Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Romney's Good Ideas and Free Stuff for Votes

If the worst thing about the presidential election process is the un-ending and ceaseless barrage of campaign commercials, the second worst thing has got to be the weeks of Monday morning quarterbacking that go on after the election ends.

With today seeing the first White House press conference since summer, of course there was talk of the election, and how Our Great Leader, HRH Barack Hussein Obama, (Peace Be Upon Him) feels about Gov. Mitt Romney.  And then for some reason (probably to show they were covering both sides) our liberal media decided to share the contents of a conference call that Gov. Romney had with his top supporters.

HRH Obama, in his press conference today, said, "my hope is before the end of the year, though, that we have a chance to sit down and talk.  There are certain aspects of Gov. Romney's record and his ideas that I think would be very helpful."  This an absolutely amazing turnaround. During the campaign, Gov. Romney had no good ideas according to the Obama campaign.  In fact, it was Gov. Romney, who said he agreed with the President on some issues, particularly in the realm of foreign relations, and was blasted for it in the press.

Of course, with the President being so "bipartisan" and "magnanimous" the mainstream media could not resist participating in their favorite sport; spinning comments so Republicans look bad.

Gov. Romney commented during a "post-election conference call" with major donors, that some of the policies enacted by the administration appeared like "gifts" to help win young minority and low income voters.  From the New York Times:
“In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups,” Mr. Romney said.

“With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift,” he said. “Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents’ plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008.”

Even the voters saw these policies and "gifts" as a reason to keep Obama in office.  A prime example of this was the YouTube video of the woman saying, vote for Obama because he gave us Obama phones and Romney will take them away.

At the GOP convention people like Sen. Rubio, Sen. Martinez, and Sen. Rice were showcased.  They all shared the same story.  They came from very humble and sometimes poor beginnings, but they worked hard, overcame adversity and made themselves into successes.

But prosperity that involves hard work is frowned upon by the left.  The left says, we will take care of you.  The government will fix your problems.  Besides, it's not your fault.  It's the rich guys fault.  We need to get at him and hit him in the wallet.  Vote for us so you can keep getting government handouts--like free healthcare, free cell phones, free Internet. Vote for us to "get revenge."

All this really shows is that Alexis de Tocqueville was right:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” 

If you offer someone YOUR cash for their vote, it is called "bribery".  If you offer someone OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY (TAX DOLLARS) for their vote, it is called "public policy."


Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Going Viral- The Secession Petitions and the White House

I seriously doubt that when someone in the current administration thought of creating a place on the White House website for people to create a short petition, gather signatures and have the Administration respond, they ever dreamed that there would be petitions from the citizens of 42 of the 50 states, asking to leave the Union.  As of 7:00 pm (MST) there was a petition visible on the "We The People" page of the White House website for every State in the Union except Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Washington.

As a bit of background,  the "We The People" page allows people age 13 and over with a valid email address to create a petition (with at title no longer than 120 characters and text no longer than 800 characters) and post that petition for anyone with an account at the "We The People" site.

The "rules" of the site are fairly simple. After you create your petition, the site will assign a web address to the petition and provide it to you.   You can then send the link to your petition to anyone you like.  People may then go to your petition, click on the "sign this petition" button, and then they are presented with a link and additional buttons to share the petition by Twitter or Facebook.  After the petition gets 150 "signatures" the petition can be found by searching the "We The People" site.  Until the 150 signature threshold, the only way anyone will know about the petition is to be sent the direct link.   The petition has 30 days to receive 25,000 signatures.   If the petition receives 25,000 signatures within 30 days, the petition will be presented to a member of the White House Staff, and an Official Response will be posted by the White House (unless by doing so, there is a violation of law).

The Louisiana Petition was the first to be posted on November 7.  The petition is as follows:
WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO: Peacefully grant the State of Louisiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

As the founding fathers of the United States of America made clear in the Declaration of Independence in 1776:
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." 
"...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government..."

For the most part, the petitions for other States basically say the same thing, with the name of the State replaced.   And no, none of these petitions are binding, and the ONLY outcome that MIGHT result from the petitions, is that some person in the administration of  Our Great Leader, HRH Barack Hussein Obama (Peace Be Upon Him), might provide a polite response.

There are those that will say these petitions are just a waist of time--  except, they are a "message" to the White House of how unhappy people are.

And no, none of these petitions will result in a State being able to secede. To secede, Arizona, for example, would require acts of both Houses, the Governor, and likely a popular vote of the people to amend the Arizona Constitution-  and beyond that, there are the implications of Amendment 14, Section 3 of the Constitution.   Robert E. Lee was stripped of his rights under the 14th Amendment-  His rights were restored by a 2/3 vote of the Congress-- in 1976 (yes nineteen seventy six).

