Tag Archives: senate

RE: The US Senate Race in Kansas

“Independent” Greg Orman, who has so many Democrat Party operative working on his campaign one expects to see Nancy Pelosi’s name on his campaign headquarters door, has stated that he will caucus with whatever party presents the best ideas.

Mr. Orman’s campaign website states:

“If Greg is elected, there’s a reasonable chance that neither party would have a majority in the US Senate. If that is the case, he will work with the other independent Senators to caucus with the party that is most willing to face our country’s difficult problems head on and advance our problem-solving, non-partisan agenda.”

Therein lays the problem, and a perfect example of: a) how constitutionally illiterate our political class has become; b) how constitutionally illiterate our citizenry has become; and c) why the 17th Amendment is the most damaging action ever executed by the Progressive Left throughout US history.

When the Progressives of the early 20th Century marshaled through the 17th Amendment, they did a great damage to the symbiotic set of checks and balanced that achieved protections for both the individual and the individual states, where the power of the federal government was concerned. Under the guise of putting more control of government into the hands of the people, the Progressives, under Woodrow Wilson, literally destroyed the check and balance that protected state sovereignty and, through that erosion, the sovereignty of the individual.

At its inception, the US Constitution mandated, in Article I, Section 3, that:

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote…”

The appointment of senators by the state legislators thwarted political faction on the floor of the US Senate. With each senator held accountable by their respective state legislatures for their votes, alliances and actions, the onus for political survival for the senatorial class was devotion to the well-being of their home states. The political ideology or factional allegiance of the senator was irrelevant for the most part. If a senator chose political party over the needs of his home state, the state legislature could – and would – simply recall him through an act the State House, replacing the senator with someone who held allegiance to his home state – and the constitution of that home state – above national political faction.

Understanding this original intent that the Framers built into the Constitution, the idea of Obamacare, or suffocating national debt, or an aggressive IRS, EPA or NSA, would never have come to be. The unfunded mandates of Obamacare would have seen the 54 senators from the 27 states that refused to establish ACA health insurance exchanges – and most likely more from states that did – voting against the bill in its infancy because the legislation harms the well-being of the individual states and usurps the authority of most every state’s constitution. So too, the national debt would never have been allowed to accumulate because it passes down to the citizens of individual states. The IRS would be little more than a gaggle of accountants, the EPA would not exist and the NSA wouldn’t be allowed to operate on US soil, if at all.

Simply put, there would be no party politics in the US Senate. It would be an assembly of representatives of each state’s government, tasked specifically and exclusively with the protection of the home state and her constitution. The passage of the 17th Amendment killed that protection and facilitated political faction on a national level to metastasize in the US Senate, something Pres. George Washington warned vehemently about in his Farewell Address.

The 17th Amendment mandates:

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote…”

By tricking – and that’s exactly what the Progressives did – the populace into thinking the popular election of their senators gave them more power over government, it literally established the opposite; delivering great power to national political parties and the federal government, while extinguishing an essential check and balance over said political parties and the federal government. The 17th Amendment took power away from the people and the states, and delivered it to the political parties and the federal government.

So, why is the Senatorial Election in Kansas a perfect example of constitutional illiteracy and Progressive manipulation? Would the 17th Amendment have not been passed Mr. Orman wouldn’t need – or aspire – to caucus with any political faction or party. He would, instead, be carrying out the will of the Kansas State Legislature and, through them, the will of the people of his state. There would be no need – or desire – to “caucus” with those of any particular political “flavor” because the well-being of each state is dictated by the needs of each state and her people, not the leaders of any political party.

To wit, imagine that the 17th Amendment had never passed, or that a smart-thinking Congress repealed it. No longer would we see any – any – legislative gridlock; no longer would we amass unrepayable debt; no longer would we see hyper-partisan or ideological pieces of legislation rammed down our throats; no longer would the American people – and her government – be held hostage to politics…no long would the American people be held hostage to politics.

Still think Progressives are on the side of the people? Yeah, neither do I…I haven’t for a very, very long time.

Democrats use fear-mongering in last ditch effort to hold majority

Democrats have gotten a large portion of their legislative and regulatory agenda enacted, but Americans seem greatly displeased with the results. Now, Democrat leadership is using FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) as a tool in the November 2014 elections to hold on to their slim and ineffectual majority in the U.S. Senate.

Former House Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi appeared on “Real Time with Bill Maher” and made the case that only Democrats could save the human race… or something.

