Category Archives: Liberal Tactics

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

Yaaawn…

Posted on by

What a week. I’ve been busy, the news-feeds are fixated, perhaps rightly so, on the Ebola outbreak. Commentators say the CDC is lying. Others say they aren’t. No one, except for a privileged few, really know what is going on nor the danger of a widespread outbreak.

I’m not interested in writing about Ebola. While my major in college was the equivalent of Pre-Med, I am not a medic, nor an EMT. I don’t claim to have any special knowledge other than a high-degree of well-earned skepticism. The real truth of it all, in my opinion, is that no one really knows what will/could/may happen with Ebola.

Change subject.

The political news has vanished from the national news scene in favor of Ebola. CNN is on a witch-hunt searching for contaminated sheets and clothing in Dallas. Ditto for most of the MSM.

In Kansas, Pat Roberts is losing…a result of his own garbage-strewn primary race that alienated his conservative core. All the so-called ‘moderates’, i.e., democrats masquerading a ‘Pubs, are publicly backing Greg Orman, the democrat running as an independent. Yeah, sure.

http://images.politico.com/global/2014/01/15/140115_sam_brownback_ap_605.jpg

KS Governor Sam Brownback speaking before the Kansas Legislature.

The same applies to Sam Brownback who is discovering he can’t buck the über-liberal education and union lobby plus their lust to spend. The Kansas establishment thought they could control Brownback. When they found they couldn’t, they turned to supporting a democrat, thus exposing their true allegiance.

And to top it all off, the Royals are in the playoffs for the World Series. Their run came at an appropriate time to redirect attention to baseball instead of politics. Whatever bangs their gong.

On the Missouri side, Representative John Diehl, the golden-boy chosen years ago to be the next Speaker of the Missouri House, is running into trouble. Conservatives are openly supporting his opponent in an attempt to remove him from office. The conservatives claim that Diehl is no ‘Pub and has blocked significant numbers of crucial, conservative legislation. They are out for payback.

And so the week ends. I’m ready for the weekend.

Facebook

Wow! What a weekend.

Posted on by

I had a real busy weekend. I had a real busy week. My shootin’ buddy and I spent Thursday at the range practicing for a pistol match coming up next month. Saturday night was a Friends of the NRA dinner and auction in H’ville. Then Sunday afternoon was the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance 25th Anniversary picnic.

I’m pretty much whooped.  Still…I’d do it again in a second.

***

The Kansas Senatorial race continues to be in the front of the news. I’ve had some friends ask me what the controversy is all about. It’s this, as briefly as I can explain.

There are (were) three candidates running for US Senator; Pat Roberts, the incumbent on the Republican Ticket, Chad Taylor on the democrat ticket, and Greg Orman, a democrat who the democrats wouldn’t let run against Taylor in the primary. Orman decided to run as an ‘independent.’ In reality, it’s two democrats running against one ‘Pub. Ordinarily, this would be a shoo-in for Roberts because Orman would split the democrat votes with Taylor.

Suddenly, the environment changed. Polls indicated that Orman was running better against Roberts than Taylor. To the democrats, this meant one of their candidates was a possible winner, especially since Roberts pissed off much of the grass-roots conservatives who had backed Milton Wolf. A significant percentage of those Wolf supporters declared they would either vote for Orman or stay home.

The democrats were now in a dilemma. Orman, a democrat in an independent’s costume, was ahead of Taylor. They decided to have Taylor quit. That would allow the democrats to vote for Orman instead of splitting their votes between the two democrat candidates.

The Kansas democrat leaders forced Chad Taylor to quit.

After a series of legal shenanigans, with the aid of their left-leaning KS Supreme Court, they got Taylor off the ticket. Bad news for Roberts. But Orman isn’t the clean-cut, scandal-free candidate the democrats and he projects. He is being sued for failure to pay royalties to another company for the use of their patented technology.

The establishment ‘Pubs are rallying around Roberts and Orman is facing more scrutiny from the national press. Surprise, surprise! Orman is keeping closed-mouth about what his political views?

