#1
On reading the link, I find cuts of some border agents, bad, and cutting funds for the virtual fence, possibly good. The hi tech "fence" has cost a bundle and has not proved effective. The money should be redirected, perhaps to some real fencing.
#3
More to the point, I imagine the argument will be made that the terror attacks were all made by people who were in the country legally -- the last two, Najubullah Zazi and Faisal Shahzad are naturalized citizens, and -- and therefore the border is not the issue. That this completely ignores the terror those living near the border endure on a daily basis will be besides the point.
While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions they've taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.
BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company's political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals.
On top of that, the oil giant has spent millions each year on lobbying — including $15.9 million last year alone — as it has tried to influence energy policy.
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
An Obama spokesman rejected the notion that the president took big oil money.
“President Obama didn't accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign,' spokesman Ben LaBolt said. “He raised $750 million from nearly four million Americans. And since he became president, he rolled back tax breaks and giveaways for the oil and gas industry, spearheaded a G20 agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and made the largest investment in American history in clean energy incentives.'
#1
While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico,
Flat out LIE in the first sentence.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/05/2010 13:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
5,000 barrels/day is 1M gallons every 5 days.
Oh, and if you believe this: In a closed-door briefing for members of Congress, a senior BP executive conceded Tuesday that the ruptured oil well in the Gulf of Mexico could conceivably spill as much as 60,000 barrels a day of oil, more than 10 times the estimate of the current flow.
Posted by: ed ||
05/05/2010 14:22 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If all restrictions were removed from the oil flow it is not impossible that it could produce 60,000 BOPD (Spindletop came in at more than that back in 1903 or so.) If the restrictions were removed abrubtly the odds are that it would blow fast briefly and then sand up/bridge over or otherwise collapse on itself. So you suggest 'blow the restrictions out of the way and cause the well to collapse'? Nah, what if it didn't collapse (and not every well would) - then you have an even bigger problem than you had before.
#4
WAPO is also reporting (h/t to drudge) that just last spring (2009 during current Obummer administration) EPA exempted BP from a detailed environmental impact analysis.
And all this time I thought it was just Bush and Cheney who were in bed with Big Oil.
#5
#4 WAPO is also reporting (h/t to drudge) that just last spring (2009 during current Obummer administration) EPA exempted BP from a detailed environmental impact analysis.
I simply cannot imagine why the Obama regime would authorize a measure such as that.
[snark off]
#8
* ION BHARAT RAKSHAK/TOPIX > EUROPE"S WEB OF DEBT [NYT COlor Graphic]; + GREECE'S DEBT WOES TEST EU UNITY [Bonds of Union].
and
* WAFF > [der Speigel] GREEKS STRUGGLE WID "SICK MAN" STATUS + HUGE NATIONAL DEBTS COULD PUSH EURO ZONE INTO BANKRUPTCY [Also read, BREAK-UP].
Personally, and in conjunction wid GREECE's monetary woes, I'm viewing the GULF OF MEXICO = MAHICO spill as a PRE-2012 [Iran, Islamist-MilTerr Nuclearization = Nuclear Terror], PRE-APOPHIS [1960's = 1980's MTV RAP "Thingys that make the MOON go Boom"] TEST FOR DESIRED OWG-NWO.
AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY, NEWS > MADONNA looks utterly fantastic in her new Celeb photos.
The powerful Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, David Obey, D-Wis., is expected to announce that he will not seek re-election in 2010. First elected in 1969, Obey has not faced a serious challenge since the mid-1980s. Obey is being challenged this cycle by Republican Sean Duffy, a former cast member of MTV's "The Real World," and current District Attorney for Ashland County, Wisconsin.
Rep. Obey will become the second chairman of a House Committee to retire this cycle. In late 2009, Bart Gordon (D-TN), Chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology, announced that he would not seek re-election.
