The American Pundit

Bad news for Democrats in Nebraska today. Bob Kerrey won’t run to hold retiring Senator Ben Nelson’s (D-NE) vulnerable Senate seat.

“I have given the decision of becoming a candidate for the U.S. Senate very serious thought and prayer,” Kerrey said in an email announcing his decision. “To those who urged me to do so, I am sorry, very sorry to have disappointed you. I hope you understand that I have chosen what I believe is best for my family and me.”

Kerrey, who moved to New York City after giving up his seat in 2001, spent nearly a week in Nebraska last month to seek advice about whether to run in a state that has drifted ideologically away from him since he left.

Kerrey was still viewed as the Democratic Party’s best chance to hold the seat. Nelson was effectively forced into retirement thanks to his unpopular vote in favor of government-run health care.

This announcement pushes the Nebraska seat further into the Republican column. Which is good news for Republicans nationally, who hope to gain control of the Senate — something that would take four pick-ups in November.

Ouch.

WASHINGTON — Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) ripped into both President Barack Obama and his re-election team on Tuesday morning for backing off its previous criticism of outside spending on campaigns and embracing the role that super PACs will play in the 2012 election.

“It is a dumb approach,” Feingold said in a phone interview with The Huffington Post. “It will lead to scandal and there are going to be a lot of people having corrupt conversations about huge amounts of money that will one day regret that they went down the route of what is effectively a legalized Abramoff system.”

Feingold went on to describe Obama’s decision as “dancing with the devil” and said voters will see Democrats as “weak” for displaying such hypocrisy.

I’ve always kinda-sorta respected Feingold. He’s a lefty but he’s an ideological lefty. He believes what he says and doesn’t bow because his party decides to opportunistically take a different course. Good for him for staying true to what he believes.

Big surprise.

New York Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has been an outspoken supporter of banning insider trading in Congress, but she and her husband profited by betting against the housing and real estate market during the 2008 financial crisis…

“We are entrusted with a profound responsibility by the American people to look out for their best interests, and nothing else, certainly not our own financial interests,” Gillibrand said in a release after the STOCK Act passed the Senate last week. “Today, we took the first step toward restoring the trust that’s been lost in Washington by ensuring that members of Congress play by the exact same rules as everyday Americans.”

And yet…

A Wall Street Journal report on congressional trading during the 2008 financial crisis found Gillibrand’s husband had “shorted” housing stocks—meaning he bet that prices on home builder stocks would fall—at least 34 times before the housing market imploded.

Gillibrand’s husband made more than 250 transactions in 2008, when his wife was in the House, and almost all of them were put options on homebuilder stocks such as Beazer Homes USA Inc., Hovnanian Enterprises Inc., Meritage Homes Corp., and Ryland Group Inc.

The Gillibrand’s also shorted the property market. Gillibrand’s husband bought options of ProShares UltraShort Real Estate; these options earned $2 for each $1 fall in real-estate stocks.

The transactions helped Gillibrand and her husband rack-up a net worth of more than $1.3 million, according to disclosure filings.

So while Americans were watching their chief investments collapse, feeling the pain of owing more than their homes would be worth, Senator Gillibrand was betting against the American economy and raking in the dough.

Just last month the Obama Administration demonized super PACs as shadowy groups allowing corporations and wealthy Americans to influence the political process without scrutiny. And you probably recall President Obama scolding the Supreme Court during a State of the Union speech a few years back for upholding political speech rights. So you might expect the president would steer clear of these super PAC groups.

You would be wrong.

The New York Times is reporting that Barack Obama has flipped on the issue and is now directly asking donors to give to Priorities USA Action, the foremost left-wing super PAC organization. The paper says Obama will, “dispatch cabinet officials, senior advisers at the White House and top campaign staff members ” to raise money for the group. The new effort was announced to the campaign’s National Finance Committee on Monday.

The Times further reports that representatives for the campaign and administration will appear at events for Priorities USA Action, which is expected to benefit Obama in the campaign by launching vicious attacks on Republicans without tying Obama’s name directly to the dirty politics. For the moment Obama himself is not expected to appear at events. Maybe he’ll continue to attack Republican super PACs while ignoring his own policy change.

Robert Zimmerman, a top fundraiser for Democrats, admits, “It’s hard to pass the plate for super PAC money while Democratic leaders have been preaching about the sins of it”. Indeed. One might even say it smacks of hypocrisy. But then, that’s what we’ve come to expect from the Obama campaign and its allies. Hypocrisy up and down, seven ways to Sunday. It’s the modus operandi of the Obama Administration, too.

I look forward to those supposedly “principled” lefties with their “principled” opposition to super PACs turn around tomorrow and explain why this is not only okay but admirable. You know it’s coming. The same people who took part in the demonization last month, when Obama decided to oppose the groups, will suddenly proclaim the virtue of such groups now that Obama has changed course. They’re hacks. All of ‘em.

Works for me.

About 7 in 10 Egyptians surveyed by Gallup in December 2011 oppose U.S. economic aid to Egypt, and a similar percentage opposes the U.S. sending direct aid to civil society groups. This rebuke of U.S. financial support may be a challenge for Egypt’s newly elected parliament and its future president as the government attempts to bolster the nation’s financial stability.

