Kratovil Watch – Page 5

Kratovil (and Castle) make your utility bills skyrocket in time for the Fourth of July

While I was away this evening Frank Kratovil and Mike Castle made it almost a Delmarva sweep voting in favor of H.R. 2454, the Waxman-Markey “cap and trade” energy tax. Only a brave Democrat in VA-2, Glenn Nye, kept it from being three-for-three in the anti-American vote department.

I’m curious to know what was promised to the two of them to get them to vote for a bill that, according to Bill Wilson of the group Americans for Limited Government, would “increase the prices of oil, gasoline, coal, and natural gas across the board, and thereby ‘incentivize’ alternatives like solar, wind, and hybrid vehicles. It won’t work, because the alternatives are inefficient, have a lower yields, and are more expensive.”

Perhaps the devil is in the details, such as the 300-page amendment tucked into the bill early this morning. In any case, I breathlessly await the poor excuses that both of these Congressmen will have when they drag their tails back to their district over the Fourth of July weekend. I know I have hard questions for them.

Panic in Detroit

And in a lot of other places too; that is if the Waxman-Markey “cap and trade” bill (H.R. 2454 – fair warning: the bill is a 1,092 page .pdf file) gets through the House and on to the Senate.

Here’s just some of the reaction. Let me start with the Americans for Limited Government group:

Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson today strongly urged Congress to reject legislation “that will deliberately increase the costs of gasoline, oil, and coal at a time when the American people can ill afford it.”

“While the American people are dealing with a brutal recession, soaring unemployment, and about to be hit with massive inflation, Congress in the Waxman-Markey bill is proposing to make energy more expensive to service a radical environmentalist agenda,” said Wilson.

“It is up to the Congress to stop this legislation dead on its tracks, before it causes an economic train wreck that will take decades to overcome,” Wilson added.

(snip)

“This bill was rejected last year, and should again be rejected this year, because it’s an economy-killer. It will cost jobs, it will cost progress, and it will cost prosperity. That is the price,” Wilson said.

Wilson says that what makes the bill even worse is that the science behind cap-and-trade is contrived and misleading. “The whole premise of global ‘warming’ is based upon flawed computer models that predict climate change, and are not based on actual observable data that can be confirmed.”

Wilson pointed to a study from APS Physics, “Climate Sensitivity Revisited”. “The Monckton study proves beyond any doubt that the UN International Panel on Climate Change’s computer models that ‘predict’ climate change greatly overstate the impact of carbon emissions. In other words, ‘man-made’ climate change is not real, and yet Congress is ready to reorganize the entire energy sector around the idea.” (Emphasis mine.)

Joining in the chorus was another pro-freedom group, Americans for Prosperity. AFP Policy Director Phil Kerpen:

The Pelosi/Reid/Obama team has been unable to pass cap-and-trade thus far for one simple reason: it’s an enormous tax. The country is struggling to cope with the current recession but the politicians in power don’t seem to care how this bill will affect your family.

President Obama famously said during the campaign “under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” But he also pledged not to raise taxes “even one dime” on middle class Americans. Well it looks like he may be poised to break that promise.

We must band together and speak out with one voice in opposition to this egregious tax hike that will have virtually no beneficial impact on the environment. In fact, the EPA has even admitted that cap-and-trade could increase carbon emissions, as jobs flee the country and the painful regulations this bill will impose.

It’s time to kill this tax-hiking, job-killing, freedom-stifling legislation once and for all and your representative’s vote will be crucial on this bill.

The e-mail urges us to call our Congressman, which in our case is Frank Kratovil.

One voice I pay attention to on energy issues is that of my friend Jane Van Ryan at the American Petroleum Institute. She passed along this letter that API president Jack Gerard sent to each member of Congress while she weighs in on the Energy Tomorrow blog.

I’m not going to lie to you and say I read the entire bill – heck, most Congressmen haven’t either. But the part which worries me the most is buried fairly deep, as most sinister provisions of a measure are. Section 702 states:

SEC. 702. ECONOMY-WIDE REDUCTION GOALS.