Rep. Pelosi told Maher that “It would be very important for the Democrats to retain control of the Senate” because  “civilization as we know it today would be in jeopardy if the Republicans win the Senate.”

No fear-mongering there…

Pelosi managed to lead the Democrats into a crushing defeat in the House after pushing legislation that almost no one actually wanted and even fewer appreciate now that Obamacare has been enacted.

Having the wicked witch of the West tell a 100% liberal audience that Republicans would end society is yelling into an echo-chamber – only Maher’s uninformed, non-critical-thinking left-wing extremist viewership would even accept her statements as anything but political rhetoric.

The current Democrat-led Senate has accomplished very little under Sen. Harry Reid’s leadership. Mainly due to Reid’s inability to aptly push flawed progressive legislation while Obama’s left-wing extremist initiatives drive more families into economic ruin and U.S. companies to send their assets overseas.

The majority of the bills passed by the Senate have been symbolic at best and ridiculous at worst. The few that have been considerable were bills that met with little debate and were obviously necessary. The rest… resolutions to name this building after that guy or have a holiday named after that other guy. Reid’s legacy will be that he was able to enact less useful legislation than any previous Senate leader in history.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been unable to push difficult bills through the Senate even though his party holds the majority. Perhaps all the time Reid is spending getting activist liberal judges on the appellate courts would be better spent getting the work of the people done.

The Senate was always envisioned to be a more deliberative body. More discussion, more debate – more… American. Harry Reid is unable to lead a body of this type. Instead, he leads by iron hand or not at all. Perhaps the latter is best for our nation.

Failing to bring a useful amount of legislation to the floor, unable to create a co-operative government and incapable of heading a productive Senate, Harry Reid is the problem that President Obama often points to. The reason Washington is unable to “do anything” is because Sen. Reid likes it that way.

Perhaps America needs new Senate leadership to end the grid-lock about which the President so often complains.

 

It Is Time, Democrats, to Send Mr. Reid Home

In these ridiculous times, where transparency is clandestine, science proves instead of disproves, and falsely instilled self-esteem trumps real education, I truly don’t expect even the most honest of Liberal or Democrat – and certainly not any Progressive – to understand, or even hear, what I am about to say, but for the good of our country I pray that they do. Truth be told, we rank-and-file Americans cannot trust the “Frank Underwoods” who lurk inside the Washington Beltway – on both sides of the aisle – to do anything on behalf of their constituencies any longer. They are frauds and converts to the oligarch. It is time we start depending on ourselves to affect real, true and honest change.

The examples of just how power-centered and self-serving the oligarchs in the US federal government have become are too many to list, although, if push came to shove, we could start amassing a list, in and of itself worthy of entry into the Guinness Book for longest continuous list of political transgressions against a people. From the IRS coercion of Conservative non-profit groups, to the political payoff that the billion-dollar so-called stimulus was to Blue State governments and labor unions, to the “too-big-to-fail” redistribution of taxpayer dollars through TARP to the über-greedy financial elites for their irresponsible financial skullduggery, the Janus-faced disingenuousness of our elected class – a disingenuousness meant to stave-off the torches and pitchforks of the taxpaying public – knows now shame…and yet we continue to tolerate it.

Stunning. Have we become that self-loathing as a people?

But even while we tolerate the power-hungry manipulations of the elected class – the elitists, the Progressives, the oligarchs – they have always been careful to at least pretend to care about the people. The entire game Progressives play is based on the false-premise that the “better educated” know how to care for the masses better than the masses know how to care for themselves. The illusion foisted by a great many Inside-the-Beltway Republicans (read: establishment Republican…Ann) is that they are standing with and for “the people,” executing a pursuit of limited government, fiscal responsibility and individual freedoms. Yet we all know that government does everything (but for achieving military superiority) poorly and at a greater price than the private-sector. And we all stand witness as government keeps expanding, both in size and scope. Now we can add overt disdain for the American people to that list.

On February 26, 2014, United States Senator and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), stood on the floor of the greatest chamber of debate – or at least what used to be – and openly expressed his hatred for the American people. Once again, abdicating his responsibility to serve his constituents, while playing partisan politics at the expense of the nation, Mr. Reid said, in defending the Patient Protection & Affordable Healthcare Act:

“Despite all that good news, there’s plenty of horror stories being told. All of them are untrue, but they’re being told all over America.”

I will overlook – for the moment – the fact that the most powerful man in the US Senate can’t speak proper English when entering his testimony into the Congressional Record. Lord knows there are members of Congress guilty of more egregious butchery of the English language.

