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: sandintoes who wrote (33550)	3/3/2009 9:17:53 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Steele's Wrong on Rush, Say Past Rivals For RNC Chair by John Gizzi 03/02/2009 Two of Michael Steele’s former rivals in the race for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee voiced sharp disagreement with the RNC chairman’s recent characterization of Rush Limbaugh’s desire for President Obama’s liberal agenda to fail as “ugly” and “incendiary.” In exclusive interviews with HUMAN EVENTS yesterday, South Carolina State GOP Chairman Katon Dawson and former Secretary of State Ken Blackwell weighed in strongly on the side of radioland’s Limbaugh. “There are 13.5 million reasons why I wouldn’t kick an 800-pound conservative gorilla in the knee,” said Dawson, referring to the national listening audience of Limbaugh’s syndicated radio program, “Rush speaks for millions of conservatives and the liberal banter is against him 100%. There isn’t a whole lot of disagreement with him among conservatives.” After six ballots and four other candidates in the race, Dawson lost the chairmanship to Steele by a vote of 91-to-77 at the RNC winter meeting in January. When I spoke to him yesterday, the South Carolina warned that a time when the Republican Party is “financially fragile,” its party leaders should “think a lilttle more about who they are going to pick fights with.” Blackwell, a longtime conservative activist and the ’08 Republican nominee for governor of Ohio, withdrew from the RNC chair’s race on the fourth ballot and endorsed Steele—an action many pundits and pols say was pivotal to Steele’s eventual win over Dawson. But Blackwell was clearly not pleased with what the candidate he finally supported was saying about Limbaugh. In his words, “Chairman Steele’s charges of Rush Limbaugh’s show as ‘ugly’ and otherwise divisive were unfortunate and wrong. “Rush Limbaugh is a conservative leader with an amazing capacity to inspire and energize our conservative base. That’s exactly what he was doing Saturday in his address to CPAC [the Conservative Political Action Conference].” Blackwell (whom I have known since he became a Republican while a Cincinnati city councilman in the early 1980’s) reminded me that he has “been on the frontlines of the conservative movement for thirty years and I am well aware of the contributions Rush Limbaugh has made to the cause of conservatism.” Does this mean, I ask, if he regrets his decision to throw his support to Steele at the RNC election? “No, not at all,” the Ohio man replied, “I honestly engage Republicans and conservatives in honest conversation. Just as I articulated my reason for my endorsement of Michael as chairman of the party, I will say to anyone and everyone who cares to listen that his words about Rush Limbaugh are unfortunate and wrong.” Blackwell went on to good-naturedly challenge me to “ask [former Secretary of Education] Bill Bennett and [Fox News TV and radio personality] Sean Hannity what they think of Michael Steele’s remarks on Rush.” Both Bennett and Hannity, he reminded me, “praised Michael and strongly endorsed him for chairman.” Another commentator on the Limbaugh-Steele controversy was a friend of both, Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder of Missouri. Kinder grew up in Cape Girardeau with Limbaugh and their families have been close friends for four generations. He was also elected lieutenant governor of his state two years after Steele won the same office in Maryland and the two worked closely together in the Republican Lieutenant Governors Association. “As a friend of both Michael and Rush, I certainly wish Michael well in his stewardship of the RNC,” Kinder told me, “But he needs to be a little more careful when the drive-by media tempts him to broadcast their themes.” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Gizzi is Political Editor of HUMAN EVENTS. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- humanevents.com

To: sandintoes who wrote (33550)	3/13/2009 1:19:20 AM
From: Peter Dierks	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Nancy Pelosi: The Jennifer Lopez of congressional travelers By Michelle Malkin • March 11, 2009 10:39 AM My syndicated column today takes a close look at the documents obtained by the invaluable Judicial Watch pertaining to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s military travel demands. There were some real gems buried in the FOIA records release. I zeroed in on Pelosi’s diva request in December 2008 to have the military reposition a military jet from San Francisco Airport to Travis Air Force base so she wouldn’t have to drive an hour and half. Reading through the e-mail exchanges between DoD officials and Pelosi’s staff, you can’t help but feel very, very sorry for the men and women in uniform who have to put up with this woman — and even sorrier for all of us taxpayers who are footing her carbon footprint-expanding bills. * Queen Nancy: Fly as I say, not as I fly by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2009 Queen Nancy: Fly as I say, not as I fly Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is the Jennifer Lopez of congressional travel – fickle, demanding, and notoriously insensitive to the time, costs, and energy needed to accommodate her endless demands. On Tuesday, the indispensable government watchdog Judicial Watch released a trove of public records through the Freedom of Information Act on Pelosi’s travel arrangements with the U.S. military. As Speaker of the House, Pelosi is entitled to a reasonable level of military protection and transport. But it’s the size of the planes, the frequency of requests and last-minute cancellations, and the political nature of many of her trips that scream out for accountability. And, of course, it’s the double-barreled hypocrisy. There’s the eco-hypocrisy of the