Monday, December 29, 2014
When I look upon that cesspool known as Washington D.C., it reminds me of middle school. You have the popular kids, who get all the attention, and then you have others who want to be in that clique. The best vehicle for those forlorn nerds to gain attention is to have their faces plastered all over the school newspaper.
Establishment republicans have that “I wannabe popular” complex. They want acceptance from the Washington D.C. socialites so bad, they’ll sell out their constituents in a heartbeat just to be invited to the ugly dog party.
Senator Lindsey Graham is one of those ugly dogs. He slavishly courts the D.C. clique by selling their talking points. One of those is threatening conservatives with the usual, “we will lose the presidency” if we don’t pander to millions of illegal aliens who’ve violated our laws and sovereignty.
"If we don't at least make a down payment on solving the problem and rationally dealing with the 11 million [people in the country illegally], if we become the party of self-deportation in 2015 and 2016, then the chance of winning the White House I think is almost nonexistent," Graham said on CNN's "State of the Union" in an interview posted Sunday.
Graham also called for a measure to help the "Dreamers," who are people brought to the U.S. illegally as children. President Obama took executive action in 2012 to grant such people legal status, and then expanded his actions after the midterm elections to include more people.
"If the Republican Party cannot muster the political courage to deal with the Dream Act children in a fair and balanced way after we secure our border, that says a lot about the Republican Party's future regarding the Hispanic community," Graham said. "I don't believe most Americans would fault the Republican Party if we allowed children who have been here since they're babies to assimilate into society with a pathway to citizenship after we secure our borders."
Senator Lindsey Graham has no regard for American citizenship, his constituents, or the state of South Carolina. He has demonstrated time after time that he will sell them out just for a chance to be invited to the ugly dog party.
What really takes political courage and fortitude is to take on the D.C. establishment like a Senator Ted Cruz. Instead, Senator Lindsey Graham rehashes a redux of Simpson-Mazzoli, a proven policy failure.
Don’t lecture us on political courage, Senator Lindsey Graham. Go back to your D.C. doghouse and chew on the scraps your masters have thrown near your dish.
Senator-elect Thom Tillis sat down for an interview with the Associated Press. Here are some of the Q & A’s :
Q: Where do you think your policy interests will lie? Do you have a first bill you expect to file?
A: I think most of my focus will be very similar to our focus when we first came into the legislature — get the regulatory environment back to a level where the cost of doing business and the uncertainty is reduced, because I believe that will create an improvement in the economy that then makes tax reform and a number of the other things that we want to do more likely to be achieved.
Q: An issue in the fall campaign was whether you believed ground troops would be needed in the Middle East as the end-game strategy to combat the Islamic State. Have you thought about that anymore?
A: What we've said is that there's a difference between having American presence advising those on the front lines that do not have to be Americans. I think that the Middle East partners have to play a role in protecting their security but I do think that American expertise is important. And you see when we create a vacuum like we did in Iraq, that's how we got to the point where we're having to have this discussion.
Q: Given the president's executive action on immigration in November, do you feel more or less confident there will be a comprehensive immigration overhaul?
A: We need to not overcomplicate the issue. We need to first and foremost have a credible strategy for sealing the border. What the president has done has actually made that task even more challenging because by saying that he can grant amnesty — at least temporary amnesty to some 3 to 5 (million) already here illegally present. He's sending a signal to those who have not yet come here that maybe if you get here you'll be afforded the same treatment. So I think it's going to create more pressure, make the situation on the border more dangerous.
Q: What are the chances that we will see significant changes to the president's health care overhaul during the next congressional session?
A: When you talk about repeal, you also have to think about things that we believe we can do because they make sense and they don't break the budget. But even that sort of bill would be vetoed by the president. I would vote for that kind of bill. Whether or not that will come up I think remains to be seen. I think what you'll see fairly quickly are legislative actions to repeal the medical device tax, which is part of the Affordable Care Act, you will see the delay or repeal of certain mandates ... because they are having negative consequences on small businesses, so you can start to systematically repeal some of the most onerous provisions of the ACA before you've got support to replace it entirely.
North Carolina’s new senator will make a good, establishment republican. Is it time for the states to call for a constitutional convention? I do believe so.