It is beyond dispute that millions of Americans have been adversely affected by this unconstitutional piece of legislation. Millions have been denied the medical insurance they prefer while millions more have been told they must either pay more or go without; left to pay an IRS extracted penalty. Still hundreds of thousands more are being put into life-threatening situations where medical treatment deemed necessary for survival is not either outside their capability to afford, not authorized, or both. The putridly ironic thing about all of this is that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was imposed on the American people under the ruse of it being “for the common good.”

To say that Mr. Reid’s comment adds insult to injury is to affect injury to insult. And while it is serving as great fodder for the elitist Washington punditry, it is much more serious an issue than that, and two-fold.

For those whose lives have now been called into question; whose life-saving treatments have become too expensive to afford; or whose treatments have now been denied, this is a direct threat – and a government mandated threat, at that – to the guaranteed right, offered us as US citizens under the bedrock understanding of Natural Law, to “…Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” While self-serving, power-hungry, elitist manipulators like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi stare, wax-faced, into the television cameras extolling all of the “common good” that the Affordable Care Act is doing, millions face the prospect of dying for the Progressive Movement’s dream of a one-payer, nationalized health insurance system…health insurance, not healthcare, system.

While this faux benevolence is continuously presented as compassionate, needed and “the right thing” to get behind by the oligarchs and their toadies – the Progressive mainstream media, it is neither compassionate, needed nor the right thing to do. It is a redistribution of wealth that is literally costing people their lives…here…in the “land of the free.”

And what does Mr. Reid say about those who are facing the loss of their lives because of the ACA? What does he say about the real-life, fact-based stories of those who have been denied “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” because of Progressive benevolence?:

“…Tales…Stories made up from whole cloth…Lies, distorted by Republicans to grab headlines or make political advertisements…”

And as egregiously rancid as this reality is – and it is, the idea that the most powerful man in the US Senate would openly call those facing debilitated health and/or death because of his Progressive ideological zealotry “liars” is not only unacceptable, it should serve as the defining reason for why he should be: a) removed from Senate leadership by his Democrat colleagues immediately; b) reprimanded and censured but the whole of chamber immediately; and c) retired by the people of Nevada at the next election.

Our American system of government was based on the idea that those who would be elected to office – be it at the federal state, county, township or municipal levels – would be understood as those in the service of the public; public servants. Today, this notion – this foundational understanding of our American governmental system – has been grotesquely bastardized , done so with all the Progressive glory that could be mustered in its execution; destroyed at first by expunging the check and balance of States’ Rights through the ratification of the 17th Amendment all the way through to the imposition of having to purchase a private-sector product (health insurance) to be considered a true and faithful American citizen. Our country has been fundamentally transformed…“top-down, bottom-up, inside-out.”

George Washington, a man who could have been king would he have wanted the title, warned – warned – in his Farewell Address of the evils of “factions” (read: political party):

“However combinations or associations of [factions] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government – destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion…

“Let me now…warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.

“Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it…”

We, the American people, should not suffer the unbridled arrogance of Mr. Reid, evidenced not only by his lust for partisan faction, but by his open and overt disdain for our fellow citizens; fellow citizens now disenfranchised by the Progressive understanding of “the common good.” Mr. Reid is the perfect example of the “evils of faction.” He is a disgrace to his elected office. He is a disgrace as an American. And he is not suited to his station in the US Senate.

If Democrats in the US Senate – as well as in general – do not seize this moment to make an example of Mr. Reid, then from this day forward let the Democrat Party be known as the toady to the Progressive Movement; the entirety of which is unworthy to lick the heel of Mr. Washington’s boot.

Senate to Hold Hearings on Controversial UN Treaty

WASHINGTON, Nov. 5, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is on the move again as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has confirmed that it will hold hearings on the treaty starting today. The treaty was defeated on the Senate floor last year after it failed to receive the required two-thirds vote, largely because of strong opposition from parental rights and disability rights advocates.
President Obama signed the treaty in July 2009, but opponents were quick to point out the dangers this treaty presented to disabled persons in the United States.

“We all want to show our love and care for people with disabilities,” said Michael Farris, founder and chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). “This treaty, however, is not the way to do it. This treaty will give United Nations and government agents, not parents, the authority to decide all educational and treatment issues for disabled children. All of the rights that parents have under traditional American law, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act will be undermined by this treaty.”

