplished" before adding: "I think the man has accomplished a lot, he's been hard hit by the spill, and some other things, um, accomplished a lot, I think it's not deserved; number one. Number two, the other thing to me is, I think this says more about the American people than it does about President Obama. I think it just shows once again that the American people are spoiled. Basically spoiled, we are as a people, too critical, we are too quick to rush to judgment, we are too negative, we are too impatient, especially impatient, we want it all solved yesterday, and if you don't, I don't care who you are, get out of the way. And again, basically spoiled, to the point where it makes me wonder if it's even possible to govern today. I got to tell you, I don't think Abraham Lincoln, who certainly didn't get everything right the first time, could govern today. I'm not sure Franklin Roosevelt could govern today, the way we are again just about like spoiled children."

This is what liberals think of you: spoiled. Do you agree? Call 877-55-DOBBS with your thoughts.

Michelle Obama at NAACP: Two Americas?

2010-07-13T07:05:00Z

As the NAACP readies a resolution that would condemn non-existent racism in the Tea Party movement, First Lady Michelle Obama riled up the convention crowd with her idea of a black vs. white America.

Speaking to the NAACP's National Convention in Kansas City today, First Lady Michelle Obama said credited the organization for where her husband stands today and urged the collected crowd that now is not the time to "rest on our laurels."

FLOTUS said: "I know that I stand here today, and I know that my husband stands where he is today, because of this organization -- and because of the struggles and the sacrifices of all those who came before us," Mrs. Obama said today. "But I also know that their legacy isn't an entitlement to be taken for granted. And I know it is not simply a gift to be enjoyed. Instead, it is an obligation to be fulfilled."

But then she advanced an idea of two Americas: "When African American communities are still hit harder than just about anywhere by this economic downturn, and so many families are just barely scraping by, I think the founders would tell us that now is not the time to rest on our laurels. When stubborn inequalities still persist -- in education and health, in income and wealth -- I think those founders would urge us to increase our intensity, and to increase our discipline and our focus and keep fighting for a better future for our children and our grandchildren."

"We are living today in a time where we're decades beyond slavery, we are decades beyond Jim Crow; when one of the greatest risks to our children's future is their own health. African American children are significantly more likely to be obese than are white children. Nearly half of African American children will develop diabetes at some point in their lives. People, that's half of our children."

"Surely the men and women of the NAACP haven't spent a century organizing and advocating and working day and night only to raise the first generation in history that might be on track to live shorter lives than their parents. And that's why I've made improving the quality of our children's health one of my top priorities."

Is this how you see the America we live in today? Let Lou know: 877-55-DOBBS.

Losing Strategy: Another Dem. Freakout

2010-07-12T07:05:00Z

Here's one way for the Democrats to ensure they lose at least one house of Congress: Continue to berate your constituents. Congressman Ciro Rodriguez, come on down, it's your turn to yell at the voters!

We saw it at town hall after town hall last summer, most notably when Indiana Democrat Baron Hill displayed an arrogance we rarely see in public from our elected officials. Then we saw Illinois Democrat Phil Hare explode at his constituents when confronted about his vote on ObamaCare, yelling about how he doesn't care about the Constitution.

The latest comes from Texas Democrat Ciro Rodriguez, who slams a newspaper on a table and screams at his constituents who are, to his dismay, informed with the facts! "I'm not gonna take it," he exclaims!

Do you think this is a good way to win re-election in the fall?!

Gibbs: We May Lose House

2010-07-12T07:04:00Z

A stunning admission by too-cute-by-half press secretary Robert Gibbs this weekend. He said: "I think there's no doubt there are enough seats in play that could cause Republicans to gain control."

Does the White House see the writing on the wall, or is this a political ploy to re-energize the Democratic base ahead of the November midterms?

Is this simply a strategy to rile up the Democratic base or an admission of what everyone else seems to know will happen?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Later, off the set, Gibbs clarified his remark and said he believes the Democrats will keep the House and the Senate. So was this calculated or was this candid? You tell us: 877-55-DOBBS.

MSNBC Hosts Say the Darndest Things

2010-07-09T07:05:00Z

GE's Gift to the Obama Administration always provides a quote or two that makes you go "Hmmm." But the place where news goes to die on Thursday night provided us with two gems that can't be ignored.

The first comes from a new player: MSNBC guest anchor Cenk Uygur filled in for the equally insane and inane Dylan Ratigan and pushed the crazy idea that President Obama is a conservative.

Uygur said: "Concentrating on the deficits, I didn't realize we voted for a Republican president. Obama seems to have bought into the Republican talking point on deficits when Americans are definitely more concerned with jobs right now. Polls show that the public wants more government spending, not less. According to the recent "USA today"/Gallup poll, 60% of Americans favor additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy. The only people who oppose more stimulus spending by the government, Republicans. Once again, I thought they lost the election. Why are they still in charge in D.C.? In all, the federal budget deficit comes in fourth in terms of the most important problem facing the country behind the economy and jobs, the oil spill in the gulf and health care. Only 5% say that the deficit is our biggest problem. Why is Obama in that 5%? Yet 14 out of the 18 people on the president's deficit commission are fiscal conservatives. Why? Why did a Democratic president stack his commission with conservatives? Because Obama loves giving them the queen. He's like a chess player who gives his opponent his most important piece in the beginning of the game in an attempt to get the other player to like him. I'm not much of a chess player but I don't think that's a winning strategy."

Then there's the old-standby, Mr. Tingle Up His Leg Chris Matthews. The liberal talker ended his show by arguing that there are two types of people in the country at the moment: those who want things to improve and those who want to see the country, and therefore the president, fail. Take a listen:

How can anyone watch this nonsense?

Leftist Vets Burn American Flag

2010-07-08T07:05:00Z

On July 4th, of all days, a group calling itself Iraq Veterans Against the War burned an upside down flag. They claim they're trying to wake us up. A stunt like this is sure to do just that. Watch this disgusting video.

On the group's website, it had the following statement: "The flag is a symbol of our unity and the blood sweat tears of those that came before us. The flag also has a purpose, some times it is a beacon or a message a warning that something is wrong. We burnt the flag to be a strong visual representation of our protest to the unjust war on terror that cannot be won. This flag represents us as a people. The flag is on the arms of every uniform on every soldier fighting in your name. If you accept that nothing is wrong you condone the atrocities that are occurring. So get angry, we are trying to wake you up."

Holder's New Black Panthers Problem

2010-07-07T07:05:00Z

Attorney General Eric Holder dropped a case of voter intimidation against the Black Panthers. Now one of his former employees says it's political motivated. And see just who he let off the hook.

According to this Fox News Report, "An ex-Justice official who quit over the handling of a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party accused his former employer of instructing attorneys in the civil rights division to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims.

"J. Christian Adams, testifying Tuesday before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said that 'over and over and over again,' the department showed 'hostility' toward those cases. He described the Black Panther case as one example of that -- he defended the legitimacy of the suit and said his 'blood boiled' when he heard a Justice official claim the case wasn't solid.

"'It is false,' Adams said of the claim.

"'We abetted wrongdoing and abandoned law-abiding citizens,' he later testified.

"The department abandoned the New Black Panther case last year. It stemmed from an incident on Election Day in 2008 in Philadelphia, where members of the party were videotaped in front of a polling place, dressed in military-style uniforms and allegedly hurling racial slurs while one brandished a night stick."

Meet one of the oh-so-nice Black Panthers who Holder's Justice Department let off the hook. Hint: He doesn't love white people:

Such a fine young man. And now he's off scot-free. Thanks, Eric Holder!

NASA's Embarrassing Muslim Outreach

2010-07-06T07:05:00Z

In a stupefying interview with Al-Jazeera, NASA administrator Charles Bolden says his "foremost" mission is to reach out to Muslims to "make them feel good" about their contribution to math and science. Huh?!

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of NASA is to improve relations with the Muslim world. How on earth will that help us in space? Well, he didn't exactly say. Since when is international diplomacy NASA's mission?! Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him.

Bolden said: "When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering."

He then said: "It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)."

What the heck is this man talking about?! How will this help us in space? How is this NASA's foremost mission?

Lt. Col. West: Storm Headed to DC!

2010-07-06T07:04:00Z

Candidate for Congress Allen West over the July 4th weekend spoke before the Tea Party of Fort Lauderdale in Florida, and he made it clear there's a storm brewing that's headed straight for the cesspool of Washington DC.

Lt. Col. West will represent the Republican Party in the race for the 22nd District in Florida against incumbent Ron Klein. Lt. Col. West addresses a fired-up Tea Party crowd and spoke out about what's wrong in Washington, what's wrong with our so-called political leaders and what lies ahead for the American middle class.

Take a look:

Unemployment: Say Whaaat, Pelosi?

2010-07-02T07:05:00Z

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues to make ridiculous claims. Maybe the botox has finally seeped into her brain! This time she says unemployment checks are a big job creator. How does that make sense?

Pelosi claimed that unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program. That's pretty typical of this increasingly government-reliant Democratic Party. Pelosi was defending a jobless benefits extension against critics who claim it gives recipients little incentive to work. So by her brilliant reasoning, those checks are helping give somebody a job.

Pelosi said: "Now let me say about unemployment insurance. We talk about it as a safety net and the rest - this is one of the biggest stimuluses to our economy. Economists will tell you. This money is spent quickly, it injects demand into the economy and it is job creating. It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name. Because, again, it is money that is needed for families to survive and it is spent. So it has a double benefit: it helps those that have lost their jobs but it also is a job creator."

Take a listen:

Does that square up with what you believe?!

Rep. Pete Stark: Borders are Secure

2010-06-29T07:05:00Z

Democrats are trying to catch Republicans making questionable statements in public. They should worry about their own, like Rep. Pete Stark, who mocked opponents of illegal immigration at a recent town hall.

California Congressman Pete Stark seems to covet controversy, constantly in trouble for quips and remarks that land him in hot water. And what else is new? On June 26th, Rep. Stark mocked an opponent of illegal immigration during a town hall meeting in his home district.

Stark began his sarcasm-laced assault by asking a self-identified Minuteman: "Who are you going to kill today?"

He continued: "We can't get enough Minutemen armed. We'd like to get all the Minutemen armed so they can stop shooting people here," Stark said.

When members of the audience pressed Stark to provide a serious answer, he said: "If you knew anything about our borders, you would know that's not the case. Our borders are quite secure, thank you."

But that's not even the half of it. Watch the video for yourself here:

As we saw last summer, Democratic Congressmen feel like they are too good to follow serious questions with serious answers. Are these elites too good for their constituents? They certainly seem to think they are.

Clinton: Blow Up Gulf Oil Well

2010-06-29T07:04:00Z

Our Supreme Leader's shown very little, if any, presidential leadership to solve the Gulf oil spill crisis. Former President Bill Clinton has his own ideas, including "fix the leak," "use the Navy," and "blow up the hole."

The former president, down in South Africa for the World Cup, said it "may become necessary" for the Navy to use explosives on the seafloor in order to stop the spill. Don't fret, though: We won't need nuclear weapons to do it.

Pres. Obama Calling Deficit "Bluff"

2010-06-28T07:05:00Z

The American people are standing up to runaway government spending. So why is Our Supreme Leader still spending yet saying he'll call our "bluff" when it comes to cutting the deficits and debt?

President Obama attended the G-20 summit and did not find unity among world leaders. The rest of the world sees reality, and they know it's time to reign in wild government spending. Our president did not agree, saying "We can't all rush to the exits at the same time." Maybe we should lead the way then!

And in some misguided comments during the summit, President Obama said he's calling our "bluff" on deficits and debt. The president said: "And people should learn that about me because NEXT YEAR when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country, I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficits and debt step-up because I'm calling their bluff. We'll see how much of that, how much of the political arguments that they're making right now are real and how much of it was just politics."

Next year? How about right now? We're not bluffing. We're begging.

Who Ya Callin' Smartass, Biden?

2010-06-28T07:04:00Z

Vice President Biden is second-to-none when it comes to saying the wrong thing. When a Wisconsin store manager quipped about lowering taxes, Biden responded by calling him a "smartass." Was he joking?

Scott Bokrin, the manager of Kopp's Frozen Custard in Milwaukee, WI got an earful from Vice President Biden on Friday. Borkin had made a crack about taxes when the vice president appeared to snap at him:

Biden: What do we owe you?
Manager: Don't worry. It's on us. ... (inaudible) ... Lower our taxes and we'll call it even.

Seems harmless enough. But a few minutes after the Kopp's manager's comment on "lower our taxes," there's another exchange:

Biden: Why don't you say something nice instead of being a smart-ass all the time? Say something nice.

Watch it here:

Afterwards, Borkin said he enjoyed his banter with the Vice President: "He was very nice. He's got a great personality...I don't think he liked it, no, but later he whispered, "Just kidding."

Do you think the Vice President was kidding? Doesn't appear that way. You tell us: 877-55-DOBBS.

Peggy West v. Miss Teen SC

2010-06-28T07:03:00Z

Lou had some fun with the Milwaukee WI County Supervisor pushing for an ordinance prohibiting her city from doing business with Arizona. Does she not sound like Miss Teen South Carolina?!

These Arizona boycotts are incredibly dumb, just like the people pushing them. Democrat Peggy West, county supervisor from Milwaukee, is one of these precious politically correct know-nothings pushing an ordinance that would prohibit Milwaukee County from doing business with firms in Arizona because of Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law. She apparently doesn't realize these boycotts are as dumb as the people pushing them.

Case in point. In making her argument, she says: "If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding the borders, I would have to look twice at this. But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border."

So we had some fun with West, comparing her to Miss Teen South Carolina from 2007. Does this not sound alike to you?!

The problem is: One's a teen beauty queen, the other is an elected official. That's probably a bit of an issue!

Illegal Immigrant Advocacy Idiocy

2010-06-25T07:05:00Z

A Milwaukee WI County Supervisor is pushing for an ordinance prohibiting her city from doing business with Arizona. Only, she needs a geography lesson: Peggy West claims Arizona does not share a border with Mexico.

Democrat Peggy West, county supervisor from Milwaukee, is one of these precious politically correct know-nothings pushing an ordinance that would prohibit Milwaukee County from doing business with firms in Arizona because of Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law. She apparently doesn't realize these boycotts are as dumb as the people pushing them.

Case in point. In making her argument, she says: "If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding the borders, I would have to look twice at this. But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border."

WHAT?! It's scary that Peggy West is making key decisions that impact real people in Milwaukee County.

Does that answer not sound like Miss Teen USA?!

This is what we're dealing with, folks. These Arizona boycotts are incredibly dumb, just like the people pushing them.

Herrada: Border Patrol Like KKK

2010-06-25T07:04:00Z

When far-left liberals get together they tend to say some truly idiotic and disgusting things. Take activist Elena Herrada, who compared the Border Patrol to the Ku Klux Klan at a recent liberal forum in Detroit.

At June 23rd's U.S. Social Forum, Herrada let loose with some of the most vile, vicious nonsense you'll ever hear. How much do these people hate the government? How much do they want open borders? Just take a listen to these statements. Here Herrada compares the U.S. Border Patrol to the KKK. She says: "Would you sit next to the Ku Klux Klan if they were sitting in a restaurant with a hood on over their head?" She continued, "There is no place for border patrol in our community, they have no good intentions. So when you see them refuse to sit with them, refuse to eat with them, pretend like they are the menace that they are."

As you might expect, the U.S. Social Forum is a far-left forum that includes attendees such as Bill Ayers, Bernadette Dohrn, and Danny Glover. Elena Herrada says of herself that she's "a Detroit community activist leader and Director of the Oral History project of Fronteras Norteñas organization. In 2001, Fronteras Norteñas received a grant, Detroit 300 (because Detroit was in the midst of a 300 year anniversary), to conduct a project for reaching out to Latinos in the Detroit community in order to gain a better understanding of Latino Detroit History."

We think she needs a better understanding of this nation before she opens her big mouth again.

Mayor Bloomberg Fights for Amnesty

2010-06-24T07:05:00Z

Lou's working hard to bring all sides together to finally solve the illegal immigration crisis in this country. What does this problem not need? A sanctuary-city mayor fighting for amnesty before border security.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has fought hard for a blanket amnesty and has willfully ignored the nation's laws in order to protect illegal immigrants over U.S. citizens. Now Mayor Mike has rounded up his big business cronies to come together and fight for amnesty without actually solving the crisis.

WCBS in New York reports: "Chief executives of several major corporations, including Hewlett-Packard, Boeing, Disney and News Corp., are joining Mayor Michael Bloomberg to form a coalition advocating for immigration reform -- including a path to legal status for all undocumented immigrants now in the United States. The group includes several other big-city mayors and calls itself the Partnership for a New American Economy. It seeks to reframe immigration reform as the solution to repairing and stimulating the economy. The CEOs said Thursday in statements that their companies -- and the nation -- depend on immigrants."

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ABOUT THIS PLAN FOR THE PARTNERSHIP FOR A NEW AMERICAN ECONOMY.

Obama to Kyl: No Border Security

2010-06-21T07:05:00Z

Stunning news from a North Tempe Tea Party town hall with Senator Jon Kyl: Why did the Arizona senator tell the crowd that President Obama and the White House refuse to secure the southern border?

Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl told the assembled audience at a North Tempe Tea Party town hall meeting that during a private, one-on-one meeting with President Obama in the Oval Office, the President told him he won't secure the border. Why? In order to get Republicans on board with comprehensive immigration reform.

Kyl explains: "Here's what the president said: 'The problem is,' he said, 'if we secure the border than you all won't have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.' In other words, they're holding it hostage. They don't want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform. I explained, 'You and I, Mr. President, have an obligation to secure the border. That's an obligation. It also has potentially positive benefits. You don't have to have comprehensive reform to secure the border, but you have to secure the border to get comprehensive reform."

Take a listen to this stunning audio:

Sounds an awful lot like Senator Kyl has been paying attention to Lou's broadcasts for the last seven years. Lou's often said there is one logical syllogism that he can't overcome. And if anybody can defeat that logic of the syllogism, then he'll sign up for whatever they want. He's said repeatedly that we cannot substantively reform immigration law unless we can control immigration, and we can't control immigration if we don't control our own borders and ports.

Sounds like Obama has that backwards.

Missouri Man's Anti-Dem Sign Torched

2010-06-21T07:04:00Z

72-year-old David Jungerman voted for Democrat Claire McCaskill for Senate in 2006. But when he spoke out politically with a 45-foot sign and called Democrats the "Party of Parasites," arsonists responded.

According to the Kansas City Star, David Jungerman farms 6,800 acres of river bottom land in western Missouri.

He's not the kind of guy who posts on Twitter or has a Facebook profile.

So when the 72-year-old Raytown man wanted to speak out politically, he used what he had handy: a 45-foot-long, semi-truck box trailer.

Are you a Producer or Parasite

Democrats - Party of the Parasites

He planted the trailer with its professionally painted message in his Bates County cornfield along heavily traveled U.S. 71 about an hour south of Kansas City. He wanted lots of people to see it.

They did. Including at least one with a good case of outrage, matches and a can of gas.

On May 12, Jungerman's trailer was torched. The Rich Hill volunteer fire department responded. A week later, it was set afire again. The firefighters put it out again.

Then flames erupted in an empty farm house that Jungerman owns.

Click here to read the full story about Jungerman's sign.

Cartoons: Illegal Immigration Absurdity

2010-06-21T07:04:00Z

There's truth in comedy, and often times the only way people "get the joke" is when a political cartoonist takes a humorous slant on a serious issue. Such is the case with the following political cartoons that several people have forwarded our way over the past few weeks.

Feel free to pass these around and share them with your friends and family.

Rep. Barton to BP: Sorry for Shakedown

2010-06-17T07:05:00Z

Fireworks at a House committee meeting at which BP CEO Tony Hayward appeared on Thursday. Rep. Joe Barton apologized to BP and called them victims of a $20 billion shakedown by the White House.

Rep. Barton said: "I'm ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday. I think it is a tragedy in the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown -- in this case a $20 billion shakedown -- with the attorney general of the United States, who is legitimately conducting a criminal investigation and has every right to do so to protect the American people, participating in what amounts to a $20 billion slush fund that's unprecedented in our nation's history, which has no legal standing, which I think sets a terrible precedent for our nation's future."

The White House shot back immediately, and too-cute-by-half Press Secretary Robert Gibbs issued the following statement within minutes of Barton's comments: "What is shameful is that Joe Barton seems to have more concern for big corporations that caused this disaster than the fishermen, small business owners and communities whose lives have been devastated by the destruction. Congressman Barton may think that a fund to compensate these Americans is a 'tragedy', but most Americans know that the real tragedy is what the men and women of the Gulf Coast are going through right now. Members from both parties should repudiate his comments."

What do you think of Congressman Barton's statement? Call Lou: 877-55-DOBBS.

Watch: Obama's Oval Office Address

2010-06-16T07:05:00Z

You know something went wrong when the leftists at MSNBC spend the following 15 minutes bashing Our Supreme Leader's first-ever Oval Office address. Uh oh! Here's what President Obama said last night.

FULL TRANSCRIPT:

Good evening. As we speak, our nation faces a multitude of challenges. At home, our top priority is to recover and rebuild from a recession that has touched the lives of nearly every American. Abroad, our brave men and women in uniform are taking the fight to al Qaeda wherever it exists. And tonight, I've returned from a trip to the Gulf Coast to speak with you about the battle we're waging against an oil spill that is assaulting our shores and our citizens.

On April 20th, an explosion ripped through BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, about forty miles off the coast of Louisiana. Eleven workers lost their lives. Seventeen others were injured. And soon, nearly a mile beneath the surface of the ocean, oil began spewing into the water.

Because there has never been a leak of this size at this depth, stopping it has tested the limits of human technology. That is why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation's best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge - a team led by Dr.
Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation's Secretary of Energy. Scientists at our national labs and experts from academia and other oil companies have also provided ideas and advice.

As a result of these efforts, we have directed BP to mobilize additional equipment and technology. In the coming days and weeks, these efforts should capture up to 90% of the oil leaking out of the well. This is until the company finishes drilling a relief well later in the summer that is expected to stop the leak completely.

Already, this oil spill is the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. And unlike an earthquake or a hurricane, it is not a single event that does its damage in a matter of minutes or days. The millions of gallons of oil that have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico are more like an epidemic, one that we will be fighting for months and even years.

But make no mistake: we will fight this spill with everything we've got for as long it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused. And we will do whatever's necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy.

Tonight I'd like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward: what we're doing to clean up the oil, what we're doing to help our neighbors in the Gulf, and what we're doing to make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again.

First, the cleanup. From the very beginning of this crisis, the federal government has been in charge of the largest environmental cleanup effort in our nation's history - an effort led by Admiral Thad Allen, who has almost forty years of experience responding to disasters. We now have nearly 30,000 personnel who are working across four states to contain and cleanup the oil. Thousands of ships and other vessels are responding in the Gulf. And I have authorized the deployment of over 17,000 National Guard members along the coast. These servicemen and women are ready to help stop the oil from coming ashore, clean beaches, train response workers, or even help with processing claims - and I urge the governors in the affected states to activate these troops as soon as possible.

Because of our efforts, millions of gallons of oil have already been removed from the water through burning, skimming, and other collection methods. Over five and a half million feet of boom has been laid across the water to block and absorb the approaching oil. We have approved the construction of new barrier islands in Louisiana to try and stop the oil before it reaches the shore, and we are working with Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida to implement creative approaches to their unique coastlines.

As the clean up continues, we will offer whatever additional resources and assistance our coastal states may need. Now, a mobilization of this speed and magnitude will never be perfect, and new challenges will always arise. I saw and heard evidence of that during this trip. So if something isn't working, we want to hear about it. If there are problems in the operation, we will fix them.

But we have to recognize that despite our best efforts, oil has already caused damage to our coastline and its wildlife. And sadly, no matter how effective our response becomes, there will be more oil and more damage before this siege is done. That's why the second thing we're focused on is the recovery and restoration of the Gulf Coast.

You know, for generations, men and women who call this region home have made their living from the water. That living is now in jeopardy. I've talked to shrimpers and fishermen who don't know how they're going to support their families this year. I've seen empty docks and restaurants with fewer customers - even in areas where the beaches are not yet affected. I've talked to owners of shops and hotels who wonder when the tourists will start to come back. The sadness and anger they feel is not just about the money they've lost. It's about a wrenching anxiety that their way of life may be lost.

I refuse to let that happen. Tomorrow, I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company's recklessness. And this fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent, third party.

Beyond compensating the people of the Gulf in the short-term, it's also clear we need a long-term plan to restore the unique beauty and bounty of this region. The oil spill represents just the latest blow to a place that has already suffered multiple economic disasters and decades of environmental degradation that has led to disappearing wetlands and habitats. And the region still hasn't recovered from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. That's why we must make a commitment to the Gulf Coast that goes beyond responding to the crisis of the moment.

I make that commitment tonight. Earlier, I asked Ray Mabus, the Secretary of the Navy, a former governor of Mississippi, and a son of the Gulf, to develop a long-term Gulf Coast Restoration Plan as soon as possible. The plan will be designed by states, local communities, tribes, fishermen, businesses, conservationists, and other Gulf residents. And BP will pay for the impact this spill has had on the region.

The third part of our response plan is the steps we're taking to ensure that a disaster like this does not happen again. A few months ago, I approved a proposal to consider new, limited offshore drilling under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe - that the proper technology would be in place and the necessary precautions would be taken.

That was obviously not the case on the Deepwater Horizon rig, and I want to know why. The American people deserve to know why. The families I met with last week who lost their loved ones in the explosion - these families deserve to know why. And so I have established a National Commission to understand the causes of this disaster and offer recommendations on what additional safety and environmental standards we need to put in place. Already, I have issued a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. I know this creates difficulty for the people who work on these rigs, but for the sake of their safety, and for the sake of the entire region, we need to know the facts before we allow deepwater drilling to continue. And while I urge the Commission to complete its work as quickly as possible, I expect them to do that work thoroughly and impartially.

One place we have already begun to take action is at the agency in charge of regulating drilling and issuing permits, known as the Minerals Management Service. Over the last decade, this agency has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility - a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations.

