Imagine if a Republican...

Improperly accepted funds and got reprimanded by the House Ethics Committee. The media would say how unethical he is. How could such an unethical person hold a seat in the House? It would be a storm to get said Republican to resign.

This scandal has been getting investigated for months and it has barely gotten any news. Why? Because Charlie Rangel is a Democrat. Who chairs the Ways and Means committee. He, more than anyone else, knew what he was doing was wrong. But he just figured he'd get away with it because he is one of the beautiful people.

The House ethics committee has admonished Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) for improperly accepting reimbursement for trips to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008 and has ordered him to repay the costs of the trip.

Rangel, who chairs the powerful Ways and Means Committee and has served in the House for more than four decades, has been under investigation by the ethics committee for two separate matters for more than two years.
The ethics committee empaneled two subcommittees to look into allegations against Rangel. One focused on charges that he improperly used his office to raise money for an academic center at City College of New York named after him and allegations that he failed to pay taxes on rental income from villa he owns in the Dominican Republican, among other charges.

Democrats tried to push through a pro-terrorist bill

Luckily the Republicans wouldn't let the bill go through. Just shows all of us how serious the Democrats are about defending America. They care more about the terrorists than they do about us American citizens.

What’s more, the proposed bill is directed at “any officer or employee of the intelligence community” conducting a “covered interrogation.” The definition of “covered interrogation” is sweeping — including any interrogation done outside the U.S., in the course of a person’s official duties on behalf of the government. Thus, if the CIA used waterboarding in training its officers or military officers outside the U.S., this would theoretically be indictable conduct under the statute.

Waterboarding is not all. The Democrats’ bill would prohibit — with a penalty of 15 years’ imprisonment — the following tactics, among others:

- “Exploiting the phobias of the individual”

- Stress positions and the threatened use of force to maintain stress positions

- “Depriving the individual of necessary food, water, sleep, or medical care”

- Forced nudity

- Using military working dogs (i.e., any use of them — not having them attack or menace the individual; just the mere presence of the dog if it might unnerve the detainee and, of course, “exploit his phobias”)

- Coercing the individual to blaspheme or violate his religious beliefs (I wonder if Democrats understand the breadth of seemingly innocuous matters that jihadists take to be violations of their religious beliefs)

- Exposure to “excessive” cold, heat or “cramped confinement” (excessive and cramped are not defined)

- “Prolonged isolation”

- “Placing hoods or sacks over the head of the individual”

Naturally, all of these tactics are interspersed with such acts as forcing the performance of sexual acts, beatings, electric shock, burns, inducing hypothermia or heat injury — as if all these acts were functionally equivalent.

Sad...just so very sad.

How is it possible to even compare the two?

Senator Harkins thinks passing Health Care reform is the same as desegregation and the Civil Rights bill. That is just a horrible comparison.

The fight for health reform is akin to the fight for desegregation and other civil rights, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said Thursday.

"We don't allow segregation on the basis of race," Harkin, the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, said at the White House healthcare summit.

"And yet we still allow segregation today in America on the basis of your health," Harkin added. "Why should we allow that to happen?"

Harkin has been one of the most vociferous proponents of healthcare reform in the Senate, and has been a top proponent of the public option. (He did concede in recent days, though, that a measure establishing a government-run health plan was unlikely to pass.)

He is doing a disservice to what the blacks had to go through back then. The NCAAP should be going after Harkin. I'm not even sure how they are even similar in the least.

No one in America is denied health care. If anyone is sick, hurt, dieing or anything they can go to the emergency room. It is illegal for the ER to turn anyone down. It's nothing like before the Civil Rights were blacks weren't allowed in white only schools or white only bathrooms.

Harkin is just a fear mongerer. He is trying to scare people into Health Care reform that will bankrupt our country.

This is how Democrats think bipartisanship should be

Obama called for a bipartisan meeting to discuss a health care bill. And this is how he runs it.

President Obama pledged to "listen" at the outset of his much-ballyhooed bipartisan health care summit on Thursday. Turns out he meant he'd be listening to his own voice.

By the end of the televised event, Mr. Obama had spoken for 119 minutes - nine minutes more than the 110 minutes consumed by 17 Republicans. The 21 Democratic lawmakers used 114 minutes, giving the president and his supporters a whopping 233 minutes, according to a "talk clock" kept by GOP aides.

