Takeover continues in financial sector, oil industry, free speech, immigration; Media ignores support for Israel

Sorry so long between posts, my friends. Learning the capabilities of Facebook is taking me some time, not mention the fact that it’s ADDICTING! 1) 87 Senators Sign Letter Urging Obama's Support of Israel, Media Mostly Mum On Monday, 87 Senators signed a letter to President Obama affirming their support for Israel while urging his. This comes in response to last month's highly-publicized flotilla incident in the Mediterranean Sea and the United Nations predictable anti-Israel reaction. A similar letter has been circulated in the House that has apparently garnered 307 signatures. Despite the overwhelming bipartisan outcry -- something rather rare in Washington these days to be sure -- very few American media outlets bothered to report the news. Led by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) - and signed by 85 other members of the upper chamber - the letter argues that Israel's blockade of Gaza was both legal and necessary, and that Israeli commandos were acting in self-defense when they landed on the ship. "[V]ideo footage shows that the Israeli commandos who arrived on the sixth ship, which was owned by the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation (the IHH), were brutally attacked with iron rods, knives, and broken glass," the senators wrote. "They were forced to respond to that attack and we regret the loss of life that resulted," the letter adds. The bipartisan group of lawmakers urged Obama to oppose a resolution in the United Nations critical of Israel. See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/06/24/87-senators-sign-letter-urging-obamas-support-israel-media-mostly-mum 2) DISCLOSE Act dead in the Senate? The phrase most hated by Lefties in the Age of Obama is: Dead in the Senate. And it appears that the flagrantly anti-free speech DISCLOSE Act may suffer a similar fate. From The Hill. Despite a hard-fought victory in the House, supporters of the Democratic campaign finance bill are now confronting a more dispiriting reality: the dwindling chances the legislation will affect the fall elections. Advocates of the Disclose Act have long pointed to July 4 as a deadline for enacting the law so that its provisions could be implemented and enforceable during the hotly-contested midterm congressional campaign. But with the Senate bogged down in fights over tax legislation, a Supreme Court nomination and energy proposals, that marker will almost surely pass without action on campaign finance. . . . The political lift will be daunting. It requires the famously deliberative Senate to act faster than the House, typically the speedier of the two chambers. In a letter to House leaders last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and sponsoring Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) committed “to working tirelessly for Senate consideration of the House-passed bill so it can be signed by the president in time to take effect for the 2010 elections (which is really what this is all about - comment and emphasis mine).” Advocates say Reid wants to bypass the committee process and bring the bill directly to the floor in the hopes of quicker passage. But the required 60 votes have yet to materialize. Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) have criticized exemptions inserted to secure House passage, and key Republican swing votes, Sens. Scott Brown (Mass.) and Olympia Snowe (Maine), have registered their disapproval. Brown said it would be “inappropriate” to rush the legislation into law during an election season. The Citizen’s United case held that Congress had violated corporations’ First Amendment free speech rights with the campaign finance laws. The Democrats, not content with allowing Americans to advocate against them, want to muzzle their political opponents with the DISCLOSE Act (emphasis mine). …House Minority Leader John Boehner said in a statement, “This bill would muzzle small businesses but protect labor unions…This is a backroom deal to shred our Constitution for raw, ugly, partisan gain.” See: http://trueslant.com/williamdupray/2010/06/26/disclose-act-dead-in-the-senate/ 2a) DISCLOSE Act Passes The House — Senate Passage Uncertain The controversial bill threatens to restrict campaign contributions from some of our most important political players. It has received widespread notice from Republicans after the National Rifle Association negotiated an exemption on the basis that they were too important to have their political donations restricted. In other words, the Second Amendment is critical, but the First Amendment — well, whatever (emphasis mine). It's also an audacious move from Congress in the wake of the Citizens United decision. It seems that Democrats can't accept the jurisdiction of the United States courts, and have to do everything in their power to circumvent that authority. Fortunately, this bill, like so many others, will likely die in the Senate. See: http://srnnews.townhall.com/newsbriefs/g/d3bafdba-a78a-49f2-bff9-980409b3420a 3) Obama accused of defying court on drilling ban Drilling companies and others who won an order from a federal judge Tuesday lifting the Obama Administration's moratorium on deepwater oil drilling (because it was unconstitutional! - comment mine) are accusing the administration of defying the court's order by announcing plans to reimpose the moratorium. WHAT?!?!? Moratorium opponents filed papers in a New Orleans federal court Wednesday afternoon requesting an emergency hearing before Judge Martin Feldman, who entered the order blocking the moratorium. Since that time, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar indicated both in a statement and Congressional testimony that he plans to re-impose the moratorium soon based on information that wasn't fully developed when the six-month