$160,000 Per Stimulus Job? White House Calls That 'Calculator Abuse'

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/10/160000-per-stimulus-job-white-house-calls-that-calculator-abuse.html

$160,000 Per Stimulus Job? White House Calls That 'Calculator Abuse'

October 30, 2009 7:12 PM
Print
RSS
E-mail
Share this blog entry with friends
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
StumbleUpon
More

Posting its results late this afternoon at Recovery.gov, the White
House claimed 640,329 jobs have been created or saved because of the
$159 billion in stimulus funds allocated as of Sept. 30.

Officials acknowledged the numbers were not exact, saying that states
and localities that reported the numbers have made mistakes.

In recent days, the Recovery Act board has been reviewing all the
numbers, with many inaccurate ones having been posted. California's
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission received $5 million in stimulus
funds to hire workers to build addition train track for the Union
Pacific Railroad in an economically tarnished spot of the Golden
State.

Brian Schmidt, director of planning and programming for the commission
said that his staff originally reported to the Obama administration
that the stimulus money saved 250 jobs. Then, realizing they had
mistakenly double credited, they later changed that to 125 jobs.
Tuesday, they updated it again to 74 jobs.

Ed DeSeve, senior advisor to the president for Recovery Act
implementation, said he'd been "scrubbing" the job estimates so much
since they came it at the beginning of the month that he now has
"dishpan hands and my fingers are worn to the nub."

White House officials heralded the unparalleled transparency in
reporting job numbers to the public, but acknowledged there is no
consistent standard across states or localities, or among federal
agencies giving out stimulus funds, in differentiating between a
"saved" job and a "created" job.

The White House argues that the actual job number is actually larger
than 640,000 -- closer to 1 million jobs when one factors in stimulus
jobs added in October and, more importantly, jobs created indirectly,
such as "the waitress who's still on the job," Vice President Biden
said today.

So let's see. Assuming their number is right -- 160 billion divided by
1 million. Does that mean the stimulus costs taxpayers $160,000 per
job?

Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic advisor to the
vice president, called that "calculator abuse."

He said the cost per job was actually $92,000 -- but acknowledged that
estimate is for the whole stimulus package as of the end of 2010.

Vice President Biden heralded news this week of gross domestic product
growth in the 3rd quarter of 3.5 percent, saying "the economic
forecasters have attributed ... the vast bulk of this growth to the
Economic Recovery Act -- the much-maligned and battered Economic
Recovery Act. Put another way, without the Economic Recovery Act,
it's very unlikely this economy would have expanded at all this last
quarter. It may have even contracted."

DeSeve and Bernstein were not able to say how many of the 640,329 jobs
were saved and how many were created. How do they know that government
officials asking for stimulus funds to help prevent layoffs were
legitimate?

"What we have to do is expect that our public officials are honest,"
DeSeve said. "I know that's a high bar."

Joining Biden at an event in which reporters were not permitted to ask
questions, California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the
money California has received "has created or saved 62,000 teachers'
jobs; but not only teachers' jobs. Those are for administrators and
professors. So there's again people that said, 'Well, we would have
done something about that, anyway.' No, those teachers would have
been gone if it wouldn't have been for the federal stimulus money. I
just wanted to make sure you understand that."

Of the 640,329 jobs cited today, White House officials said 80,000
were in the construction sector and more than half -- 325,000 -- were
education jobs, despite President Obama's claim in January that 90
percent of the stimulus jobs would be in the private sector. Bernstein
said Mr. Obama's pledge was an assessment of the totality of the jobs
saved or created by the end of 2010.

Officials pointed out that today's report did not include jobs saved
or created by more than $80 billion in tax cuts, as well as other
money in the $787 billion stimulus package, such as $250 stimulus
checks for 54 million Americans.

Copy of Pelosi Health Care Bill Available Here

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2009/10/copy-of-pelosi-health-care-bill.html

An eleven page summary is here.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_hcr_complete_summary.html

A 61 page summary of the different section heading is here.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_hcr_section_by_section.html

You can download a copy of the legislation here. This is one long
piece of legislation.
http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

Utah 912 and Utah Tea Party Rally

http://www.meetup.com/utahcounty/calendar/11637213/?a=cv1c_grp&rv=cv1c

UTAH 912 and UTAH TEA PARTY RALLY!

WE WILL SHOW YOU HOW YOU CAN REPRESENT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS A DELEGATE
AND VOTE IN THE UTAH STATE AND COUNTY CONVENTIONS! NOW YOU CAN FINALLY
MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

When: Saturday, 14 November 2009
Time: 10:00 a.m. to Noon
Where: Utah State Capitol (Inside in the Rotunda)
What: Neighborhood Call to Action! Exciting speakers! ***Delegate Training***

Come listen to keynote speaker Congressman Jason Chaffetz discuss the
conservative principles that helped him win the election and how YOU
too can REALLY make a difference.

We have organized 8 Tea Parties and 912 rallies here in Utah this past
year--thousands have attended. THANK YOU! We organized Utah's First
Tea Party on March 6, 2009 at the Utah State Capitol--long before Tea
Parties were popular nationwide (see attached photo). We organized the
first 912 rallies on March 13, 2009 around the State where we were
challenged to make our voices be heard! The Utah Tea Parties, 912ers,
and others have now joined forces to improve our government. This CALL
TO ACTION event is NOT A CAMPAIGN RALLY.

After each of our protests and rallies, everyone keeps asking, "What's
next? How can I make a REAL difference?" Now its time to take it to
the next level--it it time for ACTION! Come to the rally and we will
show you how the political system in Utah works. You will learn how
you can become part of a delegation with real power.

Did you know?

* The secret to making local and national political change is with YOU
AND YOUR NEIGHBORS.
* Utah has a unique situation which gives us an enormous
opportunity--we have a DELEGATE system with DIRECT and MAJOR impact on
Utah Elections.
* Delegates represent their neighborhood precinct in the State and
County Conventions by voting for party candidates BEFORE the primary.
* If a candidate wins 60% of the delegate votes at the convention they
become the party nominee and there is NO PRIMARY election--the winner
immediately advances to the general election! This delegate process
levels the playing field for anyone who wants to run for office.

Utah and America needs YOU to come and learn how YOU can really make a
difference to elect freedom-loving candidates to Utah's political
offices and to drive national policy. Speakers will discuss the issues
that are keeping each of us up at night--fiscal irresponsibility,
overreaching government, federal control of Utah's Education Trust
Fund Lands and energy resources, and government corruption. More
importantly, we will discuss the SOLUTION. We can not stress to you
how important it is for you to attend and BRING A FRIEND! If we all
work together, we can start changing our nation--one neighborhood at a
time. Yes, YOU can make a difference!

More details coming soon! See you there!

Event Contact: [masked]
David Kirkham

Event Coordinators:
David Kirkham, Utah Tea Party
Susan Southwick, Utah Tea Party
Brian Halladay, Utah County 912
Becky Pirente, Utah County 912
Jeff Moore, Davis County 912
Darcy Van Orden, Davis County 912
Michele LeMmon, Davis County 912
Larry Jensen, Salt Lake County 912
Kim Coleman, Salt Lake County 912
Tom Burton, Summit County 912
Jeff Marsh, Weber County 912

Harry Reid: A Mormon in the middle

http://www.sltrib.com/News/ci_13629152

Washington » Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid keeps a copy of the
Book of Mormon in his office just off the chamber floor. There's a
second copy handy to give away to someone in need of spiritual
guidance.

"I've had more than that," says the Nevada Democrat, pulling the extra
edition from his desk drawer. "I have one left."

The Temple-recommend-carrying Reid is very active in his church, say
fellow members in the Washington area. But that may come as a shock to
some Mormon critics who contend that the Senate leader's political
stands put him at odds with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints.

The latest round of religiously charged criticism came after Reid told
gay rights groups in a private meeting that the LDS Church's efforts
to back the anti-gay marriage Proposition 8 in California was a waste
of resources and hurt the faith's missionary efforts.

Utah Republican Party Chairman Dave Hansen posted a news story on that
subject on his Facebook page, prompting several conservatives to
challenge Reid's Mormon credentials.

Conservative activist and Utah blogger Holly Richardson said she found
Reid's comments disconcerting and doesn't see how Reid's far left
political beliefs can align with the LDS Church.

"I just don't get how his politics translate to somebody who has LDS
beliefs," Richardson says. "He's an embarrassment to me as a Mormon."

