Category Archives: Hypocrisy

Did you know…?

Posted on by

…that the 2nd Amendment does not protect hunting nor hunters? According to one Federal Judge, it does not.

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140509023613/vsbattles/images/8/8f/Elmer_fudd-2.jpgHave you heard the term, “Zumbo” or “Fudd?” It refers to the cartoon character, Elmer Fudd. Second Amendment rights activists use it in another form.

Fudd: Slang term for a “casual” gun owner; eg; a person who typically only owns guns for hunting or shotgun sports and does not truly believe in the true premise of the second amendment. These people also generally treat owners/users of so called “non sporting” firearms like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with unwarranted scorn or contempt.

I’ve not heard of any Second Amendment supporter use the term. I can understand how it could be used when we have hunters and hunter advocates support gun control. If it doesn’t affect hunting and hunters, they aren’t concerned. After all, an AR isn’t a hunting rifle (tell that to numerous varmint hunters!)

A legal case about hunting came before a Judge. The hunters attempted to use the 2nd Amendment in their case. The Judge ruled the 2nd Amendment didn’t apply to hunting.

Judge Rules That The Second Amendment Doesn’t Protect Hunting

Posted by on June 19, 2014 at 5:29 pm

“Fudd” isn’t exactly a term of endearment.

Fudds are generally uninterested in the Second Amendment, and are therefore the favorite of anti-gun politicians and the news media, like this collection of Fudds in a recent Jamie Tarabay article used to attack the National Rifle Association. They could generally care less about fighting for gun rights, because they assume that their guns are safe.

How is that working out for you now, Elmer?

A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit by a hunters’ group that had challenged Pennsylvania’s long-standing ban on Sunday hunting, saying she saw no proof the hunters’ constitutionally protected rights were being harmed.

U.S. District Judge Yvette Kane made the ruling in a suit brought by the Lancaster County-based Hunters United for Sunday Hunting against the Pennsylvania Game Commission, the agency that enforces the state’s game code.

Kane said she could find no proof that courts have extended Second Amendment protections to include recreational hunting. She also found that the hunters could not prove that the law unfairly discriminated between classes of hunters or that the ban on Sunday hunting violates their religious freedoms.

As stunning as this is for the Fudds, the ruling must be even more perplexing for gun control cultists. They’ve spent the last 30 or more years arguing that if the Second Amendment applied at all outside of their collectivist interpretation, then surely, the Second Amendment only applied for the purposes of hunting.

Now a federal judge has knocked over that strawman, and stomped that sucker flat.

It’s going to be interesting to see if this ruling registers with the gun controllers—my guess is that they’ll ignore it entirely, since it is inconvenient—but even more interesting to see if this has any effect on the Fudds, who are probably going to find out that they aren’t the “protected species” that they always assumed that they were.

When you hear hunters support gun control, tell them about this. They have as much invested in a strong 2nd Amendment as do the rest of us.

Facebook

Things that make me…

Posted on by

Laugh.

I really shouldn’t chuckle at this news item. The article doesn’t mention the victim’s political views, just his profession in an institution known for being a liberal haven. It really isn’t something to applaud, being an assault on someone in the pursuit of his profession.

On the other hand, I also have a strong sense of, “What goes around, comes around,” and fair turnabout, or just retribution. It’s root issue probably isn’t any of those but…it’s still funny to me.

GMU law professor pepper sprayed during lecture

By Tom Roussey, March 26, 2014 – 05:54 pm

(WJLA) – Several charges are pending against a man who walked into a classroom on George Mason University’s Arlington campus and pepper sprayed a law professor.

The school says that on Wednesday afternoon during a law and literature class in this fourth floor classroom, intruder entered. He jumped up on the desk, announced that he was making a citizen’s arrest, and then pepper sprayed Professor Tyler Cowen in the face.

Cowen ran into the hall, and the intruder chased him until an off-duty officer who happened to be a student in class caught him at one of the building’s exits and held him until police arrived.