drilling ban was imposed in late May. On Wednesday evening, the government appealed Feldman's order and formally asked him to stay the order pending that appeal. The government also said that the motion to enforce the court's order was "unwarranted and should be denied," but that officials would abide by the order until it was stayed or reversed. "Of course, until a further order of this Court or the Court of Appeals granting relief from this Court’s Preliminary Injunction Order, Defendants will comply with the Court’s Order," a government brief said. What this means is that the Obama administration is intimidating judges. See: http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0610/Obama_accused_of_defying_court_on_drilling_ban.html 3a) RUSH’s comments on the above: Now, The Politico, it's hard to tell here when you read this story, are they surprised? "Obama Accused of Defying Court on Drilling Ban." This is Josh Gerstein at his blog at Politico. They're acting a little bit surprised. I guess maybe they're surprised somebody would accuse Obama of defying it, but why? That's what dictators do. Look, this administration and the rule of law are in direct conflict with one another (emphasis mine). Whether you want to call it a slush fund or a shakedown, escrow money or whatever, the Obama administration cannot constitutionally do what they did demanding $20 billion from BP. The federal government cannot just seize somebody's property for nothing. And that's what happened, however it happened, shakedown, escrow, deal under the table, it's unconstitutional. So the fact that Obama would defy a court, that shouldn't surprise anybody. It's who the man is. In fact, the real question is how long is it going to take for Obama to either get rid of the judge or summon him to the Oval Office. If it quacks like a duck… See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_062410/content/01125104.guest.html 3b) Crime Inc.: George Soros owns $900 million of Petrobas, stands to benefit from moratorium on drilling (headline mine) …In a completely unrelated story, Soros has purchased $900 million of Petrobras. That's P E T R O B R A S, Petrobras. Then we have the BP oil spill as the next stop on this circle of life. Tony Podesta is the PR person for BP oil. …GLENN: There are, already three — sorry, 35 oil rigs out there that the equipment now is sitting idle and there are bids from other countries on those oil rigs. They are not going to sit there idle. They are going to be leased to somebody. The oil industry is saying, guys, this is going to kill us. Listen to that. The oil industry is saying, this is going to kill us to suspend all drilling. Why? Because the oil rigs are not going to — they are not going to be there. They are going to be — they are going to be leased some place else. Also, the most dangerous time to an oil rig is when you are shutting it down. That's the danger point. So we're going to shut down all oil rigs in the water, lose all that money and then lose possibly a lot of the oil rigs. We won't get them back. That was a suggestion from the Center For American Progress. Obama said we have to do that because 1500 meters of water is too deep to drill in. In a completely unrelated story, Petrobras has announced that they are going to do deepwater drilling at 2,777 meters, almost twice the distance under the surface of the water as Deep Horizons in the Gulf of Mexico. Why did you hear Petrobras? Oh, yeah, that's right. It's over on the other side of the blackboard. George Soros has $900 million in Petrobras stock. It is his number one investment. Remember, he's the guy who started Center For American Progress that is currently making the policy. Obama suspends drilling because 1500 feet is too dangerous. Petrobras says that they are going to make a — they are going to drill for oil at 2700 feet, and Obama decides to make a loan for $2 billion to Petrobras for this particular drill site. Now, why would we give up our drilling equipment? Why would we say it's too dangerous in 1500 meters and then make a $2 billion loan to Petrobras, $2 billion so they can drill 2777 meters, almost twice the distance. Well, it's good news if you are a shareholder for Petrobras because now you can go and drill. You have the equipment, you have the money and you have the backing of the United oh, wait a minute. That's right. George Soros, his major investment is in... Petrobras. It is Crime, Inc. The circle of corruption. See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/42150/ 3c) National Review: Obama's Ineffective Thuggery …Then there is Obama's decision to impose a six-month moratorium on deepwater oil drilling in the gulf. This penalizes companies with better safety records than BP's and will result in many advanced drilling rigs being sent to offshore oil fields abroad. The justification offered was an Interior Department report supposedly "peer reviewed" by "experts identified by the National Academy of Engineering." But it turns out the drafts the experts saw didn't include any recommendation for a moratorium. Eight of the cited experts have said they oppose the moratorium as more economically devastating than the oil spill and counterproductive to safety (emphasis mine). This was blatant dishonesty by the administration, on an Orwellian scale. And it's dishonesty in defense of a policy that has all the earmarks of mindless panic, that penalizes firms and individuals guilty of no wrongdoing, and that will worsen rather than improve our energy situation. Ineffective thuggery. See: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127981317 4) Federal regs set to restrain Wall Street risk WASHINGTON – Congressional negotiators struck a deal Friday on the toughest financial regulations since the Great Depression, aiming to rein in Wall Street excess and tighten rules on everything from simple debit card swipes to the most complex securities. Translation: The Obama administration is continuing it’s takeover of the financial industry and trying to make it sound like it‘s going to help America. The legislation creates a new federal agency to police consumer lending, set up a warning system for financial risks, force failing firms to liquidate and map new rules for instruments that have been largely uncontrolled. Like I said…see previous comment. …The legislation was not without its critics. Republicans complained that it ignored their efforts to impose tighter restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants who have benefited from huge federal bailouts and whose questionable lending helped trigger the housing and economic meltdowns. Exactly. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100625/ap_on_bi_ge/us_financial_overhaul 4a) Barney Frank: No such thing as too much government GLENN: We have Barney Frank, Barney Frank saying that there's just no such thing as too much regulation. I'm sorry. King George, is that you? That's fantastic. There's no such thing as too much regulation. BARNEY FRANK: I think that the general fear that the ranking member and others think that we're going to over regulate on behalf of consumers is a fantasy unrelated to any experience. The Federal Government has never done that. GLENN: Stop, stop, stop! That the government could over regulate is ‑‑ what did he say? PAT: A fantasy beyond any human experience. GLENN: Mao, Stalin, Hitler. I mean, I can't believe this. If you want to talk about a fantasy beyond any human experience, it's Barney Frank. I mean, this guy is incredible to me. By the way, they're putting in this financial regulation that Fannie and Freddie are going to be financial institutions that if they fail, the private sector banks are required to unwind them. Excuse me? If they fail? It's only a matter of time until they fail. I know that's a Barney Frank fantasy. All of Barney Frank's fantasies seem to be your nightmare. If they fail? They will fail and then every bank in America will be required to unwind them. See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/42285/ 5) House Dems prepare alternative to budget that would avoid deficit vote House Democrats are readying an alternative budget measure that would set next year’s spending levels without requiring a vote on deficits. House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-S.C.) said the alternative would be the “functional equivalent” of a full-fledged budget. But because it won't be a traditional budget resolution, it will be silent on future deficits, which are expected to average nearly $1 trillion for the next decade. Democrats have expressed concern about voting for a document showing lots of red ink in an election year. So while they are reigning the rest of the financial industry in, they continue to spend without consequence. Fantastic. See: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/104373-house-dems-prep-budget-alternative-that-would-avoid-deficit-vote 6) Senator John Kyl, Arizona, reports Obama doesn’t want to secure the border because then there will be no reason for immigration reform (headline mine) KYL: I met with the president in the Oval Office, just the two of us. I kicked the rest of the people out. I asked them if they would leave. Sorry. (Laughter). And here's what the president said. The problem is, he said, if we secure the border, then you all won't have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform. In other words, they are pulling it - PAT: There it is. KYL: They don't want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform. See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/42146/ 6a) Senators Challenge Pres. Obama on Rumors of Amnesty Through Executive Actions Several Senators have learned of a possible plan by the Obama Administration that would provide a mass Amnesty for the nation's 11-18 million illegal aliens. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), eight Senators addressed a letter to the President asking for answers to questions about a plan that would allow DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to provide an amnesty if they can't secure enough votes for a bill in the Senate. The letter that was sent to Pres. Obama earlier today asks the President for clarification on the use of deferred action or parole for illegal aliens. The executive actions are typically used in special cases and are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but if 60 votes can't be secured in the Senate to pass a mass Amnesty, the Administration may use the discretionary actions as an alternative. Here is the text of the letter signed by Sens. Grassley, Hatch (R-Utah), Vitter (R-La.), Bunning (R-Ky.), Chambliss (R-Ga.), Isakson (R-Ga.), Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Cochran (R-Miss.). Dear President Obama: We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis. While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States… See: http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/june-21-2010/senators-challenge-pres-obama-rumors-executive-order-amnesty.html 6b) White House Picks Critic of Local Immigration Enforcement for Key Role at ICE The Obama administration has tapped an outspoken critic of immigration enforcement on the local level to oversee and promote partnerships between federal and local officials on the issue. Harold Hurtt, a former police chief in Houston and Phoenix, has been hired as the director for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Office of State and Local Coordination. Starting July 6, Hurtt will supervise outreach and communication between ICE, local law enforcement agencies, tribal leaders and representatives from non-governmental organizations. "Chief Hurtt is a respected member of the law enforcement community and understands the concerns of local law