In May, news agencies and voters were stunned when Steven Ybarra, a prominent member of the DNC and California Superdelegate promised his vote to the candidate who would commit $20 million to him for use in Hispanic Outreach programs. Following a rash of negative news stories, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton denounced the demands of Ybarra and pledged that neither would meet his demands.
Just two months after the story broke; the Obama campaign has apparently rescinded their pledge and met the demands of Ybarra. On Tuesday, Barack Obama and Howard Dean announced that they would commit $20 million to be used for Hispanic Outreach Programs and Voter Registration Drives. The money committed to the project will be used by the DNC’s Hispanic Caucus and will be controlled by the Hispanic Outreach and Voter Registration Committee.
Heading up the DNC Hispanic Caucus’ Outreach & Voter Registration Committee is committee Chair Steven Ybarra.
The DNC & Obama campaign certainly cannot be criticized for the commitment of the funds to the outreach programs. However, the timing of the announcement is peculiar considering that Obama & Dean could have waited until after Democratic Convention which is just 3 weeks away. Considering that Obama has come under quiet scrutiny from within his party and vocal scrutiny from former Clinton fundraisers and supporters, one would question the timing considering that he is not yet the nominee of his party. The move by the Obama campaign in breaking another campaign pledge is certain to raise even greater concerns and outrage from former Clinton supporters committed to defeating Obama.
I personally would like to congratulate Ybarra, who first proposed his $20 million idea last November only to be shunned by the DNC and Presidential campaigns. Through careful timing and the promise of a valuable SuperDelegate vote, he was able to extort the money he wanted.
J Brown
July 31, 2008
Copyright 2008 - Politically Drunk On Power, Contact For Reprint Availability
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative To Demand President Bush Call A Special Session Of Congress
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 177,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article
Thursday, July 31, 2008
House Democrats Vote, Say Screw America, & Time For Vacation
Yesterday, Republican House members unsuccessfully attempted to force congress from adjourning for their August recess. In a vote to prevent the House of Representatives from taking vacation, 17 Democrats joined every Republican in the house only to see the measure fail by 1 vote. Nancy Pelosi was able to retain just enough votes to allow Congress to go forward with their month long vacation and further prevent any legislation aimed at addressing our energy crisis.
The 213-212 vote follows weeks of energy legislation being blocked by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who have resorted to the use of parliamentary maneuvers to keep legislation off the plate. With no pressure by applied from the presumptive Democratic Nominee, Barack Obama, Democratic Leadership have committed the US to remaining reliant upon foreign energy sources. Obama, who could flex his muscle with Democratic leadership, instead chose to refer to US energy production proposals as "schemes" in a campaign speech yesterday.
The US currently imports more than 75% of it's oil and this year, for the first time in history, will have to import natural gas. Natural gas production which would also increase under an expansion of drilling is estimated by the USGS to be our nation's second largest energy resource. Yet, due to restrictions on land based and offshore extraction, our nation will now be forced to begin importing the product; further adding to the $1.8 billion per day that transfer into the coffers of foreign nations. Yes, Senator Obama expanded us drilling is a scheme, one designed to increase supply and reduce the $1.8 billion dollar per day transfer of US wealth overseas. It certainly isn't the $10 billion per month that we are spending on the War on Terror...OH WAIT... CRAP... IT'S MORE... ABOUT...OH....$1.77 BILLION PER DAY MORE!!!
House Minority Leader John Boehner stated, "Every time Americans fill up their tanks during the month of August and pay today's historic gas prices, they will have Speaker Pelosi and Senators Reid and Obama to thank."
A little over a year ago, as Iraq's Parliament was preparing to go on vacation, congressional Democrats lambasted the Iraqi government and papers were plastered with stories of congressional outrage over the vacation. John Kerry attacked "An Iraqi Parliament that spends July and August sitting around a swimming pool while their country descends into further unrest". Perhaps Senator Kerry should lambaste congressional Democratic leadership who has decided that now is a convenient time for them to escape stresses of an economy that is stumbling and energy prices that are rising. Why is it that congressional leaders such as Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and Kerry were so willing to lambaste an incompetent Iraqi Parliament, while failing to carry out their elected duties to the American people???
Democratic Congressman Abercrombie of Hawaii, one of the 17 Democrats who courageously crossed the line, stated his disappointment in his own parties leadership and that the US should have taken action 10 years ago.
There is now only one option left to keep congress from going on vacation. The President has a Constitutional Power to force congress into a special session to address energy legislation. The President can help his own dismal approval numbers and lame-duck status, by taking charge and forcing congress to go back to work.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall.
Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative. With just a few seconds of your time and a single click, we will send an email on your behalf to President Bush, VP Cheney, Supportive Congressional Members and media outlets with a message to urge the President to call a "special session" of Congress.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 177,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
The 213-212 vote follows weeks of energy legislation being blocked by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who have resorted to the use of parliamentary maneuvers to keep legislation off the plate. With no pressure by applied from the presumptive Democratic Nominee, Barack Obama, Democratic Leadership have committed the US to remaining reliant upon foreign energy sources. Obama, who could flex his muscle with Democratic leadership, instead chose to refer to US energy production proposals as "schemes" in a campaign speech yesterday.
The US currently imports more than 75% of it's oil and this year, for the first time in history, will have to import natural gas. Natural gas production which would also increase under an expansion of drilling is estimated by the USGS to be our nation's second largest energy resource. Yet, due to restrictions on land based and offshore extraction, our nation will now be forced to begin importing the product; further adding to the $1.8 billion per day that transfer into the coffers of foreign nations. Yes, Senator Obama expanded us drilling is a scheme, one designed to increase supply and reduce the $1.8 billion dollar per day transfer of US wealth overseas. It certainly isn't the $10 billion per month that we are spending on the War on Terror...OH WAIT... CRAP... IT'S MORE... ABOUT...OH....$1.77 BILLION PER DAY MORE!!!
House Minority Leader John Boehner stated, "Every time Americans fill up their tanks during the month of August and pay today's historic gas prices, they will have Speaker Pelosi and Senators Reid and Obama to thank."
A little over a year ago, as Iraq's Parliament was preparing to go on vacation, congressional Democrats lambasted the Iraqi government and papers were plastered with stories of congressional outrage over the vacation. John Kerry attacked "An Iraqi Parliament that spends July and August sitting around a swimming pool while their country descends into further unrest". Perhaps Senator Kerry should lambaste congressional Democratic leadership who has decided that now is a convenient time for them to escape stresses of an economy that is stumbling and energy prices that are rising. Why is it that congressional leaders such as Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and Kerry were so willing to lambaste an incompetent Iraqi Parliament, while failing to carry out their elected duties to the American people???
Democratic Congressman Abercrombie of Hawaii, one of the 17 Democrats who courageously crossed the line, stated his disappointment in his own parties leadership and that the US should have taken action 10 years ago.
There is now only one option left to keep congress from going on vacation. The President has a Constitutional Power to force congress into a special session to address energy legislation. The President can help his own dismal approval numbers and lame-duck status, by taking charge and forcing congress to go back to work.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall.
Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative. With just a few seconds of your time and a single click, we will send an email on your behalf to President Bush, VP Cheney, Supportive Congressional Members and media outlets with a message to urge the President to call a "special session" of Congress.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 177,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Bush: "All Democrats have to do is allow a vote, they should not leave Washington without doing so."
“All Democrats have to do is allow a vote, they should not leave Washington without doing so”. That was the statement that President Bush made this morning in once again calling upon congress to allow debate and a vote on energy legislation that would allow expanded offshore drilling along with increased funding for commodity trade monitoring agencies and increased incentives and investment in electric vehicle technologies.
In the statement Bush attacked congressional leaders Reid and Pelosi for their use of parliamentary procedures to prevent such legislation from reaching the floor and states, “The time for action is now, this is a difficult period for millions of American families.”
Senator Reid responded to the President’s demands by commenting that he would not take advice from "the president with the worst energy record in generations.” Reid continued by stating, “He has shown no interest in doing anything but continuing more of the same failed policies that have produced the highest oil and gas prices ever." Yet, Reid’s response is inherently flawed considering that a continuation of current policy would be to do nothing, just as this congress has done, since promising Americans lower energy prices 2 years ago. An expansion of offshore drilling would be a new concept and a radical departure from 40 years of US energy policy that has focused on a reduction in domestic oil production; if enacted the US would send a clear message to the world that we are intent on increasing global oil supply and stopping the $18 billion per day that we are transferring overseas.
Reid, Pelosi, and the presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama have repeatedly stated that Oil supply is not driving the price of oil. Yet, speculation in markets is primarily driven by an expectation of future supply and demand. As a result, prices rise when traders and analysts expect lower future production or greater global demand. The three Democratic leaders have also show a level of hypocrisy in these statements concerning supply, considering that they have called upon the President to open up the nations Strategic Oil Reserves in order to counter rising gas prices. The President finally attacked the idea citing, "If you agree that we need more oil, it makes no sense to say you're for draining our nation's limited strategic reserve but against tapping into the vast resources of the outer continental shelf”.
President Bush has made many mistakes during the course of his administration, but this congress, suffering it's own record-low approval rating, has only compounded the problems that this nation is facing. Now is the time for Congressional leaders to pull their head from their "arses" and act on legislation that is an important first step in developing a “Do it all, Do it now” energy policy. 2 years ago, current congressional leaders excoriated a republican controlled congress and administration for oil prices that were averaging $60 per barrel. Just 18 months later, these polarizing and self-centered politicians have done nothing while oil & natural gas prices have more than doubled. They complain about the $10 billion dollars per month that is funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but remain silent about the $18 billion per DAY that is being transferred overseas to meet our energy demands.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall.
Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative. With just a few seconds of your time and a single click, we will send an email on your behalf to President Bush, VP Cheney, Supportive Congressional Members and media outlets with a message to urge the President to call a "special session" of Congress.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 150,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
In the statement Bush attacked congressional leaders Reid and Pelosi for their use of parliamentary procedures to prevent such legislation from reaching the floor and states, “The time for action is now, this is a difficult period for millions of American families.”
Senator Reid responded to the President’s demands by commenting that he would not take advice from "the president with the worst energy record in generations.” Reid continued by stating, “He has shown no interest in doing anything but continuing more of the same failed policies that have produced the highest oil and gas prices ever." Yet, Reid’s response is inherently flawed considering that a continuation of current policy would be to do nothing, just as this congress has done, since promising Americans lower energy prices 2 years ago. An expansion of offshore drilling would be a new concept and a radical departure from 40 years of US energy policy that has focused on a reduction in domestic oil production; if enacted the US would send a clear message to the world that we are intent on increasing global oil supply and stopping the $18 billion per day that we are transferring overseas.
Reid, Pelosi, and the presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama have repeatedly stated that Oil supply is not driving the price of oil. Yet, speculation in markets is primarily driven by an expectation of future supply and demand. As a result, prices rise when traders and analysts expect lower future production or greater global demand. The three Democratic leaders have also show a level of hypocrisy in these statements concerning supply, considering that they have called upon the President to open up the nations Strategic Oil Reserves in order to counter rising gas prices. The President finally attacked the idea citing, "If you agree that we need more oil, it makes no sense to say you're for draining our nation's limited strategic reserve but against tapping into the vast resources of the outer continental shelf”.
President Bush has made many mistakes during the course of his administration, but this congress, suffering it's own record-low approval rating, has only compounded the problems that this nation is facing. Now is the time for Congressional leaders to pull their head from their "arses" and act on legislation that is an important first step in developing a “Do it all, Do it now” energy policy. 2 years ago, current congressional leaders excoriated a republican controlled congress and administration for oil prices that were averaging $60 per barrel. Just 18 months later, these polarizing and self-centered politicians have done nothing while oil & natural gas prices have more than doubled. They complain about the $10 billion dollars per month that is funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but remain silent about the $18 billion per DAY that is being transferred overseas to meet our energy demands.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall.
Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative. With just a few seconds of your time and a single click, we will send an email on your behalf to President Bush, VP Cheney, Supportive Congressional Members and media outlets with a message to urge the President to call a "special session" of Congress.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 150,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Fact Check: Obama The Centrist & Bush's Third Term???
There was a time in this country when the main stream media would do more than just repeat the talking points of political candidates. A time when they reported the facts, and checked to them for accuracy. Obviously that time has passed, and whether it is out of adoration for Senator Obama or just negligence the media has been a willing accomplice in spreading Obama campaign rhetoric.
In recent weeks as Senator Obama has straddled the line on issue after issue, the media has been a willing accomplice in trying to define Obama as a centrist or moderate who will end the polarization in Washington and can reach across the isle. Yet, shouldn't we define moderation by an individuals experiences and past actions, not by what they hope for you too see.
I find it difficult define Obama as a centrist or moderate. There is a big difference between a politician who will cooperate with and sometimes shares or understands views of the opposition party (definition of a moderate), and a politician who attempts to weave words together so that it appears he agrees with both sides on a position. For instance, this week Senator Obama stated that Affirmative Action "was not a long term solution", yet in the very next sentence he stated his continued support of the policy. You can't have it both ways, you can't excoriate a policy that is now overwhelmingly opposed by the American People while on the same hand supporting the same policy to protect your base of voters. That is called pandering, not moderation. In position after position we have seen Senator Obama attempt to walk a line in which he can claim to take either position on an issue depending upon the group he is talking too.
The best gauge of future leadership and ability to work with both sides of the isle is simply a politicians past experience. The Washington Post sponsors a Votes Database Project which monitors the votes and voting trends that occur within congress. One reporting method that WaPo conveniently breaks these voting trends down in is the party line vote. During the 110th Congressional session running from Jan 2007 to now, Senator Obama ranked 12th among 100 Senators, having voted along party lines 96% of the time; an amazingly high percentage for someone who claims to be able to reach across the isle. The Obama campaign and pundits will argue that Obama's voting record during this session was driven by a need to shore up support among his base supporters. Yet, if that were true then we would expect his record during the 109th session of Congress to reflect a greater level of moderation. According to the Vote Database Project, During the 109th session Obama was ranked 5th in the Senate having voted along party lines 94.8% of the time. Ironically, during both sessions of congress, Obama voted along party lines more often the Senator Kennedy, Senator Reid, and Senator Kerry. For a candidate who talks about unity and his ability to work with the side, he certainly has not demonstrated it. After all, how can a candidate claim moderation when the current Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has crossed party lines during the past two sessions of congress more often than Obama?
Following John McCain's victory as the presumptive Republican Nominee, the Obama campaign and Democratic leaders immediately attacked McCain with claims that he voted with George Bush 95% of the time. The attacks are somewhat ridiculous but effective in trying to overcome the long-time perception that McCain is a moderate willing to work with the other side of the isle. My surprise has risen from the fact that the McCain campaign has done little to address these claims and allowed the media to continue to fail to challenge these claims.
First, on a lighter note, let me state that it is 100% impossible for John McCain to have voted with President Bush, after all the President has no voting powers in the Senate. But that's just a laughable technicality. According to WaPo's Votes Database Project, Obama and the DNC's claims are 100% false. McCain, unlike his Democratic Rival, has continued to maintain one of the highest levels of independence demonstrated by any US Senator since 2000. For instance, during the 110th Session of Congress, McCain ranked 65th among his colleagues having voted along party line 88% of the time, a far cry from the 12th place rank of Obama. Yet, McCain's voting record during the current session of Congress is likely to hold closer to party lines due to the nearly 50 bills that contained an Troop Withdrawal Timeline. During the 109th session of congress, McCain ranked 94th out of 100 Senators, have voted along party lines 79.4% of the time. This ranking is similar to his 93rd place rank during both the 107th and 108th Congressional Sessions.
Summary - Candidates voting with their party.
Rank & % of time voted with party
2007-2008
Obama - 12th - 96.0%
McCain - 65th - 88.0%
2005-2006
Obama - 5th - 94.8%
McCain- 94th - 79.4%
2003-2004
Obama - NOT IN CONGRESS
McCain - 93rd - 84.5%
2001-2002
Obama - NOT IN CONGRESS
McCain - 93rd - 76.2%
These numbers are interesting, because I still don't see the 95% represented anywhere. But then again, I suppose that I could go through the voting record and find a three month period somewhere when McCain did vote along the same position as Bush 95% of the time. But, by those standards, I could also take the 1 week period last year, when Obama supported the President's Immigration position and state that Obama voted with the president 100% of the time.
Obama is no centrist or moderate, he is a panderer willing to say anything based upon what group he is talking too, so long as it forwards his position. His voting record does not demonstrate any reasonable level of non-partisanship and has proven that he is beholden only to party leaders. His base of support has not come from moderate Democrats, it has come from the far-left power brokers intent upon control of the government.
John McCain's voting record has proven consistent with that of a candidate who unwilling to sacrifice his principles and beliefs in order to appease party leadership. He has upheld his ability to work with both sides of the isle. Democratic leadership can attempt to demonize McCain as a mini-me Bush, but the record will never support that claim.
Our country faces economic uncertainty driven not by a credit crisis which has hurt sectors of the economy, but rather by rising energy prices and a falling dollar that affect every sector of the economy, are causing a rise in inflation, are destroying the middle class, and which are not being addressed by our congressional leadership. We need leadership in the fall who is willing to work for the American people to not only to address our long term security, economic, and energy needs, but also has a record of nonpartisan cooperation in order to get the job done.
This week congress will most likely leave on vacation, having failed to allow debate on energy and other important economic issues. While they spend the next month at the beach and the newly anointed Party Leader, Senator Obama relaxes in Hawaii, middle class Americans will continue to suffer the affects of rising oil, food, and consumer goods prices. In just 2 months, millions of Americans will begin to flip the switches on their furnaces and will wake up to utility bills that have doubled or tripled in price. While middle class America suffers, our politicians will gorge themselves at convention parties and at their vacation homes.
Even more disgusting is the failure of Congressional leaders, Pelosi & Reid, to schedule a vote on the Flood-Relief package designed to help the tens-of-thousands of Americans ravaged by flooding in the Midwest. Within 48 hours of Hurricane Katrina, congress passed an emergency funding bill; yet this Congress has failed to act upon promised relief for this disaster which has affected citizens throughout Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, Missouri and Arkansas nearly 2 months ago.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall.
Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative. With just a few seconds of your time, we will send an email on your behalf to President Bush, VP Cheney, Supportive Congressional Members and media outlets with a message to urge the President to call a "special session" of Congress.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J BrownJuly 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 150,000 Emails Since July 17th)
In recent weeks as Senator Obama has straddled the line on issue after issue, the media has been a willing accomplice in trying to define Obama as a centrist or moderate who will end the polarization in Washington and can reach across the isle. Yet, shouldn't we define moderation by an individuals experiences and past actions, not by what they hope for you too see.
I find it difficult define Obama as a centrist or moderate. There is a big difference between a politician who will cooperate with and sometimes shares or understands views of the opposition party (definition of a moderate), and a politician who attempts to weave words together so that it appears he agrees with both sides on a position. For instance, this week Senator Obama stated that Affirmative Action "was not a long term solution", yet in the very next sentence he stated his continued support of the policy. You can't have it both ways, you can't excoriate a policy that is now overwhelmingly opposed by the American People while on the same hand supporting the same policy to protect your base of voters. That is called pandering, not moderation. In position after position we have seen Senator Obama attempt to walk a line in which he can claim to take either position on an issue depending upon the group he is talking too.
The best gauge of future leadership and ability to work with both sides of the isle is simply a politicians past experience. The Washington Post sponsors a Votes Database Project which monitors the votes and voting trends that occur within congress. One reporting method that WaPo conveniently breaks these voting trends down in is the party line vote. During the 110th Congressional session running from Jan 2007 to now, Senator Obama ranked 12th among 100 Senators, having voted along party lines 96% of the time; an amazingly high percentage for someone who claims to be able to reach across the isle. The Obama campaign and pundits will argue that Obama's voting record during this session was driven by a need to shore up support among his base supporters. Yet, if that were true then we would expect his record during the 109th session of Congress to reflect a greater level of moderation. According to the Vote Database Project, During the 109th session Obama was ranked 5th in the Senate having voted along party lines 94.8% of the time. Ironically, during both sessions of congress, Obama voted along party lines more often the Senator Kennedy, Senator Reid, and Senator Kerry. For a candidate who talks about unity and his ability to work with the side, he certainly has not demonstrated it. After all, how can a candidate claim moderation when the current Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has crossed party lines during the past two sessions of congress more often than Obama?
Following John McCain's victory as the presumptive Republican Nominee, the Obama campaign and Democratic leaders immediately attacked McCain with claims that he voted with George Bush 95% of the time. The attacks are somewhat ridiculous but effective in trying to overcome the long-time perception that McCain is a moderate willing to work with the other side of the isle. My surprise has risen from the fact that the McCain campaign has done little to address these claims and allowed the media to continue to fail to challenge these claims.
First, on a lighter note, let me state that it is 100% impossible for John McCain to have voted with President Bush, after all the President has no voting powers in the Senate. But that's just a laughable technicality. According to WaPo's Votes Database Project, Obama and the DNC's claims are 100% false. McCain, unlike his Democratic Rival, has continued to maintain one of the highest levels of independence demonstrated by any US Senator since 2000. For instance, during the 110th Session of Congress, McCain ranked 65th among his colleagues having voted along party line 88% of the time, a far cry from the 12th place rank of Obama. Yet, McCain's voting record during the current session of Congress is likely to hold closer to party lines due to the nearly 50 bills that contained an Troop Withdrawal Timeline. During the 109th session of congress, McCain ranked 94th out of 100 Senators, have voted along party lines 79.4% of the time. This ranking is similar to his 93rd place rank during both the 107th and 108th Congressional Sessions.
Summary - Candidates voting with their party.
Rank & % of time voted with party
2007-2008
Obama - 12th - 96.0%
McCain - 65th - 88.0%
2005-2006
Obama - 5th - 94.8%
McCain- 94th - 79.4%
2003-2004
Obama - NOT IN CONGRESS
McCain - 93rd - 84.5%
2001-2002
Obama - NOT IN CONGRESS
McCain - 93rd - 76.2%
These numbers are interesting, because I still don't see the 95% represented anywhere. But then again, I suppose that I could go through the voting record and find a three month period somewhere when McCain did vote along the same position as Bush 95% of the time. But, by those standards, I could also take the 1 week period last year, when Obama supported the President's Immigration position and state that Obama voted with the president 100% of the time.
Obama is no centrist or moderate, he is a panderer willing to say anything based upon what group he is talking too, so long as it forwards his position. His voting record does not demonstrate any reasonable level of non-partisanship and has proven that he is beholden only to party leaders. His base of support has not come from moderate Democrats, it has come from the far-left power brokers intent upon control of the government.
John McCain's voting record has proven consistent with that of a candidate who unwilling to sacrifice his principles and beliefs in order to appease party leadership. He has upheld his ability to work with both sides of the isle. Democratic leadership can attempt to demonize McCain as a mini-me Bush, but the record will never support that claim.
Our country faces economic uncertainty driven not by a credit crisis which has hurt sectors of the economy, but rather by rising energy prices and a falling dollar that affect every sector of the economy, are causing a rise in inflation, are destroying the middle class, and which are not being addressed by our congressional leadership. We need leadership in the fall who is willing to work for the American people to not only to address our long term security, economic, and energy needs, but also has a record of nonpartisan cooperation in order to get the job done.
This week congress will most likely leave on vacation, having failed to allow debate on energy and other important economic issues. While they spend the next month at the beach and the newly anointed Party Leader, Senator Obama relaxes in Hawaii, middle class Americans will continue to suffer the affects of rising oil, food, and consumer goods prices. In just 2 months, millions of Americans will begin to flip the switches on their furnaces and will wake up to utility bills that have doubled or tripled in price. While middle class America suffers, our politicians will gorge themselves at convention parties and at their vacation homes.
Even more disgusting is the failure of Congressional leaders, Pelosi & Reid, to schedule a vote on the Flood-Relief package designed to help the tens-of-thousands of Americans ravaged by flooding in the Midwest. Within 48 hours of Hurricane Katrina, congress passed an emergency funding bill; yet this Congress has failed to act upon promised relief for this disaster which has affected citizens throughout Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, Missouri and Arkansas nearly 2 months ago.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall.
Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative. With just a few seconds of your time, we will send an email on your behalf to President Bush, VP Cheney, Supportive Congressional Members and media outlets with a message to urge the President to call a "special session" of Congress.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J BrownJuly 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 150,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Americans & The Media Need A Fourth Grade Civics Lesson!
Perhaps it's time that average Americans go back to the fourth grade and learn how it is our government functions. Apparently there is such a dumbing down within the mainstream media and the populous that we no longer recognize or realize that no president could ever be held fully accountable for a budget deficit or government waste.
Yesterday, Senator Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid along with their 'in-step' cohorts made sure to claim no responsibility for the record $490 billion dollar deficit. Instead they made sure to lay blame at President Bush's feet and call for an end to politics as usual in Washington. Naturally the media, who assumes that issues such as government 'checks and balances' are too complicated for the average American, proudly walked hand-in-hand with congressional leaders while offering no rebuttal to the ridiculous claims.
For their part, the White House made no apologies for high federal deficit, citing that the deficit was in part due to an economic slowdown and increased government spending such as the Economic Stimulus Package that ballooned to $160 billion dollars within the halls of congress.
On the campaign trail, John McCain correctly criticized both congressional leaders and the President for the budget deficit and once again called for a greater level of fiscal responsibility within the halls of congress. McCain has long and unsuccessfully fought to end pork-barrel spending and called for a renewal of congressional prioritization during his Senate career. But McCain, as part of congress, did not excuse himself for sharing any of the blame.
Meanwhile, Pres... Excuse me... Senator Obama naturally took no responsibility for the Deficit and promptly blamed the President Bush for the entire budget shortfall. He was careful not to blame congressional democratic leaders and used the issue as a reason that voters should embrace change and end Washington's politics as usual. Yet, what actions or proposals has Senator Obama ever put forth to offer control of our government's fiscal irresponsibility? There's a reason why you are pausing; it's because he hasn't. Of Senator Obama's 3.5 years in the Senate, he has been on the campaign trail over 40% of the time. Last year, Obama did offer support for John McCain's proposed legislation to place a moratorium on pork-barrel spending, but that move was 100% our of political expedience. Prior to the proposal, Obama himself had obtained millions in pork-barrel projects and offered no objection to the practice. In fact, during his short career, including today, he has yet to offer a single piece of legislation aimed at addressing the drunken spending of congress.
The bigger question for Obama should be how he expects to balance the record budget when the cost of his campaign proposals would add anywhere from $800 Million to $1 Trillion dollars in new federal spending?
Obama has apparently forgotten that he is a Senator, and thus part of the problem. For those Obama supporters who want to blame a Republican President for the deficit, perhaps you should go back to your fourth grade social studies textbook and re-read the chapter on the three branches of government.
The President does put forth the budget, but congress must approve that budget.
The President can call upon congress for additional spending and does have final signatory over spending; but, Congress must authorize the spending, appropriate the funds, and write the check.
It is a system of check-&-balances under which CONGRESS, not the president, CONTROLS THE PURSE STRINGS.
The President should be excoriated for an administration that has adopted a policy 'Just Say Yes' to every piece of spending legislation, but remember Congress wrote, enacted and appropriated the funds for that legislation.
This week congress will head out for vacation, and Senator Obama will head to Hawaii in mid-August for his vacation; yet, congress has failed to pass and fund a Midwest Flood Relief bill that they promised to those tens of thousands of Americans ravaged by early June's flooding in Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, Missouri and Arkansas. Additionally, congress has yet to pass a single piece of legislation dealing with energy, including the 'Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008', a bill that renews American Energy Independence, calls for incentives and investments in new alternative energies and technologies, and increased funding for the agency that monitors commodities trading.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall. Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 150,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Yesterday, Senator Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid along with their 'in-step' cohorts made sure to claim no responsibility for the record $490 billion dollar deficit. Instead they made sure to lay blame at President Bush's feet and call for an end to politics as usual in Washington. Naturally the media, who assumes that issues such as government 'checks and balances' are too complicated for the average American, proudly walked hand-in-hand with congressional leaders while offering no rebuttal to the ridiculous claims.
For their part, the White House made no apologies for high federal deficit, citing that the deficit was in part due to an economic slowdown and increased government spending such as the Economic Stimulus Package that ballooned to $160 billion dollars within the halls of congress.
On the campaign trail, John McCain correctly criticized both congressional leaders and the President for the budget deficit and once again called for a greater level of fiscal responsibility within the halls of congress. McCain has long and unsuccessfully fought to end pork-barrel spending and called for a renewal of congressional prioritization during his Senate career. But McCain, as part of congress, did not excuse himself for sharing any of the blame.
Meanwhile, Pres... Excuse me... Senator Obama naturally took no responsibility for the Deficit and promptly blamed the President Bush for the entire budget shortfall. He was careful not to blame congressional democratic leaders and used the issue as a reason that voters should embrace change and end Washington's politics as usual. Yet, what actions or proposals has Senator Obama ever put forth to offer control of our government's fiscal irresponsibility? There's a reason why you are pausing; it's because he hasn't. Of Senator Obama's 3.5 years in the Senate, he has been on the campaign trail over 40% of the time. Last year, Obama did offer support for John McCain's proposed legislation to place a moratorium on pork-barrel spending, but that move was 100% our of political expedience. Prior to the proposal, Obama himself had obtained millions in pork-barrel projects and offered no objection to the practice. In fact, during his short career, including today, he has yet to offer a single piece of legislation aimed at addressing the drunken spending of congress.
The bigger question for Obama should be how he expects to balance the record budget when the cost of his campaign proposals would add anywhere from $800 Million to $1 Trillion dollars in new federal spending?
Obama has apparently forgotten that he is a Senator, and thus part of the problem. For those Obama supporters who want to blame a Republican President for the deficit, perhaps you should go back to your fourth grade social studies textbook and re-read the chapter on the three branches of government.
The President does put forth the budget, but congress must approve that budget.
The President can call upon congress for additional spending and does have final signatory over spending; but, Congress must authorize the spending, appropriate the funds, and write the check.
It is a system of check-&-balances under which CONGRESS, not the president, CONTROLS THE PURSE STRINGS.
The President should be excoriated for an administration that has adopted a policy 'Just Say Yes' to every piece of spending legislation, but remember Congress wrote, enacted and appropriated the funds for that legislation.
This week congress will head out for vacation, and Senator Obama will head to Hawaii in mid-August for his vacation; yet, congress has failed to pass and fund a Midwest Flood Relief bill that they promised to those tens of thousands of Americans ravaged by early June's flooding in Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, Missouri and Arkansas. Additionally, congress has yet to pass a single piece of legislation dealing with energy, including the 'Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008', a bill that renews American Energy Independence, calls for incentives and investments in new alternative energies and technologies, and increased funding for the agency that monitors commodities trading.
Help us end Congresses vacation by calling upon President Bush to exercise his executive power to force Congress into a "Special Session" to deal with these issues. While Congressional Members play in the surf, there are thousands still suffering from record-breaking flooding throughout the Midwest and millions suffering from record-breaking energy prices that will only increase as the temperatures drop this fall. Take a few seconds of your time, and participate in our "Cancel Congress' Vacation" initiative.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 29th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 150,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Katrina Redux: Pelosi, Reid & Obama Go On Vacation Without Passing Needed Midwest Flood-Relief Legislation
Remember the outrage that still exists today, over the Bush Administrations handling of post-Katrina relief? Perhaps you don't remember that the Republican-Led congress at the time passed a Hurricane relief bill within just 48 hours following the devastation throughout the Southern States. Last week, this congress, led by Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, once again showed that they have no leadership ability and no ability to prioritize government services. Fortunately, congress passed the Mortgage-Relief bill, a highly publicized attempt to divert attention away from the growing and impending energy crisis in this nation. But while pandering to the populous, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi failed to put forth legislation aimed at providing federal relief to the Midwestern states that have been ravaged by flooding.
That’s Right! Remember the news stories just a month ago, of the massive flooding throughout the Mississippi River Valley, affecting states from Wisconsin to Arkansas? Remember, Iowa, where over 15% of the state was underwater, causing massive property and agricultural losses?
Well guess what? Nearly 2 months later, congress has yet to pass a Flood-Relief bill that provides Federal funding that these states were promised and are waiting on.
And where is Congressional Leadership? They are headed to the beach and then Denver, for a month long break from the stresses of achieving nothing and recording a record $490 Billion deficit.
Meanwhile, residents, newspapers, and legislative leaders are becoming increasingly concerned and irate over the fact that there are still thousands who are homeless and desperately waiting Federal Aid that was promised to them.
In a letter to Speaker Pelosi last week, Appropriations Committee member Tom Latham wrote, "In light of past, swift congressional reaction to disasters, the people of the Midwest are at a loss to understand why Congress would leave town without addressing this crisis and providing some certainty to their futures," referring the inaction of congressional leaders as "simply shameful."
Debate on the bill was tabled yet again by Democratic Leadership who contended that there was just not enough time to deal with the legislation prior to the August Recess and National Conventions. Yet, after Katrina, Republican Congressional Leadership pushed a bill through congress within 48 hours.
In Iowa, the state legislature postponed their fall recess to try to determine what additional help the state could provide since Congress has yet to step up to the plate. The lack of congressional response has caused an underreported outrage among congressional Republicans, especially considering that neither Pelosi or Reid have visited Cedar Rapids or other flood ravaged Midwestern cities.
In complaints Latham stated, “With Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, we had emergency supplemental bills virtually the next day that passed practically unanimously. The idea that we don’t have time now is ridiculous. If they brought a bill Tuesday night, it would pass just about unanimously. But the House Democratic leadership will not do it.” Latham also pointed out the ridiculous excuse that Pelosi & Reid have offered that there is not time.
Latham pointed out in the letter that congress has voted on 160+ bills since the height of the Midwest flooding on June 8th. Among those bills were:
According to Iowa's Democratic Governor the state currently has more than $1.2 Billion in unmet losses stemming from the disaster. That amount, of course, does not include losses that have occurred within Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, Indiana, Arkansas and other states devastated by the early summer floods. Democratic leaders in Iowa and surrounding states have protested the decision to table Flood-Relief funding, but their cries have fallen on the deaf ears of a narrowly-focused power hungry congressional leadership.
Iowa Senate Minority Leader, Ron Wieck, said it best in an interview last week, stating, “While they vacation, many Iowans have no place to sleep tonight. They’ve been hit hard and are struggling to get back up on their feet. It is our hope that we can get the aid our state needs in a timely manner.” Senator Wieck goes on to say, “It is disappointing that the ‘hardest working Governor in America’ could not persuade members of his own party to act in the best interest of the citizens of Iowa.”
For their part, neither Presidential candidate has used their political clout to push for a rapid passage of Midwestern Flood-Relief. The most disturbing, however, is the failure of Senator Obama (you know, that guy from Illinois) to use his new-fangled political power to push congressional leaders to quickly pass legislation. While Senator Obama has been overseas pretending to be the President, he has failed to uphold his responsibility to his constituents in Illinois, many of whom have lost their homes, businesses, and livelihood to the floods. This summers rains caused massive flooding in Illinois causing a loss of life and property that extended across the state. Which raises the question of just how much Senator Obama really cares about his constituents who are still in need of federal aid and whether he is a leader within the senate or just a puppet of Pelosi and Reid?
