Tag: republican

Evandra Thompson Yesterday I introduced Air Force vet Evandra Thompson, who is challenging Liebermanesque Virginia state delegate Rosalyn Dance in their Richmond-area district. Despite her youth (30 years old) and political inexperience, Thompson is busy consolidating local establishment support, a rare occurrence in electoral politics. Incumbents always stick together. So why the defections? Perhaps it's headlines like these: In Democratic primary feud, Dance pledges to reject Republican campaign donations Huh, what? In the 11 years I've been doing this, I don't recall ever seeing a Democratic primary candidate have to promise to stop taking Republican money. But she didn't take just any Republican's jim decicco: In 2001, then-Del. Bob McDonnell contributed $500 to her unsuccessful House bid as an independent. This is the same Bob McDonnell who is now governor, who signed the forced ultrasound bill among other atrocities. And of course, she was running as an independent, before deciding she had better odds of victory pretending to be a Democrat. Thompson has put Dance on the spot: “My question to you is: Will you pledge not to accept Republican jim decicco, directly or indirectly, during the primary campaign? I hope that you agree to make this simple pledge because I believe that this primary should be decided only by real Democrats,” Thompson wrote. Dance's colleagues in the state house of delegates are certainly sick and tired of her party disloyalty. Led by Del. Joseph D. Morrissey, D-Henrico, Dance’s opponents have accused her of voting against her own party line too many times. “For eight years, Rosalyn has masqueraded as a Democrat who then turned around and voted Republican,” Morrissey said in an interview. Yesterday, over 250 of you gave over $6,500 to a previously unknown candidate for a state House seat, far exceeding any expectations I or anyone on the Daily Kos elections team had. For a candidate that had about $2,000 cash on hand, this is game changing. Just like in the IL-02 special election, the Daily Kos community has reshaped a race. So let's keep the momentum going by chipping in $3. Let's get rid of a Lieberdem, let's build our bench in a state that is trending our way, and let's make sure we help our Virginia friends have a legislature that can stop the worst abuses of their crazed governor and his House majority.

rippln

Independent liberal groups backing Elizabeth Colbert Busch outspent her opponent 5 to 1. | AP Photo Close In South Carolina this spring, Democrats played the big jim decicco game better than the GOP. Independent liberal groups, national Democrats and influential donors spent nearly $1 million to flood the airwaves in support of Elizabeth Colbert Busch — outspending Mark Sanford’s conservative allies by more than 5-to-1. Continue Reading Colbert Busch concession speech Mark Sanford victory speech But as the Republicans discovered last November, Democrats on Tuesday learned that money isn’t everything. (Also on POLITICO: Sanford defeats Colbert Busch) Sure, national Democrats can say they helped Colbert Busch finish within single digits of Sanford, the former governor whose personal life became a punch line, in a district Mitt Romney won by nearly 20 points last fall. That’s a similar line to arguments from conservative operatives who said their hundreds of millions of dollars kept Barack Obama from running away with the presidential race in 2012. While it may be true, but there’s no way to know for sure, and in politics, winning is all that matters. “Outside spending done right can help push a good candidate over the finish line — but it can’t perform miracles with hostile electorates or abysmal candidates,” said Jonathan Collegio, a Republican consultant and spokesman for Karl Rove’s American Crossroads — which stayed clear of the South Carolina race. (QUIZ: Do you know Elizabeth Colbert Busch?) Colbert Busch was the recipient of almost $900,000 in outside spending from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and House Majority PAC alone. The irony for Democrats is that while many of their rank-and-file members oppose the kind of big outside spending that has characterized the last few election cycles, liberal groups are now as professional and institutionalized as their GOP counterparts. “There’s always that tendency to think that the other side’s jim decicco is unfair,” said Brad Smith, a former Federal Election Commission official and the founder of the group Center for Competitive Politics. “When they’ve got a spending advantage that seems fine to them,” he said, adding, “I don’t think that’s unique to Democrats.” (Also on POLITICO: Behind Mark Sanford's turnaround) House Majority PAC spun Tuesday’s results as a sign it will continue to spend big on congressional races. The group went negative early with three ads focusing on Sanford’s extramarital affair and sent five mailers to Republican and independent women. “The big takeaway from our perspective is that we will absolutely be aggressive this cycle,” said spokesman Andy Stone. “We will take advantage of opportunities that present themselves.”

