Thursday, July 15, 2010

Daryl Mikell Brooks, President of The Greater Trenton Tea Party on Immigration

By Daryl Mikell Brooks

The question is not whether we should secure our borders. We need to make sure our borders are secure and enforce them effectively. That said, I am very much in favor of legal immigration. Immigration has been the life blood of this country from the very beginning. We are a nation of immigrants, coming from all around the world, and we should continue that tradition by improving the ability of LEGAL immigrants to enter this country.

A fundamental responsibility of the Federal government is to secure our borders and enforce them. While our government is spending far too much attention in areas it shouldn't be operating in, the areas where it should be operating to the fullest are suffering.

Steps to solve the problems:

1. Required use of the E-verify program for all businesses in the United States.

2. We must continue to crack down on those employers who ignore the law and continue to hire illegal employees.

3. Prevent sanctuary cities from receiving federal funds, and improve the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program.

4. Strict punishment of those who aid illegal immigrants in crossing the border, as well as those who assist in their residence in the United States.

No Amnesty.

Providing amnesty again would further degrade the rule of law in this country. It is not right to provide the same benefit of citizenship to those who disregarded our laws as those who regarded them. If we provide amnesty, which laws do we then choose to obey and which ones do we choose to disregard?

Attrition through Enforcement and a no option deadline:

There is no practical way to deport all the illegal aliens in the United States. However, by removing the employment and entitlement incentives combined with a no option deadline individuals will be self motivated to deport themselves and return through a legal process.

No Option Deadline:

At a specified date in the future, anyone caught in the United States illegally will have no option for future citizenship or the option to participate in a guest worker program. Prior to this deadline, all illegal aliens will have the option to return to their country, and then return to the United States through the proper channels via the citizenship path.

Is Donald Berwick a Conservative?

By David Bozeman

President Obama's recess appointment of Donald Berwick as head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has triggered protests from conservatives, angry over such socialist-leaning comments as "excellent health care is by definition redistributional." But among his defenders is Ezra Klein of The Washington Post, writing on July 7th that conservatives should rejoice this appointment, given Berwick's history of advocating for greater patient say in the health care process and stressing long-term preventative measures to bring down costs.

These and other fevered defenses of Berwick sound a death knell for the future of inexpensive, market-based health care in this country, because they presuppose an issue of competence and efficiency overriding a basic question of government's role in routine medical procedures. His most controversial quote, that the decision is not whether we will have rationing, but whether we will ration with our eyes open, belies the original claims of Obama-care advocates that there would be no rationing. But then liberalism must typically camouflage itself to gain a foothold.

Now, the party line, expressed by bloggers and readers is that, “I would rather have these decisions made by a man of Dr. Berwick's caliber than by a greedy insurance company.” Berwick, you see, advised us, “Please, don't put your faith in market forces.” America's health care system, it seems, “runs in the darkness of free enterprise.”

To starry-eyed liberals, his reputation — multiple Harvard degrees and honorary knighthood in the British Empire for consulting on the formation of their National Health Service — trumps the logical question: why should any third-party bureaucrat wield such influence in day-to-day doctor-patient relationships?

Any Washington reformer who eschews the profit motive is conferred greater moral standing by liberals and the media over corporate executives in Omaha and Chicago who actually lose profits and positions by mistreating their customers — providing there is competition for them to run to. Not if Dr. Berwick has his way.

Get full story here.

SEIU’s New President Should Be Asked about Liabilities, Change to Win Coalition

By Kevin Mooney

“Visionary, but divisive.”

That’s how The New York Times describes Andy Stern, the Service Employee International Union’s (SEIU) former president, in this profile piece about his successor Mary Kay Henry. She is ambitious to make her own mark in terms of organizing and politicking, according to the report. But Ms. Henry is also working to cut a distinct path and to reunite labor organizations that became split under Stern.