This congress has completely failed the American people, and despite the lessons that they should have learned from Katrina they have let down thousands upon thousands of families desperately holding on in the Midwest. The president cannot share blame for this inaction of congress. The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA responded quickly to the devastation and the president has no control over the inaction of congress. But, Bush does have one wild-card up his sleeve: Bush should exercise his executive power to cancel congress' August recess and force them into a "Special Session" to deal with the Flood-Relief legislation and our current Energy Crisis.
Today we launched a 2 week long email initiative to lobby the President and Minority congressional leaders to urge the President to CANCEL CONGRESS’ UNDUE VACATION AND CALL FOR A “SPECIAL SESSION” TO ADDRESS OUR NATIONS ENERGY CRISIS & PASS A FLOOD-RELIEF PACKAGE. The email initiative will send a unified message to the President, Vice President, Senior White House Officials, approx. 1 dozen congressmen with strong relationships with the president, and a few selected & friendly media outlets. The effort just takes seconds of your time and one click, we will do the rest.
As always, your information is not stored and will never be provided to a third party. We will need your help to spread the word, and perhaps this effort is for naught; but if no one tries then we will all pay the price. One message, one effort, 2 weeks, and potentially a chance for the President to make a stand on behalf of the American People and expose these Congressional Buffoons for who they are.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 28th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
You Can Email This Article By Clicking On The Envelope At The Bottom Of The Post
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
That’s Right! Remember the news stories just a month ago, of the massive flooding throughout the Mississippi River Valley, affecting states from Wisconsin to Arkansas? Remember, Iowa, where over 15% of the state was underwater, causing massive property and agricultural losses?
Well guess what? Nearly 2 months later, congress has yet to pass a Flood-Relief bill that provides Federal funding that these states were promised and are waiting on.
And where is Congressional Leadership? They are headed to the beach and then Denver, for a month long break from the stresses of achieving nothing and recording a record $490 Billion deficit.
Meanwhile, residents, newspapers, and legislative leaders are becoming increasingly concerned and irate over the fact that there are still thousands who are homeless and desperately waiting Federal Aid that was promised to them.
In a letter to Speaker Pelosi last week, Appropriations Committee member Tom Latham wrote, "In light of past, swift congressional reaction to disasters, the people of the Midwest are at a loss to understand why Congress would leave town without addressing this crisis and providing some certainty to their futures," referring the inaction of congressional leaders as "simply shameful."
Debate on the bill was tabled yet again by Democratic Leadership who contended that there was just not enough time to deal with the legislation prior to the August Recess and National Conventions. Yet, after Katrina, Republican Congressional Leadership pushed a bill through congress within 48 hours.
In Iowa, the state legislature postponed their fall recess to try to determine what additional help the state could provide since Congress has yet to step up to the plate. The lack of congressional response has caused an underreported outrage among congressional Republicans, especially considering that neither Pelosi or Reid have visited Cedar Rapids or other flood ravaged Midwestern cities.
In complaints Latham stated, “With Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, we had emergency supplemental bills virtually the next day that passed practically unanimously. The idea that we don’t have time now is ridiculous. If they brought a bill Tuesday night, it would pass just about unanimously. But the House Democratic leadership will not do it.” Latham also pointed out the ridiculous excuse that Pelosi & Reid have offered that there is not time.
Latham pointed out in the letter that congress has voted on 160+ bills since the height of the Midwest flooding on June 8th. Among those bills were:
- Recognizing Pittsfield, Mass., as the location of the earliest known reference to baseball.
- Designating the National Day of the Cowboy.Designating National Carriage Driving Month.
- Honoring the life of a musician who had a hit song entitled, “What’s the Use of Getting Sober When You’re Gonna Get Drunk Again.”
- Latham pointed out that more than 30,000 Iowans alone have sought FEMA assistance and the economy of Iowa is serious jeopardy of collapsing under the continued strain resulting from the floods.
According to Iowa's Democratic Governor the state currently has more than $1.2 Billion in unmet losses stemming from the disaster. That amount, of course, does not include losses that have occurred within Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, Indiana, Arkansas and other states devastated by the early summer floods. Democratic leaders in Iowa and surrounding states have protested the decision to table Flood-Relief funding, but their cries have fallen on the deaf ears of a narrowly-focused power hungry congressional leadership.
Iowa Senate Minority Leader, Ron Wieck, said it best in an interview last week, stating, “While they vacation, many Iowans have no place to sleep tonight. They’ve been hit hard and are struggling to get back up on their feet. It is our hope that we can get the aid our state needs in a timely manner.” Senator Wieck goes on to say, “It is disappointing that the ‘hardest working Governor in America’ could not persuade members of his own party to act in the best interest of the citizens of Iowa.”
For their part, neither Presidential candidate has used their political clout to push for a rapid passage of Midwestern Flood-Relief. The most disturbing, however, is the failure of Senator Obama (you know, that guy from Illinois) to use his new-fangled political power to push congressional leaders to quickly pass legislation. While Senator Obama has been overseas pretending to be the President, he has failed to uphold his responsibility to his constituents in Illinois, many of whom have lost their homes, businesses, and livelihood to the floods. This summers rains caused massive flooding in Illinois causing a loss of life and property that extended across the state. Which raises the question of just how much Senator Obama really cares about his constituents who are still in need of federal aid and whether he is a leader within the senate or just a puppet of Pelosi and Reid?
This congress has completely failed the American people, and despite the lessons that they should have learned from Katrina they have let down thousands upon thousands of families desperately holding on in the Midwest. The president cannot share blame for this inaction of congress. The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA responded quickly to the devastation and the president has no control over the inaction of congress. But, Bush does have one wild-card up his sleeve: Bush should exercise his executive power to cancel congress' August recess and force them into a "Special Session" to deal with the Flood-Relief legislation and our current Energy Crisis.
Today we launched a 2 week long email initiative to lobby the President and Minority congressional leaders to urge the President to CANCEL CONGRESS’ UNDUE VACATION AND CALL FOR A “SPECIAL SESSION” TO ADDRESS OUR NATIONS ENERGY CRISIS & PASS A FLOOD-RELIEF PACKAGE. The email initiative will send a unified message to the President, Vice President, Senior White House Officials, approx. 1 dozen congressmen with strong relationships with the president, and a few selected & friendly media outlets. The effort just takes seconds of your time and one click, we will do the rest.
As always, your information is not stored and will never be provided to a third party. We will need your help to spread the word, and perhaps this effort is for naught; but if no one tries then we will all pay the price. One message, one effort, 2 weeks, and potentially a chance for the President to make a stand on behalf of the American People and expose these Congressional Buffoons for who they are.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy & Flood-Relief Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 28th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
You Can Email This Article By Clicking On The Envelope At The Bottom Of The Post
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Send A Message To Bush To Cancel Congress' August Recess!
President Bush may have been relegated to a lame-duck presidency in his final months before leaving office, but the President still has the opportunity to flex his presidential muscle and make life just a little less comfortable for a congress who has achieved the lowest approval ratings in history.
Congress is scheduled to begin it's August recess following the successful blocking of legislative attempts to pass energy legislation including the lifting of the congressional moratorium on offshore drilling. Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi both understand that the funding bill, that must be renewed annually and provides for the moratorium will expire on September 30th. However, just because the Department of Interior funding dries up on the 30th, doesn't mean that congress will have to approve a new funding bill by then. Reid and Pelosi are fully hoping to continue to stonewall efforts by delaying a vote on the funding bill that includes the moratorium. Although they can delay the funding bill through passing temporary spending bills to allow the interior department to continue to operate, they cannot do it indefinitely. Sooner or later they will have to debate the Department of Interior Bill that includes the moratorium. The plan of Reid and Pelosi, however, is to delay the legislation until after the November elections and the new congress takes office. By doing so, they hope to pick up enough new seats in either the Senate or House to offset the votes of Democrats who have broken from party lines.
Currently, Reid & Pelosi, understand that a debate on energy legislation will only harm the careers of those opposed and that there is enough bipartisan support that legislation such as "the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" would pass. Although it is unlikely that Democrats would pick up enough seats in the House to kill such legislation, Reid only needs a few votes in the Senate to block any amendment to the Interior Funding Bill or any additional legislation. As a result of this blatant political self-indulgence, the American people are left to suffer from a congress that has failed to act in accordance with the wishes of their constituency and for whom has proven that their own political power is more important than dealing with high energy costs that will continue to cripple our economy.
Last week an increase in the Federal Minimum Wage went into affect only to be accompanied by stories that the increase has been eaten up by rising price of fuel and consumer goods. Although lower wage workers have received some relief, middle class Americans, the silent majority, who make up the backbone of our economy, have received no relief. This fall the middle class of this nation will flip on their furnaces as temperatures cool, only to discover the home heating costs have doubled or tripled in many cases. As the pocket books of the middle class shrivel, congressional leaders have shown that they just don’t care.
President Bush has no power to force congress to pass energy legislation or end the stonewalling of legislation that would provide an important first step in developing a comprehensive energy plan. But the President does have the power to inconvenience congress and flood the newspapers with articles highlighting the failures of congressional leaders.
President Bush retains executive powers under the constitution and subsequent laws that allow him to force Congress into an “Extra” or “Special Session” when the nation faces extraordinary challenges. Since the 20th Amendment was passed, only 2 presidents have called for special sessions, primarily due to the year long activity of Congress. But I can think of no issue that is more important than an energy crisis that threatens to force our economy into a stagflation similar to the 1970’s. If Reid and Pelosi want to play politics with the work of the people then President Bush should exercise his executive powers and immediately cancel Congress’ fall recess.
In one executive order the President would not only inconvenience Reid and Pelosi, but would force congressional debate on energy legislation that they are trying to avoid. The subsequent “special session” would bring to the forefront of national news that blatant attempts by congressional leadership to block legislation supported by 75% of Americans.
Today we have suspended our “Drill Now” Email Initiative which has resulted in more that 150,000 congressional emails in the past 11 days, and are launching a 2 week long email initiative to lobby the President and Minority congressional leaders to urge the President to CANCEL CONGRESS’ UNDUE VACATION AND CALL FOR A “SPECIAL SESSION” TO ADDRESS OUR NATIONS ENERGY CRISIS.
The email initiative will send a unified message to the President, Vice President, Senior White House Officials, approx. 1 dozen congressmen with strong relationships with the president, and a few selected & friendly media outlets. The effort just takes seconds of your time and one click, we will do the rest. As always, your information is not stored and will never be provided to a third party. We will need your help to spread the word, and perhaps this effort is for naught; but if no one tries then we will all pay the price. One message, one effort, 2 weeks, and potentially a chance for the President to make a stand on behalf of the American People and expose these Congressional Buffoons for who they are.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 28th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
You Can Email This Article By Clicking On The Envelope At The Bottom Of The Post
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Congress is scheduled to begin it's August recess following the successful blocking of legislative attempts to pass energy legislation including the lifting of the congressional moratorium on offshore drilling. Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi both understand that the funding bill, that must be renewed annually and provides for the moratorium will expire on September 30th. However, just because the Department of Interior funding dries up on the 30th, doesn't mean that congress will have to approve a new funding bill by then. Reid and Pelosi are fully hoping to continue to stonewall efforts by delaying a vote on the funding bill that includes the moratorium. Although they can delay the funding bill through passing temporary spending bills to allow the interior department to continue to operate, they cannot do it indefinitely. Sooner or later they will have to debate the Department of Interior Bill that includes the moratorium. The plan of Reid and Pelosi, however, is to delay the legislation until after the November elections and the new congress takes office. By doing so, they hope to pick up enough new seats in either the Senate or House to offset the votes of Democrats who have broken from party lines.
Currently, Reid & Pelosi, understand that a debate on energy legislation will only harm the careers of those opposed and that there is enough bipartisan support that legislation such as "the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" would pass. Although it is unlikely that Democrats would pick up enough seats in the House to kill such legislation, Reid only needs a few votes in the Senate to block any amendment to the Interior Funding Bill or any additional legislation. As a result of this blatant political self-indulgence, the American people are left to suffer from a congress that has failed to act in accordance with the wishes of their constituency and for whom has proven that their own political power is more important than dealing with high energy costs that will continue to cripple our economy.
Last week an increase in the Federal Minimum Wage went into affect only to be accompanied by stories that the increase has been eaten up by rising price of fuel and consumer goods. Although lower wage workers have received some relief, middle class Americans, the silent majority, who make up the backbone of our economy, have received no relief. This fall the middle class of this nation will flip on their furnaces as temperatures cool, only to discover the home heating costs have doubled or tripled in many cases. As the pocket books of the middle class shrivel, congressional leaders have shown that they just don’t care.
President Bush has no power to force congress to pass energy legislation or end the stonewalling of legislation that would provide an important first step in developing a comprehensive energy plan. But the President does have the power to inconvenience congress and flood the newspapers with articles highlighting the failures of congressional leaders.
President Bush retains executive powers under the constitution and subsequent laws that allow him to force Congress into an “Extra” or “Special Session” when the nation faces extraordinary challenges. Since the 20th Amendment was passed, only 2 presidents have called for special sessions, primarily due to the year long activity of Congress. But I can think of no issue that is more important than an energy crisis that threatens to force our economy into a stagflation similar to the 1970’s. If Reid and Pelosi want to play politics with the work of the people then President Bush should exercise his executive powers and immediately cancel Congress’ fall recess.
In one executive order the President would not only inconvenience Reid and Pelosi, but would force congressional debate on energy legislation that they are trying to avoid. The subsequent “special session” would bring to the forefront of national news that blatant attempts by congressional leadership to block legislation supported by 75% of Americans.
Today we have suspended our “Drill Now” Email Initiative which has resulted in more that 150,000 congressional emails in the past 11 days, and are launching a 2 week long email initiative to lobby the President and Minority congressional leaders to urge the President to CANCEL CONGRESS’ UNDUE VACATION AND CALL FOR A “SPECIAL SESSION” TO ADDRESS OUR NATIONS ENERGY CRISIS.
The email initiative will send a unified message to the President, Vice President, Senior White House Officials, approx. 1 dozen congressmen with strong relationships with the president, and a few selected & friendly media outlets. The effort just takes seconds of your time and one click, we will do the rest. As always, your information is not stored and will never be provided to a third party. We will need your help to spread the word, and perhaps this effort is for naught; but if no one tries then we will all pay the price. One message, one effort, 2 weeks, and potentially a chance for the President to make a stand on behalf of the American People and expose these Congressional Buffoons for who they are.
Click Here To Access the “Cancel Congress’ Vacation” Energy Initiative & Learn More
J Brown
July 28th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
You Can Email This Article By Clicking On The Envelope At The Bottom Of The Post
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
'President Bush, Order A "Special Session" Of Congress' Email Initiative
Over the past 2 months Congressional Leadership has blatantly worked to block efforts to enact any legislation designed to decrease our dependence upon foreign oil, increase incentives and investment in new technologies and alternative energy, create American jobs, and stop the transfer of Billions of Dollars in our wealth to other countries. 18 months ago the Democratic Party took control of congress upon a platform of lowering energy prices and decreasing our reliance upon foreign oil. Today, Senator Reid, Speaker of the House Pelosi, Senator Obama, and a handful of stubborn congressional leaders are holding up legislation which will provide the first step towards renewing American Energy Independence.
Over the course of 18 months congressional leadership has done nothing and developed no plan to deal with energy and fuel costs that are beyond control. Yet despite these failures congressional leadership feels that it deserves a vacation, even while middle class Americans recieve no vacation for the rising tide of oil, food, and consumer goods prices.
President Bush has the executive power to order Congress into an "Extra" or "Special Session" in order to force the debate on energy proposals that have been blocked by congressional leadership. President Bush should immediately use this power to end the congressional vacation and bring the incompetence of current congressional leadership to the forefront of the news.
Today join our 2 week long initiative to lobby the Presdident to exercise his executive powers. The form below is a simple form that we have developed. Complete the form and press submit. An email will automatically be generated and sent to the direct email addresses of The President, Vice-President, key White House Staffers, The RNC Chairman and Co-Chair, 9 Congressional leaders who support comprehensive energy reform, and several friendly media outlets. All with one click.
Chances are this won't work, after all I am a realist. But, if no one tries, including you, then you, then this cycle of power before the people will never end.
There is a link to email this article at the bottom of the post, and feel free to link to this page. If you would like to add this form to your website please contact us, for a small donation of $10 to cover our expenses we will provide the script to place the webform on your site. Please remember to help support our efforts through a small donation.
*All information collected is not sold to third parties or used in any solicitation from us. You may receive a return email from certain congressional leaders telling you to submit to another email address. Don't worry we submit to any addresses we become aware of.Please Check back for updates including information on how many emails we have sent out. If you are aware of direct email addresses you think should be added to the list, please contact us or post in the comments section below (not on the email form). We will add any email addresses not already included.
Over the course of 18 months congressional leadership has done nothing and developed no plan to deal with energy and fuel costs that are beyond control. Yet despite these failures congressional leadership feels that it deserves a vacation, even while middle class Americans recieve no vacation for the rising tide of oil, food, and consumer goods prices.
President Bush has the executive power to order Congress into an "Extra" or "Special Session" in order to force the debate on energy proposals that have been blocked by congressional leadership. President Bush should immediately use this power to end the congressional vacation and bring the incompetence of current congressional leadership to the forefront of the news.
Today join our 2 week long initiative to lobby the Presdident to exercise his executive powers. The form below is a simple form that we have developed. Complete the form and press submit. An email will automatically be generated and sent to the direct email addresses of The President, Vice-President, key White House Staffers, The RNC Chairman and Co-Chair, 9 Congressional leaders who support comprehensive energy reform, and several friendly media outlets. All with one click.
Chances are this won't work, after all I am a realist. But, if no one tries, including you, then you, then this cycle of power before the people will never end.
There is a link to email this article at the bottom of the post, and feel free to link to this page. If you would like to add this form to your website please contact us, for a small donation of $10 to cover our expenses we will provide the script to place the webform on your site. Please remember to help support our efforts through a small donation.
*All information collected is not sold to third parties or used in any solicitation from us. You may receive a return email from certain congressional leaders telling you to submit to another email address. Don't worry we submit to any addresses we become aware of.Please Check back for updates including information on how many emails we have sent out. If you are aware of direct email addresses you think should be added to the list, please contact us or post in the comments section below (not on the email form). We will add any email addresses not already included.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
The Effective Way Of Driving Speculation Out Of The Market!
The Fighting on capital hill intensified this week as the ominous reality set in that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have no intention of allowing the 'Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008' or similar legislation to be open to debate and a vote. But why?? There is a simple explanation, both Reid & Pelosi know that if a common sense bill such as the 'Gas Price Reduction Act' were to be advertised within the media, public opinion would turn sharply against those opposing the bill.
The bill would not only allow the lifting of the Federal Congressional Moratorium against offshore drilling, but would also provide incentives and investment in industries seeking alternative energies, long-life batteries and other energy-efficiency technologies. In addition, the bill would also expand the funding of Federal Agencies charged with monitoring the commodities markets and identifying manipulation or other questionable activities within the markets. The bill is not a solution to our leg of the global energy crisis, but does provide an important first step in building a realistic and comprehensive energy policy that operates on a simple principle of "DO IT All, DO IT NOW!"
In life when your faced with a hardship you do whatever you can do in order to solve the problem. In our government, there is a mentality that you do nothing because you are beholden to certain special interests. Reid & Pelosi know that once debate opened they would subject themselves to criticism and damage the possibility of expanding a majority status in congress. Reid and Pelosi also know that there is enough bipartisan support within both houses for these bills that they would PASS! By Senator Reid's own admission earlier this month, he admitted that only 80% of the Democrat Caucus was on board with his party line.
Instead of genuine solutions, Reid & Pelosi seem bent on taking the easy and political expedient routes. Their first attempts were to pass the 'Use it or Lose it Bill' built upon discredited and outright false statistical data put together by congressional staffers. The bill was condemned by nearly every government agency, energy based organization, economists and professional geological societies as damaging to US energy production. Oh by the way, the bill would have double the cost of offshore and land-based leases within 5 years.
Now Pelosi & Reid have taken the approach of passing their own failures to carry out their campaign promises of lowering energy costs onto market speculators. Market speculation should be addresses, but passing massive new regulations won't necessarily solve the problem. First, new regulations are only as effective as the ability of Federal Agencies to carry out the enforcement of the new regulations. Federal Agencies in charge of commodities monitoring are already stretched and unable to effectively carry out the monitoring of current rules and regulations. Second, how do we define who speculators are? After all a major reason for the increase in commodities investments have not come from individuals traditionally defined as market speculators. Instead a majority of the money taking flight into the commodities markets have come for institutional investors who are abandoning a volatile stock market driven by stagflation concerns and crumbling bond market driven by a declining dollar, inflation concerns, and that 'credit crunch'. Those institutional investors, for the most part, are the managers of major pension funds for government and private industry pension plans, meaning that an attack upon their investment abilities is also an attack upon their abilities to achieve necessary performance to keep millions of Americans pension plans afloat. It is simple for us to push the blame for oil prices upon the so-called 'speculators', but at the same time, we must look at the reality of who these 'speculators' are.
My question is simply: What is Speculation?? Speculation is simply an investment in or out of a particular business, commodity or market instrument. After all, anyone who invests in a securities market is speculating; there are no guarantees of performance, only the hope that sound economic management will produce results. Investment or 'Speculation' in commodities markets is driven by market trends (such as the current flight from stocks & bonds), supply and demand, environmental effects (weather, natural disasters, etc...) and government regulation. Addressing the underlying issues that affect the investment in commodities will directly affect commodities prices. If we want to control speculation, then we must address the underlying reasons for speculation.
Obviously our government has no control over the 'environmental effects' driving commodities markets, nor the cyclical market trends that affect increased or decreased speculation. What the government does have control over is the 'Supply' and 'Regulatory' aspects of commodity performance. Regulating the markets is no substitute for regulating the underlying commodity. Therefore, the best way to drive down commodities prices is to simply take steps that would affect the 'Supply' or 'Regulatory' aspects of the particular market.
Nearly two weeks ago, two events occurred that clearly demonstrated this reality. President Bush lifted his moratorium on Offshore Domestic Oil Production and demanded that congress do the same; secondly, Secretary Paulson warned that the high prices of oil were causing undue inflationary pressures upon our already struggling economy. As a result, the oil prices dropped dramatically in the hours following each of these to events and since have dropped more than $20 or 15% off of their highs. The effect on consumers has led to gas prices at the pump dropping by up to 50 cents per gallon in some areas (They have dropped by exactly 50 cents per gallon where I live).
Government & non-government reports have varied concerning the affect of speculation on pricing, with estimates ranging from very little effect to $30-$50 per barrel of oil. Even if speculation did result in increased prices of $50 per barrel, then that would mean that the remarks of Bush and Paulson started a sell-off within oil futures resulting in more than a 40% reduction in "speculation driven-pricing". Imagine the affect if congress was to send a clear message to the markets that the US was prepared to initiate a comprehensive energy policy designed to "Do It All and Do It Now". Passing further regulations in which our government has not committed the resources to enforcing will never provide a short-term solution or long-term solution to ending our dependence of foreign oil, increasing supply, and retaining and creating US wealth. It is time congress '%@#) or get off the pot' and it is time the President Bush exercise his executive powers and force congress to debate and implement comprehensive measures aimed to addressing our energy crisis and the massive transfer of American wealth to foreign nations.
Today, Sunday July 27th, is the last day of our Drill Now email initiative to congressional leaders. In the past 1 1/2 weeks our readers have sent more than 140,000 emails to congressional leaders calling for congress to stop blocking debate on bills aimed at providing increased domestic energy production. Tonight at 11 pm CST we will temporarily suspend our email initiative and launch a new 2 week long initiative aimed at calling upon President Bush to exercise his Executive Powers to force congress to open up debate and carry out the expressed will of the American People. This limited opportunity will give the President the opportunity to demonstrate to the American People who the congressional members are that are working to solve our energy crisis and who those members are that have no concern for middle class Americans. Please participate in our Energy Initiative today and then come back tomorrow to participate in our newest initiative.
CLICK HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR DRILL NOW EMAIL INITIATIVE
J Brown
July 27th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Over 140,000 Congressional Emails in less than 2 weeks, Join our Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 120,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
The bill would not only allow the lifting of the Federal Congressional Moratorium against offshore drilling, but would also provide incentives and investment in industries seeking alternative energies, long-life batteries and other energy-efficiency technologies. In addition, the bill would also expand the funding of Federal Agencies charged with monitoring the commodities markets and identifying manipulation or other questionable activities within the markets. The bill is not a solution to our leg of the global energy crisis, but does provide an important first step in building a realistic and comprehensive energy policy that operates on a simple principle of "DO IT All, DO IT NOW!"
In life when your faced with a hardship you do whatever you can do in order to solve the problem. In our government, there is a mentality that you do nothing because you are beholden to certain special interests. Reid & Pelosi know that once debate opened they would subject themselves to criticism and damage the possibility of expanding a majority status in congress. Reid and Pelosi also know that there is enough bipartisan support within both houses for these bills that they would PASS! By Senator Reid's own admission earlier this month, he admitted that only 80% of the Democrat Caucus was on board with his party line.
Instead of genuine solutions, Reid & Pelosi seem bent on taking the easy and political expedient routes. Their first attempts were to pass the 'Use it or Lose it Bill' built upon discredited and outright false statistical data put together by congressional staffers. The bill was condemned by nearly every government agency, energy based organization, economists and professional geological societies as damaging to US energy production. Oh by the way, the bill would have double the cost of offshore and land-based leases within 5 years.
Now Pelosi & Reid have taken the approach of passing their own failures to carry out their campaign promises of lowering energy costs onto market speculators. Market speculation should be addresses, but passing massive new regulations won't necessarily solve the problem. First, new regulations are only as effective as the ability of Federal Agencies to carry out the enforcement of the new regulations. Federal Agencies in charge of commodities monitoring are already stretched and unable to effectively carry out the monitoring of current rules and regulations. Second, how do we define who speculators are? After all a major reason for the increase in commodities investments have not come from individuals traditionally defined as market speculators. Instead a majority of the money taking flight into the commodities markets have come for institutional investors who are abandoning a volatile stock market driven by stagflation concerns and crumbling bond market driven by a declining dollar, inflation concerns, and that 'credit crunch'. Those institutional investors, for the most part, are the managers of major pension funds for government and private industry pension plans, meaning that an attack upon their investment abilities is also an attack upon their abilities to achieve necessary performance to keep millions of Americans pension plans afloat. It is simple for us to push the blame for oil prices upon the so-called 'speculators', but at the same time, we must look at the reality of who these 'speculators' are.
My question is simply: What is Speculation?? Speculation is simply an investment in or out of a particular business, commodity or market instrument. After all, anyone who invests in a securities market is speculating; there are no guarantees of performance, only the hope that sound economic management will produce results. Investment or 'Speculation' in commodities markets is driven by market trends (such as the current flight from stocks & bonds), supply and demand, environmental effects (weather, natural disasters, etc...) and government regulation. Addressing the underlying issues that affect the investment in commodities will directly affect commodities prices. If we want to control speculation, then we must address the underlying reasons for speculation.
Obviously our government has no control over the 'environmental effects' driving commodities markets, nor the cyclical market trends that affect increased or decreased speculation. What the government does have control over is the 'Supply' and 'Regulatory' aspects of commodity performance. Regulating the markets is no substitute for regulating the underlying commodity. Therefore, the best way to drive down commodities prices is to simply take steps that would affect the 'Supply' or 'Regulatory' aspects of the particular market.
Nearly two weeks ago, two events occurred that clearly demonstrated this reality. President Bush lifted his moratorium on Offshore Domestic Oil Production and demanded that congress do the same; secondly, Secretary Paulson warned that the high prices of oil were causing undue inflationary pressures upon our already struggling economy. As a result, the oil prices dropped dramatically in the hours following each of these to events and since have dropped more than $20 or 15% off of their highs. The effect on consumers has led to gas prices at the pump dropping by up to 50 cents per gallon in some areas (They have dropped by exactly 50 cents per gallon where I live).
Government & non-government reports have varied concerning the affect of speculation on pricing, with estimates ranging from very little effect to $30-$50 per barrel of oil. Even if speculation did result in increased prices of $50 per barrel, then that would mean that the remarks of Bush and Paulson started a sell-off within oil futures resulting in more than a 40% reduction in "speculation driven-pricing". Imagine the affect if congress was to send a clear message to the markets that the US was prepared to initiate a comprehensive energy policy designed to "Do It All and Do It Now". Passing further regulations in which our government has not committed the resources to enforcing will never provide a short-term solution or long-term solution to ending our dependence of foreign oil, increasing supply, and retaining and creating US wealth. It is time congress '%@#) or get off the pot' and it is time the President Bush exercise his executive powers and force congress to debate and implement comprehensive measures aimed to addressing our energy crisis and the massive transfer of American wealth to foreign nations.
Today, Sunday July 27th, is the last day of our Drill Now email initiative to congressional leaders. In the past 1 1/2 weeks our readers have sent more than 140,000 emails to congressional leaders calling for congress to stop blocking debate on bills aimed at providing increased domestic energy production. Tonight at 11 pm CST we will temporarily suspend our email initiative and launch a new 2 week long initiative aimed at calling upon President Bush to exercise his Executive Powers to force congress to open up debate and carry out the expressed will of the American People. This limited opportunity will give the President the opportunity to demonstrate to the American People who the congressional members are that are working to solve our energy crisis and who those members are that have no concern for middle class Americans. Please participate in our Energy Initiative today and then come back tomorrow to participate in our newest initiative.
CLICK HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR DRILL NOW EMAIL INITIATIVE
J Brown
July 27th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Over 140,000 Congressional Emails in less than 2 weeks, Join our Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 120,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
136,450 Democrats & Independents Against Obama Emails & Counting! July 26th, Update
Wow!
This morning we have updated the 'Last Stand' Email Initiative to stop the nomination of Barack Obama has passed the 136,000 mark. To date we have targeted approximately 1/4 of the Superdelegates and plan on reaching all of them, including the Superdelegates that have pledged support to Hillary Clinton, prior to the Democratic Convention.
Now is the time to try one last attempt to convince Democrat Superdelegates to drop Obama and reform the Democratic Primary System an re-establish the rule of "equal representation".
Thank you to those few have donated to offset the maintenance and time involved with this project, and thank you to those who have emailed me to thank me or to ask questions. I have been slow to respond, as I seem to be bombarded with emails from unhappy Obama supporters. I will respond to friendly emails, it may just take me a few days to do so. There have also been numerous emails as to why I have set-up this initiative, some out of curiosity some for other reasons. If you've visited our site from the beginning, then you know that I am a John McCain Supporter but that I also believe that an election should be a contest between the 2 candidates best suited to be President. I have seen, first hand, what Obama and his Chicago buddies have done the government in Illinois, and I will not stand by and risk that occurring on a national scale. I would welcome a Clinton or McCain presidency, and if there is any opportunity to keep Obama from being one-step closer the presidency then I welcome the opportunity.
I also have gained a great deal of personal respect for a group of Democrats, many life-long Democrats, who have realized that their party is no longer the party of FDR, Truman and Kennedy; it is the party of McGovern, Carter, Dukakis, Pelosi and Reid. They recognize that the party which has decried disenfranchisement and pointed fingers in the past is the very party responsible for manipulating their own primary system resulting in the most widespread volume of fraud and disenfranchisement in American Political history. We may not agree on all political positions, but we agree that this nation was built upon the ideal of "equal representation" and a government that works for the people rather than to secure more power.
Thank you again to all those who have donated and the list has been updated as of this morning. The next update will occur on Tuesday morning. With that in mind, when you complete the form, please remember the costs and time that I am committing to this project and consider a small donation. This will allow us to continue to maintain the form and update it on time every three days. Also, please remember to visit every three days to resubmit your email to the updated lists of Superdelegates.
Click Here For "Last Stand" Email Initiative For Pumas
J Brown
July 26th, 2008
Tired Of High Gas Prices? Send a message to congress to do it all and do it now! Join our Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
This morning we have updated the 'Last Stand' Email Initiative to stop the nomination of Barack Obama has passed the 136,000 mark. To date we have targeted approximately 1/4 of the Superdelegates and plan on reaching all of them, including the Superdelegates that have pledged support to Hillary Clinton, prior to the Democratic Convention.
Now is the time to try one last attempt to convince Democrat Superdelegates to drop Obama and reform the Democratic Primary System an re-establish the rule of "equal representation".
Thank you to those few have donated to offset the maintenance and time involved with this project, and thank you to those who have emailed me to thank me or to ask questions. I have been slow to respond, as I seem to be bombarded with emails from unhappy Obama supporters. I will respond to friendly emails, it may just take me a few days to do so. There have also been numerous emails as to why I have set-up this initiative, some out of curiosity some for other reasons. If you've visited our site from the beginning, then you know that I am a John McCain Supporter but that I also believe that an election should be a contest between the 2 candidates best suited to be President. I have seen, first hand, what Obama and his Chicago buddies have done the government in Illinois, and I will not stand by and risk that occurring on a national scale. I would welcome a Clinton or McCain presidency, and if there is any opportunity to keep Obama from being one-step closer the presidency then I welcome the opportunity.
I also have gained a great deal of personal respect for a group of Democrats, many life-long Democrats, who have realized that their party is no longer the party of FDR, Truman and Kennedy; it is the party of McGovern, Carter, Dukakis, Pelosi and Reid. They recognize that the party which has decried disenfranchisement and pointed fingers in the past is the very party responsible for manipulating their own primary system resulting in the most widespread volume of fraud and disenfranchisement in American Political history. We may not agree on all political positions, but we agree that this nation was built upon the ideal of "equal representation" and a government that works for the people rather than to secure more power.
Thank you again to all those who have donated and the list has been updated as of this morning. The next update will occur on Tuesday morning. With that in mind, when you complete the form, please remember the costs and time that I am committing to this project and consider a small donation. This will allow us to continue to maintain the form and update it on time every three days. Also, please remember to visit every three days to resubmit your email to the updated lists of Superdelegates.
Click Here For "Last Stand" Email Initiative For Pumas
J Brown
July 26th, 2008
Tired Of High Gas Prices? Send a message to congress to do it all and do it now! Join our Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Fox News: 75% Want Drilling Now!! 108,000 Drill Now Emails to Congress In 1 Week Via PDOP
Fox News just released their Opinion Dynamics poll showing that Barack Obama's lead over John McCain has shriveled to just 1%, echoing repeated tracking polls by Gallup and Rasmussen that also show Obama with the narrowest of leads.
In the poll, Fox News and Opinion Dynamics also found that 75% of Americans Want The Government to immediately lift the Federal Moratorium and allow drilling to begin NOW!
In the past 8 Days, our readers have submitted more than 108,000 Emails to congress via our Drill Now congressional email initiative. By taking just seconds out of your time, you can send a uniform message to congressional leaders including Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to end their stone-walling of bills and amendments that would lift the moratorium on offshore drilling.
The Drill Now Email Initiative designed to work in conjunction with the Drill Here, Drill Now Petition. The effort is to force a handful of Democratic Congressional Leaders, along with some Republicans, to stop their attempts to block the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" a bill that would remove the moratorium on offshore drilling, remove the moratorium placed on Oil Shale Exploration by congress last year, Offers incentives and investment in electric vehicle and alternative energy development, and increases funding and oversight provisions within the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the group that monitors commodities activities such as speculation).
Help us in our efforts to send a message to congress to pass the "Gas Price Reduction Act Of 2008" as an important first step in developing a comprehensive energy policy that focuses on increased domestic production, investments in alternative energy, and conservation. Join our Drill Now Email Initiative today and help us to send 1 million emails to congress in the coming weeks. It only takes seconds to complete our simple form and we do the rest.
