Obama Orders Pay Raise for Biden, Members of Congress, Federal Workers. President Barack Obama issued an executive order to end the pay freeze on federal employees, in effect giving some federal workers a raise. One federal worker now to receive a pay increase is Vice President Joe Biden. According to disclosure forms, Biden made a cool $225,521 last year. After the pay increase, he'll now make $231,900 per year. Members of Congress, from the House and Senate, also will receive a little bump, as their annual salary will go from $174,000 to 174,900.
Here's the list of new wages, as attached to President Obama's executive order: "A new executive order has been issued providing for a new pay schedule beginning 'on the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning after March 27, 2013,'" reports FedSmith.com. Jeryl Bier points to an example of the pay increase for average government executives: "Not much of an increase, but an increase all the same," Bier notes. Obama's Libya Lies Collapse: Senate Democrats Demand Answers. Not only has the scandal picked up steam in the mainstream press (Jake Tapper's ABC News report tonight is a must-watch), but high-ranking members of the President's own party are now demanding answers. This includes the man most often cited as a likely Secretary of State should Obama win a second term, Senator John Kerry: Senate Democrats joined Republicans Thursday in questioning the Obama administration's handling of the fatal Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya and why the administration refused for days to acknowledge that it was a terrorist attack linked to al Qaeda.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., circulated a bipartisan letter addressed to Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Nides, asking for an "accounting of the attacks against U.S. missions in Egypt, Libya and Yemen," according to a copy obtained by The Washington Examiner. Obama: Detention OK for 1st Amendment ‘activities’ Text smaller Text bigger The Obama administration is battling to restore a controversial provision of a new federal law that it admits could have been used to arrest and detain citizens indefinitely – even if their actions were protected by the First Amendment.
A federal judge this week made permanent an injunction against enforcement of Section 1021 of the most recent National Defense Authorization Act, which was declared unconstitutional. The Obama administration then took only hours to file an appeal of the order from U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest, and attorneys also asked her to halt enforcement of her order. In her order, Forrest wrote, “The government put forth the qualified position that plaintiffs’ particular activities, as described at the hearing, if described accurately, if they were independent, and without more, would not subject plaintiffs to military detention under Section 1021.” “It most definitely tells us something about their intent,” he told WND. Secret Service Shuts Down Conservative 'Fire Holder' Protest At White House Over 'Bomb Scare' 2012 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff.
Bin Laden Movie Generates Controversy. By Kathryn Sommers and Tom Snyder Critics and reporters have been questioning Sony Picture Entertainment’s new movie about the hunt for Usama bin Laden, the architect behind the 9/11 attacks on the United States who was killed on May 2011 by a secret team of Navy Seals. They question the unprecedented access that the Obama administration seems to have given the filmmakers, including Oscar winning director Kathryn Bigelow, about the details behind the raid. An August 2011 letter to the CIA and the Department of Defense from Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security asked for an investigation into whether the White House had given Bigelow’s team access to classified material that could be used by America’s enemies. In the wake of that letter, the watchdog group Judicial Watch recently obtained emails and meeting transcripts about the access the filmmakers received from the government.
GOP Rep. King says Obama officials disclosed identity of jailed Pakistani doctor. GOP Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, expressed concern Wednesday about the extent of the Obama administration’s efforts to protect the Pakistan doctor who was sent to prison in Pakistan for treason after helping to find Usama bin Laden. "This has been handled very poorly right from the time of the raid," King told FoxNews.com. Dr. Shakil Afridi ran a vaccination program for the CIA to collect DNA and verify bin Laden's presence at the compound in the town of Abbottabad where U.S. commandos killed the Al Qaeda chief in a May 2011 raid. The operation outraged Pakistani officials, who portrayed it as an act of treachery by a supposed ally.
King, R-N.Y., said administration officials talked about the doctor and his DNA sampling. "They put him out there," said King, who made clear he didn't know the exact details about what, if anything, the administration may have done to get the doctor out of Pakistan or otherwise protect him. The first reference to Dr. Seriously, what is Joe Biden even talking about? Not one to ever make much sense, Vice President Joe Biden has delivered yet another head-scratching speech. “Can somebody do me a favor,” Glenn asked on radio this morning. “Can somebody figure out what the heck Joe Biden is even talking about?
I want you to listen to him yell at the American people and tell me what he’s talking about.” In a speech to the AFSCME – the federal and state workers union – Biden rambled in a diatribe that sounded more Karl Marx than George Washington. BIDEN: And guess what I just described? I just described you! “What? “Now let’s – I don’t even know where to begin on this. The United States is unique in that it guarantees equal opportunity, but there is no such thing as guaranteed outcome. “We do guarantee that you’re not going to be held back from opportunity because of the color of your skin, maybe the content of your character, but not the color of your skin,” Glenn said. “Joe! Really? Michelle Obama: We need to build more sidewalks. On radio this morning, Glenn, Pat, and Stu had a field day picking apart Michelle Obama’s recent Good Morning America interview.