Greg Orman, a political enigma, faces growing scrutiny in Kansas Senate race

By Philip Rucker September 28 at 8:53 PM

WICHITA — Greg Orman, the upstart Senate candidate threatening to unseat longtime Republican incumbent Pat Roberts in Kansas, says it’s liberating to run as an independent: “I can go to Washington as a problem solver, not a partisan.”

But not having a party also liberates Orman from taking positions — especially on controversial issues that might alienate partisans.

Greenlight the Keystone XL pipeline? Orman said he doesn’t have enough information to say yes or no.

What about gun control? He said gun restrictions should be “strengthened” but would not specify whether he backs an assault-weapons ban.

And on the biggest question of all — Would he caucus with Democrats or Republicans? — Orman insists he’s not sure.

Republican Sen. Pat Roberts, left, and independent candidate Greg Orman talk after a debate at the Kansas State Fair Saturday, Sept. 6, 2014, in Hutchinson, Kansas. (Charlie Riedel/AP)

“It’s not in the best interests for us to say that,” Orman said in an interview here last week.

Orman has said he would caucus with whichever party has the majority after November’s midterm elections. But what if the Senate is evenly divided and Orman’s decision swings the balance? He said that would be “a wonderful opportunity for Kansas.”

Orman’s rise has transformed deep-red Kansas into the year’s unlikeliest political battleground. Many voters say Roberts has lost touch with the state he’s represented in Congress since 1981.

Since Democratic nominee Chad Taylor withdrew his name from the ballot this month, Roberts has been in a two-man race with Orman, who has previous ties to the Democratic Party but preaches independence. Public polling has been unreliable, but both sides believe the race is very tight.

Orman, who entered the race in June, has surged on the strength of his pitch to fix a broken Washington without any allegiance to a political party. But now the enigma is under increasing pressure from voters to provide a clearer sense of his ideology and politics, while facing attacks from the Roberts camp over his business ties and Democratic past.

“I’ve been impressed with Greg so far, but we’re still in the ‘I’m an independent’ stage,” said Lynda Neff, 68, a retired teacher. “I’m ready to move past that and hear about some issues. . . . I will support him if he gives me a little more information.”

Perhaps the biggest test for Orman, a multi­millionaire investor who is partially funding his campaign, is surviving the intensifying public scrutiny of his business and personal relationships with Rajat Gupta, the former Goldman Sachs board member who was convicted in 2012 of insider trading and is serving a federal prison sentence.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dre/politics/election-lab-2014

Election Lab: See our current forecast for every congressional race in 2014.

View Graphic

Roberts and his Republican allies have launched a barrage of attacks designed to make Orman appear untrustworthy. On the campaign trail in Kansas last week, a parade of top Republicans alleged that Orman is a liberal Democrat in disguise.

“Anybody with a liberal record like Greg’s . . . that’s not independence. That’s someone who’s trying to snooker you, Kansas,” Sarah Palin, the former Alaska governor and vice-presidential nominee, said Thursday in Independence.

Palin’s 2008 running mate, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), told voters a day earlier in suburban Overland Park: “Let’s be honest — he’s a Democrat. He walks like a duck and he quacks like a duck and he is a duck.”

Robert J. Dole, a former Senate Republican leader and 91-year-old Kansas legend, said Monday night in Dodge City, “There’s a multimillionaire who claims he’s an independent, but really [he’s] in the other party.”

In Kinsley on Tuesday, after reporters asked whether he trusted Orman to govern as an independent, Roberts said, “All of a sudden, if there’s a metamorphosis and the caterpillar changed — why, I just don’t think that’s in the cards.”

Orman argues that the Republicans are reading him wrong. He said he voted for Obama in 2008, and public records show that in the middle of that decade he made donations mostly to Democrats, including Obama and Sen. Al ­Franken (Minn.). In 2008, he briefly ran for Senate against Roberts as a Democrat before dropping out.

