Diary of an Angry American

Holder admits he may have 'misled' Congress in OFF testimony

2011-11-08T16:10:00.000-05:00

Why is the media so determined to make every excuse on behalf of disgraced Attorney General Eric Holder? A puff piece on Holder's Senate testimony from US News & World Report actually insults the intelligence of every American with the following: "So far, no evidence has come to light showing that Holder read 100-plus page memos that briefly and broadly referred to the operation, or that his senior aides knew either."

They actually state this asinine caveat as though it's a good thing. That there's no proof he read the memos doesn't make Holder look any better but would just be yet another altogether separate yet compelling reason that he should be replaced immediately. Not having read the memos just speaks to his incompetence. Most other media outlets are giving Holder a similar pass, as evidenced by the coddling in the latest CNN report: They make a point of quoting Holder as he scolds Republicans for allegedly playing "gotcha" politics, but make no mention that he admitted his Congressional testimony was misleading.

CNN never acknowledges Holder's mea culpa, which to be fair is wishy-washy and insufficient at best, but of great significance nonetheless. Holder admitted to the Senate committe that he testified in May Congressional hearings of only having been aware of OFF for a few weeks when he had actually been aware of it for at least a few months by that point.

From The Daily Caller:

“I did say a ‘few weeks,’” Holder clarified Tuesday, responding to questions from Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I probably could’ve said ‘a couple of months.'

Holder also admitted to Leahy that Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley handed him letters in person in late January, months before Holder previously claimed he knew of the controversial initiative of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). The BATFE is a division of the Department of Justice.

All hell should be breaking loose in the media, calling for his resignation and characterizing him as incompetent at best, yet the vast majority of media outlets are omitting the most pertinent details of his Senate testimony. It appears that news is now being reported quite selectively. Too bad Eric Holder isn't a football coach or his mistakes, both real and perceived, would be newsworthy.

PA House Democrats trying to lay their own failures on Corbett & the GOP

2011-10-25T10:17:00.000-05:00

The PA House Democrats have had the spin machine working overtime since Corbett took office. They're constantly insisting that Corbett and the state GOP are to blame for every problem in PA, despite the reality that such claims are patently false. There's an endless wash of memos, newsletters, tweets, press releases and more from the PA House Dems constantly pounding every Pennsylvanian with this disingenuous message. It's too bad that our state Democratic Party refuses to be accountable for their own failures and won't own up to their mistakes. The fact that they're trying to pin the fruits of their own incompetence on the current administration is truly offensive to citizens' intelligence.

The PA House Dems obviously think the voters are very stupid. There's no other way to explain their sensationalized finger-pointing at the GOP. The Dems refuse to accept any responsibility for their own bad policies and the repurcussions of those choices. Voters are tired of the blaming on multiple levels, first and foremost because it's dishonest. The party owes us the truth but all they give us is childishly crafted misinformation. And to what end? Is this our punishment for voting in a GOP majority? It's almost as though the Dems have decided that by taking away their majority, we now warrant a blizzard of PR temper tantrums.

Rather than learn from their mistakes and come up with ways to do things better, the De rfuse to acknowledge those mistakes. They want to pretend that Pennsylvania was all sunshine, rainbows and unicorns until the GOP took charge but nothing could be further from the truth. For 8 years under the Ridge/Schweiker administration there was total GOP control. During that time, Pennsylvania added more than 380,000 jobs. Even during Rendell's first term jobs increased by 163,000 when the GOP still controlled the House and Senate. But when Democrats took over the state House and held the Governor's office from 2007 through 2011, the state lost more than 137,000 jobs. Unemployment in PA more than doubled under what passes for leadership from the state Democratic party, rising from 4.2% to 8.5%.

They should be telling us what they learned from their failures and how they will use that knowledge to do better by us, but instead they're sending out memos claiming that unemployment has risen half a percentage point due to Corbett. Most citizens would be happy if it had only risen that slightly during their tenure but we're presumably supposed to be incensed at Corbett. The actions of the PA House Dems are akin to an arsonist telling you that your house is burning because the fire department is taking too long to arrive on the scene.

That's really what all this comes down to: the Democrats caused far more harm than good but now want you to blame the Republicans for not being able to fix the mess. Rendell increased total state spending by nearly 40%, even after off-setting cuts in many areas. The 2009-2010 state budget represents an overall increase of more than 36% from 2002-2003 spending. They cut budgets for executive offices and conservation by more than 50%, community development by more than 20%, environmental protection by more than 30% and the historical and museum commission by more than 40% in what they presented as a "bare bones" budget. They even cut the budget for labor and industry by more than 20% overall despite the fact that unemployment in the state more than doubled.

Yet they increased welfare spending by more than 62% in the same period, even as they cut out critical oversight needed to prevent fraud. Auditor General Jack Wagner has fought to audit various aspects of welfare in PA for years now without success, all the while calling for improved oversight as well as procedural changes to prevent waste, also with no success. Pennsylvania deserves to have adults in charge, not whiny children who want to pass the buck on their failures. We also deserve leaders with enough integrity to admit when their policies fail and learn from their mistakes. The current crop of PA House Dems soundly escew both maturity and accountability in their ridiculous PR campaign against Corbett and the GOP. We can only hope that voters start holding them accountable for the misinformation campaign they're spreading and vote them all out.

Welcome to America, terrorists and drug lords!

2011-10-25T08:55:00.000-05:00

Apparently it's not enough for some people that the highest levels of our federal law enforcement is already helping criminals get guns; So now some Senators want to encourage foreign investors to make cash puchases of expensive homes in exchange for a US visa. A new immigration bill is being proposed and one facet seeks to entice foreign buyers to make cash purchases of residential real estate of at least $500,000 by giving them a visa for doing so.

This abortion of logic is a bipartisan travesty between Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Utah Republican Mike Lee. What could possibly be more enticing to criminals than large cash purchases in exchange for preferential treatment under visa and citizenship laws? And how would these cash transactions be assessed to prevent laundered money or profits from criminal enterprise from being used for the purchases? A government that can't secure our borders is hardly competent to police such transactions.

The impetus for this provision appears to be the fact that foreign real estate investments helped prevent the housing crisis from being even worse. But since the main goal of the US government is now to punish those with assets and tax them into the poorhouse, investing in our nation is hardly a tantalizing prospect for foreign investors who are free to invest in nations with more reasonable goals and tax structures. A sensible way to entice foreign investors would be tax breaks, including protection from future tax increases over the immediate future, say, 5 years. But as usual, Washington strives to hammer home the point that there's no room for sensible decisions in government.