ABC7 was the only station there as police took the suspect into custody.

Ironically, the school says Cowen was teaching a unit on vigilantes — so some students may have initially thought that the situation was fake.

Some of my closest friends are lawyers; I hope they don’t take offense. :mrgreen:

***

Applaud.

I don’t subscribe to his politics nor his party. I can, however, applaud his determination and stamina—something all too many ‘Pub candidates lack.

Grossman passes kidney stone during gubernatorial debate

By Akilah Johnson | Globe Staff   March 26, 2014

There were more than a few pained expressions worn by gubernatorial candidates during Tuesday night’s forum dedicated to issues affecting Massachusetts’s LGBTQ community, mostly after Scott Lively, an anti-gay candidate running to “advance a biblical world view,” responded to questions.

But state Treasurer Steve Grossman, who is a Democrat from Newton, was actually in physical pain, said campaign spokesman Chandra Allard. Grossman was in the throes of passing a kidney stone, something often compared to the pain of childbirth, during the 90-minute debate, she said.

The forum was held by MassEquality and WGBH at the Boston Public Library in Copley Square and included eight gubernatorial candidates — the five Democrats and three independents, all of whom showed their support for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community except for Lively.

Grossman’s pain-level was a 10 on a scale of 1-to-10, Allard said, and yet he fervently answered questions on everything from transgender rights and mandatory sex education to issues facing youth and aging members of the LGBTQ community.

Grossman has suffered chronic kidney stones, getting them on and off for the last 30 years, said Allard. He woke up in pain at 3:45 a.m. Tuesday morning, but she said he insisted on continuing with the day, which included attending GetKonnected’s Diversity Game Changer Awards ceremony after the forum ended.

Word of Grossman’s stone — which has inspired a parody Twitter account — spread via the micro-blogging website, as did the news that he finally passed the stone, sometime during the awards ceremony.

“I’m grateful that I made it out, but I know some of my fellow stones remain confined. We must #FreeTheStones! #mapoli,”@grossmansstone tweeted Wednesday morning.

***

Feel justified.

Those of us on our side of the political fence, the conservatives opposing the democrats, liberals and RINOs, are having a sense of justice when they read the article below. This politician was a Brandy poster-boy for gun control, registration and the restriction of private firearm ownership.

He’s been busted for gun-running. Not selling just illegal firearms. No, he was selling, among other things, missiles and shoulder-fired rockets. In the indictment, documenting a meeting between Lee and an undercover FBI agent, the indicate contained, “Pg. 98-99: The undercover agent asked about the availability of shoulder fired missiles or rockets. Senator Yee responded ‘I told him about rocket launchers and things like that.’ Senator Yee asked (the agent) to provide an inventory list of desired weapons and he would see what they can do.”

***

Angry.

This section is about the continuing falseness of liberals—at all levels of political activity. On the local level, I filed for ‘Pub Precinct Committeeman and was unopposed. However, other ‘Pubs are being opposed—by dems and libs running for those same ‘Pub Committee positions. I wrote an article recently about Infiltration. This is another example.

But Infiltration is not the only, nor the leading tactic of dems and libs. No, they advocate the use of the oldest deception of all: Lies.

Matthew Yglesias is Juice Vox Media’s Village Idiot and Liar-in-Chief

Well, now we know why the Washington Post did not want to invest in Ezra Klein’s “explanatory journalism” nonsense. Turns out it is just a left-wing propaganda tool trying to spin instead of explain.

Let us turn our attention to Matthew Yglesias, the Executive Editor of Ezra Klein’s new site. As my friend Pejman Yousefzadeh has well documented, Yglesias is just not that bright. He thinks Joe Lieberman is a dumb Jewish politician; was shocked to discover Senators represent the states as opposed to populations; was unaware of a black conservative tradition; couldn’t understand why Miami didn’t expand westward (hint: a giant swamp); had no idea an incumbent President had been defeated in primaries (Jimmy Carter lost 13 primaries in 1980 to Ted Kennedy and Jerry Brown); thought Bobby Jindal’s reputation for intelligence was just ethnic stereotyping; argued it was okay to lie about having kids; wanted to know why Egypt didn’t have a Parliamentary system as if it’d matter and, by the way, it already does have one; thinks there are too many banks; thinks no banks have been chartered in 2013 even though banks were chartered in 2013; and the list goes on.

