Why Won’t Republicans Use The Illegal Immigration Crisis As A Wedge Issue And Speak To Black Americans?

“Never let a crisis go to waste” is a concept Republicans have forgotten. There are a lot of legal options for Republicans in the current illegal immigration crisis – but that is an article for another day. Today we want to focus on what Republicans should do politically.

Consider, Barack Obama plotted to use illegal immigration as an issue to win the crucial November 2014 elections. Obama’s goal was to use illegal immigration (as well as race-baiting) to incite his base vote of young white liberals and black voters as well as Latinos to the ballot box and thereby forestall disaster. Instead, the illegal immigration crisis at the southern border has focused attention on the illegal immigration issue as never before and Barack Obama and his political henchmen are on defense on the illegal immigration issue.

But the damage to Obama politically could be even greater if Republicans took advantage of the crisis swarm at the southern border.

If Republicans took a refresher course in politics the damage to the Barack Obama coalition could be even greater than to Barack Obama himself.

Consider these two videos:

Republicans, if they were smart, would approach black Americans and remind them of the dangers illegal immigration poses to the black community in particular.

The goal of a Republican approach like we suggest would not be to win the votes of black voters. The goal is to inform black voters of the dangers to them of illegal immigration and thereby checkmate Barack Obama’s political aim of flooding the November elections with his base vote.

If Republicans do not fail to take advantage of a crisis they can split the pro-Obama vote on the issue of illegal immigration while at the same time flooding the polls with their own voter base.

Barack Obama’s counter-move to any Republican outreach to the black community would be race-baiting. Obama would race-bait any Republican who speaks to the black community. Obama will also use Republican opposition to illegal amnesty to attempt to bring out the Latino vote. But the Republican riposte would be graceful.

Republicans can quote Hillary Clinton and Paul Rodriguez to counter Barack Obama race-baiting on illegal immigration:

Republicans can use the illegal immigration crisis to drive a wedge that splits the Obama coalition at its most elemental root, black voters. Republicans at the same time will build on their coalition of white working class voters.

The white working class fears lower wages and that alone explains resistance to amnesty for illegal immigrants. The white working class knows that Orwellian tags like “comprehensive immigration reform” are code words for amnesty.

Black Americans are against amnesty for illegal immigrants too even as black “leadership” supports Barack Obama’s failed policies. Republicans should take advantage of the current illegal immigration crisis and use it as a wedge issue to inform black voters that Barack Obama has stabbed them in the back. A stab in the back. That is the Barack Obama way. Ask Alice Palmer.

Obama cannot be trusted… neither by friend nor foe….

As we predicted long ago “comprehensive immigration reform” is dead. For Republicans the benefits are clear:

Immigration reform fizzles as campaign issue for Democrats

Immigration reform has fizzled as an issue for Democrats, who are barely mentioning it on the campaign trail despite making the issue their top domestic priority in 2013 and 2014.

Latino voters, who are the most energized about overhauling the nation’s immigration laws, will have little impact on the battle for control of the Senate, with the possible exception of Sen. Mark Udall’s (D) race in Colorado.

White working-class voters will play a more important role in the midterm election compared to the 2012 presidential election. They are not energized by immigration reform. Instead, they are concerned about downward pressure on wages, which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has linked to higher immigration levels.

Coincidently, President Obama’s support among white voters without college degrees has steadily eroded.

Democratic strategists admit their party’s record on immigration reform will do little to help candidates this year, although they predict it could be a potent weapon in the 2016 presidential election.

“In light of turnout models it’s probably not as strong an issue as it would be in presidential years,” said Steve Jarding, a Democratic strategist and former advisor to several senators from conservative leaning states such as former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.). [snip]

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) has led the effort in Congress to link high immigration flows to stagnant wages but many Republican lawmakers have not joined in because the business community wants more guest workers and visas for high-skilled employees.

Despite the lack of concerted effort by GOP leaders in Washington to used immigration reform as a weapon against Democrats, the issue could hurt them among white working-class voters who are slipping away from Obama.

Polling by Rasmussen, a GOP survey group, showed working and middle-class Americans oppose large expansions of immigration flows.

Republicans should tell the black community that this illegal immigration crisis will not abate until their communities are destroyed by joblessness. Republicans can cite Ruben Navarrette Jr.:

Recently, my sources in Texas who have been close to the border kids story since the start — and have batted 1.000 in terms of the accuracy of their reports — have been giving me a dire warning. It’s the equivalent of: “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”

Many Americans are angry and frustrated over the government’s handling of the border kids calamity. The Obama administration — which, according to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, was warned by state officials in the Lone Star State that this was happening as early as 2012 and obviously didn’t do enough to prepare — estimates that by the end of this year, as many as 90,000 young people will have crossed the border into the American Southwest.

Then there are the tag-alongs. Looking for jobs, and seizing on the opportunity presented by the fact that so many border patrol agents are preoccupied caring for the children, an unknown number of adults from Mexico are riding the kids’ coattails right into the United States.

It’s a total mess. But what if what we’re witnessing now is just the beginning? What if the real wave is yet to come?

My sources tell me that it is well-known that in the Rio Grande Valley, there are tens or even hundreds of thousands of people from Central America — mostly women and children — in northern Mexico right now, waiting for their chance to cross into the United States.

We should stop looking for an endpoint. This story has no end in sight.

The illegal immigration crisis caused by Barack Obama will not abate. The illegal immigration crisis created by Barack Obama’s policies and weakness will not end nor be restricted to border states and communities. Already Massachusetts is alarmed at the “spikes in detainees coming up from Texas“.

As Bristol County Sheriff Thomas M. Hodgson declared “We’re all becoming border sheriffs now with these people being carted all over the country.” “The blame goes all the way up. It’s a travesty and people ought to be upset.” “This is un-American and has raised the stakes to the public health and public safety threat.”

Barack Obama is to blame. Republicans would be wise to clue black voters about how and why Obama has stabbed them in the back.

Black Americans once were the elemental base of the new abomination called the Barack Obama coalition. We called it the “situation comedy” coalition because it so resembled what television programers want for their silly programs. But a “situation comedy” coalition is not a way to organize a political party nor govern a nation.

Barack Obama’s silly “situation comedy” coalition replaced the FDR coalition of seniors and the white working class as the Democratic party base vote. That upending led to disaster in 2010 even though the new travesty coalition helped Barack Obama personally get elected and reelected.

Republicans should tell black Americans that they are about to get the Obama stab in the back. Black voters are next in line to be dumped in favor of Latino voters from the latest incarnation of the Obama coalition.

In 2014 the failures and fissures of the new Obama “situation comedy” coalition will lead to new disaster in the November elections. If Republicans take advantage of the crisis Barack Obama created for his political benefit, Republicans can win in a rout never before seen in this countries electoral history – but first Republicans have to learn to not let a crisis go to waste.

Share

239 thoughts on “Why Won’t Republicans Use The Illegal Immigration Crisis As A Wedge Issue And Speak To Black Americans?

  1. Eleanor Clift:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/16/the-looming-political-game-changers.html

    Immigration reform, for example, was supposed to help Democrats in the midterm elections. Clashes on the border between angry Texans and buses carrying immigrant children fleeing gang violence and sex trafficking highlighted the GOP’s opposition, and Democrats thought maybe this was the game changer they needed.

    But the consensus among Republicans and Democrats interviewed for this article is that President Obama squandered his party’s advantage on immigration when he was blindsided by the sudden influx of children from Central America, and then didn’t do much to deal with the crisis until it became a big national story.

    Frank Luntz, who helped steer the GOP to its House majority in 1994, says what’s happening in Texas has captivated public attention and could negatively impact the Democrats more than anything else this year, including health care. “No one expected us to lose control of the border,” he says, and when something unexpected happens, that’s the definition of a game changer.

    “You want another game changer,” he added, “Rick Perry went from no contender to serious contender in 24 hours. He has been completely rehabilitated.”

    Democrats counting on an energized Hispanic vote in November are looking to Obama to retrieve the situation with whatever executive orders he can come up with. But Brookings senior fellow William Galston says almost any response is going to involve some steps pro-immigration advocates are not going to like. “While Hispanics are angry and disaffected with the Republicans, they’re bitterly disappointed with the Democrats.”

  2. Brilliant strategy. The ingredients are there and ready for use. All GOP would have to do is lead.

  3. Toxicity is palpable. This deal hardly had time to get off the ground when….
    A plan to house hundreds of illegal immigrant children at a multimillion-dollar hotel complex in Texas was scuttled after the prospect of taxpayers footing the bill for luxury lodging proved too much of a public relations obstacle.
    BCFS, previously known as Baptist Child and Family Services, which has a contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to run camps at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio and Fort Sill in Oklahoma, had a deal to buy the Palm Aire Hotel in Weslaco, Texas, for $3.8 million. The hotel was built in the 1980s and includes three swimming pools, tennis courts and an exercise room….
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/16/feds-to-house-illegal-immigrants-at-multimillion-dollar-hotel

  4. ..and add in the State of Maryland…O’Malley who talks out of both sides of his mouth…then retreats…

    but then there was another official from Maryland that essentially laid out step by step everything you are saying Admin above…

    that his state has many people in need…just trying to get by and they cannot afford to use their essential refunds for these kids…their health and school resources cannot absorb them…can’t remember who he is but he spoke up very strongly for his citizens and their safety and security and needs…

    *************************

    also another good one from Ron Fournier (he must be reading us here at Big Pink)

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/mr-i-me-my-obama-oughta-know-he-s-not-the-hero-20140715

    *******************

    and this….now cancelled because of backlash…but what were they thinking…are they freaking kidding us…with a grant from the federal govt

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/07/big-update-baptist-child-and-family-services-withdraws-bid-for-palm-aire-resort-video/

    *****************

    btw…i have seen a few good comments saying ‘why don’t they use those facilities for our veterans, our homeless…our own that are in need…our invisible…’

    **************************

    repubs need to pay attention to the good advice Admin has given…as well as any Democrats that have any allegiance left to Americans who have barely gotten their heads above water from the last few years….

    Wake Up…

  5. “Why Won’t Republicans Use The Illegal Immigration?????”
    *****
    That easy; the Republican wing of the Uni-Party is getting large amounts of money from entities who want unrestricted immigration and amnesty. The big payoff in the short term will be expanding H1B visas from 65,000 to 135,000 then 165,000.

  6. SHV, the motives of the Chamber of Commerce Republicans and their support for increased immigration, more H1B visas, and higher levels of legal immigration, is not what we are addressing.

    There are plenty of Republicans who oppose illegal immigration, amnesty, and even legal immigration at the present high or even higher levels. Why aren’t these types of Republicans doing what we suggest?

    Why don’t black Republicans do what we suggest? Senator Tim Scott would be an excellent person to do this in his native state of South Carolina. If Scott would take our advice and begin to address this issue in the black community in South Carolina it would get around real quick in the black community around the nation.

    There also must be a Republican SuperPac with an ounce of brains that could cut some commercials and run them in black media. Minority owned newspapers would love to receive Republican ad money as well.

  7. admin

    July 16, 2014 at 8:08 pm
    ___________________________

    And that display of doubletalk by the new shill can only be described as pathetic.

    Hillary 2016

  8. Number of Americans calling illegal immigration the ‘most important problem’ in the U.S. grows more than SIX-FOLD since May and now tops all other issues
    • 17 per cent of Americans put illegal immigration at the top of their lists of U.S. concerns, the highest-ranking item on a list of 47 issues
    • In May that number was just 3 percent
    • Since then, news reports have focused on thousands of illegal immigrant children who have flooded across the southern border
    • U.S. cities are refusing to absorb the children into communities where public services like schools and hospitals are already stretched thin
    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2694508/Number-Americans-calling-illegal-immigration-important-problem-U-S-grows-SIX-FOLD-May-tops-issues.html

  9. Misperceptions about U.S. immigration policy behind surge of illegal children, report says
    A new intelligence assessment concludes that misperceptions about U.S. immigration policy – and not Central American violence – are fueling the surge of thousands of children illegally crossing the Mexican border.
    The 10-page July 7 report was issued by the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC), which according to the Justice Department website is led by the DEA and incorporates Homeland Security. Snip
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/16/misperceptions-about-us-immigration-policy-behind-surge-illegal-children-report/

    [I just appreciate seeing the conclusion above in print.]

  10. I don’t see the Repugs taking admin’s suggestion because they are stupid.

    This stupidity is fueled and boosted by the Repugs’ historic heartlessness: They won’t address the black community because they don’t care about the blacks, the kids at the border, the middle class or anything else.

    Quite aside from the political grist that could be fed into the mill of one party or another is the fact that it is going to take smart people of good will to solve this problem.

  11. Admin. I saw an article in the New York Times imploring this nation to ignore the nativists (spelled r-a-c-i-s-t-s who cannot stand to have a black man in the white house, even if he is the most brilliant man to ever walk the face of the earth with the signs all around us), not sweat a few hundred poor huddled masses yearning to breathe freedom, and listen to our better angels. How? By these tiny children with gang tattoos into our America’s house with love and kisses, rather than send these innocents back into the funeral pires from whence they fled. What else.

    Before we attempt anything this monumental, it would be prudent to implement a test case. Pray let us stop putting these innocents up in these detention centers and move them into the plush estates of the elites, who are now telling us that they are economic patriots but if we touch of strand of their fair haired heads, they will have no choice but to flee the country (Note: see this morning’s WSJ). Oysters on the half shell, not gruel for these heroic children. And move the elites into the guest bedroom, like that scene in Dr. Zhivago, after the revolution. That would test their bona fides, would it not?

  12. Admin said.
    Republicans, if they were smart, would approach black Americans and remind them of the dangers illegal immigration poses to the black community in particular.
    ___________________________________
    Key word SMART!! 😆 😆

  13. Admin: the left has pushed the following narrative in re. the immigration crisis: that these children are refugees from violence, and this problem is the foreseeable result of Republican refusal to adopt immigration reform. That is pure sophistry, of course, but 1 out of 2 voters will buy it, lock stock and barrel. They lack any capacity to see through the political lies to the truth of the matter, and the Republicans have shown no ability to enlighten them. Moreover, the RINO is keen to abandon the American People and work with the destroyer of worlds.

    Since big media has repeated this lie time and again, and because Andy McCarthy does not comment here, let me surmise what he might say in response.

    First of all, thanks to an internal government memo, we now know that this mass invasion is the direct result of what is euphemistically described as a “mis-perception of US Immigration Policy”. In other words, this is not a case of refugees seeking asylum from persecution, and they cannot claim citizenship on that basis.

    Second, from whence cometh this mis-perception of US Immigration Policy? The left and big media (to the extent there is any difference) claim that this would not have occurred if the Republican Party had not been intranigent on the issue of immigration. But if you examine the solution proffered by the left, i.e. the Gang of 8 Bill passed by the senate, you will see that it would not exacerbated the problem, which is why the Republican Party opposed it. Shorn of the formalities, that bill provided for amnesty now, and border security later, and that is a sure fire magnet for more and more illegal immigration, even beyond what we are seeing now. And because the Republicans refused to accept that iteration, Obama has held the security of this nation hostage to his political ambitions.

    Third, the even bigger factor however is the Dream Act which targeted children of illegals and gave them special status in re. citizenship and benefits. This Act was implemented by Obama, in derogation of Congressional authority, and it has sent a clear, unambiguous signal to Latin America–sent us your children and they can stay. The coyotes picked up on this, and there is reason to believe that Obama and Soros are working in tandem on this project in order to create a welfare state constituency beholden to democrats, and the erase the southern border to create a new union comparable to the European Union. Lou Dobbs has been on this one for years.

    Fourth, there is the refusal by Obama to take the necessary steps to stem the tide. Number one: he has refuse to give a clear, unequivocal signal to Latin America correcting the mis-perception. Two: he has failed to condition US aid to the governments where these children are coming from on their stemming this tide at the source, or when it crosses their border. Three: he has failed to repel the invasion, by stationing border patrol resource not at the border, but fifty miles inland. Four: he has failed to call in the National Guard to stem the tide.

    In sum, contrary to the lies by the left and big media, this is not a refugee movement, and Obama is directly responsible for all aspects of it. It is grounds for impeachment. But so far, there have been no takers, and when the idea is run past RINOs, the faint and decry it as right wing nonsense. Bernie Goldberg is the latest example of that. If these people spent as much time figuring out how to act as they do coming up excuses for not acting progress might be possible. Simply put, they need to go.

  14. The RINO is astonishing. With a track record of losing elections, what does he advocate? Boldness? Hell no. That might mean they would lose the next election. Well, what then? We must be cautious, and pretend to be nice people. If we do that they may feed us the kitchen scraps, like they do with dogs. No wonder they hate Ted Cruz. He reminds them of what they could be if they got off their knees.

  15. Always well thought out Admin and wbb.

    The thought of 100’s of thousands of mothers and children waiting at the border is unnerving.

  16. Today I’m finding hope here:

    PRINCETON, NJ — With thousands of undocumented immigrant minors crossing the nation’s southern border in recent months, the percentage of Americans citing immigration as the top problem has surged to 17% this month, up from 5% in June, and the highest seen since 2006. As a result, immigration now virtually ties “dissatisfaction with government,” at 16%, as the primary issue Americans think of when asked to name the country’s top problem. Snip
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/173306/one-six-say-immigration-important-problem.aspx

    here with Snowden manning up where Barack never will:
    Edward Snowden: ‘If I end up in chains in Guantánamo I can live with that’ – video interview

    and in a daily mail article cited upthread.

  17. The Republican leadership is stupid but heartlessness is an unnecessary, probably unfair, charge. If Republicans are heartless what does that make Obama and his allies? Obama and his allies exploit blacks and Latinos and illegal immigrants for political purposes so they are worse than heartless, they are evil and exploit emotion.

    As the article states, blacks (as will the white working class) will be hurt by an increased labor supply especially when the increased labor comes from the easy to exploit because they are here illegally. Obama knows this but he is “heartless” and evil.

  18. As if there is not enough to despise from this creature:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/07/16/Richardson-Opposition-To-Illegals-Nativist-Tea-Party-Trying-To-Keep-America-Pure

    Richardson: Opposition to Illegals ‘Nativist’ Tea Party Trying to Keep ‘America Pure’

    Wednesday on MSNBC’s “Now with Alex Wagner,” the former Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM) said as a governor from a border state, he had to deal with “all this right-wing fear mongering” about “everything from diseases to terrorism” on illegal immigration.

    Richardson accused “the Tea Party and some of the strongest elements out there that don’t want to see comprehensive immigration reform, period” of being “nativists” that want to keep “America pure.”

  19. Immigration ‘reform’ = amnesty = voting blocks.

    Neither party cares about American’s, our homeless and mentally ill.

    It’s all about votes, for both parties.

    The wealthy that run for congress and are ordained into the Oval Office, couldn’t care less about this burden of expense added to the backs of working American’s.

    Hillary and Bill are exceptions, and very few others.

  20. More bad news which is the big news of the day (where in blazes is that Halbig decision?):

    http://news.sky.com/story/1302864/malaysian-plane-shot-down-with-295-on-board

    A passenger plane with 295 people on board has been shot down as it flew above eastern Ukraine, according to aviation sources.

    The Malaysia Airlines plane, which was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was travelling at an altitude of 10km (6.2 miles) when it was shot down, Russia’s Interfax reported.

    An adviser to the Ukrainian interior ministry said the Boeing 777 was brought down by a Buk ground-to-air missile.

    All 280 passengers and 15 crew members who were on the plane are believed to have died, he added.

    A spokesman for Malaysian Airlines, still reeling from the loss of flight MH370 in March, confirmed it had lost contact with flight MH17, which took off from Amsterdam at 12.14pm local time.

  21. For the left, this manufactured border crisis is the ultimate expression of Social Engineering.

    It is reminiscent of the failed concept of bussing

    Which caused the dry rot we see today in public education.

    And the deprivation of quality education to our children.

    Which puts our country far down the list of nations in this area.

    Just so the left wing elites could feel good about themselves.

    Next time they should try cyanide self administered.

  22. I have thought of the title of a book that would succeed on the New York Times Book List, once they get tired of reading Krauthammer’s tome:

    “The Great Unraveling:

    The Failure of American Foreign and Domestic Policy Under Obama”

  23. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2014/most_voters_want_to_send_latest_illegal_immigrants_home_asap

    Most voters don’t want any of the young illegal immigrants who’ve recently arrived here housed in their state and say any legislation passed by Congress to deal with the problem should focus on sending them home as soon as possible.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the primary focus of any new immigration legislation passed by Congress should be to send the young illegal immigrants back home as quickly as possible. Just 27% say it should focus instead on making it easier for these illegal immigrants to remain in the United States. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

    Advocates for the illegal immigrants argue that they are flooding into the country to escape violent situations in their home countries, but just 31% of U.S. voters think they are coming here now for their own safety. Most voters (52%) believe they are coming here for economic reasons. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

    Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who last week criticized efforts to deport these illegal immigrants, is now reportedly the latest governor to tell the White House not to house any of them in his state. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters disapprove of housing these illegal immigrants in their state. Only half as many (29%) approve, while 14% are undecided.

    Voters are more uncertain, however, when it comes to the $3.7 billion in new spending that President Obama has asked for from Congress to deal with these new illegal immigrants. Twenty-six percent (26%) think Congress should approve the president’s request even if it does not provide for quicker deportation of these illegals, but 40% oppose approval if money for sped-up deportation is not included. One-in-three voters (34%) are not sure.

    Earlier this month, a plurality (46%) of voters said the Obama administration, through its statements and policies, has encouraged this latest wave of illegal immigration.