Reid, who in
Advertisement
2007 became the highest ranking elected Mormon in the church's
history, says he's faced this for years. And he's not offended.

"I think some of the most unChristian-like letters, phone calls,
contacts I've had were from members of the [LDS] church, saying some
of the most mean things that are not in the realm of our church
doctrine or certainly Christianity," Reid said last week during an
interview in his office.

Reid converted to Mormonism his senior year in college and attends
church just outside the District of Columbia when in Washington or in
Boulder City when in Nevada.

He recalls a time when his grandchildren were trick-or-treating at a
local LDS ward event and came upon a poster featuring a picture of the
Devil and Reid, and asking "Can you tell the difference?"

"I remember it," Reid says when asked how he deals with the criticism,
"but I try not to let people who do not represent the teachings that I
have learned interfere with my basic beliefs."

Religion and politics » Reid isn't the first and likely not the last
political leader to face fire for personal religious beliefs.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called on the Vatican earlier this
year, an anti-abortion Catholic group hand delivered a letter calling
for her to be ousted from the faith for her pro-abortion rights stand.
A few Catholic bishops said during the 2004 presidential campaign that
they would refuse Democratic Sen. John Kerry communion for his
position on abortion.

Questions were raised during John F. Kennedy's bid for the presidency
about whether Rome would call the shots because of his Catholic faith
and similar questions arose with Mitt Romney, a Mormon, during his
White House bid last year.

"Having Mormons criticize Harry Reid, Catholics criticize Nancy Pelosi
-- George W. Bush got criticism from Methodists -- it's not an
uncommon experience at all," says John Green, senior researcher at the
Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

"There are disputes within almost every religious community about what
it means to be a strong supporter of the faith. What is it to be a
good member?" Green continues. And because much of that dispute deals
with controversial subjects, it spills over to politics.

"It is a very tough spot that Sen. Reid is in," Green says. "It ought
to be tough enough to represent Nevada [and be majority leader]
without the religion angle and the religion angle just makes that much
tougher."

Washington lobbyist William Nixon, who is also the church's Arlington
Stake president, says Reid is in politics' most precarious position.

"Serving as a majority leader in either party is always difficult for
politicians," says Nixon, a Republican. "You need to be the spear
carrier for your party even on issues that are in the extremities and
that often is at odds with what's good politics at home or even how
you may worship personally."

The LDS Church declined comment for this story but pointed to its
statement on relationships with government.

It says that elected officials who are LDS make their own decisions
"and may not necessarily be in agreement with one another or even with
a publicly stated church position."

And the church has made efforts in the past to dispel the notion that
it sides with conservative politics. In 1998, church General Authority
Marlin Jensen stressed that good Mormons can also be good Democrats.
The late James E. Faust, a Democrat and then a member of the First
Presidency, the church's top governing body, said it was in the
church's best interest to have a two-party system.

Still, Mormon faithful remain overwhelmingly conservative. A survey
released in July by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life showed
that 65 percent of Mormons aligned themselves with the Republican
Party or leaned that way, while 22 percent sided with the Democratic
Party.

There are 14 members of the LDS Church in Congress. Ten are
Republicans and four are Democrats.

But even some of the well-known Republican elected Mormons defend Reid
as a faithful church member.

"He has the right to voice his opinions but I would under no
circumstances challenge Harry's credentials as a member of the
church," says Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah.

Bennett's Utah Senate colleague, Orrin Hatch, says it's not fair for
fellow Mormons to disparage Reid as anything but a devout Mormon.
Hatch says he didn't agree with Reid's statement on the gay marriage
ballot question but said he's entitled to speak it.

"I can personally tell you that Harry is a good member of the LDS
faith and he was expressing a personal opinion that his side feels
very deeply about," Hatch says.

Reid says church leaders have never complained about his political statements.

Reid's calling » Shortly after being elected in 1986, church leaders
summoned Reid to their Salt Lake City headquarters.

"It was a pretty short meeting," Reid says. "They said, here's your
assignment: Be the best member of the church you can be. That was it."

Even on the most recent issue of gay marriage, Reid says he doesn't
disagree with the church's position on traditional marriage. The
senator says he voted in Nevada for the state constitutional amendment
to ban gay marriage.

But he says he's expressed his concern for years to leaders about the
church stepping into the debate and that the millions the church
invested in the Prop 8 campaign was bad strategy.

Reid said he's not suggesting the church change its position, just
that it not speak out so strongly. "It's just bad strategy to create
so much ill-will in California."

The Democrat, though, says he understands the backlash he gets over
such statements. He notes that most of the church's lay ecclesiastic
leaders are conservative and he's fine with that.

"I don't think my faith is a hindrance to what I do and I'm sorry if
people feel that I in some way embarrass them," Reid says, "but I have
to frankly say that even on this issue there are a lot of people that
say 'we agree with you.'"

On Sunday, Reid, with his security escort in tow, likely made his home
teaching rounds after his ward's three-hour service. Anyone who
questions his Mormon credentials should see that, says Jim Vlach, his
home-teaching companion.

"He's got a tremendous burden with health care [reform] right now, but
despite that, he finds time for home teaching," says Vlach.

Amendment Would Let Kansas Opt Out of Potential Health Reforms

http://www.kmbz.com/Amendment-Would-Let-Kansas-Opt-Out-of-Potential-He/5544725

Kansas Senator Mary Pilcher-Cook of Shawnee, along with colleagues in
the Kansas House from Wichita and Emporia, is planning an attempt to
amend the Kansas Constitution, should Congress pass health reforms
that mandate everyone carry health insurance. The amendment would
allow the state to basically opt-out of such legislation. Cook tells
KMBZ it would need the support of two-thirds of lawmakers, and then a
thumbs up from the Kansas people on the 2010 ballot.

Clunkers: Taxpayers paid $24,000 per car

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/autos/clunkers_analysis/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A total of 690,000 new vehicles were sold
under the Cash for Clunkers program last summer, but only 125,000 of
those were vehicles that would not have been sold anyway, according to
an analysis released Wednesday by the automotive Web site Edmunds.com.

Still, auto sales contributed heavily to the economy's expansion in
the third quarter, adding 1.7 percentage points to the nation's gross
domestic product growth.
Is the economy really getting better?

The Cash for Clunkers program gave car buyers rebates of up to $4,500
if they traded in less fuel-efficient vehicles for new vehicles that
met certain fuel economy requirements. A total of $3 billion was
allotted for those rebates.

The average rebate was $4,000. But the overwhelming majority of sales
would have taken place anyway at some time in the last half of 2009,
according to Edmunds.com. That means the government ended up spending
about $24,000 each for those 125,000 additional vehicle sales.

"It is unfortunate that Edmunds.com has had nothing but negative
things to say about a wildly successful program that sold nearly
250,000 cars in its first four days alone," said Bill Adams, spokesman
for the Department of Transportation. "There can be no doubt that CARS
drummed up more business for car dealers at a time when they needed
help the most."

In order to determine whether these sales would have happened anyway,
Edmunds.com analysts looked at sales of luxury cars and other vehicles
not included under the Clunkers program.

Using traditional relationships between sales volumes of those
vehicles and the types of vehicles sold under Cash for Clunkers,
Edmunds.com projected what sales would normally have been during the
Cash for Clunkers period and in the weeks after.

Edmunds.com's estimate of the ultimate sales increase generally
matches what industry experts had thought, said George Pipas, a sales
analyst with Ford Motor Co (F, Fortune 500). But that misses the
point, he said.

"The whole purpose of the program was to provide some kind of catalyst
to kick-start the economy," he said, "and by all accounts the extra
production that was added this year was a boost to the economy."
0:00 /4:57Why I fired GM's CEO

Ford was one of the biggest proponents of the Cash for Clunkers
program and several Ford models were among the top sellers under the
program.

While auto sales in September were hurt because auto dealership
inventories were drained of products by the program, sales this month
are already back on track or better, Pipas said. "I think the October
sales results will show Clunkers is behind us and there's no more
payback or inventories issues."

Emunds.com's projection indicates that, without Cash for Clunkers,
October's sales increase would be even higher. To top of page

Dem moderates challenge Reid on health care plan

http://www.ajc.com/business/dem-moderates-challenge-reid-175099.html

WASHINGTON — Democratic moderates who control the balance of power on
health care legislation balked Tuesday at a government-run insurance
option for millions of Americans, underscoring the enormity of the
challenge confronting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid one day after
he unveiled the plan as a consensus product.