Farris pointed out that, while supporters of the treaty say that it will not override American law, a recent decision in Hungary showed exactly how the treaty will look if ratified in the United States. The Hungarian constitution did not allow intellectually disabled persons to vote if they were under legal guardianship, but the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities called this law unjust, citing Article 29 of the CRPD as reason to overrule the Hungarian constitution.

“Determining a policy for allowing those with profound intellectual disabilities to exercise the right to vote is a complex and sensitive issue,” Farris said, “but what we know for sure is this: America’s legislators — and not a UN committee — should make this kind of policy decision.

“Parents in the United States are finding that homeschooling benefits their children with disabilities in more ways than a one-size-fits-all approach can ever achieve. The CRPD puts those rights at risk,” he said.

“We know that the eyes of the nation will be on the Virginia and New Jersey elections, but we can’t ignore the imminent threat posed by today’s hearing on Capitol Hill. We are urging people to call their senators and voice their opposition to the treaty,” said William Estrada, the Director of Federal Relations at HSLDA. “This is especially important if your senator is on the Foreign Relations Committee.”

The following senators are on the Foreign Relations Committee: Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), Tom Udall (D-NM), Edward Markey (D-MA), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Edward Shaheen (D-NH), Christopher Coons (D-DE), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Bob Corker (R-TN), Ron Johnson (R-WI), James Risch (R-ID), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), John McCain (R-AZ), John Barrasso (R-WY), Rand Paul (R-KY), Marco Rubio (R-FL). Senators Paul and Rubio have already shown strong opposition to the treaty.

Federal Government: Embarrassing to the Point of Painful

As the so-called “government shutdown” drags on, one thing is hard not to admit: the Obama Administration is acting in a manner that is attempting to extract the maximum amount of pain on the American people. While many are wondering how it came to this point, those of us who actually paid attention in Social Studies, Civics and American History classes – school subjects that are, today, given little, if any, attention –
understand it’s because the US Constitution and the purity of the original governmental process has been raped by the opportunistic political class.

Our nation has always had a robust political discourse, commencing from before we were even a documented nation. We have always been represented by a passionate, spirited political class; strong in their beliefs, but educated and knowledgeable enough to legislate and govern for the good of all the people. Today, this is not the case.

Today, we have a political class that insists on the importance of ideologically motivated political “achievements” over the honest representation of the American people; loyalty to political faction – of which each and every Framer and Founder warned – over loyalty to those who delivered them to power via the ballot box.

Today, we literally have people in the political class that have an inferior command of the English language, an inferior and under-performing understanding of the principles of the Constitution and the Charters of Freedom, and a devotion to Progressivism; a non-indigenous, Marxist-based ideology that believes the State is the Alpha and the Omega; the giver of rights and the final arbiter of freedom and liberty.

Today, we have a government that does not – does not – serve the American people, evidenced – in a singular point – by the overwhelming and sustained majority of Americans who do not want the Affordable Care Act implemented on any level.

FOX News reports:

Is the Obama administration employing a make-it-hurt strategy to gain political leverage in the budget battle on Capitol Hill?

Republicans are making that charge as the stalemate drags on, and point to the Pentagon furlough of 400,000 civilian staffers — even though Congress passed and the president signed a bill to supposedly keep them on the job…

Republicans argue that the intent of the law was to keep them on the job, and that the Obama administration “narrowly interpreted” it against congressional intent in order to furlough more employees.

It’s one example of how, Republicans say, the administration is making the partial shutdown of government services worse than it needs to be. Many have complained about the National Park Service cordoning off even open-air monuments in Washington, DC, such as the World War II Memorial.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), responded to criticisms by saying, “It is time for Speaker Boehner to stop the games.”

Shamefully, FOX also reported that correspondence on this situation has stalled because, as Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), stated, “Unfortunately, most of the staff who draft congressional correspondence are furloughed.”

A few notes on this shameful situation.

First, and to be equally critical to both sides, if “staffers that draft congressional correspondence” have been furloughed, perhaps those elected to Congress should learn to (and actually) write their own correspondence.

Second, to the Progressives, Democrats and our embarrassing President, it is never “game-playing” when the taxpayer’s money is being spent. It is “game-playing” when members of our military who have been maimed and permanently injured can’t get medical care because the politically opportune refuse to entertain appropriations passed through a traditional method (not every spending bill has to be an omnibus package, in fact traditionally, the 12 appropriation bills have been passed separately).

