ATP does it again! American Tradition Partnership Kills $100M Col. Utility Rate Hike

American Tradition Partnership Members Hold Off Colorado Utility Rate Hike
“Green” Energy Plan Would Have Hiked Rates by $50 to $100 Million

Denver, CO – With just hours until the General Assembly’s “crossover deadline” when legislation must pass through at least one house of the legislature or be declared dead, American Tradition Partnership (ATP) members lit up Colorado Senate phones and effectively stopped passage of S.B. 178.

If passed, S.B. 178 would force Colorado consumers to purchase an even greater percentage of renewable energy despite studies that show adding wind and solar to the utility grid actually cause more pollution.

Since renewable energy is much more expensive than traditional energy sources like coal and natural gas, S.B. 178 could have raised utility rates across Colorado by an estimated $50-$100 million or 25%.

Donald Ferguson, Executive Director of American Tradition Partnership – a grassroots organization dedicated to protecting property rights and battling environmental overreach stated, “Today’s defeat of S.B. 178 was a huge victory for hardworking Coloradans.”

“S.B. 178 was a last-ditch effort to salvage Colorado’s ‘renewable energy mandate.’ The Colorado Attorney General’s Office testified the current standard likely violates the U.S. Constitution.
ATP is currently a plaintiff in the lawsuit seeking to overturn Colorado’s Renewable Energy Standard in federal court for violating the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.    S.B. 178 was designed to overcome the legal complaints brought by ATP.

Currently, 30 states have some sort of renewable energy mandate and Ferguson is hopeful Colorado could be the linchpin in unraveling these schemes across the country, saying “S.B. 178 would have only made the current situation worse.”

Ferguson explained why these green schemes are a bad deal for consumers saying, “Just like the Solyndra scandal, so-called ‘renewable energy’ mandates are just another example of radical environmentalists using government force to line their own pockets at the expense of everyday Americans.

“And perhaps the most maddening thing is that renewable energy mandates do nothing to improve the environment!  Even President Obama’s EPA noted that the manufacturing process to create ‘green’ energy installations causes a jaw-dropping amount of pollution.  And studies show adding renewables to the grid results in more pollution than running coal or natural gas as baseload power sources.”

“The answer to America’s energy problems is the free market.  Government – and especially these schemes pushed by the radical environmentalists are getting us nowhere fast.  Just take a look at the price at the pump next time you get gas.”

###

Economy worsens as more Americans give up looking for work

Democrats are hailing new government report showing unemployment has fallen to 8.1 percent in April.
But the real numbers are sobering, and worrisome for millions of Americans.

For one, in eleven of the last twelve months the initial unemployment figure has had to be "revised" to show it was higher than initially reported.  So, in fact, the employment rate may actually have increased in April.

And second, the unemployment rate is calculated as what percentage of the labor force do not have a job and are looking for one.  In April labor force participation plunged to 63.6 percent, the worst it's been since December 1981.

The reason the unemployment rate fell is because the number of Americans who have given up looking for a job growing.  It's certainly not because enough jobs are being created.

Employers added 115,000 jobs last month.  It's the smallest increase in six months.

Even The Washington Post's reliably liberal Ezra Klein tweeted "Unemployment rate down to 8.1%, but for the wrong reason: people dropping out of labor force."

If labor force participation were the same as it were in March the unemployment rate would have risen to 8.4 percent.  Were it the same as when Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be over 10 percent.

Tweet or share this by clicking below.

Arizona 'Neo-Nazi' shooter a registered Democrat who praised Obama

JT Ready was a Democrat candidate for Pinal County Sheriff.

Well whaddaya know? The Arizona shooter the media claim is Republican? 

He's in fact a registered Democrat who praised Obama.

From none other than the Talking Points Memo just a few months ago.

"But elections records show he switched parties Jan. 13 and plans to run as a Democrat.

"He told TPM on Monday that he respects the Democratic Party’s history, saying it was the party that brought about Jim Crow laws and Alabama’s segregationist Gov. George Wallace. He said he also has a problem with tough-talking Republican sheriffs like Joe Arpaio and Babeu.

"All these, quote, border hero sheriffs — they sit there blaming the president while they’re not doing everything they can do,' Ready said.

"Obama is 'definitely not perfect in my book,' he added, but the Democratic president has sent more troops to the border and deported more immigrants than the sheriffs could ever hope to.

"Ready said he’s no longer a member of the National Socialist Movement..."

(HT Brooks Bayne)

Bryce Harper gets standing ovation in first MLB at-bat

See it here.

