I was pleased to see that the anti-ICLEI/Agenda 21 bill passed a preliminary test in the House.  I blogged on this before and I have contacted Senator Burges’ office about this.

This bill would do more than just ban ICLEI – it would ban any implementation of the Rio Declaration in Arizona.  The opponents are predictably shrill about what could happen if it passes:

Opponents say the bill, if signed into law, will shut down any government-led environmental initiative, such as Energize Phoenix, a stimulus-funded, $25 million program to improve energy efficiency in homes and businesses near the light-rail route in central Phoenix.

Under Burges’ bill, the state, counties and cities could not accept or spend funds from “certain non-governmental organizations,” including non-profit groups and contractors, for any of the declaration’s initiatives. They also could not give funds to such organizations.

*

“We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” Campbell said.

Campbell also said that the state’s Economic Security Department, which handles unemployment and welfare benefits, could be outlawed because it has to do with eradicating poverty.

Also, Arizona universities have sustainability programs that could be banned if the bill becomes law, Campbell warned.

Arizona State University has a School of Sustainability, Northern Arizona University offers a master’s in sustainable communities, and the University of Arizona has an environment and sustainability portal.

*

Campbell told MSNBC that, “The tea party and conspiracy theorists run the state now.” And while that might sound extreme to some, SB1507 does indeed include some vague accusations of a global conspiracy.

Maybe they prove too much!  I’d like to see what will happen.  But one aspect of this bill is a state-wide ban on ICLEI:

“…the state of Arizona and all political subdivisions are prohibited from implementing programs of, expending any sum of money for, being a member of, receiving funding from, contracting services from, or giving financial or other forms of aid to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives…”

Music to my ears!  I think those supporting this bill ought to descend on the state capitol in Arizona (please follow all laws and obey those in authority) and let them know:  Pass SB 1507!

In more good news, Tennessee DID pass the anti-Agenda 21 resolution (I blogged on this here and here) and more music:

The resolution, which “recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21,” was approved 19-11 on Tuesday. The House passed the measure 72-23 last month.

I guess the good people of Arizona and Tennessee did not heed the Roanoke Times!  The Roanoke Board of Supervisors should not heed the Times either!

I think what will happen is that one of the ICLEI cities will sue to stay in and the constitutionality of ICLEI will reach a courtroom where it belongs.

Nonpartisan Reviewers Are Crushing The Buffett Tax As ‘A Hoax On Voters,’ A ‘Total Sham,’ ‘Desperate.’ Even Dems Admit It’s ‘Not Going To Help’

Buffett Tax ‘Won’t Create Jobs’

BILL KELLER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: “…sounds a little desperate.” (Bill Keller, “The Sweet Spot,” The New York Times, 4/15/12)

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN: “…won’t do much to eat away at the nation’s debt, it won’t create jobs, and no one expects it to get through the Democratic-controlled Senate…” (Candy Crowley, “Buffett Rule Would Barely Dent Debt But Fits Nicely Into Obama’s Theme,” CNN, 4/16/12)

MIKA BRZEZINSKI, MSNBC: “…just what does it really accomplish, though?” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 4/16/12)

DANA MILBANK: “President Obama admits it: His proposed ‘Buffett Rule’ tax on millionaires is a gimmick…” (Dana Milbank, “Rebuffing Obama’s Gimmicky ‘Buffett Rule’,” The Washington Post, 4/11/12)

BOB SCHIEFFER, CBS: “…kind of a publicity stunt…?” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 4/15/12)

JIM VANDEHEI, POLITICO: “It’s total gimmickry. It’s 1% of what you need to actually take care of the deficit.” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 4/12/12)

·         “There’s a big danger for President Obama in that they become so insanely political in an insanely political culture. Almost everything they do now…” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 4/12/12)

FMR. REP. HAROLD FORD (D-TN): “…not going to help us grow…” Q: “So you support the Buffett rule? FORD: “No, there’s a big difference between the Buffett rule and reforming the tax code.” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 4/16/12)

FMR. SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D-WI): “My belief is this is more symbolic.” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 4/16/12)

HOWARD WOLFSON: “We have a deficit of over a trillion dollars. This is not about deficit reduction.” (MSNBC’s “Now With Alex Wagner,” 4/12/12)

UNION LEADER [NH]: “…A Total Sham…The Buffett Rule is not about math or fairness or shared sacrifice. It is simply a cynical ploy to buy the votes of the ignorant and gullible.” (Editorial, “The Buffett Rule: A Total Sham,” Union Leader, 4/12/12)

FOSTER’S DAILY DEMOCRAT [NH]: “Buffett Rule Is A Hoax On Voters … Buffett, schmuffett, President Obama’s Buffett Rule has nothing to do with fairness… It is also about distracting voters from the Obama administration’s mishandling of the economy.” (Editorial, “Buffett Rule Is A Hoax On Voters,” Foster’s Daily Democrat, 4/12/12)

MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL [WI]: “Buffett Rule Is A Political Gimmick That Won’t Work … the Buffett Rule is more likely to spawn a new generation of tax dodges than to usher in a new era of tax fairness. It is, in fact, nothing more than a smoke screen that obscures the possibility of real tax reform.” (Editorial, “Buffett Rule Is A Political Gimmick That Won’t Work,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 4/11/12)

ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER [CA]: “…the latest gimmick…” (“Taxing Those Mean Old Millionaires,” Orange County Register, 4/12/12)

BEN BOYCHUK, THE SACRAMENTO BEE: “As re-election gimmicks go, the ‘Buffett Rule’ is a lame one.” (“Head To Head: Would Rep. Paul Ryan’s Tax Plan Improve The U.S. Tax System?” The Sacramento Bee, 4/12/12)

THE ECONOMIST: “What a pity that he is changing tack this time, bashing the rich via gimmicks such as the ‘Buffett rule’ … it is a miserable portent for the future.” (Editorial, “Game On,” The Economist, 4/14/12)

BLOOMBERG NEWS: “The president may be just as happy to have an issue to campaign on as a law to sign.” (“Buffett Rule Or Not, Most Rich People Already Pay,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 4/12/12)

President Obama is taking more and more criticism over the gimmicky tax hike, the Buffett Tax, he’s been pushing all week. Of course, the tax would barely make a dent in the massive Obama deficits, will do absolutely nothing to help with high gas prices and certainly “won’t get you a job,” as a National Journal analysis piece declared. But today, more observers are calling out the president for how his Buffett Tax is far more politics than substance.