More importantly, Matthew Yglesias believes it is okay for liberals to lie in debates. He claimed “Fighting dishonesty with dishonesty is sometimes the right thing for advocates to do”. After all, according to Yglesias, Republicans are bad people; there are few if any conservatives he respects; and liberals aren’t condescending enough to conservatives who make stupid arguments no matter how smart they are.

So it’s okay to lie.

Which brings us to his video at the JuiceVox Media website. He tries to explain the National Debt and out of the gate beings with a lie. He claims the national debt is $5 trillion less than the U.S. Treasury says it is.

Then he uses deficit and debt interchangeably.

Then he claims the U.S. Government can never run out of money.

He goes through all of this to conclude that the national debt, which he understated, is just not anything to worry about.

This isn’t education. It is not explaining. It is left-wing propaganda. It is also sponsored by General Electric. Why is General Electric sponsoring left-wing propaganda?

Perhaps they don’t know. After all, Yglesias himself says it is okay for the left to lie in order to win an argument.

Never forget whom we oppose—and why we do so. It’s truth versus deceit, as much as it is Liberty versus Tyranny. You must know for whom and for what you stand for, and for what you do not. It’s an easy choice for me. How will you choose?

Facebook

Hypocrisy

Posted on by

The news this morning is filled with items that the surviving NewTown students are going back to school at a new location. There will be armed guards at the school to insure their safety.  Too bad they didn’t think of that at their old school.

Newtown shooting survivors go back to school

MONROE, Conn. Classes resumed Thursday for the students of Sandy Hook Elementary School for the first time since last month’s massacre in Newtown, where a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six educators.

With their original school still being treated as a crime scene, the more than 400 students are attending classes at a refurbished school in the neighboring town of Monroe. Law enforcement officers have been guarding the new school, and by the reckoning of police, it is “the safest school in America.”

I seem to remember a few years ago, well a couple of decades ago, when drugs and gangs were problems in schools, there were armed officers assigned to schools then. I don’t know how many there still are. I believe they are now called “resource” officers.

That leads to the following question. Why is the NEA and AFT so strongly against armed guards in school? They don’t want armed, trained teachers, either? So what do they propose?

** crickets **

They have no solution and don’t want ours either. Perhaps they would be happier in a different area of employment? I wonder how RTW would affect their, the NEA and AFT, attitude, hmmm?

***

I see that our Senator Roy Blount was bragging that he voted for the new tax plan and “averted” the fiscal cliff. Now we’re told the Senate only had access to that plan for 3 minutes before it came to a vote and it’s filled with pork, new taxes and few, if any, spending cuts.

So, Senator Blount, you’re proud of voting for a bill that you did not read, knew nothing of its contents, raised taxes and did not cut any spending. Is that correct? Then why do you expect to be re-elected?

No bill would be better than more pork, more spending. If the bill isn’t passed, the government won’t stop. I don’t see you refusing Obama’s bribe—your pay-raise, either.

RINO.

***

Something is going on in Illinois. It appears the Illinois legislature is jumping on Diane Feinstein’s gun-grabbing plan. This notice from the Illinois State Rifle Association was sent to its members this week.

SPECIAL ALERT UPDATE– YOUR ACTION REQUIRED SENATE COMMITTEE APPROVES BILLS TO RUN RANGES OUT OF BUSINESS AND BAN 80% OF YOUR GUNS

MESSAGE FROM COMMITTEE DEMOCRATS: “Eliminating law-abiding gun owners is a good ‘first step’ towards a ‘civil society.’”