    Obama is responsible. Obama is the problem. Obama is heartless and evil.

  24. Or-

    “The Great Unraveling:

    The End of American Security and Prosperity Under Obama

    And His New Democrat Party”

  25. a plurality (46%) of voters said the Obama administration, through its statements and policies, has encouraged this latest wave of illegal immigration.
    —————–
    Q.E.D.

    wbboei
    July 17, 2014 at 11:26 am

    “Admin: the left has pushed the following narrative in re. the immigration crisis: that these children are refugees from violence, and this problem is the foreseeable result of Republican refusal to adopt immigration reform. That is pure sophistry, of course, but . . .

    1 out of 2 voters will buy it, lock stock and barrel.”

    This is why less ONLY 46% blame a crisis blame Obama for this crisis

    Despite the fact that he generated it, and has refused to do what is required to stem the tide.

    As explained above.

    When lies are accepted as truth accountability cannot exist

    And a constitutional order cannot survive.

  26. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the primary focus of any new immigration legislation passed by Congress should be to send the young illegal immigrants back home as quickly as possible
    ————–
    When the Obama loving Rassmussen, who gives Obama a higher rating than any other polling group, says the figure is 59%. you begin to suspect that the real figure is well above 2/3. The departure of Scott Rassmussen and the influx of Soros money had adversely affected the integrity of their reliability. Today, I shall not scruple to say their MOE (margin of error) is 8-10% depending upon the issue.

  27. affected the integrity of their reliability
    ——————
    Sorry, that sounds like Orwellian Obamaspeak. The word is integrity, from whence cometh reliability, or the lack thereof.

  28. And while this crisis unfolds, and the destruction of our sovereignty is happening before our eyes what do we see from the RINO? We see them diving under the table, fighting the dogs for the table scraps, bloviating and just being nice. What better way to preserve their meal ticket with big business. Howie Kurtz, who would not say shit is he had a mouth full, tells us that this crisis is not so good for Obama, but by god it is hurting the Republicans too. In other words, in Howie’s gutless big media driven analyisis the honors are roughly equal. As usual, he is misreading the reason why the Republicans are held in low esteem. No Howie. It is not because they have failed to cooperate with Obama, or get behind the gang of eight, or because they have failed to be bipartisan. It is solely because they have hued to the make peace not war and above all money of their perverse consultants, and failed to stand up for the American People, the Constitiution and what they promise at election time. Cowardice should have a price.

  29. The reason I am trying to come down on this issue like a ton of bricks is because this threat to our security and prosperity MUST be laid at the feet of Obama, and rank and file Democrats must begin to reject the excuses he offers. Today 86% of them are still on his side. They must abandon him en masse for the Clintons to prevail in their struggle to regain control of the party, and put the left back in the cages where they belong. The left wing of the democrat party is the political equivalent of the Ebola virus, and it must be perceived in those terms. If they prevail, the patient will not survive.

  30. admin July 17, 2014 at 12:45 pm

    If Republicans are heartless what does that make Obama and his allies?

    It makes Obama and his allies just as heartless as the Republicans, I agree. You give all the good reasons for believing so.

    But that doesn’t excuse the Republicans. They’ve been in business for themselves for far more than a century. It was why Teddy Roosevelt bolted the party in 1908 and his distant cousin chose to run on the Democratic ticket.

    Not to worry, the Democratic Party will be back once Obama is gone.

    In the meantime, I still contend that this kid calamity at the border can only be solved by smart people of good will, which means it’s not going to be solved until Obama is out of office.

  31. I want to direct your attention to the following link, which memorializes a cross examination of then Secretary of Health and Human Services Secretary and former Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, for whom I once had fond hopes. From a legal standpoint, given the constraints of the forum, this is a brilliant cross examination, by the estimable Trey Gowdey–a world class prosecutor, for whom we should all have great respect. Even so, I do worry that the public understands what is being shown in a clip like this. I fear that they may conclude that Kathleen fended off the attack by an annoying Republican, and since she is not a lawyer, she should not have to answer his questions. Therefore, I offer this analysis of his cross examination, so it is crystal clear what he managed to accomplish through someone who was clearly an adverse witness.

    1. She does not understand the text of the First Amendment, as it relates to religious liberty. When asked why government cannot infringe on religious liberty, she responds because of the separation of church and state. That is the basis of the establishment clause, which prohibits government from promoting religion. The correct answer is the free exercise clause, which prohibits government from infringing upon religion, which is what Obamacare does in re. the mandate. That may be a technical point, but it is important from a legal standpoint.

    2. She claimed that in enforcing the birth control mandate, she balanced the state interest embodied in the statue against the freedom of religion and found that the state interest prevailed. Gowdy pointed out that the balancing test has no application here because religion is a fundamental right, and past the past decisions of the Supreme Court make clear that in cases such as this the fundamental right always prevails. He cited those cases and she was unaware of them.

    3. She claimed that she conferred with her lawyers before executing the mandate. However she would not say who those lawyers were, and I have got to believe they were relieved to hear that. Gowdy asked he whether she received a legal memorandum from those she conferred with, concluding as she did, that enforcement of the mandate was constitutionally permissible. She said it was discussions only, which warrants to inference that no lawyer was willing to state in writing that this was not a violation of the Law of the Land. When Gowdy pointed out that other agencies routinely solicited and received legal memoranda prior to implementing controversial policies, she said that is not how they do things at HHS. It is clear to me that she knew it was wrong and wanted no paper trail.

    If you are interested in watching a master of cross examination at work, then watch this video. It should be shown to law students, who must rise to the inevitable challenge which will arise in their first trial and everyone that comes later, when their opponent has proven what he wanted and turns to them and says: “your witness”.

  32. jeswezey
    July 17, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    Not to worry, the Democratic Party will be back once Obama is gone.

    —————
    In a duopoly, that is never the question.

    There are two relevant questions:

    1. first, how long will their wilderness years last?

    2. second, which faction will control the party–moderates or leftists?

    The answer to one of those questions will determine in part the other.

  33. I have one more insight to offer on Kathleen’s claim that she ran the mandate by her attorneys at HHS, they told her it was okay, and she simply relied on their advice . . . .

    Every corporation counsel, and every lawyer who works in the bureaucracy understands that he will be asked to give an opinion, and if the issue is sufficiently important to his boss, then he may not take no for an answer. How you then persuade the client to back off is situation specific.

    Assuming that Kathleen is telling the truth here, and acting under political pressure, a sense that they could pass the buck, or whatever, told her this was not a violation of the Constitution, failed to do their job. I think they figured it was a political issue, and would be resolved in that forum, and given the overall decision by Justice Roberts that Obamacare was constitutional, they may have concluded that this was not a hill to die for, careerwise.

    But for Kathleen to say by implication that the anonomous they told her it was okay but simply did not put it in writing–well to me at least that strains credulity. What probably happened is they told her this would be highly problematic, and she told them, well then don’t put that opinion in writing, because I will be asked to provide it, should the situation ever arise.

    Oh what tangled webs we weave. When first we practice to deceive.

  34. foxyladi14
    July 17, 2014 at 2:46 pm
    Putin and barry talked today. 🙁
    —————-
    Vladimir mum on US President’s thoughts. Strange reading. Lost in translation?

  35. Where’s Waldo?

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2014/07/17/care-world/

    At approximately 12:50 pm, the motorcade stopped at the Charcoal Pit, a popular, established restaurant just north of Wilmington, Del. Known for its burgers and sundaes. Obama shook hands and mingled with many of the diners, stopping at one point to pick up seven-month old Jaidyn Oates, and pose for a photo.

    He invoked Vice Presiident Biden’s name a few names, noting to some diners, “Me and Joe, we share shakes all the time,” and to others, “Biden told me the burgers are pretty good.”

    Just before hugging another young girl, whose mother lifted her across the booth to hug the president, Obama asked, “Do you give good hugs?”

    At 1:01 pm Obama declared, “I’m starving!” He sat down to eat with Tanei Benjamin, who wrote the president a year ago. The president ordered a 4-ounce “Pit special,” which is burger with fries. He asked for it to be done medium well, and to have lettuce and tomato. He also asked for a water with lemon.

    Tonight Waldo is in New York City for two fundraisers.

  36. Ron Paul is a putz:

    Ted Cruz is Leading
    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | July 17th, 2014 at 04:30 AM | 62

    “Today … Ted Cruz intends to force his Republican colleagues to put up or shut on on the border issue.”

    It seems all the Senate Republicans are willing to turn a blind eye to the scandal and corruption obviously at play in the Mississippi Senate race to protect their buddy Thad Cochran who, apparently, can no longer find his way to the clubby Senate lunches he’s been attending since Jimmy Carter was president.

    In what appears to be the ultimate modern demonstration of “drinking the Koolaid,” Republicans across the spectrum seem to have entered a pact in sticking together to defend, and even celebrate, campaign tactics predicated on gross voter fraud and manipulation of minority voters. In fact, we now know Senate Republicans funded those attacks.

    One senator, however, has broken the silence and is speaking out. Yes, one. Only one. Senator Ted Cruz, who, ironically, holds an official position with the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), the group at the center of these nasty allegations. Cruz has described the Mississippi fiasco as “appalling” and called for a “vigorous investigation” of possible criminal conduct in an interview with Mark Levin.

    “All of us want to grow the party. But what the DC machine did was not try to grow the party, but instead the ads they ran were racially charged false attacks and they were explicit promises to continue and expand the welfare state,” Cruz went on. “And nobody is suggesting that the Democrats who voted in the primary will actually vote Republican in the general election. Instead they were just recruited to decide who the Republican nominee was. And that’s unprincipled and it’s wrong.”

    Yet, in light of this principled call to ensure voting integrity, the Establishment remains undeterred, if not emboldened. The day after Senator Cruz gave this interview, the NRSC hosted a reception to thank those who, according to the invitation, “generously supported and promoted Senator Cochran’s campaign during the Primary.”

    So, I must ask: Why is Ted Cruz the only one with the courage to hold our own party accountable for what are glaring, terrible misdeeds? And why are other allegedly bold conservatives comfortable with their own silence and complicity?

    One would think that Senator Cruz would be joined by members such as Rand Paul, who, like Cruz, defeated a heavily-funded, NRSC-backed candidate in his own primary races.

    Senator Paul has distanced himself from the Republican voters seeking justice in this situation, commenting that, “I’m for more people voting, not less people voting,” and adding — for good measure — “I think the people of Mississippi spoke and I think Thad Cochran has done a lot of good things for Mississippi.”

    Similarly, Senator Marco Rubio told the Wall Street Journal: “I think Thad Cochran found whatever tactics he could use to win his election and people could have an opinion about that, but at this point we should move forward and make sure we retain that seat.” In another comment to The Hill, Rubio declared that “it’s important to rally now around the winner,” adding — in the midst of Senator Cruz’s call for an investigation — that it’s time to “move forward.”

    These viewpoints suggest a fissure that runs much deeper than a primary in Mississippi.

    And the base is taking note.

    Rand Paul is going out of his way to empower the Establishment, throwing his star power weight behind some of it’s worst offenders. In perhaps the most public example, Rand Paul took the floor alongside Mitch McConnell in the minutes following Senator Ted Cruz’s 21-hour filibuster to deliver a colloquy designed to belittle the entire heroic effort.

    He followed with an op-ed declaring the effort as misguided as Obamacare itself. His alliance with McConnell continued throughout that primary fight, with Rand Paul delivering his utmost support and enthusiasm for the defeat of a promising Tea Party candidate in his home state of Kentucky. More befuddling, Paul traveled to Maine to declare that he “wholeheartedly endorse[s] Senator Collins for re-election” — the same Susan Collins who maintains an impeccable record of Establishment bidding in Washington.

    Now, Paul’s commitment to defending the status quo continues, as he lends active support to the re-election of Senator Lamar Alexander, of Tennessee. Just months ago, all three of these Paul endorsees gave the American people a stiff arm by voting in favor of a “clean” debt ceiling increase. These are frontline battles in the fight to “Make DC Listen,” yet, Paul unabashedly lends each his support to those who stand consistently on the other side of the line.

    Ted Cruz, on the other hand, has chosen to stand alone, again and again, against the Establishment. From helping lead the charge to filibuster what the Establishment said was inevitable gun control, to standing toe-to-toe with the Administration in a fight to defund Obamacare, to challenging his own party bosses by demanding a 60-vote threshold to increase the debt ceiling without any spending reforms, Cruz takes bullets from his own party for daring to challenge the system.

    Today, in fact, Ted Cruz intends to force his Republican colleagues to put up or shut on on the border issue. They’re refusing to end President Obama’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (“DACA”) program, which is a chief instigator of the present crisis. Instead, many of Cruz’s Republican colleagues, including his fellow Texas senator, John Cornyn, want to give the President more power and use your money to pay for lawyers for the illegals.

    If the lengths to which the Establishment will go to preserve its own power were ever in doubt, what we saw in Mississippi serves as more than sufficient validation. What happened in that state was open warfare — fueled by more than one hundred thousand dollars from Republican senators — for the sole purpose of protecting a septuagenarian appropriator whose legacy is marked by a train of pork from Washington to Mississippi.

    The Republican party will not change itself. No one — not Rand, not Marco, not Ted — is going to change the party with a magical speech delivered eloquently on the Senate floor. We will not win the argument in Washington.

    Longtime incumbents, such as Cochran, who are oblivious to the realities of our modern problems, need to be ripped out of their seats and replaced with fresh, bold leaders who are undeterred by the bully tactics of the country’s most infamous “Good Ol’ Boys’ Club.” We must remake the party one hard-fought seat at a time, focusing intently on the principles we believe can turn this country around, rather than the men who feel entitled to maintain those seats.

    Thank goodness for organizations such as SCF, the Madison Project, and Heritage Action.

    Ted Cruz has proven his commitment to stand with the people and reject the “rules” of the Washington Establishment. Too often, in both overt actions and abject disregard, some of his colleagues we expect better from have chosen the institutions and establishment that have created the very mess we are in.

    At this critical time in our nation’s history, I am confident in the allegiance I have chosen. Are you?

  37. wbb 4:10. GOP as corrupt as Democrats now. Cruz excepted of course. All those post cards I sent with deceptions documented. I thought Democrats would be ashamed that all members of House and Senate knew. Instead, they – if they read them at all – were taking notes for their play books. It is a tough brotherhood hopefully to be broken by immigration overreach. Speaking of that, here’s the medical crisis flaring up. There are just a few tidbits within the excerpt.

    Waldo and the Mrs. not here either where there are some really sick kids far from home:

    7/17/14. Exclusive: Feds Struggling to Cope With Medical ‘Breakdown’ at the Border
    Snip The director of refugee health in the federal Health and Human Services Department “has identified a breakdown of the medical screening processes at the Nogales, Arizona, facility,” according to an internal Department of Defense memo reviewed by ABC News. The “breakdown” a systemic failure of the handoff of these children between CBP and HHS. Snip Two unaccompanied children were flown from Nogales to California despite having 101-degree fevers and flu-like symptoms, according to the Department of Defense memo. Those children had to be hospitalized.snip The document said three other kids were in the ICU at local hospitals in California, and two of them were diagnosed with strep pneumonia. Less than a week later, that same Ventura Naval Base suffered an outbreak of pneumonia and influenza among the unaccompanied minors inside the shelter. snip
    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/07/exclusive-feds-struggling-to-cope-with-medical-breakdown-at-the-border/

  38. There is such a thing as dual citizenship. It appears to me, that some of the militant Hispanic officials who criticize our friend Henry Cuellar for deploring the lack of ACTION by Obama on the immigration sure, are without a doubt, Mexicans first, and Americans second. Frankly, I question their loyalty to this country, and by them, I mean jackals like Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas) and Louis Guterriz (D-Illinois)for advocating la raza policies aimed at dismembering the United States, and supporting Obama in that respect. Yes. For sure. I question their loyalty to this country.

  39. It is the essence of civilized behavior in any debate, lest it forgo the issue in dispute and degenerate into name calling and ultimately violence, that in the name of peace and justice, we agree to forgo ad hominum attacks. But that assumes both sides agree to this, because that is the only way it works. It also assumes that the other side will be reasonable, and willing to compromise. Since neither of those assumptions apply to the left, we have a kill or be killed dynamic in play. In that case, we must begin with the assumption that nothing they say is sincere, everything they say is tactical and as we see with the rules for radicals, their ultimate goal is to destroy the country, without letting the people see what is really going on. That is why I say what I have said before. Fairness is for suckers.

  40. BREAKING. Official statement: Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has directed military to begin ground offensive in Gaza.
    ————–
    That was inevitable. Air strikes alone are never enough. The question becomes now, what will the Supreme Leader do to protect his surrogate, Hamas. There is no question what the golfing messiah will do. He is fully prepared to meet this contingency. How? By getting out his red crayon to draw red line and his eraser for the time he is called upon to back them up. Our big media beloved messiah watches him do nothing. He is doing the best he can, they say. Lets hope that Murdock buys CNN and buries their principals in mass graves without the benefit of last rites or golden parachutes. Then we can say of Rupert, he may be wrong, but he is doing the best he can.

  41. What the world needs now is a speech by Messiah Obama on this act of aggression by Israel, and their failure to heed his admonition that they should keep their powder dry while Hamas lobs projectiles into their land and killing their people. Obama can use that opportunity to tell them that they owe him personally because his great uncle’s mother’s father’s brother liberated a concentration camp in 1945. I am serious. The world needs to hear from Obama, desperately. With so much tragedy, and eternal sadness in the world, we could all use a good laugh.

  42. when I think of that pompous, arrogant and flat out wrong O ridiculing Romney during O’s supposed ‘comback debate’ about Romney’s position on Russia…it just goes to show that after actually being Prez for four years…O was/is still clueless about what is going on in the world…with all the spying he has allowed…and the power of the Presidency…O is still clueless

    but what can you expect from a guy who spends his time cruising for hamburgers when he should be in the ‘situation room’ monitoring and brainstorming what is going outside of his little frivolous jokes, chats, and parties…

    disaster is too kind…if the dims have any smidgen of intelligence left they will stop rationalizing and making excuses for him…he does not care…

    something psychologically wrong…delusions of grandeur…something pathological…way too detached from reality to be considered normal…

  43. Obama decides now would be a good time to lay down the law on the highway fund. Eeeeeeeeeeeek cries big media. Such a mench, our darling boy. Yes that his right mr jake tap toes. And, by the way, fuck you too. I like the way the special forces guy ripped him a new asshole when he regretted that we send our troops into harms way, to fight against people who are determined to kill us. Such a needless loss of life the big media celebrity says. That was when the special forces guy ripped his head off. I went to a birthday party last weekend and I saw someone who served in the Corps in Iraq. I asked him whether he had any misgivings about the loss of life and the lack of any lasting results. I had to ask but I knew what the answer would be. Like any marine worth his salt, he said I do not worry about whether the decision was right or wrong. All I ever worry about is the success of the mission. That is the mindset we want from marines. They do not permit themselves to question the mission, the way Berghdal did. They know that questioning leads to doubt and then they cannot focus the way they need to on the mission. But as civilians we need to ask those sorts of questions, because war is an instrument of policy and if the policy is wrong, then that raises a political question which the American people can take cognizance of and act upon–IF WE HAD A LEGITIMATE PRESS IN THIS NATION, WHICH CLEARLY WE DO NOT. PERIOD!

  44. ObamaCare:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/07/17/the-administration-just-took-obamacare-away-from-the-territories/

    Looking for a place where Obamacare doesn’t exist? Try moving to the U.S. Territories, where the Obama administration just provided a pretty big waiver from the law’s major coverage provisions.

    The Affordable Care Act’s design dealt a pretty big problem to the territories. It required insurers there to comply with the law’s major market reforms — guaranteed coverage, mandated benefits, limits on profits, etc. — without requiring residents to get coverage or providing subsidies to help afford coverage. The territories — Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands — have been warning for years that would destroy their insurance markets. The individual mandate and the subsidies are the major ways the ACA tries to bring healthy people into the individual insurance market to balance out sick patients who can no longer be denied coverage.

    That was until Wednesday, when the Obama administration told the territories that the coverage requirements actually don’t apply to them. The exemption was posted on a Health and Human Services Web site on Thursday.

    It’s an apparent reversal from last July, when a HHS official told the territories there was nothing HHS could do to help them out.

    “However meritorious your request might be, HHS is not authorized to choose which provisions…might apply to the territories,” wrote Gary Cohen last year, then the head of the HHS office overseeing Obamacare’s insurance market reforms. Cohen left the department earlier this year.

    What sparked the latest change? The definition of “state” in the Public Health Service Act indicates that the ACA market rules don’t apply to the territories, HHS wrote.

    Is it possible that the redefinition of “state” has anything to do with the Halbig lawsuit?

  45. By the way, the microphone has gone silent on that hero Bergadal, who was so beloved by big media because he was so valuable to Obama as a political stunt that he traded the Taliban version of Murder Incorporated to get him back. Strange how a guy who singed up to defend his country, got sent to Iraq, went native as they used to say in colonial times, got the sun, moon and stars traded to get him back, and now all we hear from big media is a big nawthing.

  46. Is it possible that the redefinition of “state” has anything to do with the Halbig lawsuit?
    ———————–
    Is it possible that Joe Palooka Kagen and the self proclaimed Wise Latina I will have a back channel to the Obama administration?

    It is not unlikely.