From the beginning, no one could agree on anything, even how much time each side had used. When a miffed Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, pointed out early on that Democrats had controlled 52 minutes to Republicans' 24, Mr. Obama jumped in to dispute even that.

This is great bipartisanship for Democrats. Actually it's better than what they usually give us. Of course Obama got the crap kicked out of him when the Republicans did talk. So it is no surprise that Obama and the Democrats kept them quiet for as long as possible.

But of course Obama thinks he is above everyone else. Since he is the Messiah. He should be held on a pedestal above everyone else.

The proof is in the pudding

If you raise taxes government revenue will go down. It's just common sense. If you raise the cost of something people will go else where. So if you raise the taxes on the rich they will just move.

Montgomery County officials are wondering where all the millionaires have gone, as the shrinking pool of wealthy taxpayers is wreaking havoc on the county's finances.

County officials recently pegged the budget deficit for the next fiscal year at $761.5 million. Much of the gap is caused by a drop in income tax revenue, and much of that drop is tied to a small number of wealthy county residents who lost money in a poor economy, died or fled the state's new millionaire tax.

Montgomery lost $4.6 billion in taxable income from tax years 2007 to 2008. More than 82 percent of that drop comes from taxpayers with incomes of $1 million or more, county records show. During that period, the number of income tax returns above $1 million fell from 3,172 to 2,321, a 27 percent decrease.

A weak economy that ate away at capital gains and slowed the growth of small businesses can account for much of the drop. But there's been a fierce debate since the state raised taxes for millionaires to 6.25 percent from 5.5 percent in 2008 whether millionaires are fleeing en masse for states with lower tax burdens.

Same principles go for businesses. If you lower taxes and make it easier for companies to do business they will produce more. Because of that the government revenue will go up.

If states want more millionaires and businesses to come to them they should lower taxes. It is an extremely easy and quick fix. But the Democrats never learn. They'd rather raise taxes and regulations to harm the rich. It is typical class warfare. They want to make everyone equally miserable instead of trying to make every happy.

With all due respect. Yes it is

House GOP says it isn't hypocrisy to ask for "stimulus" money even thought they voted against it. Well I totally disagree. The House GOP should be doing everything they can to try and reverse the so called stimulus and not waste the tax payers money. Which only hurts the economy more.

Amid mounting criticism, House Republicans said this week it is not hypocritical to vote against the stimulus and later seek money from it for their districts.

After standing united in opposition to the president’s economic stimulus bill a little more than a year ago, many Republicans have touted the benefits of that measure back in their districts, according to a comprehensive list compiled by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).
Citing the stimulus and other measures, the DCCC claims that 91 House Republicans are talking out of both sides of their mouths.

In recent days, former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) have echoed the DCCC claims.

But key House Republicans argue that a vote against the stimulus bill should not prevent them from writing a letter on behalf of constituents seeking grants available from the $787 billion measure. Some of them do say, however, that Republicans should refrain from attending photo-ops.

This was one of the reasons, us on the right, were so angered by Scott Brown's vote earlier in the week. The Republican Party is supposed to be the fiscally responsible ones. The minute we start taking the stimulus money for pet projects that puts our fingers on it. Makes the Republicans just as responsible for ruining our economy.

It's a good start

And hopefully the youngens among us are starting to smarten up.

The "Millennial Generation" of young voters played a big role in the resurgence of the Democratic Party in the 2006 and 2008 elections, but their attachment to the Democratic Party weakened markedly over the course of 2009. The Democratic advantage over the Republicans in party affiliation among young voters, including those who "lean" to a party, reached a whopping 62% to 30% margin in 2008. But by the end of 2009 this 32-point margin had shrunk to just 14 points: 54% Democrat, 40% Republican

It is still a sad state that so many people are brainwashed into the notion that socialism actually works. But it's better than I expect considering that high schools, college and the media are predominantly liberal. It takes a lot of courage to think on your own and go against the grain.

This is a testament to the Tea Party movement. With out them a lot of people wouldn't have got the message and been educated to the conservative movement. I've said this thousand of times before, this is a center right country. The American public is attracted to a conservative view. They just need to here it articulated correctly. Which the tea partyers are doing.

This is what the Republican Party and the conservative has lost over the years. They did a great job getting their message out in 1994. But they stopped getting their message out after they were elected to a majority in Congress. They made the mistake thinking they had a mandate and could stop educating the public. I just hope, after the conservatives take over Congress in 2010 and 2012, that they don't stop educating the public.