Tag Archives: congress

Tea Party Star Rand Paul on Mountaintop Mining: Nobody Will Miss a Hill or Two (Video)

To me, nothing makes a stronger case in favor of more government regulation than the obscene practice of mountaintop removal mining . I mean, this is the stuff that inspires sci-fi films like Avatar: giant corporations literally buying up pristine habitat, and blowing it up. It would be comical if it didn’t happen every day in Appalachia. Here, Tea Party favorite and the GOP’s Senate candidate for Kentucky Rand Paul discusses h… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Link:
Tea Party Star Rand Paul on Mountaintop Mining: Nobody Will Miss a Hill or Two (Video)

John Dean on ‘Pure Goldwater’

Author: truthdig Added: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:39:50 -0800 Duration: 925 Truthdig editor Robert Scheer interviews John Dean about “Pure Goldwater,” his new collaboration with the late senator’s son. The book is a reminder that American conservatism has drifted far from its original heading.

http://flash.revver.com/player/1.0/player.swf?mediaId=1047423

Excerpt from:
John Dean on ‘Pure Goldwater’

Clyburn, Boiled Down: We’ll Never Stop Blaming Bush

Real Clear Politics currently has a video highlighting statements by Democratic Congressman James Clyburn Jr. of South Carolina. It teases the video with a question asked by Candy Crowley of CNN. Once one sees the entire sequence, it’s clear that Clyburn really answered Crowley’s question before she even asked it. Here’s the full transcript of the vid, which begins after Indiana Republican Congressman Mike Pence had apparently made some points about how steps taken by the Obama administration to revive the economy to the point where it generates meaningful job growth aren’t working. Clyburn’s answer to when his party will stop blaming Bush is in bold: Clyburn: Uh, Congressman Spence, uh, Pence keeps talkin’ about, uh, the fact that, uh, we are, uh, failing in our approach. We all know exactly what this president inherited, and we will stop talkin’ about that inheritance, uh, when uh Congressman uh Pence and others stop talkin’ about takin’ us back uh to those failed policies. We’re trying to correct some things that we had absolutely nothin’ to do with, and the American people know that. And I would wish that all of us would get on board this in bipartisan approaches to tryin’ and get our economy stabilized, tryin’ to get our children educated, tryin’ to get workin’ men and women back to, uh, on their jobs, and look for the future, look to the future with — Crowley: Congressman? Clyburn: — a little more, uh compassion and bipartisanship. Crowley: Congressman, I think nobody disagrees with you on the goals. I think that one of the questions that’s cropping up now is, when does the statute of limitations run out on blaming the Bush administration and when is it on you all as the governing — really in the House and the Senate and the White House. When does the economy, uh, become your baby, so to speak? Clyburn: The economy is our baby. But let’s stop talkin’ about cuttin’ taxes, cuttin’ taxes, cuttin’ taxes. That simplistic approach to tryin’ to get this economy movin’ again, it’s what got us in this, uh-uh, position in the first place. We just had an across the board cut on 95% of workin’ men and women, they got an across the board tax cut. You all know that. Pence attempted to get in a word or two edgewise during Clyburn’s final two sentences and got nowhere, though Crowley got to him immediately after that. One can also hear Pence chuckling in the background as Crowley asks here “statute of limitations” question. “Congressman Pence and others” clearly have no plans to “stop talkin’ about takin’ us back to those failed policies” — policies that worked reasonably well from 2003 to 2007 , by the way, despite the sand-in-the-wheels impact of the Sarbanes Oxley law. Therefore, the short version of Clyburn’s answer to the question of when the Bush blame game will stop is, “When you guys shut up.” The one-word version is really, “Never.” As to Clyburn’s contention that “We’re trying to correct some things that we had absolutely nothin’ to do with,” it’s time to remind him and everyone else of the true origins of the housing and mortgage lending bubble. They have everything to do with government-sponsored, mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and nothing to do with George Bush, who tried — perhaps not hard enough, but genuinely tried — to stop the madness emanating from those two entities. The full scope of what these Democrat crony-controlled perpetrated on the nation didn’t become fully known until late last year. It wasn’t “only” lax credit standards, which would have been bad enough. Beyond that, as I noted on December 31 (last item at link; a column with a more complete treatment of the topic is here ), there was pervasively fraudulent loan packaging: … it’s hard to overstate the relevance of this paragraph from Peter J. Wallison in the Wall Street Journal , because it should end the debate over who is primarily responsible for the housing and mortgage-lending messes: “There is more to this ugly situation. New research by Edward Pinto, a former chief credit officer for Fannie Mae and a housing expert, has found that from the time Fannie and Freddie began buying risky loans as early as 1993, they routinely misrepresented the mortgages they were acquiring, reporting them as prime when they had characteristics that made them clearly subprime or Alt-A.” The two Democrat-crony government-sponsored enterprises created an artificial market for subprime mortgages by bilking investors for 15 years . If they hadn’t done this, subprimes would never have been able to expand to their mortally dangerous levels. Further, the victims of the misrepresentations logically would appear to include the rating agencies that some state attorneys general are going after as the supposed culprits. Sorry, Mr. Clyburn, your party and its cronies had everything to do with it. The only reason much of the American public doesn’t know this is because reporters like Candy Crowley haven’t educated themselves about what Fan and Fred really did, and therefore won’t challenge your full-of-baloney assertions. Or worse, they know and let it slide. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Read the rest here:
Clyburn, Boiled Down: We’ll Never Stop Blaming Bush

