The Republican Thread

[lostfan]

That's good news for Republicans. Steele's pretty respected and seems to "get it."

[Balta1701]

"We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black RNC Chair."

 

What, only works one way?

[mr_genius]

"We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black RNC Chair."

 

What, only works one way?

 

on que

 

[Balta1701]

on que

 

I liked that one.

[BigSqwert]

You'd think after a terrible election cycle in 2006 and 2008 the GOP would do something to rebrand its image. This isn't what I was expecting.

[mr_genius]

You'd think after a terrible election cycle in 2006 and 2008 the GOP would do something to rebrand its image. This isn't what I was expecting.

 

marketing move. 'everyday American gets his voice heard!'

 

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

marketing move. 'everyday American gets his voice heard!'

sadly, they may actually be looking for advice.

[lostfan]

Personally I think there's some smart people within the party getting heard right now. Steele for instance. Joe the Plumber always has been and will remain a joke, in the end nobody will take him seriously (although it'd be hilarious if they did).

[southsider2k5]

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/500k-s...2009-02-03.html

 

Leading The News PDF Print E-mail

$500K spent on Dem caucus retreats

By Susan Crabtree

Posted: 02/03/09 07:10 PM [ET]

 

The House Democratic Caucus spent more than $500,000 in taxpayer money over the past five years for its annual retreats at resorts in Pennsylvania and Virginia.

 

On Thursday, Democrats will head to the Kingsmill Resort and Spa in historic Williamsburg, Va., for the three-day planning powwow. The resort boasts multiple championship golf courses, a full-service spa and six restaurants.

 

Individual lawmakers pay for most of the expenses related to retreat lodging through their campaign committees, but the Democratic Caucus subsidizes some of the costs for what aides consider “official business” — to the tune of nearly $100,000 each year, according to a Democratic aide involved in retreat planning.

 

For instance, the caucus picks up the hefty transportation tab, as well as the thousands of dollars in expenses each year for guest speakers, food and entertainment, according to financial disbursement records.

 

Democratic leadership sources were reluctant to talk about any aspect of the trip, but they defended it as an important planning session for the entire country.

 

“This retreat is strategic planning for the country,” said Democratic Caucus spokeswoman Emily Barocas. “The president, vice president and three Cabinet secretaries will be meeting with the caucus to plan the direction we are taking the country in.”

 

The topic is particularly sensitive this year after several Democratic lawmakers slammed American International Group (AIG) executives for spending more than $440,000 at a company retreat in Monarch Beach, Calif., just days after the federal government bailed the company out with $85 billion in taxpayer funds.

 

Several Democratic lawmakers also excoriated banking and financial companies for flying in corporate jets to Washington to testify before several committees about their need for billions more in bailout money.

 

Williamsburg hardly compares to a balmy beach destination, but in the past five years, some of the retreat expenses jump off the page.

 

In 2004, for instance, the caucus paid more than $27,000 to Executive Jet Management for a chartered flight for Bill Clinton, who addressed the issues conference. A Democratic aide said costs soared for Clinton’s travel because there was a “horrible blizzard” that caused his plane to become stuck two days longer than expected and the caucus had to spend extra money for de-icing and storing the plane.

 

In 2005, the caucus cut a $1,100 check to retired Gen. Wesley Clark’s consulting firm for a speaking fee. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s firm received $864 in 2003 for her retreat address.

 

Besides Obama, Biden and three other Cabinet secretaries, Democrats this year are hosting Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, who will talk about stimulating the economy through technology and innovation.

 

In the past, the caucus has also paid for food and after-hours entertainment. In 2003, for example, the Caucus spent $11,200 on food and $6,900 on entertainment. Costs for renting conference rooms at the resorts also make up a large chunk of the total. In 2004, the caucus spent at least $15,000 on space rental.

 

Democrats spend the most money, however, on transportation.

 

Since 2005, the caucus has chartered an Amtrak train to ferry members to the Kingsmill resort. It costs roughly $70,000 each year for the Amtrak charter. Democratic aides argue it’s necessary so that members can spend time together and not end up taking separate cars and arriving at staggered times. Traveling by train also helps ensure the safety of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is second in the line of succession to the presidency and requires constant security detail. In this case, the source said, security helicopters fly above the train.