House Republicans “screwed the pooch” when they didn’t advance ACA funding as a separate, stand-alone appropriations bill from the start. When House Speaker Boehner stated that this Congress would operate under “regular order” he should have stated that the House would be de-bundling all legislation into stand-alone pieces, shining the light of truth and accountability on everything that passed across the House floor. Sadly, traditional, inside-the-beltway pork politics prevailed and the practice of bundling legislation to appease the politically greedy has delivered us to this point.

Truth be told, had the political class not blindly followed the Progressive Movement into ratifying the 17th Amendment, none of this would have ever come to pass. But, then, the Commerce Clause wouldn’t have even come close to allowing much of what the Federal government has done that encroaches into our daily lives.

Additionally, if Harry Reid would have operated lawfully, the omnibus appropriations package would have already been legislated, as he is – is – bound by law to have produced a budget by April 15 of each year. He has not done so since before Republicans took control of the House.

The sad, but glaringly true, fact is this. Our government has become too big and too bureaucratic. Our government has manipulated and strayed from the boundaries of the US Constitution, which is a mandated blueprint for limiting government.

Until We the People insist on repealing the 17th Amendment so as to re-employ constitutional protections for the States, and until Congress re-visits the Federal government’s grotesquely over-reaching interpretation of the Commerce Clause, it will be up to the States to save the nation, either by Constitutional Convention (which in and of itself is very dangerous were the original words of the Constitution to be manipulated by the opportunistic) or by, God forbid, secession.

And it is with tears in my eyes for our country; for freedom; for liberty itself, that I acquiesce to the notion. Buy, my God, are we to allow the greatest achievement of freedom in the history of the world be extinguished at the hand of ideological bullies?

The words of Patriot Patrick Henry said so very seriously then, are just as cogent today:

“Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! — I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Kerry states US will sign UN arms regulation treaty despite legislative objection

Hugh Nelson (CC)

Hugh Nelson (CC)

Secretary of State John Kerry stated Monday that the Obama Administration intends to sign a U.N. treaty that would restrict trade of conventional weapons, despite opposition from the Senate. Fox News reports:

“We look forward to signing it as soon as the process of conforming the official translations is completed satisfactorily,” he said. Kerry called the treaty “an important contribution to efforts to stem the illicit trade in conventional weapons, which fuels conflict, empowers violent extremists, and contributes to violations of human rights.”

The treaty would require countries that ratify it to establish national regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms and components and to regulate arms brokers, but it will not explicitly control the domestic use of weapons in any country.

Still, gun-rights supporters on Capitol Hill warn the treaty could be used as the basis for additional gun regulations inside the U.S. and have threatened not to ratify.
Last week, 130 members of Congress signed a letter to Obama and Kerry urging them to reject the measure for this and other reasons.

Since ratification of a treaty will require a 2/3 vote from the Senate, it is unlikely that the administration will succeed in getting ratification. This by no means implies that gun rights activists should rest on their laurels on this issue. If the President decides to sign this treaty, everything possible must be done to guarantee that the Senate will not ratify it. As for when the treaty could be signed, it could be any time – either in the near future, or months from now.

Poor Reid can’t handle Ted Cruz

Harry Reid is bemoaning the fact that Ted Cruz is not willing to play ball according to the (Democrat) rules on the floor. Reid calls Cruz a schoolyard bully, and points out that since he’s on the losing end, Cruz he should stop trying to force debate outside of standard order of business. In simple English, Reid is upset that Cruz is doing his job for his constituents, and refusing to allow the Democrats to push through a budget without legitimate debate, as opposed to the nonsense that fits in standard rules of order – you know, the kind of thing that lead us to the infamous Pelosi statement, “you’ve got to pass it to know what’s in it.”

This Week On The Left

Obama+Biden+Meet+Congressional+Leaders+8ADIlY8vJ5Ml

Second Amendment: The Battle Rages On

It’s hard to believe that in 2013 there would still be an attack on Constitutional rights…but there is. The most recent(and surprisingly well sustained) is against our right to bear arms.

This past week President Obama re-upped his gun control push calling on Vice President Biden and NYC Mayor Bloomberg, who held press conferences, to push his initiative.

What’s more, on Wednesday, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signed bills that require background checks for private and online gun sales and ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds(via Politico).

While some view this as “common sense” legislation there is no argument that can convince most Americans that infringement of any of their rights is common sense. With more and more restrictions on the Second Amendment, we are left wondering what rights we will be forced to give up next.

