"A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men
from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government."
(Thomas Jefferson)

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

The Civilian Expeditionary Force: Obama Says 'Burden' Can’t be All on the Military (Here it Comes)

Is this why Holder dropped charges against the Black Panthers for voter intimidation as Obama plans on using them for his Civilian Expeditionary Force? The Constitution has served the United States well for over 200 years and along comes someone we are not even sure meets the qualifications to be President and he wants to change the very basics of this Country.

The name itself is chilling. Obama needs stopped which means on November 2nd everyone who leans conservative has to vote. We cannot afford to have the House and Senate controlled by Democrats with such large numbers that we have no chance of stopping legislation in the House.

This is from ABC News not a blog from the right.

The Civilian Expeditionary Force: Obama Says 'Burden' Can’t be All on the Military
June 30, 2010 4:49 PM

From Sunlen Miller

During his town hall in Racine, Wisconsin today President Obama spoke about the civilian expeditionary force within his National Security Strategy.

“We just got to be smart about using all the elements of American power, not just one element of American power,” he said.

The president pointed to Iraq and Afghanistan where military personnel are having to engage in work that he said really should be civilian work– like building schools and bridges -- because of under-resourcing on the civilian side

“The problem is -- is that we don't have a civilian effort that has always matched up to the military effort. So the military goes in there, they clear out everything, they're -- they're making everything secure, and now the question is, all right, can we get the civilians to come in to work with the local governments to improve the situation? And a lot of times that civilian side of it has been under-resourced.”

Mr. Obama said the burden should not be all on the military.

“Make sure that we've got a civilian expeditionary force that, when we go out into some village somewhere and the military makes it secure, let's have that agricultural specialist right there, let’s have that person who knows how to train a police force right there, let's -- let's have all those personnel and let's make sure that we are giving them the support that they need in order for us to be successful on our mission.”

The president warned that if the civilian side is shortchanged it could lead to another “very dangerous situation” if the diplomatic work is not done and “the only solution is a military solution that might cost us five times as much.”

Within the administration’s National Security Strategy – released at the end of May – one of the components is a civilian expeditionary force which the White House says is “fundamental” to national security.

“Our diplomatic personnel and missions must be expanded at home and abroad to support the increasingly transnational nature of 21st century security challenges,” the NSS writes, “And we must provide the appropriate authorities and mechanisms to implement and coordinate assistance programs and grow the civilian expeditionary capacity required to assist governments on a diverse array of issues.”

-Sunlen Miller

Source: ABC News

Red tape keeps Gulf marsh cleanup on hold

One more item that Obama and his Administration are holding up -- helping save the marshes. EPA needs destroyed if this is how they operate. Oil skimmers cannot get approval to skim oil in the Gulf if they don't make sure that 99+% of the water returned to the Gulf contains no oil. All the while they sit back and observe the oil getting closer to the Gulf. Now we learn that the EPA won't give approval to clean up the marshes of LA with this approach of marsh bioremediation which was offered right after the spill and before oil got into the marshes.

EPA needs abolished and put under a department after their failure to act in an emergency. Fire the head of the EPA and anyone involved in not approving actions that were offered to save to the marshes over two months ago. Hard to say which department as they are all headed by incompetents from what we are witnessing.

But getting approval from the bureaucracy assembled to respond to the BP oil spill is slower than trudging through marsh mud in waders.

“The bureaucracy is killing us,” said Ralph Portier, an environmental biologist at Louisiana State University who started offering his expertise in marsh bioremediation shortly after the spill, and well before oil invaded the marshes on
May 22.

“We’re waiting for people in Washington to agree with people in Robert, La., that it’s OK to talk to a guy in Houma (La.) to tell people in Baton Rouge that’s it’s OK to do something down on Dauphin Island — or wherever. Pick your spot,” he said.

The above paragraph says it all -- no one is in charge and the red tape to get anything approved is worse than ever. Dereliction of duty comes to mind for Obama and his minions in the Administration. Most incompetent people ever but they 'cannot let a crises go to waste' which is an understatement as they made this Gulf Oil Crises much more difficult. Their hands off approach for weeks strict enforcement of environmental regulations has caused an ecological disaster along the Louisiana Gulf Coast and is spreading across the Gulf States.

It is the fault of Obama and his Administration as they sat back while the BP Gulf Oil spill got worse and even on this 72nd day, EPA is still stalling clean-up efforts. Why doesn't Obama overturn the EPA? Guess it doesn't fit his agenda of passing Cap and Trade.

Red tape keeps Gulf marsh cleanup on hold
Long after oil invaded, project to spray oil-eating bacteria awaits go-ahead

by Kari Huus Reporter
updated 6/29/2010 2:58:42 PM ET

At a lab on Grand Isle, La., at the edge of Barataria Bay, biologists hoping to help save the oil-soiled marshlands are at the ready with a vat containing 30,000 gallons of homegrown oil-eating bacteria. But it’s been weeks since the oil started washing up here, and still they await final clearance to begin work.

It’s frustrating for the scientists, who plan to spray large sections of the soiled marsh with this microbial stew — consisting of nutrients and three naturally occurring bacteria that eat oil — to help rid the fragile ecosystem of toxic oil.

This approach — known as bioremediation — is effective, especially if it is done soon after the oiling, they say. And it does less damage than some of the traditional methods used in marsh cleanup, such as burning and skimming.

Read more at: MSNBC

Arizona Immigration Law WORKS -- Narcotics agentgs arrest suspected drug cartel member in OKC

Imagine the shock Oklahomans had when this story broke yesterday and today 'The Oklahoman' has more details. Another Mexican drug cartel was set up in Oklahoma infringing on the Mexican cartel that was already in Oklahoma. From the article, this 'suspected' drug cartel member came to Oklahoma AFTER Arizona passed their tough Immigration Bill which mirrored the laws the Federal Government is refusing to enforce.

We applaud Governor Brewer, the Arizona State Legislature, Senators McCain and Kyl, and House Member Rep Flake and others for supporting this immigration bill so vehemently in order to stop illegals from flowing into the Country bringing their drugs and gangs with them.

It is time for the Oklahoma Legislature to pass a more comprehensive and stringent Imigration Bill which mirrors Arizona. All Mexican drug cartel members need in jail or run out of Oklahoma for good. The remainder of the 49 states needs to pass the Arizona bill in their own state legislature to drive the drug runners and Mexican gangs back to Mexico where they belong. Oklahoma already has a stringent Immigration bill on the books but tougher legislation is needed after what we have seen since Arizona passed the bill.

Say NO to illegal immigration order to stop what they are doing to this Country by running drugs and breaking the laws that Attorney General Holder refuses to prosecute. Instead, Holder wants to sue Arizona along with the Mexican President to overturn the law. Holder needs impeached for failing to uphold the Rule of Law starting with the dismissal of charges against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation caught on tape. Because they are black, they get a pass. Voter intimidation deserves jail time no matter what color of skin or nationality.

Narcotics agents arrest suspected drug cartel member in Oklahoma City

Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control agents said they arrested a suspected Mexican drug cartel leader during a raid Tuesday morning.

Published: June 30, 2010

Agents arrested a suspected high-ranking Mexican Sinaloa Cartel member in Oklahoma City during a drug raid Tuesday, indicating the organization may be trying to move in on the territory of a rival group, an Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control official said.
Officers are shown outside a Mustang home Tuesday after making entry at dawn as part of a multiagency drug raid that targeted meth operations throughout the state. Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drug Control officers teamed with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and local law enforcement to execute 13 search warrants and 18 arrest warrants.

Narcotics agents arrest suspected drug cartel member in Oklahoma City
The man was described only as a 35-year-old Mexican national. Authorities also didn't release names of others apprehended in the raid, which netted two pounds of methamphetamine, one pound of cocaine and $20,000 in cash.

Bureau Executive Director Darrell Weaver said the man's arrest is the strongest evidence to date that Sinaloa Cartel is trying to move in on the Oklahoma territory of Juarez Cartel.

"This is a disturbing case,” said Weaver, whose agents helped serve 18 arrest warrants and 13 search warrants in an operation that stretched from Tulsa to Elk City. Warrants also were served in Mustang and Norman.

At least nine people ranging from users to suppliers were arrested. The names of those arrested during the sting operation were withheld because they were included in sealed warrants, bureau spokesman Mark Woodward said.

