Republican-Owned Chrysler Dealerships Forced To Close

New information has come to light in the Chrysler Dealership closures.

Rick Moran wrote in “More evidence emerges that Chrysler Dealer closings was politically motivated,” The dealer closings were not ordered by the bankruptcy judge but by the White House. This puts a whole new light on how the dealers to be closed were chosen and, more importantly, who did it.

And Jim Hoft has found an incredible piece of information. Apparently, a politically connected group of Democrats who own six Chrysler dealerships not only were allowed to keep them, but their competition was deep sixed. Hoft has a link to a blog on the Chrysler dealer shutdowns run by Joey Smith who reports:

The company is called RLJ-McLarty-Landers, and it operates six Chrysler dealerships throughout the South. All six dealerships are safe from closing. The dealer locations are:

Bentonville, AR (northwest Arkansas)
Lee’s Summit, MO (south of Kansas City, MO)
Branson, MO
Olathe, KS (near Kansas City)
Bossier City, LA (near Shreveport)
Huntsville, AL

The interesting part is who the three main owners of the company are. The owners are Steve Landers (long-time car dealer, 4th-generation dealer), Thomas “Mack” McLarty (former Chief of Staff for President Clinton), and Robert Johnson (founder of Black Entertainment Television and co-owner of the NBA’s Charlotte Bobcats). Landers has given money to Republicans in the past, but McLarty campaigned for Obama in 2008, and Johnson has given countless amounts of money to Democrats over the years.

This thing is getting stinkier by the hour. And it’s starting to smell like rotten bananas – as in the tactic the White House is using is something you’d find in a central American banana republic and not the greatest nation on earth.

I wrote a piece on my own blog a while back when Chrysler dealer George Joseph wrote a letter published on AT about his own troubles with being shut down. In that piece, I made the argument that what we were seeing was not socialism, but gangsterism. And how did it happen?

It can happen because we are barking up the wrong tree when we accuse the Democrats of practicing socialism. Any Chicagoan recognizes what’s going on as pure gangsterism – the application of power through the use blackmail, threats, and pure muscle and the devil take the Constitution, the rule of law, and simple fairness.

It can happen because we’ve elected a president who aggrandizes power unto himself while running roughshod over individual rights.

This story is about ready to explode. All the ingredients are there for a gigantic political scandal that would shake the Obama administration to its foundation and perhaps take down several high ranking officials. All that’s needed is one connecting piece of evidence that would tie the White House Automotive Task Force to some political arm of the Democratic party.”

This is reminiscent of the Soviet Union, nationalizing every business, and forcing closures of private business. Is this really America, and is our President really forcing private businesses to close, while allowing the businesses of cronies to remain open?

Read the entire column and stay tuned. Share this with everyone you know. We can fight this.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/more_evidence_emerges_that_chr.html

 

UPDATE:  From Mark Tapscott of The Washington Examiner:

He writes: “A lawyer representing a group of  Chrysler dealers who are on the hit list deposed senior Chrysler executives and later told Reuters that he believes the closings have been forced on the company by the White House.

“It became clear to us that Chrysler does not see the wisdom of terminating 25 percent of its dealers. It really wasn’t Chrysler’s decision. They are under enormous pressure from the President’s automotive task force,” said attorney Leonard Bellavia.

RedState.com’s Josh Painter has a useful roundup of what has been found so far by a growing number of bloggers digging into what could be a very big story indeed. Also, see my column on this issue and how it fits into the larger context dubbed by the Examiner’s Michael Barone as “gangster government.”

As part of Chrysler’s bankruptcy agreement with the White House, the company plans to close roughly a quarter of its 3,200 dealerships.  Lists of the dealerships being cut and those retaining their Chrysler franchises can be found here in pdf format. Many dealers contend the criteria being used to determine which dealerships survive is not clear and that many of those that are being closed in fact are profitable businesses, despite the current recession. 

and…

UPDATE II: White House car czar married to Democratic fund raiser

Maybe it’s significant, maybe not, but a colleague here in the Examiner newsroom just reminded me that White House car czar Steven Rattner is married to Maureen White, the former national finance chairman of the Democratic National Committee. And let’s not forget that before Rattner became a Wall Street mover and shaker, he was a New York Times reporter. Check out the Wiki bio here.   

read the whole article here: HERE 

Judge Sotomayor: The “Equalizer”

For a President who constantly reminds us that he’s a constitutional scholar, Obama doesn’t seem to have any regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. His choicec of Sonia Sotormayor for the United States Supreme Court proves this, beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

That she is the child of Puerto Rican parents (not immigrants) is laudable and worthy of mentioning. But Sotormayor wears her Latina heritage like a scarlet letter. Her often-played quote “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” also proves beyond a reasonable doubt that she trumps her Hispanic heritage before the rule of law in America.