Senate Democrat Budget

On Saturday Senate Democrats approved their first budget in four years. But not without opposition. It passed Democratic approval with just a 50-49 vote showing a deep divide within the formerly solid Democrat ranks.

The main problem: failure to address the deficit problem. Just last week Obama went on the record saying, “My goal is not to chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

Apparently not all Democrats feel the same way. Many of the more moderate politicians on the left are beginning to see the importance of balancing the budget. Which could prove to be a major point of contention going into talks with House GOP.

As Senator Mark Begich (D.-AL) put it, “Passing this off to our children is not an option.”

And many other Democrats are starting to see that the ridiculous deficit and failure to balance the budget is not only failing to solve a current problem but also perpetuating a problem for future generations.

So, where does that leave us? Four *short* years later and a proposal that Senate Democrats can still barely agree on. Clearly, we’re not much further than where we started.

Obamacare Turns 3…!

At least that’s the excitement on the left. In spite of the fact that the Affordable Care Act aka Obamacare has begun to wreak havoc on citizens from small business owners to private practice doctors and everyone inside, outside or in between; there are still many who are pleased with what they have been offered.

Of course, the biggest following of Obamacare is the hundreds of thousands of American women who may now receive free birth control. Women everywhere can rest assured that they do not have to be responsible for themselves because the government will take care of it.

I guess a loss of jobs, closing businesses and smaller paychecks are worth it after all.

Thanks Obama xoxoxo.

To Paris With Love

…$585,000 that is.

VP Biden is getting more than we bargained for. On a recent trip to Europe the Vice President is said to have accrued a $585,000 bill for a one night stay in Paris. Not to mention, another nearly $800,000 for additional trip related expenses for limousine service and a night in London.

According to Fox 2 News, rooms are rented out for staff, Secret Service, military and there are security expenses involved. While this is said to be standard operating costs, there is still a lot to be said for trips equaling millions of dollars on the taxpayer’s dime.

Yes, foreign relations are necessary and yes, the safety of the President, the VP and their teams is important but is there no way to trim these costs? With trips like these is it any wonder our country is in the position it is?

Cigarette Ban in NY

Quick folks, hide your Big Gulp…I mean cigarettes! With the overturn of the ban on drinks, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is back with a new ban to rile up NY residents. This time, it’s cigarettes.

Mayor Bloomberg has submitted a proposal to the NY city council to hide cigarettes from public view. He cites health concerns, particularly in underage smoking, as the primary reason for the ban.

Now, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, parents, in case you didn’t know(and the government believes you don’t) it’s your job to keep your kids from doing bad things. Not the government’s. There will always be arguments about children hiding cigarettes or drinking or drugs from their parents but if they can keep these things from ever attentive parents, rest assured, playing peek-a-boo with cigarettes in convenience stores isn’t going to keep them from smoking.

Biden: Giffords Mortally Wounded

If there was ever a #HeadDesk moment this would be it.

On Thursday during a gun control press conference Vice President Biden said, “Think about what happened out in — when Gabby Giffords, my good friend, was shot and mortally wounded.

Now, I’m not one to judge a poor use of vocabulary and/or grammar but it would seem that the man who is next in line as leader of the free world would know the difference between “mortally wounded” and, well, just wounded.

 This is the first weekly installment of TWOTL showcasing the attacks, laughs, and gaffes from the left. Proving why the smart money is on the conservative vote.

 

Follow me on Twitter @ReneeRankine

Is House Passed GOP Budget Hopeless?

via Pennua.org

 

On Thursday, the House passed the GOP Budget Plan, authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis). It passed almost entirely down partisan lines with a 221-207 vote.

Ryan’s plan is geared toward balancing the budget within 10 years through a series of huge spending cuts equaling $4.6 trillion that primarily affect funding of social programs while keeping current Social Security benefits intact. The budget repeals Obamacare and proposes a Medicare overhaul that revisits the idea of a voucher-like program for seniors. A seemingly sound plan that leads us to economic freedom by 2023.

But will any of this really make a difference? The Democrat controlled Senate just began debating their first budget since the 2009 budget that ushered in Obamacare. A budget that is on the other end of the spectrum from the House and actually increases spending after the sequester. Their budget does not propose a balance until tentatively 2040.

With a Democratic-run Senate and President Obama in the White House, it begs the question: is the House passed budget a hopeless one? There has been an ongoing struggle between the two parties over the economy and the battle could come to a head due to the drastically different proposals and different ideas about what is important for economic growth. Obama claims, “My goal is not to chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

With such divisive plans, Obama will be looking to find a middle ground between the two proposals that could end up producing nearly $1 trillion in new taxes while saving social programs for the poor. While the idea may sound noble, it is simply another instance of working class Americans being punished for being contributing members of society, while those who are not are rewarded.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray(D-Wash.) says, “We need to tackle our deficit and debt fairly and responsibly.”