The column by the Washington Post is long. You can read it completely on their website.

I was surprised that the Washington Post says the new Senate will be ‘Pub controlled, 62 to 48 given their history of biased reporting. Joni Ernst now leads Braley, 44 percent to 38 percent. Most of the polling over the last month or more has Ernst in the lead but the MSM claimed otherwise and called Iowa a ‘leaning blue’ state.

Des Moines Register: “The ground under Bruce Braley has shifted. The Democratic U.S. Senate candidate is 6 points behind his GOP rival, Joni Ernst, according to The Des Moines Register’s new Iowa Poll of likely voters. Ernst leads 44 percent to 38 percent in a race that has for months been considered deadlocked…. One potential reason: Two-thirds of likely voters who live in the country are bothered by a remark he made about Republican U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley that’s been perceived as besmirching farmers.”

Braley should have known that dissing farmers in Iowa is not a career-enhancing tactic.

Facebook

Alpha and Omega

Posted on by

Revelation 1:8 King James Version (KJV)

8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

In the passage above, God is the beginning and the end. In today’s world, democrats and liberals want to usurp that authority.

To an extent, they have done so at the beginning with widespread abortions upon demand. Now another liberal and Obamacare architect, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, wants to kill us when we reach age 75. “Seventy-five years is enough,” he says. Death at the beginning and end by government fiat.

Whenever we chip away a bit at abortion, the abortionists scream and froth at the mouth. This month, Missouri passed a bill over democrat Jay Nixon’s veto, to extend the waiting period from 24 hours to 72 hours. It’s a small thing, giving a pregnant woman three days to think over her irretrievable decision. But if you listen to the abortionist’s protest, you would think Missouri had banned all abortions completely.

They lie, of course.

A woman doesn’t know if she is pregnant for a month or more after conception. Frequently more, two, sometimes three months before observable changes occur. The abortionists want us to believe that three days is critical? Why? Is it really the woman’s decision or the abortionists? The abortionists, according to democrats and liberals.

When Nixon’s veto was overridden, I knew it wasn’t the end. I was right. The abortionists have changed tactics. They are shipping pregnant women out-ot-state for abortions…like cattle to slaughter. All because of another 48 hours delay.

‘Out-of-state abortion providers ready to treat more Missouri women,’ St. Louis Post-Dispatch: “One of the strictest abortion laws in the country is about to take effect in Missouri, and some out-of-state providers say they are prepared to treat more Missouri women if they show up at their clinics. Starting Oct. 10, women who want to stay in Missouri for the elective procedure will have to wait 72 hours after consulting a physician before they can receive an abortion. That’s triple the previous 24-hour waiting period. There are no exemptions in the case of rape or incest. The state has only one abortion provider left, Planned Parenthood in St. Louis.

 

“Dr. Erin King, the associate medical director at Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City, said she’s not sure if more women will show up, but she’s ready to respond if they do. Her clinic is about 15 minutes from downtown St. Louis. The state of Illinois has no waiting period for women age 18 or older. … King said her group tries to provide as much information about women’s options and the state-imposed wait times on its website. … The price for an abortion varies depending on the stage of the pregnancy, which also dictates the type of abortion. The price ranges from $465 for the abortion pill to $3,720 for a procedure performed at 23 weeks, according to Hope Clinic for Women’s website. A patient then submits an itemized summary to her insurance carrier but is not always reimbursed, according to a Hope Clinic staffer. King’s clinic performs more than 5,000 procedures a year, according to its website, and is one of the closest clinics to Missouri. A Planned Parenthood and the Center for Women’s Health, located in Overland Park, Kan., serve metropolitan Kansas City. A third provider, Aid for Women, closed its doors in July, according to its website.” — PoliticMO and the St Louis Post-Dispatch.

Why all this effort to kill people from the left? Perhaps it is because they view us as commodities—commodities to be used and discarded when we are no longer useful to them. We have the abortionists at the beginning of life slaughtering innocents and then we have others, like Dr. Emmanuel, at the other end waiting to dispose of us.