Obama Wants $50 Billion For Teachers, Cops and Firemen

With a relative drop in the bailout bucket, the president thinks he can save 300,000 teachers who would otherwise be kept by economic calamity from annoying America’s children. The money would go to state and local governments struggling to make ends meet. Christian Science Monitor: Mr. Obama has intimated in the past that the federal government’s job of propping up the economy was not yet done. Last week, he sent a letter to Congress supporting efforts to pass two separate measures totaling as much as $50 billion in aid for states and cities. With states still facing large budget shortfalls, Obama wants to minimize the potential loss of teachers, law-enforcement officers, and firefighters. He estimates that as many as 300,000 teachers could be laid off. In this way, the money would largely pick up with the $787 billion federal stimulus bill left off. Read more Related Entries June 13, 2010 Obama Will Demand a BP Escrow Fund for Victims June 12, 2010 Turning the Crisis Corner

Original post:
Obama Wants $50 Billion For Teachers, Cops and Firemen

Fareed Zakaria Defends Obama’s Oil Spill Response: ‘What Does the Media Want the President to Do?’

Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria on Sunday worked overtime trying to defend Barack Obama’s pathetic response to the Gulf Coast oil spill while chastising his colleagues in the media for having the nerve to criticize the president. In the opening segment of his “Fareed Zakaria GPS” aired on CNN, Zakaria asked, “Have we all gone crazy?”  He continued, “In dealing with the serious problem involving technical breakdown, engineering malfunctions, environmental fallout, regulatory mishaps, the media has decided to hone in on one central issue above all others: presidential emotion.” With a chyron at the bottom of the screen asking, “What does the media want the President to do,” Zakaria told viewers, “The truth is that what’s happening in the Gulf is a terrible tragedy, but there is very little the federal government can do in the short-term to actually stop the spill” (video follows with partial transcript and commentary):   FAREED ZAKARIA: Have we all gone crazy? I don’t mean you, I mean us, the media. In dealing with the serious problem involving technical breakdown, engineering malfunctions, environmental fallout, regulatory mishaps, the media has decided to hone in on one central issue above all others: presidential emotion. The overriding need of the hour, we have decided, is not a cleanup plan, not a regulatory overhaul, not a new energy policy, but the image of the president visibly enraged. At this point in the complete segment that aired Sunday, Zakaria showed a clip of a video created by the Huffington Post that included snippets of media coverage asking the president to show more emotion on this subject. For some reason the folks at CNN.com chose to edit out this portion in the video it published Saturday evening. Maybe they didn’t want people to know that Zakaria was channeling the view of one of the most liberal websites in the nation. But I digress:  ZAKARIA: And what exactly is the point of all this? What purpose would be served by having the president scream or cry or whatever it is he’s supposed to do to show emotion? Would it plug the hole? The truth is that what’s happening in the Gulf is a terrible tragedy, but there is very little the federal government can do in the short-term to actually stop the spill. This is either staggering ignorance or shameful dishonesty. After all, there ARE things the federal government could have done from the beginning which would have limited the amount of oil now slamming into the Gulf states and possibly the entire eastern seaboard in the coming months. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has been asking the feds for weeks to allow him to do a variety of procedures to achieve this goal. Unfortunately, he’s still waiting for EPA environmental assessment reports. Beyond this, the Obama administration at the early stages of this crisis completely ignored emergency procedures granted the White House by Congress decades ago.   The reality is that America is likely facing its biggest non-war related catastrophe in its history, and the federal government has appeared totally inept at facing the challenge. As a result, Americans are rightfully discouraged by what they’ve seen from this president the past seven weeks and counting, and the idea that Zakaria is trying to minimize this criticism is disgusting:  ZAKARIA: This whole discussion is a terrible example of how the media can trivialize political discussion. The presidency is a serious job, the most serious job in the country. And here we are asking the man to dress the part, to play-act emotions, to give us satisfaction by just doing something even if it’s all phony stuff just designed to give the impression of action. And we’ve managed to succeed. We’ve managed to force the president to cancel his trip to Asia, demean himself by trash-talking about the CEO of British Petroleum, hold lots of pointless meetings and press conferences, have admirals give make-work briefings. The federal government is now consumed with pretending it’s doing something about a situation it actually can’t do much about…But thank goodness the president is now talking about kicking some ass. So what SHOULD the president be doing, Fareed? Nothing? Would you tolerate such inaction if George W. Bush was still in the White House? Would you be defending the president’s lack of action and emotion if there was an “R” after his name? The answers to those questions are certainly “No,” which means that James Carville was quite right when he said about Zakaria on Thursday, “I don’t think that he understands exactly what is going on down here.” That’s putting it nicely, James. 

