About Crucis

I'm a retired telecom engineer, life NRA member, Amateur Radio Operator and Air Force vet. I created this blog at the urging of some folks who think I have an occasional thought. A liberal friend once described me as "being just to the right of Atilla the Hun." I thanked her for that description and told her I'd do my best to maintain her expectations.

Betrayed

Boehner is acting as imperially as is Obama. Now that the election is over, why is Boehner rushing to fund Obamacare and Amnesty before the democrats who lost their seats, leave? Is Boehner so scared of the MSM that he would betray his party and constituents? Or, more likely in my opinion, is he a democrat wearing a republican label?

Regardless, he is pushing an $1Trillion omnibus bill over the objections of the conservatives in the House. Boehner is aware that McConnell will rubberstamp it in the Senate. Both are despicable members of the ruling class in DC.

Initially, Boehner was copying Pelosi’s tactic, “you have to vote for it to find out what’s in it.” Fortunately for us, some have seen it and are telling us what really is in the funding bill.

CROmnibus: The $1 Trillion Betrayal

By James Simpson, December 11, 2014

Flush from an unprecedented nationwide GOP victory in this November’s elections, House and Senate GOP leadership determined that their essential first course of action should be to snatch defeat from its jaws. They have brought forth a spending bill for 2015 that gives President Obama almost everything he wants, while disenfranchising the very voters who delivered the GOP victory.

The $1.014 trillion Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, (HR 83), has been dubbed “CROmnibus” as it is a combined continuing resolution (CR)[1] and Omnibus spending bill. It will provide full funding for 11 of the 12 annual appropriations bills to the end of FY 2015 (September 30th), and a short term continuing resolution to February 27 for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The 1,603 Page Cromnibus

Speaker Boehner has said he would ensure members a minimum of 72 hours to read legislation. Instead, following former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s innovative “pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it” policy, there will only be a tiny window of no more than 52 hours to read, analyze and vote on a trillion dollar spending bill that is 1,603 pages long. For reference, the Bible (NKJV) is only 1,200 pages. In 2010, incoming Speaker Boehner sang a different tune, “I do not believe that having 2,000-page bills on the House floor serves anyone’s best interests, not the House, not for the members and certainly not for the American people,” he said. But he also said he was going to cut spending…

Well, since this monstrosity went public at around 8:30 Tuesday night, countless eyes have been poring over its provisions to make sure we don’t have to pass it to find out what’s in it. Following are some of the worst:

1. Explanatory Statement

Right from the start, the very first provision indicates this is a new animal:

Sec. 4 Explanatory Statement (P 4.)

The explanatory statement regarding this Act, printed in the House of Representatives section of the Congressional Record on or about December 11, 2014 by the Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations of the House, shall have the same effect with respect to the allocation of funds and implementation of divisions A through K of this Act as if it were a joint explanatory statement of a committee of conference.

What it says in plain English is that the appropriations committee chairman will have authority to write in changes to any of the appropriations bills after the bill is passed. Usually this is done by a conference committee before the vote and indicates how and where they would like to see monies spent. This provision could allow the chairman to sneak in something or make other changes after the vote!

2. Executive Amnesty Is Fully Funded

The bill withholds funding for 451 separate activities, but none for executive amnesty. It provides at least $2.5 billion to handle this year’s influx of approximately 252,600 illegals. Most of the programs existed beforehand, but the legislation makes clear that increases have been provided to cover the additional costs:

Health and Human Services: $948 million for HHS’s Unaccompanied Alien Children program, $80 million more than fiscal year 2014, specifically to accommodate the “more than 57,000 children” apprehended in 2014. According to the Democrats, “It will also support legal services for children as they seek safety in the United States from extreme violence and abuse in their home countries.” This mantra is part of the Democrats’ effort to reclassify illegal aliens as “refugees,” a classification they clearly do not warrant. See p. 34 of Democrat bill summary.

Social Security: The following convoluted language actually gives illegals greater access to Social Security. By limiting denials to individuals whose actions have “formed the basis for a conviction…” implicitly everyone else is eligible, including those 4.5 million amnestied illegals:

None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall be expended or obligated by the Commissioner of Social Security, for purposes of administering Social Security benefit payments under title II of the Social Security Act, to process any claim for credit for a quarter of coverage based on work performed under a social security account number that is not the claimant’s number and the performance of such work under such number has formed the basis for a conviction of the claimant of a violation of section 208(a)(6) or (7) of the Social Security Act. (PP. 958-959).

