Telling Business Where To Go

Using federal bureaucratic "regulatory" power to punish free enterprise?

....The White House and its regulatory toadies are now making a serious, and we think dangerously transformative, effort to decide where in the country private companies can build manufacturing (and by extension of this incredible grab) any other facilities.

On April 20, the National Labor Relations Board filed a complaint against Boeing alleging that its decision to build a second assembly plant in South Carolina instead of the state of Washington was illegal because it amounted to a retaliatory action against the International Association of Machinists. The NLRB seeks as a remedy for this phony cause of action a judicial order forcing Boeing to shift production of its long delayed Dreamliner commercial jet from South Carolina back to its main facility in the Seattle area, Can anyone see presidential politics here in trying to force one of America’s main competitive manufacturing companies from a red state to a blue state or are we just being cynical?.....

The full story here.
When did it become constitutional for federal bureaucrats to tell businesses where they can and can not build plants and conduct business?

Overreaching and grasping for control and punishment power.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The Borg Conspiracy......: Obama negates the constitution

The Borg Conspiracy......: Obama negates the constitution:



"So says Newt Gingrich (and a lot of other knowledgeable people)."

The Newest Outrage

Curt Levey at the Committee for Justice blog has an excellent take on the president's decision to not support the constitutionally passed law that defends traditional marriage.

Statement of CFJ Executive Director Curt Levey on today’s announcement that the Obama Administration will not defend the Defense of Marriage Act:

President Obama’s decision to abandon the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is both outrageous – as a matter of Justice Department policy and constitutional law – and a miscalculation that will decreases the chances of ObamaCare being implemented, while potentially increasing calls for Supreme Court Justice Kagan to recuse herself from certain gay rights cases.

The President’s refusal to defend DOMA, a federal statute enacted by overwhelming margins in the Senate (85 - 14) and House (342 - 67) and signed into law by President Clinton, flies in the face of Justice Department policy and principles of democratic government. It has long been the Department’s policy to defend any challenged federal statute unless no plausible argument can be made in its defense. By ignoring that policy, President Obama is engaging in a disturbing power grab that, if taken to its logical conclusion, would allow him to undermine any duly enacted federal law that he doesn’t personally agree with.

But that’s not the worst of this power grab. In announcing the President’s decision, Attorney General Holder informed the nation that “the president has concluded that … sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of [constitutional] scrutiny.” In layman’s terms, that means that President Obama has decided that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits distinctions based on sexual orientation in the same way that it prohibits racial discrimination.

Of course, the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment would be quite surprised to learn that they had made same-sex marriage a constitutional imperative. However, even putting originalism and strict construction aside, it was heretofore accepted that only the judicial branch – particularly the Supreme Court – has the authority to determine the appropriate level of Fourteenth Amendment scrutiny and whether a particular piece of legislation meets that level of scrutiny.

Apparently, President Obama has now taken that authority upon himself. And this from an Administration that was outraged that Congressmen were even discussing the proper interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment provision dealing with birthright citizenship.

This is not the first time that President Obama has shown he is willing to do an end run around the other branches of government in pursuit of his political agenda. His use of White House czars to circumvent the Senate confirmation process and of the EPA to circumvent legislative resistance to cap and trade should have forewarned us that he would attempt today’s end run around the judicial system.

Even if today’s end run succeeds, President Obama may come to regret it should he fail to win reelection. In that case, it will be up to a Republican president to defend ObamaCare against current and future constitutional challenges. Obama has just handed his successor a perfect excuse to effectively repeal or cripple ObamaCare by refusing to defend it in court.

Even in the short term, the President has strengthened the hand of ObamaCare opponents, particularly the many states that question its constitutionality and plan to resist its implementation. After abandoning DOMA, Obama has no moral authority to argue that, because ObamaCare is the law of the land, all government officials must enforce it unless and until the Supreme Court decides it’s unconstitutional.