But fair to whom? Not to the citizens who are working harder for smaller paychecks due to increased taxation. Not to small business owners who have to cut costs somewhere due to Obamacare. And certainly not to our children who are suffering now but will suffer even more in the future due to the massive debt they are forced to repay.

We are increasingly becoming a nation dependent on our government for all of our relief—which only ends up applying more pressure. One that takes away the will to succeed and encourages accepting handouts. With that mentality, the House passed budget may not seem to be more than a pipe dream for many Americans. However, it is always in the roughest of times that Americans show of what we are truly made; which leaves hope that this proposal will be a first step in reaffirming American exceptionalism.

 

Follow Renee on Twitter @ReneeRankine.

 

 

 

 

Super PAC Spending in Maine’s Senate Race

Despite running against spending from non-local groups, Maine’s Senator-Elect Angus King’s campaign benefitted from money spent on his behalf by Super PAC’s.

King’s campaign was opposed to recent campaign finance reform measures that created Super PAC’s. Super PAC’s do not have to disclose their donors and can contribute unlimited amounts of money. However, they cannot give money directly to a candidate.

“Angus is opposed to the involvement of Super PACs in local elections because they have the capacity to wield unprecedented financial influence in campaigns while also shielding certain donor categories from disclosure,” said campaign policy analyst Eliza Bryant.

During the campaign, King attempted to get Republican candidate Charlie Summers and Democratic candidate Cynthia Dill to sign a pledge stating they wouldn’t take money from Super PAC’s.

“It’s kind of ironic that Angus King has run around the state of Maine descrying outside money and how bad it is, yet he’s down in Michael Bloomberg’s living room two days ago raising a half a million dollars,” said Summers during the campaign.

However, Super PAC’s are prohibited from donating directly to political candidates. They can only donate to campaign committees, which are not allowed to coordinate with a candidate’s campaign. Therefore, King has no control over what money Super PAC’s spend advertising for his campaign.

According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings, Super PAC Citizens Elect spent over a million dollars ($1,234,520) on television advertising, polling and media consulting for Angus King. It spent an additional $193,000 on advertising against Charlie Summers. By contrast, the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, the leading Super PAC contributor supporting Summers, spent only $117,000.

“The majority of the outside money in this election has been spent in attack ads against Angus King. In total, outside influences have spent over $3 million on these ads, comprising 75% of the money that has been spent on ads in this race,” said Bryant.

In total, about $3 million was spent by Super PAC’s on ads against King. About $1.7 million was spent by Super PAC’s on ads against Summers. Of the $6.4 million spent on the race, only about 46% of the money spent by Super PAC’s was used for negative ads against King.

Inhofe Review Act Defeat Will Hurt U.S Economy

SENATE VOTE WILL CAUSE JOB LOSS AND INCREASE ELECTRICITY RATES

WASHINGTON, June 22, 2012  — The U.S. Senate held an up-or-down vote Wednesday on Sen. James Inhofe’s (R-Okla.) resolution (S.J. Res. 37) to overturn the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) onerous Utility MACT rule. The resolution was defeated by a vote of 53 to 46. The pending new EPA rule will be the most expensive power plant regulation in American history and is directed at plants that use coal—America’s most abundant and affordable energy source—to generate electricity. Surprisingly several senators from states that generate significant electricity from coal voted against the regulation, ensuring higher electricity rates for their constituents.

Senators voting against the Inhofe resolution and in support of the EPA rule included Sens. Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Sherrod Brown of Ohio, both from states that generate more than 80 percent of their electricity from coal; Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, which gets nearly half of its electricity from coal; Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester of Montana, which generates 63 percent of its electricity with coal; and Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, which uses coal to generate nearly 60 percent of its electricity. All voted against the resolution and in support of an EPA rule that will increase electricity rates across the country.

Sen. Jim Inhofe said in a statement after the Senate rejected his attempt to send EPA’s rule back to the drawing boards, “Our fight is not over: we will continue to do everything possible to expose what the Obama-EPA’s damaging regulatory regime will do to destroy jobs and weaken our economy, and work every day in our efforts to stop President Obama’s war on oil, gas and coal.”

