Libertarian Leanings

This Is What You Get...

...when you vote for Democrats.  There is a "pervasive culture of retaliation and intimidation" at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  A senior enforcement attorney at CFPB has testified at a House Committee on Financial Services hearing that senior managers at the agency retaliated against her for speaking out against mismanagement.

Scott Pluta, the CFPB assistant director of the Office of Consumer Response, demoted Martin after she filed a formal complaint of discrimination for being “isolated” and prevented from doing any “meaningful work” in December 2012. Martin has not been assigned a single case or enforcement matter since she dissolved her own law practice to work for the CFPB in 2011.

After filing her complaint, Martin, a former civilian attorney for the judge advocate general at Fort Bragg, was then removed from all of her job duties.

...

Misty Raucci, a workplace private investigator who was hired by the CFPB to investigate the case, supported Martin’s testimony.

After six months, Raucci said she became a “veritable hotline for employees at CFPB, who called to discuss their own maltreatment at the bureau, mainly at the hands of Scott Pluta or [CFPB official] Dane D’Alessandro.”

Raucci said Martin was subjected to “open bashing, bullying, and marginalization” from D’Alessandro. Pluta removed Martin from her position as chief counsel in the Office of Consumer Response.

Raucci suggested that Pluta colluded with two lower-level employees—Cathaleen Skinner and Cora Hume—to have them file complaints against Martin. Skinner “stood to benefit directly from Ms. Martin’s removal from her position as Chief Counsel,” Raucci said.

This is how Democrats believe the U.S. government should work — by intimidation and retaliation.  Consider this case concerning the EPA.

The US Supreme Court Wednesday ruled unanimously in favor of an Idaho couple seeking to have their day in court to challenge an Environmental Protection Agency order that scuttled plans to build their dream home on a subdivided lot the EPA said was a federal wetland.

The couple, Chantell and Michael Sackett, had started to fill the home site with dirt and gravel to prepare for construction. But the EPA intervened, announcing that the property was a regulated wetland. Agency officials ordered the couple to restore the land to its original state or face up to $75,000 a day in fines.

Or how about this one?

All Andy Johnson wanted to do was build a stock pond on his sprawling eight-acre Wyoming farm. He and his wife Katie spent hours constructing it, filling it with crystal-clear water, and bringing in brook and brown trout, ducks and geese. It was a place where his horses could drink and graze, and a private playground for his three children. 

But instead of enjoying the fruits of his labor, the Wyoming welder says he was harangued by the federal government, stuck in what he calls a petty power play by the Environmental Protection Agency. He claims the agency is now threatening him with civil and criminal penalties – including the threat of a $75,000-a-day fine.

And if you don't happen to be a landowner subject to EPA regulations, there is the IRS to harass you if you should happen to stray from the liberal orthodoxy.  Don't file for tax exempt status if your organization has Tea Party" or "Patriot" in its name.

The Obama administration obviously considers Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of two public service organizations, “King Street Patriots” and “True the Vote”, to be a very dangerous person. She apparently gained that ominous distinction soon after filing to obtain tax-exempt IRS status for King Street Patriots in July 2010…approval, incidentally, which has yet to be granted.  Nor has tax-exempt status been awarded for a True the Vote filing which was submitted at the same time.

Catherine’s life has changed dramatically since submitting those applications. The organization has been questioned by the FBI on numerous occasions; she has had her personal tax returns audited by the IRS; and has also had her small manufacturing business tax returns audited by the IRS. In addition, her business has been subjected to two unscheduled audits by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, and Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) and has undergone another unscheduled business audit by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

And that's how Democrats think the government is supposed to work.  Get in the way, and you get run over.  It's what you get when you vote for a Democrat.

Shaping Up To Be A Fascinating November

Jonah Goldberg is not one to lament the demise of the "race card" strategy.

‘The race card is maxed out.”

That was the punch line for a recent hilarious exchange on The Daily Show in which Larry Wilmore, the faux news program’s “senior black correspondent,” reported that the race card is not only over its credit limit but is in fact “void during a black presidency.” This discovery came in the wake of Maxine Waters’s allegation that her political problems stem from a racially biased congressional ethics investigation.

Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters are both subject to congressional ethics investigation, and both for very good reasons, none of which have anything to do with race.  Waters used her influence to secure $12 million in TARP funds for a bank in which her husband was invested to the tune of $350,000.  Rangel, while chairman of the tax writing committee, failed to report the true extent of his income in order to avoid paying taxes on it.

