Category Archives: Amnesty

Are there no ‘Pubs in the Senate?

Posted on by

Once again, Mitch McConnell has shown he’s nothing more than a tool for the liberals and democrats. The DHS funding bill is being filibustered in the Senate by democrats. Even the MSM is blaming the dems for the delay. The ‘Pubs are WINNING!

What does McConnell do? He wants to compromise by stripping out the prohibition against funding Obama’s dictatorial amnesty and have the Senate vote on it separately. We all know what will happen. It will either not pass, or if passed, Obama will veto it. All the while, the DHS funding bill will pass WITH NO PROHIBITION ON FUNDING AMNESTY!! Obama gets what he wants.

We thought with the big GOP win last November that we had seen the last of Harry Reid. We were wrong. Even after Harry’s little ‘meeting’ with his financiers who gave him a black eye, Harry Reid still controls the Senate. When he barks, Mitch McConnell jumps.

It makes me wonder how big a bribe it took for McConnell to betray his constituents and the country? The biggest obstacle to restrain government in the Senate is Mitch McConnell.

After this example of political treason, it’s time to uncover the Rules for RINOs. I originally wrote about them last October. It’s time to renew our collective memories.

1) There is nothing ever worth fighting for except Democrat policies: If you’re going to fight for something, make sure you’re fighting your own base to help the Democrats achieve some policy goal that makes Tea Partiers want to stab themselves in their eyes. This makes you appear reasonable to the mainstream media and the howls of outrage from your base make it more likely that the New York Times will say nice things about you.

2) You must systematically destroy any person, place, or thing that excites conservatives: Nothing good ever comes from conservatives getting excited; so make sure to target anything and anyone that gets them fired up. If it’s a person like Ted Cruz or Sarah Palin, trash him or her publicly or have your aides leak stories to the press if you’re not brave enough to go that far. If it’s a strategy, put it down and undercut it at every opportunity. If it’s a group like the Senate Conservatives Fund or Freedomworks, scorn it and complain that it’s bad for the Republican Party.

3) You’re a winner just by virtue of being an establishment Republican: When Tea Partiers rally behind a candidate who loses, it’s because those guys don’t know what they’re doing. When establishment Republicans rally behind a candidate who loses, then they obviously selected the best candidate and no other candidate could have won. Establishment Republicans have a great formula: Win races, do nothing with that power that will make the media mad at you, which leads to more victories, which leads to doing nothing with that power that will make the media mad at you and so on and so on until the GOP totally dominates. Sure, that strategy may have lost the GOP the last two presidential elections and has produced only 45 senators so far, but it should start working any time now.

4) Trash conservatives, but hold your fire against Democrats: There’s a reason that both John McCain and Mitt Romney fought harder against their Republican primary opponents than they did against Barack Obama. The liberal media applauds you for saying mean things about conservative Republicans, but they hate it when you go after Democrats. If it comes right down to it, it’s better to go down to an honorable defeat than to win and have the media angry at you because you won a bruising race against a Democrat.

5) Communication skills are completely irrelevant: Think of yourself as a placeholder. Your job is to do just enough to keep conservatives from hating your guts so badly that you end up like poor Arlen Specter, while not making the media angry at you. Keep in mind that nothing makes the media angrier than a Republican who’s effective at anything. If you seem too charismatic or clever, liberals will perceive you as a threat who needs to be destroyed. That’s why you’re much better off mumbling boilerplate that people will forget 5 minutes after they’ve heard it.

6 Don’t freak people out by discussing how bad things are really getting: You don’t want to start freaking people out by suggesting the country could be so bankrupt we can’t even afford to borrow the money for our entitlement programs in a decade, do you? What do you think Paul Krugman would say to that? If you start telling the public that the Obama Administration got people killed with Fast and Furious and Benghazi, how do you think the Washington Post will react? Besides, if things really go south, important people like you will be living on an island somewhere; so who cares what happens to the rest of the country?

7) Accept that conservatism can’t win: Your job is not to win battles for conservatism, since that can’t happen. Instead, your job is to stave off inevitable defeat long enough to enjoy the perks of being a career politician before you start making the real money as a lobbyist. The last thing you want to do is go out and actually start trying to move the country to the right. That’s how you get MSNBC talking about you every day and Jesse Jackson calling you a racist.

8) Moderate is always better than conservative: Come on, how could any intelligent person back Pat Toomey over Arlen Specter, Marco Rubio over Charlie Crist, Rand Paul over Trey Grayson, and Ted Cruz over David Dewhurst? Granted, Rubio is coming around, but the rest of those guys have been rocking the boat since they got in the Senate. Why can’t they be more like Charlie Crist, Lincoln Chaffee, and Arlen Specter? Sure, all of those guys left the GOP, but anyone who can make it in either party obviously appeals to a lot of voters.