Department of Education: “$14 million for grants to all State educational agencies within States with at least one county where 50 or more unaccompanied children have been released to sponsors since January 1, 2014…” (P. 910) Furthermore, local agencies will be given subgrants for “supplemental academic and non-academic services and supports to immigrant children and youth.”

Department of State: $932 million. Includes a provision to assist Central American countries in improving their border security. (PP. 1303 — 1306). No funds appear to be allocated specifically to this activity but the Democrats’ bill summary identifies $260 millionto respond to a surge of unaccompanied children from Central America coming to the U.S. The funds will be used to implement a prevention and response strategy focused on border security and the reintegration of migrants, as well as the causes of the migration, including programs to improve education and employment, support families, counter gangs, coyotes and drug cartels and professionalize police forces.” See p. 53.

Note that the above does not refer to U.S. border security but that of Central American countries — an absurd gesture. The three Northern Triangle states of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador facilitated this year’s migration. Their borders are much tighter than ours. If they wanted to shut them down, they could. Flush $260 million.

Providing a short-term CR for DHS was supposed to make it appear that the GOP was going to challenge Obama’s illegal executive amnesty next year, because DHS agencies are to process new applicants under the executive order. But there is no language in the DHS CR defunding amnesty. Bill writers claimed they could not insert defund language into the DHS CR because affected programs are self-funded with user fees. Yet the bill had language restricting other user-fee based programs in other agencies. And if they couldn’t defund it now, how could they next year when the CR expires? 

Between now and February 27, Obama’s executive action is fully funded, and the CR expires after the program kicks in. Meanwhile, DHS is rushing to hire new personnel to process the illegals expected to apply for the amnesty. There were so many lies and deceptions in this exercise it was almost impossible to keep up.

The GOP House leadership wants amnesty. Rep. Pete Sessions has said publicly that Republicans did not intend to repatriate the illegals who overwhelmed the border in 2014. Regarding any immigration “reform,” Sessions emphasized that the plan, “even in our wildest dream, would not be to remove any person that might be here, unless they were dangerous to this country and had committed a crime.” They structured the CROmnibus specifically to give Obama what he wants, allowing him to take the heat for it while they pretend to oppose it. Their real goal is to pass comprehensive immigration “reform” in 2015 that will look much like George W. Bush’s failed effort in 2007.

The Daily Caller’s Neil Munro quoted a GOP Hill aide: “GOP leaders want to block and complicate the anti-amnesty fight because the GOP might win the fight against Obama… That victory would derail their plans for an GOP-designed amnesty in 2015, and complicate their efforts to keep immigration out of the 2016 election…”

The Leadership’s amnesty goals defy all logic. Those illegals brought with them a dictionary of new diseases, including most likely, the Enterovirus outbreak responsible for at least 8 deaths and numerous cases of serious paralysis. Illegals commit heinous crimes in disproportionate numbers. A major reason the GOP swept elections nationwide is that most Americans — including Democrats and Hispanic Americans — do not like Obama’s open borders policies and want illegals sent home, not to remain here stealing jobs and overburdening our welfare system — already stressed to the max. Poll after poll indicates this.

On Wednesday, an amendment was proposed that would block funding for Obama’s executive amnesty. One of the amendment’s co-sponsors was Dave Brat, the Virginia legislator who threw Eric Cantor out of office. The amendment probably won’t get a fair hearing but good on him for trying.

3. Full Funding for Obamacare

Clever language says “no new funding” for Obamacare. But Obamacare was fully funded in the CR passed in September to keep the government open until December 11, including the contentious abortion funding and other issues. Now funding will be provided for the full fiscal year. This means no Obamacare repeal this year, and as it gradually sinks its tentacles into our Nation’s heart, it will be increasingly difficult to rip out. If a Republican becomes president in 2016, by then it will be so entrenched they won’t dare risk political capital to remove it. Difficult to believe, but the GOP Leadership appears to want Obamacare almost as much as the Democrats.

4. Millions More Muslim Refugees

Syrian Refugees $3.06 billion has been provided, $1.01 billion above the President’s request for Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons. (P. 52 Democrat summary). Recall that in September Simon Henshaw, deputy assistant secretary of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, announced: “Next year, you will see thousands [of Syrians] entering the US. We are committed to a large program on a par with other large [refugee resettlement] programs in the past… Our commitment is to do thousands a year over many years,” he said. There are over 1 million Syrian refugees in Turkey who have fled Syria’s civil war. “Our resettlement program from Turkey is one of our largest in the world, and it will continue to grow,” he added. Refugees from Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran will also benefit. So if you like Dearbornistan, prepare for many more towns like it.