Weaver said he and his agents are alarmed that a second cartel is attempting to make serious inroads into this area.

Undercover agents became aware of their main suspect three months ago, after Arizona passed Senate Bill 1070 — the new immigration law that allows police to search anyone for valid documentation of citizenship.

"Our target received a dispatch from Mexico, and was told to leave Phoenix because of the new immigration law,” said an undercover case agent who asked that his name not be used. "He was told to set up shop in Oklahoma City. Fortunately, in a very short time, we learned of his presence and were able to infiltrate his operation.”

Agents discovered a lucrative operation, and according to the undercover agent, an "established market.” Undercover surveillance revealed that an average of 10 pounds of methamphetamine was being shipped into Oklahoma City a week, Weaver said. Ten pounds of methamphetamine can net $180,000 to $210,000 on the streets, depending on its purity.

The suspect tried to maintain a low profile by living in a gated apartment complex on the city's north side. But Weaver said his agents were able to track "hundreds of thousands of dollars in wire transfers” to Mexico, where the money was being used to buy land.

The narcotics bureau alleges the money was being laundered through a nondescript used car lot in Oklahoma City where people socialized more than they sold cars.

"Our target had a previous conviction for drug possession, and had already been deported once from Arizona,” the undercover agent said. "And still he was trusted to set up an operation in Oklahoma City where he personally moved money. How high up was he? He was one step removed from those on the border who make the orders.

"Now he says he can't cooperate because he has family. He knows he's finished.”
Cindy Cunningham, the agency's chief agent on electronic surveillance intelligence, said the suspect had orders to establish similar operations elsewhere, including Denver and Las Vegas.

Weaver described the case as one of the most troubling of his 23-year drug enforcement career. Agents think Juarez Cartel leaders have been preoccupied by infighting and violence on the border, leaving Oklahoma City open for opportunistic Sinaloa Cartel members.

"We were fortunate to infiltrate this organization within two months of the group setting up shop,” Weaver said. "I believe the Mexican drug cartels are the No. 1 threat to the safety of Oklahomans, and we must be vigilant in our pursuit of these individuals who want to rob everything good we want for our state while making themselves rich.

"This case shows the effects other states' policies can have on the safety of our state.”
Source: http://newsok.com/drug-sting-nets-arrests-of-cartel-suspect-others/article/3472436?custom_click=lead_story_title#ixzz0sLYxpILM

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Pence: Efforts To "Deem" A Budget Are A "Fraud" "You Can’t Deem a Budget You Never Passed"

How dumb do the Democrats think the American people are today? They must think we are pretty dumb to try and do this:

For the first time in the history of this institution, since the Budget Act, Democrats will actually ‘deem’ a budget that never went through the ordinary process of choosing and deciding on the priorities of the American people.

Will someone explain to us how Pelosi, Hoyer, and the rest of their Democrat puppets can 'deem' a budget? This is dereliction of duty not to have a budget in place for FY 11 not to mention not even attempting to do a budget. Are they afraid an actual budget will show how the Democrats are presiding over runaway spending and adding to the deficit before the election? Nancy Pelosi and her 'progressive' team need to be defeated on November 2nd in order return the United States House of Representatives to a body that honors the laws not disses the laws of this Country.

Pence: Efforts To "Deem" A Budget Are A "Fraud"

"You Can’t Deem a Budget You Never Passed"

Washington, DC - U.S. Congressman Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, delivered the following remarks at a Republican Leadership press conference today:

“Good morning. We just completed our weekly meeting of the House Republican Conference and we are ready to carry the voice of the American people into this last week before the Independence Day recess.

“The American people are frustrated. In the midst of a global fiscal crisis when many nations across the Western world are making the hard choices to put their fiscal house in order, here in the United States of America, under this Congress and this administration, it’s more of the same. More borrowing, more spending, more bailouts and the American people have had it.

“It is truly extraordinary that Democrats this week, after abdicating their responsibility to create a federal budget through the ordinary process of committee drafting and floor consideration, now expect the American people to accept some effort to ‘deem’ a budget.

“House Republicans’ advice to the American people is that when it comes to a Democrat budget, don’t blink. The reality is that you can’t deem a federal budget that you never passed. For the first time in the history of this institution, since the Budget Act, Democrats will actually ‘deem’ a budget that never went through the ordinary process of choosing and deciding on the priorities of the American people.

“But more poignantly than the internal machinations of the creation of a budget, the outlining of priorities, is this Congress also cannot deem a recovery of the American economy. Budgets are important because they provide a template for the priorities of spending and revenues that provide an environment for growth.

“Republicans are committed to demanding leadership from this Congress that will get this economy moving again and get spending under control and we’ll be taking that case against this fraud of their so-called ‘deemed’ budget resolution to the American people this week.”

Source: GOP.Gov

Everyone Must Go, If We Want to Win In Afghanistan

This retired Air Force General has it right -- Everyone Must Go! The odds of the United States and the NATO allies winning with the Obama/McChrystal Rules of Engagement (ROE) being carried out by General McChrystal before he was fired (submitted resignation) are slim to none. If General Petreaus doesn't immediately change those Rules, it is time to admit defeat and bring our soldiers home to protect us here from the terrorist who will follow after a defeat in Afghanistan.

This is the most inept group of people ever to head our National Security starting with Obama who is opposed to even saying the words "War on Terror" which speaks volumes about him and his loyalty which is not fully to the United States as exhibited by his words and actions. His fist major speech was to the Arab World as he tried to act like it is a Tea Party not a War on Terrorism. These Islamic Jihadists want to kill us not have 'tea' at the White House. The 'kumbyya" approach doesn't work with terrorist. Obama's outreach to the Islamic States while trashing our closest allies, Britain and Israel, has left many of us wondering how much worse it can get with Obama and his Administration.

General McInerney has given excellent reasons why the Afghanistan Obama Team must go. We would like to take it one step further and say the National Security Team should be fired. Some of these people like Clinton at Secretary of State should never have been appointed.

Hillary Clinton kisses Soho Arafat after Soha's Terrorist Speech

This is an example of Hillary Clinton playing up to our enemies and now she is Secretary of State who wanted to be President. We are not sure she would have been any different than Obama except the taxpayer would have had to foot the bill for flying ash trays and lamps if she had won. She is the boss of Ambassadors Eikenberry and Holbrooke who have done more harm to the Afghanistan War than help yet she has done nothing to make the situation better. Since the buck stops at the desk as the person in charge -- she needs to go for failure to act when confronted with numerous complaints about Eikenberry and Holbrooke.

The anti War on Terror group has taken over running our National Security team with the exception of Secretary of Defense Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mullen who we are not ready to lump in with the others just yet but they are getting there rapidly for failing to stand up to Obama and for our troops.

Your Secretary of Defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have accepted these ridiculous new definitions of the threat.
We were bothered when Gates and Mullen accepted new defintions and new Rules of Engagement without much of a fight. The number of casualties since the new Rules of Engagement went into force have increased dramatically. Expecting our soldiers to fight with one hand tied behind their back with little air power is asking them to go on suicide missions.

General Petreaus we hope has the opportunity to change the Rules of Engagement to favor our soldiers not the enemy. We question whether Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mullen decides to allow General Petreaus to run the war and not micro manage him from the Defense Department. Imagine our shock when looking for what General Mullen said about changing the Rules of Engagement and discovering what Mullen had to say to Karzi.
America's top military officer assured President Hamid Karzai that newly chosen NATO commander Gen. David Petraeus would pursue the policies of his ousted predecessor, whom the Afghan leader warmly praised for reducing civilian casualties. (snip)

Karzai's emphasis on preventing civilian deaths and injuries could make it difficult for NATO to relax rules of fighting that some U.S. troops say give the battlefield advantage to the Taliban. For now, however, no changes have been proposed, said a spokesman for visiting Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

That does not sound good if true -- looks like business as usual in Afghanistan where the Taliban can hide out in villages and be safe while they pick off our soldiers one by one.

General McInerney is right -- Everyone Must Go including Gates and Mullens for not standing up for their troops. They look to be nothing more than lapdogs now for Obama and his National Security advisors.

Where is a General Myers, a Stormin' Norman or a Tommy Franks when you need them? Our military knew that those three Generals put them first. Shame on Gates and General Mullen for caving into the Obama and his agenda.

Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney

- FOXNews.com

- June 29, 2010

Everyone Must Go, If We Want to Win In Afghanistan

President Obama has latched on to Gen. Petraeus as a lifeline to save his Afghanistan war strategy. But he must be bold and change course, right now.

Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and numerous other Democratic political leaders chastised General David Petraeus during his Iraq surge testimony in September 2007. A full-page placed by MoveOn.org in The New York Times labeled General Petraeus "General Betray Us" and was not condemned by any of them.

Now President Obama has latched on to Gen. Petraeus as a lifeline to save his Afghanistan war strategy. What a paradox. A better name for Obama's new view of Gen. Petraeus might be "General Save Us." Will Gen. Petraeus be able to pull off this challenge with the current Counterinsurgency (COIN) Strategy and the dangerous Rules of Engagement (ROE) that General McCrystal had instituted in his year in his role as ISAF and U.S. Forces Afghanistan commander? Unfortunately, I don't think so. That is, unless both the strategy is changed and the rules of engagement are dramatically altered and new leadership is provided to both the Defense and State departments.

First to the State Department: Ambassadors Eikenberry and Holbrooke have long outlived their effectiveness. They are a drag on success in this difficult war. They must go.

Next, to the Department of Defense: This a war is not an "Overseas Contigency Operation (OCO)" as President Obama’s administration calls it. We have lost 89 ISAF soldiers and 53 US soldiers this month with 2 days left to go.

Mr. President, we are in a violent war against radical Islam and your denial of this fact will ensure our defeat.

You and your administration cannot even define the ideology we are fighting against. John Brennan, your National Security adviser for counterterrorism, thinks "jihad" means "holy struggle" not a war against infidels.

Your Secretary of Defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have accepted these ridiculous new definitions of the threat.

This means you, and your national security leadership team are clueless about how to defeat this violent threat against America.

They must all go and you must change your senseless strategy.

How can we expect General Petraeus to defeat the Taliban when he does not have a leadership team supporting him the way the Bush administration's team did during the surge in Iraq?

Read More at Fox News and
USA Today

Obama Stiffs AZ on Troops and Gives More $ to Mexico

Bottom line is that Obama has more money for Mexico than he does for Border Security for our Border States. Over twice as much money will be leaving the US Treasury to go to the corrupt Mexican Government who wants to join in a lawsuit against Arizona and a Mexican President who trashed Arizona on our soil. Mexico should get zero and instead be issued a bill for costs associated with the United States having to provide for the needs of their citizens who are in this country illegally. Doesn't anyone in the Obama Administration including Obama understand the word 'illegal?'

Main Entry: illegal (+)i(l)-!lE-gul
Pronunciation: \ (ˌ)i(l)-ˈlē-gəl \
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French or Medieval Latin; Middle French illegal, from Medieval Latin illegalis, from Latin in- + legalis legal
Date: 1538
not according to or authorized by law: unlawful, illicit
also not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)
It is very simple -- come across the border without an official green card and the person is here illegally and should be sent back to Mexico. Border Security should have kept them out for years but INS turned a blind eye and now we have a huge problem that is getting worse. At one time people coming across the border were hard working people who wanted a better life for their families. In recent years that has changed as the drug cartels have been running drugs into this country and with that has come the violence. Without illegals from Mexico and Central and South America, Hispanic gangs would not be the problem they are today.

The fence needs built all along the border like it is in El Paso. The Border with Mexico needs secured because not only illegals are coming across but so are terrorist. Does Obama care? Not from what we can see as he looks at illegals as potential Democrat voters with 'his' amnesty plan and road to citizenship. No one here illegally should ever have a path to citizenship unless they serve in the US military. With that they will have earned their citizenship. Amnesty is earning nothing but being rewarded for breaking the law.

We also learned from the meetings the Obama people had with Arizona officials they would not discuss a possible lawsuit against Arizona:

The meetings were held as Arizona officials awaited word on a widely anticipated federal legal challenge to the measure. Obama has called the law "misguided." Brewer has called its enactment necessary due to federal inaction on border enforcement.

Goddard said the federal officials clammed up when asked during the Tucson meeting about a possible challenge. Brewer said the subject didn't come up during the Phoenix meeting.
If Obama chooses to sue Arizona, a firestorm against Obama and the Democrats will errupt across America by American citizens including Hispanics who want the laws enforced. Hispanics here legally have worked hard to make a better life and along come illegals who want everything handed to them.

This YouTube from Governor Brewer says it all about Obama putting Mexico over Border Security for our States:

The Texas and Arizona governors criticized the Obama administration's border security plans Monday, saying not enough National Guard troops are being deployed to their states.

"What we heard wasn't anything what we hoped to hear," Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer told reporters after a 90-minue briefing by federal officials sent by President Barack Obama.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican like Brewer, said the deployment to his state was "insufficient to meet the needs of securing the Texas-Mexico border."

A White House statement said plans to deploy 1,200 additional National Guard soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border would "complement the unprecedented resources and additional efforts already devoted by this administration to securing the Southwest border."

Arizona would get 524 National Guard troops, Texas would get 250, California 224 and New Mexico 72, officials said. Another 130 would be at a national liaison office.

Brewer has said the deployment should total 6,000, including 3,000 in Arizona, the state with the most illegal border crossings. Perry asked in January 2009 for 1,000 National Guard troops to help with border security in Texas alone.

The White House statement said the extra Guard troops would be used to provide intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance support as well as backup to counternarcotics enforcement until more civilian officers are trained and stationed at the border.


Monday, June 28, 2010

Breaking News: Budget Cancelled

June 28, 2010

BREAKING NEWS: We have confirmed that the federal budget planned for fiscal year 2011 has been canceled. The cause: Washington Democrats' out-of-control spending spree. We are here now outside the Capitol awaiting an apology from Washington Democrats for this betrayal of hard-working American taxpayers.

G8 summit: David Cameron defends cuts despite US warning

The new British Prime Minister David Cameron is very impressive and not afraid to take on Obama and the United States delegation about their way to grow an economy which is not working. Adding more stimulus to the deficit we already have is the Obama/Geithner prescription for disaster and the Brits as well as others in the G8 recognize that fact.

Looks like the bloom is off Obama finally by foreign leaders as they realize he is inexperienced and doesn't have a clue except to spend more Government money on a failed stimulus and tax while continue to spend money on worthless programs which increases the deficit. The flip side of the coin is that Obama and his people know exactly what they are doing in order to consolidate more power into their group.

Thank you Prime Minister Cameron for showing the way and not backing down to Obama.
G8 summit: David Cameron defends cuts despite US warning

David Cameron has made his strongest defence yet of Britain’s decision to tackle the deficit with swingeing cuts and tax rises in the face of American warnings that pulling money out of the economy would threaten the global recovery.

By Andrew Porter, Political Editor in Toronto
Published: 7:42PM BST 25 Jun 2010

Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper (left) shakes hands with Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron at the G8 and G20 summit Photo: AP

Attending his first summit of world leaders the Prime Minister said other countries would soon see that if they did not act their problems would get worse.

Barack Obama, the United States President, has warned about the dangers of pulling the fiscal stimulus too early from recovering economies. And his Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, said Europe needed to focus on growth.

But Mr Cameron, days after the Coalition’s Budget set out the drastic cuts that were needed to start tackling the deficit, has made it clear he believes his medicine is the right one.

In Toronto, where he is attending the G8 summit, he was asked by Sky News whether in the wake of Mr Obama and Mr Geithner’s comments he was worried that he had made the wrong decision about the level of cuts needed and their timing.

He said: “No, I do not think so. The threat to the British economy is not taking action on the deficit. We are borrowing this year, or we were, 11 per cent of our GDP.

“That gives us a larger budget deficit, a worse position this year, than Greece or Spain. The risk to us, which the Americans and others recognise, is not taking action.

“I think that this G8 will actually conclude that those countries with the worst problems need to accelerate their actions, which is what we have done.”

He added: “Looking across the world, there is still the underlying problem of the big surplus countries like China and the big deficit countries like parts of Western Europe and America. We have to deal with those imbalances.

“However, part of dealing with the imbalances is for the worst deficit countries to roll up their sleeves, do the job, and make sure they are living within their means. That is what we have done in Britain. I believe it will actually unlock confidence, because people now see there is a strong government with a plan for handling the problem.”