  47. Admin: a fine essay you have written here, full of terrific political insights. It is unfortunate that the Republicans listen only to their consultants, and the primary concern of consultants is to figure out new ways to raise money. Strategically they are risk adverse, and believe that if they simply avoid making mistakes, then they will win elections, because the American People will figure it all out. If they think that the American People are smart enough to figure it out, then they have learned nothing from the past two elections. When the other side gives you an opening, you must strike quickly and decisively. Unfortunately, the RINO is incapable of doing that. He is so full of mouth and gutwind, that he is more likely to punt when the ball is when he is on the other side’s 20 yard line hoping that they will fumble.

  48. Deputy Attorney General James Cole testified before a House oversight committee that the Department of Justice is taking a closer look at how some of Lerner’s emails disappeared – a new area of inquiry for the DOJ.

    Neither the country nor congress should have any confidence in this Justice Department or this deputy AG to investigate anything. This is bureaucratic doublespeak, and it promises absolutely nothing. I worry about these people destroying evidence, and getting in the way of a special prosecutor when he is appointed. If you are wondering whether I am impugning this man’s character, the answer is yes. The mere fact that he works for Holder is all you need to know. The truth here will come, if at all, from organizations like Truth to Vote, Judicial Watch and others who go before a judge. This political hack Coles is a waste of time. Or worse. . . .
    ————–

    “I can tell you the investigation includes investigating the circumstances of the lost emails from Ms. Lerner’s computer,” Cole said during his opening statement.

    He also acknowledged that both the DOJ and Federal Bureau of Investigation were taking the matter seriously, but said it was a lengthy process.

    “While I know you are frustrated by the fact that I cannot at this time disclose any specifics about the investigation, I do pledge to you that when our investigation is completed we will provide Congress with detailed information about the facts we uncovered and the conclusions we reached in this matter,” he said.

  49. 15 Journalists Have Joined Obama Administration

    According to the Atlantic, Time managing editor Rick Stengel’s decision to join the Obama administration is just the latest example of a new trend among mainstream media journalists who are making it official by joining the Obama administration. Stengel, who is joining the State Department, is just one of 15 (or 19) who have given up a career in journalism to join Obama’s crusade to fundamentally transform America:

    A wave of reporters went to work for President Obama early in the administration, a time when many media organizations were going through layoffs and Obama’s approval rating was sky-high. The flow has tapered off since then. The Washington Post’s Ed O’Keefe has semi-regularly kept tabs on the number of reporters working for Obama administration, counting 10 in May 2009, 14 in 2010, and 13 in 2011. The Washington Examiner’s Paul Beddard counted 19 reporters working for “Team Obama” in February 2012, but he included liberal advocacy groups as part of the “team.”

    Whether the number is 15 or 19, the fact that this many so-called journalists from outlets as influential as CBS, ABC, CNN, Time, the Washington Post, Boston Globe, and the Los Angeles Times want to work at the very same administration they are supposed to hold accountable is not only troubling; it also explains a lot.

    Why would anyone enamored enough with an Obama administration they want to go work for do anything that might make a potential employer uncomfortable — you know, like actually report on ObamaCare and the economy honestly, or dig into Benghazi and the IRS?

    The media is left-wing and crusading enough without the potential of a cushy government job being held out as a carrot.

    And don’t think the Obama administration isn’t doling out these jobs for a reason. What a wonderful message to send to the world of media: Don’t go too far, don’t burn a bridge, don’t upset us too much and there just might be a lifeline off the sinking MSM ship.

    And obviously it is working.

    On top of this problem, you have a number of top news network executives related to top Obama officials, many of them at the center of the Benghazi scandal — which also explains a lot.

    Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC

  50. Former NY Times editor Jill Abramson confirms to Fox Obama admin ‘most secretive’

    No doubt, former New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson is disgruntled. You get that impression from her insistence that she be called “fired New York Times editor” rather than “former.” And, in her prior capacity, you would never have seen her appear on Fox News Channel to criticize President Barack Obama’s administration.

    Nevertheless, speaking in her current capacity – an unencumbered professional journalist with nearly 40 years’ experience and no political axe to grind save for the one reserved for her former employers at the Times – Abramson and Fox News Channel’s Greta Van Susteren confirming that Obama’s is “the most secretive” administration in generations is significant.

    “I’ve never dealt with an administration where more officials, some of whom are actually paid to be the spokesman for various federal agencies, demand that everything be off the record,” Abramson said. “But the most serious thing is the Obama administration has launched eight criminal leak investigations against sources and whistleblowers, and they’ve tried to sweep in journalists.

    She added that there has been a “freeze” among journalists, specifically those covering Washington D.C. and national security.

    That is a sentiment shared by a variety of reporters and photojournalists – the Society of Professional Journalists recently accused the administration of “censorship” in the service of political goals, though that accusation did not get the coverage it should have.

    Abramson’s is a particularly galling assessment, considering that this White House promised to be the “most transparent” in history and still maintains that it is. White House Press Sec. Josh Earnest repeated this laughable claim as recently as this week.

    Her indictment is, though, most damning due to the fact that so many professional journalists have abandoned their profession in order to join this “most secretive” administration. As of September of last year, at least 15 former reporters from influential outlets like ABC, NBC, Time magazine, and The Washington Post had taken up roles working with or flacking for various federal agencies.

    If this administration is the most secretive in modern history, it does not have to worry about much oversight from many ideologically simpatico members of the press corps. If the means do not justify the ends, after all, what does?

  51. Under Obama, America’s House is falling apart.

    But big media and the sheeple could not care less.

    How do you get through to people who are this thick between the ears.

    I am now convinced that it is impossible–as the French are fond of saying.

    ——————–

    The Crisis on the Border

    No one who wants to help has authority, and no one with authority is helping.

    By Peggy Noonan

    connect

    Email

    Print

    2154 Comments

    Facebook

    Twitter

    Google+

    LinkedIn

    smaller

    Larger

    Updated July 11, 2014 6:36 p.m. ET

    What is happening at the southern border is a true and actual crisis. News accounts justly use words like chaos, collapse and breakdown. They feature images of children—toddlers, 4- and 5-year-olds—being shuffled to warehouse holding centers, sleeping crowded at night on what look like pallets, covered only in Mylar blankets. “I never thought we’d have refugee camps in America,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, “but that’s what it’s appearing.”

    All this gives normal people a feeling of besiegement and foreboding. Is a nation without borders a nation? Washington’s leaders seem to recognize what’s happening as a political problem, not a real problem. That is, they betray no honest alarm. They just sort of stand in clusters and say things.

    There seem only two groups that view the situation with appropriate alarm.

    One is the children themselves, dragged through deserts to be deposited here. To them, everything is a swirl of lights, color and clamor, and shouting and clanking. A reporter touring a detainment center in Texas noted a blank, lost look among some of the younger children. Every mother knows what that suggests. Children who cry and wail anticipate comfort: That’s why they’re crying, to alert those who care for them that something is wrong. But little children who are blank, withdrawn, who don’t show or at some point know what they’re feeling—those children are in trouble.

    The other group feeling a proper alarm is normal Americans, who are seeing all this on TV and who judge they are witnessing a level of lawlessness that has terrible implications for the country.

    This is how I think normal people are experiencing what is happening:

    Enlarge Image
    cat
    A boy in a holding cell at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Nogales Placement Center in Nogales, Ariz., June 18. Reuters

    It’s like you live in a house that’s falling apart. The roof needs to be patched and there are squirrels in the attic, a hornet’s nest in the eaves. The basement’s wet. The walkway to the front door is cracked with grass growing through it. The old boiler is making funny sounds. On top of that it’s always on your mind that you could lose your job tomorrow and must live within strict confines so you can meet the mortgage and pay the electric bill. You can’t keep the place up and you’re equal parts anxious, ashamed and angry. And then one morning you look outside and see . . . all these people standing on your property, looking at you, making some mute demand.

    Little children looking lost—no one’s taking care of them. Older ones settling in the garage, or working a window to the cellar. You call the cops. At first they don’t come. Then they come and shout through a bull horn and take some of the kids and put them in a shelter a few blocks away. But more kids keep coming! You call your alderman and he says there’s nothing he can do. Then he says wait, we’re going to pass a bill and get more money to handle the crisis. You ask, “Does that mean the kids will go home?” He says no, but it may make things feel more orderly. You call the local TV station and they come do a report on your stoop and then they’re gone, because really, what can they do, and after a few days it’s getting to be an old story.

    No one’s in charge! No one is taking responsibility. No one who wants to help has authority, and no one with authority is helping.

    America is the house that is both falling apart and under new stress. Those living within it, those most upset by what they’re seeing, know America has big problems—unemployment, low workforce participation, a rickety physical infrastructure, an unsound culture, poor public education. And of course discord of all sorts—a lot of mad squirrels running around the attic. They know America can’t pay its bills. They fear we’re living on the fumes of greatness. They want us to be strong again. Watching our border collapse doesn’t look like a harbinger of progress.

    Here it must be said that those who live comfortable lives can afford to roll with the historical punches. But people who are not affluent live closer to the ground, and closer to the country’s deterioration. The rougher America becomes, the more they feel the abrasion. They’re not protected.

    And they know no one wants to be in charge, wants to seize this thing and take responsibility. The mind-boggling fact is that everyone in charge more or less suggests they’re powerless to do anything. And the children keep coming.

    ***

    The president of course has rushed to the scene—to go, as always, to fundraisers. This is at the moment a scandal, but why? Clever people say it’s an unforced error. He has to show he cares! He ought to journey to an overwhelmed border area, stand there and point to the middle distance as a local official in a hopefully picturesque hat briefs him. It’s almost touching how much the press wants to see this. But why? Why do they want to see the president enact a degree of alarm he clearly does not feel?

    For a quarter-century I have been puzzled by the press’s emphasis on “optics,” their stupid word—actually it is a consultants’ word they’ve lamely adopted—for how things look as opposed to how they are. Their criticism comes down to a complaint they’re not being manipulated well enough. It is a strange complaint.

    Give the president points for honesty. He doesn’t want to enact an “I care and am aware” photo-op. He will pay a political price, but it is clearly a price he is willing to pay. He never has to face a voter again.

    The latest border surge has been going on for at least two years. Children and others are coming because they believe that under the president’s leadership, if they get here they’ll get a pass to stay. (They’re probably right.) This was predictable. Two years ago Texas Gov. Rick Perry wrote the president that the number of unaccompanied children was spiking sharply. He warned that unless the government moves, other minors would attempt the journey and find themselves in “extremely dangerous situations.” The generally agreed-upon number of those who’ve come so far this year is 50,000. Now government estimates are rising to at least 90,000 by year’s end.

    ***

    Meanwhile some in the conservative press call the president incapable, unable to handle the situation. But he is not so stupid he doesn’t know this is a crisis. He knows his poll numbers are going to go even lower next month because of it. He scrambled Wednesday to hold a news conference to control a little of the damage, but said nothing new.

    There is every sign he let the crisis on the border build to put heat on Republicans and make them pass his idea of good immigration reform. It would be “comprehensive,” meaning huge, impenetrable and probably full of mischief. His base wants it. It would no doubt benefit the Democratic Party in the long term.

    The little children in great danger, holding hands, staring blankly ahead, are pawns in a larger game. That game is run by adults. How cold do you have to be to use children in this way?

  52. Is a nation without borders a nation?—Noonan
    ————-
    An excellent question. One that we have never had to confront before now. Historically, we have been protected by two oceans, and weak neighbors to the north and south. But thanks to technology, coyotes, and messiah Obama, those natural protections no longer apply. Obama is a puppet of Soros, Soros hates the idea of nationalism, he blames two world wars on it, and his earnest desire is to collapse the borders, so there can be a free flow of goods and services throughout the world. Obama sees this more narrowly, as a blow against colonialism. But the question the rest of us need to be asking is the one above: is a nation without borders a nation, and how soon will we have a billion people in this country, and how soon will we hold the elites who orchestrated this demise of our nation, personally accountable. The answer to these and related questions is an imponderable.

  53. Shadow and free –

    Once again, I am completely of the mindset that this book tour and the campaigning she will do for the mid-term election is serving as a preseason game for Hillary. She just sounds like she is going to run. Charlie Rose is doing his best to trip her up with his horrible bumbles-centric questions, and with the deftness of Bill coupled with her monstrous intelligence, she is controlling the message. She is distancing herself from bumbles without dissing him. She has demonstrated that even outside of office, she has a keen understanding of what is going on, and she is subtly laying out a case for herself in 2016 without saying she is going to run.

    Is it 2016 yet?

    Hillary 2016

  54. Me: … the Democratic Party will be back once Obama is gone.

    wbboei July 17, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    There are two relevant questions:

    1. How long will their wilderness years last?

    For 1: It may last till 2020 if they lose 2016, because with a Republican in the WH and in control of Congress too, there will be single-party control and the Republicans are better at maintaining such control (6 years from 2001 to 2006) than the Democrats (2 years from 2008 to 2010).

    2. Which faction will control the party–moderates or leftists?

    I guess I don’t see the point of this question:

    The D party has always been the big tent spanning left, center and right. That has always been their strength and their weakness – a strength because they can draw on many different resources in the electorate, but a weakness because they are rarely united on a given issue.

    When I say “the Democratic Party will be back,” this is the party I’m referring to: the big tent.

    On the other hand, the Dems may just leave the right wing to the Repugs – ideologically, that’s all the Repugs are good for anyway: looking backward, voting no, lowering taxes on the wealthy, de-regulating, and generally letting the country slide into economic elitism.

    If that happens, we’ll have the Dems on the left and the Repugs on the right with neither of them able to govern. It’s a doomsday scenario. Do you think this is the necessary outcome of a post-Obama world? We may be headed that way, but I prefer to be more optimistic: It would at least open some space for a third party.

  55. This in from Senate Conservatives Fund email:

    Seven Republican senators have now been linked to the racial attacks against conservative Chris McDaniel in Mississippi.

    The financial report for Thad Cochran’s super PAC was released earlier this week and contains two alarming details.

    First, it shows that the following seven GOP senators gave a total of $160,000 to Thad Cochran’s super PAC:
    1. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) $50,000 (202) 224-2541
    2. Bob Corker (R-TN) $30,000 (202) 224-3344
    3. Rob Portman (R-OH) $25,000 (202) 224-3353
    4. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) $25,000 (202) 224-5251
    5. Richard Burr (R-NC) $20,000 (202) 224-3154
    6. Roy Blunt (R-MO) $5,000 (202) 224-5721
    7. Mike Crapo (R-ID) $5,000 (202) 224-6142

    Second, it shows that the PAC then gave a similar amount to a liberal group to run racial attacks against Chris McDaniel.

    These senators fully funded ads that urged Democrats to “cross over and vote in the republican primary” and claimed that a McDaniel win would be a loss “for race relationships between blacks and whites.”

    They also helped pay for fliers that said, “The Tea Party Intends to Prevent You From Voting” and suggested McDaniel would roll back civil rights.

    And perhaps worst of all, they helped pay thousand of dollars to Democratic activists to do so called “canvasing” to turn out votes for Cochran.

  56. Also, at Breitbart: The Mississippi Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a request by state Sen. Chris McDaniel to grant him unfettered access to un-redacted election records from the June 24 GOP primary runoff against Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS).

  57. Tweet I rcvd claims Obama to deliver speech on MH17 at 11:30 a.m. Prepare yourself to be dazzled. Where is that sarcasm font when I need it???

  58. 2. Which faction will control the party–moderates or leftists?
    I guess I don’t see the point of this question:
    ————-
    You have been reading and posting on this blog–for how long?

  59. wbboei July 18, 2014 at 10:28 am

    You have been reading and posting on this blog–for how long?
    ******

    Reading since 2007, posting since 2008. Understanding since… well, I’m kinda slow on that count, being short on candle power…

    so maybe I’ve missed something: There have always been conservative Democrats (ever hear of the ‘Reagan Democrats’?). I contend that the breed still exists, maybe I’m wrong but that would make the Democratic Party the ‘big tent’ again once the Obama cult has died out.

    If HRC makes a run for it, she might face opposition from the left, but that opposition seems to be quite the minority. She has 80-90% approval among Democrats and about 65% would vote for her in the primaries. That means to me that the left is not as powerful as it seems.

  60. Does anyone on the West Coast watch Greta?

    Since the show changed times, I only see it listed in my area @ 4:00 pm, (still at work), or 11 pm – midnight is too late for me to stay up on the week nights. I no longer have Tivo, or I could save it.

    I really miss watching Greta and hope there is a time-slot or station I missed.

  61. This is CNN:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/07/cnn-pulls-reporter-from-israel-over-tweet-192405.html?hp=f2

    CNN has removed international correspondent Diana Magnay from Israel after she referred to a group of Israelis as “scum.”

    Magnay, who was covering the Israeli missile attack on Gaza, tweeted Thursday, “Israelis on hill above Sderot cheer as bombs land on #gaza; threaten to ‘destroy our car if I say a word wrong’. Scum.”

    In a statement, a CNN spokesperson said Magnay had been “threatened and harassed” but “deeply regrets the language used.”

    “After being threatened and harassed before and during a liveshot, Diana reacted angrily on Twitter,” the spokesperson said. “She deeply regrets the language used, which was aimed directly at those who had been targeting our crew. She certainly meant no offense to anyone beyond that group, and she and CNN apologize for any offense that may have been taken.”

    Magnay has been reassigned to Moscow.

    If she said that about another group she would have been fired by CNN.

  62. The rockets at a school get very little attention, but a few Israeli’s cheering because the IDF is stopping thousands of rockets from being launched against her citizens is front page stuff. The media’s agenda is and remains to portray Israel, the victim of terror, as the aggressor. The US, France, Britain, etc. have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in order to prevail in war. Why Israel is singled out when Hamas uses Gazza civilians as human shields is liberal media hatred for Israel pain and simple.

  63. CNN has removed international correspondent Diana Magnay from Israel after she referred to a group of Israelis as “scum.”
    ———-
    Big Media = The Fourth Reich

    Instead of killing Jews themselves, they cheer on radical Islamists who do the killing for them.

    I think Magnay merely said what many members of big media are thinking.

    Are we to believe that CNN did not know that Magnay harbored such views.

    You can be certain they did.

    They assigned her to that conflict knowing she harbored such views, and knowing that those views would color her reporting.

  64. You can accuse big media of many things, and you would be right, e.g. corrupt, biased, censorship, etc. But the one thing you cannot accuse them of is being stupid. They have a perverse agenda, and a narrative that supports it. They have decided based on prejudice that the problems in the Middle East are Israel’s fault, therefore they want to drive Bibi out of power, and get some liberal in there who will give the store away for a peace agreement which the other side will not live up to because of its own internecine warfare. Their agenda is similar to Obama’s cloud cuckoo land.

  65. If we could get the American People to understand that whatever they hear from big media is not the truth, but information they have decided to report because it fits their narrative, and their narrative is based on their own power calculations which have nothing to do with the strategic interests of the United States, and, more often than not run contrary to them. I can think of no better example than their support for the most secretive administration and their attack against those who try to shine the light of truth on them, like Snowden. Yes, Greenwald handed that numbskull David Gregory his ass, but if you think the decision to vilify Snowden and to support policies which make a mockery out of the Fourth Amendment, then you are naiive. Gregory is a controlled beast and the decision to go Nazi on the American People was made at the senior management level of NBC, CNN, ABC and CBS. If Congressional whores want to talk about removing the protections of the first amendment to private citizens, they need to start with removing them from big media, because the level of abuse they have manifested warrants either censorship or removal of their FCC licenses, or Rupert Murdock buying all of them, firing all of their people and letting God sort it out.

  66. More of the truth big media does not want us to know:

    Thousands of protesters in numerous cities worldwide took to the streets Thursday and Friday, from Cairo to Istanbul to Washington, to demand an immediate halt of Israel’s ground incursion in the Gaza Strip and call on the international community to intervene on behalf of Gazans.

    In Turkey, Egypt and Jordan, rallies were held in solidarity with the Palestinian cause, some of them turning violent as demonstrators clashed with police forces and vandalized public property. There were also protests in cities including London, Madrid, New York, and Cape Town.

    In Istanbul, police warded off hundreds of rioters who attempted on Thursday to storm the Israeli embassy building. Demonstrators in Ankara and Istanbul also hurled stones at several compounds where Israeli officials reside. Calls for the destruction of the Jewish state were heard in both Turkish cities. Police responded by firing tear gas canisters and water cannons at the crowds.

    In Cairo, supporters of overthrown Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi, as well as members of his outlawed Muslim Brotherhood group, marched in protest of “Israeli aggression,” and criticized Arab governments for failing to assist the Palestinian people.

    In Jordan, protesters called on the Egyptian government to open the Rafah border crossing between Gaza and the Sinai peninsula, as Hamas has demanded, in order to allow the transfer of humanitarian aid into the Strip.

    On Thursday, in the Polish city of Krakow, a group of Israelis were assaulted and spat at in the city’s main square by a group of pro-Palestinian protesters, Channel 2 reported.

    “They approached us and hit the cameras we were holding,” one of the Israelis said of the Polish demonstrators. “They shouted at us, calling us ‘killers’ and ‘criminals’,” he added.

    Police forces broke up the demonstration a short while later; no arrests were made.

    Following a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Berlin on Thursday at which participants chanted anti-Jewish slogans, the American Jewish Committee Berlin office filed a complaint with police. According to a press statement, marchers chanted, “Jew, Jew,cowardly pig, come on out and fight.”

    Deidre Berger, director of the AJC’s Berlin office, wrote an open letter to the members of the German Bundestag calling on them to be vigilant in protecting Jewish citizens. Police should crack down on such threats “to show that anti-Semitism has no place in our society.”

    The danger of uncontrolled demonstrations was made clear last week in Paris, when violent protesters trapped Jews inside a synagogue and chanted such slogans as “Hitler was right” and “Death to Jews.” In Germany, such expressions are illegal and not protected by free-speech laws.

