ObamaCare has become big business for an elite network of Washington lobbyists and consultants who helped shape the law from the inside.
More than 30 former administration officials, lawmakers and congressional staffers who worked on the healthcare law have set up shop on K Street since 2010.
Major lobbying firms such as Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock, The Glover Park Group, Alston & Bird, BGR Group and Akin Gump can all boast an ObamaCare insider on their lobbying roster — putting them in a prime position to land coveted clients.
“When [Vice President] Biden leaned over [during healthcare signing] and said to [President] Obama, ‘This is a big f'n deal,’” said Ivan Adler, a headhunter at the McCormick Group, “he was right.”
Veterans of the healthcare push are now lobbying for corporate giants such as Delta Airlines, UPS, BP America and Coca-Cola, and for healthcare companies including GlaxoSmithKline, UnitedHealth Group and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association.
Ultimately, the clients are after one thing: expert help in dealing with the most sweeping overhaul of the country’s healthcare system in decades.
"Healthcare lobbying on K Street is as strong as it ever was, and it's due to the fact that the Affordable Care Act seems to be ever-changing," Adler said. "What's at stake is huge. ... Whenever there's a lot of money at stake, there's a lot of lobbying going on."
The voracious need for lobbying help in dealing with ObamaCare has created a price premium for lobbyists who had first-hand experience in crafting or debating the law.
CONTINUE READING: ObamaCare's architects reap windfall as Washington lobbyists - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com
Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Friday, August 16, 2013
Extortion 17 is a Bigger Scandal and Betrayal than Benghazi
Extortion
17 could be a bigger scandal and betrayal of Americans than Benghazi.
While
Benghazi resulted in four American deaths, Extortion 17 resulted in 38 deaths,
including nearly two dozen Navy SEALs. Many of these SEALs were made famous,
credited with the killing of Osama bin Laden. The Chinook helicopter they were
aboard was shot down by Taliban forces, which written
testimony confirms knew
theelite forces were coming into the area. Families are going after the Obama
administration for what they believe were leaks that led to their family
members’ deaths. According to Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), chairman of the House
Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on National Security, “We’re going
to dive into this.”
Billy
Vaughn, father of slain Navy SEAL Aaron Vaughn, recently
told Freedom Outpost
that the family wants to see Vice President Joe Biden and former Defense
Secretary Leon Panetta held
accountable for national security breaches when they outed the SEALs.
Not only were the SEAL team
members furious and shocked over the big mouths of the Obama administration
beating its chest with pride over the success of killing bin Laden, but the
families were equally enraged. The message compromised the safety of the unit,
as well as their families.
At
a gathering at the Ritz Carlton hotel in Washington, D.C. for the 50th anniversary of the Atlantic Council, a mere two days after the
raid, Vice President Joe Biden remarked to the audience,
“Let me briefly acknowledge
tonight’s distinguished honorees: Adm. Jim Stavridis is the real deal; he could
tell you more about and understands the incredible, the phenomenal, the just
almost unbelievable capacity of his Navy SEALS and what they did last — last
Sunday.”
“And what was even more
extraordinary was — and I’m sure former administration officials will
appreciate this more than anyone — there was such an absolute, overwhelming
desire to accomplish this mission that although for over several months, we
were in the process of planning it, and there were as many as 16 members of
Congress who were briefed on it, not a single, solitary thing leaked. I find
that absolutely amazing,” Biden added.
Forget Edward Snowden. Joe Biden made one of the biggest leaks of
national security information in recent history!
Former
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta made leaked
similar information while
in Afghanistan.
Karen
Vaughn, joined by her husband Billy, on Fox
News said, As soon as Joe Biden announced that it was a SEAL Team
who took out Bin Laden, within 24 hours, my son called me and I rarely ever
heard him sound afraid in his adult life…. He said, ‘Mom, you need to wipe your
social media clean…your life is in danger, our lives are in danger, so clean it
up right now’.”
READ MORE: http://dcclothesline.com/2013/08/15/extortion-17-is-a-bigger-scandal-and-betrayal-than-benghazi/
Friday, January 11, 2013
Is An Executive Order a Law that Must be Obeyed?
There’s talk that President Obama will ignore Congress and issue Executive Orders to implement new gun regulations over against the clear reading of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Is an Executive Order a law? Will we be obligated to obey it?
Executive Orders have a long history. Republicans and Democrats have issued them. Only a few of them have been overturned by the courts.
Neither Republicans nor Democrats do much about Executive Orders they don’t like since both parties issue them. This is how the Washington game is played.