ObamaCare program claims packs of stray dogs control major cities

The idea of major American cities being controlled by packs of stray dogs may have been a gag to Will Ferrell, but Barack Obama is spending taxpayer money to fight them.

The Obama administration is spending part of the ObamaCare slush fund to spay and neuter pets, Paul Bedard reports.

Why are health care funds being spent to spay and neuter animals instead of providing health care?

Organizers claim, and I'm not kidding, the reason Americans don't exercise is they are afraid to leave their homes out of fear of dog attacks.



The actual Obama-funded flyer:

Obama's not the first with the campaign slogan "Forward"

Big-spending backer abandons Lugar as polls plunge

"The American Action Network is pulling out of the Indiana GOP Senate primary, dropping its efforts on behalf of embattled Sen. Dick Lugar less than two weeks before the May 8 election," POLITICO reports just minutes ago.

The group is dropping all television ads after Tuesday and has ceased online efforts to save Lugar.  AAN has bombarded the airwaves for weeks with television ads hammering conservative challenger Richard Mourdock.

Despite the heavy spending on behalf of Lugar the senior senator has fallen behind in polling in the May 8 election, prompting AAN to abandon Lugar.

"We've decided we're going to let this race play out," AAN spokesman Dan Consto tells POLITICO.

Tweet or share this by clicking below.

Voters have no faith in Obama or Romney's economic policies

For Americans heading to the polls this November only one issue matters -- creating jobs.

But an overwhelming majority of those voters say neither Barack Obama or Mitt Romney can do it.

A new Fox News poll released yesterday shows 61 percent of registered voters say Obama does not have "a clear plan for fixing the economy."  That number rises to 68 percent among the independent voters who will decide the election and is 58 percent among women.  Only 36 percent of registered voters expressed confidence in Obama's economic policies.

The numbers are just as bad for Romney.  58 percent of registered voters say Romney does not have "clear plan for fixing the economy," with only 31 percent expressing confidence in his economic policies.  54 percent of women polled say Romney has no plan to fix the economy.

That means voters are desperately looking for a candidate with a clear, practical, proven and believable plan to fix the economy, and they're not getting it from Republicans or Democrats.  Creating jobs is far and away the most important issue in this election year, especially to the growing number of independent voters not wedded to either party.

The situation is worse for Obama.  A re-election campaign is essentially a referendum on trust in the incumbent, and voters have none.  The poll shows Romney with a 13-point edge among independents.

The election will come down to one thing.  Can Obama convince enough independent voters in swing states that things will get better if he's re-elected?

Democrats vow to kill yet another jobs bill

Senate Democrats have vowed to obstruct efforts to put approval of the Keystone jobs pipeline in legislation to be voted upon this week.

“Keystone is a program that we’re not going, that I am not going to help in any way I can,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told reporters.

“The president feels that way,” Reid emphasized.

Upping the ante in Democrats’ efforts to kill the pipeline, seven of the eight slots given to Democrats on a conference committee to has out legislation went to Democrats who voted to kill the jobs pipeline.

The other, Montana Democrat Max Baucus, promised in writing he would not support Keystone as a member of the committee.

Democrats’ efforts to kill the pipeline come as rising unemployment and gas prices are putting millions of American families beyond their financial breaking point.

Democrats' 'Freshman of the Year' Rep. Ron Reynolds arrested

Texas State Rep. Ron Reynolds has been arrested, jailed and charged with illegally soliciting clients for his law practice.  He is now free on $50,000.00 bond.  Reynolds is scheduled to appear in court Thursday.

The story does not mention his party affiliation, so, yes, he is a Democrat.

He was previously fined $10,000.00 by the Texas Ethics Commission for refusing to file legally-required disclosure statements.

"Since Reynolds first ran for office in 2008, he’s missed numerous financial disclosure deadlines, KXAN's investigation showed," KXAN reports.

"He failed to submit his Personal Financial Statement for 2008, 2010 and 2011. He was not required to file on in 2009 because he was not a candidate or elected official for that year.

"Failure to file a Personal Financial Statement is a Class B Misdemeanor. If convicted, the penalty is up to 180 days in jail, a fine of up to $2,000, or both.

"In addition, the Texas Election Code prohibits any state candidate for state office from accepting contributions or making expenditures until a campaign treasurer report is filed with the Texas Ethics Commission. Records obtained through the Texas Public Information Act show The Texas Ethics Commission voted to terminate Reynolds' campaign treasure appointment, effective May 16, 2009.

