About That Democratic Sit-In

There are a few background things all of us need to remember about the Democratic sit-in in the House of Representatives.

The Hill posted an article today about the fund raising efforts the Democrats are relating to the sit in.

The article reports:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) sent a brief email shortly after the sit-in crossed into Thursday, signed by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.)

“This is an historically important moment! John Lewis has been leading a sit-in on the House floor for 11 long hours now. We’re fighting to prevent gun violence,” the email reads. “The Republicans refuse to lift a finger. It’s shameful. I need your help to defeat them once and for all.”
 
The email asks for 6,000 donations and gives several options to donate amounts between $1 and $250. 
 
It was at least the sixth such email from the DCCC as the sit-in gained steam. Several were signed by Lewis, a civil rights leader and Georgia representative who has lead many of the demonstrations on the House floor. 

As usual, follow the money. But wait! There’s more!

The Democrats are complaining about the Republican filibuster of the two anti-Second Amendment gun bills the Democrats wanted to pass. What about the Democratic filibuster of the two common-sense gun bills the Republicans wanted to pass? (further details here) This is political theater aimed at the uninformed voter. Don’t be that uninformed voter.

 

This Really Should Not Be A Campaign Issue

Yesterday The Hill posted an article about Democrat campaign ads claiming that the Republicans cut funds to the Center for Disease Control and that is the reason we are not successfully fighting Ebola.

The article reports:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) launched an ad campaign on Monday blaming Republicans for cutting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC)  budget to fight diseases like Ebola.

“Republicans voted to cut CDC’s budget to fight Ebola,” the paid online ads state, citing a 2011 budget vote that included cuts to the agency’s spending. At the same time, the ads point to the most recent House GOP budget resolution and argue that “Republicans protect tax breaks for special interests.”

That is a rather serious charge. Thankfully, it is not true.

On Sunday, Politico posted an article by Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal that explained that the CDC budget has not been cut–the problem is how the money going to the CDC has been spent.

The article at Politico explains:

Unfortunately, however, many of those funds have been diverted away from programs that can fight infectious diseases, and toward programs far afield from the CDC’s original purpose.

Consider the Prevention and Public Health Fund, a new series of annual mandatory appropriations created by Obamacare. Over the past five years, the CDC has received just under $3 billion in transfers from the fund. Yet only 6 percent—$180 million—of that $3 billion went toward building epidemiology and laboratory capacity. Especially given the agency’s postwar roots as the Communicable Disease Center, one would think that “detecting and responding to infectious diseases and other public health threats” warrants a larger funding commitment.

Instead, the Obama administration has focused the CDC on other priorities. While protecting Americans from infectious diseases received only $180 million from the Prevention Fund, the community transformation grant program received nearly three times as much money—$517.3 million over the same five-year period.

So where is the money going? The community transformation program pays for such things as “increasing access to healthy foods by supporting local farmers and developing neighborhood grocery stores,” or “promoting improvements in sidewalks and street lighting to make it safe and easy for people to walk and ride bikes.” So the problem is not how much money the CDC received–it has to do with how the money was spent. There is nothing wrong with helping communities, but it is not wise to do it at the expense of doing research on infectious diseases–the actual mission of the CDC.

Governor Jindal reminds us what the duties of our government are:

Our Constitution states that the federal government “shall protect each of [the States] against Invasion”—a statement that should apply as much to infectious disease as to foreign powers. So when that same government prioritizes funding for jungle gyms and bike paths over steps to protect our nation from possible pandemics, citizens have every right to question the decisions that got us to this point.

We need to get back to following the U. S. Constitution–it works very well when it is followed.

 

The Timeline On The IRS Scandal

On Thursday Kimberley Strassel posted an article at the Wall Street Journal detailing the evolution of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) scandal. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp has sent a letter to the Justice Department requesting a criminal probe of Lois Lerner.

Ms. Strassel points out that Lois Lerner may have felt justified to target conservative groups based on the rhetoric of leader Democrats rather than direct orders from the White House.

The article lists what may be some of the root causes of the IRS attacks:

As the illuminating timeline accompanying the Camp letter shows, Ms. Lerner’s focus on shutting down Crossroads GPS came only after Obama adviser David Axelrod listed Crossroads among “front groups for foreign-controlled companies”; only after Senate Democrats Dick Durbin, Carl Levin, Chuck Schumer and others demanded the IRS investigate Crossroads; only after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched a website to “expose donors” of Crossroads; and only after Obama’s campaign lawyer, Bob Bauer, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission about Crossroads.

The article goes through a timeline and details various attacks on conservative groups. It also notes the difficulty various investigative committees had in getting the information they requested in the investigation.

The article concludes:

In 2012, both the IRS and Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings were targeting the group True the Vote. We now have email showing contact between a Cummings staffer and the IRS over that organization. How much more contact was there? It’s one thing to write a public letter calling on a regulator to act. It’s another to haul the regulator in front of your committee, or have your staff correspond with or pressure said regulator, with regard to ongoing actions. That’s a no-no.

The final merit of Mr. Camp’s letter is that he’s called out Justice and Democrats. Mr. Camp was careful in laying out the ways Ms. Lerner may have broken the law, with powerful details. Democrats can’t refute the facts, so instead they are howling about all manner of trivia—the release of names, the “secret” vote to release taxpayer information. But it remains that they are putting themselves on record in support of IRS officials who target groups, circumvent rules, and potentially break the law. That ought to go down well with voters.

It may be time to abolish the IRS and institute a consumption tax.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Looking At The Timeline To Understand The Scandal

Kimberley Strassel posted an article today in the Wall Street Journal about the timeline of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) scandal. She points out that the political climate in Washington at the time conservative groups were discriminated against was such that anyone who was paying attention would put the blame on Washington.