`The goals of the Safe Climate Act are to reduce steadily the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions such that–

`(1) in 2012, the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions does not exceed 97 percent of the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions in 2005;

`(2) in 2020, the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions does not exceed 80 percent of the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions in 2005;

`(3) in 2030, the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions does not exceed 58 percent of the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions in 2005; and

`(4) in 2050, the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions does not exceed 17 percent of the quantity of United States greenhouse gas emissions in 2005.

To illustrate this better, I need to use an indicator made available by the federal government. (The key pages of this 439 page .pdf are pages 47 and 51.) If you assume, as I do, that greenhouse gas production is roughly equivalent to energy usage (since our sources haven’t changed significantly in the last few decades – we’re still burning fossil fuels for the most part) then in 2005 each person used 340 million BTU of energy. This is a number which has remained remarkably constant over several decades and actually peaked way back in 1978-79.

To achieve the Waxman-Markey numbers on a per-person basis, though, we’d have to retreat to 330 million BTU of energy per person in just two years. Okay, maybe that’s doable, although the last time we came in under that amount was 1987 (under that evil anti-environmental President Reagan).

But in one decade we would have to retreat to 272 million BTU per person to meet the 2020 mandates. Folks, we haven’t seen that level of energy usage since the early 1960’s. And I don’t know about you, but my lifestyle isn’t conducive to that of an era when the Beatles were the “in” thing musically and many of us weren’t born yet. It gets even worse as restrictions become tougher, bringing our per-person usage back to pre-1949 levels by 2030. (The EIA statistics only date back to 1949.)

If you look at page 47, that chart breaks down where energy usage comes from. Just about 7% of our BTUs come from “renewable” sources and the vast majority of those are hydroelectric (think of dams) and biomass (generally burning garbage). Less than 1% comes from the environmentally favored solar, wind, and geothermal power sources.

And it’s this paucity of renewable energy sources that scares me most. The government can work until doomsday building “clean” sources but they would come nowhere near meeting demand. Naturally, they would need jillions of our tax dollars to do so and that’s where the cap-and-trade “energy tax” comes in.

In a nutshell, this artificially-created market creates a “commodity” out of carbon, where those who use it “excessively” can purchase credits from those who have them available, although all these credits originally eminate from the federal government.

Maryland is one of several states who already have a somewhat similar scam ongoing called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. While there is supposedly a small benefit for all of us through the Maryland Strategic Energy Investment Fund (the fund where Maryland’s RGGI auction proceeds are supposed to go) it looks more like a handy means of income redistribution based on target households. Certainly the miniscule savings we may receive is going to be overshadowed by the higher prices we pay for consumer goods once businesses pass on their increased energy costs under Waxman-Markey.

Just to be clear, if someone wants to put up a windmill in their back yard or slap a solar panel on their roof to “save the planet”, be my guest. But don’t expect me to willingly pay higher taxes and increased utility bills just to make some do-gooder politicians feel better and think they’re making a dent in so-called global warming. Until you blot out the sun, you’re barking up the wrong tree when it comes to climate change.

Update, Thursday 10 a.m. : Paul Blumenthal, writing for the Sunlight Foundation Blog, points out that the 1,000-page plus version of the bill I cited from the GPO was mysteriously fertilized overnight and is now significantly larger.

Another budget-busting feature I found was that any jobs created by the bill had to pay the so-called “prevailing wage” in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. Look for Section 338.

Update 2, Thursday 2 p.m. : Once again this is a featured national post on the Red County site. They even kept my title this time.

Observations for prosperity

Last night I attended what I believe is the third meeting of the local chapter of Americans for Prosperity. (As I often ask, who are the Americans against prosperity?) This post isn’t meant to be a blow-by-blow account as I try to do with Wicomico County Republican Club meetings but a few highlights from last night’s gathering combined with my thoughts on the organization.

While local residents Joe Collins and Julie Brewington are the pair who have done much of the work putting this together, we also were graced by the presence of state AFP head Dave Schwartz, who noted that the Lower Shore chapter is the “biggest early chapter” in the state – that is, in terms of the number attending at this stage of development. In fact, there’s already a possibility Worcester County may split off from the Lower Shore group because of the interest there in their own club.