But as Goldberg points out, the ethics investigations are not racially motivated.  His theory is that the blatant corruption of Waters and Rangel is the inevitable result of racial gerrymandering that had handed both congressional Democrats the cushiest lifetime jobs imaginable if they could just manage not to screw up. 

They couldn't.  But they both plan to go down fighting, and their weapon of choice is... you guessed it – the race card!

Both are demanding an immediate trial, before the November elections, which would hammer even more nails into the Democratic coffin. In effect, they’re saying, “Let us off the hook or we’ll take you all down with us in a racial spectacle.”

Oh, it's going to be a fascinating November.

With Democrats In Firm Control...

An overwhelmingly majority of voters now believe that most members of Congress have been bought with cash or campaign contributions.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 70% of U.S. voters believe most members of Congress are willing to sell their vote for cash or a campaign contribution. That’s a 14-point increase from three years ago.

Only 13% don’t think this is true, but another 17% aren’t sure.

Fifty-six percent (56%) say it’s likely that their own representative in Congress has sold his or her vote for either cash or a campaign contribution. Half as many (28%) think it’s unlikely.

It's really a beautiful arrangement.  With stimulus bills and TARP, congressman divert taxpayer dollars to their own pet special interests who, in gratitude, funnel it back in the form of campaign contributions.  Such a deal.  It's actually the Obama master plan, exemplified by the rescue of UAW (nominally GM and Chrysler).  Is there any doubt where the United Auto Workers Union is going to spend its political action money?

Charlie Rangel Is a Great Guy

So says Daniel Henninger.  According to Henninger's Great Guy Theory of History, the great guys in congress give themselves and each other a pass in the interest of the greater good they do.  Good in their own minds anyway.  Great guy Chris Dodd just got an elaborate pass on the special mortgage deals he got as a Friend of Angelo, but Rangel's tax troubles and unreported income look to be a bridge too far.

Congress just passed a financial regulation bill and people wonder how it can be 2000 pages long. The Rangel saga suggests why. The reason it's 2000 pages long has less to do with the need for regulation and a lot to do with the needs of Washington. Every financial player in America will have to contribute money, one way or another, to Washington's great guys—to their campaigns, their legacy projects, to the former members of the congressional family who will lobby and lubricate the bill's incomprehensible details.

That's the deal in Washington now. But that's not the deal as understood by most American voters. American politics is about to go through one of its periodic purifications. Decent, competent members of Congress will get swept away. Charlie Rangel, a 20-termer and a great guy, will go down in ignominy. 

In the old days, guys who were lucky or smart left office or died before the sheriff arrived. This year the voters have the Capitol surrounded. In January we're going to get the 112th Congress and a chance for better than what we've had. Let's get on with it.

Tough break for Charlie Rangel, but yes, let's get on with it.

Worried - But Still Not Getting It

According to Politico, Democrats are beginning to show some worry over their abandonment by independent voters.  But they don't seem to understand the reason behind their plummeting popularity.  Here's an example.

Pat Waak, the chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party, said the party had so far failed to convince independent voters of the steps it had taken to improve the economy.

“I think the economy is at the base of the tension,” she said. “Quite frankly, we’ve got to do a better job of messaging. There’s a lot of work to be done to get independents more comfortable with what we’re doing.”

Here's the thought that hasn't managed to penetrate progressive skulls.  Independents know what Democrats are doing, and they don't like it.  Instead of taking steps that would actually help the economy, like cutting taxes on both businesses and individuals, Democrats have used stimulus money for political payoffs, like transferring ownership of GM and Chrysler to the United Auto Workers union. 

And while the economy continues tanking Democrats decide to push a health care reform bill that will run up the deficit, will not improve care or make it any more affordable, and that a majority of Americans don't want.  It is nothing more than a naked grab for power.  It's hard to believe how Democrat/progressive leaders can be so incredibly avaricious and stupid, but they are -- just plain stupid.  They'll be sure to work on their messaging, though.

Afterthought:  If Democrats are smart enough to figure out their policies, not their message, is the reason they're losing independent voters in droves, they have a simple remedy.  They'll lie about their policies.

So let's be realistic.  Progressives, as leftists like to call themselves, know all this about the single payer systems.  They just won't admit it.  Why is that?  One of the single payer shining stars in the video above is Yale Political Science Professor Jacob Hacker.  He is very candid about the underlying rationale for promoting a public option for health insurance.  It inevitably leads to a single payer system.