CLICK HERE FOR THE DRILL NOW EMAIL INITIATIVE
J Brown
July 24th, 2008
In the poll, Fox News and Opinion Dynamics also found that 75% of Americans Want The Government to immediately lift the Federal Moratorium and allow drilling to begin NOW!
In the past 8 Days, our readers have submitted more than 108,000 Emails to congress via our Drill Now congressional email initiative. By taking just seconds out of your time, you can send a uniform message to congressional leaders including Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to end their stone-walling of bills and amendments that would lift the moratorium on offshore drilling.
The Drill Now Email Initiative designed to work in conjunction with the Drill Here, Drill Now Petition. The effort is to force a handful of Democratic Congressional Leaders, along with some Republicans, to stop their attempts to block the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" a bill that would remove the moratorium on offshore drilling, remove the moratorium placed on Oil Shale Exploration by congress last year, Offers incentives and investment in electric vehicle and alternative energy development, and increases funding and oversight provisions within the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the group that monitors commodities activities such as speculation).
Help us in our efforts to send a message to congress to pass the "Gas Price Reduction Act Of 2008" as an important first step in developing a comprehensive energy policy that focuses on increased domestic production, investments in alternative energy, and conservation. Join our Drill Now Email Initiative today and help us to send 1 million emails to congress in the coming weeks. It only takes seconds to complete our simple form and we do the rest.
CLICK HERE FOR THE DRILL NOW EMAIL INITIATIVE
J Brown
July 24th, 2008
NBC/WaPo Pollsters Are 'Cooking The Books'
On Wednesday NBC & Washington Post released their poll results showing that Barack Obama had a 6 point lead over John McCain. The results are in line with other polling data released by the large media outlets. As a result I can accept the overall polling numbers. But, as you look into the poll, you begin to wonder if NBC pollsters are properly disclosing the questions they ask and how they extrapolate their data. Portions of the polling numbers are contradictory and borderline nonsensical.
In a 2 way race, NBC reports that Barack Obama earns 47% of the vote, with McCain earning 41% and 12% of registered voters remaining undecided. NBC claims that these results were based upon a simple question asking which candidate respondents would vote for. But where the polling data becomes perplexing is when NBC asks the question of who respondents would vote for in a four-way race between Obama, McCain, Barr, & Nader. According to NBC pollsters Obama would earn 48% of vote, John McCain earns 35%, Bob Barr gets 2% with Ralph Nader topping 5% of the votes. Additionally, the results reflect 10% of voters as undecided. Now, Reread this paragraph and if you don't recognize the screwiness of the results, read it again.
According to NBC pollsters, in a 4 way race Bob Barr, a libertarian would earn 2% of the vote. Honestly, this number is fair and it makes complete sense that the votes that Barr would earn would be shaved off the totals of John McCain. After all, Barr ran under the Republican banner for years before making his decision to switch affiliations to the Libertarian Party.
On the other hand, according to NBC pollsters, over 10% of those voting for McCain would vote for Ralph Nader if his name were on the ballot. Nader is too the left of Liberal in his views and his candidacy is built upon an anti-business, highly socialized platform. Many Democrats have blamed Nader's 2000 Presidential Run as the reason for an Al Gore's general election loss, and every pundit and political analyst will tell you that Nader's name on the ballot will hurt Obama. Yet, according to NBC pollsters, Nader's support magically comes from those supporting John McCain in a general election; a candidate who is a national security hawk and supports the expansion of domestic oil production. Two policies that Ralph Nader supporters hold dear and staunchly oppose.
I will admit that there is likely some Democrats that have such a mistrust of Obama that they would vote for McCain in a two-way race; but the notion that more than 10% of McCain's supporters would drop off the books and vote for Ralph Nader is nonsensical and ridiculous at best.
The most disturbing number in the poll, however, is Obama's magically rising number. Perhaps someone could explain to me how it is that, not only does Obama lose no support in a race with Nader's name on the ballot, but how it is that his polling number increases to 48%? That's right, in the course of a few minutes, John McCains supporters told NBC pollsters that they would prefer to vote for Nader and apparently no less than 5 respondents changed from undecided to Obama. Hmm... So let me get this straight:
NBC Poll Scenario #1:
Obama or McCain? Not Sure who I'd vote for.
But what if Nader & Barr were on the ticket? Well then there's no doubt, I'm voting Obama!
NBC Poll Scenario #2:
Obama or McCain? Definitely McCain!
But what if Nader & Barr were on the ticket? Well then there's no doubt, I'm voting Nader!
Sorry, but am I the only one who sees a problem in these results? Have NBC Pollsters been sipping the Kool-Aid? The NBC poll suggests that in a four-way race Obama enjoys a 13 point lead, which begs to question whether we should now consider NBC/WaPo polls as outliers?
There is an explanation as to NBC's outrageous numbers: They are "Cooking the Books". According to NBC, the 4-way race question was only asked of half of the approximately 1,000 participants. But who were these respondents and how did NBC determine who was to be asked the question? Considering that just prior to this question, NBC asked participants about excitement levels, it's pretty safe to assume that their pollsters tended to ask the 4-way race question to a disproportionate number of respondents who claimed they were extremely excited about voting for Obama and not excited about voting for McCain (therby increasing Obama's numbers and decreasing McCain's). In other words, pollsters asked questions that would allow them to pick and choose respondents that would produce the results they were seeking. As a result, we get these ridiculous polling numbers that suggest that 10% of McCain supporters would vote for Nader if given the chance and 1% of undecided voters magically made a decision over the course of 2 minutes.
J Brown
July 24th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Over 103,000 Congressional Emails in just 8 days, Join our Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 120,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
In a 2 way race, NBC reports that Barack Obama earns 47% of the vote, with McCain earning 41% and 12% of registered voters remaining undecided. NBC claims that these results were based upon a simple question asking which candidate respondents would vote for. But where the polling data becomes perplexing is when NBC asks the question of who respondents would vote for in a four-way race between Obama, McCain, Barr, & Nader. According to NBC pollsters Obama would earn 48% of vote, John McCain earns 35%, Bob Barr gets 2% with Ralph Nader topping 5% of the votes. Additionally, the results reflect 10% of voters as undecided. Now, Reread this paragraph and if you don't recognize the screwiness of the results, read it again.
According to NBC pollsters, in a 4 way race Bob Barr, a libertarian would earn 2% of the vote. Honestly, this number is fair and it makes complete sense that the votes that Barr would earn would be shaved off the totals of John McCain. After all, Barr ran under the Republican banner for years before making his decision to switch affiliations to the Libertarian Party.
On the other hand, according to NBC pollsters, over 10% of those voting for McCain would vote for Ralph Nader if his name were on the ballot. Nader is too the left of Liberal in his views and his candidacy is built upon an anti-business, highly socialized platform. Many Democrats have blamed Nader's 2000 Presidential Run as the reason for an Al Gore's general election loss, and every pundit and political analyst will tell you that Nader's name on the ballot will hurt Obama. Yet, according to NBC pollsters, Nader's support magically comes from those supporting John McCain in a general election; a candidate who is a national security hawk and supports the expansion of domestic oil production. Two policies that Ralph Nader supporters hold dear and staunchly oppose.
I will admit that there is likely some Democrats that have such a mistrust of Obama that they would vote for McCain in a two-way race; but the notion that more than 10% of McCain's supporters would drop off the books and vote for Ralph Nader is nonsensical and ridiculous at best.
The most disturbing number in the poll, however, is Obama's magically rising number. Perhaps someone could explain to me how it is that, not only does Obama lose no support in a race with Nader's name on the ballot, but how it is that his polling number increases to 48%? That's right, in the course of a few minutes, John McCains supporters told NBC pollsters that they would prefer to vote for Nader and apparently no less than 5 respondents changed from undecided to Obama. Hmm... So let me get this straight:
NBC Poll Scenario #1:
Obama or McCain? Not Sure who I'd vote for.
But what if Nader & Barr were on the ticket? Well then there's no doubt, I'm voting Obama!
NBC Poll Scenario #2:
Obama or McCain? Definitely McCain!
But what if Nader & Barr were on the ticket? Well then there's no doubt, I'm voting Nader!
Sorry, but am I the only one who sees a problem in these results? Have NBC Pollsters been sipping the Kool-Aid? The NBC poll suggests that in a four-way race Obama enjoys a 13 point lead, which begs to question whether we should now consider NBC/WaPo polls as outliers?
There is an explanation as to NBC's outrageous numbers: They are "Cooking the Books". According to NBC, the 4-way race question was only asked of half of the approximately 1,000 participants. But who were these respondents and how did NBC determine who was to be asked the question? Considering that just prior to this question, NBC asked participants about excitement levels, it's pretty safe to assume that their pollsters tended to ask the 4-way race question to a disproportionate number of respondents who claimed they were extremely excited about voting for Obama and not excited about voting for McCain (therby increasing Obama's numbers and decreasing McCain's). In other words, pollsters asked questions that would allow them to pick and choose respondents that would produce the results they were seeking. As a result, we get these ridiculous polling numbers that suggest that 10% of McCain supporters would vote for Nader if given the chance and 1% of undecided voters magically made a decision over the course of 2 minutes.
J Brown
July 24th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Over 103,000 Congressional Emails in just 8 days, Join our Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Easily Contact Dem Superdelegates through our 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative (Over 120,000 Emails Since July 17th)
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Obama Needs 'Troop Deployment' Lessons From FDR
On the campaign trail Senator Obama has been quick to invoke the names of the great Democratic Presidents: Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy, but in reality, perhaps its time that Obama opens a history book and begins to learn why these men were great leaders. Obama's position on Iraq has morphed from a 4 year long stance of 'we cannot win, bring our troops home' to a position of 'we are winning, time to redeploy our troops to Afghanistan'.
First, let me state that I personally do not know how Anti-War groups can pledge support to Obama, considering that their sole purpose is to oppose any military action and to "bring our troops home". Senator Obama is no longer proposing a plan designed to support the positions of these fringe groups, instead he is calling for a "redeployment" of our troops. But that is a different issue.
Our nation has fought a multi-front war in the past, it was a military action I like to refer too as WWII. But unlike today, American attitudes were much different. During World War II, the "greatest generation", the generation of my grandfather, refused to consider defeat and defined victory as 'absolute'. They wanted their sons, husbands, and fathers back home, but understood that there was a cost to freedom and that the quickest way home was victory. This generation made sacrifices that few of us will ever fully understand and never be able to fully appreciate.
At the onset of our involvement in WWII, Roosevelt and Churchill made a simple decision that victory would be achieved In Europe before the full force of allied forces would be thrust into action in the Pacific. It was a plan designed to assure total victory and to end the military actions as quickly as possible. Although we simultaneously fought battles on both fronts, Roosevelt was unwavering in his belief that we must achieve total victory on one front before proceeding to the next.
Imagine the chaos that would have ensued if after reaching the outskirts of Germany, Roosevelt had made the decision that the situation had improved, we had effectively pushed the Germans out of France, and that we should redeploy troops to the Pacific front where chaotic and devastating battles were occurring. The move would have been a mistake, and the unexpected and unthought of German counterattack, later known as the "Battle of the Bulge", may have produced very different results. Roosevelt understood that there was inherent danger in shifting troops from one theatre to another without achieving victory first.
Obama's new position on Iraq, which by his own admission is opposed by our military commanders on the ground, is inherently dangerous. To begin redeploying troops into Afghanistan without assuring the security and victories we have established in Iraq, is dangerous. The American people and the media should ask a simple question: What happens if Iraq begins to fall back into chaos? I'll tell you what would occur: Obama would have to redeploy troops from Afghanistan back into Iraq. Suddenly we caught in a game of musical chairs. Only the stakes are higher, and our troops will pay the price. The situation in Afghanistan is dangerous and the Taliban has continued to restrengthen their attacks upon NATO forces. But it makes no sense to risk the gains we have made in Iraq only to redeploy those troops to a new theatre of operations. Secure our victories in Iraq and then begin a redeployment. It's a simple concept, a concept that has worked, and a concept that was exercised by one of our nation's greatest presidents.
Roosevelt's beliefs also differ from Obama on another front. Roosevelt never believed that it was his job to micro-manage the war. He was heavily involved and always made the final decision, but they were decisions that almost always followed the recommendations, advice and expertise provided by field commanders and experienced war planning staff. Following the outbreak of WWII, Roosevelt crossed party lines, subjecting himself to criticism from Democrat partisans, by appointing Republicans Frank Knox as the Secretary of Navy and Henry Stimson as the Secretary of War. Roosevelt also extended much of his delegated authority to Eisenhower, Nimitz, MacArthur and others. Roosevelt valued and depended heavily upon the operational advice and expertise of these leaders.
Obama, on the other hand, with no military experience has made it clear that he is unwilling to rely upon the delegated authority of our commanders in the field. This week, within just hours of his first-ever visit to Afghanistan and first visit in 2.5 years to Iraq, Obama announced that his position on Iraqi troop levels would not change, although he noted General Petraeus' opposition to his plans. Obama made clear in his Iraq speech that he considered "tactical desicions" to be of little importance. This is not the behavior of a leader who respects and relies upon the experience, judgement, and expertise of field commanders.
The greatest danger to our troops fighting overseas is a Commander-In-Chief who believes that he is better equipped to run our military than those who have a committed a lifetime to protecting our nation. President Bush's biggest mistake was his failure to recognize the concerns of and rely upon the planning expertise of our field commanders, prior to and immediately following the invasion of Iraq. President Johnson led our military into an unbearable and lengthy war, when he overrode General Westmoreland's military strategy for Vietnam and failed to fully deploy troop levels that Westmoreland and other field commanders were requesting early in the war. Obama has already established that he is doomed to repeat these mistakes and that his judgement, not the judgement of the commanders in the field, is right.
History has taught our nation an infinite number of valuable lessons. The question remains as to whether we will learn from these mistakes and successes. Obama's plan for Iraq is not built upon sound military strategy; it is built upon political expediency and a resolve to quench his thirst for power. Obama's Iraq propaganda is built upon a belief that the $10 billion per month we spend on funding would be better spent here in the US. Yet, Obama has failed to acknowledge that part of that $10 billion funds our troop commitment in Afghanistan and a redeployment of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan will result in no savings. Obama has also committed billions on the campaign trail to increased funding for the securing of nuclear weapons and an increased US presence in Africa (that's right, visit his website). Obama's $10 billion per month savings will never be realized under his proposals and is hypocritical considering that he has proposed no plan for reversing the $60 Billion per month that we are currently transferring to foreign nations to meet our energy needs.
Today, I leave you with one quote:
"To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required..."
John F. Kennedy - Inaugural Address 1961
J. Brown
July 23rd, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
First, let me state that I personally do not know how Anti-War groups can pledge support to Obama, considering that their sole purpose is to oppose any military action and to "bring our troops home". Senator Obama is no longer proposing a plan designed to support the positions of these fringe groups, instead he is calling for a "redeployment" of our troops. But that is a different issue.
Our nation has fought a multi-front war in the past, it was a military action I like to refer too as WWII. But unlike today, American attitudes were much different. During World War II, the "greatest generation", the generation of my grandfather, refused to consider defeat and defined victory as 'absolute'. They wanted their sons, husbands, and fathers back home, but understood that there was a cost to freedom and that the quickest way home was victory. This generation made sacrifices that few of us will ever fully understand and never be able to fully appreciate.
At the onset of our involvement in WWII, Roosevelt and Churchill made a simple decision that victory would be achieved In Europe before the full force of allied forces would be thrust into action in the Pacific. It was a plan designed to assure total victory and to end the military actions as quickly as possible. Although we simultaneously fought battles on both fronts, Roosevelt was unwavering in his belief that we must achieve total victory on one front before proceeding to the next.
Imagine the chaos that would have ensued if after reaching the outskirts of Germany, Roosevelt had made the decision that the situation had improved, we had effectively pushed the Germans out of France, and that we should redeploy troops to the Pacific front where chaotic and devastating battles were occurring. The move would have been a mistake, and the unexpected and unthought of German counterattack, later known as the "Battle of the Bulge", may have produced very different results. Roosevelt understood that there was inherent danger in shifting troops from one theatre to another without achieving victory first.
Obama's new position on Iraq, which by his own admission is opposed by our military commanders on the ground, is inherently dangerous. To begin redeploying troops into Afghanistan without assuring the security and victories we have established in Iraq, is dangerous. The American people and the media should ask a simple question: What happens if Iraq begins to fall back into chaos? I'll tell you what would occur: Obama would have to redeploy troops from Afghanistan back into Iraq. Suddenly we caught in a game of musical chairs. Only the stakes are higher, and our troops will pay the price. The situation in Afghanistan is dangerous and the Taliban has continued to restrengthen their attacks upon NATO forces. But it makes no sense to risk the gains we have made in Iraq only to redeploy those troops to a new theatre of operations. Secure our victories in Iraq and then begin a redeployment. It's a simple concept, a concept that has worked, and a concept that was exercised by one of our nation's greatest presidents.
Roosevelt's beliefs also differ from Obama on another front. Roosevelt never believed that it was his job to micro-manage the war. He was heavily involved and always made the final decision, but they were decisions that almost always followed the recommendations, advice and expertise provided by field commanders and experienced war planning staff. Following the outbreak of WWII, Roosevelt crossed party lines, subjecting himself to criticism from Democrat partisans, by appointing Republicans Frank Knox as the Secretary of Navy and Henry Stimson as the Secretary of War. Roosevelt also extended much of his delegated authority to Eisenhower, Nimitz, MacArthur and others. Roosevelt valued and depended heavily upon the operational advice and expertise of these leaders.
Obama, on the other hand, with no military experience has made it clear that he is unwilling to rely upon the delegated authority of our commanders in the field. This week, within just hours of his first-ever visit to Afghanistan and first visit in 2.5 years to Iraq, Obama announced that his position on Iraqi troop levels would not change, although he noted General Petraeus' opposition to his plans. Obama made clear in his Iraq speech that he considered "tactical desicions" to be of little importance. This is not the behavior of a leader who respects and relies upon the experience, judgement, and expertise of field commanders.
The greatest danger to our troops fighting overseas is a Commander-In-Chief who believes that he is better equipped to run our military than those who have a committed a lifetime to protecting our nation. President Bush's biggest mistake was his failure to recognize the concerns of and rely upon the planning expertise of our field commanders, prior to and immediately following the invasion of Iraq. President Johnson led our military into an unbearable and lengthy war, when he overrode General Westmoreland's military strategy for Vietnam and failed to fully deploy troop levels that Westmoreland and other field commanders were requesting early in the war. Obama has already established that he is doomed to repeat these mistakes and that his judgement, not the judgement of the commanders in the field, is right.
History has taught our nation an infinite number of valuable lessons. The question remains as to whether we will learn from these mistakes and successes. Obama's plan for Iraq is not built upon sound military strategy; it is built upon political expediency and a resolve to quench his thirst for power. Obama's Iraq propaganda is built upon a belief that the $10 billion per month we spend on funding would be better spent here in the US. Yet, Obama has failed to acknowledge that part of that $10 billion funds our troop commitment in Afghanistan and a redeployment of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan will result in no savings. Obama has also committed billions on the campaign trail to increased funding for the securing of nuclear weapons and an increased US presence in Africa (that's right, visit his website). Obama's $10 billion per month savings will never be realized under his proposals and is hypocritical considering that he has proposed no plan for reversing the $60 Billion per month that we are currently transferring to foreign nations to meet our energy needs.
Today, I leave you with one quote:
"To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required..."
John F. Kennedy - Inaugural Address 1961
J. Brown
July 23rd, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Just Say No Deal Email Initiative Updated
Good Morning,
After 6 full days since launching our 'Last Stand' Email Initiative for Democrats & Independents opposed to Obama, we are pleased to announce that more than 109,800 Emails have been forwarded to Superdelegates by our Democrat readers.
This morning the form has been reloaded with the email addresses of 73 superdelegates to be targeted within the next 3 days. In addition, individuals such as Pelosi, Reid and Dean will continue to remain on the list. With the addition of Hillary Clinton pledged supers to the list, we have retested the email addresses to assure that they are going to live account.
Although our initial aim was to target Supers who were party leaders, supported Obama against the will of their constituents, or just supported Obama; by request we are working on extending this list to include the Superdelegates who have pledged support to Hillary Clinton. If my calculations are correct, the form should be able to inundate all of the Supers by time the convention rolls around.
With that in mind, when you complete the form, please remember the costs and time that I am committing to this project and consider a small donation. This will allow us to continue to maintain the form and update it on time every three days. Also, please remember to visit every three days to resubmit your email to the updated lists of Superdelegates. The list will be re-updated on Saturday morning.
Click Here For "Last Stand" Email Initiative For Pumas
J Brown
July 23rd, 2008
After 6 full days since launching our 'Last Stand' Email Initiative for Democrats & Independents opposed to Obama, we are pleased to announce that more than 109,800 Emails have been forwarded to Superdelegates by our Democrat readers.
This morning the form has been reloaded with the email addresses of 73 superdelegates to be targeted within the next 3 days. In addition, individuals such as Pelosi, Reid and Dean will continue to remain on the list. With the addition of Hillary Clinton pledged supers to the list, we have retested the email addresses to assure that they are going to live account.
Although our initial aim was to target Supers who were party leaders, supported Obama against the will of their constituents, or just supported Obama; by request we are working on extending this list to include the Superdelegates who have pledged support to Hillary Clinton. If my calculations are correct, the form should be able to inundate all of the Supers by time the convention rolls around.
With that in mind, when you complete the form, please remember the costs and time that I am committing to this project and consider a small donation. This will allow us to continue to maintain the form and update it on time every three days. Also, please remember to visit every three days to resubmit your email to the updated lists of Superdelegates. The list will be re-updated on Saturday morning.
Click Here For "Last Stand" Email Initiative For Pumas
J Brown
July 23rd, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Obama Releases Itinerary: Shuns Saudi Arabia & UAE As Oil Prices Remain High
I'm certainly glad that Senator Obama has taken the time to finally pay some respect to our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. In what was technically to be a fact-finding mission, paid with taxpayer funds, the Senator overstepped his authority on Monday by engaging in political negotiations without any granted authority to do so. But the Obama campaign, preoccupied with creating the appearance of foreign policy savvy, failed to utilize his new-found leadership role to further American interests in the Middle East.
Back at home, middle class Americans continue to suffer the effects of oil prices that have doubled since Democratic leadership took control at the end of 2006. Economists continue to fear that rising oil prices will drive our economy into another period of Stagflation (stagnant growth w/rising inflation). Yet, Senator Obama passed on a golden opportunity to visit Saudi and UAE officials while in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has consistently ranked among the top supplier of US oil and this year has increased production by 500,000 barrels in an attempt to offset the 300,000 bbl reduction by Iran and losses due to continuous shutdowns of Nigerian oil operations. Over the past year, Saudi Arabia has continuously worked with the US in their attempts to pressure other member of OPEC to increase production, a move that would help drive speculation out of the oil markets.
Obama has slighted the Saudis on the campaign trail during the primaries and has apparently failed to recognize the value in strengthening our relationship with the oil-producing nation. Both President Bushes, President Clinton and their Secretaries of State have consistently made it a priority to pay a visit to the Saudis while on Middle East trips. Saudi Arabia is an important trading partner to the US and will continue to be an important trading partner so long as our congressional leaders refuse to take action to increase domestic oil production. Certainly one of Obama's 300 foreign policy advisers were smart enough to recommend that he visit Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Foreign policy goes beyond political showboating and the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan. Foreign policy must be built upon the basis of strengthening our domestic economic and national security interests. During this trip, Obama has failed to recognize the correlation between Middle East foreign policy and our economic interests.
Since taking control of congress on a platform that promised the American people lower and more stable energy prices, congressional leadership has failed to put forth a single measure designed to carry out that promise. Pelosi, Reid and Obama have blocked the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008", a measure calling for increased domestic oil & natural gas production, increased incentives for electric and hybrid vehicle technology and increased funding for the agency that regulates commodity trading. Pelosi, Reid and Obama also blocked a measure within the housing bill aimed at providing billions of dollars in incentives to companies developing alternative energy, claiming that the incentives needed to be offset by increased revenue. Meanwhile, they are proposing a $50 billion dollar economic stimulus package with no way of paying for it. Congressional leadership has utterly failed to take action on oil prices and now their chosen leader has determined that there is no value in meeting with the dignitaries of one of our nations leading suppliers of oil.
Obama's trip cannot be considered an exercise in foreign policy when it utterly fails to further US economic interests. Join our congressional "Drill Now" email initiative in sending a message to Congressional leaders to bring the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" to the floor. In the past week over 91,000 emails have been forwarded through our simple, user-friendly form.
CLICK HERE FOR THE ENERGY EMAIL INITIATIVE
J Brown
July 22nd, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Back at home, middle class Americans continue to suffer the effects of oil prices that have doubled since Democratic leadership took control at the end of 2006. Economists continue to fear that rising oil prices will drive our economy into another period of Stagflation (stagnant growth w/rising inflation). Yet, Senator Obama passed on a golden opportunity to visit Saudi and UAE officials while in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has consistently ranked among the top supplier of US oil and this year has increased production by 500,000 barrels in an attempt to offset the 300,000 bbl reduction by Iran and losses due to continuous shutdowns of Nigerian oil operations. Over the past year, Saudi Arabia has continuously worked with the US in their attempts to pressure other member of OPEC to increase production, a move that would help drive speculation out of the oil markets.
Obama has slighted the Saudis on the campaign trail during the primaries and has apparently failed to recognize the value in strengthening our relationship with the oil-producing nation. Both President Bushes, President Clinton and their Secretaries of State have consistently made it a priority to pay a visit to the Saudis while on Middle East trips. Saudi Arabia is an important trading partner to the US and will continue to be an important trading partner so long as our congressional leaders refuse to take action to increase domestic oil production. Certainly one of Obama's 300 foreign policy advisers were smart enough to recommend that he visit Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Foreign policy goes beyond political showboating and the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan. Foreign policy must be built upon the basis of strengthening our domestic economic and national security interests. During this trip, Obama has failed to recognize the correlation between Middle East foreign policy and our economic interests.
Since taking control of congress on a platform that promised the American people lower and more stable energy prices, congressional leadership has failed to put forth a single measure designed to carry out that promise. Pelosi, Reid and Obama have blocked the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008", a measure calling for increased domestic oil & natural gas production, increased incentives for electric and hybrid vehicle technology and increased funding for the agency that regulates commodity trading. Pelosi, Reid and Obama also blocked a measure within the housing bill aimed at providing billions of dollars in incentives to companies developing alternative energy, claiming that the incentives needed to be offset by increased revenue. Meanwhile, they are proposing a $50 billion dollar economic stimulus package with no way of paying for it. Congressional leadership has utterly failed to take action on oil prices and now their chosen leader has determined that there is no value in meeting with the dignitaries of one of our nations leading suppliers of oil.
Obama's trip cannot be considered an exercise in foreign policy when it utterly fails to further US economic interests. Join our congressional "Drill Now" email initiative in sending a message to Congressional leaders to bring the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" to the floor. In the past week over 91,000 emails have been forwarded through our simple, user-friendly form.
CLICK HERE FOR THE ENERGY EMAIL INITIATIVE
J Brown
July 22nd, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
CNN Reporters: Obama "Presumptuous" & Negotiations Overstep His Authority as a Senator
Last night on Anderson Cooper 360, two CNN political analysts charged that Senator Obama overstepped his authority as a United States Senator in acting as a negotiator with the Iraqi government and publicly disclosing statements made during those interviews.
During an interview with Anderson Cooper, David Gergen, CNN's Senior Political Analyst stated, "Barack Obama made the first mistake of his trip, in my judgment, in releasing a statement in which he said exactly what Maliki had said in those conversations.
We have a long tradition in this country that we only have one president at a time. He's the commander in chief and the negotiator in chief. I cannot remember a campaign which a rival seeking the presidency has been in a position negotiating a war that's under way with another party outside the country.
I think he leaves himself open to the charge tonight that he's meddling, that this is not his role, that he can be the critic, but he's not the negotiator. We have a president who does that. So, I think the underlying facts support him, but I think it would be a real mistake -- and I think it was a mistake -- to get into these conversations and let it be used politically. "
Gergens comments were later echoed by a second CNN Analyst, Gloria Borger, who charged, "I do agree with David. And Candy, in her earlier piece, talked about walking the fine line between being this candidate and being presumptuous. And I think that he may just have crossed that, because, you know, it is a tradition. You don't talk about these private conversations. And it's not up to Barack Obama right now to negotiate troop withdrawals. It's up to Barack Obama to be on a fact-finding mission, which is indeed what he has said he was on. "
Gergen and Borger have it right, Senator Obama is not the President and in fact is not even the official presidential nominee of his party. Obama's trip to Iraq is a taxpayer funded "Fact-Finding" mission in which he has no authority granted to him by congress nor the administration to engage in negotiations. His actions yesterday were indeed 'presumptuous' and violated his duties as a United States Senator.
The President of The United States is responsible for the course of foreign policy, and although Obama has the right to question or criticize that foreign policy, he has no constitutional authority to act in a negotiative role with foreign dignitaries.
The current administration is in ongoing negotiations with the Iraqi government concerning the role of US forces in assisting that government; a government that has been strengthened by a 'surge' that Barack Obama opposed and claimed would fail. Obama overstepped his role as a Senator and potentially undermined ongoing negotiations by engaging in diplomatic negotiations for his political gain.
Obama actions yesterday should be condemned by other members of congress, just as former President Carter's actions in Palestine earlier this year were condemned by congressional members. Obama is not the President and he is on a taxpayer funded fact-finding mission. Senator Obama's actions in Iraq yesterday clearly demonstrated his use of this trip for political purposes; the military should immediately pull funding for the trip and charge the Obama campaign for the millions of dollars that this overseas farce is costing.
No Congressional Member has the authority to engage in negotiations or dictate US foreign policy. Yesterday's actions show a clear arrogance and lack of respect for the office of the presidency and state department.
J Brown
07/22/2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Just Say No Deal Email Initiative That Has Generated Over 100,000 Superdelegate Emails Since July 17th
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
During an interview with Anderson Cooper, David Gergen, CNN's Senior Political Analyst stated, "Barack Obama made the first mistake of his trip, in my judgment, in releasing a statement in which he said exactly what Maliki had said in those conversations.
We have a long tradition in this country that we only have one president at a time. He's the commander in chief and the negotiator in chief. I cannot remember a campaign which a rival seeking the presidency has been in a position negotiating a war that's under way with another party outside the country.
I think he leaves himself open to the charge tonight that he's meddling, that this is not his role, that he can be the critic, but he's not the negotiator. We have a president who does that. So, I think the underlying facts support him, but I think it would be a real mistake -- and I think it was a mistake -- to get into these conversations and let it be used politically. "
Gergens comments were later echoed by a second CNN Analyst, Gloria Borger, who charged, "I do agree with David. And Candy, in her earlier piece, talked about walking the fine line between being this candidate and being presumptuous. And I think that he may just have crossed that, because, you know, it is a tradition. You don't talk about these private conversations. And it's not up to Barack Obama right now to negotiate troop withdrawals. It's up to Barack Obama to be on a fact-finding mission, which is indeed what he has said he was on. "
Gergen and Borger have it right, Senator Obama is not the President and in fact is not even the official presidential nominee of his party. Obama's trip to Iraq is a taxpayer funded "Fact-Finding" mission in which he has no authority granted to him by congress nor the administration to engage in negotiations. His actions yesterday were indeed 'presumptuous' and violated his duties as a United States Senator.
The President of The United States is responsible for the course of foreign policy, and although Obama has the right to question or criticize that foreign policy, he has no constitutional authority to act in a negotiative role with foreign dignitaries.
The current administration is in ongoing negotiations with the Iraqi government concerning the role of US forces in assisting that government; a government that has been strengthened by a 'surge' that Barack Obama opposed and claimed would fail. Obama overstepped his role as a Senator and potentially undermined ongoing negotiations by engaging in diplomatic negotiations for his political gain.
Obama actions yesterday should be condemned by other members of congress, just as former President Carter's actions in Palestine earlier this year were condemned by congressional members. Obama is not the President and he is on a taxpayer funded fact-finding mission. Senator Obama's actions in Iraq yesterday clearly demonstrated his use of this trip for political purposes; the military should immediately pull funding for the trip and charge the Obama campaign for the millions of dollars that this overseas farce is costing.
No Congressional Member has the authority to engage in negotiations or dictate US foreign policy. Yesterday's actions show a clear arrogance and lack of respect for the office of the presidency and state department.
J Brown
07/22/2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Just Say No Deal Email Initiative That Has Generated Over 100,000 Superdelegate Emails Since July 17th
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Monday, July 21, 2008
No Bull, OMG: Terrorist Organization To Provide Security To Obama In Palestine!!!
According to new sources, Barack Obama will be meeting with Palestinian officials in Ramallah during his current Middle East Tour. After visiting with Israeli officials, Obama will be escorted by Israeli defense forces until security is handed over to the Palestinians outside of Ramallah. The Palestinian government has charged the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades with providing security for Obama.
The Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades are a recognized TERRORIST ORGANIZATION! The organization is and has long been listed as a terrorist organization by the United States, Canada, The European Union, Japan and Israel. The Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades have taken credit for dozens of Homicide bombings within Israel, kidnappings, and rocket firings that have reigned upon Israeli towns and settlements.
Is this the foreign policy message that Obama wants to send?
What presidential candidate in their right mind would possibly agree to accept protection from a recognized and globally condemned TERRORIST ORGANIZATION?
J Brown
July 21st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
The Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades are a recognized TERRORIST ORGANIZATION! The organization is and has long been listed as a terrorist organization by the United States, Canada, The European Union, Japan and Israel. The Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades have taken credit for dozens of Homicide bombings within Israel, kidnappings, and rocket firings that have reigned upon Israeli towns and settlements.
Is this the foreign policy message that Obama wants to send?
What presidential candidate in their right mind would possibly agree to accept protection from a recognized and globally condemned TERRORIST ORGANIZATION?
J Brown
July 21st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
PDOP To Submit 100,000th Just Say No Deal Email Today!
PDOP To Submit 100,000th Just Say No Deal Email
100,000 Emails in less than a week isn’t that bad, right?
Well, we’re not quite there yet, but we are getting close. As of 2:30 CST today, our readers have submitted over 96,000 emails to Superdelegates via the email submission initiative at our site:
"Last Stand" Email Initiative For Puma Democrats
Hopefully by this evening we will pass the 100,000 mark.
Let me first thank the 9 or 10 readers who have submitted donations to assist us in our efforts. Those donations will be helped to offset the costs of updating the list and keeping it going a little while longer. The form provides Democrats and Independents opposed to the nomination of Barack Obama the opportunity to call for a Roll Call Vote at the Convention with Hillary Clinton’s Name Placed In Nomination. Additionally, the email includes a call for the Democratic Leadership to reform their primary system to focus on the principles of “Equal Representation”. With just seconds of your time, an email is generated on your behalf and sent to a large list of Superdelegates.
Although our initial aim was to target Supers who were party leaders, supported Obama against the will of their constituents, or just supported Obama; by request we are working on extending this list to include the Superdelegates who have pledged support to Hillary Clinton. If my calculations are correct, the form should be able to inundate all of the Supers by time the convention rolls around.