There's a political earthquake. Granted he's been there since Moses, but in any year he should be a shoo-in. That puts Duffy in an interesting position, since the Dems will recruit a new face who will claim that he/she is not part of the current problem in Congress (of course, said new Dem still casts his/her first vote for Nancy Pelosi).
#2
Thanks for doing more than any foreign agent to kill off the F-22. Here are some well deserved retirement parting gifts: an new oven, a leaky gas pipe and matches. Enjoy!
Posted by: ed ||
05/05/2010 14:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
sometimes the trash is beyond recycling and has to be taken (or escorted) out
Bye Obey, Trash
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/05/2010 22:20 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Cheeseheads! Something in the water up there. I can't put my finger on it, but it's there.
#5
Amazing to see so many Dems resign rather than lose. I see 3 theories out there. My current favorite is that they are unwilling to fall on the sword of The One whose KoolAid they had quaffed so willingly once upon a time. That's the problem with fairy tale endings. They don't hold up under scrutiny.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/05/2010 23:44 Comments ||
Top||
Unfortunately for Florida Senator Mike Bennett, that's just not a good enough reason to be looking at pictures of topless women while on the Senate floor.
Especially not while using his state-issued computer. And especially not while a colleague is arguing that the law currently being debated is 'disrespectful towards women'.
Even if you do get caught in such a situation, you really shouldn't threaten the reporter who ran the story - trust us, it is just going to make matters worse.
#9
Anyone whom has been in the mighty Halls of LOCAL + STATE(S) + NATIONAL, + even INTERNATIONAL, CONGRESS/GOVT-CRITTERS + AGENCIES SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISED.
A real issue is how Superiors are allowed to do so while underlings or other can't do same.
#10
A real issue is how Superiors are allowed to do so while underlings or other can't do same.
Don't be silly, JosephM. There has to be a payoff for getting to the top.
More seriously, I do not believe that bit of snark I wrote above. Those who earnt their way to the top should know when they need to focus on the situation, and when it only their presence that is required. I can imagine that the majority of the time during debates and such, nothing important is being said, and therefore does not need to be listened carefully to. Personally, I would prefer the honourable state senator had been paying his bills on-line or working on his novel, but after a while even that palls.
In reality, these two bills should be re-named the "Gun Owners Are Probably Terrorists Act," and the "National Firearm Registry Act," respectively. Collectively these bills strip citizens of their enumerated Constitutional Right to Bear Arms without any meaningful due process, and create a national firearms registry.
How S.1317 Works
A person may be added to one of more than a dozen Federal watch lists, tip-off lists or terrorist watch lists based on "reasonable suspicion" of terrorist activity. Other reasons for adding a person include , mistake or misidentification, or if a terrorist steals a person's identity. An innocent citizen placed on the list will have no administrative recourse to ensure that he or she is removed from a list.
When a citizen of the United States, fully protected by the Constitution applies to purchase a firearm, his or her personal information is run through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), and the name is run against several databases to ensure that he is not a convicted felon, drug addict, fugitive, or has some other monitored restriction or legal disability.
In addition, the person's name will be run against one or more terrorist watch lists. If the system returns an initial match, the result will be delayed, and NICS personnel will investigate further. If S.1317 becomes law and the match is confirmed, then NICS will return a "Denied" signal to the gun dealer, and the purchase will be denied. Furthermore, the personal information of the individual will be kept on file indefinitely.
Under current law, a citizen has the right to know exactly why he was denied the purchase of a firearm. With this information, the person can correct the record or appeal the decision. However, Under S.1317, the person will only receive "actual notice of the Attorney General's determination," if the Attorney General determines that such notice would not likely "compromise national security."
Due to the secret nature of the watch lists, the Attorney General may determine that simply tipping off the person that they are on a terror watch list may compromise national security, thus rendering the notice clause illusory. In that case, the person would receive a "Denied" signal from NICS, with no further information about the reason for the denial, nor with any recourse to obtain the reason for denial.