Recent independent studies show EPA’s new rules will force power plants to close across the country, cause electricity prices to spike by an average of 12 percent nationwide, and cost the economy well over a million jobs.

Emperor obama Rules by Decree on Immigration

Emperor wanna be barack hussein obama, knowing full well that over the years amnesty for illegal aliens has been consistently rejected by American voters, decided to bypass the American people and the Constitutionally legitimate legislative process to rule by executive fiat.

The White House has ordered the halting of the deportation of 800,000 illegal aliens, many of whom will be given work permits. In effect this will allow them to stay in America permanently, since two-year work permits can be renewed indefinitely. This is an unconstitutional bequeathing of backdoor amnesty to hundreds of thousands or more. In the end, the number of work permits granted in this illegal bypass of Congress will likely be much higher.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said: “Our nation’s immigration laws must be enforced in a firm and sensible manner. But they are not designed to be blindly enforced without consideration given to the individual circumstances of each case. Nor are they designed to remove productive young people to countries where they may not have lived or even speak the language. Discretion, which is used in so many other areas, is especially justified here”.

For the record Janet, evaluating the individual circumstances of each case is supposed to be done before immigrants are allowed to enter the country legally.

Never mind that for decades America’s immigration laws have not been enforced in anything remotely resembling a firm and sensible manner. Millions upon millions of illegal aliens have been pouring across America’s borders for so long that individual States have been compelled to adopt State laws in efforts to stem the swollen tide.

Forget that a massive, systemic failure by the federal government to enforce immigration laws is the reason these illegal aliens are in America.

Discretion is in no way justified here.

A conscious decision has been made to ignore Article One, Section One of the United States Constitution, which clearly states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

This is a coldly calculated, clear-minded choice made by a failed Chief Executive to circumvent the Constitution he swore to uphold.

This is a choice made for purely political reasons. Every choice made by this ‘has never stopped campaigning full time candidate’ is made for purely political reasons. It is quite simply politically unacceptable to his re-election ambitions for him to be facing harsh criticism over failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform in his first year in office; but one of his many failed campaign promises.

Put it out of your head how promises to be the most open and transparent administration in American history mysteriously disappeared when the government’s seizure of America’s healthcare system occurred behind closed doors. Immoral, unethical wheeling and dealing were required in order to secure passage of a hugely unpopular piece of legislation. One that could very well be overturned by the United States Supreme Court for being unconstitutional.

This conscious choice to violate his oath of office and to openly, obviously and willfully circumvent the United States Constitution for personal political gain is particularly inexcusable for a self proclaimed “Constitutional Law Professor”. Once again, it’s entirely indicative that Emperor obama is simply not suited for America’s division of power, checks and balances political system at all, much less the Oval Office.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/15/emperor-obama-rules-by-decree-on-immigration/

Senate Dems Reject Five Budgets While Failing to Produce One

The Democrat-controlled Senate rejected five separate budget plans including one based on President Obama’s budget plan.

In a 99-0 vote the liberal Senate voted down a budget proposal based on the President’s own plan. Without being able to raise a single vote for his own budget from his own party, serious questions are being raised about Obama’s ability to broker an agreement on the budget. The President’s inability to end an almost sure showdown over a debt-limit increase this year could bring the economy to a screeching halt.

The House-passed GOP plan received much more positive support from the Senate, but failed to garner enough votes to be brought to the floor for debate. Paul Ryan’s plan went down largely on a party-line vote 58-41 with 5 Republicans voting against it. Scott Brown (Mass), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Susan Collins (Maine), Dean Heller (Nevada) and Rand Paul (Kentucky).

Of the five plans, Sen. Rand Paul’s was the toughest on spending. The plan called for the elimination of the Departments of Commerce, Education, Housing and Urban Development and Energy. Paul’s plan received 16 votes – the least of the proposals put up for a vote.

All of the Republican plans focused on differing degrees of spending cuts much to the dismay of Senate Democrats:

“We will not allow the debt and deficit to be reduced on the backs of the middle class and most vulnerable Americans without calling on the wealthiest to contribute. That is not fair, it’s not what the American people want, and it’s simply not going to happen.” — Sen. Patty Murray, (D – Wash)

The Democrats have re-asserted their position that it is unnecessary to create and pass a budget this year because of the spending limits agreed to last year. Republicans have been quick to point out that the spending limits do not fulfill the legal obligation to produce a budget each and every year – an obligation the Harry Reid led Senate has failed to make for three consecutive years.

« Older Entries