 

In 2003 and 2004, the caucus used chartered flights and rented cars and buses to transport members to the Nemacolin resort in Woodlands, Pa. The chartered flight cost more than $10,000 and the buses were $6,500, but the hassles weren’t worth it: One year, a Democratic aide recalls, the buses broke down and closed down an entire highway.

 

Democrats and Republicans have criticized each other for the way each party pays for its annual retreat. Republicans huddled at the Homestead Resort in Hot Springs, Va., last week. The Congressional Institute, a nonprofit that pays for activities at least in part through dues from lobbyists, subsidizes the GOP retreat. Republicans also allow members of the institute’s private sector advisory board, many of whom are lobbyists, to travel to the resort each year for a dinner with the members.

 

Democrats don’t allow lobbyists at the retreat, but Republicans criticize the use of taxpayer dollars for expenses for retreats at resorts, especially during the economic downturn.

 

Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center, said she believes it’s useful for members to gather in a setting away from Capitol Hill once a year. Still, she said, when the economy is suffering and people are losing their jobs, members must be mindful to scale back and not use taxpayer dollars for luxury items.

 

“I actually think there is utility in meeting together once a year to concentrate on getting everyone to row their oars in the same direction,” she said. “But how much money is spent this year and the scope of it and how many frills there are is important. It sends a message on how seriously members are taking the economic problems when people are being laid off left and right. Unlike Michael Phelps, [lawmakers] are indeed role models.”

 

Common Cause’s Sarah Dufendach said she would rather have taxpayer money than special-interest money funding retreats. But she said this year, both Republicans and Democrats would have been better served by having their retreat locally at a place such as the Library of Congress.

 

“It would have been really good PR for both sides to stay home and bring a box lunch,” she said.

[lostfan]

Sounds to me like neither one of them should be pointing fingers at anyone

[southsider2k5]

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/this-is-...cid=VIDURVNWS03

 

I seriously laughed my ass off at this one. The part where Obama said "we don't reward failure" was the biggest load of crap that might have ever come out of his mouth. Look at the federal government and tell me we don't reward failure. We have plans for social security, welfare, unemployment, small business loans, school loans, medicare, medicade, disaster insurance, etc, etc. We are rewarding people who have kids too young, we reward people who don't stay in school, we reward people who don't save for retirement, we reward people who live in areas of the country prone to disaster, we reward families who don't save for college. Not to say that everyone in these programs has failed at something to be in them, but a large portion of each of these programs is utilized by people who don't do enough on their own. Yes, as a country reward failure of individuals all of the time.

[EvilMonkey]

Since it seems like I will get b****ed at every time I start a new thread about something that Obama and/or his administration has f***ed up or done wrong, I'll just post this one here.

 

Why is Obama trying to kill white people?!?! (I would put that line in half-green if there was a selection for that) FEMA's respoonses in Kentucky the last 2 weeks have been at least as bad, if not worse, that they were during Katrina. All during Katrina, we heard from screaming people about how the eeeevil Bush admin was trying to kill black people in the are by giving them inadaquate releif help and trailers reaking of chemicals, etc. Well, in Kentucky, due to snow and ice sotrms, people have been without power for weeks, food, etc. So what does the Obama run FEMA do? Send them food that could kill them!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/04/fema....tter/index.html

Food kits recently distributed as part of a disaster relief effort in Kentucky and Arkansas may contain peanut butter contaminated with salmonella linked to a nationwide outbreak, the Federal Emergency Management Agency said Wednesday.

So, since Bush got the blame whenever any person or agency under him f***ed up, does Obama get the blame here? Or, once again, is it different?

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Since it seems like I will get b****ed at every time I start a new thread about something that Obama and/or his administration has f***ed up or done wrong, I'll just post this one here.

 

Why is Obama trying to kill white people?!?! (I would put that line in half-green if there was a selection for that) FEMA's respoonses in Kentucky the last 2 weeks have been at least as bad, if not worse, that they were during Katrina. All during Katrina, we heard from screaming people about how the eeeevil Bush admin was trying to kill black people in the are by giving them inadaquate releif help and trailers reaking of chemicals, etc. Well, in Kentucky, due to snow and ice sotrms, people have been without power for weeks, food, etc. So what does the Obama run FEMA do? Send them food that could kill them!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/04/fema....tter/index.html

 

So, since Bush got the blame whenever any person or agency under him f***ed up, does Obama get the blame here? Or, once again, is it different?