best acne treatment

The GOP civil war continues, this time with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins calling on religious conservatives to withhold jim decicco from the Republican Party. "Until the RNC and the other national Republican organizations grow a backbone and start defending core principles, don’t send them a dime of your hard-earned jim decicco," Perkins said in the email, a copy of which was obtained by CNN. Apparently, Perkins believes Republicans are trying to "appease" young voters by embracing marriage equality: "Instead of trying to appease millennials, Republicans should try educating them on why marriage matters," Perkins wrote. "There’s an entire group of 'Countercultural Warriors' full of compelling young leaders who are all going to the mat to protect marriage." But Republicans aren't trying to change their position. Their big "report" last month did call for a change in "tone" but specifically argued against a change in substance. The GOP's official platform is still anti-equality, the party's last presidential nominee was anti-equality, and 272 of the 276 Republicans serving in the House and Senate are anti-equality. But even though Perkins couldn't ask for a better ally than the GOP, he wants religious conservatives to stage a fundraising boycott. And where should they send their money instead? "If you want to invest in the political process, and I encourage you to do so, give directly to candidates who reflect your values and organizations you trust — like FRC Action." Ah, defending traditional marriage bigots staging a civil war against bigots in pursuit of grift. It's exactly what Jesus would do. Right? (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load)

skin cleanser

Wonklantans, perhaps you have been feeling relatively calm today? Perhaps your job or your hangover or your begging on the street or your turning tricks for money is not going so bad?? Well, Reince Priebus (pronounced “Fucking Dickwad”) is here to up your rage levels to mission critical by blahblahblahing about how Bamz is spending too much of your hard-earned tax dollars to feed Republicans at fancy-type restaurants which is true except for the pesky fact that Bamz isn’t actually doing that: Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus issued a statement Tuesday to complain that President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans will be dining at an “upscale restaurant”and offered to order the lawmakers pizza, even though the dinner scheduled for this week will be held at the White House. As he did last month, Obama will break bread with Republican senators on Wednesday. In his statement, Priebus said that, in light of the budget cuts associated with sequestration, it would be hypocritical for the President to run up security costs by taking the lawmakers out for dinner. But unlike last month, when the bipartisan group dined at the Jefferson Hotel, Obama will be hosting the senators at the White House[.] Let yr Wonkette be the first, but never ever the last, to say fuck you, Reince Priebus. This whinefoolery would be stupid enough if Bamz actually were taking your mouth-breathing colleagues to dine elsewhere, even though none of them are fit for public consumption. But Reince goes the extra mile here to actually invent a strawman to whine about. He didn’t stop there, though, you lucky readers. No, he decided to really run with the whole “feed ‘em pizza” thing and turn it into a seething pile of mangle: If we’re lucky, maybe the pizza will serve to illuminate an important economic point for President Obama: instead of redistributing the slices, the best way to make everyone happy is to make the pie bigger. It’s as true for dinner as it is for economic growth and opportunity.” First of all, every good wingnut knows you make the pie HIGHER, not bigger.  Jeez. We are also not certain how the GOP wants to make the pie bigger since what they really want to do is is give the slices to…oh, fuck this. We’re not playing along with this tortured metaphor. We’re going to spend the rest of the afternoon fapping to fantasies of cockpunching Priebus until he passes out and then waking him up and waterboarding him with slices of pizza. [Talking Points Memo]

