Monthly Archives: November 2014

Did CBS Report The News Or Manipulate The News?

Posted on by

President Obama was re-elected in 2012. He won. The Republican Candidate was portrayed as an out-of-touch rich man who caused people to die of cancer. When he warned of the dangers of Russian aggression, Mitt Romney was told, “The 80’s called, they want their foreign policy back.” It was a big joke. And when Mitt Romney pointed out that it took President Obama 14 days to admit the Benghazi attack was terrorism President Obama balked, saying he did it that day.

Well, CBS News edited out part of a ‘60 Minutes‘ interview with President Obama on the day after the Benghazi attacks. During the interview, the President stated, “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved. but, obviously, it was an attack on Americans.” 

Yesterday, Breitbart.com posted an article about the incident. The article reports:

(Investigative Journalist Sharyl) Attkisson said, “Let me say that that exchange should have been pulled out immediately after the debate, which would have been very newsy at the time. It was exclusive to CBS. It would have to me proven Romney’s point against Obama. But that clip was kept secret.”

“I was covering Benghazi, nobody told me we had it and directed me from the ‘Evening News’ to a different clip of the same interview to give the impression that the president had done the opposite. And it was only right before the election that somebody kind of leaked out the transcript to others of us as CBS and we were really shocked. We saw that was something very unethical done to have kept that up.”

She added, “The ‘Evening News’ people who had access to that transcript, according to the emails that I saw when it was sent from ’60 Minutes’ to ‘Evening News’ the very day it was taken, they, in my view, skipped over it, passed it up, kept it secret. And I think that was because they were trying to defend the president and they thought that would be harmful to him.”

I don’t know whether airing that exchange would have changed any votes. I don’t know how well-informed the people who voted for President Obama were. I do know, however, that it was unethical to edit that exchange out of the interview. It prevented the American voters from getting a true picture of the events at Benghazi and the President’s reaction to those events.

 

Where Are The Young Leaders In The Democrat Party?

Posted on by

Dan Balz posted an article at the Washington Post on Saturday about the lack of young leaders in today’s Democrat party. In the last two mid-term elections, many of the younger Democrats who would have been future leaders of the party have been defeated by their Republican opponents.

The article reports:

The more serious problem for Democrats is the drubbing they’ve taken in the states, the breeding ground for future national talent and for policy experimentation. Republicans have unified control — the governorship and the legislature — in 23 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Democrats control just seven. Democrats hold 18 governorships, but only a handful are in the most populous states.

In California, Gov. Jerry Brown won again at age 76, his fourth, non-consecutive term in the governor’s office. His victory means that younger Democrats will have to wait until 2018 to compete for one of the nation’s most high-profile political jobs. In New York, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo won a second term, but can’t get out of Clinton’s shadow. The only other state among the top 10 in population held by the Democrats is Pennsylvania, newly won by Tom Wolf.

One of the largest groups of active voters in the country is senior citizens. However, I don’t think there are enough of them to continue electing aging Democrats to office. One of the problems in the recent mid-term was that the youth vote has been disillusioned with the Obama Administration and either did not turn out to vote in large numbers or did not vote for Democrats. The Republican party was known for a while as the party of white-haired old people, but that image is changing, and the Democrats are rapidly earning that label.

The article concludes:

But a political party cannot be constructed around two individuals (Obama and Clinton), as Democrats seem to be today. Winning the presidency and taking back the Senate will be the Democrats’ top priorities in the next two years. The bigger challenge of rebuilding the party in the states and nurturing a new generation of leaders should be just as urgent.

The author mentions Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren as someone he does not think will run for president. I am not convinced of that. I believe Senator Warren will challenge Hillary for the nomination from the left. Senator Warren made a number of visits in support of candidates who were running in the mid-terms and will have favors to call in during the next presidential campaign.

I believe the 2016 presidential campaign on both sides will be very interesting. I also believe that it is also well underway.

Being Force-fed Spin

Posted on by

Every now and then a person involved in policy making makes a mistake and tells the truth. Admittedly, creating and passing legislation can be messy, but that mess should be subject to scrutiny by the American people who vote for our legislators.

