Archive for February, 2010

EPA administrator Lisa P. Jackson is infecting the EPA with her radical brand of Environmental Justice. It seems, rather than simply seeking to protect the environment, which is EPA’s true mandate, the EPA has became a tool for progressives to push their Social Justice agenda.

The Environmental Justice movement is related to the Social Justice movement, which seeks to even the playing field through governmental “redistribution of wealth” policies. It’s a tenet of socialism, which marginalizes individualism and self-reliance, while promoting collectivism.

The Environmental Justice movement is based on a belief that environmental racism exists and people of color are somehow disproportionately affected by pollution. There is no real evidence of this, being that everyone, no matter their race, breaths the same air and exists in the same environment.

None the less, the Environmental Justice movement is pushing this agenda and EPA chief Lisa Jackson is leading the way.

I’ve put to together a video of some very disturbing comments from Lisa Jackson, where you can listen to her own words regarding Environmental Justice.

She seeks to indoctrinate millions of children by partnering with the Boys and Girls clubs of America. She uses fear mongering and plays the race card during speeches to LULAC and BIG, then goes on to promote government subsidized “Green Jobs” as a way to create “environmentalists for life”.

Lisa Jackson continues to push the false notion that the very air we exhale is pollution. Considering the dubious climate change science that has came to light of late, and the total rejection of a global warming crisis by the public, we can only hope the EPA will not be able to continue to push this radical leftist agenda on the American people.

This is just another example of the plethora of far left-wing radicals that surround President Obama and not the kind of change the American people are looking for.

SC Sen. Jim DeMInt is launching a money bomb for Rubio, requestion you donate $7.80 — $70.80 or $780 as a protest over Obama’s $780 scamulus bill, which was supported by Charlie Crist.

Remember, Crist would have been one of 3 progressive GOP senators (traitors) to have voted for the scamulus bill.

It’s time for all fiscal conservative to put their money where there mouth is and support Marco Rubio.

It’s time to send another message to Washington!!

Looks like even the Democratic led Senate in Virginia is rejecting health care (insurance) mandates.

RICHMOND — Virginia’s Democratic-controlled state Senate passed measures Monday that would make it illegal to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a direct challenge to the party’s efforts in Washington to reform health care.

The bills, a top priority of Virginia’s “tea party” movement, were approved 23 to 17 as five Democrats who represent swing areas of the state joined all 18 Republicans in the chamber in backing the legislation.

The bills were also expected to be approved by the GOP-controlled House of Delegates. Gov. Robert F. McDonnell (R) said he will review the bills but supports their intent.

As I’ve previously pointed out, health insurance mandates is one of the main points of contention inside the Tea Party movement. This mandate is seen as anti-liberty and it’s clearly unconstitutional on its face.

35 other states have similar bills in the works.

Lawmakers in 35 states have filed or proposed amendments to their state constitutions or statutes rejecting health insurance mandates, according to the American Legislative Exchange Council, a nonprofit group that promotes limited government that is helping coordinate the efforts. Many of those proposals are targeted for the November ballot, assuring that health care remains a hot topic as hundreds of federal and state lawmakers face re-election.

Let’s hope this effort puts a dagger in the heart of unconstitutional health insurance mandates

The Office of Special Inspector General Trouble Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) is the program designed to oversee all aspects of the TARP program and protect the taxpayer dollars that funded it. Their quarterly report dated January 30, 2009 is a long read, but a very informative one. In short, the program has not been very successful in its goals.

As stated in the report:

Many of TARP’s stated goals, however, have simply not been met. Despite the fact that the explicit goal of the Capital Purchase Program (“CPP”) was to increase financing to U.S. businesses and consumers, lending continues to decrease, month after month, and the TARP program designed specifically to address small-business lending — announced in March 2009 — has still not been implemented by Treasury. Notwithstanding the fact that preserving  homeownership and promoting jobs were explicit purposes of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), the statute that created TARP, nearly 16 months later, home foreclo- sures remain at record levels, the TARP foreclosure prevention program has only permanently modified a small fraction of eligible mortgages, and unemployment is the highest it has been in a generation. Whether these goals can effectively be met through existing TARP programs is very much an open question at this time. And to the extent that the Government had leverage through its status as a significant preferred shareholder to influence the largest TARP recipients to carry out such policy goals, it was lost with their exit from TARP.

and finished with this scathing rebuke:

It is hard to see how any of the fundamental problems in the system have been addressed to date.