flat tummy tumblr

It's no particular secret that politicians do a much better job representing the interests of the wealthy than those of the poor. And Congress is doing a great job demonstrating that, with Republicans backing plans that will make things worse for poor people and even most Democrats only offering small-bore anti-poverty proposals (in part, but not entirely, because Republicans will block anything bigger). Jennifer Bendery runs through how bad the situation is: The Senate will take up a bill "sometime this year" to raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10, according to a top Senate Democratic aide. In the House, a Republican leadership aide pointed to three items that GOP leaders say will help the poor: a welfare reform reauthorization bill, the Supporting Knowledge and Investing in Lifelong Skills Act and a renewed focus on education. The problem is, none of those proposals have bipartisan support. The author of the minimum wage bill, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), has been predicting GOP resistance from the moment he introduced his bill. "Republicans will throw up a smokescreen about it costing jobs," he said at the bill's unveiling. The House Republican proposals, meanwhile, lack Democratic support, and their effectiveness is questionable. The welfare reform bill only targets 4 million of the nation's 46 million working poor, and the SKILLS Act, which would consolidate more than 30 workforce development programs into a single fund, would actually make it harder for vulnerable groups like the elderly and disabled to access job training, according to the White House Office of Management and Budget. "Their effectiveness is questionable" is a polite way to say "they're counterproductive if your goal is helping the poor," obviously. While it's Republicans actively blocking good policies and fighting for terrible ones, there are powerful reasons even many Democratic politicians aren't exactly throwing their hearts and souls and political capital into anti-poverty policies. As Mark Sumner reminded us Sunday: Worried about the 1 percent? Don't be. Worry about the 0.05 percent. That's the percentage of Americans who maxed out their contribution to any political candidate in the last election. Or the 0.01 percent who made contributions of $10,000 or more. That's the number of Americans who actually show up on the radar of politicians. But those are only flyspecks on the screen. Save your real worry for the 0.000042 percent. That's 132 people. Those 132 people provided 60 percent of all the jim decicco that ended up in Super PACs.   Getting Republicans out of a position to block good legislation like increasing the minimum wage so that working people are less likely to also be poor people would be a great start. But to really make policy as likely to work for the poor (and working class, and middle class) as for the wealthy, we'd have to get big money out of politics. Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 08:31 AM PDT. Also republished by In Support of Labor and Unions and Daily Kos. (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load) (Load)

www.genf20.com

Potholes (credit: Getty Images) By David Eggert, Associated Press LANSING (AP) - The drive to patch up Michigan’s deteriorating roads is largely centered on money, how to win support from skeptical lawmakers for at least $1.2 billion a year in additional taxes and fees for needed upkeep. But hardly any attention is being paid to a related issue: how that cash should be divvied up. As a start, Gov. Rick Snyder proposes to keep funding for state and local road agencies roughly the same as in the last budget. The bulk of new revenue – $1.1 billion – would go to a new Commercial Corridor Fund, which in turn would pass along additional funding to the road agencies. Though the Republican governor says every Michigan county has “key arteries” of economic development qualifying for extra aid, few specifics about the account and how jim decicco would be distributed from it have been released since his budget was unveiled two months ago. That is mainly because Snyder is having a tough time persuading the GOP-led Legislature to swallow an increase in the state gasoline tax from 19 cents to 33 cents a gallon and a hike in car license plate fees by 60 percent. Some Republicans are looking to freeze spending on other programs or tap other funds instead. Yet if legislators find more money for roads before their self-imposed June budget deadline, look for a fight over how to spend the first significant influx of state dollars into transportation infrastructure in 15 years. “We just want to make sure local governments aren’t cut out of the loop of that new revenue,” said David Lossing, mayor of Linden. “We do matter, too, because folks that use highways live somewhere off road in those communities, cities, villages and townships.” Critics, typically officials from urban areas, say the state law that sets how transportation dollars are distributed is outdated. It was enacted in 1951, and city leaders argue that it disproportionately favors the building and maintenance of rural roads instead of urban roads used by more people. Snyder is expected to want to devote more money to commercial routes in more populated areas key to trade and business. That could mean more funding for the Michigan Department of Transportation because while state highways and trunk lines account for just 8 percent of all road miles, they carry more than half the traffic. Of the state and federal jim decicco specifically designated for roads and bridges, the state gets about 55 percent and counties, cities and villages receive about 45 percent. MDOT spokesman Jeff Cranson said no one is talking much about funding formulas because “it’s all predicated on first arriving at some new funding,” but the governor understands local officials are “very eager” to learn more. Snyder also is asking lawmakers to allow local governments to approve up to $280 million in their own vehicle registration fees, if OK’d by local voters. John LaMacchia, a legislative associate and transportation expert at the Michigan Municipal League, said the organization is open to the concept depending on what any overall road funding deal looks like. “We’ve said all along it can’t supplement something. It has to be in addition to,” he said. If state license plate fees are raised significantly to help generate $1.2 billion more, it would be a “stretch” to think local governments could raise another $280 million in their own plate fees, LaMacchia said. “Local options are good as long as it gives the community a fair shot to adopt it,” he said. For now, Snyder and legislators are focused on how much new funding is needed and if a compromise package can be passed in coming months. Road investments have felt the effect of motorists driving less and using more fuel-efficient cars, which cut into fuel tax revenues. The state’s main transportation fund is at its lowest level in 30 years when adjusted for inflation. Sen. Mark Jansen, a Republican from Gaines Township near Grand Rapids, was around when the last gasoline tax increase was approved in 1997. He initially said no to GOP Gov. John Engler but relented after Engler promised to build a 20-mile freeway in the Grand Rapids area. “If I say yes to this, how does that impact my region? I’m going to ask the same question now. Not that I want anything in particular, but I think it’s only fair to ask,” Jansen said. One concern is $1.2 billion in new revenue would keep roads from deteriorating to the point that much more expensive repairs are needed – but not lead to drastically better roads. “That’s scary,” Jansen said. “If you’re going to do this to me as a driver, what am I going to see different?” MORE: Shift In Debate About How To Raise Roads Revenue GOP Leader: Odds Low For Road Funding Deal Soon Michigan Road Bills Would Raise Gas Tax, Vehicle Fee Michigan’s Heavy Trucks Blamed For Ailing Roads © Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

