"What's wrong with Sweetness and Light? It's been around quite awhile." - Richard Rodgers

« Rove: Biden Is Lying About Scolding Bush | Home | Beeswax – The Easter Bunny Hates You »

Selected News For Apr 11 – Apr 17

This thread is for the busy bees of S&L to post news items we might otherwise miss.

If you do post an article, please follow these guidelines as much as possible:

  • In order to make the articles as readable as possible, please try to stick to the format described in the first of these weekly editions here.
  • Do not just post a link without noting the source, giving the headline and a brief excerpt from the article.
  • Remember to link to the original source for each item you post.
  • Avoid articles from blogs or hugely popular sites like the Drudge Report, since most people will presumably see such material elsewhere.
  • Any articles that fit under the topic of a recent thread should be posted there.
  • Remember to excerpt heavily. Posting less than a third of the article, is a good rule of thumb.

Thanks!

Related Articles:

 

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Saturday, April 11th, 2009 at 12:00 am. You can leave a response.

64 Responses to “Selected News For Apr 11 – Apr 17”

  1. bullforever
    April 11, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    Bio-fuel has a muc higher cost than “previously estimated”

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30158655/

    I particluarly like the part where they state in part:

    “Other studies have questioned the benefits of biofuels, noting that they may require more energy in production than they provide; they may not reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as hoped; and the fertilizers required to grow the crops to make the fuel may exacerbate oceanic dead zones as a result of chemical runoff into streams. “

    • jobeth
      April 12, 2009 at 10:22 pm

      All together now for a rousing….DUH!

      Wonder when these “greenies” will ever get it… Oh silly me…never.

      I’ve always wondered what they blamed the last ice age and the last warming “age” on when there weren’t any combustion engines etc.

  2. BillK
    April 13, 2009 at 7:09 pm

    For those who may remember past posts on the subject, now the investigation is canceled altogether, thanks to the ACLU.

    From the Fort Collins Coloradoan:

    Judge halts Weld County ID-theft investigation

    GREELEY — A judge has halted an identity theft investigation targeting illegal immigrants in Colorado, saying prosecutors wrongly seized federal income tax records to pursue suspects.

    The judge on Monday ordered Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck and the Weld County Sheriff’s Department to return or destroy the evidence within seven days.

    Buck will appeal the ruling, said his attorney, Lisa Hogan.

    Buck and sheriff’s investigators allege that up to 1,300 immigrants were filing tax returns using false or stolen identities. They launched an investigation dubbed “Operation Numbers Game” last year after a Texas man alerted Weld County authorities that someone was using his identity.

    The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit to stop the investigation, contending the seizure of thousands of documents from Amalia’s Translation and Tax Services in Greeley was illegal.

    The ACLU contends the records are confidential under federal law. Weld County authorities say the records were never in possession of the IRS and are therefore not confidential.

    Larimer County District Judge James Hiatt ruled the seizure was over-broad and violated the privacy rights of the people whose tax records were taken. He issued a temporary injunction halting the investigation.

    Charges had already been filed against at least 60 people, and some defendants pleaded guilty to identity theft and criminal impersonation. Hiatt said he couldn’t overturn those case but expected at least some of the defendants to seek to withdraw their pleas.

    Immigrant advocates say the people charged were being punished for doing what the law requires them to do — pay taxes. …

    http://www.coloradoan.com/arti.....002/NEWS01

    Actually, they were being punished for breaking the law in the first place – you know, entering the country illegally?

    You see the dirty little secret here of why the Government loves illegal immigrants so much – taxes paid in without requiring benefits to be paid out. Ka-ching!

    • Liberals Make Great Speedbumps
      April 14, 2009 at 12:19 pm

      Hi Bill,

      You know, I would like to see how the taxes paid by illegals vs. the costs incurred providing medical care, education etc. would stack up next to each other. I’m willing to go out on a limb and bet it’s a net outlay.

    • canary
      April 16, 2009 at 12:36 am

      Had relatives in Greely, and Weld County was sooo lenient and baffling for years, and so now the mystery is over. ACLU.

  3. proreason
    April 13, 2009 at 7:39 pm

    In case anybody thinks The Moron is kidding about forcing electic cars down everybody’s throats, Warren Buffet now owns 10% of a Chinese company that manufactures them:

    Warren Buffett hasn’t just seen the car of the future, he’s sitting in the driver’s seat. Why he’s banking on an obscure Chinese electric car company

    http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/1...../index.htm

    To a normal person, this would look like a million to one shot.
    - electric cars have never won in a free market-place
    - magic batteries have been “under development” for about 100 years now
    - how many hundreds of electric car manufacturers have failed??

    But of course, Mr. Buffet is an investing genius (only down 35% last year), so he probably knows something.

    or someone

    • Colonel1961
      April 14, 2009 at 10:27 pm

      And most people’s electricity comes from? Burning coal. Hmm. And BHO wants to dissuade that activity by taxing it to be untenable, i.e., too expensive, ergo, people can’t afford to drive because their electric cars cause pollution. Self-fulfilling prophecy or master plan – you be the judge.

      You just can’t make this stuff up…

      p.s. [Redacted. Unfortunately, Mrs. Colonel1961 has guaranteed a loss of consortium unless I removed my actual name and address from this posting. I guess some things are more important than freedom of speech...]

      Sic semper tyrannis.

  4. Flession
    April 14, 2009 at 1:19 am

    From a thrilled Associated Press

    Minn. court declares Franken leading vote-getter

    ST. PAUL, Minn. – A Minnesota court confirmed Monday that Democrat Al Franken won the most votes in his 2008 Senate race against Republican Norm Coleman, who immediately announced plans to appeal the decision.

    Coleman has 10 days to appeal to the state Supreme Court. Once the petition is filed, it could further delay the seating of Minnesota’s second senator for weeks.

    “It’s time that Minnesota like every other state have two” senators, a jovial Franken said outside his Minneapolis townhouse with his wife Franni at his side. “I would call on Senator Coleman to allow me to get to work for the people of Minnesota as soon as possible.”

    After a statewide recount and seven-week trial, Franken stands 312 votes ahead. He gained more votes from the election challenge than Coleman, the candidate who brought the legal action.

    The state law under which Coleman sued required three judges to determine who got the most votes and is therefore entitled to an election certificate, which is now on hold pending an appeal.

    “The overwhelming weight of the evidence indicates that the November 4, 2008, election was conducted fairly, impartially and accurately,” the judges wrote. “There is no evidence of a systematic problem of disenfranchisement in the state’s election system, including in its absentee-balloting procedures.”

    In its order, the judicial panel dismissed two attempts by Coleman to subtract votes from Franken over allegations of mishandled ballots in Minneapolis.

    The judges also rejected Coleman’s argument that a state board improperly made up for a packet of ballots lost between the election and the recount. His lawyers contended that the ballots’ disappearance rendered them invalid and that Coleman was entitled to review all ballots as part of the recount.

    Coleman’s lawyers claimed dozens of ballots were double-counted when their originals couldn’t be fed into optical scanning machines on Election Day. They said it was possible that originals and duplicates were included in the recount.

    The ruling diminishes Coleman’s chances of retaining a seat that he won in dramatic fashion in 2002, when he narrowly defeated former Vice President Walter Mondale. Democratic incumbent Paul Wellstone died in a plane crash with two weeks to go in the campaign.

    Franken, a former “Saturday Night Live” comic, entered the Senate race more than two years ago. A third-party candidate’s strong showing left Coleman and Franken virtually deadlocked on Election Night, triggering an automatic recount of 2.9 million ballots. Coleman led by about 700 votes before routine double-checking of figures trimmed his edge to 215 votes heading into the hand recount. By the recount’s end in January, Franken had pulled ahead by 225 votes.

    Coleman’s trial began in January and his appeal could push the race into May or beyond.

    Coleman’s lawyers have said their appeal will mostly center on violations of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection, arguing that counties had differing standards in treating absentee ballots.

    Franken’s attorneys argued that no election is absolutely precise and that all counties operated under the same standard.

    In addition to the appeal, Coleman can also initiate a new action on a federal level. Either side can appeal an eventual state Supreme Court decision to the U.S. Supreme Court or throw the disputed election before the U.S. Senate, which can judge the qualifications of its members.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....ota_senate

    After much debate and questionable ballots, the judges have spoken to, yet again, give Democrats what they want. I feel that, even if Coleman goes to federal, that he will be denied and Franken will take his place amoung his peers.