 

Minorities in this country are allowed to be racists.

 

Sotormayor has a questionable judicial record. While she is said to be a workaholic and devoted jurist, she has a 60% rate of decisions being overturned. That’s darned questionable work performance and demonstrates that she is an activist and not a constitutionalist. Her decisions fly in the face of the rule of law.

 

Sotormayor seems to have been determined to make a name for herself instead of upholding the constitution, which she was sworn in to do.I solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of (Judge.) to the best of my ability. (So help me God is traditionally added.) 

Sotormayor swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States… as did President Obama, but he’s not doing such a hot job of it either. He stated that he wants her confirmed and “walking up those marble steps and providing some justice.” An outrageous statement for the American President to make. Does he want Justice based on her Latina experience and Obama’s racial attitudes, or justice based on the rule of law and the Constitution?

 

Karl Rove wrote, “Empathy” is the latest code word for liberal activism, for treating the Constitution as malleable clay to be kneaded and molded in whatever form justices want. It represents an expansive view of the judiciary in which courts create policy that couldn’t pass the legislative branch or, if it did, would generate voter backlash.”

 

The Washington Times wrote, “With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

“Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so,” said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.”

A majority of Americans believe that judicial decisions should be made on the rule of law – even if it means they are rules against. Americans believe in fairness of law. Judge Sotormayor does not – she sees herself as “The Equalizer.”

 

Pray for the continued health of Justices Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalia.

California Budget: The Impact on Sacramento

California’s budget deficit now stands at $24.3 BILLION. In his attempt to address the budget shortfall while avoiding a $5.5 billion ask from Wall Street, Schwarzenegger wants $5.6 billion in new cuts and has also proposed borrowing $2 billion from local governments over the next fiscal year. 

According to the WSJ:

…in [Schwarzeneggers] efforts to find funds to balance the state budget, has proposed borrowing $2 billion from municipal governments over the next fiscal year, a tactic that is rankling local officials up and down the state.

Mr. Schwarzenegger is invoking a 2004 law that lets the state demand loans of 8% of property-tax revenue from cities, counties and special districts. Under the law, the state must repay the municipalities with interest within three years.

Administrators of already cash-strapped cities and counties said the loans would force even deeper cuts in services. Fewer cops and fire engines would be on the streets, they said, and parks and libraries would be closed more often. And some local governments would be forced to lay off workers to keep their budgets out of the red, they said.

The proposed borrowing would result in a $7.4 MILLION transfer from the City of Sacramento to the State General Fund coffers.  A devastating hit considering the City is currently facing a $50 MILLION budget deficit of its own.

In this clip from CBS 13, California League of Cities Executive Director Chris McKenzie speaks about the potential impact of raids on local government.  The clip is from May, but in light of the pending borrowing proposal it is still salient.

And Schwarzenegger isn’t done yet. The governor’s aides are expected to outline an additional $3BILLION in cuts by Friday, responding to new projections showing that the deficit is larger than he originally anticipated.

California Budget: Governor Proposes Eliminating CalWORKS

The governor’s aides will give lawmakers a briefing today on details of cuts aimed at closing a budget gap that is $24 billion wide, by some forecasts. ‘The voters sent a very clear message to Sacramento: Live within your means, cut spending, slash the size of government, get rid of the waste and the inefficiency and don’t raise taxes,’ Schwarzenegger says.

Now, the Schwarzenegger administration proposed $5.6 billion in additional spending reductions to narrow the state budget deficit in lieu of floating additional short-term loans, including elimination of the state’s welfare-to-work program known as CalWORKS.