When Ken Salazar became my Secretary of the Interior, one of his very first acts was to clean up the worst of the corruption at this agency. But it's now clear that the problems there ran much deeper, and the pace of reform was just too slow. And so Secretary Salazar and I are bringing in new leadership at the agency - Michael Bromwich, who was a tough federal prosecutor and Inspector General. His charge over the next few months is to build an organization that acts as the oil industry's watchdog - not its partner.

One of the lessons we've learned from this spill is that we need better regulations better safety standards, and better enforcement when it comes to offshore drilling. But a larger lesson is that no matter how much we improve our regulation of the industry, drilling for oil these days entails greater risk. After all, oil is a finite resource. We consume more than 20% of the world's oil, but have less than 2% of the world's oil reserves. And that's part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean - because we're running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.

For decades, we have known the days of cheap and easily accessible oil were numbered. For decades, we have talked and talked about the need to end America's century-long addiction to fossil fuels. And for decades, we have failed to act with the sense of urgency that this challenge requires. Time and again, the path forward has been blocked - not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor.

The consequences of our inaction are now in plain sight. Countries like China are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should

be here in America. Each day, we send nearly $1 billion of our wealth to foreign countries for their oil. And today, as we look to the Gulf, we see an entire way of life being threatened by a menacing cloud of black crude.

We cannot consign our children to this future. The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash American innovation and seize control of our own destiny.

This is not some distant vision for America. The transition away from fossil fuels will take some time, but over the last year and a half, we have already taken unprecedented action to jumpstart the clean energy industry. As we speak, old factories are reopening to produce wind turbines, people are going back to work installing energy-efficient windows, and small businesses are making solar panels. Consumers are buying more efficient cars and trucks, and families are making their homes more energy-efficient. Scientists and researchers are discovering clean energy technologies that will someday lead to entire new industries.

Each of us has a part to play in a new future that will benefit all of us. As we recover from this recession, the transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of good, middle-class jobs - but only if we accelerate that transition. Only if we seize the moment. And only if we rally together and act as one nation - workers and entrepreneurs; scientists and citizens; the public and private sectors.

When I was a candidate for this office, I laid out a set of principles that would move our country towards energy independence. Last year, the House of Representatives acted on these principles by passing a strong and comprehensive energy and climate bill - a bill that finally makes clean energy the profitable kind of energy for America's businesses.

Now, there are costs associated with this transition. And some believe we can't afford those costs right now. I say we can't afford not to change how we produce and use energy - because the long-term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater.

So I am happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party - as long they seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels. Some have suggested raising efficiency standards in our buildings like we did in our cars and trucks. Some believe we should set standards to ensure that more of our electricity comes from wind and solar power.
Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high-tech industry does on research and development - and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development.

All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fear hearing in the months ahead. But the one approach I will not accept is inaction. The one answer I will not settle for is the idea that this challenge is too big and too difficult to meet. You see, the same thing was said about our ability to produce enough planes and tanks in World War II.
The same thing was said about our ability to harness the science and technology to land a man safely on the surface of the moon. And yet, time and again, we have refused to settle for the paltry limits of conventional wisdom. Instead, what has defined us as a nation since our founding is our capacity to shape our destiny - our determination to fight for the America we want for our children. Even if we're unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don't yet know precisely how to get there. We know we'll get there.

It is a faith in the future that sustains us as a people. It is that same faith that sustains our neighbors in the Gulf right now.

Each year, at the beginning of shrimping season, the region's fishermen take part in a tradition that was brought to America long ago by fishing immigrants from Europe. It's called "The Blessing of the Fleet," and today it's a celebration where clergy from different religions gather to say a prayer for the safety and success of the men and women who will soon head out to sea - some for weeks at a time.

The ceremony goes on in good times and in bad. It took place after Katrina, and it took place a few weeks ago - at the beginning of the most difficult season these fishermen have ever faced.

And still, they came and they prayed. For as a priest and former fisherman once said of the tradition, "The blessing is not that God has promised to remove all obstacles and dangers. The blessing is that He is with us always," a blessing that's granted "...even in the midst of the storm."

The oil spill is not the last crisis America will face. This nation has known hard times before and we will surely know them again. What sees us through - what has always seen us through - is our strength, our resilience, and our unyielding faith that something better awaits us if we summon the courage to reach for

it. Tonight, we pray for that courage. We pray for the people of the Gulf. And we pray that a hand may guide us through the storm towards a brighter day. Thank you, God Bless You, and may God Bless the United States of America.

Rep. Cao: Hara Kari for BP Execs

2010-06-16T07:04:00Z

How come BP executives still have their jobs? (And how come so many Obama administration officials still have theirs?) Rep. Joseph Cao wants BP execs to know what happens in the Asian culture!

Lawmakers slammed executives from five of the world's largest oil companies at Tuesday's hearing to discuss the future of national energy policy in the wake of the Gulf oil disaster. At one point, Congressman Cliff Stearns of Florida called on Lamar McKay, chairman and president of BP America, to quit his job.

But that didn't go far enough for one lawmaker. Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao, whose home state of Louisiana has been the worst affected, went so far as to suggest McKay try a type of ritual suicide. Cao said: "Mr. Stearns asked you to resign. In the Asian culture we do things differently. During the Samurai days we just give you a knife and ask you to commit hara-kiri." McKay did not respond to these comments. However, he did say that a relief well will allow his company to get the leak under control "by mid-August."

That's probably going a bit too far. Even further than a "boot on the neck of BP" or looking for an "ass to kick."

Seattle Shock: Cop Punches 17-Year-Old

2010-06-16T07:03:00Z

Outrage in Seattle and across the country after a video captures a police officer punching a 17-year-old girl in the face after she was caught jaywalking. Watch the video: Aggressive use of force or justified?

According to KOMO News in the region "Seattle police officials said Tuesday that their officers are trained to throw a punch in certain situations, but said they have a 'number of concerns' regarding the tactics an officer used in dealing with a 17-year-old girl he punched in the face while trying to cite a group of women for jaywalking.

"'The issue we have to investigate is whether the force he used is reasonable given the combative resistance he was facing... and we're not going to pass judgment on that until the matter has been thoroughly investigated,' said Assistant Seattle Police Chief Nick Metz. Seattle police have directed a review of Seattle police tactics and training to ensure the training and implementation of those tactics are appropriate and consistent, Metz said.

"The review comes in the wake of an altercation captured on video that shows Officer Ian Walsh punching the teenage girl in the face while struggling to get her and another teen under control in South Seattle.
The incident began when Walsh spotted four young women jaywalking the 3100 block of Martin Luther King, Jr. Way S. Walsh asked the group to step over to his patrol car, but the women were being 'verbally antagonistic toward the officer,' according to officials. Police said the 19-year-old woman, identified in documents as Marilyn Levias, was resisting when Walsh tried to place handcuffs on her.

"Officials said the 17-year-old girl intervened and placed her hands on Walsh's arm, 'causing the officer to believe she was attempting to physically affect the first subject's escape,' police said. Walsh pushed back the second girl, but the girl came back at him. Walsh then punched her, police said."

You can watch the shocking video here:

What do you make of that? Aggressive force or justified use of force?

Dobbs: Obama Admin + BP = Disaster

2010-06-15T07:05:00Z

Here's the burning question Lou wants answered: Why has nobody in the Obama administration been fired for their miserable handling of the oil spill crisis in the Gulf? Can we please get some accountability?

We here at the Lou Dobbs Show have drawn Our Supreme Leader a very handy, clear map for the president that points directly to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and he hasn't been fired. Let's check out the accountability chart so far: One head of the Minerals Management Service retired, but he was retiring anyway. Where's all that accountability?

Here's Lou's thoughts on the subject:

This administration in a short year and a half -- well, it's been a LONG year and a half -- is managing to do the impossible: Make the Bush administration look semi-, quasi-comeptent!

When Democratic Congressmen Attack!

2010-06-14T07:05:00Z

Here's a free tip for vulnerable Democratic incumbents: Try not to assault and berate students on public streets. Hey, Congressman Bob Etheridge of North Carolina, this tip's especially for you.

North Carolina Congressman Bob Etheridge can be seen on the following YouTube video confronting students carrying cameras on a Washington street. In the video, the students ask the congressman if he supports the Obama agenda, and Congressman Etheridge did not take too kindly to that. Etheridge then reacts by demanding to know who the photographers are, at which point it gets physical. Rep. Etheridge grabs the camera from one man and then takes him by the wrist. Take a look:

As Andrew Breitbart's Big Government blog put it, "Fortunately, Rep. Etheridge isn't one of those gerry-mandered political welfare queens. According to the Cook Report, his district is an R+2 district. He has a credible opponent. Let's recap what we saw on this video. A sitting Congressman-a presumed living extension of James Madison and other founding fathers-was asked on a public street whether he supported the President's agenda. His response was to hit away a video camera and assault a student. The age of Pericles this ain't."

No, it ain't. Not the best way to earn re-election.

Liberal Think Tank Calling the Shots?

2010-06-14T07:04:00Z

Alabama Gov. Bob Riley accused President Obama of foolishly leading by committee on this Gulf oil crisis. But as the Wall St. Journal points out, Obama is actually taking his cues from John Podesta's liberal think tank.

With Obama in charge, we haven't made much Progress in the Gulf. Ironically, it's been the Center for American Progress that's been calling most of the shots for the White House. If you follow Podesta's group's recommendations closely, as the Journal did, you'll see that's exactly what's being implemented. Just much more slowly.

The Journal writes:

"On May 4, for instance, the CAP's energy and environment expert, Daniel Weiss, called on the president to name an independent commission to look at the causes of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. On May 22, he did just that.

"On May 21, CAP president, John Podesta, privately implored White House officials to name someone to be the public point person for the spill response. A week later, the White House announced that Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen would hold daily briefings on the spill, wherever he would be on any given day.

"On May 26, Weiss said the White House needed to demand that BP immediately set up an escrow account with billions of dollars from which claims for Gulf state residents would be paid out. Monday's headlines proclaimed the president's latest get-tough stand: BP needs to set up a billion-dollar escrow account.

"What's next, Mr. Podesta?"

What's next indeed? Maybe the White House Press Corps should camp out at CAP headquarters instead of the press briefing room.

What Keeps Senator Boxer Up at Night?

2010-06-11T07:05:00Z

Four terrorist attacks in less than a year, two of which only failed because of damning incompetence. But what does Sen. Barbara Boxer say is our greatest national security threat? Carbon!

Israel and Palestine are on the verge of violence after the flotilla attack. It's possible that Iran is a year or so away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Communist China continues to build up its military budget and spy on us every chance they get. North Korea is trying valiantly to restart the Korean War. Turkey is rapidly sliding towards radical Islamism.

But what keeps Barbara Boxer awake at night? CARBON! On the Senate floor yesterday she said: "I'm going to put in the record, Madam President, a host of quotes from our national security experts who tell us that carbon pollution leading to climate change will be over the next 20 years the leading cause of conflict, putting our troops in harm's way. And that's why we have so many returning veterans who want us to move forward and address this issue, so we can create those new technologies that get us off this foreign oil."

If we were Carly Fiorinia, we'd be using this in ads from now until November. Well, that and the "Don't call me ma'am" clip!

Rep. Frank: Give Dems More Authority

2010-06-10T07:05:00Z

In a speech to Young Democrats, Rep. Barney Frank makes the specious argument that young people disillusioned by Obama & the Dems' broken promises should...wait for it...elect more Democrats..

Outspoken Congressman Barney Frank, speaking at the 2010 Democratic State Convention Kickoff Party hosted by Young Democrats of Massachusetts & Worcester County Young Democrats, makes the argument for why young voters disgruntled with the pace of "Change" shouldn't stay home or vote for the Republicans in protest. Instead, he argues, they should turn out in droves and elect more Democrats so that a super-super-majority can pass anything it likes.

Rep. Frank says: "You can reach out to your fellow young people, and make it clear to them that, where they may not be satisfied with everything we've done... the way to cure that is to give us more authority and more ability." Take a look:

Just what the Democrats need: more authority! That'll save us!

A Disclaimer on...the U.S. Constitution?

2010-06-10T07:04:00Z

Great eye by the good people at Newsbusters: Copies of the U.S. Constitution put out by Wilder Publishing and being sold on Amazon.com come with an odd disclaimer on the first page of the pamphlet. What is it?

According to Newsbusters, the disclaimer reads: "This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today." In an example of political correctness run amok, the disclaimer goes on to warn parents of the literary material to follow: "Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work."

The provocative pamphlet also includes the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation.

On the Fox News Channel, correspondent Trace Gallagher quoted the publishing company's response to the controversy: "We specialize in classic books and we were receiving complaints about the values depicted in some of the books. We wrote the disclaimer so that we could stop having to point out to our readers that people held different values 100 or 200 years ago. It seems we're dammed if we do and dammed if we don't."

Take a look at the disclaimer:

Do you believe the United States Constitution should come with a disclaimer about values?!

Lou's Words of Wisdom to AUD Graduates

2010-06-08T07:05:00Z

Lou's reputation as a no-nonsense speaker and proponent of making the most of an education made him the perfect keynote speaker at the commencement ceremony for the graduating class at the American University in Dubai.

THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN DUBAI
THIRTEENTH COMMENCEMENT EXERCISES

KEYNOTE - MR. LOU DOBBS

Al Salamou Aleykom Your Highness Sheik Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice President and Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates and Ruler of Dubai, Your Highnesses, Excellencies, Executive Vice President Elias Bou Saab, President Lance de Masi, Members of the Governing Board, distinguished guests, Parents, Faculty Staff and Graduates. It is my honor to be with you on this special day. My heartfelt congratulations to each of you, and if I may, a few thoughts for you to consider.

We are at the threshold of a new century, a time of unprecedented promise ... and considerable peril. A time of technological advancement and economic turmoil, a time of global engagement and in some instances, conflict.

You will note those same words would have applied at any of the twelve commencements that preceded yours and those same words will likely be true for the AUD commencements that will follow in perpetuity. Promise and peril, peace and the unpredictable are elements of the nature of life itself. Not only does the history of mankind urge us to embrace life and not shirk from its challenges, but for those who would truly be leaders, to fulfill promises and to achieve great things, and do great good. You are fortunate to have not only your wonderful education here at AUD, but to have the inspiring panorama of Dubai and the wonders that have been wrought here by leaders who did not merely dream, but planned Dubai's future with purpose and accomplished the great works that make Dubai a singular, exemplary beacon of imagination in the Middle East.

Like other speakers your university might have honored with the invitation to join you here today, I also come exhorting you to embrace life, and to achieve great things. American University in Dubai has provided you with the opportunity for a world class education, the technical skills and critical thinking that are fundamental to accomplishment and success. And beyond a doubt, your generation is the most technologically advanced in history. You are superbly prepared to embrace and engage the world. I know you are eager for the challenges that await you, and all of us who have preceded you are cheering you on, and offer whatever counsel we can to help you along the way.

No commencement speaker, certainly not yours, can begin to offer in minutes any profundity that your university, your schools, family and faith have not provided you over many years. So I will urge upon you a perspective, a perspective that recognizes the privilege that is yours to be educated in this place and this time. My commencement message is simple and straightforward: Please maintain the independence of thought and critical judgment you've been taught here in Dubai. In this university, in this emirate. Both stand as monuments of imagination, of faith in the future, and the courage and capacity to resist orthodoxy. Be independent but understand what you owe others. Seek your own path, make up your own mind, and you will learn, if you have not already, that you must learn to follow before you lead. Like many of you, I attended university on a scholarship. And like you, education made all the difference in the life I have led. Like you, I wanted to make a difference, no matter how small.

Take seriously your responsibilities as educated men and women, take far less seriously yourselves. Men and women are not unlike nations, no matter how powerful or influential; their strength is amplified by humility. I know, I know. You are young lions, and rightfully proud and hardly interested in constraint....but I would urge upon you also some measure of humility. That's right, humility. Even hidden from others, humility will steel you for life's disappointments, and in success, humility will hold you back from overreaching. A small entreaty from me to you, one I hope you might consider.

As graduates of American University in Dubai, you've learned the power of knowledge and diversity, the importance of understanding that men and women of different cultures and different faiths and different generations build strength in society as we combine our talents and skills in a common purpose. Here in Dubai, you've experienced first hand the difference a leader of vision and character can make in the lives of many. Take that lesson with you throughout your lives.

The emirate of Dubai has inspired not only the middle east, but the world as a city where people are guaranteed fair treatment regardless of their race, nationality, religious beliefs or status, all the while disversifying its society and economy: built on oil exploration, Dubai is a vision come true of tourism, leisure and hospitality, financial services and real estate....and yes, education. American University in Dubai has become one of the premier institutions of higher education in the Middle East, and I know you are proud that today you become part of this institution for the rest of your lives. I salute you; celebrate your commencement, and humbly thank you for the honor of sharing this glorious day with you.

Atamanah Alley Koum Hazan Saeedan.

Thank you.

Pres. Obama Looking for 'Ass to Kick'

2010-06-08T07:04:00Z

More Americans now believe the Obama administration's response to the oil spill was worse than Bush's to Katrina. In order to deflect criticism, Our Supreme Leader now says he talks to experts so he knows "whose ass to kick." His own?

President Obama harshly defended his administration's response to the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico on Monday, telling Matt Lauer he has met with experts to learn "whose ass to kick."

Obama says "I was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the Gulf. A month ago I was meeting with fishermen down there, standing in the rain talking about what a potential crisis this could be." Obama told NBC his deliberations have been more than academic: "I don't sit around talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick."

Watch it here:

According to ABC, "a month and a half after the spill began, 69 percent in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll rate the federal response negatively. That compares with a 62 negative rating for the response to Katrina two weeks after the August 2005 hurricane." Uh oh!

Watch the Trailer for 'Undocumented'

2010-06-07T07:04:00Z

Lou's working to bring all sides together to [finally] solve the illegal immigration and border security crises. And as we see in this new unbiased film by Justin Malone, these issues are incredibly complex.

Malone's film premiered at the USA Film Festival last month in Dallas, and it's something every American needs to see. This documentary covering illegal immigration and border security is an unbiased look at the issue from all sides, and its offers dramatic, thought-provoking revelations for every American. It's not just for open borders advocates and immigration restrictionists, but it's something every politician and American citizen needs to see in order to understand the complex issue.

Like Lou, filmmaker Malone says the time has come for a new conversation, one without the extremes dominating the discourse. Whether you're an advocate for illegal immigrants or whether you're anti-illegal immigration/pro-law enforcement, this film can continue that conversation in earnest. Undocumented is so fair that 29-year veteran of INS, Michael Cutler, says on his website, "I believe that the documentary provided that essential 'level ground' and I am proud to be a part of this important film."

Watch the trailer here:

According to the fillmakers, "A project started in 2007, we sent a 20-something crew to over 25 cities around the U.S. and Guatemala--armed with a few cameras and plenty of curiosity - a king questions from people with all kinds of interests in the immigration debates. Over 400 hours of interviews, rallies, cultural commonalities & differences - incuding living & working conditions nearly everywhere these young people never dreamed could exist anywhere in today's America - have been condensed into an eye-opening, music-driven feature-length documentary narrated by the director, Justin Malone, as he recounts an incredible journey. The year-plus editorial phase combined research to work out stock footage clips from the past century & music rights to compliment stories they gathered on the road: interviews with immigrants (both legal and undocumented), activists, social workers, law enforcement agents and frustrated citizens."

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE UNDOCUMENTED PROJECT, CLICK HERE FOR THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE.

WTF: Say What, Helen Thomas?

2010-06-07T07:03:00Z

So what fate should Helen Thomas suffer for insulting comments that the Jewish people should "get the hell out of Palestine?" BREAKING on Monday: Hearst has just announced she will retire, effective immediately.

It all started on May 27th when Rabbi David F. Nesenoff interviewed Helen Thomas on the White House Lawn on American Jewish Heritage Celebration Day at the White House. He asked everyone for their open-ended comments on Israel, and Thomas instinctively shot back "Tell 'em to get the hell out of Palestine." You can witness the whole exchange here:

Her comments made the rounds late last week, and Thomas was forced to issue the following statement: "I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians. They do not reflect my heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance. May that day come soon."

But has the damage been done?

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs condemned Thomas' recent remarks. Said Gibbs: "I think those remarks were offensive and reprehensible. I think she should and has apologized. Obviously those remarks do not reflect the opinion, certainly, I assume, of most of the people in here, and certainly not of the administration."

Lanny Davis, former White House Counsel for President Bill Clinton, said in a statement: "Helen Thomas, who I used to consider a close friend and who I used to respect, has showed herself to be an anti-Semitic bigot. This is not about her disagreement about her criticisms of Israel. She has a right to criticize Israel and that is not the same as being an anti-Semite...If she had asked all Blacks to go back to Africa, what would White House Correspondents Association position be as to whether she deserved White House press room credentials -- much less a privileged honorary seat?," Davis asked. Davis said her apology did not go far enough: "In my opinion, her apology was not direct and didn't address the merits of her belief in the stereotype that Jews are aliens in Israel and don't belong there. She should be at the least suspended from all privileges in the White House press room since bigots don't merit such privileges. And I believe Hearst should consider a similar suspension of her position as a nationally-syndicated columnist until she owns up to her bigotry and aplogizes (sic) for it," he said.

Flotilla Choir: We Con the World

2010-06-04T07:04:00Z

VP Joe Biden finally came out and said Israel has a right to defend itself. But much of the lamestream media has the flotilla story wrong. So an Israeli TV show called Latma TV created a brilliant parody called We Con the World. Truly must-see TV.

It's like Saturday Night Live, only much funnier, and much more clever. The lamestream media made Israel look like the bad party, even though this flotilla accomplished its very goal to embarrass the nation in the eyes of the world. So Israeli TV show Latma TV decided to act, and you have to see this brilliant parody:

Say What, Congresswoman Sanchez?

2010-06-03T07:04:00Z

Get ready for the latest attack on Arizona lawmakers and citizens who support the new anti-illegal immigration law: Rep. Linda Sanchez now says white supremacists are behind the writing of this new law.

You can't make this stuff up. Rep. Linda Sanchez of, where else but California!, told a Democratic Club this week that white supremacist groups are influencing lawmakers to adopt laws that will lead to discrimination. Sanchez said, "There's a concerted effort behind promoting these kinds of laws on a state-by-state basis by people who have ties to white supremacy groups. It's been documented. It's not mainstream politics."

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO REP. SANCHEZ'S AMAZING COMMENTS ABOUT WHITE SUPREMACISTS MAKING LAWS LIKE ARIZONA'S.

Sanchez is accusing front organizations for white supremacist groups of approaching lawmakers to propose the language to the bills and urging them to push them through state legislatures in an effort to legalize discrimination. She said: "It creates a Jim Crow system where based on the color of your skin you could be treated as a second-class citizen or harassed based on how you look."

What we want to know is: Did she even read the law, or is she another Eric Holder or Janet Napolitano?!

Rep. Scalise on Obama's Fingerpointing

2010-05-27T07:05:00Z

Congressman Steve Scalise of Louisiana is angry. And he says the people back in his home state are angry. And instead of solving the problem, he called President Obama the "fingerpointer-in-chief."

Rep. Scalise took to the House floor earlier this week and unloaded on President Obama. Holding up a photo of a dead pelican and a copy of the Oil Pollution Act. Scalise said "I'm angry and the people back in my state are very angry." Scalise quoted the Act as mandating the president to "ensure the effective and immediate removal of discharge." Scalise dubbed Obama "the finger-pointer in chief" who had been "ceding power to BP" and begged him to be the "quarterback and "get on the field."

Do you agree with Congressman Scalise (and Lou) when they say Obama should get on the field?

Lamesteam Media Turning on Obama?

2010-05-25T07:05:00Z

It took more than a month, but the national liberal lamestream media is beginning to link the Obama administration to the oil spill down in the Gulf. All three networks now connecting anger to the White House.

Only 35 days too late, Monday night's reports on the three major lamestream networks began to highlight the anger at the federal government's slow and bumbling response. There's still no word, however, that the Interior Department last year exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis. Maybe that's the next step.

Take a look at the reports filed by ABC, NBC and CBS on the oil spill. RealClearPolitics.com provides the video evidence:

ABC's "World News" anchor Diane Sawyer addressed viewers from the shorelines of Louisiana tonight. She reported on the "anger" that is focused on Washington. "We saw a pickup truck that had a hand painted sign that said 'BP + The Feds = Another Katrina,'" Sawyer reported. ABC News reports "some of the president's supporters have questioned his leadership," referring to the anger heard from Louisiana natives (and Democratic strategists) Donna Brazile and James Carville. "One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough," Brazile said.

CBS' Katie Couric reports on how BP is trying to control the oil spill and how the EPA is limiting the use of a certain chemical used to attack the oil. She spent nearly half the show, reporting from the scene, focused on the oil spill in the Gulf. CBS' White House correspondent Chip Reid reports "critics on Capitol Hill just weren't buying what the White House was saying about the government's role in all of this and whether they could do more."

NBC's Brian Williams opened the "Nightly News" with this message: "Because the story out of the Gulf of Mexico has not changed in over a month and because there's oil spilling into that water right now and of every minute of every day, the anger and despair there are now taking a toll." NBC's Anne Thompson reported on a "frustrated" Obama administration while the bottom of the screen read "No End In Sight."

They're not all the way there yet, but it's good to see the national media trying for truth and accuracy.

Dobbs: Fire ICE's Morton Now

2010-05-21T07:04:00Z

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement's mission is to "vigilantly enforce" our nation's immigration laws. So why is the head of ICE saying they may not process illegal immigrants referred to them from Arizona?

If you want to know what type of government we have in place these days, look no further than John Morton. In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement said that Arizona's new law targeting illegal immigration is not "good government." The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach, not a patchwork of state laws, he said. "I don't think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution," Morton said.

As such, Morton said his agency will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona officials. How does that aquare up with ICE's mission? It says it right there on the website: ICE's mission "is to protect the security of the American people and homeland by vigilantly enforcing the nation's immigration and customs laws."