    Of course, should Coleman have had such a lead, Democrats would take this as far as they could go, as we learnt in the 2000 Presidential Election.

    I feel sorry MN, more than anything else. First Jesse Ventura, now this..

    • BillK
      April 14, 2009 at 2:19 am

      We’ve all seen the ballots the election board were votes for “nobody” and it’s a farce at its finest.

      Next up for the Democrats – the NY 20th Congressional District, where mysterious boxes of Democratic votes will also turn up in the numbers needed to guarantee a Democrat victory.

      Really, why even bother voting at all anymore?

      By the way, in case you weren’t already aware, Franken’s victory gives the Democrats the 60 votes they need to just ignore any and all Republican comments from now on.

    • Flession
      April 14, 2009 at 5:16 am

      Yea, I forgot to mention that..this is why they had to win this election. So morality and decency be damned, the Democrats have a Socialist agenda, and the laws and the will of the people is just getting in the way of the “laws” and “the will of the people”
      Get set guys, it’s gonna be a rough 4 years…

  5. Flession
    April 14, 2009 at 5:12 am

    [Remove]

  6. proreason
    April 14, 2009 at 10:51 am

    WOW. Texas Gov Perry reaffirms States Rights. From Drudge:

    WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACK RESOLUTION AFFIRMING STATE SOVEREIGNTY

    Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

    AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    “I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”
    …

    http://drudgereport.com/flashtx.htm

    Don’t know about you guys, but this seems like a very significant statement to me.

    Gov Perry may have just leapfrogged the line to be the next POTUS.

  7. proreason
    April 14, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    Bernacke lies through teeth, proving he was major player in Obama’s financial meltdown con-game. From the toady “newspaper” of the Democratic crime family, the USAtoday:

    4 questions, 4 answers from Ben Bernanke

    …To satisfy the enormous demand for investments both perceived as safe and promising higher returns, the financial industry designed securities that later proved to involve substantial risks…

    http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped.....nanke.html

    There are too many lies to quote. Read the article, but break-out your barf bags.

    Bullshit Ben’s basic position is that neither the government nor the fed had anything whatsoever to do with the financial meltdown. It was all private industry.

    Question “2″ is a real knee-slapper. They ask him whether printing a trillion dollars could possibly increase inflation at some point in time, and BS Ben’s guffaw-laden response is that inflation can be too high, but it “can also be too low”. So there you go. One of the two great financial geniuses saving our country from our economic disaster/devastation/crisis has figured out that that our inflation can be too hot or too cold. No response, on whether it can be “just right” or not.

    Question “5″, which didn’t reach the final article was. “Does 1 = 2?” BS Ben’s answer, reportedly, was “it depends”.

  8. mybrotherkeeper
    April 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm

    I would have to guess the America we once knew will never be again. That I will have to adjust myself to a new reality. The “new normal” may be chaos, but it has been forced upon us–the only other option being under complete domination.
    Guys like Gov. Perry are finding their voice and stopping 0’s madness before it’s too late. We are adding our voice to his and millions like him. O’s supporters will not honor our peaceful dissent, and will then try to get their way by creating chaos.
    It’s like the Bible says about the last days: “lawlessness will increase.” Once again, WE have NOT chosen chaos (Note that, Napolitano!) but 0 did. The rule of law he, and his, have no respect for. Sigh…it was all so unnecessary.

  9. Al Morone
    April 14, 2009 at 6:52 pm

    Mexican girl arrested with arsenal of anti-tank weapons:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....t-gun.html

  10. Rusty Shackleford
    April 14, 2009 at 8:02 pm

    This isn’t a news piece or anything like the typical Bees News that we see but I had to mention it.

    Being a fan of sci-fi, which occasionally rams slap up against my sensibilities as a conservative, I still had to see the re-do of “The Day The Earth Stood Still”. Now, I will say that Keanu Reeves plays his part extremely well. The rest of the cast, not so much. But the movie was a letdown for me.

    Some of you will remember that in the original, Klaatu, the alien, with his trusty sidekick, Gort, came to Earth to warn the human race about mutual self-destruction with nuclear weapons. Although a fairly pinko-sentiment in 1951, it was a well-intended, somewhat thought out premise.

    Not so the redeaux.

    Keanu, as Klaatu, announces he has come to Earth to destroy the human race because the human race is killing the Earth. He and his fellow uber-evolved keepers of the intergalactic green peace flag find this unacceptable and thus, he puts into motion the unstoppable force which rains destruction on Earthbound civilization.

    The greenies will love it. I was sorely annoyed. Plenty of other topics to choose from, really there are. Aside from that, they did hold true to the age-old hollywood notion that the military shoots at everything it wants to in a knee-jerk manner, which fits in with the original..and I guess that’s part of the story but I would’ve hoped they updated the way the alien got injured. In the original, Klaatu held up what one member of the military thought was a weapon and so he fired. Not so in the updated version. In the new version, an arbitrary shot by a soldier, totally unprovoked, provides the setting for why he ends up in the hospital.

    It could’ve been a sharp and meaningful piece and I could even tolerate an environmental message if only they didn’t present it in such poor taste. They polarized the whole thing by painting the US military in that archaic manner and then there was blubbering on the part of the supporting actress to “please not do this” as in: don’t destroy us, please give us a second chance.

    I found it all pretty much a lecture.

    So, if you’re going to see it…..if you’re a fan of the original….be prepared to be disappointed.

    • Celina
      April 14, 2009 at 8:15 pm

      Rusty, I agree. I saw it at our local military installation (DH is active duty). Personally I had never seen the original but I seriously laughed out loud at several parts along with several other people in the very small audience. None of them were intended to be jokes either.

  11. sheehanjihad
    April 14, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    http://www.comcast.net/article.....ghanistan/

    KABUL — A Taliban firing squad killed a young couple in southwestern Afghanistan for trying to elope, shooting them with AK-47s in front of a crowd in a lawless, militant-controlled region, officials said Tuesday.

    The woman, 19-year-old Gul Pecha, and the man, 21-year-old Abdul Aziz, were accused by the militants of immoral acts, and a council of conservative clerics decided that the two should be killed, officials said.

    Oh yeah, that’s right…lets allow the Taliban to rule…yeah, that’ll show everyone who says Islam is the religion of peace. Sure…right.

    • Consilience
      April 14, 2009 at 9:24 pm

      Oh, let’s not forget the “moderate” Taliban nitwits her thighness wants to “reach out” to…Islam is a scourge and should be dealt with accordingly—but our president is one, so don’t hold your breath.

  12. sheehanjihad
    April 14, 2009 at 11:39 pm

    Extreme Leftist Liberal Anti American appointed to top Pentagon post!!!!!!

    Oh good! If you think that’s bad, looks like genius appointed that Rosa Brooks ultra left loon from the LA TIMES as an ADVISOR to the Secretary of Defense. She is a virulent anti American, anti Bush, pro Muslim slithering opinion writer who also was involved with George SOROS….and that maniac group of his…..leftist, marxist, anti American, Pro “world government”….and she is going to get a Pentagon Clearance that is equal to the President. Which means, she will be able to funnel top secret documents and plans directly to our enemies…and we have to sit back and allow it. Didnt see this in the news, did we? God help us all…..

    http://www.latimes.com/news/op......columnist

  13. canary
    April 15, 2009 at 9:44 am

    L.A. Times says tea party attenders are “nuts, crackpots, stooges, irrational, dunderheads,fake”. The LAT insults Fox and other media outlets for giving attention to the “tea tantrums”.

    The L.A. Times would never say such things about Bush protesters, nor the anti-Jewish Muslims who protested with mob like behavior in support of Hamas terrorists in Gaza strip.

    From the Los Angeles Times:

    Fox News, MSNBC prejudge ‘tea parties’

    How about if we wait and see what happens at anti-tax rallies instead of promoting them or deriding them beforehand?

    James Rainey

    April 15, 2009

    It’s a real team effort over at Fox News.

    You’d expect conservative commentators like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity to be hyping today’s wave of anti-tax “tea parties.” But Fox personalities labeled “news” anchors are right there with their blessings too — one telling us the protests will focus on “how much of our hard-earned money is going to the federal government,” another assuring us the tea parties themselves are sparking economic activity.

    The Fox promotions people have been pumping up the volume, with ads celebrating hundreds of rallies and citizens who are “demanding real economic solutions.” That’s in contrast, you see, to the fake solutions President Obama wants to foist on the American people.

