Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (26545)	4/3/2008 1:17:47 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Jeff Flake's Earmark Battle Keeps On Keepin' On by Ericka Andersen Posted: 04/01/2008 Print This The scariest thing Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) heard over the Congressional recess was Hillary Clinton saying America needs a “Commander-in-Chief” of the economy. At a time when out-of-control government spending is the norm, Clinton’s statement should scare us all. For the past 8 years, Flake has lead an effort to control earmarks and pork-barrel spending, an initiative that hasn’t endeared him to the leaders of both parties. Earlier this month, the House and Senate both voted overwhelmingly against earmark moratoriums. But Flake has survived this kind of defeat before, and vows to not slow down his fight. After losing a run for a seat on the House Appropriations Committee last year, Flake re-focused his efforts on earmark reform in several different budget issues. He said earmarking simply takes too much time. Flake pointed to Homeland Security legislation earmarking as an enormous problem, saying that “no member of Congress will ever say any installation in their district is not important enough for a terrorist attack.” Every legislator in America can find reason to slot earmarks for expensive additions to safety precautions in their state whether or not they actually accomplish any increase in public safety. Later this year, another emergency supplemental spending bill for Iraq will hit the floor and it will be full of earmarks. Flake said the bill’s fate will depend on “how firm a backbone the President has.” President Bush, who delivered several vetoes last year, would maintain enough Republican support to sustain another one, based on numbers then. Flake said Sen. John McCain has continually stood by the argument that Republicans lost in 2006 because of spending and corruption -- not the war in Iraq. “[McCain] has his finger on the pulse…,” said Flake, who has campaigned with McCain, and added that the “biggest applause lines anywhere” are always about earmarks and spending. Because both Republicans and Democrats refuse to relinquish earmarks, lobbyists have begun to cash in on the practice. Contemporary earmark practices, said Flake, include lobbyists who package earmarks to secure funds for their own interests. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), no stranger to earmarks himself, has pledged to abstain from the practice this year because “there’s a lobbyist behind every earmark, packaged in a way to benefit them,” according to Flake. Flake said that there “is a place for earmarks” if the right authorization and appropriation is affirmed but these cases would be a far cry from the 36,000 earmarks tagged in 2007. The tidal wave of wasteful spending has caused economic distress as well, though Flake said “recessions serve a useful purpose.” He said such events create a “reallocation of capital that may have been skewed in the past,” advocating that the cyclical economic pattern of the market deals with things well. Aside from earmarking, Flake argued that the farm bill -- weighted as always with huge subsidies -- was one of the most important fiscal issues facing America right now. He said “we can’t have real free trade…with such a bloated farm bill” that will “run into our international trade…” As for the GOP in 2008, Flake admitted to a “tough election season” in which Republicans will hold seats only if they converge together on a message. Republicans, he said, have relied lately on “levers of power we don’t even have anymore” and the protection has worn thin. In order to “get donors energized”, the conservative message of free market principles must prevail. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Andersen is a news producer and reporter for HUMAN EVENTS. She previously interned for The Washington Examiner newspaper. She has appeared on MSNBC live and been a guest on the Lars Larson radio show. She wrote for the Indiana Daily Student, Indiana University's daily newspaper. E-mail her at eandersen@eaglepub.com. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- humanevents.com

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (26545)	1/11/2010 9:41:29 AM
From: Peter Dierks	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Reid Is Under Fire for 2008 Remarks JANUARY 11, 2010. By DEBORAH SOLOMON WASHINGTON -- Republicans called on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to resign his leadership post over remarks he made in 2008 about then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, adding to the Nevada Democrat's political troubles. Mr. Reid, who supported Mr. Obama's candidacy, said in private remarks during the campaign that the country was ready for a "light-skinned" African-American president with "no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." The remarks are recounted in a new book, "Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime." A spokesman for Mr. Reid said the senator wouldn't resign his leadership post. "He has no intention of stepping down," Jim Manley said. "Unlike others who advocate moving our nation backwards and viewing this moment for political gain, he's working...to move our country forward." The controversy comes at a critical moment for Mr. Reid, who is facing an uphill battle for re-election this year and is trying to shepherd Mr. Obama's health-care overhaul through the Senate. In a refrain echoed by other Republicans, party chairman Michael Steele said Mr. Reid should be held to the same standard as former Republican Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. Mr. Lott was forced to resign his leadership post in 2002 after suggesting the nation would have been better off had it embraced the segregationist policies of presidential candidate Strom Thurmond more than a half century ago. "There's a big double standard here," Mr. Steele said on NBC's "Meet the Press." Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl said on "Fox News Sunday" that if it was proper for Mr. Lott to resign, then Mr. Reid ought to do the same. Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Mr. Reid should "do the right thing...and step down as majority leader." In a statement Saturday, Mr. Reid said, "I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans, for my improper comments." Democrats have rallied around Mr. Reid. Mr. Obama issued a statement Saturday saying Mr. Reid had apologized to him. "As far as I'm concerned, the book is closed," Mr. Obama said. Political observers said Mr. Reid's comments weren't likely to affect his agenda in the Senate but could become an issue in his re-election campaign. "Given that the president has said that the book is closed and it would appear that Democrats are rallying around Reid, it probably won't be the distraction Republicans would like it to be," Jennifer Duffy, senior editor of the Cook Political Report, said in an email. "Game Change," the book by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, also contends that Hillary Clinton, Mr. Obama's rival for the Democratic nomination, initially turned down his offer to become secretary of state due to concerns about her husband, former President Bill Clinton. Mr. Heilemann, in a "60 Minutes" interview, said that upon being offered the job, Ms. Clinton told Mr. Obama, "You know, there's one last thing that's a problem, which is my husband. You've seen what this is like. It will be a circus if I take this job. There will be a new controversy every day that you'll have to deal with." Mr. Heilemann said Mr. Obama told Ms. Clinton: "I understand. But I want you so badly that I'm willing to live with your husband." A spokesman for Ms. Clinton declined to comment. Write to Deborah Solomon at deborah.solomon@wsj.com online.wsj.com