A key item Schwartz touched on while addressing the club was the Obamacare plan. It’s part of a “buffet” of AFP pet issues nationally that also included “card check” and Obama’a cap and trade proposal, but in this case AFP has already put up a patient advocacy website called Patients United Now.

That’s not to say they’re ignoring state issues either. Schwartz brought up the legislation authorizing speed cameras statewide (SB 277) and Collins once again mentioned an issue which helped him get involved, tax assessments. He passed out a handout explaining the concept of “constant yield”, which generally explains why tax rates get lower each year. On the other hand, he also noted that assessments continue to rise, leaving little to no benefit to taxpayers.

As for speed cameras, despite the fact a bid to take the proposed law to referendum failed, Schwartz pointed out the law can only take effect within each county after a public hearing and authorizing legislation on a local level. Thus, we can fight the idea this fall when the law takes effect. (Okay, Wicomico County Council, where do you stand on the issue?)

That makes for a nice segue into a comment I made midstream (since I got to the meeting a little late) where I asked about a legislative agenda. As I couched it, one criticism of the GOP – and by extension conservative groups – is that they can be tagged as the “party of no” if they don’t put up an alternative to ever-expanding government that addresses legitimate concerns.

Apparently the national AFP will soon be doing this for healthcare, but I’m wondering if this isn’t a job which can and should done at the state level. In terms of coordination on a statewide legislative program, one group I’d suggest AFP works with would be the Maryland Public Policy Institute. Meanwhile, a group our size can easily study the issues on a county level – after all, our protests worked to trim a proposed tax increase in Somerset County, but one can rightfully ask what needs to be made a priority and what is budgetary fat.

In return, one criticism I was asked about was why the local Republican party hasn’t shown a lot of interest in the club and some of its issues. It so happens I may have been the lightning rod because I was the lone GOP elected official there (based on my Central Committee post) but this was a legitimate question.

I can’t speak for everyone else on the Central Committee or our other Republican elected officials, but perhaps there aren’t the numbers yet to goad our party establishment into action. There were about 40 people in the room from the four Lower Shore counties, but there were three of what could be called “opinion leaders” – the local blogosphere was well represented with G.A. Harrison (Delmarva Dealings) and Joe Albero (Salisbury News) there as well. Most likely each will have their own take on the event, along with anyone who contributes to AFP’s own state blog (Subprime Maryland).

However, given the reluctance of the Tea Party movement (which helped spawn interest in AFP locally) and the Republican Party establishment to embrace each other despite what seemingly would be common cause, it may be a little bit of wishful thinking forseeing a host of local politicians to join the ranks – particularly when they often end up on opposite sides of issues.

I’ll close with one example of this. There was a brief mention of term limits – I think it was part of an offhand comment I made as a matter of fact. As it is the goal of practically every politician to be re-elected as often as possible, a group which advocates what to some is an artificial limit on the will of the people would certainly be at loggerheads with someone who enjoys holding office and wants to stay there for decades.

Thus, there may not be much hope that we become a classical political movement because most of us have no desire to be inside the system. Needless to say, fixing the system from without makes it a more difficult task. But it’s not an impossible one.

A clunker of a deal

After I wrote about the possible loss of jobs in the local auto industry on Wednesday, I wanted to bring up a bill which passed the House on Tuesday which sounds innocent enough but to me sets a dangerous precedent and insults my intelligence on several levels.

Its formal name is the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act but H.R. 2751 is better known as the “Cash for Clunkers Act”. According to this story from The Hill by Jim Snyder and Silla Brush, the bill would allow consumers to collect on a voucher up to $4500 if they trade in a “gas guzzling” car for one which gets more mileage per gallon. Obviously the concept was enticing enough to get both our local Congressmen to vote in its favor.

I’m sure many will ask what is wrong with this concept. However, we see just how the government is handling its running of the American auto industry and how they’re attempting to take away choice from the consumer by adopting stricter CAFE gas mileage standards. Moreover, I’m very leery of regulating behavior on the public dime, since the estimated tab for the program ranges up to $4 billion. To me it’s much like adding a particular tax break for doing whatever action the government wishes one to do.