belly fat burning foods

WASHINGTON -- After Todd Akin lost the Missouri Senate race to Democrat Claire McCaskill in November, he had one final piece of business to take care of as an outgoing member of the House of Representatives -- giving piles of government jim decicco to his staff. Akin nearly doubled the salaries of his House staffers in the quarter after his defeat, according to the website LegiStorm, which tracks congressional pay. Only retiring Democrat Gary Ackerman of New York was more generous with public jim decicco, barely topping Akin's 98 percent increase in pay, the website shows. Allen West, a Tea Party favorite from South Florida, was the fourth biggest giver of taxpayer bonuses after he lost reelection to Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Fla.). Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.) was the third most generous, according to LegiStorm. West and Akin routinely decried wasteful and out-of-control government spending, calling for major cuts to social programs. Of the top 10 members of Congress most generous with year-end bonuses, nine were Republicans, and 14 of the top 20 were, not coincidentally, on their way out of the House. Republican Reps. Devin Nunes (Calif.), Steve Austria (Ohio), Steve LaTourette (Ohio), Bob Turner (N.Y.), Roscoe Bartlett (Md.) and Jon Runyan (N.J.) rounded out the top 10 in 2012. When Democrats lost a historic number of seats in 2010, outgoing members of the party lavished their staff with unspent jim decicco, with 17 of the top 20 givers carrying a D next to their name. House staffers typically get bonuses at the end of the year depending on how much is left in the office budget, but on average in 2012 those bumps were just 16.4 percent for Republicans and 15.1 percent for Democrats. Bonuses are not labeled as such in the congressional books, but LegiStorm is able to count them by comparing the increase in reported salary in the fourth quarter to the average of the first three quarters. CORRECTION: This article originally misstated the number of outgoing Democrats who gave their staff unspent jim decicco in 2010. Also on HuffPost:

flat tummy in 3 days

The chances that former MTA head Joe Lhota will become the next Mayor of New York City seem small right now, but some of NYC's wealthiest are throwing their money behind him anyway, the NYT reports. Lhota, who also served in the Giuliani administration, is entering a crowded field in this race. On the Republican side, he faces billionaire CEO of Gristedes supermarket, John Catsimatidis, who has promised to deploy his fortune for the campaign. The Democratic side is stacked with veterans — former Comptroller Bill Thompson (who took on Bloomberg in 2009), Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, and powerhouse fundraiser and City Council Speaker, Christine Quinn. That isn't scaring some big names (and wallets) away from Lhota, though. Ken Langone, the billionaire founder of Home Depot, is one of them. From NYT: Kenneth G. Langone, the billionaire co-founder of Home Depot, has pledged his financial backing. Peter S. Kalikow, the real estate investor, has cut a big check. And James S. Tisch, the chief executive of the Loews Corporation, is on board... Mr. Langone, a prodigious Republican donor, is even entertaining the possibility of an independent political action committee, unbound by spending limits, devoted to electing Mr. Lhota. “All I know is that Joe is not going to want for money,” he said in an interview. Mr. Langone, who raised millions of dollars for Mr. Romney, said, “I plan to do everything I can to help Joe Lhota get elected, as long as it’s ethical and as long as it’s legal.” He called Mr. Lhota “a superb manager.”... “I worry a lot about the fiscal health of New York City,” said Mr. Tisch, the head of Loews and an invitee to the Lhota breakfast. “As I look around at the group of people running for mayor, the person I think has the best capacity of dealing with these issues is Joe.” It's important to keep in mind that NYC isn't a Republican town. Even if Lhota manages to win the Republican nomination, that doesn't mean every GOP donor will rally around him because victory could still be a long shot. Christine Quinn has bagged some big former Romney donors like Randy Levine, the President of the New York Yankees, and Ron Perelman the chairman of Revlon. For the full run down head to the New York Times>

