AG
Defends Suppressing Petraeus Scandal
Attorney
General Eric Holder defended withholding information on the scandal
surrounding CIA Director David Patraeus until after the November 6
election.
“I know
there are those who think that they have a right to know everything
about what's going on in their government,” Holder acknowledged.
“But those of us on the inside must place the broader national
interest ahead of any presumed duty to keep the general public
informed.”
“As is
becoming apparent in the post-election revelations, there are serious
issues of national security that could affect the people's confidence
in their government,” Holder continued. “If these issues had
become publicly known prior to November 6 they could've had an
irreversible impact on the election outcome. It was our considered
judgment to not let voters be stampeded by a knee-jerk reaction to a
volatile and transitory chain of events that we felt detracted from
the more significant elements of the campaign.”
Holder
argued that “the post-election separation of the offending party
from his government post exacts the appropriate measure of justice
without disrupting the ability of the Administration to continue its
governance for another term. We are confident that history will
validate the wisdom of our decision on this matter.”
Administration
Blocks Oil Development on 1.6 Million Acres
The
Interior Department issued a final plan to close 1.6 million acres of
federally owned land that had originally been slated for oil shale
development by the Bush Administration.
Interior
Department spokesman, Blake Androff explained that “injecting more
fossil-based fuels into the mix would be both unbalanced and
disruptive. The President is trying to wean the country off of energy
sources dependent on the burning of fossil fuels. Bringing more
sources of such fuels on-stream would work to thwart this objective.”
Androff
also cited “the potentially damaging international impacts of lower
prices for fossil-based fuels. Many of this country's allies in the
Middle East would be hard hit if fuel prices declined. The
President's efforts to build better relations with these countries
would be negatively affected if we were to bring an excessive
quantity of competing oil onto the market.”
Senator
Mark Udall (D-Colo) praised the plan. “Increasing supplies of oil
depresses the price,” Udall observed. “This only further delays
the country's transition toward a more environmentally-friendly way
of life. Keeping supplies tight will encourage more people to avoid
unnecessary travel and to choose public transportation for the trips
they feel they have to make.”
Hostess
Brands to Be Liquidated
The
financially troubled manufacturer of dessert cakes announced it will
be forced to liquidate its assets. The move was in response to a
strike by 5,000 employees represented by the Bakery, Confectionery,
Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Union and will result in the layoff
of 18,000 employees.
AFL-CIO
President Richard Trumka denounced the company, calling its decision
“a direct contradiction and insult to American voters. Just a week
ago voters reelected President Obama. Rather than accept this
vindication of the President's policies, the management of Hostess is
putting profit ahead of social justice.”
Hostess
has been in precarious financial shape for years. It first filed for
bankruptcy in 2004. It emerged reorganized in 2009, but has still
experienced net losses. The company again filed for bankruptcy in
early 2012. The liquidation plan calls for the company's iconic
brands"Twinkies, Ho-Hos, Ding-Dongs, etc.--to be sold to the
highest bidders and the cash used to repay outstanding debts.
Trumka
said Hostess management's decision “putting the repayment of debt
ahead of the benefit of employees is emblematic of the anti-social
nature of capitalism. Here we have owners saying they're going to
sacrifice the livelihoods of thousands of workers just because they
can't afford to pay them decent wages.”
To avert
the loss of jobs at Hostess, Trumka urged President Obama to
intervene. “There's no question that these workers need these
jobs,” Trumka asserted. “Likewise, there's no question that
consumers want their Twinkies. The government should provide the
funding necessary to assure the continuation of both.”
Congresswomen
Rally to Defense of Susan Rice
U.N.
ambassador Susan Rice has come under criticism from Senators John
McCain (R-Az) and Linsey Graham (R-SC) for lying about the September
11th attack on the Behghazi Consulate. A dozen female
members of the House of Representatives have rallied to her defense.
“Ambassador
Rice was just following orders,” Representative Marcia Fudge
(D-Ohio) declared. “Laying the blame on her is racist and sexist.”
Fudge compared the Senators' attack on Rice to “blaming a
prostitute for sticking up for her pimp. What's she supposed to do
when her boss gives the marching orders? You know he's got her in a
vise. You know she could lose her job or worse if she crosses him.”
Representative
Gwen Moore (D-Wisc) characterized Rice as “a virtual battered
woman. Their real beef is with the President. They can't get him to
answer their questions so they take out their frustration on the
person he's designated as his spokesperson.” Moore suggested that
“President Obama should consider dismissing them as Senators for
behavior unworthy of that office.”
Delegate
Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) argued that “these Senators' threat to
block Ambassador Rice's elevation to Secretary of State is futile and
misguided. Suppose she did lie about Benghazi. Well, lying for one's
country is what the nation's top diplomat is expected to do. So, even
if what they charge is true it is hardly disqualifying. Besides, they
can't stop her from becoming Secretary of State if the President
wants her.”
Testimony
from former CIA Director David Patraeus would seem to bolster the
case for Rice merely being a dutiful messenger. Patraeus told a
congressional hearing this week that “we knew from the outset that
what was happening at the Consulate was a terrorist attack. This
assessment was subsequently altered by the Obama Administration.
Ambassador Rice was merely carrying forward a message that the
President had determined best suited the needs of the country as he
saw it.”
Senator
Denies Possibility that Regulations Could Cost Jobs
Encouraged
by the recent election results, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
(D-Nev) boasted that “the Republicans' contention that excessive
government regulation causes increased unemployment has been
convincingly refuted by voters.”
“Of
course, the GOP's arguments were ludicrous from the beginning,”
Reid maintained. “If we pass new regulations the government has to
hire more people to enforce them. That means more jobs. Companies
have to hire more people to ensure they comply with the regulations.
That means more jobs. The regulations are kind of like a scissors
cutting into unemployment from both sides.”
The
possibility that more regulations could boost the cost of doing
business and, thereby, lead to cuts in the number of persons employed
was derided by Reid. “The cost of the regulations are just passed
on to the customers,” Reid explained. “They don't come out of the
employers' pockets. So how could it hurt?”
That
passed on higher costs might deter customers from purchasing products
was similarly disposed of by the Majority Leader. “If consumers
really need a product they will buy it no matter what the cost,”
Reid said. “If a slightly higher price dissuades them from buying
it means that they don't really need it. To the extent that we are
eliminating the purchase of unneeded products we are improving the
true efficiency of our economy.”
As Reid
sees it, “money that isn't spent on unneeded products could be
better used on infrastructure projects like roads and bridges, or to
invest in education or green energy. There's no shortage of ways in
which the government could more effectively deploy our nation's
resources.”
Teacher
Suspended for Criticizing Obama Policies
A Rock
Hill, South Carolina, a middle school teacher was placed on
administrative leave after her school received a complaint about
remarks she posted on her personal Facebook page. The remarks
criticized the Food Stamp program.
Rawlinson
Road Middle School spokesperson Elaine Baker said the suspension was
initiated after the school heard from a local Democratic Party
official. “In our view, the teacher used poor judgment,” Baker
said. “It is inappropriate for a person employed by a public school
to be observed criticizing any duly authorized public policy,
especially right now. The country has been through a contentious
election campaign. Now that it is over, everyone should be pulling
together behind the President.”
The fact
that the teacher's criticism occurred outside the classroom made no
difference, Baked insisted. “Even though the remarks were not
directed at her students, per se, there is no guarantee that
they couldn't be found by them,” Baked said. “For a teacher to
give the appearance of disloyalty even if outside of her role in the
classroom is still unacceptable.”