Lou, as you might expect, was not happy to hear this. And he wants Morton fired:

It's absolutely despicable, and it's unbecoming of this nation. Morton needs to be fired, and he needs to be fired now.

Lou on Calderon's Standing Ovation

2010-05-21T07:04:00Z

What a spectacle on the House floor. Not only did Mexican President Calderon criticize our laws in our Congress, but every Democrat decided to endorse his comments by giving him a standing ovation. Despicable.

Did you ever think you'd see the day when a foreign leader comes to address our Congress on our soil and criticize our laws?! But that's to be expected from Mexican President Felipe Calderon. The truly absurd part - the man received a standing ovation from almost every Democrat in Congress, including Attorney General Eric Holder. How's that for love of country?!

Attorney General Eric Holder hasn't even read the Arizona anti-illegal immigration law for himself. He admitted to a Congressional committee last week that he had yet to even be briefed on the 10-page law. And yet he's giving a standing ovation to a foreign leader speaking before our Congress and making a mockery of our laws?

Calderon said "I am convinced that a comprehensive immigration reform is also crucial to securing our common border. However, I strongly disagree with your recently adopted law in Arizona. It is a law -- it is a law that not only ignores a reality that cannot be erased by decree, but also introduce a terrible idea using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement, and that is why I agree -- I agree with the President who says the new law carries a great amount of risk with the core values that we all care about are breached."

The audacity of our members of Congress standing with the President of Mexico over their own citizens. That is absolutely unforgiveable. Especially when you consider what an utter hypocrite this Mexican president is. Amnesty International has well documented the abuse of illegal immigrants in Mexico. Especially when you consider the penalties under official Mexican law. We looked it up: Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals. In the United States, illegal immigrants find work, they get free health-care and free education. They are treated with dignity.

Here's what Lou had to say about it on Thursday's broadcast:

Have any of these members of Congress even read the Arizona law? After hearing from Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, PJ Crowley and others, I wouldn't be so sure.

Has Anyone Read the AZ Law?!

2010-05-20T07:04:00Z

Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano and PJ Crowley have openly attacked the new Arizona illegal immigration law. But we now know, they've been making disparaging remarks despite having not read the law themselves!

Attorney General Eric Holder has spent the past few weeks disparaging the new Arizona immigration enforcement law, saying it will invite racial profiling among other things. Holder has been overly critical of Arizona's new immigration law, which EVERY SINGLE POLL shows overwhelming support for, both in the state and nationally. He's instructed the Justice Department to review the law, and he's said that it could lead to racial profiling.

Then, on Thursday, while testifying before Congress, the truth came out: Holder admitted he hasn't even read the law. He said: "I've just expressed concerns on the basis of what I've heard about the law. But I'm not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with people are doing the review, exactly what my position is."

Not to be outdone, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano had a similar experience this week. She's previously called the law "misguided" and "a shame." She even said on ABC's This Week that "Unfortunately, I think it does and can invite racial profiling. I think it's bad for law enforcement."

But when pressed by Senator John McCain before a Senate committee hearing, Secretary Napolitano had to admit she hadn't read it either. "I have not reviewed it in detail," Napolitano said during a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. "I certainly know of it, senator." McCain, R-Ariz., then asked Napolitano if that meant she was not prepared to make a judgment on it. "Let me just say this: As you know, and are well aware, that's not the kind of law I would have signed."

And then there's Assistant Secretary of State P.J. Crowley. He went on Fox News to defend his colleague Michael Posner, who apologized to Communist China for the new Arizona law. China enforces its immigration laws harshly, it murders its citizens and cuts off their freedoms. And yet we're apologizing to them for enforcing our laws and calling it a human rights violation? Fox News anchor Greg Jarret then asks Crowley whether he's read the law, and he gets the dressing down of a lifetime.

Have any of these Obama surrogates actually read the law they've been disparaging?!

Al Gore's Depressing Graduation Address

2010-05-19T07:05:00Z

Deep psychosis, thy name is Al Gore. Get ready to watch a man increasingly detached from reality. Americans For Prosperity shares this video of the former VP's depressing graduation address at the University of Tennessee last week.

In lieu of the usual upbeat and inspiring words for outgoing graduates of the University of Tennessee, the increasingly delusional former vice president took the opportunity to promote his doomsday global warming scenarios.

What is wrong with this man? Could you imagine being a UT graduate or parent and hearing this drivel instead of words of encouragement and advice? Al Gore, you've done it again.

Conn. Democratic Candidate Caught

2010-05-15T07:04:00Z

Almost every poll showed that Democrats will hold onto Sen. Chris Dodd's seat. But after a new report questions whether Richard Blumenthal lied about his military service, it's likely anyone's race.

Polls showed a wide lead for Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal over both his potential challengers, Rob Simmons and Linda McMahon. But after a shocking New York Times report that Blumenthal has made several misstatements (or outright lies) about serving in Vietnam, the race is wide open again.

For years Blumenthal's been claiming that he served in Vietnam and painted himself as a victim of an American society that didn't welcome back the troops with open arms. One problem: His records clearly show he never served in Vietnam, and in fact, he received at least five deferments from 1965-70.

Here's one such video of Blumenthal claiming he served in Vietnam: "In fact, we are failing many of our veterans again. We are failing them just as we did after the Vietnam War, just as we did our World War II and Korean [sic] veterans. This nation has a way of sending young men and women to war, and then forgetting them when they come home. And that is unforgivable. And I know Congressmen like Chris Shays are working hard to change that situation. We have learned something very important since the days I served in Vietnam, and you exemplify it. Whatever we think about the war, whatever we call it, Afghanistan or Iraq, we owe our military men and women unconditional support."

Blumenthal's campaign has responded: "Richard Blumenthal's campaign manager Mindy Myers said Monday night that her boss had acted honorably despite a report by the New York Times that Mr. Blumenthal was not a Vietnam veteran despite his past statements indicating he had served there in uniform. 'The New York Times story is an outrageous distortion of Dick Blumenthal's record of service,' said Ms. Myers, who added the candidate would hold a news conference Tuesday with military veterans. 'Dick has a long record of standing up for veterans.'

Do you think the candidate misstated his record? Or was he openly lying about his service?

The "I Need a Freakin' Job" Movement

2010-05-14T07:04:00Z

A new grassroots movement is giving voice to the millions of Americans affected by our high unemployment. While our dysfunctional government does nothing, Americans are coming together to give voice to the jobless.

As stated on their website, "I Need a Freakin' Job is a grassroots American movement, giving voice to the millions affected by the crazy unemployment numbers. As our families suffer, our political leadership seems content with their dysfunctional posturing. Together we can set the record straight, or at least make fun of it."

Click here to read more about the I Need a Freakin' Job movement to see what's behind the movement and what you can do to join. And watch the group's video below:

Jeff Baker of INAFJ.org joins Lou on Monday to discuss this issue and the movement.

Holder Hasn't Even Read AZ Law

2010-05-14T07:03:00Z

Attorney General Eric Holder has spent the past few weeks disparaging the new Arizona immigration enforcement law, saying it will invite racial profiling among other things. Turns out, he hasn't even read it!

Like his friends in the White House and the Cabinet, Attorney General Eric Holder has been overly critical of Arizona's new immigration law, which EVERY SINGLE POLL shows overwhelming support for, both in the state and nationally. He's instructed the Justice Department to review the law, and he's said that it could lead to racial profiling.

Then, on Thursday, while testifying before Congress, the truth came out: Holder admitted he hasn't even read the law. He said: "I've just expressed concerns on the basis of what I've heard about the law. But I'm not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with people are doing the review, exactly what my position is."

Watch his exchange with Congressman Ted Poe here:

How can he speak ill of a law he hasn't even read? It's not like this is ObamaCare, clocking in at 2,000 pages or more. The law's been up on LOUDOBBS.COM in its entirety for weeks now. Maybe he should be reading this site.

Dobbs Presents: Nanny-in-Chief

2010-05-07T07:04:00Z

Lou came up with a great new idea for a reality show: Coming soon to a lamestream network near you, the latest spin-off to the hit TV series Supernanny: President Barack Obama stars as "Nanny-in-Chief."

As we listen carefully to this president, as we do every day, it becomes very clear that he honestly believes he knows more about how you and I should live our lives, how our families should live their lives. As a matter of fact, President Obama's pretty sure he knows better than every single American how to conduct themselves, how to live, how to think. So we thought it would be interesting, as we listen to everything he's been saying, to put it all together and take the following proposal around to every major network.

We probably shouldn't be telling you this, but we now have a reality show idea about the Nanny-in-Chief. He tells us what to read, he tells us what to watch, he tells us where not to vacation, he tells us how to conserve, he tells us how not to decorate, he tells us how to clean up, he tells us how to raise our families. He knows best, or so he thinks.

If you will, listen to our idea for what we believe will be a blockbuster reality show on nationwide television. Watch it unfold:

Think we've got a gold mine on our hands?!

MSNBC Host's Bizarre Frustration

2010-05-05T07:04:00Z

It should come as no surprise that MSNBC's hosts and analysts swing wildly to the left. But even we were surprised when anchor Contessa Brewer expressed "frustration" at the fact that the Times Square bomber had Islamic ties. Why?

MSNBC daytime host Contessa Brewer on Tuesday appeared on the liberal Stephanie Miller radio show and actually lamented the fact that the person arrested for the attempted Times Square bombing has "ties to any kind of Islamic country." Well, Contessa, we're sorry that the people attacking us don't fit the image you want them to!

Brewer told Miller: "I get frustrated and there was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry. And so there was part of me was really hoping this would not be the case that here would be somebody who is not the defined."

Watch Brewer's comments here:

If that wasn't bad enough, MSNBC's Chris Matthews let former CIA analyst Robert Baer use the airwaves to express concern that this Times Square bombing attempt will strengthen the Tea Party. Huh? Here's what Baer said: "You're gonna see the Tea Party being -- you know -- being strengthened. You're gonna see people blaming the White House for a situation it did not create."

What is going on over at the network that's GE's gift to the Obama administration?

PA Ad: "We Do Know Who You Are"

2010-05-03T07:04:00Z

A creepy new Orwellian tax-amnesty ad from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue won't do anything to settle fears about President Obama's Nanny State or the Police State. They're coming for you.

Pennsylvania's Department of Revenue has launched a new ad campaign letting residents know about a nearly two-month-long tax amnesty, during which people who owe the state back taxes can pay them with 100 percent of penalties and half of the interest waived. But the ad is appropriately scaring some folks with its Big Brother approach to tracking people down.

The ad features a computerized voice addressing an individual named Tom who owes back taxes. The voice begins: "Listen, Tom, we can make this easy," she says as a satellite image zooms in from space onto Tom's house. The voice continues to creep everyone out: "Tom, we do know who you are. Find us before we find you."

Watch it for yourself:

So what do you think? Is this an attention-grabbing ad that helps raise awareness of the program, or a bizarre Big Brother-esque ad that hits too close to home? Call Lou and air your thoughts: 877-55-DOBBS.

"From Day One:" Doth Protest Too Much?

2010-05-03T07:03:00Z

A day after the lefties over at the New York Times (for chrissakes!) compared Obama's oil spill response to Bush's Katrina, the president's surrogates used the phrase "From Day One" 16 times on the Sunday shows.

Doth this administration protest too much? Here's what Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar had to say on the Sunday shows:

Sounds like at least two people in this administration read the talking points this weekend.

Read the New AZ Law Right Here

2010-04-28T07:04:00Z

There's been much debate about the new Arizona immigration enforcement law. But to truly understand what it means, you have to read it for yourself. We've even highlighted the most important passage.

Here's a link to read Senate Bill 1070 for yourself: CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL LAW.

The most important section of the legislation is excerpted here. Notice that it mentions "reasonable suspicion," meaning liberals and ethnocentric groups who complain about random searches are ill-informed or lying. And also notice that the authorities may not "solely consider race, color or national origin" when verifying the status of suspected illegal immigrants.

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON, EXCEPT IF THE DETERMINATION MAY HINDER OR OBSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATION. ANY PERSON WHO IS ARRESTED SHALL HAVE THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS DETERMINED BEFORE THE PERSON IS RELEASED. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. A PERSON IS PRESUMED TO NOT BE AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IF THE PERSON PROVIDES TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR AGENCY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. A VALID ARIZONA DRIVER LICENSE.
2. A VALID ARIZONA NONOPERATING IDENTIFICATION LICENSE.
3. A VALID TRIBAL ENROLLMENT CARD OR OTHER FORM OF TRIBAL IDENTIFICATION.
4. IF THE ENTITY REQUIRES PROOF OF LEGAL PRESENCE IN THE UNITED STATES BEFORE ISSUANCE, ANY VALID UNITED STATES FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ISSUED IDENTIFICATION.

From "Misguided" to "Poorly Conceived"

2010-04-28T07:03:00Z

President Obama last week called the new Arizona law "misguided." Now he says it's "poorly conceived." But what else did the president say about our illegal immigration crisis at a town hall in Iowa?

In the span of a single two-minute 'paragraph' at Tuesday's town hall, Our Supreme Leader managed to express two very different thoughts. He started out by calling Arizona's new immigration enforcement law "poorly conceived," likely offending the 70 percent of Arizona citizens who support the law. But in the next breath he seems to have found a bit of religion when it comes to comprehensive immigration reform, signaling a shift towards respect for our laws rather than blanket amnesty.

First he said: "This law that just passed in Arizona, which I think think is a poorly conceived law. You can try to make it really tough on people who look like they, quote, unquote look like illegal immigrants. One of the things that the law says is that local officials are allow to ask somebody who they have a suspicion might be an illegal immigrant for their papers -- but you can imagine if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona, your great, great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don't have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you're going to be harassed, that's something that could potentially happen."

But then he said: "We can try to crack down, but the truth is, that 11 or 12 million folks, we're going to have to make them take responsibility for what they did. And the way to do that is to make them register, make them pay a fine, make them learn English, make them take responsibility for the fact that they broke the law. You make them get in the back of the line, but you also say 'If you do it the right way then you have a chance to become an American citizen.' If we have that kind of comprehensive approach, then we can once again be a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants."

Watch the president speak here:

That second part made no mention of border and port security, and no mention of the ongoing crisis in Mexico. But it is a welcome departure from the president's usual rhetoric. So is he simply paying lip service? Or do you believe President Obama's given up the quest for amnesty?

Pres. Obama Kicks Off Vote 2010

2010-04-26T07:04:00Z

It's always about group and identity politics to President Obama. And in his new kickoff video for the 2010 midterms, Our (supposedly post-partisan) Supreme Leader plays to select groups rather than all Americans.

The focus of the Democratic National Committee's $50 million plan for the 2010 midterms is persuading the nearly 15 million people who voted for the first time in 2008 to return to the polls this fall. Although such voters historically do not cast ballots in midterm elections, party leaders think their participation this year could help lift Democrats to victory in many of these close contests. But it sounds an awful lot like President Obama wants to be the president of those of you who agree with him, not the president of ALL Americans.

President Obama in this kickoff video said: "It will be up to each of you to make sure that the young people, African Americans, Latinos, and women, who powered our victory in 2008 stand together once again. ... If you help us do that - if you help us make sure that first-time voters in 2008 make their voices heard again in November - then together we will deliver on the promise of change, hope, and prosperity for generations to come."

So no Asian-Americans need vote? How about gay people? That's the tricky part about playing group and identity politics - by including only some groups, you'll inevitably leave out others. How's that for Hope & Change? How's that for inclusion? How's that for being President of the UNITED States?

For a decidedly different take on the 2010 midterms, the Republican Governors Association has released a video called "Remember November," one that incorporates some fine filmmaking into a video you will probably agree with more than the one above!

We Will Remember from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.

ACORN's Bertha Lewis Spouting Nonsense

2010-04-22T07:04:00Z

Trying to stay relevant following the collapse of her fraudulent organization, Bertha Lewis heaped praise on Young Democratic Socialists and then called the Tea Party movement a "bowel movement."

Lewis just doesn't know when to exit the stage. And now she's telling a group of young Democratic Socialists that they should "do everything [they] can" to build their Socialist organization. But if that's not bad enough, she ratcheted up the rhetoric against the Tea Party movement and insisted that our times are worse than internment under the Japanese and the years of Jim Crow laws. She said:

"Any of these groups that says, 'I'm young, I'm Democratic, and I'm a socialist,' is okay with me. You know that's no light thing to do -- to actually say, I'm a socialist. You've got to know, actually, we are living in a time that's going to dwarf the McCarthy era. It is going to dwarf the internment of World War II. We are right now in a time that is going to dwarf the era of Jim Crow and segregation. They are coming. And they are coming after you. And they are going to be brutal and oppressive. They've already shown it. ... This is not rhetoric or hyperbole -- this is real. ... This tea party so-called movement -- a bowel-movement in my estimation -- and this blatant uncovering and ripping off the mask of racism..."

Watch it here:

Bertha's apparently still reeling from the fact that ACORN lost its congressional funding after videos were released depicting actual workers in her corrupt organization offering advice on how to hide income from child prostitution from the government, as well as how to lie to get mortgages. For shame, Bertha, for shame.

Pres. Obama's Broken Tax Pledge?

2010-04-22T07:03:00Z

Our Supreme Leader swore he would not raise your taxes. His press secretary this week denied he's considering a European-style value-added tax. But President Obama's considering it, he now says.

Whatever happened to "I can make a firm pledge: Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes. Not one dime." The president's continued campaigning well into the Oval Office, but he's come a long way since the campaign trail. And he may be about to break this pledge.

Even after his press secretary Robert Gibbs denied it earlier this week, President Obama suggested that a new value-added tax on Americans is still on the table. When asked if he could see a potential VAT in this nation, the president said: "I know that there's been a lot of talk around town lately about the value-added tax. That is something that has worked for some countries. It's something that would be novel for the United States. And before, you know, I start saying 'this makes sense or that makes sense,' I want to get a better picture of what our options are."

Sounds like he's open to the idea. Watch his comments here:

Even if he doesn't move forward with the European-style VAT, tax increases may be coming anyway. As the Associated Press reports, "President Barack Obama's Democratic allies in the Senate promise to cut the deficit by almost two-thirds over the next five years, but their budget plan could threaten about 30 million people with tax increases averaging $3,700 in 2012 and after because of the alternative minimum tax. The alternative is tax increases elsewhere in the revenue code averaging up to $100 billion a year after 2011 to continue alternative minimum tax relief and also curb taxes on people inheriting large estates. The Democratic plan released Wednesday by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota relies on such boosts in revenues to carve the deficit from $1.4 trillion last year down to $545 billion by 2015. The minimum tax, or AMT, was enacted four decades ago to make sure wealthy people couldn't avoid taxes altogethe. But it wasn't indexed for inflation in people's incomes, so it gets 'patched' every year or so in order to prevent people from being surprised by multi-thousand-dollar tax bills at tax time."

How's that Hope & Change working out for us now?

William Gheen's Ignorant Comments

2010-04-21T07:04:00Z

ALIPAC President William Gheen is proud of the way he brought Sen. Lindsey Graham's alleged private life into the public discussion at a rally. He's so proud, he wants us to show you his ignorant comments.

Gheen made despicable and horrible statements about Senator Lindsey Graham's sexual preferebce at a Tea Party in South Carolina rally. These comments were uncalled for and spiteful. The left wing has been attacking the Tea Parties for statements just like this - and Lou's calling for the Tea Parties to completely disassociate itself from Gheen, and Lou's calling for Gheen to resign from his organization.

Gheen said: "The general public doesn't know this secret, I hope this secret isn't being used as leverage over Senator Graham so today, I'm saying: Senator Graham, you need to come forward and tell people about your alternative lifestyle and your homosexuality. Come out of that closet Lindsay, come out of that log cabin closet, Barney Frank is more honest and brave then you. Because at least we know about Barney Frank, and no one is going to hold it over his head, and look I'm a tolerant person, I don't care about your private life, Lindsay, but as our U.S. Senator, I need to figure out why you're trying to sell out your own countrymen, and I need to make sure you being gay isn't it.")

Lou debated Gheen on the air about these comments, and Gheen was so proud of his speech that he wanted you all to see his full remarks:

So what do you think?

Tea Party's Contract FROM America

2010-04-20T07:04:00Z

You've heard of the Contract for America, the document that helped sweep Republicans into office in 1994. But the Tea Party's released a Contract From America, hoping to sweep Democrats out of office again this year.

President Obama on Tax Day said he's "amused" by the Tea Parties rallies, saying these fine Americans should thank him. Have you ever heard such an out-of-touch statement from a president elected to serve the American people?

So it's time to send a message. And some Tea Party activists at thecontract.org are trying to return this government to the people. This tone-deaf Congress and administration may not want to listen, but the people are speaking. It begins: "We, the undersigned, call upon those seeking to represent us in public office to sign the Contract from America and by doing so commit to support each of its agenda items, work to bring each agenda item to a vote during the first year, and pledge to advocate on behalf of individual liberty, limited government, and economic freedom."

Here's the 10-point plan:

1. Protect the Constitution

Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does. (82.03%)

2. Reject Cap & Trade

Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumer prices, and weaken the nation's global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures. (72.20%)

3. Demand a Balanced Budget

Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax hike. (69.69%)

4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform

Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words-the length of the original Constitution. (64.90%)

5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington

Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities, or ripe for wholesale reform or elimination due to our efforts to restore limited government consistent with the US Constitution's meaning. (63.37%)

6. End Runaway Government Spending

Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%)

7. Defund, Repeal, & Replace Government-run Health Care

Defund, repeal and replace the recently passed government-run health care with a system that actually makes health care and insurance more affordable by enabling a competitive, open, and transparent free-market health care and health insurance system that isn't restricted by state boundaries. (56.39%)

8. Pass an 'All-of-the-Above" Energy Policy

Authorize the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation, lowering prices and creating competition and jobs. (55.51%)

9. Stop the Pork

Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%)

10. Stop the Tax Hikes

Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains, and death taxes, currently scheduled to begin in 2011. (53.38%)

CLICK HERE TO READ THE CONTRACT FROM AMERICA AND SIGN YOUR NAME IF YOU SEE FIT.

Obama's Amused by Tea Parties

2010-04-16T07:05:00Z

Never before have we seen such arrogance and smugness from a president elected to serve the American people. President Obama says he's "amused" by the Tea Parties, and he wants you to be thanking him.

At a $30,000-per-plate fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee (so much for post-partisan!), President Obama showed just how out-of-touch he is. He says he's amused by these expressions of popular will, and he truly believes you should be thanking him for this hard-left agenda:

Should we be thanking him for the biggest expansion of government in history, for the trillions of dollars in spending that adds to the deficits and debt, for a hard-left agenda that the American people simply do not want?

This isn't exactly a departure for the president. When the Tea Parties emerged last year around Tax Day, President Obama mocked them by waving his hand around and poked fun at Fox News for promoting them:

What do you make of President Obama's remarks? Call 877-55-DOBBS.

"Whether We Like It Or Not"

2010-04-15T07:04:00Z

President Obama doesn't much care for American superiority. Our Supreme Leader at the nuclear security summit said we remain a military superpower "whether we like it or not." What would he prefer?

At the two-day nuclear security summit, the president responded to a question about how the summit would play into peace-making efforts in the Middle East when he supposedly addressed the downsides of being obligated to intervene in international conflicts.

That's when the president said "It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them. And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure."

You can hear him say it here:

Would President Obama rather not be the leader of a dominant military superpower? What job would he rather have? America is the greatest force for good in the world, and sometimes our leftist leaders need to remember that.

Obama Bowing to Communist Chinese

2010-04-13T07:04:00Z

President Obama bowed to the Japanese Emperor and the Saudi king. But does that rile you up as much as seeing him bow to the President of Communist China? That sends quite a strong signal.

Here's an Associated Press photo of President Barack Obama bowing to Chinese President Hu Jintao during the official arrivals for the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington on April 12, 2010.

Does that bother you more or less than when he bowed to the Japanese Emperor and his wife back in November 2009?

Or how about the King of Saudi Arabia in April 2009?

Do you like seeing the Leader of the Free World bow down to foreign rulers? 877-55-DOBBS.

Lou & Lerrick: Sobering Statistics

2010-04-12T07:04:00Z

Did you know a record-high 45% of our GDP flows through government agencies? Or that 60% take far more from the gov't than they pay in taxes? If not, you need to hear this.

Those aren't the only two statistics from Lou's interview with Economics Professor Adam Lerrick of Carnegie Mellon that will blow your mind. It's a must-listen interview if you care about the direction of this country, our national economy and our society as a whole. Here's a sample:

Lerrick: Any government that proposes to restore the U.S. economy has to answer five basic questions: What are they trying to do, how are they going to do it, why is it going to work, where are they going to get the money, and how much is it going to cost? And until you answer those five questions, this economy is basically rudderless. Businesses don't know what to invest or how to invest. They have regulatory concerns, they don't know about their costs. People don't know whether to spend or not spend, or buy houses or not, and that's why those five simple questions have to be answered.

Lou: What are those five questions again, let's go through that...

Lerrick: What are you trying to do, how are you going to do it, why is it going to work, how much is it going to cost, and where are you going to get the money.

Lou: And you know what I was just thinking about: Those five basic questions, we've just watched our Congress and our president sign into law ObamaCare legislation purporting to take over a sixth of the economy, they didn't answer a single one of those questions. Not a single one.

You can listen to the full interview right here.

FULL TRANSCRIPT: Lou Dobbs interviews Adam Lerrick, Thursday April 8, 2010:

Lou: Let's talk about two central themes in this economy and our society right now. We are developing a pretty clear understanding in this country that there are two conflicts that are emerging into the public discussion. The conflicts have been with us for awhile, but they're emerging into the public discussion: The conflict between those who are producing and those who are not; the conflict between those who are paying taxes and those who are using taxes; those who are demanding more services and those who are paying for those services; and, a conflict between those who want the size and scope and scale of the federal government to be constrained, to be limited, and those who want the federal government to be insinuated into every corner of our society, into every element of our lives. Those are the essential conflicts that are emerging in our public discussion in which we are obviously following, and which I am talking about, and have been talking about here.

