Too much Rush? Dems lose bid to regulate talk radio

Rush will drone on, relatively unopposed, on the airways. So will Sean and Bill.

Overlooked Thursday because of the various political and media brouhahas caused by the defeat of the miasma known as the immigration reform bill and the release of additional stomach-turning Supreme Court decisions was the House of Representatives’ rejection of a Democratic attempt to impose the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters who feature conservative hosts.

By a 309-115 vote, the House barred the Federal Communications Commission from requiring conservative broadcasters such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly to balance their content with liberal programming. Once again, the Democrats tried the easy road rather than the intellectually honest one.

Advertisement

Recent statements from morons

We have eliminated the danger of sectarian war.

— Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki this week to visiting Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte.

I do think that it would not be a wise course to try to divine a pattern based on these decisions that came at the end of the session.

— White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, replying to a reporter who asked whether a series of 5-4 decisions handed down this week by the Supreme Court was “the kind of pattern that the White House had in mind when the President nominated [Chief Justice John] Roberts and [Associate Justice Samuel] Alito.”

Echoes from the culture wars: excerpts from immigration bill rhetoric

If you want to scare the American people, what you say is the bill’s an amnesty bill. That’s empty political rhetoric trying to frighten our citizens.

— President Bush May 29 at a training center for customs protection agents and other federal agents in southeastern Georgia.

You are the problem, Sen. [Trent] Lott. You and your Republican colleagues more interested in sucking up to Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid than in protecting our borders and sovereignty.

— Blogger Michelle Malkin, June 15.

Folks, I’m going to tell you something. If this happens, I’ve already told you that I think, as we sit here today, there is an 80% that Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States. If this happens, if this immigration bill goes through as the latest reports indicate that it might, we are doomed in ’08.

— Conservative radio talker Rush Limbaugh, May 17.

Waxman: ‘More dollars, less sense’ in Bush procurement spending

During the administration of President Bush, federal procurement spending has reached unprecedented levels, according to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

In a study titled “More Dollars, Less Sense” released today, Rep. Henry Waxman said more than half the such spending went to contracts not subject to full and open competition, according to Hill News. (See full report as PDF.) Says the News:

For the first time, 40 cents of every discretionary dollar spent by the federal government has gone to a contract with a private company.

State Dept. asked to hire ex-military gay linguists

If you’re fighting a war against an enemy who speaks a language — or several — you don’t know, you’re at a disadvantage. It would be hard to make sense of captured documents or question “enemy combatants,” glean useful intelligence from civilians or simply to make new friends for your side.

Donated computers with translation software would help, but it’s just not the same as being conversant in your foe’s language. You want your soldiers to be able to speak the language. But in Iraq, writes Jeff Stein, national security editor at Congressional Quarterly, “The war has been hobbled by a lack of language abilities in Iraq.” Part of the reason, says Stein, is the United States has sent people into theater with sub-par training.

The other reason: The military has been flushing its ranks of many Arabic and other language specialists — because they are gay. Yes, that’s not news. But there’s 300 ex-military linguists versed in the languages the enemy speaks who aren’t putting sorely needed expertise to work.

Democratic Congressmen Tom Landos (D-Calif.) and Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.) want to change that.

Bush patronage appointments to ambassador exceed father’s, Clinton’s

During the presidency of George W. Bush, nearly four out of every 10 of his nominees for ambassador have been “non-career appointees” — or what many would consider “political” appointees. Neither his father nor President Clinton had such a high percentage.

President Bush’s 36 percent rate exceeds the 29 percent of President Clinton’s ambassadorial nominees who were non-career appointees. During George Herbert Walker Bush’s presidency, about 31 percent were non-career appointees.

According to a Scholars & Rogues examination of records at the Office of the Historian of the Department of State, George W. Bush has made 370 ambassadorial nominations — of which 133 have been non-career appointees rather than career Foreign Service officers. President Clinton’s 431 nominations included 127 non-career appointees. The first President Bush made 272 nominations, of which 85 were non-career appointees.

Recent statements from morons

We’ve seen a number of times right now, people have been putting together investigations to see what sticks. They have had very little success so far. This is an administration that is very careful about obeying the law. [emphasis added]

— White House spokesman Tony Snow, responding to questions about apparent White House breaches of the Presidential Records Act in which 88 government officials improperly sent hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of emails through outside emails servers — e-mails that may have been illegally destroyed.

I consistently and voluntarily have made Justice Department officials available for interviews and hearings on this subject. I have taken these important steps to provide information for two critical reasons: (1) I have nothing to hide, and (2) I am committed to assuring the Congress and the American public that nothing improper occurred here. [emphasis added]

— Prepared statement of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales given May 10 to the House Committee on the Judiciary regarding the firing of eight United States attorneys.

Does money talk? Lobbying on immigration on the rise

As my colleague E Rocha pointed out earlier today, get ready for the next attempt to wrestle an immigration (or is it an anti-immigration?) bill through the U.S. Congress, complete with secrecy, parliamentary maneuvering, general political chicanery — and lobbying.

Don’t forget to keep an eye on the money. News stories, for reasons of brevity, usually refer to lobbying “groups” or “organizations.” Until one sees the lobbying activity by amount of money and name of player, it’s impact cannot be fully appreciated.

Earmarks: Congress hides money requests behind narrowed definition

Parents teach their children not to make promises they cannot — or will not — keep. In the matter of earmarks, more members of Congress should have listened to their parents.

Earmarks represent power. Members of Congress can direct how money drawn from the U.S. Treasury can be spent. For example, if a representative or senator wants to keep open a factory in his or her district that makes defense-related equipment, he or she can insert an earmark into the federal budget designating money for that use. Then he or she can claim credit for bringing that money into the district. There had been no requirement that an earmark be identified with a member of Congress. It could be a secret. So earmarks represented both power and secrecy, a democratically unhealthy combination.

Politicians like power and secrecy, especially when money is involved. So they have resisted mightily transparency in earmarks — revealing who sponsored what amount of money for what project benefiting whom. Transparency reduces power.

Recent statements from morons

I gotta learn how to laugh at myself.

— Laredo, Tex., Mayor Raul Salinas after fielding criticism for directing an employee of the Laredo Convention and Visitors Bureau at an airport information booth to remove copies of LareDOS, an alternative monthly newspaper whose “cover featured a drawing of traditional Mexican calaveras —skeletons — labeled as Salinas and the county judge dancing at the chance to do business with a corrections company that the paper has criticized.”

She’s just figuring things out.

— Britney Spears’ mother, Lynne, in a USWeekly interview about her 25-year-old, just-rehabbed, just-divorced, just-shorn, just-pussy-pictured, just-baby-car-seat-instructed, pre-divorce-worth-$50-million daughter.