Republican opposition stiffened, and party leaders announced they
would attempt to strangle the bill before formal debate begins.

Story continues below ↓

Despite the obvious obstacles, senior Democrats cast Reid's draft
legislation as a turning point in the yearlong campaign to enact
President Barack Obama's top domestic priority. Sen. Max Baucus,
D-Mont., chairman ofthe Senate Finance Committee, said there is now a
"sense of inevitability, the sense that, yes, we're going to pass
health care reform, and it's going to lower costs, provide better
health insurance coverage and cover ... and reform the health
insurance market."

The proposed government insurance option long ago emerged as the
biggest flashpoint in both the House and Senate as Democrats struggle
to pass legislation that extends coverage to millions who lack it,
bans insurance industry practices such as denying coverage on the
basis of pre-existing medical conditions and slows the growth of
health care spending nationally.

But before that issue can be joined on the Senate floor, Reid's first
challenge is to gain 60 votes — the number needed to overcome a
filibuster by Republicans — just to bring the bill up, a parliamentary
maneuver so routine that a vote is rarely required.

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, announced
that in this case, members of his party will treat it as though it
were "a vote on the merits" of a bill he said would "cut Medicare,
raise taxes and increase health insurance premiums." He suggested
Democrats could expect campaign commercials next year on the basis of
the vote, and recalled that Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., was ridiculed in
his 2004 presidential campaign for having once said he voted for a
bill before he voted against it.

Tuesday's developments illustrated the difficulties facing the
69-year-old Reid, juggling at least three separate concerns: his role
as head of the Democratic caucus, the desire to deliver on Obama's
agenda and a 2010 re-election campaign in Nevada, where his approval
ratings are low.

"This isn't over until I'm standing with President Obama and he's
signing a bill into law that delivers what Nevadans are demanding —
real health insurance reform," Reid wrote in an e-mail message to
political supporters in his home state Monday night.

The decision to include a government insurance option in his
legislation had obvious appeal for liberals who account for a strong
majority inside the Senate Democratic caucus, and it is likely to
please labor unions and party activists in Nevada.

But it has gained less-than-effusive support from Obama, who is eager
to have at least a dollop of bipartisanship for his signature domestic
issue. Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, the only Republican who has sided
with Democrats in committee this year, has announced she will not
support the bill Reid drafted.

Still, if Reid is pressed in coming weeks by moderates to fall back,
he can explain to liberals that he was forced to do so because his
preference — a government insurance option — proved to be unobtainable
in the Senate.

Already, that pressure is evident.

Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., said he may seek changes on the Senate floor,
a move likely to be welcomed by moderates. He backs a government role
in states where one or two insurers control the market and premiums
are high, along the same lines as a plan supported by Snowe.
Additionally, Carper has talked of allowing other states to invite the
federal government in — the reverse of Reid's plan, in which states
would have to opt out.

That general approach, in which a lack of competition in an
individual's state would trigger a government insurance option, "is
still alive," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D.

While Reid is expected eventually to secure all 60 Democratic votes on
the critical first test to bring the bill to the Senate floor, Sens.
Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Evan Bayh of
Indiana and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas all declined to say on Tuesday
how they would vote.

In an indication of the pressure Reid faces, Bayh said the majority
leader had agreed to cut an earlier proposal for a $40 billion tax on
medical devicemakers.

"He significantly modified that proposal in a way that I understand
will not impact thousands of good-paying jobs," said Bayh, whose state
is home to Guidant Corp., a maker of cardiovascular devices, among
other major industry players. Numerous officials said Reid had agreed
to reduce the new tax to $20 billion over a decade. The officials
spoke on condition of anonymity because no announcement had been made.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is in a similar position in the House. Efforts to
draft a consensus health care bill for a vote have been stalled for
more than two weeks. The principal stumbling block is an internal
disagreement over terms for setting fees for doctors, hospitals and
other health care providers treating patients with government-sold
coverage.

Liberals want the government to set the rate unilaterally, pegged to
the charges the government pays Medicare beneficiaries. Moderates want
the government to negotiate with the providers in setting fees.

Pelosi favors the approach liberals want, but officials say she has
all but concluded she cannot gain the necessary majority of 218 votes
for it.

House Democrats also must resolve internal disagreements relating to
abortion services and health care for immigrants before they can send
the bill to the House floor for a vote.

___

Associated Press writers Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Ben Evans, Andrew
Miga, Ken Thomas, Erica Werner and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed
to this report.

___

Congressman Mike Rogers' opening statement on Health Care reform in Washington D.C.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G44NCvNDLfc&feature=player_detailpage

Barney Frank: "We Are Trying On Every Front To Increase The Role Of Government"

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/26/frank_we_are_trying_on_every_front_to_increase_the_role_of_government.html

Make Your Reservation Today for Chaffetz, Dayton and Patrick Henry Caucus Awards

Hello Jeff,  Thanks to you, our campaign for U.S. Senate continues to dominate the momentum.  We are so excited about the upcoming "Eagar to Clean Up Washington with Joe the Plumber: The Utah Tour."  I hope you will join us for an entertaining evening on November 18, 2009 at the awards dinner!  Make your reservation online here, or if you can't attend, please give a generous contribution today here.  Help us reach our goal of raising another $5,000 before October 31, 2009! We're one of 20 races nationally identified as constitutionally conservative and who are being collectively supported.  (More to come about THAT in another email...)  If we all win, we will change the face of Congress and America's future in 2010!  You may donate online at www.Eagar4Senate.com Please be sure to pass this message on to your friends! All my best, Cherilyn Eagar U.S. Senate 2010         To schedule Cherilyn Eagar, contact Shirley@Eagar4Senate.com Become an Eagar Insider by joining Cherilyn on Facebook and following her on Twitter today! http://www.eagar4senate.com http://twitter.com/CherilynEagar http://www.facebook.com/cherilyn.eagar http://www.youtube.com/user/Eagar4Senate   Authorized and Paid for by Friends of Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate

---

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe

---

Friends of Eagar for Senate PO Box 901839 Sandy, Utah 84090 US Read the VerticalResponse marketing policy.

The CBO's estimates of insurance costs for the Baucus Senate Bill

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc10642/SFC_Subsidies_Penalties_10-09.pdf

AT&T, Google Battle Over Net Neutrality

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704224004574489323364051390.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_tech

By AMY SCHATZ

WASHINGTON—There's nothing neutral in the battle between AT&T Inc. and
Google Inc. over the future of the Internet.

Google, the powerhouse of Silicon Valley, and AT&T, champion for the
old-line phone industry, are marshaling political allies, lobbyists
and—in AT&T's case—labor unions for a fight over proposed "net
neutrality" rules that could affect tens of billions of dollars in
investments needed to upgrade the U.S. broadband network, which lags
in speed and affordability compared with some countries.

On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission made good on its
promise to push new rules that would require Internet providers such
as AT&T to deliver Web traffic without delay.
Digits

* AT&T on iPhone Exclusivity, Dropped Calls and Net Neutrality
* Angels Weigh In on Net Neutrality
* Facebook and Twitter Founders Join Net-Neutrality Wars
* 'Blue Bell' Democrats Ask FCC to Tone It Down on Net Neutrality

Broadly, that means cable and phone companies couldn't block or slow
access to services from Google, Netflix or others that are a drain on
their networks or could compete with their businesses.

But as the details of the new rules are hammered out in coming months,
AT&T and Google are ramping up efforts to ensure the FCC doesn't
impose rules that could hurt their profits or expansion plans.

Plenty of lobbyists have made their concerns about the FCC's proposal
known to their political allies over the past few weeks. But AT&T
lobbyists were particularly active, swarming Capitol Hill and state
houses, prompting a bipartisan mix of governors, congressmen and
senators to send worried letters to the FCC. Two big labor unions have
taken out newspaper ads attacking the new rules.

"Google to date has gotten relatively a free pass that they're somehow
promoting the public good on net neutrality as opposed to, what I see,
is that they're trying to entrench their business model," said Robert
Quinn, AT&T's senior regulatory lawyer in Washington.

Google responded this week with letters of support from dozens of
technology-company CEOs and venture capitalists.

"It's not too strong to say we were caught off guard" by AT&T's
efforts, says Richard Whitt, Google's top Washington policy lawyer,
who said AT&T was deliberately trying to make the issue about Google,
not the Internet itself.