I do not believe that ANYONE takes these "petitions" seriously- as far as anything "happening" or a state actually being able to secede because of the petitions.  What those that are signing this petitions are really wanting is an HONEST, FRANK AND OPEN RESPONSE from the White House (not just something written by an intern who just got clearance to work in the White House yesterday).

I also think that people have found a way to vent their anger at the "government in general"-- the White House and the Congress.   People want to feel like they are heard, and these "petitions" are a good- maybe even healthy- way to express an opinion and "believe" that a White House staff member may actually look at the "petition."

Too many times, people feel that there is no way to communicate to their government on an individual level-- hence the popularity of the Town Halls.  People feel that unless you are a Lobbyist with a truck load of cash- or a person who can donate the "Federal maximum" to a campaign-- a member of the "Party Elite" (name the party-it is on both sides)-- or a member of the media- their voice, their opinions, their ideas do not matter- that no one will see or hear what they have to say.   This "viral movement" has given people a chance to feel like they can 'get the attention' of someone in power- and they are getting on Facebook and Twitter and telling their friends, and encouraging them to sign up and "click" to express their opinion.

However, deep down inside, I don't believe that more than a handful of people think that clicking on a button on a web site will have effect on the governing or laws of this nation.  IF people actually DO believe these petitions ARE going to result in secession, I believe that would actually be convinced it is time "education reform"-  starting with the curriculum for US History and US Government...

150 Signatures Required to View/25,000 in 30 Days for White House Response
(Some states have more than one petition. State names are to the petition with the highest number of signatures as of the time of this report.  No petition listed is more than 6 days old)



Friday, August 31, 2012

Eastwood on Obama


Friday, July 6, 2012

The No History Channel

This is another one of those times that I have finally gotten frustrated enough to write on a particular topic.

Why is it that there is rarely if ever actual history on "The No History Channel?"

"Ice Road Truckers," "Mountain Men," "Mud Cats" and "Swamp People" do NOT qualify as history in my book and neither do "Ancient Aliens!"

There was a time, not that long ago, when one could count on being able to turn on the TV on a Friday night, tune into "The No History Channel,"  and watch a documentary on the Revolution, or perhaps the Presidents of the United States, or even about "How the States Got Their Shapes."  To be fair, in the not to distant past, I did know some people who referred to  "The No History Channel"  as "The World War II Channel" because of the number of WWII documentaries, but at least that was History!  And also to be fair, "Pawn Stars" does discuss the History of the items that people are coming in to pawn or sell, but that seems to be the only current History show.  One would think that with a channel named,  "The No History Channel,"  one could turn to that channel at any point in time, and see something about, well, History!

I am not the only person who has noticed.  Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), after "tweeting" about the lack of history on  "The No History Channel," responded to an inquiry by the Washington Examiner on the subject:
“I love history,” Grassley wrote. “A better understanding is going to strengthen our country. It’s going to strengthen patriotism.” Plus this non-history programming represents an unfulfilled promise by the network. “When I signed up for the History Channel on my satellite service, I expected to get history,” he said. “Instead, all I see are people chopping wood or driving trucks on an icy road.”

Worse still for "The No History Channel"- Matt Parker and Trey Stone noticed.  When the change is significant enough that "South Park" makes fun of you, you have really accomplished something!


Tuesday, July 3, 2012

So, They Say I may be a Terrorist?

Apparently, according to a new report on terrorism, my Government thinks that I may be a terrorist.

Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008 from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism classifies those of us that are "suspicious of centralized government authority" and "reverent of individual liberty" as "extreme right wing" terrorists.

Suspicious of centralized government authority?  I seem to remember Thomas Jefferson as being not just suspicious but down right FRIGHTENED of a strong centralized Government.  Ben Franklin, John Adams, and George Washington were all rather reverent of individual liberty.

The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism was started with a grant from the US Government (specifically, Department of Homeland Security).  However, they seem to have forgotten about the Founders of that Government.

Or are Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin and the other Founding Fathers all terrorist too?

Happy Independence Day- Not Happy 4th

"We hold these truths to be self evident..."

Several times this morning, I have heard something that bothers me.   It is not "spin" on particular legislation.  It is not the latest theory of why a Justice voted the way he did.  It is not an interpretation of some obscure policy or Executive Order.
It was being told "Happy 4th of July"
"...that All men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

Over the years, it seems to me that almost every one of our Holidays has lost meaning.   Merry Christmas has been replaced by Happy Holidays in an effort to become more "sensitive" and "politically correct."   Thanksgiving has become less about a day of thanks and time with family and more about looking at the store ads, who is opening when for Black Friday, and what is the plan to make the most of the biggest shopping day of the year.  Memorial Day has ceased to be a day where we remember the fallen, or visit the graves of the departed, and has become "the Official Launch of Summer." 