At the moment the voucher goes toward buying a vehicle which gets as little as 4 more miles per gallon. But as the Hill story notes, the manner of payoff is still negotiable and may be set up to eliminate any chance that a car fitting the classic definition of a “gas guzzler” (e.g. sport-utility vehicle, light-duty truck) qualifies for the taxpayer-funded subsidy.

In an era where we’ve proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that throwing taxpayer money at a problem can make it far worse than it was when it started, this program once again promises to be a never-ending boondoggle that will only siphon money from taxpayers and line the pockets of some large entity. It’s yet another case where a Congress which should have known better to mess with the free market is listening to the wrong set of people with the wrong set of priorities.

Explanation impossible? Well, maybe not.

Honestly, the production could have been better and I haven’t actually seen the ad run because I don’t watch much local TV except for MASN and that network doesn’t put many political ads on during the summer a year and a half out from the general election. Nonetheless, this ad is quite funny in a “sad, but true” way:

I don’t doubt that Frank Kratovil is “just following orders” because he’s a freshman legislator from a vulnerable district and his first priority is getting himself re-elected. Otherwise, it may be tough for him to continue living in the shadow of the Bay Bridge so he can claim to hold those “Eastern Shore values”.

There is an element of disingenuousness, though, about the NRCC’s claim of Kratovil “voting with Nancy Pelosi 89% of the time.” Aside from the really conservative folks who simply skip votes renaming a post office or honoring some sports team for winning a championship, most Congressmen do vote with Nancy Pelosi a staggering percentage of the time, and Frank has occasionally gone off the liberal reservation to vote properly on issues – although far less often than a real conservative in the Andy Harris mold would have done. Nor should it be said that Kratovil doesn’t attempt to play on that liberal staple, class envy.

Even on a bill Frank introduced which would help out small business there is a hesitation of sorts, as in this example. Why stop the break in 2011? Is there some magic formula that says we’re only allowed to keep our deduction through 2011 before it hurts the government? In a way that practice reminds me of the grants that help out cities on a temporary basis until they have to come up with the money themselves after the grant runs its course – usually resulting in either layoffs or increased taxes.

In any event, enjoy this initial salvo of Campaign 2010 and gird your loins from occasional shots across the bow for the next 10 months or so. It’ll start getting really nasty about this time next year.

LSYR fundraiser

I know you’ll all complain about the last Weekend of local rock post for two reasons: one because I should stick to politics and the other being I didn’t resize the photos like I usually do before I put together the post – so it’ll take f-o-r-e-v-e-r to load. Sorry about that!

In all honesty I could have made this WoLR 25 because many of the photos will fall under that category. But yesterday my lady friend and I sat out in the sun and enjoyed a nice day listening to the music and either renewing acquaintances or making new ones, depending on the person’s perspective and who we met.

Let me throw the pictures on, starting here. There are nine photos.

I stood on the stage and took this shot looking back out over the crowd. At most points there were between 30 and 40 there, the number fluctuated during the afternoon.

These were some of the people enjoying the pulled pork and other goodies put out by the McIvers, who graciously served as hosts.

I’m going to do the political pictures first even though the band opened things up. They played a set before the remarks and one afterward so my chronological order isn’t that important.

This man is Jim Rutledge. As far as I know he's the first Republican to step up and challenge Barbara Mikulski for her U.S Senate seat next year.

First to speak was a new political face; his name is Jim Rutledge. One could assert he’s mad as hell and won’t take it anymore because he’s a political novice looking to replace Senator Mikulski – an uphill battle to be sure.

After a somewhat lengthy introduction, he more briefly touched on some of the focal points of his campaign – national security, taxes, and the Second Amendment were some highlights.

I know someone else who has one of these on her car. It's called speaking common sense.

We’ve also penciled Rutledge in to speak at our June WCRC meeting, so perhaps more people can hear from Jim when our merry band next meets. You may have seen him yesterday evening at the Hebron Carnival since he planned on stopping by there too.