"Part of it is this notion that you find one name and you make it the
object of all your scorn and your vilification," Mr. Whitt added.
"What we represent unnerves them."

As phone and video services have migrated online, the FCC has
struggled to stretch its authority over new technologies. The FCC's
net neutrality proposal, driven by Chairman Julius Genachowski, is the
strongest move yet by the federal government to assert control over
the rules of the road on the Internet.

Mr. Genachowski and his aides have been taken aback by the uproar. "In
the run-up to today's meeting, there has been a deluge of rumors, and
no shortage of myths and half-truths," Mr. Genachowski said during
Thursday's FCC meeting. "We're addressing a topic of great importance,
where parties have strong views based on differing perspective and
experiences."

FCC commissioners voted unanimously to move forward with the
rule-making process but the two Republicans on the commission
disagreed on the need for them and raised concerns about how the rules
might apply to wireless providers and premium services that cable and
phone companies want to offer.

AT&T and other Internet-access providers want latitude to manage
traffic on congested wireless networks and freedom to devote a chunk
of their wired networks to selling more expensive services. Internet
providers are worried regulators are assuming veto power over their
efforts to develop new revenue streams from their Internet lines.

Google and other Internet companies fret that phone and cable
companies will hobble their efforts to offer competing services online
or will try charging them more for better connections to consumers.

Google wants phone and cable companies to deliver all traffic equally,
so carriers can't get in the way of it offering consumers
high-definition TV shows or movies on YouTube or phone services like
Google Voice.

Thus far, there have been only two high-profile instances of blocking
or slowing Internet traffic, and both stopped soon after the FCC told
the companies to knock it off.

The skirmishing over federal regulation of the Web between AT&T and
Google has gone on for several years. But the FCC's move to put
forward stronger open Internet rules has escalated the fight.

AT&T recently accused Google of blocking calls with its Google Voice
service, and provided evidence to the FCC that the search giant wasn't
connecting calls to a convent of Benedictine nuns, among others. The
FCC launched an inquiry.

Earlier this week, two big labor unions—the Communications Workers of
America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers—took
out advertisements in the Washington Post raising concerns that the
new rules could discourage investments in telecommunications
infrastructure, which to the unions means jobs.

Google returned fire late Sunday night, releasing a letter from 24
chief executive officers and tech-company founders, including Facebook
Inc.'s Mark Zuckerberg, and IAC/InterActiveCorp.'s Barry Diller,
urging the FCC to move ahead with the proposal. A similar letter, from
more than two dozen venture capitalists, arrived at the FCC Tuesday
morning.

It's not the first time the two companies have faced off in
Washington. AT&T and other wireless carriers were infuriated when
Google successfully pushed the FCC to impose conditions on airwaves
auctioned in 2008. Google bid enough to trigger the conditions—some
$4.6 billion—and promptly dropped out of the auction. The wireless
carriers weren't much happier when Google helped to successfully push
the FCC to set aside some valuable airwaves for free, unlicensed use
by potential competitors.

Google's success at getting the FCC to embrace its vision of the
Internet hasn't been matched at other agencies. Last month, the
Justice Department urged a federal appeals court to reject a
settlement between Google and the Authors Guild and Publishers over
its book search service.

A Federal Trade Commission investigation prompted Google CEO Eric
Schmidt to leave Apple Inc.'s board and Genentech Inc. CEO Arthur
Levinson to leave Google's board.

Meanwhile, both Congress and the FTC have expressed concerns about
current online advertising and privacy practices of Internet companies
including Google. Consumer groups have also weighed in, along with
advocacy groups such as the Future of Privacy Forum, which is funded
by AT&T.

Safe School Czar calls for 'Queering' Elementary Education

I've started looking into these claims to verify if they're true or
not. So far things seem correct.

Kevin Jennings isn't a household name, but we've been watching
his actions very closely. The reason is that Jennings poses
a severe threat to our Nation's school children, yet he is
President Obama's choice for "Safe Schools Czar"!

Let me be absolutely clear: Kevin Jennings is unfit to serve
in ANY position related to our public schools.

Recently, over 50 Congressmen formally demanded that President
Obama remove Jennings from his post. Here's what motivated
this unusually strong action...

The congressional letter states, "As the founder of the Gay,
Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), Mr. Jennings
has played an integral role in promoting homosexuality and
pushing a pro-homosexual agenda in America's schools-an agenda
that runs counter to the values that many parents desire to
instill in their children."

You can read the full letter here:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?u=22455&PID=22573899

+ + "Safe Schools" will mean "Pro-Homosexual Schools"

Jennings' intent is to use his platform as Safe Schools Czar
to aggressively promote -- and even celebrate -- homosexuality
in our schools. He is an outspoken proponent of a radical
pro-homosexual curriculum, including so-called "diversity"
training at the elementary school level!

This is deplorable. It is not to be tolerated!

On top of his unacceptable, strident stand on the homosexual
agenda, Jennings has even admitted to the use of illicit drugs,
showing no signs of remorse. This man is totally unqualified
to serve as a policymaker and role model in the Department
of Education!

+ + Tell the President: "Jennings is unsafe! Dismiss him now!"

I'm asking you to stand with me on behalf of our Nation's
school children. Join me, along with many congressional
leaders and tens of thousands of outraged citizens, in
demanding that the President dismiss Kevin Jennings from
his post at once.

I want to rally at least 25,000 signers in the next two weeks
so we can send a very strong message in support of the growing
call to remove Jennings. Go here to sign:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?u=22455&PID=22573899

Liberty Counsel fights in courtrooms across America to protect
our faith and family values. Appointments like that of Kevin
Jennings only increase the attacks we must deal with in court.

And each day Kevin Jennings is in office, the platform for radical
homosexual activism in our culture will expand. We must take
action now!

Thank you for taking a stand, and may God richly bless you.

Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman
Liberty Counsel

P.S. We believe that Kevin Jennings' history of radical
homosexual activism and his deplorable personal ethics make
him totally unacceptable as a role model and policy maker
in our Nation's Department of Education. Join us as we urge
President Obama to remove Kevin Jennings from his appointed
post immediately!

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?u=22455&PID=22573899

CA ammo law draws fire in Utah

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=8418539

ammunition.jpg
CA ammo law draws fire in Utah
October 23rd, 2009 @ 2:24pm
By Becky Bruce

SALT LAKE CITY -- Some Utah gun owners and 2nd Amendment advocates are
nervous about a new California law signed this month by Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger.

The new law sets up what amounts to an ammunition registry. Vendors
would be required to track the name, driver license number and right
thumbprint of anyone buying ammunition. In addition, there will be a
ban in California on mail order and online ammo sales -- buyers would
have to pick up their ammunition in person, and vendors would be
required to surrender their registry information to law enforcement on
request.

"The first concern, of course, is just the general invasion of
privacy, when exercising a constitutional right," says Charles Hardy,
public policy director for Gun Owners of Utah.

"Second concern is that this becomes the camel's nose in the tent," he
adds, wondering if the lawmakers and lobbyists behind this law will
try something even more restrictive next year.

Hardy isn't too worried about Utah following suit, but wouldn't be
surprised if a few other states do. He also thinks the law would do
very little to actually prevent crime.

A statement from the Gun Owners of California reads, "The governor
vetoed this bill once before … AB962 creates a liberal feel-good
logbook that will do nothing to stop crime."

The new California law takes effect in February 2011.

Media Matters coordinates campaign against 'lethal' Fox

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1009/Media_Matters_coordinates_campaign_against_lethal_Fox.html?showall

An official at a Democratic-leaning organization sends on a memo the
group Media Matters is circulating today to progressive groups,
calling Fox "a lethal 24/7 partisan political operation" and rallying
a coalition of groups to join the White House assault on the network.

"The danger to progressive causes and the institution of journalism
has become too significant to ignore," says the introduction to a memo
by Media Matters founder David Brock. "At Media Matters, we believe it
is of paramount importance that progressive leaders have the
information necessary to understand exactly what Fox News has become.
We hope this brief memorandum will assist you in reaching your own
decision on how best to engage this threat."

One of the group's conclusions: Progressive groups should join the
White House's effective boycott of the network, and failing that, "any
progressive who chooses to go on Fox News should understand that they
will be debating the political opposition, not conducting a news
interview."