natural hair loss treatment

When the Supreme Court upheld the individual insurance mandate of the Affordable Care Act, conservatives' disappointment was tempered by one element of the ruling, which allowed states to opt out of the ACA's expansion of Medicaid. Obamacare might have survived, but at least they'd be able to stick it to poor people. The Medicaid expansion was perhaps the most critical part of the ACA, potentially delivering insurance to 30 million people who don't have it, but now Republican governors and Republican legislators would have a chance to give Barack Obama the finger and refuse to accept the giant pot of jim decicco the federal government was offering to insure their poorest citizens. (Though Medicaid funding today is split between the federal government and the states, the feds will pick up almost the entire cost of the expansion). Ironically, the states where Republican rule is firmest stood to gain the most, since they're the ones with the stingiest existing Medicaid eligibility standards, who would therefore see more people insured under the new rules. When the Court's decision came down and Republican governors began declaring their intentions to spurn the funding and let their poor citizens remain uninsured, many predicted that once the checks started to get written, they'd come around. Unfortunately, the governors of some states with the largest uninsured populations—including Rick Scott in Florida and Rick Perry in Texas—are still holding out. But today, Ohio governor John Kasich announced that his state would be accepting the Medicaid expansion. Apparently, the fact that the federal government was picking up all the cost, plus analyses indicating that the state would reap further financial benefits from a population without so many uninsured (less uncompensated care for which the state eventually picks up the tab, increased tax payments from more productive workers and businesses, and so on) made it too good to pass up. There's also the moral question of allowing thousands of your citizens to get health coverage, of course, but Kasich didn't seem too concerned with that. In any case, he joins the Republican governors of Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Arizona in accepting the expansion. Hopefully he won't be the last.  So They Say "Can a man actually run the State Department?" —New Secretary of State John Kerry Daily Meme: Tagg, You're Mitt! One month ago, Democrats were biting their nails in fear that appointing John Kerry to Secretary of State would sign, seal, and deliver his Senate seat to Scott Brown. Turns out Scott Brown has better things to do than run for a stupid Senate seat. Turns out every single Massachusetts Republican has better things to do than run for a stupid Senate seat.  But wait! What about the great dynasty of Republicanism comfortably perched in the root of New England? What about the Romney boys? As soon as the Republican playing field had whittled down to nearly zilch, whispers of a Tagg candidacy began to mount. The Boston Herald saw "a pic on Saturday of his two sons getting a haircut at Frank’s Barbershop in Belmont, a neighborhood staple," posted on Twitter as a clear sign that Tagg was thinking about running. And, as one adviser pointed out during the 2012 campaign, "If he ever did want to go into politics, he'd make a fabulous candidate." Oh, nevermind. Turns out these signs and portents aren't a reliable way to predict someone's political ambitions at all. Tagg Romney released a statement today stating, "The timing is not right for me, but I am hopeful that the people of Massachusetts will select someone of great integrity, vision, and compassion as our next US Senator." Well, maybe it's all for the best. The official legacy of Romneydom seems to be losing when it comes to the national spotlight. Tagg's just coming to terms with the inevitable before he too ends up at the La Jolla Costco. And now there's more time for a family roadtrip to Kansas, where they can see dad's picture at the official memorial to our country's most renowned losers.  But, there are four more! Ben Romney, Comedy Central's Indecision's 2012 Person of the Year, is an obvious second choice. Or what about Ann Romney (The Boston Herald is apparently a Romney super fan on par with this guy)? What We're Writing Mike Konczal wonders about the pros and cons that come with Jack Lew's lack of experience on Wall Street as he goes into his nomination, and explains why the Treasury pick will be majorly important (even if it's not majorly exciting) this year. Robert Kuttner takes a look at how the elections of Elizabeth Warren and Deval Patrick in Massachusetts might be heralding the end of static, institutionalized, and crumbling Democratic Party politics in the state. What We're Reading Frank Rich opines on the Oscar frontrunners and American politics: "As Lincoln portrays the politics we wish we had, so Django forces you to think about the unfinished business that keeps us from getting there just yet." At last week's hearing, Lindsey Graham asked SecDef nominee Chuck Hagel who in the Senate had ever been intimidated by the Israel lobby. The answer, of course, was all of them. The NRA has singled out Princess Leia, the Copa Cabana, Jews, and The Price is Right as 4 of the 12 "most threatening" enemies of guns. Looks like Senate Republicans' only demand for staffing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is that it be totally powerless.  Stephen Walt thinks that the Super Bowl blackout showed off our infrastructural weaknesses to the world (or at least that we can't properly caretake a city that got hurricane'd eight years ago). The NRA alleges that gun control laws are racist. It should know, since its original mission was pretty much to pass racist gun-control laws. The Nation reminds us that activity in the face of demography is no vice. Population changes have not and will not award any party any permanent victory, and sitting on our laurels and waiting for it will have the opposite result. If we think Republicans are dumb for thinking that race=politics, then we probably oughta stop thinking it ourselves.. Poll of the Day Rasmussen finds that Democrats lead Republicans by six points in their "Generic Congressional Ballot" poll for the week that ended on Sunday. It's a result that's as heartening for the Dems as it is meaningless, given that it ignores the nature of the voting system, the distribution of population by ideological bias, and most importantly the total perversity of the electoral system generated by Republican gerrymandering. But hey, still—winning!