Votes on HB815 and HB1263 were split along party lines in the Senate Public Health Committee Wednesday night with the committee Democrats voting 6-4 and 6-3 to send the bills to the full senate. If these two bills become law, they will resulting most, if not all ranges in the state going out of business as well as the banning of ALL semiautomatic rifles, pistols and shotguns as well as banning all pump shotguns and rifles.

In comments made during testimony, committee Democrats stated plainly that HB815 and HB1263 were “first steps” and that these bills have as their objective the creation of a “more civil society.” In other words, elimination of lawful gun owners is a required first step for creating a more civil society. Of course, there was no mention of the impact of eliminating criminals.

I’m sure these democrats are proud how well gun banning has worked for Chicago and Cook County.

***

Boehner is scrambling to save his Speakership. He’s trying to persuade GOP House members that he’ll be tough with Obama this year…all the while picking off lint from his suit where he rolled over for Obama and the dems.

Boehner tells GOP he’s through negotiating one-on-one with Obama

By Russell Berman – 01/02/13 05:04 PM ET

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is signaling that at least one thing will change about his leadership during the 113th Congress: he’s telling Republicans he is done with private, one-on-one negotiations with President Obama.

During both 2011 and 2012, the Speaker spent weeks shuttling between the Capitol and the White House for meetings with the president in the hopes of striking a grand bargain on the deficit.

Those efforts ended in failure, leaving Boehner feeling burned by Obama and, at times, isolated within his conference.

Or, perhaps it’s the hot breath of opposition to his role as Speaker of the House?

Eleventh Hour: Speaker Boehner Moves to the Right

by Matthew Boyle 3 Jan 2013, 1:36 AM PDT

The Speaker of the House will be elected today and some conservatives believe they have the votes necessary to oust John Boehner. In an appearance on CNBC, American Majority Action spokesman Ron Meyer said there are more than 20 House Republicans willing to vote for someone other than Boehner on Thursday when the 113th Congress convenes to elect a Speaker. Another source from a different organization has similarly confirmed that more than 20 have planned to oppose Boehner.

I don’t trust John Boehner. He’s a liar; a phony to the core interested only in his own benefit. A loyal member of The Ruling Class. The sooner we’re rid of him, the better.

 

 

Facebook

McCaskill’s Hypocrisy and other notes

Posted on by

Update:  I returned from my walk to discover Blogger deleted the last half of my post today.  I usually have a copy, just in case, but apparently this time I forgot to save one before I hit the “Publish” button. 

***

Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) appeared on Greg Knapp’s show on KCMO this morning. She repeated her performance that caused KCMO’s previous morning host to ban her from future appearances.  Greg Knapp’s temper, so far, is still under control. Her responses were typical for a democrat…talk over the host, don’t answer the question, keep to the party talking points.

When asked about the liberal claim that oil companies receive subsidies, she repeated the usual lie.  When asked to prove the claim, she said she didn’t have the information readily at hand.  When pressed, she parroted the New York Times article from last year about oil lease royalties.  When American oil companies operate in US and foreign countries, they pay royalties to the governments for every barrel pumped. Some countries call it a usage tax.  The US calls it a royalty.

While the name “royalties” is used, in reality it is a tax.  A cost of doing business.  The oil companies declare those costs on their US tax returns.

The dems call that tax deduction a subsidy.

According to the SEC, the top three Oil Companies in the US paid over 40% of their revenues to the government in taxes.  In comparison, the top five computer companies paid about half that rate in taxes.  

Mark J. Perry, a professor of Economics at the University of Michigan, created the table below to compare Oil revenues, tax rates and profit margins with those of the largest computer companies. See who has the higher profit margin. See who has the higher tax rates.  What is good for one should be good for the other, no?