Page Elmore stressed the importance of next year's election because there's been a lot of damage done by the majority in Annapolis.

Page Elmore added a few words in his typical low-key style. I was a little surprised not to see him in his usual red shirt. He’s quite concerned about keeping some of the seats the GOP already has because of some possible changes locally.

Our keynote speaker actually was the briefest one. State Senator Harris just pointed out a couple votes his future opponent made and said he wouldn't have voted the same way.

Andy Harris isn’t quite in campaign mode yet, but mentioned we are just 17 months and 10 days from the 2010 election. It’s going to be an interesting one given his opponent now has a record – certainly Harris will point out its many shortcomings.

It occurs to me that I forgot to take a “spread” picture so you don’t get to see all the great food we had to partake in. So I’ll just get to the band pictures and wrap this up.

The band is called “The Occasionals” and played a number of classic rock staples – quite well, I might add.

The three guys who make up The Occasionals are shown as a group here.

Here's the guitar player closer up.

This one is the bass player closer up.

And finally a neat shot of the drummer.

Also, I should complement the guys who did the sound, it was excellent. Okay, perhaps the people across the way had objections but it’s not like the party was an all-night affair. Get a life people!

I spoke to YR head Mark Biehl, who thought the turnout was excellent for a first-time event. Of course, there were lessons to be learned and fine tuning to do for what the LSYRs plan as an annual affair but overall Biehl termed the gathering a “successful” one. There was a 50-50 drawing which brought in a few more dollars and a post-party gun shoot I didn’t attend – all in all, the day (and previous night for those who tended the cooking pig) was quite eventful.

Finally, yesterday after I came back home I found out someone there supposedly had some “choice words” for me when we met. Well, that someone didn’t come up to me and tell them to my face and it’s not like he didn’t have the opportunity so I’ll leave it at that and let both you and I guess what they might have been. Heck if I know, but I’m not going to lose any sleep over it either.

Simply put I’m looking forward to promoting and enjoying more LSYR events as time goes on and permits!

Two-sided politics

Half of this will be an announcement and confirmation of an upcoming event and the other half news involving the subject’s probable opponent next year.

Let’s start out with confirmation that Andy Harris will indeed serve as the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for the Lower Shore Young Republicans on Saturday, May 23rd at noon. It will be located at the McIver residence, 26144 Nanticoke Road in Salisbury and the cost for the pig roast, fried chicken, beer, and entertainment (provided by The Occasionals) is just $15 – cheap!

I would have liked a longer press release but I need to talk about format with the LSYR folks.

Anyway, it brings me to a vote that was taken in the House the other day. Once again, Frank Kratovil sides with the special interests and not the people. Sure, let’s allow ACORN more federal money!

Here’s an explanation from Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota.

Was Frank (our Frank, not the Barney of Massachusetts) for it before he was against it, or vice versa, or just plain voting the way the party bosses told him to? Heck if I know, but why should ACORN get a dime of federal funding given their track record of corruption?

Salary drive

On Thursday last we found out that our newly-minted Congressman, who’s sworn to uphold the law, isn’t above shaping it to punish those he deems unworthy of the money they’ve legally become entitled to.

With this vote on H.R. 1586 Frank Kratovil (along with 87 Republicans who should be hanging their heads in shame) decided that contractual obligations completed long before the TARP money was given to AIG (who in turn laundered it to dozens of other recipients) – and which comprised less than 1% of the total payout – mean nothing when the federal government takes over a large chunk of the company.

Certainly the bonuses seem excessive and one can argue that the legislation is an incentive not to take the federal bailout money in the first place. Truthfully the federal government should not have bailed out AIG in the first place but unfortunately they already cast that die some time ago.

But Thursday’s vote also signified another step in the continuing attitude change among Congress that they’re just damn well entitled to make decisions for the rest of us when it comes to how a business should be run; never mind that their sole expertise seems to come from accepting campaign contributions from many of these same outfits.

Moreover, the hypocricy of screaming about this less than 1 percent of the AIG money devoted to bonuses intended to insure an employee stays put as long as the company needs him yet forgiving the pork-laden stimulus bill because the earmarks “only” comprised 1 percent of the total is nearly beyond belief until you look at who’s in charge of the place.