5. Aid to Syrian Rebels

Half a Billion to Nice Terrorists “$500,000,000 … to provide assistance, including training, equipment, supplies, sustainment and stipends, to appropriately vetted elements of the Syrian opposition and other appropriately vetted Syrian groups or individuals for the following purposes: defending the Syrian people from attacks by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and securing territory controlled by the Syrian opposition; protecting the United States, its friends and allies, and the Syrian people from the threats posed by terrorists in Syria; and promoting the conditions for a negotiated settlement to end the conflict in Syria.”. Weren’t our friends in Libya “appropriately vetted” too? The bill denies use of these funds for “procurement or transfer of man portable air defense systems.” But how does DoD plan to enforce that? (PP 426-427).

6. A Bunch More Objectionable Provisions

  • EPA gets to keep on imposing “greenhouse gas” regulations that are strangling coal, while provisions reining in EPA were stripped from the bill.
  • Provisions supporting gun rights were removed.
  • $5.4 billion for Ebola efforts in Africa — more than provided to fight ISIS.
  • The bill contains phony budget gimmicks, but still violates spending caps
  • Too many others to list

Club for Growth is urging all members of Congress to vote “NO” on the Cromnibus (HR 83), as is Heritage Action for America, the political action arm of the Heritage Foundation. Conservatives may have an unlikely ally in Senator Elizabeth Warren. Warren has become the Democrat’s latest folk hero following the ignoble flameout of Wendy “Abortion Barbie” Davis. Warren has called on Democrats to deny support until one objectionable provision regarding the Dodd-Frank law is removed. The Teamsters have weighed in as well, asking members not to support Cromnibus because of changes to multi-employer pension legislation. Both sides may be willing to consider a short term 90 day CR should the CROmnibus fail to pass, but the White House understandably prefers the monster.

This bill sets horrible precedents; most importantly it blatantly dismisses overwhelming popular opposition to both executive amnesty and Obamacare. The GOP majority was elected to take action, and not the action preferred by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Obama and the Democrats, but that demanded by taxpaying voters. If allowed to stand, these two policies will rip our country apart and ensure that the GOP majority, as usual, is very short-lived.

The Hill, at the time of this writing, has released the names of 13 ‘Pub and 17 democrat House members who have said they will vote against this abomination. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas is on the list. Our own Vicky Hartzler is not. Is Vicky so enamoured with her committee assignments that she’ll sell us out and vote for this monstrosity? Calls and emails to her office have been unanswered.

To be Grubered…

http://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2014/12/09/Editorial-Opinion/Images/205733974.jpg?uuid=BU9scn_pEeSfOJWhh-TB9w

Jonathan Gruber, professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), listens during a House Oversight Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2014. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)

A new verb and noun has entered our political lexicon, “Gruber.” In the verb form, it means to frankly speak the truth in an extremely stupid manner. An example of this is when MIT Professor Jonathon Gruber admitted he thought Americans were stupid to believe the claims of the White House on Obamacare.

“He’s a gruber,” is another form of the word. In this case it describes someone who makes an utterly stupid statement that revealed a truth the speaker had intended to conceal.

Gruber had his time before Congress yesterday. He continued to dig himself deeper. Congressman Darryl Issa also had some pithy comments.

Gruber apologizes for ‘mean and insulting’ ObamaCare comments

Published December 09, 2014

MIT economist Jonathan Gruber tried to explain and even justify his controversial comments about ObamaCare during a profuse apology on Tuesday before a House committee — as Rep. Darrell Issa accused him of creating a false model as part of “a pattern of intentional misleading” to get ObamaCare passed. 

Gruber, himself a well-paid consultant during the drafting of the law, was hammered by Republicans on the House oversight committee at his first appearance on Capitol Hill since videos of his remarks surfaced.

Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, also came down hard on Marilyn Tavvener, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who he has accused in the past of allegedly inflating enrollment numbers and “cooking the books.”

Issa told Gruber: “You made a series of troubling statements that were not only an insult to the American people, but revealed a pattern of intentional misleading [of] the public about the true impact and nature of ObamaCare.” 