'Someone once said to me that this is a Trojan Horse for a single payer.  Well, it's not a Trojan Horse, right?  It's just right there.'

[...]

'One of the virtues of it is that you can at least make the claim that there's a competitive system between the public and private sectors.'

Another who makes her appearance in the video is Representative Jan Schakowsky, Democrat from Illinois.  A strong proponent of the single payer model, she is even more open about there being another agenda.  To the cheers of her single payer audience she says,

'This is not a principled fight.  This is a fight about strategy for getting there, and I believe we will.'

Ah, but where is "there?"  Just as the public option can be seen as a Trojan Horse for getting to a single payer plan, health care reform itself is a strategy. Barack Obama is pragmatic about getting and keeping power.  The goal is an enduring progressive majority in congress, and the progressive strategy for achieving it has always been to encourage more people to rely on government.  When people depend upon government they will vote for those who favor more of it.  Health care reform is vote buying on a massive scale.  And the beauty of it is that Democratic votes are bought with federal tax dollars.

Think about it for a moment.  When health care reform finally passes and we all depend on Uncle Sam to cure our ills, what will be the more beneficial to progressive politicians?  A health care system that works?  Or one that requires constant attention from our progressive champions in Washington?

Subpoena For Countrywide Documents

The timing of this ought to be interesting.

On Friday night, House oversight committee chairman Edolphus Towns (D., N.Y.) and ranking member Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) reached an agreement to subpoena documents from the "Friends of Angelo" program. Named for former Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo, the program provided VIP mortgages to "friends" including Senators Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad.

Said Mr. Towns, "In line with the commitment to an ethical and accountable Congress, the subpoena to Countrywide covers records that could show special treatment for Members of Congress." This is significant, because a compromise plan floated last week would have authorized a subpoena covering—don't laugh—all federal officials except members of Congress.

Will Democrats be able to sweep this under the carpet far enough ahead of the 2010 elections?  Or maybe the committee report will be delayed until after elections are over.  

New Jersey has a Problem

New Jersey has a big problem.

'Big Government is why New Jersey created only 6,800 private sector jobs from 2000 to 2007—while public sector jobs grew by more than 55,800. Big Government is the reason New Jersey ranks as the worst of 50 states on the Small Business Survival Index. And Big Government is a leading reason New Jersey has a “corruption problem” that an FBI agent at Friday’s press conference characterized as “one of the worst, if not the worst, in the nation.”

Sandy McClure, co-author of the book “The Soprano State: New Jersey’s Culture of Corruption,” agrees that big government is a big reason behind the state’s corruption problem. “You have all these little authorities that everyone has to go to for permission,” she says. “Too much government means too many opportunities for officials looking to cash in. And there’s no way that the press can keep track of it all.”'

In its first reporting of the corruption scandal, the Los Angeles Times demonstrated extraordinary delicacy.  A reading of the Times accounting of it would lead you to think this was a non-partisan affair.  Neither of the words "Democrat" nor "Republican" appear anywhere in an article about the arrests of 44 public officials -- a collection of mayors, state assemblymen, and city councilmen.

A slightly different picture emerges from yesterday's reporting by Examiner.com.

'The mayors of Hoboken, Secaucus and Ridgefield, the Jersey City deputy mayor and council president, two state assemblymen, numerous other public officials and political figures and five rabbis from New York and New Jersey were among 44 individuals charged Thursday in a two-track federal investigation of public corruption and a high-volume, international money laundering conspiracy, according to Michael Drewniak, public affairs officer for the US Attorney's Office in Newark, NJ.

All but one of the suspects, are part of the Jersey Democrat Party Machine.'

New jersey is said to be running neck and neck with Illinois, Barack Obama's home state, for the title "Most Corrupt State in the Union." 

Friends in Congress

As is pretty well known, Senators Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad received very favorable mortgage terms from Countrywide Financial because of their "friendship" with former Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo. Republican Congressman Darrell Issa of California wants to know what other "Friends of Angelo" might be sitting in Congress.

'A March report by Congressman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) highlighted internal Countrywide emails in which executives debated whether the mayor of Billings, Montana, was influential enough to warrant a waiving of his mortgage insurance premium. The company ultimately decided that he was. We can only imagine what Countrywide's internal emails might say about the benefits of "friendship" with Mr. Dodd, who chairs the Banking Committee of the U.S. Senate, or about others who benefited from the program.

