From CNN:

Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank, a 16-term Democrat, will announce Monday he does not intend to seek re-election in 2012, according to a statement from Frank’s office.

Good riddance, don’t let the door hit you on the way out Congressman.

H/T: Weasel Zippers.

Update: Matt Mackowiak tweets:

With Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) retiring, next in line on the Dem side of the House Financial Services Committee is Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).

Ouch, would it be wrong of me to say I hope Rep. Frank reconsiders?

Anthony D. Weiner has told friends that he plans to resign his seat after coming under growing pressure from his Democratic colleagues to leave the House, said a person told of Mr. Weiner’s plans.

His decision follows of revelations of his lewd online exchanges with women, said a person told of Mr. Weiner’s plans.

The news comes as Democratic leaders prepared to hold a meeting on Thursday to discuss whether to strip the 46-year-old Congressman of his committee assignments, a blow which would severely damage his effectiveness.

Congressman Weiner’s decision comes amid heightening pressure from Congressional Democrats who were scheduled to meet today to discuss stripping Rep. Weiner of his committee assignments which would have significantly reduced his influence and effectiveness.

Congressman Weiner reportedly informed House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Steve Israel of his decision to resign last night… His decision comes after his first face to talk with his wife, Huma Abedin, since news of his social-network indiscretions broke. Ms. Abedin had been traveling on business with her boss Secretary of State Hillary Clinton until yesterday.

Related

• Top LAX Exec Resigns In Sexting Scandal – CBS Los Angeles

A few quick comments…

First, 5-6 to seats in the Senate where all we could realistically hope for. Anyone predicting Republicans would pick-up 10 seats and gain control of the Senate was deluding themselves.

Second, even in a wave election candidates and campaigns matter. Republicans lost winnable races in Nevada and  Colorado because of flawed candidates or bad campaigns. In Colorado Dan Maes, the Republican candidate for Governor imploded after a series of mini-scandals including revelations he had embellished his resume.

In Nevada, Sharron Angle had every advantage imaginable… She was running against Harry Reid, a wildly unpopular incumbent in a state that leads the nation in unemployment and foreclosures and she lost.

I don’t think Ms. Angel was a bad candidate, I do think she ran a bad campaign. For starters her campaign was slow to transition from the primaries to the general election and she was savaged by Harry Reid for weeks before she responded. Yes, I know she was short of cash after the primaries, but she raised and spent a record amount of money in the general election… It wasn’t a lack of money that lead to her loss — ultimately I think it was the combination the pounding she took from Sen. Reid and his allies coupled with one to many seemingly small gaffes and her unwillingness to engage the media.

I can’t overemphasize that last point… The media may be a bunch jackals, but whenever a candidate refuses to engage and answer question it leaves voters thinking they have something to hide. Whether they want to or not candidates have to engage with reporters. When they don’t voters get suspicious.

Lastly, I agree with Haley Barbour, it’s time for new leadership at the RNC. Whatever Michael Steele’s strengths the RNC was wholly ineffective in this election cycle and for that reason alone the committee needs to choose a new chairman when Mr. Steele’s term is up.

Anyway, a few interesting election tidbits… In Iowa voters fired three Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of gay marriage. Color me unsurprised, I’m agnostic on the issue of gay marriage… I think it’s an inevitability. That said, the decision to legalize  gay marriage should be made by state legislatures not the courts. If the courts are continue insert themselves into the debate and usurp what should be a legislative decision there’s going to continue to be a backlash, including calls for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

In Oklahoma voters approved a measure that would bar judges from using international law or Islamic law when deciding case. Liberals are of course incensed and threatening to sue.

Voters in Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah all approved ballot measures that would amend their state constitutions to better protect the secret ballot in organizing elections. Call it a shot across the bow of unions who are pushing for a “card check” check law that would do away with secret ballots in union organizing elections. For the most part Americans don’t like idea the government to taking away a workers’ right to a secret ballot and they certainly don’t like the idea of workers to be pressured into joining a union.

Voters in Florida Overwhelmingly approved a nonbinding resolution calling for an amendment to the Constitution that would require the federal government to balance the budget without raising taxes. This got 3.5 million votes so it can’t be dismissed  as some obscure nonbinding resolution people paid no attention to… It really is the spending, stupid.