In a blistering column, The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank, certainly not someone considered a conservative flatly declares the Buffett Tax “a gimmick.” He writes, “President Obama admits it: His proposed ‘Buffett Rule’ tax on millionaires is a gimmick. ‘There are others who are saying: “Well, this is just a gimmick. Just taxing millionaires and billionaires, just imposing the Buffett Rule, won’t do enough to close the deficit,”’ Obama declared Wednesday. ‘Well, I agree.’ Actually, the gimmick was apparent even without the president’s acknowledgment. He gave his remarks in a room in the White House complex adorned with campaign-style photos of his factory tours. On stage with him were eight props: four millionaires, each paired with a middle-class assistant. . . . And if that’s not enough evidence of gimmickry, after his speech Obama’s reelection campaign unveiled an online tax calculator ‘to see how your tax rate stacks up against Mitt Romney’s — and then see what the Buffett Rule would do.’”

Appearing on MSNBC this morning, Politico’s Jim VandeHei didn’t mince words: “It’s total gimmickry. It’s 1% of what you need to actually take care of the deficit. There’s a big danger for President Obama in that they become so insanely political in an insanely political culture. Almost everything they do now is … targeted at a very specific subset of voters that they want to win.”

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorializes today, “Obama’s Buffett Rule is a political gimmick. . . . [T]he Buffett Rule is more likely to spawn a new generation of tax dodges than to usher in a new era of tax fairness. It is, in fact, nothing more than a smoke screen that obscures the possibility of real tax reform.” The New Hampshire Union Leader blasts the tax, calling it “a total sham” and writing, “The Buffett Rule is not about math or fairness or shared sacrifice. It is simply a cynical ploy . . . .”

Indeed, as Milbank writes, “The politics of the Buffett Rule — it has no chance of passing when the Senate takes it up next week — are so overt that Obama’s remarks Wednesday were virtually indistinguishable from a section of his campaign speech in Florida on Tuesday.”

Finally, most of the commenters point out that it’s particularly unfortunate that President Obama is pushing this tax hike as “a political gimmick” and “a cynical ploy” instead of taking up a serious tax reform. Milbank explains, “Three years into his presidency, Obama has not introduced a plan for comprehensive tax reform — arguably the most important vehicle for fixing the nation’s finances and boosting long-term economic growth.” VandeHei added, “He’s not offered tax reform when he could have offered tax reform. Did not offer budgets when he could’ve offered budgets.” And the Journal-Sentinel notes, “The Buffett Rule also would make the tax code more complicated. A better solution is a broad plan that would clean up the tax code by lowering rates for everyone and eliminating loopholes. . . . Obama has had several chances to show leadership on the tax issue, and, so far, has failed to do so.”

Once again, President Obama took time today to press for a tax hike, his “Buffett Tax,” instead of addressing unemployment, high gas prices, or even this country’s debt crisis. Of course, the Buffett Tax would do basically nothing to help solve any of these serious problems.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell blasted Obama’s focus on this tax hike in a statement this morning, saying, “Sadly, an administration that promised it would focus on jobs is wasting yet another day on a political event that won’t take a single person off the unemployment line. With millions out of work, gas at nearly $4.00 a gallon, and the election still seven months away, Republicans are calling on the President to join us in support of the dozens of jobs and energy bills that have passed the House but are stalled in the Democrat-led Senate. We should be focused on jobs and energy legislation that can pass—not tax-hike show-votes designed to fail.”

The White House itself has said that the Buffet Tax “was never our plan to bring the deficit down and get the debt under control” and according to The Hill today, “Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) on Wednesday acknowledged GOP criticisms that the Obama administration’s Buffett Rule ‘isn’t going to balance the budget,’ but argued that the proposal was important as a matter of ‘values’ and ‘fairness.’ ‘This is an issue about fairness,’ Coons said on MSNBC. ‘It isn’t going to balance the budget, but it is important for values and for showing some fairness.’”

And National Journal wrote yesterday that “[i]f you’re an unemployed American . . . . you’ll realize the Buffett Rule has nothing to do with helping you, or 13 million other Americans looking for work as of March, find a job.”

Interestingly, the president was rather defensive about his tax proposal this morning. The AP notes, “President Barack Obama says his call for raising taxes on millionaires is not a redistribution of wealth . . . .” And Yahoo News writes, “President Barack Obama defended his ‘Buffett Rule’ proposal for higher taxes on the very rich Wednesday, denying it was a reelection campaign ‘gimmick’ that will do little to close the deficit or spur job growth.”

Of course, National Journal pegged the Buffett Tax yesterday, with an analysis piece concluding that it is in fact a political gimmick: “[I]t tells America’s job-seekers, don’t worry, we’re going to make the tax code look more fair to you. Lots of polls suggest that’s a good political argument. But that’s what it is: a political pitch.”