The citizen may never know why he or she was denied a firearms permit, if the Attorney General determines that the mere disclosure of the determination may compromise national security. The citizen may ask why he or she was denied, but the Attorney General is not required to answer or correct erroneous information within the system.
Consequently, the citizen will be unable mount a meaningful appeal to the Attorney General's decision. Further, even if the Attorney General explains the reason for the denial, the citizen would have no way to know that their right to appeal expires after 60 days after the notice.
Assuming that the citizen appeals the decision in court, things only get harder and more confusing. First, the citizen must rely on summaries or a redacted version of the documents upon which the Attorney General made his decision. Neither the citizen nor his attorney has a right to see or rebut the evidence presented against him. Not even the court may consider the unredacted documents to determine whether the Attorney General acted reasonably in denying the firearms permit.
Text of S.2820
Preserving Records of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009 or the PROTECT Act of 2009 - Amends the federal criminal code to require: (1) the retention for a minimum of 10 years of criminal background check records for known or suspected members of terrorist organizations who attempt to purchase firearms or apply for a state permit to possess, acquire, or carry firearms; and (2) the retention for at least 180 days of other criminal background check records relating to firearms purchases.
Repeals certain provisions that require the destruction within 24 hours of identifying information for individuals who legally purchase or possess firearms. And, in case you were interested, the witness list for the hearing includes only supporters for the bill, especially Mayor Bloomberg of NYC.
#1
Filibuster. If the GOP and so-called "pro gun" Dems are true to their principles, this will die in a filibuster.
My worry is the "pro gun" Demas are about as reliable as the "pro-life" Dems were -- which is to say, they are for the most part complete and utter liars.
#4
I wondered when the "left-wing radical" gun grabbers would raise their heads in this administration. So much of the crime that gets committed or violent acts are done with stolen firearms bought illegally on the street. We had a friend murdered about two weeks ago at Parkwest Hospital by a guy by the name of Mohammed Abdo Ibssa from Ethiopia. He claimed in a note left behind that a doctor implanted a microchip in him at the behest of the CIA. A 357 mag he used was stolen. A 22 cal he had was not stolen but the serial number was filed off. Such bills would do nothing to have prevented this crime. It would have the effect of denying law-abiding citizens from having a firearm due to some administration screw-up with no recourse to due process.
#7
JohnQC - I fear that is by design. The gun grabbers are not interested in 'safety' or they would be advocating tough sentences when a firearm is used in a crime and they would be advocating mandatory firearm safety classes in public schools.
Their real goal is to disarm the public so they can be made more docile.
A man (or woman) with a loaded .45 (and the training to use it) is not exactly docile.
#8
So far as I can tell, the Great Britain approach towards gun confiscation has had no effect on crime. Gun crime still exists. In fact, there is evidence that gun-related crime has increased.
Another interesting link regarding GB gun control and crime: Link
Compared to the United States of America, the United Kingdom has a slightly higher total crime rate per capita of approximately 85 per 1000 people, while in the USA it is approximately 80. Crime is higher in GB despite draconian gun control laws.
Reducing crime is not the goal of the gun grabbers but control of the citizens. Such efforts do not seem to lead to a more civil society.
#9
How does GB produce such great snipers when at the same time they have destroyed a tradition of firearms ownership? Their military must get a different consideration. England's Olympians have to train in Ireland where firearm laws are less restrictive from my understanding.
#10
"I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
#12
So far as I can tell, the Great Britain approach towards gun confiscation has had no effect on crime.
John, it has had a huge effect. crime has gone up up up. criminals of all classes prefer an unarmed victim. not least of all the criminals in the govt wishing to steal our freedom
Posted by: abu do you love ||
05/05/2010 13:12 Comments ||
Top||
#13
If thre was any doubt the government (Democrats) are crooks, this blatent ignoring of the constitution should prove they are
Quote The second ammendment to the constitution says
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.Unquote.
