Radio America Online News Bureau

obama

Three Martini Lunch 1/11/17

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America slam BuzzFeed, and to some extent CNN, for irresponsible reporting on alleged dirt that the Russians have on Donald Trump.  They also rip Pres. Obama for his delusional farewell speech, including his patented move of urging Americans to understand one another while demonizing anyone who disagrees with him.  And they wonder why Trump would meet with someone as loony as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on the issue of vaccines possibly causing autism.

Standard Podcast [ 18:25 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Feds Trying to Grab Election Power from States

by

The Obama administration is using the intelligence reports of Russian hacking influencing the 2016 campaign as the premise for asserting more power over the states in running elections, but a top election fraud expert says federal involvement would make elections more vulnerable to mischief and is really just a way to insert the federal government where it doesn’t belong.

Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution is clear about the roles of the federal and state government in overseeing elections.

“The times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations,” it reads.

However, on Jan.6, the Obama administration – not Congress – decided to give the government more power in running elections.  President Obama has been very busy cramming in many new regulations before he leaves office, but elections expert and columnist John Fund says this one is particularly alarming.

“One of the most troublesome (orders) came last Friday and gave the federal government the power to begin centralizing our election systems. The Constitution explicitly gives states the power to set the ‘times, manner and places of holding elections,'” wrote Fund in National Review Online on Sunday.

“But Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson used the excuse of Friday’s release of a report on Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee to declare that state and local voting systems will be designated as ‘pieces of critical infrastructure’ so that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can protect them from hackers,” Fund continued.

Fund closely chronicles election fraud and is the author of books such as “Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens our Democracy” and “Who’s Counting?”  How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Are Putting Your Vote at Risk.”  He says this is another clear-cut case of Obama violating the Constitution to further an agenda.

“It’s once again the Obama administration reaching beyond it’s constitutional limits.  The states have the authority in elections in the Constitution.  If the federal government wants to intrude, wants to take over part of it, it has to negotiate with the states who are sovereign entities in their own right and come to some sort of compromise,” said Fund.

“Instead, it’s an ‘Our way or the highway’ approach and the states are naturally resentful of the fact that the federal government is now holding over them the sword that anytime there’s a problem in any election system, the federal government is aggregating to itself the power to step in and who knows what they’re going to do,” said Fund.

In addition to what he sees as a blatant violation of the Constitution, Fund says the Obama administration is taking action to address a problem that does not exist.

“The actual voting isn’t tied to the internet.  It can’t be hacked, except in a very few exceptions.  The voter registration rolls might be a problem because they often are connected to the internet.  But that’s not the votes.  So people are confusing what the hackers have been able to do with voter registration systems with the actual voting machines,” said Fund.

“If you wanted to hack them, you’d have to hack them individually one by one.  You can’t do it through the internet.  You can’t do it nationally,” said Fund.

So what’s really at work here?  Fund says the federal government instinctively bristles at the states have sovereignty in certain areas and have recently lost power on elections.

“The feds have always been angry that the states sometimes don’t listen to them.  For example, the feds lost the power just a couple of years ago in the Voting Rights Act to force 14 states to run all of their election changes through Washington.  The Supreme Court said, ‘It’s been 50 years since the civil rights revolution.  It’s time to let that go.  If Congress wants to pass a new law, they have to do that,” said Fund.

“The feds have chafed on that because it means they can’t send monitors to certain states.  They can’t intrude.  They can’t physically interfere in elections unless the states invite them in,” said Fund.

He says this new rules gives them a foot in the door again.

“This means the federal government has a new excuse, now that they’ve lost the voting rights excuse.  They have a new excuse to step in any time they want and dictate or second-guess what the states and counties are doing,” said Fund.

Fund is convinced that the the premise of the federal government coming in to make sure elections are not hacked is simply one step in a long-term endeavor to choke the sovereignty out of the states.

“This is a lot like the frog in the pot of boiling water.  The feds are turning up the heat on the states.  They hope that if they do it slowly enough and carefully enough, the states won’t be able to squawk enough.  Finally, the feds will be in charge and the states will be a secondary player in elections, not the primary player as the Constitution envisioned,” said Fund.

Even before the new rule granting DHS new power to get involved with state and local elections, some states accuse the department of trying to hack their systems unannounced in 2016.  Georgia is making the most noise about it.  Kentucky and West Virginia have reportedly expressed similar concerns.

Fund says the details on those stories are murky.

“We know very little because the feds aren’t talking,” said Fund.  “Apparently they didn’t tell the states even after they’d made the attempt.  It’s one thing to make a surprise attempt to hack into a state system.  It’s another thing after the attempt has been made not to tell the state about it,” said Fund.

