GOP spending habits obscene

Cal Thomas is a syndicated columnist. He writes:

NOT SO LONG ago, in a country that now seems far, far away, Ronald Reagan said: "...we don't have deficits because people are taxed too little. We have deficits because big government spends too much..."

Last week, a Republican Senate voted to raise the debt ceiling to nearly $9 trillion. Senators quickly passed a record $2.8 trillion budget. What would Reagan say now? ...

That Republicans are outspending the most reckless 1980s Democrat (and 1960s Great Society Democrats and 1940s FDR Democrats) is the sorriest spectacle of all.

The Senate vote increased the debt ceiling for the fourth time in five years. The statutory debt limit has now risen by more than $3 trillion since President Bush took office. That any Republican majority could preside over such fiscal irresponsibility is grounds for revoking their party membership...

Why should Republicans be re-elected when one of the major reasons the GOP exists is to reduce the size and cost of government...

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said, "This budget could be the final nail in our coffin if we don't watch it." He said GOP spending habits are demoralizing voters...

The Bush administration has sired the biggest new entitlement program in history -- a prescription drug benefit for the elderly. And let's not forget "No Child Left Behind," which massively increased federal education spending.

[Reagan] left the presidency with a surplus. So did Bill Clinton. That a GOP Congress and administration are engaging in such spending is obscene. Little will change if we vote in Democrats. who also have engaged in deficit spending. What to do?

Maybe it's time for a strong third party, or failing that, another revolution.

ContraCostaTimes.com | 03/22/2006 | GOP spending habits obscene

WorldNetDaily: Fight for your right to third party

Doug Powers writes:

Come on, third parties – it's time to gallop into Washington, D.C., in a Trojan horse

WorldNetDaily: Fight for your right to third party

Sri Lanka clocks go back to Tiger time as experiment fails

Maybe the Indiana legislators and governor could take a lesson from this episode 9,000 miles away.

The Associated Press writes:

Sri Lanka is to revert to its previous time zone from April 14 after a failed experiment, lasting nearly 10 years, aimed at maximising daylight hours.

As the country's traditional new year begins clocks will be set five and a half hours ahead of Greenwich Mean Time, falling in line with the rebel Tamil Tigers, who refused to make the switch a decade ago.

In 1996 Sri Lanka advanced its clocks by an hour, then later that year dropped back by 30 minutes.

But the hoped-for cut in electricity consumption did not happen and the move was unpopular as it had upset children's bedtimes.

Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Clocks go back to Tiger time as experiment fails

Sink the Dubai Ports Deal!

R. Cort Kirkwood has been writing about American politics and culture for more than 20 years. Regarding the proposed management of U.S. ports by an Arab company, he writes:

Our ports are gateways to America, and it does not make sense to put them under the control of a foreign power -- particularly an Islamic regime tied to al-Qaeda...

If the deal goes through, an Islamic regime will control shipping on the eastern seaboard of the United States...

What the president knew and when he knew it will remain a mystery, but whatever he knew, he knows enough now to threaten vetoing a suggested congressional measure to investigate the deal. This veto threat comes from a supposed conservative... who has never uncapped the veto pen during his five years in office. Not once has Bush seen a spending bill cross his desk that could be cut by a mere penny. But suddenly he sees a bill that merits the veto.

The Bush administration would put a despotic Islamic regime, whose potentates and bankers boast significant ties to al-Qaeda terrorists, in charge of American shipping... The deal is yet another plot, approved in secret, which would undermine American national security and sovereignty for the benefit of the transnational political and commercial plutocrats who manage government and business across the globe...

Unsurprisingly, the government secretly sanctioned the deal...

One marvels that Bush appointed an executive of DPW to a marquee position in his administration, yet knew nothing of the deal that the executive’s employer was consummating to establish financial control of major American ports...

Aside from all this, the Times reported, the deal never received the 45-day review required by U.S. law... Bush officials, apparently, did not believe the company’s owner, a foreign government, warranted that review. The Committee on Foreign Investment was created specifically to review such transactions...

Average Americans are tugging their chin whiskers, wondering whether Bush and his crew are rowing around with one oar... Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda used the UAE, a small country on the Persian Gulf bordering Saudi Arabia and Oman, as a logistical and financial base of operations for the attacks...

Bush’s approval of the sale of our ports to the UAE represents a deal with the devil where American security and sovereignty are concerned. And if those aren’t concerns enough for Bush and his understrappers, then perhaps the UAE’s dismal record on human slavery and child welfare needs considering. The UAE is a major destination for women sex slaves... as well as imported child slaves, stolen or purchased from other countries, who serve as camel jockeys. A law passed in April 2005 supposedly outlawed the practice, which features oil-rich sheiks gambling on the races, while the children, who run the risk of being trampled to death, train in the burning dessert, live in hovels, and beg for water...