In his controversial essay that appears in the October issue of The Atlantic, the prominent bioethicist Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel argues that longevity — living into your 80s, 90s and beyond — often comes at the expense of quality of life. Emanuel says he will be perfectly content if he dies at age 75.

“By the time I reach 75, I will have lived a complete life,” Emanuel writes in the magazine. “I will have loved and been loved. My children will be grown and in the midst of their own rich lives. I will have seen my grandchildren born and beginning their lives. I will have pursued my life’s projects and made whatever contributions, important or not, I am going to make. And hopefully, I will not have too many mental and physical limitations.”

Emanuel, the director of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the U.S. National Institutes of Health and head of the Department of Medical Ethics & Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, helped develop President Obama’s health care reform law. — CBS News.

Dr. Emanuel reminds me of the movie, Soylent Green. Sarah Palin’s Death Panels exist. Dr. Emanuel created them in Obamacare.

 

And people shake their heads when I predict an upcoming civil war. The left will continue to push, push, push their agenda of maximum control until the rest of us get fed up and refuse to comply. When that happens, the gloves come off and the left will unleash their goons to force us into compliance…and we will refuse. That’s why the government is creating para-military groups in the Department of Education, the IRS, USDA and other federal agencies that have nothing to do with violence except what they create themselves. Perhaps the Surgeon General’s Riot Control Police will appear next.

Is it possible to prevent a civil war? Yes, of course. But we won’t when we have leadership like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell leading the congressional ‘Pubs. They are part of the problem, not the solution.

Facebook

It’s on! Veto Override Session

Posted on by

I had hoped to go to Jeff City this morning to do some politicin’. Well…I didn’t. I’ve been running on a sleep deficit for several days and it caught up with me last night. I woke up at 9:15am and it is a three-hour drive to Jeff City.

I’ve been urging folks to go to Jeff City and lobby their legislators on a number of bills, SB 656 for one, the Armed Teacher bill. There are more on the block if the backer’s can get 2/3rds of the House and Senate to override Nixon’s veto.

Eli Yokley’s PoliticMO Newsletter has this to say.

VETO SESH — the budget: ‘Missouri legislators look to override $40 million of Nixon cuts at veto session,’ PoliticMo: “When the Missouri House convenes for the first day of veto session tomorrow, they will be faced immediately with dozens of spending items vetoed by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon that would cost the state $40 million. Nixon – a Democrat – has framed it as the Republican-controlled legislature opting to “grow government,” noting that their budget included 30 spending items not in the budget he presented. On the other side, the Legislature’s budget leaders said Tuesday Nixon’s priorities are in the wrong place, accusing him of putting his travel expenses above funding for priorities like children and victims of domestic abuse. …  Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, … who was joined by House Budget Committee Chairman Rick Stream, R-St. Louis, was non-specific when asked which items the legislature would specifically address. That information, he said, would be made available after the two budget leaders present their suggestions to members of their party tomorrow morning. Lawmakers will move through the 50 line-items one by one Wednesday morning starting in the House. Stream said debate would be limited in order to move quickly and on to other bills.

“Nixon has indicated that he could very easily turn around and withhold the new spending, especially if lawmakers override his vetoes of what he has depicted as costly sales tax measures. He has already withheld nearly $600 million due to that and sluggish state income. Schaefer said that decision – whether to withhold the money – is one the governor will have to make, but that legislators are planning to proceed with the override effort “to send the message on behalf of Missourians who are in need of these programs that the governor is wrong.'” http://bit.ly/1AyzRHS