The First Lady visited the program to promote her new cookbook, but could not refrain from imparting her wisdom. Mrs. Obama came out in support of New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed soda ban. It should come as no surprise that the First Lady – who has made federal overreach and the enforcement nanny-state policies her mission – supports the Mayor’s inane proposition. Glenn played a portion of the interview this morning: MICHELLE OBAMA: You know, mayors, local communities should make the decisions that they think are best for their community because there’s no one size fits all. Let’s get this straight, the First Lady is suddenly pro-states’ rights?
“Wait a minute. “Because what works for New York may not work elsewhere,” he continued. The interview continues with Mrs. “Hang on just a second. Obama: ‘Google, Facebook Would Not Exist’ Without Government Funding. President Barack Obama speaks during the Easter Prayer Breakfast in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, April 4, 2012. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster) (CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama insisted Thursday that without government spending, “Google, Facebook would not exist.” Obama made the remark at a campaign fundraiser while criticizing the budget passed by House Republicans.
Obama said the Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget would, among other things, cut funding for research. “I believe in investing in basic research and science because I understand that all these extraordinary companies that are these enormous wealth-generators -- many of them would have never been there; Google, Facebook would not exist, had it not been for investments that we made as a country in basic science and research,” Obama said. Obama said Ryan’s budget would gut “an advanced, responsible society.” House Republicans say President Obama is distorting the facts about their budget blueprint: Former Dem. Congressman Kennedy Alleges 'Quid Pro Quo' for Access to White House. Access to the Obama White House is in direct correlation to the amount of money donated to the president's reelection effort and the Democratic party, the New York Times reports today.
The Times reports: "those who donated the most to Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party since he started running for president were far more likely to visit the White House than others. Among donors who gave $30,000 or less, about 20 percent visited the White House, according to a New York Times analysis that matched names in the visitor logs with donor records. But among those who donated $100,000 or more, the figure rises to about 75 percent. Approximately two-thirds of the president’s top fund-raisers in the 2008 campaign visited the White House at least once, some of them numerous times.
" But the most explosive allegation in the news story comes from former Democratic congressman Patrick Kennedy, son of the late Ted Kenney, who calls what the Obama White House is doing "quid pro quo. " Patrick J. Mr. New York Times – Obama White House Bought and Paid For By Highest Bidders (WSI RELATED) White House Doors Open for Big Donors. Offensive: Obama Bypasses Congress to Give $192M in Aid to the Palestinians. Great news: “Too big to fail” banks even bigger now. Posted at 9:51 am on April 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey More than two years ago, Barack Obama railed against “too big to fail” banks and pledged to prevent the “further consolidation” of the banking system.
Did Obama succeed? According to Bloomberg, the five banks that held assets equal to 43% of the US economy in 2007 before the financial crisis and the bank bailout now control assets that equal 56% of the US economy: Two years after President Barack Obama vowed to eliminate the danger of financial institutions becoming “too big to fail,” the nation’s largest banks are bigger than they were before the credit crisis.Five banks – JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. — held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, equal to 56 percent of the U.S. economy, according to the Federal Reserve.Five years earlier, before the financial crisis, the largest banks’ assets amounted to 43 percent of U.S. output.
Related Posts: Blind Chinese activist headed to US, closing nearly month long US-China diplomatic tussle. What is Poor Judgement? What counts as poor judgement or lack of discretion these days such that Federal employment is no longer suitable? It is a good question, because the State Department is proposing to fire me in part for my “poor judgement” as shown, they say, by these two blog posts, about Hillary Clinton laughing at someone’s death and about Michelle Bachmann being, well, insane. Meanwhile, a State Department VIP apparently has had sex on an Embassy roof, captured on video, not that that matters.Now of course both the White House and Embassy Kabul on Twitter chortled over the deaths of other people, so we know that laughing about others’ deaths is not “poor judgement.”
Point noted.We have learned that having posed for Playboy doesn’t count as poor judgement for a Foreign Service Officer. Point noted. And we can show that as the US Ambassador to Iraq dressing as JFK’s unsuccessful Secret Service bodyguard for a Halloween party as Baghdad burned around you apparently isn’t poor judgement. Doing Fine? Obama can’t fix a problem he can’t see. No, you heard him right. At a press conference this morning, the President of the United States actually said, “The private sector is doing fine.” Mr. President, are you paying attention? The private sector is small businesses. Twenty-three million Americans are struggling to find work. We knew President Obama was hostile to the private sector.
President Obama has candidly, honestly, exposed his economic worldview. The people of Wisconsin have something to say on that matter. This is the danger of a president who has zero private sector experience. So we get ObamaCare, massive regulations, and plans for higher taxes. We need a president with private sector experience. Gov. Any voter who wonders whether to vote for Gov. Is that the kind of president we want?