Rand Paul Congressional Correspondents' Dinner VIDEO


Rand Paul M.D. U.S. Senator [R] KY, United States Length: 9 minutes, 25 seconds. The Radio and Television Correspondents Association gathered for their annual dinner. The 67th annual dinner was the first to be called the Congressional Correspondents’ Dinner.

Read more...

Ben Quayle Congressional Correspondents' Dinner VIDEO


The Radio and Television Correspondents Association gathered for their annual dinner.

Ben Quayle (R-AZ) takes on Obama, Biden, Gingrich, Weiner, Spitzer, and many others at Wednesday evening's Congressional Correspondents' Dinner (formerly the Radio-Television Correspondents' Dinner). The 67th annual dinner was the first to be called the Congressional Correspondents’ Dinner.


VIDEO CREDIT: PoliticoLach

Read more...

Charles Boustany Conducts Hearing on IRS Practices and the 2011 Filing Season

Charles.BoustanyWashington, DC – U.S. Congressman Charles W. Boustany, Jr., MD (R-Southwest Louisiana) today held a Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight hearing to discuss the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the 2011 Tax Return Filing Season. IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman was on hand to testify.

“Charged with administering this growing tax code, the IRS must simultaneously respect the rights of taxpayers, provide assistance to the millions of taxpayers who have questions about their taxes, and go after those who seek to cheat the tax system,” Boustany said in his opening statement. “The IRS’s dual mission of both revenue collector and social policy program administrator diverts IRS resources from its core mission and can diminish taxpayer service.
Among the biggest contributors to this problem is the new health care law, which gives IRS a host of new responsibilities, including the indoor tanning tax, new taxes and fees on employers and individuals, and a complex small business tax credit.”

Boustany indicated the committee’s desire to work on ways to reform the tax code. When asked if he felt the tax code was too complex, Commissioner Shuman responded, “Yes, it has become incredibly complex.”

As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Boustany plans to hold several hearings to look into government waste and spending in federal agencies.

###

Boustany Opening Statement: Hearing on Internal Revenue Service Operations and the 2011 Tax Return Filing Season

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Good morning. I would like to welcome everyone to today’s hearing on the Internal Revenue Service and the 2011 Tax Return Filing Season.

Today’s conversation about the IRS should begin with a topic too often ignored: the taxpayer. The National Taxpayer Advocate’s recent report to Congress provided some alarming facts on what the federal tax code has become, and how it affects the average taxpayer.

Every year, taxpayers face a tax code of growing complexity. For instance, there have been nearly 5,000 changes to the tax code in the past ten years. Between the period of 1975 and 2005, the code tripled in size. As a result of the growing length and complexity of the tax code, individual taxpayers and businesses spend an estimated 6.1 billion hours and $163 billion every single year simply complying with tax-filing requirements. The cost of compliance for your average individual taxpayer was over $250 in 2007.

As we meet today, we are in the middle of the 2011 tax return filing season and millions of individuals and businesses are working to meet their annual tax return filing obligations. As of March 18, IRS had processed over 73 million individual tax returns and issued nearly 65 million refunds totaling $193 billion. With two and a half weeks to go until the April 18 filing deadline, the Subcommittee looks forward to hearing more about the ongoing tax return season and any problems the agency and tax return filers might be encountering. The Subcommittee would also like to learn more about efforts the IRS has undertaken to improve the efficient processing of returns and refunds, including its e-filing modernization program.

Charged with administering this growing tax code, the IRS must simultaneously respect the rights of taxpayers, provide assistance to the millions of taxpayers who have questions about their taxes, and go after those who seek to cheat the tax system.

And the agency has to do this against a backdrop of ever increasing responsibilities to administer social policy programs. The IRS’s dual mission of both revenue collector and social policy program administrator diverts IRS resources from its core mission and can diminish taxpayer service. Among the biggest contributors to this problem is the new health care law, which gives IRS a host of new responsibilities, including the indoor tanning tax, new taxes and fees on employers and individuals, and a complex small business tax credit.

For FY 2012, the IRS has requested nearly $6 billion dollars, an increase of more than 8 percent from the FY 2010 appropriation. Included in this $6 billion is a request for nearly half a billion dollars, and over 1,200 new employees, to implement the health care law’s provisions. And the costs of the health care law do not end there. IRS’s implementation of the health care law is estimated to cost between $5 and $10 billion over the next ten years. So in addition to the current tax return filing season and the IRS budget request, I hope we can take this opportunity to discuss this dual mission and whether it hampers IRS’s core revenue collection responsibilities.

With that, I would like to welcome Commissioner Douglas Shulman here today, and I look forward to a fruitful discussion of his agency, its mission, and the ongoing tax return filing season.

I am now pleased to yield to our Ranking Member, Mr. Lewis.

###

TEXT and IMAGE CREDIT: Congressman Charles Boustany Washington, DC Office 1431 Longworth House Office Bldg Washington, DC 20515-1807 Phone: (202) 225-2031 Fax: (202) 225-5724

TEXT CREDIT: House Committee on Ways & Means 1101 Longworth HOB, Washington, D.C. 20515 Phone (202) 225-3625 Fax (202) 225-2610

Read more...

A failure to communicate

She said ≠ She heard

My colleague and I were making light conversation in the faculty room as we checked our mail-boxes.

“I see you have a clique of my former prealgebra students in your compressed algebra class,” Professor Turin observed. “I saw them hanging together before your class.”

“Oh, were they yours last semester? Most of them are doing pretty well,”

“I'm not surprised,” she said. Then she hesitated. “But how is Kara doing?”

I sighed.

“Poor Kara. Not well. The pace of the class has her quite stressed and she makes lots of mistakes. She really should have picked a more regular schedule.”

“That is exactly what I told her,” said Turin. “She was keen to take your class because of the compressed schedule and I warned her that it was a bad fit. She freaked out several times during my prealgebra and it was always about her fear of falling behind. I wish she had listened to me and enrolled in a regular section.”

“Yeah, well, what can you do?”

It was less than a week later that Kara read the handwriting on the wall and visited my office hour to inform me that she was cutting her losses and dropping my compressed algebra class.

“I could really use the time better on my other courses, Dr. Z. The class goes too fast and it's hard to understand.”