Mr. Issa doesn't want to imagine; he wants to discover the facts. He's asked Rep. Edolphus Towns (D., N.Y.), Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to subpoena records of the "Friends of Angelo" loan program from Bank of America, which bought the failed subprime lender last year. So far, Mr. Towns is noncommittal, and perhaps he is hoping that the issue will fade into the background during the long August recess.'

This was supposed to be the most ethical Congress in history, if we take Democratic Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi at her word.  Unfortunately, she has never shown any appetite for investigating corruption among Democrats, and since she has the final say in the matter subpoenas, we can expect she will do what she can to make this issue fade away.

40 Briefings Later...

After 40 briefings on the subject of "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- techniques that have magically been transformed by the passage of time into "torture" -- congressional Democrats still claim to have known nothing about them.  They were kept in the dark by the secretive Bush administration, so they say.

But, according to the Wall Street Journal, a February 4, 2003 briefing was given to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that described the techniques at length.  It provided detailed descriptions of which techniques were used, how waterboarding was applied, and by what process the Department of Justice approved each technique.

'The West Virginian was briefed at least 12 times more about interrogation techniques, legal authorities and other aspects of the program. The last, in June 2008, was offered to 10 members of the Senate Intelligence Committee and covered "discussion of EITs and the OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] opinions. Specific mentions of waterboarding numerous time."

Yet in October 2008, following a Washington Post report on the existence of the OLC memos, Mr. Rockefeller disclaimed any knowledge of the opinions. "If White House documents exist that set the policy for the use of coercive techniques such as waterboarding, those documents have been kept from the committee," said Mr. Rockefeller. "That is unacceptable, and represents the latest example of the Bush Administration withholding critical information from Congress and the American people in an attempt to limit our oversight of sensitive intelligence collection activities."

Amusingly, or almost, Senator Rockefeller's denial is flatly contradicted by his own report on the subject released last month, which notes that "On May 19, 2008, the Department of Justice and the Central Intelligence Agency provided the Committee with access to all opinions and a number of other documents prepared by the Office of Legal Counsel . . . concerning the legality of the CIA's detention and interrogation program. Five of these documents provided addressed the use of waterboarding."'

What we got here is the Bill Clinton legacy.  Clinton popularized the practice of flat out lying in the face of all evidence, going so far as to quibble over the meaning of the word, "is".  Deny, deny, deny.  As Clinton demonstrated, denial is a remarkably effective strategy.  Democrats have internalized it, apparently, believing there are more important principles at stake than truth, or national defense for that matter.  Earmarks, perhaps.  Power, definitely.  These continual denials by Democrats confirm that power is much more important than truth, defense, or even the constitution.

Update:  Pelosi favors a truth commission.

'Goss claimed in an opinion piece in the Washington Post two weeks ago that Pelosi and he were specifically told waterboarding had been used against Abu Zubaydah, one of three CIA prisoners subjected to the method.

[...]

Pelosi is one of many Democrats who favor a truth commission to fully examine the CIA's Bush-era interrogation program.'

Isn't that rich.  A truth commission.

Another troubling nomination

Add the name Ronald Sims to the list of Obama administration cabinet nominees who come with baggage.

'President Obama's choice for the government's No. 2 housing job is embroiled in the largest fine in U.S. history for "blatant violations" of open records laws after the Washington State Supreme Court chastised his office for withholding documents detailing taxpayer costs for a new professional football stadium in Seattle.

The documents that Ronald Sims' office was found to have kept from the public when he served as King County executive included information about cheaper alternatives to the $430 million Seattle Seahawks stadium, which was built in 2002, according to a Washington Times review of the court records.

Washington's highest court ruled in January that the withheld documents would have allowed voters in a referendum to challenge "the veracity" of King County's request for $300 million in public bonds for the project. The justices found the actions of Mr. Sims' office to be so "egregious" that they scrapped a lower court's order of a $123,780 fine - the largest ever assessed in a public records case - and recommended that the penalty be increased to as much as $825,000.

Mr. Obama nominated Mr. Sims as the top deputy at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) just three weeks after the court's ruling, which harshly and repeatedly criticized Mr. Sims' office for its conduct during a 12-year legal fight.

If confirmed, Mr. Sims would help manage billions of federal dollars set aside for building, maintaining and operating public housing inside a government agency with a history of misspending and corruption. A Senate committee last week forwarded Mr. Sims' nomination to the full Senate without asking the nominee a single question.'

Afraid to ask?