Obama administration will advance their political agenda at any cost, even American lives

2011-10-19T10:12:00.000-05:00

It's difficult for anyone reading about Operation Fast and Furious to follow the logic of the federal government. To what end should we ever knowingly allow straw purchasers to buy high-powered weapons? The government claims that it was to build a bigger case against the ultimate end-users. In other words, they were letting the "little guys" go about their business in order to build a better case against the bigger fish. That's pretty hard to believe, considering the possible implications of this strategy. This stated strategy just doesn't make sense and often when something doesn't make sense, it's simply not true.

The operation was in direct conflict with the official DOJ policy, which is to everything possible to reduce the number of illegal guns traveling south of the border. Email trails and other documentation in this case show a disturbing trend of doing the wrong thing on every level of this operation. Those running OFF were repeatedly reminded that all actions should support the DOJ mission statement yet they purposely continued to run their operation contrary to those goals. Field agents were repeatedly ordered to stand down in situations that would normally warrant action and even threatened with repurcussions should they insist on acting responsibly. The whistleblower was summarily terminated by the ATF as the investigation into the scandal grew.

The Congressional investigation is bringing disturbing new information to light. One example shows that Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress. Holder testified in May 2011 that he had merely heard about OFF a few times in recent weeks as the investigation into OFF got underway but proof shows that he was aware of the operation and regularly briefed on it from at least June of 2010 on. The White House has also denied knowledge of this and similar operations, claiming that high-level officials in the administration were not made aware of these cases but proof shows that at least one of Obama's National Security officials, Kevin O'Reilly, had knowledge of these operations.

Exactly how much O'Reilly knew is not known at this time because as the scandal heated up, he was transferred to the State Department and as the Congressional investigation picked up speed, O'Reilly was suddenly sent to Iraq as part of his new duties and unavailable to testify. The administration should recall O'Reilly immediately for testimony to avoid any illusion of impropriety. Anything less looks like an obvious and clumsy attempt at a cover-up. That O'Reilly is still in Iraq is not only obstruction of the Congressional investigation but is also fueling speculation among conspiracy theorists that the Iraq mission may be so dangerous that O'Reilly won't survive.

What has happened to the most transparent administration in the history of the nation? For all of his campaign rhetoric about accountability and transparency, Obama hasn't improved anything on those fronts. If anything, his administration appears to be doing everything in it's power to cover-up, destroy evidence and obstruct the investigation. How else can they explain missing the Congressional deadline to turn over subpoenaed documents by a full week? The public deserves to know everything that happened, the offending parties must be punished to the full extent of the law and procedures need to be revised to ensure such a debacle never happens again. But these things can't happen so long as the investigation is hampered by all of the offending parties.

To what end did anyone support OFF and the similar operations? The stakes were high, after all. Loss of life was guaranteed and there was no reason to believe that the majority of these weapons would ever be recovered so the potential repurcussions are exponential. The only thing that makes sense is that this administration wanted to support it's spurious claims that drug cartel violence is fueled by illegal American weapons purchases. After all, Hillary Clinton and others in the Obama circle like to claim that most of the guns used by the cartels come illegally from America.

Despite the fact that this claim is easily proven to be false, the administration appears to love to insist it's a fact. The folly of these operations is easily explained by the goal of "proving" this falsehood. After all, if they can facilitate a way to allow large volume buys by known straw purchasers, then track the guns across the border to seize the cache at a later date, they could easily spin it as "proof" that they've been right all along in their assertions about illegal guns in America fueling the Mexican drug trade. No matter that the evidence would be anecdotal and based on faulty premise, all that matters is that large seizures would take place and the confiscated weapons would be easily tracked back to US dealers.

The intent to further a partisan agenda here trumped the responsibility of the government to perform it's most basic function. Rather than stopping the purchases, the government coerced gun dealers into cooperating. At least one dealer expressed concern that the firearms would be used for illegal activities, especially to bring harm to law enforcement in border areas, but was continually assured that the best course of action was to continue selling guns to criminals. Rather than arrest the purchasers and recover the weapons, the government insisted on doing nothing in the hopes that they would later recover the firearms in a manner that would allow them to grandstand.

This is a complete failure of government in every possible way. They have intentionally put guns into the hands of criminals in order to further a partisan agenda. They are obstructing the investigation on various levels. There is nothing even close to transparency from this administration, as this may actually be one of the darkest corners of our government. Additional details of the Congressional investigation will be posted soon in a follow-up, so stay tuned.

Be careful what you wish for, kids

2011-10-18T08:45:00.000-05:00

It goes without saying that the "Occupy" protestors are largely pathetic failures of personal responsibility. Even in the most fawning of media portrayals -- which are legion -- these people appear to be absolutely clueless in every possible way. There is no acknowledgement of controlling one's own destiny or taking responsibility for one's own choices. This is nothing more than a glut of people who have consciously made a series of bad decisions suddenly demanding a handout to reverse their self-inflicted bad fortune.

These are freelance artists and wanna-be filmmakers who resent their struggle to make a living "protesting" the wealth of the upper classes when in fact they have simply refused to get a job. Face it, your art sucks and it's never going to pay the bills. McDonald's is in the midst of a national hiring event and supposedly offers decent benefits. Take a shower, wash your clothes, head over to the Golden Arches and voila, you can pay rent this month. Art is a hobby for millions of Americans who find time to draw, paint, sculpt and create in their free time, you know, after work.

Nobody has a right to enjoy their dream job despite a lack of success in their chosen field. Let's face it, most things that make the world go 'round aren't anyone's passion but they are jobs that need to be performed in order for us to live in a civilized society. Nobody wants to write insurance policies, clean toilets, be a medical biller or process raw sewage but these things need to be done every day and someone has to do them. There are millions of jobs in the world that don't inspire zeal in anyone yet somehow millions of Americans perform them every day with pride then go home and write, paint, take pictures, make jewelry or perform any number of hobbies in their spare time. That's life and that's how life should be beause nothing else will keep society functioning.

Imagine for a moment that these whimsical little urchins got exactly what they wanted: a society where those who have worked to earn are forced to completely subsidize those who choose to play (as opposed to the mere partial-subsidization under which we currently operate). Those billions and even trillions don't go very far when they have to cover the cost of everything for everyone. Socialism and communism have failed in every aspect in every attempt to organize such societies and for good reason: There is never enough money to satisfy those who aren't required to earn it.

These protestors lack not only vision but also maturity and even the most basic understanding of how a society can (or can't function) with any degree of success. The Tea Party has long been excoriated in the media for protesting government spending, political pay-to-play and government waste but this new movement is being lauded for harassing private citizens with largely the same demands. All of the "problems" identified by these protests (at least the few coherent points we can garner from this mess) are rooted in our government's ineptitude, incompetence and failure of accountability.