It’s more unfortunate that Congress is becoming interested in selecting the winners and losers in American business. Those in the financial sector being counted on at one time to save the venerable AIG ship were instead tossed overboard in a fit of rage because what Congress and both the Obama and Bush administrations have attempted as a fix hasn’t worked very well if at all. On the other hand, Congress received its annual raise and they’re not moving swiftly to enact a 90% tax on that which they were legally entitled to (because of legislation written in such a manner to make raises automatic without a recorded vote for them) but didn’t earn based on lousy performance.

Given the results of what has come to pass in recent days Congress shouldn’t have earned a penny over the last two sessions and it’s dubious that much in the two to three previous ones is worthy of compensation either.

Free thuggery

We all knew it was coming, the question was how long it would take to become a reality. The misnamed “Employee Free Choice Act of 2009” was introduced earlier this week. And my only surprise at H.R. 1409 is that Frank Kratovil’s name isn’t on it as a co-sponsor (at least not yet. The unions do have to get what they paid for last year.)

In a nutshell, what EFCA2009 provides is the opportunity for unions to twist the arms of workers so they sign a card claiming their support for a union shop. Once the union gets 50% plus 1 of the eligible employees the union is allowed in. For their part, the unions claim that management attempts the same sort of dirty tricks but in neither case should a secret ballot be influenced. Apparently unions want to reduce their chances of losing since they only win these elections about 2/3 of the time.

Because the bill has 222 co-sponsors, there’s little chance of it being stopped in the House – in truth, there’s little chance Frank Kratovil will be strongarmed into going into the record as voting for it unless there’s a procedural need to do so. Certainly he knows that the First District would probably rather see good right-to-work legislation than live by the EFCA2009.

Where this bill may be killed is in the Senate – that is if the GOP sticks together and sells its case to the American people. In all honesty we’re probably not ever going to get a significant portion of the hardcore union vote anyway so there’s little to lose by stopping H.R. 1409 dead in its tracks.

On the other hand, by allowing the plunder of small businesses by union locals thirsty for new sources of revenue from the dues they collect (much of which is immediately funneled into the coffers of the Democrats) the GOP puts itself at a severe monetary disadvantage by not stopping this bill. With President Obama already overturning a number of business-friendly provisions enacted under the Bush Administration there’s little doubt that EFCA2009 is yet another payback to Big Labor – one that could yield an even greater dividend than bailing out the United Auto Workers provided.

The group Americans for Job Security has set up a Facebook site to oppose the EFCA2009 initiative, and I encourage those Facebook members who believe that a worker’s right to a secret ballot should remain in place to join. Otherwise you may arrive at work one day to find Guido and Lefty waiting at the time clock with a paper for you to sign.

The 2012 campaign continues

And if you don’t believe me, just check out this video from the Obama front group “Organizing for America”:

You’ll notice about 2/3 of the way through that Mitch Stewart solicits e-mail addresses – again, a clever way to build up and expand the database originally started way back in Howard Dean’s abortive 2004 Presidential campaign and enhanced with Obama’s 2008 run.

Then again there’s nothing wrong with activism and involvement; it just needs to have a push from the correct direction. It’s interesting that Stewart blames “special interests” for standing in Obama’s way when it’s the special interests who have the most to gain from Obama’s agenda – that is if you consider Big Labor, supporters of a rewarmed HillaryCare, the teachers’ unions, radical environmentalists, and corporations who have gained from the massive government involvement in their affairs and are now rent-seeking as special interests – most right-thinking Americans who inhabit the producer class do believe those groups are special interests.

President Obama submitted the largest budget in American history with the largest projected deficit in American history at a time when the government is actually being run via continuing resolutions because the current budget is still being ironed out. Something about that just doesn’t make sense, particularly when it’s his party running Congress.

Seven weeks into an Obama presidency it almost appears that he’s already running the country in perpetual campaign mode much as President Clinton did during the first four years of his run. (The second term was more damage control mode thanks to the Monica Lewinsky scandal and accompanying impeachment drive. In Obama’s case the scandals seem to be falling amongst his underlings, though.)