Visit link:
Fareed Zakaria Defends Obama’s Oil Spill Response: ‘What Does the Media Want the President to Do?’

George W. Bush Speaks To His Friends On Facebook

In case you missed it, former President George W. Bush launched a Facebook page last week. He’s already got over 150,000 followers. On Thursday, he posted a video to tell his friends what he’s up to: 

View post:
George W. Bush Speaks To His Friends On Facebook

CNBC’s Cramer and Burnett: Could BP and Obama Have Handled Spill Better?

Reports are surfacing that BP is finally considering a suspension of its shareholder’s dividend, but what could have been done differently to avert the public relations nightmare BP is facing? Two CNBC hosts had some ideas about that, and about what could have happened if BP chose not to play ball. Jim Cramer and Erin Burnett shared their thoughts on the “Stop Trading” segment of “Street Signs” June 11 . According to the “Mad Money” host, Obama could have set a foul precedent for multi-national businesses if BP (NYSE: BP ) didn’t agree to make some concessions on how it is handling its day-to-day operations in the wake of this ecological crisis.  “I think that this is a, a stock that represents great value but you’re dealing with the government,” Cramer said. “I saw that Nancy Pelosi, she’s the second most powerful person in our country, saying that they shouldn’t be paying a dividend. I mean, this is one of those situations where I know, the president’s approval ratings are down and what you got to do is you got to go after BP if you’re the president. I’m not saying I would do it but I’m saying if I were the president of the United States, BP is public enemy number one and you’re not even going to listen to what the British say. You just gotta say, ‘Guys, here’s the deal, we’re not, we’re not going to have any dividends here. And just you know, take it or leave it, partner, because this is a company that needs U.S. ball play.” And as for other cards the Obama administration could play? There were several since it’s politically ripe for the legislative and executive branches to act in an extraordinary manner. “Hey listen, the president could take away Prudhoe Bay,” Cramer continued. “There’s a Fifth Amendment against the taking of property in this country, as opposed to like say the old Soviet Union. But you know what, I got to tell you, when you got an angry president and angry Congress, nobody’s safe. And Mark Twain said that a few years ago.” And Burnett wondered if both parties involved, the federal government and BP, might have come out way ahead had this matter been handled behind the scenes. “You know, yeah, I just wonder Jim, you know if you think about it whether the administration in hindsight could have done it differently,” Burnett said. “You know, instead of having the first thing you do – go out and say they should cut the dividend publicly, making them sort of look evil, maybe privately you have that conversation. And maybe they did and BP was just so resistant, that’s why they went public. So maybe I’m jumping to a conclusion, but if they didn’t, it would seem maybe having a little bit more – let’s just say [better] relationship between the government and BP. At least while we get through this. It might have been a better thing.” But one thing Cramer pointed out that not a lot of other outlets have seemed to pick up on – the amount of oil gushing from this spill in such a short amount of time indicates this was an incredibly huge find from a purely oil exploration perspective. “What you have on right now, you see the flow, and I thought it was 1,500,” Cramer said. “I remember when I was on the ‘Today’ show and they were talking about it being 1,500 barrels, 2,000 barrels. Now look, here’s what my oil friends say. My oil friends are very tied in. This is the greatest well in the world right now. It is literally pumping out more oil than anyone has ever seen. It has not let up one bit. My friends who are oil men are saying the same thing over and over – “This is the greatest discovery in this planet and what’s really going on is that they can’t get the pressure down. They’re just stalling hoping the pressure will come down and it doesn’t stop. It’s the greatest find of all time.”

