Day: April 28, 2009

News Flash: Arlen Switches Parties

Did you hear that?  What was that sound coming out of Washington?  It was the butts of the GOP slamming shut!

US Republican Senator Arlen Specter is to switch sides and become a Democrat.

The move would give the Democrats 59 votes in the senate, just one short of the 60 needed to overturn Republican attempts to block legislation.

The Democrats are expected to pick up their 60th vote when the result of the still-disputed Minnesota senate race is decided by the courts.

Mr Specter, a moderate, said that since he joined the Republicans in 1980 the party had “moved far to the right”.

“I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans,” he said in a statement announcing the switch.

Specter, 79, had held secret talks with Mr Obama, along with other senior Democrats including Vice-President Joe Biden, ahead of his decision to leave the Republican Party, according to officials.

Mr Specter was facing a tough challenge from conservative Pat Toomey, in a primary election to decide who would run as the Republican candidate for Mr Specter’s Pennsylvania senate seat in 2010.

Polls suggested that Mr Specter’s decision to vote for the president’s economic stimulus package earlier this year had been unpopular with Republican activists in the state.

Specter’s decision is an opportunistic one.  But now the Obama gang has what they have been missing, a 60 vote Senate, this should make the passing of his ambitious programs an almost given.

welcome to the party, Sen. Specter.

The New Energy Bill: What Is The Truth?

The following is a letter that I got as an email from the Friends of the US Chamber Of Commerce:

Today is Earth Day – a day when many Americans make resolutions to voluntarily conserve more energy and work toward cleaning up their local environment.

Unfortunately, some politicians in Congress are using Earth Day to ultimately push more taxes on American employers and working families.

And they’re doing it all in the name of the environment.

As we emailed you last week, President Obama has already admitted his “climate bill” will mean higher taxes on energy use for everybody in America.

Now, Congressmen Waxman and Markey have proposed a new bill to limit greenhouse gas emissions and create regulations on everything from:

New homes “with slanted roofs,” …to meet a “solar reflectance” standard if they use “fiberglass asphalt-shingle roofing.”

…furnaces, laundry machines, dishwashers, “showerheads, faucets, water closets, and urinals,” even jacuzzis.

Jacuzzis?

We’re all in favor of going green, but not at the cost of American jobs, economic recovery…and household appliances.

The talking points are being passed out for the coming debate.  But what is really said in the new energy bill?  Is this just the same “fear tactic” that the GOP has been using since the Obama admin came to power?

The Obama administration on Wednesday called a Democratic House proposal to reduce greenhouse gases and tackle climate change a “jobs bill” and an investment in new energy priorities, rejecting Republican criticism that it will undermine the economy by increasing costs for consumers.

Top environmental advisers to President Barack Obama broadly endorsed the draft bill that would cap greenhouse gases and reduce the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels. However, the administration officials cautioned that the White House will work with House Democrats to fine tune the legislation in the coming weeks.

Energy secretary Chu acknowledged that limits on greenhouse gases would increase energy production costs — both gasoline and electricity — but he said overall consumer energy bills would not increase because the legislation also is designed to spur increased efficiency. “Costs would actually be held constant,” he maintained.

The administration’s energy cost estimates are based on the government distributing 40 percent of the money collected from auctioning credits back to households to offset energy-related energy expenses. The House bill has yet to work out a emissions credit allocation proposal.

Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee are negotiating among themselves on whether to scale back legislation that would impose a mandatory limit on greenhouse gases, with some conservatives and moderates calling for electric utilities to be given free pollution allowances and for more modest cuts in the targets for reducing emissions.

So it begins……as usual the idea and the proposal to help the environment was all talk….the government will do what it always does……come up with an impotent environmental bill.

The debate is falling into the same line as past debates—it happened in the 70’s, if all the good ideas had been implemented then we would not be having this conversation today.  Will it happen again?  Looks like it is headed down the same path with little resistance.

Recession Breeds Protectionism

Do you recall during the debate on Obama’s stim plan there was a section called “buy American” ?  If so then you will recall all the fuss over it, some saying that it would stifle “free trade”, while others called it protectionism.  After a bit of debate it was removed from the plan as to keep the peace at home and abroad.

World Bank President Robert Zoellick expressed concern Thursday that Group of 20 countries continue to restrict trade flows despite vowing to resist protectionist policies.

Among those restricting trade were 17 members of the Group of 20 (G20) nations, a bloc of advanced and major developing economies that vowed not to cut trade during an emergency summit in November. They include the US, China, India and the European Union.

The study said the national measures to date were limited and would have a small effect on the global economy but warned that protectionism was a slippery-slope that was tried once before during the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Many countries have sought to protect local industries from demise over the last several months through a variety of new tariffs and government subsidies. The global economy is expected to contract this year for the first time since World War II.

The International Monetary Fund’s updated World Economic Outlook, released Wednesday, predicts world economic growth of negative 1.3 percent this year, marking “by far the deepest global recession since the Great Depression”. Not since the 1930s has the global economy undergone a collective contraction.

Member states are deeply divided over how to respond to the crisis, with each seeking to promote its own national business interests at the expense of its rivals. Few if any concrete decisions are expected to emerge. The focus is reportedly on working out how to implement the limited measures agreed to at the G20 leaders’ summit held in Britain earlier this month, including who is to pay for the proposed $500 billion extra emergency loan money for the IMF.

The recession looks like it will last awhile longer……the world recession will hurt everyone.  The deeper it gets the harder that countries may push protectionism.

Why Is The GOP Attacking Women?

Why not?  They surely cannot have much success attacking a popular president.  Why are women their focus of attacks?

In Brownback’s case, he is one of the Republican Party’s leading social conservatives and has been under pressure from that wing to disavow his support of the Democratic governor.

Though Sebelius has a reputation for working across party lines, she is anathema to abortion opponents because she supports  abortion rights.
Conservatives are still incensed about a Homeland Security memo that draws attention to the possible threat of “right-wing extremists” here in the U.S. But Democrats and other Napolitano supporters argue the memo itself originated with the Bush administration.
While it’s not surprising that Republicans are angry with a Democratic cabinet secretary, this brief episode is another instance in which rank-and-file Republicans tack further right than party leaders in their criticism of President Barack Obama. Conservatives in the House on Wednesday night called on Napolitano to resign because one of her memos mentioned right wing extremists as a threat.

As Media Matters for America documented, Pelosi has been the target of attacks by Republicans and conservative media figures. The Republican National Committee has attacked Pelosi for her “extremely liberal record.” On the November 1 edition of CNN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight, correspondent Andrea Koppel reported that Pelosi was “among the most liberal politicians in America,” and that “Republicans have seized on the prospect of liberal lawmakers running the House as a way to fire up their base on the campaign trail.” On the October 24 edition of MSNBC’s Scarborough Country, host Joe Scarborough claimed that Pelosi is “out of touch … in so many districts across the country.” On the October 12 edition of Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, host Sean Hannity claimed that “people don’t know how extreme she is, but we’ve got 26 days to inform people.” Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, on the October 12 edition of The O’Reilly Factor, attacked Pelosi’s “San Francisco values.” On the August 21 edition of Hannity & Colmes, Hannity called Pelosi “that San Francisco extreme left-wing liberal.”

Plus the GOP is blaming the recession on Pelosi, calling iut the “Pelosi Recession”.

Just three democratic women that are being singled out for attacks by the GOP.  I am sure there are more, but these are just the most senior of the attacks.  But why is the GOP attacking women?

Do Not Buy A Pontiac!

There is an approaching sadness for car enthusiasts.  The end of an era of American Muscle Cars.  But those dudes with lots of cash will continue to parade them through the streets of the country for all to awe.

In February, GM announced the end of the Saturn and Hummer lines while casting a ray of hope for Pontiac enthusiasts by saying that the brand would survive but be scaled back to a niche product.

But as a potential bankruptcy filing looms on June 1, the automaker has reportedly studied closing down the Pontiac brand. In the midst of pressure from the Obama administration to present a restructuring plan that shows the company’s long-term viability, the automaker recently released a statement to downplay fears that brands Americans have patronized for generations are on the chopping block.

How many other brands will eventually be abandoned?  Is this the beginning of the end of many American auto icons?