— guns: ‘Missouri Republicans push for gun bill victory,’ by the AP’s new Summer Ballentine (@esballentine): “Missouri Republicans are clashing again with Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon on guns, as lawmakers approach a vote today that could overturn his veto of legislation allowing teachers to bring firearms to school and other residents to carry them openly in public. After multiple setbacks, a veto override would mark a victory in Missouri for backers of expanded gun rights. A measure that would have voided federal gun control laws died in the final hours of session this May. Nixon vetoed a similar bill last year that could have subjected federal officers to state criminal charges and lawsuits for attempting to enforce federal gun control laws. Lawmakers passed a less sweeping bill this session that would allow specially trained school employees to carry concealed guns on campuses. The measure also would allow anyone with a concealed-weapons permit to carry their gun openly, even in cities or towns with bans against open carry. …

“Missouri lawmakers’ efforts to pass gun legislation are part of a larger movement among conservative states. After 20 children and six adults died in 2012 during a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, some Republican-led state legislatures, including Missouri’s, fought against stricter gun control laws backed by Democratic President Barack Obama. … David Kopel, an associate policy analyst for the libertarian think tank Cato Institute, said the president’s policies played a powerful role in motivating Second Amendment activism. About 30 states allow the open carrying of guns without a permit, and about 13 others require some sort of license. Kansas in April approved a measure allowing the open carrying of firearms, which, like Missouri, will trump any local bans on open carry. Georgia gun owners can carry firearms openly in more places after the Legislature reduced open-carry restrictions, and lawmakers voted to make Arkansas an open carry state last year.” http://bit.ly/1uvYWT1

— abortion: ‘House speaker advocates for abortion-policy bills on eve of veto session,’ Columbia Missourian: “Speaker of the House Tim Jones had harsh words for Gov. Jay Nixon on Tuesday as he advocated for House bills 1132 and 1307 on the eve of the legislature’s veto override session.  … Jones said he hoped that the legislature would override the governor’s vetoes on the two bills.  House Bill 1132 establishes a tax credit for contributions to pregnancy resource centers, maternity homes and food pantries. House bill 1307 extends the waiting period for a woman considering an abortion from the current 24 hours to 72 hours. … Jones also said of House Bill 1132 that those who wanted to see the bill enacted into law were “simply asking for an extension of the public-private partnership.'” http://bit.ly/1p79qCM

Another veto to overturn is for SB 523, the Student Protection bill sponsored by our own Senator Ed Emory.

This act prohibits school districts from requiring a student to use an identification device that uses radio frequency identification technology to identify the student, transmit information regarding the student, or monitor or track the location of the student. The bill protects our students in public schools from unwanted data surveillance and tracking. This also prohibits the transmission of this data. — Missouri Alliance for Freedom.
The Legislature has already overridden one of Nixon’s vetos this year, the Tax Cut bill, SB 509, vetoed by Nixon early in the 2014 legislative session. The Legislature, promptly overrode Nixon’s veto within a week, if I remember correctly. Now, it’s time to continue that trend.

***

The Kansas Senatorial Soap Opera continues—with lawsuits. ‘Independent’ candidate Greg Orman is being sued in Federal court over the failure of his holding company to pay royalties to another company. The suit has been slowly making its way through the legal system since 2012.

Chad Taylor is now suing the state of Kansas—Kris Kobach as Kansas Secretary of State, to get himself removed from the November ballot. It’s a liberal tactic to shift democrat votes who would normally vote for Taylor, to vote for ‘democrat-masquerading-as-an-independent/RINO’ Greg Orman.

Kobach refused to remove Taylor from the ballot citing Kansas law.

Kobach cited a 1997 Kansas statute requiring a withdrawing candidate to declare he or she is “incapable” of serving if elected. Taylor’s letter, Kobach said, referenced the law but did not contain the required language. — Kansas City Star.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article1512707.html#storylink=cpy

According to Kansas law, the only valid reason for candidate withdrawing at this point in the election cycle is if the candidate is incapable of holding the office—such as a severe illness, injury, or sudden mental defect of the candidate. Taylor’s problem is that he has none of these valid reasons for withdrawing. None, that is, than obeying the democrat party’s diktat to quit.

I’m sure Pat Roberts would love to join in. I wouldn’t be surprised if he weren’t checking to see who he can sue to join in on the fun.

Facebook

Friday Follies for September 5, 2014.

