Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Obama Wants to Control the Banks
I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?
My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.
It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.
If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html#printMode
My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.
It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.
If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html#printMode
Friday, March 27, 2009
Glenn Beck talks with Congresswoman Bachmann
GLENN: 888 727 BECK. Congressman Michele Bachmann is with us now. Congressman, how are you?
CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Good morning, Glenn, good afternoon, good evening, good to see you.
GLENN: How are things?
CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Well, things are hot on the front lines in Washington, D.C. There's a lot happening, a lot of pots are boiling over and we're very concerned about what we're seeing.
GLENN: I want to talk to you a little bit about Timothy Geithner. Explain to America what is happening with how close are we to having Timothy Geithner be able to shut down private businesses if they feel it's a threat to the economy?
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23295/
CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Good morning, Glenn, good afternoon, good evening, good to see you.
GLENN: How are things?
CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Well, things are hot on the front lines in Washington, D.C. There's a lot happening, a lot of pots are boiling over and we're very concerned about what we're seeing.
GLENN: I want to talk to you a little bit about Timothy Geithner. Explain to America what is happening with how close are we to having Timothy Geithner be able to shut down private businesses if they feel it's a threat to the economy?
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23295/
New Era of Spend & Blame
For a guy who talks so much about wanting a new era of re sponsibility, President Obama spends an awful lot of time blaming Republicans for all the wild and reckless spending he crammed into his own budget.
After running a campaign against the $1 trillion deficit he "inherited" from President Bush and the Republicans, Obama quickly matched it. During his first 50 days in office, he and his Democratic-controlled Congress spent $1 billion an hour.
Under Obama's proposed budget, the overall national debt doubles in five years and triples in 10.
Not exactly "moving from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest," as he promised.
How does Mr. Responsibility explain the disconnect between this reality and his absurd claims? By insisting that Republicans were worse.
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03272009/news/columnists/new_era_of_spend__blame_161557.htm
After running a campaign against the $1 trillion deficit he "inherited" from President Bush and the Republicans, Obama quickly matched it. During his first 50 days in office, he and his Democratic-controlled Congress spent $1 billion an hour.
Under Obama's proposed budget, the overall national debt doubles in five years and triples in 10.
Not exactly "moving from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest," as he promised.
How does Mr. Responsibility explain the disconnect between this reality and his absurd claims? By insisting that Republicans were worse.
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03272009/news/columnists/new_era_of_spend__blame_161557.htm
Obama is flunking economics
Welcome to March Madness on the Potomac.
Many Americans are so emotionally invested in the Obama presidency that they consider it too historic to fail.
They won't tolerate any criticism of the president or his administration, finding it easier to simply attack critics. And whatever goes wrong that they can't defend or deflect, they just blame on George W. Bush.
http://cnn.site.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Commentary%3A+Obama+is+flunking+economics+-+CNN.com&expire=-1&urlID=34968338&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FPOLITICS%2F03%2F27%2Fnavarrette.obama.economics%2Findex.html%3Feref%3Drss_topstories&partnerID=211911
Many Americans are so emotionally invested in the Obama presidency that they consider it too historic to fail.
They won't tolerate any criticism of the president or his administration, finding it easier to simply attack critics. And whatever goes wrong that they can't defend or deflect, they just blame on George W. Bush.
http://cnn.site.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Commentary%3A+Obama+is+flunking+economics+-+CNN.com&expire=-1&urlID=34968338&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FPOLITICS%2F03%2F27%2Fnavarrette.obama.economics%2Findex.html%3Feref%3Drss_topstories&partnerID=211911
Terror inmates may be released in US: intel chief
President Barack Obama's intelligence chief confirmed Thursday that some Guantanamo inmates may be released on US soil and receive assistance to return to society.
"If we are to release them in the United States, we need some sort of assistance for them to start a new life," said National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair at his first press conference.
"You can't just put them on the street," he added. "All that is work in progress."
http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?id=CNG.18e9e5692442aa61d7510553b5ffc14e.e01&show_article=1
"If we are to release them in the United States, we need some sort of assistance for them to start a new life," said National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair at his first press conference.