“That's a perfectly reasonable decision, Kara. It's important to make the best use of your time. You should do better next semester in a regular section of algebra.” I paused before asking her a question. “Did you talk to your prealgebra instructor before enrolling in my class?”

I deliberately did not mention my colleague's name or otherwise indicate that I had already discussed the matter with her. Kara brightened up immediately.

“Oh, yeah! I did! Turin said I could definitely do well in your class. She said I was all ready for it, but I guess things just didn't quite work out as we had expected.”

My eyebrows wanted to go up and my eyeballs wanted to bulge out, but I think I managed to control my facial features and maintain a mien of serenity.

“Well, yes, Kara. Things didn't work out this time. Better luck next time.”

After Kara left my office, I stalked the hallways looking for my colleague. Turin was in her office. I recounted my conversation with her former student. She was dumbfounded.

“That doesn't sound anything like the conversation we had. I tried really hard to warn her she was making a mistake!”

We considered the matter for a while. Clearly Kara had a ferociously effective data filter that allowed only good news to impinge on her consciousness. Since it is Professor Turin's nature to be encouraging and as positive as possible, I was certain she had sprinkled her cautions with snippets of praise that had been the only things Kara had heard. Eventually, Turin reconstructed her comments and we identified Kara's post-production editing.

What Turin said:

“You're a good prealgebra student, Kara, but Dr. Z's compressed algebra class would be a tough challenge. I'm certain a regular algebra class would be perfect for you.”

What Kara heard:

“You're a good prealgebra student, Kara, but Dr. Z's compressed algebra class would be a tough challenge. I'm certain a regular algebra class would be perfect for you.”

There's no simple cure for this. Certainly Turin isn't suddenly going to stop offering her students positive feedback, even if only as mitigating factors in a negative review. Equally certainly, Kara is not going to stop selectively hearing what she wants to hear. I fear the set of solutions may be the empty set.

Read more...

John Boehner Calls For House to Renew D.C. School Choice Program H.R. 471 VIDEO FULL TEXT


House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) speaks on the House floor in support of H.R. 471, legislation renewing the bipartisan, successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which has helped thousands of disadvantaged students gain access to a quality education. Boehner also submitted for the record letters from a parent and several students who hope the Obama Administration will work with Congress to ensure the program will continue.

H.R. 471 To reauthorize the DC opportunity scholarship program, and for other purposes in PDF FORMAT

TEXT and VIDEO CREDIT: JohnBoehner

Read more...

John Kline, Michele Bachmann, Erik Paulsen and Chip Cravaack Voice Concern Over Medical Device Tax

Michele BachmannLast night, Reps. John Kline (MN-02), Michele Bachmann (MN-06), Erik Paulsen (MN-03) and Chip Cravaack (MN-08) sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman voicing their concerns about the $20 billion medical device tax included in the new healthcare law. In January, Rep. Paulsen introduced the “Protect Medical Innovation Act” which would repeal the job-crushing medical device tax. Reps. Kline, Bachmann and Cravaack are among the bill’s 110 co-sponsors. Minnesota is home to over 400 medical device companies employing 35,000 people.

“The planned $20 billion excise tax on medical device manufacturers will lead to higher prices for devices and increased health care premiums. We also believe the tax will force medical device companies to reduce US employment and research and development expenditures,” said the letter. “We encourage you to look toward established industry sources to better understand the practicalities of the medical device market. As you work through this process, we need to learn more about your approach to these issues to ensure that the regulations do not exacerbate the impact on jobs and competitiveness resulting from the excise tax on medical devices.”

###

Contact: Becky Rogness 202-225-2331

MN Letter to IRS Commissioner Re Medical Device Tax in PDF FORMAT

H.R.436 -- Protect Medical Innovation Act of 2011 in PDF FORMAT

TEXT and IMAGE CREDIT: Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Proudly Serving the 6th District of Minnesota. # Washington Office 107 Cannon HOB Washington, DC 20515 Phone: (202) 225-2331 Fax: (202) 225-6475.

Read more...

Spencer Bachus We will reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac H.R. 1182 FULL TEXT

Spencer BachusWASHINGTON (March 29) – Congressman Spencer Bachus (AL-6) released the following statement about the proposals introduced today by several Republicans on the Committee to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Bachus is Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

“In our Pledge to America, House Republicans said: ‘We will reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by ending their government takeover, shrinking their portfolios, and establishing minimum capital standards.’ As Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, I want to make it clear: We are fully committed to these goals.

“On March 17, the Committee’s Vice Chairman, Rep. Jeb Hensarling, introduced H.R. 1182, a bill that represents Republicans’ ultimate objective, as articulated in the Pledge to America, to end the $150 billion bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and make sure that such a bailout is never again forced on the American taxpayer.

Bill Text 112th Congress (2011-2012) H.R.1182.IH in PDF FORMAT To establish a term certain for the conservatorships of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to provide conditions for continued operation of such enterprises, and to provide for the wind down of such operations and the dissolution of such enterprises.

“This comprehensive reform of the U.S. mortgage market will be supplemented by targeted bills which Capital Markets Subcommittee Chairman Scott Garrett will shepherd through his Subcommittee, all of which advance the same goal as the Hensarling bill: to create a well-functioning, private, competitive secondary mortgage market to price mortgages according to risk, be more innovative and efficient, and operate with less political interference.

“Finally, Insurance and Housing Chairman Judy Biggert will begin a parallel legislative effort to reform the Federal Housing Administration. This effort will focus on legislation to clearly define FHA’s mission and prevent it from simply replacing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as a source of taxpayer exposure to the mortgage market.

“The strength of the Republican Financial Services Committee team has been and will continue to be the cooperation and collaborative effort of its subcommittee chairmen. The reform of housing policy, which spans the jurisdiction of several subcommittees, will display the power of this willingness to work together and accomplish great things.”

TEXT and IMAGE CREDIT: Spencer Bachus Washington Office 2246 Rayburn Building Washington, DC 20515 (p) 202-225-4921 (f) 202-225-2082

Read more...

Rand Paul Responds to President Obama's Address 03/28/11 VIDEO FULL TEXT


Following President Obama's national address this evening regarding the situation in Libya, Sen. Rand Paul released the following remarks in response to the President.

VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT: Sen. Rand Paul Response to President Obama’s Address Time to consult Congress, follow Constitution before action Monday, March 28, 2011.

FULL TEXT TRANSCRIPT:

Rand Paul Responds to President Obama

The President of the United States often faces unforeseeable dilemmas that demand tough decisions based on reliable intelligence. The recent events in Libya presented President Obama with such a scenario. But how our Commander in Chief chose to handle this new dilemma raises serious questions about his understanding of constitutional checks and balances.

Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi is every bit the madman Ronald Reagan once said he was, but are the rebels adherents to Jeffersonian democracy or Bin Laden’s radical jihad?

In 2007, then-candidate Obama said that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

I agree with candidate Obama. Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to heed his own advice. He has ignored our constitution and engaged us in a military conflict without congressional debate and approval

What imminent threat did Gadhafi or Libya pose to the United States? Obviously, the decision to take military action of this magnitude is something that should not be taken lightly, and should first require determining whether it is in the United States’ vital national interest.

Over the weekend, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that America has no vital interest in Libya.

Our brave men and women in uniform are patriotic defenders of our nation. They are members of the greatest military in the world, and in times of war, I am confident of their willingness and ability to ensure that our vital interests are protected.

But they should not be asked to be nation-builders or the world's policemen. And they should serve in wars authorized and called for by the United States Congress, not the United Nations.

At the moment, there are uprisings taking place across the Middle East. The problem with sending U.S. military to help rebels in Libya or anywhere else is that we are taking sides in a conflict and on behalf of a people whom we know nothing about.

When, or if, there is regime change in Libya, what kind of leadership, exactly, will replace Gadhafi? Who are the Libyan rebels exactly? The Daily Telegraph newspaper in London reported over the weekend that some Libyan rebel leaders now claim they have members of al-Qaida within their ranks and are glad to have them. Why do we have American soldiers, our best and bravest, helping people in Libya who may be the very same people we ask our military to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Intervening in a civil war in a tribal society in which our government admits we have no vital interests to help people we do not know, simply does not make any sense. Libyan society is complicated, and we simply do not know enough about the potential outcomes or leaders to know if this will end up in the interests of the United States, or if we are in fact helping to install a radical Islamic government in the place of a secular dictatorship.

Of even more lasting concern is how our troops were committed to this battle by President Obama.

The Founding Fathers understood the seriousness of war and thus included in our Constitution a provision stating that only Congress can declare war. The decision to wage war should not be taken cavalierly. As Madison wrote:

The Constitution supposes what the history of all Governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.

If President Obama had consulted Congress, as our Constitution requires him to do, perhaps we could have debated these questions before hastily involving ourselves in yet another Middle Eastern conflict.

The Constitution doesn't say the president can wage war after he talks to a handful of Congressional leaders.

The Constitution says Congress – all of Congress – is responsible for declaring war.

While the President is the commander of our armed forces, he is not a king. He may involve those forces in military conflict only when authorized by Congress or in response to an imminent threat. Neither was the case here.

We are already in two wars that we are not paying for. We are waging war across the Middle East on a credit card, one whose limit is rapidly approaching. And this is just wrong.

We already borrow money from countries like China to pay for our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and it would be interesting to know how many Americans believe we should continue borrowing money and saddling future generations with debt to pay for our current actions in Libya.

The subtext to the President’s speech concerning Libya tonight was “What if we had done nothing?” But a better question might be, What if helping Libya’s interest actually hurts America’s interests? What if we are sending our military to places where we might actually be helping the same terrorists we fight in other countries or potential future terrorists?

It’s time that we re-examine these policies by once again consulting the Constitution on such matters and the common-sense principles that made this country great. We can no longer afford to spend what we don’t have. And we can’t afford to address every other nation’s problems before we can address our own.

Over the coming days and weeks, Congress will force President Obama to confront these questions. Our brave young men and women have answered the call of duty time and time again over the past decade. Our soldiers deserve, at the very least, that before we send them into a third war that Congress – the People’s House – deliberate, debate, and decide whether this war is in our vital national interests.

We will gather information, ask questions, and deliver our best advice about whether we, as the people's representatives, believe we should be at war. Whatever the outcome, we stand square behind our troops, and seek that their mission be clear and true.

Thank you for listening tonight, and God bless the United States of America.

TEXT CREDIT: Senator Paul, U.S. Senator for Kentucky:

VIDEO IMAGE and TEXT CREDIT: SenatorRandPaul

Read more...

John Boehner asks Five Simple Questions for Democrats on Spending Cuts

John BoehnerIt was 37 days ago that House Republicans passed H.R. 1, a clear plan for cutting spending to create a better environment for job growth and keeping the government funded for the rest of this fiscal year. But here we are, more than a month later, and nobody knows where the Democrats who run Washington stand on cutting spending – including Democrats themselves.

To help move the process along, we’d like answers to these five simple questions:

* 1) When will Senate Democrats offer a serious plan for cutting spending and funding the government for the rest of the fiscal year? AP noted that “[t]he House has voted for $61 billion in cuts” – H.R. 1. But Politico says “Senate Democrats haven’t put forward a long-term spending plan that can move through their chamber.” In fact, Democrats have “shown no ability to rally behind a long-term budget proposal.” So where is their plan?

* 2) Where does the White House stand on cutting spending and funding the government for the rest of the fiscal year? “Democrats on both sides of the Capitol say they have no idea where the White House stands or who’s running the show,” reports Politico. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) said on the Senate floor, “Our president has failed to lead this debate or offer a serious proposal for spending and cuts that he would be willing to fight for.” And Rep. Mike Capuano (D-MA) asked, “Where is the president going to lead? And are we going to follow?”

* 3) What exactly is the White House willing to cut? The Washington Post says “Democrats are being disingenuous by suggesting they have already worked hard to reduce spending or to reach out to Republicans.” Despite repeated claims by the White House and top Democrats, “when they're translated into real numbers, the White House is arguably meeting the GOP just one-sixth of the way — not halfway at all,” says AP.

