Pelosi PAC Pays Husband
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed nearly $100,000 from her political action committee to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past decade, a practice of paying a spouse with political donations that she supported banning last year.
I distinctly remember Nancy telling the nation that the new Democratic-controlled Congress was going to be the most ethical ever. But as the article states, it isn't:
Financial Leasing Services Inc. (FLS), owned by Paul F. Pelosi, has received $99,000 in rent, utilities and accounting fees from the speaker's "PAC to the Future" over the PAC's nine-year history.
The payments have quadrupled since Mr. Pelosi took over as treasurer of his wife's committee in 2007, Federal Election Commission records show. FLS is on track to take in $48,000 in payments this year alone - eight times as much as it received annually from 2000 to 2005, when the committee was run by another treasurer.
Pelosi paying hubby, Rangel isn't paying his taxes, and William Jefferson still hasn't faced a trial. I guess they are going to get away with it, as usual.
VP Debate Moderator Writing Book On Age Of Obama
The moderator of tomorrow's vice-presidential debate is writing a book to come out on the day the next president takes the oath of office that aims to "shed new light" on Democratic candidate Barack Obama and other "emerging young African American politicians" who are "forging a bold new path to political power."
She should excuse herself. If this were a trial, this would be enough for a mistrial. But no one from the MSM will call her on it, and like the unethical and illegal activities of the Democrats in Congress, she'll get away with it.
Obamatons, please tell us all again how wrong we are, in our claims that the MSM is biased and in the tank for Obama.
Use Of Deadly Forced Justified
Yesterday, I posted on the story of Gerald T. Meyers, the sex offender that never registered as required by Indiana law and recipient of the coveted PYY Depraved Bastard Of The Week Award. The late Mr. Meyers met his demise literally at the hands of the father, of the teenage daughter who who was his intended victim.
Well, today Prosecutor Carl Brizzi announced that no charges would be filed, saying that the father was legally justified in protecting his daughter. Now, one would wonder why this would even be an issue, until one happens to stumble upon this follow-up article in the Indianapolis Star.
"The underlying premise is that victims of crime can have an opportunity to defend themselves if they choose to do so," said Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, which has been a supporter of the push for stronger laws.
But other advocates and state lawmakers say the expansion of such laws could promote violence as a means of retaliation and point to examples of the laws' abuse in other states.
"The concern I've had is that by changing well-developed law, maybe we're encouraging more people to shoot first," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which has opposed the strengthening of force laws.
Let's get one thing straight here. If you are in my home unannounced, uninvited, and are conducting yourself in a threatening manner, you had better have life insurance and a will made out. I won't be happy about what I will do. But make no mistake, I will have no regrets.
I knew it would only be a matter of time before the liberal anit-gun do-gooders would want to weigh in on this. I am still waiting for the ACLU to become involved in some perverted way, like they often do.