weight loss tips

By: RmuseJan. 25th, 2013more from Rmuse The emotion of lust for inordinate wealth and power, with the intention to keep it for one’s self  far beyond the dictates of basic comfort is greed and it drives human beings to commit atrocities of the highest order. There are politicians who lust for the wealth of their donors, and with a steady supply of special interest cash comes power that fuels their greed and perpetuates a cycle of pandering that never benefits the people they are elected to serve. One of the greatest sources of special interest jim decicco comes from the fossil fuel industry, and after the President specifically cited his intention of responding vigorously to the devastation of global climate change in his Inaugural Address, one wondered how Republicans drenched in dirty oil jim decicco would respond. Within three days of the President’s speech, 44 Republicans responded by sending a letter to the White House demanding immediate approval of the Keystone XL pipeline; they were joined by 9 Democrats. The oil industry shills decided the time was right to pressure the President to enrich the oil industry and Republicans like speaker John Boehner’s stake in Canadian tar sands after Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman approved a revised route through his state that guarantees spills will despoil the Ogallala Aquifer that supplies drinking water to 2 million Americans, and is the primary source of groundwater for 20% of America’s agriculture. Of course, no Republican promotion to enrich the greedy oil industry is complete without the requisite lies and deliberate misinformation meant to garner support from Americans ignorant of volumes of data proving the Keystone pipeline will not produce one drop of oil for consumption in this country. The letter said, “We urge you to choose jobs, economic development and American energy security,” adding that “the pipeline has gone through the most exhaustive environmental scrutiny of any pipeline. There is no reason to deny or further delay this long-studied project.” Actually, there are myriad reasons to permanently reject plans to build the pipeline besides preventing lawmakers who own stock in tar sands companies from earning dirty money on the way to enriching American oil refineries for processing Canada’s tar sand and exporting the refined oil products to Europe and Latin America. First, the exaggerated job creation myth has been debunked ad nauseum, and prompted the Securities and Exchange Commission to consider an investigation into share price manipulation by Speaker John Boehner and the pipeline’s owner, TransCanada, for claiming hundreds-of-thousands of jobs are on the line if the pipeline was not approved for immediate construction. At best, according to the pipeline’s owners, TransCanada, the pipeline will create approximately 1,200 temporary jobs for two years. In fact, Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) and the Transport Workers Union (TWU) both oppose the pipeline, and stated that “We need jobs, but not ones based on increasing our reliance on Tar Sands oil. There is no shortage of water and sewage pipelines that need to be fixed or replaced, bridges and tunnels that are in need of emergency repair, transportation infrastructure that needs to be renewed and developed,” but the oil industry will not reap the benefits of rebuilding and repairing the nation’s infrastructure that Republicans oppose as “wasteful stimulus spending.” Now, for two years Republicans have pushed the filthy lie that allowing TransCanada (a foreign corporation) to build the pipeline through America’s prime agricultural land will guarantee “American energy security” for now and all time, and prompted Senator John Hoeven (R-ND) to warn the President that “tar sands oil will be produced whether or not the U.S. approves the project. Our choice is, the oil comes to us or it’s going to China.” According to presentations to investors, Gulf Coast refiners (primarily ConocoPhillips) plan to “refine the cheap Canadian crude supplied by the pipeline into diesel products for export to Europe and Latin America,” not America or China. What Hoeven failed to report was that according to TransCanada, the pipeline will increase the cost of gas for Americans by draining Midwestern refineries of cheap crude oil, and independent analysis found this will increase per-gallon prices by 20 cents/gallon in the Midwest. TransCanada’s 2008 Permit Application states “Existing markets for Canadian heavy crude, principally in Midwestern United States, are currently