* 4) What exactly are Congressional Democrats willing to cut? “The top two Democratic leaders in the House have twice split on whether to approve short-term government funding bills that cut billions from federal accounts,” reported Politico. And remember: the House-passed H.R.1 received more votes in the Democrat-run Senate than the status quo spending plan put forward by Democratic leaders.

* 5) Do Democrats intend to shut down the government because they can't agree among themselves? Politico says Democrats have been “wobbly in their budget message, divided on major votes and out of sync…” To mask these ongoing divisions – and their desire to keep the job-crushing spending binge going – Democrats have repeatedly rooted for a government shutdown. As CNN reported, “it is the Democrats talking most about shutting down the government.”

The new Republican Majority is working to clean up the mess left behind when “the Democratic-controlled Congress failed to pass a budget” last year. But we need to know – as Speaker Boehner asked the other day – “when it comes to cutting spending and keeping the government running, where are Washington Democrats?”

TEXT and IMAGE CREDIT: Speaker of the House John Boehner Contact H-232 The Capitol Washington, DC 20515 P (202) 225-0600 F (202) 225-5117

Read more...

Donald Trump if Pesident Obama was born in the United States he shoud have a birth certificate VIDEO



“They give you a certificate of live birth which anybody can get. Just walk into the hospital. This guy either has a birth certificate or he doesn't.”

Read more...

Michael Hayden Stephen Hadley CNN's State of the Union VIDEO


CNN's State of the Union with Candy Crowley talks to two former intelligence officials. Michael Hayden and Stephen Hadley about the task of removing Moammar Gadhafi from power.

Stephen John Hadley (born February 13, 1947, in Toledo, Ohio) was the 21st U.S. Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (commonly referred as National Security Advisor), serving under President George W. Bush.

Michael Vincent Hayden, (born March 17, 1945 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) is a retired United States Air Force four-star general and former Director of the National Security Agency. On May 8, 2006, Hayden was nominated by President George W. Bush to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency

VIDEO CREDIT: State of the Union with Candy Crowley

Read more...

Richard Lugar Meet the Press 03/27/11 TEXT VIDEO


MR. GREGORY: We are joined now by the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana.

Welcome to MEET THE PRESS, Senator.

SEN. RICHARD LUGAR (R-IN): Thank you very much.

Richard Lugar

MR. GREGORY: You've heard from Secretary Gates and Clinton. And I wonder, are you satisfied with the progress in Libya and with their explanation of our mission?

SEN. LUGAR: Well, I was startled to hear Secretary Gates say that Libya was not a vital interest, that Secretary Clinton then came in with the fact that our European allies are very disturbed about the situation. And, of course, we have justified military action as a humanitarian action to stop the shooting of civilians. I would just start by saying, before our nation goes to war or has military action, there must be a plan, there must be objectives, the endgame, what we want to, to achieve. And then, at least, some means as to how that's going to occur. That has not happened as yet, and the president has said we've had success because Gadhafi would have murdered many people in Benghazi. But the fact is that there was fighting in Benghazi because the so-called rebels, the other people that are not Gadhafi supporters, started a civil war in Libya, following civil wars that had commenced in Tunisia and Egypt. And, and facts are that that civil war was proceeding and, in many cases, the rebels seemed to be winning, except when they got to Benghazi, or in Tripoli. So, at this point, we then adopt a no-fly zone with the thought of knocking out Gadhafi's aircraft. And then the ground zone situation in which we knocked out the tanks and trucks and the other situation.

Now, having done all of that, the fact is now that the rebels, as you pointed out, in Ajdabiya and...(unintelligible)...have come back, so that on the eastern side of Libya, the cities all seem to be lined up with the rebels. On the western side and Misrata, the Gadhafi people are trying to take that so they at least have all of that side of the country. And, in the meanwhile, we're saying that we're going to back off of the no-fly zone or take a much less of a role there, leave that to the Europeans. It--and it simply leaves the whole situation up for grabs in which there is hopefulness, maybe, that Gadhafi will leave or that something bad will happen to him, or, or, in fact, that somehow these persons who are the rebels who we really don't know, who have no particular government, are, are going to form something that is more friendly to us or to the Europeans.

MR. GREGORY: Well, let me ask you to unpack that a little bit. If it's not in our vital interest, bottom line, should we not be involved?

SEN. LUGAR: I think there should have been a plan for what our objectives were, a debate as to why this was in our vital interest before we committed military forces to Libya.

MR. GREGORY: It's interesting, the press secretary for the president, Jay Carney, said this was not, in fact, a war. This was, "A time limited, scope limited, military action." Do you think that that's a bit of dancing there? And does the president, when he speaks to the nation, have to be more forthright about what we're engaged in?

SEN. LUGAR: Well, when I had the opportunity to ask the president during this telephonic conference that Secretary Clinton has mentioned, he justified action as a humanitarian gesture, that it would have been unconscionable to stand by while Gadhafi murdered people in Benghazi. As a result, these people were saved, and now we move backward in terms of our obligations in the situation. An, an event no boots on the ground. The president has reiterated that. So this means, in essence, the Libyans are still going to have to solve their civil war. We've pretty well knocked out Gadhafi's air force and many of his tanks, but the fact is that the country is still very divide with east and west cities...

MR. GREGORY: And what is our commitment? What is our commitment to that civil war?

SEN. LUGAR: Well, I don't believe we should be engaged in the Libyan civil war. I believe the Libyans are going to have to work that out. The fact is that we don't have particular ties with anybody in the Libyan picture, and we will have to at least adjust to whatever that outcome may be. But, as far as we're concerned, as Secretary Gates has said, it is not of vital interest to the United States. American interests are not at stake, and we clearly have already done much more than our part with regard to the no-fly zone, with regard to European friends.

MR. GREGORY: Will it require more funds from the government for this military operation?

SEN. LUGAR: Of course. And that's what I stated from the beginning. There has to be objectives and a plan and an agreement that we're prepared to devote the military forces but also the money. It makes no sense, sort of in the front room, where in Congress we are debating seemingly every day the deficits, the debt ceiling situation coming up, the huge economic problems we have; but in the back room we are spending money on a military situation in Libya. Estimates are that about $1 billion has already been spent on an undeclared war in Libya.

MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.