Read more:
CNBC’s Cramer and Burnett: Could BP and Obama Have Handled Spill Better?

November Election Already ‘Mightily Out of Control’ for G.O.P., Says Front-Page Blurb in NY Times

One of the New York Times’s favorite themes is the ever-impending Republican civil war that will ruin the party’s chances in whatever election that’s coming up. Former chief political reporter Adam Nagourne y is a past master, but he’s now covering the West Coast. Luckily, Times contributor Matt Bai was there to fill the gap Thursday, explaining how the Republicans may blow a great opportunity through ruinous infighting in the primaries. The assumption behind Bai’s “Political Times” piece ” For Republicans, Sorting Out Candidates Gets a Bit Messy ” is that a crowded field of candidates in the Republican primaries is a bad thing. A front-page, above-the-fold teaser distorted one of Bai’s already premature judgements, leaving out his qualifier to suggest Republican prospects are already sunk: ” Some critics are already asking Republican leaders how they managed to let a promising election season get so mightily out of control .” Bai wrote: Primaries are a wonderful thing — or at least that’s the standard line among Republican leaders these days. “Primary campaigns can be healthy,” said Ken Spain, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, “because they prepare the eventual nominee for how to aggressively campaign in November and provide the candidate with an opportunity to familiarize himself or herself with the electorate.” What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger! Let democracy flower! Of course, Republicans have little choice but to see it this way, since nearly every nonincumbent Republican running for Congress this year has had to endure a primary, often with enough candidates to field a softball team. This disorderly sorting out of candidates, a process that in many cases features establishment types with good hair against ideologues in search of a Bastille to storm, will not matter much if Republicans can regain a majority in at least one chamber in November. If they do not, however, Republican leaders will have to answer the question some critics are already asking, which is how they managed to let a promising election season get so mightily out of control . A front-page, above-the-fold teaser distorted Bai’s already premature judgement by leaving out his qualifier: ” Some critics are already asking Republican leaders how they managed to let a promising election season get so mightily out of control .” By last summer, though, public meetings on health care were erupting in fury and the phrase “Tea Party” was entering the political lexicon. Suddenly, more conservatives were jostling for a chance to challenge incumbent Democrats and their own party, and to promote ideological purity. Stunned Republicans in Washington were reluctant to rescind their tacit endorsements of what they saw as electable candidates, but the last thing they wanted was to square off against newly energized Tea Party types. Instead, the party basically tried to slink off to the sidelines, which only emboldened more primary challengers. A lot of establishment candidates, meanwhile, ended up in the worst of all worlds, branded as instruments of the party but running without much practical help from Washington. Focused on potential Republican problems, Bai didn’t even mention the  bloodbath in Tuesday’s Arkansas Senate primary pitting supporters of center-left sitting Sen. Blanche Lincoln and Bill Halter, backed by the far-left and national unions.