Let's see... Katrina killed a few thousand people, and FEMA screwed up big time. This event has killed few if any, and as far as I have read, FEMA has responded reasonably well. This peanut butter thing is of course the fault of the company and/or the FDA, which Obama is working to change.

 

So... if you are looking to show that Obama's administration is doing much better than Bush, you succeeded. But in reality, I don't see much Obama effect on this incident at all anyway.

 

[ChiSox_Sonix]

So, since Bush got the blame whenever any person or agency under him f***ed up, does Obama get the blame here? Or, once again, is it different?

 

Of course it's different, he's our Savior.

[NorthSideSox72]

Of course it's different, he's our Savior.

Yes, that is exactly why it is different.

 

[southsider2k5]

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/stephen-g...a-companys-gift

 

Daschle's Tax Problems Stem From Media Company's 'Gift'

By Stephen Gutowski (Bio | Archive)

February 5, 2009 - 12:21 ET

 

*

* [Printer-friendly version]

 

 

By now most people have heard that Barack Obama's nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Daschle, has backed out due to some major tax problems. Many have probably even heard that the bulk of his problems involve his affinity for free limo service, not to mention the inevitable limousine liberal jokes that followed. However, most have no idea exactly who was paying for Daschle's free rides.

 

That company is a media investment firm named InterMedia Partners. They own or have controlling stakes in a variety of media platforms from outdoor magazines to Spanish language television to Christian publishing companies. On top of providing him with the now troublesome transportation they also paid Daschle a million dollar annual salary for his advice. Here is how Fox News described Daschle and InterMedia's car troubles:

 

Senator Daschle is a limited partner in InterMedia Partners of Englewood, CO and Chairman of its Executive Advisory Board. Senator Daschle also is an independent consultant to InterMedia Advisors, LLP of New York City. He entered into a business relationship with InterMedia in February, 2005. Beginning in April, 2005, the senator was provided the use of a car and driver by Mr. Leo Hindery, the Managing Partner of InterMedia. In addition to being business partners, Mr. Hindery and Senator Daschle have been personal friends for many years. Charges for the car and the services of the driver were billed to InterMedia. InterMedia did not issue Senator Daschle a Form 1099 for the value of the car service and Senator Daschle did not report the value of the car service as income on his original tax returns for 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

 

Senator Daschle told staff that in June, 2008, something made him think that the car service might be taxable and he disclosed the arrangement to his accountant. Under Section 132 of the Internal Revenue Code, the value of transportation services provided for personal use must be included in income. Senator Daschle estimated that he used the car and driver 80% for personal use and 20% for business use. On January 2, 2009, Senator Daschle filed amended returns for 2005, 2006 and 2007 reporting the value of the car service as income. He did not pay self-employment tax on the personal value of the service. It was determined during the Committee review of Senator Daschles returns that the personal value of the car service is subject to self-employment tax. The senator has acknowledged that the 2005, 2006 and 2007 tax returns will need to be adjusted to pay the applicable Medicare taxes of 2.9% of the personal value of the service.

 

As egregious as it is that neither InterMedia nor Daschle figured that money spent on transportation for the former senator could be taxable there is another side of the story that is perhaps more shocking. That is the fact that, according to Politico.com, Tom Daschle has been pushing for the founder and managing partner of InterMedia, Leo Hindery, to be placed high up in the Obama administration:

 

Tom Daschle backed the patron who paid him a million-dollar salary and supplied him with a free car and driver for a job inside the Obama administration, two Democrats said Monday.

 

Leo Hindery, whose InterMedia Partners employed the former Senate majority leader, had been mentioned as a possible secretary of commerce or U.S. trade representative.

 

"Tom was pushing for him," said one Democratic source.

 

Yes, that's right, Tom Daschle is backing the media mogul who gave him a million dollar a year consulting position and what Daschle understood to be a "gift" of free limo transportation. But this isn't the first time that the media executive who has worked everywhere from the San Francisco Chronicle to AT&T's cable service, Leo Hindery, has used his financial support to influence powerful Democrats:

 

Hindery, who had been Daschle's top Senate fundraiser, was also the top fundraiser for a losing candidate for New York mayor, Freddy Ferrer, and a top supporter of former Sen. John Edwards' White House bid. He chaired an economic initiative, the Horizon Project, which aimed, with little success, to move Democratic leaders toward a more skeptical stance on trade.