Finally, even the President’s critics will concede that his conclusion about the proper level of constitutional scrutiny for sexual orientation – whether right or wrong – must have been based on legal research and analysis rather than just a sudden political whim. If so, Obama and Holder surely consulted the nation’s Solicitor General – the government’s top constitutional attorney – when conducting this important legal analysis. As a result, the Administration will be called upon to disclose whether Elena Kagan was still Solicitor General when this consultation began.

If the answer is yes and Kagan was involved in determining the federal government’s official position on the proper scrutiny for sexual orientation, it opens up an ethical can of worms for her concerning Supreme Court cases in which that standard is at issue. It’s a can of worms that Obama may come to regret.

Consider and Ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The Chamber of Commerce ON FIRE

Jake Tapper of ABC interviews Bruce Josten of the Chamber of Commerce.

Tapper is of course most focused on the White House's charging the United States Chamber of Commerce of accepting foreign funds to run political adds against the progressive movement in America.

And... does Jake get an ear full!

abc blog Jack Tapper

TAPPER: But why not just settle the dispute by opening your books?

JOSTEN: ....What this administration wants is a list of who the companies are who are contributors, and we saw last year, Jake, why, when we very publicly ran ads against the Patients Protections and Affordable Care Act, quoting the CBO, quoting the head of CMS, the Centers for Medicare Services, that it would not in fact bend the cost curve down, that it would bend the cost curve up as they testified before the senate finance committee, there was an attempt to try and find out who were the corporations that were contributing to that effort.

When some of those corporate names were divulged, not by us, by others, what did they receive? They received protests, they received threats, they were intimidated, they were harassed, they had to hire additional security, they were recipients of a host of proxies leveled at those companies that had nothing to do with the purpose of those companies. So we know what the purpose here is. It's to harass and intimidate....

TAPPER: But do you not understand why some people might say, “Let's just have full disclosure of everything”?

JOSTEN: ...Look, if you're in the business that we are in, you are audited annually by the IRS, your activities are reviewed consistently by the federal election commission and others, that's fine with us, because we comply with all the laws.

I think this has nothing to do with the suggestions here, I think this has to do with a desperate administration, trying to change the subject away from what they have been doing, which is what the American people want to talk about, which is economy and jobs. Not this.

TAPPER: But why not just settle the dispute by opening your books?

JOSTEN: I've explained to you, we're not going to subject our contributors to harassment, to intimidation, and to threats and to invasions of privacy at their houses and at their places of business, which is what has happened every time there's been disclosure here.

I would note that the same people, in this administration and the congressional majority, that supported the so-called DISCLOSE act. If you take a look at that legislation, Jake, you'll find fascinatingly that it somehow amazingly carves out the single biggest monolithic contributor to elections: organized labor. 420 million bucks in 2008....

Now... talk about "calling a spade a spade"... Mr. Josten is on fire the entire interview! You will want to read it all... then consider just how thuggish our White House administration has become.

It is a sad, dying, thrashing thing to behold... but rest assured... there is no pity for it's miserable, falling from grace, in the eyes of Americans.

xtnyoda, shalomed

This is a truly amazing clip showing Schieffer smacking down Axelrod's foreign money accusation against the Chamber of Commerce.

When Schieffer asks Axelrod for some sliver of evidence to substantiate his libelous charge all Axelrod can respond with is a challenge to Schieffer to prove that the Chamber doesn't accept foreign money?

So Axelrod thinks that he can just make any wild claim of illegal activity and it is then up to American businesses to prove him wrong.... without a single piece of evidence to back his claim?

This is justice turned on it's head by the White House.

xtnyoda, shalomed

A couple of days ago xtnyoda sent us to the Borg Conspiracy to read his opinion on the President taking on FOX NEWS and saying that FOX NEWS was destructive for America.... now.... the White House takes one step further and even pricks the sensibilities of CNN by stating that MSNBC is good for Americans.