Were these protests being held at Congress, the White House and state or local government offices natiowide, they would have a sensible purpose with intelligent goals. But as they are, it's merely a bunch of lazy, spoiled, entitled brats harassing those who have bothered to work out of spite that their own choice to merely play hasn't paid off. Support or applause for these misdirected and ignorant sentiments is pathetic, at best. These protestors are intentionally turning a blind eye to all of the very real problems in our society and creating scapegoats to avoid taking responsibility for their own choices. If they have any success with their childish and misguided mission, we will all be far worse off for it.

Auditor General not permitted to audit welfare benefits

2011-09-29T08:01:00.000-05:00

Pittsburgh's WTAE news team wanted to do an investigative report on cash welfare benefits. A sister station in Minneapolis had been assured by Minnesota state officials that the cash benefits program was well safeguarded to protect taxpayers' money but the KTSP news team found a lot of problems in the system. For instance, Minnesota claimed that EBT cards can't be used in liquor stores but KTSP found they can -- and are -- being used in liquor stores. Recipients in MN were using EBT cards for "tattoos, liquor and out-of-state vacations", according to WTAE, and using them in all 50 states plus the US Virgin Islands. Transactions from just one month (May 2010) from Pennsylvania EBT cards show that the cards are used in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. There were nearly 800 transactions in California alone in just that month.

In fact, our own Department of Public Welfare doesn't know how or where Pennsylvania recipients are using EBT cards and apparently they don't care. The DPW does not track individual expenditures on the cards so they don't know where the cards are being used. State Auditor Jack Wagner hoped to audit the records but the DPW has refused to allow the AG's office access to the information, citing privacy concerns. The DPW has denied 4 requests from the AG's office to date, over the last year. This is inexcusable in that these are public funds and the Auditor General position exists solely to oversee and improve how tax money is being spent.

The DPW lacks sufficient controls and documentation to prevent fraud and abuse. Even worse, Wagner's investigation was very basic due to DPW's refusal to cooperate still found the the "potential for fraud and abuse is high" based on the number of out-of-state transactions alone.

Wagner states the the sheer volume of out-of-state transactions in neighboring states "could indicate that recipients may be residing in other states or could be involved with inappropriate activity. In May 2010, there was 72,179 transactions worth over $4 million in New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Delaware, Ohio and West Virginia."

"The sheer volume of out-of-state transactions disclosed by our auditors demonstrates the possibility that recipients are potentially engaged in costly travel and may be residing in other states,” Wagner said."

In May 2010 alone, there were nearly 95,000 out-of-state transactions worth more than $5 million. However, Wagner is unable to determine if any of these transactions were improper because DPW will not cooperate with his office. Despite DPW's refusal to be audited by our chief financial watchdog, Wagner was still able to identify at least one case of definite fraud because a series of transactions in just one day withdrew nearly $150,000 from a single account.

Wagner states that DPW lacks the appropriate policies and procedures to prevent fraud and abuse in the system. He recommends that DPW develop policies tomonitor usage, verify recipient eligibility and ensure funds aren't being spent contrary to the intended purpose of the program. Read Wagner's press release on this topic here.

It's obvious that DPW is failing Pennsylvanians miserably as the department appears to be completely incompetent. They aren't serving the needy properly if resources are being wasted on abusers. They aren't serving taxpayers at all by neglecting to be responsible stewards of our money. By refusing to comply with the audit, DPW demonstrates complete disregard for all Pennsylvanians and prove that this department is a total failure in it's current state.

All those responsible for the management and policies in DPW should be immediately removed and replaced with capable, competent leaders who respect the citizens of this state. Citizens should contact their local representative and tell them to demand DPW submit to a comprehensive audit by the AG's office. It's fine to offer privacy protection for recipients of public welfare but privacy control should not be so stringent as to allow wanton fleecing of taxpayers with no regard for the integrity of the programs.

Democratic lawmakers grandstanding and passing the buck on education cuts

2011-09-28T13:04:00.000-05:00

School funding in Pennsylvania is an arcane property-tax based system long criticized by just about everyone. There are many repurcussions for all invloved and seem to be few, if any, good things about the system. Districts have unequal funding since property taxes are based on local millage rates. Some of the poorest, worst-performing school districts in the state share a border with some of the wealthiest and best. The students from the poor districts are stuck in failing schools despite being a stone's throw from successful ones. Taxpayers are held hostage by school board decisions and demands of unions, no matter how incompetent or unreasonable. People buy houses and pay them off, owning the home outright only to lose them to the county if they can't afford tax increases over which they have little to no control.

These aren't the only problems, nor are they new problems. But the state's current budget crisis has brought an entirely new dimension to light. After 8 years of Ed Rendell's utter incompetence as Governor, Pennsylvania has a $4 billion deficit. Rendell increased spending by about 40% over his tenure but none of that money appears to have been spent wisely. We lead the nation in bad roads and structurally deficient bridges. Our public transportation systems and schools lack dedicated funding. All we have to show for Fast Eddie's frivolous spending are crony contracts and overpaid politicians.

We've run out of money and our state is in worse shape in many areas than ever before. What passed for leadership from Rendell has been a complete failure in every sense, catapulting Pennsylvania into the bottom in many categories. Bring in Tom Corbett, barely sworn in as our new Governor, and his attempts to bring some fiscal sanity back to the Keystone state. Corbett actually increased state spending on education to the tune of $240 million. But temporary federal stimulus funds for education are no more, meaning that schools are getting $900 million less total. The Governor and the state legislature have no authority to force the federal government to hand out stimulus money to schools and did all they could by increasing education funding despite a $4 billion shortfall.

Sidebar: All school districts were well aware that the federal stimulus money was a temporary payout which would end in 2010. They only received the money for two school years, which means they knew damn well not to make any big or permanent changes that their budgets could not support after the stimulus funds were gone. They had no reason to believe these emergency programs would continue. They could easily have parceled out the windfall carefully so as to not spend it all immediately or they could have allocated the funding in ways in which it wouldn't be too sorely missed after it ended.

In addition, less than 30% of eligible Pennsylvania schools applied for federal grant money available to them for the current school year. And they are all well aware of the state's budget crisis. Yet they aren't taking any responsibility for their own fiscal mismanagement or poor planning. Instead they're laying sole blame on the Governor's administration. Corbett is being excoriated for not simply taxing an additional one billion dollars out of Pennsylvania's citizens in order to indulge the whims of school administrators and reward their bad behavior with stimulus funds.