Sunday, December 28, 2014
The Obama administration’s “hapless fool” policies are, once again, praised in the media. If you want a lesson in sycophancy just watch the talking heads effervesce over the genius of our president and his troop of bureaucratic monkeys. There should be a new term for this kind of political spin. How about the Obamafuscation factor?
Recently, the mainstream media had an orgasm over a reported 5% GDP growth in the third quarter. Great isn’t it? Not quite. What they didn’t tell us is where Americans were spending their money. Guess where all that hard earned cash went to. That’s right healthcare. Zero Hedge published the following graph:
Not only were libtard, talking heads praising this misleading report, they also attributed lower gas prices and the collapse of the ruble to our feckless leader’s energy policies. Anyone worth their salt knows the Obama administration has an axe to grind when it comes to conventional energy. The EPA has practically declared a war on the oil, gas and coal industry. We can attribute this oil boom to fracking on state and privately owned lands. The federal government had nothing to do with it, yet, they and their minions claim all the credit. Nola.com writes:
President Barack Obama and his left-wing environmental allies have declared war on America's energy sector. That's not hyperbole, according to a Senate committee's minority report; it's a quote.
"Setting the Record Straight: Hydraulic Fracturing and America's Energy Revolution" the report Republican staffers on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works released, sounds as dry as kindling. But it makes for some scary Halloween reading.
The report harshly criticizes the Obama administration's duplicity with energy production and supply. While publicly extolling the benefits the United States has reaped from fracking, the administration has done all it can to undermine it and other techniques.
The war is conducted on two fronts. One involves limiting the land involved. Many green extremists want energy supplies kept in the ground and when it comes to federal land Obama's bureaucrats are doing what they can to help.
"The Obama Administration has granted only half the amount of leases compared to those granted under the Clinton Administration and a third less than those granted under the Bush Administration," the report says.
Citing government statistics, the report notes a 6% fall in oil production and a 28% fall in natural gas production on federal lands between 2009 and 2013.
The second front involves mobilizing the federal bureaucracy to gum up the works and trump state management. The regulatory overload makes it much harder to get a drilling permit and much more expensive to operate.
And finally, the coup de grace, King Obama declares he will, by executive order of course, normalize relations with Cuba. This president has a bad habit of aiding our enemies, while at the same time, alienating our allies. This should be a relief to Cuba’s benefactor, Venezuela. That regime can no longer afford to subsidize its totalitarian compatriot. But now, because of another misguided and hapless policy, the Obama gives these two regimes a reprieve.
At some point and time, we have to ask ourselves, whose side are these people on? We can only thank God for American ingenuity and perseverance. As long as we have that, this country can endure all the Obamafuscations this administration and their minions in the media throw at us.
Once again, critics of Obamacare have proven to be prescient. Anyone with half a functioning brain could have predicted Democratic promises were based on lies. Here in North Carolina, liberals spent the past four years protesting at our state's capitol, demanding legislators expand Medicaid coverage. They insisted the federal government was going to pay 90% of the cost, infinitum. Skeptics realized the implications of expanding this program and warned that health care access would diminish. Well guess what? It’s happening. The New York Times reported the following:
WASHINGTON — Just as millions of people are gaining insurance through Medicaid, the program is poised to make deep cuts in payments to many doctors, prompting some physicians and consumer advocates to warn that the reductions could make it more difficult for Medicaid patients to obtain care.
The Affordable Care Act provided a big increase in Medicaid payments for primary care in 2013 and 2014. But the increase expires on Thursday — just weeks after the Obama administration told the Supreme Court that doctors and other providers had no legal right to challenge the adequacy of payments they received from Medicaid.
The impact will vary by state, but a study by the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan research organization, estimates that doctors who have been receiving the enhanced payments will see their fees for primary care cut by 43 percent, on average.
Stephen Zuckerman, a health economist at the Urban Institute and co-author of the report, said Medicaid payments for primary care services could drop by 50 percent or more in California, Florida, New York and Pennsylvania, among other states.
And guess who’s going to make up that cost. You can expect an avalanche of lawsuits by special interest groups demanding states pay for the difference. Don’t doubt it, it’s already happening.
How can the U.S. Congress make itself irrelevant? Let’s count the ways. The Constitution specifically dictates legislative powers are exclusively granted to this branch of government. Yet, Congress creates agencies and confers upon them regulatory powers that have the force of law, therein bypassing the legislative process. This was deliberately done with passage of the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946.