Sooner or later the press is going to defend itself against political attack... and we are seeing it begin in America with the above video.

OH Mr. President... are you listening? You are about to lose the MSM... Mr. President... are you listening? Your threats and intimidation are about to come back at you... sir.

America is not Chicago. We don't quiver when you speak.

xtnyoda, shalomed

It takes a publication from Australia to finally tell the truth... that our government is overtly lying to Americans about the amount of debt that our government is crushing American citizens with... overt lies and cover-up.

From Down Under

US Government 'hiding true amount of debt'

THE actual figure of the US' national debt is much higher than the official sum of $US13.4 trillion ($14.3 trillion) given by the Congressional Budget Office, according to analysts cited on Sunday by the New York Post.

"The Government is lying about the amount of debt. It is engaging in Enron accounting," said Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University....

What shall you do?

1. Get out of debt.
2. Help those you love get out of debt.
3. Get your church out of debt.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Michael Barone over at Real Clear Politics has an informative article today about the desperation coming out of the White House... and the matter of fact manner in which the White House is threatening American business and people to keep their mouths shut if they disagree with the White House.

Gangster Government Stifles Criticism of Obamacare

"There will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases."

That sounds like a stern headmistress dressing down some sophomores who have been misbehaving. But it's actually from a letter sent Thursday from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans -- the chief lobbyist for private health insurance companies....

... Sebelius has "zero tolerance" for that kind of thing.... And there's a threat. "We will also keep track of insurers with a record of unjustified rate increases: those plans may be excluded from health insurance Exchanges in 2014."...

....The threat to use government regulation to destroy or harm someone's business because they disagree with government officials is thuggery.... They want to stamp out negative speech about Obamacare. "Zero tolerance" means they are ready to use the powers of government to threaten economic harm on those who dissent.

The closing paragraph of Sebelius's letter to AHIP's Karen Ignagni gives the game away. "We worked hard to change the system to help consumers." This is a reminder that the administration alternatively collaborated with and criticized Ignagni's organization. We roughed you up a little, but we eventually made a deal.

The secretary goes on: "It is my hope we can work together to stop misinformation and misleading marketing from the start." In other words, shut your members up and play team ball -- or my guys with the baseball bats and Tommy guns are going to get busy. As Cowen puts it, "worse than I had been expecting."

The old "Huckster" as the libs loved to call Mike Huckabee, received a lot of grief over his reference to Arkansas being a lot like a "banana republic"... but he may have been more prophetic about this later day in America itself.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The very "liberal" POLITICO... is treating the coming November election as though it's already decided.

POLITICO

GOP plans wave of White House probes

If President Barack Obama needed any more incentive to go all out for Democrats this fall, here it is: Republicans are planning a wave of committee investigations targeting the White House and Democratic allies if they win back the majority.

Everything from the microscopic – the New Black Panther party – to the massive –- think bailouts – is on the GOP to-do list, according to a half-dozen Republican aides interviewed by POLITICO.....

... and they think it's already time to "expose" the conservative's coming agenda after the elections?

I'm sure this makes the republicans giggle with glee... and rightly so.

Perhaps POLITICO is actually trying to lull the conservative movement into an election day slumber... hoping to take some of the bite out of conservative's awakened passion for this election... hoping to induce many to stay home on election day thinking the election is a foregone conclusion.

Once again... I think the progressives have greatly underestimated what they have awakened in America.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The mounting evidence of piles of lies continues to grow... and the sweltering stench is spreading like a failed sewage treatment plant...

except in this case... the failures were deceptively planned from before the beginning... therefore the stench is remarkably worse.

CNS News

Obama Administration Approves First Direct Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Through New High-Risk Insurance Pools
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor

(CNSNews.com) - If you want proof that President Obama's Executive Order on taxpayer-funded abortion was a sham, look no further than Pennsylvania, says House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio).