    There’s something dispiriting, though not surprising, in watching the conservative movement’s favorite news outlet shamelessly promote a political happening, while simultaneously claiming its coverage will be “fair and balanced.”

    That said, some liberal media voices seem just as intent on squelching the protesters before they’ve shoveled a single bag of Lipton into a single pond. At MSNBC, commentators Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews wrote off the demonstrations as the work of nothing more than crackpots or political stooges.

    I’ve got a novel idea: How about if we wait and see what happens at these rallies? Maybe journalists can watch, report how many people are there, describe the kinds of things they say and tell us what they plan to do next.

    I’m expecting you’ll see a fair amount of that approach, particularly from newspapers, which have mostly presented such old-school reporting in earlier stories on protests over Obama’s economic policies.

    But that’s probably far too stodgy for cable television outlets, which increasingly build ratings by offering their audiences the political slant they expect, and want, to hear.

    Organizers set today’s protests to coincide with the April 15 income tax deadline. The cable-TV-driven movement found its inspiration in, yes, a cable TV moment…

    http://www.latimes.com/enterta.....873.column

    • caligirl9
      April 15, 2009 at 9:40 pm

      I just read that piece of doo-doo.

      Perhaps attendance isn’t so great because it’s being held on a WORKDAY and people who pay taxes WORK?

      Hmmmmm … no media geniuses have yet made that connection!

    • pdsand
      April 15, 2009 at 10:52 pm

      I happened to see part of the tea party in Denver today, it was really something.

    • canary
      April 16, 2009 at 12:48 am

      We had ours today. I thought everyone state was. Alot of people had to work, but nearly 5000 came. And if any acorn nuts were there, they were sadly disappointed, it was so mellow and non-partisan. I only noticed two or three security, and a Mexican news channel. Hardly any media, which is typical, as our news is so worthless. It was so non-partison. Random people took turns on the top steps of the capital, and maybe one comment and couple of signs, critizing Republican politicans, one that really deserved it. They were petitioning for signatures to “return” the measley amount our state got. lol. There was no other topic or agenda as the media claimed it would be used for. There were a few dozen other’s in the state. More are planned. I guess 9/12 is suppose to be another big nationwide one. It was so calm, peaceful. No bull horns. Only take a half a dozen of acorn nuts to make more commotion, swaggering and sassing.

  14. sheehanjihad
    April 15, 2009 at 10:10 am

    Apparently, the left is afraid. Very afraid. Good! They should be, and this is only the beginning!

  15. BannedbytheTaliban
    April 15, 2009 at 1:15 pm

    Liberal Students Block Free Speach and UNC-Ch:

    From WRAL in Raleigh:

    Protest at UNC stops ex-congressman’s speech

    CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — Campus police used pepper spray on student protesters angry over immigration issues who disrupted a Tuesday night speech by former Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo at the University of North Carolina.

    Hundreds of protesters denouncing Tancredo’s tough stances against illegal immigration gathered at Bingham Hall, shouting profanities at the former Colorado congressman, who tried to speak about his opposition to in-state tuition for unauthorized immigrants.

    …Officers ejected two women who delayed the speech by holding a 12-foot banner across the classroom where Tancredo was to speak. It read, “No dialogue with hate.” Tancredo tried to pull the banner away, saying, “You don’t want to hear what I have to say because you don’t agree with me.”

    …Young said the use of force was being investigated by the department.

    “This is the free speech crowd, right?” Tancredo joked at one point as protesters screamed at him.

    Before the speech ended, some in the audience of 150 urged the students to let Tancredo speak.

    http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4954946/

    So we are only allowed to talk about things the left agrees with now that Obama has won and all issues have been settled. What a world we live in. What you do you want to bet the little punk that got sprayed will sue?
    When was the last time you heard conservatives stopping someone from speaking because they dissagreed with their opinion? Yeah, I can’t think of any either.

  16. BannedbytheTaliban
    April 15, 2009 at 1:40 pm

    Get ready for a little mushroom cloud to come out of your ears.

    From his biggest supporters, the AP:

    Appeals court: Marine can’t sue Murtha

    By Nedra Pickler – The Associated Press
    Posted : Wednesday Apr 15, 2009 11:19:50 EDT

    WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., cannot be sued for accusing U.S. Marines of murdering Iraqi civilians “in cold blood,” remarks that sparked outrage among conservative commentators.

    The appeals court in Washington dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought by a Marine who led the squad in the attack. The judges agreed with Murtha that he was immune from the lawsuit because he was acting in his official role as a lawmaker when he made the comments to reporters.

    …Wuterich’s attorney Mark S. Zaid said that despite the appeals court ruling, Murtha should apologize for his statements.

    “It is disappointing that the court has placed members of Congress on a special pedestal and granted them carte blanche immunity to defame anyone they choose as part of their official responsibilities without even allowing a victim to expose the actual facts that are known only to the perpetrator,” Zaid said.

    Murtha’s spokesman declined to comment.

    Another Marine involved in the Hadithah fighting, Justin Sharratt, has filed a slander lawsuit against Murtha in Johnstown, Pa. Although the judge in that case may consider Tuesday’s decision and give it weight, it is not binding on that court since it’s in a different appeals court circuit.

    A former lance corporal, Sharratt sued Murtha in September claiming the lawmaker’s remarks not only defamed him, but denied him due process and the right to a fair trial on the charges in military court. Sharratt was initially charged with three counts of premeditated murder, but was exonerated after a full investigation and the military equivalent of a preliminary hearing. Sharratt said it was proven he killed insurgents, not civilians.

    http://www.marinecorpstimes.co.....it_041509/

    It is amazing that a court would rule that a politician can defame anyone they want, especially when purposely doing so for political gain and propaganda. This is utter BS! Politicians should be held to a higher standard because the weight of their words, not be granted immunity.

    If it were a just world Murtha would be hanged for treason and sedition. Instead he is elected to another term. How much longer will the insanity continue? When the courts are openly in favor of the legislature do we still have separation of powers?

    • Liberals Demise
      April 16, 2009 at 10:04 am

      Improvise……..overcome…………adapt
      Marines don’t start the fights………..They finish them!!!

      Murtha…you pig!!

    • wardmama4
      April 17, 2009 at 10:14 pm

      This disgusts me to no end – I wonder what ex-Marine Murtha promised the judge and how much the donation is that the judge promised ex-Marine Murtha for this little non-decision.

      If there is any justice at all – ex-Marine Murtha will be killed in cold blood.

      You know what gets me, it is bad enough that Murtha is a corrupt politician but to be an ex-Marine and slander active duty Marines in a war zone is horrible but even worse is that this porkulus pig of an ex-Marine voted Yea on the action in Iraq vote on 10 October 2002.

      He is a liar, a hypocrite, a slanderous corrupt old fool. I wish I could be a fly on the wall when this pos meets God – it would be worth every bit of pain and suffering I’ve gone through in this life.

  17. caligirl9
    April 15, 2009 at 9:37 pm

    From another open-minded liberal birdcage liner, the LA Times.

    Many immigrants deported for nonviolent crimes

    Human Rights Watch says its study dispels ‘the myth that immigrants deported for crimes are invariably people here illegally who committed serious, violent crimes.’

    By Andrew Becker and Anna Gorman
    April 15, 2009

    Federal authorities have repeatedly said their priority is to find and remove illegal immigrants with violent criminal histories, but the U.S. government’s stepped-up enforcement in recent years has led to the deportation of hundreds of thousands of immigrants convicted of nonviolent crimes, according to a new study.

    Nearly three-quarters of the roughly 897,000 immigrants deported from 1997 to 2007 after serving criminal sentences were convicted of nonviolent offenses, and one-fifth were legal permanent residents, according to the study released today by Human Rights Watch.

    “This explodes the myth that immigrants deported for crimes are invariably people here illegally who committed serious, violent crimes,” said David Fathi, director of the New York-based advocacy group’s U.S. program. “We know now the large majority are being deported for nonviolent, often quite minor crimes.”

    The report comes at a time when President Obama has said he will push for immigration reforms and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has begun reviewing enforcement policies.

    The deportations cited in the report occurred after the passage of a 1996 law that mandated the detention and deportation of all immigrants, even those who are longtime lawful residents, if they committed a crime punishable by at least one year behind bars.

    The law is retroactive, so immigrants are often deported because of crimes they committed before the law was written.

    The top reasons for deportation during the 10-year period were entering the U.S. illegally, driving while under the influence of alcohol, assault and immigration crimes, such as selling false citizenship papers, the report said.