Gruber has come under fire for claiming ObamaCare’s authors took advantage of the “stupidity of the American voter.” 

He delivered a mea culpa of sorts in his opening remarks on Tuesday for what he called his “mean and insulting” comments, explaining some of his remarks while trying to take some of them back. After once saying a lack of transparency helped the law pass, Gruber said Tuesday he does not think it was passed in a “non-transparent fashion.” 

He also expressed regret for what he called “glib, thoughtless and sometimes downright insulting comments.” 

“I sincerely apologize for conjecturing with a tone of expertise and for doing so in such a disparaging fashion,” Gruber said. “I knew better. I know better. I’m embarrassed and I’m sorry.” 

He said he “behaved badly” but stressed that “my own inexcusable arrogance is not a flaw in the Affordable Care Act.” 

Gruber’s appearance before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Tuesday marked one of Issa’s last, high-profile shots at the health care law before he hands over his chairmanship next year. Issa, R-Calif. — who has led the committee through controversial probes of the Benghazi attacks, the IRS scandal and more — led the questioning of Gruber, an MIT economist. 

The videos of Gruber’s remarks have renewed Republican concerns over the health care law, and the way in which it was drafted and passed. Lawmakers also have obtained videos that show Gruber saying the act was written in a “very tortured way.” 

Issa and democrat Elijah Cummings questioned Gruber when he appeared before the Committee. Cummings was more concerned about the truth revealed, the democrat view of voters, than the fact that the entire concept of Obamacare was a fraud.

The column continues.

During questioning, Issa asked Gruber, “Are you stupid?” 

“I don’t think so, no,” he responded. 

Issa added: “So you’re a smart man who said some … really stupid things.” 

Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top Democrat on the committee, also criticized Gruber for giving opponents of the law a “PR gift.” 

“You wrapped it up with a bow,” Cummings said, while claiming the controversy “has nothing to do with the substance of this issue.” 

Business as usual in Obama’s Washington.

***

For my Navy and Marines friends…

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/navy/sports/m-footbl/auto_player/10613312.jpeg

Navy’s new “Don’t Tread on Me” football uniform.

At the 115th meeting of the football teams from the U.S. Military Academy and the U.S. Naval Academy on Saturday, the Midshipmen will be decked out in special uniforms featuring a stylized version of the First Navy Jack, the rattlesnake flag first flown at the bow of naval vessels during the Revolutionary War warning foes “DON’T TREAD ON ME.” Navy leads the series 58-49-7.

***

Boehner is planning on selling out conservatives with his newly announced budget. The budget contains funding for Obamacare and Amnesty and provides funding through September, 2015. Boehner fears the MSM and is giving in to the democrats. He should fear us, those who voted for the new GOP-led Congress, instead.

BUDGET DEAL: WILL THE FAT LADY SING?
Though we have seen similar deals evaporate before, an agreement has reportedly been reached on a $1.1 trillion spending bill that, if passed, would avert a partial government shutdown while delaying a fight over President Obama’s immigration actions until early 2015. Fox News: “The GOP-led House Appropriations Committee released the plan, which would keep most of the government funded through September 2015, following days of backroom negotiations. The government technically runs out of money at midnight Thursday. The narrow window raises the likelihood that lawmakers will have to pass a stopgap spending bill to buy time…. Strong opposition to the House budget plan from the Republicans’ conservative caucus could force GOP chamber leaders to rely on Democratic votes to avert a government shutdown. House Speaker John Boehner can afford to lose only 17 caucus votes before he must turn to support from House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi, D-Calif., has said her party would be willing to help but has signaled she may make some demands.” — FOX Newsletter.

Boehner is not without opposition, however.

GOPers push amendment to defund temporary amnesty - DailyCaller: “[N]ew anti-amnesty language is being pushed by Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon, South Carolina’s Rep. Mick Mulvaney and Virginia Rep. Dave Brat…The draft amendment [to the budget bill] bars various agencies from spending any money to implement Obama’s amnesty, including any fees paid by legal immigrants to immigration agencies…The amendment will be examined on Wednesday by the powerful rules committee, which sets the rules for debates.” — FOX Newsletter and The Daily Caller.

Boehner and McConnell are working to tighten their control of the House and the Senate. Representative Darryl Issa is being shuffled off to an “Intellecutal Property” committee and Senator Jeff Session is being booted off his Budget Committee.