With that in mind, when you complete the form, please remember the costs and time that I am committing to this project and consider a small donation. This will allow us to continue to maintain the form and update it on time every three days. Also, please remember to visit every three days resubmit your email to the updated lists of Superdelegates. The list was last updated on Sunday and will be re-updated on Wednesday morning.
Click Here For "Last Stand" Email Initiative For Pumas
J Brown
July 21st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
100,000 Emails in less than a week isn’t that bad, right?
Well, we’re not quite there yet, but we are getting close. As of 2:30 CST today, our readers have submitted over 96,000 emails to Superdelegates via the email submission initiative at our site:
"Last Stand" Email Initiative For Puma Democrats
Hopefully by this evening we will pass the 100,000 mark.
Let me first thank the 9 or 10 readers who have submitted donations to assist us in our efforts. Those donations will be helped to offset the costs of updating the list and keeping it going a little while longer. The form provides Democrats and Independents opposed to the nomination of Barack Obama the opportunity to call for a Roll Call Vote at the Convention with Hillary Clinton’s Name Placed In Nomination. Additionally, the email includes a call for the Democratic Leadership to reform their primary system to focus on the principles of “Equal Representation”. With just seconds of your time, an email is generated on your behalf and sent to a large list of Superdelegates.
Although our initial aim was to target Supers who were party leaders, supported Obama against the will of their constituents, or just supported Obama; by request we are working on extending this list to include the Superdelegates who have pledged support to Hillary Clinton. If my calculations are correct, the form should be able to inundate all of the Supers by time the convention rolls around.
With that in mind, when you complete the form, please remember the costs and time that I am committing to this project and consider a small donation. This will allow us to continue to maintain the form and update it on time every three days. Also, please remember to visit every three days resubmit your email to the updated lists of Superdelegates. The list was last updated on Sunday and will be re-updated on Wednesday morning.
Click Here For "Last Stand" Email Initiative For Pumas
J Brown
July 21st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
OMG: Congressional Democrats Pushing To RAISE Federal Gas Tax by 50%
In perhaps the most distasteful and contrarian effort yet, stories are surfacing through news agencies this morning of a private congressional talks that would actually raise the Federal Gas Tax by approximately 50%. That's right, a 50% increase in the federal gas tax at a time when Middle Class and Lower Class Americans, along with the backbone of our economy, the trucking industry, are suffering from oil prices that have more than doubled since the beginning of 2007.
Fueled by reports that funding for Highway projects will continue to fall short of actual costs, the AP has reported that Congressional Democrats are privately discussing and pushing for a 10 cent per gallon increase in the federal gas tax imposed upon both gasoline and diesel fuels. According to the AP, Congressional Democrats are currently writing legislation for the increase to be included in the 2009 Highway funding act. Currently the tax, which was passed to be a temporary tax, is 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 23.4 cpg on diesel fuel.
Democratic leadership is pushing for the increased taxes based upon a current shortfall in Federal Highway funding, a shortfall that will only increase as long as the current leadership continues to fail to enact legislation aimed at lowering fuel prices. Just three years ago the federal highway fund reported a budget surplus, but as oil prices have risen, so have the costs of the heavy machinery and asphalt that is used in highway projects. It is the rising cost of oil that has created the budget shortfall, and this congress apparently feels that increasing fuel prices further will magically solve the problem.
Congressional Democratic Leadership, running on a platform of lower oil prices in 2006, has failed to enact a single piece of legislation aimed at lowering fuel prices. This summer, they have held up legislation put forth by Republican leadership aimed at increasing domestic oil production and increased funding for federal commodities regulators (the regulators who provide oversight to the "speculators"). In fact the only legislation that current Congressional leadership has pushed for is the so-called "use it or lose it bill" which would double the land-lease rates on offshore drilling.
Middle Class Americans are being hammered at the pump and at retail checkout counters. Last month, consumer inflation rose by over 1%, driven by high oil prices. This fall consumers will face a double-whammy as they turn on their furnaces, only to find that home heating costs have also skyrocketed. Inflation is only likely to rise, as the trucking industry, the backbone of our economy, continues to reel from increased fuel prices. Yet, despite a growing concern over stagflation, congressional Democratic leadership is proposing a tax on the very product whose high prices are damaging our economy.
The report by the AP, which was pounced on by smaller news agencies, has received little attention by major news agencies who are seemingly obsessed with a presidential nominee. It is time, that the press reports this travesty and that American people realize that the current congressional leadership is a disaster who has shown no ability to pass legislation based upon the concerns and needs of middle class Americans.
Join us today in our email initiative aimed at sending congressional leadership a message to put forth a vote on the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008". Visit and participate in our Energy Email Initiative. The form takes seconds to complete and generates an email on your behalf that is automatically sent to dozens of congressional leaders. In the past 5 days our readers have sent out over 84,000 emails to congressional members. Today we will add a caveat to our emails telling congressional leadership to oppose any gas tax hike.
Energy Email Initiative
J Brown
July 21st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Associated Press: Dream Of Gas Tax Holiday Falters
Newsminer.com: The Gas Tax
Fueled by reports that funding for Highway projects will continue to fall short of actual costs, the AP has reported that Congressional Democrats are privately discussing and pushing for a 10 cent per gallon increase in the federal gas tax imposed upon both gasoline and diesel fuels. According to the AP, Congressional Democrats are currently writing legislation for the increase to be included in the 2009 Highway funding act. Currently the tax, which was passed to be a temporary tax, is 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 23.4 cpg on diesel fuel.
Democratic leadership is pushing for the increased taxes based upon a current shortfall in Federal Highway funding, a shortfall that will only increase as long as the current leadership continues to fail to enact legislation aimed at lowering fuel prices. Just three years ago the federal highway fund reported a budget surplus, but as oil prices have risen, so have the costs of the heavy machinery and asphalt that is used in highway projects. It is the rising cost of oil that has created the budget shortfall, and this congress apparently feels that increasing fuel prices further will magically solve the problem.
Congressional Democratic Leadership, running on a platform of lower oil prices in 2006, has failed to enact a single piece of legislation aimed at lowering fuel prices. This summer, they have held up legislation put forth by Republican leadership aimed at increasing domestic oil production and increased funding for federal commodities regulators (the regulators who provide oversight to the "speculators"). In fact the only legislation that current Congressional leadership has pushed for is the so-called "use it or lose it bill" which would double the land-lease rates on offshore drilling.
Middle Class Americans are being hammered at the pump and at retail checkout counters. Last month, consumer inflation rose by over 1%, driven by high oil prices. This fall consumers will face a double-whammy as they turn on their furnaces, only to find that home heating costs have also skyrocketed. Inflation is only likely to rise, as the trucking industry, the backbone of our economy, continues to reel from increased fuel prices. Yet, despite a growing concern over stagflation, congressional Democratic leadership is proposing a tax on the very product whose high prices are damaging our economy.
The report by the AP, which was pounced on by smaller news agencies, has received little attention by major news agencies who are seemingly obsessed with a presidential nominee. It is time, that the press reports this travesty and that American people realize that the current congressional leadership is a disaster who has shown no ability to pass legislation based upon the concerns and needs of middle class Americans.
Join us today in our email initiative aimed at sending congressional leadership a message to put forth a vote on the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008". Visit and participate in our Energy Email Initiative. The form takes seconds to complete and generates an email on your behalf that is automatically sent to dozens of congressional leaders. In the past 5 days our readers have sent out over 84,000 emails to congressional members. Today we will add a caveat to our emails telling congressional leadership to oppose any gas tax hike.
Energy Email Initiative
J Brown
July 21st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Associated Press: Dream Of Gas Tax Holiday Falters
Newsminer.com: The Gas Tax
Sunday, July 20, 2008
78,600 Just Say No Deal Emails In 3 Days!
Good & Bad News This Morning!
Our 'Last Stand' Email Initiative For Puma Democrats bypassed the 78,000 Email mark last night during just 3 days of operation. This morning we have updated the Superdelegate emails within the system to target a second group of Supers. We did leave in place the email addresses of 11 party leaders such as Pelosi, Reid and Dean, so that they feel the full force of the initiative to reform the party and put Hillary Clinton's name in nomination at next months convention. We currently plan on updating the list again in 3 days so please be sure to check back.
Now the bad news, maintaining the list and site takes a great deal of effort and time, along with the extra costs I am incurring due to the volume of submissions. On Friday, the Obamabots began spam commenting this and certain other posts on the site, along with overloading my contact email in an effort to disrupt our efforts. Comment moderation has been turned on within certain posts, but the time and effort is disrupting my schedule. Please be sure to pass the link on to other Just Say No Deal sites and encourage them to participate right away. Currently we received just a handful of small donations from the thousands of individuals that have participated in our initiative. Our continuation of the initiative is solely based upon how much time I can afford to continue to commit to the project and your generosity. Thanks Again and good luck.
'Last Stand' Email Initiative For Just Say No Deal & Puma Democrats & Independents
J Brown
July 20th, 2008
Our 'Last Stand' Email Initiative For Puma Democrats bypassed the 78,000 Email mark last night during just 3 days of operation. This morning we have updated the Superdelegate emails within the system to target a second group of Supers. We did leave in place the email addresses of 11 party leaders such as Pelosi, Reid and Dean, so that they feel the full force of the initiative to reform the party and put Hillary Clinton's name in nomination at next months convention. We currently plan on updating the list again in 3 days so please be sure to check back.
Now the bad news, maintaining the list and site takes a great deal of effort and time, along with the extra costs I am incurring due to the volume of submissions. On Friday, the Obamabots began spam commenting this and certain other posts on the site, along with overloading my contact email in an effort to disrupt our efforts. Comment moderation has been turned on within certain posts, but the time and effort is disrupting my schedule. Please be sure to pass the link on to other Just Say No Deal sites and encourage them to participate right away. Currently we received just a handful of small donations from the thousands of individuals that have participated in our initiative. Our continuation of the initiative is solely based upon how much time I can afford to continue to commit to the project and your generosity. Thanks Again and good luck.
'Last Stand' Email Initiative For Just Say No Deal & Puma Democrats & Independents
J Brown
July 20th, 2008
8 Million Reasons Why Obama Welcomes The Abortion Debate!
There is no doubt the the Saddleback Forum highlighted the stark differences between Barack Obama and John McCain. Even Democratic Pundits were forced to admit that Obama's performance at Saddleback was lackluster and demonstrated his inexperience and policy weaknesses. However, in the hours following the debate, certain events would occur that would actually shift much of the political focus onto an issue that the Obama campaign openly welcomes.
Immediately following the Saddleback event, Fox news provided outstanding coverage that focused primarily on the mistakes that the candidates made on National Security and Economic issues. Naturally, considering McCain's outstanding performance, much of the discussion centered around Obama's views of 'Evil' and the 'hardest decision' he has ever made. However, ObaMSNBC and CNN offered a much different analysis of the forum. Although there were some discussions as to Obama's apparent weaknesses, much of the discussion was centered around the Abortion issue and John McCain's Pro-life assurances that have helped him to finally start to make steps in garnering conservative support. Unfortunately, in the days following Saddleback much of the news coverage and blogging community would follow in the footsteps of CNN and ObaMSNBC and focus on the abortion issue.
In recent days the coverage has become more focused on McCain's pro-life stance and Obama's vote against the Born Alive Act in Illinois; and although Obama's vote against the act is important, the new focus on the Abortion issue is a welcome change for the Obama campaign.
The Abortion issue is a winning issue for the Obama Campaign, they know it, and so does the mainstream media. The reasons why abortion becomes a winning issue are simple and have nothing to do with the issue itself.
The Abortion debate is the most distracting and divisive social issue in existence, and as a social issue it should take a back seat to the primary functions of government: Protecting our Sovereignty and Economic Policy. For the Obama campaign whose perceived economic advantage is slipping and who is now overwhelmingly viewed as the weaker candidate on National Security, a focus on social issues is a welcome distraction. As long as we debate the stances and merits of the candidates Pro-Life or Pro-Choice policies, the Obama campaign does not have to deal with the real issues. Obama's gaffes of Saturday night, for which there were plenty, have been all but forgotten by the media because of this new focus on the abortion issue.
There is a bigger reason, however, why the Obama campaign welcomes this new debate and campaign focus. In fact, there are 8 million bigger reasons. The Obama campaign knows that he must garner support from over 90% of voting Democrats in order to win the general election. Yet, currently polls indicate that 18% of registered Democrats are either undecided or plan to vote for McCain. Much of this 18% is comprised of moderate Democratic voters who supported Hillary Clinton during the primaries. Without their votes, Obama will lose and that is why his campaign has spent 3 futile months trying to convince and even scare these voters into supporting his candidacy.
Immediately following the end of the Democratic Primaries, there was a blatant attempt by the Obama Campaign, his surrogates and left-wing sites such as Huffpo and Kos to scare Clinton supporters into backing the Obama campaign. The 2 issues they jumped upon were A) Accusations that John McCain was a sexist pig who dumped his first wife for a younger model, and B) The threats that if John McCain were elected he would "magically" overturn Roe v. Wade. Now these myths were dispelled thanks in part to the most vocal of Anti-Obama democrats who understood how our government functions and countered these attacks. But this week, what are the two stories that have resurfaced?
In the wake of the Edwards affair, Democrats have defended his actions by accusing McCain of cheating on his first wife; and in the wake of Saddleback there has been a renewed focus on the Abortion issue. Democratic leaders and the blow-hards at Huffpo and Kos know that Obama is weak on both economic and national security credentials so they welcome the opportunity to turn the focus of the campaigns back onto social issues, particularly Abortion.
This is a strategy that unfortunately will work if the issue continues to be front and center. Why? Because like it or not 51% of Americans consistently poll as pro-choice. Although much of that 51% is in favor of specific regulation of Abortion, the issue is confusing and often clouded. For instance, Obama's defense of his vote against the "Born Alive Act", is that the act was somehow a threat to Roe v. Wade; despite the reality that 98 US Senators voted for an Identical Federal Bill. The "Born Alive Act" was never designed as a piece of Abortion legislation, it was in fact a humanitarian based piece of legislation. The bill did not seek to further regulate abortion or redefine abortion rights, yet, the Obama campaign has successfully lobbied the media into turning his vote into a Roe v. Wade issue. Obama's spin is an outright lie, yet no one in the MSM is willing to call him on it. As a result, most American's who are not politically astute simply tune out and walk away with a perception that Obama was merely upholding his pro-choice views.
The abortion issue is a complex issue that has been debated for the past forty years and will continued to be debated for years to come. There appears to be no middle ground and neither vocal side of the debate will ever be able to convince their opposition that they are right. The media has successfully brought this issue to the forefront, something that Obama surrogates have been unable to do during the past three months; and apparently the conservative community is more than willing to allow this issue to become a focal point of this election. But trust me, the Obama campaign, like the Democratic leadership of the past few years, is not interested in resolving the debate, but rather will use this issue to divide the American electorate. They will use this issue to break the American Electorate in half and scare them into overlooking the fundamental issues of national sovereignty and sound fiscal policy.
To date, the 18% or approximately 8 million Democrats who have not jumped on the unity wagon have been willing to place America's national security and economic interests rightfully ahead of these divisive social issues. Yet, if McCain and his supporters allow social programming to become the focal point of this election, he will forgo any gains within this "swing" group and thus lose the election. The media will drive this issue as far as we will let them and it is time that Conservatives, Republicans, Independents, and moderate Democrats refocus on the most fundamental issues of national security and economics, just as they have successfully done for the past three months.
J Brown
August 20th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Be Sure To Visit Our Friday Coffee Break Section For Reader Offers
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article
Immediately following the Saddleback event, Fox news provided outstanding coverage that focused primarily on the mistakes that the candidates made on National Security and Economic issues. Naturally, considering McCain's outstanding performance, much of the discussion centered around Obama's views of 'Evil' and the 'hardest decision' he has ever made. However, ObaMSNBC and CNN offered a much different analysis of the forum. Although there were some discussions as to Obama's apparent weaknesses, much of the discussion was centered around the Abortion issue and John McCain's Pro-life assurances that have helped him to finally start to make steps in garnering conservative support. Unfortunately, in the days following Saddleback much of the news coverage and blogging community would follow in the footsteps of CNN and ObaMSNBC and focus on the abortion issue.
In recent days the coverage has become more focused on McCain's pro-life stance and Obama's vote against the Born Alive Act in Illinois; and although Obama's vote against the act is important, the new focus on the Abortion issue is a welcome change for the Obama campaign.
The Abortion issue is a winning issue for the Obama Campaign, they know it, and so does the mainstream media. The reasons why abortion becomes a winning issue are simple and have nothing to do with the issue itself.
The Abortion debate is the most distracting and divisive social issue in existence, and as a social issue it should take a back seat to the primary functions of government: Protecting our Sovereignty and Economic Policy. For the Obama campaign whose perceived economic advantage is slipping and who is now overwhelmingly viewed as the weaker candidate on National Security, a focus on social issues is a welcome distraction. As long as we debate the stances and merits of the candidates Pro-Life or Pro-Choice policies, the Obama campaign does not have to deal with the real issues. Obama's gaffes of Saturday night, for which there were plenty, have been all but forgotten by the media because of this new focus on the abortion issue.
There is a bigger reason, however, why the Obama campaign welcomes this new debate and campaign focus. In fact, there are 8 million bigger reasons. The Obama campaign knows that he must garner support from over 90% of voting Democrats in order to win the general election. Yet, currently polls indicate that 18% of registered Democrats are either undecided or plan to vote for McCain. Much of this 18% is comprised of moderate Democratic voters who supported Hillary Clinton during the primaries. Without their votes, Obama will lose and that is why his campaign has spent 3 futile months trying to convince and even scare these voters into supporting his candidacy.
Immediately following the end of the Democratic Primaries, there was a blatant attempt by the Obama Campaign, his surrogates and left-wing sites such as Huffpo and Kos to scare Clinton supporters into backing the Obama campaign. The 2 issues they jumped upon were A) Accusations that John McCain was a sexist pig who dumped his first wife for a younger model, and B) The threats that if John McCain were elected he would "magically" overturn Roe v. Wade. Now these myths were dispelled thanks in part to the most vocal of Anti-Obama democrats who understood how our government functions and countered these attacks. But this week, what are the two stories that have resurfaced?
In the wake of the Edwards affair, Democrats have defended his actions by accusing McCain of cheating on his first wife; and in the wake of Saddleback there has been a renewed focus on the Abortion issue. Democratic leaders and the blow-hards at Huffpo and Kos know that Obama is weak on both economic and national security credentials so they welcome the opportunity to turn the focus of the campaigns back onto social issues, particularly Abortion.
This is a strategy that unfortunately will work if the issue continues to be front and center. Why? Because like it or not 51% of Americans consistently poll as pro-choice. Although much of that 51% is in favor of specific regulation of Abortion, the issue is confusing and often clouded. For instance, Obama's defense of his vote against the "Born Alive Act", is that the act was somehow a threat to Roe v. Wade; despite the reality that 98 US Senators voted for an Identical Federal Bill. The "Born Alive Act" was never designed as a piece of Abortion legislation, it was in fact a humanitarian based piece of legislation. The bill did not seek to further regulate abortion or redefine abortion rights, yet, the Obama campaign has successfully lobbied the media into turning his vote into a Roe v. Wade issue. Obama's spin is an outright lie, yet no one in the MSM is willing to call him on it. As a result, most American's who are not politically astute simply tune out and walk away with a perception that Obama was merely upholding his pro-choice views.
The abortion issue is a complex issue that has been debated for the past forty years and will continued to be debated for years to come. There appears to be no middle ground and neither vocal side of the debate will ever be able to convince their opposition that they are right. The media has successfully brought this issue to the forefront, something that Obama surrogates have been unable to do during the past three months; and apparently the conservative community is more than willing to allow this issue to become a focal point of this election. But trust me, the Obama campaign, like the Democratic leadership of the past few years, is not interested in resolving the debate, but rather will use this issue to divide the American electorate. They will use this issue to break the American Electorate in half and scare them into overlooking the fundamental issues of national sovereignty and sound fiscal policy.
To date, the 18% or approximately 8 million Democrats who have not jumped on the unity wagon have been willing to place America's national security and economic interests rightfully ahead of these divisive social issues. Yet, if McCain and his supporters allow social programming to become the focal point of this election, he will forgo any gains within this "swing" group and thus lose the election. The media will drive this issue as far as we will let them and it is time that Conservatives, Republicans, Independents, and moderate Democrats refocus on the most fundamental issues of national security and economics, just as they have successfully done for the past three months.
J Brown
August 20th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Be Sure To Visit Our Friday Coffee Break Section For Reader Offers
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Obama's Bus Rolls Over A Disabled American Veteran!
Remember the 2004 election? You know, that election in which John Kerry attacked the Republican party based upon the ads that help to unseat Max Cleland? Remember how up in arms liberal blogs were about what the perceived as unjust and unfair attacks upon the disabled veteran?
So what happened to these legions of outraged bloggers?
What happened to a media that was clearly sympathetic to Cleland?
What happened to the Democratic Leaders that were outraged by the ads claiming that Cleland was 'soft on national security'?
Personally, I don't know what policy positions Max Cleland ever represented; and honestly, I it doesn't matter, because this story has nothing to do with his political career. For those of you who don't know Cleland's background, he is a Vietnam veteran who was awarded both the Silver Star and Bronze Star for valour in combat. Cleland was seriously injured near the end of his tour by a grenade blast that resulted in the amputation of both of his legs and one arm. Regardless of his political positions, no one can deny Clelands service to this nation nor the sacrifices and suffering he incurred during and after his service.
After losing his re-election bid, Cleland entered the private sector and last July went to work for Tissue Regeneration Technologies as a lobbyist for the company. Tissue Regeneration Technologies is a multi-faceted health care company focusing on non-invasive treatment for chronic wounds. According to TRT's press release, Cleland would act as a liaison for the companies' unit specializing in "advanced wound and cardiac care technology. TRT is currently sponsoring clinical trials to treat wounded US soldiers returning from combat in Iraq and Afghanistan." Clearly, Cleland had chosen to represent a company providing critical treatments and researching new technologies that could be applied to fellow soldiers who were wounded during their service to this country.
Now, I'm sure that Cleland is well-paid, and why shouldn't he be? He is a lobbyist, but I think that we can all agree that his lobbying efforts are worthwhile and certainly represent a company that is providing important research, treatment, and services to those who serve our country. So now you should understand why I was so disgusted to read Ben Smith's article at Huffpo yesterday. Smith's article, entitled "Obama Disinvited 'Lobbyist' Cleland", outlined the events that occurred earlier this month during an Obama fundraising event in Atlanta. On July 8th, Cleland was abruptly 'disinvited' from an Obama fundraising event because of his status as a registered lobbyist (of course, there are dozens of former congressional members who are now lobbyists).
In the article, Smith pointed out that Obama deputy campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand stated in an email, "This was a hard decision regarding Senator Cleland...If we make exceptions, we will open ourselves to criticism" (referring to Obama's ban on contact with registered lobbyists). Of course associates close to Cleland have disclosed that Cleland is not an active Washington Lobbyist for the firm, instead working primarily from his home in Georgia.
When Smith pressed Obama spokesman Bill Burton on the issue, the Obama campaign responded by stating, "Sen. Obama has nothing but respect for Sen. Cleland's service to our country and appreciates his support."
I find a certain level of absolutely disgusting hypocrisy in a candidate who will work so diligently to present the appearance that he has no ties to the so-called evil lobbyists; all the while accepting political contributions from individuals such as Stanley O' Neil (the ousted CEO of Merril Lynch that was lambasted by congress for his compensation while his company contributed to the current mortgage meltdown), along with Robert Wolf the chairman of UBS Americas and Frank Clark, the CEO of ComEd; both of whom are responsible for bundling a minimum of $250,000 each for the Obama Campaign (numbers as of November 2007, Obama refuses to release the actual amount raised)
Obama has received millions from executives working for companies mired in the 'mortgage meltdown' and other industries. For his part, dozens of the bundlers listed in Obama's rolls work for law firms such as Skaden Arp, Sidley Austin, Jones Day, Latham & Watkins, and Wilmerhale LLP, all of which are ranked among the WORLD's LEADING CORPORATE LAW FIRMS. What type of clients do Corporate Law Firms Represent?? By the way the employees of these big 5 law firms have led these firms to represent 5 or Obama's top 20 contributors.
So let me get this right... We have no respect for and refuse to associate ourselves with a Vietnam Veteran who lost 3 limbs in service to this great nation, has served as a member of Congress and whom works for a company who provides treatment too and develops new technologies to treat our wounded soldiers. Meanwhile, we will proudly associate ourselves with and allow fundraising from Corporate Attorney, executives and CEO's.
Perhaps I am missing something?
Perhaps I should drink the kool-aid and try to understand?
Where in the hell is the left that was so adamant in attacking republicans for their attacks against Cleland during his congressional campaign?
Where the hell is John Kerry who used Cleland as a rallying point for his campaign?
What the hell is wrong with a presidential candidate who behaves in this manner?
And Where the hell is the press?
Perhaps they could remove their heads from the arses of the Obama campaign long enough to actually report this story. I apologize, if you've read my posts before, then you know that I typically refrain from such language. But come on, this is disgusting; for god's sake, this man lost 3 limbs in service to this nation and works for a company that provides valuable medical services to our wounded veterans. This is a disgrace, and a slap in the face to every man and woman who are serving our nation or have ever served our nation.
J Brown
July 19th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
So what happened to these legions of outraged bloggers?
What happened to a media that was clearly sympathetic to Cleland?
What happened to the Democratic Leaders that were outraged by the ads claiming that Cleland was 'soft on national security'?
Personally, I don't know what policy positions Max Cleland ever represented; and honestly, I it doesn't matter, because this story has nothing to do with his political career. For those of you who don't know Cleland's background, he is a Vietnam veteran who was awarded both the Silver Star and Bronze Star for valour in combat. Cleland was seriously injured near the end of his tour by a grenade blast that resulted in the amputation of both of his legs and one arm. Regardless of his political positions, no one can deny Clelands service to this nation nor the sacrifices and suffering he incurred during and after his service.
After losing his re-election bid, Cleland entered the private sector and last July went to work for Tissue Regeneration Technologies as a lobbyist for the company. Tissue Regeneration Technologies is a multi-faceted health care company focusing on non-invasive treatment for chronic wounds. According to TRT's press release, Cleland would act as a liaison for the companies' unit specializing in "advanced wound and cardiac care technology. TRT is currently sponsoring clinical trials to treat wounded US soldiers returning from combat in Iraq and Afghanistan." Clearly, Cleland had chosen to represent a company providing critical treatments and researching new technologies that could be applied to fellow soldiers who were wounded during their service to this country.
Now, I'm sure that Cleland is well-paid, and why shouldn't he be? He is a lobbyist, but I think that we can all agree that his lobbying efforts are worthwhile and certainly represent a company that is providing important research, treatment, and services to those who serve our country. So now you should understand why I was so disgusted to read Ben Smith's article at Huffpo yesterday. Smith's article, entitled "Obama Disinvited 'Lobbyist' Cleland", outlined the events that occurred earlier this month during an Obama fundraising event in Atlanta. On July 8th, Cleland was abruptly 'disinvited' from an Obama fundraising event because of his status as a registered lobbyist (of course, there are dozens of former congressional members who are now lobbyists).
In the article, Smith pointed out that Obama deputy campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand stated in an email, "This was a hard decision regarding Senator Cleland...If we make exceptions, we will open ourselves to criticism" (referring to Obama's ban on contact with registered lobbyists). Of course associates close to Cleland have disclosed that Cleland is not an active Washington Lobbyist for the firm, instead working primarily from his home in Georgia.
When Smith pressed Obama spokesman Bill Burton on the issue, the Obama campaign responded by stating, "Sen. Obama has nothing but respect for Sen. Cleland's service to our country and appreciates his support."
I find a certain level of absolutely disgusting hypocrisy in a candidate who will work so diligently to present the appearance that he has no ties to the so-called evil lobbyists; all the while accepting political contributions from individuals such as Stanley O' Neil (the ousted CEO of Merril Lynch that was lambasted by congress for his compensation while his company contributed to the current mortgage meltdown), along with Robert Wolf the chairman of UBS Americas and Frank Clark, the CEO of ComEd; both of whom are responsible for bundling a minimum of $250,000 each for the Obama Campaign (numbers as of November 2007, Obama refuses to release the actual amount raised)
Obama has received millions from executives working for companies mired in the 'mortgage meltdown' and other industries. For his part, dozens of the bundlers listed in Obama's rolls work for law firms such as Skaden Arp, Sidley Austin, Jones Day, Latham & Watkins, and Wilmerhale LLP, all of which are ranked among the WORLD's LEADING CORPORATE LAW FIRMS. What type of clients do Corporate Law Firms Represent?? By the way the employees of these big 5 law firms have led these firms to represent 5 or Obama's top 20 contributors.
So let me get this right... We have no respect for and refuse to associate ourselves with a Vietnam Veteran who lost 3 limbs in service to this great nation, has served as a member of Congress and whom works for a company who provides treatment too and develops new technologies to treat our wounded soldiers. Meanwhile, we will proudly associate ourselves with and allow fundraising from Corporate Attorney, executives and CEO's.
Perhaps I am missing something?
Perhaps I should drink the kool-aid and try to understand?
Where in the hell is the left that was so adamant in attacking republicans for their attacks against Cleland during his congressional campaign?
Where the hell is John Kerry who used Cleland as a rallying point for his campaign?
What the hell is wrong with a presidential candidate who behaves in this manner?
And Where the hell is the press?
Perhaps they could remove their heads from the arses of the Obama campaign long enough to actually report this story. I apologize, if you've read my posts before, then you know that I typically refrain from such language. But come on, this is disgusting; for god's sake, this man lost 3 limbs in service to this nation and works for a company that provides valuable medical services to our wounded veterans. This is a disgrace, and a slap in the face to every man and woman who are serving our nation or have ever served our nation.
J Brown
July 19th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
51,000 Superdelegate Emails And Counting In Just 2 Days!
Over the next month Puma & Just Say No Deal Democrats will make their 'last stand' against the travesty that has become the Democratic Primaries. The group was founded not only upon their support for Hillary Clinton, but moreover their call for reform within the Democratic Party & Primaries.
I am pleased to announce this morning that over the course of the last 2 days submissions through our site have generated more than 51,000 emails to our first targetted list of Superdelegates. Today is the last day before we reload the list with the 2nd group of superdelegates to be contacted. The form offers Democrats opposed to Obama once last chance to flood congressional and party leaders mailboxes with calls to place Hillary Clinton's name in nomination at the convention. Please see the details at the 'Last Stand' Email Inititiative for Puma Democrats
Please remember, that maintaining this program comes at a great deal of time, effort, and cost on our part. Any donations are greatly appreciated.
'Last Stand' Email Initiative for Puma and Just Say No Deal Democrats & Independents
J Brown
July 19th, 2008
I am pleased to announce this morning that over the course of the last 2 days submissions through our site have generated more than 51,000 emails to our first targetted list of Superdelegates. Today is the last day before we reload the list with the 2nd group of superdelegates to be contacted. The form offers Democrats opposed to Obama once last chance to flood congressional and party leaders mailboxes with calls to place Hillary Clinton's name in nomination at the convention. Please see the details at the 'Last Stand' Email Inititiative for Puma Democrats
Please remember, that maintaining this program comes at a great deal of time, effort, and cost on our part. Any donations are greatly appreciated.
'Last Stand' Email Initiative for Puma and Just Say No Deal Democrats & Independents
J Brown
July 19th, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Having It All - Both Oil and Clean Energy [Guest Post]
By: Ken Moyes
Listening to your Representatives in Congress and the pro drilling and anti-drilling pundits can be very frustrating. I heard this morning on a news show from a Democratic "Strategist" on a major news show that we will now not benefit from drilling for twenty years. Tom Daschle said, on June 22nd, on Fox News Sunday that we would have no oil until 2030. Is he is actually stating that it would take 22 years to find oil and drill for it? Just last week I was hearing ten years to bring oil to the pumps as gasoline. What changed in the last week? These sides all seem to feel that energy from renewable or from depleting resources is an all or nothing proposition.Here are some basics to consider to ease the frustration:
* By 2030 the world's energy consumption, measured in BTU's, will be 146% of what it is today.
* 86 Billion Barrels of untapped oil appear to be under our feet on shore and under our continental shelf off shore.
* Our current annual imported oil consumption is about 7.6 Billion Barrels.
* We have a 49 year supply of natural gas under our feet on shore and under our continental shelf off shore.
* We have massive resources of coal, and if we can figure out how to use it cleanly, we are the most energy rich country, probably in the universe (a little exaggeration).
* Growing our energy, unless it is grown on land that can't grow food very well, means that we have less land to grow food for the world's population to eat.
* Growing both food and energy means that both food and energy are subject to weather shortfalls at harvest.
* Wind is more viable than solar currently. Today's cost to establish a wind turbine is $2Million per Megawatt. Texas presently holds 27% of the nation's 16,193 Megawatts of wind turbine capacity. Wind turbine is the more promising of the renewable energy sources in the near future.
* We currently send $500,000,000,000 ($500 Billion) annually to foreign economies for oil each year and this is expected to grow.
* The annual U.S. trade deficit has been reported as $856.7 Billion or 6.5% of the economy. This trade deficit is slowly sucking the life blood out of our nation. If we eliminated the $500 billion from the $856.7 Billion - math says that we have a trade deficit of $356.7 Billion. If we drill for and increase the export of natural gas (It can be liquified for transport), we can wipe out the remaining trade deficit with energy alone.
* As the world's population grows, more food will be needed. More land will be needed to grow that food - probably arid land will have to be utilized.
* We will need more water for drinking, for irrigation, and to extract geo-thermal energy .
* To obtain this much water, we will have to start desalinizing ocean water - this will take an enormous amount of energy.
* The mere announcement that the U.S. has opened 86 Billion Barrels of oil up for drilling would drive a spike through the oil futures speculators. They are smart; they bet on the future of energy consumption against the future of oil availability; they would see the potential of 86 Billion Barrels coming on line; the futures speculation would dissipate and the price of oil would start a decline just on the announcement.
* The search for oil, both on shore and off shore, would bring jobs. The supply and support chain would require machinists, welders, and other skilled labor. These jobs would pay better than service work. These jobs would revive the Midwest and the Gulf States.
What if we actually elected some forward thinkers, for a change, and established a bipartisan plan to maximize energy production in this nation. We could use use royalties and tax incentives to balance the cost of the energy in an inverse relationship with how clean it is, how water intensive it is, and how much good growing land it uses. If we looked forward, and not with a myopic approach toward one type of energy, to develop every bit of energy we could, we could have a sound thriving economy, export energy to a world with a 146% energy hunger, and provide drinking water and irrigation to feed the world. This seems like a noble venture we could all get behind.
Why can't we believe in and achieve "Having It All"? The Energy Information Administration Web Site (http://www.eia.doe.gov/) is filled with information - check it out.
Read More Articles By Ken Moyes at his weblog - Broken Government
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Be sure to read our Drill Now Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Listening to your Representatives in Congress and the pro drilling and anti-drilling pundits can be very frustrating. I heard this morning on a news show from a Democratic "Strategist" on a major news show that we will now not benefit from drilling for twenty years. Tom Daschle said, on June 22nd, on Fox News Sunday that we would have no oil until 2030. Is he is actually stating that it would take 22 years to find oil and drill for it? Just last week I was hearing ten years to bring oil to the pumps as gasoline. What changed in the last week? These sides all seem to feel that energy from renewable or from depleting resources is an all or nothing proposition.Here are some basics to consider to ease the frustration:
* By 2030 the world's energy consumption, measured in BTU's, will be 146% of what it is today.