9) It’s fine to lie to your base: Just tell your supporters what they want to hear to get them to vote you into office and then keep your promises if it’s convenient. Tell them you’ll NEVER support amnesty and then lead the charge on it or say, “Read my lips: no new taxes,” and then push through a massive tax increase. The media loves it when Republicans screw over their own supporters and besides, what are they going to do? Vote for the Democrat?

10) Don’t make the mistake of talking about conservative principles when it matters: When you talk about conservative principles, mention them occasionally, quietly, as if they’re something your base is forcing you to do. Don’t ever make a big deal over it, even if your opponent is taking wildly unpopular liberal positions. Sure, the American public may ferociously oppose partial birth abortion and refusing to deport illegal aliens who’ve committed serious crimes, but if you make an issue of it, the media will think you’re one of THOSE Republicans. You know, the ones that actually believe in things. Better to just mumble some platitudes about your commitment to life and the rule of law as you get back to your talking points about the corporate tax rate.

These rules also apply to our state legislature. There aren’t as many RINOs in Jeff City as there are in the US Senate. Still, there are enough in Jeff City to block conservative issues and bills, i.e., RTW.

It becomes increasing difficult to support ‘Pubs at the national level when they continue to betray us at every opportunity.

Facebook

An alternate choice?

Posted on by

The primary battle between two GOP candidates for Governor has commenced. Catherine Hanaway has been broadcasting some particularly vile radio ads against Tom Schweich. Yes, those ads are supposedly from a third party but they have the consent and approval of the Hanaway campaign. In some campaigns in past years, my candidate of choice, often took a turn on who used smear tactics. Those were the ones I voted against.

I’ve met both candidates in their previous campaigns for office. Neither, in my view, are choice candidates.

Yes, Schweich has had some questionable campaign donations and has given some questionable donations to other candidates. Am I convinced of the validity of those charges? No, I’m not.

Catherine Hanaway has issues as well. Her voting record in the state legislature has a number of questionable votes. One in particular was her vote against Missouri’s Concealed Carry law. She said, in an interview last year in Joplin that she voted according to the wishes of her district. Hanaway isn’t the White Knight of Missouri politics. Her consistency record is poor.

So who do we support? There may be an alternate choice. The GOP’s state Lincoln Day celebration occurred in Kansas City this last weekend. The state Lincoln Day gathering shifts each year between the St. Louis area, the Kansas City area, and Springfield. This year, it met in the downtown KC Marriott.

Eric Greitens

Eric Greitens

Eric Greitens, from the St. Louis area, had a hospitality suite in the Marriott and met with a number of state GOP activists and politicos. If you look at his bio, he has an impressive record. A friend who spoke with Greitens told me he believes Greitens will run for Governor.

Eli Yokley’s PoliticMO newsletter had this to say about Greitens.

FOR YOUR RADAR — ‘Who is Eric Greitens?,’ asks Missouri Scout: “Bill McMorris writes a piece about Eric Greitens’ impressive resume in the Washington Free Beacon. You’ll get a sense of the dude, but I won’t bury the lede… it’s in the final paragraph: Greitens will begin travelling the state on book tour in two weeks, evangelizing his doctrine of renewal and self-reliance and meeting the constituents he hopes will put him in the governor’s mansion. The primary is August 2016.”

— Greitens, a former U.S. Navy Seal, had a suite tucked away on the 19th floor of the Marriott Downtown in Kansas City over the weekend, where Republicans had gathered for their annual Lincoln Days gathering. Greitens met with activists and Republican consultants in his suite. The word is he is in, but he is staying quiet, letting Tom Schweich and Catherine Hanaway “shoot cruise missiles” while he flies under the radar. — PoliticMO Newsletter, February 24, 2015.

Greitens said he will travel around the state, “evangelizing his doctrine of renewal and self-reliance.” That would certainly be different from the current doctrine of crony-capitalism and voter dependency.

Catherine Hanaway won the straw poll for Governor over Tom Schweich this last weekend. There was a big controversy over the poll when the ballot box disappeared for a time and suddenly reappeared…stuffed with votes for Hanaway. Hmmm.

***

National Public Radio took a look at union membership across the country and its decline. They created a map that shows the transition in membership. Missouri union members were 23% of the workforce at one time, now their membership has declined to 8%. That’s a good thing.