Yesterday the Daily Caller posted an article about some of the things that were involved in the passage of ObamaCare. As I am sure you remember, ObamaCare was passed through the reconciliation process rather than the normal Parliamentary Procedure. Also, not one Republican voted for it.

The Daily Caller reports a statement from the man who designed it, Jonathan Gruber:

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay, so it’s written to do that.  In terms of risk rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed… Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass… Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.”

This is the YouTube video of his remarks:

This is an example of a party with a political agenda taking advantage of the lack of involvement of the American people in the political process in America. If we are to keep the republic we were given by our Founding Fathers, we need to wake up and start paying attention. Otherwise, we will become the world’s next banana republic.

 

This Sounds Great, But It Is A Really Bad Idea

Posted on by

The National Review posted an article on Friday stating that if states apportioned their Electoral College votes by district, the Republicans could win the White House in 2016. Thanks, but no thanks.

The article states:

Starting in January, Republicans will hold state legislative majorities and the governor’s mansions in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, Iowa, and Nevada. If some or all of those states passed laws allocating their electoral votes by districts, all of these purple-to-blue states would allocate their electoral votes in a way that would make it extremely likely for Republicans to win at least half of them. And without half the electoral votes in those states, it would nearly impossible for the Democratic nominee to win.

For example, Barack Obama won Ohio twice, and because he won the popular vote in 2012, won all of the state’s 18 electoral votes. Under the district system, if the Republican presidential nominee wins all of the U.S. House districts in Ohio currently held by the GOP, he would get twelve electoral votes and the Democrat would get only six.

…Any state’s change to this more proportional system would be entirely constitutional. When Barack Obama won one of Nebraska’s electoral votes in 2008, no one on the Democratic side complained.

Although I can understand the logic of this, I think it is a really bad idea to tinker with the Electoral College. For example, without the Electoral College, Rhode Island, Montana, Wyoming, and several other states would never see a Presidential candidate. They would have essentially no voice in national elections. If we begin tinkering with the Electoral College, I suspect it will be the first step on the road to abolishing it. I think that is a really bad idea.

Finding Your Humanity

Posted on by

The New York Post posted a story today about Martin Greenfield, an 84-year-old Holocaust survivor, owns and operates Martin Greenfield Clothiers in Brooklyn, NY.  He has written a memoir entitled “Measure of a Man,” in which he shares some of his experiences in the Holocaust.

Please follow the link above to read one excerpt from the book. The story is about his experience when he was freed from the concentration camp and had an opportunity to take revenge on someone who had treated him very badly.

Some Good News and Bad News In The October Employment Numbers

Posted on by

Yesterday Investors.com posted an article about the employment numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday.

The jobless rate is 5.8%, the lowest since June 2008. However, the Labor Force Participation Rate (the percentage of Americans of working age who are working) is at 62.8 percent, essentially flat since April according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics website.

Despite these relatively good numbers, consumer confidence is still low, Part of the reason for that is what has happened to Middle Income family income since 2007.

The article at Investors.com reports:

Real median household incomes fell 6.6% from $55,627 in 2007 to $51,939 at the end of last year. It will take years to recoup that loss. Meanwhile, male workers’ incomes have been in a tailspin for over a decade.

Private-sector wages grew 2% from last year in October — just barely ahead of the 1.7% rise in inflation.

So lack of opportunity stemming from 2% GDP growth and slow-growing family incomes have put average Americans in a sour mood.

The article at Investors.com further reports:

It’s policy failure. We and others repeatedly warned that President Obama’s massive stimulus, cheap money and heavy-handed regulation were a recipe for stagnation. That’s exactly what happened.

Each era of big government tinkering ends with the the economy being systematically run into the ground by Keynesian policymakers — and with economists pondering whether it’ll always be this way.

“Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” President Reagan famously asked in the 1980 campaign. Today, Americans seem to be saying no.