* 86 Billion Barrels of untapped oil appear to be under our feet on shore and under our continental shelf off shore.
* Our current annual imported oil consumption is about 7.6 Billion Barrels.
* We have a 49 year supply of natural gas under our feet on shore and under our continental shelf off shore.
* We have massive resources of coal, and if we can figure out how to use it cleanly, we are the most energy rich country, probably in the universe (a little exaggeration).
* Growing our energy, unless it is grown on land that can't grow food very well, means that we have less land to grow food for the world's population to eat.
* Growing both food and energy means that both food and energy are subject to weather shortfalls at harvest.
* Wind is more viable than solar currently. Today's cost to establish a wind turbine is $2Million per Megawatt. Texas presently holds 27% of the nation's 16,193 Megawatts of wind turbine capacity. Wind turbine is the more promising of the renewable energy sources in the near future.
* We currently send $500,000,000,000 ($500 Billion) annually to foreign economies for oil each year and this is expected to grow.
* The annual U.S. trade deficit has been reported as $856.7 Billion or 6.5% of the economy. This trade deficit is slowly sucking the life blood out of our nation. If we eliminated the $500 billion from the $856.7 Billion - math says that we have a trade deficit of $356.7 Billion. If we drill for and increase the export of natural gas (It can be liquified for transport), we can wipe out the remaining trade deficit with energy alone.
* As the world's population grows, more food will be needed. More land will be needed to grow that food - probably arid land will have to be utilized.
* We will need more water for drinking, for irrigation, and to extract geo-thermal energy .
* To obtain this much water, we will have to start desalinizing ocean water - this will take an enormous amount of energy.
* The mere announcement that the U.S. has opened 86 Billion Barrels of oil up for drilling would drive a spike through the oil futures speculators. They are smart; they bet on the future of energy consumption against the future of oil availability; they would see the potential of 86 Billion Barrels coming on line; the futures speculation would dissipate and the price of oil would start a decline just on the announcement.
* The search for oil, both on shore and off shore, would bring jobs. The supply and support chain would require machinists, welders, and other skilled labor. These jobs would pay better than service work. These jobs would revive the Midwest and the Gulf States.
What if we actually elected some forward thinkers, for a change, and established a bipartisan plan to maximize energy production in this nation. We could use use royalties and tax incentives to balance the cost of the energy in an inverse relationship with how clean it is, how water intensive it is, and how much good growing land it uses. If we looked forward, and not with a myopic approach toward one type of energy, to develop every bit of energy we could, we could have a sound thriving economy, export energy to a world with a 146% energy hunger, and provide drinking water and irrigation to feed the world. This seems like a noble venture we could all get behind.
Why can't we believe in and achieve "Having It All"? The Energy Information Administration Web Site (http://www.eia.doe.gov/) is filled with information - check it out.
Read More Articles By Ken Moyes at his weblog - Broken Government
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Be sure to read our Drill Now Email Initiative
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Drill Here, Drill Now Email Initiative Sent 43,000 Emails In Just Than 2 Days.
On Wednesday we initiated a Drill Now Email Initiative designed to work in conjunction with the Drill Here, Drill Now Petition. The effort is to force a handful of Democratic Congressional Leaders, along with some Republicans, to stop their attempts to block the "Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008" a bill that would remove the moratorium on offshore drilling, remove the moratorium placed on Oil Shale Exploration by congress last year, Offers incentives and investment in electric vehicle and alternative energy development, and increases funding and oversight provisions within the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the group that monitors commodities activities such as speculation).
For their part congressional leadership has put forth the "Use It Or Lose It Bill" which would double land lease rates for oil companies currently engaged in offshore & onshore drilling operations. The Pelosi and Reid backed bill has been condemned for using inaccurate and false statistical data, extrapolated without the use of scientific data readily available thru the Department of Energy, USGS, US Coast Guard and other federal agencies. The bill has also been condemned by numerous watchdog groups, energy associations, and geological associations for its inevitable affect of decreasing competition, increasing research and production costs, establishing shorter periods to complete research and extract oil, and inevitably leading to lower long-term domestic production.
Help us in our efforts to send a message to congress to pass the "Gas Price Reduction Act Of 2008" as an important first step in developing a comprehensive energy policy that focuses on increased domestic production, investments in alternative energy, and conservation. Join our Drill Now Email Initiative today and help us to send 1 million emails to congress in the coming weeks. It only takes seconds to complete our simple form and we do the rest.
In just 2 days we have sent over 43,268 emails to congressional leaders. Today, we are adding 11 additional congressional members to the list as we continue to expand our reach. We need your help to spread the word. In addition, any donations would be appreciated to help offset our time and expenses in these efforts.
Drill Now Email Initiative
J Brown
July 18th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
For their part congressional leadership has put forth the "Use It Or Lose It Bill" which would double land lease rates for oil companies currently engaged in offshore & onshore drilling operations. The Pelosi and Reid backed bill has been condemned for using inaccurate and false statistical data, extrapolated without the use of scientific data readily available thru the Department of Energy, USGS, US Coast Guard and other federal agencies. The bill has also been condemned by numerous watchdog groups, energy associations, and geological associations for its inevitable affect of decreasing competition, increasing research and production costs, establishing shorter periods to complete research and extract oil, and inevitably leading to lower long-term domestic production.
Help us in our efforts to send a message to congress to pass the "Gas Price Reduction Act Of 2008" as an important first step in developing a comprehensive energy policy that focuses on increased domestic production, investments in alternative energy, and conservation. Join our Drill Now Email Initiative today and help us to send 1 million emails to congress in the coming weeks. It only takes seconds to complete our simple form and we do the rest.
In just 2 days we have sent over 43,268 emails to congressional leaders. Today, we are adding 11 additional congressional members to the list as we continue to expand our reach. We need your help to spread the word. In addition, any donations would be appreciated to help offset our time and expenses in these efforts.
Drill Now Email Initiative
J Brown
July 18th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Obama Donor Base Shrivels, Campaign Blows $35 Million, Obama Bloggers Reporting False Numbers
This morning the papers were overloaded with positive stories proclaiming that Barack Obama was back on his A-Game and raising money like there was no tomorrow. Unfortunately the MSM once again failed to look at the actual numbers that should be of concern for the Obama campaign.
It is true that the Obama campaign did raise $52 million in June, along with DNC fundraising that added another $22 million to their coffers. That's a total haul of $74 million for the Democrat party in the month of June. But Obama, whose campaign has been so proud to taught his 1.5 million donors during the months of February, March & April, changed it's tone in yesterday's campaign release. In yesterday's release, David Plouffe stated, "Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people contributed...". Naturally, I pulled out the calculator only to grin at the reality that Obama, while raising a record $52 million, saw his donor base cut in half in June. That's right, just 764,000 donors compared to the 1.5 million who donated to his campaign in April.
The Obama campaign and it's surrogates had proudly projected that Obama would raise $100 million in June and a total of $250 - $300 million prior to the election. But the media failed to focus on the fact that Obama's total was only half of what they projected, primarily due to his shrinking donor base. Interest in the Obama campaign is also shriveling up online, where Obama's website which once ranked near the top 500 according to Alexa Web Tracking, has seen a consistent downward trend in visits since reaching it's pinnacle in early March. Today, Obama's website ranking has dropped to it's lowest level since the first of the year, and ranks around 3,000. The campaign website trend may also be disturbing considering the consistency within McCain's site visits and an upward trend since the beginning of June.
More disturbing for the campaign is the the cash on hand scenario. The McCain campaign and RNC currently have just shy of $100 million in the bank to take their fight forward. Meanwhile the Obama campaign announced yesterday that the campaign and DNC had a total closer to $72 million. This number is troubling for many in the Obama campaign, considering that just one month ago the two groups reported over $35 million of cash on hand. Considering that the DNC and Obama campaign raised $74 Million in June and that the DNC only spent $2 million; that would mean that the Obama campaign burned thru $35 million during the month of June. An astonishing amount considering that the Summer months are typically the doldrums of the campaign season. Even more disconcerting are the polls that continue to show the Obama has failed to increase his support, with his favorability ratings dropping and unfavorable rising.
For their part, Obama bloggers, including Huffpo, Politico, and TPM are reporting false numbers this morning, spreading stories that the DNC and Obama campaign have $92 million in the bank. Their reports are fueled by an LA Times story that simply failed to do any fact-checking. The Obama campaign press release yesterday specifically reported that the combined total cash on hand was $72 million.
One additional aspect of Obama's fundraising numbers is the Hillary effect. Since suspending her campaign in early June, Clinton has participated in several fundraisers and publicly pushed her largest contributors to donate to Obama's campaign. Following one recent fundraising event with Clinton, the Obama campaign reported that they had raised $5 million during the private event. Considering that many, but not all, of Clinton's donors have made contributions to Obama's campaign it's pretty safe to assume that 15%-30% of his fundraising total were derived directly from former Clinton supporters.
Further concerns may surface for the Obama campaign considering that many of the 130,000 donors who funded 60% of his primary campaign have already maxed out their general election contribution. Recent contribution requests reflect this growing desperation for new cash. The Obama campaign once proudly asked for a $5 contribution in their fundraising efforts; today, the campaign has increased their requests to $25.
There is an increasing consensus that Obama will have too dramatically outspend John McCain in order to win the general election; but the question remains, how much will they have to spend? It is unimaginable that the Obama campaign burned through $35 million dollars in the month of June and the best they could do was to 'barely hold on'. Last fall, the DNC requested that donors contribute to individual campaigns rather than the 'move on' type 527's that played such an important role during the last presidential cycle. As a result, DNC cash on hand and 527 groups are lagging far behind the RNC and Republican 527's. If Obama hopes to maintain his efforts to 'buy an election' he is going to have to find a way to reach back out to the small donors to fund his campaign. This may prove more elusive than ever considering that middle class and lower class citizens are being hammered by increasing inflation, record gas prices, and an impending high cost to heat their homes this fall. Perhaps Obama should consider using his new influence to push congress to bring the "The Gas Price Reduction Bill" to a vote and send a message that he actually cares about the middle and lower classes.
J Brown
July 18th, 2007
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
It is true that the Obama campaign did raise $52 million in June, along with DNC fundraising that added another $22 million to their coffers. That's a total haul of $74 million for the Democrat party in the month of June. But Obama, whose campaign has been so proud to taught his 1.5 million donors during the months of February, March & April, changed it's tone in yesterday's campaign release. In yesterday's release, David Plouffe stated, "Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people contributed...". Naturally, I pulled out the calculator only to grin at the reality that Obama, while raising a record $52 million, saw his donor base cut in half in June. That's right, just 764,000 donors compared to the 1.5 million who donated to his campaign in April.
The Obama campaign and it's surrogates had proudly projected that Obama would raise $100 million in June and a total of $250 - $300 million prior to the election. But the media failed to focus on the fact that Obama's total was only half of what they projected, primarily due to his shrinking donor base. Interest in the Obama campaign is also shriveling up online, where Obama's website which once ranked near the top 500 according to Alexa Web Tracking, has seen a consistent downward trend in visits since reaching it's pinnacle in early March. Today, Obama's website ranking has dropped to it's lowest level since the first of the year, and ranks around 3,000. The campaign website trend may also be disturbing considering the consistency within McCain's site visits and an upward trend since the beginning of June.
More disturbing for the campaign is the the cash on hand scenario. The McCain campaign and RNC currently have just shy of $100 million in the bank to take their fight forward. Meanwhile the Obama campaign announced yesterday that the campaign and DNC had a total closer to $72 million. This number is troubling for many in the Obama campaign, considering that just one month ago the two groups reported over $35 million of cash on hand. Considering that the DNC and Obama campaign raised $74 Million in June and that the DNC only spent $2 million; that would mean that the Obama campaign burned thru $35 million during the month of June. An astonishing amount considering that the Summer months are typically the doldrums of the campaign season. Even more disconcerting are the polls that continue to show the Obama has failed to increase his support, with his favorability ratings dropping and unfavorable rising.
For their part, Obama bloggers, including Huffpo, Politico, and TPM are reporting false numbers this morning, spreading stories that the DNC and Obama campaign have $92 million in the bank. Their reports are fueled by an LA Times story that simply failed to do any fact-checking. The Obama campaign press release yesterday specifically reported that the combined total cash on hand was $72 million.
One additional aspect of Obama's fundraising numbers is the Hillary effect. Since suspending her campaign in early June, Clinton has participated in several fundraisers and publicly pushed her largest contributors to donate to Obama's campaign. Following one recent fundraising event with Clinton, the Obama campaign reported that they had raised $5 million during the private event. Considering that many, but not all, of Clinton's donors have made contributions to Obama's campaign it's pretty safe to assume that 15%-30% of his fundraising total were derived directly from former Clinton supporters.
Further concerns may surface for the Obama campaign considering that many of the 130,000 donors who funded 60% of his primary campaign have already maxed out their general election contribution. Recent contribution requests reflect this growing desperation for new cash. The Obama campaign once proudly asked for a $5 contribution in their fundraising efforts; today, the campaign has increased their requests to $25.
There is an increasing consensus that Obama will have too dramatically outspend John McCain in order to win the general election; but the question remains, how much will they have to spend? It is unimaginable that the Obama campaign burned through $35 million dollars in the month of June and the best they could do was to 'barely hold on'. Last fall, the DNC requested that donors contribute to individual campaigns rather than the 'move on' type 527's that played such an important role during the last presidential cycle. As a result, DNC cash on hand and 527 groups are lagging far behind the RNC and Republican 527's. If Obama hopes to maintain his efforts to 'buy an election' he is going to have to find a way to reach back out to the small donors to fund his campaign. This may prove more elusive than ever considering that middle class and lower class citizens are being hammered by increasing inflation, record gas prices, and an impending high cost to heat their homes this fall. Perhaps Obama should consider using his new influence to push congress to bring the "The Gas Price Reduction Bill" to a vote and send a message that he actually cares about the middle and lower classes.
J Brown
July 18th, 2007
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Please Be Sure To Join Our: Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
Democrats & Independents Please Be Sure To Join Our: 'Last Stand' Stop Obama Email Initiative
Thursday, July 17, 2008
The Hidden Dangers of the 'Use It Or Lose It Bill'
I initially thought that HR. 6251, The so-called 'Use It or Lose It Bill' being pushed by Pelosi, Reid, and written by Representative Rahall was nothing more than political propaganda aimed at creating the false perception that congressional leadership was intent on doing something about our energy crisis. As I wrote about in the '68 Million Acre Joke' the entire basis of this legislation was built around a report issued by Congressman Rahall that claimed that if Oil companies were to drill on the current leases they hold, they would quadruple current offshore production and double our entire domestic oil production. Unfortunately, Congressman Rahall and his staff literally 'made-up' the figures within the report without consulting any statistical data, analysis, or expertise that was readily available from the Department of Energy, Coast Guard, USGS, and other related government agencies. The information was extrapolated using the crudest methods and has been condemned by just about every related government agency and independent energy research group and professional geological associations.
The bill initially failed within the house, but reports surfaced yesterday that Pelosi and Reid had been holding private meetings with moderate congressional Democrats who have refused to support the bill, in an attempt to revive the legislation. Of course, with my inquisitive mind, I decided to actually look into the bill and determine why Pelosi and Reid are pushing so hard. What I discovered, is that hidden deep inside the bill are some disturbing provisions designed to raise government revenue, limit competition within the companies currently exploring and drilling, and undoubtedly lead to less offshore oil production.
In June, the head of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, an independent professional association that typically avoids taking positions on public policy, wrote a condemning letter to Speaker Pelosi, and Congressmen Hoyer and Boehner. In the letter the independent associations president wrote, "As Congress considers measures to deal with high crude oil prices, I urge caution. Policies that increase exploration costs, decrease the available time to properly evaluate leases, and restrict access to federal lands and the Outer Continental Shelf do not provide the American people with short-term relief from high prices and undermine the goal of increasing stable long-term supplies." This letter should be of particular significance, not only because of the rarity of the organization condemning a piece of legislation, but more importantly because this is an association made up of the very scientists responsible for mapping, locating, and exploring potential offshore deposits. Once again, this congressional leadership, along with a number of both Democrats and Republicans are attempting to pass legislation in driven by false statistical data and directly opposed by the expertise of much of the geological community.
One provision of the legislation actually shortens the allotted lease period from the current 10 years to a 5 year lease. At the end of the five year period, the lease will "not be renewed for an additional period, unless the Secretary determines that as of the date of the expiration of the preceding period--
‘(i) production of oil or gas is occurring under the lease; or
‘(ii) the lessee is making good-faith progress towards such production and additional time is required to initiate such production; and
‘(C) be subject to a rental for each such additional period that is not less than double the rental rate that applied for the last year of the initial period;’.
This provision sets forth a government determined timetable for the exploration of "production" of oil in each lease block within a 5 year period. By this standard alone, oil companies would be forced to vastly expand their exploration abilities and "rush" to production, an event that would undoubtedly lead to increased costs and potential accidents. Moreover, considering that congressional leadership has condemned offshore drilling by citing that we would not receive a drop of oil for 7 to 10 years, why would they shorten the exploration and production time to a 5 year period. By their own statements that have established a timetable that they do not believe the oil companies can meet. However, the most damaging part of this legislation rests in the increased lease rates that congress is wanting to place upon the oil companies; lease rates that would 'no less than double' if the companies were not producing within 5 years. Now tell me, how would you expect private companies to react to these provisions.
The bill also implements a "lose it" provision in which the government "shall not issue any new lease that authorizes the exploration for or production of oil or natural gas...unless the person--
(1) certifies for each existing lease under such Acts for the production of oil or gas with respect to which the person is a lessee, that the person has diligently developed the Federal lands that are subject to the lease in order to produce oil or natural gas or is producing oil or natural gas from such lands; or
(2) has relinquished all Federal oil and gas leases under which oil and gas is not being diligently developed."
The hidden danger of the 'lose it' provision simply rests in the fact that with increased rental rates and increased expenses for exploration and development, smaller drilling companies will no longer be able to compete with the largest oil companies. The net result would be that the rampant monopolization that currently exists withing the wholesale US oil market will spill over into the US production market. As smaller companies fail to carry out government established timetables on current leases, they will be forced to either forgo the lease and write-off millions of dollars in losses, or give up their rights to future land leases. The result would mean less drilling competition, less exploration, and subsequently less production.
This bill is simple; simply horrible that is. It was designed to raise government revenue by more than doubling lease rates over the next five years and subsequently set standards that are largely considered unrealistic and unachievable. The bill will reduce competition and directly contradicts any sensible and prudent measure that congress should be taking during a time of record oil prices and potential economic stagflation. Congressional leadership is playing politics with our energy needs and now trying to push a harmful bill down our throats while using manipulated and unsubstantiated data to try to sell it too us.
Within three months temperatures will cool down across this nation, and Americans across the upper US will flip the switch on their heaters. When this occurs, the American consumer will not only have to suffer unbearable prices at the pump and an inflation rate that alone topped 1% last month, but they will face the reality of dramatically increased home heating expenses. The current congressional leadership has utterly failed to carry out their promises in 2006 and has made it clear that they have no intention of passing genuine and effective legislation any time soon. It is time that we get off our butts and send a message to congress to take action or resign.
Start today, by sending a message to congressional leaders to pass the 'Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008', send an email to congressional leadership through our energy email initiative today.
J Brown
July 17th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics and link to our Email Initiative
The bill initially failed within the house, but reports surfaced yesterday that Pelosi and Reid had been holding private meetings with moderate congressional Democrats who have refused to support the bill, in an attempt to revive the legislation. Of course, with my inquisitive mind, I decided to actually look into the bill and determine why Pelosi and Reid are pushing so hard. What I discovered, is that hidden deep inside the bill are some disturbing provisions designed to raise government revenue, limit competition within the companies currently exploring and drilling, and undoubtedly lead to less offshore oil production.
In June, the head of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, an independent professional association that typically avoids taking positions on public policy, wrote a condemning letter to Speaker Pelosi, and Congressmen Hoyer and Boehner. In the letter the independent associations president wrote, "As Congress considers measures to deal with high crude oil prices, I urge caution. Policies that increase exploration costs, decrease the available time to properly evaluate leases, and restrict access to federal lands and the Outer Continental Shelf do not provide the American people with short-term relief from high prices and undermine the goal of increasing stable long-term supplies." This letter should be of particular significance, not only because of the rarity of the organization condemning a piece of legislation, but more importantly because this is an association made up of the very scientists responsible for mapping, locating, and exploring potential offshore deposits. Once again, this congressional leadership, along with a number of both Democrats and Republicans are attempting to pass legislation in driven by false statistical data and directly opposed by the expertise of much of the geological community.
One provision of the legislation actually shortens the allotted lease period from the current 10 years to a 5 year lease. At the end of the five year period, the lease will "not be renewed for an additional period, unless the Secretary determines that as of the date of the expiration of the preceding period--
‘(i) production of oil or gas is occurring under the lease; or
‘(ii) the lessee is making good-faith progress towards such production and additional time is required to initiate such production; and
‘(C) be subject to a rental for each such additional period that is not less than double the rental rate that applied for the last year of the initial period;’.
This provision sets forth a government determined timetable for the exploration of "production" of oil in each lease block within a 5 year period. By this standard alone, oil companies would be forced to vastly expand their exploration abilities and "rush" to production, an event that would undoubtedly lead to increased costs and potential accidents. Moreover, considering that congressional leadership has condemned offshore drilling by citing that we would not receive a drop of oil for 7 to 10 years, why would they shorten the exploration and production time to a 5 year period. By their own statements that have established a timetable that they do not believe the oil companies can meet. However, the most damaging part of this legislation rests in the increased lease rates that congress is wanting to place upon the oil companies; lease rates that would 'no less than double' if the companies were not producing within 5 years. Now tell me, how would you expect private companies to react to these provisions.
The bill also implements a "lose it" provision in which the government "shall not issue any new lease that authorizes the exploration for or production of oil or natural gas...unless the person--
(1) certifies for each existing lease under such Acts for the production of oil or gas with respect to which the person is a lessee, that the person has diligently developed the Federal lands that are subject to the lease in order to produce oil or natural gas or is producing oil or natural gas from such lands; or
(2) has relinquished all Federal oil and gas leases under which oil and gas is not being diligently developed."
The hidden danger of the 'lose it' provision simply rests in the fact that with increased rental rates and increased expenses for exploration and development, smaller drilling companies will no longer be able to compete with the largest oil companies. The net result would be that the rampant monopolization that currently exists withing the wholesale US oil market will spill over into the US production market. As smaller companies fail to carry out government established timetables on current leases, they will be forced to either forgo the lease and write-off millions of dollars in losses, or give up their rights to future land leases. The result would mean less drilling competition, less exploration, and subsequently less production.
This bill is simple; simply horrible that is. It was designed to raise government revenue by more than doubling lease rates over the next five years and subsequently set standards that are largely considered unrealistic and unachievable. The bill will reduce competition and directly contradicts any sensible and prudent measure that congress should be taking during a time of record oil prices and potential economic stagflation. Congressional leadership is playing politics with our energy needs and now trying to push a harmful bill down our throats while using manipulated and unsubstantiated data to try to sell it too us.
Within three months temperatures will cool down across this nation, and Americans across the upper US will flip the switch on their heaters. When this occurs, the American consumer will not only have to suffer unbearable prices at the pump and an inflation rate that alone topped 1% last month, but they will face the reality of dramatically increased home heating expenses. The current congressional leadership has utterly failed to carry out their promises in 2006 and has made it clear that they have no intention of passing genuine and effective legislation any time soon. It is time that we get off our butts and send a message to congress to take action or resign.
Start today, by sending a message to congressional leaders to pass the 'Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008', send an email to congressional leadership through our energy email initiative today.
J Brown
July 17th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics and link to our Email Initiative
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
'Last Stand' Email Initiative For Puma Democrats Against Obama
UPDATE - August 16th - Congratulations Pumas, Hillary's name has been placed in nomination and as a result we have removed this form. Thanks Again.
As most of you are aware I am a Mccain supporter but as I have made no secret of since this blog started on May 5th; but I also have a strong belief that our nation should nominate the two candidates who are best suited to be our Commander-In-Chief. Over the past two and half months my sight has been visited by thousands of knowledgeable Democrats opposed to Barack Obama because they foresee the damage that this candidate could inflict upon this country. There is nothing that I fear more than the lack of experience, over-zealous populism, and harmful policy positions of a candidate who was illegitimately nominated and who is more concerned with power than moving this country forward and protecting our sovereignty. With that in mind, I would rather John McCain take his chances of losing against Hillary Clinton, than risking the chance that Senator Obama could ever become president. As a result, I have a gift for my Puma friends who have won my enduring respect for their stand against a system that is inherently disenfranchising and has abandoned the very policies of the greatest leaders of that party.
Today, I am launching a 'last stand' email initiative for the Democrats and Independents opposed to Obama. Like the 'Drill Now' email initiative that we launched, the form below offers you a chance to mail multiple Supers with one easy click and a unified message to assure a roll call, and place Hillary Clinton's name on the ballot. Additionally the form will allow you to continue to pressure the 543 Supers that we are targeting that have either committed to Obama or are still undecided.
Now here is the catch, we want to maximize the saturation of this message. But the problem with email lobbying is that the more people they target, the less effective they are. A majority of spam bots, blockers, and even your email software will automatically tag mass emails as spam. So when you mail 543 Supers you've already damaged the reach of your message just by pressing send. Additionally, as we began working on this idea several weeks ago and compiling the list, we found that many Supers, especially congressional Supers have multiple email addresses. For instance, Nancy Pelosi has 3 that are tested and possibly a fourth that we are waiting to see if it is still active. As a result the challenge that we have is that our program will not send out, or is not set up to effectively send mail to the 832 email addresses of the 500 Supers. Unlike our Energy initiative which is highly targeted, this list is simply too big.
In response, in order to achieve maximum saturation and maximum reach we are breaking up the email list into blocks of 10-15 email addresses. We can send out up 4 blocks per submission, so a reach of up to 60 delegates per submission. This assures that the messages are not tagged as spam, which they are not, and they reach the their intended audience. Every 3 days we will update the email list with 45-50 new addresses (we will continue to include certain Dem. Leaders such as Pelosi, Reid and Dean every cycle) so that by the start of the convention we have thoroughly saturated the targeted 543 delegates. So be sure to check back every 3-4 days and resubmit the form.
When you submit the form, an email is automatically generated and sent on your behalf, coming from your email address. Now it's important to realize that you may receive auto-responses from some of the email addresses telling you to submit your email to another address. Don't worry, the email has been sent to the other addresses as well. This form will send a unified message, with a unified tagline.
Now this effort will be time-consuming from my end and is likely to be fraught with challenges and increased costs from the software provider. My ability to maintain the updated list, address the technical challenges, and offset any additional costs rests purely in your hands. If you use the form, please be generous enough to make a small donation to offset our costs. I'm obviously not looking to make money, but I can also not afford to spend hours per day maintaining this effort and making sure that addresses are accurate without some offset. So thank you in advance.
So, spread the link, and good luck. If you can manage to convince the supers to throw this sham of a candidate out the door and reform a disenfranchising system, then congratulations. If not, then I look forward to working together this fall to "Stop Obama".
Remember you may receive a return email from certain Supers, or an undeliverable due to volume. As an example Pelosi's speaker email address is being bombarded and many of the emails are being returned as undeliverable. Be sure to check back every 3 days as we update the lists. The first Supers to be targeted will be those with great influence, those that have voted against their constituency, and those who have switched. Pass the link and please remember to be generous to help us maintain this form.
J. Brown
July 17th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics and link to our Email Initiative
Remember To Participate In Our Drill Now Email Initiative.
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
As most of you are aware I am a Mccain supporter but as I have made no secret of since this blog started on May 5th; but I also have a strong belief that our nation should nominate the two candidates who are best suited to be our Commander-In-Chief. Over the past two and half months my sight has been visited by thousands of knowledgeable Democrats opposed to Barack Obama because they foresee the damage that this candidate could inflict upon this country. There is nothing that I fear more than the lack of experience, over-zealous populism, and harmful policy positions of a candidate who was illegitimately nominated and who is more concerned with power than moving this country forward and protecting our sovereignty. With that in mind, I would rather John McCain take his chances of losing against Hillary Clinton, than risking the chance that Senator Obama could ever become president. As a result, I have a gift for my Puma friends who have won my enduring respect for their stand against a system that is inherently disenfranchising and has abandoned the very policies of the greatest leaders of that party.
Today, I am launching a 'last stand' email initiative for the Democrats and Independents opposed to Obama. Like the 'Drill Now' email initiative that we launched, the form below offers you a chance to mail multiple Supers with one easy click and a unified message to assure a roll call, and place Hillary Clinton's name on the ballot. Additionally the form will allow you to continue to pressure the 543 Supers that we are targeting that have either committed to Obama or are still undecided.
Now here is the catch, we want to maximize the saturation of this message. But the problem with email lobbying is that the more people they target, the less effective they are. A majority of spam bots, blockers, and even your email software will automatically tag mass emails as spam. So when you mail 543 Supers you've already damaged the reach of your message just by pressing send. Additionally, as we began working on this idea several weeks ago and compiling the list, we found that many Supers, especially congressional Supers have multiple email addresses. For instance, Nancy Pelosi has 3 that are tested and possibly a fourth that we are waiting to see if it is still active. As a result the challenge that we have is that our program will not send out, or is not set up to effectively send mail to the 832 email addresses of the 500 Supers. Unlike our Energy initiative which is highly targeted, this list is simply too big.
In response, in order to achieve maximum saturation and maximum reach we are breaking up the email list into blocks of 10-15 email addresses. We can send out up 4 blocks per submission, so a reach of up to 60 delegates per submission. This assures that the messages are not tagged as spam, which they are not, and they reach the their intended audience. Every 3 days we will update the email list with 45-50 new addresses (we will continue to include certain Dem. Leaders such as Pelosi, Reid and Dean every cycle) so that by the start of the convention we have thoroughly saturated the targeted 543 delegates. So be sure to check back every 3-4 days and resubmit the form.
When you submit the form, an email is automatically generated and sent on your behalf, coming from your email address. Now it's important to realize that you may receive auto-responses from some of the email addresses telling you to submit your email to another address. Don't worry, the email has been sent to the other addresses as well. This form will send a unified message, with a unified tagline.
Now this effort will be time-consuming from my end and is likely to be fraught with challenges and increased costs from the software provider. My ability to maintain the updated list, address the technical challenges, and offset any additional costs rests purely in your hands. If you use the form, please be generous enough to make a small donation to offset our costs. I'm obviously not looking to make money, but I can also not afford to spend hours per day maintaining this effort and making sure that addresses are accurate without some offset. So thank you in advance.
So, spread the link, and good luck. If you can manage to convince the supers to throw this sham of a candidate out the door and reform a disenfranchising system, then congratulations. If not, then I look forward to working together this fall to "Stop Obama".
Remember you may receive a return email from certain Supers, or an undeliverable due to volume. As an example Pelosi's speaker email address is being bombarded and many of the emails are being returned as undeliverable. Be sure to check back every 3 days as we update the lists. The first Supers to be targeted will be those with great influence, those that have voted against their constituency, and those who have switched. Pass the link and please remember to be generous to help us maintain this form.
J. Brown
July 17th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics and link to our Email Initiative
Remember To Participate In Our Drill Now Email Initiative.
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Obama, Pelosi and Reid's 68 Million Acre Joke
This week President Bush signed an executive order lifting the 29 years old offshore drilling moratorium. Of course lifting the ban is more a symbolic move than a practical one; after all, congress must also lift their ban on offshore drilling before any action can be taken. But congress cannot act unless House and Senate leadership stops blocking the bills that would authorize drilling to commence. Senator Reid and House Speaker Pelosi have both stated that they will not allow drilling legislation to proceed, although they are both aware that the legislation now has enough support to pass both houses. Senator Reid yesterday acknowledged that only 80% of the Senatorial Democratic Caucus opposed lifting the moratorium. If that were the case, then that would mean that the legislation would have close to the 60 votes needed to prevent a filibuster.
The argument of Reid, Pelosi, Obama and several other congressional leaders has shifted in the past few weeks from an attitude that we cannot drill to an attitude that oil companies should drill on the land they already lease. This argument is based upon a report published by Rep. Rahal that pointed out the oil companies currently hold the leases on 68 Million Acres of unproducing land. According to the report, that 68 million acres, if tapped, would provide 4.8 million barrels of crude per day, or roughly 3 times our current offshore drilling production. Wow! Sounds Great!! If only these congressional leaders had the ability to apply logic and provide actual geological data to back up their claims.
Now most Americans would assume that the production number, 4.8 mil. barrels per day, would be based upon geological studies. But of course, it's not. The 4.8 million barrels per day that Pelosi, Reid and Obama are claiming is a number that was literally made up by congressional staffers putting together the report. The Institute For Energy Research quickly pointed out that the number was based upon our current offshore extraction, stating "in order to arrive at these numbers, the authors of the report had to “extrapolate” as follows:
The argument of Reid, Pelosi, Obama and several other congressional leaders has shifted in the past few weeks from an attitude that we cannot drill to an attitude that oil companies should drill on the land they already lease. This argument is based upon a report published by Rep. Rahal that pointed out the oil companies currently hold the leases on 68 Million Acres of unproducing land. According to the report, that 68 million acres, if tapped, would provide 4.8 million barrels of crude per day, or roughly 3 times our current offshore drilling production. Wow! Sounds Great!! If only these congressional leaders had the ability to apply logic and provide actual geological data to back up their claims.
Now most Americans would assume that the production number, 4.8 mil. barrels per day, would be based upon geological studies. But of course, it's not. The 4.8 million barrels per day that Pelosi, Reid and Obama are claiming is a number that was literally made up by congressional staffers putting together the report. The Institute For Energy Research quickly pointed out that the number was based upon our current offshore extraction, stating "in order to arrive at these numbers, the authors of the report had to “extrapolate” as follows:
- Roughly 23 million acres of federal land are producing 1.6 million barrels each day today.
- Roughly 3 times as many federal acres - about 68 million - are leased to oil companies, but are not currently producing oil or gas.
- Therefore, the United States could be producing 3 times as much oil - or an additional 4.8 million barrels per day - if the lease holders for the non-producing federal lands started producing oil today. "
Pelosi, Reid and Obama are using data which has absolutely no geological evidence to back up their claims. The fact is that the 23 million acres that are currently considered to be producing are the result of years of geological research and exploration of the total acreage that the oil companies lease. The oil companies, like any business would, have already tapped into the largest and easies to reach oil deposits contained within this 91 million acres of land. Therefore, the 23 million acres that are currently producing are the most productive and cost-effective of the total available acreage. The oil companies could extract oil from the 68 million acres of remaining land, but at a much higher costs, a greater length of time, and with less production than their current rate. The very basis of Pelosi, Reid and Obama's claims are false and meant to mislead a general public too lazy to "look into it".
The IER goes further in their criticism of these congressional leaders by pointing out that "Using the “report” as a baseline, the Institute for Energy Research (IER) has calculated several ways to achieve American energy independence September 1, 2008:
- If we use the very same extrapolation, we can estimate that all 2.45 billion acres of the mostly-inactive federal estate (onshore and offshore) could be leased to produce an additional 160 million barrels of oil each day. That’s almost double the amount that is produced on a daily basis in the entire world.