One of the best economic thinkers I believe in the country is Professor Adam Lerrick. He is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. And he and I have been talking about this, because he is the first person to have introduced me to the fact that we have an extraordinary dichotomy in our economy between those who are paying taxes and those who are not.

Adam, great to have you back with us.

Lerrick: Lou, always a pleasure.

Lou: How is it that we have reached this point where our society is bifurcated between producers and non-producers, those who are paying taxes and those using them?

Lerrick: Well Lou, it has sort of crept up on us. And the way it crept on us is because every time a free market-type president wanted to lower taxes in order to stimulate growth, the only way he could get Congress to agree to that was to lower taxes even more on the people at the lower end of the income spectrum.

Lou: Right.

Lerrick: But those people didn't pay very much tax in the first place. So each time you've gotten to the point where you've got a concept which they call refundable tax credits where people who don't pay any taxes, you actually send them a check. And you call it a tax credit. And now we've reached the point, as you said, where 50% of Americans do not pay any federal income tax at all and 60%, an overwhelming majority, receive far more from the federal government than they pay in income taxes.

Lou: The burden of paying those taxes when we have that, your best analysis, now the Tax Policy numbers are based on households, 47% of households not paying taxes, receiving more federal money. In terms of individuals, as you and I have discussed in the past, what do you think the breakdown is?

Lerrick: The Tax Policy Institute is pretty accurate. I think the number is a little bit higher, they do households, they do individuals, it's a little higher but the numbers for no taxes at all is about 50%. When you then take people that just pay a very tiny amount of tax, less than $500, and less than 5% of their income, the lower of those two, you get up 60%. And those people receive far more from the government then they pay in taxes. I want to bring another number for you Lou.

Lou: Sure.

Lerrick: Which is, what do you think about an economy where 45% of GDP flows through government agencies?

Lou: I think I want to throw up.

Lerrick: Well, that's the U.S. economy today. Today you have that federal government spending is 25% of GDP, and if you add in state and local government spending you are at 45%. These are historic highs, except for WWII where of course federal government spending went very high because of the war. But since the war, fed government spending has averaged between 18-20%, about. We have now in the last five years jumped it up to 25% which is more than a 25% increase, and there is no foreseeable scenario where it is going to go back down below 25%.

Lou: Well I'm one of those guys who still remembers my economics class and I remember the GDP equaled government spending, investment and consumption. What happened?

Lerrick: Well what happened is...

Lou: Do I remember that correctly, first of all?

Lerrick: Well yeah, you add in exports you take out imports and there you are. And that's another problem because if you now take the U.S. economy, I'm going to give you three facts, and you tell me how you feel about them.

Lou: Alright.

Lerrick: The first one we talked about: A majority of Americans receive more from the government than they pay in income taxes. Two: Almost half of government spending at all levels now equals almost half of GDP. And three: A large portion of our debt...the only way we finance this huge government spending is by selling debt to foreigners.

Lou: Right.

Lerrick: So an ever-increasing part of every Americans life, everyday, is spent working for the Chinese.

Lou: Incredible. I don't even know what to say to that. I was talking to John Stossel. I was a guest on his show the other day, and John's a well-known, prominent, Libertarian, as were the other panelists in this discussion. And they would have none of the fact that I was concerned about the fact that we had this extraordinary, external trade debt that I was worried about that, that I was worried about fiscal deficits, that I was worried about consecutive trade deficits...I couldn't believe how dismissive they were of what are obviously dislocations in an economy that was once proud, productive, and dominating in the world. Instead we're now a debtor nation. I mean, help me out here professor, I felt so alone.

Lerrick: Well the problem Lou is this, and it's not the Chinese that fault we're working for them.

Lou: No, it's our fault!

Lerrick: It's our fault. It's Republicans and Democrats. Finally, the Bush administration used to say all the time, fiscal deficits don't matter. But they forgot the last part of that sentence, as long as the Chinese will buy your bonds.

Lou: Exactly.

Lerrick: Alright, and the Chinese have now bought so many bonds, the Koreans, the Chinese, the Indians, the Japanese. That they are worried. And they're worried about the dollar because the whole point of the dollar, we had a huge a huge privilege that the world liked to hold dollars, we were in what they called the reserve currency of the world financial system.

...Interview resumes...

Lou: I want to go back to how we got here. You have just terrified me to be honest. Expressing that government is effectively nearly half of the economy now. What are the implications of that as best you can discern?

Lerrick: Not good. Just think of it, Lou, the government is notoriously inefficient at running anything. As Milton Friedman used to say all the time, "If you put the government in charge of the Sahara Desert, there'd be a shortage of sand."

Lou: I hadn't heard that one.

Lerrick: If you're now thinking of channeling almost half of the economy through the government, think of the waste, think of the lost growth.

Lou: Think of this, this doesn't even include the recent takeover of a sixth of the economy through ObamaCare.

Lerrick: True. I mean, the idea that we are going to have a federal government agency that's going to oversee the health-care system and make it more efficient and lower costs and more effective than the private sector, is, for any normal person, almost laughable. Anyone who's gone and gotten a drivers license knows that that's laughable.

Lou: Well, what are we doing? I feel like a fool because I have not noticed as this percentage has crept up - that is government involvement, at all levels, particularly, federal government, as a dominant force in our economy.

Lerrick: It happens because it sounds like what we call alchemy: you can make gold out of some ordinary metal. The government comes in and says we're going to you this, we're going to give you that, and if they're really pressed, they're going to say we'll pay for it a certain way. And they use mirrors and smoke and strange projections and they delay payments in order to show that maybe it is self-financed.

Lou: If you would, I'd like you to hear something that Richard Trumka the head of the AFL-CIO said last night at the Kennedy School of Government. I was stunned by it. Even as a union leader, for him to be this blatant in his view about sharing wealth - not creating wealth, not creating opportunity, not generating opportunity, but sharing wealth. Here is Richard Trumka from last night, I want to get your reaction to this.

Richard Trumka at Harvard University on April 7th: "Working people want an economy that creates good jobs. Where wealth is fairly shared. Where the economic life of our nation is about solving big problems like the threat of climate change rather than creating big problems like the foreclosure crisis. "

Lou: What is your reaction to that?

Lerrick: My reaction is very simple. And this is one of our problems in this country today. We do not have an economic policy. We have a social policy disguised as an economic policy. And social policies are all about redistribution. And redistribution doesn't drive productivity and doesn't raise economic growth. And this is a fundamental difference between Libertarians and Democrats. Democrats view the world as a fixed pie. The only way you can improve the life of one group is to take an equivalent amount away from another group. Libertarians and market-oriented policy makers think the pie can rise and good sound economic policies will increase the size of the pie so that everyone can actually have a rising standard of living and it isn't a fixed sum game where you have to take away from one group and have to give to another.

Lou: And it is very clear that the head of the AFL-CIO means to be a redistributionist, means to be if you will, a Socialist.

Lerrick: At least a Social Democrat. We don't know if we'd go as far as Socialist, but Lou, we're looking at an economy where all the issues we talked about of who pay taxes, who pays and who pays for cause, government spending. But we also have an economy where the government decides who peoples banks will lend to, at what interest rates, and what their executives will be paid. The government is now going to be in charge of health care. The government is now going to control almost one half of the dollars flowing through the economy. This is not the U.S. economy that you and I think of. But it's the one we have.

Lou: And not being that economy, forgive me, but I feel like a stranger in a strange land here. This is not a Brave New World, I've entered a strange land.

Lerrick: Well Lou, all I can say is that one of your colleagues once said to me, you know, if I wanted to live in France, I'd move to France. The food's better.

Lou: I do pretty well even on the bad food here. And I was thinking actually of fast food. When I get home I get great food. I think I've covered all the bases here, I think I'm okay.

Lerrick: Well Lou, let me leave you with just one thing. Any government that proposes to restore the U.S. economy has to answer five basic questions: What are they trying to do, how are they going to do it, why is it going to work, where are they going to get the money, and how much is it going to cost? And until you answer those five questions, this economy is basically rudderless. Businesses don't know what to invest or how to invest. They have regulatory concerns, they don't know about their costs. People don't know whether to spend or not spend, or buy houses or not, and that's why those five simple questions have to be answered.

Lou: What are those five questions again, let's go through that...

Lerrick: What are you trying to do, how are you going to do it, why is it going to work, how much is it going to cost, and where are you going to get the money.

Lou: And you know what I was just thinking about: Those five basic questions, we've just watched our Congress and our president sign into law ObamaCare legislation purporting to take over a sixth of the economy, they didn't answer a single one of those questions. Not a single one.

Lerrick: That's right. Let's simplify ObamaCare. In its simplist form, you are saying there are 35 million Americans who don't have health care. We are going to give that to them. That's the basic premise of ObamaCare. That costs trillions of dollars. And that money has to come from somewhere. That's why the health care debate never focused on the core issue. It may be that we as a society decide that is a good thing, that everyone in this country should have health care. That may be a good social choice. But it should be framed simply, there are 35 million people, we're going to give a large new entitlement program to [them]. It's going to cost X trillion dollars, do you think it's worth it?

Lou: And what will be the impact on me.

Lerrick: What will be the impact on me? Who's going to pay for it? Where the money's going to come from, what will be the impact on every individual in this society, and we can decide. Is this something we want to do? Now President Obama and Speaker Pelosi have said this is not a question, it's a moral imperative. So anyone who disagrees with doing this is just a bad person.

Lou: And unfortunately, it is an every dwindling minority who will be paying for whatever the consequences are. Adam Lerrick, we thank you as always for being here, we appreciate it.

Lerrick: Pleasure, Lou.

Unions Projecting 'Hatred' On You

2010-04-08T07:04:00Z

AFL-CIO leader Richard Trumka spoke at Harvard University, addressing the crowd as a Socialist. It's clear the union is no longer about the American worker. The union is now strictly about the expansion of government.

Trumka's speech was nothing more than a carefully constructed effort to put the unions into a role to do something about something that doesn't exist. If that sounds confusing, it's because these folks are confused themselves. Trumka and the unions are denigrating the popular expression of will that is the Tea Party movement, saying their bigots and homophobes and full of hate.

Trumka said "Our politics have been dominated by greed and the forces of money for a generation. Now, amid the wreckage that came from that experiment, we hear the voices of hatred, of racism and homophobia. At this moment of economic pain and anger, political intellectuals face a great choice-whether to be servants or critics of economic privilege. And I think this is an important point to make here at Harvard. The economic elites at JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and the other big Wall Street banks are happy to hire intellectual servants wherever they can find them. But the stronger the alliance between intellectuals and economic elites, the more the forces of hatred-of anti-intellectualism-will grow. If you want to fight the forces of hatred, you have to help empower the forces of righteous anger. And at this moment, the labor movement is working to give voice to the justified anger of the American people. We need help. We need public intellectuals who will help design the policies that will replace the bubble economy with a real, sustainable economy that works for all of us."

CLICK HERE TO WATCH TRUMKA'S SPEECH IN FULL...

And here's the full text of Trumka's speech: Good evening. Thank you, John. I will never be able to express how much I owe you and how much the American labor movement owes you. The Institute of Politics is fortunate to have you as a fellow this semester. And let me add my thanks to the Institute of Politics and Bill Purcell for inviting me to be here with you tonight.

I am going to talk tonight about anger-and specifically the anger of working people. I want to explain why working people are right to be mad about what has happened to our economy and our country, and then I want to talk about why there is a difference between anger and hatred. There are forces in our country that are working hard to convert justifiable anger about an economy that only seems to work for a few of us into racist and homophobic hate and violence directed at our President and heroes like Congressman John Lewis. Most of all, those forces of hate seek to divide working people - to turn our anger against each other.

So I also want to talk to you tonight about what I believe is the only way to fight the forces of hatred-with a strong progressive tradition that includes working people in action, organizing unions and organizing to elect public officials committed to bold action to address economic suffering.

That progressive tradition has drawn its strength from an alliance of the poor and the middle class-everyone who works for a living. But the alliance between working people and public minded intellectuals is also crucial-it is all about standing up to entrenched economic power and the complacency of the affluent. It's an alliance that depends on intellectuals being critics, and not the servants, of economic privilege.

I am here tonight at the Kennedy School of Government to say that if you care about defending our country against the apostles of hate, you need to be part of the fight to rebuild a sustainable, high wage economy built on good jobs - the kind of economy that can only exist when working men and women have a real voice on the job.

Our republic must offer working people something other than the dead-end choice between the failed agenda of greed and the voices of hate and division and violence. Public intellectuals have a responsibility to offer a better way.

The stakes could not be higher. Mass unemployment and growing inequality threaten our democracy. We need to act-and act boldly-to strike at the roots of working people's anger and shut down the forces of hatred and racism.

We have to begin the conversation by talking about jobs-the 11 million missing jobs behind our unemployment rate of 9.7 percent.

Now, you may think to yourself, that is so retro. Jobs are so twentieth century. Sweat is for gyms, not workplaces.

For a generation, our intellectual culture has suggested that in the new global age, work is something someone else does. Someone we never met far away in an export processing zone will make our clothes, immigrants with no rights in our political process or workplaces will cook our food and clean our clothes.

And for the lucky top 10 percent of our society, that has been the reality of globalization-everything got cheaper and easier.

But for the rest of the country, economic reality has been something entirely different. It has meant trying to hold on to a good job in a grim game of musical chairs where every time the music stopped, there were fewer good jobs and more people trying to get and keep one. Over the last decade, we lost more than 5 million manufacturing jobs-a million of them professional and design jobs. We lost 20 percent of our aerospace manufacturing jobs. We're losing high-tech jobs-the jobs we were supposed to keep.

For most of us, economic reality has meant trying to pay for the ever-more-expensive education needed to pursue a good job-the cost of a college degree has gone up more than 24 percent since 2000 while average wages and salaries have increased less than one percent. It has meant trying to pay for exorbitant health care as employer coverage went away or got hollowed out. It has meant trying to eke out a decent retirement even as the private sector shed real pensions and long-term investment returns evaporated. Meanwhile, Wall Street middlemen raked in the bonuses.

And that was the reality for most Americans before the Great Recession began in 2007. Since then, we have lost 8 million jobs when the economy needed to add nearly three million just to keep up with population growth. That's 11 million missing jobs.

We used the public's money to bail out the major banks, only to see those same banks return to the behavior that got us here in the first place-aggressive risk taking in securities and derivatives markets, and handing out gigantic bonuses. Most galling of all-they used the funds we gave them -- courtesy of TARP and endless cheap credit from the Federal Reserve -- to fight even the most modest, common sense reforms of our financial system.

President Obama's economic recovery program has done a lot of good for working people-creating or saving more than 2 million jobs. But the reality is that 2 million jobs is just 18 percent of the hole in our labor market.

The jobs hole - and the decades-long stagnation in real wages -- are the source of the anger that echoes across our political landscape. People are incensed by the government's inability to halt massive job loss and declining living standards, on the one hand, and the comparative ease with which government led by both parties has made the world safe again for JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, on the other hand.

Rescuing the big banks hasn't done much for Main Street. The very same financial institutions that got bailed out have not only cut way back on lending to business, they have never stopped foreclosing on American families' homes.

The fact is that for a generation we have built our economy on a lie-that we can have a low-wage, high-consumption society and paper over the contradiction with cheap credit funded by our foreign trading partners and financial sector profits made by taking a cut of the flow of cheap credit.

So now a lot of Americans are angry. And we should be angry. And just as we have seen throughout history, there are plenty of purveyors of hate and division looking to profit from our hurt and our anger.

I am a student of history, and now is the time to remember our history as a nation. Remember that when President Franklin Roosevelt said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself," other voices were on the radio, voices saying that what we really needed to fear was each other - voices preaching anti-Semitism and Nazi-style racial hatred.

Remember that when President John F. Kennedy stepped off the plane in Dallas on November 22, 1963, radio voices were calling for violence against the President of the United States. And the violence came-and took John and Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King and Medgar Evers and so many others.

But in the United States, we chose to turn away from the voices of hatred at those critical moments in the twentieth century. In much of Europe, racial hatred and political violence prevailed in response to the mass unemployment of the Great Depression. And in the end, we had to rescue those countries from fascism-- from the horrible consequences of the failure of their societies to speak to the pain and anger bred by mass unemployment.

Why did our democracy endure through the Great Depression? Because working people discovered it was possible to elect leaders who would fight for them and not for the financial barons who had brought on the catastrophe. Because our politics offered a real choice besides greed and hatred. Because our leaders inspired the confidence to reject hate and charted a path to higher ground through broadly shared prosperity.

This is a similar moment. Our politics have been dominated by greed and the forces of money for a generation. Now, amid the wreckage that came from that experiment, we hear the voices of hatred, of racism and homophobia.

At this moment of economic pain and anger, political intellectuals face a great choice-whether to be servants or critics of economic privilege. And I think this is an important point to make here at Harvard. The economic elites at JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and the other big Wall Street banks are happy to hire intellectual servants wherever they can find them. But the stronger the alliance between intellectuals and economic elites, the more the forces of hatred-of anti-intellectualism-will grow. If you want to fight the forces of hatred, you have to help empower the forces of righteous anger.

And at this moment, the labor movement is working to give voice to the justified anger of the American people. We need help. We need public intellectuals who will help design the policies that will replace the bubble economy with a real, sustainable economy that works for all of us.

Working people want an American economy that creates good jobs, where wealth is fairly shared, and where the economic life of our nation is about solving big problems like the threat of climate change rather than creating big problems like the foreclosure crisis. We know that growing inequality undermines our ability to grow as a nation by squandering the talents and the contributions of our people and consigning entire communities to stagnation and failure. But despite our best efforts, we have endured a generation of stagnant wages and collapsing benefits-a generation where the labor movement has been much more about defense than about offense.

We in the labor movement have to challenge ourselves to make our institutions into a voice for all working people. And we need to begin with jobs. Eleven million missing jobs is not tolerable. That's why we are fighting for the AFL-CIO's five point jobs program-extending unemployment benefits, including COBRA health benefits for unemployed workers; expanding federal infrastructure and green jobs investments; dramatically increasing federal aid to state and local governments facing fiscal disaster; creating jobs directly, especially in distressed communities; and finally, lending TARP money to small and medium sized businesses that can't get credit because of the financial crisis.

As we meet tonight, organizers working for the AFL-CIO's 3 million-member community affiliate Working America are knocking on doors across our country talking jobs. We are organizing support for George Miller's Local Jobs for America Act that would target $100 billion in job creation dollars toward our country's hardest hit communities-to keep teachers in the classroom and first responders on the job, and to create new jobs where Wall Street destroyed them. We are organizing support for financial reform and accountability for Wall Street. We are working to counter the Glenn Beck effect and turn anger into action for real change.

But we are not just talking about how to create jobs, we are talking about how to pay for them. Wall Street should pay to clean up the mess they made, and we are supporting four ways for the big banks to pay-President Obama's bank tax, a special tax on bank bonuses, closing the carried interest tax loophole for hedge funds and private equity, and most important, a financial speculation tax levied on all financial transactions-including derivatives-that would raise over $150 billion a year, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The financial speculation tax would have negligible impact on long-term investors, but would discourage the short termism in the capital markets that led to so much destruction over the last decade.

When it comes to creating jobs, some in Washington say: Go slow-take half steps, don't spend real money. Those voices are harming millions of unemployed Americans and their families -- and they are jeopardizing our economic recovery. It is responsible to have a plan for paying for job creation over time. But it is bad economics and suicidal politics not to aggressively address the job crisis at a time of stubbornly high unemployment. In fact, budget deficits over the medium and long term will be worse if we allow the economy to slide into a long job stagnation -- unemployed workers don't pay taxes and they don't go shopping; businesses without customers don't hire workers, they don't invest and they also don't pay taxes.

But we must do much more to restore broadly shared prosperity.

We must take action to restore workers' voices. The systematic silencing of America's workers by denying their freedom to form unions is at the heart of the disappearance of good jobs in America. We must pass the Employee Free Choice Act so that workers can have the chance to turn bad jobs into good jobs, and so we can reduce the inequality which is undermining our country's prospects for stable economic growth.

We must have an agenda for restoring American manufacturing-a combination of fair trade and currency policies, worker training, infrastructure investment and regional development policies targeted to help economically distressed areas. We cannot be a prosperous middle class society in a dynamic global economy without a healthy manufacturing sector.

We must have an agenda to address the daily challenges workers face on the job - to ensure safe and healthy workplaces and family-friendly work rules.

And we need comprehensive reform of our immigration policy based on ending exploitation and securing fairness, working for an America where there are no second class workers.

Each of these initiatives should be rooted in a crucial alliance of the middle class and the poor-the majority of the American people. And those of us in the labor movement know that we can only achieve these great things if we work together with community partners who share our goals, and with government leaders who share our vision.

Government that acted in the interests of the majority of Americans has produced our greatest achievements. The New Deal. The Great Society and the Civil Rights movement -- Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage and the forty-hour work week, and the Voting Rights Act. This is what made the United States a beacon of hope in a confused and divided world. In the end, I believe the health care bill signed into law last month is an achievement on this order, one we can continue to improve upon to secure health care for all.

But too many thought leaders have become the servants of a different kind of politics-a politics that sees middle-class Americans as overpaid and underworked. That sees Social Security as a problem rather than the only piece of our retirement system that actually works. A mentality that feels sorry for homeless people, but fails to see the connections between downsizing, outsourcing, inequality and homelessness. A mentality that sees mass unemployment as something that will take care of itself, eventually.

We need to return to a different vision.

President Obama said in his inaugural address, "The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act -- not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth." Now is the time to make good on these words - for Congress, for President Obama and for the American people.

These are big challenges. But it is long past time to take them on. If you are worried about the anger in our country, if you don't want the forces of hatred to grow, be a part of the fight for economic justice and a new economic foundation for America. Be a critic of power and privilege, not its servant.

Be the source of the ideas that can rebuild our economy and restore confidence in government. As students, as teachers, as workers-all of us can play a role in this great effort. Whether here within the university, at think tanks, in the government, in the press, or even working with us in the labor movement, working people need the help of engaged policy intellectuals if we are together going to build an economy that works for all.

Think about the great promise of America and the great legacy we have inherited. Our wealth as a nation and our energy as a people can deliver, in the words of my predecessor Samuel Gompers, "more schoolhouses and less jails; more books and less arsenals; more learning and less vice; more leisure and less greed; more justice and less revenge; in fact, more of the opportunities to cultivate our better natures."

That is the American future the labor movement is working for. Let me be clear: There is no excuse for racism and hatred. All Americans need to unite against it. The labor movement must be a powerful voice against it. But you cannot fight hatred with greed. Working people are angry-and we are right to be angry at the betrayal of our economic future. Help us turn that anger into the energy to win a better country and a better world.

Republican Lawmaker Fails Pop Quiz

2010-04-08T07:03:00Z

Not everyone needs to be a Constitutional scholar. But for our so-called leaders in Washington who've sworn to uphold that sacred document, knowing what's in the Constitution should be universal.

The Constitution has become an afterthought for so many of our so-called representatives. Already this month we've seen one of our elites in the nation's capital say he doesn't care about the Constitution. Congressman Phil Hare told his constituents that he just didn't worry about that pesky little document:

And now another: Eight-term Congressman Frank LoBiondo of New Jersey couldn't answer even the most basic question, like what Article I, Section I tells us. A Tea Part activist showed up at Rep. LoBiondo's town hall and quizzed the congressman, and the results are rather embarrassing.

The point is not to embarrass each individual member of Congress and hold them to impossible standards, or rather basic standards like this video shows. The point is, if these so-called representatives don't even know the most basic information, how do they know where in the Constitution it says Congress can mandate that everyone in this country buy health insurance or face a civil or criminal penalty? Food for thought.

Collateral Murder? Rules of Engagement

2010-04-07T07:04:00Z

WikiLeaks.org has released a classified US military video depicting what it calls "the indiscriminate slaying" of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad. But what does this video tell us about the Rules of Engagement?

WikiLeaks released a video showing an engagement in New Baghdad in 2007, during the so-called surge, in a rough area known for its insurgency. The engagement unfortunately resulted in the deaths of two journalists from Reuters. Wikileaks called the incident "collateral murder" and says that it wants to promote the safety of journalists in war zones with the release of the DoD video. But take a look at the video for yourself, and see why our forces fired on the group and on the vehicle that came to their aid:

So is this a clear case of aggressive force? Remember, again, the context: It came during the surge in a hotbed of insurgency. In the video, one member of the group starts preparing what looks like an RPG launcher, as well as some individuals with AK-47s. The launcher then reappears at in the video at 4:06 as the man wielding it sets up a shot for down the street.

What do you think about this situation? Is it a clear case of aggressive force and an "indiscriminate slaying?" Or is this the horror of an urban war where enemies are not clearly marked?

Call Lou with your thoughts: 877-55-DOBBS.

Professor Obama: Rambling Man

2010-04-07T07:03:00Z

Maybe this is why the president doesn't give more press conferences. Asked a simple question about being over-taxed, Professor Obama delivered a rambling 17-minute, 2,500-word incoherent answer.

According to the Washington Post account, Obama started out feisty. "Well, let's talk about that, because this is an area where there's been just a whole lot of misinformation, and I'm going to have to work hard over the next several months to clean up a lot of the misapprehensions that people have," the president said.

He then spent the next 17 minutes and 12 seconds lulling the crowd into a daze. His discursive answer - more than 2,500 words long -- wandered from topic to topic, including commentary on the deficit, pay-as-you-go rules passed by Congress, Congressional Budget Office reports on Medicare waste, COBRA coverage, the Recovery Act and Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (he referred to this last item by its inside-the-Beltway name, "F-Map"). He talked about the notion of eliminating foreign aid (not worth it, he said). He invoked Warren Buffett, earmarks and the payroll tax that funds Medicare (referring to it, in fluent Washington lingo, as "FICA").

Always fond of lists, Obama ticked off his approach to health care -- twice. "Number one is that we are the only -- we have been, up until last week, the only advanced country that allows 50 million of its citizens to not have any health insurance," he said.