 

[...]

 

"He didn't get in it for the money or any of those other things - the guy really got in it because the guy wanted to be part of shaping the policy," said Paul Blank, Edwards campaign manager, who recalled getting 2 a.m. emails from Hindery on economic policy.

 

"He acted more like an economic policy staffer than a renowned Democratic donor." Hindery, though, was also in the top rung of donors: He personally contributed more than $1 million to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee under Daschle's leadership.

 

Just as Hindery is no stranger to Democrat fundraising, he is also no stranger to controversial avenues of getting this funding into candidates hands. During the failed John Edwards campaign for president in '08 Hindery underwrote their private jet travel expenses. Underwriting campaign travel expenses is a practice which the Politico described as a "campaign finance loophole" and one that has since been closed.

 

However, as with his previous forays into Democrat fundraising, his latest attempt to gain political influence seems to have failed:

 

Obama's aides rejected Daschle's suggestion that a top job go to Hindery, for whose private equity fund Daschle had served as a rainmaker and adviser.

 

We will see if Daschle continues to push the Obama administration to appoint Hindery to an influential government position. And we will see if media mogul Hindery continues to use his connections and influence to try and shape policy and gain a government position. My guess is this isn't the last we will hear from these two.

[kapkomet]

Obama Warns of 'Catastrophe:' What Happened to 'Hope' and 'Change?'

 

 

I love that headline. We all know what happened: the brainwashing of America to pass every pet Democratic project that they have wanted for the last 40 years presented itself in a "collapse of the economy".

 

[EvilMonkey]

Let's see... Katrina killed a few thousand people, and FEMA screwed up big time. This event has killed few if any, and as far as I have read, FEMA has responded reasonably well. This peanut butter thing is of course the fault of the company and/or the FDA, which Obama is working to change.

 

So... if you are looking to show that Obama's administration is doing much better than Bush, you succeeded. But in reality, I don't see much Obama effect on this incident at all anyway.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/200...NEWS01/90131003

Dozens of deaths have been reported and many people are pleading for a faster response to the power outages. Some in rural Kentucky ran short of food and bottled water, and resorted to dipping buckets in a creek......................At least 42 people have died in the icy arc of destruction that began in the Midwest..................................Local officials grew angrier at what they said was a lack of help from the state and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.........................Smith said FEMA was still a no-show days after the storm.

Sure, weather and road conditions are part of the problem in getting relief there, but that was also the problem in the areas that Katrina hit. So is Obama to be blamed for the slow reactions as Bush was? Guess not, its always someone elses fault. Oh, and was was Obama doing while this was going on? Keeping it real, dining on $100 a serving steak. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...s-are-on-t.html The storm hit on a Tuesday,FEMA 'started working' on Friday, and Obama had steak.

Edited February 5, 2009 by Alpha Dog

[mreye]

Let's see... Katrina killed a few thousand people, and FEMA screwed up big time. This event has killed few if any, and as far as I have read, FEMA has responded reasonably well. This peanut butter thing is of course the fault of the company and/or the FDA, which Obama is working to change.

 

So... if you are looking to show that Obama's administration is doing much better than Bush, you succeeded. But in reality, I don't see much Obama effect on this incident at all anyway.

 

 

I think what he's getting at is if Bush was still in charge he would take some heat or this (Most likely. We'll never know.)

[southsider2k5]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/f...over-long-haul/

 

CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul

Stephen Dinan (Contact)

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

 

President Barack Obama speaks to the House Democratic Issues Conference on Thursday in Williamsburg. Associated Press

 

President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

 

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

 

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.

 

The House last week passed a bill totaling about $820 billion while the Senate is working on a proposal reaching about $900 billion in spending increases and tax cuts.

 

But Republicans and some moderate Democrats have balked at the size of the bill and at some of the spending items included in it, arguing they won't produce immediate jobs, which is the stated goal of the bill.

 

The budget office had previously estimated service the debt due to the new spending could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost of the bill -- forcing the crowd-out.

 

CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.