- If we use the very same extrapolation, we can estimate that the 9.4 billion acres of the currently non-producing moon orbiting our earth could produce an additional 654 million barrels each day. That would supply America’s total annual demand in less than 12 days (but the pipeline construction would be a bear).
...Obviously, oil and gas aren’t going to be found under every each and every acre of land, just as the sun is not going to shine and the wind is not going to blow during every hour of every day. The moon, however, may have oil and gas - we don’t know because, like 97 percent of the U.S. outer-continental shelf, we haven’t looked."
If oil extraction was based upon the type of research (made-up numbers) that Pelosi, Reid, and Obama have provided us, then why is it that other nations are drilling in the waters off our coasts. By Obama's logic, it is ridiculously ineffective for a nation, such as China, to begin drilling operations just 60 miles off our shore. After all, the Chinese, according to Obama's methodology should have more than enough oil resting off of their massive shoreline. Oh...Wait... the Chinese must not subscribe to the PRO (Pelosi, Reid, & Obama) school of oil extraction. The fact is that the 68 million acres does contain oil, but the question is at what price, length of time, environments intrusiveness, and results could that oil be extracted? Wouldn't it be wiser for us to look for oil deposits that are larger, less intrusive, less expensive, easier and quicker to extract? After all the Chinese and Russians are doing it off our shorelines, and the last time I checked the EPA has no control over their operations.
Obama, Pelosi and Reid would never apply this failed logic to land, but somehow the media has allowed them to apply it the sea. After all, if they used the same extrapolation methods on land, then I could sink a small well in backyard in Illinois and produce more than enough oil to be energy "self-sufficient".
Let's face the facts, we need an energy policy that takes advantage of every possible resource at our disposal, increases incentives to develop efficient and low cost alternative energy and technology, focuses on efficiency and conservation, increases American control over environmental friendly extraction of it's energy needs, creates jobs, and ends the $10 trillion dollar transfer of American wealth that is expected to occur over the next 10 years. Offshore drilling legislation is an important first step in instituting an a comprehensive and no-nonsense based energy policy. Personally, I would like to see an amendment to the legislation that calls for the drilling rigs to be manufactured on US soil. But regardless, we must take action now, and end the ridiculous claims and obstructionism of our current congressional leadership.
18 months ago they ran on a platform that promised us increased energy independence and lower energy costs. In 18 months they have done nothing, proposed no legislation designed to lower energy costs or offset global oil production that peaked in 2005, and now are blocking legislation that will not solve our problems, but will set us on the right path. What is occurring in Washington today is what happens when our elected officials become more focused on obtaining power than doing the job they were elected to complete.
Join us in our efforts to send a message to Washington that if you will not take action today, then we will begin change congressional leadership. Visit American Solutions and sign the Drill Here, Drill Now Petition and then participate in our Drill Now Email Initiative. With one simple form and click we will instantly & simultaneously send emails, on your behalf, directly to the members of congress, including Reid, Pelosi, and Obama, who are obstructing legislation that has the votes to pass. If they won't listen to us, perhaps clogging their congressional mailboxes with millions of emails calling for action will wake them up.
Click Here to Participate in the Drill Now Email Initiative.
J Brown
July 16th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics and link to our Email Intitiative
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
So Senator Obama, Where's Your $100 Billion In Savings Now?
Two months ago on this site In the Obama's Kid Gloves Series I wrote about Senator Obama's constant claims on the campaign trail that the US was wasting $100-$150 Billion per year on a "war that never should have been authorized and a war that never should have been waged". On the campaign trail Obama has consistently claimed that this money should have been used here in the US to bolster our economy and provide social programs such as the ones he is proposing. In that series of articles I pointed out that Obama's claims, by his own foreign policy positions, were misleading and false. Guess What?
I was right!
In the past few days, a pandering Obama, grasping for any issue that might demonstrate a shred of hope for a campaign damaged by our own successes in Iraq, decided too call for a redeployment of our forces from Iraq to Afghanistan. I'm not going to discuss the ridiculousness of a man that was against a surge in Iraq, while calling for a surge in a much more hostile terrain. Additionally, I will agree that Nato forces should be bolstered by all member countries of NATO; but I also believe that it is ridiculously naive for any president to arbitrarily shift forces from one theatre to another without consulting the commanders on the ground. In fact, by Obama taking a stance in arbitrarily dictating the course of a war, he is committing the same mistake that Bush made when he refused to heed the advice of our military commanders. It is no means unreasonable for a President to establish a soft target for troop withdrawals while allowing military leadership to develop a plan concerning the timing and progression of withdrawals. But did you catch the key words: Military Leadership. What occurred during the first three years of Iraq is the result of an administration that did not rely upon it's military commanders to develop and institute a plan of action. Obama, if elected, has charted his course towards the same doom.
I'm not going to talk about Obama's hypocrisy and lack of understanding in regard to Iraq & Afghanistan. Tonight, I'm only going to discuss one more issue that Obama must now stray from. Unless I am mistaken, the last time I checked the cost of waging a war in Afghanistan is not any cheaper than waging a war in Iraq. So if Senator Obama's position is that we should now redeploy our troops to Afghanistan, without any regard to our relationship and the security of Iraq, then "Where Is The $10 Billion Per Month that Senator Obama was going to use to fund his massive populist programs?"
Where Is It??
Still Waiting For An Answer??
Thats right, there are no savings, and there will be none. Any additional deployment to Afghanistan will last for years. There is no easy solution, nor an enemy that seeks martyrdom in Afghanistan. The fighters in Afghanistan are hardened and intent on quick actions followed by a retreat into the mountains. Our presence in Afghanistan will last for years, and it is unrealistic and misleading for Obama to tell his supporters and the American people that a pullout from Iraq will create Billions of dollars for domestic utilization. As a result, in order for Obama to carry out his nearly $1 trillion in campaign promises, he will be forced to reach even deeper into your pockets to replace the imaginary $150 billion per year that he indended on saving by an Iraqi withdrawal.
J Brown
July 15th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember To Participate In Our Drill Now Email Initiative. Just one form simultaneously emails dozens of congressional leaders responsible for holding up energy legislation.
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
I was right!
In the past few days, a pandering Obama, grasping for any issue that might demonstrate a shred of hope for a campaign damaged by our own successes in Iraq, decided too call for a redeployment of our forces from Iraq to Afghanistan. I'm not going to discuss the ridiculousness of a man that was against a surge in Iraq, while calling for a surge in a much more hostile terrain. Additionally, I will agree that Nato forces should be bolstered by all member countries of NATO; but I also believe that it is ridiculously naive for any president to arbitrarily shift forces from one theatre to another without consulting the commanders on the ground. In fact, by Obama taking a stance in arbitrarily dictating the course of a war, he is committing the same mistake that Bush made when he refused to heed the advice of our military commanders. It is no means unreasonable for a President to establish a soft target for troop withdrawals while allowing military leadership to develop a plan concerning the timing and progression of withdrawals. But did you catch the key words: Military Leadership. What occurred during the first three years of Iraq is the result of an administration that did not rely upon it's military commanders to develop and institute a plan of action. Obama, if elected, has charted his course towards the same doom.
I'm not going to talk about Obama's hypocrisy and lack of understanding in regard to Iraq & Afghanistan. Tonight, I'm only going to discuss one more issue that Obama must now stray from. Unless I am mistaken, the last time I checked the cost of waging a war in Afghanistan is not any cheaper than waging a war in Iraq. So if Senator Obama's position is that we should now redeploy our troops to Afghanistan, without any regard to our relationship and the security of Iraq, then "Where Is The $10 Billion Per Month that Senator Obama was going to use to fund his massive populist programs?"
Where Is It??
Still Waiting For An Answer??
Thats right, there are no savings, and there will be none. Any additional deployment to Afghanistan will last for years. There is no easy solution, nor an enemy that seeks martyrdom in Afghanistan. The fighters in Afghanistan are hardened and intent on quick actions followed by a retreat into the mountains. Our presence in Afghanistan will last for years, and it is unrealistic and misleading for Obama to tell his supporters and the American people that a pullout from Iraq will create Billions of dollars for domestic utilization. As a result, in order for Obama to carry out his nearly $1 trillion in campaign promises, he will be forced to reach even deeper into your pockets to replace the imaginary $150 billion per year that he indended on saving by an Iraqi withdrawal.
J Brown
July 15th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember To Participate In Our Drill Now Email Initiative. Just one form simultaneously emails dozens of congressional leaders responsible for holding up energy legislation.
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Drill Here, Drill Now Congressional Email Initiative
July 14th, 2008
UPDATE: WE HAVE TEMPORARILY SUSPENDED THIS INITIATIVE AND REMOVED THE WEBFORM TO ALLOW FOR OUR 2 WEEK LONG - "CANCEL CONGRESS' VACATION EMAIL INITIATIVE
WE WILL REOPEN THE DRILL NOW EMAIL INITIATIVE ON AUGUST 11th.
Today President Bush, following John McCain's call, rescinded the executive order banning offshore drilling and exploration. The only thing that now stands in the way of renewing American oil production are a few stubborn Senators who have failed to enact any legislation designed to decrease our dependence upon foreign oil, create American jobs, and stop the transfer of Billions of Dollars in our wealth to other countries.
18 months ago the Democratic Party took control of congress upon a platform of lowering energy prices and decreasing our reliance upon foreign oil. Today, Senator Reid, Speaker of the House Pelosi, Senator Obama, and a handful of stubborn congressional leaders are holding up legislation which will provide the first step towards renewing American Energy Independence.
Over the course of 18 months congressional leadership has done nothing and developed no plan to deal with energy and fuel costs that are beyond control. Today, we need to declare our independence from leadership that cares more about retaining their political power than enacting legislation that 70% of Americans support and which most of our allies and enemies are now pursuing.
T. Boone Pickens, an "oil man" from Texas has done more in the past two weeks in developing a plan of action than the 535 member of congress have done in 25 years. Pickens has developed an aggressive plan built upon alternative energy source. Pickens has stated that "this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of", but has also acknowledged that part of the solution to our energy crisis is more exploration and drilling of both oil and natural gas. At current prices the United States is on pace to transfer more than $10 Trillion dollars into the pockets of foreign nations over the next ten years.
Today is our independence day and join us in our email initiative.
The form below is a simple form that we have developed. Complete the form and press submit. An email will automatically be generated and sent to the direct email addresses of Senator Reid, Speaker of the House Pelosi, Senator Obama, and other members of congress who are holding up offshore drilling legislation. All with one click.
Join our initiative in forcing congress to take the first step in ending our energy dependence, lowering long term prices, retaining American wealth, allowing American environmental regulation of drilling and creating American Jobs. Drilling won't solve our energy problems, but is a necessary and important first step.
If we carpet-bomb congressional mailboxes with enough calls for action, perhaps they will wake up. After you submit your email, visit the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less Website to sign the petition. There is a link to email this article at the bottom of the post, and feel free to link to this page.
Please remember to help support our efforts through a small donation.
*All information collected is not sold to third parties or used in any solicitation from us. You may receive a return email from certain congressional leaders telling you to submit to another email address. Don't worry we submit to any addresses we become aware of.
Please Check back for updates including information on how many emails we have sent out. If you are aware of direct email addresses you think should be added to the list, please contact us or post in the comments section below (not on the email form). We will add any email addresses not already included.
DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW PETITION FROM AMERICAN SOLUTIONS
J. Brown
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Hot Air: IBD Poll: Drill Here, Drill Now
UPDATE: WE HAVE TEMPORARILY SUSPENDED THIS INITIATIVE AND REMOVED THE WEBFORM TO ALLOW FOR OUR 2 WEEK LONG - "CANCEL CONGRESS' VACATION EMAIL INITIATIVE
WE WILL REOPEN THE DRILL NOW EMAIL INITIATIVE ON AUGUST 11th.
Today President Bush, following John McCain's call, rescinded the executive order banning offshore drilling and exploration. The only thing that now stands in the way of renewing American oil production are a few stubborn Senators who have failed to enact any legislation designed to decrease our dependence upon foreign oil, create American jobs, and stop the transfer of Billions of Dollars in our wealth to other countries.
18 months ago the Democratic Party took control of congress upon a platform of lowering energy prices and decreasing our reliance upon foreign oil. Today, Senator Reid, Speaker of the House Pelosi, Senator Obama, and a handful of stubborn congressional leaders are holding up legislation which will provide the first step towards renewing American Energy Independence.
Over the course of 18 months congressional leadership has done nothing and developed no plan to deal with energy and fuel costs that are beyond control. Today, we need to declare our independence from leadership that cares more about retaining their political power than enacting legislation that 70% of Americans support and which most of our allies and enemies are now pursuing.
T. Boone Pickens, an "oil man" from Texas has done more in the past two weeks in developing a plan of action than the 535 member of congress have done in 25 years. Pickens has developed an aggressive plan built upon alternative energy source. Pickens has stated that "this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of", but has also acknowledged that part of the solution to our energy crisis is more exploration and drilling of both oil and natural gas. At current prices the United States is on pace to transfer more than $10 Trillion dollars into the pockets of foreign nations over the next ten years.
Today is our independence day and join us in our email initiative.
The form below is a simple form that we have developed. Complete the form and press submit. An email will automatically be generated and sent to the direct email addresses of Senator Reid, Speaker of the House Pelosi, Senator Obama, and other members of congress who are holding up offshore drilling legislation. All with one click.
Join our initiative in forcing congress to take the first step in ending our energy dependence, lowering long term prices, retaining American wealth, allowing American environmental regulation of drilling and creating American Jobs. Drilling won't solve our energy problems, but is a necessary and important first step.
If we carpet-bomb congressional mailboxes with enough calls for action, perhaps they will wake up. After you submit your email, visit the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less Website to sign the petition. There is a link to email this article at the bottom of the post, and feel free to link to this page.
Please remember to help support our efforts through a small donation.
*All information collected is not sold to third parties or used in any solicitation from us. You may receive a return email from certain congressional leaders telling you to submit to another email address. Don't worry we submit to any addresses we become aware of.
Please Check back for updates including information on how many emails we have sent out. If you are aware of direct email addresses you think should be added to the list, please contact us or post in the comments section below (not on the email form). We will add any email addresses not already included.
DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW PETITION FROM AMERICAN SOLUTIONS
J. Brown
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Hot Air: IBD Poll: Drill Here, Drill Now
70 Al-Quaeda Militants Surrender to US Forces in Iraq! Where’s The Media?
70 Al-Quaeda Militants Surrender to US Forces in Iraq! Where’s The Reports
We are a country at war. A country that has 200,000 troops fighting insurgents and terrorists throughout the Middle East. Yet as I opened the papers this morning the story that should have been on the front-page was no where to be found. US mainstream media has once again proven that they are intent on reporting only the political events or negative news stemming out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
According to the Arab newspaper Al-Hayat more than 150 militants tied to Al-Quaeda or the Sunni based Islamic Army of Iraq have surrendered to US forces after they turned over a list of the militants to local Sunni leaders. After negotiations with tribal leaders half of the Sunni militants were released after turning in their weapons and pledging to Sunni leaders and US forces that they would no longer participate in armed conflict in return for their removal from the most wanted list. Nearly 70 Al-Quaeda militants who surrendered were arrested.
The surrender of the militants to US forces occurred without a single shot being fired and demonstrates the strengthening bonds between joint US/Iraqi forces and Sunni leadership. 2 years ago this hand-over of militants would have never have occurred.
It is unfortunate that US mainstream media continues to ignore the positive events that are occurring within Iraq and the strengthening of our relationship within that country. We have made genuine progress in Iraq and are building a relationship that will hopefully leave our nation with a strong ally within in the region.
The turnaround in Iraq occurred with the onset of the “surge” plan that was pushed for by military leadership and adopted by the Bush Administration. The turnaround was only possible after the Bush administration made the decision to finally allow military commanders to develop their own plan for securing Iraq.
The improvement in Iraq is what occurs when our Commander-In-Chief comes to the realization that our Commanders-On-The-Ground are better suited, more knowledgeable, and more experienced in conducting operations and establishing a plan. The Bush administration’s biggest mistake in Iraq was when they failed to allow military commanders, who wanted more time and a better plan, to determine our plan-of-action prior to the invasion of Iraq.
The question this election day is whether American’s will elect a president who understands that being commander-in-chief does not qualify you as an operational commander, or whether we elect a president who values the knowledge, training, experience, and wisdom of the commanders on the ground?
J Brown
July 14th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
We are a country at war. A country that has 200,000 troops fighting insurgents and terrorists throughout the Middle East. Yet as I opened the papers this morning the story that should have been on the front-page was no where to be found. US mainstream media has once again proven that they are intent on reporting only the political events or negative news stemming out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
According to the Arab newspaper Al-Hayat more than 150 militants tied to Al-Quaeda or the Sunni based Islamic Army of Iraq have surrendered to US forces after they turned over a list of the militants to local Sunni leaders. After negotiations with tribal leaders half of the Sunni militants were released after turning in their weapons and pledging to Sunni leaders and US forces that they would no longer participate in armed conflict in return for their removal from the most wanted list. Nearly 70 Al-Quaeda militants who surrendered were arrested.
The surrender of the militants to US forces occurred without a single shot being fired and demonstrates the strengthening bonds between joint US/Iraqi forces and Sunni leadership. 2 years ago this hand-over of militants would have never have occurred.
It is unfortunate that US mainstream media continues to ignore the positive events that are occurring within Iraq and the strengthening of our relationship within that country. We have made genuine progress in Iraq and are building a relationship that will hopefully leave our nation with a strong ally within in the region.
The turnaround in Iraq occurred with the onset of the “surge” plan that was pushed for by military leadership and adopted by the Bush Administration. The turnaround was only possible after the Bush administration made the decision to finally allow military commanders to develop their own plan for securing Iraq.
The improvement in Iraq is what occurs when our Commander-In-Chief comes to the realization that our Commanders-On-The-Ground are better suited, more knowledgeable, and more experienced in conducting operations and establishing a plan. The Bush administration’s biggest mistake in Iraq was when they failed to allow military commanders, who wanted more time and a better plan, to determine our plan-of-action prior to the invasion of Iraq.
The question this election day is whether American’s will elect a president who understands that being commander-in-chief does not qualify you as an operational commander, or whether we elect a president who values the knowledge, training, experience, and wisdom of the commanders on the ground?
J Brown
July 14th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Change We Can Believe In? [Guest Post]
Courtesy of Lynette Long
I get it. I’m converted. I believe in change. Amen. Halleluiah! Put me on the change bandwagon. I want Change! Change I can believe in. Not small change either. I want the whole tamale. We need fresh blood, new meat, and innovative ideas in Washington. We need new leadership.
So let’s get rid of the good old boys who control Washington. I know they agree with me.
Ted Kennedy, Massachusetts Senator. “With Barak Obama, we will close the book on Old Politics,” Senator Ted Kennedy, January 28, 2008. That means you babe. You’re part of that closed book. Besides you ignored the voters of Massachusetts who voted for Hillary by a fourteen point margin, and endorsed Barack Obama. Ignoring your constituents and the will of the people is old politics.
John Kerry, Massachusetts’ other Senator. “I continue to believe that this election is about the future, not the past, and that the country needs a president that will change the status quo and change the Washington system and to give voice to all of those who voices are ignored in the corridors of power,” John Kerry, January 10, 2008. Well John, women are the most disenfranchised people in government. You didn’t give voice to the women of your state who voted for Hillary in record numbers when you endorsed Obama. Bye-bye John. Make room for the young and the new.
Nancy Pelosi. Speaker of the House of Representatives. “ Frankly his lack of Washington experience, in my view is a giant plus, because he comes here free, free and fresh and new, and not hamstrung by Washington, DC, which is a city of status quo,” Nancy Pelosi, June 28, 2008. Well Nancy, you are part of that status quo and the ultimate insider. You stood silently by as a woman was sexually harassed by the press and the media. Resign and make room for change.
Howard Dean, Chairman of the DNC. Howard, you’re tired, tired, tired and worse you’re ineffective. You’ve been a governor of Vermont, a presidential candidate and head of the DNC, it’s time for some new faces. The head of the DNC has never been a woman, so move over and allow a woman to have your job. That would be change.
Bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico. “It is time for a new generation of leadership to lead America forward,” March 21, 2008. Well guess what? You’re part of the old generation. Besides you endorsed Obama after Clinton won your state, and you were adamant in numerous public statements, that super delegates should follow the will of the voters. When questioned about your endorsement, you replied, Hillary only won New Mexico by a small margin. Talk about splitting dog hairs.
Let’s clean house. Let’s not just get rid of the ultimate Democratic insiders, but also the people that run their campaigns. How about David Axelrod, Mark Penn, Donna Brazile and Mark Squire? You’ve all got to go. You’re all graduates of the school of dirty politics. The politics of change needs new leaders, women leaders.
And now let’s talk about the Vice-Presidency. Since we have a white male and a black male running for president, let’s be fair and nominate two women. Last I looked women were over half the population, so why not give us half the slots. A real seat at the table, that would be change, wouldn’t it? I’d be happy to volunteer for VP, I don’t have much experience in politics, but that doesn’t matter. If one-hundred-forty-three days of national experience is enough to run for president, what the hell, my twenty-one day tour of Europe during graduate school and my African safari two years ago should qualify me as an international expert. Did I mention I lived in Japan for a year? Besides I’d only be attending funerals anyway. I’m well prepared. I own a few black suits. A heartbeat away from the presidency you say. Well I promise, I’m smarter that George Bush, cuter than Richard Nixon, and more honest than Dick Chaney.” Anyway I’m one of the people and I promise to tell the truth, does that count for anything?
You can read more article by Lynette Long @ Lynette Long - Truth, Justice, & The American Way
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report - Democratic Disenfranchisement
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
I get it. I’m converted. I believe in change. Amen. Halleluiah! Put me on the change bandwagon. I want Change! Change I can believe in. Not small change either. I want the whole tamale. We need fresh blood, new meat, and innovative ideas in Washington. We need new leadership.
So let’s get rid of the good old boys who control Washington. I know they agree with me.
Ted Kennedy, Massachusetts Senator. “With Barak Obama, we will close the book on Old Politics,” Senator Ted Kennedy, January 28, 2008. That means you babe. You’re part of that closed book. Besides you ignored the voters of Massachusetts who voted for Hillary by a fourteen point margin, and endorsed Barack Obama. Ignoring your constituents and the will of the people is old politics.
John Kerry, Massachusetts’ other Senator. “I continue to believe that this election is about the future, not the past, and that the country needs a president that will change the status quo and change the Washington system and to give voice to all of those who voices are ignored in the corridors of power,” John Kerry, January 10, 2008. Well John, women are the most disenfranchised people in government. You didn’t give voice to the women of your state who voted for Hillary in record numbers when you endorsed Obama. Bye-bye John. Make room for the young and the new.
Nancy Pelosi. Speaker of the House of Representatives. “ Frankly his lack of Washington experience, in my view is a giant plus, because he comes here free, free and fresh and new, and not hamstrung by Washington, DC, which is a city of status quo,” Nancy Pelosi, June 28, 2008. Well Nancy, you are part of that status quo and the ultimate insider. You stood silently by as a woman was sexually harassed by the press and the media. Resign and make room for change.
Howard Dean, Chairman of the DNC. Howard, you’re tired, tired, tired and worse you’re ineffective. You’ve been a governor of Vermont, a presidential candidate and head of the DNC, it’s time for some new faces. The head of the DNC has never been a woman, so move over and allow a woman to have your job. That would be change.
Bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico. “It is time for a new generation of leadership to lead America forward,” March 21, 2008. Well guess what? You’re part of the old generation. Besides you endorsed Obama after Clinton won your state, and you were adamant in numerous public statements, that super delegates should follow the will of the voters. When questioned about your endorsement, you replied, Hillary only won New Mexico by a small margin. Talk about splitting dog hairs.
Let’s clean house. Let’s not just get rid of the ultimate Democratic insiders, but also the people that run their campaigns. How about David Axelrod, Mark Penn, Donna Brazile and Mark Squire? You’ve all got to go. You’re all graduates of the school of dirty politics. The politics of change needs new leaders, women leaders.
And now let’s talk about the Vice-Presidency. Since we have a white male and a black male running for president, let’s be fair and nominate two women. Last I looked women were over half the population, so why not give us half the slots. A real seat at the table, that would be change, wouldn’t it? I’d be happy to volunteer for VP, I don’t have much experience in politics, but that doesn’t matter. If one-hundred-forty-three days of national experience is enough to run for president, what the hell, my twenty-one day tour of Europe during graduate school and my African safari two years ago should qualify me as an international expert. Did I mention I lived in Japan for a year? Besides I’d only be attending funerals anyway. I’m well prepared. I own a few black suits. A heartbeat away from the presidency you say. Well I promise, I’m smarter that George Bush, cuter than Richard Nixon, and more honest than Dick Chaney.” Anyway I’m one of the people and I promise to tell the truth, does that count for anything?
You can read more article by Lynette Long @ Lynette Long - Truth, Justice, & The American Way
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report - Democratic Disenfranchisement
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Dean Compares Clinton Supporters To His 2004 Supporters, Admits He Controlled Primaries
This Friday the Howard Dean version of the Obama Love Fest Tour headed out to New Hampshire to help campaign for Obama in a State whose 4 electoral votes are up for grabs in November. Among Dean's stops was a semi-private meeting held at the home of New Hampshire Democrat Terie Norelli in Portsmouth on Friday. Speaking to a groups of 60 prominent local Dem. leaders and activists, Dean weighed in the unification efforts following the primaries.
Howard Dean has some interesting comments concerning the primaries and especially Hillary Clinton's most ardent supporters (aka. PUMAS). While addressing a group of 60 activist Dean told the crowd that the Democratic Party was making progress in unifying Clinton Supporters comparing Clinton to himself and her supporters to his in 2004. Dean told the crowd that he understood how tough it is too come together following a tough primary battle stating, "I know how hard this is because I didn't win when I ran, and it was very hard to get my supporters back on board with Sen. (John) Kerry, But we did. It took some time and some hard work but I think we're making big progress." Dean assured local Democrat leaders that the DNC and Obama campaign was working hard and that Clinton's supporters were reunifying.
In Obama World, Dean is right; Clinton supporters are coalescing around Barack Obama. But of course in Obama World, only Clinton voters who support Obama are "genuine" while those such as Pumas are considered to be "McCain" and "RNC" Operatives. My site for instance continues to get bombarded with comments from Obama supporters who continue to attack Pumas on the basis that aren't real Democrats. Nearly all of these comments are deleted due to the other language they like to use.
In Obama World, Pumas don't matter, they are irrelevant, and will never be part of the "New Democratic Party". The only people that Dean and Obama consider to be real Democrats are those who unequivocally agree with whatever policies the party's candidate adopts. There is no room for dissent, no room for individual thinking and no room for steadfast values. In Obama world, there are no steadfast values, only positions and power; positions that will shift based upon which crowd you are pandering too, and positions that will shift in order to gain political power. In Obama world, campaign supporters are to accept whatever lies and broken promises occur, so long as ultimate power is obtained. But then again, Dean & Obama have yet to figure out that we live in the real world.
Dean also had some interesting comments on the primaries during his trip to the Granite state. New Hampshire citizens are growing increasingly concerned that their first in the nation primary is in jeopardy. When asked about New Hampshire's status, Dean remarked, "That'll be up to President Obama. When you have a Democratic president ... the president essentially says who the DNC chair is going to be and they have control over the schedule." According to Fosters.com Dean also 'used words like "terrific" and "pleased" to describe his feelings for the 2008 nominating schedule.'
The problem with Dean and Obama is that they see nothing wrong with the Democratic Primary System, a system that deserves scrutiny and is in desperate need of an overhaul. The system has abandoned the principles of 'equal representation' that our nation and the idea of the proportional primary was founded upon. The system has been manipulated to award those who focus on preferential centers within a state while punishing those who run a statewide campaign. See: The Final Report - Democratic Disenfranchisement.
Dean's remarks over the weekend show the arrogance of himself and the Obama campaign. While attacking Senator McCain, Dean remarked, "I don't think the John McCain of 2000 would have voted for the John McCain of 2008. ... This is a guy who really has become a politician — not a maverick independent like he was in 2000." Dean's attack on McCain is somewhat laughable considering that Dean's position would mean that after 26 years, Mcain has suddenly decided to abandon his principles and independence. The very man who John Kerry openly courted for the VP in 2004, is suddenly part of the so-called "right-wing conspiracy", even though McCain's primary victory came on the backs of moderate republicans and independents. Perhaps Dean should focus on his own candidate; the one who has openly broken every promise he has made to the Leftist-Base, and all within just one month. That is not independence, it is forte' of a politician raised in the Chicago combine.
Obama is much more than the typical politician. Unlike the typical politician who at least has some core values, Obama has none. He will say anything, do anything, and throw anyone under the bus so long as it helps quench his thirst for power. He is a man who will tell you what you can do, what questions you can ask, and when you can ask them.
J Brown
July 13th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Howard Dean has some interesting comments concerning the primaries and especially Hillary Clinton's most ardent supporters (aka. PUMAS). While addressing a group of 60 activist Dean told the crowd that the Democratic Party was making progress in unifying Clinton Supporters comparing Clinton to himself and her supporters to his in 2004. Dean told the crowd that he understood how tough it is too come together following a tough primary battle stating, "I know how hard this is because I didn't win when I ran, and it was very hard to get my supporters back on board with Sen. (John) Kerry, But we did. It took some time and some hard work but I think we're making big progress." Dean assured local Democrat leaders that the DNC and Obama campaign was working hard and that Clinton's supporters were reunifying.
In Obama World, Dean is right; Clinton supporters are coalescing around Barack Obama. But of course in Obama World, only Clinton voters who support Obama are "genuine" while those such as Pumas are considered to be "McCain" and "RNC" Operatives. My site for instance continues to get bombarded with comments from Obama supporters who continue to attack Pumas on the basis that aren't real Democrats. Nearly all of these comments are deleted due to the other language they like to use.
In Obama World, Pumas don't matter, they are irrelevant, and will never be part of the "New Democratic Party". The only people that Dean and Obama consider to be real Democrats are those who unequivocally agree with whatever policies the party's candidate adopts. There is no room for dissent, no room for individual thinking and no room for steadfast values. In Obama world, there are no steadfast values, only positions and power; positions that will shift based upon which crowd you are pandering too, and positions that will shift in order to gain political power. In Obama world, campaign supporters are to accept whatever lies and broken promises occur, so long as ultimate power is obtained. But then again, Dean & Obama have yet to figure out that we live in the real world.
Dean also had some interesting comments on the primaries during his trip to the Granite state. New Hampshire citizens are growing increasingly concerned that their first in the nation primary is in jeopardy. When asked about New Hampshire's status, Dean remarked, "That'll be up to President Obama. When you have a Democratic president ... the president essentially says who the DNC chair is going to be and they have control over the schedule." According to Fosters.com Dean also 'used words like "terrific" and "pleased" to describe his feelings for the 2008 nominating schedule.'
The problem with Dean and Obama is that they see nothing wrong with the Democratic Primary System, a system that deserves scrutiny and is in desperate need of an overhaul. The system has abandoned the principles of 'equal representation' that our nation and the idea of the proportional primary was founded upon. The system has been manipulated to award those who focus on preferential centers within a state while punishing those who run a statewide campaign. See: The Final Report - Democratic Disenfranchisement.
Dean's remarks over the weekend show the arrogance of himself and the Obama campaign. While attacking Senator McCain, Dean remarked, "I don't think the John McCain of 2000 would have voted for the John McCain of 2008. ... This is a guy who really has become a politician — not a maverick independent like he was in 2000." Dean's attack on McCain is somewhat laughable considering that Dean's position would mean that after 26 years, Mcain has suddenly decided to abandon his principles and independence. The very man who John Kerry openly courted for the VP in 2004, is suddenly part of the so-called "right-wing conspiracy", even though McCain's primary victory came on the backs of moderate republicans and independents. Perhaps Dean should focus on his own candidate; the one who has openly broken every promise he has made to the Leftist-Base, and all within just one month. That is not independence, it is forte' of a politician raised in the Chicago combine.
Obama is much more than the typical politician. Unlike the typical politician who at least has some core values, Obama has none. He will say anything, do anything, and throw anyone under the bus so long as it helps quench his thirst for power. He is a man who will tell you what you can do, what questions you can ask, and when you can ask them.
J Brown
July 13th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Want to contribute to PDOP: Click Here to submit your own article.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
PDOP Now Accepting Readers Submissions
Good New!
We have re-introduced and are once again accepting articles written by our readers to our site.
Whether you are a reader who has something to say or another blogger looking to contribute and/or cross-post another article here is your chance.
There are some simple guidelines for submissions.
A) All articles submitted will be reviewed to assure that the content is consistent with our site and does not contain inflammatory language. As a result there will typically be a 24 - 48 hour delay before approved articles are posted.
B) All articles must be complete. We are not an aggregator and excerpts will not be published. You will always receive full credit for any article and we will include links back to your site. We understand that cross posts offer a unique opportunity to attract new readers for both blogs and as such submissions are treated as shared work.
C) You must be a subscribed reader to our email subscriptions or through a feed reader for consideration of publication.
We have re-introduced and are once again accepting articles written by our readers to our site.
Whether you are a reader who has something to say or another blogger looking to contribute and/or cross-post another article here is your chance.
There are some simple guidelines for submissions.
A) All articles submitted will be reviewed to assure that the content is consistent with our site and does not contain inflammatory language. As a result there will typically be a 24 - 48 hour delay before approved articles are posted.
B) All articles must be complete. We are not an aggregator and excerpts will not be published. You will always receive full credit for any article and we will include links back to your site. We understand that cross posts offer a unique opportunity to attract new readers for both blogs and as such submissions are treated as shared work.
C) You must be a subscribed reader to our email subscriptions or through a feed reader for consideration of publication.
Obama Campaign Still Not Providing Donor Information To Watchdog Groups
Obama Campaign Still Not Providing Donor Information To Watchdog Groups.
The Center For Responsive Politics published a post at their blog yesterday afternoon welcoming Senator McCain’s campaign for taking positive steps toward providing enhanced information on his campaign contributors.
On June 25th, The Center For Responsive Politics in conjunction with 7 other campaign finance watchdog groups sent a joint letter to both Senator Obama and Senator McCain’s campaign requesting further disclosure of their donors and especially the fundraising “bundlers” responsible for millions in contributions. Senator McCain’s campaign responded in a letter to the watchdog groups yesterday citing their intention to update their “bundler” information on a monthly basis, in addition to providing the name, address, employer, and occupation of the “bundlers”. The McCain campaign also took the unprecedented step in committing to providing enhanced donor information on small contributors whose information is not required to be filed with the FEC. The Center For Responsive Politics pointed out, “This would appear to be the first time that a major party's nominee has provided the public access to a full database of his campaign contributors. The watchdogs applaud this effort to go beyond what the FEC requires”.
The Obama campaign, on the other hand, has failed to respond to ongoing requests by the watchdog groups including the June 25th joint letter. The Obama campaign did respond earlier this week to a New York Times request to publish an updated list of their “bundlers” (after six months of refusing to update the list), but as the Center pointed out the list does not provide information on the employers, occupations, and addresses of the bundlers. Further concern stems from the lack of reporting concerning the actual amounts raised by these bundlers. This presents a problem in tracking the payback as Obamas list of bundlers includes numerous common names such as Lisa Davis.