"You can't just put them on the street," he added. "All that is work in progress."
http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?id=CNG.18e9e5692442aa61d7510553b5ffc14e.e01&show_article=1
Another "Don't let a crisis go to waste" moment
The ObamaBots really like this line, don't they? Rambo E. was the first one to come out with it: "you never let a good crisis go to waste." We've actually heard those words from the Leader of the Free World as well. Yesterday it was the tax cheat in chief ... Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. He was testifying before some group of self-important legislators in Washington when he uttered the line again, though in slightly different form. Said Geithner: "We have a moment of opportunity here, and we don't want to waste this opportunity." What was he talking about? Regulation. Getting the government more and more involved in regulating the private sector.
I know you hate it when I bring this up, but how else are you going to learn? What sort of economic system do you call it when industry, businesses and financial institutions are privately owned but government controlled? The word would be "fascist." Never let a good learning opportunity go to waste.
http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2009/03/another-dont-let-a-crisis-go-t.html
I know you hate it when I bring this up, but how else are you going to learn? What sort of economic system do you call it when industry, businesses and financial institutions are privately owned but government controlled? The word would be "fascist." Never let a good learning opportunity go to waste.
http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2009/03/another-dont-let-a-crisis-go-t.html
An Alarming video every Westerner should see
Anyone (like Barack Obama) entertaining ideas of western democracies establishing friendly relations with the radicals of the Islamic world should watch this video.While watching the inflammatory rhetoric of the speaker, remember that this is not a Jihadists from Iran but a professor from Kuwait - a country with every reason to be grateful to the USA for liberating it from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein's invasion.
http://www.tangle.com/view_video.php?viewkey=0861ff3eabea1ceb73e4
Thursday, March 26, 2009
House Health Plan to Include Government-Run Option
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House this year will consider health-care legislation including an option for a government-run program that would compete with insurers.
“This is a big agenda, and I believe it should have a public option in it for it to be really substantial,” Pelosi told reporters at her weekly news conference in the U.S. Capitol.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=worldwide&sid=axI6NVjq8cfI
“This is a big agenda, and I believe it should have a public option in it for it to be really substantial,” Pelosi told reporters at her weekly news conference in the U.S. Capitol.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=worldwide&sid=axI6NVjq8cfI
Critics Say Senate Bill to Rescue Newspapers May Invite Government Control of News
Call it the opening salvo of the broadsheet bailout. Castaway columnists and struggling stringers might be America's next charity case if Sen. Benjamin Cardin has his way.
The Maryland Democrat proposed a bill Tuesday that would rewrite tax law to allow newspapers to operate as tax-exempt nonprofit organizations, just as long as they don't make official endorsements of political candidates.
But some media analysts say that could create government control of the news.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/26/critics-say-senate-invite-government-control-news/
The Maryland Democrat proposed a bill Tuesday that would rewrite tax law to allow newspapers to operate as tax-exempt nonprofit organizations, just as long as they don't make official endorsements of political candidates.
But some media analysts say that could create government control of the news.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/26/critics-say-senate-invite-government-control-news/
Roubini Says Stocks Will Drop as Banks Go ‘Belly Up’
U.S. stocks will fall and the government will nationalize more banks as the economy contracts through the end of 2009, said Nouriel Roubini, the New York University professor who predicted last year’s economic crisis.
“The stock market is a bit ahead of the real macroeconomic and financial news,” Roubini, a professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business and the chairman of consulting firm Roubini Global Economics, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in London today. “We’ll have some major banks going belly up that will need to be taken over.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=worldwide&sid=aUzSQ01UhV6s
“The stock market is a bit ahead of the real macroeconomic and financial news,” Roubini, a professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business and the chairman of consulting firm Roubini Global Economics, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in London today. “We’ll have some major banks going belly up that will need to be taken over.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=worldwide&sid=aUzSQ01UhV6s
Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures
President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s.
What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/
What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/
Let 'em have it, Daniel Hannan
If only some politicians would stand up to the leadership here in America... I salute you, Daniel Hannan!
The Worst Is Yet to Come: Possible toLose Even More Jobs?
President Obama warned America today during an online town hall meeting that the country hasn't stopped losing jobs in this recession.
The president picked a dozen questions from more than 100,000 that were submitted online or by YouTube during the last week as Obama made himself"Open for Questions" from regular Americans.
The overriding issue of the inquiries was about the country's economy and the president warned that despite signs of fiscal improvement, people could expect even more jobs to be eliminated before the unemployment rate stops rising.