Boehner and other Republicans point to reports that the Health and Human Services Department is giving Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new high-risk insurance pool that will cover any abortion that is legal in the state.

"The fact that the high-risk pool insurance program in Pennsylvania will use federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions is unconscionable," Boehner said in a statement on Tuesday.

“Just last month at the White House, I asked President Obama to provide the American people with a progress report on the implementation of his Executive Order, which purports to ban taxpayer-funding of abortions. Unfortunately, the President provided no information, and the American people are still waiting for answers."

President Obama pledged that under his health care plan “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”.....

When your word becomes worthless... just know... that your word is worthless.

If you don't care... there is no hope for you.

xtnyoda, shalomed

UHHHH OHHHH... it appears that the White House and Google just might be on a collusion course...

The Hill

Issa wants answers on White House’s Google ties
By Sara Jerome

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, wrote to Google on Friday to reiterate his concerns that White House Deputy Chief Technology Officer Andrew McLaughlin had inappropriate contact with the company, where he was formerly an employee.

“In April it was revealed that ... McLaughlin used his personal email account to engage in official business, including discussions on policy matters under his review with [Google],” Issa wrote.

The White House reprimanded McLaughlin in May for what it deemed were “incidental” violations of the administration’s ethics code. The White House said McLaughlin’s e-mails with Google officials had no effect on policy decisions.

Issa noted that messages sent on private e-mail accounts or through Facebook and Twitter are not captured and archived by the White House under the Presidential Records Act. He said he is concerned about reports that White House staffers may be contacting lobbyists through private accounts.

In the letter, Issa asked Google’s federal director Michael Bradshaw to provide information by July 20 on Google’s policy for retaining private e-mails, how long e-mails are retained by a Gmail account, how Google would react if subpoenaed by a law enforcement agency, and whether the White House or any federal agency has contacted the company about the retention of e-mails sent by personnel.

Issa raised concerns over McLaughlin’s ties to Google in April and called for a hearing into the matter. A hearing scheduled for June was later postponed.

“The American people have a right to expect that White House employees are working to advance the public interest and not the interests of the lobby shops who formerly employed them,” Issa said in a letter at the time. “The use of a Gmail account to communicate with lobbyists and evade transparency laws is at odds with President Obama’s promises to limit the influence of lobbyists.”

Three cheers to our most transparent administration.

xtnyoda, shalomed

On The Mark is on the mark again with this follow-up video to the video of Sen. Kyl stating that the president of the US told him that in order for the president to secure the border the president would first have to secure immigration reform... which is as crooked as politics can get.

The White House of course denies the president said any such thing... now the video of McCain explaining that the president said exactly that very thing to him and... 39 other republican senators a few weeks ago.

So... who's lying?

It's time for a Grand Jury investigation... under oath... and lets see who perjures themselves then.

xtnyoda, shalomed

PS... where's the MSM on this?

Now battle lines are being drawn between a Federal Judge and the White House... the Federal Judge ruling that for the White House to shut down the industry of an entire region the White House needs something more than the personal opinion of the president to enact such a drastic measure.... in other words... a federal judge has decided that the president isn't quite at the vaulted level of 'dictator' just yet.

Yahoo news report

Judge blocks Gulf offshore drilling moratorium

NEW ORLEANS – A federal judge struck down the Obama administration's six-month ban on deepwater oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday, saying the government rashly concluded that because one rig failed, the others are in immediate danger, too.

The White House promised an immediate appeal. The Interior Department had halted approval of any new permits for deepwater drilling and suspended drilling of 33 exploratory wells in the Gulf.

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said President Barack Obama believes strongly that drilling at such depths does not make sense and puts the safety of workers "at a danger that the president does not believe we can afford."

Several companies that ferry people and supplies and provide other services to offshore drilling rigs asked U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman in New Orleans to overturn the moratorium.

They argued it was arbitrarily imposed after the April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig that killed 11 workers and blew out the well 5,000 feet underwater. It has spewed anywhere from 67 million to 127 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.

