The Gulf Oil Spill is Barack Obama’s Katrina and Halliburton All Rolled Into One

By Bob L.

This is what is running our Country, and just think of all those that ELECTED this bunch of misfits that are not qualified to do their jobs, but yet you are paying their wages.
___________________________________________________________
Posted by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, May 5th

There was the delayed response. There was the worrying about the image. There was the lack of resources. No, I’m not talking about Hurricane Katrina, but the Obama Administration’s handling of the British Petroleum oil spill.

But it gets better. It is not only like Bush’s Katrina, but like Halliburton too.

Turns out Barack Obama has gotten more money from British Petroleum than any other American politician. Not just that, but BP spent $15.9 million lobbying the Democrats and Obama last year.

The result of all that money to Obama? The Obama Administration exempted British Petroleum from an environmental drilling study.

Oh, and while the oil was spreading, the Interior Department Chief of Staff was white-water rafting on the Grand Canyon as part of a “work-focused” trip.

That’s like Obama’s Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, who stayed on a ski vacation post-Christmas instead of returning to deal with the panty-bomber.

These guys remain amateurs. They run a good campaign, but they can’t govern to save our lives.

The FCC grabs power unlawfully to appease a fringe movement

Posted by Neil Stevens
Wednesday, May 5th

I’ve been ill but please bear with me. Today brought some huge news for anyone who conducts business or pleasure on the Internet: The FCC has announced its plans to deem and pass Net Neutrality. Specifically, The FCC will defy a court order to stop regulating the Internet by nonsensically deeming the Internet not to be an information service, and regulate it under Title II of the Communications Act.

That sounds mild but it has disastrous consequences.

Title II of the Communications Act gives the FCC strong and broad powers. If the FCC is allowed to put the Internet in the US under those powers, then the Obama administration will have total power to tax Internet users, regulate content on Internet servers, and even institute price controls on Internet services. Does this sound like it has anything to do with “restoring” anything? I don’t think so.

The fact is, the idea that this “Net Neutrality” plan is anything but a power grab was always a lie being pushed by a couple of sources. The first is Google, which has had ties with the administration from Eric Schmidt himself advising Barack Obama, to Andrew McLaughlin who’s been lobbying for Google from his job as Deputy White House CTO. Google stands to benefit when the FCC passes regulations which favor Internet firms like Google over ISPs.

Part of Google’s drive has been in funding Free Press, a radical fringe group dedicated to the nationalization of all mass media in America. Their neo-Marxist vision is to have people’s state commissars dictating all the news you read in the newspaper, watch on television, and see on the Internet. Obviously, they’ve been pushing hard for deem-and-pass “reclassification” of the Internet under FCC total control

However they’re gradually letting slip how much of a fringe group they really are, despite their “Save the Internet” front group having a long list of names. They can’t even decide how many supporters they want to lie and say they have! Is it 1.7 million, or is it 1.6 million? Oops, maybe it’s just 1.0 million. But now the radically pro-Net Neutrality Cecilia Kang, who runs with stories clearly pushed by Google and Free Press without fact checking them first as seen in the updates, claims Free Press is nowhere near a million, and sits at only half that.

Should the tens of millions of Americans on the Internet, we who make a living or keep in touch with friends and family, have our fate determined by a small band of fringe neo-Marxist radicals, or self-seeking lobbyists at Google? I say no. This matter should be decided in the Congress, where the power is legitimately held to tell the FCC what it can and can’t regulate. And problems people have with their ISPs should be handled in the state legislatures, who have oversight of the local franchise monopolies that govern most cable and DSL Internet in America.

Hands off our Internet, FCC. End the power grab now.

It’s Because They Want To Kill Us, Stupid

Posted by Lori Ziganto
Wednesday, May 5th

The night the NYC car bomb attempt went down, I was so grateful that, once again, the diligence of the public and the swift action of the NYC Police thwarted yet another potential attack. Shortly thereafter, while still incredibly grateful obviously, I became angry. I’ve had it. Firstly, because the current strategy of homeland security seems to be “Hey, guys, we’ve totally unclenched our fists. We can haz cookie now?” Secondly, because the left and their media lackeys are not only dangerously naive, but also purposefully misleading.

They are so deeply invested in both political correctness and in their violent, racist “tea baggers” meme, it clouds all else. Even common sense and the security of our country. It was swiftly apparent that they were *wishing* that the failed bomber was a tea partier, so that they could further their lame narrative and continue to try to excuse Obama and his administration for their failures and utter incompetence. Gee, Obama, how is that “unclenching of fists” deal working out for you?

That night, Attorney General Holder said “It’s important that American people remain vigilant.” Sadly, it’s quite clear that the administration and many on the left refuse to do the same; unless it’s remaining vigilant in their pursuit of demagoguing Republicans. It’s gotten to the point where I was honestly waiting for the release of a statement from Obama, consisting of a sternly worded apology and claims that he inherited the bomber, Faisal Shahzad, from Bush.

Bloomberg started the insane blame the Republicans at all costs narrative off with a bang. When asked by the elfin Katie Couric for a guess as to who the bomber could be, Bloomberg offered this:

What’s Wrong With Racial Profiling Anyway?

By A.W.R. Hawkins
05/06/2010

On April 23, Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed an immigration bill that outlaws illegal immigration in Arizona. The bill’s passage allows state law enforcement personnel to arrest and deport illegal immigrants instead of continuing the practice of capturing them, then helplessly watching federal agencies drop the ball on deportation.

Because this law should bring a new level of scrutiny and profiling to bear on Mexicans who have crossed the border illegally, Democrats, “human rights activists,” Hispanic PACs, and the Rev. Al Sharpton are all shouting “racism” from the rooftops. Sharpton, in particular, is promoting a boycott of Arizona and is promising to take his posse there to demonstrate in the streets.

Even Fox News’ Shepherd Smith sarcastically referred to the new legislation the “driving while Latino” law.

But the fundamental question none of these groups or individuals appear willing to ask is: “What’s wrong with racial profiling anyway?” It is, after all, a valuable tool in solving cases for law enforcement.

When law enforcement officials are looking for a serial killer, they don’t bother talking to very many females. Nor do they question many blacks, Hispanics, or Middle-Easterners. Why? Because doing so would be an absolute waste of time: They know the overwhelming odds are that the killer is going to be a male who is white, and who either lives alone or lives with his mom. So they look for men who fit that profile rather than wasting their time investigating those who don’t fit the profile.