"Reynolds didn’t file a new appointment until Jan. 19. In the meantime, he raised $129,914 and spent $110,484 in campaign funds . Violating the Election Code regarding raising or spending funds without a campaign treasurer appointment is a Class A Misdemeanor. If convicted of a Class A Misdemeanor, the penalty is up to a year in jail, a fine of up to $4,000 or both.

"The investigation also show that a Federal Tax Lien filed against Reynolds in Fort Bend County indicating that he owes the Internal Revenue Service $59,122. Court filings also show Reynolds and his law firm own $10,466.56 plus interest on a debt to Martindale-Hubble.

"Reynolds' law firm, Brown, Brown & Reynolds, is listed as being in Tax Forfeiture by the Secretary of State’s office, effective Dec. 10.

"Records filed at the Secretary of State’s office shows other entities involving Reynolds were involuntarily dissolved or forfeited because the credit card used to pay the fee was declined."

While under investigation for all that, he was nonetheless named "Freshman of the Year" by the House Democrat Caucus.

“I was proud to announce that Ron was our Freshman of the Year,” said Jessica Farrar, House Democratic Leader.  His legislative paycheck is being garnished to collect the fines for disclosure violations.

Tweet or share this by clicking below.

Portugal admits Keynesian economics are a failure

"Defending austerity is not getting any easier for Europe’s politicians. And Vitor Gaspar, Portugal’s finance minister, has it harder than others. The country’s unemployment rate is 14 percent, and its economy, which has been stagnant for years, is expected to shrink another 3.3 percent in 2012," The New York Times writes.

"Opponents of austerity may cite Portugal as a country that could benefit from economic stimulus and kinder budget cuts. But Mr. Gaspar, speaking to The New York Times last week, has a message for observers who say Europe needs to substantially relax its austerity approach: We tried stimulus and it backfired."

"My country definitely provides a cautionary tale that shows that, in some instances, short-run expansionary policies can be counterproductive," Gaspar tells the Times.
Europe's failed experiment in government-run economies has resulted in collapse, bankruptcy, bailouts, massive unemployment, riots, arson and human suffering.

And America's economic collapse has its roots is government interference in the economy. After decades of banks refusing to offer home loans to people who clearly could not pay them back the government's "Community Reinvestment Act" and hearings accuse banks of racism bullied lenders into offering subprime mortgages.  The government-inflated bubble eventually burst, toppling the economy like a line of dominoes.

The sad fact is while Americans and even now Europeans see the failure of government-directed "stimulus" programs, Democrats and Republicans don't.  Republicans masterminded the bank bailouts and Democrats still defend Obama's failed "stimulus."

Originally blogged at LNCC

U.S. tax laws force Americans to choose between citizenship, divorce or jail

No man should have to leave the United States to seek freedom, but under our current tax regime that’s exactly what’s happening.

Last year nearly 1,800 Americans renounced their U.S. citizenship or handed over their green cards, Reuters reports.  They love the United States and consider themselves proud Americans, but complicated, uneven U.S. tax laws force many to renounce their citizenship to avoid being forced to divorce or go to jail for laws tax attorneys can’t even interpret.

That’s a record number since the Internal Revenue Service began publishing a list of those who renounced in 1998. It’s also almost eight times more than the number of citizens who renounced in 2008, and more than the total for 2007, 2008 and 2009 combined…

…The United States is one of the only countries to tax its citizens on income earned while they’re living abroad. And just as Americans stateside must file tax returns each April – this year, the deadline is Tuesday – an estimated 6.3 million U.S. citizens living abroad brace for what they describe as an even tougher process of reporting their income and foreign accounts to the IRS. For them, the deadline is June.

The National Taxpayer Advocate’s Office, part of the IRS, released a report in December that details the difficulties of filing taxes from overseas. It cites heavy paperwork, a lack of online filing options and a dearth of local and foreign-language resources.

For those wishing to legally escape the filing requirements, the only way is to formally renounce their U.S. citizenship. Last year, IRS records show that at least 1,788 people did, and that’s likely an underestimate. The IRS publishes in the Federal Register the names of those who give up their citizenship, and some who renounced say they haven’t seen their name on the list yet…

…But those of more modest means renounce, too. They say leaving America is about more than money; it’s about privacy and red tape.

On April 7, 2011, Peter Dunn raised his right hand before a U.S. consular officer in Toronto and swore that he understood the consequences of giving up his U.S. citizenship. Dunn, a dual U.S.-Canadian citizen who has lived outside the United States since 1986, says he renounced because he felt American citizenship had become more of a liability than a privilege.