It goes without saying that little of Obama’s agenda can be stopped in the House of Representatives and given the tendency of a small group of Senate RINO’s to place what they consider political expediency above principle it’s not likely that body will be much of a speedbump either.

But the one thing both House and Senate are afraid of is a large-scale backlash from constituents – witness the firestorm conservatives caused on immigration or the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination.

I’m considering this video an effort to short-circuit the prospect of a conservative grassroots rebellion by isolating those on the left who would be most likely to be active and sending out their competing propaganda to a list of activists all their own, one backed by much of the mainstream media. This is particularly true in our Congressional district, where a freshman Democrat who barely won election (and flip-flopped on the stimulus bill) will most likely face a strongly conservative challenger next year.

So I bring this video to your attention even though it’s from a source that would normally not attract my notice as much. It proves a point that we on the right need to stay on our toes and not let the intraparty squabbles such as Limbaugh vs. Steele or Limbaugh vs. Newt distract us from the main goal of squelching the socialist Obamanation agenda.

An apt cartoon

If a picture is worth a thousand words, then it looks like I can save a whole lot of typing by inserting this recent cartoon by Michael Ramirez:

Now there is an argument that there should be some RINO pellets in that pile and that contention is a correct one to an extent. However, when you consider that had any of the 58 Senate Democrats thoughtfully departed from what became the party line and dissented from the stimulus package, you should realize that those “no” votes would have been enough to sink it as well. Certainly there is plenty of blame to assign to Senators Specter, Snowe, and Collins, but there’s a lot of Senators who have a “D” after their name who are equally guilty. At least there were still seven Democrats in the House who showed some cajones – unlike our so-called “independent” representative who doesn’t trust in the people to drive our economy despite the fact they’ve done it for what, 230 years or so?

Anyway, what Ramirez drew up simply serves as a timesaver for my rant. We’re stuck with this thing now, at least insofar as immediate spending is concerned. Perhaps over the next four years we’ll put the adults back in charge and terminate what we can of this boondoggle. Until then, look for a bleak economic outlook and yet more attempts to jumpstart the economy by attaching the cables to the tailpipe instead of the engine.

Showing his true (blue) colors

Oh, the tangled webs politicians weave. You know, for a guy who’d only had one elected post prior to becoming Congressman – a post which wasn’t by its nature political (as a State’s Attorney, he should have been concerned with enforcement of the law, not creating it), Frank Kratovil has shown that he can play the political games like a ten-term veteran.

Let’s take yesterday’s stimulus package votes as an example. First, though, I want to back up and repeat what Frank released when he voted against the original House version of the stimulus package:

Today, Congressman Frank Kratovil voted against a proposed economic stimulus package saying that not enough of its spending was focused on immediate, short-term stimulus measures.

“We’re already facing the largest budget deficit in our nation’s history. That means we can’t afford to get this wrong. We need to make some tough choices about where we can and can’t afford to be spending taxpayer money, and I’m not convinced that this package focused enough of its spending on the programs most likely to have a short-term economic impact.”

While the stimulus package does include needed investments in infrastructure and education, the short-term stimulative effect of these projects are watered down by discretionary spending on other programs with less potential for short-term economic impact. Kratovil indicated that he would like to see more of the focus shifted back toward shovel-ready projects most likely to create jobs and improve our transportation, energy, and information technology infrastructure in the short term. Although many of these programs are admirable causes, they certainly are not emergencies and should not be lumped in with legitimate efforts to strengthen our economy and get people back to work.

“Clearly Congress needs to act, but we have to act prudently,” said Kratovil. “Moving forward, I’m going to work with like-minded colleagues on both sides of the aisle to advocate for more disciplined, focused spending in hopes of producing a better bill during conference with the Senate” said Kratovil.

(Emphasis in original)

Well, given the fact that Frank only had a short amount of time to consider the revised bill you wonder what was added into or subtracted from it for him to change his mind from one passage vote in late January to the next yesterday.

But perhaps a better question is what changed his mind in just a few minutes. Continue reading “Showing his true (blue) colors”