    “We’re concerned that there are no more taboos against open expressions of anti-Semitism at such protests,” Berger said. Reports of aggressive anti-Israel demonstrations have come in from other cities in Germany, including Frankfurt, Gelsenkirchen, Kassel and Bremen.

    Another pro-Palestinian demonstration is scheduled for Saturday in Berlin. Several thousand demonstrators are expected.

    Meanwhile, across the Atlantic Ocean, demonstrators gathered in Washington for a series of largely peaceful protests, in memory of four Palestinian children who were killed on a Gaza beach Wednesday, apparently by errant Israeli navy gunfire.

    On Thursday, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had intensified his fiery rhetoric against Israel over its ground invasion of Gaza and accused the country of state terrorism and genocide. Erdogan added that the two countries, whose relations soured after Israeli commandos stormed a pro-Palestinian aid ship trying to breach Israel’s security blockade of Gaza, resulting in the deaths of nine Turkish citizens in 2010, will not mend ties on his watch.

    “Since [Israel’s creation] in 1948, we have been witnessing this attempt at systematic genocide every day and every month,” Erdogan said. “But above all, we are witnessing this attempt at systematic genocide every Ramadan.”

    Following the protests in Turkey and Erdogan’s statements, Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman on Friday instructed the family members of all diplomats serving in the country to return to Israel at once. Liberman further ordered the reduction of diplomatic representation in the state to a minimum.

    Riot police use water cannons and teargas to stop hundreds of pro-Palestinian Turks who were staging a protest rally against Israel outside the Israeli consulate , in Istanbul, Turkey, early Friday, July 18, 2014 (photo credit: AP/Emrah Gurel)
    Riot police use water cannons and teargas to stop hundreds of pro-Palestinian Turks who were staging a protest rally against Israel outside the Israeli consulate, in Istanbul, Turkey, early Friday, July 18, 2014 (photo credit: AP/Emrah Gurel)

    “I have instructed the Foreign Ministry to clarify to the government of Turkey that Israel strongly protests the blatant violation of diplomatic guidelines, violations strongly enhanced by Turkish authorities and security forces during the demonstrations,” Liberman said.

    “We place the responsibility for the safety of Israeli representatives serving there on the Turkish government,” he added.

    Read more: Protests worldwide as Gaza offensive intensifies | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/protests-worldwide-as-gaza-offensive-intensifies/#ixzz37rEVqGLO
    Follow us: @timesofisrael on Twitter | timesofisrael on Facebook

  67. And what does Messiah Obama say to all this?

    He says “Obama is very concerned . . .”

    Which is a rather monarchial way of putting it.

    Sometimes referred to as the divine “we”.

    However . . .

    When someone told Stalin that the Pope was very concerned, he replied nonchalantly . . oh, and how many divisions does the Pope have?

    If the Pope had a hundred divisions, but could not bring himself to use them then the result would be no different.

    The American centered world order which has been in existence since World War II is collapsing around our ears, thank to big media beloved Obama.

  68. Analysis by a Republican on Warren’s prospects for winning the nomination in 2016:

    2. Warren has to beat Hillary. The proverbial 800-pound gorilla in the 2016 presidential race is Hillary Clinton. Hillary is beatable, in theory, in a primary; after all, she lost to Obama in 2008. But in reality, her massive name recognition and fundraising prowess starts her off in a much stronger polling position than in 2008, and her presence alone may deter Warren from running (and already influenced Warren to sign a letter encouraging Hillary to run). Moreover, Warren would face a serious demographic challenge. Obama’s 2008 victory over Hillary required a two-pronged assault on her coalition: one prong was anti-war white liberals who carried Obama to wins in the caucuses and states in the Pacific Northwest and Upper Midwest, and the other was an overwhelming, 90%+ majority among black voters (see, e.g., here, here, and here), who allowed Obama to sweep the South (in most Southern states, black voters are a majority of the Democratic primary electorate, and Obama swept Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, DC and Delaware).

    Warren, running more on economic populism (e.g., Hillary’s six years on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart) than Hillary’s support for the Iraq War or Hillary’s opposition before 2013 to same-sex marriage, is one of the few Democrats with the fundraising ability and ideological footprint to replicate the first part of Obama’s primary coalition, and her gender neutralizes Hillary’s most potent weapon. But there is no reason to believe that she could reconstruct the monolithic black support that was decisive for Obama. That would leave Warren needing to make a frontal assault on Hillary’s existing base, a much tougher challenge than consolidating the support of people who are not already locked in.

    http://www.redstate.com/2014/07/18/elizabeth-warren-face-ted-cruz-2016/

  69. Judge Naomi Reese Buckwald is a sorry character.

    You may recall, she is the one who used her office to criticize Sarah Palin for showing the country her disabled grandchild, and allowed Monsanto to purchase every seed in nature, genetically alter it, and claim that these seeds are their property. claim by farmers to claim to allow them to use seeds which are the bounty of nature.

    Recently, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who is very ambitious, and has won a number of lawsuits against Wall Street, but lost a case before her because of the inept way she handled the case. He went to a celebration recently, and called her the worst judge in the country. I do not think she is even that good.

  70. As long as judges consider themselves competent to decide issues which should go to the legislature, they should forfeit the protection they would otherwise have against attacking the decisions of the judiciary. When the cross that line and legislate, their decisions should be subject to public review, comment and criticism, just as they would be for any politician. Put differently, enter the political arena at your own sufferance/

  71. Admin: http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelcannon/2014/06/23/what-kagan-and-scalia-might-say-about-halbig-v-sebelius/

    “This Court has no roving license, in even ordinary cases of statutory interpretation, to disregard clear language simply on the view that (in [the IRS’s] words) Congress “must have intended” something broader…And still less do we have that warrant when the consequence would be to expand [benefits and penalties beyond the lines drawn by Congress]…

    That was Kagen in a similar case.

    Let us hope that DC Circuit will adopt that logic in the Halbig case.

    They seem to be having some trouble with it, because a decision is now overdue.

  72. The latest insight from Richard Fernandez, someone who perceives the deeper logic of things. Leading from behind is not leading–it is a retrograde maneuver. “An army of lions led by a stag is not an army of lions. Substitute the word steer (i.e. castrade) for stag and you have got Messiah Obama. And the disastrous results are self evident everywhere you look . . . . . .
    ————–

    The destruction of the Malaysian airliner comes at a time when international tensions are very high. From fighting in Gaza, Syria and Iraq to the manifestly failing attempts to negotiate away Iran’s nuclear program to renewed attacks on Kabul’s airport — at no recent time have American efforts to preserve the Long Peace been under such threat.

    If Leading from Behind is working, it’s not obvious.

    The president has spent the last few weeks laughing at everything. But now he is faced with something possibly new and disturbing, something which a speech or an executive order won’t handle. He must tread very carefully. Above all he must remember that foreign policy is not something he conducts out on the golf course.

    It is past due for the other branches of government and the American people to be told what is going on. No more narratives about videos, no more talking points, no more Soros, no more Susan Rice.

    The world is sliding into serious crisis under the most mediocre Western leadership since the Second World War. They do not even seem prepared to acknowledge the possible disaster they are causing. They have singularly failed to address the energy and security problems that have fueled instability, preferring instead to pander to the environmental and cultural obsessions that are relics of the halcyon days of the immediate post-Cold War. They have pursued narrow commercial and partisan agendas without regard to consequences.

    The Mod Squad style of statesmanship is failing the world. And now, as events take us into ever more dangerous waters, Western voters must ask themselves: how much more reality TV, how much more anachronistic cool, how much more incompetence can they survive?

  73. Western voters must ask themselves: how much more reality TV, how much more anachronistic cool, how much more incompetence can they survive?
    ——————
    What a closing sentence. Every word of it is perfect. It is poetry masquerading as prose.

    True wit is nature to advantage dressed–what oft was thought by ner so well expressed–Alexander Pope.

  74. Obama White House’s chilling attempts to stifle its detractors

    Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

    By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
    ·Published July 17, 2014
    ·FoxNews.com

    Facebook
    663
    Twitter
    185
    livefyre
    238

    “Chilling” is the word lawyers use to describe governmental behavior that does not directly interfere with constitutionally protected freedoms, but rather tends to deter folks from exercising them.

    Classic examples of “chilling” occurred in the 1970s, when FBI agents and U.S. Army soldiers, in business suits with badges displayed or in full uniform, showed up at anti-war rallies and proceeded to photograph and tape record protesters. When an umbrella group of protesters sued the government, the Supreme Court dismissed the case, ruling that the protesters lacked standing — meaning, because they could not show that they were actually harmed, they could not invoke the federal courts for redress.

    Yet, they were harmed, and the government knew it.

    What journalist could perform his work with the feds watching? The reason we have a First Amendment is to assure that no journalist would need to endure that.

    Years after he died, longtime FBI boss J. Edgar Hoover was quoted boasting of the success of this program. The harm existed in the pause or second thoughts that protesters gave to their contemplated behavior because they knew the feds would be in their faces — figuratively and literally. The government’s goal, and its limited success, was to deter dissent without actually interfering with it. Even the government recognized that physical interference with and legal prosecutions of pure speech are prohibited by the First Amendment. Eventually, when this was exposed as part of a huge government plot to stifle dissent, known as COINTELPRO, the government stopped doing it.

    Until now.

    Now, the government fears the verbal slings and arrows of dissenters, even as the means for promulgating one’s criticisms of the government in general and of President Obama in particular have been refined and enhanced far beyond those available to the critics of the government in the 1970s.

    So, what has the Obama administration done to stifle, or chill, the words of its detractors? For starters, it has subpoenaed the emails and home telephone records of journalists who have either challenged it or exposed its dark secrets. Among those journalists are James Risen of The New York Times and my colleague and friend James Rosen of Fox News. This is more personal than the NSA spying on everyone, because a subpoena is an announcement that a specific person’s words or effects have been targeted by the government, and that person continues to remain in the government’s crosshairs until it decides to let go.

    This necessitates hiring legal counsel and paying legal fees. Yet, the targeting of Risen and Rosen was not because the feds alleged that they broke the law — there were no such allegations.Rather, the feds wanted to see their sources and their means of acquiring information. What journalist could perform his work with the feds watching? The reason we have a First Amendment is to assure that no journalist would need to endure that.

    Two weeks ago, a notorious pot stirrer in Norfolk, Neb., built a mock outhouse, put it on a truck and drove the truck with permission in a local Fourth of July parade. In front of the outhouse, he placed a mannequin that he claimed looked like himself, and on the outhouse, he posted a sign that stated: “Obama Presidential Library.”

    Some thought this was crude, and some thought it was funny; yet it is fully protected speech. It is protected because satire and opinion about public figures are absolutely protected, as well as is all criticism of the government. Yet, the Department of Justice has sent a team to investigate this event because a local official called it racist. Such an allegation by a public official and such a federal investigation are chilling. The reason we have a First Amendment is to ensure that the government stays out of investigating speech.

    And just last week, Attorney General Eric Holder, while in London, opined that much of the criticism of Obama is based on race — meaning that if Obama were fully white, his critics would be silent. This is highly inflammatory, grossly misleading, patently without evidential support and, yet again, chilling. Tagging someone as a racist is the political equivalent of applying paint that won’t come off.

    Were the Democrats who criticized Attorney General Alberto Gonzales or Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice racists? Is it appropriate for government officials to frighten people into silence by giving them pause before they speak, during which they basically ask themselves whether the criticism they are about to hurl is worth the pain the government will soon inflict in retaliation?

    The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to permit, encourage and even foment open, wide, robust debate about the policies and personnel of the government. That amendment presumes that individuals — not the government — will decide what language to read and hear. Because of that amendment, the marketplace of ideas — not the government — will determine which criticisms will sink in and sting and which will fall by the wayside and be forgotten.

    Surely, government officials can use words to defend themselves; in fact, one would hope they would. Yet, when the people fear exercising their expressive liberties because of how the governmental targets they criticize might use the power of the government to stifle them, we are no longer free.

    Expressing ideas, no matter how bold or brazen, is the personal exercise of a natural right that the government in a free society is powerless to touch, directly or indirectly. Yet, when the government succeeds in diminishing public discourse so that it only contains words and ideas of which the government approves, it will have succeeded in establishing tyranny. This tyranny — if it comes — will not come about overnight. It will begin in baby steps and triumph before we know it.

    Yet we do know that it already has begun.

  75. I saw an elderly Filipino man wearing a cap that said USS Cowpens-CG-63. I asked him whether this was a guided missile cruiser and he said no it is an aircraft carrier. I told him that if it was a carrier it would say CV or CVA. I asked him if it flew planes off its deck. He said yes, helicopters. I asked him if it also flew fixed wing aircraft and he said yes. It is a small carrier he said.

    I googled that ship a couple minutes ago, and noted that it is in fact a cruiser. But in reading about that ship, I discovered something much more interesting. There are ships that are, for lack of a better word, snake bit, jinxed, call it what you will. And this one appears to be one of them. The last three captains were either relieved of command for vile and abusive behavior toward the crew, adultery and poor performance. But one of them I found particularly interesting.

    Her name is Holly Graff, she graduated from the Naval Academy and her big sister, Robin is an admiral, and apparently a good officer. Holly however was different. She was an over achiever, and her classmates at Annapolis all figured she would rise to flag rank. The navy brass invested in her, to ingratiate themselves to the feminist lobby in congress. And in so doing, they took a big risk, because she had a history of being what has been described as a female Captain Blye.

    I have attached a link which gives a scathing account of her performance, part of which is hearsay, but like the old Cole Porter stage play in the 20’s Fifty Million Frenchmen can’t be wrong. Some people will dismiss this as a case of male resentment, but the charges here are multiple, specific, and backed up by others who served under her command. Ultimately they were validated at an Admiral’s mast, where she was relieved of command, and given a general discharge, which was later modified to honorable, because the Navy could not allow one of its superstars to fail and the record was sealed. This is another example the price of political correctness.

    The link is here, in case you are interested.

    http://www.militarycorruption.com/hollygraf2.htm

  76. It just occurred to me that the cover-up of Captain Graf’s transgressions by the Navy brass based on her gender is no different than the cover-up of Obama’s lies, unconstitutional actions and thuggish tactics by big media based on his race. And therein lies the dilemma. On the one hand the nation seeks to be inclusive, and as the Commandant of Paris Island said in response to the charge that female marines may not have the warrior ethos, whenever we can use technology to compensate for physical strength differences we will use them, because what we are interested in is results. But when the commitment to equality paralyzes the ability to hold all people in positions of authority accountable, particularly where they hold other people’s lives in their hands, it is a bridge too far. Unfortunately, that is where we are today with the glorious, big media beloved, nation destroying Obama.

  77. wbboei July 18, 2014 at 12:41 am

    15 Journalists Have Joined Obama Administration

    … don’t upset us too much and there just might be a lifeline off the sinking MSM ship.

    This confirms what I was saying about the MSM… a sinking ship.

  78. Admin: this is from RINO Rick Moran:

    The kind of Democrat that Hillary Clinton appeals to most is a more traditional, bread-and-butter Democrat who wants more social spending for the poor and middle class to presumably help them overcome the high unemployment and stagnant wages of the last few decades. “Fairness,” entitlements, “female empowerment,” racial justice, pro-union legislation — these are the issues that Hillary Clinton would like to run on if she takes the plunge and enters the race.

    But the issue that most galvanizes the Warren supporter is economic inequality — specifically, the huge gap between the super rich and the rest of us. Where the Warren and Clinton factions cleave is on the notion that something can be done about income inequality. Clinton gives lip service to the issue while Warren has made it a centerpiece of her political personae. Hillary really has no standing on the matter since she is widely viewed as too cozy with the “too big to fail” crowd. But she has the rhetoric down pat and can sound just as radical as Warren on the subject.

    More than anything else, what excites the Democratic base about Warren is her insistence that income inequality is the number one issue facing America. And while Hillary Clinton cozies up to plutocrats who give hundreds of millions of dollars to her and her husband’s foundation, the far-left liberals who believed so passionately in the now defunct Occupy Wall Street movement pine for a Warren candidacy.

    They may not get it. But, as John Dickerson of Slate points out, if she decides to run, Warren’s high profile will mean it is her issues that will dominate the debate inside the Democratic Party in 2016:

    If Warren joined the race, she would not win, but she would till the ground, putting grit and the smell of earth in the contest. She would energize the Democratic Party’s liberal base, which would then stir up other Democrats who seek to moderate or contain that group. Warren would challenge the Democratic Party on issues like corporate power, income inequality, and entitlements. She would be a long shot and she would have nothing to lose—which means she could keep talking about those ideas out loud. Because Clinton is close to Wall Street and finance executives and Warren is gunning for them, she has the potential to put campaign pressure on Clinton that other candidates can’t. Clinton and other candidates would be forced to explain where they stood more than if Warren weren’t in the race.

    The drawback for Democrats is once you get passed the turgid rhetoric of Warren and the wealth-inequality warriors, they are left with the question — “So? What are you going to do about it?”

    Warren says raising the minimum wage would be a good first step. This is sort of like President Obama saying that passing immigration reform would have stopped the current border crisis — not quite a lie, but beyond fantasy. They can’t talk about how to solve the problem because their solutions would reveal their true nature: their desire to destroy free market capitalism. It’s no accident that the Democrats have turned to a Frenchman, Thomas Piketty, as their new economic guru. Piketty’s book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, has been wildly popular with the hard left because of its near religious arguments against capitalism. It’s the rhetoric of Elizabeth Warren told in graphs and charts.

    If Hillary Clinton runs, she’s going to have to sound an awful lot like Elizabeth Warren. In that sense, Warren is already a winner in 2016. The hard left has given up on denying Clinton the nomination and is now concentrating on holding her feet to the fire on economic populist issues.

    In this, their success will form the basis for the debate with the Republican nominee, who better have a good answer when the question of wealth inequality comes up.

  79. Published on Jul 19, 2014 by RT. Barack Obama claims the US has firm evidence that the plane was shot down by a missile, fired from an area controlled by anti-Kiev fighters. He also accuses Russia of supporting them. Nevertheless US president agrees to Putin’s calls to conduct transparent investigation and says it’s too early to say who and why shot down the plane. Ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern see the situation as isolation for President Poroshenko.

    ‘Obama agrees with Putin on MH17 and vice versa. Poroshenko isolated’
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZwythZvgeg&feature=youtu.be

    If I may, Asshat.

  80. wbboei July 19, 2014 at 4:38 am

    … their success [of the Democratic left] will form the basis for the debate with the Republican nominee, who better have a good answer when the question of wealth inequality comes up.

    That is indeed the rub not just for the R nominee but for the R party as a whole: Their mantra of de-regulation and lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy won’t stick any more.

    Btw, note that your whole quote, except the last phrase above, is about some supposed problem in the Democratic camp. That is indeed the Repug approach that wins elections: Let the other guys fight it out and then sit around with no ideas and let the election fall into their laps.

    This gives me additional hope for 2016, because it looks like the Repugs are poised to nominate Rand Paul, who has no idea how to address the jobs issue. Paul would go down real real bad.

  81. 1. We need new blood, old ideals and guts to repeal what has been shoved onto our lives.

    2. I cannot think of a single reason as to why a conservative, or even a principled Republican would vote for Cochran in the General. Not a single reason. I can think of dozens of reasons as to why one should not vote for Cochran. I’d be interested in hearing why any conservative or any principled Republican would vote for Cochran.

    3. The Barbours are quislings and need to be treated as such. If they dare show their ugly fat mugs at any GOP event, they ought to be booed off the stage. Henry needs to be removed as Republican National Committeeman from Mississippi. They both should be wearing orange jumpsuits for their shananigans in the Senate runoff. They are despicable scoundrels and thugs.

    4. When you get a fundraising mailer from RNC send the postpaid envelope back, perferably wrapped around a brick, with a note that they do not get a dime until they 1) remove Henry Barbour from the RNC, 2) fire Sally Bradshaw, 3) denounce what was done in Mississippi, and 4) punish any state with open primaries by slashing their national convention delegations in an effort to put an end to open primaries.

    5. Some will continue to say that GOP continues to be the party of stupid. Part of me says that they are engineering a loss in Mississippi and for the senate so as to maintain there comfortable position in congress.

    6. All I can say about this one is this…Mr. Priebus…wait for the replies on your next diaries…your party is in deep trouble.

    6 If you “feed the bears” by voting for Cochran in the general election, you are essentially saying, “This practice in the primaries is OK. I condone it, and will follow whatever path my RINO, Establishment, Progressive Leaders lay out for me”. They need to be slapped, real hard, right now.