Dropping CalWORKS would save an estimated $1.3 billion next year and is the largest single piece of a 25-item list of additional spending cuts given to a two-house committee working on the budget deficit.

The deficit has been pegged at $24.3 billion by the Legislature’s budget analyst and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had wanted to cover part of it with some loans known as “revenue anticipation warrants” or RAWs, but abandoned that strategy last week after learning that the federal government wouldn’t back the loans. Without those guarantees, obtaining financing from private lenders was uncertain.

Slashing the state prison budget by an additional $788.5 million is the second largest item on the list.

The complete list may be found here.

California High Court Upholds Gay Marriage Ban

BREAKING: The California Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld same sex marriages that were already performed but upheld voters’ rights to uphold the state constitution banning gay marriage

At issue in the court decision were two questions about Proposition 8, which 52 percent of voters approved in November — just six months after a divided court issued its groundbreaking ruling to allow same-sex nuptials.

The first question was whether the measure amounted to an improper method of amending the state Constitution — essentially targeting a minority group by depriving gay couples of the right to marry. The second was what to do with the 18,000 same-sex marriages that took place before Proposition 8 took effect.

Justices heard arguments from both sides in March, appearing reluctant to overturn the will of the voters but also seemingly opposed to canceling any existing marriages.

Tuesday’s ruling upholds the will of California voters as expressed in Proposition 8 while at the same time validating the  legal status of some 18,000 same-sex couples who were married in California between June — when the legalization took effect — and Election Day in November.

Read the Supreme Court press release

In Honor of Those Who Serve

Those of us at the Sacramento Citizen would like to recognize and thank those brave souls who have given their lives for the cause of freedom.

At the very first official Memorial Day, held in 1868 at Arlington National Cemetery, Union general John A. Logan said the day was “for the purpose of strewing with flowers or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country.” With those words, the thousands of spectators who had gathered that day spread out across the then-much-smaller cemetery to do just that.

For many Americans, Memorial Day marks little more than the start of summer. It’s a day off to mow the lawn, go to the pool or grill in the back yard with family and friends.

But it’s no holiday for America’s best. Memorial Day will find our troops fighting terrorists and other enemies of freedom around the globe. Therefore on May 25, let us take a moment to reflect on the sacrifices that members of our military make every day. The Department of Veterans Affairs maintains 128 national cemeteries in 39 states. Visit this link to find a cemetery in your state. Leave a flower on the grave of a soldier known or unknown to you. Take your children and explain the meaning behind this important national holiday.

On this day, we express our gratitude to those who have served or are currently serving in our Armed Forces.  Your commitment and sacrifice for our country is more than appreciated, it is revered. Because so many have given so much, the United States faces a bright future of freedom and prosperity.

God bless you!

California Breakup: What’s Old is New Again

In Tuesday’s special election California voters rejected the political establishment’s $16 billion in higher taxes by a nearly two-to-one margin. Defeat of Propositions 1A through 1E means the state budget’s $15.4 billion river of red ink will deepen to a projected $21.3 billion.  The current budget debacle has once again raised the governance question and resurrected an old yet still radical idea – the breaking up of California into smaller more accountable government units.

While currently garnering a great deal of buzz, this is far from a new idea.  In fact it is the latest revision of 27 prior attempts with most attempts never getting far off the ground. The last serious attempt was made by Republican Assemblyman Stan Statham in the early 1990s. The most famous secession movement came in 1941, when several counties in Northern California and southern Oregon tried to form the State of Jefferson – until World War II intervened.

Two distinct prosals are circulating on the web. Former Assemblyman Bill Maze, is suggesting that two Californias are more easily governed than one. His proposal would split California in two: the conservative interior as one state and the liberal coast as another.  The second proposal would split California into four distinct states with populations more typical of other US States.  The political units would be:

• San Diego/Orange County/Inland Empire (socially conservative, Hispanic, heavily military)
• Greater LA (Hollywood and Hispanics, very liberal)
• San Francisco/Silicon Valley (Liberal, but very dynamic and market oriented)
• Central (Conservative, Kansas-like)

The proposals may be little more than a political scientist’s late night fantasy and experts argue that the proposal doesn’t have a chance of working, but in what looks to be an era of reform and severe voter dissatisfaction, never say never.