A few minutes later he got to the next point, which seemed awfully similar to the first. "Number two, you don't know who might end up being in that situation," he said, then carried on explaining further still.

"Point number three is that the way insurance companies have been operating, even if you've got health insurance you don't always know what you got, because what has been increasingly the practice is that if you're not lucky enough to work for a big company that is a big pool, that essentially is almost a self-insurer, then what's happening is, is you're going out on the marketplace, you may be buying insurance, you think you're covered, but then when you get sick they decide to drop the insurance right when you need it," Obama continued, winding on with the answer.

Halfway through, an audience member on the riser yawned.

Take a look at his answer here, if you can stomach it:

Even President Obama seemed to recognize that he had gone on too long. He apologized -- in keeping with the spirit of the moment, not once, but twice. "Boy, that was a long answer. I'm sorry," he said, drawing nervous laughter that sounded somewhat like relief as he wrapped up. But, he said: "I hope I answered your question."

Must-See Documentary: Generation Zero

2010-04-07T07:02:00Z

A groundbreaking new documentary film provides a unique perspective on the causes of the recent economic meltdown. Take a closer look at "Generation Zero: The Truth About the Financial Meltdown."

From Citizens United Productions, the producers of this fantastic new film say "The current economic crisis is not a failure of capitalism, but a failure of culture. Generation Zero explores the cultural roots of the global financial meltdown - beginning with the narcissism of the 1960's, spreading like a virus through the self-indulgent 90's, and exploding across the world in the present economic cataclysm.

"Generation Zero goes beneath the shallow media headlines and talking head sound bites to get to the source of today's economic nightmare. With a cutting edge style and haunting imagery, this must see documentary will change everything you thought you knew about Wall Street and Washington.

"Featuring experts, authors, and pundits from across the political spectrum, Generation Zero exposes the little told story of how the mindset of the baby boomers sowed the seeds of economic disaster that will be reaped by coming generations."

WATCH THE TRAILER HERE:

And best of all, it features Lou Dobbs!

Click here to find out more information about the film and where you can screen it and purchase it.

Rep. Cohen: Another Tea Party Smear

2010-03-31T07:04:00Z

Democrats and their left-wing advocates are continuing their pained effort to paint the Tea Party members as racists and bigots. The latest: TN Congressman Steve Cohen says they're the kind without robes and hoods.

Interviewed on the left-wing Young Turks program, Rep. Cohen says: "Tea Party people are kind of like without robes and hoods. They have really shown a hardcore, angry side of America that is against any type of diversity. We saw opposition to African Americans, hostility toward gays, hostility to anybody who wasn't a clone of George Wallace's fan club, and I'm afraid they've taken over the Republican Party."

Rep. Cohen must have missed the new report that showed more than 40 percent of Tea Party members consider themselves Democrats and Independents. Watch Congressman Cohen's smears here:

Do you believe the Tea Party movement is steeped in race, or are these merely citizens concerned for the future of this country? Give Lou a call with your thoughts: 877-55-DOBBS.

Donate to Matthew Snyder's Fund

2010-03-31T07:04:00Z

In a bizarre case, the father of a fallen Marine has been ordered to pay the despicable Westboro Baptist Church more than $16,000 in court fees after the so-called church picketed his son's funeral. Please donate to his fund.

Our soldiers - these brave men and women in uniform fighting for our freedoms - deserve our utmost respect. Yet the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas has taken it upon itself to picket the funerals of our fallen heroes. Among the teachings of this so-called church, which was founded in 1955 by pastor Fred Phelps, is the belief that God is punishing the United States for "the sin of homosexuality" through events such as soldiers' deaths. If that's not the most ill-conceived logic you've ever heard, I'm waiting for anything that will top it. So the Westboro Baptist Church appeared outside Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder's funeral in 2006 in Westminster, Maryland, carrying signs reading "You're going to hell," "God hates you" and "Thank God for dead soldiers." Oh, and "God Hates Fags." Classy folks.

Lance Corporal Snyder's family sued the church and went to trial in 2007 alleging privacy invasion, intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy. A jury awarded the family $2.9 million in compensatory damages plus $8 million in punitive damages, which were reduced to $5 million. Westboro in 2008 appealed the case to the 4th District, which reversed the judgments a year later, siding with the church's claims that its First Amendment rights had been violated. Then, in the ultimate insult to injury, The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered that Snyder pay more than $16,000 in costs requested by Westboro for copies of motions, briefs and appendices.

Please donate to MATTHEWSNYDER.ORG to donate to Mr. Snyder's legal fund. Do what you can.

And here's what Lou had to say about it on the March 31st broadcast:

The Dobbs Forbearance Award Goes To...

2010-03-30T07:02:00Z

Congratulations to Admiral Robert Willard, Commander of the Navy's Pacific Fleet, for winning the Dobbs Forbearance Award, for not breaking out in laughter after Rep. Hank Johnson said Guam might tip over and capsize!

Admiral Willard earns our highest esteem for not breaking out in laughter, nor slapping his forehead in disbelief at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the defense budget. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) said he's afraid that the U.S. Territory of Guam is going to "tip over and capsize" due to overpopulation. The military is proposing the addition of 8,000 U.S. servicemembers and their families. Addressing Admiral Willard, who commands the Navy's Pacific Fleet, Rep. Johnson made a tippy motion with his hands and said sternly, "My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize." Willard paused and said: "We don't anticipate that."

Listen to the bizarre exchange here:

Like other islands, Guam is attached to the sea floor, which makes it extremely unlikely that it will tip over, even if there are lots and lots of people on it. Guam is 30 miles long and up to 9 miles wide in certain spots, with a population of 175,000 civilians.

So congratulations to Admiral Willard. You're a better man than we are!

Three Journalists Step Up for Civility

2010-03-30T07:02:00Z

The pink poodle that is the state-run national liberal media often refuses to ask the very questions we've entrusted then to ask. But on Monday's broadcast, Lou gave credit to three journalists who stepped up for decency.

As Lou said, "We have three examples of news organizations actually having the guts and a sense of journalistic responsibility, and they actually asked a question that was value-laden. One that says, in and of itself its very interrogatory, that they care about civility, decency and responsibility in public discourse, and by God we want to give them credit." ABC's Jake Tapper, CBS' Bob Schieffer and CNN's Candy Crowley all pressed Democratic operatives and White House aides about whether it's appropriate for them to try to raise money off the recent incidents of vandalism in the wake of ObamaCare's passage.

But the national liberal media returned to normal soon after that. Newsbusters pointed out that NBC on Monday night squeezed in a few seconds for the arrest of "a Philadelphia man for threatening the life of the number two Republican in the House of Representatives, Eric Cantor of Virginia." Yet after the networks led last week with less-immediate threats against Democrats, they weren't so interested in a real case of a death threat against a Republican as neither CBS nor ABC aired a word about the arrest and NBC's Brian Williams gave it short-shrift after leading last Wednesday with Democrats as the victims: "It's getting ugly as anger over health care reform erupts into some over-the-top rhetoric, including threats now against members of Congress." The next night, Williams still portrayed opponents as the only ones with miscreants amongst their ranks: "While the White House continues to celebrate its largest-ever legislative victory, opponents of health care reform have reacted to the final vote with anger, a few of them with threats of violence." CBS last week started with "threats of violence against Democrats who voted for health care reform" as Nancy Cordes relayed how "Democrats complain Sarah Palin is also using violent words and imagery."

Democrats Begin To Tell the Truth

2010-03-29T07:02:00Z

Only now that ObamaCare has become the law of the land are Democrats finally beginning to tell the truth: Sen. Max Baucus says this bill was intended to be an income shift; and Howard Dean says of course it's meant to be wealth re-distribution.

Congressman John Dingell says he "goofed" when he told a radio talk show host that the bill will eventually do what the Democrats really want, which is to "control the people."

But Senator Max Baucus, the man who drafted much of this maligned legislation, can't walk back these words the way that Rep. Dingell did: "This is also an income shift. It's a shift to leveling - to help lower income, middle income Americans. Too often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind. Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America."

And now former DNC Chairman and presidential candidate Howard Dean is finally admitting that the purpose of this bill was to re-distribute wealth in this country, one of President Obama's favorite topics. Dean
said: "You need to do some redistribution, and this is a form of redistribution."

Even President Barack Obama is finally getting back to his pre-presidency rhetoric, saying ObamaCare is a step in the right direction of universal health care. Why couldn't these Democrats make these statements BEFORE the bill was passed? Where's the political courage?

Idiot of the Week: Norman Goldman

2010-03-24T07:02:00Z

Liberals are so focused on race that they hardly ever argue the facts. Reacting to the effort to repeal ObamaCare, this idiot said some Supreme Court Justices use racial epithets to describe President Obama.

Filling in for the equally deranged Ed Schultz on his national talk show, left-wing talk show host Norman Goldman said "The best argument that I can see coming from the opponents of health-insurance reform...is that the mandate is unconstitutional." So far so good! The nonpartisan CBO would agree.

The Congressional Budget Office weighed in on an individual mandate to buy health insurance in 1994. The CBO stated: "A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government. Federal mandates that apply to individuals as members of society are extremely rare. One example is the requirement that draft-age men register with the Selective Service System. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is not aware of any others imposed by current federal law."

But then Goldman loses his mind. "And they may win," he says. "Because five members of the Supreme Court don't like Mr. Obama. And they'd be happy to rub his nose in the mud. They might even call him the N-word. You never know. You never know."

Listen to his delusional ranting here:

And he's supposedly a "senior legal analyst" and an attorney. We hope he doesn't represent us some day.

As if that weren't enough, liberal professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell, fresh off calling America a "hollow prize" that Obama inherited, says the effort to repeal ObamaCare is steeped in race.

Lacewell-Harris says "...It looks like the turn of the century film OBirth of a Nation,' 1915, which looked back on the period of Reconstruction, when the anxiety was different kinds of people holding public office - this idea that somehow the country had been lost and the fact that all of this had been backed up with the states' rights language, the same sort of secessionist language we hear going on, that we see in the lawsuit, pushing back and saying the federal government doesn't have the right to tell us what to do, that is actually what the Civil War was about. It was about establishing that the federal government does have the right to make policy for the nation."

Why is the left wing so focused on race when everyone else wants to talk about the facts?

ObamaCare: See How They Voted

2010-03-22T07:02:00Z

Did your so-called representative vote for or against this bill that an overwhelming majority of Americans did not want? See the roll call here, and make your voice heard about whether you think that was the right call.

Click here to see the full roll call vote.

	Ayes	Noes	PRES	NV
Democratic	219	34
Republican		178
Independent
TOTALS	219	212

---- AYES 219 ---

Ackerman
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene

Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar

Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

---- NOES 212 ---

Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Arcuri
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Emerson
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry

Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hoekstra
Holden
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kissell
Kline (MN)
Kratovil
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary

Minnick
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Space
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

These 51 Democrats Need To Go

2010-03-16T07:03:00Z

Now 51 liberal senators say they will vote to pass government-run healthcare -- the so-called public option -- through the reconciliation process. See who they are right here...

Public Option Whip List

24 have signed a letter to Harry Reid asking for a public option in reconciliation. 19 have given statements to us, reporters, or their constituents. 4 more have made statements on video. And 4 are extremely likely based on their previous support for the public option and Senate leadership, even though they haven't made an official statement yet.

Candidates: Elaine Marshall (NC), Bill Halter (AR)

Statements are only counted if they make clear that the senator will vote yes if the House version of the public option (or stronger) is brought up for a vote in reconciliation.

120 House members signed.
Click here to view the House members.

Rep. Boehner's Impassioned Speech

2010-03-16T07:03:00Z

In case you missed it, House Minority Leader John Beohner turned in an impassioned last-ditch effort to keep ObamaCare from passing. And he excoriates the Democratic Party for failing the American people.

At one point, Rep, Boehner shouted: "Have you read the bill? Have you read the reconciliation bill? Have you read the manager's amendment? Hell no you haven't!"

Hell no, they haven't. But they passed it anyway.

Which Democrats Are Now Vulnerable?

2010-03-16T07:02:00Z

Thirty-four Democrats voted NO to ObamaCare. But for the rest of them, a YES vote may have signed their political obituaries. Politico does a good job of breaking down which Dems are now vulnerable.

Check out POLITICO's rundown of lawmakers whose reelection prospects have been significantly imperiled by their announced support of or opposition to health care reform.

"The most immediate blowback from the votes will be felt by Democrats in marginal and conservative-minded districts. They are now assured of being attacked as accomplices to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is not especially popular in many of those districts.

"Of these members, many are in their first or second terms, and their path to Washington was greased by strong Democratic years in 2006 and 2008. Now, however, their support for the health care bill will put them in an unfamiliar defensive posture in an already tough year, without a popular Democratic presidential nominee leading the ticket or a GOP majority to campaign against.

"Members in this category include Reps. Harry Mitchell of Arizona, Chris Carney of Pennsylvania and Baron Hill of Indiana, each of whom was elected in the 2006 Democratic wave and represents a seat that George W. Bush carried twice.

"And virtually every freshman Democrat who won a marginal district in 2008 will need to mount a vigorous explanation of the benefits of a "yes" vote - especially members like Reps. Mark Schauer of Michigan and Dina Titus of Nevada, who won Republican-held seats.

"Some veterans - among them nine-term Rep. Earl Pomeroy, who hails from solidly Republican North Dakota, and West Virginia Reps. Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall - will also feel the heat.

"By the time the clock ticked down on the health care vote late Sunday evening, a handful of junior Democrats holding marginal seats had also cast 'yes' votes that will be the staple of GOP attacks, including Arizona Rep.
Gabrielle Giffords, Wisconsin Rep. Steve Kagen, Florida Rep. Ron Klein, and Illinois Reps. Bill Foster and Debbie Halvorson.

"Two first-term women, however, stand out for being in extreme jeopardy:
Florida Rep. Suzanne Kosmas and Colorado Rep. Betsy Markey, both of whom went from no on the November health care vote to yes in March and both of whom represent GOP-leaning seats that voted for presidential nominee John McCain in 2008.

"After Markey announced her support for the bill last week, the National Republican Congressional Committee immediately blasted out an e-mail labeling her "Betsy Margolies-Mezvinsky" - a reference to former Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, who lost her seat in 1994 after taking a bullet for the party and casting a tough vote for President Bill Clinton's budget.

"Republicans are convinced a handful of vulnerable junior Democrats who have backed the economic stimulus, cap and trade and both health care bills - a roster that includes Ohio Reps. Mary Jo Kilroy and Steve Driehaus, New Hampshire Rep. Carol Shea-Porter and Virginia Rep. Thomas Perriello - are imperiled by tripling down on an ambitious Democratic agenda that hasn't been completely embraced by their competitive House districts."

AND THERE'S PLENTY MORE ON THE LIST. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE REST OF POLITICO'S ANALYSIS OF WHICH DEMOCRATS ARE WALKING THE PLANK.

ObamaCare: Call These Congressmen Now

2010-03-16T07:02:00Z

It's not too late to make your voice heard on ObamaCare. Congressman Kucinich may have flipped, but some Democrats are still on the fence. Make your voice heard to these members of Congress.

According to ABC's David Chalian, "If every sitting House Democrat who voted for the health care bill in November, voted for it again this weekend, Nancy Pelosi would have the 216 votes she needs to pass it. However, because of resistance to the Senate bill overall and (for several anti-abortion rights Democrats) specifically its abortion language, Democrats know they will not be able to get all their previous YES votes to vote YES again. So, the game becomes how many previous YES votes can Democratic leaders afford to lose? The answer to that question is another question, of course.

"How many previous NO votes can Democratic leaders definitively flip to YES? You will see below that there is no margin for error. And this remains somewhat fluid as Pelosi searches for her final handful of votes. But here is a snapshot of the current landscape.

"There is a universe of roughly 15 previous YES votes from which Democrats are worried about losing a handful. Right now, it looks like they can afford to lose NO MORE than 7 of these YES votes most of which will come from the Democratic anti-abortion rights crowd.

"But what about previous YES votes that Democrats need to work to keep YES?
The White House and Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill are prepared to lose some of these. The first six names below are of most concern to the Democratic leadership and most likely to bolt.

Rep. Stupak
Rep. Carney
Rep. Rahall
Rep. Berry
Rep. Driehaus
Rep. Arcuri
Rep. Dahlkemper
Rep. Pomeroy
Rep. Ellsworth
Rep. Hill
Rep. Grijalva
Rep. Gutierrez
Rep. Owens
Rep. Cardoza
Rep. Costa

"Of the 37 currently serving Democratic members of the House who voted NO on health care in November, there is a highly targeted group of 15 that are publicly undecided that Pelosi hopes she flips from NO to YES to make up for any of the above YES defectors. Democrats know they will not be able to flip all 15. Probably fewer than 10 are willing to flip on the final vote.

"The first nine names listed below are the top tier NO-to-YES targets for the Democratic leadership out of this group of 15. And no Democrat on the Hill seems to think leadership will get all nine of them to flip which is why Democrats are trying to keep their YES defectors above to seven at a maximum.

Rep. Baird
Rep. Gordon
Rep. Altmire
Rep. Boccieri
Rep. Kosmas
Rep. Murphy
Rep. Markey
Rep. Teague
Rep. Tanner
Rep. Boyd
Rep. Matheson
Rep. Nye
Rep. Barrow
Rep. Childers
Rep. Davis - TN

Use the Representative Finder feature to make your voice heard to these Democrats currently deciding whether to back ObamaCare. www.house.gov

Transparency? Nope. Openness? Nope.

2010-03-16T07:02:00Z

Remember all those promises Candidate Obama made about transparency and openness in government? Turns out, like many of us expected, those promises were empty. A new AP report shows exactly how closed this administration is.

Here's a clip of one of the many empty promises Obama made to the American people:

But that hasn't happened. In fact, according to this report from the Associated Press, "[f]ederal agencies haven't lived up to President Barack Obama's promise of a more open government, increasing their use of legal exemptions to keep records secret during his first year in office."

The AP goes on to report: "An Associated Press review of Freedom of Information Act reports filed by 17 major agencies found that the use of nearly every one of the law's nine exemptions to withhold information from the public rose in fiscal year 2009, which ended last October.

"Among the most frequently used exemptions: one that lets the government hide records that detail its internal decision-making. Obama specifically directed agencies to stop using that exemption so frequently, but that directive appears to have been widely ignored.

"Major agencies cited that exemption at least 70,779 times during the 2009 budget year, up from 47,395 times during President George W. Bush's final full budget year, according to annual FOIA reports filed by federal agencies. Obama was president for nine months in the 2009 period.

"Departments used the exemption more even though Obama's Justice Department told agencies to that disclosing such records was 'fully consistent with the purpose of the FOIA,' a law intended to keep government accountable to the public.

"For example, the Federal Aviation Administration cited the exemption in refusing the AP's FOIA request for internal memos on its decisions about a database showing incidents in which airplanes and birds collided. The FAA initially tried to withhold the bird-strike database from the public, but later released it under pressure.

"The FAA claimed the same exemption to hold back nearly all records on its approval of an Air Force One flyover of New York City for publicity shots - a flight that prompted fears in the city of a Sept. 11-style attack. It also withheld internal communications during the aftermath of the public relations gaffe.

"In all, major agencies cited that or other FOIA exemptions to refuse information at least 466,872 times in budget year 2009, compared with
312,683 times the previous year, the review found. Agencies often cite more than one exemption when withholding part or all of the material sought in an open-records request.

"The AP examined the 2008 and 2009 budget year FOIA reports from the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury and Veterans Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency; and the Federal Reserve Board."

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE AP ABOUT THIS HOPE AND CHANGE.

Mmm Mmm Mmm: Another Obama Tribute

2010-03-16T07:01:00Z

We've seen it in schools all across the country: schoolkids singing the praises of Our Supreme Leader. Now, the ultimate tribute: a youth orchestra in President Obama's home state does the honors.

Enter the Midwest Young Artists organization, a group dedicated to "inspiration through music." They give Our Supreme Leader the full orchestral treatment, along with a choir and a spoken word segment to round out the production. Gary Fry, the Choral Program Director and Voices Rising Director for MYA, must be trying to secure an invitation to the Oval office.

This piece was performed on February 21, 2010 at Pick-Staiger Auditorium in Evanston, Illinois, a northern suburb of Chicago. And he enlisted the service of an entire auditorium of Chicago area school children to complement his shrine to President Obama:

Does anyone need a shower after that performance?

Dobbs on the Devil at the Vatican

2010-03-11T08:03:00Z

The Pope's chief exorcist says sex abuse scandals in the Roman Catholic Church are proof that that "the Devil is at work inside the Vatican." But Lou's not scared of the devil's advance, as he said on Wednesday's broadcast.

As reported by the Times Online in the UK, "Father Gabriele Amorth, 85, who has been the Vatican's chief exorcist for 25 years and says he has dealt with 70,000 cases of demonic possession, said that the consequences of satanic infiltration included power struggles at the Vatican as well as 'cardinals who do not believe in Jesus, and bishops who are linked to the Demon.'

"He added: "'When one speaks of 'the smoke of Satan' [a phrase coined by Pope Paul VI in 1972] in the holy rooms, it is all true including these latest stories of violence and paedophilia.'"

Here's Lou's take on the steady advance of the Devil, including his take on why so many people question what God and Jesus look like, but nobody ever questions the appearance of Satan!

For more videos of Lou, click here to see his YouTube archive.

Culture of Corruption: RNC Takes Aim

2010-03-10T08:03:00Z

Remember when Nancy Pelosi promised to "drain the swamp" and root out what she called the Culture of Corruption? My, how the tables have turned! The RNC's latest ad calls out the Democrats' hypocrisy.

In a new television commercial, the Republican National Committee blames House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for recent ethical problems dogging congressional Democrats. The RNC ad, titled "Pelosi's Failure," highlights Rep. Eric Massa's sudden resignation from Congress following allegations that he sexually harassed a male staff member and Rep. Charles Rangel's decision to relinquish the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee as he battles his own ethical issues.

National Republicans are hoping to seize the mantle of honest governing from Congressional Democrats, who took back control of the House and Senate in the 2006 midterm elections largely on their promise to clean up the "culture of corruption" on Capitol Hill.

Do you think it will be an effective campaign? What do you think of the Democrats' ethical violations? Call Lou: 877-55-DOBBS.

Democrats' Hypocrisy on Reconciliation

2010-03-08T08:03:00Z

President Obama wants what he's calling an "up or down vote" on his ObamaCare legislation. But before the Democrats had control of Congress and the White House, why were they railing against the use of reconciliation?

And, as always, Lou is all too happy to point out the hypocrisy of the left on issues like these. Do these lawmakers remember that there's such a thing as "archives?!"

Public vs. Private Pay Discrepancy

2010-03-05T08:03:00Z

For quite some time Lou's been talking about how government workers have incredible job security, unbelievable benefits and high salaries. And now, some eye-opening numbers from a USA Today report on the difference between public and private workers.

As the USA Today report shows, "federal employees earn higher average salaries than private-sector workers in more than eight out of 10 occupations, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data finds. Accountants, nurses, chemists, surveyors, cooks, clerks and janitors are among the wide range of jobs that get paid more on average in the federal government than in the private sector.

"Overall, federal workers earned an average salary of $67,691 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The average pay for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $60,046 in 2008, the most recent data available. These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis."

Click here to read more from the USA Today report...

Pre-Pres. Obama: Need More Than 50 +1

2010-03-03T08:03:00Z

Before he took over the Oval Office with his hard-left agenda, pre-President Obama said it'd take more than simply 50-plus-1 to overhaul this nation's health-care system. Then why will he go ahead with reconciliation?

Think this president will do whatever it takes to pass his left-wing agenda?
Sound off on the broadcast: 877-55-DOBBS.

Can't-Miss Interview with Dr. Gallo

2010-02-26T08:03:00Z

Our school administrators and teachers are failing students all acorss the country. Finally, one school official is stepping up for her students, and you can't miss this amazing interview with a Rhode Island superintendent.

Fewer than half of the students graduate from the Central Falls Schools system in Rhode Island, and only 7% of 11th graders were proficient in math last year.

So when Dr. Frances Gallo asked the teachers to add just 25 minutes to their work day, to do some more tutoring and spend some more time in the lunchroom with the students, the teachers union threw a fit. They then demanded yet another raise, which they already received twice in the last five years.
Keep in mind, these teachers make three and a half times what the parents in that impoverished city make.

How did Dr. Gallo respond? She fired them all! Good for her! And even the union-friendly Obama administration supported the move Secretary Arne Duncan saying he endorsed the decision.

Dr. Gallo is a remarkable woman, and this interview with Lou on the February 25th broadcast of the show is certainly one you can't miss:

Part I:

Part II:

Do you support Dr. Gallo like Lou does? Call the show and discuss our educational system in this country: 877-55-DOBBS.

National Disgrace: Ground Zero Outrage

2010-02-22T08:03:00Z

Nearly a decade after the 9/11 attacks, not one project has been finished at the World Trade Center site. This Sunday on CBS, 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley reported on the seven-story pit.

The Ground Zero Outrage
by Scott Pelley

Nearly a decade after the 9/11 attacks, not one project has been finished at the World Trade Center site. This Sunday on CBS, 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley took a trip to the seven-story pit.

"I describe it as a national disgrace." Larry Silverstein, the 78-year-old New York City real-estate tycoon, shook his head slowly as we stood over the muddy pit known around the world as ground zero. It took three cameramen from 60 Minutes to photograph the expanse of the 16-acre hole that was once the basement of the World Trade Center. True, some construction had begun, but as I stood there with Silverstein looking at rainwater pooling down below, I thought, "Nobody's gonna believe this."

According to the plans announced with fanfare seven years ago, Silverstein and I should have been craning our necks at five skyscrapers, including America's tallest tower. We should have been jostled by commuters surging in and out of a spectacular, $2 billion train station. And, all around us, there should have been a gentle, cascading sound from the 9/11 memorial, two waterfalls laid out in the footprints of the Twin Towers, a whispering reminder of 2,752 people murdered here.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

But as we stood near the center of the seven-story pit, none of that was here. Nearly nine years after the attack on Manhattan, not one project was finished. Silverstein, who wears ship propeller cuff links that symbolize his affection for his massive yacht, was supposed to have built those five skyscrapers himself. He ended up with the job after what may be the worst timing in the history of commercial real estate: He signed a 99-year lease on the World Trade Center just six weeks before 9/11. Now he stood over the hole in the heart of Manhattan and spoke in his clipped Brooklyn accent, as though he was revealing a dark, national secret, "It's hard to contemplate the amount of time that's gone by here, the tragic waste of time and what could have been instead of what is today."