Last but not least, according to net neutrality opponent Scott Cleland all 95 Democrats who signed the Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s net neutrality pledge lost their reelection bids. I’m not sure what to read into that other than Tuesday was really bad day for Democrats. Regardless, I have to wonder when so called “net neutrality” supporters will get it through their heads that too much government regulation is the problem?

Edit: It occurs to me  I should mention the biggest winner of the night was Sarah Palin… Ms. Palin endorsed 43 House candidates and 12 Senate candidates in this election cycle. Of the candidates she endorsed, 30 won House seats and 7 won Senate seats. And their were several races still to be decided.

Sure, a couple of her higher profile candidates lost, but at a minimum that’s a 67% average.

Related

• 2010 Election Maps – ABC News
• Poll: GOP candidates top Obama in hypothetical 2012 race – Cnn.com
• President Obama still isn’t listening to the American people – Nile Gardiner, Daily Telegraph
• Racist Tea Party? GOP Welcomes Diverse Cast of Newcomers – Buy Benson, Townhall.com
• You think ’10 was tough? Check out ’12 – The Hill
• The Midterms: Lessons Learned and the Way Forward – Sarah Palin, National Review Online
• Devastation: GOP Picks Up 680 State Leg. Seats – National Journal
  

When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

Pelosi has served as speaker in the 110th and 111th Congresses.

At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi’s first day as speaker, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (8.67 trillion), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department.  At the close of business on Oct. 22, it stood at $13,667,983,325,978.31 (13.67 trillion), an increase of 4,997,387,083,005.27 (or approximately $5 trillion).

The President and Congressional Democrats love to criticize Republicans for “wanting to return to the policies that got us into this mess”… The problem with that argument is that Congressional Democrats have essentially doubled down on the big spending, big government policies of George W. Bush and former House Speaker Denis Hastert. Who as CNSNews notes “enjoys the distinction of having increased the debt more than any other speaker except Pelosi.” Having added $3.1 trillion to the debt during his tenure as Speaker.

To put this in to perspective it took 207 years from Frederick Muhlenberg who became the First Speaker of the House on on April 1, 1789 to February 23, 1996 more than a year into Newt Gingrich’s speakership for the amass $5 trillion in debt. Since then the national debt has skyrocketed to 13,667,624,992,210.96 (13.677 trillion) as of October 22, 2010.

The government’s current spending are unsustainable, it’s time we held our elected leaders accountable and returned to the type common sense, constitutionally limited, fiscally responsible government our founding fathers intended.

Previous

• Big Spender: Obama Has Now Borrowed $3 Trillion
• It’s the Spending, Stupid

It’s official: The Obama administration has now borrowed $3 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

It took from 1776, when the United States became an independent country, until 1990, the year after the Berlin Wall fell signaling victory in the Cold War, for the federal government to accumulate a total of $3 trillion in debt, according to the Treasury Department. It only took from Jan. 20, 2009, the day President Barack Obama was inaugurated, until Oct. 15, 2010, for the Obama administration to add $3 trillion to the federal debt.

The overall debt of the federal government, according to the Treasury Department, is now $13.666 trillion.

Republicans are far from blameless here; they’ve done more than their fair share of debt accumulation over the years. One things certain though, they’re pikers compared Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the Democrats who currently control Washington… these clowns have done in twenty months what it took previous Democrat and Republican administrations 214 years, from 1776 to 1990, to do.

At this rate Barack Obama is going to drive the car out of the ditch and right off a cliff!

H/T: Doug Powers.

Related

• How the Fed Is Holding Back Recovery – David Malpass, Wall Street Journal (Subscription Required)

Our last national generic ballot poll found the Republicans ahead 45-42 despite the fact that Congressional Republicans had a 24/61 approval rating. Even among respondents who said they were going to vote Republican the Congressional GOP could muster only a 44/35 approval.

John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are going to claim a mandate when their party does well at the polls this fall but they don’t even have much of one with the people who are going to vote Republican this fall, much less with the population at large. If they keep on doing what they’re doing the GOP may well take control of the House this fall and then lose it right back in 2012.