California Voters Resoundingly Reject Ballot Measures

California voters have crushed efforts by elected leaders to patch a gaping hole in the state budget with a package of ballot measures that included borrowing, extending $16 billion worth of taxes and promising to reform future budgets with a reserve fund and a spending cap.

Just how bad was it?  You can check out the running carnage tally here, but so far:
Prop. 1A: Yes – 34, No – 66
Prop. 1B: Yes – 37, No – 63
Prop. 1C: Yes – 35, No – 65
Prop. 1D: Yes – 34, No, 66
Prop. 1E: Yes – 34, No, 66
Prop. 1F: Yes – 74, No, 26

Californian’s were all warned that if the Propositions failed the state’s economy would sink even further. To highlight that fact, last week Schwarzenegger released two dire budget plans: The most optimistic projects a $15.4 billion gap, which widens to $21.3 billion if voters reject today’s ballot measures.

Voters didn’t take the bait.

The resounding rejection Tuesday of five ballot measures meant to shore up the state’s shaky finances leaves California facing another monumental budget problem — and could hasten the arrival of a financial reckoning – one that has been put off by lawmakers time and again through band-aid budgets and budgetary shell games.

While ABC World News reported that California’s economic woes are due to our sheer size and unwillingness to raise taxes, let us be very clear: California’s current economic crisis is directly linked to lawmakers addiction to overspending.

As George Will, pointed out California government has hardly been starving for money: “If, since 1990, state spending increases had been held to the inflation rate plus population growth, the state would have a $15 billion surplus instead of a $42 billion budget deficit.” In addition, in Arnold “Schwarzenegger’s less than six years as Governor, per capita government spending, adjusted for inflation, has increased nearly 20 percent.”

Tuesday’s election was not merely a rejection of tax hikes, it was a rejection of Sacramento politics as usual. Voters have sent a clear message to Sacramento: Enough is enough. It’s time for Government – Democrats and Republicans alike – to live within their means. Tax hikes never solve budget deficits, and now that the voters have all but eliminated the option of higher taxes, it is time to reform the system and make it work for the people – not against them.

As Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth said late Tuesday night, now is the time “to end the cycle of permanent budget crises, make government work efficiently, help create new jobs and change the self-serving culture in Sacramento.”

Will California Voters Answer the Special Election Call?

An unending run of grim economic news has seemingly put California voters in a foul mood before Tuesday’s special election.  Today’s special election arrives in the midst of a bad national economy and arrives three months after a 15 week squabble to close an earlier $42 billion shortfall.

Add in a complex set of ballot propositions and rising distrust of Sacramento politicians (approval ratings now stand at 14%), and the election is shaping up as a replay of 2005, when voters rejected every measure on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s special election ballot.

Californian’s have all been warned that if the Propositions fail the state’s economy will sink even further.  To highlight that fact, last week Schwarzenegger released two dire budget plans: The most optimistic projects a $15.4 billion gap, which widens to $21.3 billion if voters reject today’s ballot measures. 

Hardly an inspiring message that urges citizens to the polls.

“[Voters] are having a hard time seeing how this set of ballot measures (is) going to be a part of the solution to California’s economic recovery or a solution to the budget difficulties of the state government,” said Mark Baldassare, president of the Public Policy Institute of California.

The measures would create a state spending cap, extend a series of tax increases, repay education funding, authorize borrowing from future lottery proceeds and transfer money from children’s and mental health programs to the state’s general fund. The only one of the six measures leading in opinion polls was Proposition 1F, which would prohibit pay raises to state elected officials during deficit years.

Californians are projected to reject the lead measure with 57% of voters opposing it, according to poll results released late Monday by the nonpartisan Survey USA.  With the exception of Prop 1F, pollsters are predicting that the other measures may follow suit.

“It fair to say that the governor’s and the Legislature’s approval ratings make it more difficult for people to feel that the budget measures are needed as a solution,” said PPIC director Mark Baldassare in the Fresno Bee. “Add to that the general complexity of them and the economic uncertainty in their own lives, and it’s a difficult time for voters to accept these measures as necessary.”

