In light of recent talk of moats and alligators , Mark Salter recalls circa-2005 Obama’s efforts to scuttle immigration reform on behalf of big union interests and to prevent a president from the wrong political party from taking credit amongst
I just finished Andrew Breitbart’s book Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World! . (The words “Right” and “Nation” are placed in red print in the title, so that the title carries a nice double meaning. Hence the odd capitalization of the title of this post.) This isn’t going to be your standard book review. It’s going to be a little more personal. I hope that’s OK. Many of you know that I know Andrew personally. I met him at a monthly Los Angeles gathering that was for years hosted on the first Friday of every month by Scott Kaufer, a reader of the site and one of the greatest human beings I have ever met. Scott provided me with the key to a world of fascinating people too lengthy to list, but which has included Cathy Seipp, Mickey Kaus, Ann Coulter, Tammy Bruce, Jill Stewart, Amy Alkon, Dale Launer, Michael Walsh, Steve Oney, Matt Welch, Tim Cavanaugh, Mike Sullivan, Bruce Feirstein, Bob Sipchen, Christan and Jody Lindke, Ben Sheffner . . . the list goes on and on. And that list includes Andrew Breitbart, through whom I “met” (in some cases virtually) Larry O’Connor, Larry Solov, Adam Baldwin, John Nolte, James O’Keefe, Alex Marlow, Kurt Schlichter, Liberty Chick, Dana Loesch, and so on. Scott has called off the monthly gathering, and I am desperate to find some way to revive it. It enriched my life immeasurably, and I miss the meetings terribly. For some reason Andrew eventually took to me, and started giving me inside information on what was going to break next on his Big sites — whether it was the NEA scandal, the next step in the ACORN scandal, a new victim of Roman Polanski — the stories seemed endless. And whatever the latest story was, it was always fascinating. Andrew would always swear me to secrecy, sort of . . . but he would permit me to drop vague hints . Long-time readers will remember me issuing knowing pronouncements about what might be the next shoe to drop. ( Always trust content from Patterico! ) Well, as I think many of you already suspected, 98% of the time I wasn’t guessing . I knew what was coming next. I will never forget pacing in my back yard, shouting excitedly into my cell phone as Andrew was laying out the plan for releasing ACORN videos out of Los Angeles — and asking my advice about the best way to do it. We had been exchanging e-mails, and at some point I suspected that the woman he was describing on the main L.A. ACORN video — happily offering advice and counsel on how to further a house of child prostitution, according to Andrew — was the same woman who had told the ever-gullible L.A. Times columnist James Rainey that she had angrily turned O’Keefe and Giles out of her office. If Breitbart had a video of that very same person actually helping O’Keefe and Giles, we had damning evidence of a columnist for a major daily newspaper — a media critic, no less! — accepting the bogus story of an ACORN shill without even having checked with Breitbart . Breitbart said the name “Lavelle Stewart” sounded familiar, but he had to go check. I kept prodding him. In one reminder, I sent this e-mail: If you get a chance to call me, call the cell: [redacted]. I’m dying to know if “Lavelle Stewart” is our woman in L.A. Andrew’s response was succinct: “YES!” In no time flat, we were again on the phone. (Andrew is not big into e-mail. When you e-mail him asking for an important status update on a big story, usually the reply is a terse one-line e-mail asking you to call him. Which is way more fun anyway.) We knew we had a great story that would, once again, discredit the partisan media scoundrels who are responsible for shaping the narrative in this country. We were absolutely giddy . The story led to a series of posts on this site in which I danced with unabashed glee on the grave of James Rainey’s credibility. If you haven’t read those, do yourself a favor . I have almost never had this much fun as a blogger . Breitbart’s book abounds with this kind of joyous storytelling, of taking on the Big Media goons — a lowly David facing down the Goliath Media Complex, armed with nothing but the truth . Which, as it turns out — especially when leavened with a little humor — is all it takes to win the day against the biggest liars out there. But it helps to have a camera in hand. Just today I read some of the best passages in the book. They have to do with Andrew’s efforts to debunk the lie that the Tea Party is racist. Much of the story is recounted in a legal filing (.pdf), highlighted here by Lee Stranahan , against the would-be speech-stomper Shirley Sherrod. I still hope to summarize that legal filing soon, as it recounts the context of the Sherrod lawsuit: namely, the B.S. accusations of racism against the Tea Party. The filing reminds us how Andrew and Larry O’Connor did yeoman’s work to prove that Congressmen were not spit on and called the “N” word. And then, as Andrew’s book so well documents, it all culminated in an incredible story in which Nevada union thugs pelted Breitbart’s group with eggs — and then damn near got him arrested by claiming that he was the guy throwing the eggs!!! I had read bits of this story online before, but it was very clarifying to