Below are some of the dates and statements made during this time:

Aug. 9, 2010: In Texas, President Obama for the first time publicly names a group he is obsessed with—Americans for Prosperity (founded by the Koch Brothers)—and warns about conservative groups.

Aug. 11: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sends out a fundraising email warning about “Karl Rove-inspired shadow groups.”

Aug. 21: Mr. Obama devotes his weekly radio address to the threat of “attack ads run by shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names. We don’t know who’s behind these ads and we don’t know who’s paying for them. . . .

Week of Aug. 23: The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer authors a hit piece on the Koch brothers, entitled “Covert Operations,” in which she accuses them of funding “political front groups.”

Aug. 27: White House economist Austan Goolsbee, in a background briefing with reporters, accuses Koch industries of being a pass-through entity that does “not pay corporate income tax.” The Treasury inspector general investigates how it is that Mr. Goolsbee might have confidential tax information. The report has never been released.

Week of Aug 27: the Democratic Party files a complaint with the IRS claiming the Americans for Prosperity Foundation is violating its tax-exempt status.

Please follow the link above to see the entire list of dates and events. Part of the scandal is how the conservative groups were treated by the IRS, but another part of the scandal is the ignorance of American voters which resulted in a fairly effective public relations campaign against conservatives and tea party members. Both things are a threat to our republic, but the latter is actually a more serious long term threat.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why The Holy Land Foundation Trial Is Still Important

The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development that provided millions of dollars of material and logistical support to Hamas was designated as a charity by President Clinton in 1995 (Executive Order 12947). On July 27, 2004, a federal grand jury in Dallas, Texas, returned a 42-count indictment against the Holy Land Foundation. Charges included: conspiracy, providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization, tax evasion, and money laundering. The indictment alleged that the Holy Land Foundation provided more than $12.4 million to individuals and organizations linked to Hamas from 1995 to 2001, when their assets were frozen. In November 2008, the jury found against the Holy Land Foundation on all 108 charges. The charges included conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, providing material support to a foreign terrorist, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

The above information comes from Wikipedia, but as far as I can tell, is accurate. One of the unindicted co-conspirators in the trial was CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations).

Where am I going with this? For some reason CAIR is still considered a valid group to represent moderate Muslims. They are nothing of the kind. They are a legal group set up by the Muslim Brotherhood to use the American legal system to pave the way for Sharia Law. The plan to bring America under Sharia Law is explained in the documents introduced as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial. These documents came from a sub-basement in the home of  Ismail Elbarasse in Annandale, Virginia. The documents were discovered in 2004 when a Police officer saw a woman dressed in traditional Islamic clothing videotaping the support structures of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, and stopped the car. The driver was Ismail Elbarasse, and because there was an outstanding warrant on him, he was detained and his house searched. That is where the documents were found. They detail how the Muslim Brotherhood plans to bring America into a worldwide caliphate through the exploitation of America’s judicial system. CAIR has been involved in a number of high profile law suits to allow Muslims special government protected religious privileges. CAIR has also made inroads into the graces of our lawmakers.

Today the Daily Caller posted an article about a secret fundraiser held by Representative Nancy Pelosi.

The article reports:

The donors at the undisclosed May 16 event included Nihad Awad, the co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, according to data provided by the nonpartisan Investigative Project on Terrorism.

The article further reports:

The cheapest tickets cost $5,000, and the most expensive were $30,800 per couple, according to the event invite from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which used the cash to fund Democratic candidates. (View the invite here)

The hosts of the event were DCCC chairman Rep. Steve Israel and two Muslim representatives, Rep. Keith Ellison and Rep. Andre Carson.

CAIR is not a group I want donating to Congressional campaigns.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Attacking The Donors

Under the guise of transparency, some Democrats have asked that Political Action Committees list major donors. Although that sounds like a reasonable request, some recent activities by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) make me wonder about their motives.

Normally, a political campaign attacks the opposing candidate. Unfortunately, the people currently running the Democrat campaigns have not felt the necessity of being limited by such restrictive rules. I have recently posted articles about the attacks on Frank Vandersloot, a major donor to Restore Our Future, (rightwinggranny.com), attacks on New Hampshire businessman Jack Gilchrist (rightwinggranny.com), who had the nerve to appear in a Romney ad. The Democrats have also gone after billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, charging that he was tied to the Chinese mob and a prostitution ring.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air reports:

The attack on Adelson falls into the same category as the demonization of the Koch brothers for their funding of conservative activism.  It’s designed to intimidate them — and others who might want to get involved in politics — out of the public sphere.  (That’s not an impulse limited to the Left, either; the Right has George Soros as its bête noir, for example.)

Why did the DCCC, of all Democratic organizations, start throwing mud at Adelson?  They wanted to attack John Boehner and House Republicans for supposedly taking prostitution money, but that’s a very big reach even if they had some evidence on Adelson — which they don’t, and never did. 

The good news here is that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee issued a public apology Thursday afternoon to Mr. Adelson.

The article at Hot Air quotes the statement:

“In press statements issued on June 29 and July 2, 2012, the DCCC made unsubstantiated allegations that attacked Sheldon Adelson, a supporter of the opposing party. This was wrong. The statements were untrue and unfair and we retract them,” the DCCC wrote. “The DCCC extends its sincere apology to Mr. Adelson and his family for any injury we have caused.”

Any person who runs for office in the current political climate can expect to be smeared, lied about, and threatened by the Chicago thugs that have taken over the Democrat party (I say that sadly–I used to be a Democrat). However, it is truly a shame that those who make political donations are now also vulnerable to this sort of thuggish behavior.

Enhanced by Zemanta