Whatever happens with the ports deal, Americans need to know this latest scheme to undermine American national security and sovereignty is of a piece with nearly everything else this administration has done or failed to do. Bush not only refuses to stop illegal immigration from Mexico, but also suggests a “guest-worker” entitlement that would permit the alien horde to establish a permanent presence on American soil. He also supports handing Social Security benefits to these criminal aliens. The tsunami of illegal immigrants across the southern border poses a domestic security threat not just because so many are drug dealers, rapists, and murderers, but because Islamic terrorists can sneak across the open border unnoticed amid the tide.

Aside from that, the Bush administration hasn’t stopped the unimpeded flow of government-authorized immigrants and visitors from Islamic countries...

Thus does the government spend less time performing constitutional and legitimate duties, such as controlling immigration and providing for national security, and more time supporting a massive, intrusive, and unconstitutional “homeland security” agency with the authority to trace the activities of everyone in the country...

In the same way, perhaps if the Bush administration were not waging an unconstitutional war in Iraq, it could spend more time and money controlling immigration here, which would obviate the unconstitutional, garrison-state security measures that harass law-abiding citizens...

The government now wants to scrutinize the private lives of all Americans: their financial transactions, their e-mail, their phone calls, and their political activities. Someday, the government may force real Americans to carry identification cards. Already, uniformed federal police search old ladies at airports and harass men who have received the nation’s highest decoration for bravery...

Thus has Bush promised to veto a bill that would provide some measure of national security, and a cadre of internationalists and global elites who care nothing for American sovereignty support him...

Average Americans might wonder why any foreign company, state-controlled or not, is running an American port, the way companies from Singapore, Japan, and Denmark run them now...

Thus, this sale. It is another piece of the plan, which includes subverting national sovereignty via immigration and billion-dollar global transactions, to cede control of American business, government, and institutions to the corporate, political, and cultural elites who contrived and command the plan, and will augment their considerable powers at the expense of the consumers and taxpayers who unwittingly support the nefarious enterprise.

It mightn’t matter to Bush and Wall Street’s elite who runs America’s harbors, industry, and commerce. But it might just matter to the average Joe, who wants physical security for his family, a job that pays a living wage, and an economy that flourishes — not wilts. Americans must ask themselves: “Would anyone approve this mad idea for the ports but a man who has gone mad, or a man who isn’t mad at all but perfectly sane, whose loyalties lie not with his people and his country, but with a grandiose liberal abstraction that travels hidden under such disingenuous names as equality, democracy, rights, and freedom?”

Further, Americans must ask themselves: “Despite blustery claims from defenders of the Bush administration that Bush is doing what’s right, is the administration loyal to U.S. citizens and doing what’s right for them, or only to itself and to the rootless elites who empower it and thereby profit from the concentration of political and financial power among the few at the expense of the many?”

An empowering of the elites in our society would explain the threat to veto. Until the average American understands this truth and does something about it, he will toil in futility for Bush, Cheney, and the elites who are plotting America’s demise.

What You Can Do

Readers are encouraged to contact their U.S. senators and representatives urging them to pass legislation blocking the Dubai Ports deal.

Sink the Dubai Ports Deal! (by R. Cort Kirkwood)

Decision hurts state wineries

The editors of the Richmond Palladium-Item have a good editorial on this bill. As they point out, there does not need to be any conflict between active lawsuits and new legislation, as long as the new legislation is not retroactive in scope. Senator Garton makes the claim that everyone would start bringing their lawsuits to the legislature if they do not follow this policy. That assumes that every litigant would be able to find a sympathetic lawmaker and would be willing to wait through the months the legislature is not in session on the gamble that they might pass favorable retroactive legislation.

Indiana Senate President Pro Tem Robert Garton exercises a selective respect for the independence of the judicial branch of government.

The Republican Senate leader last week unilaterally killed a bill that would have allowed wine to be shipped to customers in Indiana, a move that, left unchallenged, could cause great damage to the state's promising homegrown wine industry...

Garton killed the bill arguing, speciously, that because there is a lawsuit pending by Indiana wineries, "it will not be considered further by the Senate this year."

"We are not the judicial branch of government," the Republican leader said.

Consider the ramifications of Garton's position. Want to stop a bill, any bill, from making its way through the Indiana General Assembly? Apparently, all it takes is the filing of a lawsuit? Now consider the hypocrisy.

The Legislature is not, as Garton asserts, the judicial branch of government...

About 30 wineries in the state get up to 40 percent of their sales through mailed shipments, according to state winery officials who say that many could be forced out of business if the Legislature fails to act.

Gov. Mitch Daniels needs to enter this fray forcefully and on behalf of the state's wineries, which are important to the state's tourism and economic development. The days of legislatively picking winners and losers among the state's diverse and competitive alcohol beverage interests must fall beneath the weight of open markets.

Palladium-Item - www.pal-item.com - Richmond, Ind.