Any "Law " passed becomes null and void on the instant of enactment.
I wonder if this would be considerd as a high crime or treason, or misdemeanor enough to Impeach Obama?
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/05/2010 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#15
So far as I can tell, the Great Britain approach towards gun confiscation has had no effect on crime.
Should have said, has not reduced crime but increased it. Guns are still available to the criminal class.
Neville Uluth8269: JohnQC
I'd like to know why you had your friend murdered.
I'm not entirely certain what you are trying to say. If it is a flip remark intended to be humorous, it falls the wrong way with me at this time. There are a lot of people who are suffering because of this nut who heard voices. I suspect his own family is also suffering because he also took his own life. If your remark is intended to be cruel you should take a look at yourself.
[Iran Press TV Latest] US President Barack Obama says US citizens will not be terrorized by incidents like the attempted attack on Times Square, vowing "to do everything in our power" to protect the nation.
"We know the aim of those who try to carry out these attacks is to force us to live in fear," Obama said during an address at the Business Council in Washington D.C. on Tuesday.
"And thereby amplifying the effect of their attacks, even those that fail. But as Americans, and as a nation, we will not be terrorized. We will not cower in fear," he added.
The US president said the suspect in the case, Faisal Shahzad, is currently under interrogation and that "justice will be done" in the case.
Obama described the incident as "another sobering reminder of the times in which we live."
Shahzad was arrested late on Monday as he was preparing to board a plane at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, US Attorney General Eric Holder announced early on Tuesday.
Shahzad, who is of Pakistani origin, has been accused of driving a vehicle with explosives, gasoline, propane, and burned wires into Times Square.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/05/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Obama described the incident as "another sobering reminder of the times in which we live."
No mention of radical islam, jihad, global terrorism, etc. Only acceptance, resignation, and lament. Just another enshalah moment for our first muslim president.
#2
Asshat. Too busy milking the Gulf oil spill for political gain to care about the folks in NYC. And Bloomberg! He's toast. Asshat... assclown, I can't throw 'em around fast enough - too many idjits in competition to see who is Culo Numero Uno.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/05/2010 1:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Americans will not be terrorized -- except by the IRS.
Posted by: chris ||
05/05/2010 23:05 Comments ||
Top||
#10
A most sad state of affairs. The Obama Admin sees Americans as a bigger threat than Islamists. Americans RECOGNIZE that their everyday lives are threatened more by their own government.
Tipping point.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/05/2010 23:38 Comments ||
Top||
"This remark is the equivalent of using the 'n' word. It shows contempt for middle America, expressed knowingly, contemptuously, on purpose, and with a smirk. It is indefensible to use this word. The president knows what it means, and his people know what it means. The public thought we reached a new low of incivility during the Clinton administration. Well, the Obama administration has just outdone them," ATR president Grover Norquist tells Inside the Beltway.
#2
Ok..so I'm a Teabagger. Fari enough. Can I call the POS who currently occupies the WH a Chicago Hotplater? He is from Chicago afterall.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/05/2010 22:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Half of America elected this bigoted racist elitist socialist pig into office. Ameirica is getting exactly what we asked for. God help us. I was thinking about Lincoln today as I drove across the south, Texas, Louisana, and Mississippi. He must be holding his head in worry because he above all understands where we are going as a nation and what it will take to bring it back.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
05/05/2010 22:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
What is a Chicago Hotplater? It sounds like it ought to mean a tap dancer, but from the context I suspect it's quite insulting.
#5
My apologies to TW and all whose sensibilities will be offendded. But "hotplating" exists just as does "teabagging". Fair is fair. I'll leave it y'all to Google it. Keep some mouthwash and brainbleach handy. You'll need it.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/05/2010 22:51 Comments ||
Top||
#6
No apologies necessary for a vocabulary lesson, Rex Mundi. I wasn't aware such things happened in Cincinnati.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
