Democrat Hit List Targets BP Republicans

Get this. Democrats have added five Republican senators to their "hit list," naming them BP Republicans. Nevermind that Barack Obama received the biggest donation of anyone in Congress from BP, and millions arrived in the warchests of prominent Democrats. Ah, none of that has anything to do with "the list." The list is merely...convenient - and targets hotly contested seats. To be clear (as Obama would say), it really has nothing to do with BP, and everything to do with a Democrat smear. Democrat funds will flood into these races. Read below what you can do about it.

Democrat Hit List

The Liberal battle cry ringing forth: "stop standing in the way and start working with President Obama and Democrats," the list names a Republican senator and a Republican congressman Sen. David Vitter (LA) and Rep. Joe Barton (TX). The remaining three are candidates trying to unseat Democrats: Candidates for the Senate, Ron Johnson (WI), Dino Rossi (WA) and Pat Toomey (PA).

Previously designated BP Republicans are Rep. Joe Barton (TX) and candidates for the Senate, Sharron Angle (NV) and Rand Paul (KY).

Let's keep these people on our donations list - as little or as much as possible to give. If you have not made online donations before, it is very, very easy. It is safe and your name can be kept private. It takes about 2 minutes, no longer. Every cent counts, and if you do donate, please put a notation that you are donating with the Ten Buck Friday bloggers and readers. No on in Ten Buck Fridays benefits in any way by the donations made. Our Internet presence can be a force for great good. By the time November rolls around, let's make our candidates aware that we are here, working for them, knowing they will be working for us.

DeMint Vitter Try to Stop Federal Funding for Obama's Arizona Lawsuit

Republican Senators Jim Demint (SC) and David Vitter (LA) have introduced an amendment to "prohibit federal funding" for the government's lawsuits against the state of Arizona.

David Vitter and Jim DeMint

Senator David Vitter is the chairman of the U.S. Senate Border Security and Enforcement First Immigration Caucus. Senator Jim DeMint is chairman of the U.S. Senate Steering Committee.  The DeMint-Vitter amendment includes prohibiting funds to the Department of Justice and other government agencies attempting to sue Arizona for SB 1070. Source: Daily Caller

From Senator Vitter's website:

Arizona’s new law, SB 1070, grants state law enforcement officials the authority to enforce federal immigration laws by allowing them to inquire about immigration status of individuals who are lawfully stopped for other crimes. The law explicitly forbids racial profiling. As many as 18 states are considering similar laws, as reported by the Associated Press, including Florida, South Carolina, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Michigan. 

From Senator DeMint:

“States like Arizona shouldn't be prosecuted for protecting their citizens when the federal government fails to do so,” said Senator DeMint. “The federal government is rewarding illegal behavior and encouraging many more to enter our nation illegally when they refuse to enforce our laws. States along the border are facing kidnappings, drug trafficking, human trafficking and gang violence and they have a duty to keep their residents safe. Instead of suing states for doing his job, the President should get serious and stop holding border security hostage to pass amnesty and score points with his liberal base.” 

Odd that this Department of Justice is interested in suing a state attempting to apply federal law, but ignores sanctuary cities who routinely bread federal illegal migrant laws. That oddity is being discussed everywhere today. There are more than 50 sanctuary cities in the U.S.

ClimateGate: Sea Ice Returns: Senate Demands NASA Flawed Data Explanation

As the true loons of global warming pretend that ClimateGate has not happened, we learn that Artic Sea ice  is "about to hit normal," for the first time since 2001, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center for this time of year. The U.S. Senate is finally demanding explanation from NASA about their roll in global warming and their flawed climate data.

There's a lot of ClimateGate news out. The following compilation comes through the amazing Climate Depot. Here are some discussions you might be interested in:

Why Climate Models Lie: Article says "climate scientists have been less than truthful" about their data. We certainly know this to be true after ClimateGate, but this is a good overview of deceptions we can attribute to faulty (inaccurate) computer data.

Senators Demand Explanation of NASA Flawed Climate Data. Two Republican Senators, John Barraso (WY) and David Vitter (LA) has written to NASA Chief Charles Bolden saying the American people deserve to know the truth about the data. They point to "corrupted data," and have asked Bolden to testify before the Senate. Read Senator Barrasso's letter to NASA:

We shouldn't make decisions affecting millions of American jobs when the data isn't credible. 

And then, there's this: NASA Data Worse than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits. How disgusting is it that our own American NASA is a fraud. It makes me sick to my stomach to even think about it. But...

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched ClimateGate data.

Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute says of NASA's four temperature data sets,  "three out of the four...stink." Anyway we look at it, NASA employees are government employees, and it pains me to put it that way.

Whitewashing Professor Jones and CRU: Across the pond, where all the data was accumulated and supposedly "organized" by climate-fraud-once-considered-guru, Professor Phil Jones, we learn that Jones and his fraudulent allies have escaped the whole debacle with their reputations "intact." The thing to remember here is that they escaped prosecution because of a 6-month statute of limitations law.