Posted on by

http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ap_kris_kobach_dm_120424_wblog.jpgI’ve a followup from yesterday’s post. Democratic nominee, Chad Taylor, must remain on the November ballot, according to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. It seems that, according to Kansas law, Taylor can only withdraw at this point if he is unfit to hold the office.

Uh-oh!

If Taylor makes that claim, it could mean he’s also unfit to hold his office as Shawnee County (KS) District Attorney. Caught between a rock and a hard place, aren’t you, Chad?

But let’s assume that Taylor did drop out leaving Pat Roberts running against “independent,” Greg Orman? Orman claims he hasn’t decided which party he would caucus with if he won. It’s significant that some of his backers are a number of so-called “moderate” ‘Pubs. You know whom I speak, the liberals masquerading as republicans. These are the same groups who are also backing democrat Paul Davis against ‘Pub Sam Brownback for Kansas Governor. A Pat Roberts spokesman said:

“…some members of Traditional Republicans for Common Sense had revealed their true colors by endorsing Democrat Paul Davis for governor rather than backing Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.” — Topeka Capitol Journal.

If the Kansas Senate race becomes a two-dog race, is Roberts a shoo-in? No, according to an article that appeared in the American Thinker.

Democratic Senate candidate in Kansas withdraws

By Rick Moran, September 4, 2014

The Kansas Senate race, which was supposed to be a breeze for long time GOP Senator Pat Roberts, just got very interesting.

Democratic candidate Chad Taylor told the Kansas secretary of state that he was withdrawing from the race, leaving the field clear for a head to head match up between Roberts and independent businessman Greg Orman.

Politico:

Orman, 45, has shown some fundraising prowess throughout the campaign, raising more than $670,000 through mid-July.

The development could have serious implications in the battle for control of the Senate. Once viewed as a GOP lock, Kansas may now emerge as a critical race in determining whether Republicans return to power for the first time in nearly a decade. Republican outside groups — which had been mainly focused on four red states and battlegrounds states like Iowa, Colorado and New Hampshire — may be forced to spend money to save Roberts’ seat.

A mid-August poll of likely voters from Democratic firm Public Policy Polling showed Orman beating Roberts 43-33 in a head-to-head matchup, while Taylor was shown losing narrowly. Randy Batson, a Libertarian candidate, will also be on the ballot.

Roberts’ camp quickly sought to cast Orman as a Democrat in disguise, calling Taylor’s withdrawal a “corrupt bargain between Greg Orman and national Democrats including Senator Harry Reid that disenfranchises Kansas Democrats.”

“Orman is the choice of liberal Democrats and he can no longer hide behind an independent smokescreen,” the Republican’s campaign said in a statement.

Travis Smith of Axiom Strategies, a Roberts consultant, said the campaign will give Orman, whom he said wasn’t really taken seriously as a contender until Taylor withdrew, a “full, thorough vetting.”

“I don’t think he can get away with it,” Smith said.

Orman has spent time as both a Democrat and Republican, but he emphasizes that he’s spent more of his life as an independent or unaffiliated voter — and most of his political donations have gone to independent candidates.

While Kansas is a solidly GOP state, the rise of the tea party has alienated many moderates in a state with a long-standing tradition of centrist lawmakers. As the state GOP has moved sharply to the right, it has created an opening — not just for Orman, but also Democrat Paul Davis in this year’s governor’s race against conservative incumbent Sam Brownback.

Orman has vowed not to vote for either of party’s standard-bearer as Senate leader. His campaign website describes North Dakota Democrat Heidi Heitkamp and Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski as potential leaders he could support, willing to buck their party “to vote for what is right.”

Is Orman a Democratic stalking horse? Whether he is or he isn’t, that’s how Roberts is going to portray him. He is probably not going to get all the Democratic votes that Tayor was going to receive, which means he will have to draw a lot of non-alinged voters to his side in order to beat Roberts.

Possible, but not probable.