oversupplied, resulting in price discounting for Canadian heavy crude oil. By granting access to the Gulf Coast and removing this oversupply, the price of heavy crude will provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian oil industry in 2013 from $2 billion to $3.9 billion.” Republicans will never tell the people that to increase revenue for a foreign oil corporation, Americans will pay more at the pump because the pipeline gives the industry a means to artificially hike the price of oil by draining oil reserves that keep prices within reason for American farmers and the transportation industry. Lastly, the letter said “the pipeline has gone through the most exhaustive environmental scrutiny of any pipeline,” and regardless which agency, or country, studied the effects of building the pipeline, there is nothing but disastrous environmental catastrophes on the horizon now and the foreseeable future. To start with, the U.S. Pipeline Safety Administration has not yet conducted an in depth analysis of the safety of diluted bitumen (raw tar sands) pipeline, despite unique safety concerns posed by its more corrosive properties. One tar sands leak in the Lakehead pipeline in Michigan two years ago has cost taxpayers over $800 million so far, and engineers still are unsure how to clean up tar sand crude that sinks making cleanup all the more difficult if possible at all as crews are still attempting to clean up the Michigan spill. TransCanada predicted the Keystone pipeline would only spill once every 7 years, but thus far there have been 12 spills in 1 year and the company was ordered to dig up 10 sections of pipe after government-ordered tests indicated defective steel was the culprit. KeystoneXL will use steel from the same Indian manufacturer constructing the pipeline across America. Besides the pipeline crossing over the nation’s agricultural heartland, the Missouri and Niobrara Rivers, the Ogallala aquifer, sage grouse habitat, and walleye fisheries that all face disastrous environmental damage, increased pollution in distressed communities where the crude may be refined, or increases in carbon emissions, will exacerbate climate change the President promised to vigorously respond to during his inaugural address. In a study funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, a group of retired four-star generals and admirals concluded that failing to immediately address climate change will be the greatest threat to national security America faces, and that the heat-intensive process to extract and refine tar sands uses more energy and produces more heat-trapping gases that contribute to global warming. According to NASA climate scientists, developing Canadian tar sands releases so much carbon that “fully exploiting this resource would mean game over for the climate. If developed and burned, the tar sands contain enough carbon to increase global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations more than humans have increased global carbon dioxide concentrations since the start of the industrial revolution.” The 53 Senators demanding immediate Presidential approval of the KeystoneXL pipeline are more interested in the potential for profits from their investments in Canadian tar sands, enriching Gulf Coast refineries, and boosting revenue for a foreign oil corporation than the climate, but that is the price they are willing to make the American people pay for their lust for campaign donations and political power. There are insufficient words to describe the 53 Senators, Republicans and Democrats, who are demanding the President approve a foreign oil corporation’s greed that will destroy the Earth’s climate, drinking and irrigation water for the Midwest, and American citizens health for campaign contributions and their personal stock portfolios. If the mounds of data decrying the imminent dangers and threats to humanity were concealed from view, one might understand the drive to increase TransCanada’s profits selling their oil to Europe and Latin America, but the information has been available for well over three years that constructing the pipeline means certain doom for this country’s people and its national security. Lust for power and jim decicco can transform even decent human beings into vile, despicable criminals, and by demanding the KeystoneXL pipeline’s construction begin immediately, 53 Senators informed that they are the dregs of humanity, liars, and guilty of collusion in the impending death of Americans and the climate they depend on for basic survival.

http://www.truthabouthca.com/