It's lunacy, pure and simple. But just when we all assumed it couldn't get any more ridiculous, some do-nothing Democrats in the state legislature are trying to get school districts to sue Corbett for discrimination. Our arcane system of funding education primarily via property taxes means that some schools receive significantly less funding than others. The schools collecting less in property taxes depend much more heavily on the state budget's direct funding of education. Thus, poorer schools are losing more money without the federal stimulus funds than wealthier districts in more affluent areas.

Our schools certainly have some serious and immediate problems as a result -- an inequitable and questionable funding system, subpar adminstrative and leadership, and immediate funding needs, just to name a few -- but none of these are the fault of our new Governor, nor will they be solved in a courtroom. The suggestion to sue his administration reveals complete ignorance on the part of these state representatives. They clearly don't understand how our state funds education, nor do they seem to care. They are putting all taxpayers at risk of having to come up with a billion dollars that we don't have should the suit succeed (although under the circumstances, such a lawsuit would be so frivolous that seems highly unlikely). It's the lowest form of pandering on the parts of Rep. Bill Kortz and Marc Gergely.

Kortz and Gergely aren't truly concerned about education or else they would be proposing new ways to fund all schools equally. Both men are grandstanding with this hare-brained scheme to encourage school districts to sue taxpayers right into the poorhouse. It's nothing but cheap political scheming: Blame the GOP and if you say it enough times, these dumb voters will believe it, despite the fact that it's not true. Voters need to contact Kortz and Gergely to request their funding proposals. It will be interesting to see what they have to offer constituents besides cheap political shots and pandering, if they have anything else to offer.

English-only government helps immigrants, hurts no one

2011-09-28T10:37:00.000-05:00

There are more than 320 languages spoken in the US so it's surprising that most bilingual actions by our government are only conducted in Spanish. This sends an ugly message to the majority of immigrants who speak neither English nor Spanish. We're saying that we cater only to a select immigrant population and they're not in the preferred group. Immigrants who can't speak English are ostracized in our society to a great extent so our goal should be to help them learn English, not to help them avoid learning it.

State Representative Scott Perry has crafted HB 888 which calls for all government business, including printed documents, to be conducted only in English. Despite being characterized as prejudiced against immigrants, the proposed law actually benefits immigrants. Perry points out that English proficiency is a requirement of our citizenship tests. We're hardly doing them any favors by providing government materials in a foreign language when in fact they need to be able to read and write in English in order to become citizens.

Immigrants proficient in English enjoy an average income about 30% higher than those who don't learn the language. People living in America but not proficient in English face bleak financial futures with limited opportunities and low wage rates. Their earning potential is equal to that of a high-school droupout with no GED. Conducting government business in foreign languages decreases the need thus the motivation to learn English. That relegates immigrants into a subculture characterized by poverty, a lack of opportunity and being cut off from much of society.

The US Department of Labor has found that immigrants receiving the most foreign-language support learn English more slowly than immigrants who receive less language support or none at all. The DOL theorizes that the large number of Spanish-speakers in the US allows immigrants to live and work here without the need for English while other immigrant populations don't have the opportunity to live and work largely amongst native speakers. Conducting government business in Spanish may actually go a long way toward creating a group of second-class citizens cut off from much of American life. That's not in anyone's best interests and it hurts us all.

Safety is also a consideration. So long as government business is not English-only, people who can't read or write in English can have driver's licenses, including CDL's. They can't reasonably be expected to read signs, construction limitations or safety requirements yet we allow them to drive tractor trailers. If they can't speak, read or write English, how do they get insurance and keep it up to date? How can they safely navigate our roads or obey the laws? In a country where nearly 100 die each day in motor vehicle accidents, allowing people with little or no proficiency in English to have a driver's license, especially a commercial one, should be criminal.

Those who say English-only government is discriminatory are ignoring the facts. Our current system is discriminatory in that it relegates Spanish speakers to a subclass in our society, potentially doing them great harm with little, if any, good.

'Green' also means other people's money

2011-09-23T09:38:00.000-05:00

FEMA may run out of money in less than a week but Democrats can't live with cuts to questionable 'green' initiatives even in the midst of the Solyndra scandal. That about sums up the priorities and incompetence of Congress. There's an immediate need to more than $1 billion in disaster aid and that money has to come from somewhere. The GOP crafted what they characterize as a bill with bipartisan appeal that would divert more than $1.5 billion in loan monies slated for 'greener' vehicles to disaster aid. Democrats refuse to divert the money and voted down the bill, leaving many Americans in limbo.

What the Democrats don't seem to understand is that our supply of money is finite. If we have to pay for something important right now, the money has to come from somewhere and the government loan program for automakers is a fine choice. Higher fuel efficiency is not an equal priority to helping people recover from a natural disaster. This begs the question: How many union jobs are tied to this loan fund? Union jobs are the obvious impetus because what else would put loans for R&D at private companies (who are generally making money hand-over-fist) ahead of Americans devestated by a natural disaster except big-money campaign donations to the Democratic party?

The Democratic opposition is wholly political in that it refuses to prioritize needs in our country. While some GOP members also voted against the bill because they felt the off-setting cuts weren't deep enough, only 6 Democrats voted in favor. It's hard to give the GOP naysayers hell here because the off-setting cuts are in fact insufficient. There are plenty of frivilous funding examples that should be cut anyway but especially right now in the midst of our record debt and deficit and even moreso due to the shortage of disaster funding. But unlike the GOP opposition to this bill, which has a reasonable opposition in light of the current financial situation, Democratic opposition is not just politicial but completely self-serving. It's a blatant statement to the nation that political power is the party's only concern: Getting elected, getting re-elected and continuing to advance an agenda that fails America even in the face of widespread disapproval from citizens.

In the midst of the Solyndra scandal, many of the Democratic party's 'green' initiatives should be scaled back or put on hold entirely as this adminstration's utter incompetence has been bared for all to see. That the deal was bad for taxpayers is evident from the very beginning. That the company didn't meet the standards to receive the loan seems to have been evident to everyone involved throughout the process, all the way up the chain of command. The White House closely monitored the entire process and can't play dumb on this one as they have tried (quite unsuccessfully) with other recent failures of enormous proprtions, like Operation Fast and Furious. From rushing the approval so that Biden could grandstand for the cameras to the restructured agreement giving private investors precedence ahead of the DOE to recoup money in the event of Solyndra's collapse, everything about this is obviously saturated with cronyism and political payback.