The Obama campaign has also failed to act on requests by the various watchdog groups to provide additional information on contributions not required by the FEC. In particular, information as to where Obama’s small donors are coming from.
The campaign finance watchdog groups have repeatedly sought additional information and openness from the Obama campaign only to have their requests for the most part ignored. Their concern stems from a campaign season that has already raised a record volume of contributions. Requests for bundler information is particularly important considering that 60% of Senator Obama’s campaign contributions have stemmed from just 7% of his 1.5 million reported donors.
The watchdog groups have reason to be concerned about Obama’s bundlers as they include some of the nations most powerful executives such as Frank Clark, the CEO of ComEd, and Robert Wolf the CEO of UBS Americas. Both donors had raised over $200,000 each for the Obama campaign as of last November. Also included are bundlers such as like Jim and Paula Crown, of Chicago’s Crown Family; whose sister sits on the Board of Directors of Northern Trust. Dozens of Obama bundlers whose employment information was released in November are corporate attorneys or executives at investment banks such as Goldman Sachs, Lehman, Citigroup, and others.
According to the article put forth by the center, the 8 watchdog groups will send a joint letter The groups “to Senator Obama again and inform him of the measures the McCain campaign has agreed to, and will challenge his campaign to either follow suit or take additional steps toward greater transparency.”
There is a certain irony about a candidate who claims to transcend politics as usual but whom will respond to the New York Times while ignoring repeated requests for transparency from campaign finance groups.
J. Brown
July 12th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
The Center For Responsive Politics published a post at their blog yesterday afternoon welcoming Senator McCain’s campaign for taking positive steps toward providing enhanced information on his campaign contributors.
On June 25th, The Center For Responsive Politics in conjunction with 7 other campaign finance watchdog groups sent a joint letter to both Senator Obama and Senator McCain’s campaign requesting further disclosure of their donors and especially the fundraising “bundlers” responsible for millions in contributions. Senator McCain’s campaign responded in a letter to the watchdog groups yesterday citing their intention to update their “bundler” information on a monthly basis, in addition to providing the name, address, employer, and occupation of the “bundlers”. The McCain campaign also took the unprecedented step in committing to providing enhanced donor information on small contributors whose information is not required to be filed with the FEC. The Center For Responsive Politics pointed out, “This would appear to be the first time that a major party's nominee has provided the public access to a full database of his campaign contributors. The watchdogs applaud this effort to go beyond what the FEC requires”.
The Obama campaign, on the other hand, has failed to respond to ongoing requests by the watchdog groups including the June 25th joint letter. The Obama campaign did respond earlier this week to a New York Times request to publish an updated list of their “bundlers” (after six months of refusing to update the list), but as the Center pointed out the list does not provide information on the employers, occupations, and addresses of the bundlers. Further concern stems from the lack of reporting concerning the actual amounts raised by these bundlers. This presents a problem in tracking the payback as Obamas list of bundlers includes numerous common names such as Lisa Davis.
The Obama campaign has also failed to act on requests by the various watchdog groups to provide additional information on contributions not required by the FEC. In particular, information as to where Obama’s small donors are coming from.
The campaign finance watchdog groups have repeatedly sought additional information and openness from the Obama campaign only to have their requests for the most part ignored. Their concern stems from a campaign season that has already raised a record volume of contributions. Requests for bundler information is particularly important considering that 60% of Senator Obama’s campaign contributions have stemmed from just 7% of his 1.5 million reported donors.
The watchdog groups have reason to be concerned about Obama’s bundlers as they include some of the nations most powerful executives such as Frank Clark, the CEO of ComEd, and Robert Wolf the CEO of UBS Americas. Both donors had raised over $200,000 each for the Obama campaign as of last November. Also included are bundlers such as like Jim and Paula Crown, of Chicago’s Crown Family; whose sister sits on the Board of Directors of Northern Trust. Dozens of Obama bundlers whose employment information was released in November are corporate attorneys or executives at investment banks such as Goldman Sachs, Lehman, Citigroup, and others.
According to the article put forth by the center, the 8 watchdog groups will send a joint letter The groups “to Senator Obama again and inform him of the measures the McCain campaign has agreed to, and will challenge his campaign to either follow suit or take additional steps toward greater transparency.”
There is a certain irony about a candidate who claims to transcend politics as usual but whom will respond to the New York Times while ignoring repeated requests for transparency from campaign finance groups.
J. Brown
July 12th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obama's Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Friday, July 11, 2008
Is Obama 'Fit' Enough To Be Our President?
Is Obama "Fit" Enough To Be Our President?
Listening to a popular talk show on Wednesday the host briefly read an excerpt of an article that had been published by the LA Times earlier that day. After I recuperated from the shock that the LA Times actually printed an article pointing out a problem with Senator Obama, I realized that this wasn’t the first time this issue had been brought up. In the article, ‘Obama Shows Signs Of Being Trail-Weary’ the LA Times inadvertently pointed out the fact that for at least the second time this year Obama is demonstrating an unusually high level of fatigue. The article, which I believe was written to invoke sympathy for the poor campaigner, pointed out that Obama appears to be showing fatigue from the ‘unrelenting attention and prolonged campaigning’.
The article continues by pointing out that Obama previously expressed the effects of campaign stress when he ‘told a customer at an Indiana diner two months ago that he had lost 7 or 8 pounds. He said he was learning to get by on four-to-five hours' sleep.’
Any individual who has followed the presidential race closely over the past months has recognized this noticible difference in the demeanor of Obama. The more lighthearted press interviews of February and March have given away to a candidate who appears to struggle with any question he doesn’t have a clear answer too. During April and May, Obama’s speeches and interviews turned south as non-stop campaigning took it’s toll on the Senator. While campaigning in Oregon, Obama appeared more like a zombie going through the motions during press interviews. Of course, it was during one of these interviews when Obama remarked that he had visited 57 states. His campaign quickly attributed the gaffe to sleep deprivation. Most noticable is the change in Obama’s appearance as his hair now appears to have a strong grey tone. For the LA Times, a publication uncontestedly ‘in the tank’ for Obama, to publish an article pointing out Obama’s fatigue should lead American’s to question whether Obama is “fit” enough to handle the most demanding job in the world.
On the other side of the campaign trail, John McCain has shown frustration towards reporters at times, but has made “recuperative time” a priority of his campaign. Obama supporters will naturally argue that McCain has not yet had to endure the “grueling” campaign schedule of the contested Democratic Primaries. Yet, even that argument does not hold much weight. With the exception of her “Indiana Speech, In April & May, Hillary Clinton appeared to become more energized on the campaign trail as she fed upon the positive support of her voters. Obama, as an alternative appeared lethargic, increasingly irritable, and negative. In recent weeks, outside of a few staged photo ops, how often have we seen Barack Obama crack a smile on the campaign trail? His tone has become pointedly negative, with no positive remarks towards the campaign or the country.
Campaigns are grueling and they can take a toll on a candidate; but they are no match for the stresses and lack of privacy that will ensue as the ‘most powerful leader in the world’. For their part, both Bush Presidents and President Clinton made firm commitments to time management, proper rest, and physical activity. As President’s they understood the necessity of maintaining good mental and physical health. Both Clinton and Bush ended their campaigns with a visible energy and heightened spirits, they appeared to enjoy the campaigns and nearly endless attention. If Obama is struggling with sleep lethargy and the endless media attention now, how is he possibly going to fare when the stakes are much greater than merely winning an election? If he were to be elected to the presidency, he would quickly find himself in the midst of a job with an endless travel schedule and an endless stream of briefings, meetings, and events that begin at 5 AM and tend to last well into the night.
The office of the presidency is the hardest and most thankless job in the world. The media and populus rarely offer praise and most often focus on the most minute details of your statements or life. The President is the LEADER of our nation and as such must possess the most fundamental trait of a sound leader: Time Management. Hillary Clinton and John McCain understand the importance of proper time management. This is the reason why both the Senators, much older than Obama, have appeared more energetic, positive and as though they enjoy campaigning. Anyone who has ever led a management team or organization, worked as a salesperson or in any job that imposes deadlines, or is a stay-at-home Mom understands the mental clarity that comes from proper time management and rest. Time Management is the most important factor in making sound decisions and maitaining proper health. Apparently, Senator Obama has yet to realize the importance of time management; or simply lacks the trait.
The most disturbing aspect of Obama’s handling of the stresses of the campaign is simply the timing. Last time I checked a calendar the election was still 4 months away. June and July are histoically and will always be the most relaxing period of a presidential campaign. In fact, the real campaigning will not even begin until after the conventions. Now is the period of time in which there are fewer appearances, less travel, and lighter schedules; yet even the LA Times has noticed that Obama is not handling this lighter stress.
Obama supporters can use any excuse that they can imagine, but it will not deflect from the issue at hand. Do we really want a President who appears to struggle and who’s health suffers from the mere stresses of a campaign? Do we really want a President who is hopped up on caffeine and nicotine to substitute for his lack a proper rest and time management? Is Barack Obama “Fit” enough to be our President.
J Brown
July 11th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Listening to a popular talk show on Wednesday the host briefly read an excerpt of an article that had been published by the LA Times earlier that day. After I recuperated from the shock that the LA Times actually printed an article pointing out a problem with Senator Obama, I realized that this wasn’t the first time this issue had been brought up. In the article, ‘Obama Shows Signs Of Being Trail-Weary’ the LA Times inadvertently pointed out the fact that for at least the second time this year Obama is demonstrating an unusually high level of fatigue. The article, which I believe was written to invoke sympathy for the poor campaigner, pointed out that Obama appears to be showing fatigue from the ‘unrelenting attention and prolonged campaigning’.
The article continues by pointing out that Obama previously expressed the effects of campaign stress when he ‘told a customer at an Indiana diner two months ago that he had lost 7 or 8 pounds. He said he was learning to get by on four-to-five hours' sleep.’
Any individual who has followed the presidential race closely over the past months has recognized this noticible difference in the demeanor of Obama. The more lighthearted press interviews of February and March have given away to a candidate who appears to struggle with any question he doesn’t have a clear answer too. During April and May, Obama’s speeches and interviews turned south as non-stop campaigning took it’s toll on the Senator. While campaigning in Oregon, Obama appeared more like a zombie going through the motions during press interviews. Of course, it was during one of these interviews when Obama remarked that he had visited 57 states. His campaign quickly attributed the gaffe to sleep deprivation. Most noticable is the change in Obama’s appearance as his hair now appears to have a strong grey tone. For the LA Times, a publication uncontestedly ‘in the tank’ for Obama, to publish an article pointing out Obama’s fatigue should lead American’s to question whether Obama is “fit” enough to handle the most demanding job in the world.
On the other side of the campaign trail, John McCain has shown frustration towards reporters at times, but has made “recuperative time” a priority of his campaign. Obama supporters will naturally argue that McCain has not yet had to endure the “grueling” campaign schedule of the contested Democratic Primaries. Yet, even that argument does not hold much weight. With the exception of her “Indiana Speech, In April & May, Hillary Clinton appeared to become more energized on the campaign trail as she fed upon the positive support of her voters. Obama, as an alternative appeared lethargic, increasingly irritable, and negative. In recent weeks, outside of a few staged photo ops, how often have we seen Barack Obama crack a smile on the campaign trail? His tone has become pointedly negative, with no positive remarks towards the campaign or the country.
Campaigns are grueling and they can take a toll on a candidate; but they are no match for the stresses and lack of privacy that will ensue as the ‘most powerful leader in the world’. For their part, both Bush Presidents and President Clinton made firm commitments to time management, proper rest, and physical activity. As President’s they understood the necessity of maintaining good mental and physical health. Both Clinton and Bush ended their campaigns with a visible energy and heightened spirits, they appeared to enjoy the campaigns and nearly endless attention. If Obama is struggling with sleep lethargy and the endless media attention now, how is he possibly going to fare when the stakes are much greater than merely winning an election? If he were to be elected to the presidency, he would quickly find himself in the midst of a job with an endless travel schedule and an endless stream of briefings, meetings, and events that begin at 5 AM and tend to last well into the night.
The office of the presidency is the hardest and most thankless job in the world. The media and populus rarely offer praise and most often focus on the most minute details of your statements or life. The President is the LEADER of our nation and as such must possess the most fundamental trait of a sound leader: Time Management. Hillary Clinton and John McCain understand the importance of proper time management. This is the reason why both the Senators, much older than Obama, have appeared more energetic, positive and as though they enjoy campaigning. Anyone who has ever led a management team or organization, worked as a salesperson or in any job that imposes deadlines, or is a stay-at-home Mom understands the mental clarity that comes from proper time management and rest. Time Management is the most important factor in making sound decisions and maitaining proper health. Apparently, Senator Obama has yet to realize the importance of time management; or simply lacks the trait.
The most disturbing aspect of Obama’s handling of the stresses of the campaign is simply the timing. Last time I checked a calendar the election was still 4 months away. June and July are histoically and will always be the most relaxing period of a presidential campaign. In fact, the real campaigning will not even begin until after the conventions. Now is the period of time in which there are fewer appearances, less travel, and lighter schedules; yet even the LA Times has noticed that Obama is not handling this lighter stress.
Obama supporters can use any excuse that they can imagine, but it will not deflect from the issue at hand. Do we really want a President who appears to struggle and who’s health suffers from the mere stresses of a campaign? Do we really want a President who is hopped up on caffeine and nicotine to substitute for his lack a proper rest and time management? Is Barack Obama “Fit” enough to be our President.
J Brown
July 11th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Thursday: Iran Fires More Missiles Fueling Fears Of Even Higher Oil Prices
Reports surfaced early this morning of additional Iranian missile tests occurring overnight. The new round of tests follows the testing of missiles conducted the previous day that included an updated Shahab-3 missile capable of reaching Israel, Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan and other nations within the missiles 1,250 mile range. Iranian officials have stated that the tests were conducted as a deterrent to potential Israeli Air Strikes upon Iranian Nuclear Facilities.
The tests conducted by Iran came just hours after Secretary of State Rice warned Iran that "that we will defend American interests and the interests of our allies". Over the course of the past 2 years, the United Nations, European Union, and United States have all enacted several rounds of sanctions aimed at undermining the ability of the Iranian Government to obtain materials necessary for military purposes. Over the course of the last 3 years the United States and European Union have attempted to encourage Iran to abandon it's Nuclear Program through repeated offers of economic and energy incentives including Russian supplied (non-weapons grade) Uranium necessary for a civilian nuclear program. The most recent EU incentives package was rejected by Iran earlier this month.
Iran's continued pursuit of it's undisclosed nuclear program will inevitably lead to an air strike by Israel. Iranian leaders understand that Israel, in which a single nuclear strike would destroy a large portion of the Israel and thus the country, will not allow Iran to go Nuclear. Israeli fears have heightened due to recent Israeli intelligence reports and a lack of international effectiveness over the past 6 years. Israeli intelligence, acting in conjunction with an Iranian dissident group, was responsible for exposing the Iranian Nuclear Program in early 2002.
Over the past 2 years, increased sanctions along with incentive packages have failed to alter the course of the Iranian government. The global community is now to a point whereas they must either take action or enact sanctions against the remaining goods flowing into Iran. Currently, the global sanctions have aimed to punish the Iranian government while not disrupting the flow of consumer goods or refined oil products into the gas-strapped country. (Yes, Iran is sitting on a pot of oil, but imports an overwhelming majority of the refined product) The global community is rapidly approaching the point of which we can no longer straddle the fence.
Further complicating the matter is the resulting instability in oil prices due to continued Iranian belligerence. With continued missile tests oil prices are likely to continue their upward trend as fears grow over oil supply. Iranian officials are fully aware of the global affect on markets.
Here in the US gas prices continue to spike as we will soon find ourselves in the midst of the Indian summer and impending Autumn. This fall, as temperatures begin to cool, homeowners across the nation will open their mailboxes to find gas bills that are out of control; not because of brutally cold temperatures but because of the huge increase in natural gas and oil prices. This year, our nation which has one of the largest natural gas supplies in the world, will be forced to begin importing natural gas. The Winter's high energy costs accompanied by increasing gas prices, oil-driven inflation in consumer goods, and rising food prices due to the increased use of bio-diesel and ethanol will provide a perfect storm to drive down consumer confidence and spending. Yet, in Washington our politicians have taken a position that "no action is the best action".
It does not take Albert Einstein to figure out that rising energy prices, global economic weakening and Middle East turmoil are intertwined. Our nation and the international community have a long history of underestimating the intent of meglomaniacal leaders. In the past, when our civilization was much less advanced and economies much more self-sufficient, we could afford the high price of willful ignorance. Today, we cannot. The US, along with the EU and NATO cannot be allowed to continue to waffle on Iran. If we take no action to diminish the instability caused by Iran and address immediate, intermediate and long-term energy needs our economy and the lives of millions will be damaged.
Congress must act, not 6 months from now and certainly not a year from now, to immediately pass comprehensive legislation that aims to increase current energy supplies (oil & natural gas), increase energy self-sufficiency, provide incentives (tax & otherwise) for the development of new technologies, increase conservation efforts and the development of alternative fuel sources. The plan must be comprehensive and certainly will not please the extremists on either side. Senator Obama, Harry Reid, and democratic leadership who control the agenda of congress have made no attempt to put forth such a plan. Both the Bush Energy Plan and Democratic Energy plans were partisan driven pieces of legislation that provided no realistic hope for an improved energy outlook. If congress is unwilling to act immediately, then those obstructionists must be removed come November.
For his part, Obama does not comprehend the damage that high energy prices inflict upon our economy. He has continued to criticize any position, including offshore drilling legislation, put forth by other candidates. As an alternative, Obama has offered no change in energy policy, rather alluding to the fact that he would have preferred a "gradual" rise in prices. Obama has condemned McCain's call for drilling offering up statements that drilling would not increase oil supplies for 5, 10 and most recently 7 years. Yet, a determined American spirit has proven that we are capable of achieving results much faster, as demonstrated by a reality series in which oil was produced by land-based drilling within just 52 days. Obama, instead, wants to address energy prices by focusing on increased fuel efficiency, conservation, bio-diesel, and alternative energies which are not yet efficient enough, will not prove viable for 5, 10 or even 7 years, and which will take decades to install a viable infrastructure for distribution. Obama's lack of understanding is highlighted by his narrow focus on gas prices; refusing to address the fact that 35% of the oil we use is earmarked for manufacturing and consumer goods and that natural gas is headed in the same direction as oil. Obama continues to focus on bio-diesel and ethanol as gas-alternatives, yet apparently he has not been to the grocery store lately or read the news of rising prices and shortages caused by the increased use of these "food-based" fuels. Bio-Diesel and Ethanol are renewable but the production side is severely limited and subject to massive volatility due to weather conditions and natural disasters. It is time to end the speeches and take meaningful action.
On the campaign trail Senator Obama has also demonstrated a complete lack of understanding concerning global diplomatic efforts in regard to Iran. Since 2002, the US along with several of our allies have repeatedly called upon the UN to enact sanctions and take action against an illegal Iranian Nuclear Program. Illegal because they have been in complete and total violation of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaties that they bound themselves too. Despite Russia and China's blockade of these efforts, the UN has enacted increasing sanctions aimed at damaging the Iranian government. The US and European Union have gone further than the UN sanctions. Our nation, the EU, and the UN have repeatedly offered incentive packages to Iran for disclosure and an end to their enrichment program. Apparently Obama has no understanding of these efforts, including the Sanctions built into the Iran bill Obama voted against last October.
This week, Obama called for tough sanctions against Iran, using a recently published report disclosing US exports to Iran as evidence that the Bush Administration has failed. Yet, the $550 million in exports that have occurred during the Bush Administration have been consumer goods, including the nearly 30% that were cigarettes. Included in the report was a small amount of rifles and rifle parts ($150-$200k - less than 1/10th of 1%) that were sold prior to imposing sanction. Regardless, the products included in this report were specifically excluded from US and international sanctions that were not designed to target the civilian population. So apparently in Obama's world the US, the EU, and UN should have passed sanctions that targeted the Iranian civilian population and thus created a greater level of US hatred and support for the Iranian Government. Now I agree with Obama that we should immediately pass tougher sanction; sanctions that target the only remaining product that could cause a collapse of the Iranian leadership: GAS!
The reality is that the Middle East is spiraling toward war; not driven by US policy, but driven by a meglomaniacal leader who the world has failed to take seriously. This turmoil directly affects gas prices and should be a wake-up call to Americans that we must take all steps necessary and within our abilities to reduce our reliance upon Middle East oil.
Contact your congressional leaders, sign the Drill Here, Drill Now petition, and for God's Sake do not vote for an empty suit who has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding and no solutions on the issues that matter most.
J Brown
July 10th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
The tests conducted by Iran came just hours after Secretary of State Rice warned Iran that "that we will defend American interests and the interests of our allies". Over the course of the past 2 years, the United Nations, European Union, and United States have all enacted several rounds of sanctions aimed at undermining the ability of the Iranian Government to obtain materials necessary for military purposes. Over the course of the last 3 years the United States and European Union have attempted to encourage Iran to abandon it's Nuclear Program through repeated offers of economic and energy incentives including Russian supplied (non-weapons grade) Uranium necessary for a civilian nuclear program. The most recent EU incentives package was rejected by Iran earlier this month.
Iran's continued pursuit of it's undisclosed nuclear program will inevitably lead to an air strike by Israel. Iranian leaders understand that Israel, in which a single nuclear strike would destroy a large portion of the Israel and thus the country, will not allow Iran to go Nuclear. Israeli fears have heightened due to recent Israeli intelligence reports and a lack of international effectiveness over the past 6 years. Israeli intelligence, acting in conjunction with an Iranian dissident group, was responsible for exposing the Iranian Nuclear Program in early 2002.
Over the past 2 years, increased sanctions along with incentive packages have failed to alter the course of the Iranian government. The global community is now to a point whereas they must either take action or enact sanctions against the remaining goods flowing into Iran. Currently, the global sanctions have aimed to punish the Iranian government while not disrupting the flow of consumer goods or refined oil products into the gas-strapped country. (Yes, Iran is sitting on a pot of oil, but imports an overwhelming majority of the refined product) The global community is rapidly approaching the point of which we can no longer straddle the fence.
Further complicating the matter is the resulting instability in oil prices due to continued Iranian belligerence. With continued missile tests oil prices are likely to continue their upward trend as fears grow over oil supply. Iranian officials are fully aware of the global affect on markets.
Here in the US gas prices continue to spike as we will soon find ourselves in the midst of the Indian summer and impending Autumn. This fall, as temperatures begin to cool, homeowners across the nation will open their mailboxes to find gas bills that are out of control; not because of brutally cold temperatures but because of the huge increase in natural gas and oil prices. This year, our nation which has one of the largest natural gas supplies in the world, will be forced to begin importing natural gas. The Winter's high energy costs accompanied by increasing gas prices, oil-driven inflation in consumer goods, and rising food prices due to the increased use of bio-diesel and ethanol will provide a perfect storm to drive down consumer confidence and spending. Yet, in Washington our politicians have taken a position that "no action is the best action".
It does not take Albert Einstein to figure out that rising energy prices, global economic weakening and Middle East turmoil are intertwined. Our nation and the international community have a long history of underestimating the intent of meglomaniacal leaders. In the past, when our civilization was much less advanced and economies much more self-sufficient, we could afford the high price of willful ignorance. Today, we cannot. The US, along with the EU and NATO cannot be allowed to continue to waffle on Iran. If we take no action to diminish the instability caused by Iran and address immediate, intermediate and long-term energy needs our economy and the lives of millions will be damaged.
Congress must act, not 6 months from now and certainly not a year from now, to immediately pass comprehensive legislation that aims to increase current energy supplies (oil & natural gas), increase energy self-sufficiency, provide incentives (tax & otherwise) for the development of new technologies, increase conservation efforts and the development of alternative fuel sources. The plan must be comprehensive and certainly will not please the extremists on either side. Senator Obama, Harry Reid, and democratic leadership who control the agenda of congress have made no attempt to put forth such a plan. Both the Bush Energy Plan and Democratic Energy plans were partisan driven pieces of legislation that provided no realistic hope for an improved energy outlook. If congress is unwilling to act immediately, then those obstructionists must be removed come November.
For his part, Obama does not comprehend the damage that high energy prices inflict upon our economy. He has continued to criticize any position, including offshore drilling legislation, put forth by other candidates. As an alternative, Obama has offered no change in energy policy, rather alluding to the fact that he would have preferred a "gradual" rise in prices. Obama has condemned McCain's call for drilling offering up statements that drilling would not increase oil supplies for 5, 10 and most recently 7 years. Yet, a determined American spirit has proven that we are capable of achieving results much faster, as demonstrated by a reality series in which oil was produced by land-based drilling within just 52 days. Obama, instead, wants to address energy prices by focusing on increased fuel efficiency, conservation, bio-diesel, and alternative energies which are not yet efficient enough, will not prove viable for 5, 10 or even 7 years, and which will take decades to install a viable infrastructure for distribution. Obama's lack of understanding is highlighted by his narrow focus on gas prices; refusing to address the fact that 35% of the oil we use is earmarked for manufacturing and consumer goods and that natural gas is headed in the same direction as oil. Obama continues to focus on bio-diesel and ethanol as gas-alternatives, yet apparently he has not been to the grocery store lately or read the news of rising prices and shortages caused by the increased use of these "food-based" fuels. Bio-Diesel and Ethanol are renewable but the production side is severely limited and subject to massive volatility due to weather conditions and natural disasters. It is time to end the speeches and take meaningful action.
On the campaign trail Senator Obama has also demonstrated a complete lack of understanding concerning global diplomatic efforts in regard to Iran. Since 2002, the US along with several of our allies have repeatedly called upon the UN to enact sanctions and take action against an illegal Iranian Nuclear Program. Illegal because they have been in complete and total violation of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaties that they bound themselves too. Despite Russia and China's blockade of these efforts, the UN has enacted increasing sanctions aimed at damaging the Iranian government. The US and European Union have gone further than the UN sanctions. Our nation, the EU, and the UN have repeatedly offered incentive packages to Iran for disclosure and an end to their enrichment program. Apparently Obama has no understanding of these efforts, including the Sanctions built into the Iran bill Obama voted against last October.
This week, Obama called for tough sanctions against Iran, using a recently published report disclosing US exports to Iran as evidence that the Bush Administration has failed. Yet, the $550 million in exports that have occurred during the Bush Administration have been consumer goods, including the nearly 30% that were cigarettes. Included in the report was a small amount of rifles and rifle parts ($150-$200k - less than 1/10th of 1%) that were sold prior to imposing sanction. Regardless, the products included in this report were specifically excluded from US and international sanctions that were not designed to target the civilian population. So apparently in Obama's world the US, the EU, and UN should have passed sanctions that targeted the Iranian civilian population and thus created a greater level of US hatred and support for the Iranian Government. Now I agree with Obama that we should immediately pass tougher sanction; sanctions that target the only remaining product that could cause a collapse of the Iranian leadership: GAS!
The reality is that the Middle East is spiraling toward war; not driven by US policy, but driven by a meglomaniacal leader who the world has failed to take seriously. This turmoil directly affects gas prices and should be a wake-up call to Americans that we must take all steps necessary and within our abilities to reduce our reliance upon Middle East oil.
Contact your congressional leaders, sign the Drill Here, Drill Now petition, and for God's Sake do not vote for an empty suit who has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding and no solutions on the issues that matter most.
J Brown
July 10th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Obama's Move To Invesco Aims to Suppress Voices of Opposition
Obama’s Move to Invesco Aims to Suppress Voices of Opposition
Last week Senator Obama announced the move of his acceptance speech to the 76,000 seat Invesco Field. The media, for their part, lifted their head out of the tank long enough to willingly begin drawing comparisons between Obama’s yet-to-be-held acceptance speech and President Kennedy’s Acceptance speech at the LA Coliseum in 1960. Unfortunately the media, in true representation of their view of journalistic integrity, failed to ask the simple question: Why?
The move to Invesco Field represents a logistical nightmare and demonstrates a fiscal irresponsibility on the part of the DNC and Obama Campaign. Network executives, quick to promote the move are now realizing that the new venue will cause their networks to blow their budgets set aside for the Democratic Convention. With ad slots already sold, the networks are unable to adjust their costs and now must swallow hundreds of thousands of dollars in new costs to cover the convention. The move is also questionable considering that the DNC has fallen far short of raising of the $40 million that they estimated the convention to cost. As a result the DNC has already scaled back on festivities and are likely to make further cuts to accommodate the estimated $3 million price tag for the Invesco speech. Knowing how political parties operate, it is safe to assume that the actual price tag will most likely balloon to well over $5 million.
So Why The Sudden Move?
Most people would assume that the move is for pure propaganda reasons. After all, Obama has established himself as the ‘propagandist’ candidate. Obama hoped that the move would provide a positive psychological effect by surrounding him with 76,000 supporters all chanting “Yes We Can!” Of course, none of those 76,000 will be able to answer the question of “What Can You Do?”
Moreover, Obama hoped, and the media complied with his request, to further strengthen the comparison between him and President Kennedy. Of course, outside of his youth and oratory abilities Obama has little in common with President Kennedy. After all, Kennedy was the statesman who stated in his inaugural address, “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.” All the while, Senator Obama has promised billions of dollars in new social spending from Faith-Based initiatives to massive College Education Reimbursements to government mandated ‘paid-leave’ legislation. Obama’s campaign has focused little on the promotion of self-reliance and independence; his campaign has made populist promises of entitlement to nearly every group comprising the general electorate.
Kennedy during his acceptance sent a clear message to the world, stating, “To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right.” He echoed those sentiments in his inaugural address; sentiments that clearly are not shared by a candidate who has predetermined and continuously restated this predetermined schedule for troop withdrawal from Iraq with no regard to our current successes and military leaderships recommendations.
Kennedy was also a supporter of a more equitable and reasonable tax system. During his administration he put forth and was able to pass legislation that provided the third largest post-WWII tax cut. In fact, as a percentage of national income, his tax cut was nearly equal to that of the 3 combined Bush tax cuts. (1.90% versus 2.00% combination of 01’, 02’, and 03’ Tax cuts) Source: Joint Committee on Taxation, Tax Foundation. During his speech for a tax cut Kennedy stated, “Moreover, special provisions have developed into an increasing source of preferential treatment to various groups. Whenever one taxpayer is permitted to pay less, someone else must be asked to pay more… It will be a major aim of our tax reform program to reverse this process, by broadening the tax base and reconsidering the rate structure. The result should be a tax system that is more equitable, more efficient and more conducive to economic growth.” Meanwhile in 2008… What Does Senator Obama intent to do? Perhaps, Mr. Obama believes that President Kennedy was wrong as well.
Mr. Obama, you are no John Kennedy. The move to Invesco is nothing more than propaganda meant to bolster the perception that Obama’s support is overwhelming. It is an attempt to draw inaccurate comparisons to a great leader of the past while distracting from the lack of substance that exists within his rhetoric.
More importantly, however, is the fact that the propaganda aspect of the Invesco move is merely a side-effect of the more narrow purpose for the move. The move to Invesco is ultimately an attempt to distract the media from covering the opposition that will protest outside the Democratic convention. From wide-ranging activists to PUMA Democrats, the protesters outside the convention will represent a formidable force. As a result, The Obama campaign will do anything and spend any amount of money to provide the appearance of party unity and suppress the voices of opposition.
The DNC and Obama campaign have already succeeded in convincing local authorities to limit protesters to a fenced-in area well out of range of the ears of convention attendees and media microphones. Now it seems that Obama wants to further suppress their voices by relocating his acceptance speech. God forbid that those who have seen the man behind the curtain are actually given notice in August.
The reality is that 2,000 people protesting a convention with 20,000 in attendance is much more likely to draw attention than 2,000 people protesting a speech that is given with 76,000 in attendance.
Barack Obama is the quintessential politician, willing to say anything, do anything, and abandon any position in order to secure his election. Today’s Democratic leadership in an attempt to quench their thirst for ultimate control of the government appears willing to sacrifice any political integrity that they have left. Every day, this campaign is beginning to closely resemble a Junior High School “Class Presidential” election, in which victory is granted to the person that makes the most ridiculous promises.
Obama’s move to Invesco will undoubtedly be over-promoted and under-analyzed by the press. So as I leave you today, think of this: Imagine 75,000 people all chanting in unison, “Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can!” Now tell me: What visions of political speeches from the past do you picture in your mind?
You’re first instinct is typically the right one.
J. Brown
July 9th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Last week Senator Obama announced the move of his acceptance speech to the 76,000 seat Invesco Field. The media, for their part, lifted their head out of the tank long enough to willingly begin drawing comparisons between Obama’s yet-to-be-held acceptance speech and President Kennedy’s Acceptance speech at the LA Coliseum in 1960. Unfortunately the media, in true representation of their view of journalistic integrity, failed to ask the simple question: Why?
The move to Invesco Field represents a logistical nightmare and demonstrates a fiscal irresponsibility on the part of the DNC and Obama Campaign. Network executives, quick to promote the move are now realizing that the new venue will cause their networks to blow their budgets set aside for the Democratic Convention. With ad slots already sold, the networks are unable to adjust their costs and now must swallow hundreds of thousands of dollars in new costs to cover the convention. The move is also questionable considering that the DNC has fallen far short of raising of the $40 million that they estimated the convention to cost. As a result the DNC has already scaled back on festivities and are likely to make further cuts to accommodate the estimated $3 million price tag for the Invesco speech. Knowing how political parties operate, it is safe to assume that the actual price tag will most likely balloon to well over $5 million.
So Why The Sudden Move?
Most people would assume that the move is for pure propaganda reasons. After all, Obama has established himself as the ‘propagandist’ candidate. Obama hoped that the move would provide a positive psychological effect by surrounding him with 76,000 supporters all chanting “Yes We Can!” Of course, none of those 76,000 will be able to answer the question of “What Can You Do?”
Moreover, Obama hoped, and the media complied with his request, to further strengthen the comparison between him and President Kennedy. Of course, outside of his youth and oratory abilities Obama has little in common with President Kennedy. After all, Kennedy was the statesman who stated in his inaugural address, “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.” All the while, Senator Obama has promised billions of dollars in new social spending from Faith-Based initiatives to massive College Education Reimbursements to government mandated ‘paid-leave’ legislation. Obama’s campaign has focused little on the promotion of self-reliance and independence; his campaign has made populist promises of entitlement to nearly every group comprising the general electorate.
Kennedy during his acceptance sent a clear message to the world, stating, “To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right.” He echoed those sentiments in his inaugural address; sentiments that clearly are not shared by a candidate who has predetermined and continuously restated this predetermined schedule for troop withdrawal from Iraq with no regard to our current successes and military leaderships recommendations.
Kennedy was also a supporter of a more equitable and reasonable tax system. During his administration he put forth and was able to pass legislation that provided the third largest post-WWII tax cut. In fact, as a percentage of national income, his tax cut was nearly equal to that of the 3 combined Bush tax cuts. (1.90% versus 2.00% combination of 01’, 02’, and 03’ Tax cuts) Source: Joint Committee on Taxation, Tax Foundation. During his speech for a tax cut Kennedy stated, “Moreover, special provisions have developed into an increasing source of preferential treatment to various groups. Whenever one taxpayer is permitted to pay less, someone else must be asked to pay more… It will be a major aim of our tax reform program to reverse this process, by broadening the tax base and reconsidering the rate structure. The result should be a tax system that is more equitable, more efficient and more conducive to economic growth.” Meanwhile in 2008… What Does Senator Obama intent to do? Perhaps, Mr. Obama believes that President Kennedy was wrong as well.