    … The report said 28% of those deported on criminal grounds were convicted of violent or potentially violent offenses, such as robbery and kidnapping.

    Roy Beck, executive director of NumbersUSA, which favors stricter controls on immigration, said illegal immigrants had no right to be here and should be removed regardless of their criminal records.

    “They don’t need to have committed a crime at all,” he said. “They still should be deported.”

    The Human Rights Watch report estimates the deportations have caused the separation of more than 1 million family members.

    Yakara Hernandez of Tampa, Fla., said she and her husband understood that he came to the U.S. illegally and were willing to pay the penalty. Hernandez said they owned a business and a home, paid taxes and were raising three daughters.

    But she said the family’s life had been on hold since immigration officials deported her husband to Honduras in December 2006.

    Hector Hernandez had a drunk driving conviction and had been deported once before. He was arrested at the Port of Tampa and flown to his native country after spending two months in immigration jail..

    Leticia Benitez, who lives in Azusa, said her family had also been divided by deportation. Benitez’s husband, a legal permanent resident, was arrested in 2007 and deported to Mexico based on an old misdemeanor conviction for statutory rape…

    The biggest problem with the 1996 law is that it didn’t give judges enough discretion to consider family and community ties, said Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. Immigrants are punished twice for their crimes, she said.

    “Not only are they dealing with whatever the mistake was in the criminal justice system, then they have to deal with the immigration consequences,” she said.

    Human Rights Watch recommended that Obama and Congress amend the law to allow legal permanent residents facing deportation to ask a judge for permission to stay in the country if their crimes were minor and their family connections strong.

    The report also calls on immigration authorities to focus their deportation efforts on undocumented immigrants convicted of violent crimes…

    http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....3268.story

    Wah! Wah! Wah! Is it only European immigrants who are cautioned to not get into any legal trouble while living in the U.S. and waiting for their chance at citizenship? Heck, my mom lived on a green card visa since 1956 and finally got her citizenship in the late 1980s (German-born). Her entire family came here legally and all were upstanding citizens who did not do anything to bring attention to themselves or get arrested for any sort of crime.

    Note that the examples in the article are Hispanic surnames…

    • wardmama4
      April 17, 2009 at 10:18 pm

      Has the LA Times forgotten or shall I say overlooked that all these ‘immigrants’ (NOT) illegal aliens committed a Federal Crime to even be in the US to be deported for a ‘minor’ crime (and someone please explain to me how statutory rape is a minor crime).

  18. BillK
    April 16, 2009 at 1:17 am

    Hmmm, any pressing items on the agenda at the Justice Department?

    No?

    Let’s condemn the NSA.

    From the Wall Street Journal:

    NSA Exceeds Legal Limits In Eavesdropping Program

    By Evan Perez and Siobhan Gorman

    WASHINGTON — A National Security Agency eavesdropping program exceeded legal limits intended to safeguard privacy, and officials have taken steps to bring the intercepts program into compliance, the Justice Department said Wednesday.

    The department, in a statement, said problems with the NSA program were uncovered as the Justice Department and National Security Agency were conducting routine oversight of intelligence activities to ensure compliance with laws and court orders.

    Attorney General Eric Holder has sought court approval to renew the NSA program after instituting new safeguards.

    The House intelligence committee was informed of the compliance issues and is conducting an inquiry, a House congressional official said.

    The New York Times on Wednesday reported on its Web site that the program intercepted private email messages and phone calls of Americans. However, intelligence officials have described the program as primarily searching for information based on data about communications, such as email addresses, subject headers and the time a message or phone call was placed.

    The Justice Department said officials notified the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of the problems with the NSA program and took “comprehensive steps” to correct the matter.

    “The Justice Department takes its national security oversight responsibilities seriously and works diligently to ensure that surveillance under established legal authorities complies with the nation’s laws, regulations and policies, including those designed to protect privacy interests and civil liberties,” the department said. …

    http://online.wsj.com/article/.....23961.html

    But when the next terrorist attack occurs, the press and Democrats will trip over each other on their way to the mic to ask “Why didn’t we know?”

    We’re not talking about intercepting calls or emails between the average American and their Mom here.

    Note that nowhere in the AP reports on the subject will you find this paragraph:

    NSA spokeswoman Judith Emmel said NSA’s operations “are in strict accordance with U.S. laws,” adding that the agency maintains “rigorous internal oversight mechanisms and are subject to external oversight” by the intelligence director, Justice Department and Congress.

  19. BillK
    April 16, 2009 at 1:22 am

    Destroying our intelligence agencies, part II.

    From the Wall Street Journal via Fox News:

    Portions of CIA Memos Expected to Be Released

    By Evan Perez and Siobhan Gorman

    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is expected to release some operational details of a Central Intelligence Agency interrogation program and its legal rationale, while seeking to keep secret the names of detainees and the way techniques were applied to particular prisoners, two officials familiar with the matter said Wednesday.

    An announcement is expected Thursday on the release of memorandums in which Department of Justice lawyers gave legal guidance on CIA interrogations. During a fierce debate, CIA officials have argued for keeping sensitive information secret, while Attorney General Eric Holder and other Obama administration lawyers have favored a full release.

    Administration lawyers on Wednesday were still deliberating what portions of three memos would be released. The two officials said the administration plans to propose redacting parts of the memos. In addition to the prisoner names, certain operational details of interrogations are expected to stay secret, they said.

    White House spokesman Robert Gibbs declined to comment Wednesday on how the administration plans to handle the memos.

    The decision poses a major test for President Barack Obama in balancing the politics of the campaign trail with the realities of being commander in chief. Administration officials say the president has lived up to his promises of openness on national-security matters. The administration already has released nine previously secret Justice Department memos dealing with counterterrorism and interrogation policy, they note.

    The CIA has argued forcefully that making operational details public will hurt national security by undermining relations with foreign intelligence services and potentially embroiling CIA officers in further inquiries by Congress and others, even though their activities were approved by the Justice Department at the time. …

    http://online.wsj.com/article/.....23013.html

    Of course, why? Obama is bowing, uh, shaking hands with his friends on the far left:

    The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act seeking disclosure of three secret Justice Department memos from 2005.

  20. imnewatthis
    April 16, 2009 at 4:30 am

    Re the UNC Chapel Hill episode with Tom Tancredo; once again I urge people to view the lesbian protesters at Smith College who were allowed to shut down the speech by Ryan Sorba. The unbelievable videos are on the massresistance site. Free speech seems to be a thing of the past.

    • Liberals Demise
      April 16, 2009 at 9:51 am

      Free Speech only exists if you never served in the military(Honorably) or are anti-abortion or a member of the NRA or a member of another political party or anyone with a opinion against this existing Pre$ident, Congre$$ or $enate!!
      I am now considered a “terrorist” by my government. I am now being eyeballed by the Obeyme Nazi SS while illegals walk our streets free from scrutiny or even a casual glance. This regime of “PIGS” are the arrogent effers and they will soon paint too many Americans with the broad brush of tyranny into a corner. When that happens…..there is only one way to go……

      ……………………………..”OUT FIGHTING!!!!!”

  21. texaspsue
    April 17, 2009 at 1:54 am

    Savage is suing Napolitano:

    Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Janet Napolitano Over Homeland Security’s Rightwing Extremism Policy

    ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that it has filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of the political beliefs. Click here to read the Law Center’s complaint.

    The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage, Gregg Cunningham (President of the pro-life organization Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc (CBR)), and Iraqi War Marine veteran Kevin Murray. The Law Center claims that Napolitano’s Department (DHS) has violated the First and Fifth Amendment Constitutional rights of these three plaintiffs by attempting to chill their free speech, expressive association, and equal protection rights.

    http://www.thomasmore.org/qry/page.taf?id=19

    It’s about ding dang time SOMEONE said something about this injustice! Sheesh!

    • proreason
      April 17, 2009 at 10:46 am

      Hear hear!

      It’s about time somebody turned the odious tactics of the commiecrats back on the scum.

      Frankly, I’m more willing to donate money to efforts like this than to politicians who I know will be lining their own pockets once elected, no matter what they say when running.

    • Odie44
      April 17, 2009 at 11:02 am

      texas –

      Great post, thank you for informing us.

      From moment 1 of the DHS release, my first thought was “isn’t this the same profiling Dems used to hijack our court systems?”

      Add it the dope Napo’s “apology” – and we have the silver bullet.
      Napo: “It wasn’t an accusation, it was an assessment”
      Thank you for providing the exact illegal language Mdm. Napo. “Assessing” the color of people in cars, on foot and in public places is what led to “racial profiling laws”, among other issues. Accusation has nothing to do with it.