Those ignorant on global warming aren't who you expect

2011-09-16T12:18:00.000-05:00

Society treats people who question man-made global warming pretty much as conspiracy theorists deserving of tinfoil hats. Any doubts about climate change are equivocated with utter insanity including but not limited to: eschewing science, hating nature and the environment, being a right-wing nutjob, extraordinary ignorence and intentionally ignoring basic scientific facts. The vast majority of Americans appear to be grossly ignorant of this topic entirely, but not because they question the edicts. Rather, the least informed on this matter are often those who wholly accept the popular myths.

Most of what we read and hear from popular media on global warming is presented as fact and ignores significant criticism from the scientific community. Those who just accept what they read in the local paper or see on the national news are likely to believe that if human behavior doesn't change drastically, we will soon kill our planet. And those who do research the topic for themselves have to put considerable effort into locating credible sources, as objective sources aren't easily found. An internet search of 'scientific dissent on global warming' generates lots of blogs and popular conservative sites, regardless of search engine. This allows global warming disciples to pretend that dissent is meritless because they can point to anectdotal examples like opinion pieces and simply deride them as ignorant.

More importantly, it makes it difficult for people to educate themselves on the issue and helps misinformation to flourish. People who accept global warming edicts from Al Gore and the UN like to claim that there is no scientific dissent on this issue, that the scientific community is in agreement with their pronouncements and has the data to back up these claims but that's grossly inaccurate. There is generally a scientific consensus on climate change but the anthropogenic effects are hotly contested. Popular opinion seems to be that we must drastically overhaul our way of life in order to prevent irreversible damage to the environment when in fact anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is questionable, at best. It's also important to note that science is not a consensus but rather a process of exploration and investigation to establish truth. It's simply not enough that they believe in it; They must be able to present sufficient supporting data sufficient to justify their position because that's what science requires. It's not a matter of opinion or personal belief.

There are theories and data that support AGW and then there are equally compelling theories and data that show the effects of AGW to be negligable. Computer models on the subject differ greatly and have long been suspect in accuracy. Solar activity plays a big part in earth's temperature and weather patterns. We can't ignore the fact that the planet has always displayed cyclical warming and cooling patterns, including drastic shifts in weather. There is a lot of documentation disputing AGW as a major concern yet the average person appears to be believe that our way of life is going to destroy life as we know it unless we institute drastic measures at exhorbitant costs to completely overhaul every aspect of life on this planet.

Professionals from all walks of life who fail to embrace the populist assumptions of AGW are dismissed as unqualified simply because they're not climate scientists but the sciences are not exclusive fields lacking connection to one another. We would not dismiss a physicist's opinion on an issue in a chemistry lab simply because it comes from a physicist and not a chemist. We wouldn't ignore a physician who comments on matters of biology, nor condemn an engineer for offering data relevant to a matter of botany. Yet the climate debate is closed to the entire scientific community outside of the world's climate scientists if and when these otherwise learned professionals offer a dissenting observation.

Criticisms from medical, veterinary, physics, engineering and science professionals are derided yet all layman are embraced by the AGW community so long as they accept the mantra without question. Look no further than Nobel Prize winner Al Gore, who couldn't handle undergrad math and science classes at Harvard and never finished graduate school. Or Charless Monnett, the wildlife biologist and whale researcher who "determined" that AGW is killing bears. Or any liberal Hollywood celebrity. Or many media personalities who choose to eschew objectivity in their reporting.

All fields of science are complex and overlapping, taking cues and making discoveries based on interdisciplinary works yet climate science is shutting out all other disciplines while embracing layman, politicians and special interests -- many of whom stand poised to profit handsomely from it, including Al Gore. There is compelling evidence to suggest that the effects of AGW are being overstated and exploited -- and legitimate criticisms are being silenced -- for political and financial gain. We must stop passing out tinfoil hats instead perform our due diligence to educate ourselves on the facts of the issue instead of subscribing to the popular quasi-information being fed to us all.

Government shouldn't be exempt from accountability

2011-09-15T10:07:00.000-05:00

A newly sworn in President Obama made a point about executive salaries back in 2009. He said:

"We don't disparage wealth . . . But what gets people upset -- and rightfully so -- are executives being rewarded for failure."

Unveiling a plan to cap executive compensation for companies receiving federal bailouts, Obama had some choice words regarding banking execs who received lavish bonuses from institutions receiving billions of our tax dollars:

"(Such behavior) is exactly the kind of disregard for the costs and consequences of their actions that brought about this crisis: a culture of narrow self-interest and short-term gain at the expense of everything else,"

Regardless of where a person stands on this issue, we must all question why such edicts apply only to the private sector. Obama's sentiments are just as applicable to our elected officials, none of whom have seen a decrease in compensation during America's economic crisis despite their obvious culpability for our exponentially increasing debt and deficit. Why aren't members of Congress conributing towards their own healthcare and pensions? Why haven't they taken a salary cut, reduced staff, found ways to reduce expenses across the board? Why hasn't his administration reduced expenses for staffing, travel and other non-essential perks?

City evacuation plan missing in action

2011-09-15T08:55:00.000-05:00

The Tribune Review recently reported that Pittsburgh officials received a $580,000 grant from Homeland Security in 2007. The money was paid to Michael Baker Corporation to plan a mass evacuation of downtown Pittsburgh in the wake of 9/11, yet here we are in 2011 and there's still no plan. A draft was issued to the city about 8 months ago but little further information is available as the city sits in limbo. Comparatively, the city of Philadelphia started drafting a plan covering evacuation of the entire city in April 2007 and was able to implement it in April of 2008. Why does our city seem to continuously fall short of meeting it's responsibilities to citizens?

Philly's plan was in response to a 2006 report which identified gaps in the area's emergency preparedness system. Pittsburgh's impetus was the gridlock and mass confusion following the evacuation of downtown while flight 93 was still in the air in 2001.

Philadelphia: Less than 2 years from identifying need to putting a system in place
Pittsburgh: Ten years and counting, from time need was identified and still no system

Philadelphia has approximately 5 times the population of Pittsburgh and more than twice the land area of our city. That makes their plan somewhat more complex in that it must: cover more area; move more people; requires greater resources to design and implement; and must account for more contingencies than plans covering smaller, less populous areas.

Philadelphia: about 1.5 million people over 135 square miles
Pittsburgh: just over 300,000 people in an area roughly 55 square miles

One of the most disturbing differences between the two plans is that Philadelphia's covers the entire city while Pittsburgh's plan will only adress evacuation of the downtown area. City government maintains that we do have an evacuation plan but in reality the plan addresses only when to evacuate buildings, not how to facilitate an evacuation.