Under Article One, Section Seven all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. This was done to ensure our representatives, and by extension the citizens of this country, had control over policies by using the power of the purse. Yet, Congress conferred upon these federal agencies the ability to create, implement and collect fees and penalties, in effect, funding itself without having to go to Congress with hat in hand.
The Obama administration has mastered exploiting federal agencies in pursuit of its radical agenda. The president’s immigration policies do not have Congresses approval, which by the way, is dictated under Article One, Section Eight. These totalitarians openly brag that they don’t need funding from Congress. They will get all the money they need from collecting fees from illegal aliens. The Washington Examiner reported the following:
The Obama administration is spending nearly $50 million to hire and house 1,000 new federal workers to process immigration cases after President Obama announced that he would unilaterally protect up to 5 million illegal immigrants from deportation.
The Citizenship and Immigration Services agency will devote $40 million to annual salaries and almost $8 million a year to the lease of a new building just outside Washington, in which employees will review the claims of illegal immigrants who apply for newly protected status, according to the New York Times.
In recent weeks, critics have warned that Obama’s executive action would further increase the federal bureaucracy, leaving taxpayers on the hook for the expansion of immigration services
“They are in the process of hiring 1,000 full-time staff to quickly approve applications for the president’s illegal amnesty, which will provide work permits, photo IDs, Social Security and Medicare to illegal immigrants — all benefits rejected by Congress,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said earlier this month. “This action will mean that American workers, their sons, their daughters, their parents, will now have to compete directly for jobs, wages, and benefits with millions of illegal immigrants.”
The Obama administration counters that the fees recouped through the president’s executive action eventually will cover the cost of the new federal workers
Congress needs to take power away from these federal agencies. They can start by passing a law mandating all fees and penalties are to go into the general fund. This will help ensure these government entities do not abuse their powers by imposing punitive fees upon a hapless citizenry as a means for funding, and will give power of the purse back to Congress where it belongs.
Monday, December 22, 2014
By T.L. Coston
‘Twas the Congress before Christmas and all through the House
Establishment Republicans were stirring along with the louts;
Teat Squawkers gathered in the halls, all fret with care
In the hopes that staffers would grant them taxpayer wares
Citizens were soothed by the midterm elections
As visions of prosperity danced in their direction
Then I and my fellow Americans settled down for a long, holiday cheer
Busying ourselves with family, friends and maybe a beer
When on Fox News there rang such a clatter
I leaped from my couch to see what was the matter
Away to the T.V. I made a dash
Grabbed the remote and gave it a blast
Statuary Hall was full of buzz
As reporters and politicians mugged about
Cameras and lights filled the place
While media whores pan-caked their face
D.C. courtesans rushed around in delight,
“Good news! The federal government has a green light!”
The House passed Cromnibus with the president’s help
A whopping $1.8 trillion will give you a yelp!
And so the D.C. Establishment wins again
As Americans are saddled with $18 trillion in debt
So enjoy your holidays the best you can
Just remember we’re too stupid to understand
File away another fiscal year
Please…please don’t shed a tear
Republicans say another election has to be won
And so the campaign must go on
So envision a distant capitol with no care, or class
They are wiping their asses with all of our cash
And from the White House they stand and cheer,
“Screw you, voters! And your Happy New Year!”
Monday, December 1, 2014
If you’re a democrat go ahead and vote as often as you like. Hell, no one is going to prosecute you. You belong to an elite club of liars, cheats and thieves. Townhall.com reported the following:
Video of Opelousas, Louisiana Mayor Don Cravins Sr.'s Nov. 3 remarks show him telling a crowd in his home town that 'if you early voted, go vote again tomorrow. One more time’s not going to hurt.' Louisianans, like Americans in many states, had the option of either voting 'early' or showing up on Election Day. Taking advantage of both options would be a crime. And for voters worried about criminal fraud charges, Cravins said he had an insurance policy – the re-election of a Democratic district attorney...'Tomorrow we’re gonna elect Earl Taylor as the D.A. so he won’t prosecute you if you vote twice,' Cravins said. Taylor won a fourth term on Nov. 4...Cravins' remarks were met first by laughs and then by wild cheers. Mary Landrieu's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
And don’t worry about the mainstream media reporting any wrong doing. They’re too busy reassuring Americans there is no voter fraud.
Did Rich Lowry say what I think he said? My God! The horror! Andrea Mitchell rightfully gasped. What kind of man would suggest anyone should respect the law, or law enforcement?
“If you look at the most credible evidence [of Michael Brown's death at the hands of a Ferguson, Mo., police officer], the lessons are really basic,” Lowry said during an appearance on Meet the Press. “Don’t rob a convenience store. Don’t fight with a policeman when he stops you and try to take his gun. And when he yells at you to stop, just stop.”
What kind of Grimm’s fairy tale does Mr. Lowry think this is anyway?
It’s getting to the point where you can’t have a beer in your local pub without some sniveling, liberal weenie exclaiming racism, or some other politically correct nonsense. Take a look at the above sign. Do you see the offensive slogan?
Take a look at this glass. I don’t hear Germans complaining about being stereotyped for their weird sexual proclivities. If you want a good dominatrix flick, you’ll be sure to find a German woman dressed in skin tight latex with a whip. Just saying.
Political correctness is getting so bad that home builders are renaming master bedrooms to owner’s suites. Welcome to the brave new world of who can be the most offended.
In what world does a thug like Michael Brown become a martyr? Is he supposed to be the Rosa Parks of today’s civil rights movement? Let’s be frank, this guy strong armed a grocery store clerk and stole a box of cigars. He later attacked a police officer with the intent of killing him, and yes, forensic evidence backs up eyewitness accounts. This cannot be an isolated incident. I have no doubt Michael Brown had a history of this kind of behavior. Yet, this is the man blacks are hanging their hat on.
It is sad that the President of the United States is a cheerleader for lawlessness. His Attorney General, Eric Holder, who is complicit in the murder of U.S. border patrol agents, incited a riot when the Grand Jury didn’t indict. On top of that, this administration is in cahoots with racist like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan.
We are hearing all sorts of excuses for the breakdown of the black community. So much so, liberals have claimed it an institution. They want to embrace this felonious culture, but only if it’s black. Whitey has no excuse for their crimes because they were and are oppressors. Blacks can murder, steal and cause mayhem however, whenever and wherever they choose because it’s their birthright.
A couple of weeks ago, the Charlotte Observer published a New York Times op-ed by Brent Staples in which he bemoaned the loss of black political power because 1 out of 13 has felony convictions. And you guessed it; it’s all whitey’s fault. According to Mr. Staples, our election laws were designed by white supremacists to keep the black man down. Here is the reasoning for allowing murderers, rapist, and thieves the right to vote:
The debate looks a lot different in Maine and Vermont, states where there are no black populations to speak of and racial demonization does not come into the equation. Both states place no restrictions on voting rights for people convicted of even serious crimes and have steadfastly resisted efforts to revoke a system that allows inmates to vote from prison.
Maine residents vigorously debated the issue last year, when the Legislature took up — and declined to pass — a bill that would have stripped the vote from some inmates, whose crimes included murder and other major felonies. Families of murder victims argued that the killers had denied their loved ones the right to vote and therefore should suffer the same fate.
Those who opposed the bill made several arguments: That the franchise is enshrined in the state Constitution and too important to withdraw on a whim; that voting rights keep inmates connected to civic life and make it easier for them to rejoin society; that the notion of restricting rights for people in prison was inconsistent with the values of the state.
A former United States marshal and police chief argued that revoking inmate voting rights would strip imprisoned people of dignity and make rehabilitation that much more difficult. The editorial page of The Bangor Daily News argued against revocation on the grounds that, “Removing the right of some inmates to exercise their legal responsibility as voters in a civilized society would undermine that civilized society.”
There is dignity in being a convicted felon? I thought the point of a penal system was to separate and punish those who’ve demonstrated their unwillingness to participate in a civil society. They are in prison because they are not civilized. Why would we give them a right to vote? Is there a bottom to the Democratic Party’s cesspool?
Why anyone would want to subject themselves to this mania is beyond me. I remember HAVING to go to Walmart after one of these maelstroms. The store was completely trashed.
I don't recall anyone getting killed this year by a stampede of bargain shoppers. There's something to be thankful for.
H/T: NC Renegade