  22. proreason
    April 17, 2009 at 11:07 am

    If you haven’t seen this yet, it’s a stunning life-affirming video you will want to watch over and over.

    Look particularly for the facial reaction of people at the 1:50 minute mark.

    If you aren’t filled with goosebumps by 2:00, there’s no hope for you.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY

    Also, look for the facial expression of the young man on the right at 3:19. It’s already been building for 80 seconds and he is still so stunned he can’t control his face.

  23. canary
    April 17, 2009 at 3:28 pm

    New Investigation, Obama caught spying on us in last few monthes through e-mails, wire-tapping. Apparently, he went over the top in looking for “man made disastors”

    http//www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/us/16nsa.html?_r=1

    April 16, 2009
    Officials Say U.S. Wiretaps Exceeded Law
    By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN
    WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year, government officials said in recent interviews.

    Several intelligence officials, as well as lawyers briefed about the matter, said the N.S.A. had been engaged in “overcollection” of domestic communications of Americans. They described the practice as significant and systemic, although one official said it was believed to have been unintentional.

    The legal and operational problems surrounding the N.S.A.’s surveillance activities have come under scrutiny from the Obama administration, Congressional intelligence committees and a secret national security court, said the intelligence officials, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because N.S.A. activities are classified. Classified government briefings have been held in recent weeks in response to a brewing controversy that some officials worry could damage the credibility of legitimate intelligence-gathering efforts.

    The Justice Department, in response to inquiries from The New York Times, acknowledged Wednesday night that there had been problems with the N.S.A. surveillance operation, but said they had been resolved.

    As part of a periodic review of the agency’s activities, the department “detected issues that raised concerns,” it said. Justice Department officials then “took comprehensive steps to correct the situation and bring the program into compliance” with the law and court orders, the statement said. It added that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. went to the national security court to seek a renewal of the surveillance program only after new safeguards were put in place.

    In a statement on Wednesday night, the N.S.A. said that its “intelligence operations, including programs for collection and analysis, are in strict accordance with U.S. laws and regulations.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the intelligence community, did not address specific aspects of the surveillance problems but said in a statement that “when inadvertent mistakes are made, we take it very seriously and work immediately to correct them.”

    The questions may not be settled yet. Intelligence officials say they are still examining the scope of the N.S.A. practices, and Congressional investigators say they hope to determine if any violations of Americans’ privacy occurred. It is not clear to what extent the agency may have actively listened in on conversations or read e-mail messages of Americans without proper court authority, rather than simply obtained access to them.

    The intelligence officials said the problems had grown out of changes enacted by Congress last July in the law that regulates the government’s wiretapping powers, and the challenges posed by enacting a new framework for collecting intelligence on terrorism and spying suspects.

    While the N.S.A.’s operations in recent months have come under examination, new details are also emerging about earlier domestic-surveillance activities, including the agency’s attempt to wiretap a member of Congress, without court approval, on an overseas trip, current and former intelligence officials said.

    After a contentious three-year debate that was set off by the disclosure in 2005 of the program of wiretapping without warrants that President George W. Bush approved after the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress gave the N.S.A. broad new authority to collect, without court-approved warrants, vast streams of international phone and e-mail traffic as it passed through American telecommunications gateways. The targets of the eavesdropping had to be “reasonably believed” to be outside the United States. Under the new legislation, however, the N.S.A. still needed court approval to monitor the purely domestic communications of Americans who came under suspicion.

    In recent weeks, the eavesdropping agency notified members of the Congressional intelligence committees that it had encountered operational and legal problems in complying with the new wiretapping law, Congressional officials said.

    Officials would not discuss details of the overcollection problem because it involves classified intelligence-gathering techniques. But the issue appears focused in part on technical problems in the N.S.A.’s ability at times to distinguish between communications inside the United States and those overseas as it uses its access to American telecommunications companies’ fiber-optic lines and its own spy satellites to intercept millions of calls and e-mail messages.

    One official said that led the agency to inadvertently “target” groups of Americans and collect their domestic communications without proper court authority. Officials are still trying to determine how many violations may have occurred.

    The overcollection problems appear to have been uncovered as part of a twice-annual certification that the Justice Department and the director of national intelligence are required to give to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on the protocols that the N.S.A. is using in wiretapping. That review, officials said, began in the waning days of the Bush administration and was continued by the Obama administration. It led intelligence officials to realize that the N.S.A. was improperly capturing information involving significant amounts of American traffic.

    Notified of the problems by the N.S.A., officials with both the House and Senate intelligence committees said they had concerns that the agency had ignored civil liberties safeguards built into last year’s wiretapping law. “We have received notice of a serious issue involving the N.S.A., and we’ve begun inquiries into it,” a Congressional staff member said.

    Separate from the new inquiries, the Justice Department has for more than two years been investigating aspects of the N.S.A.’s wiretapping program.

    As part of that investigation, a senior F.B.I. agent recently came forward with what the inspector general’s office described as accusations of “significant misconduct” in the surveillance program, people with knowledge of the investigation said. Those accusations are said to involve whether the N.S.A. made Americans targets in eavesdropping operations based on insufficient evidence tying them to terrorism.

    And in one previously undisclosed episode, the N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress without a warrant, an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said.

    The agency believed that the congressman, whose identity could not be determined, was in contact — as part of a Congressional delegation to the Middle East in 2005 or 2006 — with an extremist who had possible terrorist ties and was already under surveillance, the official said. The agency then sought to eavesdrop on the congressman’s conversations, the official said.

    The official said the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some intelligence officials about using the N.S.A., without court oversight, to spy on a member of Congress.

  24. canary
    April 17, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    Lawsuit against Homeland Security Report

    http://www.thomasmore.org/qry/page.taf?id=19

    ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced that yesterday evening it filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of their political beliefs. Click here to read the complaint filed by the Thomas More Law Center.
    Napolitano tried to blunt the public furor over the Report by a half-hearted apology to veterans, but she left out of her apology all of the other Americans her Department has targeted because of their political beliefs. In fact, officials in DHS now admit that their internal office of civil liberties objected to the language in the extremism report, but the Department issued it anyway.

    Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center stated, “Janet Napolitano is lying to the American people when she says the Report is not based on ideology or political beliefs. In fact, her report would have the admiration of the Gestapo and any current or past dictator in the way it targets political opponents. This incompetently written intelligence assessment, which directs law enforcement officials across the country to target and report on American citizens who have the political beliefs mentioned in the report, will be used as a tool to stifle political opposition and opinions. It will give a pretext for opponents of those Americans to report them to police as rightwing extremists and terrorists. You can imagine what happens then.”

    The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:

    Opposes restrictions on firearms
    Opposes lax immigration
    Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
    Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
    Opposes same-sex marriage
    Has paranoia of foreign regimes
    Fear of Communist regimes
    Opposes one world government
    Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
    Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
    . . . and the list goes on
    The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host, Michael Savage, Gregg Cunningham (President of the pro-life organization Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc (CBR)), and Iraqi War Marine veteran Kevin Murray. The Law Center claims that Napolitano’s Department (DHS) has violated the First and Fifth Amendment Constitutional rights of these three plaintiffs by attempting to chill their free speech, expressive association, and equal protection rights. The lawsuit further claims that the Department of Homeland Security encourages law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious rightwing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs.

    Thompson added, “The Obama Administration has declared war on American patriots and our Constitution. The Report even admits that the Department has no specific information on any plans of violence by so-called ‘rightwing extremists.’ Rather, what they do have is the expression of political opinions by certain individuals and organizations that oppose the Obama administration’s policies, and this expression is protected speech under the First Amendment.”

    The Law Center is asking the court to declare that the DHS policy violates the First and Fifth Amendments, to permanently enjoin the Policy and its application to the plaintiffs’ speech and other activities, and to award the plaintiffs their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for having to bring the lawsuit.

    Click here to read the DHS extremism report.

    The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at http://www.thomasmore.org.

  25. caligirl9
    April 17, 2009 at 3:52 pm

    President of France grows testes, says the “U.S. president is weak.”

    Viva la France!! (almost … keep it up, Sarkozy, someone someday will have the intestinal fortitude to listen to you!)