As an American, Dunn had to file tax returns and report all of his bank accounts – even joint accounts and his Canadian retirement fund. If he didn’t, he would be breaking U.S. law and could face penalties of up to $100,000 or 50 percent of his undeclared accounts, whichever is larger. Dunn says he was tired of tracking IRS policy changes, and he had no intention of returning to the United States. Renouncing his citizenship, as he puts it, was “a no-brainer.”

“If it was just me then it would be one thing,” says Dunn, a part-time investor who worried that having to share information with the IRS would deter future business partners – and upset his wife, who is Canadian. “Disclosing joint accounts I hold with my wife and anyone I ever want to do business with – that’s just too much. My wife’s account is none of their business.”…

…Around the world, American women’s clubs – known for promoting American culture overseas through Fourth of July celebrations and Thanksgiving dinners – are growing empathetic toward those who renounce.

The American Women’s Club in Dusseldorf, for instance, now links to renunciation information on its Website. The Federation of American Women’s Clubs Overseas has opposed new IRS rules, in part because the rules were pushing members to give up their citizenship. “The candidates are not tax-evaders or un-patriots,” reads the organization’s last annual report.

In Europe, American women say they feel pressure to renounce even from their husbands.

“American women married to non-Americans are only just now finding out that they have to disclose years and years of income and accounts,” says Lucy Stensland Laederich, a leader of the women’s club who lives in Bordeaux, France.

Laederich has been acting as the group’s liaison with politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and plans to attend a meeting to discuss expatriate tax issues with Maloney and Treasury Department officials on Tuesday.

“When they decide to come clean and report everything,” she says, “they have to go ask their husbands for all of their bank information, retirement funds, and investment accounts, everything.”

Some of their husbands, Laederich says, refuse to hand over information to the IRS. That leaves the women in difficult predicaments.

“Your options are to ignore the IRS and stick your head in the sand; take your name off of all the accounts and live in a completely cash economy; divorce; or renounce U.S. citizenship,” Laederich says. “We’ve seen all of these things happen.”

Originally blogged at the LNCC.

Americans give up on Obama, Romney's ability to fix the economy

• 38 percent of Americans say the economy will improve in the next 12 months; 19 percent expect it to get worse, 42 percent expect it to “stay the same.”

• 36 percent say President Obama’s policies “helped” the economy; 33 percent say they “hurt” it, 30 percent say his policies have not made much difference on the economy.

• 32 percent say that if Mitt Romney wins the presidential election, economic conditions will be “helped.”

• 24 percent say economic conditions will be hurt, 39 percent say his election will not make much difference.

• 31 percent say that if Mr. Obama wins re-election this year, economic conditions will be “helped.”

• 30 percent say economic conditions will be “hurt,” 37 percent say his re-election will not make much difference.

Source: An NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey of 1,000 U.S. adults conducted April 13 to 17, reported by The Washington Times' Jennifer Harper.

Keep in mind this is just a poll of adults, not likely voters, so it's essentially meaningless.  But it shows a larger skepticism of the ability of Republicans and Democrats to fix the economy.

Democrats cheer the death of Christian prison minister Colson

Charles Colson, who dedicated much of his life to ministering to prisoners and keeping released convicts out of prison so they can lead law-abiding lives has passed away at age 80.

Predictably, the Party of Hate chimes in on the death of an honorable man. (Profanity edited out.)

CBGLuthier
RIP Ratf----r Their term not mine. I think rats are morally superior to Colson and his kind.

Great Caesars Ghost
rest in pieces

Festivito
Reap what you sew, and say hi to your grandma for me for a long long eternity.

underpants
We should say something good when some dies.  Chuck Colson is dead. Good.

Liberals continue their War On Women

Actual baby shirt purchased by Democrats in 2008.

MSNBC falsely claims Palin loved being sexually harassed by Secret Service 

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/04/21/msnbc-claims-palin-bragging-about-being-ogled-by-the-secret-service/

How they voted on the Buffett tax hike on job creation

The following senators voted to spread class warfare and implode any economic recovery by raise taxes on job-creating investment (the "Buffett rule.")

Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Mike Jackson for Congress campaign sputters, stalls

From today's Houston Chronicle:

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that Mike Jackson‘s fundraising in CD36 has been less than impressive? Just over $200K total, with $50K of that being loans, and $75K on hand, for a veteran legislator who’s been running since the beginning and is the consensus favorite?...The guy who’s gonna win generally has no trouble raking in the dough. Anyone want to venture a theory about this?