SEN. LUGAR: Some would say only hundreds of millions, and that that will diminish in the days ahead. But what knows how long this goes on? And furthermore, who has really budgeted for Libya at all? I have not really heard the administration come forward saying that we're going to have to devote these funds, folks. And therefore something else will have to go or it simply adds to the deficit.

MR. GREGORY: Let me ask you, finally, Senator Lugar, can the U.S. and its allies accomplish the mission that they've set out to achieve if Moammar Gadhafi remains in power?

SEN. LUGAR: Probably not. In large part, since we have taken the position that Moammar Gadhafi is an especially evil, bad dictator, and we have now indicated, the president said that he must go, he lacks legitimacy and so forth. Others have made the same statement. But if, in fact, he stays, is successful with his forces in subduing the rebels, then we are going to have to deal with Gadhafi and whatever we have there. I think there is sort of a vague hope still, animated by Secretary Clinton, that perhaps he may be thinking about where he might go, or with his money and his family and so forth, who might accept him in the world and sort of slip out of the picture. But even if he did...

MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.

SEN. LUGAR: ...the forces that are allied with him may very well still prevail in the civil war.

MR. GREGORY: All right. We will leave it there. Senator Lugar, thank you very much.

SEN. LUGAR: Thank you.

TEXT IMAGE and VIDEO CREDIT: www.msnbc.msn.com/

Read more...

Publish and perish?

Wisconsin GOP channels Joe McCarthy

There's this history professor back at the University of Wisconsin, ensconced in an endowed chair at the Madison campus. He decided it would be nice to start a modest little blog. He even had a catchy title: “Scholar as Citizen.” You can already see that it was a fail-safe proposition. Soon the hit-meter would be recording Internet traffic on a gargantuan scale. No doubt.

He posted his first blog entry on March 15, not even a couple of weeks ago. Its title was as irresistible as the name of his blog: Who's Really Behind Recent Republican Legislation in Wisconsin and Elsewhere? (I've probably lost you now; the title is so seductive you've certainly already clicked on the link.) The inevitable happened: over half a million hits in a handful of days.

I am so jealous.

But I don't envy what happened next. The Wisconsin Republican Party decided that UW Madison's Bill Cronon, the Frederick Jackson Turner Professor of History, Geography, and Environmental Studies, is a dangerous radical who must immediately be stifled into silence—even, ideally, hounded from academia. The state GOP filed an open-records request with UW demanding access to Professor Cronon's e-mail, hoping to find something embarrassing if allowed to root through his archives. (Remember, a handful of words in a private e-mail can be inflated into an international scandal if ideologues are willing to clutch their pearls and shriek in affected outrage; the ginned-up “Climategate” furor proved that.)

Cronon has published his own detailed commentary on the Republican fishing expedition, correctly pointing out its McCarthyist antecedents and winkling out the purely political motivations of the GOP's incipient smear campaign by closely reading the text of the Republicans' open-records request. He declines to be intimidated.

Smart ALEC

Cronon's greatest sin appears to have been his discussion of the American Legislative Exchange Council. What, you've never heard of ALEC? As Cronon pointed out in his original post, ALEC much prefers to lurk in the background. Its on-line archive of “model legislation” is not open to the public and membership in ALEC is strictly controlled. (Are you a right-wing elected official or a deep-pockets teabagger with money to contribute? Come on down!)

ALEC drafts legislation which Republicans are wont to introduce in their various state legislatures, pulling ready-made extremist boilerplate off the ALEC shelf to add to their bill drafts. It's like “writing” a term paper by downloading an Internet document, except that technically it's not plagiarism. ALEC is eager for legislators to attempt to enact the components of its political program.

While ALEC tries to hide in the shadows, its influence on public policy is potentially revealed whenever its model legislation is actually published as a legislator's introduced bill. Cronon was rude enough to connect the dots and expose ALEC's influence in recent Republican legislation, especially in Wisconsin. But ALEC's close-mouthed membership and blocked website prevent the average citizen from peeking at the man behind the curtain. What else might these right-wing ideologues have in store for us? How can we find out? Must we wait till the legislation actually appears?

I may be able to help a little. You see, I have a copy of ALEC's Source Book of American State Legislation. It's in the form of a small paperback that I glommed onto while working as a legislative aide in Sacramento, where some ALEC-friendly Republicans were pushing draconian tax-cutting measures like the infamous Proposition 13 and the subsequent (and lesser-known because it failed) Proposition 9. I no longer recall precisely how I acquired it (my boss was hardly likely to have been one of ALEC's favorites), but I suspect I picked it up out of curiosity from the discard pile outside a Republican legislator's office and decided to keep it.

The book begins by offering a bogus quote from Abraham Lincoln, the long-since refuted litany that begins, “You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.” Perhaps it's significant that ALEC's book opens with a hoax, especially given the hollow-shell justifications of Republican politicians who claim that collective bargaining must die if workers are to prosper. I presume they will soon introduce measures to establish more prisons and workhouses to manage the poor.

Is the old ALEC paperback out-of-date and of little use to us today? I think not. Although it carries a publication date of 1980, the 92-page booklet is oracular in its contents. The nutcase wet-dreams of yesteryear are the standard policy planks of today's teabagger politicians. Here, for your edification, is a sampler of the Source Book's list of model legislation. The headings are from the booklet and the descriptions are excerpted from the actual text. A few may seem like motherhood and apple pie (both of which, come to think of it, are now more controversial than they used to be), but there are some real nuggets of crazy in here. The first item is especially pertinent (complete with Wisconsin reference!).

Controlling the Bureaucracy

Public Services Protection Act. The suggested Public Services Protection Act prohibits contractual agreements between all governmental subdivisions of the state and any public employee union or association. This prohibition safeguards against the incidence of public employee strikes which are inseparable from the collective bargaining process and present a danger to the health, safety and general well-being of all state residents. Since 1959, when the first compulsory public sector bargaining legislation was enacted in Wisconsin, there has been a dramatic increase in public employee unionization and in the incidence of public employee strikes.

Enterprise Zone Act. The suggested Enterprise Zone Act establishes a mechanism for the establishment of enterprise zones—areas of inadequate population and limited economic activity which have been released from most government controls and regulations in order to promote economic and population revitalization.