Brock concludes:

Fox News is engaged in a 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week
political campaign against the Obama administration, the progressive
movement, and the entire progressive agenda. There is no real
distinction between its "opinion" and so-called "news" programs. They
both display the same contempt for journalistic standards,
objectivity, and accuracy. The examples provided above represent a
mere fraction of those Media Matters has collected and offer much for
progressives to consider when deciding whether or how to engage Fox.
In our professional opinion, any progressive engaging Fox News will be
engaging not a journalistic enterprise, but the political opposition.

When confronted with evidence and charges such as these, Fox has
reacted forcefully to protect its image, brand, and ratings. This
reveals that it is not impervious to criticism. In fact, Fox is
scared. One need look no further than its paranoid reaction to the
recent comments of Anita Dunn to see this fear. "If they repeat this
long enough," said Fox's Bernie Goldberg on October 19, "and often
enough – that Fox News is not a real news organization, it's an arm of
the national Republican Party, it's not to be taken seriously – if
they say that long enough, it might become part of bloodstream of the
American culture."

For once, Mr. Goldberg's network was broadcasting the truth. Fox
News' success as a political campaign depends upon the pretense of
being an independent and credible news organization. It is now the job
of progressives to expose the true nature of the network, thereby
defending their own political principles and the institution of
journalism itself.

Full memo after the jump.

Dear:

In recent days, a new level of scrutiny has been directed toward Fox
News, in no small part due to statements from the White House, and
from Media Matters, challenging its standing as a news organization.

Media Matters has monitored Fox News every day for more than 5 years.
Our analysis of their programming has led us to the unavoidable
conclusion that Fox is no longer operating as a "conservative news
organization," but as an outright partisan political operation – and
brazenly so.

Since the election of Barack Obama, the Fox News Channel has
transformed itself into something truly unprecedented: a lethal 24/7
partisan political operation with an instantaneous national reach. Fox
has declared war on this White House, the majority in the United
States Congress, and progressive organizations and activists. For Fox
News, victory is defined as the destruction of both the Obama
administration and the entire progressive policy agenda. Fox News host
Glenn Beck predicted last week that he will soon "take the
administration down."

The danger to progressive causes and the institution of journalism has
become too significant to ignore. At Media Matters, we believe it is
of paramount importance that progressive leaders have the information
necessary to understand exactly what Fox News has become. We hope this
brief memorandum will assist you in reaching your own decision on how
best to engage this threat.

As our evidence demonstrates, Fox News has exhibited a consistent
willingness to ignore any and all journalistic standards to pursue
political ends. The failure to recognize Fox News for what it is
enables the network to continue waging a massive conservative
political campaign disguised as journalism.

We hope you find this information helpful. If you have any questions
or would like any additional information, please feel free to contact
Media Matters at your convenience. Together, we can hold Fox News
accountable to the high standards of journalism every American has a
right to expect from their media.

Sincerely,

David Brock
Founder & CEO, Media Matters for America

Time for Obama to Quit Attacking Fox News and Grow Up

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/23/lloyd-green-fox-news-white-house-attack-hunter-thompson-gibbs/

The Obama White House looks like it is has taken a page out of the
playbook of the late Nixon Press Secretary Ron Ziegler. In a fit of
pique, during the 1972 presidential campaign, Ziegler barred Rolling
Stone reporter and Gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson from flying on
the lead campaign press plane, notwithstanding that Thompson had been
covering the race, that there was space on the plane, and that
Thompson was an accredited reporter. Thompson's problem was that he
did not report things the way the Committee to Reelect the President
would have liked things to have been reported.

Well, Robert Gibbs,the Obama press secretary, is doing all he can to
follow in Ziegler's footsteps. Gibbs is trying to get the news
organizations that cover the White House to drop Fox from the White
House press pool. Pressed on his efforts to get the press to dump Fox
from the pool, Gibbs demurred. Despite repeated questioning by ABC's
Jake Tapper, Gibbs would not give a straight answer on where the White
House stood on Fox and pool coverage.

It does not look like Gibbs and the White House are meeting with the
success they had hoped for. On the Atlantic Monthly's Web site, Matt
Cooper was critical of the White House's approach. According to
Cooper, if the White House could talk to Iran it could surely talk to
Fox. Jay Leno has also weighed in. Leno quipped that the
administration was raising another 40,000 troops -- to fight Fox. In
the Senate, Minority Whip Lamar Alexander chided Obama for Nixon-like
tactics. This is not where Obama thought he would be.

Now today's New York Times reports that Fox's competitors in the press
pool refused to comply with a government effort "to exclude Fox from a
round of interviews with the executive-pay czar Kenneth R. Feinberg."
According to The Times, a "pool" camera was to tape the interviews.
Guess what? The administration blinked. Fox stayed in the mix.

Perhaps it is time for Gibbs and this administration to act like grown
ups. Perhaps it is time for Gibbs and this administration to take a
different page out of the 1972 campaign playbook. -- After being
thrown off the Nixon plane, Thompson sat down for a whole bunch of
drinks with Nixon speechwriter Pat Buchanan. Thompson was back on the
plane.

If Obama can get the prof and the cop together for a beer, he should
be adult enough to call a truce and sit down with Fox's Roger Ailes
over a bottle of Jack Daniels.

Lloyd Green served in the Justice Department during the George H.W.
Bush presidency.

Administration Loses Bid to Exclude Fox News From Pay Czar Interview

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/white-house-loses-bid-exclude-fox-news-pay-czar-interview/

The Obama administration on Thursday failed in its attempt to
manipulate other news networks into isolating and excluding Fox News,
as Republicans on Capitol Hill stepped up their criticism of the
hardball tactics employed by the White House.

The Treasury Department on Thursday tried to make "pay czar" Kenneth
Feinberg available for interviews to every member of the White House
pool except Fox News. The pool is the five-network rotation that for
decades has shared the costs and duties of daily coverage of the
presidency.

But the Washington bureau chiefs of the five TV networks consulted and
decided that none of their reporters would interview Feinberg unless
Fox News was included. The network pool informed Treasury that Fox
News, as part of the rotation, could not be excluded from such
interviews under the rules of the pool.

The administration relented, making Feinberg available for all five
pool members and Bloomberg TV.

The pushback came after White House senior adviser David Axelrod told
ABC News' "This Week" on Sunday that Fox News is not a real news
organization and other news networks "ought not to treat them that
way."

Media analysts cheered the decision to boycott the Feinberg interview
unless Fox News was included, saying the administration's gambit was
taking its feud with Fox News too far. President Obama has already
declined to go on "Fox News Sunday," even while appearing on the other
Sunday shows.

"I'm really cheered by the other members saying "No, if Fox can't be
part of it, we won't be part of it,'" said Baltimore Sun TV critic
David Zurawik, calling the move to limit Feinberg's availability
"outrageous."

"What it's really about to me is the Executive Branch of the
government trying to tell the press how it should behave. I mean, this
democracy -- we know this -- only works with a free and unfettered
press to provide information," he said.

Several top White House advisers have appeared on other news channels
to criticize Fox News' coverage of the administration, dismiss the
network as the mouthpiece of the Republican Party and urge other news
organizations not to treat Fox News as a legitimate news network.

On Wednesday, Obama, speaking publicly for the first time about his
administration's portrayal of Fox News as illegitimate, said he's not
"losing sleep" over the controversy.

"I think that what our advisers simply said is, is that we are going
to take media as it comes," Obama said when asked about his advisers
targeting the network openly. "And if media is operating, basically,
as a talk radio format, then that's one thing. And if it's operating
as a news outlet, then that's another. But it's not something I'm
losing a lot of sleep over."

Obama's comments also came after he met Monday with political
commentators Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC; Eugene
Robinson and E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post; Ron Brownstein of the
National Journal; John Dickerson of Slate; Frank Rich, Maureen Dowd
and Bob Herbert of the New York Times; Jerry Seib of the Wall Street
Journal, Gloria Borger of CNN and U.S. News and World Report, and Gwen
Ifill of PBS.

House Republican leaders rushed to the defense of conservative
commentators Thursday after the president's comments.

Rep. Mike Pence, chairman of the House Republican Conference, said
conservative commentators speak more for Americans than the national
media outlets that have targeted them for criticism.

"Goaded on by a White House increasingly intolerant of criticism,
lately the national media has taken aim at conservative commentators
in radio and television," the Indiana Republican said on the House
floor. "Suggesting that they only speak for a small group of activists
and even suggesting in one report today that Republicans in Washington
are 'worried about their electoral effect.' Well, that's hogwash."