***

This from today’s FOX Newsletter…

DEM REVOLT BEGINS ON OBAMA AMNESTY
After maintaining a weeks-long filibuster of a Republican bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security but roll back president Obama’s executive actions granting amnesty and work permits for millions of illegal immigrants, Senate Democrats are starting to splinter. Unable to break the Democratic logjam, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that he would instead offer a standalone bill to block Obama’s amnesty gambit before resuming the funding fight. Appearing on “Fox & Friends,” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said he would vote to “prevent the president from his executive action” and suggested that there might be the five other Democrats necessary to advance the legislation.

“Well, this bill removes those excuses. It sets up a simple political equation: Either stand in defense of extreme overreach, or stand with constituents in support of shared democratic values.” –Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell in a floor speech today. — FOX Newsletter, February 24, 2015.

The danger here is the McConnell is about to sell us out again. He has already asked the House to revise the DHS funding bill to include funding for Obama’s amnesty program. Initially, Speaker John Boehner has refused, saying the House has done their job, it’s now up to the Senate. I don’t trust Boehner to continue to stand on his statement.

Facebook

Speed bumps

Posted on by

Late yesterday, a Federal Judge in Texas issued a temporary restraining order against Obama Executive Order that game ‘amnesty’ for illegal aliens. The Judge is hearing a 26-state suit against Obama’s use of executive orders to bypass Congress, specifically opening the nations doors to millions of illegal aliens within and perched on our borders.

BAIER TRACKS: COURT SHAKES UP AMNESTY FIGHT ON HILL…
“As is so often the case, states lead the way. A lawsuit filed by 26 states against President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, took a big step forward. On Monday, a federal judge blocked the president’s actions granting legal status to millions of illegal immigrants. U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen’s decision puts a freeze on the president’s plan, the first phase of which was supposed to begin Wednesday. While the administration will no doubt appeal the ruling, this decision could provide a legislative opening for the Homeland Security funding bill that is stalled in the Senate. The bill is being blocked by Democrats and would also be certainly vetoed by the President should it pass. So what is the way out of the standoff?  The Republican argument may be to ask how they could fund anything that has been blocked by the courts and go full steam ahead on offense. Or, Republicans may be so encouraged about the chance for legal remedy that the looming showdown is drained of some of its urgency and move toward compromise. We’ll see what they choose.” – Bret Baier. — FOXNews Newsletter, February 17, 2015.

The White House says it will appeal.

***

There is a column posted on the American Thinker website that would be hilarious…if it weren’t so true. The subject? “Illegal aliens complain about life in suburbia.”

It seems that life here is sooo…difficult. They can’t drive because they can’t get licenses. If they settle away from urban areas, there aren’t any lawyers with immigration experience…and the lawyers that do, want to be paid! By the illegal aliens! Up front in many cases!

Not only that, but many schools have no or limited bilingual education. They seem to think children speak English!

Boo! Hoo!

Illegal aliens complaining about life in suburbia

By Pedro Gonzales, February 17, 2015

Lawbreakers are victims! Kirk Semple writes in the New York Times:

José was looking for peace and quiet, in addition to work, when he decided to settle in the hinterlands of upstate New York 14 years ago. “A lot of farmland and trees,” he recalled, speaking in Spanish. “It reminded me of my village in Mexico.”

But he quickly learned that being poor and undocumented and living far from the well-established immigrant networks found in the nation’s big cities made life especially difficult. There was the absence of public transportation (he cannot legally drive), the scarcity of lawyers with immigration expertise and a feeling of isolation fed by his inability to speak English and the lack of opportunities to learn it.

“It’s a big challenge,” said José, 38, who works on a dairy farm in Livingston County, where he lives with his wife and four children, about 230 miles from New York City. “We’re a forgotten community in terms of service.” (He asked that his last name not be published because of his immigration status.)

And there you have it. The Illegal Aliens aren’t hiding in the shadows any more, they’re as out as Anderson Cooper, and not only that, they have a sense of entitlement. What right do they have to anything from America? They are here illegally!

“I worry about people falling through the cracks,” said Emma Kreyche, an organizing and advocacy coordinator at the Worker Justice Center of New York, a group that provides legal representation and advocacy for agricultural and other low-wage workers across the state.

I think the illegal aliens are the ones creating cracks, by having taxpayer money spent on them while they themselves pay no income tax.

…

Carina Diaz, 31, who emigrated from Mexico in 2005 and lives in Genesee County, said that until recently, her children’s schools neither provided translators for parent-teacher conferences nor translated important documents into Spanish.

Should Carina sue the schools for failing to adequately provide for illegal aliens? Or sue all of America for not speaking her language?

“I would say, ‘What’s this say?’ “ Ms. Diaz recalled in Spanish. “ ‘I want to participate in the school!’ “ Other immigrant parents, she said, chose not to make such demands for fear of retribution. “The parents don’t want to say anything because they don’t want anything done against their kids,” she said.