soak in the entire narrative in the book. The fringe left did what they specialize in: attack you in the nastiest possible way, and then accuse you of doing precisely what they just did to you . Thank God Andrew had a cameraman recording everything, or he probably would have gone to jail — and Eric Boehlert would still be talking about the time Breitbart egged those poor union guys in Nevada. (To be fair, I have run into people on the right who employ this precise tactic: attack you in the nastiest possible way, and then accuse you of doing precisely what they just did to you . Long-time readers know just what I mean. This tactic is, unfortunately, not limited purely to the left.) Let me close by saying: I bought the book because Andrew is my friend. As I began reading it, I enjoyed it because I could hear his voice as I read it. But now that I have finished it, I am convinced that every single reader of this site would love it. There are parts you will disagree with. I did. That’s fine. Andrew would tell you the same. But if you share the belief that Andrew and I hold, that the real problem in this country is Big Media and its distortion of the basic facts of life — and that the proper way to combat this scourge is with a joyous, unblinking march straight towards the conflagration — you will love this book. Buy it now. I promise you won’t regret it.
Originally posted here:
Andrew Breitbart’s RIGHTeous IndigNATION: A Review . . . Of Sorts
Take no prisoners! (Daily Caller) — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton is expanding his investigation into the meetings between special interest groups and the Obama White House that set the stage for the passage of Obamacare, sending document requests to 12 industry groups and unions that played a key role in the negotiations. In April 18 letters to the groups, Upton asks for extensive details and documents about each organization’s interactions with the White House in regards to the health care law. The requests come as the Obama White House has so far declined to provide its documents about the meetings. At issue are special deals struck between interest groups and President Obama to either garner the support of major industry sectors or soften their criticism of the health care law. In one major instance, the pharmaceutical drug sector agreed to back the legislation as long as the costs to that sector did not exceed $80 billion. The drug sector eventually spent over $100 million on television advertisements touting the law. The industry groups and unions subject to Upton’s request are AARP, AFL-CIO, AdvaMed, AFSCME, American Hospital Association, American Medical Association, America’s Health Insurance Plans, Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, Business Roundtable, Federation of American Hospitals, PHRMA, and SEIU.
From the diaries by Erick On March 7, the Wisconsin Senate passed a bill reforming the public sector union bargaining process. For weeks, the Senate remained at an impasse on the issue as absent Senate Democrats denied the quorum required to move forward. By redrafting the bill to exclude certain fiscal items, a 2/3 quorum was no longer required to vote on the legislation. The Senate promptly approved the bill 18-1. After passage of the bill by the Senate, the Joint Committee of Conference then received the bill. This committee’s responsibility is to make changes to similar pieces of legislation passed in both the Senate and House. Once these changes are approved by the Joint Committee of Conference, the legislation is then submitted for approval by the legislative chambers. For a bill to be submitted to the governor for his signature — and thereby enacted into law– the language in the bill passed by the Senate and the House must be identical. In this case, the Joint Committee of Conference approved the language of the bill passed by the Senate verbatim, submitting this to the House for Approval. Typically, consideration of legislation by this committee for the mark-up process takes weeks. However, the committee completed its work on this public sector union bill just hours after posting notice of its upcoming meeting. Much criticism has been levied at the Wisconsin Republicans for the actions of the Joint Committee Meeting. In a dramatic outburst, Representative Peter Barca proclaimed , “This is a violation of the Open Meetings Law!” What does the law say? The portion which the Democrats claim is being violated is Wisconsin Open Meetings Law , in particular §19.84 of the statute. §19.84 (1) Public notice of all meetings of a governmental body shall be given in the following manner:….(2) Every public notice of a meeting of a governmental body shall set forth the time, date, place and subject matter of the meeting, including that intended for consideration at any contemplated closed session, in such form as is reasonably likely to apprise members of the public and the news media thereof. The public notice of a meeting of a governmental body may provide for a period of public comment, during which the body may receive information from members of the public.