Department of Labor Rolls Back on Unions

A quick trip around Hannity's America...

State of the Union

Good news and bad news from team Obama. The good news is that we've finally found an instance in which they support less federal regulation. The bad news is that it's in the area of organized labor, where corrupt union bosses make federal regulation deeply necessary.

The Washington Times reports that the Obama administration has gotten rid of major federal oversight of union finances. After hiring a former AFL-CIO attorney, the Department of Labor is axing two key regulations that required unions to report detailed information about their finances and compensation.

The Labor Department simply stated that "it would not be a good use of resources" to force union officials to report on any conflicts of interest. And, in its typical transparent manner, the administration would not say what role the AFL's former lawyer played in this decision.

So let me get this straight: Swine odor research is a great use of federal resources, but preventing union corruption doesn't make the cut? If this is truly the case, this administration has its priorities upside down.

Hail to the Chief!

California Senator Dianne Feinstein made an epic appearance on CNN's "State of the Union" last weekend. She discussed President Obama’s first 100 days in office and, needless to say, she had quite a positive take on them. Her revisionist history has landed her in Monday's Liberal Translation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATOR DIANE FEINSTEIN (D-Calif.): I think the Republican Party should stop being the party of no.

LIBERAL TRANSLATION: ... and start taking advice from a liberal California Democrat.

FEINSTEIN: This is a president well-elected by a large number of people.

LIBERAL TRANSLATION: Trust me, I said the same thing after Bush was re-elected.

FEINSTEIN: He has had a very strong first 100 days.

LIBERAL TRANSLATION: Barbara Boxer and I think he's like, so amazing. OMG.

FEINSTEIN: He has traveled the countries abroad, he's turned the page, he's opened a new day, he's taken strong executive actions, he's put together programs, he's delved into the economy.

LIBERAL TRANSLATION: Funny his initials are B.O. and not J.C.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

That Obama, there's just nothing he can't do, is there? If only those stubborn Republicans would get out of his way, what a country this would be! One-party rule.

Bashing the Troops

Last week liberal Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz decided to use a House Judiciary Committee hearing as a forum to slam the brave men and women of our armed forces.

The hearing was on the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, which defines attacks against another person on the basis of religion, national origin, gender and sexual orientation as hate crimes. At the hearing, Congressman Tom Rooney — a former member of the U.S. military — offered an amendment to make attacks against veterans hate crimes as well.

Well, that idea didn't sit well with Congresswoman Wassermann Schultz.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONGRESSWOMAN DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D-Fla.): I'm from a state, as Mr. Rooney is, that includes and represents the districts that include real victims.

I represent a very large — one of the largest gay populations in the United States of America. One of the largest Jewish populations in the United States of America. My region — our region has a very large African-American population.

It really is belittling of the respect that we should have for these groups to suggest that members of the armed services have somehow systematically been the victims of hate crimes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Congresswoman, including our soldiers in this bill wouldn't belittle anybody. I think you and Janet Napolitano need to revisit your opinion of our veterans.

Now I'm personally opposed to hate crime legislation because I feel you are trying to punish people for their thoughts or perceived thoughts, but if you are going to have it, excluding veterans would be a crime.

Media Darling

In Media Mash, as President Obama's first 100 days draws near, we are now getting word on just how biased the network news coverage of President Obama has been.

The Center for Media and Public Affairs has found that ABC, CBS and NBC have devoted a staggering amount of time to Mr. Obama during their broadcast. And I'm sure it won't come as a shock to many of you, but the study shows that the coverage itself has been overwhelmingly positive.

Here are the numbers: In only his first 50 days in office, the evening news broadcasts on those three networks devoted 28 hours to President Obama. By contrast, President Bush received only 8 hours of coverage. And all of that time devoted to covering the anointed one's presidency featured positive coverage 58 percent of the time. However, during George Bush's first 50 days, only 33 percent of the stories were favorable.

Not to mention, the study shows Barack Obama has received more coverage than George Bush and Bill Clinton combined. That may explain why when Robert Gibbs was asked how he would grade the press corps' coverage of the administration so far, he gave them a "strong A."

By the way, I give Robert a strong F.

— Watch "Hannity" weekdays at 9 p.m. ET on FOX News Channel