Fiscal Responsibility

Tax Limitation—State Constitutional Amendment.. To prevent taxes from increasing year after year, a state constitutional amendment has been suggested that would limit the total amount of taxes that can be imposed by the state. The tax revenue limit would be an appropriate percentage of total annual personal income in the state, and has ranged between 6 per cent and 14 per cent in those states where the amendment has been proposed.

Spending and Debt Limitation Amendment. The suggested Spending and Debt Limitation Constitutional Amendment would limit the growth of state spending to the estimated growth of the state economy as established by law.

Death Tax Reform Act. The suggested Death Tax Reform Act remodels the state estate tax computation system. Reform of this system is necessary in order to ease some of the financial burden imposed on a decedent's estate, thus providing that more of the value of the estate be passed on to family and other heirs. [Various thresholds on estate taxes protect families and small businesses, but these are deemed inadequate by those who want to protect inherited wealth by completely eliminating what they insist on calling the “death tax.”]

Fundamental Rights.

The Right to Work Act. The suggested Right to Work Act establishes public policy with respect to compulsory or “closed shop” unionism. The Right to Work Act protects the right of each person to join or decline to join any labor union or association without fear of penalty or reprisal.

Sagebrush Rebellion Act. The suggested Sagebrush Rebellion Act establishes a mechanism for the transfer of ownership of millions of acres of unappropriated public lands from the federal government to the states.

Student Freedom of Choice Act. The suggested Student Freedom of Choice Act would prohibit the collection of mandatory student activity fees in state-operated colleges and universities.

Criminal Justice

Crime Victims Compensation Act. The suggested Crime Victims Compensation Act enables the creation of District Crime Victims Compensation Boards to hear claims and to make monetary awards to innocent persons who suffer catastrophic loss as as result of violent criminal victimization.

Improving Education

Textbook Content Standards Act. The suggested Textbook Content Standards Act establishes the requirement that textbooks and teaching materials adopted for use in public schools accurately portray American history, tradition and values. Abraham Lincoln said, “The philosophy of the classroom today is the philosophy of the government tomorrow.” [There's no citation, of course. Is this another bogus Lincoln quote? If so, how nice to find it in an item about accuracy in textbooks!]

Honor America Act. The suggested Honor America Act requires that all public elementary and secondary school students recite the Pledge of Allegiance during each school day.

Governmental Affairs

Washington, D.C. Amendment Rejection Resolution. The suggested Washington, D.C. Amendment Rejection Resolution provides legislatures with a formal method of detailing their reasons for opposition and rejection of the proposed Washington, D.C. Constitutional Amendment. [In other words, the black citizens of D.C. are disenfranchised and we want to keep it that way.]

Energy

More American Energy Program. Tight supplies of crude oil and refined petroleum products have stirred a great deal of interest in the increased production of domestic conventional fuels and the development of alternate fuels and renewal energy resources. [This entry starts off well, outlining a seemingly reasonable program of tax incentives for solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass energy projects. It includes elimination of redundant bureaucratic regulation—sounds good, but could mean deregulation in practice—and one-stop permit processes. Then comes the next “reform,” which is the poison pill in the mix.] Requirement that state departments of energy regulations and standards meet, but not exceed in restrictiveness, those required by the Federal Clean Air Act of 1977. [ALEC loves states' rights except when California enacts stricter air standards than those promulgated by the feds. Right.]

Resolutions

Voluntary School Prayer Resolution. Resolved, by the Legislature of [name of state], each house concurring, that this legislature respectfully urges the Congress of the United States to propose a constitutional amendment authorizing the several states to enact legislation permitting voluntary, non-denominational prayer in their public schools.

Plus ça change

As you can see from the above compendium, ALEC's 1980 legislative program is not only alive and well, much of it is already embodied in measures introduced or enacted across the country. It was impolitic of Prof. Cronon to point this out. He dared teach us some contemporary history. By the terms of ALEC's accuracy-in-education standards, he would have been well advised to concentrate on adumbrating our nation's Christian heritage and the anti-union convictions of the Founding Fathers.

Let us all be grateful that he didn't!

Read more...

Bob McDonnell Weekly Republican Address TEXT VIDEO 03/26/11


FULL TEXT TRANSCRIPT:

Hi I'm Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, Before I begin today, I want to thank the brave men and women of our armed forces for their selfless service during recent operations in Libya, and their ongoing great work in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their relief efforts in Japan.

Gov. Bob McDonnell

Virginia is home to many of our nation’s most important military installations, and we thank these courageous Americans for their defense of the freedom and liberty that we hold dear.

Like most governors, my top priority for our Commonwealth is ensuring fiscal responsibility and helping the private sector create the good jobs our citizens need.

Here in the states, we have to balance our budgets. We can’t print money, and we have....
... strict debt limits, so we have to live within our means. We manage our state budgets like you run your family and business budgets. That means making tough choices.

When I took office last year, we faced historic budget deficits of $6 billion here in Virginia. And we closed those deficits by cutting spending, not raising taxes. In the process we reduced state spending to 2006 levels -- and turned a shortfall into a surplus.

We’ve acted in a fiscally responsible manner here in Richmond. And that’s what Republican governors from Madison to Austin and Tallahassee to Albuquerque are doing right now.

But our work in the states is at risk of being undermined by some of the unrealistic and irresponsible policies that are coming from Washington.

Chief among those: the passage, one year ago this week, of the federal healthcare bill.

Unlike states, families, and businesses, the federal government doesn’t have to balance its budget. And that unfortunate reality leads to policies like the federal healthcare bill that push expensive, unfunded and unsustainable programs onto the rest of us. Washington passes the law, and then expects us to balance the books.

One year after the federal healthcare bill was rammed through the Congress in a partisan vote, we now see it has more to do with expanding control by the federal government than actually reforming our healthcare system.

The 2,700-page legislation simply will not work. It creates new entitlements and bureaucracies, and could cost all of us in fewer jobs and lost opportunities.

The law shifts billions in unfunded mandates onto state governments, and rigid new requirements restrict the governors’ abilities to manage our state programs. The result: higher costs, less innovation and freedom. That’s a prescription for serious problems at the state level, where much of this plan must be implemented.