Republicans and Democrats like Executive Orders on difficult issues because it stops the legislative process that they’ll have to participate in and eventually vote yes or no. They can always tell the voters back home, “Well, I would have voted against that if the President hadn’t issued an Executive Order. Golly gee willikers, now my hands are tied.” Right.
An Executive Order is only valid if it’s done within the jurisdictional authority of the President’s constitutional authority. To rule against the Second Amendment is not a presidential prerogative. If it is, then the President could turn his attention to the First Amendment and issue an order that newspapers can no longer criticize him. Conservative talk radio would die a quick death if the President issued an Executive Order saying that the freedom of speech had to be limited in several ways, one of which was negative political speech, especially about him.
Don’t get me wrong. I do believe that President Obama would like to do all these things. He’s mad with power. He has a vendetta against America.
Chris Matthews of MSNBC made a statement about how President Obama should have been treated by presidential challenger Mitt Romney in their second debate. It was the fact that Gov. Romney actually challenged the President that led Matthews to go Gestapo on Romney:
“I don’t think [Mitt Romney] understands the Constitution of the United States… He’s the president of the United States. You don’t say, ‘you’ll get your chance.’”
Yes you do. President Obama is an elected official. He’s not a king. The king battle was fought a long time ago at Runnymede in 1215.
If the President and other anti-Second Amendment advocates want to limit our freedoms, then they can go through the amendment process. An Executive Order is the chicken’s way out. It’s also unconstitutional.
The Democrats know this. That’s why they’re sending out Vice President Biden to soften the rhetoric:
“The president is going to act. There are executive orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”
Did you see it? “Legislative action that we believe is required.” In terms of the Separation of Powers, the President does not have the constitutional authority to legislate. Of course, that hasn’t stopped him or any other president.
CONTINUED: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/01/is-an-executive-order-a-law-that-must-be-obeyed/#ixzz2Hg9ktPlf
Executive Orders have a long history. Republicans and Democrats have issued them. Only a few of them have been overturned by the courts.
Neither Republicans nor Democrats do much about Executive Orders they don’t like since both parties issue them. This is how the Washington game is played.
Republicans and Democrats like Executive Orders on difficult issues because it stops the legislative process that they’ll have to participate in and eventually vote yes or no. They can always tell the voters back home, “Well, I would have voted against that if the President hadn’t issued an Executive Order. Golly gee willikers, now my hands are tied.” Right.
An Executive Order is only valid if it’s done within the jurisdictional authority of the President’s constitutional authority. To rule against the Second Amendment is not a presidential prerogative. If it is, then the President could turn his attention to the First Amendment and issue an order that newspapers can no longer criticize him. Conservative talk radio would die a quick death if the President issued an Executive Order saying that the freedom of speech had to be limited in several ways, one of which was negative political speech, especially about him.
Don’t get me wrong. I do believe that President Obama would like to do all these things. He’s mad with power. He has a vendetta against America.
Chris Matthews of MSNBC made a statement about how President Obama should have been treated by presidential challenger Mitt Romney in their second debate. It was the fact that Gov. Romney actually challenged the President that led Matthews to go Gestapo on Romney:
“I don’t think [Mitt Romney] understands the Constitution of the United States… He’s the president of the United States. You don’t say, ‘you’ll get your chance.’”
Yes you do. President Obama is an elected official. He’s not a king. The king battle was fought a long time ago at Runnymede in 1215.
If the President and other anti-Second Amendment advocates want to limit our freedoms, then they can go through the amendment process. An Executive Order is the chicken’s way out. It’s also unconstitutional.
The Democrats know this. That’s why they’re sending out Vice President Biden to soften the rhetoric:
“The president is going to act. There are executive orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”
Did you see it? “Legislative action that we believe is required.” In terms of the Separation of Powers, the President does not have the constitutional authority to legislate. Of course, that hasn’t stopped him or any other president.
CONTINUED: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/01/is-an-executive-order-a-law-that-must-be-obeyed/#ixzz2Hg9ktPlf
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Obama sets January deadline for gun control proposals
Spurred by a horrific elementary school shooting, President Barack Obama vowed to send Congress new policy proposals for reducing gun violence by January.
"This time, the words need to lead to action," Obama said Wednesday. He tasked Vice President Joe Biden with leading an administration-wide effort to create the new recommendations and pledged to push for their implementation without delay.