•   To the extent that huge, interconnected, “too big to fail” institutions contributed to the crisis, those institutions are now even larger, in part because of the substantial subsidies provided by TARP and other bailout programs.

• To the extent that institutions were previously incentivized to take reckless risks through a “heads, I win; tails, the Government will bail me out” mentality, the market is more convinced than ever that the Government will step in as necessary to save systemically significant institutions. This perception was reinforced when TARP was extended until October 3, 2010, thus permitting Treasury to maintain a war chest of potential rescue funding at the same time that banks that have shown questionable ability to return to profitability (and in some cases are posting multi-billion-dollar losses) are exiting TARP programs.

• To the extent that large institutions’ risky behavior resulted from the desire to justify ever-greater bonuses — and indeed, the race appears to be on for TARP recipients to exit the program in order to avoid its pay restrictions — the current bonus season demonstrates that although there have been some improvements in the form that bonus compensation takes for some executives, there has been little fundamental change in the excessive compensation culture on Wall Street.

• To the extent that the crisis was fueled by a “bubble” in the housing market, the Federal Government’s concerted efforts to support home prices — as discussed more fully in Section 3 of this report — risk re-inflating that bubble in light of the Government’s effective takeover of the housing market through purchases and guarantees, either direct or implicit, of nearly all of the residential mortgage market.

This is yet another valid example that government is never efficient, effective, or competent. However, they are very effective at being inefficient and efficiently ineffective.

As reported previously on The Liberty Journal, several big supporters of the Teal Party Movement has already pulled out.

Fox new is reporting the following..

Over the past few weeks, several sponsors, speakers and volunteers have backed out of the convention, scheduled Feb. 4-6 at Opryland Hotel in Nashville, Tenn., after learning that the convention organizer, Tea Party Nation, is a for-profit company. Some activists and outsiders alike are questioning the motives of Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips.

Phillips originally said profits from the convention would fund a tax-exempt, “527” political organization that would air ads to promote conservative candidates.

But Phillips later told Politico that plans for the 527 group may not fly.

The event’s main sponsor, American Liberty Alliance, dropped its sponsorship after learning that those who purchased tickets paid for them through PayPal accounts linked to an e-mail address belonging to Phillips’ wife.

National Precinct Alliance has canceled precinct strategy workshops. Meanwhile, American Majority scrapped plans for two sessions at the convention and withdrew its sponsorship.

The national convention that began as a way to unify tea party activists from across the country is now threatening to divide them. Some of Tea Party Nation’s own volunteers and members have rejected the convention because they see profiteering and fear a Republican Party takeover.

Something just doesn’t smell right here. I think Scott Boston summed it up pretty well..

“It seems to me like it’s going to be a bunch of people who want to stand in front of our movement and lead it as parade leaders rather than being somebody who wants to walk with us in the parade,” said Scott Boston, member of Bowling Green Ohio Tea Party Patriots.

Sara Palin is still planning on being the keynote speaker at the event. At $349 to hear Palin and $549 for the full event, I don’t see the average Tea Party activist attending.  This kind of thing runs counter to the fiscal sensibility of Tea Party activists.

It’s a shame it had to come to this. The Tea Party movement deserves better.

This is not a Democrat-Republican issue. This is not about the fact that since KIrk is still voting, why couldn’t the Senate go ahead and ram healthcare legislation through Congress.  This act is about an unrepresentative Congress. Perhaps some Massachusetts voters could argue that Kirk’s vote still represents their views, but it doesn’t change the fact that this one vote affects how every American is represented in Congress.

Breitbart’s BigGovernment covers the issue very well here. It is spelled out that once Scott Brown (R-Ma) was elected, Kirk became a non-member of Congress. Regardless of the support or opposition to whatever legislation Kirk is voting on, members of both parties should have not allowed the vote.

Logic leads one to conclude that the Republicans have not opposed Mr. Kirk’s voting because it allows some of them to actually not have to vote yes on unpopular and insane legislation that they really support.