Most notably, the federal healthcare bill dramatically expands Medicaid, which was already growing at unsustainable rates.

In Virginia alone, state spending on Medicaid has grown by a staggering 1,600% over the past 27 years. The program now accounts for 21% of our entire general fund budget, and is projected to grow another 26% between 2012 and 2016. Under the federal healthcare bill, Virginia will be forced to spend $2 billion more on Medicaid between 2014 and 2022.

The more spending required for Medicaid entitlements, the less money available for roads, schools, law enforcement and higher education. The more mandates on employers, the less jobs that they can create. This federal law will lead to painful decisions that will impact every American.

The federal healthcare bill is not only a budget buster, it’s also unconstitutional.

Virginia, like the majority of states, is challenging this legislation in court. Already a federal district court judge has ruled in our favor, concluding that the provision that a Virginia citizen must purchase insurance or face a penalty is unconstitutional.

Courts have split on this issue. Everyone agrees that the case will ultimately be decided by the United States Supreme Court. But now the very same administration that was in such a rush to pass the bill is in no hurry to find out if it’s legal. And that’s an answer we all need to know.

The legal issues must be settled promptly by the court to create certainty and finality for healthcare providers, businesses and all Americans. Shockingly, the Obama administration opposes an expedited appeal to the Supreme Court, preferring the potential for years of costly litigation in the lower courts.

Regardless of party, we should all agree that the sooner we know if the law is constitutional, the better for the American people.

Also, we can all agree that we must make our health system more affordable, accessible and accountable.

Republican governors are on the front lines of this effort.

We believe that the best way to do that is by repealing this burdensome and bureaucratic bill and replacing it with innovative free-market policies that drive down costs and increase coverage.

We can do that by instituting real lawsuit reform, allowing citizens to purchase healthcare insurance across states lines, encouraging health savings accounts, allowing voluntary market-based purchasing pools and exchanges and focusing on prevention and real health maintenance. Those are just a few of the ideas.

We need policies that give greater freedom to citizens and employers and don’t overly burden states and businesses. Policies that recognizes what history teaches well: and that is that the creative solutions of the free market beat one-size-fits-all plans of big government.

Here in your state capitols, Republican governors are leading the effort to cut government spending, keep taxes low, help the private sector create jobs, provide access to affordable healthcare and get our economy back on track by making our states more competitive.

We are asking this administration to join us in the effort. Thank you for taking the time to listen today and have a great weekend. ####

VIDEO and IMAGE CREDIT: gopweeklyaddress

Read more...

Why wait till 2012?

The San Francisco Chronicle's “Bad Reporter,” Don Asmussen, neatly pots the crazy Minnesota congresswoman with an anticipatory cartoon. I'm just concerned it will give Bachmann ideas. Run for president a year early? It's just crazy enough to work!

Read more...

John Boehner “The Status Quo Is Unacceptable, and That’s All Washington Democrats Are Offering”

John Boehner and Republican leadership

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is joined by, left to right, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI), and Natural Resources Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) at a press conference to announce the American Energy Initiative. March 10, 2011.
Speaker Boehner on Cutting Spending: “The Status Quo Is Unacceptable, and That’s All Washington Democrats Are Offering”

Washington (Mar 25) House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement regarding Washington Democrats’ continued failure to offer a credible, long-term plan to cut spending and keep the government running:

“It has now been 34 days since the House passed H.R. 1 to keep the government running through September and make the spending cuts economists say are needed to end the uncertainty facing job creators. At no point in the 34 days since the House acted have the Democrats who run the Senate and the White House put forward a credible, long-term plan to resolve their budget mess. Instead, Washington Democrats continue to downplay the severity of their budget mess, and the uncertainty it’s causing job creators in America.
We have been ready to do the people’s work, but we weren’t sent here to negotiate with ourselves. Many questions remain, starting with: when it comes to cutting spending and keeping the government running, where are Washington Democrats? If they have a plan, what is it? If Democrats don’t have a plan, do they intend to shut down the government because they can't agree among themselves? The status quo is unacceptable, and right now that is all Washington Democrats are offering.”

TEXT CREDIT: Speaker of the House John Boehner Contact H-232 The Capitol Washington, DC 20515 P (202) 225-0600 F (202) 225-5117

IMAGE CREDIT: SpeakerBoehner

Read more...

Michele Bachmann Nuclear Power Remains Vital VIDEO


Rep. Bachmann joined David Asman and Liz Claman on Bulls and Bears on Fox Business today. She spoke about why the situation in Japan can be a learning opportunity for the U.S. Our nation should not do away with nuclear power, but rather we can put greater safety measures into place and new responses into place because of what happened in Japan. Bachmann also discussed her "no" vote on the continuing resolution, due to the fact the CR did not included language to defund ObamaCare

TEXT and VIDEO CREDIT: RepMicheleBachmann

Read more...

Jim Jordan, Tim Scott, Scott Garrett Welfare Reform Act of 2011 VIDEO.


Jim Jordan, Tim Scott, Scott Garrett Welfare Reform Act of 2011 Bill Summary & Status 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) H.R.1167

Republican Study Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), Rep. Tim Scott (R-SC), and RSC Budget and Spending Task Force Chairman Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ) have introduced the Welfare Reform Act of 2011. This legislation will help food stamp recipients become independent of government assistance, give taxpayers a clearer picture of national welfare spending, and return the federal welfare budget to pre-recession levels after unemployment falls to 6.5%. Currently, there are 77 means-tested federal programs that provide benefits specifically to poor and low-income Americans.

“Welfare’s chief function should be to help people reach the point where they no longer need it,” said Chairman Jim Jordan. “Decades of experience prove we can’t just throw money at the problem of poverty. We need a smarter approach that promotes self-reliance and acknowledges the interconnected nature of all our anti-poverty programs. At the end of the day, the most effective welfare benefit is the one that leads to a job.”

“I am proud to be a principal co-sponsor of the Welfare Reform Act and will work with my colleagues to see this measure advance through the House,” said Rep. Tim Scott. “We have seen welfare spending continue to rise dramatically, even as the number of Americans living at or below the poverty level increases. We should seek to break the cycle of poverty and offer a path to self-reliance, and with it, self-respect.”