"We're going to have to be patient and persistent about job creation because I don't think that we've lost all the jobs we're going to lose in this recession," Obama said.
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7177676
The president picked a dozen questions from more than 100,000 that were submitted online or by YouTube during the last week as Obama made himself"Open for Questions" from regular Americans.
The overriding issue of the inquiries was about the country's economy and the president warned that despite signs of fiscal improvement, people could expect even more jobs to be eliminated before the unemployment rate stops rising.
"We're going to have to be patient and persistent about job creation because I don't think that we've lost all the jobs we're going to lose in this recession," Obama said.
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7177676
98% of Obama's budget through..except
GLENN: This is great. How many times did you hear this during the campaign: How could Obama be a socialist if he's cutting taxes for 95% of all Americans? How could that possibly be? Well, it's very easy to be a socialist and take from one small group of wealthy people and give it to everybody else to buy their favor. I mean, that's actually a standard feature. That car comes loaded with that. I'd like, "Ooh, is that the new Buick Socialist?" "Yes, it is." "Does it have redistribution of wealth?" Oh, sure, it's standard on that.
How many points did the campaign promise, "I'm going to cut taxes for 95% of Americans." How many people bought that, how many people? Well, enough to win the election, right? He argued this on two fronts. One, it's not a real tax cut. The tax cut he's offering has an income cap that keeps falling and falling. And even if you get it, it's going to be overwhelmed by thousands of dollars in increased energy costs away from his global warming taxes. Number two, what in Barack's history makes you believe that he's actually going to cut taxes for anyone? What evidence is there that he actually cares about cutting taxes? Everything in his record points to the fact that he really enjoys doing the opposite. Well, here we are, two full months into his presidency. He has now spent more than even most critics including me could have possibly imagined. We have the largest deficits in our history by far locked in for the next 10 years and now this from ABC News: On a conference call with reporters, budget director Peter Orszag indicated that while 98% of the budget markups in the House and Senate are on par with the administration's budget blueprint, some campaign trail promises may get left on the cutting room floor like... wait for it, wait for it. Let me give you a second just to guess. 98% of the things that he wanted and he promised are in the budget. That means of every 50 things he wants, he's only not able to get one. What's that one thing? What's that one thing he really wants, he really, really cares about that he's not going to be able to get? Wait for it. Remember he wants it so very much. Give you a second to think. Time's up. Oh, what is free milk? No, sorry. While 98% of the budget markups quoting from ABC News in the House and Senate are on par with the administration's budget blueprint, some campaign trail promises may get left on the cutting room floor like middle class tax cuts. What? But did he get the free milk? Actually that's not true. To extend the movie analogy, tax cuts won't be on the cutting room floor because they never made it into the cutting room. They were never flamed. They were never in the script. They weren't discussed at any pitch meeting. The only place tax cuts ever appeared was in the trailer. Barack Obama is like a Ben Affleck movie. The trailer looks great but then when you get there, you're like, I don't remember seeing that advertised.
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23229/
How many points did the campaign promise, "I'm going to cut taxes for 95% of Americans." How many people bought that, how many people? Well, enough to win the election, right? He argued this on two fronts. One, it's not a real tax cut. The tax cut he's offering has an income cap that keeps falling and falling. And even if you get it, it's going to be overwhelmed by thousands of dollars in increased energy costs away from his global warming taxes. Number two, what in Barack's history makes you believe that he's actually going to cut taxes for anyone? What evidence is there that he actually cares about cutting taxes? Everything in his record points to the fact that he really enjoys doing the opposite. Well, here we are, two full months into his presidency. He has now spent more than even most critics including me could have possibly imagined. We have the largest deficits in our history by far locked in for the next 10 years and now this from ABC News: On a conference call with reporters, budget director Peter Orszag indicated that while 98% of the budget markups in the House and Senate are on par with the administration's budget blueprint, some campaign trail promises may get left on the cutting room floor like... wait for it, wait for it. Let me give you a second just to guess. 98% of the things that he wanted and he promised are in the budget. That means of every 50 things he wants, he's only not able to get one. What's that one thing? What's that one thing he really wants, he really, really cares about that he's not going to be able to get? Wait for it. Remember he wants it so very much. Give you a second to think. Time's up. Oh, what is free milk? No, sorry. While 98% of the budget markups quoting from ABC News in the House and Senate are on par with the administration's budget blueprint, some campaign trail promises may get left on the cutting room floor like middle class tax cuts. What? But did he get the free milk? Actually that's not true. To extend the movie analogy, tax cuts won't be on the cutting room floor because they never made it into the cutting room. They were never flamed. They were never in the script. They weren't discussed at any pitch meeting. The only place tax cuts ever appeared was in the trailer. Barack Obama is like a Ben Affleck movie. The trailer looks great but then when you get there, you're like, I don't remember seeing that advertised.