Big Eight Computer Reported Huge Profits in Q2

Big 5 – Q2 2011 Sales (b) Profits (b) Profit Margin Tax Rate
Exxon $125,486 $10,898 8.68% 41.47%
Shell $124,562 $8,759 7.03% 41.19%
Chevron $68,948 $7,760 11.25% 41.24%
BP $103,848 $5,620 5.41% 35.10%
ConocoPhillips $65,627 $3,402 5.18% 44.91%
Totals ($) / Avg. (%) $488,471 $36,439 7.46% 40.80%
Big 8 – Q2 1011
Apple $28,570 $7,310 25.59% 23.46%
Microsoft $17,370 $5,870 33.79% 7.05%
IBM $26,666 $3,663 13.74% 25.03%
Intel $12,847 $3,160 24.60% 27.71%
Google $9,030 $2,500 27.69% 18.83%
HP $31,632 $2,304 7.28% 20.33%
Cisco $10,866 $1,807 16.63% 16.81%
Dell $15,017 $945 6.29% 19.23%
Totals ($)/Avg. (%) $151,998 $27,559 25.08% 19.81%
Sources: Yahoo! Finance and MSNBC

(remainder deleted.)
 …
(added at 11:23am)
At the end of the session, Greg Knapp thanked McCaskill for appearing on the show.  Her response as she hung up was, “Yeah, sure…”

Real class there, Claire.  Real class.

US Armed Forces funds diverted by Senate to pay for Kennedy Institute

Posted on by

Is aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war, treason? Most would say, “Yes.”

If so, then what do you call those members in the Senate that diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill that had been budgeted for fuel, ammunition and training to pay for some special pork projects including funding the Ted Kennedy Institute for Education.

The lack of those funds directly affects the safety and well being of troops in the field, in combat. Here’s a column from the Washington Times that provides more detail.


U.S. troop funds diverted to pet projects

Shaun Waterman THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis.

Among the 778 such projects, known as earmarks, packed into the bill: $25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.

While earmarks are hardly new in Washington, “in 30 years on Capitol Hill, I never saw Congress mangle the defense budget as badly as this year,” said Winslow Wheeler, a former Senate staffer who worked on defense funding and oversight for both Republicans and Democrats. He is now a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information, an independent research organization.

Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, called the transfer of funds from Pentagon operations and maintenance “a disgrace.”

“The Senate is putting favorable headlines back home above our men and women fighting on the front lines,” he said in a statement.

Mr. Wheeler, who conducted the study, compared the Obama administration’s requests for funds with the $636 billion spending bill that the Senate passed. He discovered that senators added $2.6 billion in pet projects while spending $4 billion less than the administration requested for fiscal 2010, which began Oct. 1.

Mr. Wheeler said that senators took most of the cash for the projects from the “operations and maintenance” or O&M accounts.

“These are the accounts that pay for troop training, repairs, spares and supplies for vehicles, weapons, ships and planes, food and fuel,” Mr. Wheeler said.

Raiding those accounts to fund big-ticket projects the military does not want, but that benefit senators’ home states or campaign contributors, amounts to “rancid gluttony,” he said.

The administration’s budget requested $156 billion for the regular O&M account and $81 billion for O&M for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill passed by the Senate cut $2.4 billion from the regular account and $655 million from the war O&M fund.

Senate appropriators insisted that the O&M accounts, despite the cuts, do not shortchange the troops.

“The operation and maintenance title is fully funded,” Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye, Hawaii Democrat, said during the debate on the bill. “There is no shortage. … The committee is deeply concerned that the critical operational needs of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines are met with the finest equipment available.”

Money for the Kennedy Institute was inserted by Mr. Inouye and Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat. Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat, and Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, sought the funding for the World War II museum.

Whitney Smith, a spokesman for Mr. Kerry, said the earmark was “a worthy investment.”

“Sen. Kennedy served on the Armed Services Committee for 27 years, where he fought to deliver top-of-the-line body armor and armored Humvees to protect our troops and save lives. Educating Americans about these battles is a core mission for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute, which showcases one senator’s ability to make a difference,” Mr. Smith wrote in an e-mail. “This funding will help the Edward M. Kennedy Institute become one the nation’s pre-eminent civic educational institutions, and Sen. Kerry is proud to have worked with Chairman Inouye to make it possible.”