“Ms. Henry seems more eager than Mr. Stern to reach a settlement to end a bruising war with Unite Here, the union representing hotel and restaurant workers,” the report says. “The two unions have often sought to sabotage each other’s organizing drives.”

Although she has resisted the idea of rejoining the AFL-CIO, which the SEIU left in 2005, Ms. Henry has expressed interest in some form of reconciliation.

“It really isn’t about structure,” she is quoted as saying. “Most workers have had it with the direction of the economy and having to make ends meet with shrinking incomes, rising health costs and no retirement security. That’s where I want to put our attention as a movement. Not to how the deck chairs are arranged.”

But what about the union’s financial picture? Vinnie Vernuccio, an adjunct analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and former Bush Labor Department official, has carefully documented the SEIU’s deteriorating financial position. Ms. Henry should be asked how she will address the organization’s rising liabilities.

Get full story here.

Election Fraud is a Danger to Democracy

By Rebekah Rast

“Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual — or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country.”—Samuel Adams

Elections are one of the building blocks of the nation’s democracy, and their integrity in the United States is critical to the government functioning legitimately by the consent of the governed.

Unfortunately, the unresolved cases of the New Black Panther Party intimidating voters at the polls and ACORN engaged in election fraud are breaching the trust American citizens have in their voting system. Unless action is taken, that trust will continue to wither.

“Voting in this country is one of our most valuable honors and rights as U.S. citizens,” says Bill Wilson, president of Americans for Limited Government (ALG). “If people lose trust in the voting system then our entire democracy and the framework of our government is lost.”

That sentiment was shared by Rep. Gregg Harper (R-MS), a member on the Committee on House Administration and Subcommittee on Elections. “United States citizens have long participated in America’s electoral process because they know their vote counts,” he said. “But when this process is abused through voter fraud, the general public is cheated and they lose faith in one of our most fundamental rights as Americans.”

Proof and allegations of voter fraud can be found throughout our nation’s election history. When investigated, however, many task forces have been stonewalled or given such a run-around that the cases are eventually dropped. With the contentious talk between candidates involved in the upcoming elections, voter fraud and election stealing should not be dismissed as a hoax.

One such controversial election was in 1984 in Indiana’s 8th district. The election battle was so tight between Rep. Frank McCloskey (D-IN) and Republican-challenger Rick McIntyre that the results were decided upon in Congress.

Get full story here.

Goldberg Rips Critics of Her Mel Gibson Comments

Whoopi Goldberg went off on “The View” Wednesday morning in response to the tons of criticism she’s received since stating her opinion that Mel Gibson is not a racist.

The actor’s telephone conversations – laced with comments offensive to blacks, women, and in Wednesday’s released rant, Latinos – were secretly recorded by his ex-girlfriend and have been steadily revealed to the public by Radar Online.

Goldberg said on Monday’s show: “I know Mel, and I know he’s not a racist. I have had a long friendship with Mel. You can say he’s being a bonehead, but I can’t sit and say that he’s a racist having spent time with him in my house with my kids. I don’t like what he’s done, make no mistake.”

Since those words left Goldberg’s mouth, all hell has broken loose, she said Wednesday.

“There has been a lot of hassle … in the media recently about moi because I had the audacity to say that I had some personal time with Mel that goes over years and years and said that I did not think of him as a racist,” Goldberg started off.

“If you had actually watched the show, you would have heard us say, and you would have heard me specifically say, ‘I don’t condone this. I don’t think this is right, I don’t think this is smart. But here’s the piece of information that I have. My experience tells me that this is not a racist,’” she continued.

“Being a black woman, you’d think you would give me a little bit of leeway to have some feelings if I was around a racist.”

Goldberg saved her harshest reaction for viewers who ended up harassing her receptionist because they couldn’t reach the actress herself.

“People called my office and went off on the young lady that works there. You’re going to call because you think that I’m doing something wrong And you do the same thing to this young lady - that you don’t even know – that Mel Gibson supposedly did? Who are you?” she says, making a spitting noise. “You can kiss my behind.”


