![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr6Iqt-JUSVjhHGJc8mKqyAHokY4k7ax5nu1J0K1hwN4dqM1e_0QJHBzpQ_AqPgWx_EMc1_QSv88VWwWArBiOpNxzbKk3O1jJ-hsdKBGNV4k70AH1mHM3pUCHSVZ-wemal0NYmgg/s400/China+Port.jpg)
If this is the new wave of America's newly found 'Green' Industry then someone ought to ask our Whitehouse cabinet officials - What Gives?
Click Here
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Driving through Newport News Thursday night I grabbed a copy of my old hometown paper – the Daily Press (affectionately known during my youth as the Daily Mullet Wrapper). I almost fell out of my seat when I read an editorial calling for restraint in the pay of government employees and drastic reform in their benefit packages.
When a newspaper published in an area dominated by the federal government calls for curbing the federal trough, you know things have really gotten bad.
Harken back to the 2010 State of the Union Address:
President Obama attacked the Supreme Court with them sitting before him. I wonder how Obama would feel if a GOP Congressional majority booed him at the 2011 State of the Union? Yes I know, two wrongs don’t make a right.
This is was National Review had to say about Chief Justice John Robert’s remarks on the matter:
Chief Justice John Roberts, belatedly responding to the president’s State of the Union address, said it was “troubling” for the justices to be surrounded by hooting and hollering critics of their campaign-finance decision without being able to respond. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said it was the Court’s decision that was troubling. (Translation: Democrats think they have found a winning issue.) Roberts was right. Next year, the justices should stay home.
Chief Justice Roberts is right. So is the NR, the Justices should stay home.
from Delmarva Dealings
I never thought of it this way before, but the National Review is dead on:
The Senate can pass only one reconciliation bill per year, which is why the Democrats—who seem to intuit that they won’t be so numerous next year—want to combine the healthcare reconciliation bill with legislation that would make the government the direct provider of most student loans. The combination is poetic: American college-loan policy offers an illustration of how the government can absorb an activity incrementally, claiming to cherish the benefits the private sector provides until the bait has worked and it’s time for the switch. Government support for student loans began in the form of subsidies for private loans, much as the Democrats’ health-care bill would succor the insurance industry by subsidizing its product while forcing people to buy it. In the 1990s, Democrats added a “public option”—making government the direct provider of some student loans—with the Clinton administration claiming that “students and schools are served by healthy competition” between the private sector and the government. This is the same rhetoric Obama used when he tried to sell us a public option for health care. And now we see how quickly Democrats dispense with the rhetoric of competition when a government takeover seems viable: The new student-loan bill would make the public option the only option, thus completing the absorption of the activity. In a similar way, the current health-care legislation isn’t the endgame.
The left’s response will always be that the government can do it cheaper and / or better.
from Delmarva Dealings