Tax laws force Americans to give up citizenship to avoid divorce, jail

No man should have to leave the United States to seek freedom, but under our current tax regime that’s exactly what’s happening.

Last year nearly 1,800 Americans renounced their U.S. citizenship or handed over their green cards, Reuters reports.  They love the United States and consider themselves proud Americans, but complicated, uneven U.S. tax laws force many to renounce their citizenship to avoid being forced to divorce or go to jail for laws tax attorneys can’t even interpret.

That’s a record number since the Internal Revenue Service began publishing a list of those who renounced in 1998. It’s also almost eight times more than the number of citizens who renounced in 2008, and more than the total for 2007, 2008 and 2009 combined…

…The United States is one of the only countries to tax its citizens on income earned while they’re living abroad. And just as Americans stateside must file tax returns each April – this year, the deadline is Tuesday – an estimated 6.3 million U.S. citizens living abroad brace for what they describe as an even tougher process of reporting their income and foreign accounts to the IRS. For them, the deadline is June.

The National Taxpayer Advocate’s Office, part of the IRS, released a report in December that details the difficulties of filing taxes from overseas. It cites heavy paperwork, a lack of online filing options and a dearth of local and foreign-language resources.

For those wishing to legally escape the filing requirements, the only way is to formally renounce their U.S. citizenship. Last year, IRS records show that at least 1,788 people did, and that’s likely an underestimate. The IRS publishes in the Federal Register the names of those who give up their citizenship, and some who renounced say they haven’t seen their name on the list yet…

…But those of more modest means renounce, too. They say leaving America is about more than money; it’s about privacy and red tape.

On April 7, 2011, Peter Dunn raised his right hand before a U.S. consular officer in Toronto and swore that he understood the consequences of giving up his U.S. citizenship. Dunn, a dual U.S.-Canadian citizen who has lived outside the United States since 1986, says he renounced because he felt American citizenship had become more of a liability than a privilege.

As an American, Dunn had to file tax returns and report all of his bank accounts – even joint accounts and his Canadian retirement fund. If he didn’t, he would be breaking U.S. law and could face penalties of up to $100,000 or 50 percent of his undeclared accounts, whichever is larger. Dunn says he was tired of tracking IRS policy changes, and he had no intention of returning to the United States. Renouncing his citizenship, as he puts it, was “a no-brainer.”

“If it was just me then it would be one thing,” says Dunn, a part-time investor who worried that having to share information with the IRS would deter future business partners – and upset his wife, who is Canadian. “Disclosing joint accounts I hold with my wife and anyone I ever want to do business with – that’s just too much. My wife’s account is none of their business.”…

…Around the world, American women’s clubs – known for promoting American culture overseas through Fourth of July celebrations and Thanksgiving dinners – are growing empathetic toward those who renounce.

The American Women’s Club in Dusseldorf, for instance, now links to renunciation information on its Website. The Federation of American Women’s Clubs Overseas has opposed new IRS rules, in part because the rules were pushing members to give up their citizenship. “The candidates are not tax-evaders or un-patriots,” reads the organization’s last annual report.

In Europe, American women say they feel pressure to renounce even from their husbands.
“American women married to non-Americans are only just now finding out that they have to disclose years and years of income and accounts,” says Lucy Stensland Laederich, a leader of the women’s club who lives in Bordeaux, France.

Laederich has been acting as the group’s liaison with politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and plans to attend a meeting to discuss expatriate tax issues with Maloney and Treasury Department officials on Tuesday.

“When they decide to come clean and report everything,” she says, “they have to go ask their husbands for all of their bank information, retirement funds, and investment accounts, everything.”

Some of their husbands, Laederich says, refuse to hand over information to the IRS. That leaves the women in difficult predicaments.

“Your options are to ignore the IRS and stick your head in the sand; take your name off of all the accounts and live in a completely cash economy; divorce; or renounce U.S. citizenship,” Laederich says. “We’ve seen all of these things happen.”

Originally posted at the LNCC

Democrats celebrate Ann Romney's birthday with misogynist slurs, calls for her death.

Twitchy reports: "After GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney wished his wife Ann a happy birthday on Twitter this morning,  liberals quickly responded with the new tone-y vitriol we’ve come to expect. They also attacked Mrs. Romney for saying, 'It was my early birthday present for someone to be critical of me as a mother.'"