California’s Most Liberal and Conservative Cities

Prior to an election, the Secretary of State’s Office releases a pleathora of voter registration data. With the coming California Special Election on May 19th, the Sacramento Bee has taken the liberty of composing a fun look at which cities are the most politically polarized.

Here’s how they broke down the numbers: To figure out the most conservative cities, the Sacramento Bee looked for the places with the lowest percentage of voters registered Democrat; for the most liberal, those with the lowest percentage of Republicans. To keep small numbers from masquerading as big trends, the Sacramento Bee excluded cities with fewer than 5,000 registered voters.

You can check out the SacBee’s slideshow of The most conservative and liberal cities in California here.

Cal Chamber Releases Annual Job Killer List

The California Chamber of Commerce has released their annual “Job Killer” list.  The 2009 list highlights 29 legislative measures that represent what the Chamber calls a ”threat” to California’s recovering economy.

Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth commented, “the Cal Chamber is exposing bills that are most harmful to California’s economy.  We must stop any legislation that causes job losses.”

The Chamber releases a list of bills annually they believe would decimate job growth in California.  Among the bills on this year’s list are new health care taxes, rollbacks of workers’ compensation reform, limits on affordable housing and development, restrictions on the use of voter-approved transportation funding, and a tax on freight movement.

President of the California Chamber of Commerce, Allen Zaremberg noted that there is no more business as usual with unemployment exceeding 11 percent and burdensome regulations unique to California which adds costs for business and harms the economy.

Zaremberg said “Legislators must make job creation their top priority.  A robust private sector economy will provide our state government with sufficient resources for a quality educational system and the public safety services we deserve.”

Read more here…

California’s Growing State Government

On the heels of last month’s “tea party” protests against higher government spending and the threat of higher taxes, Rasmussen recently released a new poll which shows 60% of Americans believe the government has too much power and too much money.

The oft repeated claim of conservatives is that at every level, government is too big, too inefficient, wasteful, and all too often interferes with private citizens and enterprises who want to get things done.  Despite the claim, it is rare that the citizenry is presented with a state sponsored study that outlines the projected growth and development of government – in terms of square feet.

Square Footage of California’s Government
Over the last five decades, state office space occupied in the Sacramento region has grown steadily.  From 2.3 million net square feet (NSF) of primarily owned space in 1960, the state office inventory in Sacramento has grown to more than 17 million NSF of occupied space in 2007.  Of that 17 million, 58 percent is state-owned and 42 percent is leased.

Currently, state office space sprawls over 500 locations in the Sacramento region.  Several state agencies have more than 20 different office locations in the region (e.g. Consumer Affairs, Corrections and Rehabilitation, Transportation, and Fish and Game).  While the California Department of General Services notes that steps have been taken to consolidate all or portions of agencies, a great deal of fragmentation still remains.  Over 60% of state office space is in the central city area.  Almost 13 million NSF (or about 76%) is within five miles of the Capitol with the remainder highly dispersed throughout the region.

Sacramento Region State Office Planning Study
Since 1960 the Capitol Area Plan, the master plan for development on state-owned land surrounding the Capitol, has guided the State of California’s office presence in the Sacramento region.  To guide the physical growth of government over the next 40 years, the state’s real estate manager, the Department of General Services, recently released its “Sacramento Region State Office Planning Study” [http://www.dgs.ca.gov/PlanningStudy.htm]. The first of its kind in four decades, this study will contribute to shaping the future landscape of the Sacramento area based on the state’s development projects.

The study estimates a need for another 13.7 million square feet in the capital region, far more than currently controlled by state government in the downtown core.

In other words, California will need to nearly double its office space over the next 40 years and will look to fill remaining vacant spots in Sacramento’s central core, including the rail-yards, but will also consider other areas such as suburban office campuses and the West Sacramento riverfront.

While the findings of the study could mean opportunities for landlords and developers – the massive government growth laid out in the report is not good news for California taxpayers.  Already burdened with some of the highest combined state and local taxes in the nation, every new government building and program adds more weight to the burden now borne by the taxpayer. 