 

CBO said there is no crowding out in the short term, so the plan would succeed in boosting growth in 2009 and 2010.

 

The agency projected the Senate bill would produce between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent higher growth in 2009 than if there was no action. For 2010, the plan would boost growth by 1.2 percent to 3.6 percent.

 

CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.

[southsider2k5]

You gotta love Sarah Palin.. Er Joe Biden. With these odds, why are we rushing to spend a trillion dollars again?

 

http://www.cq.com/flatfiles/editorialFiles...l?docid=3026783

 

Biden Gives Odds on Messing Up

By Edward Epstein, CQ Staff

 

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is nothing if not optimistic. So it was a little surprising when he hedged a bit earlier today, telling House Democrats there is "30 percent chance we'll get it wrong."

 

He was referring to efforts by the new administration and the Congress to address what he called a "constellation of crises" at home and abroad that pose great risks for the nation.

 

"If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there's still a 30 percent chance we'll get it wrong," he told the lawmakers at their policy retreat in Williamsburg, Va.

 

Biden, who stopped at the meeting on his way to an international security conference in Munich, said "not since World War II, at least, has a caucus gathered with so much at stake for our country, with the stakes so high." He listed the economic crisis and ongoing fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as the most pressing issues.

 

Biden used a football analogy to describe the situation in Iraq, saying the United States is "on the 20-yard-line" and "driving toward the goal." But sticking with his football metaphor, the vice president said the situation in Afghanistan is much more serious now. The effort there, he said, "is on the 20-yard-line with 80 yards to go. We've got a long, long way to go."

 

He also warned that the United States will have to extend a new aid package to Pakistan to help fight the Taliban influence.

 

He thanked the lawmakers for passing an $819 billion stimulus bill (HR 1).

 

"In these uncharted waters, you stepped up in a big way," he said.

[DukeNukeEm]

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/this-is-...cid=VIDURVNWS03

 

I seriously laughed my ass off at this one. The part where Obama said "we don't reward failure" was the biggest load of crap that might have ever come out of his mouth. Look at the federal government and tell me we don't reward failure. We have plans for social security, welfare, unemployment, small business loans, school loans, medicare, medicade, disaster insurance, etc, etc. We are rewarding people who have kids too young, we reward people who don't stay in school, we reward people who don't save for retirement, we reward people who live in areas of the country prone to disaster, we reward families who don't save for college. Not to say that everyone in these programs has failed at something to be in them, but a large portion of each of these programs is utilized by people who don't do enough on their own. Yes, as a country reward failure of individuals all of the time.

This is such a colossal crock of bulls***.

 

Unemployment in the US is like 50%, in the UK it's 65% and in some places like Sweden it's above 80%. America has some pretty sweet distinctions too among developed countries: we are the only developed country in the world without universal healthcare (yet you lament Medicare and Medicaid) and/or any government mandated sick pay. The "reward" for people that dont save for college amounts to a $3500/year Stafford loan with 3% interest rates. The best part is, none of the socially democratic countries around the globe have anywhere near the deficit we do despite all the "failures they reward."

Edited February 6, 2009 by DukeNukeEm

[EvilMonkey]

This is such a colossal crock of bulls***.

 

Unemployment in the US is like 50%, in the UK it's 65% and in some places like Sweden it's above 80%. America has some pretty sweet distinctions too among developed countries: we are the only developed country in the world without universal healthcare (yet you lament Medicare and Medicaid) and/or any government mandated sick pay. The "reward" for people that dont save for college amounts to a $3500/year Stafford loan with 3% interest rates. The best part is, none of the socially democratic countries around the globe have anywhere near the deficit we do despite all the "failures they reward."

Unemployment here is less than 10%. While it may be thie highest it has been in the last 17 years, it is still less than 10%.

[DukeNukeEm]

Unemployment here is less than 10%. While it may be thie highest it has been in the last 17 years, it is still less than 10%.

I didn't mean unemployment rate......

 

btw- I dont like you because you make me mad with bad posts. Seriously, never reply to me ever again. Asking politely.

Edited February 7, 2009 by DukeNukeEm

[DrunkBomber]

I didn't mean unemployment rate......

 

btw- I dont like you because you make me mad with bad posts. Seriously, never reply to me ever again. Asking politely.

Why dont you just put him on ignore?