    7. You make a good point, but he hasn’t got a snowball’s chance in hell. He’ll find himself on the sharp end of all that “racism” BS that his collaborators slung during the runoff, and be shocked — shocked, I say!! — at the level to which our discourse has sunk. He’ll deserve the result; we won’t.
    —————
    The above is typical of the conservative reaction to the dirty race baiting tactics of the (Barbour/Rove)machine in Mississippi. And now we find that Republican senators who rely heavily on Tea Party support contributed to these tactics of paying black voters to cross party lines and vote for the RINO, and characterizing the tea party as a throwback to the KKK. And, worst of all perhaps, the word from the RNC head, Priebus (another empty suit) is mum. I was not surpised that senators like McConnell and Corker (a real dickhead) funded this assault. I am unimpressed that Portman did his little sgt Schultz routine. But I am surprised that Mike Crapo got pulled into this. What does this mean? It means that, on the odds, the Republican party will lose that seat, based on the logic above. Personally, I would vote for Beezebub Prince of Devils before I would pull the lever for Thad Cochrane–a man who oozes corruption out of ever pore in his body. But what this all means as well, is that the RINO would rather lose an election than lose control of the party. This is why I believe it is futile to hope for a transformation of the Republican Party. It is as clear to me now as it was before that the only solution is a conservative party. That is an option the RINO should embrace because it allows them to do more of this losing elections but maintaining control of the party. After what they did in Mississippi, no one should believe them. And that means they will not win the senate. Professor Jacobson believes that the predations by Obama will not affect his favorability rating but may affect turn-out. Well, it is obvious to me that the predations by the Republican Party in Mississippi against the Tea Party may have a similar effect. The RINO was keen to recruit the Tea Party as their ground army, but now it has reached the point where the Tea Party will no longer bark at their master’s command, and may even bite him in the ass. Let’s hope so. Until the people of this country get beyond the delusion that there are two parties, and recognize that this is all for show, and the reality is there are two nations–one inside the beltway, and the other outside, and those inside the beltway are the latter day version of colonialist, more national decline is inevitable.

  82. This gives me additional hope for 2016, because it looks like the Repugs are poised to nominate Rand Paul, who has no idea how to address the jobs issue. Paul would go down real real bad.
    ————–
    That will never happen. He is trying to re-market himself as a RINO, and losing his core conservative base. The most likely candidates are Jeb Bush, Chris Christy, and a wild card governor of a Republican state e.g. Perry, Kasik, etc. If those candidates turn your stomach, then you are not alone. They will make it much easier for Hillary. The Warren vs Cruz scenario is unlikely. I think Cruz will be a conservative party candidate in 2020, because I cannot see how the RINO can continue this subterfuge much longer. They have been outed, and Mississippi is the smoking gun. What happened there has shaken the faith of their base, and the defiance we see from Barbour adds insult to injury.

  83. If Hillary Clinton runs, she’s going to have to sound an awful lot like Elizabeth Warren. In that sense, Warren is already a winner in 2016. The hard left has given up on denying Clinton the nomination and is now concentrating on holding her feet to the fire on economic populist issues.–RINO Rick Moran.
    —————
    Therein lies the dilemma.

  84. When I learned that the Supreme Court of Mississippi turned down Chris McDaniel’s request to set aside the election based on its violation of the law, and the discovery that voters were bribed, and its invocation of charged racial rhetoric, etc. I asked myself are these judges really impartial, or are they controlled by the Barbour machine. Turns out they are elected as a general rule, which means they are beholden to the powerful Barbour machine. And when one of the justices dies quits or retires prior to the expiration of his eight year term, the governor appoints the replacement. Haley Barbour was the Governor of Mississippi, and I would not be surprised if one or more of those nine jurists was appointed by him and is therefore a crony.

  85. That is indeed the rub not just for the R nominee but for the R party as a whole: Their mantra of de-regulation and lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy won’t stick any more.
    ————–
    The reason it will not stick is because it relies on micro economics to make its case. Mico economics is a dreary science and it does not reach the masses. Therefore, even though the argument is valid, and Kennedy invoked it in his mantra that all boats rise with the tide, the electorate we have today will not buy it. And even if they did, you would still have the spectacle of the elites making out like the thieves they are. The RINO seeks to reposition himself closer to the democrat position, without losing his conservative base. He hopes their hatred for Obama, a man who is destroying the future for millions of people, will cause them to overlook their own slight of hand. That argument has a half life of two years or less. He will act out his pathology between now and then, and disasters will be a daily occurrence. But the willingness of the RINO to go along with him, and their refusal to consider the only appropriate remedy which is impeachment will do them in.

  86. [These guys just keep on giving for America!]
    Mad World News[WATCH] Veterans “Welcome” Obama to Delaware With Their Backs to Him
    ‘When Obama arrived in Delaware on Thursday, these veterans were ready. But they weren’t saluting, or cheering. The “warm welcome” was orchestrated by Marine veteran Martin Nicholson, who is the Northeast Regional Coordinator for Gun Rights Across America. In the video below, you can hear Nicholson giving commands to the 25 veterans.

    “Obama’s not doing anything to protect our veterans. He wants to ban the importation of the AK-47 rifle, but he refuses to help our veterans who were shot at by them! I think I speak for all of us when I say, I can’t ever remember a U.S. President who has disrespected our men and women who have honorably served the nation they love, more than Barack Hussein Obama. Seeing our veterans awaiting the passing motorcade to send that man the message of their disapproval can be summarized with one epic phrase: ‘OOH-RAH!’” -Martin Nicolson
    I commend these warriors for utilizing their 1st Amendment rights (which THEY fought for) to send a message to the man who has done so little to support them as their Commander-In-Chief. From shutting down their World War II memorial, to ignoring the VA situation where Soldiers are dying on waiting lists, I’d turn my back on him too. He’s done far worse to them.’
    http://madworldnews.com/watch-veterans-welcome-obama-delaware-backs/

  87. Conservatives are not stupid. They can listen to a dickhead like Corker wax on and on and on about the constitution and liberty, and reject him because his voting record shows that his only constituency is his donors. I never want to hear another speech from any politician. All I want to know is what will they do to correct the problem, and do they have the guts to see it through. In the final analysis, that’s all that matters.

  88. Just hearing about this. 7/16/14. Is it old news here? A former Baptist preacher!

    Upset Win for Tea Party Candidate in North Carolina
    RALEIGH, N.C.—Call it another GOP runoff surprise.
    The victory by a former Baptist preacher and tea party darling Tuesday night shows just how chaotic the political landscape is, particularly in a low-turnout runoff in a conservative Congressional district.
    Mark Walker won 60% of the 31,000 votes cast to trounce Phil Berger Jr., a county prosecutor and son of one of the most powerful men in North Carolina, state Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger. Mr. Walker was out-raised and out-spent in the runoff race in North Carolina’s 6th Congressional District, which is based in Greensboro and runs along the Virginia line. The men were competing for the seat being vacated by long-serving U.S. Rep. Howard Coble, who is retiring.
    Mr. Walker had relatively few endorsements compared to Mr. Berger, who campaigned hand in hand with Mr. Coble. He used a playbook that was very similar to the one used by David Brat in Virginia, in his upset last month of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.
    Mr. Walker credited his win to his one-on-one interaction with voters and a rejection of the slew of negative campaign ads run by Mr. Berger. Mr. Walker won in spite of some gaffes, including a false assertion that Mr. Berger had been cited for ethics violation by the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Walker was mistakenly referring to a 1935 case involving another Mr. Berger.
    Mr. Berger asked his supporters Tuesday night to get behind Mr. Walker and keep the seat in Republican hands, where it’s been since 1985 when Mr. Coble first won the seat.
    Democratic nominee Laura Fjeld said Mr. Berger’s people should back her instead, calling Mr. Walker “a radical extremist” whose views don’t jibe with North Carolina’s. Ms. Fjeld is a former administrator with the 17-campus University of North Carolina system
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/07/16/upset-win-for-tea-party-candidate-in-north-carolina/

  89. The only thing Warren and Hillary have in common is their gender and they are Democrats.

    The Obots would support a female goat, or kangaroo…as long it it wasn’t Hillary Clinton.

    Maybe One-Drop-of-Native-American-Blood is about as qualified as their beloved Baracko.

  90. If Hillary can’t win a Primary over OneDropOfBlood, I will officially become an Independent and our girl shouldn’t run for President, evah…

  91. Maybe the best answer to a bot who continues to worship Obama is this one I just thought of:

    Is your grasp on reality so tenuous that you cannot see what he has done to this nation–on every conceivable front? If so, then all I can say is I feel sorry for you.

  92. There should be two or three preliminary questions like: Obama promised if you like your insurance plan then you can keep it. Do you really believe that? Obama promised “Y”. Do you really believe that? Obama promised. You don’t really believe that–do you? And then the coup d gras: Is your grasp on reality so tenuous that you cannot see what he has done to this nation–on every conceivable front? If so, then all I can say is I feel sorry for you.

  93. If Hillary can’t win a Primary over OneDropOfBlood, I will officially become an Independent and our girl shouldn’t run for President, evah…
    —————
    It is more than ironic that in an effort to promote a wealthy white liberal to an elite institution like Harvard, we have adopted the racial code of the ante bellum south, and used it once more as a basis for discrimination. Then as now, the criterion was 1/8 minority blood. The Ava Gardner/Howard Keel movie Show Boat has a scene depicting that.

  94. wbboei
    July 19, 2014 at 12:36 pm
    **********

    So now it is the US SUpremes or bust, I hope he goes all the way…he needs to win!

  95. Hillary Clinton wins the popularity contest.

    The former secretary of state leads potential presidential candidates in terms of familiarity and favorability, according to a new Gallup poll.

    Clinton is familiar with 91% of voters surveyed between July 7 and 10, with 55% of them having a favorable view of her, according to the poll.

    She bested her possible archrival, Vice President Joe Biden, who’s known but not well-liked, according to the results. Although the gaffe-prone veep is familiar with 80% of voters, more dislike him (42%) than support him (38%).

    Possible dark horse New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo came in a surprising third — beating out Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley — with 51% of voters saying they were familiar with Cuomo and 27% had a favorable view, according to the poll.

    Progressive leader Warren, who has tried curbing rumors she’ll run for President, landed a 38% familiarity rating and is favorable with 21% of those voters, the poll shows. O’Malley, who’s expected to make a run, is familiar with 16% of voters.

    One-Drop-of Blood has a 21% favorable vote………too bad, so sad.

    No contest there.

  96. Compare Bill Clinton’s response when TWA flight 800 tragically came down and Obama’s callous response to the current tragedy. He is a cold and out of touch President.

  97. wbboei
    July 19, 2014 at 12:25 pm
    If Hillary Clinton runs, she’s going to have to sound an awful lot like Elizabeth Warren. In that sense, Warren is already a winner in 2016. The hard left has given up on denying Clinton the nomination and is now concentrating on holding her feet to the fire on economic populist issues.–RINO Rick Moran

    ____________

    If the hard left runs Warren against Hillary in a primary, the only way Warren will win is if the lefties use the shady tactics they did to steal the nomination for Obama. Of course, that’s exactly what they will do. The mitigating factor in terms of support for Warren is that, at this point, there is less enthusiasm for her than there was for Obama, especially among Dem elected officials. Of course, we’re not there yet, and that could change. Although MSM and the ultra-liberal Dims will support Warren, there’s a good chance they won’t be quite as rabid as they were about Obama. Most of the elected officials, who vote as super delegates, will likely not be as easily swayed by bribes and intimidation by party leaders as they were in 2008. Nor will they be as quick to back stab the Clintons as they previously were, IMHO. If those assumptions are correct, the net result will be that Warren’s chances of winning the nomination will be less than O’s, especially factoring the dissolution of the O coalition. Of course the two variables that could impact the primary outcome are the possibility – make that likelihood – that the lefties will be playing fast and loose with election regulations, and the possibility that the Pubs will encourage crossover voting for Warren in the primary.

    I hope Hillary will carefully consider all angles of this issue as she is determining just how far to the left she will have to go in order to gain the confidence of the O Dims. The obvious answer to that is, she won’t get their support no matter what she promises or how much she identifies herself with Obama.. If it weren’t for the damage it would do to her in the general election, I wouldn’t care if she erected a statue of Lenin in her yard, and posted videos of her and Obama holding hands and singing ” Wind Beneath My Wings” to each other. I wouldn’t care if she told countless lies to the crazy left in order to get the nomination. After their sleaziness in 2008, they deserve to be bamboozled. Problem is, she can’t stand too close to the Obama and hope to win the general election. But then, neither can Warren.

  98. This weak and timid President talks big… and does nothing: A devastating attack on Obama by a top Washington insider

    Clark S. Judge believes Obama’s reaction to the tragedy was ‘disconnected’
    Immediately ‘reverted to script’ to praise his administration
    Former adviser to Ronald Reagan says it confirms ‘chaos’ of foreign policy

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2698685/This-weak-timid-President-talks-big-does-A-devastating-attack-Obama-Washington-insider.html#ixzz37zsOTOcy

    At a political event in Wilmington, Delaware, on Thursday, President Obama devoted only 40 seconds to the shooting down of the Malaysian airline, his first statement to the world following the news.

    His emotionless reference to the attack as ‘a terrible tragedy’ seemed disconnected from the horrific moment, particularly as he immediately reverted to script to praise his administration and criticise Republicans.

    It was a far cry from President Reagan’s 1983 fierce denunciation of the Soviet shooting down of a Korean airliner as a ‘crime against humanity’.

    The US failure to follow through in Syria gave the Russian president confidence that he could move with impunity.
    It was a far cry from President Reagan’s 1983 fierce denunciation of the Soviet shooting down of a Korean airliner as a ‘crime against humanity

    SOON he was picking a fight with Ukraine. Like the scene in The Godfather – when, at his child’s baptism, Michael Corleone renounces the devil as the camera cuts back and forth to his men eliminating rival gangsters – Putin, before global television cameras, watched the opening ceremonies of the Sochi Olympics as Russian troops began movements preparatory to seizing Crimea.

    This week, in the skies over Ukraine, we saw the consequences of the recklessness that the Russian godfather’s probing has unleashed.

    Putin was not the only one to detect opportunity in American indecision. China stepped up its probes in the East and South China Seas. In the Middle East, with the US military presence drawn down nearly to zero in Iraq and soon Afghanistan, an army of ruthless fanatics gestating unnoticed in Syria’s east saw the chance to break out of national boundaries and within a few weeks occupied much of western and central Iraq.

    Why has so much of the global order come apart so fast?

    For the same reason that, as a friend reports, on the streets of San Salvador those who will smuggle your child to the Rio Grande have been securing an unprecedented volume of sign-ups. When asked about the chances of the child staying in America once the border is crossed, they tell parents: ‘It has never been easier.’

    Now the word on weakness is everywhere, even the poorest barrios of Central America.

    …………………..

    Read the whole article…….laughing stock.

  99. loving the comments……..

    There is at least one sane person in Boston MA.

    Mazda, Boston, United States, 6 hours ago

    The problem with this president he’s skated through life on freebies and everyone has covered his rearend his whole lifetime . Now he’s top dog and hasn’t a clue on how to deal with crisis after crisis plus he’s surrounded by inexperienced yes people who are also in over their heads. They deal in theory not reality!

    ……………………………

    Houston gets it toooo…..

    pocogirl, Houston, 8 hours ago

    The problem with Prime Minister David Cameron having a friendly chat with Obama is that Obama is so disconnected and arrogant that his words will never be heard. This former community organizer and freshman senator is totally clueless about international politics and the role of the U.S. plus he surrounds himself with equally clueless advisers like Valarie Jarrett. Meanwhile Obama attends fund raisers while the world burns.

  100. Another good as gold House Rep:
    Cartels suspected as high-caliber gunfire sends Border Patrol scrambling on Rio Grande
    7/20/14.
    Snip The weapons were fired at the U.S. side of the riverbank in the area of the Rincon Peninsula across the Rio Grande from Reynosa, Mexico, at about 8:30 p.m., sources said. Bullets ricocheted into an area where Border Patrol agents were positioned, US Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, told FoxNews.com. Border Patrol sources confirmed Gohmert’s account, and said the shots may have been fired by .50-caliber weapons. “We don’t have any armor that can stop a .50-caliber round, so our Border Patrol agents had to take cover when the rounds were richocheting around them,” said GOHMERT, WHO HAS BEEN IN THE AREA FOR THE LAST WEEK TO GET A FIRST-HAND LOOK AT THE BORDER SITUATION. Snip
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/20/cartels-suspected-as-high-caliber-gunfire-sends-border-patrol-scrambling-on-rio/

  101. MSNBC on the job…at its best…can’t make this stuff up…see the actual, live on-air videoclip for yourself…

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/07/msnbc-duped-by-prank-plane-crash-witness-192340.html?hp=r14

    MSNBC got badly pranked on Thursday afternoon by a man claiming to be a member of the military in Ukraine who witnessed the Malaysian Airlines plane crash.

    “The Cycle” host Krystal Ball introduced the caller as an “MSNBC exclusive.”

    “Let’s turn now to an MSNBC exclusive. U.S. Staff Sergeant Michael Boyd, he is at the U.S. embassy in Ukraine and he says he saw a missile in the air hit the plane, he is on the phone with us,” Ball said.

    It goes downhill from there.

    “Well I was looking out the window and I saw a projectile flying in the sky and it would appear the plane was shot down by a blast of wind from Howard Stern’s ass,” the caller said.

    But Ball didn’t seem to catch the joke.

    “So it would appear the plane was shot down, can you tell us anything more from your military training of sort of missile system that may have been coming from?” Ball said in response.

    “Well you’re a dumbass aren’t ya?” the caller said.

    Ball, still confused, said “I’m sorry sir?” before pausing for a moment and saying they were taking a break.

    After a commercial break, Ball said the individual on the phone previously had not been an eyewitness.

    “We thought we had an eyewitness on the scene, that individual was not actually an eyewitness,” she said.

    Update (4:36 p.m.)

    MSNBC spokesperson Lauren Skowronski said in an email the call was “an unfortunate incident and we immediately clarified for our viewers.”

  102. Me: “the rub… for the R party: Their mantra of de-regulation and lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy won’t stick any more.”

    wbboei July 19, 2014 at 12:58 pm

    The reason it will not stick is because it relies on micro economics to make its case. Micro economics is a dreary science and it does not reach the masses.

    For the record, economics used to be called (19th century) “the dismal science.” You’re right that the Republican mantra is based on micro-economics. But micro-economics can reach the masses because everyone is familiar with home economics, which resembles micro-economics more than it does macro-economics.

    The government budget, expenditures, tax rates, the interest rates its sets, the unemployment figures, excess supply or demand, international trade and so forth are all part of macro-economic theory that is very far from everyone’s field of everyday concern. Few people have taken a college economics course and, of those who do, most go on to get an MBA and go into business because there is not much demand for economists except in academia, perhaps journalism, and government. MBA studies are micro-economic study.

    So Republicans used to be able to make “common sense” arguments like “not spending more than you earn” to call for reduced government spending, and cutting taxes on the rich because it is the rich “who create jobs” and that’s the way wealth “trickles down” to the lower classes in the brilliant “supply-side economics” theory.

    I like to think that people are just fed up with this bullshit and don’t believe it any more. Tax cuts for the rich don’t bring jobs or an economic upswing because the rich simply do not create jobs. The rich are in it only to make more money for themselves. If they create assets along the way, that sounds great; but new assets don’t necessarily create jobs — in fact, they may lead to payroll cuts and losses of jobs. There are myriad examples of this.

    The rich don’t care one way or another about jobs or even assets. In fact, there are new ways of creating wealth for themselves by tricky trading in new markets, derivatives and the Wall Street casino, investing in foreign countries, and even what used to be called white-collar crime but is no longer a crime.

    As for de-regulation: I was relieved to hear Romney repeat several times during his campaign that “the markets need regulation.” I think the American public is ready to hear that now. But is the Republican Party ready? The Libertarians certainly are not, and they have an audience in the American electorate, where less government is equated with more freedom.

    We agreed when you said “The Republican Party is a lost cause.” I’m willing to leave it at that.

    wbboei July 19, 2014 at 1:11 pm

    …. All I want to know is what will they do to correct the problem, and do they have the guts to see it through. In the final analysis, that’s all that matters.

    Yeah, I certainly agree with that. But that means I’ll never vote for another Republican candidate again.

  103. For the record, economics used to be called (19th century) “the dismal science.” You’re right that the Republican mantra is based on micro-economics. But micro-economics can reach the masses because everyone is familiar with home economics, which resembles micro-economics more than it does macro-economics.
    ——————
    I am not sure any more. When this the political base of this nation was comprised of families as opposed to solitary individuals, when consumerism was not the new religion, when mass media was not the opiate of the masses, when mass culture aimed above the sewer, when celebrity status was earned not invented, when our educational system taught people to think for themselves rather than parroting the meme of the left, when people could see beyond race and gender to the common good, when the elites of this nation thought about the country rather than just themselves, and when people lived within their budgets, then perhaps economics was not such a dreary science and people could accept Reagan’s line that government must live within its means just like a family must. Today however, it is all le bon tempts rould, forget domani, and money, why money and free cell phones fall from the sky. What nobler case for government can there be than to redistribute the wealth, and if you doubt that proposition then ask yourself how a nobody like Elizabeth Warren has hitched that wagon–unequal distribution of wealth to a star. No. Half of our country is financially dependent on government, two out of five people of working age are not working, our house is collapsing, and big media is telling us all is well, be happy, don’t worry. Putin, terrorism, unlawful immigration are destructive forces, but they are as nothing compared to the treason whether witting or unwitting of big media. And the reason for this is self evident. They are in the business of blinding us to what is really happening, and they go for cheap tawdry thrills to distract us, not once, not twice, but every fucking time. This will never change until they are defrocked, and their fortunes are placed on the auction block.

  104. Try thinking about it this way: the younger generation lives with massive debt, from student loans etc. In that sense they do not live within their means. Therefore, the micro-economic argument relative to government is a non starter, unlike a generation ago. That is a fact, and an outcome determinative one politically speaking. It is common for people today to live beyond their means therefore they will be unresponsive to a political argument that government must do so, not when there are so many places where people of high moral principles (liberals) can gladly direct opm (other people’s money) to prove to themselves what superior people they are. Reach into their pockets, however, and it is a different story. Under the best of circumstances the dobermans will come out and you will be asked not so politely to leave. They call this noblesse oblige. I can them useless motherfuckers.