More on Obama's opinion on the Constitution

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/10/obamas_columbia_thesis_excerpt.html

Denis Keohane
Michael Ledeen at PJM reports on President Obama's Columbia college
thesis, of which ten whole pages were made available to Joe Klein. The
paper was entitled "Aristocracy Reborn," and Obama wrote this about
the Constitution:

"... the Constitution allows for many things, but what it does
not allow is the most revealing. The so-called Founders did not allow
for economic freedom. While political freedom is supposedly a
cornerstone of the document, the distribution of wealth is not even
mentioned. While many believed that the new Constitution gave them
liberty, it instead fitted them with the shackles of hypocrisy."

Goes along with this audio from 2001:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkpdNtTgQNM

"constitution is a charter of negative liberties...doesn't say what
the federal government must do on your behalf..."

White House attacks worry moderate Democrats

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28638.html

A White House effort to undermine conservative critics is generating a
backlash on Capitol Hill — and not just from Republicans.

"It's a mistake," said Rep. Jason Altmire, a moderate Democrat from
western Pennsylvania. "I think it's beneath the White House to get
into a tit for tat with news organizations."

Altmire was talking about the Obama administration's efforts to
undercut Fox News. But he said his remarks applied just the same to
White House efforts to marginalize the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a
powerful business lobby targeted for its opposition to climate change
legislation.

"There's no reason to gratuitously piss off all those companies,"
added another Democrat, Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia. "The Chamber isn't
an opponent."

POLITICO reported earlier this week on an all-fronts push by the White
House to cut the legs out from under its toughest critics, whether
it's the Chamber, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck and
the rest of the Fox News operation.

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn has defended the push,
saying the administration made "a fundamental decision that we needed
to be more aggressive in both protecting our position and in
delineating our differences with those who were attacking us."

Congressional Republicans counterattacked Thursday. House Minority
Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the administration was "targeting
those who don't immediately fall in line" with "Chicago-style
politics" aimed at "shutting the American people out and demonizing
their opponents."

Boehner's No. 2, Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) complained that the
nation's problems are growing while the White House "bickers with a
cable news network."

Liberal Democrats have little heartburn over the administration's
attacks on Fox and Limbaugh. But the attacks make moderates uneasy —
especially when they extend to the Chamber of Commerce.

While Limbaugh and Fox commentators like Beck make no secret of their
dislike for Democrats, the Chamber's Republican lean is partially
counteracted by nominal and financial support for pro-business
Democrats who need to win votes from pro-business Republicans. The
campaign websites of moderate Democrats from across the country are
filled with endorsements from the Chamber of Commerce.

Rep. Brad Ellsworth of Indiana, for example, has this testimonial from
a Chamber official on his site: "On issues ranging from lowering taxes
to increasing trade, Indiana's businesses and workers have no better
friend than Brad Ellsworth."

Ellsworth got a $5,000 campaign contribution from the Chamber in the
past election.

Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), another recipient of a Chamber
contribution, said Thursday that he had no intention of stepping into
the middle of a fight between the White House and the Chamber, but he
did note that he had won an award for his voting record from the
national Chamber of Commerce.

A senior House Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity while
questioning the wisdom of the White House strategy, said: "I have no
problem with [going after] Rush at all. I don't have much of a problem
with Fox. I think the Chamber's another story."

The Democrat took issue with Chamber leaders in Washington, who he
said "do not do a good job of representing the interests of their
members." But he also acknowledged the benefits the Chamber's goodwill
can confer on certain segments of the caucus.

He said that the White House is trying to "take advantage of the
discontent within the Chamber. Several flagship companies, including
Apple and PG&E, have cut ties with the Chamber to protest its
opposition to the climate change legislation that passed the House
earlier this year.

Some Democratic critics of the White House attacks say it may
strengthen the relationship between the Chamber and moderate Democrats
in Congress, who will fast become the organization's best hope for
addressing its concerns if it is frozen out by the White House.

"I don't think the White House's relationship with the Chamber will
have any effect on individual members' relationships with the
Chamber," said Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, a centrist Democrat. "I think
we'll be judged on how we conduct ourselves."

Great-grandmother who shot robber says 'God was with me'

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/10/22/horse_shoot.html?sid=101

By John Futty
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Police investigate last night's shooting.
10TV
Police investigate last night's shooting.
RELATED LINKS

* Read all the comments posted previously on this case
* Read the original Dispatch story on the shooting

When an armed robber barged into a North Side motel room Wednesday
night and ordered the six people there to the floor, he put a
70-year-old woman closer to her handgun.

The great-grandmother knelt between the beds, reached into her purse
on the floor and pulled out her .357 Magnum pistol.

She fired one shot at the robber, who staggered from the room,
collapsed in the parking lot and died.

"It's a wonder she didn't shoot us all," said her 51-year-old son, who
was preparing to hand over his cash when he heard the gunshot. "She's
the worst shot in the world.

"She said to me, 'God was with me tonight. You know I couldn't have
done that myself.'"

None of the family members, who live in Ironton, wanted to be
identified, fearing retaliation; and the woman didn't want to be
interviewed. They have moved to a different room in the motel.

"She's torn all to pieces," her son said. "Who would ever want to
shoot someone?"

Wayne Winston, 25, died of a single gunshot wound in the chest,
Franklin County Coroner Jan Gorniak said yesterday. Police listed his
address as "streets of Columbus."

The woman has a permit to carry a concealed gun, her son said, and
carries the gun she inherited from her late husband.

Asked to describe his mother, he said, "Religious. She's always been my hero."

The family was staying in a first-floor room at the Continent Inn,
near I-71 and Rt. 161, while attending the All-American Quarter Horse
Congress. The son said he was in the room with his mother, his wife,
his daughter and son-in-law and a family friend.

The door was partially open so the adults could stay within earshot of
two girls, ages 12 and 17, in the room next door.

The son said the door flew open shortly after 9 p.m. and they found
themselves confronted by a man who pointed a black handgun at them and
said, "Everybody here knows what the game is." He told them to get on
the floor and began demanding money from the son and his son-in-law,
who were closest to the door. The gunman seemed angry that the
son-in-law had only $14.

"I was going into my pocket for money" when a shot rang out and the
gunman ran from the room, the son said. "I thought I was shot. I
didn't realize my mother had shot him. It was mass chaos."

He still wasn't sure what had happened when he went outside and saw
the intruder's body in the parking lot. Then he heard a second shot.
His mother, the gun at her side, had tensed up and "squeezed off
another shot into the floor," he said.

Columbus police don't expect to file charges against the woman but
said the case probably will be presented to a Franklin County grand
jury as a routine procedure. The son said the officers who met with
his family were "extremely supportive."

He has a horse farm and is attending the Quarter Horse Congress to
watch his 21-year-old daughter compete and to support others who train
at his farm.

Word of the shooting spread quickly yesterday among those attending
the event, which is in its third and final week at the Ohio Expo
Center.

"That's a hell of a woman," said George Wyeth, 63, of Claysville, Pa.
"I don't blame her a bit. You pull a gun on someone, you ought to get
shot."

"I give her a lot of credit," said Beverly Hicks, 77, of Perrysburg in
northwestern Ohio, who doesn't know many people her age who carry
guns. "I'd be afraid to carry a gun."

Police Sgt. Ken Tischler, a community liaison officer, said armed
robberies of motel guests near the Continent are rare, but he had
warned people attending the Congress about a rash of vehicle break-ins
at motels in the I-71 and Rt. 161 area - 102 thefts from autos between
mid-August and late September.

4-U.S. FCC commissioners support 'open Internet' rule

http://www.reuters.com/article/regulatoryNewsConsumerGoodsAndRetail/idUSN2237873320091022

By John Poirier and Sinead Carew

WASHINGTON/CHICAGO, Oct 22 (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators
voted unanimously Thursday to support an open Internet rule that would
prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content
based on the revenue it generates.

The proposed rule now goes to the public for comment until Jan. 14,
after which the Federal Communications Commissions will review the
feedback and possibly seek more comment. A final rule is not expected
until the spring of next year.

"I am pleased that there is broad agreement inside the commission that
we should move forward with a healthy and transparent process on an
open Internet," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said.

The vote came despite a flurry of lobbying against the net neutrality
rule by telecommunications service providers like AT&T Inc (T.N),
Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N) and Qwest Communications
International Inc (Q.N), which say it would strip them of the ability
to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and
competition.