CLINTON OFFICIAL: ‘I Don’t Think Anyone Is Satisfied With This Budget’

MAYA MACGUINEAS: “…the budget just doesn’t get us close to where we need to go.” (Maya MacGuineas, President Of The Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget, MSNBC, 2/13/12)

·         “…the President’s budget, there weren’t really very high expectations for it, I’m afraid, and he probably met it.” (Maya MacGuineas, President Of The Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget, MSNBC, 2/13/12)

ROGER ALTMAN, Senior Treasury Official In The Clinton Administration: “I don’t think that anyone is satisfied with this budget… It confirms the dire debt and deficit outlook.” (“Obama Budget Sees Recovery Gaining Speed,” NBC News, 2/13/12)

PETER G. PETERSON FOUNDATION: “Unfortunately, these measures are not sufficient to put America on a sustainable long-term fiscal path.” (Press Release, Peter G. Peterson Foundation, 2/13/12)

·         “Even under optimistic assumptions, the President’s own numbers show debt rising rapidly after 2022 and reaching levels that would put the economy at risk.” (Press Release, Peter G. Peterson Foundation, 2/13/12)

DAVID WALKER: “…we’re making some of the same mistakes as Greece. Government’s grown too big. Promised too much. Waited too long to restructure. The budget, the President’s not aggressive or specific enough. We’re still talking about a $700 billion-plus deficit ten years from now.” (David Walker, Former U.S. Comptroller, CNBC’s Squawk Box, 2/13/12)

·         “It should have been much more specific, much more substantive than it is.” (David Walker, Former U.S. Comptroller, CNBC’s Squawk Box, 2/13/12)

THE CONCORD COALITION: “Overall, the bottom-line numbers indicate that much additional work needs to be done.” (The Concord Coalition, Press Release, 2/13/12)

·         “The White House now projects that the deficit for the current fiscal year will be slightly higher than last year’s $1.3 trillion, which seems at odds with all of the talk in Washington last year about spending cuts and deficit reduction…” (The Concord Coalition, Press Release, 2/13/12)

SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (ID-CT): “Quite simply, it is not the blueprint we need to put our fiscal house back in order.” (“GOP: Obama Playing Budget Politics,” Politico, 2/13/12)

JULIANNA GOLDMAN, Bloomberg: ‘A real miss for the President.’ “When you look at the projections for the deficit, this is a real miss for the President. Remember he had promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term…” (Bloomberg, 2/13/12)

Three weeks ago MSNBC reported (I have taken the liberty of underlining some the bubbly comments):

U.S. economic growth increased at its fastest in a year in the third quarter as consumers and businesses set aside fears about the recovery and stepped up spending, creating momentum that could carry into the final three months of the year.

Though part of the increase came from the reversal of temporary factors that had restrained growth, the expansion was a welcome relief for an economy that looked on the brink of recession just weeks ago.

It also provided a small respite for President Barack Obama, whose approval rating has plummeted in part because of the weak recovery, from the parade of bad news on the economy. Still, even the White House admitted that faster growth was needed.

It seems that the Huffington Post and Reuters was a bit premature breaking out the bubbly.  CNBC reported today:

Gross domestic product  grew at a 2.0 percent annual rate in the July-September quarter, the Commerce Department said in its second estimate on Tuesday, down from the previously reported 2.5 percent.

Oops. Looks like we are back “on the brink” again!

Seems that the Obama Administration put a spin on the numbers that could only make Pinocchio seem excited.

These left wing news outlets are so interested in making this Administration appear successful that they never miss an opportunity to hype the initial figures, which are inevitably inflated, be it GDP, unemployment or the latest state du jour.

But the corrections are never mentioned with the same fanfare. If they are mentioned at all it is usually beneath a misleading headline or they try to put lipstick on a pig, as the CNBC story does:

While the revision was below economists’ expectations for a 2.5 percent growth pace, the composition of the GDP report, especially still-firm consumer spending and the first drop in businesses inventories since the fourth quarter of 2009 set the platform for a stronger economic performance this quarter.

Sadly, the Democrats will keep running with the first report right up until the the first correction is released. Then, if they must talk about it, they use the talking points spin to pretend that the really great news, that became mediocre (or bad) news is somehow even better news.

The pattern is repeated over and over. The unemployment rate dips a bit and, despite a net loss of jobs for the month, somehow the fact that the Obama Administration has again significantly shrunk the size of the workforce – as people give up on finding work and settle down into good entitlement Democrats – is not mentioned.

For example, in 2008, the Department of Labor showed that 66% of the people age 16 and over were in the US workforce.

As of last month, the Obama Administration recons that the US workforce has fallen to only 64.2% of the population.

What that means is that in 2008, there were 205,260,000 people in the US workforce, and today there are 199,662,000.

What that means is that Obama has decided that 5,598,000 have dropped out of the workforce since he became president.

Apparently, there are two ways to reduce the unemployment rate in this country. Actually do something to encourage more jobs, like ridding businesses of some of the regulatory burdens that hinder job growth, or simply pretend that the workforce has fewer people.

Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has taken the latter course.

And if we take away the artificially inflated GDP – inflated by “stimulus” spending – then the economy is most likely receding, masked by borrowed (and printed) money.

Or to put it in terms of a family, you can make it appear that your net worth is greater by borrowing against all of your credit cards and depositing that money in the bank, but we all know that is not a true picture of your wealth.

The same is true with the economy. “Stimulus” money will add to the GDP and make it look like America is beginning to recover, but it is not. This is why Obama wants another stimulus.

As he shrinks the size of the workforce to pretend fewer people are unemployed, he is borrowing money to place in the nations bank account, the GDP.

He hopes to point to a shrinking unemployment rate and a growing economy, but both of these numbers are simply accounting tricks.

Lies.

As the number of workers shrinks, the number of taxpayers also shrinks. The Gross Domestic Product shrinks. And the number of people on government assistance grows. These are facts that cannot be ignored or covered up with smoke and mirrors. It is happening and it continues to get worse, despite the fake numbers we are fed.

The other part of Obama’s “Jobs Creation” plan calls for putting teachers, police and firefighters back to work. In a doubly sweet move, Obama gets to appease unions and create more artificial jobs to pretend the country is beginning to prosper.

It is truly sad that the “mainstream media” in this country has decided to jump into bed with the government. Freedom of the Press was one of the basic rights intentionally included by the nation’s founders. A skeptical press – free to question the running of the government – is an important part of a Republic.

Sadly, a press that is complicit with the government to further an agenda may destroy this country.

After ignoring or avoiding the stimulus bill President Obama has been campaigning around the country for the last few weeks, Senate Democrats are finally holding a vote this afternoon on it. Of course, the vote is expected to fail, and despite Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) predictions on MSNBC this morning that the “overwhelming majority of Democrats” will vote for it, there are serious questions as to whether a majority of Democrat senators will support the bill.

