Category Archives: The Ruling Class

Ramblings

Posted on by

When Mrs. Crucis and I took our trek last month, we expected to see a cross-section of America. We saw some of the best of our nation and some of the worse.

We love the mountains and the deserts of the South West. One of our favorite areas is the Four-Corners area where Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico meet. It is also the location of the Navajo Nation, a third world nation, poverty stricken, and dependent on federal welfare, a reservation where the only new buildings are those built or underwritten by the feds. All else is ramshackled and dilapidated and most of the housing is either rusting mobile homes or decaying federally funded public housing.

The Navajoes have a rich culture. One that appears to be incompatible with that of the rest of the country. It seems to affect the Navajoes more than the other tribal areas we traveled through in Utah, Idaho and Montana. The Blackfoot reserivation in Montana was clean, neat and well-kept. They have the same problems with drugs and alcoholism as do many reservations, but they also have a viable community. The Blackfoot Reservation was remarkedly different from the Navajo Reservation.

The Navajoes culture is dying. When we traveled through Shiprock, NM, we stopped at a (federally underwritten) strip-mall. There was a gift shop that Mrs. Crucis wanted to visit and we needed to stock up on edibles. We usually fixed sandwiches for lunch when traveling.

Next to near the entrance of the grocery was a bulletin board. While waiting for Mrs. Crucis, I scanned the notices, sale items, people looking for rides to one destination or another, handyman flyers looking for work…and a notice from the Navajo Tribal Government looking for people to teach the Navajo language to the younger members of the tribe.

That saddened me. The loss of the language and its culture wasn’t due to assimilation, it was due to purposeful neglect. The feds refuse to allow Navajo to be spoken in schools. The younger generation, those who still remain, don’t speak it in their day-to-day life. The older generation is dying off. The language is headed for extinction.

Contrast the economy of the Navajo reservation with that of Utah, Idaho, Montana and to a lesser extent, New Mexico. In Utah, the homes were well kept and maintained. Nearly every yard had a well-kept, neatly mowed and trimmed lawn. Due to the climate, many were small, some only 15’x15′. But the care and effort to maintain the home was well evident. Mrs. Crucis loves Utah, it is one of her favorite states.

I was struck with Darby, Montana. Montana has no state sales tax; no sales tax at all. On the other hand, there appeared to be a casino around every corner with a pawn shop within walking distance. We saw more casinos and pawn shops in Montana than in any other state in our travels.

What struck me about Darby was seeing three gun-shops in a three-block stretch of town. That’s my kind of town.

On the political scene, to differences are just as obvious. The moral and political corruption of the establishment parties in Washington are becoming incompatible to the conservative core outside of the DC beltway. It matters not if that establishment is Dem or ‘Pub. Both are rotten.

The ‘Pub establishment fears Trump, Cruz, Walker and the other conservative candidates more than they do Hillary, Sanders, O’Malley and Biden. The ‘pub establishment believes they can work with the dems. We already see that in the actions of McConnell and Boehner.

Sadly, the infection is present at the state and local levels as well. The Republican Party is dying. There may be a period of remission if Cruz, or Walker, or one of the conservative insurgents win the nomination and the Presidency. But the sickness is still present in DC.

A conservative President would have to fight both the dems and the ‘pubs in Congress. I doubt that he could prevail unless he chooses to use some of the same tactics as has Obama. Using Executive Orders to bypass Congress, for instance.

Ted Cruz has declared that if he wins the nomination and the Presidency, one of his first acts would be to rescind every illegal Executive Order issued by Obama. I think he should go further and rescind all EOs issued by Obama and some from G. W. Bush, too. That act alone would reverse a corruptive trend in government started by Teddy Roosevelt.

Before TR, a President issued an Executive Order rarely. Those EOs, were issued when Congressional approval wasn’t available, when action was needed immediately. Later, the EO would be presented to Congress for approval. Some were approved, some were disapproved and the EO was rescinded.

It is time for the use of Executive Orders to end. It is time for the political establishment of both parties to end as well.

Is it time of a new party, a third party to give conservatives a choice? I’m unsure. The ‘Pubs have one last chance to survive, to end the rule of the Establishment and return government to the people instead of the Washington political elite.

I’m supporting Ted Cruz. Nearly everyone I meet and talk with does, too. Some like Trump because he says what they believe. I can understand that. I agree with much than Trump says as well but I don’t believe Trump would be a good president. He is as corrupted by power as is the Establishments in Washington.

When we were traveling through New Mexico, the news of the EPA spill in Colorado that polluted the Animas River was announced. The prevailing opinion of the region’s residents is that the EPA purposely broke the dam that caused the spill.

It was ironic that when John McCain visited the Navajo Nation a few days later, he was run off by the President of the Navajoes. The dependent children of Washington rebelled against one of the leading members of the Washington Establishment and ran him out of town.

It was a good day, when I heard that.

Facebook

When the GOP tries to…

Posted on by

…out liberal the democrats, can any good come from it?

Many insiders believe SCOTUS is going to declare Obamacare subsidies to be unconstitutional. ‘Pubbies everywhere should celebrate! Let Obamacare implode and when the screams get the loudest push through a total repeal and allow insurance companies to provide healthcare insurance like they did before Obamacare. Those companies who dropped out of the healthcare market will return when there’s money to be made once again. The greatest healthcare system in the world, available to everyone regardless of their ability to pay, will return, albeit over a couple of years.

What is the GOP establishment doing? They are planning to pass legislation to reinstate subsidies!

House Republicans craft Obamacare subsidies alternative ahead of Supreme Court ruling

By Tom Howell Jr. – The Washington Times – Wednesday, June 17, 2015
http://twt-thumbs.washtimes.com/media/image/2015/06/17/Boustany_s878x585.jpg?9739c089d09019457eff90957353d2bf131e7da7

“I think it’s a good plan. It’s a good start,” Rep. Charles W. Boustany Jr., Louisiana Republican, said after huddling with the GOP caucus behind closed doors. (Associated Press)

House Republicans settled on the outlines of a plan Wednesday to wean the country off of Obamacare’s subsidies in anticipation of a Supreme Court ruling this month that could throw the massive health program into chaos.

Described as a “work in progress,” the plan would continue to pay full subsidies under the Affordable Care Act to all beneficiaries regardless of where they live, but starting next year states could begin to opt out of Obamacare, taking the money as a block grant to help their residents obtain insurance however local officials see fit. (Read the entire column here.)

Conservative groups, like the Heritage Foundation, are agast!

Don’t Fix Obamacare

Mike Needham / /

Many Republicans are watching ongoing developments in the King v. Burwell Obamacare case with trepidation. In the abstract, most recognize the opportunity such a case represents to roll back Obamacare and force a debate about real, pro-market insurance reform.

But as the decision looms, many now have second thoughts, convinced that the country will blame them for disruption in the ruling’s wake and that eventually, the only politically tolerable option will be to cave and restore the Obamacare subsidies eliminated by the Supreme Court.

That assumption is wrong, and Republicans will do more harm than good for their cause if they act on it.

According to a new poll conducted by the American Perceptions Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, the fear that Republicans, not Democrats, will take the blame for any disruption caused by the ruling appears to be unfounded. Only 36 percent of Americans will blame congressional Republicans, with 58 percent of the blame split between President Obama and congressional Democrats.

Also wrong is the presumption that most Americans will look past their general opposition to Obamacare and push for Congress to extend the subsidies to prevent disruption. A staggering supermajority—69 percent—told pollsters they agreed that “Passing new legislation to continue the Obamacare subsidies doesn’t fix the problem – it just prolongs it.”

Moreover, restoring the subsidies appears likely to shift more rather than less blame to Republicans for the situation. According to Heritage’s survey, 67 percent of Americans agree that if Republicans extend the law’s subsidies for the short term, “they will bear the blame when the time comes to take those subsidies away.” (more here.)

By reinstating the subsidies, the GOP will then own every piece of Obamacare. It was the GOP who kept it in force. It was the GOP who provided funding for Obamacare in last year’s Cromnibus bill instead of allowing Obamacare to starve for funds. Now if they provide funding for subsidies, Obamacare will not be a democrat albatross, it will a republican one—exactly what the GOP establishment claims to fear!

Last week the House voted to kill, with a number of democrats, the TPA portion of Obama’s trade bill. Obama’s bill was split into two parts, TPA (Trade Promotion Authority) the fast-track trade authority, and the TPP (TransPacific Pact).

The TPP was filled with kickbacks, union payoffs and a multitude of items unrelated to trade. TPA, on the other hand, gave Obama a rubber stamp to do whatever he wanted to do. Congress would NOT be able to make any amendments to future trade bills, just an Up/Down vote. With the well-demonstrated lack of backbone among the GOP leadership in both Houses of Congress, any trade bill brought before them would likely be approved.

When you see the GOP supporting Obama against the democrats, you know something is very, very wrong in the GOP DC establishment. Now, McConnell and Boehner are about to try again.

GOP leaders vow to resurrect Obama trade deal

By Dave Boyer and Stephen Dinan – The Washington Times – Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Republican leaders will try to resurrect the trade deal Democrats sank less than a week ago, planning a revote Thursday and insisting they will corral enough votes to approve fast-track negotiating powers that President Obama needs to complete a legacy-building Pacific Rim agreement.

Mr. Obama met Wednesday afternoon with Democratic lawmakers who support free trade to make sure they will vote for the plan, and House Republican leaders began the process of forcing a revote on powers known as Trade Promotion Authority, which is favored in their party, and Trade Adjustment Assistance, which is generally a Democratic priority.

Democrats last week voted against Trade Adjustment Assistance as a way of poisoning the package, so Republican leaders have decided to split the bill and pass Trade Promotion Authority first, then leave it to Mr. Obama to rally enough Democrats to pass Trade Adjustment Assistance.

“We are committed to ensuring both TPA and TAA get votes in the House and Senate and are sent to the president for signature,” said a joint statement by House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, rejecting claims that the issue was dead.

The republican party appears to have made an alliance with democrats and the GOP establishment is acting in concert with democrats to fulfill democrat agendas and policies. That begs the question, “Are there two political parties in Washington or only one?” More and more it appears to be just one.

Being a Republican (note the capital R) is more than just winning elections, it is a political philosophy. It does no one any good to win elections if the result is the same as if democrats had won.

I used to think a 3rd party would allow democrats to control Congress for at least two election cycles before being effective and in that time, democrats could gut our liberties and the Constitution blocking any 3rd party from power. Watching the actions of McConnell, Ryan, Boehner, et. al., I’m beginning to believe that has already happened.

Facebook

Bullet Points

Posted on by

There are a number of items in the news today. The top story is the rebellion in the GOP House ranks against John Boehner. The MSM, including FOX, poo-poos the idea that Boehner can be turned out. Other commentators, however, believe there is a significant chance to oust Boehner.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax/files/eb/eb93f57b-c271-41ee-9ca0-a84839e85d7d.jpg

Reps, Ted Yoho, R-Fla., Louie Gohmert, R-Texas., and House Speaker John Boehner. (Kevin Dietsch/UPI/Landov; Alan Youngblood/Ocala Starbanner/landov; Shawn-Thew/epa/landov)

Two GOP candidates have stepped forward to run against Boehner. The strongest is Louis Gohmert (R-TX). But there is a second candidate, too, Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL). Gohmert is a strong conservative track-record. I don’t know much about Yoho other than he’s running against Boehner.

In the end, it matters not, who of these candidates receives the votes. The important thrust is that at least twenty-nine GOP Representatives—DON’T VOTE FOR BOEHNER! If Boehner loses the first vote, then the GOP can consolidate with another candidate, Gohmert I would hope, to choose another Speaker and put Boehner out on the curb.

I’ve already heard some RINOs say that a vote against Boehner is a vote for Pelosi. Not true, it’s another lie by the GOP establishment. The only way a ‘Pub can vote for Pelosi is to actually vote for her, or, to vote, “Present,” to reduce the number of votes cast. Boehner needs the majority of the votes, not just the highest number of votes. If he doesn’t get a majority, he loses.

A number of Representatives have already announced they won’t vote for Boehner. Many more have quietly let it be known they probably won’t. There are fifty new representative coming to Congress. Many of them ran on a ticket of opposing John Boehner. At first look, getting twenty-nine ‘Pubs to vote against John Boehner seemed impossible. When you look more closely, that impossibility fades.

A number of talk show hosts, Glenn Beck for one, are telling their audience to call the Capitol switchboard,1-877-762-8762, to speak to their representatives and to tell them to not vote for Boehner. The switchboard is being flooded and was shutdown once already this morning.

Go make that call!

***

Sarah Palin is back in the news against. Not for something she did but for something her son did. He used the family dog as a foot-stool.

PETA is outraged. Ho-hum.

The real thing that has the left outraged is not the photo of her son stepping on the family dog (it was a big dog. PETA looked the other way when Ellen Degenerate posted one like it,) but her 2014 award of being the top American Achiever.

The left rejects achievement. It is their antithesis. Achieving, in their minds, means someone loses, therefore achievement must be limited to be ‘fair.’

American Achiever of 2014: Sarah Palin

By M. Joseph Sheppard, December 27, 2014

It would be the height of churlishness for even the most inveterate leftist to deny the import of someone who made Time magazine’s “100 Most Influential People” list, and then the Smithsonian Institution‘s “100 Most Significant Americans Of All Time” list.  Both affirmations were earned by former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

To then accept Governor Palin as “American Achiever of the Year 2014” would be for most, if not all on the left (and to be fair, many in the GOP) no doubt a bridge too far.  However, such partisanship should not stand in the way of a general acknowledgement of what was a remarkable year for Palin.

Palin achieved what such luminaries as President Obama did not: a place in the Smithsonian’s prestigious “Most Significant” list.  After being written off by many in the media, and especially the left, as “irrelevant” and predicted by MSNBC’s Krystal Ball as “not going to have an effect on the [2014] midterms,” Palin’s record of success of her endorsed candidates was nothing short of phenomenal. (The article continues on the American Thinker website.)

Sarah Palin is never far from conservative’s minds. She is the epitome of conservatism. Maligned and slandered by the left, she continues on, unrepentant, and speaks her mind. The left hates her with a passion because she is the standard the left hates and cannot beat.

The Many Memes of Sarah Palin

By M. Joseph Sheppard, January 5, 2015

Defining a politician’s personality, whether positively to build them up, or negatively to tear them down, is a basic rule of politics. Themes can define an image e.g. “Roosevelt’s categorization of Al Smith as “The Happy Warrior” or Democrat folklore depicting William Jennings Bryan as “the Great Commoner” are two classic positive examples. On the negative side, Mitt Romney never recovered from being defined as “Mr. 1 percent”, nor did John Kerry from being “Mr. Flip Flop.”

Once a politician is defined (fairly or unfairly doesn’t enter into the picture) as say, Rick Perry was as a forgetful ditherer, it becomes extremely difficult to shake off the perception — even though in his case it was based on a single, admittedly important, debate moment. Such is the power of media defining that an entire career as a successful governor of a major state can have that whole positive history shrouded in the fog of a slip of the tongue or a moments’ forgetfulness.

This eternal and unshakable truism seems to have one, and perhaps the only one exception to the rule, and that is Governor Palin. Once the media got over their initial shock at her 2008 convention address, the entire subsequent campaign was involved in a liberal media/blog attempt to stick a permanent, negative label on her. That a flow of constant new Palin memes continues to this day shows that for all their efforts nothing has stuck irrevocably and fatally detrimentally.

Before Palin’s convention address there was some flailing about by a confused media and a number of memes were tried out. “Palin’s a bad parent neglecting her children, especially the special needs one, for a campaign”. That such nonsense has never been used against a man, and the anger of many women at such a ridiculous concept put paid to that quickly. Next was “Palin’s a hypocrite because her daughter is pregnant” which quickly died after Palin describe her family as “having the same ups and downs as all families” which, rightly received an understanding and warm reception. There was even a despicable campaign from the likes of Daily Kos and the even wilder “progressive” fringes, which suggested Trig might not even be Sarah’s child.

After the Gibson interview the left crowed “Palin doesn’t even know what the Bush doctrine is”. As it turned out neither did 90% of the population either — it being unlikely that if the question was put to those crowing they could have answered it, so that quickly died the death. What did have legs, and is only 6 years later fading from the arsenal of even the lowest information voters, was the “I can see Russia from my house” statement. This line, of course, was not even spoken by Palin but had a life of its own, which is a sad reflection on some segments of the population.

No matter the lies, no matter the numerous slanders, no matter the accusations, Sarah Palin continues on, a stalwart pillar of American Conservatism.

Twenty-Fifteen is starting off with a bang!

Facebook

A whiff of rebellion

Posted on by

I started the day off thinking it was Saturday. On occasion, retirees like myself have difficulty remembering what day it is. Why? Because more often than not, one day seems more like another. That is one reason why I’ve tried to maintain the same habits I had when I was working. I’m usually successful. Today, I was not.

***

John Boehner - D-OH

John Boehner – D-OH

Next week on January 6, 2015, the House will vote for the Speaker of the House publicly on the House floor. John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi are running. Conventional thought says Boehner is a shoo-in.

Perhaps, not.

The rushed passage of the CRomnibus funding bill upset…no, that is too mild a word, enraged GOP voters from one end of the country to another. It was viewed as a betrayal by Boehner and the GOP establishment leadership by preventing the GOP from using the power of the purse to control Obama, amnesty, et. a., and it was!

Next week, the House will choose a new Speaker. The winner will have to acquire a majority, not a plurality,  of the votes. There are 435 members in the US House of Representatives. That means, if all vote, the winner for Speaker must have 218 votes to be Speaker. If any Representative refuses to vote or votes, “present!”, the number of votes needed to win decreases.

Remember, it is not the candidate who gets the most votes that wins the Speakership, it is the one who receives the majority of the votes cast. There is a difference, a big difference in those two words: majority vs. plurality.

Eric Erickson is the guest host for Rush Limbaugh today. He reminded us that all it takes to remove Boehner as Speaker is for 29 ‘Pubs to vote for someone else—not Pelosi, not to not vote, just vote for ANY other ‘Pub and Boehner loses. They don’t even have to vote for the same ‘Pub, each could vote for a different Representative and if Boehner doesn’t get the majority of the votes cast, he’s out.

By various counts, the rebels need only four to six ‘Pub votes to block Boehner next week. Many other think they have a real chance of doing just that.

The Last Resort: Replace John Boehner

By Lester Jackson, January 2, 2015

Crominbus was the last straw. Conservatives are now absolutely livid at the RINO Establishment. Rarely, if ever, has such an unmistakable voter mandate been so brazenly nullified before the newly elected could even take office. Calls escalate to “end” the Republican Party because conservatives cannot change it. By contrast, Rush Limbaugh, while lamenting that “the losers in the last election [got] pretty much everything they want[ed],” nevertheless rejects the third party call: “taking over the Republican Party is better.”

Sarah Palin protests that what House Speaker John Boehner and 162 Republican “yahoos” did “stinks to high heaven,” for which Rep. Gohmert expects Boehner to be rewarded with Democrat votes for speaker. Palin declares open season on RINOs, including replacing Boehner. Conservatives find it especially galling — and intolerable — to have a Speaker who (a) shows utter contempt for the representatives whose election resulted in his ascension to power; and (b) does everything he can to subvert the wishes, interests and values of these representatives and their constituents.

It could take years replace or seize control of the Republican Party, by which time everything this country has stood for could be destroyed. However, there is a clearly viable short term strategy. Oust Boehner from the speakership — now!

If the 2014 and 2010 elections are to have any meaning at all, if all the work and promises made to elect Republican majorities in both houses of Congress are not to be completely nullified, replacing Boehner must be considered the top priority. (Although Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell deserves recognition for his zealous defense of freedom of speech, he too should be replaced because he is a RINO stooge, as Andrew McCarthy makes plain. However, due to different House and Senate procedures, what follows is confined to Boehner.)

The article is long, the meat of it is too long to quote here. Go to the website and finish reading it. It’s worth your time. There are other articles on this same subject, here, here, and here.
Facebook

Recap…

Posted on by

I blogged (yes, it’s a verb!) yesterday about gas prices dropping below $2/gallon by Christmas. I was pessimistic. In thirteen states, including Missouri, that goal has already been reached.

In These 13 States, Gas Is Selling for Below $2 a Gallon

Natalie Johnson / /

Just two weeks ago, a sole gas station in Oklahoma swept headlines for dropping gas prices below $2 a gallon. Today, 13 states have joined that list, and the trend is expanding.Gas for less than $1.90 a gallon can be found in at least one station in Oklahoma, Louisiana and Ohio, according to CNN. CNN cites 10 additional states– Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Texas and Virginia– that now have gas below $2 a gallon.“What we’re seeing is markets at work,” Heritage Foundation economist Nick Loris said. “Significant increases in supply and a relatively weak demand is lowering prices not just at the pump, but for most of the goods and services we pay for.”

The national average has dipped to $2.55 a gallon, marking the lowest drop since October 2009, according to AAA’s Fuel Gauge Report. Just a year ago, that average was $3.23.

“Oil prices are plunging because there is so much oil in the market,” AAA spokesman Mark Jenkins said in a press release. “It’s unclear exactly how long this will continue, but gas prices will keep falling as long as oil prices do.”

Jenkins said oil prices are predicted to continue dropping through the first half of next year, increasing the “likelihood of $2 gasoline.”

CNN partially attributes this drop in prices to decreased oil demand because of the “economic slowdowns” across Europe and Asia along with increasingly fuel-efficient vehicles.

Another key reason for the drop is the increase in U.S. output. Domestic oil production is at a three-decade high, contributing to the increase in supply and driving down costs.

But Loris cautions against celebrating too soon.

“The falling prices are certainly a welcome relief,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean policymakers should ignore the government-imposed regulations and restrictions that artificially inflate prices and prevent markets from working more efficiently.”

Low gas prices is a Christmas gift to us all.

***

I’m a Mark Levin fan. I have most (all?) of his books. I don’t agree with everything he says, but I do believe most. He is one of the stalwarts of conservatism in the country. His Landmark Legal Foundation is in the forefront litigating for our liberty and the retention of our constitutional rights.

He also has a temper.

Mark Levin slams GOP: ‘The Constitution is in tatters’

By Cheryl K. Chumley – The Washington Times – Tuesday, December 16, 2014
http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2014/05/29/ap88849515097_c0-0-4883-2846_s561x327.jpg?e9405e23da046a9ad99c1e954eefdd816ea390cd

Conservative Talk Show host and founder of the Landmark Legal Foundation, Mark Levin.

Conservative talk radio icon Mark Levin blasted his fellow Republican Party members during his most recent show, slamming the leadership for caving on the budget and for, time after time, ignoring basic constitutional principles.

“The Constitution is in tatters,” he said, adding that he was “one inch away” from breaking with the Republicans.He went on, Newsmax reported: “I want to tell the Republican leadership, the RNC, the NRSC, the NCCC, the NAACP — whatever they call themselves in the Republican Party — I am one inch away from leaving you. And I bet I speak for hundreds of thousands of people. One inch. You think this is a joke? You think you can lie to the American people?”

He spoke specifically to Republican promises to defund Obamacare and fight President Obama on immigration amnesty — and the recent failures of GOP leadership to take advantage of the budget dealings with Democrats to do just that.

“Do you think you can lie to … conservatives about how you’re going to defund Obamacare, run millions of dollars on ads on that to get re-elected, on how you’re going to fight unconstitutional amnesty? Tooth and nail? You think you can lie to us with impunity? And repeatedly? I don’t care how many millionaires and billionaires you have in your damn back pocket,” he said, Newsmax reported.

Mr. Levin then blasted the Republicans for speaking ill of Sens. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee in Politico and other media outlets.

“You sound like a bunch of munchkins,” he said. “Backbenchers. Immature! Stupid! Childish comments. I don’t know what this is going to add up to. I don’t know why we’re here. I’ve seen this movie before, and you’re so ineffective. You’re so impotent.”

Mr. Levin also said that he “worked for a president who shut down the damn government over half a dozen times. It’s not the end of the world. … Our Constitution is in tatters.”

Levin’s rant comes on the same day RINO Jeb Bush announced the formation of an “exploratory committee,” i.e., how many donors he can corral. Levin carries a lot of clout. His ‘Convention of States’ continues to gather more support. If another Romney or Bush RINO gets the nomination on 2016, the GOP is dead.

Facebook

Betrayed

Posted on by

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 million “to 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.

Facebook

Monday’s Talking Points

Posted on by

Headlines on various news outlets this morning: 

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/qOfRT7BPcaTlkwlu5HHtxQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTM3NztweG9mZj01MDtweW9mZj0wO3E9NzU7dz02NzA-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/aed728e6332f562e660f6a7067001a15.jpg

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel

Hagel Fired for Contradicting Obama over ISIS threat!

From FOX News…

OBAMA FINDS MIDTERM SCAPEGOAT IN HAGEL
In another strong sign of President Obama’s hard tack left in the wake of a midterm drubbing, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is heading for the exits. First reported by the NYT, the cashiering of the Pentagon boss comes after “the two men mutually agreed” that it was time for the only Republican in Obama’s cabinet to go. But given the fact that the White House was the one pushing out the story, it seems more likely that the president had grown tired of the ongoing pressure from Hagel and members of the top brass to take a more aggressive stance on national security threats abroad. The conflict went public back in August when Hagel openly contradicted White House talking points on the threat posed by Islamist militants in Iraq and Syria. While Obama succumbed to the pressure, Hagel’s ouster shows the president seeking to reassert control over his foundering foreign policy. — FOX Newsletter, November 24, 2014

Never let it be said that Obama lets anyone on his staff disagree with him. I wonder which hand-puppet will be chosen next for Sec’y of Defense?

***

Rand Paul has been the fair-haired boy of Libertarians and the Paulbot wing of the GOP. He has been viewed as an opponent of the GOP Washington establishment. When Ted Cruz and Mike Lee stood up in opposition to Harry Reid, and occasionally Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul stood in the background giving the impression of supporting Cruz and Lee but seldom actually doing so on the floor of the Senate.

I’ve never trusted Rand Paul. In my view, he is too much like his Dad—inconsistent, a bit unstable with a tin-foil hat firmly in place. My view, again, has been vindicated. The reports today have Rand Paul cozing up to Mitch McConnell, worming his way into the establishment and the Ruling Class.

Paul strengthens McConnell ties with fundraiser hire – National Review: “[Sen.] Rand Paul [R-Ky.] is bringing on [Sen.] Mitch McConnell’s [R-Ky.] national finance director, Laura Sequeira, to play a key fundraising role at his political-action committee ahead of an expected 2016 presidential campaign.”

[Flashback: “We’ve developed a very tight relationship, and I’m for him…I don’t think he’s made a final decision on that. But he’ll be able to count on me.” – Senate Majority Leader-elect Mitch McConnell in a post-election interview.] — FOX Newsletter, November 24, 2014.

McConnell, immediately following the election, betrayed the GOP by publicly stating the Senate would not use the only real weapons of Congress against a rogue President—impeachment and removal from office, and the power of the purse—defunding Obama’s acts of defiance to Congress and strictures of the Constitution. When asked what McConnell would do to oppose Obama, McConnell, in essence, said he’d rollover and do nothing. That allows Obama to continue his lawless edicts without opposition…and now Rand Paul will help McConnell to do…nothing.

***

I have been called, on occasion, a Grammar-Nazi. I accept that label. Why is grammar necessary, and spelling, too? Because correct grammar and spelling enhances communication and decreases confusion and misunderstanding.

It is a failing of education when schools no longer teach grammar, sentence structure and construction, spelling and writing. Not cursive hand-writing, although that should be taught, too, but writing as in Writing an Essay. Clear, concise writing, with proper sentence and paragraph structure, is fading. Others agree with me.

Descriptive versus Prescriptive: Another Left-Wing Scam

By Bruce Deitrick Price, November 24, 2014

Everywhere we look, we’ve got pompous professors telling us they don’t dare prescribe what’s right in language.  No, no, no, no.  It’s not their role.  Nor yours either, that’s for sure.  People can express themselves as they wish.  It’s America, the 21st century.  God forbid we should tell anybody how to do anything.“Weird Al” Yankovic put out a popular video called “Word Crimes.”  It’s gotten almost 20,000,000 views.  In effect, he says: “Hey, moron, do it the right way.”  He got everybody talking about correct grammar.  Boy, we needed that.  Thanks, Weird Al.

Naturally, all the primly pontificating nuisances crawled out of the woodwork to tell us: hey, stop all that prescribing!  You can only describe. 

And why?  Because when anthropologists go in the jungle to study a primitive culture, they must remember that the natives are the experts on their own language.  Great.  That’s fine and dandy.  But that has nothing to do with how we should deal with our own language. In our case, you ask the relevant experts (teachers, novelists, journalists), average the answers, and that’s probably a good guide.  But you certainly don’t listen to left-wing scam artists telling you that our experts are not allowed to speak, because anything they say would be prescriptive, and we don’t allow that when we go into the jungle on anthropological expeditions.  Doesn’t this sophistry almost make your head spin?

But look again, and it turns out there is a second sophistry on top of the first one.  These discussions about natives, experts, and ourselves casually presuppose that we are talking about adults.  But many times, without ever acknowledging it, the discussion shifts over to school and the teaching of children.  Isn’t it obvious that the freedom you might give to adults is not appropriately given to children?

In other words, when liberal sophisticates start discussing this issue, they always pose it in terms of freedom, creativity, self-expression, laissez-faire, do your own thing, and gather ye rosebuds while ye may.  Sure, if you insist, adults can wear clothes inside-out and stay drunk.  Let’s not waste time discussing it.  If you want to arrange your sentences backward and break every grammatical rule, go for it.

What we’re discussing now is what’s appropriate in the early grades at school.  Teaching is typically prescriptive, and that’s how it should be.  Schools should teach the right ways to do things.  (This approach has got to be far more efficient than what many public schools are now doing: teach no ways at all, or teach all the ways as if none is preferable.) 

Bottom line, what newspapers call Standard English should be taught first.  That seems to be what our left-wing professors are eager to stop.

So what are the pros and cons?  Do you let a child do anything the child wants?  Are you doing children a favor if you allow them to go out with dirty faces or raggedy clothes?  Isn’t it foolish to pretend that children live and learn in a vacuum?

It seems to be common sense and common decency to tell children what is typically done.  With regard to language, this might require explaining regional variations, work-related slang, and even class differences.  Most children can understand these ideas at a fairly young age.  They probably already speak a different way with their friends from how they do with their parents.

To pretend that all these nuances don’t exist is the opposite of teaching.  To pretend that everything is equally acceptable is a nasty sort of nihilism.

Question is, why are liberals so eager to drown children in permissiveness and relativism?  Who is being served?  Just recently reports came out about a Chicago school that was teaching anal sex to fifth-graders.  And this would be for whose benefit?  The children’s?  No, this is surely liberals trying to break down the last barriers.

Presumably we’re seeing that same worldview when schools refuse to teach grammar.  The point, always, is power – in this case, the power to make the rules.  That’s why the left always maneuvers to control language, semantics, and education.

The sophistry prohibiting prescriptive grammar is not about grammar at all.  It’s about the left being able to tell everybody else how to talk, and how to think.  (Note that the anti-prescriptive diktat is itself prescriptive.)

Liberals always want to play their ideological games, using kids as guinea pigs.  If you don’t tell the kids what the prevailing rules are, the kids will be left in an intellectual wasteland.  To excuse this, you have a whole Education Establishment boldly proclaiming that whatever little children say is just fine, whatever it is.  No rules, guessing, and invented spelling – that’s what elementary education is for many.

But how can they justify all this logically?  Well, some genius thought, why don’t we just bring back anthropological field work to our own society?  We’ll announce (and argue with great indignation) that professional authors, English professors, and smart citizens who have used the language expertly for a lifetime have absolutely no special standing.  They should shut up, lest they be guilty of the crime of prescription.  The left has gotten away with this fluff for 75 years.

Aren’t you tired of left-wing professors using lame sophistries to dumb down the schools and the society?  Here’s a plan: don’t accept lame sophistries.

Sophistry. That’s a word I’ve not seen for a long, long time. Truthfully, now, how many of you know what it means? Don’t know? Here’s the definition. If you and your children don’t know, it’s a good topic for teaching both of you.

soph·ist·ry
ˈsäfəstrē/
noun
noun: sophistry
  1. the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
Facebook