Roberts’ real danger is in a credible Libertarian candidate who might draw just enough Republican votes to deny him victory.

Orman has several things going for him:

1. Kansas is a cheap media state so Orman can compete on a somewhat equal level.

2. Roberts is disliked by a majority of Kansans who think he has been in Washington too long.

3. The state GOP is divided and Tea Party Republicans may stay home on election day.

This is a recipe for disaster and unless Roberts is successful in getting people to believe that Orman is really a Democrat in independent clothing, he will be in trouble in November.

It is quite possible that the Kansas Senate race—and Gubernatorial race, will turn into a free-for-all. No one knows who will come out on top.

Facebook

2012 Redux — Kansas

Posted on by

14785422344_a9fa1504c6_zClaire McCaskill, according to some, set up Tod Adkins as an opponent and then set him up, again, to fail. She has been working with the dems in Kansas to repeat her 2012 tactic. This time in Kansas.

There are two articles that appeared today on this subject, one from FOXNews and the other in the PoliticMO newsletter.

From the FOXNewsletter, September 4, 2014:

WAPO: MCCASKILL BEHIND KANSAS CANDIDATE SWITCH
WaPo: “Democratic nominee Chad Taylor dropped out of the race for U.S. Senate in Kansas on Wednesday, an 11th hour move that could clear the way for his party to rally behind an independent candidate and potentially change the math in the battle for the Senate majority. … The move, which came on the last day for ballot changes, could clear the way for Democrats to rally behind Greg Orman, an independent candidate who has left the door open to caucusing with both parties if elected. Orman, who used to be a Democrat and a Republican, has been viewed as a more viable opponent against Sen. Pat Roberts (R), who polls show is vulnerable. Orman has been a far more productive fundraiser than Taylor.”
 
[No exit? – The Hill: “Despite filing papers with the Kansas secretary of State withdrawing from the Senate race late Wednesday, Democrat Chad Taylor may be stuck on the ballot this fall. Two election law statutes have raised questions about whether Taylor gave sufficient cause to remove himself from the ballot, and, if so, whether Democrats must ultimately choose a candidate to replace him.]

Howdy, neighbor – WaPo: “Taylor, the Shawnee County district attorney, was in touch with at least one prominent Democrat in the days leading up to his decision. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) spoke with Taylor about dropping out of the race in order to consolidate support behind Orman in hopes of unseating Roberts, according to Democrats familiar with the talks. … In an interview with The Washington Post last week, Orman would not say which party he would caucus with if elected. He suggested that he would side with whichever party is in the majority and would consider joining both sides if he ends up being the deciding vote.”

In 2012, dems clandestinely supported Tod Adkin’s candidacy for Senator believing him to be the weaker candidate as compared to John Brunner or Sarah Steelman. Chad Taylor learned, to his dismay, when you’re a dem and you get orders, you obey or be hammered.

Greg Orman claims to be an independent. He’s not. He’s been endorsed by Kansas’ RINOs who refuse to support the state’s conservatives. They’re nothing more than liberals masquerading as ‘Pubs. Orman is just another lib hiding his true allegiance to the liberal, progressive agenda. At least Chad Taylor was truthful about what he was and his agenda. Not so, Orman.

The other article comes from the PoliticMO newsletter. It mirrors the tale from FOX.

ACROSS THE BORDER — ‘The Senate Race In Kansas Just Got Crazy,’ FiveThirtyEight: “The past few weeks haven’t produced much good news for Democrats’ hopes of retaining the Senate. While their position is far from catastrophic — the Senate playing field is broad this year, and the outcome of many races is uncertain — Democrats’ chances of keeping the Senate were down to 35 percent as of the FiveThirtyEight forecast late Wednesday afternoon. Part of the problem is that Democrats are almost entirely playing defense, with few prospects to pick up Republican-held seats. Georgia, where we have the Democrat Michelle Nunn’s odds at about 30 percent, looks like their best opportunity. It’s also too early to foreclose the possibility of Democrats winning Kentucky, but Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has not trailed in a nonpartisan poll since May, and two new surveys Wednesday put him ahead.