“So once again, the feds are playing sneaky, not telling the states what they would normally be expected to tell them, and all because the feds think they know best,” said Fund.

The silver lining to the Obama administration’s action is that it can be easily reversed.

“With the stroke of a pen, it could go away tomorrow if tomorrow was Jan. 20, which is the day Donald Trump is inaugurated,” said Fund.

However, he warns not to assume Trump will scrap the new federal power right away.

“I suspect at the very least he should have his appointees ask some very searching questions about, ‘Was this really justified?  Couldn’t they have worked with the states toward some sort of compromise solution?  Does the government always have to bigfoot in if there’s a perceived issue involved?’  The answer to those questions is no it doesn’t.  The feds should get in the habit of cooperating with the states, not commanding the states,” said Fund.

Critics contend that compromised voter registration information online ought to be a major concern.  Fund says there’s an easy solution.

“The smartest way to stop hackers from getting into voter registration systems, which are online, is to stop online registration.  Go back to the old system where you have to fill out a postcard and send it in.  The records are kept.  It’s a little cumbersome, but you can’t hack a piece of paper,” said Fund.

“I’m not saying hackers aren’t a problem,” said Fund.  “I’m saying that if we keep our systems simple, don’t go to internet voting which would be a potential disaster, and if we maintain vigilance, we don’t have to surrender our traditional control of state and local elections and federal elections to Washington,” said Fund.

Standard Podcast [ 7:55 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 1/9/17

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud Mark Hemingway of “The Weekly Standard” for shredding the ridiculous notion that the Obama administration has been scandal-free.  They also unload on the FBI for doing nothing after the man who later became the Ft. Lauderdale airport terrorist came to them and said his mind was being controlled by U.S. intelligence agencies.  And they highlight the FBI revelation that the Democratic National Committee refused to allow agents to inspect their servers after they suspected they had been hacked.

Standard Podcast [ 18:27 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

No One Has Seen A Year Like This

by

One of America’s top political analysts says he and just about every other expert were wrong about the 2016 elections, noting Donald Trump is unlike any of his predecessors and his win promises to gut much of the Obama legacy.

Dr. Larry Sabato runs the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, where he teaches political science.  He also heads up Sabato’s Crystal Ball, which predicts presidential, Senate, House, and gubernatorial races.  In more than 40 years of tracking presidential races, has he ever seen a campaign like this one?

“Never, and no one in my field has,” said Sabato.  “I’ve talked to a number of historians and people who focus on politics and political history.  Everyone agrees that this election stands out in all of American history.  Whether you liked the result or didn’t like the result, it’s just different,” said Sabato.

He says the Trump’s background is one of many things that distinguish him from previous presidents.

“Donald Trump is the only president-to-be who has not served in any political office or military office.  He is an outsider complete and total.  He’s the richest president by far.  There’s just so many categories that make him unusual,” said Sabato.

When 2016 dawned, Trump was the front-runner for the Republican nomination, and other than an opening loss in Iowa, was the clear favorite throughout the chase for 1,237 delegates.  Sabato says Trump benefited from a crowded GOP field.

“During the competitive part of the primary…Trump only received about 38 percent of the vote.  Sixty-two percent of Republicans voted for other candidates.  The problem (for the other candidates) was there was so many of them.  So 38 percent was more than enough to win the nomination,” said Sabato.

All the supposed experts declared that Trump’s style, persona, and policy positions couldn’t possible win him the general election, but again Trump proved them all wrong.  Sabato says it’s always hard for a party to win three consecutive terms in the White House.  He says the only exception in modern history is the transition from Ronald Reagan to George H.W. Bush..

Another big factor that Sabato says was overlooked was a massive enthusiasm gap between supporters of Trump and Hillary Clinton.

“The turnouts in small town America, in rural America among the blue collar workers and white working class were enormous.  It was just enormous, whereas Clinton was unable to excite even solid Democratic groups like millennials and African-American voters,” said Sabato.

He points out that Clinton won those groups handily but their turnout numbers were way down compared with 2012.

Sabato also notes that the media became fixated on Trump’s negatives and failed to pay attention to Clinton’s unpopularity.

“Hillary Clinton was more unacceptable than we realized.  Yes, we knew she had high negatives.  That was obscured by the fact that Trump had even higher negatives so we didn’t focus on her negatives.  But it turned out her negatives unenthused the Democratic base, to a much greater degree in the end, than Trump’s negatives unenthused the Republican base,” said Sabato.

While Democrats offer excuses for Clinton’s defeat such as the influence of the Russians and the FBI to the existence of the Electoral College, Sabato says the real answers cut much closer to home.