Read them all here.

Obama campaign endorses Romney?

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod: "The choice in this election is between economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead, and an economy that continues down the road we are on..."

Vindicated Vitter vows to block pay hike for energy-blocking Salazar

A liberal assault on Sen. David Vitter’s attempt to block a pay raise for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has failed, because liberals simply made up the charges.

“The committee found that there was no substantial credible evidence that you violated the law or Senate rules,” the Senate Ethics Committee ruled.

A vindicated Vitter will continue to seek a block of Salazar’s raise.

“I’m glad that I killed Ken Salazar’s salary increase — he has completely failed us on energy policy,” Vitter said. “And I’ll absolutely place a hold on any raise for him in the future.”

But Senate Democrats, and some Republicans, oppose the move.

“Salazar makes about $19,600 less than other Cabinet secretaries because the Constitution prohibits a House or Senate member from being appointed to an executive branch job whose pay has risen during the lawmaker’s term. As a senator from Colorado, Salazar had voted to increase the salary for the Interior secretary. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepted a lower salary for her post for the same reason,” The Hill reports.

Keith Olbermann's statement on his firing from Current TV

My full statement: 
I'd like to apologize to my viewers and my staff for the failure of Current TV.

Editorially, Countdown had never been better. But for more than a year I have been imploring Al Gore and Joel Hyatt to resolve our issues internally, while I've been not publicizing my complaints, and keeping the show alive for the sake of its loyal viewers and even more loyal staff. Nevertheless, Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt, instead of abiding by their promises and obligations and investing in a quality news program, finally thought it was more economical to try to get out of my contract.

It goes almost without saying that the claims against me implied in Current's statement are untrue and will be proved so in the legal actions I will be filing against them presently. To understand Mr. Hyatt’s “values of respect, openness, collegiality and loyalty,” I encourage you to read of a previous occasion Mr. Hyatt found himself in court for having unjustly fired an employee. That employee’s name was Clarence B. Cain. http://nyti.ms/HueZsa

In due course, the truth of the ethics of Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt will come out. For now, it is important only to again acknowledge that joining them was a sincere and well-intentioned gesture on my part, but in retrospect a foolish one. That lack of judgment is mine and mine alone, and I apologize again for it.

The four best legal arguments against ObamaCare

Damon W. Root, senior editor of Reason magazine and Reason.com, lays out the case:

1: The Individual Mandate Violates the Original Meaning of the Constitution

2. The Individual Mandate Rests on an Unbounded and Unprincipled Assertion of Federal Power

3. The Individual Mandate Cannot Be Justified Under Existing Supreme Court Precedent

4. The Individual Mandate Threatens the Foundations of Contract Law

Rep. Gohmert: Breitbart's death a loss to ‘nation and freedom’ - The Hill's Video

Rep. Gohmert: Breitbart's death a loss to ‘nation and freedom’ - The Hill's Video

Obama bank rules mean no free checking for the poor

“Bank of America Corp. is working on sweeping changes that would require many users of basic checking accounts to pay a monthly fee unless they agree to bank online, buy more products or maintain certain balances,” The Wall Street Journal reports this morning.

“The search for new sources of income is especially pressing at Bank of America, where 2011 revenue dropped by $26.2 billion, or 22%, from its 2009 level.”

Why is revenue dropping?

“The fee experiments exemplify some unintended consequences of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial-regulation overhaul, which clamped down on certain revenue sources of banks and motivated them to seek ways to make up the difference,” the Journal reports.

“The overdraft decision came just months before the Dodd-Frank law halved what financial institutions could charge merchants for accepting credit and debit cards. That took away $2 billion in annual revenue from the bank,” the Journal reports.

“The double hit prompted bank executives to look for new revenue ideas that could be fast-tracked because the outlook for the bank’s consumer operations was so bleak, said one person familiar with the planning. That was when it came up with the idea of a $5 monthly fee on certain customers who used their debit cards. It was a plan that could be implemented quickly and wouldn’t require a lot of new technology.”

Banks’ offers of free checking were intended to attract younger customers, but benefitted the poor at large.  Banks continued to offer it despite the loss because many account holders kept their business at that bank once they became more affluent as they got older.  Customers who once had free checking accounts would take out loans, purchase CDs and move up to charged checking accounts with more services. That’s where the banks made their money.

But unable under Dodd-Frank to make any more money off more affluent customers, which Obama saw as “profiteering,” banks are now forced to soak the young and poor to stay in business.

Thanks, Obama.