    From the Times Online (UK)

    Sarkozy snipes at ‘dim’ Spanish PM and ‘weak’ Barack Obama
    The US President is weak, the Spanish leader is dim, the German Chancellor is clinging on to France’s coat-tails and the head of the European Commission is irrelevant.
    That, at any rate, is the world according to President Sarkozy, who has spent the week airing his unvarnished opinions of Barack Obama and an array of international politicians — abruptly ending France’s honeymoon with the US and needling Washington on several strategic issues.
    In the latest in a stream of accounts from the Élysée Palace, Mr Sarkozy was quoted yesterday as telling an all-party group of MPs that Mr Obama was inexperienced and indecisive. “Obama has a subtle mind, very clever and very charismatic,” the French President said. “But he was elected two months ago and had never run a ministry. There are a certain number of things on which he has no position. And he is not always up to standard on decision-making and efficiency.”
    The US President had underperformed on climate change when they met, Mr Sarkozy said, according to an account of the MP’s session in the newspaper Libération. “I told him, ‘I don’t think that you have quite understood what we are doing on carbon dioxide’.”

    Mr Sarkozy was apparently irked by media reports that Mr Obama had saved the day in London by persuading President Hu of China to reach a compromise with France over tax havens. Mr Sarkozy’s version is that he shamed Mr Obama into action, telling him: “You were elected to build a new world. Tax havens are the embodiment of the old world.”
    Mr Sarkozy was also reported yesterday to have cracked a dubious joke about Europe’s “Obamamania”. According to L’Express news magazine, he mentioned Mr Obama’s planned visit to Normandy for the D-day anniversary in June, saying: “I am going to ask him to walk on the Channel, and he’ll do it.”
    This jaundiced view of Mr Obama may have been prompted by the US President’s heartfelt welcome at the G20, Nato and EU summits. “The President is annoyed by what he sees as the naivety and the herd mentality of the media,” wrote Claude Askolovitch, a commentator close to the Élysée Palace.
    The end of the short-lived Franco-American honeymoon also reflects a decision to swing France back towards its traditional role as counterbalance to US power, a shift that began with tension over the London economic summit. In the Élysée account Mr Sarkozy played the pivotal role as upholder of principle in the face of ineffectual US leadership. He had telephoned Gordon Brown on the eve of the summit and threatened not to turn up at all if the leaders refused his demand to name and shame tax havens, according to the leaks.
    Although Mr Sarkozy has taken France back into full membership of the Nato alliance, over the past week he has picked various quarrels with Washington, demanding, for instance, a separate headquarters for a new European defence force — an idea opposed by Britain and the US. He has criticised Mr Obama for calling for Turkish membership of the EU…
    He also seems to have adopted Mr Berlusconi’s idea of tact. The Italian Prime Minister, who referred to Mr Obama as “suntanned”, used the same adjective while touring a makeshift school in L’Aquila yesterday. He said to a black priest: “My compliments, you are very suntanned,” and told a black boy: “I wish I had as much time to lie in the sun as you do.”

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t.....106250.ece

    Finally a “world leader” who is not a kool-aid drinker. Well, not yet anyway. TOTUS kool-aid is not nearly as tasty as a fine French wine!

    • canary
      April 17, 2009 at 6:26 pm

      Something else our news didn’t show was the 300 arrested in France over violent protests and riots, starting buildings on fire. I only saw a bit, signs saying for France to get out of the United Nations, because it was not covered well. The U.S. news was all on Obama, and showed him as a leader. But, we’ve known Obama has made a laughing stalk of America, and continues to do so.

    • Confucius
      April 17, 2009 at 8:04 pm

      “Mr Sarkozy was apparently irked by media reports that Mr Obama had saved the day in London by persuading President Hu of China to reach a compromise with France over tax havens.”

      I’m glad you found this story, caligirl9.

      I read Xinhua’s coverage of the G-20 summit. There was no mention of a kerfuffle between Hu and Sarkozy; certainly, there was no mention of Obama’s saving-the-day. Xinhua’s take was that Hu got everything he wanted.

      By the way, I would like to tell you (and everyone else here) what the Chinese really think of Obama, but that she-male Janet Napolitano might label me a racist white supremacist.

    • caligirl9
      April 17, 2009 at 8:40 pm

      Hmmmm, Confucius say 1.3 billion Chinese people can’t be wrong … *wink*

  26. BillK
    April 17, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    Revenues down? Job losses?

    This came out on tax day.

    From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

    State law restricting teacher raises likely to be repealed

    By Amy Hetzner

    A state law used to settle contracts and restrict teacher compensation in school districts from Wauwatosa to Cedarburg to New Berlin could be repealed this year, now that Democrats control both houses of the Legislature and the governor’s mansion.

    The Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee took the most significant step toward eliminating the qualified economic offer law since Gov. Jim Doyle took office simply by keeping the repeal proposal in the budget that it will begin considering Thursday. Prior attempts by Doyle to repeal the QEO as part of the biennial budget process were rejected by the committee when it was under bipartisan and Republican rule.

    But now that the process is controlled by Democrats, who typically are more favorable to teacher- and labor-backed issues, state Sen. Luther Olsen (R-Ripon) called the chances the QEO will be eliminated this year “100%.” Passing the measure with the budget is viewed as easier than proposing it as an individual bill.

    “The teachers union has wanted to get rid of this for a long time,” Olsen said. “They finally got the Democrats in power to do it. The Democrats plan to get rid of the QEO. The governor will get rid of the QEO.”

    In place since 1993, the QEO was implemented as part of a three-pronged approach to change how public schools are funded in the state.

    The state promised to pay two-thirds of the costs of public education, and at the same time imposed restrictions on the amount of revenue local districts could raise per pupil and allowed districts to limit teacher pay with the QEO.

    Specifically, the QEO says districts can avoid going to arbitration for teacher negotiations so long as they offer their teachers a 3.8% annual increase in pay and benefits.

    Teachers complain that the QEO has unfairly singled them out for restrictions of their collective bargaining abilities while also depressing their salaries for the past 16 years.

    School districts, on the other hand, have argued that the QEO virtually guarantees teachers minimum compensation increases of 3.8%, while state-imposed revenue caps allow operating budgets to rise by about 2% annually. They fear eliminating the QEO, however, will lead to further increases in class sizes and program reductions than they have faced in recent years, given that revenue controls would be the only prong of the original three school funding measures to remain in place.

    Compounding the concern is another proposed change in state law that would make consideration of a local government’s economic condition less important in arbitration hearings.

    “This is a train wreck that is going to happen,” said Kelly Herda, a Nicolet Union High School Board member. “We will be broke.”

    Such fears are misplaced, said Debbie Brent, chief negotiator for the Wauwatosa Education Association, which saw contract talks end earlier this year when the Wauwatosa School Board invoked the QEO. Teachers just want a fair shake in bargaining, she said. They’re not interested in bankrupting the school systems where they work.

    “Repealing the QEO is good,” Brent said. “It’s a good thing only because the principle and the philosophy that it’s based on is ethically wrong. But it isn’t going to do much.”

    Mary Bell, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, said that – more than increasing salaries – repealing the QEO would change the climate for teachers within their school districts.

    It would give teachers a greater role in making professional development decisions and improving school quality by enhancing their position at the table, she said.

    “These are career teachers who live and work and have chosen a profession where they’re focused on what a district can do,” said Bell, whose organization is the largest teachers union in the state. “They have to consider their own economic welfare, but that is certainly not why they’re there and certainly not why they’re in those districts. So bankrupting those districts is not in their benefit.” …

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/e.....75992.html

    These are “career teachers” who are willing to walk out of their schools for the political cause du jour and are upset that they are limited to 3.8% salary increases.

    Most of the American public would do just about anything for a “virutally guaranteed” 3.8% salary increase; most salaried employees who are still employed haven’t had a raise in years.

    But the Democrats know where their money come from, so repealing the limit has a “100% chance” of happening.

    Nice job, Wisconsin voters…

  27. BillK
    April 17, 2009 at 4:48 pm

    More from Wisconsin, from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

    Some state workers earned more than $50,000 in overtime

    By Patrick Marley

    Madison – Twenty-five state employees earned more than $50,000 in overtime last year, including a nurse clinician at Mendota Mental Health Institute who earned $97,800 in overtime payments on top of regular pay, a report released Friday says.

    The overtime payments more than doubled the nurse clinician’s salary, bringing total pay to $181,200.

    In all, the state spent $66.5 million on overtime wages in 2008, or 2.2% more than the previous year, the Legislative Audit Bureau found. The report was an update of an audit issued last year.

    The audit did not include employee names, and auditors said they could not release them because of labor contracts that prohibit the release of personal information.