He also dismissed suggestions that the measures set in train by George Osborne in the Budget on Tuesday would lead to Britain plunging back into recession.

He said: “Obviously, I want growth to continue, but as I say, I have to weigh up the risks. If you look across Europe, the greatest risk to Britain is sovereign-debt default, sovereign-debt crisis, like you have in countries like Greece.

“The risk to us is not just growth ticking down because there is a difficult situation in Europe. The risk to us is a lack of confidence in the British economy that I think there would have been if we did not take the very strong action that we have taken to deal with the budget deficit, which has been welcomed by the CBI, by the Chambers of Commerce, and right across the business spectrum.

Excerpt: Read More at the
London Telegraph

Ex-BP official received payouts, perks -- Now works for Department of Energy

Is the real reason Koonin is not helping with the Gulf Oil Spill by BP after the explosion, because he is working on Obama's Cap and Trade? This just proves that Obama has a very cozy relationship with BP who he used to write Cap and Trade. Is Koonin the person who wrote Cap and Trade?

This is one time we don't see anything unethical about Koonin working on the Gulf Oil Spill if he can help but now this Administration is worried about ethics? Give us a break as they haven't worried about ethics in the past and we don't expect them to in the future.

Ex-BP official received payouts, perks
At Energy, Koonin is barred from spill role
By Jim McElhatton
8:06 p.m., Sunday, June 27, 2010

OUT OF THE LOOP: Steven E. Koonin, an undersecretary at the Department of Energy, cannot have anything to do with the BP remediation. (U.S. Department of Energy)

Steven E. Koonin, undersecretary for science at the Department of Energy, reported receiving a host of lucrative corporate payouts and perks when he left his job as chief scientist at oil giant BP last year to join the Obama administration.

But because of Mr. Koonin's extensive ties to BP, he can't have anything to do with the most pressing issue now facing the Energy Department: how to stop up to 2.5 million gallons of oil a day from gushing into the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
Mr. Koonin took home $1.8 million in BP compensation and bonus money during 2008 and the first three months of 2009. That doesn't include an additional $244,600 in BP bonuses he listed as a "receivable," as well as additional BP stock assets worth more than $1 million, U.S. Office of Government Ethics filings show.

What's more, BP is continuing to pay to prepare Mr. Koonin's tax returns through 2011, and it paid for temporary housing, a per-diem and a rental car when he returned to the United States before he took the DOE job, according to the records.

A copy of Mr. Koonin's financial disclosure was obtained by The Washington Times.
The government filings give additional insight into compensation practices at the oil company, which are coming under sharp scrutiny in Congress following the oil spill. Unlike a handful of other top executives, Mr. Koonin's pay package and corporate perks were not required to be disclosed in regulatory filings and only became a matter of public record because he joined the federal government.

When Mr. Obama nominated Mr. Koonin to the energy post last year, the White House highlighted Mr. Koonin's work for BP "guiding the company's long-range technology strategy, particularly in alternative and renewable energy sources." And his official Department of Energy biography notes that, among other duties, Mr. Koonin provided "technical advice to senior executives" while at BP.

Energy officials say Mr. Koonin's recusal from taking part in the department's oil-spill efforts hasn't affected their response: "The department has had a team of more than 200 scientists, engineers and other experts from our national labs working to assist the efforts to stop the oil spill," Energy Department spokeswoman Stephanie Mueller said.

"The secretary [Steven Chu] has high regard for the undersecretarys scientific expertise, but has had no shortage of expert input over the past several weeks. He fully supports the government ethics rules and expects every department employee to abide by them," she added.

Lawrence M. Cathles III, a professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Cornell University, who has served on several committees of the National Research Council, said he wasn't sure Mr. Koonin should be barred from working on the oil-spill crisis.

Read More at: Washington Times

BP Gulf Disaster -- Avertible Catastrophe from the Financial Post

This is the most detail we have seen about the offer from the Dutch. You can add 'Why didn't we take them up on their offer?' to the questions we have been asking. Why does the US Government not want the help of the Dutch? They have the expertise we don't have but yet are turned away because according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) they don't meet their standards.

We have a massive amount of oil about to hit our coasts and the nitwits at the EPA don't want minute particles of oil pumped back into the Gulf with the water as the oil is skimmed into ships. The EPA is allowing the oil to harm our beaches and marshes so what kind of Environmental Protection group of people are they? Looks like they are in bed with the Cap and Trade and global warming crowd so heavily they will not acknowledge an environmental disaster that is happening in the Gulf due to THEIR stringent regulations.

President George W. Bush was one of the best conservation Presidents we have ever had with his initiatives on clean skies and clean water but yet the media and the environmentalists routinely attacked him. He did more for the environment than the EPA will ever do as they are narrow minded in their enforcement of regulations that make no sense.

Give me a conservationist any day of the week over an environmentalist. You will have a better environment without all the garbage out of the environmentalist who are willing to burn tires to prove a point which pollutes the air. They have zero common sense. Look what happened in Montreal -- a lot of these people also declare themselves part of the Global Warming movement but yet set fires.

Republicans for years have cared about conservation of our natural resources and when they can, they use green products that in a lot instances clean better without damage the environment in which we live and much better for allergies. Democrat Progressives on the other hand want to micro manage everything to obtain more and more power. The Progressives see the environment as a candidate for complete takeover to further their socialist agenda.

We fail to see how this Progressive mentality of the EPA is helping the environment of the Gulf as we are facing an ecological disaster thanks their inept, stubborn attitude about what constitutes a hazard in the Gulf. We believe the amount of oil this Administration has allowed to spill in the Gulf unchecked as they dilly dally around with their 'pristine' regulations will cause much more harm than releasing minute particles of oil back in the Gulf.

If Obama expects his charade of caring about the Gulf to make a difference, he is mistaken. Not allowing the Dutch and other countries to help skim off the oil shows the real truth about how Obama will lie, cheat, and steal to get Cap and Trade passed. He is already allowing an explosion on an oil rig to harm the Gulf to get his way. He is not going to get his way and while he is stonewalling fixes in the Gulf, more and more Americans are getting fed up with Obama, his entire Administration and the Democrat controlled congress.

Avertible Catastrophe

Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post · Saturday, Jun. 26, 2010

Some are attuned to the possibility of looming catastrophe and know how to head it off. Others are unprepared for risk and even unable to get their priorities straight when risk turns to reality.

The Dutch fall into the first group. Three days after the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico began on April 20, the Netherlands offered the U.S. government ships equipped to handle a major spill, one much larger than the BP spill that then appeared to be underway. "Our system can handle 400 cubic metres per hour," Weird Koops, the chairman of Spill Response Group Holland, told Radio Netherlands Worldwide, giving each Dutch ship more cleanup capacity than all the ships that the U.S. was then employing in the Gulf to combat the spill.

To protect against the possibility that its equipment wouldn't capture all the oil gushing from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch also offered to prepare for the U.S. a contingency plan to protect Louisiana's marshlands with sand barriers. One Dutch research institute specializing in deltas, coastal areas and rivers, in fact, developed a strategy to begin building 60-mile-long sand dikes within three weeks.

The Dutch know how to handle maritime emergencies. In the event of an oil spill, The Netherlands government, which owns its own ships and high-tech skimmers, gives an oil company 12 hours to demonstrate it has the spill in hand. If the company shows signs of unpreparedness, the government dispatches its own ships at the oil company's expense. "If there's a country that's experienced with building dikes and managing water, it's the Netherlands," says Geert Visser, the Dutch consul general in Houston.

In sharp contrast to Dutch preparedness before the fact and the Dutch instinct to dive into action once an emergency becomes apparent, witness the American reaction to the Dutch offer of help. The U.S. government responded with "Thanks but no thanks," remarked Visser, despite BP's desire to bring in the Dutch equipment and despite the no-lose nature of the Dutch offer --the Dutch government offered the use of its equipment at no charge. Even after the U.S. refused, the Dutch kept their vessels on standby, hoping the Americans would come round. By May 5, the U.S. had not come round. To the contrary, the U.S. had also turned down offers of help from 12 other governments, most of them with superior expertise and equipment --unlike the U.S., Europe has robust fleets of Oil Spill Response Vessels that sail circles around their make-shift U.S. counterparts.