enforcement leaders," said John Morton, the Homeland Security assistant secretary for ICE. "His experience and skills will be an invaluable asset to the ICEs outreach and coordination efforts." But as a police chief, Hurtt was a supporter of "sanctuary city" policies, by which illegal immigrants who don't commit crimes can live without fear of exposure or detainment because police don't check for immigration papers. See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/24/obama-administration-picks-critic-immigration-enforcement-key-role-ice 7) Blagojevich Aide: President Obama Knew of Plot The plot thickens in Chicago. The Chicago Sun-Times reports: A top aide to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he believed Barack Obama knew of Blagojevich's plot to win himself a presidential Cabinet post in exchange for appointing Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate. John Harris, Blagojevich's former chief of staff, testified Wednesday in the former governor's corruption trial that three days after the Nov. 4, 2008, presidential election, the ex-governor told Harris he felt confident Obama knew he wanted to swap perks. "The president understands that the governor would be willing to make the appointment of Valerie Jarrett as long as he gets what he's asked for. . . . The governor gets the Cabinet appointment he's asked for," Harris said, explaining a recorded call. Harris said Blagojevich came away believing Obama knew what he wanted after having a conversation with a local union representative, who in turn spoke with labor leader Tom Balanoff, with whom Blagojevich met to discuss a Jarrett appointment. Jarrett, now a White House adviser, was seeking the appointment to Obama's Senate seat. See: http://srnnews.townhall.com/newsbriefs/g/95b9e592-c943-403b-a5ad-99d6e09e3045 8) Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says A military source close to Gen. David Petraeus told Fox News that one of the first things the general will do when he takes over in Afghanistan is to modify the rules of engagement to make it easier for U.S. troops to engage in combat with the enemy, though a Petraeus spokesman pushed back on the claim. Finally. Someone with some sense. See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/25/petraeus-modify-afghanistan-rules-engagement-source-says/ 8a) MoveOn.org Removes 'General Betray Us' Ad From Website In a classic example of liberal hypocrisy, the far-left leaning, George Soros-funded group MoveOn.org has removed its controversial "General Betray Us" ad from its website. For those that have forgotten, shortly after General David Petraeus issued his report to Congress in September 2007 concerning the condition of the war in Iraq and the success of that March's troop surge, MoveOn placed a full-page ad in the New York Times with the headline, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" This created quite a firestorm with media outlets on both sides of the aisle circling the wagons to either defend or berate both the Times and MoveOn. Now that President Obama has appointed Petraeus to replace the outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the war effort in Afghanistan, the folks on the far-left that castigated Petraeus when he worked for George W. Bush have to sing a different tune. With that in mind, the ad, which has been at MoveOn's website for years, was unceremoniously removed on Wednesday… See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/06/24/moveon-org-removes-general-betray-us-ad-website 9) Big Sis Napolitano Issues New Language Rules RUSH: Also, the director of Homeland Security, Big Sis Janet Napolitano has issued a statement. Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano, also known as Big Sis, issued a statement this morning regarding America's two most pressing issues: the Gulf oil spill and President Obama's devotion to golf. Secretary Napolitano, speaking to labor leaders, declared that from this day forward no one in the Obama administration or those seeking favors or mercy from the administration shall use the phrase Gulf oil spill. It will now be referred to as the BP-caused disaster. Official language requirements used inside the administration from Janet Napolitano, no longer the Gulf oil spill, it is the BP-caused disaster. You think I'm kidding? Along those same lines, it can no longer be said by administration officials, the press office, or the media that the president went to play golf. The president no longer plays golf. The president is clearing his mind. We appreciate your cooperation. We'll take note of those that do not do as instructed. So it's no longer the Gulf oil spill, it's the BP-caused disaster. He doesn't play golf anymore, he clears his mind. See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_062410/content/01125104.guest.html 10) Times Square car bomber details his chilling plot NEW YORK – Admitted terrorist Faisal Shahzad was so eager to tell how he plotted to kill Americans in Times Square, he went to court with a prepared statement. U.S. District Judge Miriam Cedarbaum refused to hear him read it Monday, instead challenging the Pakistan-born American citizen to just say "what happened." In an unapologetic, matter-of-fact courtroom colloquy that followed, Shahzad offered chilling details about how he trained with the Pakistani Taliban to build bombs, then returned to the U.S. to launch an attack that would avenge attacks on Muslims by U.S. forces overseas. "One has to understand where I'm coming from," he said in an unusual departure from tightly scripted guilty pleas, with his defense attorney and prosecutors sitting in silence in federal court in Manhattan. "I consider myself ... a Muslim soldier." …"I want to plead guilty, and I'm going to plead guilty 100 times over," he said. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100622/ap_on_re_us/us_times_square_car_bomb