Number of Minority-Owned Businesses Increases but Economic Parity Remains Elusive

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The U.S. Commerce Department’s Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) and the U.S. Census Bureau today announced that the number of minority-owned firms increased by 46 percent to 5.8 million between 2002 and 2007 according to data from the Preliminary Estimates of Business Ownership by Gender, Ethnicity, Race and Veteran Status: 2007, from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2007 Survey of Business Owners.

“It is encouraging that the minority business community is growing and making progress relative to all U.S. firms, but economic parity remains elusive,” MBDA’s National Director, David A. Hinson said. “While the number of minority-owned businesses continues to grow, they are still smaller in size and scale compared to non-minority-owned firms.”

In 2007, average gross receipts for minority-owned firms increased to $179,000 from $167,000 in 2002 - still well below gross receipts for non-minority-owned firms, which had average gross receipts of $490,000.

“We must continue to close this gap,” Hinson said. “It is unacceptable, particularly during an economic crisis that disproportionately affects the minority business community, to have this ongoing disparity.”

As the nation’s population demographics change, so too has the United States business community. Specifically:

•Between 2002 and 2007, the number of minority firms grew by 46 percent, compared to 18 percent for all U.S. firms, and compared to 13.7 percent growth for the minority population age 18 and older, during the same period.

•Minority-owned firms employed approximately 5.9 million people in 2007, up from 4.7 million in 2002.

•Asian-owned firms grew 41 percent to 1.6 million from 2002. Asian-owned firms continue to generate the highest annual gross receipts at $510.1 billion in 2007, increasing 56 percent from 2002.

•The number of Hispanic-owned businesses totaled 2.3 million in 2007, up 44 percent from 2002. Receipts for Hispanic firms increased 55 percent to $343.3 billion.

•Black, or African-American-owned businesses grew to 1.9 million firms in 2007, up 61 percent from 2002 - the largest increase among all minority-owned companies; and generated $135.6 billion in gross receipts, up 53 percent from 2002.

•There were 237,203 American Indian and Alaska Native-owned businesses in 2007, up 18 percent from 2002, generating $34.2 billion in gross receipts, an increase of 27 percent.

•Native Hawaiian- and Other Pacific Islander-owned businesses totaled 38,854 in 2007, up 34 percent from 2002. While these firms’ reported the largest increase in receipts among all minority-owned firms in 2002 (63 percent), the total amount reached only $7 billion.

•Minority-owned firms employed approximately 5.9 million people in 2007, up from 4.6 million in 2002.

Read More..

Revs. Sharpton, Jackson downplay tea party issue

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton sought Wednesday to steer attention away from an NAACP resolution condemning racism within the tea party movement, saying focus should remain on jobs and an upcoming march in Washington.

Jackson deflected questions about the resolution at a news conference during the annual convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Kansas City.

"We will not be diverted or otherwise distracted by any other message except putting America back to work," Jackson said a day after convention delegates approved the resolution. "We want jobs and justice and peace."

Sharpton was a little more direct, saying issues surrounding the tea party go beyond claims of racism. He said the civil rights movement sought to pressure the federal government to step in when states were enforcing segregation laws, and the tea party's focus on states' rights puts people at risk.

"They talk about restoring dignity. They are really talking about restoring a time before the federal government intervened and protected the rights of people," Sharpton said.

He noted Arizona's new law that directs local and state law enforcement to take on federal duties by questioning people about their immigration status, after they've been stopped for another crime, if there's reason to suspect they're in the U.S. illegally.

"There clearly are some racial leaves in their tea bag," Sharpton said. "But this is not just about race. It is about how you see government."


3.1 million jobs lost under Obama


The White House now claims that its various stimulus and bailout efforts have "saved or created" 2.5 million to 3.6 million jobs. If so, they must have been created not in the United States, but in Fantasyland.
We hate to be negative, but the claims made by the administration's top economists are ludicrous. The U.S. economy has struggled for more than a year and a half under Obamanomics and is no better for it.