I hope the new Republican Congress will have the courage to encourage the President (strongly) to change direction.

When The Government Interferes With The Free Market, Bad Things Happen

Posted on by

Fox News is reporting today that the Ivanpah solar plant is applying for a federal grant to pay off its federal loan. Can I get another credit card to pay off my credit card?

The article reports:

The Ivanpah solar electric generating plant is owned by Google and renewable energy giant NRG, which are responsible for paying off their federal loan. If approved by the U.S. Treasury, the two corporations will not use their own money, but taxpayer cash to pay off 30 percent of the cost of their plant, but taxpayers will receive none of the millions in revenues the plant will generate over the next 30 years.

But solar is the new green energy, so what is the problem?

The article explains:

But since then the plant has not lived up to its clean energy promise. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the plant produced only about a quarter of the power it’s supposed to, a disappointing 254,263 megawatt-hours of electricity from January through August, not the million megawatt-hours it promised.

A NRG spokesman blamed the weather, saying the sun didn’t shine as often as years of studies predicted. However by the four-year mark, NRG has “every confidence that the plant will function as anticipated for the life of the facility,”according to the company.

And then there is the bird issue:

The problem is that birds see the mirrors as water. As they approach, the 800º F solar beams roast any bird that happens to fly by. A recent study released by the California Energy Commission conducted by the Center for Biological Diversity called Ivanpah a “mega-trap” that will kill up to 28,000 birds a year.

And then there is the crony capitalism issue:

The plants’ owner at the time, BrightSource Energy, said it will likely kill only a thousand birds a year. BrightSource came under scrutiny by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and investigators found the company received direct “guidance and support from the White House” for how it obtained its $1.6 billion in federal loans.

It’s time to unelect every member of Congress who is spending money on projects such as this. No wonder we are broke.

This Is The Outcome Of Political Correctness

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Investors.com posted an article about recent events in Sweden. Sweden has an open-border immigration policy which resulted in the arrive of 100,000 refugees fleeing the conflict in the Balkans in the 1990’s, and  more recently, refugees from Iraq and other Arab countries settling there. Unfortunately, rather than rejoice in their new-found freedom, many of these refugees have brought the oppression of their former homelands with them.

The article explains what has happened:

The perils of multiculturalism and open borders have reached critical mass in Sweden. There are Muslim enclaves where postal, fire and other essential services — even police officers themselves —require police protection.

A police report released last month identifies 55 of these “no-go zones” in Sweden. These zones are similar to others that have popped up in Europe in recent years. They formed as large Muslim populations emigrating to politically correct and tolerant European states refuse to assimilate and set up virtual states within a state where the authorities fear to tread.

Soeren Kern of the Hudson Institute has documented the proliferation of these zones. They are de facto Muslim micro-states under Shariah law that reject Western values, society and legal systems. In these districts non-Muslims are expected to conform to the dictates of fundamentalist Islam or face violent consequences.

“A more precise name for these zones,” says Middle Eastern expert Daniel Pipes, “would be Dar al-Islam — the House of Islam or the place where Islam rules.”

This is not an imaginary tale about a small percentage of Muslims–this is something that is actually happening with the consent of a majority of the Muslim community. There have been no-go zones in France for decades.

Islam is as much a political system as it is a religion, and those Muslims who believe they are correctly following the Koran strive to set up Sharia Law in whatever country they settle. We have already had a court case where Christians were arrested for preaching near the site of a Muslim event in America (rightwinggranny). Many of our states have passed preemptive laws outlawing Sharia Law in their states. We need to aware of the fact that Islam is a conquering religion. Political correctness is not our friend in this matter.

Out Of The Woodwork They Come

Posted on by

WRAL.com reported yesterday that North Carolina NAACP President Rev. William Barber has stated that Republican state House Speaker Thom Tillis was elected to the U.S. Senate on Tuesday not because North Carolinians support his policies but because of changes to state voting laws that affected who cast ballots.