Democrat leader who wags her finger at the rest of us for our too-big carbon footprints and crusades for massive taxes and regulation to reduce global warming. Then there’s the Bay Area hypocrisy of the woman who represents one of the most anti-military areas of the country soaking up military resources to shuttle her (and her many family members) across the country almost every weekend. Remember: Pelosi’s San Francisco is notorious for banning the Marines’ Silent Drill Platoon from filming a recruitment commercial on its streets; killing the JROTC program in the public schools; blocking the retired battleship U.S.S. Iowa from docking in its waters; and attacking the Navy’s Blue Angels – which left-wing activists have tried to banish from northern California skies for the past two years. Apparently, those anti-war protesters have no problem with evil military jets currying Pelosi and her massive entourages to the funerals of the late Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Charlie Norwood; foreign junkets to Rome; and politicized stops to Iowa flood sites to bash the Bush administration. One exasperated Department of Defense official, besieged with itinerary changes and shuttle requests back and forth between San Francisco Airport to Andrews Air Force Base for Pelosi, her daughter, son-in-law, and grandchild, wrote in an e-mail: “They have a history of canceling many of their past requests. Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi's team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?…[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case’…” Another official pointed out the “hidden costs” associated with the speaker’s last minute changes and cancellations. “We have…folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets etc.” Upset that a specific type of aircraft was not available to her boss, a Pelosi staffer carped to the DoD coordinators: “This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset [s]peaker.” Three months ago, turmoil erupted over Queen Nancy’s demand for the military to reposition her plane to fly out of Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, Calif., closer to where she had “business,” instead of San Francisco Airport/SFO (1.5 hours away). A special air missions official wrote: “We have never done this in the past. The deal is…that the Speaker shuttle is from DC to SFO and back. We will not reposition. We do not reposition for convenience even for the SECDEF. It is not [too] far of a drive from Travis to SFO. Did the escort suggest to the Speaker that this is ok? If so, I hope you guys correct them immediately. If you agree with me that I am correct, then you need to stay strong and present the facts to the Speaker’s office.” Another official stated bluntly: “We can’t reposition the airplane such a short distance. It is not a judicial use of the asset. It is too expensive to operate the jet when there is truly no need to do so.” A beleaguered colleague responded: “[Y]ou know I understand and feel with you…but, this is a battle we are bound to lose if we tell the speaker office. In the end, this is what will happen…I wish that I could say this is a one-time request, but we know it will probably happen again in the future.” In the end, the military won that battle. But a few days later, Pelosi was back with a new demand: that her military plane taking her from DC to San Francisco make a stop in New Jersey to bring her and three Democrats to an “innovation Forum” at Princeton University involving 21 participants and no audience. A Gulfstream jet was secured for the important “official business.” No word on whether Pelosi required vanilla-scented candles, Evian water, and fresh white lilies aboard the flight. But rest assured: Air Diva traveled in style, courtesy of your tax dollars and the forbearance of the U.S. military. * Posted in: Nancy Pelosi michellemalkin.com

To: sandintoes who wrote (33550)	3/30/2009 3:36:23 PM
From: Peter Dierks	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Pelosi's Library Quarantine The CPSC is left cleaning up the House Speaker's messy child-safety law. MARCH 30, 2009 It looks like "Jumanji" in local libraries these days, after the classic children's book about chaos unleashed by the failure to heed warnings. In February, an overzealous law governing lead in products resulted in toys going from store shelves to the trash heap. Now, confusion over how the rules affect children's books has led some libraries to rope off kids' sections. Last summer, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) interpreted the 2008 law to include children's books, though exactly what that means is anyone's guess. CPSC spokesman Scott Wolfson told the Associated Press that until the agency can give clearer guidance, especially on books published before 1986, public and school libraries "should take steps to ensure that the children aren't accessing those books." The agency hurried to say it didn't mean to tell libraries to toss the books, but that it is "investigating" whether there are unsafe lead levels. Democrats in Congress have leapt to criticize acting CPSC Chairman Nancy Nord, in hopes President Obama will replace her. But the real culprit here isn't the CPSC, which is overwhelmed with requests from manufacturers trying to make sense of the chaos that Congress created. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman has dismissed efforts to improve the law, claiming the real problem is that "misinformation has spread" about the impact on businesses. Older books pose hardly any danger, according to safety experts at the Centers for Disease Control. The problem is the ambiguity in a law that leaves businesses facing lawsuits if they can't prove their products are safe. In addition to libraries, thrift stores, church bazaars and small batch toymakers are also unclear what they can and can not sell. Makers of bicycles and ATVs have pulled youth models -- designed to increase safety -- off the showroom floor at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Nancy Pelosi boasted last summer that the toy safety law would mean products weren't merely made differently in the future but would be removed from the shelves today. That's the real source of this mayhem, as she was amply warned at the time by Democrat John Dingell, among others. Ms. Pelosi prevailed, and now the harm to thousands of businesses, charities and even public libraries is manifest. Since the House Speaker won't admit a mistake and fix the law, the CPSC must do what it can to prevent more damage to the already challenging economy. online.wsj.com