Unfortunately, as have gone these aforementioned days, so is going Independence Day.
"...that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness..."
Of all Holiday's on the American Calendar, Independence Day is unique.   With Independence Day, no American can complain of "religious" overtones as they do with Christmas and for a few Thanksgiving.   It is not about whether one supports the Troops or necessarily remembering those who gave "the last full measure of devotion."   It is not a day where we celebrate our right to freely assemble and associate ourselves with others like us to demand concessions in the workplace (Labor Day- for those who have forgotten the original intent of that day as well).  Nor is it a day set aside for the celebration of the foundations of Christianity.   

Rather it is the day we set aside to Celebrate the foundation of those Rights that secure our Freedoms to Celebrate or Protest all other Holidays.
"...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the Consent of the Governed..."

Independence Day is just that…the day where we celebrate our Independence.   Recently, a radio show I listen to was talking about the US Citizenship test that immigrants are required to pass before they become citizens and how many natural born Citizens would fail that test.   That conversation caused me to question how many know what it is we celebrate on Independence Day. 
We are not celebrating the beginning of the Revolution- that began in 1775.   We are not celebrating the birth of our Republic as the Republic was not truly formed until the Constitution was ratified in 1789.   We are not even celebrating the founding of our Government, for it can well be argued that our first Government, under the Articles of Confederation, was a dismal failure.  Most shocking of all, we are not even celebrating the day when the Continental Congress voted to Declare Independence from the Crown (John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail after the vote to declare independence,  The second of July 1776, will be the most memorable epocha in the history of America. I am apt to believe it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival”).  New York did not approve the Declaration until July 19, 1776, and the actual signing (for most of the signers) was on August 2, 1776.

We celebrate Independence Day on July 4th because on that day the final wording was approved, and the document was sent to be printed and distributed to We the People.
“…That these united Colonies, are and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent States…

Independence Day is about Freedom.  It is about those freedoms which are established in our Constitution and excercised each and every day by each and every one of us, no matter our Political, Religious, or other affiliations.  It is about the hundreds of thousands who shed their blood and gave their lives, to fight for the very freedoms we exercise when we disagree with each other and our Government.  It is about Celebrating the right to express our selves and our differences.  And yes, it is about Celebrating the Freedom to say, “Happy 4th of July” instead of “Happy Independence Day.”

Gone are the days where Independence Day was celebrated by the whole town, gathering in the square, listening to a reading of the Declaration of Independence and firing the brass cannon in front of the court house.   But the reason for our celebrations remain, the right to be Free and Independent. 

So the next time someone wishes a “Happy 4th,” reply, “Happy Independence Day”
“…for support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Devine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes , and our sacred Honor.”


Friday, June 29, 2012

Fast and Furious: The Justice Dept Strikes Back

There are some times that I absolutely hate being right. Especially when it comes to the actions of our elected officials. This time I may not have been 100% right however, unfortunately, I am close enough.

Wednesday night I wrote about and discussed the possibility that after the contempt citation for Atty. Gen. Holder was passed by the House of Representatives, that Our Great Leader, HRH Barack I (peace be upon Him) would immediately grant Atty. Gen. Holder a pardon. This was based on the idea that the house would be passing a single contempt citation holding the Atty. Gen. in criminal contempt.

As has been reported widely the House actually passed two contempt citations against Atty. Gen. Holder, the first being a criminal citation and the second being a civil citation. My understanding is that a Presidential Pardon would have no effect on the civil citation.

So of course, when news broke this afternoon, that the Justice Department stated they were refusing to accept the House citation of contempt against Atty. Gen. Holder and stated flat-out that they would not prosecute, I was less than surprised.

And with that, Faster than you can say Furious, Holder is off the hook (criminally)-- for now.

The Justice Department may only refuse to prosecute as long as the current administration is in office. This still leaves open the possibility of a Presidential Pardon for Atty. Gen. Holder. If this November, HRH Barack I is replaced, the Romney administration can immediately take up criminal sanctions. Therefore it would not surprise me if the Presidential Pardon comes right before Obama leaves office January 20, 2013.

This is just another example of this administration's arrogance and a refusal to bow to the rule of law and the will of the people.


Thursday, June 28, 2012

First Thoughts on the Obama Care Ruling

Like most I am still trying to decide exactly how I feel about the Supreme Court's ruling this morning in "National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius" also known as the Obama Care ruling.

I've downloaded the Court's opinion and am in the process of reading and digesting it.

While on the surface it appears to some, especially those on the liberal side of the aisle, that this was a defeat for the GOP.  It may not have been.

Of primary import is the fact that nothing galvanizes conservatives like a Supreme Court ruling that does not go their way. While the ruling upheld what was previously called an individual mandate, it's important to note that the Court ruled that this is an individual tax not a mandate. It is also important to note that the Chief Justice in his opinion limited the application of the Commerce Clause.