Why does neither the U.S. government nor U.S. energy companies have on hand the cleanup technology available in Europe? Ironically, the superior European technology runs afoul of U.S. environmental rules. The voracious Dutch vessels, for example, continuously suck up vast quantities of oily water, extract most of the oil and then spit overboard vast quantities of nearly oil-free water. Nearly oil-free isn't good enough for the U.S. regulators, who have a standard of 15 parts per million -- if water isn't at least 99.9985% pure, it may not be returned to the Gulf of Mexico.


- Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe and author of The Deniers.

Read more: Financial Post

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Taiwan Oil Skimmer Heads to Gulf -- will it be allowed to operate in the Gulf?

This A-Whale skimmer ship from Taiwan stopped in Norfolk and is now on its way to the Gulf to assist in the BP oil spill clean-up if the Federal Government will allow them to help. Who knows at this point in time since they have to get EPA approval since small amounts of oil will be put back into the Gulf with the water. Let's see -- we have small amounts of oil which are barely visible versus huge amounts of oil heading for the beaches of the Gulf Coast so which will the EPA choose? Jury is out on whether EPA and the rest of this Administration is willing to accept help or continue to put roadblocks in the way of protecting the beaches. We should know shortly if Obama and his Administration will permit this ship into the Gulf to help or if they will put more roadblocks in the way.

"A Whale," a Taiwanese-owned ship billed as the world's largest skimming vessel, is docked in Norfolk, Va., on Friday, June 25, en route to the Deepwater Horizon disaster area. The ship — the length of 3 1/2 football fields and 10 stories high — is designed to collect up to 500,000 barrels of oily water a day through 12 vents on either side of its bow. (AP)

Taiwan oil skimmer heads to Gulf

NORFOLK, Va. -- With no assurances it will be allowed to join the Gulf oil cleanup, a Taiwanese-owned ship billed as the world's largest skimming vessel began a three day voyage to the scene of the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

The ship — the length of 3 1/2 American football fields and 10 stories high — is designed to collect up to 500,000 barrels of oily water a day through 12 vents on either side of its bow. It docked in Norfolk en route to the Gulf from Portugal, where it was retrofitted to skim the seas.

The ship and its crew of 32 were to leave Virginia waters Friday evening.

The owners of the “A Whale” said the ship features a new skimming approach that has never been attempted on such a large scale. They are anxious to put it to its first test in the Gulf.

“We really have to start showing people what we can do,” said Bob Grantham, project coordinator for TMT Group, a Taiwan-based shipping company.

The company is still negotiating with the Coast Guard to join the cleanup and does not have a contract with BP to perform cleanup work. The company also needs environmental approval and waiver of a nearly century-old law aimed at protecting U.S. shipping interests.

Environmental Protection Agency approval is required because some of the seawater returned to the Gulf would have traces of oil.

The Coast Guard, which has received more than 2,000 cleanup proposals, said the supertanker skimmer had survived a preliminary review and was being studied further.

Capt. Ron LaBrec said that initial review involves a number of government agencies, including the EPA.

One question, he said, is: “Will a large vessel like this be able to operate this in this kind of area?”
If the ship passes the additional review, its owners could then negotiate terms with BP. He could not provide an estimated timetable for the review would be completed.

The company said it also needs a waiver of the 1920 Jones Act, which limits the activities of foreign-flagged ships in coastal U.S. waters. The A Whale is Liberian-flagged vessel.
Grantham said TMT was hopeful it could secure the necessary approvals during the ship's three-day passage to the Gulf.

Read More at: Chinapost.com

No skimmers in sight as oil floods into Mississippi waters

As we covered yesterday, there are over 2,000 skimmers in the United States with only 20 in the Gulf. Why? Obama told Senator LeMieux (see video in right column) that they had to stay where they were in case of another oil spill. Why won't Obama accept the help of skimmers from foreign countries who are experts at cleaning up oil spills? When you can answer those questions you will see a disengaged President who cares more about golf and taking expensive trips on Air Force One than he does the people of this Country especially if you are from red states.

Obvious by his first 17 months in office that this President cares about one thing -- himself. He was inexperienced from the beginning which the mainstream media continued to hide as they built him up as someone who could walk on water. No longer can they hide this inexperienced, narcissist person who they helped elect by hiding facts of Obama's background. Obama had the thinnest resume ever to President but the media like the lapdogs they are for the Democrats made it sound like writing two biographies was all the experience he needed to be President. Then we find out that Bill Ayers wrote the first of the Obama books. Who wrote the second?

Obama has done everything wrong with this oil spill and it continues now with still refusing help of foreign nations, other oil companies, sending no skimmers to the Gulf to augment the '20' in the Gulf and hindering Governor Jindal's attempts to save his coast and his economy. What Obama is doing by not sending skimmers to protect the Gulf Coast should be labeled criminal. What does Obama want to do instead of sending skimmers -- pass Cap and Trade in the Senate. If that doesn't tell you what this is all about, nothing will. He will do and say anything to get his Cap and Trade passed including destroying the ecology of the Gulf of Mexico and harming the economies of the Gulf States. We have NEVER had a more spoiled manchild occupying the White House than we do today.

If the Democrats in the Congress had any sense at all, they would be taking a group to the White House to demand additional skimmers in the Gulf (as many as could fit) to clean up the oil instead of seeing the oil heading for the pristine white beaches of our Gulf States. They would also demand he accept help from foreign countries. Gene Taylor (D-MS) stopped short in this article of putting the blame where it belongs at Obama's feet as this is much worse than Hurricane Katrina which was a natural disaster. This is manmade and the 'manchild' in the White House is doing NOTHING to help.

The Coast Guard who is still in charge is dysfunctional at best. Why was the Navy never called in to take charge? They have the expertise not the Coast Guard. Now we learn the Coast Guard Commanders on site cannot even make the decision -- it has to go to a Command Center where it seems to takes days to make a decision. Do they have to get approval from the White House before they can act? Who knows!

Cannot believe the pictures coming out of the Gulf all the while Obama is playing at President. We don't know what else to call it because he is in command of little. Even the firing of McChrystal turns out was more about the fact McChrystal said there will be no progress in the next six months in Afghanistan when he recently briefed NATO. He told Obama it will take years, when Obama wanted months so the United States could be out of Afghanistan when he ran for office in 2012. The Rolling Stone article looks to be a ruse for Obama to get rid of McChrystal because he didn't tell him what he wanted to hear.

One thing Obama does well is lecture!

It is becoming clearer by the day with Obama refusing to add skimmers in the Gulf and his moratorium on deep well drilling that he wants to kill the Gulf economy along with the Gulf and the coastal ecology. Obama had a disaster handed to him and he has failed miserably (on purpose?). Is it because in his small mind as a socialist that this disaster will help pass Cap and Trade which BP wrote.

When is Cong Gene Taylor (D-MS) going to go one on one with Obama since Obama is the leader of his Party? For years you could count on Taylor to be the sane voice of the Democrats in the House but in the 2nd year of Pelosi as Speaker, his fairly conservative voting record went left. Is this article going to be the last we hear of Gene Taylor on the subject of skimmers protecting our Gulf shores or is he going to stand up to Obama and demand answers to questions? We are not holding our breath, but we are hoping to see the Gene Taylor who would stand up to anyone come back.

Posted on Saturday, June 26, 2010

No skimmers in sight as oil floods into Mississippi waters

People hold hands in Gulfport, Miss., to protest offshore oil drilling. Scores of similar demonstrations were held around the United States, including one at Anna

By Karen Nelson Biloxi Sun Herald
GULFPORT, Miss. — A morning flight over the Mississippi Sound showed long, wide ribbons of orange-colored oil for as far as the eye could see and acres of both heavy and light sheen moving into the Sound between the barrier islands. What was missing was any sign of skimming operations from Horn Island to Pass Christian.

U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor got off the flight angry.

"It’s criminal what’s going on out there," Taylor said minutes later. "This doesn’t have to happen.”

A scientist onboard, Mike Carron with the Northern Gulf Institute, said with this scenario, there will be oil on the beaches of the mainland.

“There’s oil in the Sound and there was no skimming,” Carron said. “No coordinated effort.”

Taylor said it was a good thing he didn’t have a mic in the helicopter, because he might have said some things he didn’t want his children to hear.