The rule would prevent operators from discriminating against any legal
content a third party wants to deliver to consumers on their networks,
though it allows for "reasonable" network management to unclog
congestion, clear viruses and spam, and block unlawful content like
child pornography or the transfer of pirated content.

The full FCC slate of three Democrats, led by Genachowski, and two
Republicans voted in favor of issuing a proposed network neutrality
rule for public comment.

But the two Republicans, Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker,
did express concern with the content of the rule, saying they do not
share the majority's view that the Internet is showing breaks and
cracks and that the government is the best tool to fix it. They also
questioned whether the FCC has the legal authority to regulate the
Internet network.

Nonetheless, the vote was 5-to-0 for proceeding with the rulemaking,
and 3-to-2 for approving the notice's language in its entirety, said
Jen Howard, an FCC spokesman.

The FCC will accept public comments until Jan. 14; then it will review
them and can ask for further comment, with replies due by March 5.

"We commend the FCC for beginning the process," said Senators Byron
Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, and Olympia Snowe, a Maine
Republican, in a joint statement. They proposed a net neutrality bill
in the last session of Congress. Continued...

Barack Obama sees worst poll rating drop in 50 years

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6409721/Barack-Obama-sees-worst-poll-rating-drop-in-50-years.html#

The decline in Barack Obama's popularity since July has been the
steepest of any president at the same stage of his first term for more
than 50 years.

Gallup recorded an average daily approval rating of 53 per cent for Mr
Obama for the third quarter of the year, a sharp drop from the 62 per
cent he recorded from April.

His current approval rating – hovering just above the level that would
make re-election an uphill struggle – is close to the bottom for
newly-elected president. Mr Obama entered the White House with a
soaring 78 per cent approval rating.

The bad polling news came as Mr Obama returned to the campaign trail
to prevent his Democratic party losing two governorships next month in
states in which he defeated Senator John McCain in last November's
election.

Jeffrey Jones of Gallup explained: "The dominant political focus for
Obama in the third quarter was the push for health care reform,
including his nationally televised address to Congress in early
September.

"Obama hoped that Congress would vote on health care legislation
before its August recess, but that goal was missed, and some members
of Congress faced angry constituents at town hall meetings to discuss
health care reform. Meanwhile, unemployment continued to climb near 10
per cent."

Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey is in severe danger of defeat while
Democrats are fast losing hope that Creigh Deeds can beat his
Republican opponent in Virginia. Twin Democratic losses would be a
major blow to Mr Obama's prestige.

Campaigning for Mr Corzine in Hackensack on Wednesday night, Mr Obama
delivered a plea that almost seemed as much for himself as the local
candidate: "I'm here today to urge you to cast aside the cynics and
the sceptics, and prove to all Americans that leaders who do what's
right and who do what's hard will be rewarded and not rejected."

Mr Corzine, a former Goldman Sachs executive and multi-millionaire, is
currently running even in New Jersey, which is normally comfortably
Democratic, while Mr Deeds is trailing badly in Virginia, a swing
state that was key to Mr Obama's 2008 victory.

Mr Obama is also facing widespread criticism for his drawn-out
decision-making process over what to do next in Afghanistan.

Republicans sense Mr Obama is in a vulnerable position and this week
saw the return to the public stage of his perhaps most vehement
opponent – Vice-President Dick Cheney.

In a blistering speech on Wednesday night, he accused Mr Obama of
failing to give Americans troops on the ground a clear mission or
defined goals and of being seemingly "afraid to make a decision" about
Afghanistan "The White House must stop dithering while America's armed
forces are in danger," Cheney said at the Center for Security Policy
in Washington.

"Make no mistake, signals of indecision out of Washington hurt our
allies and embolden our adversaries."

He hit out at Obama aides who suggested that the Bush administration
had failed to weigh up conditions in Afghanistan properly before
committing troops.

"Now they seem to be pulling back and blaming others for their failure
to implement the strategy they embraced. It's time for President Obama
to do what it takes to win a war he has repeatedly and rightly called
a war of necessity."

Democrat trick to reduce cost of health care regulations defeated in Senate

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2009/10/democrat-trick-to-reduce-cost-of-health.html

Democrats lost a big test vote on health care legislation on Wednesday
as the Senate blocked action on a bill to increase Medicare payments
to doctors at a cost of $247 billion over 10 years. . . .

By addressing doctors' fees in a separate bill, Senate Democrats could
hold down the cost of the broader health legislation, keeping it
within the limits set by President Obama. House Democrats are
considering a similar tactic. Republicans said it was a transparent
ploy to hide the cost of a health care overhaul.

Democrats had hoped that by passing the Medicare bill they could
appease doctors and secure their support for the broader legislation.
. . .

Obama's 'safe schools czar' acts up

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/22/obamas-safe-schools-czar-acts-up/

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The only safe thing that can be said about President Obama's "safe
schools czar," Kevin Jennings, is that he's completely inappropriate
for an important White House appointment. Mr. Jennings has a long,
troubling history, but the list just got a little longer with the
information that he's a long-time member of the extremist homosexual
organization ACT UP (AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power).

On Oct. 11, 2008, Jeff Davis, Mr. Jennings "partner" of 15 years,
described their first meetings: "The first few interactions were
challenging for both of us. He was a member of Act Up. Act Up! So it's
like - you know - here's a big gay activist."

ACT UP's demonstrations in the late 1980s and early 1990s centered on
vandalism of churches, businesses and homes as well as disrupting
public events. The Catholic Church was a favored target because it
opposes same-sex marriage and the distribution of condoms. From New
York to Los Angeles, activists disrupted Catholic Masses and
desecrated Holy Communion, which Catholics believe is the body of
Christ.

Churches weren't the only target. ACT UP fanatics invaded the
MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour studio in 1991 and chained themselves to
Robert MacNeil's desk during a live broadcast. Protesters carried
signs declaring, "The AIDS Crisis is Not Over."

Mr. Jennings' membership in ACT UP merely reinforces how unsuitable he
is for the honor of serving as a presidential appointee. Everything
about his ideology - from his admiration for North American Man/Boy
Love Association (NAMBLA) supporter Harry Hay to backing "Queering
Elementary Education" to his use of false statistics - paints Mr.
Jennings as an extremist. As usual, the White House has refused to
answer questions about Mr. Jennings' membership in this fringe group.

ACT UP, like NAMBLA, was not even considered a mainstream group among
homosexuals. With his record of putting his radical agenda before
everything else, Mr. Jennings doesn't belong at the Department of
Education in any role.

Justice concludes black voters need Democratic Party

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/20/justice-dept-blocks-ncs-nonpartisan-vote/?feat=article_top10_read#top10block

By Ben Conery

KINSTON, N.C. | Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last
year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local
elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the
electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be
achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council
and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that
black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by
the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively
black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks
only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid
of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate
black voters' right to elect the candidates they want.

Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge
the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to
black voters' election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice
Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results
here.

Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive
to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department's
decision "racial as well as partisan."

"On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C.,
overturning a valid election," he said. "That is un-American."

The decision, made by the same Justice official who ordered the
dismissal of a voting rights case against members of the New Black
Panther Party in Philadelphia, has irritated other locals as well.
They bristle at federal interference in this city of nearly 23,000
people, two-thirds of whom are black.

In interviews in sleepy downtown Kinston - a place best known as a
road sign on the way to the Carolina beaches - residents said partisan
voting is largely unimportant because people are personally acquainted
with their elected officials and are familiar with their views.

"To begin with, 'nonpartisan elections' is a misconceived and
deceiving statement because even though no party affiliation shows up
on a ballot form, candidates still adhere to certain ideologies and
people understand that, and are going to identify with who they feel
has their best interest at heart," said William Cooke, president of
the Kinston/Lenoir County branch of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People.

Mr. Cooke said his group does not take a position on this issue and
would not disclose his personal stance, but expressed skepticism about
the Justice Department's involvement.

Blackburn: Net neutrality is "fairness doctrine for the Internet"

http://thehill.com/hillicon-valley/605-technology/63875-blackburn-net-neutrality-is-qfairness-doctrine-for-the-internetq

Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) spoke against net neutrality regulations
today at an event put on by the Safe Internet Alliance. Representing
the songwriters, singers, actors, producers and other entertainers in
Memphis and Nashville, she said the creative community does not want
the federal government to interfere with how they are able to get
content to consumers via the Internet.