Other cities large and small have detailed plans in place yet this is not a priority for our city leaders despite the fact that Pittsburgh has been the target of a few of the plots foiled since 9/11. Aspects of most plans include things like designated routes for pedestrian, public transit and vehicle traffic to prevent gridlock and improve safety as well as special provisions for the most at-risk of the population, such as how to evacuate hospitals, move the disabled and assist the elderly. Our plan is to stay inside unless city officials tell you to leave but once they do, then you're on your own.

Pittsburgh has already been targeted by terrorists and had a fairly close call with flight 93. Although it's highly unlikely that warfare will ever take place in our streets, natural and man-made disasters are a very real threat and much more likely to occur. A detailed emergency plan needs to be in place and there's no excuse for putting it off any longer.

PWSA incompetence reaches extraordinary levels

2011-09-12T10:48:00.000-05:00

A recent audit of the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority has found that much of the administrative work is subcontracted to outside agencies at a far higher price than the cost to handle such tasks in-house. Among other services contracted at a premium without accountability, PWSA pays somebody to handle their capital-planning budget. The company doing so has been handling this monthly task for more than 6 years without a contract. Have any of those monthly budgets ever included a line-item showing money that would be saved by PWSA doing it's own work? That's unlikely because a subcontractor can hardly be expected to recommend it's own termination, especially when the customer is a lucrative cash-cow that eschews contracts or any of the price-controls that are supposed to be used in such government work.

Politicians should reimburse taxpayers for crimes

2011-09-12T09:18:00.000-05:00

State Senator Jane Orie's defense of allegations from the Allegheny County DA's office have cost taxpayers over $1 million so far. Taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill for her defense if she's found guilty or for any other politicians guilty of a crime (ahem, Perzel, Veon and all the rest). The law allows tax money to be used to defend allegations against our elected officials but the gravy train runs out when charges are filed. That's fair, so long as investigations are handled professionally and aren't politically-motivated fishing expeditions financed by tax dollars.

But the money spent prior to the filing of charges is not recouped after guilt has been admitted or determined by the courts. That's yet another crime against taxpayers. Once convicted, they should be forced to pay restitution in the amount that they stole plus anything paid on their behalf for defense.

Taxpayers are on the hook for more than $12 million in Bonusgate legal costs, not including the cost of the investigation or prosecution. The various defendents in that case should be required to repay the whole $12 million plus, as well as the $10-plus million they illegally spent on themselves for which they were prosecuted, yet we've haven't seen any big restitution verdicts as part of the sentencing thus far. It's rare for courts to order politicians convicted of crimes to ever make the taxpayers whole again.

These criminals have little accountability to the residents for their embezzlement so it's likely that the lax penalties encourage such crimes. Making restitution a top priority might help prevent future crimes and any money recouped would be an improvement from the current status quo. Many politicians don't take their responsibility to taxpayers seriously, as evidenced by their embezzlement itself but perhaps they'd be less likely to blatantly steal our money if there was some chance they'd have to pay it back.

Arguments against school vouchers don't make sense

2011-09-07T10:43:00.000-05:00

Debate is raging in Pennsylvania over whether or not we should allow school vouchers. There are good arguments for vouchers, most importantly that they get students out of failing schools. Public schools, as a virtual monopoly, have little incentive to improve. After all, they still receive tax dollars no matter how many children in their districts attend private schools. This means school districts are receiving the same or even increased funding via property taxes even as enrollment drops. The competition angle is important because it means that schools will be forced to improve in order to attract more students.

Currently, many parents pay twice, once through taxes to fund public schools and again as tuition to their kid's school, if they can afford to do so. If they can't afford tuition or acquire scholarships, their children are stuck with a substandard education. Critics contend that if parents don't like a school district they should move. That seems like an undue hardship for most people and it's a surprising attitude from the liberal crowd indeed. These people claim that a $24 state-issued ID card every 4 years is an undue hardship for voters but they expect parents to uproot their families from the communities they love when the schools aren't good enough. That's ludicrous. People have roots in their communities, churches, family and friends, homes they love; They shouldn't have to walk away from all of those things and more simply to receive an adequate public education.

Americans shouldn't have to shoulder myriad expenses simply so their children can learn. Just consider the many effects: Longer commutes to work, family, religious services, preferred grocery stores and friends; Unnecessary closing costs or rent deposits on new housing; Moving expenses and other details to numerous to mention. Moving is a complete upheaval of your entire life. We pay a hefty premium in property taxes here in Pennsylvania and deserve decent schools for the money we spend. The system should work for us, not the other way around. It's never acceptable for our lives to revolve around what's convenient or preferred for the government-run system we are funding. The argument that we should bend to the system instead of being served by it is dangerously ignorant.

Voucher opponents are also ignoring the many benefits to communities from school choice. It will not only help people stay in their neighborhoods and be a more cohesive community but it also helps communities thrive. Private schools benefit the entire community, not just their own students. They perform community service, pick up litter, plant flowers, paint storefronts, hold clothing and food drives and many other helpful services. More students means more hands to work and more families to donate goods. Many schools or their affiliated religious institutions offer daycare, before- and after-school programs, activities, groups to join and sports. More students means more money to sponsor activities. Those little church festivals and school carnivals bring outsiders into the community who spend money. People put quarters into parking meters, visit local restaurants, buy gas and shop in an area they normally wouldn't have traveled to but for attending a scout meeting, dance recital or little league game. Depriving parents of school choice doesn't end with children receiving substandard educations. It also keeps communities depressed.

Another popular argument against vouchers is that it's tax money funding private organizations. This argument is invalid because tax money funds all types of private organizations both directly and indirectly. Tax breaks and incentives to businesses, including oh-so-popular "green" initiatives, is one very obvious means of such funding. But another one that voucher critics never acknowledge is that our state and local governments outsource most things. Lots of our local and state tax dollars go to private companies, as government is mostly bureaucratic and has little true productivity. Tax money is used to pay private contractors to design, build and maintain our infrastructure; It's used to pay private doctors, nurses and hospitals to treat people on Medicaid; It's used to pay consultants to make decisions on whether or not we should change parking rates, revise our public transportation system or create a storwater authority.

Tax money funds critical miltary supplies to protect our soldiers, all made by private firms. It funds private practice social workers, home health workers, psychologists and others in the human services field. It's also handed out in grants to private organizations that help children, the elderly, victims of abuse, people with mental and physical disabilities and for employment incentives with private companies. This is done because government has found it more expedient and efficient to contract with professionals in a given field than to employ such professionals. Education can not reasonably be held to a different standard than treating our ill, building our bridges, caring for our disabled or any other service coordinated by our bureaucrats.