“They’re paying all these boats to run around like headless chickens,” Taylor said, as reporters gathered to hear his assessment of the Sound.

There has been hope among state officials the islands would stop a lot of the oil and skimmers could take care of the passes or breaks between the islands.

Horn Island was doing its part Saturday, observers pointed out. The wiggly lines of sheen were coming straight at it from the south, headed for the island’s southern beaches. The island had boom in place to protect the inlets and sensitive wetlands along its northern shore, the side that faces the mainland.

Even the Pascagoula River was doing its part.

Carron pointed out the line where the river’s fresh water met the Sound’s salt water near Horn Island. All along the line was the orange oil caught between the two types of water and held at bay.

But where the failure came was in the human effort.

There were dozens of boats of all sizes running around, some leaving trails through the sheen. Two boats among a group near Ship Island were pulling boom in a line, but not using it to round up oil. That was at 10 a.m.

Taylor slipped a note to a fellow passenger.

It said: “I’m having a Katrina flashback. I haven’t seen this much stupidity, wasted effort, money and wasted resources, since then.”

Back on land in Gulfport, Taylor let loose.

“A lot of people are getting paid to say, ‘Look! There’s oil’ and not doing anything about it,” Taylor said. “There shouldn’t be a drop of oil in the Sound. There are enough boats running around.

“Nobody’s in charge,” Taylor said. “Everybody’s in charge, so no one’s in charge.

“If the president can’t find anyone who can do this job,” he said, “let me do it.”

Taylor and U.S. Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., took the morning flight on a National Guard helicopter with representatives of the state DEQ and BP.

After the flight Wicker said he feels it’s not too late for President Barack Obama to accept help from other countries that have offered the services of their large oil-skimming boats.

Wicker blamed bureaucracy and the president, but said, “Mississippi has been a champ from the beginning of this.”

He also said he noticed BP has been slow to accept prevention plans from local governments.

Taylor was ready for action.

Katrina wasn’t preventable, he said, but the disaster of oil reaching Mississippi beaches is preventable.

He had said earlier that if organized right, he believed a lot of small boats, working hard and working together, could contain the floating oil.

Instead, the vessels of opportunity seem to have no game plan.

There should be some light aircraft spotting for and guiding them, said Carron, who was also puzzled by the response. “I don’t really understand it all.”

Before he took the flight, Taylor said, he had submitted a detailed plan of action to BP and the Coast Guard commander. He was on the Coast on Saturday to see if any of it was being carried out — it addressed ways to solve the lack-of-communication issues between spotters and skimmers.

He was scheduled to go aboard a boat in the Sound to see the situation from that perspective as well.

Taylor was concerned Coast Guard Cmdr. Jason Merriweather, assigned to Mississippi, doesn’t have the authority to act independently; that he reports to the Unified Command in Mobile; and that all his decision are filtered through that group.

Carron said he was just as concerned with whether there’s submerged oil coming in with the orange floating bands.

And all the while the NOAA trajectories for where the oil is heading get progressively grim for Mississippi.

Saturday’s briefing projected oil would be on the beaches of the barrier islands, the Chandeleurs, in Alabama and the Florida Panhandle. For Sunday the projection of beached oil showed thicker lines as the bulk of the oil body moved closer.

For Monday the projection was more of the same, except it included a red X at Bay St. Louis, meaning the forecast is oil will reach the mainland there.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/26/96608/no-skimmers-in-sight-as-oil-floods.html#ixzz0s3v62Q96

Friday, June 25, 2010

As Oil Washes on Shore in Alabama and Florida, Yet Another Federal Agency Joins Swarm of Spill Probes -- Who is in Charge?

A child pokes a stick into some oil that came ashore on the beach at Gulf Shores, Ala., on Friday, June 4, 2010. Oil began to be sighted on the beaches as it washed ashore from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Day 69 and oil from the BP Horizon oil well disaster is now washing up on Alabama at Gulf Shores and Florida beaches at Pensacola. These are some of the most beautiful beaches in the Gulf being contaminated by oil which is still leaking from the BP Horizon well as they have not been able to capture all the oil after 69 days. How much is leaking? Who knows as the reports are all over the place since it doesn't seem like anyone is really in charge of this disaster.

The United States has access to over 2,000 skimmers to vacuum up the oil as reported by Senator LeMieux (R-FL) (see right hand column of DfS for his report), but Obama has stated they need to stay where they are at in case of another spill. How stupid is that? How many skimmers does the Obama Administration have in the Gulf? Twenty -- yes that is right 20 out of over 2,000 are all the skimmers that are in the Gulf working to vacuum up the oil. That is not only incompetence but negligence on the part of this Obama Administration.

While we have only 20 skimmers in the Gulf out of over 2,000, Obama is yucking it up at the G-8 conference while oil is now washing ashore in Gulf Shores, Alabama, and Pensacola, Florida.

The question of the day is if he is going to be playing golf this weekend as well -- probably go golfing when he gets back on Sunday from Canada.

When you look at these groups investigating the BP Gulf Oil Disaster, you really do have to ask yourself 'Who is in charge?' Since the Minerals Management Office was lax in safety inspections for BP and other items surrounding this BP oil well, we are not sure that they should be involved in the investigation but maybe should be part of those being investigated. Minerals Management Office might be an agency that should be looked at to be disbanded after their incompetence over the years and scandals surrounding the members of the office.

We believe the idea from former Senator Slade Gorton (R-WA) to have a board similar to the National Transportation and Safety Board is worthy of consideration and the best idea we have heard.
The National Transportation Safety Board was established in 1967 to conduct independent investigations of all civil aviation accidents in the United States and major accidents in the other modes of transportation. It is not part of the Department of Transportation, nor organizationally affiliated with any of DOT's modal agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration. The Safety Board has no regulatory or enforcement powers.

To ensure that Safety Board investigations focus only on improving transportation safety, the Board's analysis of factual information and its determination of probable cause cannot be entered as evidence in a court of law.
When we look at the Obama Commission, we cringe as there are no experts in Petroleum Engineering, but we have people who are against off shore drilling and the oil and gas industry on the Commission. This Presidential Commission looking into the BP Disaster may be one of the worst and most biased ever. Being headed by former Senator Graham of Florida who opposes off shore oil drilling doesn't give us much confidence either. Looks to us like it is a stacked board to get the results that Obama wants.

If it wasn't bad enough with the oil still leaking, we have Interior Secretary Salazar who lied about the results from his committee on off shore drilling. They were to advise President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion and are are now accusing his administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium -- something they actually oppose. See Experts Say White House 'Misrepresented' Views to Justify Drilling Moratorium for more details. That was no 'Misrepresented' it was outright lying by Salazar who should have been fired but since he does the bidding of Obama that won't be happening.

Because of Salazar lying about what previous experts said which a Federal Judge recognized in overturning the moratorium, the Interior Department has no business investigating anything about this BP Deep Horizon Oil Disaster. Salazar is willing to kill the economy of the Gulf Coast with his lies about the experts in order to issue a moratorium. Why does Obama want to kill the economies of Gulf Coast States and drive petroleum companies out of the Gulf with a moratorium? If that question can be answered, the reason for the stalling by Obama and his people on this disaster may also be answered.

At this point in time there is no board or commission that is run by the Obama Administration most Americans would trust. An investigative board should be comprised of people who actually understand oil drilling in the deep water of the Gulf not a bunch of environmentalists who hate oil and gas to start with not to mention offshore drilling.

My home sits several miles from one of the premier petroleum schools in America, Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological Engineering at The University of Oklahoma. This school has world renown experts with experience in offshore drilling and a new facility dealing with oil drilling. Will Obama ask OU for advice -- probably not as it is part of Red State America even though President Boren supported Obama at one time.

Either Obama and his Administration are the most inept group ever to be in office or they are stalling on purpose to make sure off shore drilling in the Gulf is curtailed so we can be more dependent on oil from Obama's friends in the Arab world and from George Soros and Petrobaus. The stalling started with not accepting immediate help from foreign countries and other oil companies. Now Obama is only sending 20 out of 2000 skimmers into the Gulf to vacuum the oil to keep it from hitting the beaches which is not working as oil is spreading to more Alabama and Florida due to lack of skimmers. For weeks Obama and his Administration have continually put roadblocks in the way of Governor Jindal who has been trying to save the Louisiana beaches and marshlands. To top everything off when Obama decided to name a Commission, he filled it with a with a group of anti oil and gas production members with no expert petroleum engineers allowed.

