That Darn George Bush

H/T Mike

Here’s an opinion piece by Chuck Green who
writes “Greener Pastures”
for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel,
one of the more liberal papers in the country. Additionally, Mr. Green is a
lifelong Democrat.  So this is a rather a stunning piece…

Continue reading

The Corruption Continues…..

The Campaigner in Chief has shifted into the next gear. In his weekly radio address, he said we need to drill for more oil and that by doing so would create more jobs. Remember, Obama is in Campaign Mode and will say anything to get re-elected. I will give Obama credit for one thing, he does know how to campaign, he just doesn’t know when to shut-up. He’s like the used car salesman that keeps calling you after the sale, trying to get you to buy the car you already bought. People don’t seem to remember that it was Obama that signed the oil moratorium after the BP oil rig explosion and he continued to sign them even after a Federal Judge said it was illegal for him to do it. Remember when George Bush was in Office and Congress had a fit when gas prices sky rocketed? Funny how you don’t hear that now, now that there is a Democrat/Socialist/Progressive/Marxist in the White House.

Corruption has taken over Washington and the Politicians should be held accountable.

Judicial Watch has done a great job investigating Obama, below are just a few items  they have found.

Thanks, 1 Dragon


Press Releases


Corruption Chronicles Entries

More blog entries on Barack Obama


No dip in earmarks despite White House push for transparency

The Hill

Transparency requirements pushed for by the Obama administration have not changed the total spending on earmarks for 2010, according to a study by a group critical of the practice.

The amount of money directed by lawmakers in 2010 to specific projects back in their districts adds up to $15.9 billion, according to the analysis by Taxpayers for Common Sense,

Earmarks in 2009 added up to a total of $19.9 billion. But that figure drops slightly below the 2010 total to $15.6 billion when taking out $1.8 billion included in an emergency war-spending bill, another $2.3 billion in earmarks for the Army Corps of Engineers operations and maintenance projects and roughly $200 million for earmarked disaster aid.

In 2010, lawmakers received fewer earmarks to pay for Army Corps of Engineers projects but overall funding didn’t decrease. Taxpayers for Common Sense says the Obama administration included money for those projects in its budget request, a departure from the way the local projects were handled during the Bush administration.

“High levels of special interest spending remain and powerful lawmakers are hoarding cash for their districts while the rest of the Congress fights for table scraps,” said Ryan Alexander, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

“Spending should be a meritocracy,” she added. “Instead of simply rewarding the constituents or campaign contributors of the politically powerful, our taxpayer dollars must be spent on only the most critical and important projects

With Congress set to consider another emergency war-spending bill this year, the 2010 number could increase.

A White House spokesman said preliminary data shows progress in reducing earmark levels.

“This is a good step forward and Congress should be applauded, but there is more work to accomplish to restore the public trust,” said Thomas Gavin, a spokesman for the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Congress defines spending as an earmark if it goes toward a project at the formal request of a lawmaker. Most of the $1.4 trillion in 2010 discretionary spending is directed by executive branch agencies.

Appropriators, who review the president’s budget requests and win more earmarked funds for their constituents than other lawmakers, have defended the earmarking process, noting earmarks account for less than 1 percent of the federal budget.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) have sought to make it easier for the public to review earmarks, requiring last year that all lawmakers post earmark requests on their official websites.

Obama, in his State of the Union address last month, called on lawmakers to go a step further by putting “all earmark requests on a single website before there’s a vote so that the American people can see how their money is being spent.”

As a presidential candidate, Obama called for cutting earmarks down to their 1994 levels, or about $8 billion. He has since called for a competitive bidding process for earmarks going to for-profit companies, a move that has been adopted by the House but not the Senate.


Democratic Senator slams Obama over earmarks

Washington Examiner

By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
Dec. 27, 2009

Remember when President Obama promised to go through legislation “line by line” eliminating earmarks? Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., hasn’t forgotten:

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) said Obama made earmark reform “a very big part of [his] campaign” but still signed this month two massive spending measures that both included approximately $4 billion in earmarks.

Feingold, who broke with his party to oppose both the $447 billion 2010 omnibus spending bill and the $636 billion 2010 Pentagon spending bill, said the president could have used his veto pen to reject the measures and force lawmakers to cut earmark funding.

“We’ve got to have a fresh start next year, and I’ve signaled that if they want my vote, they’ve got to stop just signing onto huge numbers of earmarks,” Feingold said.

Obama talked tough about earmarks on the campaign trail.

“Absolutely, we need earmark reform,” Obama said in his first presidential debate with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). “And when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.”

There’s no bigger illustration for why we need earmark reform than the health care legislation just passed. The problem ultimately isn’t so much that billions in pork barrel spending targeted to lawmakers districts — though that’s pretty egregious in and of itself –but  the $15 billion in earmarks handed out this year amount to chicken feed at the rate Congress is currently spending. The problem is the way that earmarks grease the wheels to buy votes needed to pass much more expensive legislation. Just ask Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., whether they would have voted for Obamacare had they not received hundreds of millions in earmarks.