Well, not so fast.  WAVY.com reported on November 5:

Unofficial results from the State Board of Elections on Wednesday show more than 2.9 million people cast ballots through early and absentee voting and on Election Day. The number exceeds the 2.7 million who voted in the last midterm in 2010.

This year’s total represents 44 percent turnout when compared with the registered population of 6.6 million people. That’s the same percentage as 2010. It falls short of the recent record of 62 percent in 1990.

This year’s ballot tally should increase slightly as absentee and provisional ballots are inspected.

Reverend Barber, just because you say it does not make it true.

The article at WRAL also reports:

Barber said there were widespread reports of voting problems – the State Board of Elections said the election ran rather smoothly – and the shortened early-voting period and the elimination of same-day registration affected thousands of North Carolina voters.

 Again, Reverend Barber, please get your facts right. Just for the record, the early-voting period was shortened, but the number of hours for early voting did not change.

According to Poor Richard’s News:

Comparing May 4, 2010 North Carolina primary election data with the May 14, 2014 primary data, the study found that voter turnout increased across the board, but particularly among black voters, where it increased by 29.5 percent, compared to an increase of white voter turnout of 13.7 percent. The findings were based on Census Bureau data and public names who signed the voter rolls.

The problem with same-day registration is that it gives the city or town involved no opportunity to confirm the address and information of the voter and thus opens the door for voter fraud. If the Reverend Barber is in favor of voter fraud, then he should support same-day registration. If he is in favor of honest elections, he should not.

Amoral vs. Immoral

Posted on by

According to the ConstitutionCenter.org:

If there is a lesson in all of this it is that our Constitution is neither a self-actuating nor a self-correcting document. It requires the constant attention and devotion of all citizens. There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: “A republic, if you can keep it.” The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health.

Somehow we have not done as good a job of keeping our republic as we might have. The recent election was a ray of hope, but we have a long way to go to get back to the government our Founding Fathers envisioned.

Fox News is reporting:

The Justice Department released nearly 65,000 pages of subpoenaed documents related to the DOJ’s botched gunrunning sting, after a federal judge overruled the Obama administration’s decision to withhold the records by invoking executive privilege. The program, which targeted Mexican gun cartels, came under scrutiny after weapons involved in the operation were connected to the killing of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in 2010.

“Issa and his idiot cronies never gave a damn about this when all that was happening was that thousands of Mexicans were being killed with guns from our country,” Holder wrote to members of his staff in April 2011, after Issa threatened to subpoena a Federal Firearms Licensee witness to testify on the investigation. “All they want to do — in reality — is cripple ATF and suck up to the gun lobby,” he continued, referring to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the branch of the Justice Department that was in charge of the gunrunning operation.

“Politics at its worst — maybe the media will get it,” Holder’s email added.

It is obvious from that statement that Eric Holder did not believe he had done anything wrong. There is no acknowledgement that running guns to Mexico might be illegal or immoral.

According to the dictionary:

amoral – lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something

immoral – not conforming to accepted standards of morality

Somehow we have morphed from the representative republic created by the U.S. Constitution to a country ruled by a bunch of elite political class who can no longer distinguish between right and wrong. If we do not remedy this situation in 2016, we will lose our republic.

Also, please note that the documents released were released on the eve of the election in the hopes that no one would pay attention to them.

 

 

Fracking?

Posted on by

Townhall.com posted an article today about Breitling Energy Corporation, a company recently awarded the Excellence in Corporate Responsibility for the Southwest Region by the Oil and Gas Awards.

The article reports:

Of particular note, the judges mentioned both Breitling Energy and Mr. Faulkner’s high public profile espousing the benefits of the shale oil revolution as one of the deciding criteria. Public education. Telling the other side of the story. Helping people obtain clear facts about what has been researched by academia, science, and the government.

In all those areas, not one single report has implicated fracking for any damage to the environment, water tables, or the air. In fact, a recent report by the unbiased American Lung Association, gave North Dakota exceptional marks for its air quality, in spite of the over 200 drilling rigs operating in the northwestern corner of the state in the now-infamous Bakken shale.