This story began as so many stories do at 60 Minutes, with a simple question. Walking through the office one day last fall, I asked one of our producers, Shawn Efran, "Hey, what ever happened to ground zero?" It seemed to me a lot should have been finished downtown, but I wasn't hearing anything about it. Shawn and I had been among the many 60 Minutes people who had raced downtown after the first 767 struck in 2001. Most everyone who witnessed the calamity will tell you it's never far from their minds, even now.

9/11/01

The morning of 9/11, the Twin Towers were still standing but mortally wounded. I left our 60 Minutes offices on the West Side and jumped into a cab. "World Trade Center," I said. "Ya nev'a gonna get there," the driver replied without looking back. Sure enough, after a couple of miles down the West Side Highway, the cops turned the cab around. I bailed out and started running along the Hudson River, trying to reach the scene. I pushed through what seemed like tens of thousands of Manhattan office workers, walking up all six lanes of the highway. They looked like refugees from combat, which, of course, they were. As I came into the neighborhood of the World Trade Center, I started to trip over and kick something scattered all over the road. They were women's high heels, hundreds of them, abandoned in the panic. I raised my eyes from the Blahniks and Ferragamos to the burning facade of architect Minoru Yamasaki's Tower Number One. My first sense was relief. The tower hadn't fallen. But just then, the building's television mast that reached to 1,727 feet appeared to sway, which struck me as incredibly odd. Amazing how you won't believe what's happening right in front of you when your mind is unequipped for the truth. I decided the sway was an illusion created by the heat of the fire but, just as I fabricated that reassuring thought, the top floors began to pancake. People say catastrophes appear to unfold in slow motion. I promise you, it's true. To my eye, the 110th floor fell on 109, which fell on 108. Bang, stop, bang, stop, bang, stop. I told myself it would quit-10 or 15 stories-but as the roar shook the air and the collapse picked up speed, I surrendered to what was happening. I dropped to both knees and prayed to God to take the souls without pain. It was the only thing left to hope for.

A hurricane of ghastly gray powder shot through the canyons of downtown and covered everything: survivors, flattened fire trucks, and taxis that were now just 18 inches tall.

Then, silence. Like the first big snow of winter.

The powder blew and drifted. It struck me there was nothing left that was recognizable. How many thousands of computers had there been, office chairs, desks, filing cabinets, doors, telephones? Where were the people? All had been cremated by the titanic force of the collapse. The only thing that survived (and that rained down for more than an hour) was paper. There were stock trade receipts, appointment calendars, photos of a family on a ski vacation. Paper, ashes, and silence.

At the end of that day, standing by the flaming neo-Gothic arches that formed the base of the towers, I knew two things were true: The United States would have Osama bin Laden in a cage, and ground zero would be rebuilt into a soaring statement of American spirit.

Now standing with Silverstein on the edge of the pit, an old thought came back to me, "Amazing how you won't believe what's happening when your mind is unequipped for the truth."

The Master Plan

A year and a half after the attack, another architect would have a clear canvas in Lower Manhattan. After a global competition, Polish-American architect Daniel Libeskind unveiled his master plan for the rebirth of ground zero. People would argue about the design but not the ambition: five skyscrapers, one reaching 1,776 feet, a memorial, a performing-arts hall, a museum, and a transit hub. As the strobe lights of news cameras shot like lightning over the buildings of Libeskind's scale model, no one knew this dramatic announcement would be the first in a series of meaningless unveilings. Instead of a construction site, ground zero became a stage for politicians to announce futile ground-breakings, mere illusions of progress. By the 10th anniversary, next year, $7 billion will have been spent and not one project finished.

When you ask for specifics about completion dates, he says things like, "What I can tell you is that downtown will come back."

Chris Ward

"For me this is a dream job. This was the job that I always wanted." Standing in the pit, Chris Ward would have you believe he's the luckiest construction manager in the world. I felt I had to remind Ward that he was one in a series of executive directors of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to take on ground zero. "Come on," I said, "This ate up three executive directors before you. Now you're No. 4."

"I'm No. 4. Well, you know, fortune favors the daring."

The Port Authority is the behemoth of a bureaucracy that builds bridges, tunnels, seaports, and airports around New York and New Jersey. "The Port," as it's known, built the World Trade Center in the 1970s and still controls the land. It was up to the port to make the ground zero site ready for Silverstein's construction projects. But the port is years behind schedule and billions over budget.

Under his white hard hat, Ward has the rounded, heavyset features common to the New York and Jersey construction workers swarming over the pit today. Ward has a background overseeing big projects and I couldn't help but notice on his résumé that he has a degree from the Harvard Divinity School. "Can't hurt," I thought, on a project as bedeviling as this.

Ward was hired to head the Port Authority a year and a half ago, specifically to get ground zero off the ground. As he walked me, two producers from 60 Minutes, and three camera crews through the project, he wanted to emphasize how hard a job this is. All the building projects are interconnected in the basement. A delay in one place can hold up the whole works. He has two active rail lines to work around. And one relic of 9/11, the Deutsche Bank building, remains an abandoned hulk that's holding up much of the project. The building's demolition has been held up by a fire, lawsuits, and asbestos abatement. Ward told me, "This is one of the great construction feats of all time, the most complex site in the whole world."

Ward sounds optimistic, but there are a thousand things in this complex job that threaten to upend his newly drawn schedules and budgets. When you ask for specifics about completion dates, he says things like, "What I can tell you is that downtown will come back." I felt for the guy. Incompetent bureaucrats and feckless politicians had left him with this mess. So much more can and will go wrong.

Construction has begun on the memorial and on two skyscrapers at ground zero. The steel is now rising above the pit on one of Silverstein's office buildings and on the 1,776-foot skyscraper that will be the signature tower on the site. But the master plan is history. For the most part, no one can say with certainty what will be built at ground zero or when.

As we wrapped up the filming in the pit and the crews were putting away their gear, I thought ground zero had been victimized again, this time by a lack of leadership. Since 9/11, there have been three governors of New York, four directors of the Port Authority, and no one to see the project through.

Scott Pelley is a 60 Minutes correspondent.

Democrats' Hypocrisy on Reconciliation

2010-02-22T08:03:00Z

Harry Reid told Republicans to "stop crying" about reconciliation, the Democrats' attempt to jam through ObamaCare. But as you'll see here, Democrats sang an entirely different tune when they were the minority.

Isn't it funny how things change?

Pride! America's Surprise Olympic Romp

2010-02-22T08:02:00Z

The United States has never been the dominant country at the Winter Olympics. But up in Vancouver this time around, USA is asserting its dominance, and all of us back home can be proud of that great effort.

America's Surprise Olympic Romp
Canada's 'Own the Podium' Plan Falls Short So Far as the U.S. Dominates; 'It Might Not Last'

By MATTHEW FUTTERMAN, IAN JOHNSON and KEVIN HELLIKER in Vancouver, British Columbia

America is delivering an Olympics beating that nobody saw coming.

The U.S. won as many medals on Wednesday-six-as it won during the entirety of the 1988 Games in Calgary, Alberta.

The 20 medals that America had won through Friday afternoon at the Vancouver Games represent far more than half of its greatest Winter Olympics haul ever-the 34 that it garnered during the 2002 Salt Lake City Games.

Once the poor sisters of the Winter Games, once pressed to explain why a country with so much money and the greatest snow on earth couldn't dominate the slipping-and-sliding sports, America is on the verge of turning Vancouver into a romp.

To be sure, fortunes could change. Only seven of 16 days of competition have been completed. As of Friday afternoon, nearly 60% of medals at these Games remained to be won. But several events remain in which Americans are podium favorites, including six more in alpine skiing, three in bobsled, and nearly a dozen more in speedskating.

Leaders of the U.S. Olympic Committee are already taking a victory lap. In a statement, released after the U.S. set a Winter Games record winning six medals in a single day, newly hired chief executive Scott Blackmun said he was "incredibly proud of the American Olympians participating in these magnificent Games, and I can't wait to see what happens next."

Perhaps most impressive is that America is winning medals in traditional sports often dominated by Europeans, such as alpine skiing, figure skating and long-course speedskating. Noting that the number of Winter Olympics events has risen to 86 from 46 in Calgary, Olympic historian David Wallechinsky said, "We're expected to do well in new events like freestyle skiing and snowboarding. But this week is not just a new-event phenomenon for the U.S."

Indeed, ground zero for the beat-down has been Whistler's Creekside ski area, site of the alpine skiing events. On Friday, the Americans continued to morph into the 21st-century versions of Swiss and Austrian skiers. Bode Miller took the silver and Andrew Weibrecht took the bronze in a Super-G race filled with high-speed crashes and skiers careening on and off the twisting course on the Dave Murray slope.

When it was over, the powerful Swiss and Austrian teams, led by veteran superstars Carlo Janka and Michael Walchhofer, still had just two alpine medals between them through four races, and only one in the men's competition, compared with six for the U.S., surpassing the team's previous record of five in Sarajevo in 1984.

Meanwhile, Canadian Manuel Osborne-Paradis, who was supposed to exploit his home-slope advantage in a discipline where familiarity with a course can make a huge difference, hit an unexpected jump in the upper portion of the course and skittered out of bounds.

Mr. Weibrecht, competing in his first Winter Games and ranked just 18th in the world in Super-G, set the tone early, as the third skier down the mountain on a sun-splashed day that softened the snow just enough to allow the skiers to take chances. Mr. Weibrecht has never won on the World Cup circuit, but his run of 130.65 gave him a brief 0.65-of-a-second lead he held until his teammate Mr. Miller bolted through the gate eight starters later.

Skiing with a scary determination, Mr. Miller turned in one of his trademark chin-first runs, searing through the dangerous turns at the top of the course mostly on the edges of his skis. Dancing from side to side, Mr. Miller grazed many of the gates that mark the edge of the course, and looked as if he might fly out of his boots during his quick shifts in direction.

As he crossed the finish line, Mr. Miller looked at the timing board that put him in first place by three one-hundredths of a second, allowed a Cheshire-cat grin and beat his chest.

Only Aksel Lund Svindal, skiing a masterful run that balanced aggressiveness and control, topped Mr. Miller.

Mr. Miller said the team's success is due to a new commitment to skiing on the edge. He said he quit in 2007 because he thought the team was too timid.

"I didn't think this was the kind of skiing we should be doing," Mr Miller said. "I didn't think people were taking the risk or skiing with the heart that skiing needs. That's why I didn't want to be a part of it."

Now, Mr. Miller said, "the inspiration level is climbing. They see teammates on the podium and they want that, too. It's not necessarily the result, but they want to be smiling, they want to ski inspired. You're seeing a result you haven't seen from the U.S. in a long time, or ever."

Sasha Rearick, the head coach of the U.S. ski team, said that despite the victory and the weak showing of the Swiss and Austrians, those teams would be back. "The Austrians are a strong team," he said. "They didn't bring their best skiing today by any means."

The U.S. performance comes as a surprise in part because America has never won the medal count at a Winter Olympics Games. The closest it came was Salt Lake City, where it took second in total medals (behind Germany) and third in the gold-medal count (behind Germany and Norway).

But the performance is also a surprise because USOC officials had adamantly refused to speculate about America's performance in Vancouver. While Canadian officials boasted of their $120 million own-the-podium program and predicted a total medal count of 35, officials of the USOC remained silent. A year before the Games, the USOC targeted $16 million mainly toward events where the U.S. had the best chances for medals rather than equally across the board, said Alan Ashley, chief of sport performance for the USOC.

"We'll let the chips fall where they fall," Mr. Ashley said in an interview ahead of the 2010 Games. Pressed to make a medal-count prediction, he said, "I think we have the potential to have a very experienced team that will go there with great performances."

The global recession also hurt U.S. Olympians more than those from countries where athletes rely almost entirely on government funding. When the U.S. speedskating team lost a primary sponsor to the recession, comedian Stephen Colbert managed to get his name on their uniforms while spending barely a dime of his own. In an episode that gave the U.S. Olympic team a bargain-basement image, Colbert Nation gained major-sponsor status on the roughly $350,000 that his viewers kicked in.

Yet this week, the joke has been on the competition. U.S. athletes have performed well even in events like Nordic combined, in which America traditionally has stunk. Johnny Spillane was a ski length away from the gold in Nordic combined when he settled for the silver, the first-ever medal for the U.S. in the sport.

But most encouraging is that America's dominance has been widespread. In figure skating Evan Lysacek put the hammer to Russia's defending gold medalist, Evgeni Plushenko. Lindsey Vonn and Julia Mancuso made a mockery of the women's downhill, as Ms. Vonn finished an absurd 1.46 seconds ahead of the bronze medalist Elisabeth Görgl.

Not everyone is convinced that the success will last indefinitely. Wolfgang Maier, chief of the German ski team, said everything has come together for the Americans in a way that might be hard to duplicate in the future.

"They are almost as good as the Austrians once were," Mr. Maier said. "But you have generational talents in Vonn and Miller, and Miller is already getting old. It might not last."

Tim Cafe, a New Zealand skiier who spends five months a year in Austria training, said it's too early to write off the Austrians. "They'll be back for sure, but for the Americans to step in like this and fill that role, it shows they're doing something right."

Lawsuit: School Spies On Its Students

2010-02-19T08:03:00Z

A lawsuit in Philadelphia alleges that a wealthy suburban Philadelphia school district spied on its students with webcams in school-issued laptops. What the heck is going on in our nation's schools?

Schools gave students computers, then used webcams to spy on them: lawsuit

Lesley Ciarula Taylor

A wealthy suburban Philadelphia school district spied on its students with webcams in school-issued laptops, a lawsuit filed by one student's parents charges.

Students only found out about the snooping when a principal told a student they had a picture of him doing something wrong in his home, the suit says.

"The school district has the ability to intercept images from that webcam of anyone or anything appearing in front of the camera at the time of activation," the lawsuit against the Lower Merion School District claims.

"The school district has the ability to remotely activate the embedded webcam at any time," the lawsuit says.

"Many of the images captured may consist of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including various stages of undress."

It was only when an assistant principal at Harriton High School told Grade 10 student Blake Robbins she had a picture that proved he "was engaged in improper behaviour in his home" that anyone realized the school could peep into students' home lives without them knowing, the lawsuit says.

Assistant principal Lindy Matsko "cited as evidence a photograph from the webcam embedded in" Robbins' school-issued laptop, the lawsuit says.

Blake's parents, Michael and Holly Robbins, filed the lawsuit Feb. 11 on behalf of all 1,800 students at Lower Merion's schools. The lawsuit alleges the webcams violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantees of privacy, Pennsylvania common law, the U.S. Civil Rights Act, and a variety of other laws.

In his welcome to students, posted on the district website, school district superintendent Dr. Christopher McGinley speaks glowingly of the program to give every student their own laptop and create "an authentic, mobile, 21st century learning environment."

The program "ensures that all students have 24/7 access to school-based resources."

The Robbins lawsuit contends the district also had 24/7 access to the students "by the unauthorized, inappropriate and indiscriminate remote activation of a webcam."

"This is the first we have heard of the allegations," district spokesman Doug Young said Thursday. "We can categorically state that we are, and always have been, committed to the privacy of our students."

Young promised to answer specific questions at a later date.

Serving the wealthy Main Line outside of Philadelphia, the Lower Merion School District "is one of only two districts in Pennsylvania to earn Moody's highest bond rating," information in McGinley's biography says. Its teachers are among the highest paid in Pennsylvania and its students' college-entrance scores are among the highest in the country, the information says.

Is This Change You Can Believe In?

2010-02-16T08:03:00Z

President Obama scores cheap political points by dissing the influence of money in politics. Then why, the Daily Caller asks, has Obama has stuffed the diplomatic corps with more of his biggest donors than any president in the past 40 years?

Obama's bundlers occupy dozens of key positions
By Chris Palko - The Daily Caller 02/16/10 at 8:28 pm

Barack Obama has long decried the corrupting influence of money in politics. As a candidate, he ran against lobbyists and the pay-for-play culture of Washington. As president, he has continued to hammer the theme, most recently in his impassioned attacks on the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v Federal Election Commission.

Given this, it's a little surprising to learn that Obama has not only embraced the sordid money-driven culture of DC, but actually outdone his predecessors. An analysis by the American Foreign Service Association, for example, found that Obama has stuffed the diplomatic corps with more political appointees (i.e., cronies) than any president in the past 40 years. Only a year into the administration, close of half of the president's biggest donors already have federal jobs.

Below is a list of Obama campaign bundlers and the taxpayer-funded positions they've received:
The Big Changers' Club ($500,000+)

Avant, Nicole (Los Angeles, CA)
Position: Ambassador to the Bahamas

Barzun, Matthew (Louisville, KY)
Position: Ambassador to Sweden

Beyer, Don (Alexandria, VA)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein

Bleich, Jeff (Piedmont, CA)
Position: Ambassador to Australia

Danzig, Richard (Washington, DC)
Position: Member, Defense Policy Board

Donahoe, Eileen Chamberlain (Washington, DC)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to UN Human Rights Council

Eacho, William (Bethesda, MD)
Position: Ambassador to Austria

Forester, Christine (San Diego, CA)
Position: Member, Presidential Committee on the Arts and Humanities

Genachowski, Julius (Washington, DC)
Position: FCC Chairman

Gips, Don (Boulder, CO)
Position: Ambassador to South Africa

Gutman, Howard (Washington, DC)
Position: Ambassador to Belgium

Harris, Scott (Washington, DC)
Position: General Counsel, Department of Energy

Katz, Allan (Tallahassee, FL)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to Portugal

Kennard, William (Washington, DC)
Position: Ambassador to the European Union

Oreck, Bruce (Boulder, CO)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to Finland

Overton, Spencer (Chevy Chase, MD)
Position: Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Policy

Perrelli, Tom (Arlington, VA)
Position: Assistant Attorney General

Rivkin, Charlie (Los Angeles, CA)
Position: Ambassador to France and Monaco

Roos, John (Hillsborough, CA)
Position: Ambassador to Japan

Sanchez, Frank (Tampa, FL)
Position: Undersecretary of International Trade

Solomont, Alan (Boston, MA)
Position: Ambassador to Spain

Spinner, Steve (Menlo Park, CA)
Position: Loan Programs Advisor, Department of Energy

Stroum, Cynthia (Seattle, WA)
Position: Ambassador to Luxembourg

West, Tony (Oakland, CA)
Position: Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division

The Yes We Can Crew ($200,000+)

Arriola, Ricky (Miami, FL)
Position: Member, Presidential Committee on the Arts and Humanities

Chun, Marisa (San Francisco, CA)
Position: Deputy Associate Attorney General

Cohen, Dick (Minneapolis, MN)
Position: Member, Presidential Committee on the Arts and Humanities

Craig, Greg (Washington, DC)
Position: Former White House Counsel

Eisen, Norm (Washington, DC)
Position: Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform

Froman, Michael (New York, NY)
Position: Deputy National Security Advisor for International and Economic Affairs

Holtzmann, Max (Miami Beach, FL)
Position: Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Agriculture

Hudson, James (Washington, DC)
Position: Director of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Johnson, Jeh (Montclair, NJ)
Position: General Counsel, Department of Defense

Kaplan, Sam (Minneapolis, MN)
Position: Ambassador to Morocco

Lamb-Hale, Nicole (Detroit, MI)
Position: Deputy General Counsel, Department of Commerce

Levi, John (Chicago, IL)
Position: Board Member, Legal Services Corporation

Lion, Margo (New York, NY)
Position: Co-chair, Presidential Committee on the Arts and Humanities

Moelis, Cindy (Chicago, IL)
Position: Director, Commission on White House Fellows

Orrick, William (San Francisco, CA)
Position: Counselor to the Assistant Attorney General to the Civil Rights Division

Overmann, Lynn (Miami, FL)
Position: Senior Advisor, Office of the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs

Phillips, John (Washington, DC)
Position: Chairman, Commission on White House Fellowships

Rediker, Doug (Washington, DC)
Position: Nominated to Alternate Executive Director, IMF

Rivkin, Bob (Chicago, IL)
Position: General Counsel, Department of Transportation

Rogers, Desiree (Chicago, IL)
Position: White House Social Secretary

Sedgwick, Tod (Washington, DC)
Position: Ambassador to Slovakia

Stetson, Jane (Norwich, CT)
Position: DNC National Finance Chair

Susman, Lou (Chicago, IL)
Position: Ambassador to the Court of St. James (United Kingdom)

Sussman, Bob (Washington, DC)
Position: Senior Policy Counsel, Environmental Protection Agency

Tchen, Tina (Chicago, IL)
Position: White House Director for Public Engagement

Welters, Beatrice (McLean, VA)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago

White, Barry (Newton Centre, MA)
Position: Ambassador to Norway

Better Believe It Squad ($100,000 Club):

Adelman, David (Atlanta, GA)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to Singapore

Bansal, Preeta (New York, NY)
Position: General Counsel, OMB

Fulton, Laurie (Alexandria, VA)
Position: Nominated to Ambassador to Denmark

Goldring, Fred (Los Angeles, CA)
Position: Member, Presidential Committee on the Arts and Humanities

Jarrett, Valerie (Chicago, IL)
Position: Senior advisor to the President

Jennings, Kevin (New York, NY)
Position: Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools

Lazarus, Eddie (Los Angeles, CA)
Position: FCC Chief of Staff

Sapiro, Miriam (Washington, DC)
Position: Deputy US Trade Representative

Schwartz, Eric (New York, NY)
Position: Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration

Thummalapally, Vinai (Colorado Springs, CO)
Position: Ambassador to Belize

Wise, Judy (Chicago, IL)
Position: Member, Commission on White House Fellowships

Team Hope ($50,000+):

Jacobson, David (Glencoe, IL)
Position: Ambassador to Canada

Kirk, Ron (Dallas, TX)
Position: US Trade Representative

Landesman, Rocco (New York, NY)
Position: Chairman, National Endowment for the Arts

Maxey, Ken (Los Angeles, CA)
Position: Deputy Political Director, DNC

Rice, Susan (Washington, DC)
Position: Ambassador to the United Nations

Salzman, Amelia (Bethesda, MD)
Position: Associate Director for Policy Outreach, Council on Environmental Quality

Yale, Matt (Chicago, IL)
Position: Deputy Chief of Staff, Secretary of Education

Your Rights: The Bloomberg Smackdown

2010-02-16T08:03:00Z

Don't try your gun stings here, warns West Virginia State Senator Jeffrey Kessler. It's an effort to ban the undercover stings that NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg has used to showcase illegal gun sales in other states.

Don't try gun stings here, West Virginia pol Kessler warns Mayor Bloomberg

BY Adam Lisberg
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU CHIEF

Monday, February 15th 2010, 4:00 AM

West Virginia has a message for Mayor Bloomberg: Don't come 'round here to buy our guns.

A legislator there wants to ban the type of undercover stings that Bloomberg has used to showcase illegal gun sales in other states - and throw the mayor's investigators in jail if necessary.

"It's for us to handle within our own borders," said state Sen. Jeffrey Kessler, who is running for governor in 2012. "We jealously guard our gun rights, and we're vocal advocates for the Second Amendment."

He calls his proposal the "Bloomberg bill" - a reflection of how Bloomberg's anti-gun crusade has made him public enemy No. 1 to gun lovers.

The mayor has spent millions hiring private investigators to videotape gun dealers seemingly violating federal law - selling weapons to people who say they couldn't pass a background check, or who appear to be straw purchasers on behalf of others.

"It may be good for getting headlines, but it may well be compromising actual law enforcement activities," Kessler said. "He's not a federal law enforcement officer."

Bloomberg has defended the stings as necessary to keep out-of-state guns from ending up on New York streets and in the hands of criminals.

He has put the videos on YouTube and mailed copies to Congress. A spokesman refused to say whether more are in progress.

Kessler's bill would ban those stings, making a felon out of anyone who "persuades, encourages or entices" a gun dealer to make an illegal sale.

"It's not appropriate for any other law enforcement, absent the feds, to engage in gun buys - or try to entrap with gun buys - within our borders," Kessler said.

"If there are violations, they should be investigated by clearly recognized law enforcement in our state, rather than by bringing in hired goons to do it."

Bloomberg spokesman Jason Post fired right back, saying the mayor won't stop his fight.

"This legislation gets it exactly backward. The city has never broken the law, but we have caught unscrupulous gun dealers selling in violation of federal law," Post said.

"Because 90% of guns used in crimes in New York City come from out of state, we have been forced to go outside our own borders to keep New Yorkers safe."

Kessler said he introduced the bill after the National Rifle Association told him of similar proposals in other states. The NRA didn't return a call for comment, but Kessler said he expects his bill to become law.

-----------------------

The Department of Justice in 2007 already warned Mayor Bloomberg about the legal ramifications of when people from outside law enforcement undertake actions typically reserved for law enforcement.

More Bizarre Education Decisions

2010-02-11T08:03:00Z

We've been talking about North Carolina's strange decision to begin its U.S. History curriculum in 1877. Now, some more changes coming to your children's textbooks. But it's not too late to speak out.

On Thursday's broadcast we spoke with Matthew Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law. Lou and Staver discussed potentially dramatic changes to the framework of textbooks that are being discussed by the Texas State Board of Education (TSBOE).

TSBOE will soon finalize the language that textbook publishers use to align their textbooks to current standards. As Texas is a leader in textbooks, most other states purchase the same educational materials. The textbook controversy in Texas affects every American because, to have a bright future, we must know our past. America has a rich past founded on Judeo-Christian values and to forget them, or worse, to distort them, will doom our future. Those who want to reshape America begin by rewriting our past. We repeat the mistakes of the past when we are ignorant of them.