She’s so oppressed by the country she sneaked into!

While some schools in her area had begun to provide interpreting services, she said, there were still no low-cost or free English as a second language classes available for adults. “Many people want to take them but there aren’t any,” she said.

And they’re not even free! Why are illegal aliens even asked to pay for anything? Uninvited guests should be treated better than that!

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/illegal_aliens_complaining_about_life_in_suburbia.html#ixzz3S1RzKOjM

Poor, poor illegals. Perhaps life would be easier if they just went back to wherever they came from?

 

Facebook

To be Grubered…

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

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

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

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

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

Gruber apologizes for ‘mean and insulting’ ObamaCare comments

Published December 09, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The column continues.

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

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

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

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

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

Business as usual in Obama’s Washington.

***

For my Navy and Marines friends…

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

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

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

***

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

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

Boehner is not without opposition, however.

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

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

Facebook

Told ya so

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

***

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

Executive Amnesty Order? What Order?

Posted on December 8, 2014 by John Hinderaker

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Facebook

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

Monday’s Moments for July 1, 2013

Posted on by

A collection of miscellany for today. Today is the date a series of new state laws take affect across the country. The Senate, the dems and fifteen ‘pubs, passed their Illegal Alien Amnesty bill. The House rejected the Food Stamp and Pork bill with the help of democrats and Heritage Action for America had a presentation at a local Tea Party gathering.

Starting with the last item, last Friday night, Mrs. Crucis and I were invited to attend a Tea Party meeting where the regional Hertiage Action representative Ben Evans would be speaking. It was an interesting session. The HA representative was accompanied by the MOGOP Political Director, Steve Michael.

That, by itself, was an interesting connection. The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action purport themselves to be non-establishment. The Missouri GOP is the establishment…at least at the state level. The question is, is Heritage Action supporting the establishment or is the MO GOP establishment distancing themselves from Washington?

The actual presentation was about what I expected. I did have my opinion confirmed that sending emails to our elected US Representatives and Senators was useless. At best, they are just counted. Some officials may tally by subject. A few, a very few apparently, may note the number of pros and cons on a subject. For the most part, emails, unless addressed to a specific staffer, go into the bit bucket. Unfortunately, the same applies for phone calls. Unless you connect to the specific staffer working the issue, your call is ignored.

Signing online petitions is worth even less. There are a few exceptions when the petitions are conducted by some lobbyists. They use the petitions to brow-beat pols into believing whatever position the lobbyist represents.

What does work? Personal visits and actual snail-mail letters according to Heritage Action. I have my doubts on the former. I’ve spoken several times with my local US representative on a number of issues. Regardless, she votes the Washington establishment line.

What did I take away from this meeting? Personal meetings and letters work for some but I’m not convinced it will be all that effective.

A woman at the meeting, in the Q&A session, asked if our ‘Pub representatives really understand how angry people are becoming. The answer? “No, they’re not.” Apparently, once in office, our representatives become isolated behind their hired staffers—staffers whose job it is to formulate policy and to isolate their boss from the public.

Many of these hired staffers are long-time members of the establishment. When a Congressman leaves office, they migrate to another Congressman. In their view, contrary positions from constituents are ignored and public trends are modified to support political positions of the Washington establishment. Establishment staffers insure inexperienced Congressmen toe the establishment line.

Not only do our officials not understand how angry people are, neither, I believe, do the Heritage Action rep and the MOGOP political director. My impression is that these two heard what they expected to hear.

I have been a Heritage Action member since it was created over a year ago. I will continue to be a member. Unfortunately, I’m coming to believe the Heritage Action leadership and by extension, the Heritage Foundation are behind the curve. Both the HA and HF believe in action by lobbying ‘Pub politicians. I no longer believe that tactic works.

***

One aspect of the HA meeting was the Heritage Foundation scorecard of Missouri’s U.S. elected officials. I was surprised to hear that Billy Long, Congressman from Missouri’s 7th District had a score above 90%. The score reflected how consistent Billy Long voted on issues—conservative vs. non-conservative, as judged by the Heritage Foundation.

During the last primary, I heard a lot of criticism about Billy Long. I had no real basis to judge, I’m not in his district. In retrospect, if Billy Long was so bad, how did he acquire such a high score? I have some opinions why but those aren’t the subject of this post.

Newly elected Jason Smith (R-MO-8) who was recently replaced Jo Ann Emerson, had a very low score. Jason Smith had only voted once when the last scoreboard scores were calculated. He voted, “Yes,” on the Food Stamp bill, in contradiction of his campaign rhetoric. He campaigned that he’d vote, “No.” Jason, you disappoint me. In office a week and already you’ve already reneged on meeting your campaign promises to your constituents.

But, Jason Smith wasn’t alone. Every Representative in Missouri voted for that monstrous welfare bill—as did all the ‘Pubs from Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, and other midwestern states. It lost because 71 ‘Pubs, and the House dems (who wanted MORE welfare,) voted against the bill.

It’s a sad tale when we have to rely on dems to kill a wasteful bill. Yes, Jason Smith, disappointed me. I’d hoped you’d be more than just an establishment rubber-stamp.

***

The Senate, with the help of 15 ‘Pub Senators, passed the Illegal Alien Amnesty bill—a bill masquerading as an immigration ‘reform’ bill. The primary spokesman for the ‘Gang of Eight’, Marco Rubio staked his political career on the vote and will likely now bear the consequences. Rubio used the Tea Party to get elected. I doubt the Tea Party members in Florida will repeat their mistake.

***

Today is July 1st and across the country new laws take effect. Here’s a summary.

Around the nation, July 1 marks the start of new fiscal years and the date recently passed legislation goes into effect, although states often mark their independence by enacting new regulations on their own calendars.

The laws and effective dates vary somewhat from state to state, but an overview of legislation set to hit the books July 1st shows that state lawmakers took positions on the following five topics of national debate:

– GUNS: State legislatures across the U.S. discussed gun laws in the wake of mass shootings that shocked the nation in 2012. Most efforts to pass restrictions faded amid fierce opposition. Only a handful of states enacted new limits, some of which go into effect Monday. Among them Colorado is notable for requiring background checks for private and online gun sales and outlawing high-capacity ammunition magazines. At least 18 states, however, have gone the other way and loosened gun laws. Kansas laws set to take effect will allow schools to arm employees with concealed handguns and ensure that weapons can be carried into more public buildings.

– TECH: Dozens of states examined technology laws. Recently passed legislation in eight states will prevent businesses from demanding passwords to social media sites as a condition of employment. The law in Washington state also stops employers from compelling workers to add managers as “friends” so their profile can be viewed. Four states updated tech laws to allow drivers to show proof of car insurance on an electronic device, such as a smartphone.

– CARS: A handful of states have restricted cellphone use while driving. Starting Monday in Hawaii and West Virginia motorists will have to put down handheld devices. Meanwhile, in South Dakota beginning drivers will face similar restrictions. Utah also enacted limits for newbies with a law that has already taken effect. A few states have banned texting while driving. Other state laws affecting drivers will make it illegal to smoke in a car with a child, raise highway speed limits, crackdown on drunken drivers and raise gas taxes. NOTE: in Kansas, texting in an automobile is illegal even when the auto is stopped or not moving.

– ABORTION: Nationally, state lawmakers proposed more than 300 bills that would have restricted abortions, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. At least 13 state legislatures passed new limits, though two are waiting for governors to sign off. Notably, a bill that would have closed almost every abortion clinic in Texas was defeated by a Democratic filibuster and a restless crowd in late June. The Texas governor, however, has ordered another special legislative session to push the bill through. North Dakota has passed the nation’s strictest abortion law, which takes effect in August, banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.

-DRONES: An Idaho law taking effect Monday forbids anyone from using an unmanned aircraft for spying on another. Virginia has passed a ban preventing authorities from using drones for the next two years, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Four other states approved anti-drone regulations, though legislation aimed at law enforcement in Texas isn’t effective until fall.

…

Not all of the measures set to take effect were matters dominating national political discussion. The following five examples of recently approved legislation show state-level updates can cover a variety of topics:

– SEXIST LANGUAGE: Washington lawmakers are completing work to strip the state’s books of sexist language. References to “his” will be changed to “his or her,” college “freshmen” will become “first-year students” and “penmanship” will be called “handwriting.”

– JACKPOT: Wyoming residents might soon consider 7, 1 and 13 as lucky numbers. A Cowboy State law kicking in Monday calls for the state to establish a lottery for the first time, leaving a dwindling list of only a handful of states without such a prize drawing.

– ELECTION DAY DRINKING: Kentucky has lifted a ban on election day drinking. It was one of the last states with Prohibition-era restrictions on the sale of alcohol while polls are open.

– EDIBLE LANDSCAPING: Maine lawmakers this session have directed officials to plant edible landscaping, such as fruit trees or berry shrubs, around the Statehouse.

– TANNING: Dozens of states this year considered keeping minors out of tanning beds. New Jersey and Nevada restrictions kick in July 1, and an Oregon limit takes effect in January.

Facebook