These are only a few of the items where Obama and his Administration have been negligent for days on end. There are many more that have made no sense. All of them together add up to negligence on the part of Obama and his Administration -- we would like to see charges of criminal negligence filed but we are not holding our breath.

Read about these Commissions and ask yourself -- WHO IS IN CHARGE?

Yet Another Federal Agency Joins Swarm of Spill Probes

Laura Parker ContributorAOL News

(June 25) -- When a little-known federal agency with just 14 investigators joined the growing list of government probes into the Deepwater Horizon disaster, it renewed cries from the Gulf of Mexico -- and beyond -- that no one seems to be in charge.

The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board's sleuthing brings the count of federal investigations to six -- and that's not counting the probes under way by a half-dozen congressional committees. Or the investigation being conducted by Robert Bea, a University of California, Berkeley, engineering professor who has assembled a 66-member team to assist the various investigative efforts. "It's hard to see who's in charge. The answer is: nobody," said Lee Hamilton, who co-chaired the 9/11 Commission's investigation into the 2001 terrorist attacks. "The president can't control Congress. He can't control BP. He can't control the states, which are doing their own investigations. All he can control is what the executive branch is doing."

The inquiry by the chemical safety board, an independent agency, follows those launched by the Justice Department; the Interior Department; the Coast Guard and the Minerals Management Service, working jointly; and President Barack Obama's seven-member special commission.

"I would have preferred one central investigation by the federal government, or even one by the executive branch," said Slade Gorton, a two-term Republican senator from Washington state and a member of the 9/11 Commission. Gorton also served on a special panel headed by former Secretary of State James Baker that investigated the 2005 explosion at BP's Texas City refinery that killed 15 workers. The report, published in 2007, harshly criticized BP for lax safety.

"We had 11 members, seven of whom were industrial safety experts," said Gorton, who singles out Obama's presidential commission as lacking in technical expertise. "We had people with no agenda to start with."

Peter Goelz, former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board, thinks the gulf oil spill reinforces the need for an independent investigative agency patterned on the NTSB. This super-agency would investigate not only oil spills, but also other disasters such as the West Virginia coal mine explosion that killed 29 miners last month.

"We've got so many investigations of the spill going on, the public quite rightly can ask, what agendas are at play behind each one of these?" Goelz said. "In the NTSB, we have a model that not only works from a technical standpoint, but one that the various constituencies believe in."Despite the chaos inherent in multiple investigations, however, Hamilton said the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

"You have a better chance of getting to the bottom of things," he said. "You have a better chance of ending up with the whole picture than if you have a single agency doing the whole investigation."

A scorecard to the probes under way so far:

Joint Coast Guard/Minerals Management Service

A public hearing resumes July 19 before a six-member panel of Coast Guard and MMS officials assembled in a New Orleans airport hotel meeting room. Last month, 37 witnesses were called to describe the April 20 explosion and fire on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. In the coming session, the panel will look into the decision-making aboard the rig.

So far, the hearing has produced the clearest picture so far of what happened on the Deepwater Horizon. But the proceedings are not without complications:

Robert Kaluza, one of BP's top officials on the rig, declined to testify, citing his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.

In addition, the panel's public questioning of witnesses has come in for criticism from the Interior Department's acting inspector general, Mary Kendall. Because the MMS lacked clear guidelines for conducting accident investigations (they are summed up in a scant five paragraphs of regulations), the Coast Guard's more substantial procedures are guiding the probe. The Coast Guard rules "are comprehensive," Kendall told a House committee, "but in my view, completely backwards, gathering evidence via public hearing, rather than developing evidence to culminate in a public forum.

"The Justice DepartmentAlways wary of competing investigations, where witnesses may give contradictory statements, prosecutors and defense attorneys prefer to work in a more controlled setting. That's not going to happen in this case.

Another potential headache for prosecutors is the MMS's partnership with the Coast Guard in investigating the cause of the disaster -- as well as the MMS's role leading up to the disaster. According to testimony at the joint hearing in Louisiana, the minerals agency approved BP's plan for the well that blew out and failed to ask to see relevant documents that BP was required to provide to the government. The civil investigation is proceeding under the direction of Bruce Gelber, who heads the environmental enforcement section.

Determining how much oil has been spilled is key: Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, fines could range from $1,000 per barrel of oil spill up to $4,300 per barrel if a federal judge finds that the spill occurred because of gross negligence.

The Presidential Commission

The Columbia Accident Investigation Board took just seven months to investigate the breakup of the space shuttle Columbia over Texas. But the presidential commission examining the oil spill will not meet until mid-July and may not issue a report until next year.

Chaired by former Florida Sen. Bob Graham, a Democrat, and William Reilly, a Republican, who headed the Environmental Protection Agency under the elder President George Bush, the panel is already drawing fire for being more political than neutral.

One panel member, Frances Beinecke, president of the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council, has blogged about "America's addiction to oil" and urged a ban on offshore drilling.

Graham, who also served as Florida's governor, worked for years to prevent drilling off Florida's coast.

The Interior Department

Immediately after the spill, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar asked a panel of seven scientists to report on drilling safety within 30 days. After the finished 38-page report ended up at the center of the court fight over Obama's six-month drilling moratorium, panel members said Salazar had misinterpreted their report and that they did not argue for a blanket moratorium.

Meanwhile, on May 11, Salazar asked the National Academy of Engineering to help determine the cause of the explosion, fire and spill by providing "a fresh set of eyes." Molly Galvin, an NAE spokeswoman, said the engineers will examine the technology and performance of the Deepwater Horizon's blowout preventer and make recommendations aimed at avoiding future spills. That panel will send an interim report to Salazar and the Coast Guard and the presidential commission in October, and deliver a final report next June.

The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board

The tiny agency, with 14 staff investigators, became involved after House Energy Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., asked it to investigate the spill. The board has solid background on BP, having spent nearly two years probing the 2005 explosion at BP's Texas City refinery. In the end it cited cost-cutting, a lax safety culture and production pressure from BP executives as factors in causing the accident. The board also found "striking similarities" between the refinery explosion and a 2006 BP pipeline break at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, that leaked 4,800 barrels.

But the board also lacks cash. Chairman John Bresland warned in a letter to Waxman that the agency had spent $2.5 million investigating Texas City. The Deepwater Horizon investigation presents "an even higher level of cost and complexity," Bresland said.

Source: AOL News

Rubio Weighs in on Obama's Incompetence (BP Oil Spill)

When Javier reminds Rubio that Crist has spoken approvingly of Obama’s response, Rubio says, “He’s the only man in Florida” who is. Rubio also says that Governor Crist has a political motivation in praising Obama’s efforts, in attempting to convince Obama supporters to vote for Crist in November. That will almost certainly be a declining constituency.

Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Sources Say

It should be mandatory that the Rules of Engagement brought into Afghanistan by the Obama Administration which gave protection to the enemy by allowing them to hide in Afghanistan villages among the civilians be reviewed and changed. Soldiers fighting in Afghanistan are fighting with one hand tied behind their back and that needs to change immediately. Putting a date for withdrawal as firm like Obama has done only emboldens the enemy to hang on until that time.

Obama may be the poorest excuse for a Commander in Chief this Nation has ever had. In fact, what is he good at except partying in the White House and using Air Force One as his taxi?

Either the Commander of the forces in Afghanistan has the authority to run the war the way he sees fit or get our troops out. Obama and the people he chose around him as his national security team were unfit to be in charge of running the war in Afghanistan as witnessed by the Obama Rules of Engagement.

Too many Americans have already lost their lives due to the ineptness of this Administration and their 'Rules of Engagement' that tied our military's hands. What is with Democrats and wanting to micromanage wars? They make the worst Presidents -- the last four have been nightmares when it comes to our military and national security. Waiting for Obama to start shooting off Cruise Missiles next at tents like Clinton did to show he is in charge.

Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says
Published June 25, 2010

A military source close to Gen. David Petraeus says one of the first things the general will do when he takes over in Afghanistan is to modify the controversial rules of engagement to make it easier for U.S. troops to engage in combat with the enemy.