  105. S
    July 20, 2014 at 8:09 am
    MSNBC on the job
    ————-
    Her Krystal Ball is, how shall I put it, a little cloudy?

    She got punked alright.

    But MSNBC has been punking the ignoranti for so long that they have no grounds to object.

    The equitable doctrine of unclean hands applies: he who seeks equity must do equity.

    And a network whose business strategy is to lie to people cannot object to being lied to back.

    This has its parallel, of course, in the courtroom.

    Sometimes a lawyer will become so focused on his own script and the points he is trying to make through cross examination that he fails to listen closely to the response, and if he did so, he could easily impeach the witness.

    Krystal Ball–what’s in a name?

  106. freespirit July 20, 2014 at 2:42 am

    You draw a scary picture of what Warren could do running a primary campaign the same way Obama did, but I don’t think HRC will let that influence her own primary style and certainly not her policy stances.

    What do I mean by “primary style?” Consider the fact that HRC already has an army of 2 ½ million supporters logged onto Ready for Hillary, before she even announces. Once she announces, I dare to think that both you and Shadowfax and hundreds of thousands more, if not millions, will join the bandwagon.

    If HRC announces let’s say on 20 Jan 2015, she will have nine months before the serious campaigning begins in Iowa, NH, SC and so forth, during which she can travel at leisure all around the US and meet with people in town hall meetings convened by Ready for Hillary.**

    This will look more like a general election than a primary campaign, because, in these meetings, she can meet with Democrats, Independents, Republicans, Tea Party, Libertarians, low-info people who just want to see her, and maybe even hecklers suffering from CDS.

    In the town halls, she can take and answer questions from Joe and Jane Schmoe and deepen her awareness of where the country’s at, what policies are needed, and what can be done. By the time the primaries come around a year later, she’ll have a clear message to deliver and it will be her own message — not a takeoff of Warren or Obama — plus an army of millions to flood the early primary states and beyond.

    And of course, she’ll have plenty of money.

    So, I would still like to see a couple of other people throw their hats in the ring just to make a show of it, but any candle Warren tries to hold out to HRC will be snuffed out pretty quickly. Besides, Obama’s Chicago chicaneries aren’t necessarily Warren’s cup of tea.

    ** The trick here is for HRC to put her schedule online a week or two in advance and then Ready for Hillary can organize the meetings around that schedule. That way, there’s no illicit connection between her campaign and the PAC.

  107. It is not reductio ad absurdum to say that her candidacy depends on big media. The electorate as a whole is gullible and will take whatever big media says as gospel. If they bless it, she is feted. If they question it, as I doubt they will, because her commitment to the status quo is similar to theirs, and then the outcome is uncertain. Her policies would differ somewhat from those of Obama, especially in foreign affairs, and perhaps the economy, but there is nothing in her resume to suggest that she questions the legitimacy of the political class, or their right to substitute their judgment for that of the American People. The same is true of Bush and Christie. For me, she is the best alternative among the status quo politicians who will attract the donors in 2016. Nothing of substance will happen to change the equation in favor of the American People until conservatives exit the Republican Party.

  108. wbboei July 20, 2014 at 10:22 am

    and

    wbboei July 20, 2014 at 10:33 am
    ——–

    OK, I can see you have a better grasp of why micro-economics no longer holds sway over the sheeple.

    … people of high moral principles (liberals) can gladly direct opm (other people’s money) to prove to themselves what superior people they are. Reach into their pockets, however, and it is a different story. Under the best of circumstances the dobermans will come out and you will be asked not so politely to leave. They call this noblesse oblige.

    ROTFLMAO !!!

  109. The big picture from a Harvard Professor, world class historian and Great American Nial Ferguson. This comment is especially germane, when we speak of status quo politician, who, by definition, protects RENT SEEKING SPECIAL INTERESTS:

    “Republics were regarded by most ancient political philosophers as condemned to decadence, or to imperial corruption. This was the lesson of Rome. Democracy was always likely to give way to oligarchy or tyranny.

    The late Mancur Olson had a modern version of such cyclical models, arguing that all political systems were bound to become the captives, over time, of special interests. The advantage enjoyed by West Germany and Japan after World War II, he suggested, was that all the RENT SEEKING ELITES of the pre-1945 period had been SWEPT AWAY by defeat. This was why Britain won the war but lost the peace.

    This is why I see the prospects as essentially hopeless, absent some game changing event. A system of graft and corruption such as we have today, with all the hangers on in big media, K street, lawyers, trade association, etc. centered in Washington will eventually fail, because of the forces of disequilibrium. At some point, the parasite kills the host. And, the tipping point may be closer than we think.
    —————————–

    How America Lost Its Way

    Not everyone is an entrepreneur. Still, everyone should try—if only once—to start a business. After all, it is small and medium enterprises that are the key to job creation. There is also something uniquely educational about sitting at the desk where the buck stops, in a dreary office you’ve just rented, working day and night with a handful of employees just to break even.

    As an academic, I’m just an amateur capitalist. Still, over the past 15 years I’ve started small ventures in both the U.S. and the U.K. In the process I’ve learned something surprising: It’s much easier to do in the U.K. There seemed to be much more regulation in the U.S., not least the headache of sorting out health insurance for my few employees. And there were certainly more billable hours from lawyers.

    This set me thinking. We are assured by vociferous economists that economic growth would be higher in the U.S. and unemployment lower if only the government would run even bigger deficits and/or the Fed would print even more money. But what if the difficulty lies elsewhere, in problems that no amount of fiscal or monetary stimulus can overcome?

    Nearly all development economists agree that good institutions—legislatures, courts, administrative agencies—are crucial. When poor countries improve their institutions, economic growth soon accelerates. But what about rich countries? If poor countries can get rich by improving their institutions, is it not possible that rich countries can get poor by allowing their institutions to degenerate? I want to suggest that it is.

    Consider the evidence from the annual “Doing Business” reports from the World Bank and International Finance Corporation. Since 2006 the report has published data for most of the world’s countries on the total number of days it takes to start a business, get a construction permit, register a property, pay taxes, get an export or import license and enforce a contract. If one simply adds together the total number of days it would take to carry out all seven of these procedures sequentially, it is possible to construct a simple measure of how slowly—or fast—a country’s bureaucracy moves.

    Seven years of data suggest that most of the world’s countries are successfully making it easier to do business: The total number of days it takes to carry out the seven procedures has come down, in some cases very substantially. In only around 20 countries has the total duration of dealing with “red tape” gone up. The sixth-worst case is none other than the U.S., where the total number of days has increased by 18% to 433. Other members of the bottom 10, using this metric, are Zimbabwe, Burundi and Yemen (though their absolute numbers are of course much higher).

    Why is it getting harder to do business in America? Part of the answer is excessively complex legislation. A prime example is the 848-page Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of July 2010 (otherwise known as the Dodd-Frank Act), which, among other things, required that regulators create 243 rules, conduct 67 studies and issue 22 periodic reports. Comparable in its complexity is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (906 pages), which is also in the process of spawning thousands of pages of regulation. You don’t have to be opposed to tighter financial regulation or universal health care to recognize that something is wrong with laws so elaborate that almost no one affected has the time or the will to read them.

    Who benefits from the growth of complex and cumbersome regulation? The answer is: lawyers, not forgetting lobbyists and compliance departments. For complexity is not the friend of the little man. It is the friend of the deep pocket. It is the friend of cronyism.

    We used to have the rule of law. Now it is tempting to say we have the rule of lawyers, which is something different. For the lawyers can also make money even in the absence of complex legislation.

    It has long been recognized that the U.S. tort system is exceptionally expensive. Indeed, tort reform is something few people will openly argue against. Yet the plague of class-action lawsuits continues unabated. Regular customers of Southwest Airlines recently received this email: “Did you receive a Southwest Airlines drink coupon through the purchase of a Business Select ticket prior to August 1, 2010, and never redeem it? If yes, a legal Settlement provides a Replacement Drink Voucher, entitling you to a free drink aboard a Southwest flight, for every such drink coupon you did not redeem.”

    This is not the product of the imagination of some modern-day Charles Dickens. It is a document arising from the class-action case, In re Southwest Airlines Voucher Litigation, No. 11-cv-8176, which came before Judge Matthew F. Kennelly of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. As the circular explains: “This Action arose out of Southwest’s decision, effective August 1, 2010, to only accept drink coupons received by Business Select customers with the purchase of a Business Select ticket on the date of the ticketed travel. The Plaintiffs in this case allege Southwest, in making that decision, breached its contract with Class Members who previously received drink coupons,” etc.

    As often happens in such cases, Southwest decided to settle out of court. Recipients of the email will have been nonplused to learn that the settlement “will provide Replacement Drink Vouchers to Class Members who submit timely and valid Claim Forms.” One wonders how many have bothered.

    Cui bono? The answer is, of course, the lawyers representing the plaintiffs. Having initially pitched for “up to $7 million in fees, costs and expenses,” these ingenious jurists settled for fees of $3 million “plus costs not to exceed $30,000” from Southwest.

    Canada’s Fraser Institute has been compiling an “Economic Freedom” index since 1980, one component of which is a measure of the quality of a country’s legal system and property rights. In the light of a case like the one described above, there is nothing surprising about the recent decline in U.S. performance. In 2000 U.S. law scored 9.23 out of 10. The most recent score (for 2010) was 7.12.

    Such indexes must be used with caution, but the Fraser index is not the only piece of evidence suggesting that the rule of law in the U.S. is not what it was. The World Justice Project uses a completely separate methodology to assess countries’ legal systems. The latest WJP report ranks the U.S. 17th out of 97 countries for the extent to which the law limits the power of government, 18th for the absence of corruption, 19th for regulatory enforcement, 22nd for access to civil justice and the maintenance of order and security, 25th for fundamental rights, and 26th for the effectiveness of criminal justice. Of all the former British colonies in the report, the U.S. ranks behind New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Canada, Hong Kong and the United Kingdom—though it does beat Botswana.

    The decline of American institutions is no secret. Yet it is one of those strange “unknown knowns” that is well documented but largely ignored. Each year, the World Economic Forum publishes its Global Competitiveness Index. Since it introduced its current methodology in 2004, the U.S. score has declined by 6%. (In the same period China’s score has improved by 12%.) An important component of the index is provided by 22 different measures of institutional quality, based on the WEF’s Executive Opinion Survey. Typical questions are “How would you characterize corporate governance by investors and boards of directors in your country?” and “In your country, how common is diversion of public funds to companies, individuals, or groups due to corruption?” The startling thing about this exercise is how poorly the U.S. fares.

    In only one category out of 22 is the U.S. ranked in the global top 20 (the strength of investor protection). In seven categories it does not even make the top 50. For example, the WEF ranks the U.S. 87th in terms of the costs imposed on business by “organized crime (mafia-oriented racketeering, extortion).” In every single category, Hong Kong does better.

    At the same time, the U.S. has seen a marked deterioration in its World Governance Indicators. In terms of “voice and accountability,” “government effectiveness,” “regulatory quality” and especially “control of corruption,” the U.S. scores have all gone down since the WGI project began in the mid-1990s. It would be tempting to say that America is turning Latin, were it not for the fact that a number of Latin American countries have been improving their governance scores over the same period.

    What is the process at work here? Perhaps this is a victory from beyond the grave for classical Western political theory. Republics, after all, were regarded by most ancient political philosophers as condemned to decadence, or to imperial corruption. This was the lesson of Rome. Democracy was always likely to give way to oligarchy or tyranny. This was the lesson of the French Revolution. The late Mancur Olson had a modern version of such cyclical models, arguing that all political systems were bound to become the captives, over time, of special interests. The advantage enjoyed by West Germany and Japan after World War II, he suggested, was that all the rent-seeking elites of the pre-1945 period had been swept away by defeat. This was why Britain won the war but lost the peace.

    Whatever the root causes of the deterioration of American institutions, smart people are starting to notice it. Last year Michael Porter of Harvard Business School published a report based on a large-scale survey of HBS alumni. Among the questions he asked was where the U.S. was “falling behind” relative to other countries. The top three lagging indicators named were: the effectiveness of the political system, the K-12 education system and the complexity of the tax code. Regulation came sixth, efficiency of the legal framework eighth.

    Asked to name “the most problematic factors for doing business” in the U.S., respondents to the WEF’s most recent Executive Opinion Survey put “inefficient government bureaucracy” at the top, followed by tax rates and tax regulations.

    All this should not be interpreted as yet another prophecy of the imminent decline and fall of the U.S., however. There is some light in the gloom. According to the most recent United Nations projections, the share of the U.S. population that is over 65 will reach 25% only at the very end of this century. Japan has already passed that milestone; Germany will be next. By midcentury, both countries will have around a third of their population age 65 or older.

    More imminently, a revolution in the extraction of shale gas and tight oil, via hydraulic fracking, is transforming the U.S. from energy dependence to independence. Not only could the U.S., at least for a time, re-emerge as the world’s biggest oil producer; the lower electricity costs resulting from the fossil-fuel boom are already triggering a revival of U.S. manufacturing in the Southeast and elsewhere.

    In a functioning federal system, the pace of institutional degeneration is not uniform. America’s four “growth corridors”—the Great Plains, the Gulf Coast, the Intermountain West and the Southeast—are growing not just because they have natural resources but also because state governments in those regions are significantly more friendly to business. There are already heartening signs of a great regeneration in states like Texas and North Dakota.

    “In America you have a right to be stupid—if you want to be.” Secretary of State John Kerry made that remark off the cuff in February, speaking to a group of students in Berlin. It is not a right the founding fathers felt they needed explicitly to enshrine. But it has always been there, and America’s leaders have frequently been willing to exercise it.

    Yes, we Americans have the right to be stupid if we want to be. We can carry on pretending that our economic problems can be solved with the help of yet more fiscal stimulus or quantitative easing. Or we can face up to the institutional impediments to growth I have described here.

    Not many economists talk about them, it’s true. But that’s because not many economists run businesses.

  110. I think the dreariest science of all is being someone like Presidential historian Michael Becheloss, who went overboard in his compliments to Obama, and who tempers his analysis of history to conform to the rules of political correctness. Doris Kearnes Goodwin too, when she is not too busy plagiarizing.

  111. Obama was installed by the elites for the express purpose of protecting rent seeking special interests, and inviting new parasites as well to climb aboard the staggering host. The last politician to take on those rent seeking special interest was Teddy Roosevelt. The closest thing we have to him today is Ted Cruz, which is why the honey badger makes the elites nervous. If they thought they could call him a racist and make it stick, which is now their first line of attack, they would gladly do so through their mouthpieces, CNN and NBC. But being Hispanic, that is not they know it won’t work. If he was black, they would use a celebrity criminal like Sharpton to call him an uncle Tom, as they do with Clarence Thomas, Tim Scott, etc. You may think this is a simple case of pandering, but what it really is is the elites going to war to preserve their rent seeking practices, which deplete the vitality of this nation. And, to be clear, the answer to this is not more regulation, but less regulation. For them, regulation is good, because they can spread the costs, and it poses an entry barrier to competition. That, in essence, is what crony capitalism is all about.

  112. I do not know what is it about transgenders. My cousin in California called me and mentioned among other things that the class nerd who she always protected in high school underwent a transgender operation and was on the welcoming line of their high school reunion, with hairy legs and a low cut gown. Then, I went to a restaurant in the Capitol Hill district, and read that the Seattle Human Rights Commission has gone ballistic on a restaurant that reassigned a transgender waiter to a different area because a customer made an untoward comment, rather than calling the police and ejecting the customer. And now I read that Eric Holder has made a commitment to promoting the rights of transgenders. It would seem to me that investigating major crises like fast and furious, IRS abuse, Benghazi, VA abuse, and the protection of our nation’s southern border would command a higher priority, but when you are running from the truth like he is, any diversion will suffice.

  113. Remember when we brought down an Airliner? :thinking:

    On July 3, 1988, Iranian Airlines Flight IR655 with 290 people on board was blown out of the sky over the Persian Gulf by two missiles from the USS Vincennes. This was in a war zone — the Iran-Iraq war…

    Please credit and share this article with others using this link:http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/421387. View our policies at http://goo.gl/9HgTd and http://goo.gl/ou6Ip. © Post Publishing PCL. All rights reserved.

  114. foxyladi14 July 20, 2014 at 11:40 am

    Thanks for the video. Sarah is well intentioned and speaks truth to power, but she’s not a good speaker. She refers to her notes but doesn’t know how to deliver. She comes across as un-educated and should hire a speechwriter.

    All her points are good except the old Republican claptrap in the first sentence: “letting free markets create jobs.” Bullshit.

  115. Free

    If it weren’t for the damage it would do to her in the general election, I wouldn’t care if she erected a statue of Lenin in her yard, and posted videos of her and Obama holding hands and singing ” Wind Beneath My Wings” to each other. I wouldn’t care if she told countless lies to the crazy left in order to get the nomination. After their sleaziness in 2008, they deserve to be bamboozled.

    Halarious Free! Same here, and she could leave smoldering bags of poo on the DNC’s door step from now until she becomes President.

  116. Newt.
    An enjoyable read. A sober topic which has been at the forefront of minds here for the longest time.
    …With the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria causing the collapse of Iraq and continued violence in Syria, the Syrian dictatorship consolidating its power, the Iranians failing to take steps to end their nuclear weapons program and Hamas firing more than 1,000 rockets at Israel, the President and his team have moved decisively to brief The New York Times on his passion for late-night intellectual dinners exploring physics, architecture and questions far more profound than the fate of the Middle East.
    It is as though the more dangerous the world becomes the more Obama hides in a fantasy world of avoiding the responsibilities of the presidency. He uses the office to surround himself with court jesters who distract him in an enlightened and noble way from the growing failures of his policies and the rapidly expanding threats to the civilized world….
    http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/18/opinion/gingrich-obama-mind/index.html

  117. Republican claptrap in the first sentence: “letting free markets create jobs.” Bullshit.
    ————–
    I think that is demonstrably true. Just as I think over regulation and high taxes have a chilling effect on job creation. The problem we have today is neither party practices what they preach. Both talk about job creation but what they practice is crony capitalism. Crony capitalism is efficient for them, for the reasons explained above. Crony capitalism is terrible however for the American people however because it drives out competition, and cause job creation in the cheapest venues only–china. It is short sighted for the elites, because a day of reckoning for them is certain to come, but they do not see that far ahead. They think they can get the rest of us fighting among ourselves, and not see who is making the money and who is getting screwed. Wholly owned big media is their tool for doing this.

  118. It is as though the more dangerous the world becomes the more Obama hides in a fantasy world of avoiding the responsibilities of the presidency. He uses the office to surround himself with court jesters who distract him in an enlightened and noble way from the growing failures of his policies and the rapidly expanding threats to the civilized world….
    ——————
    Bingo. And big media is thrilled, because they believe their place on Noah’s Arc is secure.

  119. The elites are pretty pathetic. They have all you could ever want in terms of material things, they do not give a rat’s ass about the future of the country, but what really concerns them is their social standing, and place in the pecking order. To borrow the insight of an old Rockford episode, they live in a world of lions, tigers and monkeys. Lions have arrived, tigers are those on the move up, and monkeys are there to entertain them in the naive belief that they will one day become lions. How terrible would it be for a member of that vaunted club to fall flat on his face, to be ridiculed by their group and to be expelled. That is what they flirt with every time they open their mouth and say something that does not jibe with the narrative of their group which is reasonably calculated to expand their power and to preserve their status. What a dreary world to live in and be a part of. In the post war period brave producers, directors and actors, like Paul Neuman, were willing to show the shallowness and the tripe of that miserable existence. But the current studio heads are consumed by it, and so are the minions of the uniparty. I look at a guy like Orrin Hatch who was once a fire breathing conservative, and today is the worst example of a castrade.

  120. “All her points are good except the old Republican claptrap in the first sentence: “letting free markets create jobs.” Bullshit.”
    so who creates the jobs? the gubbermint?

    what a foolish statement.

  121. I think the elites are pretty pathetic. They have all you could ever want in terms of material things, they do not give a rat’s ass about the future of the country, but what really concerns them is their social standing, and place in the pecking order. To borrow the insight of an old Rockford episode, they live in a world of lions, tigers and monkeys. Lions have arrived, tigers are those on the move up, and monkeys are there to entertain them in the naive belief that they will one day become lions. How terrible would it be for a member of that vaunted club to fall flat on his face, to be ridiculed by their group and to be expelled. That is what they flirt with every time they open their mouth and say something that does not jibe with the narrative of their group which is reasonably calculated to expand their power and to preserve their status. What a dreary world to live in and be a part of. In the post war period brave producers, directors and actors, like Paul Neuman, were willing to show the shallowness and the tripe of that miserable existence. But the current studio heads are consumed by it, and so are the minions of the uniparty. I look at a guy like Orrin Hatch who was once a fire breathing conservative, and today is the worst example of a castrade.

  122. jeswezey
    July 20, 2014 at 12:33 pm

    foxyladi14 July 20, 2014 at 11:40 am

    Thanks for the video. Sarah is well intentioned and speaks truth to power, but she’s not a good speaker. She refers to her notes but doesn’t know how to deliver. She comes across as un-educated and should hire a speechwriter.

    All her points are good except the old Republican claptrap in the first sentence: “letting free markets create jobs.” Bullshit.
    _______________________________

    Well miss Warren is a better speaker. 🙂

  123. foxyladi14
    July 20, 2014 at 2:54 pm
    —————
    Fucking Warren.

    Her solution is to force Members of Congress to put their financial holdings in a blind trust, so as not to be make policy decisions on the basis of personal factors.

    Does this leftist loon not realize that Cheney did exactly that, while her minions continued to assert that his actions were motivated by the stock he held in Haliburton.