“Hillary Clinton doesn’t want to talk about her inability to generate a large turnout among Democratic groups.  She doesn’t want to talk about her inability to attract the white working class that got Bill Clinton elected in good part in 1992 and 1996.  She never had a message that reached them,” said Sabato.

“Her slogan, although technically it was ‘Stronger Together’ whatever that means, was really ‘It’s My Turn.  It’s My Turn.’  Well, people rarely elect a candidate because it’s their turn.  They want to know what’s in it for them,” said Sabato.

But Clinton was not the only loser on election night.  Sabato says President Obama took one on the chin as well.

“It hurts him a great deal.  Why did he campaign so hard for a woman who gave him such trouble in 2008 and very nearly won the nomination instead of him?” asked Sabato.  “He understood, just as Ronald Reagan understood, that if you don’t get a successor of your party elected to succeed you, much of what you’ve done is going to be reversed rather quickly and probably easily.”

For Sabato, 2016 leaves him with two major takeaways about the state of American politics.  First, he says we need to pay more attention to who the most motivated voters are.

“A constituency that is ignored and feels angry or abused is going to turn out in larger numbers.  It may be African-Americans for Barack Obama in 2008 or it may be white working class, rural or small town voters for Donald Trump in 2016.  Always ask yourself, where’s the energy in the electorate,” said Sabato.

However, for all the big wins Republicans enjoyed in 2016, they still have some demographic problems.

“Republicans still have some of the basic problems they had before Trump was elected.  They still don’t appeal to many minorities.  They still don’t appeal to millennials.  They have to get a larger share of more groups in the electorate if they are to win not just the electoral vote but the popular vote in future elections,” said Sabato.

Standard Podcast [ 14:56 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Obama Trying to Handcuff Trump on Energy

by

President Obama is taking multiple actions that could hamstring President-Elect Donald Trump’s plans to unleash domestic energy production, which is a major component of the Trump economic agenda.

On Tuesday, Obama banned offshore energy exploration in massive portions of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans.

“The law allows a president to withdraw any currently unleased lands in the Outer Continental Shelf from future lease sales. There is no provision in the law that allows the executive’s successor to repeal the decision, so President-elect Donald Trump would not be able to easily brush aside the action,” reported CNBC.

The law in question is legislation from 1953 that deal with offshore leases.  Advocates of American energy exploration contend this is simply Obama’s gift to the environmental lobby.

“There have been a lot of environmental groups, especially over the past few months, who have been urging the administration to take some sort of action,” said Chris Warren, vice president for communications at the Institute for Energy Research.

“This is pretty much the Obama administration giving an early Christmas gift to the ‘keep it in the ground’ activists, these folks who want to keep all our oil, gas, and coal resources in the ground,” he added.

Warren suspects the waters in question could yield trillions of barrels of oil, but he says greater energy independence isn’t even the most important result if those areas were to be opened up

“We produced a study a few years back at what would happen if we were to produce our oil and gas resources offshore in the Atlantic, the Arctic and the Gulf (of Mexico).  These numbers are staggering.  You’re talking about hundreds of thousands of jobs a year, hundreds of billions of dollars in GDP output per year, higher wages for folks, more revenue for government,” said Warren.

Warren says the method by which Obama is locking the offshore areas seems suspect.

“This is a pretty obscure provision in an old law.  It’s never been used in this manner so we’re not quite sure how the next administration can take care of it but they certainly will be working hard to do so,” said Warren.

He sees two possible remedies.

“One way they can do this is by undesignating this area.  Of course, they’ll be sued after that but they’ll take it to the court system and we’ll see how it shakes out from there.  Congress could also pass legislation to reverse this,” said Warren.

Obama’s efforts are not limited to offshore exploration.  Earlier this month, the administration blocked the controversial path of the Dakota Access Pipeline.  This week, it also finalized the Stream Protection Rule, which mandates distances that coal mining operations must keep away from waterways.

Warren says the latter policy continues Obama’s strangling of the coal industry.

“This is really just another way that the Obama administration is trying to take coal off the table.  They want to prevent it from being mined.  They want to prevent it from being used in our electricity system with the clean power plant regulation, which was the hallmark of this administration’s climate agenda.  This is just one more regulation that the Obama administration is trying to push out the door,” said Warren.

So is Obama succeeding at putting roadblocks in the way of the Trump energy agenda?  Warren says there are new hurdles to clear but that Trump still has other good options.

“Our federal lands have tons of oil, gas, and coal resources that have been held under lock and key by this current administration.  It hasn’t been through regulation.  It’s been by slow-walking permits, offering very few leases to companies to produce these resources.  That’s something the Trump administration can come in and do fairly quickly,” said Warren.