If we do as they want we’ll end up saving about $1.3 billion. Like I said, works for me.

We can’t be surprised. Mubarak was in power for decades and Egyptians remember who supported him.

Ironically, we’re not going to want to stop forking over the aide because we need a bargaining chip with Egypt’s new government. The country has arrested 19 Americans, including Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s son, for promoting democracy. And it’s not entirely clear if the next government will keep its semi-peace with our regional allies.

Mr. Inevitability’s biggest legacy in governance.

Senate President Therese Murray declined to say Monday whether she’d support a 20 percent increase in the state cigarette tax proposed last month by Gov. Deval Patrick to help fund the exploding cost of health care programs.

“The Senate can’t initiate a tax. We’ll see what the House does as they prepare their budget,” she said.

This is just the latest tax increase needed to fund the outrageous costs related to RomneyCare.

Governor Brilliant Businessman apparently didn’t foresee a massive entitlement program having out-of-control costs.

A “green” automaker that received a half-billion dollar taxpayer loan from the Obama Administration has announced layoffs in the states of Delaware and California.

The layoffs include 26 workers at a former General Motors plant in Wilmington that Fisker is retooling to manufacture its Nina plug-in hybrid sedan. Another 40 contractors and employees who were working in design and development of Fisker’s Karma luxury car in Anaheim, Calif., also have been cut.

The layoffs come as Fisker is seeking to renegotiate its loan agreement with the Department of Energy.

Fisker has received $193 million of the $529 million DOE loan, mostly for work on the Karma, which sells for about $100,000. The introduction of the Karma was delayed because of regulatory issues and battery pack problems that prompted a voluntary safety recall by Fisker.

What a clusterfark.

But it gets better.

Fisker has only received $193 million of the loan because its original loan agreement stated payouts would be continent upon the company meeting sales and performance goals. It’s not meeting those goals.

So what’s going on now? The Department of Energy is renegotiating its agreement with Fisker so the failing company can have access to the rest of the money. You know, the money that wasn’t payed out because the company is failing.

We have a failing company and the Obama Administration is working to make sure more taxpayer money is pumped into the failure.

And why? Because Obama has staked quite a bit of political capital on the success of these “green” companies. If they keep going under, as they would under fair market conditions, he’ll look a fool. So he’s rigging the market to keep them afloat through the election.

Pathetic. And corrupt.

Good question. Why not? If we accept that Americans can be forced to purchase a certain type of government-approved insurance, why can’t the government force Americans to buy a certain type of government-approved vehicle?

This is exactly the danger of allowing the individual mandate to stand. Once you accept government can force private citizens into the marketplace to purchase a specific good or service, there’s no end to government power. It would be a disaster for individual liberty.

Seems like common sense. People using taxpayer money to feed themselves should probably be making the most of what they’re given. If you can afford Oreos, you can afford a loaf of bread.

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – A Florida lawmaker is pushing a bill that would ban the use of food stamps to purchase snacks and sweets, such as cookies and cakes.

Republican State Sen. Ronda Storms, of Valrico, says her goal is to stop a small percentage of recipients who misuse food stamps.

Welfare liberals are predictably outraged.

Critics say the government shouldn’t be telling people what to eat.

Democratic Rep. Gwyndolen Clarke-Reed, of Pompano Beach, also says the educational provision is demeaning to minorities and the poor by implying they aren’t smart enough to make their own choices.

You know what? Tough. If you’re on welfare for any extended period of time it seems to me there’s a good chance you’ve made bad choices. If you have to resort to being fed by taxpayers for an extended period of time, you’ve made bad decisions.

It’s time to take the pride out of living off welfare. Long-term welfare (not talking about temporary assistance) is a sign of failure.

There’s no pride in living off the fruits of other people’s labor. None. Let’s get that out there and over with.

If you’re reliant on taxpayer-funded sustenance for any extended period of time, why should we assume you’ve got your crap together and can make good decisions? Don’t want to attend the classes? Don’t live off welfare.

Don’t call it a comeback.

No, seriously, don’t call it a comeback.

The spot is supposed to be encouraging, as it focuses on the resilience of Detroit. “It’s halftime. Both teams are in their locker room discussing what they can do to win this game in the second half,” Eastwood says in the spot. “It’s halftime in America, too. People are out of work and they’re hurting. And they’re all wondering what they’re going to do to make a comeback. And we’re all scared, because this isn’t a game. The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together, now Motor City is fighting again.”

But contrary to what the might ad suggest, the spot was actually filmed in New Orleans and Los Angles. “Yes, part of it was filmed in New Orleans . . . and some was filmed in various parts—such as Los Angeles,” Dianna Gutierrez said. She specifically points to the tunnel scenes as being taken at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, while the stadium shots were in New Orleans.

Asked whether any part of the ad was filmed in Detroit, Gutierrez said that previously taken footage from various parts of the Motor City was used. No image of Detroit was shot for the specific use in this ad.

So when they absolutely positively had to show video of Detroit…they used stock footage. Everything they filmed new was filmed elsewhere. What a confidence builder for the city, huh?