Told ya so

During the runup to the general election last month, I wrote a number of blog post concerning the Kansas Senatorial race. Specifically, I took Greg Orman to task for being a democrat masquerading as an ‘independent.’ I said that he was a dem and would always be a dem. Orman never contradicted me, nor anyone else. In fact, he steadily refused to answer any questions on how he would vote as Senator or even which party he would join, or caucus, if elected.

I said he was a democrat and I was right. My opinion has been vindicated.

Yes, Dems did funnel money to ‘independent’ in Kansas Senate race

By Byron York | December 8, 2014 | 6:38 pm

Anyone who followed this year’s Senate race in Kansas — the one longtime GOP incumbent Pat Roberts appeared to be losing to Greg Orman, the businessman running as an independent — knows Orman and his supporters vigorously denied Roberts’ allegation that Orman was really a Democrat running to further the Democratic agenda.

“By word, by deed, by campaign contribution, this man is a liberal Democrat,” Roberts said of Orman during a debate in October. “A vote for Greg Orman is a vote to extend the Barack Obama/Harry Reid agenda.”

Not true, Orman answered. “The senator can say that over and over again, but it doesn’t make it so.”

What voters did not know was at that very moment, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid’s political action committee, the Senate Majority PAC, was preparing to pour more than a million dollars into the pro-Orman effort in Kansas. Reid was just waiting to make sure the donations came so late in the campaign that the public wouldn’t find out about them until after the election.

Note that a number of Kansas ‘moderates’, what real ‘Pubs call RINOs, supported Orman against Roberts.

***

I suppose this section of today’s blog could be titled, “Rampant Lawlessness.” Some information is coming to light about Obama’s Amnesty Executive Orders…there aren’t any, at least, not yet. Senator Jeff Sessions has been dogging Obama and discovered this bit of information.

Executive Amnesty Order? What Order?

So much is happening on the immigration front that it is hard to keep up, but this story is worth at least a mention: it turns out that President Obama hasn’t issued an executive amnesty order after all:

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a leading opponent of President Obama’s move to provide amnesty for up to 5 million illegal immigrants, expressed astonishment Monday and ridiculed the administration for not carrying out the action through an executive order.

In remarks made at the Washington office of the government-watchdog group Judicial Watch, Sessions said: “I guess they just whispered in the ear of (DHS Director) Jeh Johnson over at Homeland Security, ‘Just put out a memo. That way we don’t have to enforce the law.’”

The news that Obama had not signed an executive order to carry out the policy he announced to the nation in a televised address Nov. 20 was broken by WND Senior Staff Writer Jerome Corsi last week.

As a result of the president’s use of a memo instead of an official order, the senator observed: “We don’t even have a really significant, direct, legal direction that we can ascertain, precisely what the president is doing. It’s a stunning event in my view.”

It is indeed. The explanation, I assume, is that Obama thinks it will be harder to mount a legal challenge to his unconstitutional usurpation if there is no actual order that defines what he has done. There is no bottom to the depth of the Obama administration’s corruption.

Have we been lied to, again, by Obama, or is he taking his lawlessness to greater heights? That is a good question that I have no answer. Of course with this tactic it is DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson who is hanging in the breeze, not Obama.

Yawwwwn, Part II

Did it again today…overslept, that is. This time I think I’m caught up. I think.

The unfortunate part of oversleeping is that my To-Do list hasn’t shrunk. I’ve a number of tasks to do and with oversleeping, my allotted time for a post is gone.

So this will be quick.

News item: Our newly elected democrat Speaker of the US House is using the age-old tactic of his predecessor, Nancy Pelosi. He’s pushing a Continuing Resolution that will fully fund Obama’s illegal Alien Amnesty Executive Order and fully fund Obamacare. John Boehner (D-OH), is counting on Nancy Pelosi’s aid and her democrat House members to override the objections of the ‘Pub conservatives in the House.

Conservatives complain House GOP leaders ramming through spending bill

By Scott Wong12/06/14 06:00 AM EST

House conservatives are griping that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is putting the squeeze on them by rushing through a $1 trillion spending bill in Congress’s last week in session.

Appropriators are expected to roll out the legislation early next week, giving critics scant time to figure out what’s inside before they cast their votes by the end of the week. The government would shut down on Dec. 12 without a new funding bill.

“Here we are doing the appropriations bill the last couple days” before a government shutdown, conservative Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) said in an interview this week. “That’s not to squeeze Harry Reid. That’s to squeeze us.”