Feldman sided with the companies, saying in his ruling the Interior Department assumed that because one rig failed, all companies and rigs doing deepwater drilling pose an imminent danger.

"The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is an unprecedented, sad, ugly and inhuman disaster," he wrote. "What seems clear is that the federal government has been pressed by what happened on the Deepwater Horizon into an otherwise sweeping confirmation that all Gulf deepwater drilling activities put us all in a universal threat of irreparable harm."

His ruling prohibits federal officials from enforcing the moratorium until a trial is held. He did not set a trial date.....

Anyone want to wager that this judge won't be recommended for a spot on the SCOTUS while the current administration is in the White House?


:-)

xtnyoda, shalomed

Arizona Senator Kyl reveals an absolutely shocking exchange that he personally had with the President of the US. This is... remarkable... in the worst sense of the word.

Human Events post
Video - Sen. Kyl: 'Obama Says No Border Security without Amnesty' (by Connie Hair)

In a stunning revelation at an Arizona town hall meeting this past Friday, Republican Senator Jon Kyl told his constituents that President Obama privately insisted that he will not secure the border until amnesty for illegal aliens passes first....

Transcript (at 3:21): SEN. JON KYL:

I met with the president in the Oval Office, just the two of us… Here’s what the president said. “The problem is,” he said, "If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”

[gasps from the audience]

KYL: In other words they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform. I explained, “You and I have an obligation to secure the border. That’s an obligation. It also has some potentially positive benefits. You don’t have to have comprehensive immigration to secure the border, but you have to have a secure border to get comprehensive immigration reform. You may be surprised, maybe you don’t think that there’d be any more incentive, but I’m not so sure that that’s true. In any event, it doesn’t matter we’re supposed to secure the border.”

That’s why this is being done. They want to get something in return for doing their duty. And that’s—

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Chicago politics.

KYL: Yeah.

If this exchange is truly accurate from this US Senator... it smacks of the worst of "boot heel" politics... at the expense of the citizens and sovereignty of our nation's borders. The "boot heel" applied to our citizens for political advantage.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Inquiring American's still want to know...

... about possible job offers to candidates to NOT run against White House endorsed candiates...

The Hill article

Judiciary Republicans want info from Holder on White House job talks

Two senior Republicans are demanding to know if the Justice Department played a role in administration job talks with Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) and Colorado Democratic Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff.



Reps. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) on Tuesday sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder asking him to provide “any and all documents and correspondence relating” to talks with the two candidates.

“We believe these offers could violate federal statutes prohibiting the solicitation of certain public offices, promising government employment in exchange for political activity, or improper interference by Administration employees in political campaigns,” the two Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee wrote.

“We are alarmed to learn that what we believed to be an isolated incident of potentially criminal conduct now appears to be a pattern of potentially corrupt practices by the White House.”....

..... The Hatch Act makes it illegal for a federal employee to use his official “positions or authority” to interfere with or affect the result of an election, but legal experts argue that Obama officials would have had to know there were committing a crime before they
offered Sestak or Romanoff positions.

The letter to Holder is a necessary step before Smith can offer a “resolution of inquiry,” a parliamentary maneuver that must be voted on by all members of the committee, and, if passed, would require the administration to provide all documents, e-mails and phone records on the issue. Before he can offer the resolution in committee, Smith must
show that he formally requested the documents from Holder.



Smith last Friday told The Hill he intended to pursue the parliamentary move.

“Congress has a duty to the American people to investigate allegations of criminal conduct at the White House,” he said in a statement. “If the administration continues to stonewall Republicans about what really happened in the job offers to Rep. Sestak and Andrew Romanoff, we will pursue the truth by every available means.”....

.... House Judiciary Democrats in December voted down a GOP resolution of inquiry that would have required the Justice Department to provide Congress with information regarding the decision to transfer, detain and prosecute Guantanamo Bay detainees in the U.S.