If a person opposes school vouchers than they must also oppose every other aspect of outsourcing in our government. If private schools are too biased, too exclusive, not accountable enough to teach our children, then private contractors and medical professionals can't reasonably be up to the required standards of building our roads or caring for our sick. If private schools can't be trusted to educate our kids then we can't give private employers incentives for hiring displaced workers or making environmentally-focused changes. We utilize the private sector in every aspect of our government except education.

Public schools will see a decrease in funding but will have less students to educate. Very few of their costs are fixed, generally just electricity and heat. Most costs are tied to number of students so fewer students means they don't need as many books and supplies, fewer lunches to prepare and serve, lower water bills, fewer teachers and administrative personnel. Increasing funding to poor-performing schools has not led to improvements so decreasing funding won't hurt the schools; If there were a correlation between dollars spent and performance, we wouldn't be having this debate because our public schools would all be stellar. There is no rational or logical reason to continue holding students hostage to failing schools.

The arguments against voter ID are irrational

2011-09-02T09:19:00.000-05:00

Opponents of voter ID requirements like to cite disenfrachisement as their main concern but there's no evidence that such laws disenfranchise anyone except people trying to commit fraud. Plaintiffs in anti-ID cases in both Indiana and Georgia could not produce a single registered voter who would be unable to vote because of the new laws. The population of the two states combined exceeds 10.5 million yet opponents, including the Georgia NAACP, could not find a single person who would be adversely affected by the new voting requirements.

Further, this alleged disenfrachisement is generally accepted as a conservative ploy to suppress the will of vulnerable groups in our society but in reality, minority votes have significantly increased in states with strict voter ID laws. The increase may be attributed to more confidence in the voting system. Or perhaps minorities, concerned by the liberal buzz that "the man" is trying to prevent them from voting, are mobilized en masse to make sure they vote. Maybe there is some other reason altogether but the bottom line is that minorities are voting in record numbers in states with strict voter ID requirements, for whatever reason. Do we really care why? Probably not. The important thing is that more Americans are exercising their right to vote, which is always a good thing, and that those votes can be validated as honest and authentic thanks to the new laws in those states.

Critics also like to claim that such laws are unnecessary because fraud rarely ever happens. They cite a lack of proven cases as evidence that no problem exists but in reality, we don't know how much fraud is happening because there's no way to prevent or identify most instances under our current system. Since we're simply taking everyone at their word that they are who they claim to be and are only casting one ballot, there's absolutely no way to know if votes are valid or fraudulent. Only by instituting a voter ID requirement will we ever be able to identify fraudulent votes.

Think of it this way: a patient goes to the doctor for a physical and the doctor pronounces him as healthy without doing any exam simply because the patient looks healthy. Had the physician performed a few simple tests, she would have seen that the patient has diabetes, cancer or heart disease. Voter ID is a simple test -- and the only way -- to detect debilitating disease in our voting system. Without it, we have no way to know it's happening thus no way to quantify it. The patient is sick whether he receives the test or not, the only variable is whether or not he knows he is sick. Likewise, our voting system may be diseased but we can't assess it's health (i.e., integrity) without running a simple test.

The current system is rife with opportunities for fraud but whether or not it's happening, we can't know. There is no logical or rational argument against voter ID requirements. There is no downside to safeguarding this critical American freedom. In addition to no downside, the positive results of strict voter ID laws have been significant and instantaneous. It's a win-win for all Americans and the only ones left out in the cold will be the frauds and those being electing by fraudulent votes.

Geez, come up with your own ideas!

2011-09-01T09:22:00.001-05:00

Clearly someone over at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is reading my blog. How about a little credit, Rob? But seriously, the cartoon is great and epitomizes exactly what we're all thinking about our boy Mayor. Love the Carmen Sandiego touch too!

The dirty tangled web of local politics

2011-08-31T11:05:00.025-05:00

The Orie case is a demonstration of local politics at their worst in every possible way. State Senator Jane Orie was tried on charges of using state offices and staffers for campaign work back in February. At the time, the defense presented seemed somewhat compelling and many spectators would not have been surprised at an acquittal. This also would have lent credence to Governor Corbett’s decision as then-Attorney General to not pursue the Orie matter, as opposed to the murmurs of Corbett turning a blind eye to the possible criminality of the politically connected Orie family. Jane Orie once worked under Corbett in the AG’s office and her brother was employed there at the time the DA's office charged her while the AG's office did not.

Just when an end was in sight, the case screeched to a mistrial with County Judge Jeffrey Manning exploding on the bench to declare that defense documents were obviously forged. The case is rife with questions about professional conduct on all sides. The entire matter offers a disturbing snapshot of the grossly incestuous state of local politics.

Should Orie resign?

2011-08-31T09:51:00.004-05:00

State Senator Jane Orie has long been a force to be reckoned with in Harrisburg but her voice has been noticeably muted throughout the ongoing scandal. She seems to have faded from the forefront of state and local matters entirely. It’s fair to say she’s simply chosen to maintain a lower profile while working just as hard as ever for her constituents, but we can’t ignore the possibility that her personal concerns are impacting her ability to fulfill her duties.

She hasn’t been found guilty of any wrongdoing, yet the Allegheny County District Attorney’s office is offering a varied array of serious charges against her. Orie shouldn’t be condemned based on allegations, but the hoopla surrounding the case seems sufficient to impact her work. Regardless of the eventual outcome of the cases against her, Orie needs to prove to the public that she is in a position to continue in her current capacity without question. Her office needs to show us that her attendance is still good, that she’s introducing relevant legislation and still working hard for our state. If they can’t do so, then she needs to step aside and relegate the responsibilities of her office to someone who can give it the attention it deserves.

There is a question of whether the charges are warranted or merely a political vendetta. Voters will have to wait for the rest of the evidence to be presented and decide for ourselves if she is guilty, victimized by a political machine or perhaps a little of both. Until then, Orie needs to show constituents that her personal problems aren’t impacting her job performance and if she is unable to do so, should resign so that constituents can be properly represented.

Perzel singing like a canary?

2011-08-30T14:42:00.002-05:00

Former PA House Speaker John Perzel has steadfastly maintained his innocence throughout the Bonusgate investigation despite being branded by the Attorney General's office as the architect of a scheme that bilked taxpayers out of more than $10 million. Facing more than 80 charges, many of them felony counts, Perzel seems poised to enter a plea which would be a complete about face. As recently as a few weeks ago, Perzel boasted that he's confident he will be acqitted on all counts when the facts come to light. Less than 2 weeks ago, Perzel told the Philadelphia Daily News that he's not considering a plea deal, despite the fact that 3 of his co-defendents had already accepted pleas.