Some of the suggestions that have come forward at various times include:

--Removing references to Daniel Boone, General George Patton, Nathan Hale, Columbus Day, and Christmas.

--Including the cultural impact of hip hop music, ACLU lawyer Clarence Darrow, and the Hindu holiday of Diwali.

--Replacing the term "American" with "Global Citizen" stating that students need to be shaped "for responsible citizenship in a global society" without any mention of citizenship in American society.

--Replacing expansionism and free enterprise with imperialism and capitalism.

--The Board's next meeting is in March and the final reading and adoption of the social studies guidelines will be in May.

Liberty Counsel urges you to make you voice heard now, before the next meeting. Please be courteous when you call the board members to encourage them to promote traditional, pro-American language in their guidelines, or, you may also email them at sboesupport@tea.state.tx.us. Please note that this e-mail address automatically distributes to all 15 board members so duplicate messages are not necessary.

Members of the Texas State Board of Education GAIL LOWE, Chair
(512) 556-6262
(512) 936-4319 Fax

LAWRENCE A. ALLEN, JR., Vice Chair
(713) 203-1355

TERRI LEO, Secretary
(512) 463-9007

COMMITTEE ON INSTRUCTION
BARBARA CARGILL, Chair
(281) 465-8095

KEN MERCER, Vice Chair
(512) 463-9007

LAWRENCE A. ALLEN, JR. - listed above
(713) 203-1355

TERRI LEO - listed above
(512) 463-9007

GERALDINE MILLER
(972) 419-4000
(214) 522-8560 Fax

COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL FINANCE / PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND DAVID BRADLEY, Chair
(409) 835-3808

RICK AGOSTO, Vice Chair
(210) 226-7106
(210) 226-7104 Fax

CYNTHIA NOLAND DUNBAR
(512) 463-9007
(512) 936-4319 Fax

GAIL LOWE - listed above
(512) 556-6262
(512) 936-4319 Fax

RENE NUÑEZ(915)
(512) 351-9923
(512) 936-4319 Fax

COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL INITIATIVES
BOB CRAIG, Chair
(806) 744-3232
(806) 744-2211 Fax

MAVIS B. KNIGHT, Vice Chair
(214) 333-9575
(214) 339-9242 Fax

MARY HELEN BERLANGA
(361) 881-1000
(361) 881-1028 Fax

PATRICIA HARDY
(817) 598-2968
(817) 598-2833 Fax

DON McLEROY
979) 255-2538
(979) 846-1174 Fax

FOR MORE ON THIS, CHECK THE LC.ORG WEBSITE...

Buried: Obama's Odd Personal Story

2010-02-08T08:03:00Z

At the Democratic National Committee fundraiser in Washington, Obama pledged to keep fighting for his national health care system. And then he shared a bizarre story of a campaign worker who died from breast cancer.

Obama begins: "I got a letter -- I got a note today from one of my staff -- they forwarded it to me -- from a woman in St. Louis who had been part of our campaign, very active, who had passed away from breast cancer. She didn't have insurance. She couldn't afford it, so she had put off having the kind of exams that she needed. And she had fought a tough battle for four years. All through the campaign she was fighting it, but finally she succumbed to it. And she insisted she's going to be buried in an Obama t-shirt."

As Byron York noted, "Many observers have noted that the president often seems extraordinarily self-referential. It's all about him, they say. But even those critics might be a little taken aback by the 'buried in an Obama t-shirt' remark. Is it really that much about him?"

The statement comes at 8:25 in this video below:

You can see that the crowd laughed after the "T-shirt" comment -- perhaps because they thought it was funny or perhaps because it made them a bit uneasy. In any event, Obama was serious.

Missed 'em? See All the Super Bowl Ads

2010-02-08T08:03:00Z

Did you miss anything? Right here you can watch everything you might have missed when your Super Bowl party guests spoke too loudly during the commercial breaks! What did you think of this year's batch of ads?!

CLICK HERE TO WATCH ALL THE 2010 SUPER BOWL ADS

And here are some of the winners from Sunday:

Dave, Jay and Oprah at the worst SB party ever:

Betty White tackled for Snickers:

Tebows talk about life for Focus on the Family:

Google's Parisian Love:

Fundraiser for Ramos and Compean

2010-02-01T08:03:00Z

On Saturday, February 20th, the Border Patrol Agents Legal Defense and Relief Fund holds a fundraiser to assist with the legal expenses for the final appeals of former border agents Ignacio Ramos and Joe Compean.

Outrage: Save Our SEALs Please

2010-02-01T08:02:00Z

***UPDATE***
Since the "Save Our Seals" Rally in Perrysburg on January 19th we have raised $3,895.00 in support of three US Navy Seals being charged with prisoner abuse during the detainment of a known enemy of the United States. The Children of Liberty: District 5 wishes to thank everyone who has helped us up to this point to support these gentlemen, and we look forward to your continued support and assistance of these brave men. In our continued effort to help these men, we have scheduled a Spaghetti Dinner for Saturday, February 27th, 2010. It is being held at the Fraternal Order of Eagles hall located at 1163 N. Main Street in Bowling Green. Doors will open at 5:00pm and dinner will be served until 8:00pm with a cash bar available. Suggested donation is $5.00 per person. Please come and enjoy a delicious spaghetti dinner while supporting our heroes!

Three Navy SEAL commandos captured one of the most-wanted terrorists in Iraq. Now they face a court-martial for giving the terrorist a bloody lip. Support our SEALs!

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DONATE TO THE SAVE OUR SEALS FUND, PLEASE SEND A CHECK TO OR CONTACT THE BANK OF MAUMEE.

Bank of Maumee
c/o Leslie
3425 Briarfield Blvd.
Suite 100
Maumee, OH 43537

Make the check out to Save Our SEALs.

And please help support our SEALs!

150 turn out in Perrysburg for area SEAL
'03 grad faces court-martial for Iraq detainee's treatment
By JC REINDL
BLADE STAFF WRITER

With rallying cries of "justice for SEALs not terrorists," more than 150 people gathered in a Perrysburg park Tuesday to show support for a local Navy SEAL facing court-martial for allegedly mistreating an Iraqi detainee.

The noon rally in Hood Park coincided with the original trial date for PO 2nd Class Matthew McCabe, a 2003 graduate of Perrysburg High School, who is accused of punching the suspected mastermind of a 2004 ambush that killed four U.S. security contractors in Fallujah. A military judge last week postponed the trial to May 3 at Norfolk Naval Base in Virginia.

Two other SEALs accused of lying to investigators in the case are to be tried at a U.S. base in Baghdad, where their accuser, Ahmed Hashim Abed, the purported mastermind, is being held.

"Is it just me, or do these SEALs probably deserve a reward rather than punishment from our government?" asked Adrianne Lee, 25, of Bowling Green, one of several supporters who addressed the crowd by megaphone.

Rally organizer Corey LeRoux, 24, an Army Reserve veteran and high school classmate of Mr. McCabe, said the military's court-martial is a gross overreaction the public needs to be aware of.

"These guys are facing severe punishment, possibly jail time, a ruined military career, all because some jerk - terrorist - said he was [punched]," said Mr. LeRoux, who served two tours of duty in Iraq.

The rally was sponsored by District 5 of Children of Liberty, an Ohio group that aligns itself with the Tea Party political movement. Several speakers segued their support for the three embattled SEALs to a broader political cause.

President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) were especially unpopular among the crowd.

"The SEALs have done their job to protect us from enemies foreign; now we need to protect them and us from enemies domestic," said Scott Allegrini, founder of Children of Liberty. "What we can do to support our soldiers is to find people who support our soldiers and elect them."

The group's districts, of which there are currently two - 5 and 9 - are organized according to U.S. congressional districts. Mr. LeRoux and his father, Ron LeRoux, 43, of Perrysburg Township, organized District 5 last fall.

Those at the rally lined the street facing the center of downtown Perrysburg waving U.S. flags and signs protesting the court-martial.

A separate rally in Virginia for all three SEALs also was scheduled yesterday outside the Norfolk Naval Station. A Facebook page supporting the men had more than 218,000 members as of yesterday.

Cliff Warstler, a retired member of the Ohio Air National Guard's 180th Fighter Wing, said it's important to distinguish the actions that the SEALs are accused of from horrific activities, such as raping or killing civilians, that deserve severe punishment.

"What our government is doing to the Navy SEALs is a crime," said Mr. Warstler, dressed nearly head to toe in camouflage. "They are heroes, they should be given medals of honor. They definitely don't deserve to be prosecuted."

Mr. McCabe stands accused of assault for punching Mr. Abed in the abdomen. He is in U.S. custody for his suspected role in the 2004 deadly ambush of four Americans working in Iraq as Blackwater security officers.

A spokesman for the military's Special Operations Command Center did not respond to a message seeking comment yesterday. The center has previously urged the public to withhold judgment until the evidence is heard.

An attorney representing Mr. McCabe also did not respond to a phone message. Those attending the rally were asked to donate money to help with Mr. McCabe's legal expenses.

Mr. LeRoux said the McCabe family was aware of yesterday's event in Perrysburg, although they were in Virginia and did not attend. Mr. McCabe is not in custody, Mr. LeRoux said.

Information from the Associated Press was used in this report.

SCOTUS Ruling Has Been Misunderstood

2010-02-01T08:00:00Z

The left has misunderstood the Supreme Court's decision to roll back McCain-Feingold. This Denver Post editorial argues that ruling ended laws that basically amounted to censorship and will allow greater freedom for political speech. Read more.

Supreme Court's ruling has been misunderstood
The high court's decision forces corporations to disclose their backing of political speech. This should be a welcome change.

By The Denver Post

Posted: 01/31/2010 01:00:00 AM MST

Even President Obama repeated the cliched warning in his State of the Union last week that a recent Supreme Court decision would "open the floodgates for special interests." But the truth is, big money is already in politics.

As Denver Post reporter Burt Hubbard showed recently, "State candidates, stealth political groups and special-interest political campaigns in Colorado have amassed millions of dollars in campaign donations to kick off the 2010 elections."

Record-setting collections for state and national races are being backed by the full melange of corporate and private donors - and it all was done before the Supreme Court's decision. Top donors in Colorado included the pharmaceutical industry, Wal-Mart and Qwest.

We think the high court's ruling ended laws that basically amounted to censorship. Lifting McCain-Feingold rules will allow greater freedom for political speech.

The justices reversed a restriction on corporations and unions from paying directly for television political advertisements in the days leading up to an election. The limitation doesn't apply to other forms of speech, and was therefore unfair.

We've received dozens of letters from readers who disagreed with our stance. (Many are printed in today's Perspective.) But we think the high court's decision has been misunderstood, even by the president, as The New York Times' Linda Greenhouse demonstrated.

Limitations on direct giving to candidates remain. Laws continue to prevent corporations from giving directly to a candidate, and individuals remain limited in the amount of money they can donate to candidates in primaries and general elections.

McCain-Feingold, passed in 2002, represents but a small part of hundreds of pages of campaign-finance regulations put in place over decades. The rules-upon-rules framework has created a flawed system that runs contrary to the First Amendment.The goal of these regulations is always laudable - that is, to reduce the influence of money in politics - but they've been impossible to enforce. No sooner does a rule pop up here than a new kind of political action committee or 527 organization springs up to mask special-interest donations.

So much money is being shuffled around behind the scenes that often voters don't know who is behind many campaign-style ads and efforts until months after Election Day.

Political experts and academics who have studied campaign laws since the Nixon administration have had a difficult time proving that big donations are as corrupting as conventional wisdom holds.

The public has to remain vigilant, but the high court's decision should make it easier to be so, as corporations will have to disclose their backing of political speech. Such transparency will be a welcome change.

Time to Act: Moody's Warns United States

2010-02-01T08:00:00Z

President Obama has said we're out of money. Yet this administration continues to spend beyond our means. Now a key investor service says we need to act to reduce our deficits or our credit rating will be downgraded.

Moody's warns US of credit rating fears

By Michael Mackenzie in New York and Gillian Tett in London

Moody's Investors Service fired off a warning on Wednesday that the triple A sovereign credit rating of the US would come under pressure unless economic growth was more robust than expected or tougher actions were taken to tackle the country's budget deficit.

In a move that follows intensifying concern among investors over the US deficit, Moody's said the country faced a trajectory of debt growth that was "clearly continuously upward".

Steven Hess, senior credit officer at Moody's, said the deficits projected in the budget outlook presented by the Obama administration outlook this week did not stabilise debt levels in relation to gross domestic product.

"Unless further measures are taken to reduce the budget deficit further or the economy rebounds more vigorously than expected, the federal financial picture as presented in the projections for the next decade will at some point put pressure on the triple A government bond rating," the rating agency added in an issuer note.

This week, the White House forecast a $1,565bn budget deficit for 2010, which represents 10.6 per cent of gross domestic product and is the highest such ratio of debt to GDP since the second world war.

While the budget gap is forecast to fall to about 4 per cent by 2013, it is based in part on economic growth not falling below government expectations, Congress agreeing to tax rises and a spending freeze on non-security discretionary spending.

Crucially, projections of the overall debt-to-GDP ratio for the US are seen rising from 53 per cent in 2009 to 73 per cent in 2015 and 77 per cent by 2020.

Moody's, however, says this understates the overall US debt level.

"Using the general government measure, including state and local governments as well as the federal government, which is used internationally, this ratio would be well over 100 per cent in 2020."

The issue of sovereign risk dominated many discussions in the Davos World Economic Forum last week. While much attention focused on the fiscal crisis in Greece, considerable concern was also voiced about the outlook for countries such as the US and UK.

"Everyone has reason to be concerned about the US economy right now and the US dollar," said Tony Tan, deputy head of the Government of Singapore Investment group. "We still think that the US economy is the most diversified and resilient in the world, but it is going through a difficult time."

At the heart of investor concerns is whether countries such as the US with its rising debt burdens has the political will, or the sense of consensus, to take decisive measures to cut debt.

Some investors at Davos suggested it might be helpful if the credit rating agencies were to step up their threats about a potential future downgrade in countries such as the US and UK, since it would force politicians to act - and turn the issue into an election topic.

US treasury bonds were relatively steady on Wednesday with the yield on the 10-year note rising 3 basis points to 3.67 per cent.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

Obama Bows Down Yet Again

2010-02-01T08:00:00Z

Saudi Kings, Japanese Emperors...to whom won't Obama bow down? Well, apparently the Mayor of Tampa, Florida makes the list as well. Check out this AP photo from Tuesday, January 28th.

Please Donate to Haiti Relief Funds

2010-01-26T08:03:00Z

Medical and food supplies in Haiti are running out. So we're urging all of listeners to please donate whatever you can, within your means, to help the victims of the disastrous earthquake in Haiti.

Salvation Army:
www.salvationarmyusa.org

Red Cross:
www.redcross.org

Every little bit counts!

Obama's Media Honeymoon Ending

2010-01-26T08:00:00Z

The national liberal media's unmitigated swooning over President Obama is dwindling, according to new research. As his first year in office went on, fewer and fewer stories about the president were positive.

Obama's honeymoon with media is history

By Jennifer Harper

He has an official pre-presidential logo and a dramatic custom-built dais - with columns - even before he arrived at the White House. President Obama drew instant love from the press, who were captivated by the image before them.

Mr. Obama garnered more coverage - and more positive coverage - than former Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan during their comparable times in office, according to a study released Monday by the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA).

Much of the Obama coverage was breathlessly positive, even melodramatic. But then something happened.

"The press stopped covering President Obama the historical figure, and started covering President Obama the politician. It took a few months, but many journalists started returning to their old critical ways, and the coverage went negative," said CMPA Director Robert Lichter, who conducted the research in conjunction with George Mason and Chapman universities.

"Barack Obama had his honeymoon, but now the party's over. He got all the spectacular stuff when he was just beginning. Still, there's a silver lining for Mr. Obama - his coverage would be envied by other recent presidents," Mr. Lichter added.

Indeed. The analysis was based on 3,859 news stories that appeared on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts, plus in the New York Times, Time and Newsweek from Jan. 20, 2009, through Dec. 31, plus a separate analysis of 1,728 stories on the Fox News Channel "Special Report."

During the entire first calendar year of his administration, Mr. Obama's mainstream media coverage was almost "perfectly balanced" - he rated 49 percent positive and 51 percent negative evaluations by sources and reporters.

That's pretty good compared to his predecessors during their first 12 months in the White house. Previous CMPA studies found that Mr. Bush received only 23 percent positive evaluations in 2001; Mr. Clinton had 28 percent positive evaluations in 1993 and Mr. Reagan had 26 percent positive evaluations in 1981.

"Obama's balanced media coverage in 2009 was still about twice as positive as the coverage received by Bush and Reagan during comparable time periods," the study said.

The proverbial press honeymoon waned with the White House in early summer, the study found. Presidential evaluations from January through April were 59 percent positive then dropped to 46 percent positive from May through July. In the last four months of the year, Mr. Obama received 39 percent positive reviews.

Fox News was never in the Obama fan club, however. Only 22 percent of their stories on Mr. Obama were positive during the year, some of it quite pointed.

"The president's story does not make any sense," said Fox News correspondent Jim Angle on June 3.

"His quest to secure the 2016 Olympics for Chicago failed in spectacular fashion," commented Fox News' Bret Baier in October.

Relations between the network and the White House have been described as "a war" by many news analysts; the Obama administration is not shy about lobbing its own bombs at Fox by questioning its "point of view" as a news organization.

"We don't feel the obligation to treat them like we would treat a CNN, or an ABC, or an NBC, or a traditional news organization," White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer told the New York Times.

Fox News commentator Greg Gutfeld responded, "The White House has a new communications director and he's just as adorably misguided as the previous one."

As a cautionary tale to White House strategists, the CMPA study found that the press hammered on Mr. Obama's policies, though his personal leadership often escaped heavy criticism. The research found that during 2009, reviews of his policy were only 37 percent positive - and 63 percent negative.

Paying for Pelosi: A $100K Bill

2010-01-26T08:00:00Z

Obama's spending freeze should involve taking away Speaker Pelosi's Taxpayer Credit Card. That is, unless you want to pay for Pelosi's $101,000 bill for in-flight services that include food and liquor. What a waste!

Taxpayers pay $101,000 for Pelosi's in-flight 'food, booze'
Speaker's trips 'are more about partying than anything else'

Posted: January 29, 2010
By Bob Unruh

It reads like a dream order for a wild frat party: Maker's Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey's Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey ... and Corona beer.

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for "in-flight services" - including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That's almost $1,000 per week.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time.

"Speaker Pelosi has a history of wasting taxpayer funds with her boorish demands for military travel," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said today. "And these documents suggest the Speaker's congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else."

Pelosi, D-Calif., recently joined President Obama on a Judicial Watch list of Top 10 corrupt politicians because of her "sense of entitlement," the group said.

"Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline," the evaluation said.

And WND reported almost a year ago that Pelosi was shown to have been erratically canceling and rescheduling flights, as one would with an on-call taxi service.

"We have ... folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets etc," said one Department of Defense e-mail then.

Another official sent an e-mail questioning a series of Pelosi's requests for aircraft.

"Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi's team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?" it stated. "[T]here's no need to block every weekend 'just in case'..."

The e-mail noted that the speaker's office had "a history of canceling many of their past requests."

Yet another e-mail exchange at that time revealed Pelosi's demand that jets pick her up at Travis Air Force Base rather than San Francisco's airport.

"She lives about 1.5 hours from SFO and much closer to Travis. ... Whether it is the best use of assets is not the question. But instead is it worth upsetting the speaker. ..."

Said another, "This is a battle that we are bound to lose if we tell the speaker('s) office. In the end, this is what will happen. I wish that I could say this is a one-time request, but we know it will probably happen again in the future."

Yet another indicated a deep level of frustration:

"Here is the laydown: there are five G5s. Two are broke. Two off on CODELS. One slated for priority White House... we should keep on G-III for now for Tuesday afternoon and start sacrificing goats and chickens."

Judicial Watch said the newly obtained 2,000 pages of documentation show Pelosi's military travel cost the U.S. Air Force $2,100,744.59 over two years - including $101,429.14 for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol.

Among the newest highlights revealed:

* Pelosi used Air Force aircraft to travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,210.51 per flight. Of 103 Pelosi-led congressional delegations (CODEL), 31 trips included members of the House speaker's family.

* One CODEL traveling from Washington, D.C., through Tel Aviv, Israel, to Baghdad, Iraq, May 15-20, 2008, "to discuss matters of mutual concern with government leaders" included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. This flight included the purchase of the long list of alcoholic drinks.

* According to a "Memo for Record" from a March 29-April 7, 2007, CODEL that involved a stop in Israel, "CODEL could only bring kosher items into the hotel. Kosher alcohol for mixing beverages in the delegation room was purchased on the local economy i.e. bourbon, whiskey, scotch, vodka, gin, triple sec, tequila, etc.

Pelosi's office could not be reached for comment. The answering machine said the office would be closed until Monday, and the mailbox was full, so no messages could be left.

Judicial Watch Inc. describes itself as a constitutionally conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Wake Up Call? No, Full Speed Ahead!

2010-01-20T08:01:00Z

Politicians and pundits following Scott Brown's victory say this a "Wake Up Call" for Obama and the Democrats. But, no, that message isn't being received: The left is saying it's full speed ahead on ObamaCare.

And Politico also conveyed that Democrats aren't ready to listen to the American people: Obama's former campaign manger, David Plouffe, added on ABC's "Good Morning America": "I'm very confident we can pass health-care reform."

Democratic leaders insisted they planned to press ahead with health reform, and met late into Tuesday night in Speaker Nancy Pelosi¹s office. But they made no decisions about how to proceed, now that Brown has swept away the Democrats¹ filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate. Their options are few, and extremely complex, mostly involving legislative tactics that would be difficult to pull off in the best of circumstances, let alone at a time when members are worried they could be the next Martha Coakley a seeming Democratic shoo-in laid low, in part, by health reform. And already Tuesday night, Democrats were being forced to come to terms with the prospect that their decades-long goal of health reform might once again fall short, despite getting closer to becoming law than ever before.

Pelosi insisted Democrats could still make it happen. "We will get the job done. I am confident of that. I have always been confident of that," she told reporters as she left the Capitol at 11:30 p.m. "Massachusetts has health care and so the rest of the country would like to have that too," Pelosi said, referring to the state¹s health care program. "So we don't [think] a state that already has health care should determine whether the rest of the country should."

Obama's 1st Year: By the Numbers

2010-01-19T08:01:00Z

It's been one year since Barack Obama became President Barack Obama. So, rhetoric aside, how's the president really doing? Let's take a look at Our Supreme Leader's first year in office...by the numbers.

A by-the-numbers look at Obama's first year
Jan 18 10:13 AM US/Eastern
By The Associated Press

Highlights of Obama's first year, by the numbers:

___

7,949.09-Dow Jones Industrial Average close on Jan. 20, 2009.

10,609.65-Dow Jones Industrial Average close on Jan. 15, 2010.

13 million-Number of people 16 and older unemployed as of January 2009.

14.7 million-Number of people 16 and older unemployed as of December 2009.

7.7 percent-Unemployment rate January 2009

10.0 percent-Unemployment rate December 2009

$787 billion-Cost of economic stimulus approved by Congress.

$10.6 trillion-Outstanding public debt Jan. 20, 2009.

$12.3 trillion-Outstanding public debt Jan. 14, 2009.

$296.4 billion-Federal spending from the financial crisis bailout fund before Jan. 20, 2009.

$173 billion-Federal spending from the financial crisis bailout fund after Jan. 20, 2009.

$165 billion-Amount of bailout funds repaid by banks and automakers.

139-Bank failures between Jan. 20, 2009, and Jan. 14, 2010.

274,399-Number of properties that received forclosure-related notices in January 2009.

349,519-Number of properties that received forclosure-related notices in December 2009.

34,400-U.S. troops in Afghanistan in January 2009.

70,000-U.S. troops in Afghanistan as of Jan. 12, 2010.

319-U.S. military deaths in Afghanistan from January 2009 through Jan. 15, 2010.

139,500-U.S. troops in Iraq in January 2009.

111,000-U.S. troops in Iraq as of Jan. 12, 2010.

152-U.S. military deaths in Iraq from January 2009 through Jan. 15, 2010.

539-Appointments to top federal policy positions submitted to the Senate

352-Appointments confirmed by the Senate.

180-Appointments in top policy positions carried over from the Bush administration.

12-Formal news conferences.

21-Foreign countries visited.

29-States visited.

10-Visits to Camp David.

2-Vacations.

___

Sources:

AP reporting and analysis

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Treasury Department

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

RealtyTrac Inc.

Defense Department

White House Transition Project

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Dobbs: Government Services Highlights

2010-01-15T08:01:00Z

President Obama and the Democratic leadership want to shove government-run health care down our throats. But as the following open letter points out, government doesn't exactly have a good track record when it comes to public services.

To President Obama and all 535 voting members of Congress,

* The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775. You have had 234
years to get it right, and it is broke.

* Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years
To get it right, and it is broke.

* Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it
right, and it is broke.

* Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44
years to get it right, and they are broke.

* Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to
get it right, and it is broke..

* The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to cut our
dependence on foreign oil. You had 32 years to get it right, and we import more oil than ever before.

You have failed in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars.

And you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system? Not a chance!

Big Mistake: Coakley Offends Catholics

2010-01-15T08:00:00Z

How can a Massachusetts Senate candidate possibly offend 39 percent of voters in her state? If it's Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley, she would tell devout Catholics not to bother working in an emergency room.

Under the conscience clause, workers in health-care environments ranging from doctors to maintenance men can refuse to offer services, information, or advice to patients on issues like contraception, blood transfusions, etc..if the workers are morally against it. Here is how Ms. Coakley handled the matter.

Ken Pittman: Right, if you are a Catholic, and believe what the Pope teaches that any form of birth control is a sin. ah you don¹t want to do that.

Martha Coakley: No we have a seperation of church and state Ken, lets be clear.

Ken Pittman: In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.

Martha Coakley: (SSuh, ehSum..) The law says that people are allowed to have that. You can have religious freedom but you probably shouldn¹t work in the emergency room.