Mr. Obama, you are no John Kennedy. The move to Invesco is nothing more than propaganda meant to bolster the perception that Obama’s support is overwhelming. It is an attempt to draw inaccurate comparisons to a great leader of the past while distracting from the lack of substance that exists within his rhetoric.
More importantly, however, is the fact that the propaganda aspect of the Invesco move is merely a side-effect of the more narrow purpose for the move. The move to Invesco is ultimately an attempt to distract the media from covering the opposition that will protest outside the Democratic convention. From wide-ranging activists to PUMA Democrats, the protesters outside the convention will represent a formidable force. As a result, The Obama campaign will do anything and spend any amount of money to provide the appearance of party unity and suppress the voices of opposition.
The DNC and Obama campaign have already succeeded in convincing local authorities to limit protesters to a fenced-in area well out of range of the ears of convention attendees and media microphones. Now it seems that Obama wants to further suppress their voices by relocating his acceptance speech. God forbid that those who have seen the man behind the curtain are actually given notice in August.
The reality is that 2,000 people protesting a convention with 20,000 in attendance is much more likely to draw attention than 2,000 people protesting a speech that is given with 76,000 in attendance.
Barack Obama is the quintessential politician, willing to say anything, do anything, and abandon any position in order to secure his election. Today’s Democratic leadership in an attempt to quench their thirst for ultimate control of the government appears willing to sacrifice any political integrity that they have left. Every day, this campaign is beginning to closely resemble a Junior High School “Class Presidential” election, in which victory is granted to the person that makes the most ridiculous promises.
Obama’s move to Invesco will undoubtedly be over-promoted and under-analyzed by the press. So as I leave you today, think of this: Imagine 75,000 people all chanting in unison, “Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can!” Now tell me: What visions of political speeches from the past do you picture in your mind?
You’re first instinct is typically the right one.
J. Brown
July 9th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Obama Doomed to Repeat Bush’s Biggest Mistake
Obama Doomed to Repeat Bush’s Biggest Mistake
Obviously there are any number of policy moves made by the Bush administration that are subject to criticism. However, one mistake in particular will stand out above the rest in history. Over time the causes of the Iraq War will fade and history will focus on the events that occurred after the invasion. As an example, how many of you can tell me the when the Vietnam War started, how it started or the events that occurred during the 10 years prior to escalation?
President Bush’s biggest mistake in Iraq was made during the months prior to the invasion. President Bush in a rush to launch an invasion following the expiration of yet another UN resolution chose to override the judgment, experience, and knowledge of our nation’s top military commanders. Bush was many top generals and analysts that we needed to establish a plan for occupation and security following the initial invasion. The Civilian Leadership of the Bush Administration chose to overlook the calls for additional planning and decided on an occupation force less than half of what military leadership wanted. The first 3 years of the War in Iraq were marred by the mistake of a Commander-In-Chief that adopted war policies in direct contradiction of those recommended by top commanders.
John McCain was one of the first congressional leaders to openly criticize President Bush for failing to follow the recommendations of our military leadership and for his stubbornness in regards to troop levels and post-war planning. Bush’s resolve has been an asset to our nation at times, but he will long be remembered for his mistake in believing that as commander-in-chief he knows best. It would take more than three years before military leadership would take the reigns in Iraq and President Bush would finally follow the recommendations of military leadership who believed that a troop surge in conjunction with diplomatic pressure could quell the violence in Iraq.
Today we are slowly recognizing the value and positive results generated by listening to our military leadership and allowing them to develop a strategy for Iraq. Violence in Iraq has dropped dramatically, political reconciliation is taking place, and Iraqi leadership continues to meet the benchmarks put forth at the time of the troop surge. As security continues to build public confidence in the fledgling Iraqi government, we will soon find our military in position to begin a steady withdrawal from Iraq. However, any withdrawal from Iraq should be done in a manner in which our military leadership and the Iraqi government see fit. We have a humanitarian obligation to the citizens of Iraq and a need to prevent the possibility that Iraqi society could collapse, thereby creating a perception of a second abandonment by the US.
For one, I cannot see the media perception that Obama has moved to the center on Iraq policy. He has not changed his perception of the security or socio-political environment in Iraq. To this day, he has stuck with his policy that he would immediately begin withdrawing 2 brigades per month from Iraq. The media have been willing accomplices of the Obama propaganda machine by advertising the Obama will consider the advice of the military leadership in the Middle East. But if Obama truly intended on considering the recommendations of military and Iraqi leadership than he would have never have taken a position that stubbornly defines a systematic withdrawal of forces. The fact is that Obama has absolutely no military experience, no background of military education, and no history of seeking to understand the situation on the ground by consulting or meeting with our military commanders.
During WWI, WWII, Korea, and the Gulf War our commander-in-chief’s established objectives but allowed our military to plan and institute the actions to carry out those objectives. During those wars we were blessed with civilian leadership that did not try to micro-manage those wars. It would be refreshing if Obama would state that he would establish an objective to withdraw our troops within a matter of 2, 3, 4, or 5 years; but allow our military leadership on the ground to establish when and how the troop withdrawals are to take place. Instead we may be doomed to electing another President who mistakenly overlooks the recommendations of our military leadership and stubbornly attempts to micro-manage a war when they have no military experience.
The questions that the media should be asking are:
Why is it that Senator Obama wishes to follow in the footsteps of President Bush by not allowing our military commanders on the ground to develop and carry out a plan of action to meet the President’s objectives?
And, what qualification does Senator Obama have that lead him to believe that he is better suited to micro-manage a war than our military commanders?
The Iraq war is the only issue that Senator Obama has not truely flipped on. Unfortunately, like President Bush prior to 2007, it is the one issue he should flip on.
There is inherent value in learning and understanding history; without knowledge of our past mistakes we are doomed to repeat them.
J Brown
July 8th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Obviously there are any number of policy moves made by the Bush administration that are subject to criticism. However, one mistake in particular will stand out above the rest in history. Over time the causes of the Iraq War will fade and history will focus on the events that occurred after the invasion. As an example, how many of you can tell me the when the Vietnam War started, how it started or the events that occurred during the 10 years prior to escalation?
President Bush’s biggest mistake in Iraq was made during the months prior to the invasion. President Bush in a rush to launch an invasion following the expiration of yet another UN resolution chose to override the judgment, experience, and knowledge of our nation’s top military commanders. Bush was many top generals and analysts that we needed to establish a plan for occupation and security following the initial invasion. The Civilian Leadership of the Bush Administration chose to overlook the calls for additional planning and decided on an occupation force less than half of what military leadership wanted. The first 3 years of the War in Iraq were marred by the mistake of a Commander-In-Chief that adopted war policies in direct contradiction of those recommended by top commanders.
John McCain was one of the first congressional leaders to openly criticize President Bush for failing to follow the recommendations of our military leadership and for his stubbornness in regards to troop levels and post-war planning. Bush’s resolve has been an asset to our nation at times, but he will long be remembered for his mistake in believing that as commander-in-chief he knows best. It would take more than three years before military leadership would take the reigns in Iraq and President Bush would finally follow the recommendations of military leadership who believed that a troop surge in conjunction with diplomatic pressure could quell the violence in Iraq.
Today we are slowly recognizing the value and positive results generated by listening to our military leadership and allowing them to develop a strategy for Iraq. Violence in Iraq has dropped dramatically, political reconciliation is taking place, and Iraqi leadership continues to meet the benchmarks put forth at the time of the troop surge. As security continues to build public confidence in the fledgling Iraqi government, we will soon find our military in position to begin a steady withdrawal from Iraq. However, any withdrawal from Iraq should be done in a manner in which our military leadership and the Iraqi government see fit. We have a humanitarian obligation to the citizens of Iraq and a need to prevent the possibility that Iraqi society could collapse, thereby creating a perception of a second abandonment by the US.
For one, I cannot see the media perception that Obama has moved to the center on Iraq policy. He has not changed his perception of the security or socio-political environment in Iraq. To this day, he has stuck with his policy that he would immediately begin withdrawing 2 brigades per month from Iraq. The media have been willing accomplices of the Obama propaganda machine by advertising the Obama will consider the advice of the military leadership in the Middle East. But if Obama truly intended on considering the recommendations of military and Iraqi leadership than he would have never have taken a position that stubbornly defines a systematic withdrawal of forces. The fact is that Obama has absolutely no military experience, no background of military education, and no history of seeking to understand the situation on the ground by consulting or meeting with our military commanders.
During WWI, WWII, Korea, and the Gulf War our commander-in-chief’s established objectives but allowed our military to plan and institute the actions to carry out those objectives. During those wars we were blessed with civilian leadership that did not try to micro-manage those wars. It would be refreshing if Obama would state that he would establish an objective to withdraw our troops within a matter of 2, 3, 4, or 5 years; but allow our military leadership on the ground to establish when and how the troop withdrawals are to take place. Instead we may be doomed to electing another President who mistakenly overlooks the recommendations of our military leadership and stubbornly attempts to micro-manage a war when they have no military experience.
The questions that the media should be asking are:
Why is it that Senator Obama wishes to follow in the footsteps of President Bush by not allowing our military commanders on the ground to develop and carry out a plan of action to meet the President’s objectives?
And, what qualification does Senator Obama have that lead him to believe that he is better suited to micro-manage a war than our military commanders?
The Iraq war is the only issue that Senator Obama has not truely flipped on. Unfortunately, like President Bush prior to 2007, it is the one issue he should flip on.
There is inherent value in learning and understanding history; without knowledge of our past mistakes we are doomed to repeat them.
J Brown
July 8th, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Obama’s Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
Obama’s Mortgage Mess Deeper Than First Reported
The Washington Post broke a story this morning on the possibility that Senator Obama received preferential treatment in regards to his June 2005 mortgage from Northern Trust. Although the Obama campaign and Northern Trust have both stated that the loans were given in accordance to company practices, perhaps the media should launch their own independent investigation.
As reported by WaPo the Obama campaign claimed that the discounted rate on his $1.3 million mortgage was due to a competitive offer made by another lending institution. A campaign spokesman went further by claiming that Obama had no prior ties to the Chicago based Northern Trust. Apparently the Obama campaign has once again forgotten those “pesky” disclosure rules of the Federal Election Commission.
According to FEC records Senator Obama received extensive campaign support from executives and board members of Northern Trust during both his 2004 Senatorial Campaign and this year’s presidential campaign. In 2003, during his bid for the Senate, William Osborn the Chairman of Northern Trust (and director of the Federal Reserve) contributed $1,000 to Obama’s Senatorial campaign followed up by a maximum contribution to the Senators primary campaign.
During Obama’s Senatorial Campaign he also received numerous contributions from Darrell Jackson, The President and CEO of Northern Trusts Illinois West Region (includes Obama’s residence). In addition Barbara Lumpkin (Senior Vice President of NT), Kelly Welsh (Executive VP and General Counsel of NT), and John Bross (a former Vice President of NT) were healthy contributors to Obama’s Senate Pursuits. The most interesting of the contributions that flowed from these executives into Obama’s campaign coffers occurred on May 5th and 6th of 2005 when Bross and Welsh contributed money on consecutive days. The interesting fact of these contributions are that they occurred 6 months after the Senator took office and just 1 month prior to his closing on his Northern Trust Loan. The donations that May of 2005 stand out because there were relatively few contributions to the Obama coffers in 2005, as a result of his election 6 months earlier.
At the time that Obama received his “super jumbo” mortgage, Chairman Osborn shared his position on Northern Trusts’ Board of Directors with Arthur Kelly and Susan Crown, both contributors of the Senator’s 2004 campaign. Obama can credibly deny his knowledge of these contributions; that is with the exception of Susan Crown.
Susan Crown is a member of the Henry Crown Family, (owners of the Henry Crown Company based in Chicago), a family who has proven to be influential and successful fundraisers for Barack Obama. Susan and her direct family members have directly contributed more than $56,000 to Obama’s Senatorial and Presidential Campaigns. In addition, Susan’s siblings, James and Paula, have proven to be important campaign bundlers for the Senator. Last November the Obama campaign disclosed limited information on their campaign bundlers, in which they credited the Crown sibling with raising over $200,000 for the Obama campaign. It is unclear as to any additional “bundling” since the Obama campaign has since refused to release this information.
The Crown family’s ties to Northern Trust represent one association and “coincidence” that Obama must explain if he expects the public to believe that fair competition led to his preferential loan up 50 basis points lower than market rates and no origination fees.
Obama’s rise to power has been a direct result of his ties to a corrupt Chicago Political machine driven by a never-ending pursuit for power. From the onset of his political career Obama has exploited his political connections. In his first Illinois campaign his opponent, a popular female Democrat who lost her congressional election, was forced out of the race after Obama’s campaign successfully challenged her election petition. In 2004 during a heated Senatorial campaign, Obama’s associates obtained and released divorce records of his opponent that led to a public embarrassment and withdrawal from the race.
Obama’s Chicago political connections are responsible for millions of dollars in campaign contributions stemming from the financial sector. During his 2004 Senatorial bid Obama received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chicago based financial executives. This election cycle, Obama has continued his procurement of financial industry funds from executives such as Stanley O’Neal, the ousted chairman of Merrill Lynch. For more information on Obama’s Subprime buddies read: Obama Accepts Millions from “Subprime” Tied Contributors.
J Brown
July 3rd, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article starting Thursday July 3rd at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Feel free to excerpt and/or link. Copyright 2008 - full reproduction prohibited with author permission.
.
The Washington Post broke a story this morning on the possibility that Senator Obama received preferential treatment in regards to his June 2005 mortgage from Northern Trust. Although the Obama campaign and Northern Trust have both stated that the loans were given in accordance to company practices, perhaps the media should launch their own independent investigation.
As reported by WaPo the Obama campaign claimed that the discounted rate on his $1.3 million mortgage was due to a competitive offer made by another lending institution. A campaign spokesman went further by claiming that Obama had no prior ties to the Chicago based Northern Trust. Apparently the Obama campaign has once again forgotten those “pesky” disclosure rules of the Federal Election Commission.
According to FEC records Senator Obama received extensive campaign support from executives and board members of Northern Trust during both his 2004 Senatorial Campaign and this year’s presidential campaign. In 2003, during his bid for the Senate, William Osborn the Chairman of Northern Trust (and director of the Federal Reserve) contributed $1,000 to Obama’s Senatorial campaign followed up by a maximum contribution to the Senators primary campaign.
During Obama’s Senatorial Campaign he also received numerous contributions from Darrell Jackson, The President and CEO of Northern Trusts Illinois West Region (includes Obama’s residence). In addition Barbara Lumpkin (Senior Vice President of NT), Kelly Welsh (Executive VP and General Counsel of NT), and John Bross (a former Vice President of NT) were healthy contributors to Obama’s Senate Pursuits. The most interesting of the contributions that flowed from these executives into Obama’s campaign coffers occurred on May 5th and 6th of 2005 when Bross and Welsh contributed money on consecutive days. The interesting fact of these contributions are that they occurred 6 months after the Senator took office and just 1 month prior to his closing on his Northern Trust Loan. The donations that May of 2005 stand out because there were relatively few contributions to the Obama coffers in 2005, as a result of his election 6 months earlier.
At the time that Obama received his “super jumbo” mortgage, Chairman Osborn shared his position on Northern Trusts’ Board of Directors with Arthur Kelly and Susan Crown, both contributors of the Senator’s 2004 campaign. Obama can credibly deny his knowledge of these contributions; that is with the exception of Susan Crown.
Susan Crown is a member of the Henry Crown Family, (owners of the Henry Crown Company based in Chicago), a family who has proven to be influential and successful fundraisers for Barack Obama. Susan and her direct family members have directly contributed more than $56,000 to Obama’s Senatorial and Presidential Campaigns. In addition, Susan’s siblings, James and Paula, have proven to be important campaign bundlers for the Senator. Last November the Obama campaign disclosed limited information on their campaign bundlers, in which they credited the Crown sibling with raising over $200,000 for the Obama campaign. It is unclear as to any additional “bundling” since the Obama campaign has since refused to release this information.
The Crown family’s ties to Northern Trust represent one association and “coincidence” that Obama must explain if he expects the public to believe that fair competition led to his preferential loan up 50 basis points lower than market rates and no origination fees.
Obama’s rise to power has been a direct result of his ties to a corrupt Chicago Political machine driven by a never-ending pursuit for power. From the onset of his political career Obama has exploited his political connections. In his first Illinois campaign his opponent, a popular female Democrat who lost her congressional election, was forced out of the race after Obama’s campaign successfully challenged her election petition. In 2004 during a heated Senatorial campaign, Obama’s associates obtained and released divorce records of his opponent that led to a public embarrassment and withdrawal from the race.
Obama’s Chicago political connections are responsible for millions of dollars in campaign contributions stemming from the financial sector. During his 2004 Senatorial bid Obama received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chicago based financial executives. This election cycle, Obama has continued his procurement of financial industry funds from executives such as Stanley O’Neal, the ousted chairman of Merrill Lynch. For more information on Obama’s Subprime buddies read: Obama Accepts Millions from “Subprime” Tied Contributors.
J Brown
July 3rd, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article starting Thursday July 3rd at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Feel free to excerpt and/or link. Copyright 2008 - full reproduction prohibited with author permission.
.
We Elected These Buffoons?
Imagine that you were the CEO of large automobile manufacturer and last night the plant that manufactured the transmissions for your product was destroyed in a massive fire. What would you do?
Would you work extra hours, demanding that your executive team make the same commitment?
Would you burn up the phones looking for a new supplier, someone to provide the product that is essential to your production?
Or would you take a vacation and tell your shareholders that you want to use this opportunity to develop technology that will make transmissions obsolete?
The government is the only organization in the world in which we pay leadership to not solve problems. Perhaps it is time that Americans wake-up, demand solutions, demand an end to the polarizing positions that our congressional leaders have taken and reestablish accountability within the government.
Our economy is not improving and will not improve unless our congressional leadership takes immediate steps to address rising energy prices. We are oil driven society and regardless of your environmental positions, our reliance upon oil is not going to change anytime soon. As we approach the Independence Day weekend oil prices are once again in record territory and the market has been pummeled by a continuation of credit worries, a dollar that continues to fall, and news coming from the manufacturing industry of rising productions costs and falling sales.
So…Where is Congress????
On Vacation!
Our congressional leadership apparently feels that they are deserving of a nice relaxing vacation after their months of hard work at avoiding economic issues. Both parties are responsible for the polarization within our government; they have adopted strategies in which they place blame on others while doing nothing to solve problems. The only thing that congress has done successfully is the exploitation of our nation’s challenges for their political gain.
Eighteen months ago, Democrats swept into power on a platform that criticized the Bush administration and congressional republicans for oil prices that had jumped from $25 to $60 per barrel since 2000. They promised us that they would solve rising energy prices; yet 18 months later oil has hit new record highs closing at over $140 per barrel. This week the President of OPEC made statements eluding to his belief that oil would reach $170 per barrel by the end of summer, nearly 3 times the cost when our current congressional leadership promised action.
So what action has our congressional leadership taken? They tried to pass a Windfall Profits Tax, a tax that admittedly would not lower oil prices and would base consumer relief upon government rebates provided by the newly generated revenue. When we passed a WPT under the Carter administration domestic production fell, prices increased and the IRS stated that it cost taxpayers $150 million dollars a year just collect the tax. Now imagine the costs associated with the proposed government rebates tied to this new WPT. The WPT would result in a massive new bureaucracy charged with the redistribution of these taxes based upon a government determination of who is eligible to receive the funds.
Congressional leadership attempted to pass a Price-Gauging bill, a useless piece of legislation that only mirrored the price gauging laws already in place in every state of the Union. And finally, they blocked an amendment attached to the mortgage relief act that would have provided $6 billion in renewable energy incentives. Then they went on vacation.
In recent weeks Congressional leaders have blocked legislation that would allow individual states to determine if offshore drilling would be allowed off their coasts. The irony is that the legislation has the votes to pass and the support of over 60% of Americans. Congressional leadership has referred to the bill as a “band-aid” providing no long term solutions and doing nothing to lower prices or increase supply for at least 5 years. So rather than relying upon American ingenuity and attempting to increase domestic production, our congressional leadership has determined that no action is the best action. Congressional leadership has told the oil companies to drill on the land they already lease, of course they conveniently left out that much of the land that is not being drilled on has been explored and does not have sufficient oil reserves to warrant the cost of drilling. But would it take 5 year to start to see new oil flow from these areas? Perhaps, but then again if we can watch a cable TV show, Black Gold, in which a fully functioning oil rig can start producing oil in less than 55 days, then why would not believe that our ingenuity could further speed up offshore production.
Congressional leadership has also demonstrated their complete lack of understanding as to the economic costs of high oil. Only 65% of our oil consumption stems from transportation; with a majority of that 65% being consumed by the transportation of manufactured goods and the airline industry, both of which would not receive rebates stemming from a WPT. The other 35% of our consumption is used for petroleum based consumer goods, manufacturing, and heating. Dow, for instance announced a 20% increase in the cost of their petroleum-base products. High oil prices affect much more than the cost at the pump.
Congressional leadership has also proposed closing the so-called “Enron” loophole. An idea that would work in theory, but in practice could have a wide-ranging and devastating effect on personal savings. Congress jumped on the speculator bandwagon only to learn that the influx of commodities investments includes the movement of billions of dollars of pension assets into these markets. Once again, congressional leadership has decided that no action is the best action.
Perhaps the best indicator of whether our congressional leadership is truly concerned with solving the oil crisis rests in the mindset of this leadership. This week Senator Reid attacked our use of Coal and Oil as being “dirty” products that make us “sick”. The media for their part has turned these comments into a debate as to whether these comments are accurate. The issue isn’t the accuracy of these statements, Coal and Oil are dirty products that do make us sick; but attacking these necessary resources does not solve our energy problems. Our society is dependent upon oil and coal. Even if technology were produced today, it would take decades to retrofit our infrastructure and wean our economy off of oil and coal. But the fact remains that these new technologies are not yet developed and if we do not take action to stabilize the energy markets they may never be developed. After all, a country that has bankrupted itself due to the inaction of leadership cannot afford to research and develop new technologies.
Congress could solve the energy crisis that will only strengthen when temperatures fall this winter. But there actions must be bi-partisan and our leaders must be willing to take steps that will anger the special-interests on both sides of the debate.
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Would you work extra hours, demanding that your executive team make the same commitment?
Would you burn up the phones looking for a new supplier, someone to provide the product that is essential to your production?
Or would you take a vacation and tell your shareholders that you want to use this opportunity to develop technology that will make transmissions obsolete?
The government is the only organization in the world in which we pay leadership to not solve problems. Perhaps it is time that Americans wake-up, demand solutions, demand an end to the polarizing positions that our congressional leaders have taken and reestablish accountability within the government.
Our economy is not improving and will not improve unless our congressional leadership takes immediate steps to address rising energy prices. We are oil driven society and regardless of your environmental positions, our reliance upon oil is not going to change anytime soon. As we approach the Independence Day weekend oil prices are once again in record territory and the market has been pummeled by a continuation of credit worries, a dollar that continues to fall, and news coming from the manufacturing industry of rising productions costs and falling sales.
So…Where is Congress????
On Vacation!
Our congressional leadership apparently feels that they are deserving of a nice relaxing vacation after their months of hard work at avoiding economic issues. Both parties are responsible for the polarization within our government; they have adopted strategies in which they place blame on others while doing nothing to solve problems. The only thing that congress has done successfully is the exploitation of our nation’s challenges for their political gain.
Eighteen months ago, Democrats swept into power on a platform that criticized the Bush administration and congressional republicans for oil prices that had jumped from $25 to $60 per barrel since 2000. They promised us that they would solve rising energy prices; yet 18 months later oil has hit new record highs closing at over $140 per barrel. This week the President of OPEC made statements eluding to his belief that oil would reach $170 per barrel by the end of summer, nearly 3 times the cost when our current congressional leadership promised action.
So what action has our congressional leadership taken? They tried to pass a Windfall Profits Tax, a tax that admittedly would not lower oil prices and would base consumer relief upon government rebates provided by the newly generated revenue. When we passed a WPT under the Carter administration domestic production fell, prices increased and the IRS stated that it cost taxpayers $150 million dollars a year just collect the tax. Now imagine the costs associated with the proposed government rebates tied to this new WPT. The WPT would result in a massive new bureaucracy charged with the redistribution of these taxes based upon a government determination of who is eligible to receive the funds.
Congressional leadership attempted to pass a Price-Gauging bill, a useless piece of legislation that only mirrored the price gauging laws already in place in every state of the Union. And finally, they blocked an amendment attached to the mortgage relief act that would have provided $6 billion in renewable energy incentives. Then they went on vacation.
In recent weeks Congressional leaders have blocked legislation that would allow individual states to determine if offshore drilling would be allowed off their coasts. The irony is that the legislation has the votes to pass and the support of over 60% of Americans. Congressional leadership has referred to the bill as a “band-aid” providing no long term solutions and doing nothing to lower prices or increase supply for at least 5 years. So rather than relying upon American ingenuity and attempting to increase domestic production, our congressional leadership has determined that no action is the best action. Congressional leadership has told the oil companies to drill on the land they already lease, of course they conveniently left out that much of the land that is not being drilled on has been explored and does not have sufficient oil reserves to warrant the cost of drilling. But would it take 5 year to start to see new oil flow from these areas? Perhaps, but then again if we can watch a cable TV show, Black Gold, in which a fully functioning oil rig can start producing oil in less than 55 days, then why would not believe that our ingenuity could further speed up offshore production.
Congressional leadership has also demonstrated their complete lack of understanding as to the economic costs of high oil. Only 65% of our oil consumption stems from transportation; with a majority of that 65% being consumed by the transportation of manufactured goods and the airline industry, both of which would not receive rebates stemming from a WPT. The other 35% of our consumption is used for petroleum based consumer goods, manufacturing, and heating. Dow, for instance announced a 20% increase in the cost of their petroleum-base products. High oil prices affect much more than the cost at the pump.
Congressional leadership has also proposed closing the so-called “Enron” loophole. An idea that would work in theory, but in practice could have a wide-ranging and devastating effect on personal savings. Congress jumped on the speculator bandwagon only to learn that the influx of commodities investments includes the movement of billions of dollars of pension assets into these markets. Once again, congressional leadership has decided that no action is the best action.
Perhaps the best indicator of whether our congressional leadership is truly concerned with solving the oil crisis rests in the mindset of this leadership. This week Senator Reid attacked our use of Coal and Oil as being “dirty” products that make us “sick”. The media for their part has turned these comments into a debate as to whether these comments are accurate. The issue isn’t the accuracy of these statements, Coal and Oil are dirty products that do make us sick; but attacking these necessary resources does not solve our energy problems. Our society is dependent upon oil and coal. Even if technology were produced today, it would take decades to retrofit our infrastructure and wean our economy off of oil and coal. But the fact remains that these new technologies are not yet developed and if we do not take action to stabilize the energy markets they may never be developed. After all, a country that has bankrupted itself due to the inaction of leadership cannot afford to research and develop new technologies.
Congress could solve the energy crisis that will only strengthen when temperatures fall this winter. But there actions must be bi-partisan and our leaders must be willing to take steps that will anger the special-interests on both sides of the debate.
- We must be willing to attempt an increase in domestic oil production (including drilling, the use of oil shale, and coal gasification) with stringent environmental regulations. Domestic oil production will create new jobs, strengthen the falling dollar, reduce the trade deficit, and increase government revenue.
- We must be willing to invest and provide incentives to private industry and entrepreneurs seeking the development and improvement of alternative energy sources.
- We must be willing to strengthen our relationships and promote new agreements with our true allies such as Canada; as opposed to passing new regulations which demote the use of Canadian oil while promoting the importation of oil from Middle Eastern countries.
- We must build new refineries and be willing to re-examine our environmental regulations. Re-examining does not mean that we lower standards, but it does mean that our government applies uniform standards.
- We must be willing to push for regulations aimed at increasing performance and gas mileage within the auto industry; but again, an auto industry that is going bankrupt will not be able to develop enhanced technology.
- Finally, we must be willing to return to the principles of Teddy Roosevelt. Roosevelt understood that our capitalism must be a “modified capitalism” based upon a government that promotes strong competition within industry rather than freedom of the market. Since WWII, our government has abandoned the promotion of capitalist competition thus allowing our economy to drift back into a late 1800’s capitalism based upon mergers, acquisitions, and the monopolization of industry. Our government has led us down a path in which every aspect of the oil industry is controlled by monopolizing entities. The production side is monopolized by OPEC, intent upon manipulating prices through production controls. The refinement and delivery of the product is controlled by a limited number of non-competitive, monopolizing oil companies, supported by our government. For years, private companies have absorbed the costs of rising oil but are no longer able too. Meanwhile, oil companies have passed along their increased production costs and maintained record profits. There is no competition within the oil industry and free markets cannot control an industry in which there is a lack of competition.
So what can we do?
It is too late to invoke anti-trust laws to break up these monopolies and price controls will not work so long as production is controlled by OPEC. Taxation is a method for generating government revenue and no substitute for genuine regulation. Taxation has only strengthened the collusionary ties between our government and the oil companies. But in a lack of competition, profits-caps will work! There is no reason why our government cannot enact a profits cap on the oil industry. A profits cap based upon an averaging method would immediately lower prices, allow the oil companies to retain healthy profits, encourage oil companies to develop new technologies by allowing increased profitability for the development of such technologies, and protect the American consumer against the genuine lack of competition. It is a solution that will work without nationalizing the companies and creating further bureaucracy. It is time that we return to the politics of Teddy Roosevelt.
Our solutions to rising oil prices must be found in a comprehensive effort that provides immediate, intermediate and long-term solutions. Genuine energy reform will anger special interests on both sides of the debate, but then again we elect our officials to cater to our challenges not to the lobbies pursuing specific interests. It is time that our leadership gets off their duff, abandons the special interests, abandons their pursuit of political power and does the job we pay them for.
So while our legislature enjoys a “well-earned” vacation perhaps the American people should begin to work on the job of replacing them.
J Brown
July 2nd, 2008
Remember Just $10! Visit John McCain
Democrats join the PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Accepts Millions From “Subprime” Tied Contributors
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
A Message From George Washington On Party Unity
Dissent will always exist within a political party during any election. This presidential election is certainly no exception to the rule. Dissent within the ranks of a political party is perfectly normal and helps to maintain a check upon the power-hungry. For their part the media has focused their attention this season upon the attempts at unity within the Democratic Party; with little regard to the voices of dissent within the Republican Party.
The best gauge as to the intentions of a candidate is not to observe who supports the candidate, but rather who does not. Within the Republican Party, John McCain has had trouble garnering widespread support from the “Conservative” base or right wing of the party. The Obama campaign has tried to define McCain as a far right candidate, out of touch with America, and beholden to the base of the party. However if that were the case, then Conservatives would flock to McCain, embracing him as the champion of conservative values. Have they?
The same methodology can be used with the Democratic Party. Barack Obama has attempted to define himself as a moderate, centrist candidate, able to cross the aisle to work with Republicans to build his New World Order. Obama’s support from within the Democratic Party has come from the far-left and the Party elite; the dissent has risen from the moderate Democrats and “Reagan” Democrats. So what does that tell you about the candidates? One has been tagged as “not conservative enough” and one that represents the “Soros” faction of the far-left.
John McCain has long been the established “maverick” of the Republican Party; able to moderate his position for what he believes is the proper path for America. He has accepted sharp criticism from Conservative and the Far-Right of the party and he has responded not by pandering to his critics but rather by offering to work with his critics. Conservatives and the Far-Right of the party will eventually turn out and vote for John McCain in November, not because they fully support or share his policies but rather to stop what they view as the radical and manipulative policies of a power-hungry politician.
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is suffering a different fate. The moderate Democrats, led by truly grass roots movements (Puma and Just Say No Deal) see their party being taken over by a small faction of wealthy individuals, intent upon power. They no longer view the Democratic Party as a party of inclusion and a party with leadership able to moderate their positions. The moderate Democrats understand that their party’s leadership is part of the problem within Washington, not part of the solution. For their part, Democratic and far-left leadership has taken a different approach for building unity within their party. They have sent a clear message that Democrats should vote for a Democrat; that party unity is more important than whom the nominee is; that party unity is more important than the values that the “Reagan” democrats share. Party leadership has gone so far as to create their own organization, HOUND; an organization to promote "Unity" and subvert the genuine GRASS-ROOTS movement of PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL.
So…On this week in which we celebrate the birth of our nation and the liberties and freedoms which our predecessors have fought so hard to uphold, I bring you a simple message; a reminder and a warning from our First President and the man who was charged with uniting and building this great nation.
George Washington on Political Parties from his Farewell Address, 1796:
“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism…
...Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”
Jarid Brown
July 1st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10!Visit John McCain and join the PUMA Community and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Subprime Buddies
The best gauge as to the intentions of a candidate is not to observe who supports the candidate, but rather who does not. Within the Republican Party, John McCain has had trouble garnering widespread support from the “Conservative” base or right wing of the party. The Obama campaign has tried to define McCain as a far right candidate, out of touch with America, and beholden to the base of the party. However if that were the case, then Conservatives would flock to McCain, embracing him as the champion of conservative values. Have they?
The same methodology can be used with the Democratic Party. Barack Obama has attempted to define himself as a moderate, centrist candidate, able to cross the aisle to work with Republicans to build his New World Order. Obama’s support from within the Democratic Party has come from the far-left and the Party elite; the dissent has risen from the moderate Democrats and “Reagan” Democrats. So what does that tell you about the candidates? One has been tagged as “not conservative enough” and one that represents the “Soros” faction of the far-left.
John McCain has long been the established “maverick” of the Republican Party; able to moderate his position for what he believes is the proper path for America. He has accepted sharp criticism from Conservative and the Far-Right of the party and he has responded not by pandering to his critics but rather by offering to work with his critics. Conservatives and the Far-Right of the party will eventually turn out and vote for John McCain in November, not because they fully support or share his policies but rather to stop what they view as the radical and manipulative policies of a power-hungry politician.
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is suffering a different fate. The moderate Democrats, led by truly grass roots movements (Puma and Just Say No Deal) see their party being taken over by a small faction of wealthy individuals, intent upon power. They no longer view the Democratic Party as a party of inclusion and a party with leadership able to moderate their positions. The moderate Democrats understand that their party’s leadership is part of the problem within Washington, not part of the solution. For their part, Democratic and far-left leadership has taken a different approach for building unity within their party. They have sent a clear message that Democrats should vote for a Democrat; that party unity is more important than whom the nominee is; that party unity is more important than the values that the “Reagan” democrats share. Party leadership has gone so far as to create their own organization, HOUND; an organization to promote "Unity" and subvert the genuine GRASS-ROOTS movement of PUMA and JUST SAY NO DEAL.
So…On this week in which we celebrate the birth of our nation and the liberties and freedoms which our predecessors have fought so hard to uphold, I bring you a simple message; a reminder and a warning from our First President and the man who was charged with uniting and building this great nation.
George Washington on Political Parties from his Farewell Address, 1796:
“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism…
...Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”
Jarid Brown
July 1st, 2008
Please be sure to vote on this article at Real Clear Politics
Remember Just $10!Visit John McCain and join the PUMA Community and JUST SAY NO DEAL Community
Must Read: The Final Report-Democratic Disenfranchisement
Obama's Subprime Buddies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