The ugly truth is, U.S. businesses have shed 3.1 million jobs since Obama took over. That's a hard fact from the Bureau of Labor Statistics — not an imaginary number, like those the White House just released.

It isn't hard to understand why a new CBS News poll shows just 13% of Americans believe that Obama's plans have helped the economy. People aren't fooled by the clouds of rhetoric emanating from the mouths of Democratic politicians; they know the real story is that official unemployment is at 9.5%, and not below 8%, as White House advisers promised in 2009 if the stimulus was passed.

How can the White House so blithely produce such a nonsense jobs estimate? Driven by political desperation as their favorability ratings slip, they've cooked the numbers.

Writing on the National Review's blog, the redoubtable Veronique de Rugy, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center, notes the job estimate is based on an economic fallacy: that government spending creates more economic activity than it consumes.


The reality is every dollar the government spends costs the economy in terms of output. We're seeing that now. The "medicine" of stimulus via higher government spending turns out to be poison.


Obviously the stimulus did not work and making up numbers of "jobs saved" is not going to save the jobs of Democrats who voted for this mess. Despite this poor performance the labor thugs are still backing the Democrats, but the rest of America seems to know the score.

BY Merv Benson

Companies Sitting On Cash, But, Not Hiring. Media Shocked!

Hidden within this Washington Post article is a warning to “Corporate America”: Obama is probably going to be coming after you in short order

Corporate America is hoarding a massive pile of cash. It just doesn’t want to spend it hiring anyone.

Way to start off on a truly negative note, WP.

Nonfinancial companies are sitting on $1.8 trillion in cash, roughly one-quarter more than at the beginning of the recession. And as several major firms report impressive earnings this week, the money continues to flow into firms’ coffers.

Yet all the good news from big business hasn’t translated into much promise for jobless Americans, leading many to wonder: If corporations are sitting on so much money, why aren’t they hiring more workers?

Certainly, the WP will tell everyone the reality of the situation, right?

The answer to that question has become a political flash point between the White House and big business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which held a jobs summit Wednesday and accused the Obama administration of dumping onerous regulations on businesses. That has created an environment of “uncertainty,” which is causing firms to hold back on hiring as the unemployment rate has hovered near 10 percent, the Chamber said.

The White House countered that companies are wary of hiring not because of new regulations but because they’re still waiting for consumer demand to return. The administration also claimed credit for 3.5 million jobs created by the stimulus bill from last year.

This is where people are making that gesture with their hands which means “give me more info.” Well, the won’t. Certainly, there is something to companies not wanting to hire until consumer demand returns. But, to have the Chambers’ position be about “uncertainty”, and leave it at that, is absurd and irresponsible. Though, it does protect Obama and the Democrats, which is what the media wants, from people understanding that the legislation passed by Democrats, such as the Health care travesty and financial reform, and want to pass, such as Cardcheck and cap and tax, not to mention what they won’t pass, namely, re-authorization of the 2001/2003 tax cuts, all contribute to this uncertainty. Companies just won’t hire beyond what they truly need when they have feckless incompetents passing and trying to pass burdensome legislation.

The Washington Post tries out a few other excuses, but, never does get around to wondering about Democrat policies. The second to last paragraph should be worrisome, though

Some analysts said it may be hard to create policy that compels companies to use some of their cash to hire workers. “CEOs don’t like taking risks. They kind of move in packs,” said Zachary Karabell, president of River Twice Research.

The very fact that the WP throws this paragraph and a follow up to end the story should make you wonder if they have heard something, or were just speculating based on their love of government forcing compliance.

by William Teach

Subdued AgBank debut casts doubt over fundraisings

By Samuel Shen and Jason Subler

SHANGHAI (Reuters) - The lackluster Shanghai debut of Agricultural Bank of China's (Shanghai:601288.SS - News) $22 billion IPO underscores the challenges ahead for China's markets, as other big banks look to tap investors for billions of dollars in funds.