Warren says the Obama and Trump approaches to energy could not be more different.

“We’re not talking about favoring one source over another, whether it’s coal or natural gas or wind or solar or whatever.  It’s about allowing Americans to make those choices for themselves,” said Warren.

“Under this current administration, that hasn’t been the case.  It’s been throwing money and mandating the sources that President Obama prefers.  Under the Trump administration, I think we’ll see an end to that,” said Warren.

Standard Podcast [ 7:34 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘We Cannot Trust the Russians’

by

Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., is calling for immediate aid to the displaced Syrian people at risk of being butchered by the Syrian government forces and he warns the incoming Trump administration that Russia has designs on calling the shots throughout much of the Middle East.

Reacting to Tuesday’s news that Syrian rebels have effectively lost their stronghold on Aleppo, Pascrell says that leaves a massive humanitarian crisis.

“There’s a huge humanitarian problem there for the people who remain in Aleppo and the surrounding areas.  Aid has not been able to get to them.  Food has not been able to get to them because of the cabal between the Russians and the Syrian government,” said Pascrell.

“Right now, the immediate problem is to bring aid to those people who need it.  There’s no water.  There’s no food.  And obviously, if you watch the pictures, there’s very little shelter,” said Pascrell.

He says the blame for the humanitarian nightmare belongs at the feet of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“Assad has butchered his own people.  He chooses to continue to do this.  He wants to bring the people and anybody that joins them, such as the rebels, to their knees.  While that’s happening, innocent people are dying,” said Pascrell.

Pascrell admits the crisis in Syria has no simple solutions, since trying to find and train moderate rebels has proved elusive and the U.S. is simultaneously fighting radical forces like ISIS and the Al Nusra Front.

“That’s a very difficult enterprise.  Four years ago, we did know there were a certain amount of rebels who had the exact same agenda as we had, and that is is to overthrow the Assad government.  We put that aside and allowed Assad to get stronger,” said Pascrell.

Russia is one of the key reasons for Assad;s ability to beat back the rebels, particularly in providing the air power that eroded the rebel grip in Aleppo.  Pascrell says it’s long past time to impose economic sanctions on Moscow.

“We don’t want to risk outright war with the Russians.  That’s not what we seek and I’m sure that’s not what they seek with us.  But I think if we put economic sanctions on the Russians, it’s worked before.  It could work again,” said Pascrell.

He says Americans should have no illusions about Russia.

“We cannot trust the Russians.  We can’t trust the Russians now and we’re not going to be able to trust them after January 20.  Anybody that’s foolish enough to think that we can do this is simply going to bring more misery upon the Syrian people,” said Pascrell.

But the wariness toward Russia extends far beyond Syria.  To begin, Pascrell says you just have to look at how Vladimir Putin handles criticism from his own people.

“We’re dealing with a Russian government here that has suffocated any dissent in its own country.  How many journalists have been thrown in prison?  How many journalists have been thrown the heck out that are now in the United States?” said Pascrell.

He says the Russian involvement in Syria combined with the crackdown on rights in Turkey are combining towards the creation of a troubling and growing alliance throughout the region.

“Pretty soon you’re going to have an alliance between the Russians, the Turks, the Iranians and the Syrians.  I see that developing there right now.  The Turks have their own problems internally and [Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan] is going to take it out on American foreign policy.  There’s no two ways about it,” said Pascrell.

“[The Russians] don’t want these countries to turn to the West.  They want these countries to turn to Russia.  So we’re between that rock and the rock of not getting involved where American lives are going to be lost.  Not an easy question to resolve whether it’s Obama or Trump,” said Pascrell.

In fact, the congressman would not be surprised if Russia makes our fight to eradicate ISIS more difficult than it needs to be.

“While we’re fighting ISIS and giving all we can in order to fight the extreme jihadists, we need to recognize at the same time that Russia will simply go with the flow in whatever suits their purpose,” said Pascrell.

While he encourages President-Elect Trump to study up on all the ways Russian aggression is evident today, Pascrell says he has no idea what to expect from the incoming administration.

“I don’t know what to expect.  Does anybody know what to expect?  Whether it was the campaign or whether it was after the campaign, you never know what he’s going to say or what direction he’s going to go in.  I don’t think it’s healthy for the region.  I’ll tell you that,” said Pascrell.

Standard Podcast [ 8:26 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 12/14/16

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America enjoy reading the Politico story of how the Clinton campaign vigorously resisted efforts from allies to go to Michigan to help her win there.  They also sigh over the carnage in Syria and the latest toothless response from the Obama administration.  And they discuss the state of Keith Olbermann’s mental health as he offers an unhinged rant saying Donald Trump cannot be allowed to take office or else it will mean the end of our independence.