Further the Court held that the government cannot coerce States into an enormous expansion of Medicare. If the states choose not to expand Medicare then that would force those that are above the poverty level but without insurance into government pools. This could potentially put a large burden on the Federal Government financially.

This ruling also paints the Obama administration into a corner. If they brag about their health care ruling, then they have to admit that this is the largest tax increase in the history of the United States certainly if not the history of modern civilization. They swore they would not raise taxes on the middle class or the poor and yet the Court has ruled today that they did.

I'm also looking at the dissent from Justice Kennedy. It is been reported, but not widely, that there are some very interesting "errors" in the wording of the dissent. The dissent appears to read like a majority opinion. Further the dissent is reported to refer in places to a dissent that no longer exists begging the question was this dissent actually the majority opinion at one point? Did Chief Justice Roberts originally vote to strike the entire law? If so why did the Chief Justice change his vote?

The final opinion handed down by the Court today is 193 pages long and I have certainly not finished reading it yet. Rest assured when I do I will have more here.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Fast and Furious- The Holder Contempt Vote

Tomorrow will be a huge day with the Supreme Court announcing the ruling on Obama Care and its Tax Hikes and the Holder Contempt vote for his decision to defy Congress's lawful subpoena asking for documents regarding the testimony Holder gave to Congress stating "No one knew anything about Fast and Furious"-- which he then retracted in a letter about 9 months later.

Unfortunately, based on the recent history of Our Great Leader, HRH Barak I, (Peace be upon him) in going around Congress on immigration, defying the Courts in the ruling on SB1070, and his stated goal of "not waiting" for the Congress and acting on his own, I STRONGLY SUSPECT, that shortly after the House cites Holder for Contempt, His Imperial Majesty Barack Hussein Obama, will just issue a pardon for Eric Holder, stating this was all a Republican witch hunt and then say something to the effect "well, President Ford issued a pardon for Nixon,"  Fast and Furious was the same thing as what President Bush did (Operation Wide Receiver), and Congress should sit down and shut up.  He will also go back to the "Executive Privilege" claim.

ICE Agent Jamie Zapata
On the claim of Executive Privilege- my first response to Executive Privilege is sorry-- the President has stated he knew NOTHING about  Fast and Furious- How can there be Presidential Communication about something he knew nothing about?

My second response Executive Privilege?   Sorry--  United States. v. Nixon 418 US 683 (1974) states executive privilege does not cover criminal activity.  Congress is investigating Criminal Activity and there is evidence already that "high levels" of the administration of Our Great Leader, HRH Barack I (Peace be Upon Him), knew of and were briefed on Fast and Furious- despite denials of the Administration.

On "its the same thing Bush did"-- There are MAJOR differences between Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious. Operation Wide Receiver was run by BATFE by placing RFID markers in gun stocks and following straw purchasers and arresting them.   Wide Receiver was ended when Justice found problems with the RFID markers AND Wide Receiver was conducted in COOPERATION with the Mexican government.   In contrast, Fast and Furious was run WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE of Mexico and included few if any RFID markers.  Wide Receiver covered 275 guns-- Fast and Furious, OVER 2000!

On "this is a Republican Witch Hunt"--Unfortunately, the facts and the record seem to get in the way of the denials and the cover up.  Democratic Congressman Ciro Rodriguez of Texas, a member of the Appropriations Committee, requested a $30 Million increase for the Justice Department for the parent of Fast and Furious, Operation Gunrunner.  The appropriation request was made in March of 2009- with Fast and Furious beginning less than six months later. How could a Congressman know about money needed for a Justice Department operation, unless he had been briefed on the operation and asked to appropriate the money?  Or are we saying the Congressman just made the whole thing up as some place to park $30 million?

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry
On March 12, 2010 Gary Grindler, Attorney General Holder's current Chief of Staff, attended a meeting on Fast and Furious where he wrote on his notes "multiple long rifle sales," "Fast and Furious," and notes about long gun reporting and multiple weapons sales.  He also wrote "seizures in Mexico"-- but remember, the Justice Department said they knew nothing of Fast and Furious.
The list of these events goes on and on.

Why care?  Because the reason for Fast and Furious was simple- If American's are outraged about Guns from Arizona going to Mexico, they would support a renewal of the Assault Weapon's Ban.   This was the stated goal of Eric Holder as early as 2009.

On "Ford pardoned Nixon"-- No one died from the Watergate break in.

Lest we forget, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed on December 15, 2010, by guns purchased in January 2010 through Fast and Furious, allowed to leave Phoenix, cross the border, and show up in the hands of drug traffickers. 

Lest we also forget ICE Agent Jamie Zapata was killed in February 2011, also with guns from Fast and Furious.
Lest we also forget, hundreds of others are estimated to have been killed directly from Fast and Furious.

But of course, Our Great Leader is probably right--  this is all nothing and just a distraction...