The president, who exerted little political capital on gun control despite a series of mass shootings in his first term, bristled at suggestions that he had been silent on the issue during his first four years in office. But he acknowledged that Friday's deadly shooting had been "a wake-up call for all of us."
Twenty children and six adults were killed when a man carrying a military-style rifle stormed Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., Friday morning.
The president also called on Congress Wednesday to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and to pass legislation that would close the gun show "loophole," which allows people to purchase firearms from private dealers without a background check. Obama also said he wanted Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity ammunition clips.
"The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing," Obama said. "The fact that we can't prevent every act of violence doesn't mean we can't steadily reduce the violence."
The president's announcement Wednesday underscores the urgency the White House sees in formulating a response to the Newtown shooting. The massacre has prompted several congressional gun rights supporters to consider new legislation to control firearms, and there is some concern that their willingness to engage could fade as the shock and sorrow over the Newtown shooting eases.
CONTINUED: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2012/12/19/obama-sets-january-deadline-for-gun-control-proposals/?subscriber=1
"This time, the words need to lead to action," Obama said Wednesday. He tasked Vice President Joe Biden with leading an administration-wide effort to create the new recommendations and pledged to push for their implementation without delay.
The president, who exerted little political capital on gun control despite a series of mass shootings in his first term, bristled at suggestions that he had been silent on the issue during his first four years in office. But he acknowledged that Friday's deadly shooting had been "a wake-up call for all of us."
Twenty children and six adults were killed when a man carrying a military-style rifle stormed Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., Friday morning.
The president also called on Congress Wednesday to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and to pass legislation that would close the gun show "loophole," which allows people to purchase firearms from private dealers without a background check. Obama also said he wanted Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity ammunition clips.
"The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing," Obama said. "The fact that we can't prevent every act of violence doesn't mean we can't steadily reduce the violence."
The president's announcement Wednesday underscores the urgency the White House sees in formulating a response to the Newtown shooting. The massacre has prompted several congressional gun rights supporters to consider new legislation to control firearms, and there is some concern that their willingness to engage could fade as the shock and sorrow over the Newtown shooting eases.
CONTINUED: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2012/12/19/obama-sets-january-deadline-for-gun-control-proposals/?subscriber=1
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Perpetual Revolution by Robert Ringer
by Robert Ringer
Monday, November 7, 2011
As the election season revs up, bull-slinging, the favorite sport of the criminal class east of the Potomac, is in full bloom. Some of the best zingers we’ve been treated to lately include:
•Che Obama, at the G-20 in France, saying, with a straight face: “I have to tell you, the least of my concerns at the moment is the politics of a year from now.” Sure, Barry.
•Nancy Pelosi, at a recent press briefing, saying, with a straight face: “If President Obama and the House congressional Democrats had not acted, we would be at 15 percent unemployment.” Sure, Nancy.
•Joe Biden saying, with a straight face, that if Obama’s $447 billion “jobs bill” (i.e., stimulus package) is not passed, there won’t be enough police to prevent rapes and robberies. Sure, Joe.
Do they really believe any of this nonsense? No, of course not. But they do know, through experience, that slinging a decorative array of fecal matter against the wall can win over a significant portion of the electorate — particularly those who don’t know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
But let’s put the sleepwalkers aside for a moment. They’re pretty much already owned by the left anyway. I’m more concerned about the supposedly conservative media types who are hopelessly trapped in the Beltway Paradigm.
By Beltway Paradigm, I’m talking about those who believe the far-left zealots will ultimately fail because, in the end, the free market will overrule their desires. They are fond of saying that socialism is simply not in the American DNA, thus in the next election voters will root out those on the far left.
Their problem is that they do not understand how the left-wing revolutionary mind works. Lefties know that communism makes the masses worse off, but they also know they can override that reality through the use of force.
Media mainstreamers, even those who are usually on target, simply cannot grasp a scenario that is so far outside the Beltway Paradigm. In their minds, they naively assume there will always be a next election.
And, even more naively, they assume the government would never use violence against U.S. citizens. Underlying this naiveté is that they cannot bring themselves to believe there is a serious revolution afoot in this country — and throughout the world.
In that vein, a year ago I participated in a panel discussion with three staunch Republicans, one of whom was a high-profile Fox News contributor. At one point in our discussion — and without giving it a second thought — I happened to mention Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler, and Barack Obama in the same sentence, which caused the Fox News contributor to frantically blurt out, “I didn’t say that!” to make certain the audience knew the comment had not come from him.
His knee-jerk attempt to distance himself from my comment took me aback, because I sometimes forget that mainstream guys never stray from the comfortable thoughts contained within their Beltway Paradigm. And, rest assured, revolution is not within that paradigm.
Whether it’s the Occupy Wall Street protesters, rioters in Greece, public workers defacing the state capitol building in Madison, Wisconsin, or thugs tearing down the city of Oakland, brick by brick, they are all focused on the same objective: equal distribution of wealth and a classless society. They may not use the word communism, but communism is precisely what they yearn for.
Do I believe every person in these rowdy mobs is consciously involved in a communist revolution? No, of course not. A majority of them, in fact, are probably nothing more than “useful idiots” who are hopelessly addicted to the idea of less and less work coupled with more and more entitlements. I doubt they realize that the system they long to see implemented is communism — or ultimately leads to communism.
In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote: “In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!”
The key words here are “support every revolutionary movement against existing social conditions.” When you use these words as a filter, it’s easier to understand the connection between such seemingly disparate events as those in Egypt, Libya, Greece, Wisconsin, and Lower Manhattan. After all, the only thing that matters is that workers must always revolt against “existing social conditions.”
The result is perpetual revolution, because there are always “existing social conditions.” That’s why most rioters who have been interviewed seem not to be able to coherently explain exactly what they’re rioting about. For the left, mob violence is an end in itself. To parody Ursula the witch in the Disney classic The Little Mermaid, it’s what they live for.
One of Lenin’s more infamous statements was when he said, “We say that our morality is wholly subordinated to the interests of the class struggle of the proletariat.” Translation: Anything goes, because the communists’ noble end justifies any means, including lying, stealing, cheating, or even the murder of innocent people. From whence comes the kind of absurd bull slinging we hear from committed lefties like Obama, Pelosi, and Biden.
Marx and Engels viewed the world as divided into two classes — the exploiters, who own the means of production, and the exploited, who have no choice but to sell or trade their physical labor in order to survive. And based on the worldwide uprisings we’ve seen over the past year, nothing much has changed in the 163 years since Marx and Engels wrote The Communist Manifesto. Isn’t it amazing that the revolution they called for is still going strong so long after the collapse of the great social experiments in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe?
Above all, Marx and Engels fervently believed that the root of all evil is private property. They cared little about freedom, because, clearly, freedom is impossible without private property. Property is an extension of a man’s life, thus if everything he creates can be taken from him, he has no incentive to create. If everything he buys with his earnings can be taken from him, he has no incentive to earn.
I don’t believe it was so much that Marx and Engels didn’t understand this self-evident reality. I believe it was more a case of their choosing to ignore it. In their narrow, somewhat childish, view of the world, workers deserved to receive all of the proceeds from the sale of whatever was produced by their labor. Management, they believed, was incidental to the production of a product, thus management and owners deserved nothing.
All this by way of reminding you that there is a revolution afoot, and it’s a revolution that Obama and his class-warfare pals can win. From Greece and Portugal to California and Wisconsin, from Italy and Spain to Illinois and New York, the socialist model is collapsing under its own weight. Economic and demographic forces are shining a spotlight on the reality that the combination of ever-bigger government financed by an ever-smaller tax base is doomed to failure.
Nevertheless, Obama and his class-warfare pals can win. The more obvious their failure becomes, the more angry and panicked the wealth redistributors, especially in Washington, D.C., will be. Their bull slinging is easy enough to laugh off, but if it doesn’t work — if it becomes clear that the Democrats are going down to defeat in 2012 — look for them to go to their weapon of last resort and use brute force to “temporarily” suspend elections.
Of course, the least of my concerns at the moment is suspension of the 2012 elections. Sure, Robert.
You have permission to reprint this article so long as you place the following wording at the end of the article:
Copyright © 2011 Robert Ringer
ROBERT RINGER is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.
http://robertringer.com/2011/11/perpetual-revolution/
Monday, November 7, 2011
As the election season revs up, bull-slinging, the favorite sport of the criminal class east of the Potomac, is in full bloom. Some of the best zingers we’ve been treated to lately include:
•Che Obama, at the G-20 in France, saying, with a straight face: “I have to tell you, the least of my concerns at the moment is the politics of a year from now.” Sure, Barry.
•Nancy Pelosi, at a recent press briefing, saying, with a straight face: “If President Obama and the House congressional Democrats had not acted, we would be at 15 percent unemployment.” Sure, Nancy.
•Joe Biden saying, with a straight face, that if Obama’s $447 billion “jobs bill” (i.e., stimulus package) is not passed, there won’t be enough police to prevent rapes and robberies. Sure, Joe.
Do they really believe any of this nonsense? No, of course not. But they do know, through experience, that slinging a decorative array of fecal matter against the wall can win over a significant portion of the electorate — particularly those who don’t know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
But let’s put the sleepwalkers aside for a moment. They’re pretty much already owned by the left anyway. I’m more concerned about the supposedly conservative media types who are hopelessly trapped in the Beltway Paradigm.
By Beltway Paradigm, I’m talking about those who believe the far-left zealots will ultimately fail because, in the end, the free market will overrule their desires. They are fond of saying that socialism is simply not in the American DNA, thus in the next election voters will root out those on the far left.
Their problem is that they do not understand how the left-wing revolutionary mind works. Lefties know that communism makes the masses worse off, but they also know they can override that reality through the use of force.
Media mainstreamers, even those who are usually on target, simply cannot grasp a scenario that is so far outside the Beltway Paradigm. In their minds, they naively assume there will always be a next election.
And, even more naively, they assume the government would never use violence against U.S. citizens. Underlying this naiveté is that they cannot bring themselves to believe there is a serious revolution afoot in this country — and throughout the world.
In that vein, a year ago I participated in a panel discussion with three staunch Republicans, one of whom was a high-profile Fox News contributor. At one point in our discussion — and without giving it a second thought — I happened to mention Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler, and Barack Obama in the same sentence, which caused the Fox News contributor to frantically blurt out, “I didn’t say that!” to make certain the audience knew the comment had not come from him.
His knee-jerk attempt to distance himself from my comment took me aback, because I sometimes forget that mainstream guys never stray from the comfortable thoughts contained within their Beltway Paradigm. And, rest assured, revolution is not within that paradigm.
Whether it’s the Occupy Wall Street protesters, rioters in Greece, public workers defacing the state capitol building in Madison, Wisconsin, or thugs tearing down the city of Oakland, brick by brick, they are all focused on the same objective: equal distribution of wealth and a classless society. They may not use the word communism, but communism is precisely what they yearn for.
Do I believe every person in these rowdy mobs is consciously involved in a communist revolution? No, of course not. A majority of them, in fact, are probably nothing more than “useful idiots” who are hopelessly addicted to the idea of less and less work coupled with more and more entitlements. I doubt they realize that the system they long to see implemented is communism — or ultimately leads to communism.
In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote: “In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!”
The key words here are “support every revolutionary movement against existing social conditions.” When you use these words as a filter, it’s easier to understand the connection between such seemingly disparate events as those in Egypt, Libya, Greece, Wisconsin, and Lower Manhattan. After all, the only thing that matters is that workers must always revolt against “existing social conditions.”
The result is perpetual revolution, because there are always “existing social conditions.” That’s why most rioters who have been interviewed seem not to be able to coherently explain exactly what they’re rioting about. For the left, mob violence is an end in itself. To parody Ursula the witch in the Disney classic The Little Mermaid, it’s what they live for.
One of Lenin’s more infamous statements was when he said, “We say that our morality is wholly subordinated to the interests of the class struggle of the proletariat.” Translation: Anything goes, because the communists’ noble end justifies any means, including lying, stealing, cheating, or even the murder of innocent people. From whence comes the kind of absurd bull slinging we hear from committed lefties like Obama, Pelosi, and Biden.
Marx and Engels viewed the world as divided into two classes — the exploiters, who own the means of production, and the exploited, who have no choice but to sell or trade their physical labor in order to survive. And based on the worldwide uprisings we’ve seen over the past year, nothing much has changed in the 163 years since Marx and Engels wrote The Communist Manifesto. Isn’t it amazing that the revolution they called for is still going strong so long after the collapse of the great social experiments in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe?
Above all, Marx and Engels fervently believed that the root of all evil is private property. They cared little about freedom, because, clearly, freedom is impossible without private property. Property is an extension of a man’s life, thus if everything he creates can be taken from him, he has no incentive to create. If everything he buys with his earnings can be taken from him, he has no incentive to earn.
I don’t believe it was so much that Marx and Engels didn’t understand this self-evident reality. I believe it was more a case of their choosing to ignore it. In their narrow, somewhat childish, view of the world, workers deserved to receive all of the proceeds from the sale of whatever was produced by their labor. Management, they believed, was incidental to the production of a product, thus management and owners deserved nothing.
All this by way of reminding you that there is a revolution afoot, and it’s a revolution that Obama and his class-warfare pals can win. From Greece and Portugal to California and Wisconsin, from Italy and Spain to Illinois and New York, the socialist model is collapsing under its own weight. Economic and demographic forces are shining a spotlight on the reality that the combination of ever-bigger government financed by an ever-smaller tax base is doomed to failure.
Nevertheless, Obama and his class-warfare pals can win. The more obvious their failure becomes, the more angry and panicked the wealth redistributors, especially in Washington, D.C., will be. Their bull slinging is easy enough to laugh off, but if it doesn’t work — if it becomes clear that the Democrats are going down to defeat in 2012 — look for them to go to their weapon of last resort and use brute force to “temporarily” suspend elections.
Of course, the least of my concerns at the moment is suspension of the 2012 elections. Sure, Robert.
You have permission to reprint this article so long as you place the following wording at the end of the article:
Copyright © 2011 Robert Ringer
ROBERT RINGER is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.
http://robertringer.com/2011/11/perpetual-revolution/
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Setting the Record Straight on Federal Disaster Funding
Liberals have spent the past two weeks asking Congress to write a blank check for federal disaster funding. They’ve concentrated their attacks on House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) for seeking offsets in other areas of the budget to cover the additional aid.
They’ve portrayed Cantor as a callous conservative, suggesting that his stance is extreme and hypocritical. The facts tell another story.
The Wall Street Journal reveals that it’s actually congressional Democrats, not Cantor, standing in the way of additional disaster funding. House Republicans have offered a plan that gives more money to the Federal Emergency Management Agency than President Obama requested. They did this by cutting spending in other areas, such as the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program.
That program is a pet cause of many Democrats, including Vice President Biden. In fact, the Journal explains, it was Biden who personally intervened to convince the CEO of California-based Fisker Automotive to manufacture electric cars in Wilmington, DE.
CONTINUED: http://blog.heritage.org/2011/09/03/setting-the-record-straight-on-federal-disaster-funding/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
They’ve portrayed Cantor as a callous conservative, suggesting that his stance is extreme and hypocritical. The facts tell another story.
The Wall Street Journal reveals that it’s actually congressional Democrats, not Cantor, standing in the way of additional disaster funding. House Republicans have offered a plan that gives more money to the Federal Emergency Management Agency than President Obama requested. They did this by cutting spending in other areas, such as the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program.
That program is a pet cause of many Democrats, including Vice President Biden. In fact, the Journal explains, it was Biden who personally intervened to convince the CEO of California-based Fisker Automotive to manufacture electric cars in Wilmington, DE.
CONTINUED: http://blog.heritage.org/2011/09/03/setting-the-record-straight-on-federal-disaster-funding/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Monday, July 11, 2011
Analyst Predicts Hagan Will Be Obama's Surprise VP Choice in 2012
A political analyst has predicted Kay Hagan will be President Obama's vice presidential running mate in 2012.
Alan Steinberg, who writes at PolitickerNJ.com, wrote about a series of events that could lead to Hagan be chosen for the position.
U.S. Senate Steinberg said he believes Obama will announce before the 2012 election that he will appoint Vice President Joe Biden as his Secretary of State to replace Hillary Clinton. Clinton has indicated she will not return for another term. Then, he says Obama will tap Hagan two weeks before the Democratic convention in Charlotte.
CONTINUED: http://www.myfox8.com/news/wghp-story-hagan-obama-surprise-vp-choice-110711,0,5843235.story
Alan Steinberg, who writes at PolitickerNJ.com, wrote about a series of events that could lead to Hagan be chosen for the position.
U.S. Senate Steinberg said he believes Obama will announce before the 2012 election that he will appoint Vice President Joe Biden as his Secretary of State to replace Hillary Clinton. Clinton has indicated she will not return for another term. Then, he says Obama will tap Hagan two weeks before the Democratic convention in Charlotte.
CONTINUED: http://www.myfox8.com/news/wghp-story-hagan-obama-surprise-vp-choice-110711,0,5843235.story
Monday, March 21, 2011
Joe Biden: ‘Framers Intended to Grant Congress Power to Initiate All Hostilities, Even Limited Wars’
Rewriting the Constitution?
After studying the constitutional language governing the use of military force and the debates that the Framers had on the issue, Joe Biden determined that the Founding Fathers had vested the power to authorize even the limited use of military force in the Congress not the president---unless it was necessary for the president to act swiftly to repel an attack on the United States or to rescue U.S. citizens.
THE ARTICLE ON CNSNEWS: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/flashback-joe-biden-framers-intended-gra
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