"Net neutrality, as I see it, is the fairness doctrine for the
Internet," she said. The creators "fully understand what the fairness
doctrine would be when it applies to TV or radio. What they do not
want is the federal government policing how they deploy their content
over the Internet and they want the ISPs to manage their networks and
deploy the content however they have agreed on with ISP. They do not
want a czar of the Internet to determine when they can deploy their
creativity over the Internet. "They do not want a czar to determine
what speeds will be available....We are watching the FCC very closely
as it relates to that issue."

When it comes to broadband expansion, she said, she wants to make sure
"all individuals' rights are respected and that we look at the freedom
of all broadband participants." She said Congress needs to make sure
the groups receiving stimulus funds for broadband expansion are able
to deploy reasonable and effective network management tools so they
can be helpful in tracking down illegal activity."

"We shouldn't look at technology as how do we punish and impede, but
how do we encourage innovation," she said. "That needs to be a key
thought as we move forward... How do we encourage that innvoation and
not impede it?"

ACORN in Philly

http://biggovernment.com/2009/10/21/acorn-video-prostitution-scandal-in-philadelphia-pa-part-i/

Oaks Responds...

http://asoftanswer.com/2009/10/14/keith-olbermann-declares-elder-oaks-one-of-the-worse-people-in-the-world/

Obama strategy: Marginalize most powerful critics

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28532.html

This is the first of a two-part look at the marginalization of the
GOP. Tomorrow: GOP officials fear that the party's image is being
defined increasingly by boisterous conservative commentators.

President Obama is working systematically to marginalize the most
powerful forces behind the Republican Party, setting loose top White
House officials to undermine conservatives in the media, business and
lobbying worlds.

With a series of private meetings and public taunts, the White House
has targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the biggest-spending
pro-business lobbying group in the country; Rush Limbaugh, the
country's most-listened-to conservative commentator; and now, with a
new volley of combative rhetoric in recent days, the insurance
industry, Wall Street executives and Fox News.

Obama aides are using their powerful White House platform, combined
with techniques honed in the 2008 campaign, to cast some of the most
powerful adversaries as out of the mainstream and their criticism as
unworthy of serious discussion.

Press secretary Robert Gibbs has mocked Limbaugh from the White House
press room podium. White House aides limited access to the Chamber and
made top adviser Valerie Jarrett available to reporters to disparage
the group. Everyone from White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to
White House Communications Director Anita Dunn has piled on Fox News
by contending it's not a legitimate news operation.

All of the techniques are harnessed to a larger purpose: to
marginalize not only the individual person or organization but also
some of the most important policy and publicity allies of the national
Republican Party.

Dunn said that in August, as the president's aides planned for the
fall, they made "a fundamental decision that we needed to be more
aggressive in both protecting our position and in delineating our
differences with those who were attacking us."

"It was a time for us to look at the extraordinary success we've had
in terms of legislation but also to look at where we needed to be more
aggressive in defining what the choices are, and in protecting and
pushing forward our agenda," she said.

The campaign underscores how deeply political the Obama White House is
in its daily operations — with a strong focus on redrawing the
electoral map and discrediting the personalities and ideas that have
powered the conservative movement over the past 20 years.

This determination has manifested itself in small ways: This president
has done three times as many fundraisers as President George W. Bush
had at this point in his term. And in large ones: Beginning with their
contretemps with Limbaugh last winter, Obama's most important advisers
miss few opportunities for public and highly partisan shots at his
most influential critics.

It's too early to tell if the campaign is working, but it's clearly
exacerbating partisan tensions in Washington.

"They won — why don't they act like it?" said Dana Perino, former
White House press secretary to Bush. "The more they fight, the more
defensive they look. It's only been 10 months, and they're burning
bridges in a lot of different places."

White House officials see things differently. They see an opportunity
to corner critics of the president's policies, especially on health
care and financial regulations, and, in the process, further
marginalize the Republican Party.

Privately, officials have talked with relish for months of the
potential to isolate the GOP as a narrow party of white, Southern
conservatives with little appeal to independent-minded voters.

This won't happen overnight, but a combination of demographics —
especially the explosion of a Hispanic population that has been voting
for Democrats — the near-extinction of Republicans in the Northeast
and the steady rightward drift of the GOP's grass-roots activists at
least makes it a plausible goal.

By design or not, nearly every Republican whom Obama has nominated for
a White House job — Ray LaHood for Transportation, Judd Gregg for
Commerce and John McHugh for the Army — represents an area Democrats
can take back if the sitting Republican is gone. None is from the
South.

So is the strategy working? White House officials point to a new ABC
News/Washington Post poll to argue the answer is emphatically yes.
Only 20 percent of those surveyed identified themselves as
Republicans, the lowest in 26 years of asking the question.

Democrats lock Republicans out of committee room

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/63941-democrats-lock-republicans-out-of-committee-room

Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) locked Republicans out of the House
Oversight and Government Reform Committee room to keep them from
meeting when Democrats aren't present.

Towns' action came after repeated public ridicule from the leading
Republican on the committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), over
Towns's failure to launch an investigation into Countrywide Mortgage's
reported sweetheart deals to VIPs.

For months Towns has refused Republican requests to subpoena records
in the case. Last Thursday Committee Republicans, led by Issa, were
poised to force an open vote on the subpoenas at a Committee mark-up
meeting. The mark-up was abruptly canceled. Only Republicans showed up
while Democrats chairs remained empty.

Republicans charged that Towns cancelled the meeting to avoid the
subpoena vote. Democrats first claimed the mark-up was canceled due to
a conflict with the Financial Services Committee. Later they said it
was abandoned after a disagreement among Democratic members on whether
to subpoena records on the mortgage industry's political contributions
to Republicans.

A GOP committee staffer captured video of Democrats leaving their
separate meeting in private chambers after the mark-up was supposed to
have begun. He spliced the video to other footage of the Democrats'
empty chairs at the hearing room, set it to the tune of "Hit the Road,
Jack" and posted it on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee's
minority webpage, where it remained as of press time.

Towns's staffers told Republicans they were not happy about the
presence of the video camera in the hearing room when they were not
present. Issa's spokesman said the Democrats readily acknowledged to
Republicans that they changed the locks in retaliation to the
videotape of the Democrats' absence from the business meeting even
though committee rules allow meetings to be taped.

"It's not surprising that they would choose to retaliate given the
embarrassment we caused by catching them in a lie on tape," said Issa
spokesman Kurt Bardella. "If only they
would use their creative energy to do some actual oversight rather
than resorting to immature tactics, but I guess we're getting some
insight into what lengths they'll go to avoid addressing the
Countrywide VIP issue."

Towns's office said in a statement the locks were changed on
Republicans "because they don't know how to behave." As for the video
the GOP made, Towns's office pointed out: "The minority is using
taxpayer dollars to make these campaign style videos."

The partisan sniping recalls a similarly bitter name-calling match
between House Republicans and Democrats on the Ways and Means
Committee in 2003 when Republicans controlled the majority and former
Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) chaired the panel. The episode ended in
Thomas, known for his acerbic tongue, summoning the Capitol Police to
evict an outraged gaggle of Democratic colleagues from a library in
the Longworth House office building.

The committee had convened that morning to consider a bipartisan bill
that would revise the nation's pension and retirement-saving system.

Democrats objected when Thomas brought up a 90-page substitute measure
that had been released shortly before midnight the night before.
Democrats said they needed more time to read it. Thomas disagreed.

In response, Democrats objected to a normally perfunctory motion to
dispense with the reading of the dense legislation. A clerk obligingly
began reading it line by line.

Democrats departed to a library just off the main hearing room,
leaving only Rep. Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-Calif.) to prevent the
Republicans from obtaining unanimous consent to skip the reading.
After a few minutes, Thomas asked again for the unanimous consent, and
instantly brought down his gavel. Stark told reporters he had
objected, but Thomas had replied, "You're too late."

Even before Thomas gaveled the reading to an end, he had directed
staff to call the Capitol Police to remove the Democrats form the
library.

Countrywide, now owned by Bank of America, was reported to have given
VIP loans and treatment to lawmakers and officials at the federal and
local level who were in a position to influence policy affecting the
mortgage giant. Issa has repeatedly reminded Committee Democrats that
Bank of America officials had said they would turn over records on the
VIP program – but only in response to a subpoena.

Towns, who received a mortgage loan from Countrywide but insists he
was not part of the VIP program, has said he declined to launch an
investigation because he does not want to interfere with an ongoing
Justice Department probe into the matter.