As the AP reports today, “Democratic unanimity is not assured. Moderates like Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. — both are up for re-election next year in states where Obama figures to lose — may abandon their party, even as oil-state Democrats have been assuaged by a decision to get rid of an Obama proposal to have oil companies give up tax breaks. ‘We’re likely to lose two, three, four Democrats,’ Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second ranking Democrat in the Senate, told Chicago’s WTTW-TV Monday.”

And The Hill writes, “Democratic leaders in the Senate are scrambling to avoid defections on President Obama’s jobs package, which appears headed for defeat on Tuesday. A lack of Democratic unity on the president’s bill would be embarrassing for the White House, which has been scolding House Republicans for refusing to vote on the measure.”

Indeed, The Hill points out, “Despite the changes, the legislation still does not enjoy the support of all 53 senators who caucus with the Democrats. A handful of Democrats are undecided or leaning no on the bill. Democrats who will vote no or are leaning no include Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.), who all hail from red states and are up for reelection next year. . . . [Sen. Joe] Lieberman [ID-CT] opposes the bill because the 5.6 percent surtax on millionaires is being used for new spending instead of reducing the deficit, and will vote against the measure on final passage, his office said. . . . The office of Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Monday that he is undecided. ‘He wants to see the whole thing — including amendments — before he decides whether he’ll vote for it,’ an aide said. . . . Tester is officially against the bill. He supports an overhaul of the tax code rather than the changes in the bill and is concerned that the payroll tax cuts would weaken Social Security. . . . Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) remained officially undecided on the bill as of Monday, his office said. Webb has a problem with the millionaire’s surtax because it is a tax increase on ordinary earned income. He would prefer closing loopholes and increasing taxes on capital gains. Nelson has spoken disparagingly of Obama’s proposal, but his office said Monday that Nelson has not decided yet how he will vote on it and is still studying the bill. Manchin has been critical of the legislation, though he, too, has not said how he will vote. His office did not respond to questions Monday.”

Meanwhile, jobs groups have declared their opposition to the new surtax Democrat Senate leaders added to the stimulus bill. In a letter to senators last week, a group that includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the

National Association of Manufacturers, the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, and the Associated General Contractors, wrote, “the burden of the proposed tax increases would fall disproportionately on the income of America’s small and mid-sized businesses who pay taxes at individual rates. . . . the Obama Administration’s own data demonstrates that 4 out of 5 of the taxpayers who will face this surtax are business owners – and thus, increasing the tax burden on these business owners will reduce the amount of capital that they would otherwise have available to invest in their company or hire additional workers.”

“In sum,” the jobs groups write, “the Senate legislation would pay for the President’s Jobs Bill by raising tax rates on hundreds of thousands of business owners, a job killing tax hike to pay for a bill purported to strive for job creation.”

As Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell explained last week, “The president himself has said that raising taxes is the last thing you want to do in a weak economy — even the White House predicts the unemployment rate will be high when this tax would kick in. So the real goal here for the Democrats, as far as I can tell, is entirely political — by arguing for a permanent tax hike to pay for a temporary stimulus, they essentially admitting they’re not interested in creating jobs–because proposing a partisan tax hike 13 months before an election won’t create a single job.”

President Obama’s New Stimulus Bill ‘Is More About Campaigning Than Governing,’ ‘He Knows It’s Not Going To Pass’

Senior WH Aide Calls Effort ‘First Act Of A Long Term Play’

MSNBC’s CHUCK TODD: “WH senior aide pre-spinning the Jobs bill defeat in senate: ‘first act of a long term play.’” (@Chucktodd, Twitter, 10/11/11)

POLITICO: “public theater … they know it’s going nowhere.” “Democrats may not vote on President Barack Obama’s jobs bill just once. They could hold several votes on it, even though they know it’s going nowhere. But that’s just the public theater.” (“Democrats’ Plan B On Jobs Bill: Go Smaller,” Politico, 10/10/11)

ASSOCIATED PRESS: “In President Barack Obama’s sales pitch for his jobs bill, there are two versions of reality: The one in his speeches and the one actually unfolding in Washington.” (“SPIN METER: Obama’s Disconnect In Jobs Sales Pitch,” AP, 10/11/11)

·         “John Sides, political science professor at George Washington University, said Obama’s approach on the jobs bill is ‘more about campaigning than governing.’ ‘He’s mostly just going around talking about this and drawing contrasts with what the Republicans want and what he wants and not really trying to work these legislative levers he might be able to use to get this passed,’ Sides said. ‘That just suggests to me that he is ready to use a failed jobs bill as a campaign message against the Republicans.’” (“SPIN METER: Obama’s Disconnect In Jobs Sales Pitch,” AP, 10/11/11)

‘Obama Jobs Bill Doesn’t Apply,’ ‘Not Shovel Ready’

“Oops, Obama touts his jobs plan today at an Ohio bridge that won’t qualify.” “The president’s jobs bill is designed for ‘immediate’ highway spending. And the new $2.3 billion Cincy bridge is not scheduled to even start construction for probably four years…” (“Oops, Obama Touts His Jobs Plan Today At An Ohio Bridge That Won’t Qualify,” Los Angeles Times, 9/22/11)

“Highway officials say their bridge replacement plans not ready to hire workers till 2013 or later – so Obama jobs bill doesn’t apply.” (CBS’ Mark Knoller Twitter, 9/22/11)

“…despite the attention given by Obama, the timetable suggests it is not ‘shovel ready’ and won’t spur increased employment right away. According to a project schedule posted online, construction work is scheduled to begin in January 2015. Prior to that date, officials will spend 18 months acquiring right of way for the new span.” (“A Bridge Too Far? Obama Travels to Ohio Bridge That’s Not ‘Shovel Ready’ to Push Jobs Bill,” ABC News, 9/22/11)