To be honest I’m not at all surprised by PPP’s findings, first American’s aren’t terribly happy with of Congress in general. Second grassroots conservatives still haven’t forgiven the Congressional Republicans for their big spending, big government bender during the Bush years.  And third I suspect if you asked American’s what they really think of Congress they’d say both parties pretty much suck… The current generation of Congressional Democrats only seem to care about expanding the size and intrusiveness of government while spending us into bankruptcy. While Congressional Republicans only seem to care about… To be blunt I don’t know the hell Congressional Republicans care about these days.

Yeah, sure, they’re paying lip service about returning to commonsense conservative principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, a strong national defense and vibrant free markets, but given their big spending, big government bender during the Bush years they don’t have much credibility there…

Anyway, despite their credibility problems Republicans appear to be headed for significant gains November’s mid-term elections… The question will they hold true to commonsense conservative principles or will they go on another big spending, big government bender?

I think that there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life. Now, the basis for that would be, how does it affect other people. In other words… The federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country.

His answer is rather chilling, but it seems to reflect the broader attitude of many in Congress… Screw the Constitution we can do whatever we want and you rubes had better get used to it.

Every member of Congress swears an oath to defend the Constitution of United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic:

“I, [State your Name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Frankly, I don’t see how Rep. Stark can bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution when he so clearly has no respect for it or the limits it places on the powers of the Federal Government. Ronald Reagan said it best, The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people, too much authority from the states, and too much liberty with the Constitution.

I should note that while the woman questioning Rep. Stark argues very effectively against health care reform on 13th Amendment grounds, as Ed Morrissey notes, Fifth Amendment protections against the confiscation of private property and the Article I, Section 8 mandate that Congress protect ownership ones “exclusive right to their Writings and Discoveries” for those in the sciences and arts also apply.

Update (Wednesday, August 4, 2010): Michelle Malkin has more on Pete Stark’s remarks at last weekend’s town hall… Rep. Stark apparently didn’t know what the Government’s E-Verify program is and mockingly told his constituents that denying jobs to illegal aliens could be “unconstitutional.”

Wow, Pete Stark is another great example of why we need Congressional Term limits. Never mind his convoluted views on the Constitution, he’s openly contemptuous of the people he was elected to represent. Rep. Stark seems to have forgotten that he is an elected representative who serves at the will of the people, it’s time for the people of California’s 13th congressional district to send him into retirement.

Related

• Judge lets Virginia healthcare challenge proceed – Reuters
• ObamaCare and the Constitution—An Update – Betsy McCaughey, The Wall Street Journal

Voter unhappiness with Congress has reached the highest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports as 71% now say the legislature is doing a poor job.

That’s up ten points from the previous high of 61% reached a month ago.

Only 10% of voters say Congress is doing a good or excellent job.

Nearly half of Democratic voters (48%) now give Congress a poor rating, up 17 points since January. The vast majority of Republicans and voters not affiliated with either party also give Congress poor ratings.

Seventy percent (70%) of voters say Congress has not passed any legislation that would significantly improve life for Americans, up 10 points over the past month and the highest level of dissatisfaction measured in regular tracking in over three years. Only 15% say Congress has passed such legislation.

Forty percent (40%) of voters nationwide now say it is at least somewhat likely Congress will seriously address the most important issues facing the nation. That’s down from 59% last March. Only 9% say it is Very Likely Congress will address these issues.

Heh, heck of a job there Harry, Nancy… Keep doing what you’re doing.

The latest calculation of the National Debt as posted by the Treasury Department has – at least numerically – exceeded the statutory Debt Limit approved by Congress last February as part of the Recovery Act stimulus bill.

The ceiling was set at $12.104 trillion dollars. The latest posting by Treasury shows the National Debt at nearly $12.135 trillion.

A senior Treasury official told CBS News that the department has some “extraordinary accounting tools” it can use to give the government breathing room in the range of $150-billion when the Debt exceeds the Debt Ceiling.

Were it not for those “tools,” the U.S. Government would not have the statutory authority to borrow any more money. It might block issuance of Social Security checks and require a shutdown of some parts of the federal government.

Right, we’re already in debt up to our eyeballs and what’s the Democrats plan?

Keep spending… Look folks, you can’t spend your way to prosperity. Anyone who tells you you can probably thinks an alcoholic can drink his way to sobriety.

Related

• The Audacity of Debt – Wall Street Journal