Boehner critics say there’s no reason the Speaker couldn’t have brought the spending package to the floor this past week, giving the House more time to consider it.

But doing so would also give more time for the right to build a case against it.

“They don’t want you to read it, that’s why! You think they want you to analyze all the mischievous items in there?” Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.)  told The Hill.

Asked if the timing of the plan was aimed at jamming the Senate or House conservatives, Jones replied: “I think its aimed at screwing over the American people. You can quote me on that.”

Pushing a government funding bill through Congress at the 11th hour is nothing new.

What’s striking this time, however, is that Boehner and outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) are mostly in agreement on how to do it.

And the Speaker, fresh off a big midterm victory, seems in no mood to kowtow to conservatives who’ve been agitating for a lame-duck spending fight to stop President Obama’s executive action on immigration.

House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) said the legislation will be unveiled on Monday, setting up a likely House vote on Wednesday — just one day before money runs out for the government.

Boehner and Rogers blame the Senate for the bill’s timing.

The House passed seven of the 12 appropriations bills this Congress, while eleven passed out of committee. The Senate passed zero.

“And as a result, it makes it that much more difficult to come to an agreement with the Senate on an omnibus appropriations package,” Boehner told reporters on Thursday.

Rogers also pointed the finger at the upper chamber and said House negotiators were doing “the best we can.”

“Look, we were given less than a month to put an omnibus bill together for the entire government for the entire year — it’s a trillion plus dollars with thousands of items,” Rogers said. “And since the Senate did not pass any of the appropriations bills, it forced us to put together an omnibus.”

While work on the package will continue this weekend, the general framework is known.

Most of the government will be funded in an 11-bill omnibus running through the end of the fiscal year in September. The Homeland Security Department would be kept on a shorter leash, funded with a short-term continuing resolution that would keep money flowing only until February. The combination is being called the “cromnibus.”

The short-term funding for Homeland Security is intended to push the fight over Obama’s immigration actions into next year, when Republicans will control both chambers of Congress.

Boehner signaled it’s unlikely he’ll make any significant changes to the package’s framework, ignoring demands by immigration hard-liners to include language to de-fund the implementation of Obama’s immigration actions, which could give legal status to up to five million undocumented workers.

GOP leaders appear to have much of their conference behind them, though many conservatives are expected to vote no.

“I think the fix is in,” Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) told The Hill.

He wanted GOP leaders to bring the spending package to the floor this past week with stronger immigration language. That way, the House would have had time to respond to any changes the Senate made to the legislation.

Boehner instead called a vote Thursday on a messaging bill that rebukes Obama’s immigration move, a measure the Senate will not take up.

“I’ve implored them. I’ve begged them. I’ve spoken in various meetings so that we wouldn’t be up against some crisis. … This is not the way it’s supposed to be done,” Salmon said.

Some conservatives acknowledge that they’ll have no chance of blocking the cromnibus if House Democrats decide to get on board. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) warned Republicans Friday not to bog down the package with “destructive” riders, including proposals to roll back environmental regulations or halt a new law that legalizes marijuana in D.C.

But sources in both parties said they expect a good number of Democrats to cross the aisle and vote for the spending plan in the end. Especially since it’s based on months of work from House and Senate appropriators from both parties.  

“I believe we need to fund the government through Sept. 30. If not, it will be very chaotic next year,” said retiring Rep. Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.), a House appropriator who is leaning toward voting for the plan. “An omnibus bill is a lot better than a CR or continuing resolution. So this is the best of two worlds.”

What are we seeing from Washington? Both the House and the Senate are still controlled by democrats.

Conservatives across the country are calling their US Representatives and Senators, asking, begging, pleading, demanding they vote against this rush to fund Obama’s unconstitutional acts. How will you vote, Representative Vicky Hartzler? Will you oppose this democrat tactic or will you, once again, act like an establishment rubber stamp?

Regardless how you vote, Vicky, it will be remembered come 2016.

Yaaawn…

As you can see by the timestamp of this post, it’s a bit later than usual. I normally start research for my daily blog at 9am, start writing around 10am and hit the ‘publish’ button around 11-11:30am.

That didn’t happen today. I overslept.

Like many who are older, I have sleeping problems. Primarily, my knee starts hurting and will wake me up. I shift position and usually can drift off again. My usual mode of sleep is in 30 to 90 minutes increments.

Occasionally, like last night, I have difficulty just getting to sleep. That, by itself, is not a problem because once I do get to sleep, I’m good for the rest of the night.

Last night both conditions arose. I couldn’t get to sleep and when I did, the weather front and all night rain combined to keep me awake.

Well, I didn’t have much to write about today with its repetitive news cycle. CNN continues to lie about the events in Ferguson and New York and the great liberal unwashed are lapping it up.

Like Ferguson, when the coroner’s report was released on Garner, the cause of death was completely different from the version reported by the MSM. It indicated that he wasn’t choked, contrary to the reports of CNN and the MSM who continues to spew the lie that he was. Why? Perhaps to ferment discord…and ratings. Perhaps, if we had a real justice system, the producers of the MSM news programs would be charged with inciting riots and civil unrest.

Won’t happen, I know.

Post-Ferguson Era

According to some news outlets, we are now in a ‘Post-Ferguson Era.’ The Eric Garner case in New York has pushed Ferguson from the national headlines.

Like you, I haven’t a clue what ‘Post-Ferguson Era’ means. Regardless, Ferguson continues to be highlighted in Missouri’s news—Nixon is still running from it, Attorney General Chris Koster was successful is keeping out of the limelight and is using Ferguson for his advantage for 2016. Democrat legislators from St Louis are proposing new bills that would cripple law enforcement if/when they encounter violent thugs, and the Kansas City ‘Red’ Star has a surprisingly balanced editorial!

The millennium has come! The KC Star has an editorial contrary to the liberal party line!

Let’s get back to the headlines.

http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2014/11/24/fergusonjpeg-06e2e_c0-326-3000-2074_s561x327.jpg?e6f3f10d7e7b7f874d41be4a69b48182d5e91f7e

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon

Democrat Governor Jay Nixon, during a visit to the Missouri bootheel was asked about his orders for the National Guard. Nixon responded:

“Our plan was to have, and we did have, over 700 guardsmen out that night, guarding locations all throughout the region. We wanted to have the local police — St. Louis County and St. Louis City — and others, to patrol on the front lines who had been engaging directly with many of those folks throughout the summer. We thought that was better than bringing in the National Guard in full military garb straight onto those streets. Obviously Monday night, we were somewhat surprised by the … riots, not helped by the number of folks trying to whip that up at various times. As the night went on, we did bring in additional guardsmen into the police department there to back up the folks who were there, and ended up getting out their response teams in the area.”

Nixon continued:

“Really, the choice that night was whether we’re going to lose lives or lose property. When you have that many hundreds of people shooting guns and running throughout the area and looting, I think it was important to preserve life, and I think all of the unified commanders, as well as the guard’s folks, did a great job of that. We didn’t have a single shot fired by a single law enforcement officer, and we had hundreds of shots fired out. We didn’t have a single shot fired by a national guardsman, and we had none of them significantly injured. So while it was a difficult thing to watch, and challenging, in many ways, I think that when we look back at this, having those law enforcement officers out first, having the guard there behind them, was in fact the best way to do it.” — Southeast Missourian.

While Nixon was on his road-trip, Chris Koster was establishing his position for a future run for Governor. Koster is hoping to gain some kudos over Missouri’s ‘Deadly Force’ statute that Koster claims is contrary a federal court decision.

Missouri’s attorney general called Tuesday night for a change in state law to make it tougher for law enforcement officers to justify the use of deadly force, a week and a half after a grand jury declined to indict former Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of unarmed teenager Michael Brown.

NBC News reported last week that one of the factors that would have complicated any prosecution of Wilson was a Missouri statute that gives peace officers greater leeway in using deadly force than is allowed in many other states. In a statement to MSNBC’s “The Last Word,” Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster said Wednesday night that state lawmakers should bring the statute into line with an important Supreme Court ruling.

“Among the problems that Ferguson has brought to light is the need to update Missouri’s use of deadly force statute,” Koster said. “This statute is inconsistent with the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Tennessee v. Garner. Consequently, it is important this statute is amended by the Missouri legislature to incorporate the Garner decision and to avoid confusion within the criminal justice system.”

The 1985 Garner decision is one of two Supreme Court rulings — the other is from 1989 — addressing when a law enforcement officer can justifiably use deadly force.