“…that’s what the spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Transportation told me. That this really isn’t the best example of a shovel ready bridge or a shovel ready project.” (Brianna Keilar, CNN, 9/22/11)

“Remember when the President referred to the last stimulus projects saying they ‘weren’t as shovel ready as he had hoped?’ Well, this may be another example of the same problem.” (“Reality Check: Someone Needs To Tell The President The Brent Spence Bridge Is Not Shovel Ready,” WXIX Fox News [Cincinnati & N. Kentucky], 9/21/11)

Speaking in the Rose Garden this morning, President Obama unveiled his new fiscal plan, but like his latest stimulus bill, it’s been met with mostly skepticism and criticism so far. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell summed it up: “Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings, and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth—or even meaningful deficit reduction. The good news is that the Joint Committee is taking this issue far more seriously than the White House.” Newsweek’s Jon Meacham was even more succinct, saying on MSNBC, “I just think it’s a big, big mess and the President has given up the chance now to lead effectively on this stuff . . . .”

News outlets previewed the speech by pointing out its decidedly political tint. Politico writes, “Suffering an erosion of support from the broad coalition that elected him, Obama has crafted a plan that reads more like a blueprint for shoring up his restless Democratic base than a vehicle for reaching across the aisle in search of bipartisan compromise.” The Washington Post notes, “Coming as a congressional super­committee goes to work to find budget savings this fall, Obama’s position will probably delight Democrats, who have fretted for months that he is doing too little to solve the nation’s jobs crisis while being too willing to embrace major changes to Medicare and Social Security. But his plan has little chance of passing and is already inflaming Republicans, who have vowed to oppose new taxes and have called for deep cuts in federal spending and entitlements.” And MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski mused this morning, “I think this is about the next election. Someone is going to have to explain to me why it’s not.”

On the substance, The Wall Street Journal writes, “Mr. Obama’s plan, which will be offered to the lawmakers charged with negotiating a deal by Nov. 23, will include roughly $1.5 trillion in tax increases primarily on wealthy Americans and corporations, people familiar with the proposal said. . . . The roughly $1.5 trillion in tax increases that Mr. Obama is expected to propose would include the expiration in 2013 of the Bush-era tax cuts for families making more than $250,000 a year. Mr. Obama will also include a set of tax increases he put forward last week to pay for his $447 billion jobs bill: limiting itemized deductions for families with taxable income of $250,000 or more a year, and ending tax breaks for oil companies, corporate-jet owners and investment-fund managers.” In another story, the WSJ observes, “President Barack Obama’s proposal to raise taxes on some millionaires will likely please members of his party, but it is unlikely to have much practical impact on federal deficits anytime soon.” And ABC’s Jonathan Karl pointed out yesterday, “It’s not new, by the way, he proposed a millionaires tax to finance healthcare and it went nowhere. This is not a new idea.”

Appearing on “Meet The Press” yesterday, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell told NBC’s David Gregory, “I would simply go back to what the President said last December in signing a two-year extension of the current tax rates: it’s [raising taxes] a bad thing to do in the middle of an economic downturn. And of course the economy, some would argue, is even worse now than it was when the President signed the extension of the current tax rates back in December. I think what he said then still applies now.”

Reacting to the president’s so-called “Warren Buffett tax” idea, Leader McConnell said, “[I]f Warren Buffett would like to give up some of his benefits we’d be happy to talk about it. I mean, I think that means testing benefits is one of the ways that we’re going to have to solve at least this Social Security and Medicare problems long-term for the next generations. With regard to his tax rate, if he’s feeling guilty about it, I think he should send in a check. But, we don’t want to stagnate this economy by raising taxes.”

Senate News Briefing 9.19.11

This is a trend that is unlikely to change. MSNBC and Politico gang up to try to make Republicans look as bad as possible and portray their candidate, Barack Obama, in the best light possible.

Kudos to Newt Gingrich for (again) calling out the media for their not so hiddenagenda. I will have to hand it to Newt, when he said:

“I for one and I hope that all of my friends up here are going to repudiate every effort of the news media to get Republicans to fight each other, to protect Barack Obama who deserves to be defeated. And all of us are committed as a team. Whoever the nominee is, we are all for defeating Barack Obama.”

he was right on the mark. It didn’t really change the questions that the liberal questioners asked, but it did set the tone for the Republicans answers. Most refused to get down in the mud with MSNBC’s Brian Williams and Politico’s John Harris, who did their best to toss out questions designed to exploit the Democrat’s talking points and accentuate the negatives of each candidate.

One of the more embarrassing moments was seeing Telemundo’s Jose Diaz-Balart being brought out on stage as a token Latino to ask the question “What will you do with the millions of illegal immigrants already here?” I can only imagine that in the depraved liberal minds at MSNBC-Politico the “consensus” was that the Republicans would do what any Democrat would do in the same position: Pander! And to their credit, none of the Republicans took the race-bait.

But most Conservatives understand. What to do with illegal aliens is a tough question. And there is no right answer for a Republican. It is like your wife asking if a dress makes her look fat. It was a great “gotcha” question. One of the best I have heard.

And there are only two answers. Deportation or amnesty. Neither of which is going to help any Republican. The Democrats have an answer for this: grant amnesty and issue them Democrat Voter ID Cards, full access to health care and free housing and money, in exchange for voting for Barack Obama.

For Republicans, there really is no answer… yet. This question is the equivalent of the left wing media asking Obama during the Gulf oil spill exactly what he would do to clean up the environment, assuming that the oil leak was finally plugged some day in the future. Well, while the oil is still spewing, there is no answer. You must first plug the leak, then you can assess the situation.

But, of course, we already know what Obama’s plan would be. Do nothing to stop the flow and when it is finally plugged, blame someone else. And just as the Obama Administration turned away oil skimmers and innovative potential solutions and offers to help, so does he turn away states trying to stop the flow of illegal aliens across America’s borders by filing law suits to stop them.

Most of the candidates did well on this “gotcha” question asked by a token Latino – to maximize the pressure and potential embarrassment. They all said we need to tighten the border first. Even Ron Paul admitted that the US-Mexico border was a mess.