AgBank's debut caps off years of planning and preparation, completing its transformation from technical insolvency to a sprawling giant with assets of around $1.2 trillion and a customer base of 320 million -- larger than the population of the United States.

It comes against a less-than-ideal backdrop of a weak stock market, questions over economic growth and rival banks returning to capital markets to supplement their coffers after a lending spree last year.

JPMorgan Chase Earns $4.8 Billion

JPMorgan Chase said it earned $4.8 billion during the second quarter on Thursday, helped by strong performance across its different businesses and a decline in loan loss reserves.

On a per share basis, the company said it earned $1.09 a share, excluding the impact of a benefit tied to a reduction in loan loss reserves. Including that, the bank reported a profit of 73 cents a share.

Analysts were expecting the New York City-based bank to earn approximately $2.8 billion during the quarter, or 67 cents a share, according to Thomson Reuters.

Advertise On YWN »
Company CEO Jamie Dimon said he was encouraged by a decline in the number of consumers defaulting or falling behind on loans, but was hesitant to say whether the trend would continue.

“It is too early to say how much improvement we will see from here,” said Dimon.

Improving credit trends allowed the company a rare opportunity to draw down some of the massive amounts of reserves it has stockpiled since the crisis began for loan losses. In total, the company said it released $1.5 billion from its reserves, providing a lift to earnings.

That increase was partially offset though by a $550 million charge it took as a result of a tax levied on bankers earlier this year by the British government. The tax is expected to impact the U.K.-based operations of a number of big U.S. banks this quarter.

Still, the bank’s credit card and retail banking business each reported higher profits compared to last quarter and a year ago. Even with the recent market sell-off, earnings at the firm’s asset management business was up from 2009 as well.

(Source: CNN Money)

New Jobless Claims Fall to Lowest Level Since 2008

WASHINGTON – "New applications for unemployment benefits fell sharply last week as General Motors and other manufacturers skipped their usual summer shutdowns. The Labor Department said Thursday that new claims dropped by 29,000 to 429,000, the lowest level since August 2008 (see chart above). It was the second straight week that initial claims dropped sharply and the third drop in the last four weeks. Claims fell by 17,000 in the previous week."

MP: The two-week drop of -46,000 initial jobless claims was the largest in a year, and brought the new claims number to 429,000, the lowest level since the week ending August 23, 2008.

BY Mark J. Perry

Oksana To Judge: Strip Mel of Custody ... Now

Sources connected with the custody case tell TMZ ... Oksana's lawyers will tell the judge the secretly-recorded tapes show Mel is a danger to their daughter Lucia and he should not have any contact with her.

Oksana claims in the tapes Mel struck her on January 6 while she was holding the baby. The L.A. County Sheriff's Department is investigating Mel for child endangerment, among other things.

Sources connected with Mel tell us the actor denies striking Oksana.

The court hearing will almost certainly force the issue of the admissibility of the secretly-recorded tapes.

We will be at the courthouse -- of course.

Another Broken Promise - Surprise! Abortion Really IS Covered in Health Care Bill

If you want proof that President Obama's Executive Order on taxpayer-funded abortion was a sham, look no further than Pennsylvania, says House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio).

Boehner and other Republicans point to reports that the Health and Human Services Department is giving Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new high-risk insurance pool that will cover any abortion that is legal in the state.

"The fact that the high-risk pool insurance program in Pennsylvania will use federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions is unconscionable," Boehner said in a statement on Tuesday.

“Just last month at the White House, I asked President Obama to provide the American people with a progress report on the implementation of his Executive Order, which purports to ban taxpayer-funding of abortions. Unfortunately, the President provided no information, and the American people are still waiting for answers."