Standard Podcast [ 20:01 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 12/8/16

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are glad to see Jill Stein’s quixotic recount journey get shut down in Michigan and headed towards an anticlimactic finish in Wisconsin.  They slam the media for only now realizing that many of the new jobs created in the Obama years are low-wage, part time openings that aren’t a long-term solution for families.  And they unload on CNN for suggesting that racism was behind the fierce Republican opposition to President Obama’s agenda.

Standard Podcast [ 21:52 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 12/1/16

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America have all crazy news today.  They slam Pres. Obama for suggesting that Fox News being on in restaurants and bars is the reason Democrats fell short in 2016.  They also unload on BuzzFeed for demanding to know whether popular HGTV hosts agree with their pastor about homosexuality being a sin –  which leads to a bunch of fun tangents about HGTV in general.  And they rip Democrats and the media for throwing a hissy fit about the Electoral College and even intimidating electors just weeks after clutching their pearls about Trump possibly not accepting the election results.

Standard Podcast [ 23:20 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Energy Industry Wants Help from Trump

by

President-Elect Donald Trump is vowing to unleash American energy and begin scrapping burdensome regulations on his very first day in office, announcements welcomed by the energy industry, although they still have other goals they want to see the new administration pursue.

In a short video, Trump outlined several directives he will issue on his first day in office on issues ranging from trade and immigration to national security and ethics reform.  However, promoting domestic energy and rolling back regulations were right near the top of the list.

“I will cancel job killing restrictions on the production of American energy, including shale energy and clean coal, creating many millions of high paying jobs,” said Trump in the video.

“On regulation, I will formulate a rule which says that for every one new regulation, two old regulations must be eliminated,” said Trump.

The energy industry is hopeful that the next four years will offer it a more hospitable environment than what it received during the Obama administration.

“We’re certainly encouraged by the fact that the president-elect understands that one of the key drivers to a strong economy is energy security,” said American Petroleum Downstream Group Director Frank Macchiarola.

Macchiarola believes Trump understands the need to champion domestic energy production and is fully confident the American people are on board.

“Survey after survey tells us that the American public is concerned about economic growth and believes that we need to be energy secure,” he said, but notes that Obama has left a pretty complicated knot for the new president to untangle on energy regulation.

“I think what happened over the course of the Obama administration is that there was a lot of consolidated power in the administration.  I think with the division in Congress and the stalemate between both parties in the House and Senate, I think the administration took that opportunity to consolidate it’s power through a stronger regulatory agenda,” said Macchiarola.

He says those regulations had a clear impact on the energy industry.

“We have 145 current regulations that directly impact the oil and natural gas sector, whether it’s issues related to public land and access or issues related to the downstream or issues related to air or water or an issue like the Renewable Fuel standard.  It’s a broad spectrum,” said Macchiarola.

Macchiarola and his allies want the Trump administration to go over every single one of those regulations and provide as much relief as possible.

“What we really would like to do is to have the new administration, with a fresh set of eyes, take a look at this regulatory onslaught that we’ve seen.  And, again, consistent with their message and principles that they stated during the campaign about the need for less burdensome regulations here in Washington, free up capital to be invested in the private sector and the nee for secure U.S. domestic energy production,” said Macchiarola.

One of the policies Macchiarola is most concerned about is the Renewable Fuel Standard, or RFS, and the increasing amount of ethanol being required in our fuel.  He says the RFS was created last decade to help boost energy independence at a time when the U.S. was importing vast amounts of energy.

He says the policy no longer fits the reality.

“What they didn’t know is that we would have an American energy renaissance.  Because of the shale revolution here in the United States and the energy renaissance, we’re now producing greater and greater amounts of oil and natural gas.  We’re the world’s leading producer of oil and natural gas,” said Macchiarola.

“At the same time, demand for energy has essentially flat-lined.  So what you’ve seen is America become more energy secure over that time,” he added.

Macchiarola says addressing the RFS is critical now because the amount of ethanol about to be required in gasoline is incompatible with the vast majority of American vehicles.

“(It) creates an issue because it potentially adds cost to the consumer both through food and fuel.  And these higher ethanol blends above E10 are incompatible with the cars we have on the road today.  So the bottom line is the RFS is a mess, and it really needs to be fixed,” said Macchiarola.

Bipartisan legislation to address the Renewable Fuel Standard exists in the House of Representative but has not yet been considered.

Standard Podcast [ 7:28 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share