The real question is how a smart Latino like Diaz-Balart can allow himself to be used and degraded by MSNBC like that.

There was a little bit of back and forth between the only two candidates that matter – Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. Williams was no doubt salivating like a preying mantis when the two Governors got into a “your predecessor created more jobs than you did” match. Ho-Hum.

Mitt Romney took the Obama “blame others” tactic. He said he did relatively poorly in Massachusetts because the state was in such a mess and is run by Democrats. Well, at least he didn’t blame Bush.

The rest of the field, outside of Romney – Perry, are simply a waste of time to continue tossing questions to in these debates. There are a number of good qualities about all of them but John Huntsman who acts like Utah, where he was governor, is an actual state. Boston has twice the population of Utah and the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex about three times the population of Huntsman’s state. And the influence of the Mormons is tremendous in Utah. And no matter what you think of Mormons, you simply cannot deny the positive aspects of a family centered religious climate on the health, education and welfare of the citizens. Utah is not number one in any of the areas Huntsman bragged about because of government, they are number one because of the strong, positive influence of Christ, thanks to the Mormons.

And who really gives a rat’s behind if he can say that in Chinese?

To sum up this debate – MSNBC accentuated every negative talking point on an individual basis, minimized the opportunity for bashing Obama as mush as possible and maximized the opportunity for each candidate to attack one another.

The questions were not designed to determine what was best about each candidate, rather, what was worst.

MSNBC and Politico were the big losers because the lady and gentlemen on the stage refused to play their game. And Newt Gingrich upped his value, in my opinion, on why he belongs in this debate. His role of Candidate-Moderator is a much needed and appreciated contribution to poke a finger back in the eye of the questioners. While Newt is never going to win the nomination, he should be the third and final candidate in future debates, standing with Perry and Romney.

MSNBC and Politico team up for an epic fail. As expected.

The cheating scandal in Atlanta public schools seems to be getting worse:

A new Georgia state report details the nation’s largest-ever cheating scandal, concluding that half of Atlanta’s schools allowed practices that inflated students’ scores to go unchecked for as long as a decade.

The want of integrity is widespread:

In the report, the governor’s special investigators describe an enterprise where unethical — and potentially illegal — behavior pierced every level of the bureaucracy, allowing district staff to reap praise and sometimes bonuses by misleading the children, parents and community they served.

There could be criminal charges!

The report accuses top district officials of wrongdoing that could lead to criminal charges in some cases.

This whole thing is criminal; I agree!  The crime was entirely the result of the Federal takeover of education.  Don’t believe me, believe MSNBC (hardly conservative!):

For teachers and their bosses, the stakes were high: Schools that perform poorly and fail to meet certain benchmarks under the federal law can face sharp sanctions. They may be forced to offer extra tutoring, allow parents to transfer children to better schools, or fire teachers and administrators who don’t pass muster. (emphasis mine)

No child left behind?  Right!  These children were left behind:

In Georgia, teachers complained to investigators that some 11-year-olds could only read as well as 6-year-olds. But, they said, principals insisted those students had to pass their standardized tests. Teachers were either ordered to cheat or pressured by administrators until they felt they had no choice, authorities said.

And these:

More than a dozen students interviewed by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution — including Tony Hughley, Valencia Tucker and Sebastian Mathis, quoted above — said all students are victims of the corrupt educators who, they believe, put their jobs above the student’s education.

And maybe this one:

Shawnna Hayes-Tavares said her son’s test scores dropped dramatically after he transferred out of Slater Elementary. She said a testing coordinator at the new school told her the test scores could have been inflated.

I agree with the one student who suggests the teachers ought not be blamed but rather the higher-ups.  The real blame ought to be placed in the lap of those who brought about Federal control of education.  This entire scandal was spawned by the No Child Left Behind law.

Administrators — pressured to maintain high scores under the federal No Child Left Behind law — punished or fired those who reported anything amiss and created a culture of “fear, intimidation and retaliation,” according to the report

This law, passed in 2001, was alas a product of a Congress and administration largely governed by so-called conservatives.  It is administrated by the United States Department of Education.

Lest one contend that this was an isolated incident, examine these cheating incidents in schools around the nation:

Houston, TX

Michigan public schools  (This expert says cheating is a major problem:)

About 1% to 2% of teachers cheat, said John Fremer, president of Caveon Testing Security, a Utah firm that contracts with states to deter cheating. However, he and other experts say it is a growing national problem because of the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind law and movements in many states to tie teacher pay and evaluations to test scores.

Maryland schools, too!

When President Bush and the liberals were in alliance to take over education, there was one member of Congress who said no.  Cong. Ron Paul.  He would abolish the federal department of education and return significant authority to parents and local school districts:

Paul supports giving educational control back to parents, rather than allowing the federal government to fund the schools. He plans to discontinue the Department of Education and return its functions to the states.

Maybe the next awesome RP campaign commercial should speak to this issue.  Federal control and regulation of education is an utter failure and creates the threat of government indoctrination of children.  It ought to be abolished.  President Paul can do that without Congress by simply asking his Education Secretary to grant universal waivers from all educational programs such as NCLB (other than civil rights) until Congress agrees to abolish NCLB and the Department of Ed and return education to local control.

I just finished a conference call with US Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) and I asked the Senator if he had any updated fgures on the damage that the union protesters had done to the building itself.

According to the DailyKOS and other left wing sources, the initial damage estimates of $7.5 million had been dropped to ZERO.

Senator Johnson replied that the $7.5 million figure was based on fears of the protesters may have damaged the expensive marble that accents the Capitol building.

After finally being able to look at the damage, the last estimate that the Senator had heard was around $350,000.00.

Senator Johnson cautioned, however, that the scene last night after the near riots that broke out after the vote to curb collective bargaining for some union workers will most likely add to that total.

Johnson is quite concerned over the number of death threats and threats of violence against not only the State Republican Senators, but their families as well. The death threats include threats of executions, the promise of a bullet in the head, beatings with baseball bats and threats against the families by saying “we know where you live”.

The Senator was amazed that the Democrats seem to view running away and riots as Democracy in action.

What Governor Walker is trying to do is solve a serious financial issue. 60% of the Wisconsin budget are spent on wages and benefits for State workers, while that figure increased to 75% in school districts.

Of course the Washington Post was more concerned with the liberal talking points wondering why the Senators had not used the option they voted on last night before now. (That was the number one question on MSNBC and CNN last night after the news broke of the vote.)

Johnson said that after weeks of trying to get the Democrats back to do the business of the state, to lay their ideas and options on the table and discuss another way to resolve the fiscal crisis, there has been little progress. He said one Democratic Senator had even requested an absentee ballot for an April election a pretty clear sign they had no intention of returning, prefering instead to stay away and hope public sentiment would turn in their favor.

More From Virginia Right!

• Michele Bachmann’s Response to State of the Union
• Video: Richmond Union Rally a Major Flop!
• Are 3 Liberal Appeals Court Judges Preparing to Give Cuccinelli a Victory Over ObamaCare?

Virginia Right! Recommends

• ARIZONA LEGAL DEFENSE FUND, Time To Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is  (LogisticsMonster)
• Rep. Tom McClintock’s Response to Pres. Calderon  (LogisticsMonster)

Ask Virginia Right! To Recommend Your Posts

By now, the fact that Kieth Olbermann has been voted off Insanity Island, or MSNBC as it is known in the People’s Republic of Northern Virginia, is well known, even to the twitter deprived  rioters in Egypt.

Now comes word that Insanity Island has again voted, and the results were not pretty for Ed “Sargent” Schultz and his appropriately named “Ed Show”. (Which is not to be confused with the Mr. Ed show, about a talking horse. The Ed Show is about a talking Jackass.)

Seems Schultz declared, after the Tucson shooting, that he would never tone down his Palin-o-phobic rantings and that his segment “Psycho Talk” would forever remain a mainstay on his Ed Show.

Newsbusters BUSTED Ed:

Folks, let me tell you something, I’m making this announcement right away. We are not changing “The Ed Show” on MSNBC. As long as they open their mouths over there on the right, we will continue to have the segment called “Psycho Talk,” because that’s exactly what it is. And as soon as they say that they’re not going to vote to repeal health care, then I’ll make some changes.

More From Virginia Right!

• The Left Wants Sarah Palin DEAD! Tweets Exposed!
• What Happens to the Clunkers You Turn In?
• BRITAIN CONTINUES to RISE as the EU SHOWS ITS TRUE COLOURS!

Virginia Right! Recommends

• Obama to Acquire Control of the Internet?  (WesternFront America)
• Retired General Calls For New Elections To Replace The Fraud In The White House  (LogisticsMonster)

Ask Virginia Right! To Recommend Your Posts

MSNBC is reporting something I had been telling people for some time:  The zodiac is wrong.  People think the sun is in Aries from March 21 to April 20 but it is not!  It is actually about a month earlier.  Why astronomer Sanders?  (I do have a six inch Newtonian and I have done public observing nights in Hanover before) Here’s why:

The shift is caused by precession, the wobble in the Earth’s axis caused by the gravitational attraction of the moon to the Earth’s equator. Precession popped into the spotlight this week after Minnesota Planetarium Society board member Parke Kunkle told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune about the gap between the astrological and the astronomical view. The story spread around the Internet quickly, but it’s actually old news, Rao said.

It is old news.  It also is evidence that astrology has insufficient basis in fact to be trusted.  In fact, I could argue that the Resurrection has more evidence than astrology (such things as the Twelve Apostles were willing to die for their faith, the sudden rise of Christianity, the logical failure of alternatives such as the disciples took the body or the enemies of Jesus took it); I recommend my readers still clinging to the stars for answers seek the Bright and Morning Star (Jesus!  See Revelation 22:16) instead.  Try the BGEA website to find out more about receiving Jesus as Saviour and Lord!  (Again this is not an endorsement of this blog or this blog entry by the BGEA!)

The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that there will be a comprehensive review of history texts from a certain publisher after the discovery that there were factual inaccuracies in two Virginia history texts.

The state Department of Education ordered a review of “Our Virginia: Past and Present” and “Our America: To 1865″ after the discovery of an inaccurate passage about the number of blacks who fought for the Confederacy.

A subsequent review by historians found multiple other errors, according to the Education Department.

I am sure there are inaccuracies in history texts but not the ones the State Board of Education found.  Don’t take my word for it; take the word of the former Chairman of the Texas State Board of Education, Don McLeroy (thanks to MSNBC and fellow blogger Tom White):

Former board chairman Don McLeroy, one of the board’s most outspoken conservatives, said the Texas history curriculum has been unfairly skewed to the left after years of Democrats controlling the board and he just wants to bring it back into balance.

Among the things MSNBC reported (and I think when they report something like this, you can believe it!) are these:

In one of the most significant changes leading up to the vote, the board attempted to water down the rationale for the separation of church and state in a high school government class, pointing out that the words were not in the Constitution and requiring that students compare and contrast the judicial language with the wording in the First Amendment.

They also rejected language to modernize the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D., and agreed to replace Thomas Jefferson as an example of an influential political philosopher in a world history class. They also required students to evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty.

I certainly can agree that students should indeed study the words of the Constitution (the left might call that illegal veneration!) versus what the Supreme Court said on religion.  I certainly can agree that historic periods SHOULD be called BC and AD, not BCE and CE!  I finally agree that agencies like the UN could be seen as a threat to global sovereignty.

There’s more!  As I wrote at the time, it’s time to liberate the kids from left-time history and social studies texts!

I was listening to the Texas Board of Education Friday at work via the technological wonder of live streaming.  Like many meetings it was somewhat boring.  But it was music to my ears.  On Friday, May 21, 2010, the children of Texas were liberated from left-wing politically correct history and social studies texts and curriculum.

It’s time for the Virginia State Board of Education liberate the children and teens of this Commonwealth!  Simply adopt the Texas curriculum (as adapted for Virginia) and the textbooks produced in result to the new curriculum.

We conservatives need to petition Governor McDonnell to encourage the SBOE to do exactly that; to appoint board members who will adopt the Texas strategy of bringing truth to history.  It’s time to assert that America is exceptional, that religion was critical to its development and continuing function to this day, that the free market system built this nation, that we are a Shining City on a Hill, that our founding principles should be restored and that those principles induced those who saw the nation’s shortcomings and called us back to those principles.

We need to tell the truth about how Herbert Hoover was a great humanitarian not a heartless uncaring Chief Executive.  We need to tell the truth about how Phyllis Schlafly saved the nation from the terrible social engineering of the ERA.  We need to tell the truth about how President Ronald Wilson Reagan was one of those who helped defeat communism and bring about a victorious end to the Cold War. We need to tell the truth about our constitutional republic and that UN and similar agencies are a threat to sovereignty.  We need to tell the truth about Austrian economics.  We need to tell the truth:  FDR and his New Deal did not end the Depression and that lax securities regulations was only a small part (if any) of its cause.  That there are two sides to secession.  We need to tell the truth about so-called climate change and the problems of evolution.

I urge the readers to contact the SBOE and Governor McDonnell – Adopt the Texas textbook standards!  If you are a conservative with any sort of credentials, especially political ones, apply to serve on the SBOE.

The Constitution was read out loud in the well of the House of Representatives today and the liberals were flummoxed!  (Thanks to Gary Bauer’s End of Day report of 1/6/11)

The New York Times editorialized unfavorably:

In any case, it is a presumptuous and self-righteous act, suggesting that they alone understand the true meaning of a text that the founders wisely left open to generations of reinterpretation. Certainly the Republican leadership is not trying to suggest that African-Americans still be counted as three-fifths of a person.

Actually the GOP did not read that repealed part of the Original Constitution!

It also meant that legislators would not read the original language from Article 1 that tacitly acknowledged slavery.

That language, called the “three-fifths compromise,” stated that representatives would be parceled out based on a count of all free inhabitants, excluding Indians, and “three-fifths of all other persons.” Those persons were understood to be slaves.

Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Illinois objected saying that not reading it would ignore the advances of history.  I wonder what Rep. Jackson would have said if they had not edited it out.  Probably evidence the GOP wants to turn back the clock on civil rights!

Rep. Jerrod Nadler commented, “They’re reading it like a sacred text.”  the Constitution is (next to the Bible) the Supreme Law of the Land (look at Article VI) but maybe liberals would rather revere so-called constitutional rights NOT FOUND there such as abortion!

Ezra Klein, a writer for the Washington Post, said on MSNBC that the Constitution is confusing and the reading is a “gimmick”, and it was written more than “100 years ago.”  The Constitution dates from 1789, by the way!

Dahlia Lithwick contends that this Constitution business is a “fetish” and compared it to rubbing a Buddha doll to get special help!  (I suppose that analogy would not fly if it offended an officially protected group.)

Gary Bauer is right:

The Left’s hostility to the plain language of the Constitution has been obvious for decades. The Constitution serves as a check against liberals’ wild ambitions — and they fear more Americans coming to that understanding. Their hysterical reaction to having this great document read aloud in Congress proved why it needed to be done.

Let’s hope the new Congress holds true to the values of the Constitution!  And let’s thank Cong. Ron Paul for bringing about interest in this august document and its meaning!

MSNBC has a fascinating article about how more and more airports are considering private companies to run security rather than the TSA:

“The TSA has grown too big and we’re unhappy with the way it’s doing things,” said Larry Dale, president of Orlando Sanford International Airport. “My board is sold on the fact that the free enterprise system works well and that we should go with a private company we can hold directly accountable for security and customer satisfaction.”

Private security in airports?  That sounds like secession from the Union or something!  But it’s legal!  (By the way, I was in Orlando Sanford airport last week and there was excellent security in that airport!)  Of course the security rules are the same.  But more and  more airports are considering an alternative to the TSA.  Ron Paul was right again; in the Fourth GOP 2008 debate, Cong. Paul offered the idea that the fact that the government banned armed pilots might have deterred the 9/11 attacks rather than allowing private companies such as airlines to protect passengers and crew:

“…we turned it over to the Federal Government and look at the mess we have now at airports.  *  *  *  Private industry protects their property all the time.  People who haul around money in armored trucks protect their money all the time.  But here is one example when the Federal Government was involved and we messed it up…”

Albert Hunt wrote for Bloomberg that the GOP Presidential election in 2012 is wide-open.  He cites the usual candidates:  Romney, Pawlenty, Gingrich, Palim, Huckabee, etc.

There is no candidate like a Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan or Bob Dole, waiting his turn as the nominee.

Hunt even found space to discuss former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum and Nebraska Senator John Thune but he did not cite Ron Paul.  That’s okay.  We’ll surprise them again!  Paul’s common sense libertarianism will find a fertile audience among voters in both parties and independents, too.  Is it 2011 yet?  Yes it is!

New!!! Virginia Blog Roundup – Old Dominion Blogs – now online and FREE! Read all the Virginia Blogs in one place.

The Virginia Right! News Hound surfs the ‘net to take the pulse of the world every day. The links published below are opinions and takes on the news that we find interesting. By design, these links are mostly outside of the Mainstream Media. This feature is designed to save you the time of sifting through dozens of websites and blogs. Buckle up. It is going to be a bumpy ride.

More From Virginia Right!

• Virginia Right! News Hound for 12/1/2010
• Virginia Right! News Hound for 11/30/2010
• Virginia Right! News Hound for 11/22/2010

Virginia Right! Recommends

• Peggy West: Mental Midget Award #1  (LogisticsMonster)
• GUY NEWS – BULLYING IN THE WORKPLACE  (BarkingSpider)

Ask Virginia Right! To Recommend Your Posts