Mrs. Landrieu said she was “proud to fight” for money for the World War II museum, which is not just a “monument to the brave men and women who served during World War II,” but also “a constant reminder to future generations about the tremendous sacrifice of millions of Americans.” She added that the earmarked funds “will help to increase tourism to New Orleans.”

Beyond those two earmarks, the largest in the Senate bill are:

– $20 million for Humvee maintenance at an Army National Guard installation in Maine, sponsored by Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe, Maine Republicans. The senators said cuts in the maintenance program proposed by the administration would result in the “layoff of 175 employees in a region already suffering” from the recession.

– $20 million for the Maui Space Surveillance System in Hawaii, requested by Mr. Inouye.

– $25 million inserted by Mr. Inouye for the Hawaii Federal Health Care Network. Mr. Inouye’s Web site says the health care program “supports applied research, development and deployment of technology to improve access and the quality of care to service members, military families and impacted communities.”

Laura Peterson, of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan spending watchdog, told The Washington Times, “Earmarks like these take money away from other defense programs that the Defense Department actually wants. While military health care is certainly a worthwhile venture, it’s hard to see how a program located in Hawaii that openly favors Hawaii-based industries guarantees [the Department of Defense] the best value for such an exorbitant price tag.”

Mr. Inouye had a total of 35 earmarks worth more than $206 million in the final bill, and the ranking Republican on the committee, Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, sponsored 48 worth $216 million.

Mr. Cochran defended earmarking as part of Congress’ responsibility to direct government spending.

“I am not ready to cede the power of the purse to any administration,” he told The Times in an e-mail. “It is vested by the Constitution in the Congress.” He added that appropriators had “reviewed the budget request very carefully, conducted public hearings and reported the appropriation bills that the committee thinks will serve the public interest.”

…

If the government was run with the same rules as governs businesses, this action would be a crime. It would be misappropriation of funds and fraud. But the Government isn’t a business, contrary to the liberals lust to nationalize the nation. But it does have fiscal responsibility to the nation, to the Armed Forces to insure our security. If an outside party had diverted fuel and ammunition to troops in combat, it would be called sabotage. If it was done by US citizens, it would be called treason.

What do we call it when sabotage is done by members of the US Senate?

Facebook

US Armed Forces funds diverted by Senate to pay for Kennedy Institute

Posted on by

Is aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war, treason? Most would say, “Yes.”

If so, then what do you call those members in the Senate that diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill that had been budgeted for fuel, ammunition and training to pay for some special pork projects including funding the Ted Kennedy Institute for Education.

The lack of those funds directly affects the safety and well being of troops in the field, in combat. Here’s a column from the Washington Times that provides more detail.


U.S. troop funds diverted to pet projects

Shaun Waterman THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis.

Among the 778 such projects, known as earmarks, packed into the bill: $25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.

While earmarks are hardly new in Washington, “in 30 years on Capitol Hill, I never saw Congress mangle the defense budget as badly as this year,” said Winslow Wheeler, a former Senate staffer who worked on defense funding and oversight for both Republicans and Democrats. He is now a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information, an independent research organization.

Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, called the transfer of funds from Pentagon operations and maintenance “a disgrace.”

“The Senate is putting favorable headlines back home above our men and women fighting on the front lines,” he said in a statement.

Mr. Wheeler, who conducted the study, compared the Obama administration’s requests for funds with the $636 billion spending bill that the Senate passed. He discovered that senators added $2.6 billion in pet projects while spending $4 billion less than the administration requested for fiscal 2010, which began Oct. 1.

Mr. Wheeler said that senators took most of the cash for the projects from the “operations and maintenance” or O&M accounts.

“These are the accounts that pay for troop training, repairs, spares and supplies for vehicles, weapons, ships and planes, food and fuel,” Mr. Wheeler said.