Troops on the ground and some military commanders have said the strict rules -- aimed at preventing civilian casualties -- have effectively forced the troops to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.

At a news conference at the Pentagon Thursday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen said Petraeus will have the flexibility to make tactical changes. But he said that does necessarily mean changes will be made.

President Obama said Wednesday after he accepted Gen. Stanley McChrystal's resignation in the wake of a magazine article in which he and his staff were critical of the administration that the change-up does not represent a shift in war strategy.

The issue is likely to be front and center in Senate confirmation hearings for Petraeus next week.

Fox News' Steve Centanni and Justin Fishel contributed to this report.

Source: Fox News

National Debt Tied with Terrorism as the Greatest Perceived Threat to our Future Well-Being

We found this gem at the bottom of Dr. Coburn's email very telling:

Just The Facts: A 2008 review by the Internal Revenue Service found that an estimated 100,000 federal employees were delinquent on their federal taxes, for a total of nearly $1 billion in back taxes. If you include federal retirees and the military, the amount jumps to $3 billion.
That is a pretty telling paragraph -- people involved with the Federal Government don't worry about their taxes. There has to be a better way than the Tax Code we have today. Just look at how many tax laws are added each year and then changed again. A simplified tax structure would help cut down unnecessary paperwork and would be more fair to everyone.

Great to see the American people waking up to what is happening in Congress and the White House with runaway spending. Every time we turn around Obama is promising more money overseas when we are running such a huge deficit. He doesn't care as he takes on a road to bankruptcy as long as he gets to do what he wants.

We could save a lot if Obama would be grounded and not be able to use Air Force One to take a trip to a state like Ohio where he was on the ground 59 minutes and gave a 12 minute speech at a cost estimate of $500,000 to $1,000,000. Then we learn that his wife and daughters are vacationing in California on our nickle. Who keeps track of the White House budget or did the Democrats in Congress give him unlimited funds to spend what he wants? That is also something not going over well with the American people.

In fact, most people I talk to in person, on the phone, or on line have frankly had it with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid treating the United States Treasury like their piggy bank to spend at will. Pelosi and Hoyer have no intention of even doing a budget resolution this year in defiance of the Budget Law from 1974. Are they afraid the American people will see their runaway spending and what they have added to the deficit before the election?

This email from Dr. Tom Coburn brings good news and as Republicans we need to drive home that the runaway spending and adding to the deficit has to stop as the Federal Government needs to go on a diet from spending money they don't have. We need to support Senators Thune, DeMint, and Coburn in their efforts to reign in federal spending by sending more Republicans to the Senate like Marco Rubio, Sharron Angle, Mike Lee, and other Conservative Republican Senate candidates who are being elected in primaries this summer.

Dear Sharon,

A recent poll indicated that the national debt is tied with terrorism as the greatest perceived threat to our future well-being. In the Gallup poll to survey the concerns of Americans, 79 percent of Americans now rank the national debt as an extremely serious or serious concern.

Twice as many Americans rate government debt as an extremely serious concern as those concerned with the environment and global warming.

View Poll Here

It should not be surprising to see terrorism listed as a major concern for most Americans, as it has been for the past nine years. The threat posed by our enemies is immediate and it must be met with absolute American strength. The fact that concerns over mounting government debt now match concerns regarding terrorism is telling, and frankly, gives me some hope that we can end the spending addiction in Washington before it is too late.

This poll confirms something that you and I already know. When given the facts about the mismanagement of our federal government, our neighbors, friends and family instantly recognize the threat and understand that reckless spending is not just innocent child’s play by our political leaders. It is malpractice that threatens each and every one of us.

This week, Senators Thune, DeMint and I continue to challenge a plan by Senate leaders to pass an “extenders” bill that will add billions more to our deficit. I have offered 20 specific amendments that will ensure that not a single dime is added to our $1.6 trillion budget deficit for 2010.

Frankly, it is unlikely the Senate will accept my cost cutting and government efficiency amendments. True change, the kind that will interrupt our current path to insolvency, will come when the voice of the American people—fully armed with the facts—is heard in Washington. If you would like to see how senators vote on cost cutting amendments as they are debated, you can track them here.

The Gallup poll is proof that we are making a difference that will soon be heard in Washington. The majority of Americans now know the threat posed by reckless spending. Now, it is our job to make sure that our friends and neighbors get to the polls on Election Day.

Thank you for your efforts to inform your friends and neighbors, and as always, keep fighting!

Dr. Tom

P.S. If you’re interested in volunteering for the 2010 election, click here. Your efforts will make a difference on Election Day.

In The News “If You Can't Budget, You Can't Govern”"...the House is likely to pass a "functional equivalent" measure that leaves out inconvenient budget numbers - most notably an annual operating deficit averaging around $1 trillion over the next five to 10 years." Read more.

House ’shreds our constitution for raw, ugly, partisan gain’ by vote of 219-206

We noticed in the vote that both parties had people voting yes or no that reflected how blue or red their district is -- Republicans had 2 but the Democrats had many more that were told to vote like they wanted once the final numbers were secure. In the House, Republicans cannot stop a bill because of the huge numbers in favor of Democrats. We are still asking today "How many Democrats are in Congress because of ACORN fraulent ballots?" The number of close races won in 2006 and 2008 by Democrats defy probability.

Labor Unions once again are favored by their puppets, the Democrats. Democrats don't get it there is a Constitution in this Country guaranteering freedom of speech for all just not for Democrats and their unions. We expect because of the limiting of free speech by this Democrat amendment favoring their Labor Unions (can you say George Soros money?) to be overturned by the Supreme Court.

The language in question would exempt from disclosure requirements transfers of cash from dues-funded groups to their affiliates to pay for certain election ads.
Once you have an exemption from disclosure requirements, Democrat unions can spend whatever they want on ads. The Obama campaign turned off security for credit cards so that Soros funded credit cards could be used to funnel money into the Obama campaign and not take federal funds which he had promised to do. That should have been a red flag that what Obama says and what he does are two different things.

This is the Democrat's last gasp because they know deep down they will NEVER have these huge numbers again in the House. In fact, Pelosi could lose her Speaker's chair and her personal Air Force plane in January. There has never been a Speaker who is as polarizing as Nancy Pelosi who also has no regard for the Constitution or for the Rules of the House. No better example than the fact the Democrats are not introducing a budget resolution this year in the House which breaks the Rules they passed in 1974. Rules mean ZERO to these progressives in their march toward socialism.

House ’shreds our constitution for raw, ugly, partisan gain’ by vote of 219-206
By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
06/24/10 6:10 PM EDT

The DISCLOSE Act is the Democrats big legislative “fix” to pushback against the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision that eliminated a number of campaign finance restrictions on first amendment grounds. It just passed the House this afternoon — even with 36 Democrats voting against it.

House Republican Leader John Boehner’s already declaring that the legislation will “Shred Our Constitution for Raw, Ugly, Partisan Gain.” Normally, I’d automatically dissmiss such a press release as hyperbole, but this time I’m not so sure. For one thing, the DISCLOSE Act does this:

A Democratic amendment tucked into campaign finance legislation Wednesday night also drew fire from Republicans and their allies, who contend it gives special treatment to Democrat-allied labor unions. The language in question would exempt from disclosure requirements transfers of cash from dues-funded groups to their affiliates to pay for certain election ads. It was inserted into the bill by Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.), chairman of the House Administration Committee and a big union backer.

So unions now get nearly unrestricted, undisclosed political spending. Further, the restrictions in the DISCLOSE Act only cut one way — against business. If you took TARP funds as a business, express political advocacy is now verboten. So GM has very limited first amendment rights, but even though arguably primary beneficiary of the auto bailout was the United Auto Workers union which got government garunteed billions directly as a result of the TARP funding — UAW can spend almost whatever it pleases, and it has a history of spending millions on Democratic campaigns.

Further, under the DISCLOSE Act if a company has more than $7 million in government contracts, it has no right to political speech. But public sector unions can spend millions of recycled tax dollars campaigning for Democrats, no problem. All this will likely do is make business spend more money on lobbyists rather than campaigns. Of course, campaign spending is much more transparent than lobbying, but when it comes to the DISCLOSE act, clean elections and free speech seem to be secondary considerations to getting Democrats elected.

Read more at the Washington Examiner