 ....

The continued stonewalling is making the issue more suspicious each and every day that goes by.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Last week xtnyoda recorded the second installment of the white house reported crime of trying to influence an election... and today comes installment number 3 in the continuing saga.

CBS news report

GOP Lawmaker Darrell Issa Poised to Call for Special Prosecutor to Investigate White House

Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight committee, told CBS News Wednesday that he will call for a special prosecutor to investigate the White House if it does not address Rep. Joe Sestak's claim that he was offered a federal job in exchange for dropping out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary.

"If the public doesn't receive a satisfactory answer, the next step would be to call for a special prosecutor, which is well within the statute," Issa (pictured) told Hotsheet.

The California Republican has been pushing for the White House to provide details of conversations between Sestak and administration officials in the wake of Sestak's comment during a radio interview last month that he was offered a high-ranking administration job in exchange for dropping his primary challenge against Sen. Arlen Specter.....

It is refreshing to see that at least one of the MSM networks are starting to pick up the story.

xtnyoda, shalomed

xtnyoda reported this was coming about a month ago and it is perhaps just now starting to pick up some traction... will the MSM do their job?

American Spectator article

Specter Opens Door on White House Felonies

"There's a crime called misprision of a felony. Misprision of a felony is when you don't report a crime. So you're getting into pretty deep areas here in these considerations." -- U.S. Senator Arlen Specter on March 12, 2010

"The 'stonewall strategy' functioned from the very first episodes of the cover-up. It was instinctive, from the very top of the Administration to the bottom. It was also ad hoc, developed in small reactions to the flurry of each day's events…we found ourselves trying to hold a line where we could." -- Nixon White House Counsel John Dean in his Watergate book Blind Ambition

Here we go again.

Even as the drama of health care carries the headlines, beneath the surface, visible now, the iceberg of scandal ripples.

First, the timeline on the blossoming scandal upon which we will now officially fix the dreaded "gate" descriptive. Jobsgate....

The MSM is certainly trying with everything in it's power to keep this under wraps... hidden from the public.

One more glaring example of the MSM abdicating their responsibility... and not just abdicating... but actually being in collusion with a specific political party and purpose... the MSM is sold out... and cannot be trusted.

In the mean time we await for a true investigation to take place... for justice to be done... the American people are waiting for justice against abuse from the white house to take place.

xtnyoda, shalomed

UHHHH OHHHH!

There is big time trouble brewing on The Hill and the American Spectator is all over it...

After you take a look at the whole Spectator article... the question begs itself...

"Will the MSM pick up on this major story and run with it?

Ameican Spectator breaking news report

White House Accused of Federal Crime in Specter, Bennet Races

"Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." -- 18 USC Sec. 211 -- Bribery, Graft and Conflicts of Interest: Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

"In the face of a White House denial, U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak stuck to his story yesterday that the Obama administration offered him a "high-ranking" government post if he would not run against U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary."
-- Philadelphia Inquirer
February 19, 2010

A bombshell has just exploded in the 2010 elections.

For the second time in five months, the Obama White House is being accused -- by Democrats -- of offering high ranking government jobs in return for political favors. What no one is reporting is that this is a violation of federal law that can lead to prison time, a fine or both, according to Title 18, Chapter 11, Section 211 of the United States Code.

The jobs in question? Secretary of the Navy and a position within the U.S. Agency for International Development.

The favor requested in return? Withdrawal from Senate challenges to two sitting United States Senators, both Democrats supported by President Obama. The Senators are Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Michael Bennet in Colorado.

On Friday, Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestak, the Democrat challenging Specter for re-nomination, launched the controversy by accusing the Obama White House of offering him a federal job in exchange for his agreeing to abandon his race against Specter.....

What do you think? How long before the MSM is forced to pick this up? And keep in mind that these accusations are being leveled from within their own party.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed