Category Archives: Impeachment

Is it time?

Posted on by

Washington, DC, and the nation abounds with rumors of impeachment for Obama. Everyone also knows that any impeachment bill that gets out of the House will be killed by Harry Reid in the Senate.

Or, will it? Dems, mainly those in the House and Senate imperiled at the polls by Obama’s dictatorial Executive Orders, may, in fear of their positions, agree to impeachment and the Senate trial.

Paul Ryan has declared Obama has not committed any ‘high crime’ sufficient for impeachment. He and others equate ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors‘ as it is written in the Constitution, with civil crimes, like theft, murder and extortion committed by the Hoi Polloi.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6a/Senate-Johnson-Impeachment-Trials.jpgNot so, Mr. Ryan. For impeachment, ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors‘ means whatever the Congress says it is. President Andrew Johnson was nearly impeached for firing one of his cabinet secretaries. Congress can use almost any issue to impeach a President. All they need are the votes. In Obama’s case, his failure to uphold his oath of office by failing to secure our borders, is sufficient for impeachment.

The possible charges against Obama are many. Some accuse him of failing to uphold his oath of office. Failing to secure our borders is one example. His flagrant use of Executive Orders, many designed specifically to by-pass Congressional approval, is another. His attempts to infringe upon religious freedom in violation of the 1st Amendment adds to the list of acts that could be used for impeachment.

A number of years ago, I posted some notes I’d made from Thomas Wood’s book, “33 Questions about American History You’re not Supposed to Ask.” In Wood ‘s book, one chapter was about the rise of the Imperial Presidency. The method used by presidents to create that Imperial Presidency was Executive Orders.

We can thank Teddy Roosevelt for the proliferation of Executive Orders.

What is an Execute Order? An Executive Order is a directive to those departments of the Executive branch of government. Initially, it was the act of implementing legislation passed by Congress. However, in some cases, Orders were written that were not supported by preceding acts of Congress. During the early years of our republic, those orders were submitted to Congress requesting concurrence, i.e., ex post facto Congressional approval of the Executive Order. Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, Presidents were extremely reluctant to issue an Executive Order being cognizant that Congress could subsequently reverse and not approve the order. This trend continued through the Civil War until the presidency of Teddy Roosevelt.

It was TR who pioneered rule by executive order as a governing style among American chief executives. Many Americans rightly howled during the 1990s when Clinton aid Paul Begala famously said of executive orders, “Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool.” But Clinton, who once called Theodore Roosevelt his favorite Republican president, was only exercising a power that TR had made a major feature of the presidential office early in the century.

…

To appreciate the transformation that occurred in American government under TR, consider the number of executive orders issued by the presidents of the late 19th century. Presidents Hayes and Garfield issued none. Arthur issued 3, Grover Cleveland (first term) 6, Benjamin Harrison 4, Cleveland (second term) 71, McKinley 51. TR issued 1,006.— Crucis’ Court, July 21, 2009.

The current push for impeachment is Obama’s excesses in issuing Executive Orders that violate the Constitution by by-passing Congress. The use of Executive Orders by Obama, or EOs as some call them, is the usurpation of power granted solely to Congress, not the Executive branch of our government.

Ted Cruz, according to a Washington Post article, says the illegal use of EOs to give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens is sufficient to impeach Obama.

Cruz: It’s about executive power – WaPo: “The fate of a Republican proposal to address a brewing immigration crisis along the U.S.-Mexico border was cast into doubt Wednesday after a tea party senator lobbied against it to House members. The effort by Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.), who made his pitch to a group of House Republicans in a closed-door evening meeting, marked another direct shot at attempts by Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants arriving from Central America…’The only way to stop the border crisis is to stop Obama’s amnesty,’ Cruz said in a statement. ‘It is disappointing the border security legislation unveiled today does not include language to end Obama’s amnesty. Congress cannot hope to solve this problem without addressing the fundamental cause of it.’” — FOXNewsletter, July 31, 2014.

But just who is it that is talking the most about impeachment? It is the democrats. They are using impeachment as a fundraising tool.

THE PARTY OF IMPEACHMENT
“You bet we’re going to run on a Congress that is just obsessed with lawsuits, suing the President, talking about impeaching him, instead of solutions for the middle class, talking about jobs and infrastructure. You bet that we’re going to ask people to support us based on that contrast.” – DCCC Chairman Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y. told CNN Wednesday To wit – Washington Examiner: “Just as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., stepped onto the House floor to blast the lawsuit as ‘another Republican effort to pander to the most radical right-wing voters at taxpayer expense,’ the House fundraising arm sent out an email from Pelosi asking for donations ranging from $5 to $250 or more, to ‘support the president.’” Ummmm… – Daily Caller: “In a speech on the floor of the House Wednesday, Texas U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee claimed that Democrats never sought to impeach President George W. Bush. Not only is that claim false, but Jackson-Lee actually co-sponsored a 2008 bill to do just that and spoke in at least one House committee hearing in support of the effort.” — FOXNewsletter, July 31, 2014.

The most telling quote came from Judge Andrew Napolitano. “The choice is between two more years of government by decree or two years of prosecution. It is a choice the president has imposed upon us all.” It is time to end government by decree. Taking back the entire Congress in 2014 if the first step.

Facebook

Passed…

Posted on by

As you can see, I have a blog today. That means I was not picked for the jury yesterday. Jury selection took ALL day. We didn’t get finished until nearly 5PM.

The trial promises to be a particularly nasty one. I’m glad, in a way, I wasn’t picked. I think I was excluded due to my answer to the first question yesterday morning.

The court officials were introduced, the Judge, the prosecuting and defending attorneys, and the court recorder. The first question was, “Do any of you [the potential jurors] know any of these officials?” I raised my hand. “Who do you know?” I was asked. “Judge Collins. We are acquaintances.”  I noticed later that everyone who knew Judge Collins was not picked for the Jury. Oh, well.

***

It appears the Nixon impeachment is stalled in committee.

IMPEACHMENT EFFORT NIXED — ‘Missouri House committee will not vote on attempt to impeach Governor Nixon,’ MissouriNet: “Efforts to impeach Governor Jay Nixon (D) will not be brought up for a vote in the House Judiciary Committee, its chairman told Missourinet Monday afternoon. Representative Stanley Cox’s (R-Sedalia) committee held two hearings in the last two weeks on three resolutions seeking to impeach Nixon on three different lines of reasoning. After a hearing last week he went to the members of that committee and asked them whether they wanted to vote on the resolutions. … Cox says he agrees with the decision of the committee members. … Cox says he believes there is strong circumstantial evidence that Nixon violated the laws of the state, but says he and the other Judiciary Committee members did not think the evidence and arguments met the standard for impeachment. … The articles of impeachment filed against Nixon accused him of violating the state’s Constitution in three areas.” — PolitcMO Newsletter, May 6, 2014.

Other bills, such as the Paper ballot initiative, are also hung in committee. On the other hand, Nixon’s veto of the Tax Cut bill could be overridden before this legislative term is over.

TAX CUT OVERRIDE IN SIGHT — Republicans believe they have the votes to override Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto of Senate Bill 509: ‘Mo. House plans Tuesday vote to override Nixon’s veto of tax cut,’ PoliticMo: “The Missouri House of Representatives is expected to vote on Tuesday to override Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto of a $620 million tax cut. By a party line vote on Monday, the Missouri Senate sent the tax cut bill back to the House on Monday afternoon, but Republicans opted to wait until Tuesday when all their members would be present to take a vote, House Majority Floor Leader John Diehl said after the House adjourned. Republicans need the support of all 108 House Republicans and at least one Democrat to override Nixon’s veto. The bill would reduce the maximum tax rate on personal income from 6 to 5.5 percent beginning in 2017 and allow a 25 percent deduction of business income on personal tax returns. Both provisions would be contingent on state revenues being $150 million higher than the highest of the three previous years.

“Democratic Reps. Keith English, D-Florissant, and Jeff Roorda, D-Barnhart, (the lone Democrat to support the bill initially) are considering siding with the Republican majority to override Nixon’s veto. “Do you believe you have the votes,” a reporter asked Diehl. “I believe I do.” Nixon has opposed the bill citing the potential negative impact of reduced revenue on education funding, as well as a potential “fatal flaw” that he had said could eliminate the entire income tax code above $9,000.”

— The bill has been the subject of a compressed campaign-like effort from both sides of the issue. Nixon has made more than a dozens of trips to cities and towns across Missouri urging residents to call their lawmakers and tell them to oppose the bill. Nixon, speaking in Springfield on Monday, pointed to the recent downgrade of the credit rating for the state of Kansas, which recently cut taxes on a similar scale. Nixon’s tour schedule since April 16: Jefferson City, Mo., Ozark, Mo., St. Louis County, Mo., Kansas City, Mo., Springfield, Mo., Jefferson City, Mo., Columbia, Mo., Cape Girardeau, Mo., Savannah, Mo., Springfield, Mo., De Soto, Mo., St. Louis, Mo., Jefferson City, Mo., Kansas City, Mo., and Springfield, Mo.

— Agriculture and business groups have lined up in favor of SB 509 in a way many tried to avoid during the HB 253 fight last year. The groups include the National Federation of Independent Businesses, Associated Industries of Missouri, Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Missouri Association of CPAs, Missouri Retailers Association, Missouri Realtors Association, Missouri Poultry Association, Missouri Pork Association, Missouri Grocers Association, Missouri Dairy Association, and the Missouri Cattlemen’s Association.

HOW THEY SEE US — A12 of the New York edition of the New York Times today, Julie Bosman from Jefferson City, ‘In Missouri, Republicans Prevail on Tax Bill’:  “In a showdown over tax policy, the Republican-controlled State Senate on Monday overrode Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto of a major tax-cut bill, setting the stage for sharp reductions in state personal income taxes. The Senate debated the bill for less than 30 minutes before overriding the veto on a 23-to-8 vote. The Republican-controlled House is expected to vote on the override on Tuesday. Myron Neth, a Republican member of the House, delivered an impassioned speech on the floor in favor of the bill Monday night, arguing that the state needed to give businesses tax breaks in order to stay competitive.  …

“The vote was a rebuke of Mr. Nixon, who last September lobbied so vigorously against a different tax-cut bill championed by Republican legislators that the lawmakers failed to override his veto of that measure. The governor, who had described the new tax-cut bill as ‘ill-conceived,’ said in an interview Monday night that he was prepared for it to now become law. … Democratic senators who spoke against the bill said they worried it would threaten Missouri’s excellent credit rating and reduce state funds for education. … After the legislature failed to override the governor’s veto last year, the Republicans came back this spring with a shorter bill, only five pages long. They rallied more support in the business community and argued that the tax cut would boost small businesses. In the halls of the Capitol, they posted black-and-white placards outside their offices, displaying the number of businesses in their districts that they said would benefit. And perhaps most crucially, after the governor vetoed the most recent bill last Thursday, they moved quickly to schedule an override session, hastily gathering members on Monday.” — PoliticMO Newsletter, May 6, 2014.

***

And for a parting shot, here’s an editorial how Tea Partiers are terrorizing the GOP Establishment.

PRUDEN: Tea Party challengers terrorizing the Republican establishment again

By Wesley Pruden, The Washington Times, Monday, May 5, 2014

This might be the year of the state senator. That’s not necessarily a good thing. It’s how Barack Obama got his start. Several ambitious state senators are challenging incumbent Republican senators, and the prospect of surprises from the heartland terrifies the Republican establishment.

Some incumbents apparently no longer actually live in the states they represent, having outgrown their bucolic origins and aspire to the undisturbed life in Hollywood on the Potomac, bathed in the twinkle and tinsel of an ersatz Hollywood.

The patricians of the Republican establishment — party moguls from yesteryear, aspiring kingmakers, PAC artists and corporate patriots — are trying to kill the Tea Party graveyard dead, so the patricians can retreat to the gentle Capitol Hill life of going along to get along. Tea Party zealots, who think passion and zealotry in the cause of reform is what the market is waiting for, are out to teach the party establishment to treat them with a little respect. No more Rodney Dangerfield.

Establishment Republicans, with their green-eyeshade DNA, are always afraid of controversy, and learn to deal with it reluctantly, and usually not very well. This puts them at disadvantage, often fatal, with Democrats, who love hubbub, chaos and brawling. “Democrats are like alley cats,” a wise old party elder in the South once observed. “Democrats fight, and alley cats fight, and the result is more Democrats and more cats.”

Tea Party Republicans usually come equipped with more fire and zeal than smarts and moxie, but they’re learning. In the recent past they had to learn the hard way with little help from the experienced party establishment. The Republicans might have taken the Senate four years ago if several of the party regulars who could have helped inept nominees had not jeered from the sidelines after their candidates lost in the primary.

Several Democratic senators were begging to be picked off, but incompetent nominees, including two who said dumb things about rape and abortion, saved the Democratic majority. They were left twisting slowly, slowly in the wind. Two years ago, the establishment got the candidates it wanted in North Dakota, Ohio and Montana, and lost just like the Tea Party upstarts.

The Tea Party, says Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who managed the National Republican Senatorial Committee in 2010 and 2012, says the Tea Party movement “was the wind at our backs in 2010,” but when fissures opened the party produced “candidates who could get nominated but who couldn’t get elected, and that’s obviously not the goal.”

Two upstarts this year are state senators, Joni Ernst in Iowa and Chris McDaniel in Mississippi. Mrs. Ernst looks like a fashionable Junior League matron, rides a Harley hog, commands the largest battalion in the Iowa National Guard as an Army lieutenant colonel (her husband is a retired sergeant major), and talks like an earthy Democrat. She boasts that as an Iowa farm girl she learned to castrate hogs and that will make her effective in cutting pork in Washington. Some Iowans thought this was in bad taste, but her polls number jumped at once. She emerged from also-ran to contender almost overnight.

Mr. McDaniel has mounted the most brazen challenge of all, as Republicans define brazen. He’s challenging Sen. Thad Cochran, who is running for his seventh term, and he has the endorsement of every Republican who ever sat on a veranda at the country club, sipping pink gin or a Pimm’s No. 1 cup.

Mr. McDaniel, like any well -brought-up Southerner, shows the senator, 76, respect and due deference, but argues that he’s not conservative enough and that six terms is enough for anyone. The Republican establishment, led in Mississippi by Haley Barbour, the former governor, likes the senator for the reason that Mr. McDaniel doesn’t. He’s the king of pork and the emperor of earmarks, just the sort Joni Ernst wants to confront with her pig shears.

The senator has a shrinking lead in the polls, but has little organization — until this year he never needed one — and he lent credence to the charge that he’s out of touch with Mississippi when it was discovered that he lists a rented Capitol Hill basement apartment as his “primary residence.” This is only a little more persuasive than the “rented room with bath” in Dodge City that Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas lists as his Kansas residence. Mr. Roberts is hotly pursued by Milton Wolf, locally infamous as the second cousin, once removed, of Barack Obama. Suddenly, the Republicans are getting to be fun.

Y’all have a great day!

Facebook

Milestones

Posted on by

Missouri House Bill 1439, The Second Amendment Protection Act, passed in the Missouri Senate last night, April 30, 2014, on a vote of 23 to 8. It had passed the House earlier, on April 12, 2014, on a vote of 119 to 41.

According to an email issued by Ron Calzone, the Senate made some language changes that will require another vote in the House. He expects that vote to occur today. The changes are minor language clarifications that do not affect the purpose of the Bill.

April 30, 2014

HB 1439 “passed” in the House 110 to 41 on April 12th, now it has passed the Senate by a vote of 23 to 8. Both votes are enough to override a veto by the Governor.

A few minutes before 7:00 on Wednesday, the Missouri Senate voted 23 to 8 to “third read and pass” HB 1439, the Second Amendment Preservation Act.

Since the Senate made changes to the House version of the bill, the House has to vote on it one more time to accept those changes. If they don’t accept the changes, both the Senate and House will have to vote again.

The Senate made the changes we desired — we put teeth back in the bill and removed the troublesome controlled substances language.

Some other friendly amendments were added prior to taking the bill to the floor, and a couple of technical fixes were added on the floor. Although the changes were not part of the underlying Second Amendment Preservation Act, they are all germane to the bill title and good for gun rights.

The final language of HB 1439, as passed the Senate, will be available here: http://www.house.mo.gov/billsummary.aspx?bill=HB1439&year=2014&code=R in a day or two. Be sure to click on the link that says “Senate Sub”, not “Senate Comm Sub” to get the latest round of amendments.

The SAPA portion of the bill can also be viewed here: http://www.mofirst.org/?page=issues/nullification/SAPA/HB1439-Detailed.php

Hopefully, the House will take up HB 1439 as early as tomorrow and pass it without further amendments – then it can be sent to the Governor

We’ll have more new as it develops.

For liberty,

– Ron

One more milestone passed on the road to full passage in Missouri. The vote totals are important. They show enough support in the Legislature to override Jay Nixon’s expected veto.

***

I’m glad a local State Representative won’t be running for office again. Why? Here’s why: He allowed a vote on, and voted for, Medicaid Expansion in Missouri, a requirement for the full implementation of Obamacare.

MEDICAID EXPANSION — ‘Medicaid bill wins symbolic vote, inches forward in Mo. House,’ Virginia Young: “In what Missouri House Insurance Committee Chairman Chris Molendorp acknowledged was a symbolic move, a Medicaid expansion measure gained its first committee endorsement of the year today. Molendorp, R-Belton, and the four Democrats on his committee combined to recommend a wide-ranging bill that would expand the public health insurance system to about 300,000 low-income adults. The vote was 5-2, with five Republicans absent. … The 121-page proposal adopted by the committee is modeled on a plan developed by Sen. Ryan Silvey, R-Kansas City. It attempts to address GOP opposition to Medicaid expansion by requiring a host of changes, such as photo IDs for food stamp recipients and more transparent billing practices for hospitals. But with only 11 days left in the legislative session and GOP leaders opposed to the bill, it’s unlikely to go any further. Molendorp acknowledged as much after the committee vote. — PoliticMo Email, May 1, 2014.

Molendorp says the passage was symbolic. The truth of the matter is that the proposal should have never reached this point. Missouri can’t afford Medicaid Expansion. The Feds will provide funds for three years. After that, the ENTIRE cost burden would fall on the state. We can’t afford such gross unfunded mandates.

***

Impeachment efforts against Governor Jay Nixon reached another milestone yesterday with the completion of public comments in the Missouri House Judiciary Committee. The Committee Chairman, Representative Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia), said he would poll committee members to see if they wanted to vote and move forward.

IMPEACH NIXON? — ‘Mo. House committee considering vote on impeaching Nixon,’ PoliticMo: “The Missouri House Judiciary Committee heard final testimony on Wednesday in favor of resolutions moving to impeach Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon. Rep. Stanley Cox, a Sedalia Republican who chairs the committee, said he will now begin meeting with committee members to consider whether to send the resolutions on to the full House. “I’m going to see if there is a majority of the committee that wants to vote,” Cox said. “I haven’t decided how I’m going to vote. I’m going to talk to the other committee and see how they’re going to be.

“The two days of hearings, which began last week, were to hear three Republican-backed resolutions against Nixon. One, sponsored by Rep. Nick Marshall, alleges Nixon violated the Missouri Constitution’s provision banning same-sex marriage in issuing an executive order allowing the Missouri Department of Revenue to accept tax returns from same-sex couples filing jointly with the federal government. It was heard last week. The second, filed by Rep. Mike Moon, was critical of delayed calls for special elections in three vacant House seats. The third, by Rep. Rick Brattin, accused the Nixon administration of releasing private conceal-carry weapons permit source documents to federal authorities. They were heard by the committee on Wednesday. As they did last week, several committee members, including a handful of Republicans, expressed concerns that any legal issue with action from the governor might be better handled in the judicial system. Moon said impeachment hearings are by definition political and should be seen as a constitutional check on the executive branch. … 

“Brattin faced perhaps the most critical reception from the committee. He alleges Nixon’s administration violated privacy concerns in releasing data to the federal government in response to subpoenas, but did not state any specific crime Nixon had committed himself. Instead, Brattin accused Nixon of turning his attention away from the issue and allowing his administration to break the state law banning implementation of REAL ID. But Nixon did act, and let his director of the Department of Revenue go (he resigned at the height of the controversy last year). Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, noted that the court and the state auditor had sided with Nixon on the controversy in noting that he did not break any laws. In other words, two branches of government have sided with Nixon.” http://bit.ly/1fzoDP3 — PoliticMO Newsletter, May 1, 2014

***

While this might not be a milestone, it is revealing about the character of John Boehner. The writer of the article below agrees with my statements that I have written over the last few years.

Is John Boehner Stupid, Bought, or Playing for Other Side?

,

Something is wrong with the most powerful Republican in the United States Congress. He is either stupid, bought and paid for by crony corporate interests, or he’s on the other side (a Democrat posing as a Republican). Because nothing else explains the news that the GOP intends to pass immigration reform (i.e. amnesty) this year.

Nothing.

You might be wondering how I know it’s “amnesty?” Because to pass it through Harry Reid’s Senate and to avoid a veto from President Barack Obama, it must include some form of amnesty for illegal immigrants (i.e. future Democratic voters). Nothing could ever pass Harry Reid’s Senate that doesn’t include some form of amnesty, allowing Democrats to wear the crown of conquering heroes to the Latino community and therefore garner more votes for Team Obama in November.

Democrats are about to be crushed. They are drowning. They are desperate to shuffle the deck. Why would any sane GOP leader throw them a life preserver?

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer – the ultimate liberal – is winking and nodding on Sunday morning TV shows like it’s a done deal.

Do you think he’s winking because he’s just agreed in the backroom to a deal that hurts Democratic voters? Do you think the president that has, for all intents and purposes halted deportations, would agree to any bill that sells illegal immigrants down the river? If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you in…Mexico.

Now let’s examine why even discussing (let alone passing) any immigration bill is self-destructive, stupid and political suicide for Republicans.

First, Democrats are on the run. They are about to be destroyed in November. Every poll shows it. Every bit of common sense tells the same story. Every conversation with average middle class Americans proves it. Obamacare has ruined Obama and the Democratic Party. The latest poll shows Obama at 41 percent approval.

There are literally no voters left to support Obama who aren’t being bribed with a government check. Just as I reported earlier this year, Obama’s support among the actual taxpayers, business owners and homeowners of America is darn close to zero.

Knowing this, why would the leader of Congressional Republicans want to change the conversation? Why would he want to let Obama off the hook? Why would he discuss anything but Obamacare for the next six months? Doesn’t Boehner want to win? When you’ve got the opposition on the run, why would you lift your boot off their neck? Makes me wonder which team he’s playing for. What about you?

Why wouldn’t any sane GOP leader keep talking Obamacare 24/7 for six months in a row, until the clock runs out? Millions have lost their coverage; millions more have had premiums raised; millions have lost their doctors; everyone that can think is steaming mad.

The vast majority of people who got free insurance from Obamacare are virtually 100 percent government-addicted, welfare-loving, food stamp-loving, dependent Democratic voters. Obama hasn’t picked up one vote. But he’s gotten millions of independents mad as a hornet’s nest.

AP

AP 

To change the conversation now would be dereliction of duty. If this were the military, Gen. Boehner would be relieved of his command and brought up on criminal charges. He is harming his own troops. He is purposely losing the war. He is pulling defeat from the jaws of victory. Who does that?

Secondly, my grandfather taught me about how to treat your loyal customers. He was a successful small business owner. He always said the key to success was “the customer is always right.”

Why would Boehner poke a stick in the eyes of his best customers? Why would he mock conservatives? Why would he turnoff his loyal conservative base now, on the precipice of a landslide in November? It defies logic.

Third and most importantly, if everyone “in the know” believes the GOP is on the verge of a massive landslide victory (and they are), why would you even think of negotiating an immigration reform bill now?

Think about it. Now it’s a lose/lose. Obama and Reid hold all the cards. But starting in January 2015, with a GOP Senate and House, with Obama an embarrassed, emasculated lame duck, the GOP would hold all the cards.

What Republican leader would be dumb enough to pass the bill now? Wait until 2015 and instead of begging for crumbs, the GOP is dictating the terms of Obama’s surrender. What sane leader would trade a win/win for a lose/lose scenario?

Into this situation steps Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), leader of the party that practices shooting itself in the foot. Boehner is theoretically on our side, yet he wants to let Democrats off the hook for Obamacare, change the conversation to something divisive and controversial, demoralize and anger his own best customers, hand a moral victory to Obama, inspire the Democrats’ core voters, and negotiate from the worst possible position, instead of waiting just a few months to negotiate from the best possible position.

Does any of this make sense to you? So I ask you…

Is John Boehner stupid, bought and paid for, or on the other side? He’s either not thinking clearly, or he’s not on our side. No matter your answer, it’s now clear Boehner has to go.

Normally, I take anything from The Blaze with a large dose of salt. All too often, Beck and his crew have their tin-foil hats on too tight. But…this time they agree with me and say the same, paraphrased, as have I. As the adage goes, the quality of an article is directly proportional to the degree it agrees with you.

Facebook

The Follies for Friday, July 19, 2013

Posted on by

Mrs. Crucis is like a kid waiting for Christmas. She’s finally gotten our cats interested in playing with some toys. We bought a laser toy recently. Our tiger-striped tabby, Amber, reacted when Mrs. Crucis shined the laser on her paws. Our big black cat, Snowflake, just yawned.

Both, finally got into the game batting at a string off a short pole. We’ve had these cats for eight years and it’s only recently they’ve been interested in toys. Mrs. Crucis has been watching “Cats from Hell” on Animal Planet and has obviously learned something.

She saw some cat toy on TV and ordered it. She’s be not-so-patiently waiting for it to arrive. We received a shipping notice earlier this week and since has been waiting, on pins ‘n needles, for the mailman to arrive.

Just like a little kid. I’m not sure which is funnier, the cats or her.

***

We’re beginning to see Holder’s next step in the Zimmerman persecution. Holder issued orders to the Sanford, FL police to retain custody of Zimmerman’s pistol pending a federal investigation.  The FBI has already investigated and found nothing to pursue.

Justice Department places ‘hold’ on Trayvon Martin trial evidence, including George Zimmerman’s gun – which Florida law says must be returned to him

By David Martosko, PUBLISHED: 16:34 EST, 18 July 2013 | UPDATED: 08:54 EST, 19 July 2013

The U.S. Department of Justice, overseen by Attorney General Eric Holder, has ordered the Sanford, Florida police department to keep possession of all the evidence from George Zimmerman’s second-degree murder trial – including the exonerated neighborhood watch volunteer’s gun.

Sanford police confirmed on Thursday that the DOJ asked the agency not to return any pieces of evidence to their owners. Zimmerman was expected to get his firearm back by month’s end.

Want to bet Holder won’t trump up some charge? I don’t.

If Zimmerman attempts to buy a replacement pistol, I’ll bet the NICS check will flag him. There’s no legal reason for that to happen but I’m sure it will. So what do we have to fight this type of state tyranny? Private sales.

Now you know why the libs demand all firearm sales pass through a FFL—to keep their enemies defenseless.

***

Remember all those recall petitions in Colorado? The lib legislators tried to block the recall election.  They failed. The recall election is on!

Latest win for Colorado gun-rights activists: Recall election set Sept. 10

By Valerie Richardson – The Washington Times, Thursday, July 18, 2013

DENVER—Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper set Sept. 10 as the date for the state’s first-ever legislative recall election Thursday after a judge rejected a lawsuit aimed at stopping the recalls of two Democratic state legislators.

Denver District Court Chief Judge Robert Hyatt said the recall may proceed, ruling that the right of citizens to recall officeholders outweighed the technical objections to the petitions brought by constituents of Senate President John Morse and state Sen. Angela Giron.

“I’m really, really happy, obviously,” said Victor Head, president of Pueblo Freedom and Rights, which organized the Giron recall. “He ruled with the people instead of with the lawyers and the bureaucrats.”

Citizens’ groups began circulating petitions in April to recall the two lawmakers in reaction to their votes in favor of three gun-control bills, which took effect July 1. A petition drive to repeal the bill restricting ammunition-magazine capacity is also underway.

Yes, what goes around, comes around. Actions have consequences. It’s time the libs learn the consequences of their actions.

***

It’s not really news, now. It’s been plastered all over the news, cable outlets and the internet for several days—Detroit is bankrupt!

‘Motor City’ Detroit files for bankruptcy with 100,000 creditors

Detroit has become the largest city in US history to file for bankruptcy, owing 100,000 creditors $18.5 billion.

By 1:14PM BST 19 Jul 2013

The city of Detroit filed for bankruptcty on Thursday afternoon, ending weeks of speculation about a possible such move.

Kevyn Orr, the city’s emergency manager, handed over a 3,000 page document detailing all the money which the city is unable to pay.

The list of those owed includes the names of all of the city’s active employees and its retirees, a list of properties that have tax claims with the city, numerous bondholders, business creditors and companies that insured Detroit debt.

The largest creditor is the city’s general pension scheme, which is owed $2 billion.

We knew the city was bankrupt. We’ve known it for years. Detroit is and has been financially and morally bankrupt for years, decades, really. A large city government, led and controlled by libs, socialists and democrats, has been run into the ground. The residents has been leaving in droves. The population is half what it was in 1950. Vast swatches of the city is empty and the houses, falling into deep disrepair, are being razed.

And the unions are still fighting, in the courts, the inevitable result—bankruptcy. Why? Because they have been bleeding the city’s finances for decades. If the city really is placed in bankruptcy, the money stream will be cut off. Detroit is nearly $20 Billion (yes, that is Billion with a B!) in debt. A significant portion of that is to the union pension funds. Now the unions with have to fund the pension funds themselves using money that had been used for political purposes as well as lining the union leaders’ pockets.

City leaders are already calling for Obama to bail them out.

***

Finally, this blurb from the Heritage Foundation concerning Benjamin Franklin. The libs belittle Franklin at every opportunity. They claim he’s one of the countries first atheists. An incorrect fact. He was a Deist. 

Benjamin Franklin: The Sage of America

By

There was a time, not too long ago, when every schoolchild in America learned about Benjamin Franklin and his exploits; a great many read his brief Autobiography. Unfortunately, that time has passed. None of the American Founders is the icon he once was, of course, but in the case of Franklin, this is especially lamentable because Franklin addressed himself more to the common man, and to the young, than did his colleagues. He directed his writing largely to the formation of popular character and had a very salutary effect on that character for as long as he was widely read.

Life

Born in Boston in 1706, Franklin was older by a generation than most of his fellow Founders. The youngest son of youngest sons for five generations back, as he tells us with pride, Franklin necessarily made his own way in the world. He tried several trades before settling on printing, the one mechanical trade that suited his bookish and searching mind.

While still very young, he read books of “polemic Divinity,” mostly attacks on Deism that he found in his father’s library. These books had an effect “quite contrary to what was intended by them,” Franklin tells us, and he became “a thorough Deist” by the time he was 15.[1] His unconventional religious beliefs, together with his fondness for disputing with his fellow Bostonians, contributed to his eventual need to depart for Philadelphia.

When only 16 and a printing apprentice to his brother James, he penned a series of essays under the pseudonym Silence Dogood, devoted to chiding the faults and encouraging the virtues of his fellow Bostonians. It was a device he returned to again and again. In Philadelphia, he wrote as the Busy-Body, a self-proclaimed censor morum, and at other times as Alice Addertongue, Obadiah Plainman, Homespun, and of course Poor Richard, whose sententious proverbs (many gleaned from other sources) remain part of our heritage. Franklin considered newspapers (as well as almanacs) to be “another Means of communicating Instruction”[2] to the wider public and filled his out with small, edifying pieces. It was part of a larger educational project, to which his Autobiography also belongs.

Franklin’s curiosity extended not only to politics, morality, and theology, but also to science. He investigated natural phenomena from weather patterns to the Gulf Stream to electricity. He founded the American Philosophical Society to advance the cause of science in the New World. His research in electricity led to the discovery of the polarity of electrical current; his invention of the lightning rod and many other advances brought him international renown. He was admitted to the Royal Society of London and other European learned societies. Franklin was the only one of the Founders with an international reputation before independence, and that reputation was scientific.

I invite you to read the entire article. Have your children read it, too. They’ll learn much about our Founding Fathers and Franklin that I doubt is being taught in their schools.

Facebook

Elections have Conseqences

Posted on by

Elections, and actions, have consequences. Missouri is suffering under those consequences as more and more revelations are uncovered about the illegal release of confidential information to the FedGov—in particular, to the DHS and the IRS.

The first case of individual data being illegally collected was disclosed when the Department of Revenue, through their licensing bureau, refused to issue a CCW permit. The DoR has been collecting and scanning private documents and forwarding that information out of state in violation of Missouri law.

One CCW applicant refused to submit the requested documents. The Dor refused to issue the permit—although the DoR has no legal authority to refuse a permit once it has been approved by the county’s Sheriff! That applicant sued the DoR and a Judge issued the Injuction prohibiting the DoR from collecting any further data pending the resolution of the suit.

Jay Nixon initially denied the accusations. However, later, in testimony before the state legislature, the DoR confirmed they did collect private information as they have been accused. A Missouri Judge granted an injunction to block the DoR from collecting private data from Missouri’s citizens.

Today, new allegations broke about illegal actions by the Nixon administration. By Missouri law, personal information of the state’s CCW holders is confidential. That data is held by the DoR and can only be released for criminal investigations—individual information. The Missouri Highway Patrol admitted this week it had requested the complete CCW database from the DoR, twice, and had sent that information to the IRS. Again, in violation of Missouri law.

Highway patrol gave feds Missouri weapon permits data

JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri State Highway Patrol has twice turned over the entire list of Missouri concealed weapon permit holders to federal authorities, most recently in January, Sen. Kurt Schaefer said Wednesday.

Questioning in the Senate Appropriations Committee revealed that on two occasions, in November 2011 and again in January, the patrol asked for and received the full list from the state Division of Motor Vehicle and Driver Licensing. Schaefer later met in his office with Col. Ron Replogle, superintendent of the patrol.

After the meeting, he said Replogle had given him sketchy details about turning over the list, enough to raise many more questions. Testimony from Department of Revenue officials revealed that the list of 185,000 names had been put online in one instance and given to the patrol on a disc in January.

Schaefer has been investigating a new driver licensing system. He and the committee grilled the revenue officials for several hours in the morning and again at midday before they admitted the list had been copied. The investigation was triggered by fears that concealed weapons data was being shared with federal authorities.

Under Missouri law, the names of concealed weapon permit holders are confidential. The only place in Missouri where the names of all concealed carry permit holders is stored is among driver license records. Permit holders have a special mark on their licenses indicating they have been granted the privilege of carrying a gun.

The list was given to the Social Security Administration Office of Inspector General, Schaefer said he was told.

“Apparently from what I understand, they wanted to match up anyone who had a mental diagnosis or disability with also having a concealed carry license,” Schaefer said. “What I am told is there is no written request for that information.”

Chris Koster, Missouri’s Attorney General, whose office is administratively under the Governor, has not, so far, investigated these violations of state law despite numerous request for him to do so.

What has all this to do with today’s post title? It’s the fact that Jax Nixon and Chris Koster was re-elected to office by a large margin last November. Does anyone truly believe if either, or both of them had lost that election, that the heads of the DoR, the DMV and the Highway Patrol would still be in office? If Ed Martin had beaten Koster last November, I guarantee that all three agency heads would be under investigation. If Nixon had lost his election, all three agency heads would be under suspension pending the results of that investigation.

But—neither lost and now we have a massive cover-up by Nixon’s department heads. Those are the consequences of that election. The voter’s action in that election has lead directly to this situation. Yes, elections have consequences.

Facebook

Friday Follies for January 6, 2012

Posted on by
I was listening to the radio this morning and the news is filled about an illegal alien who killed a mother and child last July.

Drunk-Driving Illegal Alien Kills Mother and Daughter in Missouri

Another family has been devastated by a drunk-driving illegal alien. Mother and hospice nurse Diane Bronson and her 11-year-old daughter Anna of Belton, Missouri, were killed on July 4 in a head-on crash. The deadly SUV was driven by 18-year-old Felix Solano Gallardo whose blood alcohol was measured two hours after the wreck at .185, double the legal limit in Missouri. He had driven 14 miles the wrong way on the interstate before smashing into the Bronson’s car.
Diane and her daughter were on their way to a Fourth of July celebration in Sugar Creek where her husband Buddy was set to ride an antique scooter in the parade. They never made it.

Kansas City Star, July 5, 2011

Diane K. Bronson was eight months pregnant when a state paint-striping truck rear-ended her vehicle in 1999.

Firefighters had to cut her out of the wreckage, and Bronson suffered a serious head injury. But she survived, as did her prematurely born baby, whom she named Anna.

On Monday — more than 11 years later — Bronson and Anna, of Belton, (MO) were again involved in a highway crash. But this time, neither survived.

Police blamed the 8:30 a.m. wreck on Interstate 435 near 63rd Street in Kansas City on a drunken driver going the wrong way.

Jackson County prosecutors charged Felix Solano-Gallardo, 18, of Kansas City, Kan., on Monday with two counts of involuntary manslaughter. His blood alcohol content was 0.185, more than double the legal limit of 0.08, more than two hours after the wreck, according to court records.

Police were still working Tuesday to confirm the man’s identity. According to court records, Gallardo gave his name as Felix Gallardo, but he had two Mexican identification cards on him with a different name, and both cards had different photos. Prosecutors think he is an illegal immigrant.

Police said they think Gallardo had been driving the wrong way for at least 14 miles because they think he ran a driver off of Interstate 70 into a concrete median near Harrison Street earlier. The victim told police the driver drove at him from one side of the highway to the other and appeared to be trying to hit him, police said.

At least nine motorists called 911 to complain about a wrong-way driver on I-70 or I-435 Monday morning.

Gallardo was uncooperative with police and invoked his right to an attorney using an interpreter, according to court records.

The story is approaching an end.  Felix Solano-Gallardo plead guilty to two counts of Manslaughter. 

Solano-Gallardo could receive up to 30 years in prison when he is sentenced March 9.
Solano-Gallardo’s correct name and age have been unclear throughout his prosecution. Immediately after his arrest, he gave investigators the Solano-Gallardo name, while later telling immigration officers that his correct name was Luis Solano-Barrera. Under that name also he gave a birth day that would have made him 23 years old.
But under oath Wednesday, he said his name was Solano-Gallardo and that he was 19 years old.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/01/04/3352620/man-admits-driving-drunk-in-kc.html#storylink=cpy

When he was arrested he had a number of different IDs on his person—none that were later found to be valid.

***

Eight point five. That is the latest unemployment rate presented by the Obama Administration.  As usual, it is a pack of lies. The real rate around 11%.  The government has been manipulating the statistics again.

The methodology used by the Department of Labor to calculate unemployment is to compare those drawing unemployment with the number of the employed.  That latter figure can be manipulated as desired to include those working part-time and to list those holding more than one job as two people.

In addition at this time of year is the “seasonal adjustment.” That is a factor to adjust the seasonal increase of temporary jobs over the holiday season, roughly from mid-October through the end of December.

The problem with that adjustment is that they calculate the adjustment using the employment figures for the last five years.  The higher employment of the Bush years is dropping off. The calculation now contains the abysmal employment of the Obama years.  Consequently the current adjustment makes the unemployment look better.

Smoke and Mirrors.

Here is another view of that 11% real unemployment rate from The Washington Post, a member in good standing of the state media.

Wonkbook: The real unemployment rate is 11 percent

Posted by at 07:51 AM ET, 12/12/2011
Typically, I try to tie the beginning of Wonkbook to the news. But today, the most important sentence isn’t a report on something that just happened, but a fresh look at something that’s been happening for the last three years. In particular, it’s this sentence by the Financial Times’ Ed Luce, who writes, “According to government statistics, if the same number of people were seeking work today as in 2007, the jobless rate would be 11 percent.”
Remember that the unemployment rate is not “how many people don’t have jobs?”, but “how many people don’t have jobs and are actively looking for them?” Let’s say you’ve been looking fruitlessly for five months and realize you’ve exhausted every job listing in your area. Discouraged, you stop looking, at least for the moment. According to the government, you’re no longer unemployed. Congratulations?
Since 2007, the percent of the population that either has a job or is actively looking for one has fallen from 62.7 percent to 58.5 percent. That’s millions of workers leaving the workforce, and it’s not because they’ve become sick or old or infirm. It’s because they can’t find a job, and so they’ve stopped trying. That’s where Luce’s calculation comes from. If 62.7 percent of the country was still counted as in the workforce, unemployment would be 11 percent. In that sense, the real unemployment rate — the apples-to-apples unemployment rate — is probably 11 percent. And the real un- and underemployed rate — the so-called “U6” — is near 20 percent.
There were some celebrations when the unemployment rate dropped last month. But much of that drop was people leaving the labor force. The surprising truth is that when the labor market really recovers, the unemployment rate will actually rise, albeit only temporarily, as discouraged workers start searching for jobs again.

A number of conservative pundits have predicted that the unemployment figures for the rest of 2012 will continue to “improve.”  It will improve not because more people are going back to work. No, it will be lower because Obama’s administration will continue to manipulate the data to reflect the result that makes Obama look good…if that is possible.

When you hear someone claim that Obama is putting people back to work and use the unemployment rate as proof, look them in the eye and know them for the liar they are.

***

“An Impeachable offense.”  That was the statement by a local conservative talk-radio host this morning.  Obama made four recess appointments yesterday. Four people who Obama knew would not pass the approval process in the Senate.  Three of the appointees were union goons to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The other was to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Obama thumbs nose at Constitution on ‘recess appointments’

By: Examiner Editorial | 01/05/12 8:05 PM

President Obama is not one to let the Constitution get in the way of a “recess appointment.” He just named Richard Cordray to direct the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and he has announced three similar recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board. But Obama is making these appointments at a time when the Senate is actually in session, according to the Constitution and under all definitions accepted by authorities for the last century. If the Senate is in session, the Constitution requires the Senate’s advice and consent to these appointments.

This attempt to circumvent the legislative branch is a violation of Obama’s oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution. Instead he is thumbing his nose at it and daring Congress, or anybody else, to stop him. It’s the same sort of fundamental disrespect for the rule of law that is routinely practiced by tinhorn dictators like Hugo Chavez.
…
A president’s recess appointment power exists under Article II, Section Two of our Constitution, and it requires the Senate to be in recess at least three days before the power is exercised. Nowhere does it say the president gets to decide when the Senate is in recess; only Congress can do that. It has never been understood any other way.  
To justify this power grab, Obama contends that the Senate has actually been in recess for weeks because the Senate’s brief pro forma sessions every three days are a sham since no official business is conducted. Obama might as well argue that his appointments are legal because the moon is made of green cheese. Article I, Section Five of the Constitution states, in part, that “Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days …” The House has not consented to a Senate recess. Thus, the Senate’s pro forma sessions are strictly constitutional, the Senate is legally in session, and Obama must seek its advice and consent on these appointments. Otherwise, they are null and void and will be thrown out by a federal court. Obama is counting on that not happening before November’s election.

Obama’s problem is that the Senate is not in recess. The Senate has not “officially” been out of session since 2007.  Harry Reid kept the Senate in session to block any recess appointments by George Bush(43).  Reid has continued the tactic for other reasons, like trying to show it’s the ‘Pubs who are blocking legislation, but now that tactic has come around to bite Obama in the butt.

If a vote of Impeachment does come forth in the House, it will be the second time in less than a decade an a half that a democrat President has violated his oath of office.

But then, the democrats care little for such oaths nor for the Constitution. They view them as impediments to their efforts to seize and retain political power.

Impeachable Offenses and other topics

Posted on by

Newt and Representative Trent Franks (R-AZ) have indicated that Eric Holder’s and, by extension Obama’s, declared intention to not uphold the Defense of Marriage Act, signed by Bill Clinton by the way, to be an impeachable offense.  The Executive Branch of the federal government does NOT have the ability to pick and choose which laws will be enforced.  

This announcement by Holder isn’t the first instance where laws were ignored. The infamous Black Panther Voter Intimidation case is another.  In that case the guilty verdict had been declared, Holder illegally set the verdict aside.

***

If a Tractor Beam is possible, can Warp Drives be far behind?

***

I note that public service unions in Missouri have no right to collective bargaining nor the right to strike.  Those same rules apply to unionized federal employees.

What is so different about Wisconsin?  Nothing.

…

From the Heritage Foundation’s Morning Bell, March 3rd, 2011.

The Wisconsin state Senate passed a new rule fining any Senator who misses two or more days of session $100 a day.

In the private sector, if I took off from work and stayed away I’d find a pink slip and a final paycheck mailed to my house.  It should be no different for politicians.  They are no special elite with special privileges. 

***

Criminal malfeasance by Border Patrol policy makers?

Border Patrol agents shot beanbags at a group of suspected bandits before the men returned fire during a confrontation in a remote canyon, killing agent Brian Terry with a single gunshot, records show.

…
Border Patrol officials declined to answer questions about protocol for use of force, citing the ongoing investigation.
But Terry’s brother, Kent Terry, said the other agents who were there that night told him that they were instructed to use the non-lethal beanbags first. It’s a policy that doesn’t make sense to Kent Terry.
“You go up against a bandit crew that is carrying AKs, and you walk out there with guns loaded with beanbags – I don’t get it,” Terry said in a phone interview from Michigan. “It’s like going to the Iraqi war with one knife. It boggles my mind. … These guys (Border Patrol agents) are professionals; they should be able to use their judgment call on their own.”
***

Governance by incompetency and maliciousness—that will be the Obama legacy.