Furthermore, the report details that several of its long-term development opportunities can be accomplished working with major redevelopment projects throughout the region.  With redevelopment comes the threat of eminent domain and a greater consumption of property tax dollars.  According to a 2005 LAO report, redevelopment consumes approximately 10 percent of all property taxes statewide.  In 2006-2007 redevelopment agencies diverted almost $4.6 billion in property tax increment revenues from counties, cities, special districts, and school districts.  The state’s General Fund must backfill the schools’ losses, at the cost of about $2 billion a year.

In Conclusion
It was 1967 when Ronald Reagan said that “the time has come for us to decide whether collectively we can afford everything and anything we think of simply because we think of it. The time has come to run a check to see if all the services government provides were in answer to demands or were just goodies dreamed up for our supposed betterment. The time has come to match outgo to income, instead of always doing it the other way around.”

Before California’s government undertakes massive new spending to gobble up precious public resources and squeezes out opportunity for private industry, we should closely examine whether or not expanding the physical size of government by an additional 13.7 million square feet is truly justified.  With a great deal of fragmentation still existing among current state properties, there is significant opportunity for state agencies to become more efficient and effective with their current allotted space.

Soak The Rich

With the Obama administration determined to expand government under the guise of “jobs” and “stimulus,” more than ever, America is divided between the contributors and working, productive members of society, and the takers, welfare, entitlement folks.

 

Being “rich” according to America’s leftists, is anyone who operates a small business, drives a nicce car, lives in a nice house… or works in the private sector. A ‘rich” government employee is just fine with leftists. They ought to feel right at home in California, where our fire fighters make $114,000 annually, and thousands of State Workers make more than $300,000 annually, and the private sector is shrinking. Obama is creating a permanent welfare state of mindless fembot followers, while Conservatives are desperately trying to get out the message that providing for yourself is far more rewarding.

 

Finally, statistics are being revealed to prove that high-tax states are losing 1,100 residents everyday, while low-tax states are enjoying an 89% increase in jobs. Duh? Do you think there is some connection?

 

Stephen Moore and Arthur Laffer wrote a fantastic article in the Wall Street Journal titled “Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich:” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260067214828295.html

 

It is a must-read and a must pass-along! And please, send it to college aged kids. We’ve got to end the entitlement mentality.

Nancy Pelosi’s “Most Ethical Congress”

Does everyone remember in 2006 when Nancy Pelosi stated that her Congress would be the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history.”  She described the vote as a mandate “to restore stability and bipartisanship” in Washington and for “a new direction” in the war in Iraq.” “The American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead ,” Pelosi said.

 

Her disreputible, lying, cheating tactics in the past few years have demonstrated that Pelosi is not only a prevaricating, double-dealing dullard, she is a political hack.

 

Today, she also demonstrated that she’s not even a good liar. Under strong attack from Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused the CIA and Bush administration of misleading her about waterboarding detainees in the war on terror and sharply rebutted claims she was complicit in the method’s use.” To the contrary … we were told explicitly that waterboarding was not being used,” she told reporters, referring to a formal CIA briefing she received in the fall of 2002. Pelosi said she subsequently learned that other lawmakers were told several months later by the CIA about the use of waterboarding.

“I wasn’t briefed, I was informed that somebody else had been briefed about it,” she said. (AP, Yahoo News)  HERE

 

She’s not nearly as good as either of the Clintons. “I wasn’t briefed” and I wasn’t informed” is not nearly as good as Bill Clinton’s “It depends on what the meaning of the words ‘is’ is.” ?”

   

After claiming that the CIA lied about methods used during interrogation, I wondered what Geroge Tenant might have to say.

 

How is it that Nancy was misled by someone who she claimed was stupid? Where does that leave Nancy?  Stupendously incompetent or a second-rate Liar or both?Since Hillary Clinton used the same excuse of being “misled” by President Bush on the Weapons of Mass Destruction issue, it appears that George Bush was smarter that any Democrat in congress.

Nancy Pelosi has become a giant liability to the Democrats. Bets are on as to how long Obama will allow her to stay. Will he send her on another world tour? Will he send her packing? Frankly, I hope she is allowed to stay. She provides so much entertainment while destroying our country.

 

Thank goodness that Democrats don’t last long in the White House – without completely discrediting themselves, but only after causing irreparable damage.

 

For an excellent history of Pelosi and her lies, take a look through Michelle Malkin’s history of columns about her: HERE