Democrat Congress

The House Of Czars; No Transparency, No Accountability, No Oversight

These endless appointments of czars who answer to nobody but the President raise some constitutional issues. The power of appointments is clearly defined in our constitution.

Article II – The Executive Branch, Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution carefully and deliberately to deny absolute power to emanate from one person. That was why they required that no principal officers could exercise any power unless the U.S. Senate decided to confirm them. The Founding Fathers were specifically blocking the type of centralized power that President Obama is currently exerting.Ken Klukoswki at Townhall.com wrote in June about the perilous path that these czar appointments can lead to. (more…)

Obama Pushes Offshore Drilling

A truly brilliant path towards energy independence. I’m sure glad that while President Obama continues to search for ways to bankrupt our nation, he finds the time to spend more of our tax dollars on programs that have little benefit to the taxpayers that are funding them.

The Wall Street Journal

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil’s state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil’s Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil’s planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

The U.S. Export-Import Bank tells us it has issued a “preliminary commitment” letter to Petrobras in the amount of $2 billion and has discussed with Brazil the possibility of increasing that amount. Ex-Im Bank says it has not decided whether the money will come in the form of a direct loan or loan guarantees. Either way, this corporate foreign aid may strike some readers as odd, given that the U.S. Treasury seems desperate for cash and Petrobras is one of the largest corporations in the Americas.


This come on top of the Congress introducing legislation to permanently ban drilling in ANWR, the Obama Administration backing a nuclear energy program for the UAE, banning offshore drilling here off the U.S. coast, scrapping oil and gas leases in Utah, stopping the nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain (effectively killing future nuclear plant construction), and forming a joint task force to help Pakistan’s energy crisis. h/t Gateway Pundit

And a new twist has emerged in this story as reported by Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.

Who else besides Obama has taken an interest in Petrobras?  Hmmmmmm:

His New York-based hedge-fund firm, Soros Fund Management LLC, sold 22 million U.S.-listed common shares of Petrobras, as the Brazilian oil company is known, according to a filing today with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Soros bought 5.8 million of the company’s U.S.-traded preferred shares.

Soros is taking advantage of the spread between the two types of U.S.-listed Petrobras shares, said Luis Maizel, president of LM Capital Group LLC, which manages about $4 billion. The common shares were 21 percent more expensive than preferred today, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. …

Petrobras preferred shares have also a 10 percent additional dividend, said William Landers, a senior portfolio manager for Latin America at Blackrock Inc.

“Given that there will most likely never be a change in control in the company, I see no reason to pay a higher price for the common shares.” Brazil’s government controls Petrobras and has a majority stake of voting shares.

This story is from last Friday.  Is it a coincidence that Obama backer George Soros repositioned himself in Petrobras to get dividends just a few days before Obama committed $2 billion in loans and guarantees for Petrobras’ offshore operations?

Bookmark and Share

A Doctor’s Response To Obama’s NYT Op-Ed

h/t American Thinker

Mr. President, I just read your op-ed in the New York Times.  You must either be incredibly ignorant (e.g., pediatricians performing tonsillectomies, surgeons being paid $50,000 for an amputation), or else you believe that Americans are incredibly stupid.

You justify a hasty and massive healthcare “reform” to save money, by spending an additional trillion dollars.  You would fix a “broken” and broke Medicare system by adding another 47 million beneficiaries to government programs while arguing this will reduce overall costs.
I’ve itemized your inaccurate claims, with my comments in italics.

You assert that your healthcare reform will:

  • Force insurance companies to insure pre-existing conditions. That’s like allowing bettors to wait till after the race has been run, to place their bets. That won’t cut costs.
  • Eliminate lifetime limits on coverage. Unlimited lifetime coverages must increase premiums to pay for them and will raise total costs.
  • Require insurance companies to pay for routine examinations, preventive care, and screening tests like mammograms and colonoscopies. Once again, how can you be insured against a sure thing? The only way my company can pay for a colonoscopy is to add enough onto the premium to pay for it, plus their overhead.
  • Make Medicare more efficient, so tax dollars won’t enrich insurance companies. Insurance companies do not derive income from Medicare, because it is a federal program. Incidentally, its costs per patient have increased much faster than private insurance.
  • Cut hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and inefficiency in federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid. These programs have been in effect over 40 years — and I’ve seen the waste and inefficiency for most of that interval. Did you just find out about the waste and inefficiency now, and why hasn’t something already been done about it?
You claim that:
  • “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” But didn’t you just imply this week that Medicare Advantage subsidizes insurance companies and should be eliminated to save money?
  • “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” But large numbers of doctors have indicated that they will quit or retire if this plan is enacted
  • “You will not be waiting in any lines.” Maybe you won’t but we will. Your plan will add up to 47 million new insureds, with no increase in the supply of primary care physicians that are already in short supply.
We physicians live with our healthcare system, all day and every day.  We care about being able to heal.  We hate disputing with insurance companies, and especially with government bureaucrats.  Certainly changes in insurance practices are needed, and would have occurred long ago, absent a government record of 60 years of meddling with the market.
As you say, “…let’s disagree over issues that are real, and not wild misrepresentations” such as those in your op-ed, “that bear no resemblance to anything that anyone has actually proposed.”
And I agree, this is about America’s future:  whether Americans will remain free, or be ruled by an increasingly intrusive and authoritarian statist government.

G. Wesley Clark, MD

(Doctor Clark is not related to the retired general of the same name)

Bookmark and Share

Health Reform Author Cornered, Can’t Answer Question On Funding

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) faced constituents at a town hall doubleheader. With a clear majority of those in attendance voicing opposition to Obamacare, DIngell appeared clueless when confronted by constituents with questions about the bill. One father concerned about coverage for his son who suffers with Cerebral Palsy, was told by Dingel that he’d put in an amendment to cover his son. The dad raised the BS flag.

At the meetings conclusion, with shouts of “kill the bill” echoing through the venue, Dingell may have thought the worst was over. But, not so fast. One angry constituent demanded to know where the funding was coming from. Face to face with Dingell she demanded he answer one question, “Is the money coming out of my paycheck?” Dingell was speechless.

Note the arrogance of Dingell’s inference that he know what is best for “his people”. Add to that his proclamation that he’s been in congress for 50 years, and you have every reason necessary to vote him out of office in 2010.

Bookmark and Share

Could There Be A Peasant Uprising Afoot?

More and more Congressmen are finding out that the unwashed masses they represent are not happy with what is going on in the halls of Congress. The arrogant and dismissive attitudes of those who are supposed to represent the people continues to build a groundswell of protest from coast to coast. And, it’s all being caught on video.

Gateway Pundit, Ed Morrissey at Hot Air, and Michelle Malkin have more coverage on the spreading revolt.

Bookmark and Share

Steven Crowder Exposes Socialized Medicine

This is a must see for everyone, especially those who somehow have fallen for the Socialist promise of quality care for all managed by the government. As Steven Crowder will show, the age old adage of, “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”, applies to your health care as well.

Take Crowder’s advice and pass this on to everyone you know. Their life just may depend on it.

Bookmark and Share

Boxer: “I Will Continue To Be A Race Baiting Elitist” Updates I & II: Interviews With Harry Alford

Barbara Boxer takes a much deserved beat-down from Harry Alford, chair of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. Boxer, an out of touch elitist that is prone to foot in mouth syndrome, attempts to marginalize Mr. Alford’s testimony before her committee by trooting out quotes from the NAACP and 100 Black Men organizations. Mr. Alford left no doubt as to his view of the insulting and condescending nature of Boxer’s remarks.

Update I: Interview With Harry Alford

Update II: A Second Interview With Harry Alford

Bookmark and Share

The Govenment’s Power Grab For Your Health Care

Click To Enlarge

Click To Enlarge

Eliminating private health insurance and converting to government controlled health care is, in fact, what Democrats in Congress have planned for America. IBD Editorials found the shocking details 16 pages into the 1,018 page bill.

Congress: It didn’t take long to run into an “uh-oh” moment when reading the House’s “health care for all Americans” bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

From the beginning, opponents of the public option plan have warned that if the government gets into the business of offering subsidized health insurance coverage, the private insurance market will wither. Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington’s coverage.

The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, “fizzle out altogether.”

What wasn’t known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.

The legislation is also likely to finish off health savings accounts, a goal that Democrats have had for years. They want to crush that alternative because nothing gives individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less, than HSAs.

With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to the left’s expansion of the welfare state will be removed.

The public option won’t be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny.

Washington does not have the constitutional or moral authority to outlaw private markets in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn’t be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in Americans’ lives.

It took just 16 pages of reading to find this naked attempt by the political powers to increase their reach. It’s scary to think how many more breaches of liberty we’ll come across in the final 1,002.

Blue Dog Dems are becoming wary of this bill and their political futures if this legislation passes. As Michelle Malkin suggests,

Buck up the Blue Dogs with a phone call – Capitol switchboard is 202-224-3121:
Reps. John Barrow (D-Ga.)
Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.)
Baron Hill (D-Ind.)
Jim Matheson (D-Utah)
Charlie Melancon (D-La.)
Mike Ross (D-Ark.)
Zack Space (D-Ohio)

Bookmark and Share

The National Debt Road Trip

Brought to you by Political Math, the same producer of visualizations on Obama’s Budget Cuts, The Stimulus, and Obama Health Reform and Wait Times. You can watch all of them at his You Tube Channel, 10000Pennies.

Bookmark and Share

Money For Nothing, NH Stimulus Costs $8.32 Million Per Job

More good news about the Obama Stimulus having its “intended” effect. NH has received $416 million in stimulus funds thus far and has actually created jobs with the money. Unfortunately, the number of jobs created is a mere 50.  Quite an accomplishment by the Granite State considering that since President Obama took office we have been losing jobs at the rate of 16,000 per day.  But, remember President Obama is telling us that the stimulus is having its intended effect, so all is well.  After such a stunning success with taking the money and creating jobs, you’d think NH would be boasting and showing off their magic job machine.  However, as Ed Morrissey at Hot Air has pointed out< mums the word in NH.

More than $400 million in federal stimulus money has come to New Hampshire this year, and more is on the way.

The Office of Legislative Budget Assistant reported last week that $413.6 million made its way to the state under a list of programs that involve education, highways, environmental, health and human services, energy and law enforcement. …

So far, a total of 50 jobs have been created by the funding, 34 of them full time. The OES will be headed by a director whom Gov. John Lynch has not yet appointed. All five OES jobs are described as full-time temporary positions that will go out of existence in September 2011, the end of the federal fiscal year.

Now that’s job creation.  I especially like the part about them being temporary full time posotions in government bureaucracies that will be eliminated when the federal money dries up.
What ever happened to the transparency and accountability promised by President Obama?  Patrick Hynes at Now Hampshire points out the fallacy of transparency.

NowHampshire.com has repeatedly asked the state’s “stimulus czar” Orville “Bud” Fitch for up-to-date tallies of stimulus jobs created in New Hampshire. At the end of May, Fitch did not know. On June 26th, Fitch told Nowhampshire.com, “We are just now rolling out a reporting system to gather information from grant fund recipients.”

Once again, the the Federal Government is proving that the only thing it is efficient at is wasting our tax payers dollars.  At $8.32 million per job they should all be summarily sent to the unemployment line.

Bookmark and Share