    The Journal Sentinel and the Minocqua-based Lakeland Times sued the state in 2005 over those contracts, saying they do not trump the state’s open records law. The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case this week and is expected to issue a ruling by July.

    Fifteen of the 25 highest overtime earners were correctional officers and sergeants. The other 10 worked directly with patients for the Department of Health Services.

    The Mendota nurse clinician averaged 80 hours of overtime for every two-week pay period.

    Another nurse clinician, who works at the Central Wisconsin Center, earned $85,818 in overtime alone last year. In 2007, that nurse earned $103,062 in overtime.

    Almost all overtime payments were generated by the Department of Corrections, the Department of Health Services, the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Transportation, which includes the State Patrol. All of those agencies maintain 24-hour facilities or must respond to emergencies, driving up the need to rely on overtime, auditors said.

    Policies on when workers can earn overtime are set in labor contracts approved by state agencies and the Legislature. The audit did not identify any abuse of state policies but said the agencies need to analyze their overtime practices closely.

    The departments of Corrections and Health Services were supposed to submit reports in January on how they would reduce overtime costs, but they have asked for additional time to complete their analysis. …

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/s.....76972.html

    I’ve no issue with paying overtime, but if someone is working 80 hours per week, doubling their salary,, perhaps it’s time to add another (lower cost) employee instead?

  28. BillK
    April 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm

    There is literally no end to the “high speed rail” fantasies of the far left.

    Not just in California (LA to San Francisco or LA to Las Vegas).

    From the Madison, WI Capital Times:

    High speed rail in Madison, Midwest on Obama’s top 10 list

    A high speed rail project that includes Madison is in President Obama’s strategic plan of a “top 10″ list of rail projects that have been identified to jump-start a potential world-class passenger rail system in America.

    The president released his strategic plan for high speed rail Thursday morning — a plan that would spend $8 billion in stimulus funds and another $1 billion a year for five years as a down payment to revitalizing the country’s passenger rail system.

    The 10 corridors identified in the plan include the Chicago Hub Network, which would link Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison and Minneapolis/St. Paul, and also would have high-speed lines serving St. Louis, Kansas City, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Louisville.

    The nine other corridors identified in the plan include corridors in California, the Pacific Northwest, the South Central states, the Gulf Coast, Florida, the Southeast, Keystone (three Pennsylvania cities), Empire (three New York cities) and northern New England.

    The plan, released by the U.S. Department of Transportation, said application procedures for rail projects are expected to be finalized this spring, and first round grant awards are expected to be announced before the end of the summer.

    Appearing with Vice President Joe Biden and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Obama said the country cannot afford not to invest in a major upgrade to rail travel. He said he understands it necessarily will be “a long-term project” but said the time to start is now.

    Obama said, “This is not some fanciful, pie-in-the-sky vision of the future. It’s happening now. The problem is, it’s happening elsewhere.” He cited superior high-speed rail travel in countries like China, Japan, France and Spain.

    The rail upgrades are critically needed, Obama said, because the nation’s highways and airways “are clogged with traffic.”

    The money will go not only to high-speed rail development but also to a parallel effort to improve rail service along existing lines — upgrades that would allow faster train travel.

    The White House said funding will move into the rail system through three channels, first to upgrade projects already approved and only in need of funding, thus providing jobs in the short term. The second and third would focus on high-speed rail planning and then a commitment to help in the execution of those plans far into the future when the stimulus funds are no longer available.

    Transportation Department officials say about six proposed routes with federal approval for high-speed rail stand a good chance of getting some of the $8 billion award. The spurs include parts of Texas, Florida, the Chicago region, and southeast routes through North Carolina and Louisiana.

    The U.S. Federal Railroad Administration says the term high-speed rail applies to trains traveling more than 90 mph. The European Union standard is above 125 mph. …

    http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topstories/447355

    Needless to say, none of these routes will ever make dollar one in profit.

    Not to mention what will happen the first time someone gets hit by a 125 MPH train – there will be immediate calls that that speed is just far too fast.

    The highways and air corridors are clogged?

    That couldn’t be because people prefer to travel that way.

    No, those stupid consumers just don’t know what they should be demanding.

  29. BillK
    April 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm

    Another person who would know is written off as a clueless moron.

    From the ultra far-left Madison, WI Capital Times:

    State rep uses his ‘Hot Air Report’ to debunk claims of global warming

    By Jessica VanEgeren

    On a recent afternoon, state Rep. Jim Ott sits in his office on the third floor of the Capitol. Sunlight streams in from the windows behind him and skylight overhead.

    The Republican lawmaker is quick to point out that no lights are on. He also shares his inclination to use the stairs, rather than the elevator, to reach his office. Not wasting energy, or much else for that matter, was a lesson he learned early in life.

    “I was raised in a house where you didn’t have a lot of extra stuff lying around,” said the 61-year-old from Mequon, a town of roughly 23,000 residents on the shoreline of Lake Michigan just north of Milwaukee. “So am I against conservation? Absolutely not. The environment is a finite resource. Whether it’s the natural resources we use or the air we breathe, those resources are not unlimited. We’ve got to take care of them.”

    Taking care of those finite resources, however, doesn’t mean that government needs to step in with legislation designed to protect all aspects of the environment. Like many lawmakers on his side of the political aisle, Ott doesn’t buy into the notion that global warming is caused by the human consumption of fossil fuel. Instead, he cites natural occurrences, including volcanic eruptions, forest fires and a change in the strength of the sun’s radiation, as other possible culprits. A lawmaker now for just over two years, Ott is making waves — and a name for himself — with a new weekly e-newsletter titled “Hot Air Report,” whose sole purpose is to debunk scientific theories about global warming, or as he puts it, “the hot air” surrounding the global warming debate.

    “I think we’ve got an awful large portion of the population that thinks global warming is happening, we’re causing it, it’s getting worse and there are all sorts of dire consequences awaiting us if we don’t do something now,” Ott said. “I see what’s happening as climate change, not global warming.”

    In Ott’s case, he’s not just another lawmaker refuting global warming. Ott has a master’s degree in physical geography, which included professional training in climatology, and worked as a meteorologist for a Milwaukee television station for 30 years. He also earned a law degree from Marquette University in 2000.

    “It’s natural for him to take an interest in the topic and to speak out on it,” said Rep. Mark Gottlieb, R-Port Washington. “I think his leadership on this issue is something the Legislature is fortunate to have right now.”

    Given his professional training and his current position in the statehouse, Ott has designed his Hot Air Reports to be as political as they are scientific, a slant that has not escaped his critics.

    “If people understand the difference between propaganda and peer review science, they will see it for what it is,” said Shahla Werner, director of the John Muir Chapter of the Sierra Club. “Hot air propaganda.”

    These types of comments don’t rattle Ott. On the contrary, he’s used to hearing them. He said it is typical of global warming proponents to throw out names like “deniers” for anyone who questions the extent to which human involvement affects global warming.

    “With global warming, the strong believers don’t want to discuss the possibility human-produced carbon dioxide isn’t the main factor that they think it is,” Ott said. “They just want to do something about it.”

    Doing something about global warming often takes the form of legislation, as it did two years ago in Wisconsin with the introduction of the Safe Climate Act. The bill would have laid the groundwork for Wisconsin to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions within a certain time frame. As a freshman representative, Ott spoke out against the bill, which quickly died in subcommittee. While that bill was defeated, Ott says the impending recommendations from Gov. Jim Doyle’s Task Force on Global Warming will likely spark the next global warming-related fight at the statehouse.

    Ott contends implementing policies to counteract global warming will produce few jobs and do little or nothing to cool the Earth or reduce carbon emissions. Cap-and-trade policies, for instance, would cost state firms millions of dollars, he argues. Under these plans, companies that are unable to meet their emission limits can buy credits from companies that pollute less; in effect, the buyer is paying a penalty for polluting while the seller is rewarded for having reduced emissions. Gov. Doyle has said he would support such a policy as has President Obama.

    “I don’t think anything an individual state does will have any impact on global temperatures,” Ott said. “We’d be wasting our time. Wisconsin fighting global warming is something I have a problem with.” …

    http://www.madison.com/tct/news/stories/447038

    Bravo for him, and for using the good will he’s developed over decades as a Milwaukee TV meteorologist for good.

    Here’s a sample from one of his newsletters:

    Over the last couple of decades, the more than 20 climate computer models developed by climate researchers have consistently predicted a continuation of rising carbon dioxide levels and warmer temperatures. These predictions run decades into the future. A report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that by 2100 the western, southern and eastern portions of North America will warm by 3.6 to 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit. Another study conducted by a researcher at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute predicts that by 2100, heat wave temperatures in Chicago would reach 115 degrees.