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23229/
States Rebellion Pending
Our Colonial ancestors petitioned and pleaded with King George III to get his boot off their necks. He ignored their pleas, and in 1776, they rightfully declared unilateral independence and went to war. Today it's the same story except Congress is the one usurping the rights of the people and the states, making King George's actions look mild in comparison. Our constitutional ignorance -- perhaps contempt, coupled with the fact that we've become a nation of wimps, sissies and supplicants -- has made us easy prey for Washington's tyrannical forces. But that might be changing a bit. There are rumblings of a long overdue re-emergence of Americans' characteristic spirit of rebellion.
Eight state legislatures have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and 10th amendments to the U.S. Constitution; they include Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington. There's speculation that they will be joined by Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=31201
Eight state legislatures have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and 10th amendments to the U.S. Constitution; they include Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington. There's speculation that they will be joined by Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=31201
Death of the Obama dream
Well, that was fast.
On March 20, only two months after the cosmic anointing, Vanity Fair, of all places, unloaded on Barack Obama, in the terms it had reserved for the past four or five years for the likes of George W. Bush.
Well, not the whole magazine, but one of its writers, media writer Michael Wolff, took an axe to the president, in a posting beginning “Sheesh, the guy is Jimmy Carter,” ending “This guy is leaden and this show is in trouble,” and titled “Barack Obama is a Terrible Bore.”
The same day, ex-fan Peggy Noonan called him “insubstantial and weightless...not fully focused...jumping from issue to issue and venue to venue from day to day.” “The administration’s difficulties...have created an unfortunate impression of incompetence,”
said The Economist. Politico noted that his skills as a salesman have begun to desert him.
It all came at the end of what Rick Klein of ABC News called Obama’s ‘lost week,’ which got worse on Sunday, when he was attacked by the New York Times in three columns and one editorial. One warned of an oncoming fall of Katrina dimensions. And these were his friends.
http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=www.washingtonexaminer.com+%3E%3E+Noemie+Emery&expire=&urlID=34922777&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Fcolumns%2FNoemieEmery%2FDeath-of-the-Obama-dream-41801612.html%23&partnerID=436229
On March 20, only two months after the cosmic anointing, Vanity Fair, of all places, unloaded on Barack Obama, in the terms it had reserved for the past four or five years for the likes of George W. Bush.
Well, not the whole magazine, but one of its writers, media writer Michael Wolff, took an axe to the president, in a posting beginning “Sheesh, the guy is Jimmy Carter,” ending “This guy is leaden and this show is in trouble,” and titled “Barack Obama is a Terrible Bore.”
The same day, ex-fan Peggy Noonan called him “insubstantial and weightless...not fully focused...jumping from issue to issue and venue to venue from day to day.” “The administration’s difficulties...have created an unfortunate impression of incompetence,”
said The Economist. Politico noted that his skills as a salesman have begun to desert him.
It all came at the end of what Rick Klein of ABC News called Obama’s ‘lost week,’ which got worse on Sunday, when he was attacked by the New York Times in three columns and one editorial. One warned of an oncoming fall of Katrina dimensions. And these were his friends.
http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=www.washingtonexaminer.com+%3E%3E+Noemie+Emery&expire=&urlID=34922777&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Fcolumns%2FNoemieEmery%2FDeath-of-the-Obama-dream-41801612.html%23&partnerID=436229
Obama's Just Not That Into You
Does President Obama truly believe that he can castigate and condemn Wall Street on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and then secure its cooperation on the other days of the week?
Does he not understand that when he ignites a public furor over AIG bonuses and then incites Congress to pass a punitive tax, he sends shivers down the spines of every other corporate executive who makes a lot of money?