More:
November Election Already ‘Mightily Out of Control’ for G.O.P., Says Front-Page Blurb in NY Times

Sociological Study Reveals High Financial Malfeasance Rates in Largest U.S. Corporations

WASHINGTON, DC, June 2, 2010 — The need to “fix” or restate financial statements is an admission by corporate management that these reports (prior to their being corrected) to the government and the investing public misrepresented the corporations' financial positions, Texas A&M University sociology professor Harland Prechel reports in a research paper published in the June 2010 issue of the American Sociological Review (ASR). Prechel and Theresa Morris of Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, examined the revised statements from hundreds of the largest U.S. companies between 1995 and 2004, then co-authored the paper, titled “The Effects of Organizational and Political Embeddedness on Financial Malfeasance in the Largest U.S. Corporations: Dependence, Incentives, and Opportunities.” The researchers' analysis examines restatements that occurred after Congress passed the 2001 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which held chief financial officers (CFOs) and chief executive officers (CEOs) personally responsible for corporate violations of security and exchange laws. Soon after this legislation was passed, the number of financial restatements rapidly increased. After eliminating the legitimate reasons for financial restatements such as accounting rule changes, their analysis shows that over 21 percent of the corporations in their study group restated their finances at least once, and some as many as seven times, during the study period. more at the link http://www.asanet.org/press/financial_malfeasance.cfm added by: Incredulous

ABC’s Terry Moran Frets that ‘Republican Reformist’ Schwarzenegger Is Being ‘Squeezed Out’ of GOP