    Ten years ago these models were producing the same forecasts they are today: warming, warming and more warming. And yet over the last decade global temperatures have been basically flat. A recent study led by Dr. Anastasios Tsonis at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee found that global temperatures have leveled off since 2001.

    The problem with using computer models to predict the weather is that no model is comprehensive enough to simulate every square inch of the atmosphere. Over time this leads to small errors, which increase the farther into the future the models are run.

    In reality, atmospheric computer models are not very accurate beyond a few days. Currently, the National Weather Service issues forecasts for seven days. Beyond that timeframe, their forecasts are only for very general temperature and precipitation trends. These extended forecasts are not much better than chance when predicting a month or more in advance. In fact, their models did not predict last winter’s severe cold and snow across the United States.…

    Hot Air Newsletter

  30. Al Morone
    April 17, 2009 at 6:30 pm

    Liberal actress: “Tea party goers are racist rednecks!”
    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....re-racist/

    • caligirl9
      April 17, 2009 at 7:39 pm

      I have yet to read of any account in any media, liberal, conservative or otherwise, that even mentions a “racist” agenda to the Tea party.

      Because we disagree with the policies of a president who happens to be black that makes us racist?

      I know that many people voted for TCO to “prove” they were open-minded. What a stupid reason to vote for anyone!

      I guess we should have been having Tea Parties when Bush was in office, we bad!

  31. canary
    April 17, 2009 at 6:53 pm

    Awesome chance to give Obama a grade on how he is doing. So far he is getting a F. Be sure and vote.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493093/

    • proreason
      April 17, 2009 at 7:08 pm

      lol.

      But I couldn’t vote. Maybe they shut it down.

      I’m surprised you can still see the results.

    • Liberals Make Great Speedbumps
      April 18, 2009 at 1:51 am

      PR,

      It’s up again, I just voted. Care to guess what I gave him?

  32. BillK
    April 17, 2009 at 7:06 pm

    From an excited AP, a reminder that regulation will solve everything:

    Bernanke: financial innovation needs regulation

    WASHINGTON (AP) – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Friday that financial innovation is good for the economy but must be accompanied by proper regulation.

    New financial products, such as subprime mortgages and structured investment vehicles, have become symbols of the economic crisis. The challenge for the government is to come up with regulations that protect consumers without stifling innovation, the Fed chief said.

    “As we have seen all too clearly during the past two years, innovation that is inappropriately implemented can be positively harmful,” Bernanke said in a speech to a Fed conference. “It would be unwise to try to stop financial innovation, but we must be more alert to its risks and the need to manage those risks properly.”

    The central bank already is moving in that direction. The Fed and other regulators last year put forward credit card rules that were seen as the biggest clampdown in decades, seeking to protect consumers from companies that arbitrarily raise interest rates or don’t give borrowers adequate time to pay their bills. But those rules don’t take effect until next year.

    The central bank also approved new regulations aimed at curbing abuses on home mortgages. They bar lenders from making loans without proof of a borrower’s income and would require lenders to make sure risky borrowers set aside money to pay for taxes and insurance.

    However, critics complained that federal regulators have moved too slowly and not done enough in the face of heavy lobbying from financial services firms. On the housing front, critics contend that a more vigilant Fed might have prevented the worst abuses during the boom when borrowers got homes they clearly could not afford, often under terms they did not fully understand.

    In his speech, Bernanke said regulators need to watch closely to ensure that complex financial products and services are explained in ways that consumers can understand. …

    http://www.9news.com/money/art.....;catid=344

    “Regulators need to watch closely to ensure that complex financial products and services are explained in ways that consumers can understand.”

    The same Americans who think that government spending will somehow get us out of an economic downturn? Good luck with that.

    But more importantly:

    They bar lenders from making loans without proof of a borrower’s income and would require lenders to make sure risky borrowers set aside money to pay for taxes and insurance.

    Or, the rules banks themselves used before forced to issue loans to people who didn’t qualify by groups like ACORN.

    Got it.

    Mr. Bernanke, I think the President’s “community organizers” would like to have a word with you.

    • caligirl9
      April 17, 2009 at 7:42 pm

      In regards to the statement: They bar lenders from making loans without proof of a borrower’s income and would require lenders to make sure risky borrowers set aside money to pay for taxes and insurance—Methinks that horse has left the barn …
      The banks don’t need regulating per se … they need to return to sound business practices, period. That simple. Stop making bad loans on bad investments.

  33. proreason
    April 17, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    billk: “Or, the rules banks themselves used before forced to issue loans to people who didn’t qualify by groups like ACORN.”

    yep. The mortgage industry was the most conservative business in the world until, untouched by political hands, they turned into riverboat gamblers suddenly in the 90’s. And of course, the elixer the greedy bastards all saw was the opportunity to lend money to people who would never pay it back. Greedy and dumb.

    But with a guy like Ben at the helm, we’ll fix that problem with the free market system.

    Why, just the other day, he informed us that ALL the problems we have today are with greedy capatalists who were completely uncontrolled by our diligent but overworked regulators. Who knew? and what a relief to know someone like Ben fully understands the problem.

    And thank god he was able to steer Dubya so wisely to the TARP bailout just 6 weeks before the election.

  34. BillK
    April 17, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    Sarah continues to be herself.

    From a clearly depressed AP:

    Palin Stands Against Abortion During Ind. Speech

    Governor Says ‘Life Is Ordained, Life Is Precious’

    By Ken Kusmer

    EVANSVILLE, Ind. — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking at anti-abortion group’s dinner, criticized President Barack Obama for supporting abortion rights and challenged the idea that unplanned pregnancies are a nuisance that can be solved by abortion.

    Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate, spoke to an overflow crowd organizers said numbered 3,000 at the Vanderburgh County Right to Life banquet Thursday night.

    Some in the crowd wore white “Palin 2012″ T-shirts. Earlier, GOP National Chairman Michael Steele described her as one of the party’s standard bearers, though he said it was too early to judge what her standing would be in three years.

    Palin said the challenges she faced during her pregnancy with her son Trig, who was born with Down syndrome, gave her an opportunity to live out her anti-abortion beliefs. She said she prayed often during her pregnancy, especially after tests revealed that her son would be born with the condition.

    “The moment he was born, I knew that moment my prayers had been answered,” Palin said. “Trig is a miracle. He is the best thing that ever happened to me and I want other women to have that opportunity.”

    She challenged the notion that children must be born perfect and that unplanned pregnancies are inconvenient and can be ended by abortion. “I know for sure my son is perfect just as he is, made in the image of God,” she said.

    She asked the crowd to keep working for the “culture of life” in America.

    “Life is ordained, life is precious,” she said.

    Palin said women who can’t give birth should have the opportunity to adopt children who might otherwise be aborted. She mentioned that her own daughter Bristol became pregnant as an unmarried teen and has since given birth to a son.

    Palin also took Obama to task for his support of abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research.

    She said deciding when babies get human rights isn’t above her pay grade — a reference to Obama’s response to a question from the Rev. Rick Warren last year. The Democrat said such questions were above his pay grade.

    Palin received at least two standing ovations. After the speech, she addressed an overflow crowd in another room and thanked them for their support. …

    http://www.thedenverchannel.co.....etail.html

    How can you not love this woman?

    Of course, the AP had to get their digs in:

    Some Alaska lawmakers criticized Palin’s decision to make the trip as the state Legislature approaches its Sunday deadline.

    As if the Governor of a state has anything to do with the legislature other than sign things they pass.

    Finally, I don’t mean to be too “tinfoil hat” about this, but aside from trying to make some subtle racial comment, is there any reason the author even mentioned the color of the tees:

    Some in the crowd wore white “Palin 2012″ T-shirts.

    • Liberals Make Great Speedbumps
      April 18, 2009 at 1:59 am

      Hi BillK,

      I’m not seeing the undercurrent in the tee shirt comment. I just see it as pointing out that the shirts were white. Who knows however, when the msm is involved.

    • BillK
      April 19, 2009 at 3:32 am

      Did the reporter mention what color the clothing of anyone else in the audience was wearing? Or even the color of what Palin was wearing?

You must be logged in to post a comment.


« Home | To Top
« Rove: Biden Is Lying About Scolding Bush | Beeswax – The Easter Bunny Hates You »