President Obama pledged that under his health care plan “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”

In a May 13 letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Boehner asked if her department has provided guidance to the states on how to implement the president’s Executive Order on abortion funding. Boehner also asked Sebelius if the new federal high-risk pools would exclude abortion coverage.

He says his questions remain unanswered.

"Millions of Americans care deeply about this aspect of the new law and its implementation, and no progress report is complete without detailed information about it,” Boehner wrote to Sebelius.

The conservative Family Research Council says the $160 million in taxpayer funds for Pennsylvania is the first known instance of direct federal funding of abortions through the new high-risk insurance pools.

The abortion funding for pool participants validates the arguments pro-life groups made throughout the health care debate – that taxpayer dollars will fund abortions, said Tom McClusky, senior vice president of the Family Research Council’s political action arm.

“For our efforts to remove the bill's abortion funding, we were called 'deceivers' by President Obama and 'liars' by his allies. Now we know who the true deceivers and liars really are,’ McClusky said.

"This action by the Obama Administration also exposes the worthlessness of President Obama's Executive Order that supposedly would prevent federal funding of abortion, but which both sides, including Planned Parenthood, agreed was unenforceable.

"While the American people deserve an apology from President Obama for his deception, we should only be satisfied when this Pennsylvania abortion funding is rescinded and the health care law repealed.

McClusky noted that the new health care law also includes $12.5 billion for community health centers, and $6 billion for co-ops, both of which can fund abortions. And some people will use tax credits to help them pay for plans that cover abortion.

Even before it’s fully implemented, the Democrats’ health care plan “is already being exposed as a high-taxing, poorly thought-out, and taxpayer-funding-of-abortion monstrosity,” McClusky said.

Republican leader Boehner says House Republicans would codify the Hyde amendment, thus prohibiting all authorized and appropriated federal funds from being used to pay for abortion. Under the Republican plan, any health plan that includes abortion coverage would not receive federal funds

Posted by Kresta In The Afternoon

QB Drew Brees and the Saints the Big Winners at the ESPY Awards

The ESPY awards for this year were very much interesting for the fans of sports as Drew Brees took four titles. Drew Brees was chosen the winner for the category of Best Male athlete along with three other titles. Drew Brees was given the trophy of being the best male athlete over the famous players of National Basketball Association Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Albert Pujols and Jimmie Johnson. The female athlete of the year trophy was given to Lindsey Vonn. The show of the 14th of July was hosted by Seth Meyers and it was shown live on many of the channels like ESPN, ESPN3, Justin TV and many others. Many awards were distributed on the Wednesday night to various people. The Nokia Theatre of Los Angeles was filled with lights and many people due to the ESPY awards.

The best team of this year award was given to The New Orleans. Phil Jackson coach of the champions LA Lakers was given the title for the best coach. The 18th annual ESPY awards were a great opportunity to see all the athletes of sports who came there. The best female tennis award went to the gorgeous Serena Williams where as Kobe Bryant was declared the best player of NBA Lakers. Landon Donovan was given a trophy for his stunning goals in the World Cup series. The names of the winners of the ESPY awards have been posted on the internet where the people can see the whole list. Drew Brees had done a great job by getting four great awards from the other sportsmen.

Bill Clinton Back In White House Trying To Save Economy

Washington Post:

Burdened by low approval on the economy, President Obama brought former president Bill Clinton and investor Warren Buffett to the White House on Wednesday to talk about job creation.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs denied that Clinton — who oversaw record surpluses and was generally seen as business-friendly — was brought in to mediate between business leaders and Obama, now under fire from corporate leaders for his economic policies.

This week, the US Chamber of Commerce issued a harsh letter complaining that the White House is burdening businesses with too much regulation and hampering job growth.

“Do I think they speak monolithically for business? No,” Gibbs said of the Chamber.