(3) Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than 2 hours in advance of the meeting.” At first glance, it appears that due to the lack of a 24 hours notice to the public, the Joint Committee of Conference violated the Wisconsin Open Meetings Law. However, there is much more to this statute. We must also take into consideration §19.87 regarding the notice required by legislative meetings. §19.87(2) No provision of this subchapter which conflicts with a rule of the senate or assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a meeting conducted in compliance with such rule. Is there is a rule senate or assembly or joint rule which qualifies for this exception to the general Wisconsin Open Meetings Law notice requirements? To determine this, we simply need to take a look at the Wisconsin rules for the legislature. Joint Rule 27 . Committee hearings open to public. Unless otherwise provided by law, every committee hearing, executive session, or other meeting shall be open to the public. If time permits, advance notice of every regularly scheduled committee hearing, executive session, or other meeting shall be published as provided in joint rule 75 . Since this was not a regularly scheduled meeting, so Joint Rule 75 does not apply. Joint Rule 27 requires only that such a non-regularly scheduled meeting be open to the public, without proscribing a time requirement. In addition, the Senate Rules clearly agree with this analysis. Senate Rule 93 (2) A notice of a committee meeting is not required other than posting on the legislative bulletin board, and a bulletin of committee hearings may not be published. Senate Rule 93 (3) (3) The daily calendar is in effect immediately upon posting on the legislative bulletin boards. The calendar need not be distributed. The Senate clerk indeed posted notice of this committee on the legislative bulletin board. The Senate rules require no notice of a committee meeting besides such a posting on the legislative bulletin board. This requirement is far less than the 24 hour notice guidelines specified §19.84 (1) of the Open Meetings Law . However, we saw in §19.87(2) of the same statute, that a senate, assembly, or joint rule does in fact trump this much more stringent notice requirement! Accusations that the Wisconsin Republicans violated this law are incongruent with reality, distort the law, and qualify as demagoguery.
Visit link:
Wisconsin Senate Republicans did not Violate the Open Meetings Law
RedState Morning Briefing For February 25, 2011 Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge. 1. It’s a Strategy, Not a Conspiracy 2. 67% disapprove of legislators fleeing Wisconsin to avoid vote 3. University of Central Florida Hosts Terrorists & Forcibly Removes Their Detractors 4. Moving RINOS Rightward is Good, Defeating them is even Better 5. Secret White House Meetings ———————————————————————- 1. It’s a Strategy, Not a Conspiracy I’ve written at length about the destructive energy policies of the Left and of the Obama Administration. Specifically, their hostility toward domestic producers and the producing states will inevitably lead to higher unemployment and a stagnant economy in the near term; long term, they imperil our national security. What could possibly motivate them? Some say that Obama is merely the puppet of an evil conspiracy which is bent on our destruction. Others say that Obama thinks he is acting in the country’s best interest, but that his perspective is limited and his worldview is skewed. It is important for us to act as if it is the latter, and here’s why. Please click here for the rest of the post. 2. 67% disapprove of legislators fleeing Wisconsin to avoid vote Two-thirds of likely voters disapprove of Wisconsin legislators fleeing the stat to avoid their duty to vote. New Rasmussen Reports polling finds America’s voters strongly oppose Wisconsin state senators fleebagging tactics to avoid a vote that would restrict collective bargaining rights for government workers’ unions. Only 25% of likely U.S. Voters approve of this failed 2003-vintage Democrat tactic. Please click here for the rest of the post. 3. University of Central Florida Hosts Terrorists & Forcibly Removes Their Detractors While it’s certainly the case that a University may host an event paneled by individuals that the University leadership does not agree with or even may find reprehensible, it starts to look more like endorsement when they get into the habit of tossing law abiding citizens for asking questions of the University guest that may be uncomfortable. Such was the case in the almost universally overlooked incident that took place at the University of Central Florida (UCF) in November of last year. Please click here for the rest of the post. 4. Moving RINOS Rightward is Good, Defeating them is even Better Well, the dust has settled from the 2010 legislative session, and organizations like National Journal and American Conservative Union have published their annual voting reports. So who are the ‘top conservatives’? You’ll never guess. Please click here for the rest of the post. 5. Secret White House Meetings Remember all that highfalutin rhetoric from Barack Obama about not doing business with lobbyists, etc? Well, we already knew it was a lie given the number of lobbyists he let into the White House to work after saying he wouldn’t. But it appears the lie is a serial lie. Obama is having his minion take meetings with lobbyists routinely, but they are doing it outside the White House across the street. Why? Because he can say no lobbyists have been to the White House. Please click here for the rest of the post.
Read the original post:
Morning Briefing for February 25, 2011