“Kansas, however, had become an under-the-radar opportunity for Democrats. The Republican incumbent there, Pat Roberts, barely survived his primary and has extremely low approval ratings. Several recent polls had put the race in single digits between Roberts and his Democratic opponent, Chad Taylor, with the independent candidate Greg Orman getting about 20 percent of the vote. As of Wednesday, the FiveThirtyEight forecast gave Roberts an 80 percent chance of winning. That’s not bad, but it’s not any better than McConnell, who also has about an 80 percent chance of holding on in a race that has gotten far more attention. Late Wednesday afternoon, however, Taylor announced his withdrawal from the race, setting up a contest between Orman and Roberts. (There is also a Libertarian candidate, Randall Baston, on the ballot.)

“Why would Taylor leave the race right when polls showed it tightening? Perhaps because he and Orman share a lot in common philosophically. Based on the ideological ratings we track (more background on those here), both Taylor and Orman rate as the equivalent of moderate Democrats. Orman, in fact, ran as a Democratic candidate for the Senate in 2008, although he withdrew from the race during the primary. … There was also a recent survey, from Public Policy Polling (PPP), which showed Orman ahead of Roberts 43-33 in a potential two-way race. The same poll had shown Taylor trailing Roberts by 4 percentage points in the event Orman dropped out. If the PPP survey is accurate, this is a huge problem for Republicans. Suddenly, they’re behind in a race against a former Democrat who might caucus with the Democratic Party should he make it to the Senate. … If we do program the model to treat an Orman win as a Democratic pickup, then the Democrats’ chances of retaining the Senate would improve to 38 percent from 35 percent. We’re going to do some further thinking overnight about how to handle the case.” http://53eig.ht/Z7D6uC

WHY’S IT MATTER HERE? — ‘Was Claire McCaskill in the middle of a Democratic effort to push Chad Taylor out of Kansas race?,’ on PoliticMo: “Kansas Democratic Chad Taylor terminated his U.S. Senate campaign Wednesday, clearing the way for a two-way race between independent candidate Greg Orman and Republican Pat Roberts as the embattled incumbent seeks a fourth term. Taylor’s exit puts the Kansas seat back in play for Democrats hoping to weaken Republicans in their quest to take back control of the upper chamber for the final two years of President Obama’s term.

“The late change appears to be placing Kansas in the same place Missouri was two years ago: In the center of the political universe as an unexpected opportunity for Democrats to take a win away from the GOP in a race that was not even supposed to be competitive. Here in 2012, Democratic U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill made a gamble to back Republican Todd Akin in the three-way Republican primary. Akin won, and the rest is legitimate history. Nearly two years later, some are asking whether McCaskill – whose political stock has been on there rise since her 2012 victory – was involved again. Wednesday night, hours after Taylor’s announcement, an aide to McCaskill said she did speak with Taylor in recent weeks surrounding his decision to drop out. ‘Claire did talk with Chad Taylor and was happy to,’ the aide said. ‘She thinks very highly of him and thinks he has a very bright political future. And she knows these decisions are both hard and personal.’

“McCaskill’s involvement comes as she has been working to raise her profile as a party leader. In Missouri, McCaskill has led Democratic efforts to take back seats in the Legislature and contributed $200,000 of her own money to the cause. Nationally, McCaskill has said she will back Hillary Clinton for president. She was one of the first Senate Democrats to support the “Ready for Hillary” PAC, and has traveled to Iowa to campaign for her. Last week, the Kansas City Star reported that the former state Representative and state auditor was even flirting with a run for governor. McCaskill has made no secret her hope to be Missouri’s first female chief executive. That 2016 question for McCaskill, the report noted, may have something to do with what happens in 2014′s U.S. Senate elections.” http://bit.ly/1pszXdR

What goes around, comes around. This time, if McCaskill has her way, it will happen in Kansas like it did in Missouri two years ago.

Facebook