The report makes the amazing statement that 'The scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact," making the reader wonder what such a committee would consider enough to damage a Warming scientist's reputation - nothing it would seem!

And then, 56% trust Weathercasters more than Al Gore on Global Warming.

To Fairness Doctrine Naysayers: Support from RINOs

Graphic courtesy of CityPages
 

We now have the first Republican, Senator Richard Lugar, showing support for a Fairness Doctrine. Will Senators Olympia Snow, Chuck Hagel, and Susan Collins follow suit, and abandon any semblance of Conservatism? If ever there was an issue to be defended by Congress, Republican or Democrat, free speech is it. We have one thing to remember and to fight for: a Fairness Doctrine is diametrically opposed to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It's that simple:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment (enactment, endowment, formation, setting-up) of religion, or prohibiting (forbidding, preventing, suppressing) the the free exercise (pursuit) thereof; or abridging (abbreviating, compressing, curtailing, decreasing, lessening, omitting) the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition (ask, call upon, request, seek, urge) the government for a redress (adjustment, amendment, rectification, reformation) of grievances (damages, injustices)

Senator Dennis Kucinich is on record saying that a Fairness Doctrine will aid in:

...achieving a free exchange and a multiplicity of ideas," and finally, with a new law, we will be able to determine "if there is a balanced and fair representation"

The First Amendment does not guarantee "balanced and fair representation." "Fair and balanced" has nothing to do with the First Amendment. If Congress actually respects the First Amendment and makes "no law," but relies on the Federal Communications Commission to, again, institute a Fairness Doctrine - which would also abridge the First Amendment - is not law, but is a "regulation," what can we do about it? Take the FCC to court? For my activist readers, let's attempt to find out where Snowe, Collins and Hagel stand on this issue.

If you are a constituent of one of the three and get a statement, please leave it here in comments or blog about it and send a link.

Email Senator Lugar: (R-IN) Phone: 202-224-4814, Fax: 202-228-0360 (R-ME) Phone: 202-224-2523, Fax: 202-224--2693

Email Senator Snowe (R-ME) Phone: 202-224-5344 and 800-432-1599, Fax: 202-224-1946

Email Senator Hagel (R-NE) 202-224-4224, Fax: 202-224-5213

Visit VoteSmart for all the pertinent information and background about you Congressman Please read the following excellent report from Martin at Blogbat who was sitting at the table with Senator Richard Lugar:

*****

Senator Lugar Hints at Support for "Fairness Doctrine" by Martin at Blogbat.com Last week I [and] other World Affairs Council members had the chance to meet with Indiana Senator Richard Lugar at the Capitol.

During our visit with the Indiana Republican on 7 November, he seemed to offer his support for a revived “Fairness Doctrine” tailored to target only one viewpoint – that of the comparatively modest talk radio industry. On the topic of such legislation, Lugar seemed sympathetic to the significant hostility among the left towards what he called “irresponsible” “right wing” radio, using catch-phrases right out of the Idiots Guide to Liberalism, intimating that talk radio was somehow a rogue entity that merely stirred up the common people to the consternation of all-knowing legislators. (Never mind the rogue entity on Capitol Hill that is attempting to usurp the Constitution.) Senator Lugar first greeted each of us and was extremely friendly and cordial, before taking his usual seat (now that the Democrats are in power) in the Senate Foreign Relations committee room, as we each grabbed a chair – I wound up with the honor of holding down the chair of genuine conservative Louisiana Senator David Vitter.

Senator Lugar then gave us a quick run-down of things like the international financial crisis, his own biography, and the in-coming administration before taking questions. During much of this, much that was said was nothing notable or new. The senator is indeed truly likable man and I must say I can see why, politics aside, he has been as successful in the Senate as he has been. However, unfortunately, beyond personality and congeniality, the Senator and millions of Americans part ways – and do so on numerous issues.

However, Lugar, who voted in favor of an amendment in the 2007 Defense Authorization bill sponsored by Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman that would have killed such a censorship doctrine’s revival, is also known, as a Rockefeller Republican for among other things most recently ganging up with Ted Kennedy against the American people during the Amnesty war of 2006. Now that it seems safe for him to do so, he appears to be reversing his position on the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” as well. Lugar’s language was strong and even harsh as he laid out the argument in favor of conservative radio censorship, as if he were a schoolmaster educating his children about the danger of alligators and why we need to trap them. As he sat in his seat sipping water from a glass with an emblem that read, “United States Senate”, Senator Lugar seemed to offer what was hardly a fair and balanced assessment of the state of media bias of his own. Instead, he seemed to ape the utterly false meme that talk radio was some giant politically unified monster for which there was no real counterweight. Read more from Martin at Blogbat.us

*****

Related:
The Fairness Doctrine: What You May Not Know

Background: What the FCC and the Media Has in Mind for You and TheFairness Doctrine: A Chilling Effect, and then a brush-up on the The Fairness Doctrine, The First Amendment and all that.