To: sandintoes who wrote (33550)	4/2/2009 10:59:48 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Is This the End of Capitalism? Hardly, but it's a great excuse for the antiglobalization crowd. By DANIEL HENNINGER APRIL 2, 2009 Heads of state, perplexed finance ministers, inflated retinues and journalists from 20 nations arrived in London yesterday to address "the greatest financial crisis since the Depression." By 4 p.m. London time today they will hold a press conference and go home. Is there any chance we can adopt this system for Congress? Possibly the G-20 kept it short to minimize the potential ruin visited on London by the professional street fighters fronting the anti-capitalism mobs on global TV screens. In truth, the G-20's goal was accomplished before the first plane landed. The mere announcement of the meeting brought forth a torrent of pent-up "global" agendas. The German magazine Spiegel crammed all of them into one headline: "Can the G-20 Save the World?" "Who is going to save capitalism?" the Germans asked. Many, it appears, have been waiting for their 15 minutes to offer the answer. China wants a new global currency to replace the inflatable dollar. The managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has said the world financial system needs an "early warning system," which one guesses the rocket scientists at the IMF would provide. France's Nicolas Sarkozy wants a global "financial regulator." On Sunday the New York Times raised its hand to announce the crisis "has led to a fundamental rethinking of the American way as a model for the rest of the world." Here's my two cents worth: Beware of real-estate salesmen. The housing bubble that floated into view in 2007 is turning into the blob that ate the world. Real-estate mortgages and their derivative securities are a significant problem. That discrete problem, however, has been pumped up to an historic "crisis of capitalism." Capitalism didn't tank the U.S. economy. Overbuilt housing did. Overbuilt housing tanked the economies of the U.K. and Ireland and Spain. If little else, we've learned that artificially cheap housing sets loose limitless moral hazard. Virtually every white-shoe financial institution in the world, plus the Russians, stuffed their balance sheets with securities carved out of the dreams of real-estate developers. This plunge had less to do with capitalism than with psychosis, defined in textbooks as "a mental illness that markedly interferes with a person's capacity to meet life's everyday demands." For sane bankers that includes due diligence and risk management. In a normal environment, the problems revealed by the crisis in mortgage finance would produce fixes relevant to the problem, such as resetting the ratios of assets to capital for banks and hedge funds, or telling the gnomes of finance to rethink mark-to-market and the uptick rule. More energetic reformers might consider Gary Becker's suggestion that as financial institutions expand in size, their capital requirements tighten, so that compulsive eaters like Citigroup can fit inside their capital base. Nothing's normal about now, however. After the full folly of the mortgage plunge became public in September 2008, the broad credit markets locked up, stock indexes fell and the world's economies spiraled into a severe recession. The loss of savings and jobs has been brutal. Someone has to take the fall for this, and it had to be more than the boys in mortgage-backed securities. Two signal events in history are shaping the politics of the current economic crisis: the Great Depression and the Reagan presidency (and in Europe, Thatcherism). The Depression put in motion an historic tension between public and private sectors over who sets a nation's course. After 50 years of public dominance, Reagan's presidency tipped the scales back toward private enterprise. The economic life of the ensuing 35 years became "the American model." Every waking hour of this economically liberal era, the losing side has wanted to tip the balance back toward public-sector power. The opportunity to achieve that goal finally arrived -- with the great recession of 2009. Thus rather than fixing just what the mortgage crisis broke, the G-20 suddenly became a meditation on the "future of capitalism." No surprise that the French and Germans, who for years have wanted to slow such American fast runners as Microsoft and Intel, came to London seeking ponderous new bureaucracies euphemized as a "new global financial architecture." It's been a long time since anyone thought to elevate the IMF as an economic driver. Meanwhile, the new U.S. president is attempting to replace the American model of some three decades with the Obama model, which promises to grow the U.S.'s $14 trillion GDP (something else he "inherited") with government investments in national health insurance and renewable energy technologies. I'm thinking that the two happiest G-men in London are Hu Jintao of China and Lula da Silva of Brazil. Their game is catching up with the West. It's a lot easier to play ball in the G-20 league if in the future the competition will be running in slow motion. Write to henninger@wsj.com online.wsj.com