Not Kennedy's Seat: The People's Seat

2010-01-12T08:02:00Z

In a debate, Mass. Sen. Candidate Scott Brown says ObamaCare would be a disaster for working Americans. When moderator David Gergen asks if he'll sit in Ted Kennedy's seat and reject it, Brown responded: "It's not the Kennedy's seat, it's not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat."

A refreshing change! And in a sign of the intensity of his support, and the interest in his campaign, Scott Brown raised over $1 million in online donations last night.

Reversal: Obama & Reid on Lott in 2002

2010-01-11T08:00:00Z

The top Democrats claim Reid's remarks were innocuous, and that "book is closed." But Harry Reid and Barack Obama sang quite different tunes in 2002, when they blasted Sen. Trent Lott for his race-based remarks. What did they say in 2002?

FIRST, LET'S CHECK IN WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA'S THOUGHTS AT THE TIME:

Illinois Senator Barack Obama (D-13th), who hosted WVON's Cliff Kelley Show, challenged the Republican Party to repudiate Lott's remarks and to call for his resignation as senate leader.

"It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do," said Obama.

He said: "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."

AND SENATOR HARRY REID HIMSELF HAD THIS TO SAY:

Reid on 'ethnic jokes'
Posted by Benjamin Spillman
Saturday, Jan. 09, 2010 at 01:03 PM

The Associated Press State & Local Wire
December 20, 2002, Friday, BC cycle

Nevada lawmakers not surprised by Lott resignation

DATELINE: LAS VEGAS

Sen. Harry Reid said Republican Senate leader Trent Lott's decision to relinquish his post Friday came as no surprise.

"He had no alternative," the Nevada Democrat and Senate minority leader said. "Senator Lott dug himself a hole and he didn't dig it all in one setting. He dug it over the years. And he couldn't figure out a way to get out of it."

Reid, who has called colleagues in a bid to win his party's Senate leadership post should Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., resign it seek the presidency, said he had no preference for a replacement for Lott.

Lott's resignation Friday culminated a controversy over his racially insensitive comments at Sen. Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party.

Lott said that Mississippians were proud to have voted for Thurmond in 1948 on the pro-segregationist Dixiecrat ticket.

Asked if the episode would serve as a warning to weigh his own words carefully, Reid said: "You play how you practice."

"If you tell ethnic jokes in the backroom, it's that much easier to say ethnic things publicly. I've always practiced how I play."

Does that square up with what you heard this weekend? Why the double standard?

Interpol Immunity: So Long, Sovereignty

2010-01-08T08:03:00Z

Someone in the national liberal media might want to ask Our Supreme Leader about the executive order he signed in December granting immunity to Interpol agents. Just another move that reduces our national sovereignty.

Executive Order -- Amending Executive Order 12425

Interpol Immunity
Obama takes America down another notch with an unnecessary, reckless act.

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Finally, today, we get at least an attempt at an explanation of President Obama's dead-of-night decision on December 16 to grant Interpol - the international police force - immunity from American law. (See here and here.) Unfortunately, in the habit to which we've grown accustomed, the Obama administration itself didn't provide the explanation. It comes from Interpol's secretary general, Ron Noble, via an informative report by Valerie Richardson at Human Events. (Ms. Richardson, who quotes from my posts in her story, was good enough to call me for comment; I regret that, because of the press of other business, I didn't retrieve the message until after I learned early this morning that her story was posted.)

The biggest problem with President Obama's immunity grant is that it came without any explanation. The administration can't or won't explain why a president - whose administration is notoriously indifferent to American sovereignty - suddenly decided Interpol needed to be freed from the U.S. Constitution and other American law. Certainly, Interpol was not clamoring publicly for immunity; neither Noble nor any other Interpol official was heard to suggest that American law was interfering with some aspect or other of its operations.

To his credit, Noble at least attempts a post hoc rationalization for Obama's move. Richardson writes:

Why does Interpol suddenly need diplomatic immunity? Noble explained that when President Reagan signed the original order, the organization didn't have a permanent U.S. staff or office. That changed in 2004 with the opening of the Office of the Interpol Special Representative to the United Nations.

The revisions bring Interpol's U.S. office in line with its other seven international offices, all of which already enjoy full diplomatic immunity. "It's international custom that international organization are exempt from FOIA," said Noble. "We're no different than any other international organization."

That doesn't begin to cut it. An agency's having a permanent U.S. presence is more of a reason to bind it by U.S. law, not a rationale for immunizing it. And Interpol apparently has had no difficulty operating under the Reagan-era restraints during the five years since its permanent office opened. Moreover, as Richardson points out, Interpol is not just "any other international organization"; it is an international law-enforcement organization. As I've explained before, "what prevents law-enforcement and its controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical" are the constraints of law - in the U.S., such provisions as the Fourth Amendment, the Freedom of Information Act, and other limitations of the Constitution and federal law that protect the liberty and privacy of Americans.

AMERICA: JUST ANOTHER COUNTRY
Advertently or not, however, Noble does tip us to President Obama's thinking - and to why the administration clearly doesn't want to discuss the matter any further. The issue is what Noble refers to as "international custom"; relatedly, this is about the game known as "customary international law," so beloved by transnational progressives.

Here's how the game works. International-law professors, jurists, and bureaucrats announce some piety that they think everyone should follow (e.g., the death penalty is an unconscionable human-rights violation). Once enough of them have followed it for long enough (in recent years, "long enough" seems to have become "ten minutes" . . . or the time it takes to announce these new international standards), the piety is deemed - at least by transnationalists - to be universally binding. In their view, it thus becomes the obligation of every nation to fall into line, changing their laws to whatever extent is necessary to do so. That is, the sensibilities of the "international community" (i.e., the elites of the global Left) void the democratic self-determinism of the American people.

In 1983, President Reagan thought about the issue of diplomatic immunity for Interpol and decided that the agency merited limited protection but, because it was a police force, not unqualified protection. Significant privileges and immunities, he determined, should be withheld: Interpol's property and assets should remain subject to search and seizure, and its archived records should remain subject to public scrutiny. That made good sense. If it hadn't made good sense, Congress could have enacted corrective legislation - and surely Interpol would have complained. Everyone, however, was content, and for over a quarter-century the arrangement has worked.

Nevertheless, as Noble points out, Interpol (which is headquartered in France) has seven other international offices. As its website explains, these are located in Argentina, Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, El Salvador, Kenya, Thailand, and Zimbabwe. These seven countries have decided to give Interpol unqualified diplomatic immunity. By President Obama's transnationalist lights, this means an "international custom" has been established.

Given the sovereignty concerns raised during the confirmation hearing of committed transnationalist Harold Koh to become the State Department's top lawyer, President Obama plainly does not want to tell the American people he thinks President Reagan's executive order needs to be scrapped because that's not how they do it in Cameroon. So he just scrapped it and hopes, if he doesn't tell us why, we won't care to figure out why.

This is surely another reckless gesture designed to eviscerate America's special status and self-determinism - to make us just one of 192 other countries, no better, no different, no superpower. The president knows that Americans don't share his view of America, which is a big reason behind his tumbling approval ratings. Saying out loud that we need to immunize Interpol - to put it above the U.S. Constitution - in order to be more like Kenya, Thailand, Zimbabwe, etc., would not go over well. That would bode ill for the administration's agenda to subjugate the U.S. to such transnationalist schemes as the Law of the Sea Treaty and the International Criminal Court. Better to say nothing.

Crotch Bomber: GOP Secret Plot?!?

2010-01-07T08:00:00Z

Just when you thought vicious liberal mouthpieces couldn't show themselves to be more idiotic, Mike Malloy suggests the Underwear Bomber was a secret plot by Republicans to undermine President Obama.

"My gut feeling is this was deliberate, this was deliberately done in order to put the Obama Administration in such a vice grip that it's impossible to get anything done. To raise so much fear -- this is what Republicans do, this is what they do."

Obama's Broken C-SPAN Promises

2010-01-06T08:02:00Z

How many times did President Obama and then-Candidate Obama promise that the health-care negotiations would be televised? EIGHT times he "misspoke" about the Change he'd bring. Watch all of his misstatements, courtesy of Breitbart.TV.

How's that for the most open and transparent government in history? Where's all that Change we can believe in? We still see Business as Usual.

Lou's Theme: Waylon Jennings' America

2010-01-05T08:02:00Z

Of all the songs Lou's been enjoying lately, this one tops the list. We hope you'll all enjoy this beautiful song from one of the best Country & Western singer-songwriters in music history.

LYRICS:
Some have said, down through history
If you last it's a mystery
But I guess they don't know, what they're talking about From the mountains down to the sea You've become such a habit with me America, Amer-ica

Well I come from, down around Tennesee
But the people in California
Are nice to me, Amer-ica
It don't matter where I may roam
Tell you people that it's home sweet home America, Amer-ica

Chorus:
And my brothers are all black and white, yellow too And the red man is right, to expect a little from you Promise and then follow through, America

And the men, who fell on the plains
And lived, through hardship and pain
America, Amer-ica
And the men who could not fight
In a war that didn't seem right
You let them come home, America

And my brothers are all black and white, yellow too And the red man is right, to expect a little from you Promise and then follow through, America

Well I come from, down around Tennesee
But the people in California
Are nice to me, Amer-ica
It don't matter where I may roam

And my brothers are all black and white, yellow too And the red man is right, to expect a little from you Promise and then follow through, America

Tell you people that it's home sweet home America, Amer-ica America, Amer-ica

And my brothers are all black and white, yellow too And the red man is right, to expect a little from you Promise and then follow through, America

It's home sweet home, Amer-ica
America, Amer-ica

Democrats Attack Independent Pollster

2010-01-04T08:01:00Z

The thin-skinned White House attacked Gallup when it didn't like their polling numbers. Now the Democratic Party and liberal blogosphere are attacking independent pollster Scott Rasmussen because they don't like his "flawed" model. Here we go again...

Low favorables: Democrats rip Rasmussen

By ALEX ISENSTADT | 1/2/10 5:53 PM EST

Democrats are turning their fire on Scott Rasmussen, the prolific independent pollster whose surveys on elections, President Obama's popularity and a host of other issues are surfacing in the media with increasing frequency.

The pointed attacks reflect a hardening conventional wisdom among prominent liberal bloggers and many Democrats that Rasmussen Reports polls are, at best, the result of a flawed polling model and, at worst, designed to undermine Democratic politicians and the party's national agenda.

On progressive-oriented websites, anti-Rasmussen sentiment is an article of faith. "Rasmussen Caught With Their Thumb on the Scale," blared the Daily Kos this summer. "Rasmussen Reports, You Decide," the blog Swing State Project recently headlined in a play on the Fox News motto.

"I don't think there are Republican polling firms that get as good a result as Rasmussen does," said Eric Boehlert, a senior fellow with Media Matters, a progressive research center. "His data looks like it all comes out of the RNC [Republican National Committee]."

"Whether intended or not, Rasmussen polls have been used by conservative voices as talking points, and when that happens on one side it inevitably produces a reaction from the other," explained Mark Blumenthal, a polling analyst and the editor and publisher of Pollster.com. "Rasmussen produces a lot of data that appear to produce narratives conservatives are promoting, and that causes a reaction."

While Scott Rasmussen, the firm's president, contends that he has no ax to grind - his bio notes that he has been "an independent pollster for more than a decade" and "has never been a campaign pollster or consultant for candidates seeking office" - his opponents on the left insist he is the hand that feeds conservative talkers a daily trove of negative numbers that provides grist for attacks on Obama and the Democratic Party.

Nothing, however, sets off liberal teeth gnashing more than Rasmussen's daily presidential tracking polls, which throughout the year have consistently placed Obama's approval numbers around 5 percentage points lower than other polling outfits.

"He polls less favorably for Democrats, and that's why he's become a lightning rod," said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin political scientist who studies polling. "It's clear that his results are typically more Republican than the other person's results."

On Saturday, Dec. 26, for example, Rasmussen's daily tracking had Obama's approval at 44 percent, with a disapproval figure of 56 percent. A Real Clear Politics compilation of other pollsters, meanwhile, showed Obama with an average approval figure of 49.5 percent and disapproval of 45.1 percent.

"He's been underpolling Obama all year," said Boehlert. "People start thinking, 'There's something going on here.'"

It's not just the data that Rasmussen's critics object to - they also have a problem with the way the firm frames questions in its automated polls, which are the staple of its work.

In August, for example, Rasmussen asked respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement "It's always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money."

"Why stop there, Rasmussen? Why not add a parenthetical phrase about how tax cuts regrow hair, whiten teeth, and ensure that your favorite team will win the Super Bowl this year?" responded Daily Kos blogger Steve Singiser, who frequently writes about polls.

Democratic pollster Mark Mellman believes Rasmussen designs its polling questions to elicit negative responses about Obama and Democrats - a sentiment that is widely shared in the liberal blogosphere.

"I think they write their questions in a way that supports a conservative interpretation of the world," said Mellman. "In general, they tend to be among the worst polls for Democrats, and they phrase questions in ways that elicit less support for the Democratic point of view."

Democratic politicians seem equally leery of Rasmussen polling: At a news conference just prior to the 2008 election, when asked about a poll showing GOP Sen. John Sununu moving ahead of eventual Democratic winner Jeanne Shaheen, then-Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Chuck Schumer had a ready answer.

"Yeah, that was a Rasmussen poll," said a dismissive Schumer.

In an interview, Rasmussen adamantly denied that he is framing his polling to appeal to a conservative audience, saying: "We certainly don't see it that way."

"It's the adage that if you don't like the message, shoot the messenger," he added.

Rasmussen is quick to point out the accuracy of his surveys - noting how close his firm was to predicting the final outcome in this fall's New Jersey governor's race. (Rasmussen's final survey in the race showed Republican Chris Christie edging out Gov. Jon Corzine 46 percent to 43 percent. Christie beat Corzine 48 percent to 45 percent on Election Day.) And he argues that he was among the first pollsters to show Obama narrowing the gap with Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary.

Last year, the progressive website FiveThirtyEight.com's pollster ratings, based on the 2008 presidential primaries, awarded Rasmussen the third-highest mark for its accuracy in predicting the outcome of the contests. And Rasmussen's final poll of the 2008 general election - showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent - closely mirrored the election's outcome.

Rasmussen, for his part, explained that his numbers are trending Republican simply because he is screening for only those voters most likely to head to the polls - a pool of respondents, he argues, that just so happens to bend more conservative this election cycle.

Polling all adults - a method used by Gallup, another polling firm that conducts a daily tracking poll of Obama - Rasmussen acknowledged, is "always going to yield a better result for Democrats."

But critics note that the practice of screening for only those voters regarded as most likely to head to the polls potentially weeds out younger and minority voters - who would be more likely to favor Democrats than Republicans.

Alan Abramowitz, an Emory University political scientist, said there was "huge concern right now" that Rasmussen was polling a universe of largely conservative-minded voters.

"How is Rasmussen selecting likely voters almost a year before the election? And why would you even screen for likely voters in measuring presidential approval?" said Abramowitz. "My guess is that it's heavily skewed toward older, white, Republican voters."

Others assert Rasmussen is simply reflecting a more GOP-friendly political environment in his polling.

"The way he does polls is that he's more likely to get high-energy voters," said Tom Jensen, a pollster for the North Carolina-based Democratic firm Public Policy Polling. "I think Rasmussen favors Republicans this year, but I don't think he inherently favors Republicans."

"If I'm looking at public polls that are ABC News, CBS, Quinnipiac, Rasmussen, I'm paying attention to Rasmussen," said GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio. "As a pollster, I'd much rather look at a pollster who is looking at likely voters than a pollster who is looking at adults."

Rasmussen, of course, is hardly the only pollster to come under fire this election cycle - just the one who attracts the most sustained criticism.

Last month, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh accused the Gallup polling organization of "doing everything they can - they're upping the sample to black Americans - to keep" Obama's approval at 50 percent.

And PPP, which has also increased its profile in the past two election cycles, has drawn criticism from Republicans for repeatedly showing North Carolina GOP Sen. Richard Burr with low ratings heading into his 2010 reelection.

"You'd like for people to approach poll data in an intellectually honest way and not just say, 'I don't like this pollster because of his numbers. But that's just the nature of partisan activism," said Jensen, whose firm, like Rasmussen's, relies on automated polls. "I don't think that what's happening with Rasmussen is unusual. It's just that sometimes when people are unhappy, sometimes you shoot the messenger."

Franklin, the University of Wisconsin political scientist, argued that the frequency with which Rasmussen produces data makes the firm an inevitable target in the 24/7 media age.

"I really think that if Rasmussen were polling three times a month or one time a month, he wouldn't be as much of a thorn in the side of Democrats," said Franklin. "But because he's polling so much, he stands out every day."

Rasmussen says the attention that his often buzzworthy polls generate - positive or negative - is good for business.

Proving that he revels in it, Rasmussen recently posted an unusual video clip on his website - late-night comedian Jimmy Fallon deriding the pollster earlier this year in a rap song as an "outlier" whose results were "spastic."

"We are excited by it," Rasmussen said of the attention his firm has received.

Gun Ownership Up, Gun Crimes Way Down

2010-01-04T08:00:00Z

Here's a note for all those people who want to assault our Second Amendment rights: Murder in the United States plummeted to a 46-year low, with the largest year-over-year drop since the 1960s, even as gun ownership has risen to an apparent all-time high.

More guns, more crime? Not in 2009.
By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
12/31/09 3:56 PM EST

Stories of skyrocketing gun sales dominated the headlines earlier this year, with the number of gun-purchase background checks in the first six months of 2009 soaring 25 percent over the same period in 2008. Yet as the NRA points out today, murder in the U.S. has plummetted to a 46-year low (with the largest year-over-year drop since the 1960s) even as gun ownership has risen to an apparent all-time high.

Meanwhile, across the pond, gun crime in Britain has risen 89 percent since the UK banned guns in 1997.

Some may jump too far in there conclusions, but we can at least say this: There is no evidence from the U.S. experience this decade that higher rates of gun ownership lead to more crime, nor from the British experience this decade that fewer guns translate to less crime.

Ben Nelson: Legislator of the Year

2009-12-23T08:00:00Z

As seven attorneys general investigate Sen. Ben Nelson's Cornhusker Kickback that guaranteed 60 votes for ObamaCare, National Review's Rich Lowry argues that Nelson now takes the crown as Legislator of the Year.

Ben Nelson: Legislator of the Year
This is beggar-my-nation legislating.

Too bad Barack Obama hasn't followed through on his promises of legislative transparency. Then we all could have watched Harry Reid live on C-SPAN handing an oversized Publishers Clearing House-style $100 million check to Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson.

The highest-profile Democratic hold-out on Obamacare, Nelson said last week, "My vote is not for sale." He obviously meant that in the sense that he'd be righteously indignant at any suggestion that his vote could possibly be bought for anything less than the low nine digits.

Nelson got the feds to pick up forevermore 100 percent of the additional Medicaid spending that will be imposed on Nebraska by the bill. In stereotypically Orwellian fashion, the provision is called "Equitable Support for Certain States." That, naturally enough, translates into special, inequitable support for three states, totaling $1.2 billion over ten years. Vermont and Massachusetts argue they are due the funds for prior expansions of Medicaid, but what's Nebraska's excuse?

By the standards of Washington, Nelson deserves to be named "legislator of the year," with distinction in gross backroom dealing. His plunder perfectly encapsulates the current Democratic project in all its shameless audacity.

The Nebraskan is touted as a conservative Democrat. The Democratic leadership went out of its way to recruit Nelsonesque candidates in the 2006 and 2008 congressional races. These "majority makers" from Red States are supposed to represent the ideological diversity of the Democratic party, although they somehow always vote in numbers sufficient to enable Nancy Pelosi and Reid's governmental adventurism.

Many of the Blue Dogs rely on a simple electoral formula: Sound moderate at election time, then vote with the liberal priorities of the national party, repeat as necessary. Obama hopes to replicate this strategy on a grand scale. He wants to pivot to portraying himself as a fierce fiscal hawk next year, despite all the debt he accumulated this year, notwithstanding all he said about fiscal restraint last year.

This is the larger dishonesty in which all the smaller subsidiary ones are embedded. Obama has maintained all along that the health bill doesn't fund abortion. He accused those who maintained otherwise of bearing "false witness," a deliberately fraught phrase.

Nelson's resistance to this allegedly nonexistent abortion funding was at the core of his long-running objection to the bill. During the weekend, he signed off on a weak compromise denounced by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that still allows the bill's subsidies to go to abortion coverage. In a Christmas miracle, Nelson's principled opposition to the abortion-funding stream vanished precisely as the $100 million check arrived.

Governors across the country have inveighed against the bill's expansion of Medicaid because, eventually, they will be left with part of the bill. Seized with the problem, Nelson crafted a farsighted legislative compromise of the sort Daniel Webster or Henry Clay might be proud - exempt Nebraska. This is beggar-my-nation legislating, and the health-care bill is shot through with it.

The New York Times reports that the bill cracks down on doctors referring Medicare patients to hospitals in which they have a financial interest. Not everywhere, though. The bill offers an exemption for certain doctor-owned hospitals, the deadline for which Reid extended to Aug. 1, 2010, specifically to include Bellevue Medical Center - in Bellevue, Neb.

Logrolling has always been with us. As Ronald Reagan said, politics is the second-oldest profession and closely related to the first. But, in keeping with the new scale of Obama-era spending, the price tag of the payoffs has grown. If a fence-sitting Democrat didn't get a handout of a hundred million or more, he is a rank legislative incompetent. Mary Landrieu scored $300 million in Medicaid funding for Louisiana even before crunch time arrived.

The route to 60 Senate votes went through Harry Reid's favor factory. Democrats will pass a new $2.5 trillion entitlement out of the Senate and will disgrace themselves doing it. Witness their pliable, self-interested legislator of the year.

By Rich Lowry

What Dem. Sen. Whitehouse Thinks of You

2009-12-21T08:00:00Z

Do you oppose the president's health-care plan on ideological grounds? Senator Sheldon Whitehouse doesn't buy it. He thinks you're nothing more than a right-wing militia member, or part of an Aryan support group.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse took shots at those who are not supporting the president's health care legislation. During a floor speech, he excoriated Senate GOP members for up holding the pending health care bill and accused their supporters of being birthers and fanatics in right-wing militia and Aryan support groups. He started off by citing an editorial from the Manchester Journal Inquirer, which used insults like "lunatic fringe."

He then had this to say: "They are desperate to break this president. They have ardent supporters who are nearly hysterical at the very election of President Barack Obama. The birthers, the fanatics, the people running around in right-wing militia and Aryan support groups, it is unbearable to them that President Barack Obama should exist. That is one powerful reason. It is not the only one."

Do you disagree with the Senator from Rhode Island? Make your voice heard at 877-55-DOBBS and tell Lou why Sen. Whitehouse is dead wrong.

Washington Times reporter Kerry Picket tried to ask Sen. Whitehouse about his comments, and he flatly denied he said it: "I didn't say that, you should listen more closely," he said. Take a listen:

Do You Live in a Happy State?

2009-12-18T08:00:00Z

A new study breaks down the happiest states in the union, and the results may shock you: Louisiana tops the list, New York comes up last. Check out the full list and let us know if you think it's accurate...

Happiest U.S. States Pinned Down

Ever wondered if you'd be happier in sunny Florida or snow-covered Minnesota? New research on state-level happiness could answer that question.

Florida and two other sunshine states made it to the Top 5, while Minnesota doesn't show up until number 26 on the list of happiest states. In addition to rating the smile factor of U.S. states, the research also proved for the first time that a person's self-reported happiness matches up with objective measures of well-being.

Essentially, if an individual says they're happy, they are.

"When human beings give you an answer on a numerical scale about how satisfied they are with their lives, it is best to pay attention. Their answers are reliable," said Andrew Oswald of the University of Warwick in England. "This suggests that life-satisfaction survey data might be very useful for governments to use in the design of economic and social policies," Oswald said.

The happy-states list, however, doesn't match up with a similar ranking reported last month, which found that the most tolerant and wealthiest states were, on average, the happiest. Oswald says this past is based on raw averages of people's happiness in a state, and so doesn't provide meaningful results.

"That study cannot control for individual characteristics," Oswald told LiveScience. "In other words, all anyone has been able to do is to report the averages state-by-state, and the problem with doing that is you're not comparing apples with apples because the people who live in New York City are nothing like the individuals living in Montana."

Rather, Oswald and Stephen Wu, an economist at Hamilton College in New York, statistically created a representative American. That way they could take, for example, a 38-year-old woman with a high-school diploma and making medium-wage who is living anywhere and transplant her to another state and get a rough estimate of her happiness level.

"Not much point in looking at the happiness of a Texas rancher compared to a nurse in Ohio," Oswald said.

Here are the 50 U.S. states (and the District of Columbia) in order of their
well-being:

1. Louisiana
2. Hawaii
3. Florida
4. Tennessee
5. Arizona
6. Mississippi
7. Montana
8. South Carolina
9. Alabama
10. Maine
11. Alaska
12. North Carolina
13. Wyoming
14. Idaho
15. South Dakota
16. Texas
17. Arkansas
18. Vermont
19. Georgia
20. Oklahoma
21. Colorado
22. Delaware
23. Utah
24. New Mexico
25. North Dakota
26. Minnesota
27. New Hampshire
28. Virginia
29. Wisconsin
30. Oregon
31. Iowa
32. Kansas
33. Nebraska
34. West Virginia
35. Kentucky
36. Washington
37. District of Columbia
38. Missouri
39. Nevada
40. Maryland
41. Pennsylvania
42. Rhode Island
43. Massachusetts
44. Ohio
45. Illinois
46. California
47. Indiana
48. Michigan
49. New Jersey
50. Connecticut
51. New York

Highlights from the Code Red Rally

2009-12-16T08:01:00Z

The Lou Dobbs Show was proud to help sponsor Tuesday's Code Red rally on Capitol Hill. Thousands of you showed up to tell President Obama and the Democratic leadership to keep your hands off our health care. Check out the highlights from the event...

Laura Ingraham:

Rep. Michelle Bachmann:

Dick Armey: