Banner ad

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Cruising the Web

The WSJ exposes how Obama's rhetoric about supporting "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants" and "new offshore areas for oil and gas development" was just smoke and mirrors. When push comes to shove, his administration is blocking such development. And of course, Lindsay Graham is trying to promote his own compromise whereby Republicans would vote for "cap and trade" while the Democrats would agree to more offshore drilling and creating more nuclear plants. He's not able to make the sale now. Perhaps his colleagues are better able than he to figure out the snakeoil that Obama is peddling.

Surprise, surprise. Nancy Pelosi knew more about Eric Massa's shenanigans than she'd previously let on. The Democrats might want to disclaim any responsibility for Massa, but they were happy to have this creep as part of their caucus and would have supported him for reelection if he'd voted for the health care bill without his harassment of aides coming to light.

Harry Reid is pledging to pass filibuster reform in the next term. Yeah, sure. First he has to get reelected. I doubt that he'll be making Senate policy come January. And the Democrats have to worry about the possibility that they will one day be in the minority themselves. When that happens, the filibuster will suddenly be holy once again.

Brian Riedl exposes all the dishonest budgetary gimmicks within Obama's budget. It really is amazing how they can slap these false figures into the budget by such tricks and then claim how they're reducing spending. They can claim savings that won't ever happen. They can hypothesize the rosiest of scenarios for the economy and then make guesstimates about how much revenue they'll garner when their imaginary economic growth takes place. He uses as a phony baseline a pretense that the Iraq surge would last forever and then he can claim all the savings that will result from his continuing the policies he always planned to enact in the first place.

Joshua P. Thompson previews another firefighters' disparate impact case headed for the Supreme Court. We'll see if having standards means anything or if all that matters is if you get the appropriate mix of races scoring well on a test.

Instead of being angry about tuition hikes, University of California students should be protesting the public employee unions who are bankrupting their state and forcing these changes on them. And they better get used to it since it is their generation that will be paying for those public employee pensions for the rest of their lives.

James Pethoukokis explains how Obama's policies are stifling free trade.

Another headache for Nancy: the Hispanic Caucus says that its members won't vote for the Senate health bill because of its limits on spending on health care for illegal immigrants. Of course, if they use the Slaughter solution, they will be able to vote for it without voting for it.

Jay Cost lays out why those House Democrats supporting Bart Stupak's anti-funding of abortion language have to worry about the Senate Democrats. If they truly are standing on principle, this has to really give them pause. Of course, if they're willing to pass the bill without really voting for it why should they care about how the Senate deals with the provisions on abortion.


Bachbone said...

Lindsey Graham gets more duplicitous every year, it seems. Or perhaps it's just that his antics are getting more publicity.

mselflea said...

Free trade ultimately rewards countries with educated, motivated work forces. Depending on where you look, that is either our country (right) or countries like India/ China, countries that are hungry to improve their lot in life. What a powerful nation we would be if we could unleash the "animal spirit" resident in this country-linking economic activity with the freedom outlined in our constitution. Instead the rhetoric is mostly targeted at what the risks are. Of course one can argue that the benefits have never been very well presented either depending on the audience.

mark said...

If it turns out Pelosi covered for Massa, she deserves the same ridicule that Denny Hastert got for his handling of Mark Foley. Worse actually, since she should have learned from that.
In the meantime, where are repubs on John Ensign? He sleeps with his friend's wife, has mommy and daddy pay them off (making the wife a prostitute and her husband a pimp), and then illegally sets him up as a lobbyist and steers contracts to them. Repubs seem to have forgiven Diaper Dave Vitter. Let's see if they set the bar a bit higher for Ensign.

Pat Patterson said...

Not so fast! I'm certainly not going to claim that what Sen Ensgin did wasn't tawdry in the extreme but as of yet there has been no indication that he broke any laws. He might actually have a claim for blackmail by the Hamptons and the Hamptons attorney. But if you can't see the difference between what Ensign did and the now admitted sexual harassment and sexual assault of Massa then the left has truly lost all sense of proportion. Massa appears to have resigned to end any investigation while Ensign has said that not only will he run again but that he would cooperate with an ethics investigation.

mark said...

Tawdry? Gee, don't be so tough on the guy.
How about stripping him of committee assignments during the investigation? Diaper Dave Vitter broke the law. How about demanding that he step down?
Typical: Each party wants to call out the other side for misdeeds, and protect their own. Only when both parties (and their supporters) call bs on their own will anything change.

Pat Patterson said...

The problem with that logic is that the Republicans did not demand Massa step down or resign. That came from within the Democratic party itself.

The Republicans have been demanding that something be done about Rep Rangel to no avail so what makes you think they actually have a say in this other than going to the newspapers or tv.

As to Vitter many Republicans did call for his resignation though James Carville, obviously a Republican dupe, said Vitter's actions were not criminal. Again as bad as both of the senators behaved they fell into the Clintonian definition of sexual activity while Massa clearly physically abused or harmed someone.

mark said...

A bit slow today, Pat? That dems called for Massa to resign before repubs is something we need more of(just as not calling for Rangel to resign was a failure of dem leadership, something we need less of).
Please refresh my memory: Who were the republicans who called on Vitter to resign? I believe anyone who mattered took a pass on that issue.

Pat Patterson said...

Sam Brownback called for his resignation as well as the head of state Republican organization of Louisiana. Plus equating a misdemeanor charge at best with a confession of felonius assault is a bit much. But since Vitter is not Gary Studds then he might actually be defeated in his next election.