Raiding those accounts to fund big-ticket projects the military does not want, but that benefit senators’ home states or campaign contributors, amounts to “rancid gluttony,” he said.

The administration’s budget requested $156 billion for the regular O&M account and $81 billion for O&M for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill passed by the Senate cut $2.4 billion from the regular account and $655 million from the war O&M fund.

Senate appropriators insisted that the O&M accounts, despite the cuts, do not shortchange the troops.

“The operation and maintenance title is fully funded,” Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye, Hawaii Democrat, said during the debate on the bill. “There is no shortage. … The committee is deeply concerned that the critical operational needs of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines are met with the finest equipment available.”

Money for the Kennedy Institute was inserted by Mr. Inouye and Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat. Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat, and Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, sought the funding for the World War II museum.

Whitney Smith, a spokesman for Mr. Kerry, said the earmark was “a worthy investment.”

“Sen. Kennedy served on the Armed Services Committee for 27 years, where he fought to deliver top-of-the-line body armor and armored Humvees to protect our troops and save lives. Educating Americans about these battles is a core mission for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute, which showcases one senator’s ability to make a difference,” Mr. Smith wrote in an e-mail. “This funding will help the Edward M. Kennedy Institute become one the nation’s pre-eminent civic educational institutions, and Sen. Kerry is proud to have worked with Chairman Inouye to make it possible.”

Mrs. Landrieu said she was “proud to fight” for money for the World War II museum, which is not just a “monument to the brave men and women who served during World War II,” but also “a constant reminder to future generations about the tremendous sacrifice of millions of Americans.” She added that the earmarked funds “will help to increase tourism to New Orleans.”

Beyond those two earmarks, the largest in the Senate bill are:

– $20 million for Humvee maintenance at an Army National Guard installation in Maine, sponsored by Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe, Maine Republicans. The senators said cuts in the maintenance program proposed by the administration would result in the “layoff of 175 employees in a region already suffering” from the recession.

– $20 million for the Maui Space Surveillance System in Hawaii, requested by Mr. Inouye.

– $25 million inserted by Mr. Inouye for the Hawaii Federal Health Care Network. Mr. Inouye’s Web site says the health care program “supports applied research, development and deployment of technology to improve access and the quality of care to service members, military families and impacted communities.”

Laura Peterson, of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan spending watchdog, told The Washington Times, “Earmarks like these take money away from other defense programs that the Defense Department actually wants. While military health care is certainly a worthwhile venture, it’s hard to see how a program located in Hawaii that openly favors Hawaii-based industries guarantees [the Department of Defense] the best value for such an exorbitant price tag.”

Mr. Inouye had a total of 35 earmarks worth more than $206 million in the final bill, and the ranking Republican on the committee, Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, sponsored 48 worth $216 million.

Mr. Cochran defended earmarking as part of Congress’ responsibility to direct government spending.

“I am not ready to cede the power of the purse to any administration,” he told The Times in an e-mail. “It is vested by the Constitution in the Congress.” He added that appropriators had “reviewed the budget request very carefully, conducted public hearings and reported the appropriation bills that the committee thinks will serve the public interest.”

…

If the government was run with the same rules as governs businesses, this action would be a crime. It would be misappropriation of funds and fraud. But the Government isn’t a business, contrary to the liberals lust to nationalize the nation. But it does have fiscal responsibility to the nation, to the Armed Forces to insure our security. If an outside party had diverted fuel and ammunition to troops in combat, it would be called sabotage. If it was done by US citizens, it would be called treason.

What do we call it when sabotage is done by members of the US Senate?

Cartoons of the Day: Chuch Asay, Lisa Benson, Gary Varvel and Michael Ramirez

Posted on by

Thanks, Senator Scummer. Via Chuck Asay…


From Lisa Benson…

From Gary Varvel…



And finally from Michael Ramirez…



Yes, I think Obama’s “honeymoon” is over. The public is beginning to wake up. None too soon. Now, if only the public would DO SOMETHING to fight these democrat idiocies.