Nightline’s Terry Moran on Wednesday profiled Arnold Schwarzenegger as a “Republican reformist” and never once referred to him as a liberal. Instead, the co-anchor tagged the California Governor as a “lonely figure” in the GOP. Moran sympathized, “When you look at the way the Republican Party is going, here in California and around the country, rise of the tea party, candidates like Rand Paul, do you think there’s still room in the Republican Party for someone like you?” He then prompted, ” Or are you being squeezed out? ” Of course, most Republicans in California and nationwide would say that Schwarzenegger’s embrace of liberalism indicates someone who left the party, rather than being “forced out.” Although Moran noted the Governor’s massive unpopularity (his approval rating hovers around 23 percent), he never really explained why. The host also noted the state’s $19 billion deficit, but not the excessive spending. Instead, Moran spun, ” He sounds pragmatic, though many of his reform efforts have failed .” Throughout his two terms, journalists have often favored Schwarzenegger as an example of the ideal Republican. On November 20, 2006, CNN’s Bill Schneider enthused, “In California, Schwarzenegger carried independent voters handily. He reclaimed the center. Schwarzenegger did two things President Bush has never done. He flatly acknowledged his mistakes, and he changed course.” A transcript of the June 9 segment, which aired at 11:45pm EDT, follows: TERRY MORAN: Arnold Schwarzenegger. He rose from big screen action hero to Republican reformist in charge of governing California. But this real-life script hasn’t exactly enjoyed a Hollywood happy ending. Now he’s staring down his final months in office, and he’s going to end his term on something of a down note. So, what has he learned about politics and what’s next? I spent the day with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. On primary night in California last night, the big political stars of the state took center stage. But the guy who once dominated California politics, who seemed poised a few years back to usher in a new era in the Golden State, like Ronald Reagan before him, he was out of the limelight, strangely muted. These are difficult days for Arnold Schwarzenegger, and for a guy who has lived his life in the limelight, from his championship body building days immortalized in the documentary Pumping Iron, to his Hollywood career, built on indomitable action roles like The Terminator and Conan the Barbarian. [Clips from Schwarzenegger’s movies.] SCHWARZENEGGER: You see capital gains taxes going up. MORAN: The real world of politics has not been easy for California’s Governor, and for all his relentless self-confidence, he knows it. You’ve become a very unpopular governor. SCHWARZENEGGER: You know something, it’s perfectly fine. I understand the mood. I don’t blame the people for being upset about what’s going on. MORAN: What’s going on in California is a colossal grinding fiscal and political crisis with no end in sight. A $19 billion deficit in the state’s budget. A political system in such deep partisan gridlock it makes Washington look almost functional. It’s all a recipe for deep voter disgust. And a lot of that anger is aimed right at Schwarzenegger, who has seen his approval rating collapse to 23 percent, with seven in ten saying they disapprove with the way he’s done his job. But he is determined to keep pushing. We caught up with Schwarzenegger last week aboard the USS Midway Museum in San Diego, where he was unveiling Operation Welcome Home. It’s an ambitious effort to help returning veterans in the state. SCHWARZENEGGER: We want them to move smoothly from the battlefront to the home front. MORAN: The goal? Streamline the sometimes confusing process of coming home. SCHWARZENEGGER: We are saying to the veterans, you don’t have to run around anymore. You don’t have to get the runaround. No, you just go to one place, you call and we will pay attention. MORAN: It’s the kind of program tailor made for Schwarzenegger right now. It’s got bipartisan support. It doesn’t cost much. It’s doable. Because the last thing Schwarzenegger wants to talk about, even think about now, is the end of his career as governor. And this is really a major initiative of what are your last months in office, yeah? SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, it doesn’t matter if it is my last months in office, which it’s not. It’s my last year in office. But you know, this is irrelevant. I mean we continue on until the last. We sprint to the finish line. MORAN: Schwarzenegger, though, is sprinting on his own, a lonely figure on the state’s political landscape, and in the national GOP. When you look at the way the Republican Party is going, here in California and around the country, rise of the tea party, candidates like Rand Paul, do you think there’s still room in the Republican Party for someone like you? Or are you being squeezed out? SCHWARZENEGGER: I don’t feel like I’m getting squeezed out. I feel like I need reforms. It’s not the Republican Party. It’s not the Democratic Party. It’s the system that is wrong. What we want to do is create a system where you get rewarded for compromise, rather than get punished for compromise and rewarded for getting stuck in the ideological corners. CAMPAIGN AD: After Arnold, don’t we deserve a Republican? MORAN: Schwarzenegger was hammered this primary season by Republicans running away from him and Democrats trashing him. But, Arnold Schwarzenegger is far from the only incumbent politician getting trashed these days. [Video of tea partiers.] As President Obama struggles with a stumbling economic recovery and an environmental disaster in the gulf, Arnold sounds like he’s got some sympathy for him. As a governor, how do you rate President Obama and his administration’s response to the oil spill in the gulf? SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, I mean, I think that he’s doing everything that he can. And everything that he’s doing to his knowledge. There is no one in the political arena that is an expert it in, so we all rely on experts to tell us, you know, what is the thing to do. MORAN: As the oil continues to gush into the waters of the gulf, Schwarzenegger is blunt about the blame. SCHWARZENEGGER: I think one should not lose sight of one thing. Why do we have this problem? The problem is because we failed as a country to force the oil companies to have a safety device, which, European countries have. What’s the safety feature? What device do you have? Nothing, because they lobbied and Congress voted against it. MORAN: There are people who say that because of the scale of this catastrophe, BP should, essentially, be put out of business. SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, you know, that’s all easier said than done. You can’t go just now and say this is the worst company, let’s put them out of business when the fact is that 95 percent of our, you know, energy comes from fossil fuels. I mean it’s, I think, crazy talk. MORAN: He sounds pragmatic, though many of his reform efforts have failed . But yesterday, primary day, a triumph. A Schwarzenegger-backed ballot measure that would do away with party-controlled primaries in favor of open primaries, passed handily. SCHWARZENEGGER: You will see extraordinary change in a direction that California will be going and the kind of decisions that will be made here. MORAN: And then there are programs like Operation Welcome home, something that can get done for returning soldiers like Lance Yonker. LANCE YONKER (RETURNING SOLDER): Plastic surgeon put this ear back on and put my head together with 70 staples. And, you know, I had to learn how to walk again and do all that, and, you know, I’ve seen the worst of it, and Operation Welcome Home and everything that’s going on here has really helped me. MORAN: So, as the race to succeed him revs up, Arnold Schwarzenegger is looking to make a mark where he can. And given the state’s deep and intractable problems, a question, did California terminate the governator? The old body building competitor just won’t have it. SCHWARZENEGGER: You never have the surrender kind of attitude. I remember Munich, trying to break a record, I couldn’t. It was 500 pounds on the bench press. And I tried it many times after that, but the 11th time, I did it. So, people fail in sports, people fail all the time in many other things. That doesn’t mean that you give up. It means that you continue on and you keep saying, “I’ll be back.” That is the important thing. MORAN: He’ll be back. And Schwarzenegger told me he won’t think about what he’ll do next until the day he leaves office.

See the original post here:
ABC’s Terry Moran Frets that ‘Republican Reformist’ Schwarzenegger Is Being ‘Squeezed Out’ of GOP