Does he seriously believe that Wall Street investors will not worry that their winnings, should they join the Treasury as partners in risky investments, would be subject to public abuse, publicity and confiscatory taxation?
Of course he realizes that his rhetoric makes it unlikely that his program will succeed. He obviously gets it that the entire concept of a public-private partnership is impossible amid a climate of waging class warfare, taxing the rich and heaping contempt on anyone who makes money. The president is quite bright and certainly understands that you cannot shake hands with your right while you launch a roundhouse with your left.
So why does Obama persist in his aggressive rhetoric? Why does he continue to treat Wall Street as something out of Dante's Inferno?
Because he's just not that into you! He doesn't really care if the public-private partnerships work out.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/obamas_just_not_that_into_you.html
Does he not understand that when he ignites a public furor over AIG bonuses and then incites Congress to pass a punitive tax, he sends shivers down the spines of every other corporate executive who makes a lot of money?
Does he seriously believe that Wall Street investors will not worry that their winnings, should they join the Treasury as partners in risky investments, would be subject to public abuse, publicity and confiscatory taxation?
Of course he realizes that his rhetoric makes it unlikely that his program will succeed. He obviously gets it that the entire concept of a public-private partnership is impossible amid a climate of waging class warfare, taxing the rich and heaping contempt on anyone who makes money. The president is quite bright and certainly understands that you cannot shake hands with your right while you launch a roundhouse with your left.
So why does Obama persist in his aggressive rhetoric? Why does he continue to treat Wall Street as something out of Dante's Inferno?
Because he's just not that into you! He doesn't really care if the public-private partnerships work out.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/obamas_just_not_that_into_you.html
O'S FOREIGN FAILURES
AMERICA'S enemies smell blood and it's type "O."
All new administrations stumble a bit as they seek their footing. But President Obama's foreign-policy botches have set new records for instant incompetence.
Contrary to left-wing myths, I wasn't a fan of the Bush administration. (I called for Donald Rumsfeld to get the boot in mid-2001.) But fair's fair. Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.
Vice President Dick Cheney was arrogant. Vice President Joe Biden is arrogant and stupid. Take your pick.
Don't worry about the new administration's ideology. Worry about its terrifying naivete.
Consider a sampling of the goofs O and his crew have made in just two months...
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_foreign_failures_161154.htm
All new administrations stumble a bit as they seek their footing. But President Obama's foreign-policy botches have set new records for instant incompetence.
Contrary to left-wing myths, I wasn't a fan of the Bush administration. (I called for Donald Rumsfeld to get the boot in mid-2001.) But fair's fair. Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.
Vice President Dick Cheney was arrogant. Vice President Joe Biden is arrogant and stupid. Take your pick.
Don't worry about the new administration's ideology. Worry about its terrifying naivete.
Consider a sampling of the goofs O and his crew have made in just two months...
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_foreign_failures_161154.htm
'Mandatory youth service' bill advances
Congress appears ready to pass an Obama administration plan that could create mandatory public service requirements for all American youth, fulfilling a campaign promise.
The bill, HR 1388: The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, otherwise known as the "GIVE Act," has already passed the House by a vote of 321-105.
On Tuesday, the Senate voted closure on the motion to proceed by a margin of 74-14 in a move that makes its ultimate passage likely.
The bill, promoted by the Obama administration as a means of encouraging America's youth to participate in voluntary community service, has received little scrutiny from Congress or the public.
Yet, a version of the bill in the House proposes to establish a Congressional Commission on Civil Service tasked with determining whether a mandatory service requirement for all young people in America could be developed and implemented, though it is not clear that provision will survive a conference committee.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=92902
The bill, HR 1388: The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, otherwise known as the "GIVE Act," has already passed the House by a vote of 321-105.
On Tuesday, the Senate voted closure on the motion to proceed by a margin of 74-14 in a move that makes its ultimate passage likely.
The bill, promoted by the Obama administration as a means of encouraging America's youth to participate in voluntary community service, has received little scrutiny from Congress or the public.
Yet, a version of the bill in the House proposes to establish a Congressional Commission on Civil Service tasked with determining whether a mandatory service requirement for all young people in America could be developed and implemented, though it is not clear that provision will survive a conference committee.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=92902
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