    Elizabeth Warren is mentally unsound. Just like her looney left supporters.

  124. The thing that comes across to me loud and clear is the lack of anything new and inspiring from either political party. And this is doubly strange, since by every empirical measure, we are slipping away as a nation. A radical new agenda is required, but the political class as a whole has nothing new to offer. Both play entirely to our worst instincts, fear on the one hand and greed on the other.

  125. MSNB superstar Lawrence O’Donnel is a smirking asshole. I understand that he was admitted into a hospital funded by the Koch Brothers. That hospital saved his life. Politically, this was a bitter pill for him to swallow as a leftist loon, since it means that he owes his very existence to a charter member of the vast right wing conspiracy. No harder however than it was for me. For me their saving his life was a tragedy. As in, if Gladstone fell in the river Thames and drowned that would be a misfortune. If someone reached in the water and saved him that would be a tragedy–Benjamin Disraeli.

  126. The leftist loon Warren has nothing to add to the current discussion. Any serious reformer would look beyond her bumper sticker bullshit. They would target the financial industry with a vengeance like Roosevelt did. They would condemn crony capitalism. They would empower the FCC to set aside mergers. They would take on monopolists like Comcast and General Electric. There is a lot a serious reformer could do. Warren is not a serious reformer.

  127. I wonder why someone hasn’t floated the idea of Miss Luberack (Pelosi) running for President? She would be exceptionally well qualified to carry on the race to the bottom started by Obama. Like Warren could say, even though I own a 28 room mansion, I am not wealthy. What draws me to the presidency is nothing more and nothing less than an earnest desire to do what is best for illegal immigrants, and those who choose not to work for a living. That statement alone would get her 50% of the vote.

  128. One of the many, many, many dirty tricks played by big media in the 2008 was false moral equivalences which pronounced an artificial parity between outrageous lies by the Obama campaign with de minimus lapses by Hillary’s campaign. They would ignore what Obama was doing and exaggerate what Hillary’s people were doing to the point of absurdity. Well, big media is at it today, through the voice of a waste of protoplasm named Nicolas Kristoff who markets himself as a Harvard man and a Oxford graduate–an over educated idiot we should not waste our time listening to. From this high perch writing for NYT he claims a moral equivalence between attackers and victims in the case of the ongoing Hamas/Israel conflict. Bill Clinton, to his credit, explains the truth of the matter. (Note: the New York Times has more stupid people within its organization than any other institution other than a mental hospital.)
    —————-

    Hamas was perfectly well aware of what would happen if they started raining rockets into Israel. They fired one thousand and they have a strategy designed to force Israel to kill their own civilians so that the rest of the world will condemn them.

    Bill Clinton:

    “They (Israel) know when Hamas attacks them that Hamas has set up a situation which politically it can’t lose, because they (Israelis) can say ‘well if I attack them back they always hide behind civilians and I’ll kill civilians, and if I don’t we’ll look like fools letting somebody shoot a thousand rockets at us and not responding.’

    In the short and medium term Hamas can inflict terrible public relations damage by forcing (Israel) to kill Palestinian civilians to counter Hamas. But it’s a crass strategy that takes all of our eyes off the real objective which is a peace that gets Israel security and recognition and a peace that gets the Palestinians their state.”

    Somehow, Nicholas Kristof shows his readers that he does not get it. Instead, he writes, “this is a war in which both peoples have a considerable amount of right on their sides. The failure to acknowledge the humanity and legitimate interests of people on the other side has led to cross-demonization. That results in a series of military escalations that leave both peoples worse off.”

  129. Krystal Ball is an expert in some subjects. Foreign policy, however, does not happen to be one of them. She ran for Congress in Virginia and lost by 2-1. Big media treats her as a credible sounding board on the challenges women face in society and politics.

    “In October 2010, while in the final stages of her Congressional campaign, Ball received national attention when photos taken six years earlier emerged showing her at a holiday party dressed as a “naughty Santa” sucking a red dildo attached to her then-husband’s nose and leading him around on a leash.[17] The event quickly became a launching point for Ball, resulting in her being called upon by various news organizations for her inputs on the challenges faced by women in today’s society and political environment.”

    Far be it from me to ever question the judgment of big media.

  130. It doesn’t take much to see the disdain the Obama administration has toward Fox News, as Secretary of State John Kerry got into an angry exchange on Sunday with host Chris Wallace.

    Kerry, pulling off a feat last accomplished by then-U.N. ambassador Susan Rice when she hit all five Sunday talk shows to mislead the country about an anti-Islamic video causing the attack in Benghazi, told Wallace at one point on “Fox News Sunday,” “You like to ask questions, but you don’t like to get answers!”

    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/07/20/thin-skinned-kerry-throws-a-tantrum-on-fox-let-me-answer-let-me-answer-133027

  131. Followup to wbboei July 18, 2014 at 12:41 am
    15 Journalists Have Joined Obama Administration
    According to the Atlantic, Time managing editor Rick Stengel’s decision to join the Obama administration is just the latest example of a new trend among mainstream media journalists who are making it official by joining the Obama administration. Stengel, who is joining the State Department, is just one of 15 (or 19) who have given up a career in journalism to join Obama’s crusade to fundamentally transform America:
    ——————————–
    ‘My bad’: State Dept. official apologizes for #UnitedForGaza tweet
    …In a tweet directed to the State Department, Mr. Stengel said, “Critical for a full, credible and unimpeded intl investigation of crash. Urge Russia to honor it’s [sic] commitment,” Twitchy first reported.
    After receiving swift backlash, the tweet was deleted, and Mr. Stengel sent out a terse explanation.
    “Earlier tweet with wrong hashtag was a mistake. My bad,” he said….
    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/20/my-bad-state-dept-official-apologizes-unitedforgaz/

  132. “In October 2010, while in the final stages of her Congressional campaign, Ball received national attention when photos taken six years earlier emerged showing her at a holiday party dressed as a “naughty Santa” sucking a red dildo attached to her then-husband’s nose and leading him around on a leash.[17] The event quickly became a launching point for Ball, resulting in her being called upon by various news organizations for her inputs on the challenges faced by women in today’s society and political environment.”

    _______________

    Women like Ball represent one of the “challenges faced by women in today’s society and political environment”. Not too surprising that MSM would look to someone of such obvious deficits to speak to the issues facing women. They look to Obama as someone who can speak to issues facing our country and the world. In both cases, they may as well consult with a child. The answers and commentary received would be about as cogent and will thought out. And, at least the child would have an excuse for being self-centered, immature, and poorly informed.

  133. Another misinformed ideologue masquerading as a journalist is this Erin Burnett who began her career as a Goldman Sachs financial analyst, married a hump in that industry, and tries in vain to launch an attack interview against Ted Cruz and gets shut down, but even after he has rebutted every charge she makes, she goes on talking and accusing. She is not a journalist–not even close. She reeks class bias, and is pretty pathetic to watch.

  134. So, I would still like to see a couple of other people throw their hats in the ring just to make a show of it, but any candle Warren tries to hold out to HRC will be snuffed out pretty quickly. Besides, Obama’s Chicago chicaneries aren’t necessarily Warren’s cup of tea.
    ____________

    True. But, we are hearing reports that Warren is Obama’s cup of tea. If she runs and he supports her, his hatchet men and women will be part of the package. They’ll keep it on the down low, of course

    I hope the scenario you described becomes a reality, Jes. If so, I will certainly be on board, and I’m sure Shadow will, as you said. However, I believe it’s foolish to underestimate what the ultra-left can and will do to keep Hillary out of the WH. The DU kids slam her and Bill regularly, and speak about Warren as if she is almost as wonderful as their Obama. Same for other progressive blogs and forums. The problem with the far left is that they have no though of protecting this republic and the principles on which it was founded. That’s not the goal. Not maintaining America’s strength. Not ensuring our freedoms and rights. They are convinced that because those of us who don’t believe as they do must be too ignorant and unenlightened to have a voice, any and action necessary to circumvent the will of the majority, and force their vision on the country is more than justified. In other words, we are all so effing stupid and backwards, they are within their rights to shove us out of the way, and install their people in elected positions. There’s nothing more dangerous than a zealot, except maybe a zealot who’s also a naive, idealistic idiot.

    Shadow. I’m cracking up about the poo being delivered to DNC. I would love to help Hillary out with that. lol

  135. This email from DSCC. Now, I don’t think they’re genuinely concerned about the possibility of O being impeached. They want a reason to slam Palin and the T-Party, and more importantly, they want MONEY. Fat chance. I’d sooner donate to the Society for the Preservation of Low-down, Low-lifes.

    ________________________

    Last week, Sarah Palin called for President Obama’s impeachment. You’ll never guess what happened next…

    Tea Party Senate candidates in Iowa and Georgia joined Palin and jumped on the impeachment bandwagon!

    If we let these Tea Partiers win and take control of the Senate, they could follow through on their threats – and hold a TRIAL to impeach President Obama.

  136. The Dims really seem to be worried about the T-Party winning senate seats. Given the outcome of most of the recent elections, that’s a little surprising.

  137. This guy Corker is a dirty RINO. He has been in Congress for only 5 years, yet he rakes in more campaign contributions than anyone else. He is the junior senator from Tennessee, yet he rakes in twice as much as the senior senator who has been in congress for 12 years, and five times as much as the infamous Thad Cochrane from the sister state of Mississippi who has been in congress for 30 years and in known to be in the hip pocket of lobbyist. Corker deserves a corruption reward. No wonder Corker threw a hissy fit when Ted Cruz filibustered Obamacare and threatened to shut off the spigot of dirty money that Bob Corker takes in the same way a heroin addict ingests smack. This guy does not represent the people of his state. He represents donors. And he has been musing about running for president. God help us. We know for a fact Corker won’t/

    Total Campaign Contributions Received by Bob Corker: $11,812,776

    Interest

    Contributions

    Securities & Investment $1,055,171
    Real Estate $634,283
    Banks and Credit $613,369
    Insurance $534,713
    Misc Finance $500,475
    Lawyers/Law Firms $485,607
    Health Professionals $464,213
    Lobbyists $280,815
    General Contractors $252,250
    Oil & Gas $240,077

    Top 10 Organizations Funding

    Organization

    Contributions

    Unknwon $172,647
    Donaldson Lufkin And Jennrtte $31,000
    Eastman Chemical Company $25,950
    Welsh Carson Et Al $20,500
    Aim Healthcare $19,100
    Hca Incorporated $19,100
    Lifepoint Hospitals $17,400
    Corrections Corporation Of America $17,200
    Experian $17,000
    Unum Group $16

  138. Total Campaign Contributions Received by Addison “Mitch” McConnell: $23,505,347

    He has been in office for almost 30 years as well. And he is the Minority Leader.

    Corker has none of these things going for him.

    But he gladly puts the interests of his contributors ahead of those of the people of his state.

  139. Bob Corker, a Republican, epitomizes everything that is wrong with our political system. He is a prime example of the Republican establishment renewing itself with people who put party and lobbyists over the interests of this country. And you thought that was only a democrat disease? It is endemic in both wings of the uniparty. Now I see he is getting his mug on television, commenting on the Israel/Hamas conflict. He knows little about the subject, really, but there he is pontificating as if he did, and when he runs for president people will say he knows foreign policy, when all he really knows is how to triangulate between lobbyists, donors and his career. Not much room for more in his ditty bag. Good old Bob “Show Me The Money” Corker.

  140. See the pattern. In re. Benghazi, and now the border crisis, the Obama administration has advanced knowledge that a disaster was imminent, yet they failed to preempt that disaster and protect American interests, and when the inevitable happened, they claimed that the whole damned thing was spontaneous meaning it could not have been anticipated. NYT and other big media outlets can continue to censor relevant information and lie. In fact, why not let them stay that course, so they can be held jointly and severally responsible when there is an accounting. This piece is from Legal Insurrection:

    WaPo: Obama Admin Was Warned About Border Crisis Last Year

    Posted by Aleister Sunday, July 20, 2014 at 4:19pm

    “The administration did too little to heed those warnings.”

    http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2013/07/gop-begins-long-immigration-reform-process-focusing-border-security
    If you’re like most Americans, you may be wondering why the surge of illegal immigrants at the southern border happened all at once. People want to know the cause and what could have been done to prevent it.

    While answers have been scarce, the Washington Post has published a rather damning piece which claims that the Obama administration was warned ahead of time that this was going to happen.

    David Nakamura, Jerry Markon and Manuel Roig-Franzia contributed to this report:

    Obama aides were warned of brewing border crisis

    Nearly a year before President Obama declared a humanitarian crisis on the border, a team of experts arrived at the Fort Brown patrol station in Brownsville, Tex., and discovered a makeshift transportation depot for a deluge of foreign children.

    Thirty Border Patrol agents were assigned in August 2013 to drive the children to off-site showers, wash their clothes and make them sandwiches. As soon as those children were placed in temporary shelters, more arrived. An average of 66 were apprehended each day on the border and more than 24,000 cycled through Texas patrol stations in 2013. In a 41-page report to the Department of Homeland Security, the team from the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) raised alarms about the federal government’s capacity to manage a situation that was expected to grow worse.

    The researchers’ observations were among the warning signs conveyed to the Obama administration over the past two years as a surge of Central American minors has crossed into south Texas illegally. More than 57,000 have entered the United States this year, swamping federal resources and catching the government unprepared.

    The administration did too little to heed those warnings, according to interviews with former government officials, outside experts and immigrant advocates, leading to an inadequate response that contributed to this summer’s escalating crisis.

    Steven Hayward of Powerline puts things in perspective:

    Nothing Happens for No Good Reason

    My great teacher of foreign policy and strategic studies, the late Harold Rood, had a simple maxim at the heart of his analytical technique: “Nothing happens for no good reason.” This maxim has come back to me watching the saga of the flood of “unaccompanied alien children” (as the government officially calls them) on our southern border. Everyone seems to be treating this as though it was a random or unpredictable event, like a hurricane or winter snowstorm, seemingly spontaneous, and building a momentum of its own.

    It is extremely unlikely that this is a spontaneous phenomenon.

    Democrats continue to paint the border crisis as a spontaneous humanitarian refugee situation but as new details emerge, it looks more and mor

  141. Democrats continue to paint the border crisis as a spontaneous humanitarian refugee situation but as new details emerge, it looks more and more like a planned event and something the White House knew was coming.
    ————–
    Not only did they know it was coming, they planned and encouraged it. Res ipsa locitur.

  142. Me: Republican claptrap: “letting free markets create jobs.”

    wbboei July 20, 2014 at 2:25 pm

    I think that is demonstrably true. Just as I think over-regulation and high taxes have a chilling effect on job creation…. Both [parties] talk about job creation but what they practice is crony capitalism…. Crony capitalism is terrible for the American people because it drives out competition, and cause job creation in the cheapest venues only – China.

    We have widely differing views here.

    Even the matter of crony capitalism calls for scrutiny, because crony capitalism is just one step beyond the robber barons’ gilded age of laisser-faire, an age which was brought to an end by the trust-busters (a bipartisan effort, I might add). Crony capitalism today means that, in contrast to the trust-buster epoch, elected officials are now on the take and have no intention of busting the trusts.

    All that politicians who clamor for ‘free’ markets and de-regulation want is more elbowroom for their mega-corporations that already rule the world, so they will keep the US as their home base and bring home some bacon – to them.

    These mega-corporations are monopolies that strangle competition only if they are not regulated. If monopoly is the best way of organizing an economic sector, then it has to be regulated for the public good. So, I don’t agree that “over-regulation” even exists, nor do regulations have a “chilling effect on job creation.” Give me examples of what you mean by that.

    I don’t agree either that high taxes have a chilling effect on job creation. What high taxes? The corporate income tax? This tax comes after the income and investments are made, not before. So there is no incentive for a company to cut staff or not make investments in order reduce its taxes — the incentive is just the opposite. The only reason for cutting corporate income tax is to let the company’s top officers and their shareholders cream off more profits for themselves.

    And that gets back to the Republican claptrap of cutting taxes – for the wealthy who supposedly create jobs. As I explained upthread, the wealthy don’t create jobs.

    One last note on China – China is definitely not the “cheapest venue.” They are subcontracting a lot of work to Vietnam, which is a lot cheaper. GDP is on the rise, poverty and joblessness is down, and believe me, their corporations are strictly controlled and regulated.

  143. jeswezey

    July 21, 2014 at 7:46 am
    ———–
    The only alternative vehicle for job creation is government programs, aimed either at that goal directly, as in the case of public works projects like The Civilian Conservation Corps, or indirectly, through expanding the level of government oversight with agencies as pristine, unbiased and concerned with individual liberty as . . . um . . . er . . . why the IRS of course. History has shown that the electorate is too dumb to spit, which is why the elected Obama. But even they can comprehend that one.

    In terms of fiscal policy, I would give tax breaks to those people who put their own capital at risk and can prove that in the tax year in question they created good paying jobs. That is where the majority of new jobs come from, as major corporations have moved overseas. Job creation should be a major goal of tax policy and so should its opposite number. Those who derived their income through passive investment, or by being a bureaucrat in a corporation or government should bear the tax increases.

    To be clear, tax increases standing alone are bad. Those who claim they represent an investment in the future of this nation are the same people who want to use other peoples money (OPM0 for their own pet projects, as we have seen repeatedly with Obama. But when you are dealing with a debt that exceeds our gross national product, and neither party has the stomach to deal with that issue, until the markets force them to do, in a slash and burn scenario, you have only two ways to go: tax increases or rampant inflation. The latter I submit is more destructive. However, it is also the one preferred by the political class, including big media because they do not have to man up.

  144. I’d forgotten this speech of Mitch’s at of all places, The Heritage Foundation. It will probably be incorporated into my next mailing. HYPOCRITE.
    Sen. Mitch McConnell Insists: One And Done For Obama
    by FRANK JAMES
    November 04, 2010 12:02 PM ET
    In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) didn’t yield an inch on his position that the main job of congressional Republican leadership is to prevent President Obama’s re-election.

    That’s the only way to get past the impediment of presidential vetoes, the Senate minority leader said.

    He said:

    “Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it.”
    Maybe it’s possible that McConnell could make himself clearer but it’s hard to see how.
    snip
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/11/04/131069048/sen-mcconnell-insists-one-term-for-obama

    Well, Mitch. You’ve come a long way, baby.

  145. jeswezey

    July 21, 2014 at 7:46 am
    ——–
    I hope you understand that I am not in any way shape or form a defender of crony capitalism. That is not capitalism at all. That is corporate welfare, paid for by the public. And it is the enemy of capitalism, because its goal is to erect entry barriers to competition, and to use taxpayer leverage (OPM) for its own ends. As we saw with our own eyes in the 2008 debacle, the financial institutions socialized their losses and privatized their profits. This is why I despise the RINO. What I am talking about is small business, which produces 80% of the new jobs in our economy. They are the ones adversely affected by Obama’s perverse policies. He rewards crony capitalists and burdens our job creators. And so do the ignoranti who accept his word as gospel.

  146. One of the tragedies of old age is we begin to look like caricatures of ourselves. I can think of no better example than Mitch McConnell. To me, with every passing year, he looks more and more like an insect. A wood tick, waiting to become Senate Majority Leader, always the bridesmaid never the bride until now. Some odds maker is now telling us that the chances are 62% that his party will regain the senate. This depends of course on the wisdom of the American Public, that they understand what they are losing, and it also assumes that to the extent that voter turn out is the critical factor in mid term elections, that the direct attack of the Republican Party on its voter base and campaign army will have no affect. Color me skeptical. I think they will lose the Cochrane seat in Mississippi, and wouldn’t it be ironic if that loss prevented them from taking the senate?

  147. If you blanch at negative things said about Hillary then do not open this link. I debated on whether or not to post it in the first place, but decided in the balance, that most people here could handle it. I do not expect Hillary to be perfect, and I do believe Benghazi is a problem for her. And, of course, the tone here is not positive. Why then to post it? Only because it provides some additional facts that help me understand what is at foot, and it does reflect some of the insights of Clinton insiders as well. It does not appear to reflect the insights of Obama People, other than confirming the role of Jarrett and the wisdom of the author of The Dune, namely that power does not corrupt, rather it attracts corrupt people. Where this is interview is very good is in clarifying the difference between the Clintons and fuck stick Obama, which we understand, but the public does not–and needs to because more and more of them are retching at the prospect of two more years with this bastard. But I would say this to all of you, but to southern born especially, if you do not want to hear negative things as well, pass this one by. It is just not worth spoiling our day, dealing with things we have no ability to control.

    http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2014/07/20/ed-klein-blood-feud/

  148. So, US power in the world is reduced to having Michelle do hashtags, and DiFiY telling Putin to man up.

    How many divisions does the pope have?

    Pathetic.

    Who give a fuck what gun grabbing DiFiY says?

    Certainly not Putin.

  149. This confirms the diagnosis of Obama by shv several years ago—does it not. Attention deficit disorder. As this offer belated notes, Obama has no grasp of reality, beyond campaigning. Hope, change and the big bang. This is the act out stage we our seeing now, where his main focus will be on fundraising, trying to create a legacy, and preventing the Clintons from regaining control of the party. The real world is not his world. “No connection to reality”–just like the people who voted for him.
    ——————-

    Presidential Attention Deficit Disorder.

    by Jim Gerhety

    Here’s one big question: Will we still be talking about Ukraine and Israel/Hamas at the end of the week? Or will some other part of the world — or perhaps our own border — blow up then, pushing Ukraine and everything else back to the inside pages?

    Remember those kidnapped schoolgirls? Remember how releasing the Taliban Five was an ominous indicator for Afghanistan? Remember ISIS taking over Iraq? Remember the Syrian civil war? Aren’t there still oodles of Central American kids coming over our border?

    Does our media lose interest in these crises because the president isn’t interested in them? Or does the president feel like he’s doing fine because the media stops covering them?

    Take a look at the president’s schedule for the coming week, as laid out in Mike Allen’s other morning newsletter . .

    Monday morning, the President will sign an Executive Order to protect LGBT employees from workplace discrimination. In the afternoon the President will award Ryan M. Pitts, a former active duty Army Staff Sergeant, the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry. On Tuesday, the President will deliver remarks and sign H.R. 803, Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, at an event at the White House; the Vice President will also attend.

    “Afterward, the President will travel to Seattle, WA to attend a DNC event. Later in the day, the President will travel to San Francisco, CA, where he will remain overnight. On Wednesday, the President will attend a DCCC event in the San Francisco area, and later in the day will travel to the Los Angeles area, where he will remain overnight. On Thursday, the President will visit a community college in Los Angeles to deliver remarks on the importance of job-driven skills training, particularly for fast-growing sectors such as health care. Later, he will attend a DNC event . . .

    That’s three days of fundraisers! Two feel-good ceremonies on touchy-feely domestic issues! It’s like Obama has decided he’s governing in the late 1990s.

    If you mention an Obama fundraiser, inevitably some snotty lefty will respond, “Sure, because Obama’s the first president to ever attend a campaign fundraiser.” No, but he’s the first one to ever do so many:

    In his first term, Obama attended more fundraising events than any other president in recent history. According to author Brendan J. Doherty, from 2008 to 2012 Obama went to 321 events, compared to just 80 for Ronald Reagan. And . . . he’s done 72 events in his second term — 34 this year alone. So far, he’s ahead of the pace of George W. Bush, who had been to 30 events at this point in 2006. In his two presidential terms combined, Bush hosted 318 fundraisers. Obama has already smashed that number with 393 events to date.

    I wonder if the big theme in the second half of 2014 is going to be increasingly open questions about Obama’s connection to reality, or whether he’s locking himself in an ever-thicker psychological and scheduling cocoon, behaving as if he’s enjoying a fabulously successful presidency and that the world is getting better, more tranquil, and more prosperous on his watch.

  150. On the southern border, parents in Central America send unescorted preteens northward among thugs, rapists, and murderers, in hopes that their offspring will survive and thus either anchor their own immigration or at least send back money from the north. Somehow that reality is lost in all the talk about the “children” — the abject callousness of the parents, the greedy cynicism of Central American governments, the shameless duplicity of Mexico that facilitates the transit of children, and the wink-and-nod demographic angling of the Obama left. Add it all up and we see tens of thousands of children manipulated as mere pawns, as racialists, the callous, and the conniving all call others the very names that properly fit only themselves.–Victor Davis Hanson

  151. Earth to Obama:

    Oh great one, oh messiah mine, oh mybarack Obama

    May we approach?

    Oh thank you kind sir.

    Now wake the fuck up, because:

    You, may not be interested in war.

    But war is interested in you.

  152. And by the way, I will admit that I was dead wrong about Kline. It is obvious that Clinton people leak information to him, but by no stretch of the imagination is he a Clinton supporter, which I previously suspected based on his earlier book, and some of the exculpatory information which emerged from his second with respect to Benghazi–specifically, that Hillary was ordered to promote the political lie that the video was the cause in fact of the attack on the diplomatic outpost. Clearly, he is on the other side.

  153. OMG, check out the small photo of Barry in the top, left corner of Drudge.

    He looks about 70 years old.

  154. I do not think we need a special prosecutor for the IRS scandal. All that will do is hide the corruption from public view. I think Judicial Watch is doing just fine. As a result of their efforts, as opposed to those of the RINO or our MIA big media, the IRS who previously told us that Lerner’s emails were irretrieably lost, now facing the reality of perjury charges and jail time, is floating the idea that they may not be lost after all, which is what IT experts have been suggesting all along. Don’t be surprised if some of this does not end up at the feet of Bob Bauer @ Perkins Coie.
    ——————–
    IRS: Maybe Lois Lerner Emails Aren’t So “Lost” After All, Oh, And We Lost a Few More Too

    By: Matthew Clark (Diary) | July 21st, 2014 at 04:45 PM | 8

    The IRS just can’t get anything straight. The Obama IRS appears to now be backtracking on just how “lost” Lois Lerner’s emails are.

    As the Washington Examiner reports:

    New testimony from a key Internal Revenue Service official indicates the IRS may not have lost two years of emails sent by former top IRS official Lois Lerner after all.

    That is what the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee suggested Monday morning in a newly released transcript of a recent closed-door interview with IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane. . . .

    Kane told Oversight staffers last week that the backup tapes that held two years of lost Lerner emails may actually still exist.

    In fact he testified, “There is an issue as to whether or not there is a — that all of the backup recovery tapes were destroyed on the 6-month retention schedule. . . . I don’t know whether they are or they aren’t, but it’s an issue that’s being looked at.”

    Well do they are don’t they?

    The IRS continues to play fast and loose with the truth. Yet the timing of this new possible admission is a bit ironic.

    The IRS’s new story on the Lerner emails comes just days after the DOJ announced it was beginning an investigation into the matter and just one week after a pair of federal judges demanded answers “under oath” from the IRS on what exactly happened with Lerner’s hard dive and how these emails went missing.

    Yet this latest testimony also revealed several more IRS employees who worked for Lerner during the targeting scandal now appear to have had similar computer issues.

    As the deflection and misdirection from the IRS continues, so too does our lawsuit on behalf of 41 targeted groups from 22 states. The truth will come out and those responsible for violating the constitutional rights of thousands of conservative Americans will be held accountable.

  155. Webboei, if possible please add the website of some of the good articles you post. I would like to forward them to my cousin, however, he reads nothing without a website or source.

    Thanks

  156. wbboei
    July 21, 2014 at 1:22 pm
    On the southern border, parents in Central America send unescorted preteens northward among thugs, rapists, and murderers, in hopes that their offspring will survive and thus either anchor their own immigration or at least send back money from the north. Somehow that reality is lost in all the talk about the “children” — the abject callousness of the parents, the greedy cynicism of Central American governments, the shameless duplicity of Mexico that facilitates the transit of children, and the wink-and-nod demographic angling of the Obama left. Add it all up and we see tens of thousands of children manipulated as mere pawns, as racialists, the callous, and the conniving all call others the very names that properly fit only themselves.–Victor Davis Hanson

    ______________________

    This is spot on. What would be the greater trauma for a child – Remain among loved ones (who may live in poverty )in the country of your birth where you understand the language, customs, culture, etc., or travel with criminals to a new country where nothing and no one is familiar?

  157. wbboei
    July 21, 2014 at 8:24 pm
    …the IRS who previously told us that Lerner’s emails were irretrieably lost, now facing the reality of perjury charges and jail time, is floating the idea that they may not be lost after all, which is what IT experts have been suggesting all along.

    It is amazing what will turn up with a sworn statement ordered by a federal judge for direct party information and just what will fall out. The IRS has been hiding their IT personnel who have first hand knowledge of not just what is available but who ordered it “crashed”. I imagine there was a mutiny by the IT department who has no intention perjuring themselves and going to jail for these clowns. This judge understands the maxim of “keeping friends in low places” and just how much they can screw you up if you jerk them around.

  158. Meghan Kelly on FOX had on the author of the latest hate book about the Clintons. Some of the allegations by this guy sound like they are right out of one of those supermarket rags like NATIONAL ENQUIRER that any sane people would roll their eyes and laugh about…unnamed sources but always a close advisor of the Clintons. WINK, WINK.

    And here that tower of fair and balanced reporter, Kelly, has this guy on her show and encourages him to spout and spout this
    stuff. Never, ever consider Meghan Kelly anything but a Clinton hater and a highly partisan Republican.

  159. Southern Born

    July 21, 2014 at 8:38 pm

    Webboei, if possible please add the website of some of the good articles you post. I would like to forward them to my cousin, however, he reads nothing without a website or source.

    Thanks
    ———-
    If you tell me which posts you are referring to, then I will go back and give you the link.

  160. Mormaer
    July 21, 2014 at 9:16 pm

    The IRS has been hiding their IT personnel who have first hand knowledge of not just what is available but who ordered it “crashed”. I imagine there was a mutiny by the IT department who has no intention perjuring themselves and going to jail for these clown
    ————–
    Oh, to be a fly on THAT wall.

    Perjury?

    Contempt of court?

    Me????

    Fuck you Jarrett.

    Unless, you agree to do the time for me.

    And I want that in writing.

  161. What we are likely to find, in due course, is that as we saw with the Obama CIA agents who had relevant information were forced to sign non disclosure or lose your job and pension agreements, the same non disclosure agreement, with the same teeth in it was forced down the throats of the IT people. You know and I know what happens to the esprit d corp of an organization when it starts throwing its people to the wolves, and despite what I personally feel about that agency, and I have known some of their people over the years who do have the taste for blood, there are thousands of others who take pride in their work, value their careers and will react viscerally when their bosses tell them to lie. What happens in that case if no one steps forward? Perhaps that low life bastard contributor to Obama who heads that agency, and when he is under examination with serious criminal ramifications, makes macabre jokes about practicing law for a year and giving it up for Lent, and then gets all pissy faced when wonky Warren who lost the debate to the dumbest man ever to serve as vice president says I do not believe you. Well, since no one believes him, if he signs the document, is it really perjury? Or is this Obama crony just another bad joke?

  162. Mormaer
    July 21, 2014 at 9:16 pm

    Nothing so fixates the mind as the imminent prospect of being hanged–Dr Johnson

    Or, in this case, being sent to federal prison for perjury.

  163. Admin: on the question of who in the Obama Administration will sign the affidavit the court has required, memorializing their lie that the emails of Lois Learner are lost and unrecoverable. It would require someone who was willing to commit perjury for Obama and was unconcerned about the consequences. Hypothetically, that could be just about any member of big media, but I think the most likely candidate would be Ben Smith, biggest liar of them all. And unlike the hapless IRS commissioner, he did not give up being a liar (spelled lawyer) for Lent.

  164. You have got some pretty tenacious people going after Obama, and I do not mean congress. I mean Judicial Watch and that lady attorney with a big DC firm who represents True to Vote and has the demeanor of Lady Thatcher–meaning that she is serious as a heart attack and does not suffer Obamafools gladly. Add to this mix, not one but two US Federal District judges, who unlike Roberts, take their mandate seriously, and have courage which he clearly does not. Ultimately, we may see something which we have never seen before now–accountability for the messiah. If we can wake him up from the pink haze that surrounds his head. You might think it was choom, but I really couldn’t comment.

  165. There is something fundamentally wrong with the system when it allows a man who is a good campaigner to gain office, when he has zero aptitude for governance, which is the whole point of the exercise.

  166. I hope big media rots in hell for destroying the American dream. They are singularly responsible. No. That is not hyperbole. They found a man who they knew was utterly unqualified for the job, they played the race card against the country, they censored information from voters, they rigged the debates, they look down on the American People, they vilify critics as racists, and they lie to us about him even now. Our future is in peril, so long as they maintain their svengali hold over the public mind. If I had only one wish, it would be to see all of them out of business. Of all the rent seeking parasites that feed off the system and the American People big media is the worst. They are the ultimate recipient of all the dirty money raised by the parties from corporate donors looking to screw the American People. Again, to be specific, I mean NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, AP, NYT, WashPo.

  167. In 2016, thanks to Soros and Citizens United, the parties will raise $2 billion. Much of that dirty money will go to NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, and they will try to play the role of dishonest broker as they have since 2008. Rent seeking parasites.

  168. When big media saw its reputation going down the toilet, it was incumbent upon elder statesmen like Brokaw to intervene. Woodward, to his credit tried, but when he was attacked by the snarling leftists, he gave up the ghost. Browkaw on the other hand never lifted so much as a finger to guide big media away from the prepecise, preferring instead to maintain his social status within the Washington community which by his own admission has become the New Versailles while the country as a hole suffers. Sarah calls this community a bubble. I think it is more akin to Poe’s short story The Mask of Red Death, where the same kind of self proclaimed nobility believes in error that they can wall themselves off and be safe from the plague outside their palace. When the elder statesmen of a community like there’s fail to speak out, because they are too fat dumb and happy, they become a walking, breathing anachronism.

  169. wbboei July 21, 2014 at 10:37 am

    “The only alternative [to ‘free’ markets] for job creation is government programs…
    like The Civilian Conservation Corps, or indirectly, through expanding the level of government oversight….”

    The CCC was my model for supporting the 2009 Stimulus, which did save the general economy from total collapse even if it was a scam. In such a situation as the end of 2008, even throwing money out of an airplane would have been sufficient to sustain demand and keep the “free” market going.

    Your mocking the IRS as an example of expanded government oversight does not fall on deaf ears; but such abuse of government power for political purposes is not, I’m sure you’ll agree, what that or any other agency of the government was created for, nor is it the way these agencies normally work, nor would they work that way under an HRC presidency.

    So, this abuse should not be taken as some basis in theory why government stewardship of the economy should be thrown to the winds of “de-regulation” in order to return to a “free” economy. To repeat Romney: The markets need regulation.

    “In terms of fiscal policy, I would give tax breaks to those people who put their own capital at risk and can prove that in the tax year in question they created good paying jobs.”

    This is a good idea that we have agreed on before (I think it was 2 years ago), but there are two caveats:

    (1) Instituting this system would take more intensive government oversight, which I think you are arguing against.

    (2) To be most effective, it would call for an increase in capital gains tax for those people who do not create jobs, better to incentivize the job-creators. This is supported by your statement:

    “Job creation should be a major goal of tax policy and so should its opposite number. Those who derived their income through passive investment, or by being a bureaucrat in a corporation or government should bear the tax increases.”

    Then we have another point of agreement:

    “… when you are dealing with a debt that exceeds our gross national product, and neither party has the stomach to deal with that issue, until the markets force them to, in a slash and burn scenario, you have only two ways to go: tax increases or rampant inflation. The latter I submit is more destructive.”

    Here we also agree. This is, in fact, what is happening in France — the tax increases are why Hollande is so unpopular (believe it or not, but Hollande must envy Obama’s popularity). Hollande is willing to lose popularity and a second term for the better interests of the country, but he has the small community of economists, and also German investors in France, on his side.

    In sum, the Republican mantra of cutting taxes and de-regulating may get them a lot of votes but if they get to do it, they will do even more harm to the country than Obama could dream of.

  170. wbboei July 21, 2014 at 10:59 am

    Mitch McConnell…. waiting to become Senate Majority Leader….
    I think they will lose the Cochrane seat in Mississippi, and wouldn’t it be ironic if that loss prevented them from taking the senate?

    Color me ironic. I want both these bastards gone and plan to do as much as I can with my resources to make sure it comes true…

  171. Your mocking the IRS as an example of expanded government oversight does not fall on deaf ears; but such abuse of government power for political purposes is not, I’m sure you’ll agree, what that or any other agency of the government was created for, nor is it the way these agencies normally work, nor would they work that way under an HRC presidency.
    —————–
    The behavior of government agencies is predictable. The beginning of wisdom on this point is to recognize that while the name of their agency may (or may not) have been descriptive of what is does, initially, over the course of time, government agencies, and quasi government agencies like for example the NAACP is governed by only two variables: the incentive to expand their power and overcoming the constraints upon that expansion.

    The original purpose of the NAACP for example was to promote racial equality, whereas today they practice a subtle, and at times like this, not so subtle form of racism. You could not deduce that from the title, or the iconography they promote of Martin Luther King. But upon closer examination, including the words and deeds of Ben Jealous, their bona fides–or lack thereof become, how shall I put it, obvious.

    And sometimes, as we see with the IRS they carry internal incentives and constraints so far as to become a rogue organization. This happens when the wed themselves to the political party who like them profits from the expansion of government, and is willing to fund it until it breaks the back of the taxpayer. At that point, those in the agency become a powerful political interest seeking to elevate their rights and privileges of those over all other aspects of society. Then we have a problem, as we see with Lois Learner.

    The evolution from pro bono publica to interest group abusing public power is best illustrated by an attorney I know who now fights the system, and has the designation of super lawyer. He tells the story of how he went to work for the Washington State Attorney’s office in 1972 and was told by his boss your client is the public, whereas when he left that agency twenty years later, his boss told him your client is not the public but that bureaucrat down the hall. Not surprisingly, he now does a land office business suing the State of Washington on disputes that arise from that very kind of bureaucratic arrogance.

    It therefore follows that those people who see the solution to every problem in the expansion of government should think long and hard about the full ramifications of what they are proposing. Over time, these agencies become rent seeking parasites.

  172. wbboei
    July 22, 2014 at 1:25 am
    ________________________________

    Wbboei it says even more about the LOFo’s that elected this BOOB to the highest office in the land. 🙄

  173. At that point, those in the agency become a powerful political interest seeking to elevate their rights and privileges of those over all other aspects of society. Then we have a problem, as we see with Lois Learner.
    ————–
    I did not get the full sense of the rapaciousness of the upper echelon of the bureaucracy until I drove through the counties in Virginia and Maryland, and saw their multi million dollar homes–mansions—all for being such loyal devoted public servants. I have lived in that part of the country–as a young child during the Korean War, as a midshipman during the Viet Nam War, and based on those recollections, I can tell you for a fact that it was never like this–even during those war time eras. Today, under this administration, these rent seeking parasites are out of control.

    That is not to say that we should abolish en masse these administrative agencies. We are well beyond that point, and even if we could, there is no guarantee that this would be a good thing for the country. We need only think back on the lapses by the Bush Administration in protecting the public against defective food, products and medicine to realize that they do have a role to play in our society. But they should be open and transparent. They should cooperate with congress. And they should be subject to close budgetary oversight, mindful of the incentives and constraints which guide their behavior, more so than their putative mandate, which is often a hollow shibboleth.

  174. Admin must be hard at work with commentary on this:

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/appeals-court-irs-obamacare/2014/07/22/id/584127/

    US Appeals Court Throws Out IRS Rule on Obamacare Subsidies

    0
    inShare.

    .

    President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul suffered a potentially crippling blow as a U.S. appeals court ruled the government cannot give financial assistance to anyone buying coverage on the insurance marketplace run by federal authorities.
    The decision, if it withstands appeals, may deprive more than half the people who signed up for Obamacare the tax credits they need to buy a health plan.

    “We reach this conclusion, frankly, with reluctance,” District of Columbia Appeals Court judge Thomas Griffith writes in the 2-1 ruling, which the Obama administration confirmed Tuesday it will appeal.

    “At least until states that wish to can set up Exchanges, our ruling will likely have significant consequences both for the millions of individuals receiving tax credits through federal Exchanges and for health insurance markets more broadly,” Griffiths wrote.

    The way the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is written makes clear that the subsidy is available only to people who bought plans on state-run exchanges, a three-judge panel in Washington ruled today.

    Only 14 states have opted to set up their own marketplaces, making delivery of tax credits via the federal exchange crucial to meeting Obamacare’s goal of broadening health-care coverage in the U.S.

    “A very large share of people need the subsidies,” said Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston. If the ruling isn’t overturned, “it basically would significantly cripple the law,” Blendon said.

    snip

    *******************

    O spokesperson Josh saying the subsidies will continue to flow and they will not follow what the court says

  175. wbboei July 22, 2014 at 10:26 am

    You illustrate your idea of galloping government abuse using the NAACP, which is an NGO operating in the “free” market. The NAACP is way out of the ballpark. I thought you would come back at me with the Department of Justice!

    Anyway, as I said, we definitely agree that the IRS and DOJ are examples of how government is currently going awry. But the solution is not to abolish the IRS and DOJ nor to reduce their powers or privatize them, but to replace the president and his whole crew.

    To get back to the statement that started our little debate, “letting free markets create jobs” is still bullshit.

    First of all, we’ve got to realize what the ornery Amurikan understands by “free” market or “free” anything else for that matter. This “free” drivel is built into our national culture as if we all understood what it meant: It means no constraints or fetters of any kind, no rules, no boundaries or limits. As soon as there are rules to be obeyed, we’re not free any more. I think you can agree that that is bullshit, but that’s the way the man in the street thinks. So the Republican “free market” claptrap gets them votes from ornery people.

    In a free market in that very American sense of the concept ‘freedom’, it’s the law of the jungle where only the big and strong win out — it’s the ones who are “too big to fail” that make the rules, but they are unwritten rules and therefore invisible, and physically understandable, so no one rankles. They just shut up. America today is ruled by big corporations and big media because nobody wants any rules. And big corporations aren’t creating any jobs. To the contrary, they are shipping them overseas. And big media pumps whatever opium the big corporations want into the flaccid brains of the huddling masses that are still yearning to be “free” a hundred years after their ancestors read those words on the Statue of Liberty.

    Can we agree here?

    Then, in that phrase, you have “letting” free markets create jobs. This means Hands Off or Laisser Faire, just like in the good ol’ days of the Gilded Age of robber barons. “Letting” is just icing on the cake: You make something free by “letting” it do what it wants. The rich “let” their Dobermans loose on you if they think you’re asking for a handout, you “let” your kids eat their way to diabetes, “let” them play electronic war games and watch violent movies, then “let” them buy guns and play the games for real on the streets. “Letting free markets create jobs” is overkill. I think we can agree on that too.

    So, I’m sorry to say it about Sarah Palin, whom I like a lot actually, but she hasn’t put much thought into what a truly free market actually is and has swallowed a large shovelful of Republican bullshit.

Comments are closed.