He appears to have changed his tune, as it's widely reported that Perzel will plead guilty to public corruption charges tomorrow. This guy is alleged to have been the mastermind so it's not surprising that he's going to plead in light of other defendents cooperating with prosecutors. It's one thing to insist you're innocent of allegations but trying to convince a jury after a bunch of folks working under you have already admitted guilt is quite the uphill battle. Let's just hope the AG's office hasn't offered a deal that allows Perzel to continue bilking taxpayers via a pension.

Taxpayers may get some justice yet but it can only come with a stiff prison sentence and full restitution, including damages. After all $10 M would have collected a lot of interest over the past 5+ years. At least Perzel is saving us the expense of a trial so for that I say, thanks for finally doing something right for your state just this once.

Where's Luke?

2011-08-29T15:06:00.000-05:00

City residents are playing hide-and-go-seek with Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, who is noticeably absent from various important events. The latest in a long line of glaring absences was Raventahl's failure to show up on Washington Boulevard after flash flooding killed four people during the evening rush hour on August 19. Ravenstahl defended his decision to stay away by claiming he "didn't want to appear to be a political opportunist" but that's a pretty flimsy excuse. Doing one's job is hardly frowned upon as exploitation, even in the realm of politics, and mayors are expected to be present for important events, be they planned or impromptu. Obviously the mayor can't be at every event taking place in the city but it's ridiculous to pretend that he simply can't be available for events that change the face of Pittsburgh. Yes we understand that he himself can't do every job and we're not asking him to dig ditches or inflate lifeboats; We'd simply like our mayor to be a little more involved than tweeting and phoning in his concern for the city he's supposed to run.

He has such a Where's Waldo? reputation that the Post-Gazette has compiled a handy timeline to help residents keep track of his presence during mementous events in 'Burgh history. Ravenstahl says he can't be everywhere and characterizes critics as having "no comprehension of the facts or more likely a political ax to grind". Wow, someone sure can't handle constructive criticism, which isn't helping to dispel his image as the inept boy-mayor.

Ravenstahl has suggested that the demands of parenting sometimes make him unavailable but again, this is a flimsy excuse. If mayoring is too difficult to work into your parenting schedule then it's time to resign and find a regular 9-to-5 like the rest of us schmucks who have to balance work and family. We've all got to put our families first in some situations but not many of us are able to consistently permitted to skip the most important events at work and still have a job, regardless of the excuse. And for a guy who's concerned about being labeled an opportunist, playing the dad card is a pretty bad move considering that the majority of his absences have nothing to do with his family. Some of his highest-profile gaffes are attributed to to taking in a BoSox game, partying to celebrate his 30th birthday, taking a personal vacation during the city budget crisis and traveling with billionaires for personal pleasure instead of attending major city events. None of those trips are getting him closer to a 'world's best dad' mug so using his son as an excuse just makes him appear shallow and insincere.

The Mayor has an active social life and wants to be a hands-on family man. Nobody begrudges him that in any way. All residents are asking for is for Ravenstahl to display a little common sense in his priorities. If he isn't capable of prioritizing properly then he has no business being in the Mayor's office.

WTF Fridays

2011-08-26T13:20:00.000-05:00

Introducing "WTF Fridays", a run-down of some of the weeks most ridiculous news stories.

Gadhafi's collection of Condi photos - Which is creepier, the photo collection or the quote in the article telling us why this shouldn't come as a surprise?

Vengeful pooping - Does breaking into someone's house and pooping on their stuff really make you feel better about the break-up? Or is there just more rage now that you've been arrested?

PLCB being sued - Another shining example of competence from a bloated government regulatory body.

Obama's Justice Department doing it's best to move as many jobs overseas as possible

2011-08-26T12:59:00.000-05:00

The DOJ is working hard to get as many manufacturing jobs out of America as possible. They raided Gibson Guitars for the second time in 2 years, seizing material alleged to be illegal under foreign laws without filing any charges. If a company is breaking any law, even a foreign one, it's safe to say we have the appropriate regulations in place to charge them somewhere in the myriad trade laws, import laws, business code and criminal code in this country so why no charges against Gibson? Without charges, the feds are just stealing inventory and stopping production for no apparent reason except to enjoy throwing their weight around.

Gibson maintains that they have all of the appropriate documentation to prove the purchase was legal and furthermore that the DOJ is misinterpreting the foreign law in question. Why isn't this headline news? Federal seizures stopping are a big deal, yet this is hardly mentioned. It's an even bigger deal if the DOJ may be misinterpreting the law. Stay tuned for updates as the story unfolds.

Enablers, maybe. Equally responsible, not even close.

2011-08-26T12:54:00.000-05:00

Mexican President Felipe Calderon is blaming America for the lawlessness and domestic terrorism in his country. Rather than take responsibility for his nation's utter failure to stem crime, he always finds a host of reasons to blame the USA for Mexico's problems. Calderon has insisted that Mexico can't stop crime because of the American guns that move freely south of the border and is now pointing his finger at American's "insatiable" appetite for drugs as the reason for Mexican terrorism.

Obviously it hasn't occurred to Calderon that Americans are largely addicted to drugs because Mexican cartels flood our country with them. Sure the law of supply & demand comes into play here to some extent so yes, the market for drugs does encourage the distribution of drugs. However, people can't get addicted to drugs when they're in short supply, tough to find and expensive to buy. But when we have cartel mules waltzing across our border completely uninhibited with large quantities of cheap drugs, then yeah, more people try them thus more people get addicted.

Stop blaming America for Mexico's complete incompetence in pulling their people out of poverty and violence. And start taking some responsiblity for the problems Mexican government incompetence is causing in other countries, especially America.

UPMC hypocrisy can't be justified

2011-08-26T10:40:00.000-05:00

Western Pennsylvania has been watching the unfolding melodrama between UPMC and Highmark for months now and the sides seem to be further apart than ever. There's no end to media coverage of the war between the two, including countless letters to the editor bemoaning the greed of both agencies and the absolute disregard for patients and providers alike. Yet Highmark isn't doing anything wrong. They continue to attempt to negotiate with the unbending atrocity that is UPMC but without success. Consumers are being bombarded with scare tactics, including advertising campaigns from both organizations. Perhaps worst of all, we're subject to whiny self-righteous op-ed pieces by UPMC executives who, despite their education and credentials, appear to be quite ignorant on various fronts, not the least of which is the basic matter of how to do business. UPMC has no ground to stand on in this matter because their entire argument is nothing but hypocritical whining and excuses that don't hold up against facts.