“The Welfare Reform Act takes the necessary step of reforming an antiquated system tainted with inefficiencies and consumed by costly government spending,” said Rep. Scott Garrett. “I’m proud to stand with my colleagues in supporting this important bill that streamlines our country’s welfare system and promotes self-reliance as the solution to poverty in America.”

Since President Johnson declared a War on Poverty in 1964, Americans have spent $16 trillion on welfare at the state and federal level. Congressional Republicans and President Clinton enacted reforms in 1996 that required beneficiaries of a new program (TANF) to either work or prepare for a job. Millions of families have since moved off the TANF rolls and begun to provide for themselves.

Despite the success of these reforms, national welfare spending has almost doubled since 1996 and could total more than $10 trillion over the next decade. Even with all these resources devoted to assistance for the poor, poverty is higher today than it was in the 1970s.

Key Points on the Welfare Reform Act of 2011

* Building on the Success of 1996 – TANF-like reforms will help food stamp recipients become self-reliant by requiring able-bodied adult beneficiaries to work or prepare for a job.
* Disclosure of National Welfare Spending – To provide taxpayers a clearer picture of the money they spend on means-tested welfare at all levels of government, each year the President’s budget will report figures for total federal, state, and local welfare spending over the ensuing decade.
* Return to Pre-Recession Budget – In the first budget written after unemployment falls to 6.5% or lower, overall federal spending on means-tested welfare will return to its 2007-level and be allowed to grow with inflation.

TEXT CREDIT: Republican Study Committee (RSC) - The Caucus of House Conservatives FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

VIDEO CREDIT: RepublicanStudyComm

Read more...

Five Star: The Sweetest




Finally I’d manage to step into that fully crowded bus. Apart from getting rid of hot sun, sitting under air conditioner, writing so many articles and submitting it in many wonderful social sites; what attracts me in my office is the bonding between colleagues. In fact, I hate to call them my colleagues-they are my very close friends. Oh! I’m about to reach the bus stop named City Stand where I’d to get down. I still wonder how come that place got such a name! On my way to office, I never miss to give a glance to Amrita TV’s bureau. I’d done internship there for fifteen days. From there, I got a group of wonderful media friends who are still in touch with me. Walking all the way, I reached my office. As uncle, our boss’ dad, used to say our company is a small family. There are only five employees- three females and two males. Being the youngest, I’m their pet I guess!

When I entered, as usual, Roshna has come. She is a very talented girl whose boldness I admire very much. She comes to the office first. She is too helpful, friendly and hardworking. She sings well and plays music in a very high volume. So we call her the DJ of our company. In the initial days, I thought she had a little head weight. But now, she is almost like my elder sister whom I can tell anything. Here comes Amith, the guy with whom I always keep fighting. He is very sweet and lovable friend. Whenever we both fight, others ask us to stop quarrelling. But once we stop, they wonder how we became friends. Another interesting thing about me and Amith is that we haven’t talked even a single word in the first week when I joined. He plays guitar and because of his talent, our boss has gifted Amit his own guitar.

“Goooood Mooorning”….Yeah! That is Basabi, our manager. She comes carrying her laptop bag that is too big for her size. With hands full of colorful bangles and trendy earrings, she is an amazing creature. Her life story is almost like Chetan Bhagat’s Two States. She is a Bengali and her husband is a Tamilian. One of my colleagues gave her hubby a name, Rajappan; just to irritate her. But now it has ended up in such a way that she also addresses him so, while talking to us. As soon as she came, she started describing about the scooty she is going to buy. Every day, we hear the same story. Still it is nice to listen to her stories. Amith calls me and Basabi as ‘foodies’ as if he never ate anything. On the spot, he got a nod on his head from manager saab.

Time is 11pm. The final bird of our nest, Nikhil comes with his usual smile. He is a good friend who has a marvelous sense of humor. He is talks very slowly and many times stops in between saying nothing. He also goes to guitar class with Amith in weekends. So when they come to office, this is their main point of discussion. Nikhil’s main hobby is looking down through the window and explaining us what is going outside.

Article writing, chats through skype, lunch and tea breaks, gossips about Rihanna and music make another day colorful. It is hard even to imagine missing anyone of these four buddies. Our bond is becoming stronger day by day. Some relations are hard to build and hardest to break...

Read more...

Joe Miller to chair Western Representation PAC

Joe MillerSPARKS, NV -- Western Representation PAC (website: www.WesternPAC.org), one of the largest and fastest-growing conservative action groups in the country, announced today that former Alaska US Senate Republican nominee Joe Miller, is the PAC’s new Chairman. Miller is replacing Dustin Stockton, who founded the PAC and has assumed the role of Chief Strategist for the organization.

Regarding the announcement Miller said, "I am thrilled to be joining the Western Representation PAC. Despite being formed fairly recently, the PAC was able to gain strong support and make an important impact during the 2010 election cycle. We plan to build on that great start and bring the voice of ‘We the People’ to bear even more as we move towards 2012."

Miller joins the organization as it continues its campaign against the overbearing influence and unsustainable cost of government employee unions. Western Representation PAC spearheaded the nationwide support for Gov. Scott Walker. The group launched an aggressive ad campaign supporting Walker's commitment to balanced budgets and ending compulsory unionism. We will be supporting similar efforts across the country.

“We couldn’t be more excited to have Joe Miller join our team,” said Stockton. “His character, and his commitment to protecting the values that make America the greatest nation on Earth, make Joe the perfect man to chair our organization.”

Western Representation PAC supported Miller in his stunning primary victory over Sen. Lisa Murkowski. The group also ran independent expenditure campaigns in Nevada and Massachusetts.

Stockton formed Western Representation PAC with his father, Roger Stockton, in early 2009, with the goal of making a difference in the political process.

Beginning with no financial or political backing, the organization has become one of the largest and fastest-growing political organizations in the nation thanks to over 250,000 supporters across the country.

###

TEXT CREDIT: www.WesternPAC.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 23, 2011 CONTACT: Roger Stockton at (775) 313-5800 or Roger@WesternPAC.org

Read more...

Sexy Nude Celebrity Hot Female Celebrity