On Wednesday, the White House also responded directly to the Chamber. “We were surprised and disappointed by the rhetoric we have heard from some in the business community,” White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Valerie Jarrett wrote in a letter addressed to the Chamber. “While we may not agree on every single issue, we should always remember that there is much we agree on and that we are all working towards the same goal of putting American back to work and getting our economy back on track,” they wrote.

Clinton, whose foundation is working on clean energy programs that would employ additional workers, and Buffett met with Obama as part of a White House push on the economy and employment. On Tuesday, Obama tapped Jacob Lew as budget director and publicly directed him to reduce the deficit. On Thursday, Obama travels to Michigan to talk job creation once more.

Gibbs said the timing of the two Wednesday meetings was coincidental, and that Buffett initiated their sit-down.

“You don’t turn down an opportunity to talk to Warren Buffett,” Gibbs said. Buffett has been an Obama supporter and adviser since backing him in the 2008 primaries.

The Clinton meeting was designed to “discuss new ways to create jobs in the private sector and continue to build on the success we have seen through the Recovery Act on building public-private partnerships in the clean energy sector,” a White House statement said.

By Pat Dollard

Dick Cheney has heart device implanted

By Agence France-Presse

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Former US vice president Dick Cheney had a new heart device implanted when he was operated on last week, he said in a statement on Wednesday.

Doctors implanted a pump that improves heart function in the 69-year-old Cheney at a hospital in Fairfax, Virginia, in the Washington suburbs.

The statement said the operation took place last week, without giving a date. Cheney was hospitalized in late June.
"The operation went very well and I am now recuperating," he said.

One of America's most powerful and controversial vice presidents, Cheney was a driving force behind George W. Bush's "war on terror" that included the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, warrantless wiretapping on US citizens, and the use of torture on terror suspects.

"As many of you know, I have dealt with coronary artery disease for decades, suffering my first heart attack in 1978 at age 37," Cheney said in the statement.

"A few weeks ago, it became clear that I was entering a new phase of the disease when I began to experience increasing congestive heart failure."

After that he decided to "take advantage of one of the new technologies available and have a Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) implanted."

He described the device as "a small implantable pump that improves heart function and will enable me to resume an active life."

Cheney has had a long list of health scares, including undergoing quadruple bypass surgery and two artery-clearing angioplasties. In 2001, he was fitted with a pacemaker.

Despite his persistent health problems, Cheney has remained a prominent Republican on the political scene since leaving office, often criticizing President Barack Obama.

The NAACP Risks the Ash-bin of History

by Ken Blackwell

The NAACP is in the headlines again. This old and respected civil rights organization is taking the unwise step of condemning the TEA Party for alleged racism. Those allegations include unsubstantiated charges that TEA Partiers rallying at the Capitol against passage of the unconstitutional health care takeover had yelled racial epithets at black congressman who were walking from their offices to the House of Representatives to cast historic votes. They yelled the “N” word, the congressmen claimed. But no one seems to be able to produce any video, any audio, or any sworn statements naming names, or even pointing to specific yellers.
When asked why they chose to walk through a crowd of anti-ObamaCare demonstrators, the liberal Members disingenuously replied: It was the first day of spring. Right. And Gov. Sanford wanted to enjoy the spring air hiking the Appalachian Trail, too.

I want to remind my friends why the NAACP is revered in the black community in this country. At a time in the early 1900s when hundreds of communities in this land of liberty were in the grip of the murderous Ku Klux Klan, when hundreds of black Americans were lynched every year for daring to exercise their right to vote, when local law enforcement, editors and jurors ignored the plight of black Americans, the NAACP was there to champion civil rights for the oppressed.

For these and many other courageous actions, the NAACP deserves the gratitude of all Americans. But this legendary organization is risking its honored legacy when it cries wolf and hurls baseless charges of racism against Americans who are exercising their civil rights to protest against radical policies coming from Washington, D.C.

The NAACP can once again become the respected organization that champions civil rights for all, if it avoids these race-baiting tactics.