The 1985 decision says it’s justifiable only if the officer has probable cause to believe a fleeing suspect is a violent felon and poses a significant threat to the officer or the public — requiring the existence of a threat before an officer can use deadly force. The 1989 decision — Graham v. Connor — found that an officer’s justification for use of deadly force must be assessed in the context of a “reasonable” officer’s state of mind under the specific circumstances — one of which can, but doesn’t necessarily have to be, a threat to the officer or the public.

In an interview last week with NBC News, Roger Goldman, Callis Family Professor of Law emeritus at St. Louis University Law School, said that under the current statute, “if I’m representing the police officer, I’m arguing that Missouri law allows an officer to use deadly force to stop a fleeing felon even if he is not a danger to the public or fellow officers.”

I am not a lawyer so I’ll leave a review of Koster’s comments to those who are. However, I’d like to point out a flaw in Professor Roger Goldman’s logic—Michael Brown was NOT a fleeing felon. He was an aggressive thug who initiated the attack on Darren Wilson and was attacking Wilson when he was shot. If Brown had run, he probably would still be alive today. Assuming, of course, that he wasn’t shot by some storekeeper who had a weapon and was determined not to be a victim of thuggery.

Some residual protesters are walking to Jeff City to make their demands known to a legislature that is not in session and to a Governor who is out of town. According to some reports, the protesters have met some contrary opinions along the way.

More than halfway through their journey to the Capital City, marchers on a 120-mile journey from Ferguson were met with opposition Wednesday as they journeyed through Mid-Missouri.

Andrew McFadden Ketchum came from Denver to join the marchers on a whim and said it has become an “amazing experience.”

“There’s a lot of love here,” he said. “I was surprised at what I saw in Rosebud. It was so quiet when we went in and then bang, the noise started.”

Ketchum posted a video to YouTube, which shows the group walking through the small Gasconade County town. Residents are seen standing along the highway quietly until the group approaches the center of town where some members of the crowd begin yelling.

Someone can be heard shouting, “No peace, no welfare checks!”

“All this for a thug and a thief,” shouts another resident in an apparent reference to Michael Brown.

Although the legislature is out of session, December is when bills are pre-filed for the upcoming session. Two St Louis legislators want to constrain police when encountering suspects on the street.

Vet Ferguson bills with care in Missouri legislature

12/03/2014 4:11 PM

Missouri lawmakers have responded to the police shooting of teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson with a host of bills on matters such as police use of deadly force and overuse of traffic tickets by some cities.

The spate of legislation filed in advance of the 2015 session’s Jan. 7 start could lead to thoughtful discussions. But it is important that the General Assembly vet the bills carefully.

Two Democratic senators from the St. Louis area, Maria Chappelle-Nadal and Jamilah Nasheed, have filed legislation aimed at limiting the circumstances under which a police officer can use deadly force. Nasheed’s bill would require officers to use other options first, such as a taser, and issue a warning before firing a shot. It also would cause officers to be suspended without pay pending an investigation if they fired at a suspect more than 20 feet away.

Lawmakers and the public need to hear from police about these proposals. Good police departments heed to standards and best practices developed and constantly re-evaluated by law enforcement professionals. State legislators should tap that expertise before setting their own rules.

The same goes for bills that call for the appointment of a special prosecutor in all officer-involved shootings. Lawmakers need to hear from prosecutors about the wisdom of that idea.

Maria Chappelle-Nadal and Jamilah Nasheed are Missouri’s leading gun control advocates. They have opposed every bill in the legislature that supports gun owners and bills that enhance Missourian’s 2nd Amendment rights. Perhaps the photo below from the Riverfront Times blog is indicative of the separation between them and the rest of Missouri.

Photo from the Riverfront Times.

The photo above is the supposed original version according to the Riverfront Times. When it was shared on the internet, it was trimmed to exclude to two outer figures leaving only the center sign and protester. The Riverfront Times now claims that the verbiage of the sign was altered from “leaves home” to “robs a store.” I’ve examined the photo closely and the digital information with it and I can see no evidence that it has been altered. But I make no claims to be an expert on digital photos. Regardless of the validity, there is a truth in the message as it appears above—a truth that is being ignored because it doesn’t support an protester’s and the St Louis liberal agenda.

Perhaps the Riverfront Times and the protesters are upset that the photo reveals a truth behind the lootings and burnings in Ferguson. It would seem the two legislators from St Louis prefer the logic of the photos above as a basis for law than a law that protects businesses from thugs and thieves.

No Post…busy

I’ve errands to do and the news cycle is repetitive, nothing new. Hope y’all have a great day.