The scientific evidence seems to show that fracking is not harmful to the environment. Until someone can show scientific evidence that it is, I think it is a good idea for America to move toward energy independence. We have seen in the past month or so what a joy lower prices at the pump can be–I would love to continue in that direction. Also, the Middle East is not getting more peaceful as time goes on, and being energy independent would give America the freedom to make more intelligent choices in choosing how we deal with the various countries in the Middle East.

The Definition Of Insanity Is Doing The Same Thing Over And Over And Expecting Different Results

Posted on by

The Washington Times reported yesterday that after Tuesday’s election, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have both expressed a desire to stay on as the Democrat party leaders in Congress.

The article reports:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi asked her fellow Democrats to keep her on as their leader in the new Congress next year, saying she still has unfinished goals she wants to accomplish.

She said the chief message she took from Tuesday’s election, which saw Democrats eviscerated at all levels, is that voter suppression was a problem.

I would be more than willing to guarantee that voter fraud on the part of Democrats was more of a problem than voter suppression.

The article also states:

The Californian is likely to get her colleagues’ support to remain as their leader, and Senate Democrats’ leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has indicated he will stay on as they shift to the minority, meaning that despite devastating losses in both chambers, Democrats will keep their leadership team intact.

Admittedly, President Obama is the major part of the reason the Democrats took a beating on Tuesday, but Representative Pelosi and Senator Reid were also part of the problem. When a football team continually loses games, you change the coaching team. If the Democrats want to regain control of the House and the Senate, they need to retool their leadership team–it is not an attractive team.

 

The Educational Aspect Of The 2014 Mid-Term Election

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Signal posted an article about the education policies of the winners and losers in Tuesday’s election. As parents become more aware of the problems with a federally controlled education system, they are voting for the candidates who will give them more freedom and more choice in matters involving their children’s education.

The article cites some of the candidates and their positions on education:

Charlie Crist, running as a Democrat, lost his election bid for Florida governor to incumbent Republican Rick Scott. Crist supported the state’s teachers’ union and the Florida School Boards Association’s campaign , to stop Florida’s tuition tax credit scholarship program. The program, which enables nearly 69,000 low-income children to attend a school of choice, is the nation’s largest choice program.

David Figlio of Northwestern University, who has evaluated the scholarship program on an annual basis for the state, found that “scholarship students are by and large the ones who struggled the most at the public schools they left behind, but that they are now, on average, making the same academic gains as students of all income levels nationally.”

Scott’s victory is a victory for supporters of school choice in the Sunshine State.

Similarly, in Wisconsin, Republican Scott Walker won his re-election bid for governor running, in part, on a platform of expanding school choice.

Voters voted for candidates who opposed Common Core and supported state and local control of education.

The changes in the leadership of the Senate Committee dealing with education will make a difference:

Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., will take the helm of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee and is likely to work to reauthorize No Child Left Behind. Although Congress should pursue policies that would allow states to completely opt out of No Child Left Behind, as the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success, or APLUS Act, does, a potential reauthorization of NCLB would provide an opportunity to move the nation’s largest K-12 education law in a more student-centered direction.

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., already has introduced the CHOICE Act, which would allow states to have Individuals with Disabilities Education Act funds follow children to the private schools of their parents’ choice. Rep. Todd Rokita, R-Ind., has introduced a companion measure in the House. A similar approach to Title I funding for low-income school districts also has been advanced in the House by Rep. Luke Messer, R-Ind.

…The Higher Education Reform and Opportunity Act—or HERO Act— introduced by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., would empower states to allow any entity to credential courses, which could pave the way for a more flexible college experience for students and make possible a dramatic reduction in college costs.

It’s time for parents and local school boards to take back education. The newly-elected Senate may provide that opportunity. However, the corporate and political interests that are supporting Common Core and the new Advanced Placement U.S. History course will strongly oppose any move in that direction. It won’t be easy to get this done, but it is very doable.

It May Not Be A New Beginning, But It Is The End Of Something Awful

Posted on by

One of the main problems with the Obama Administration has been the President’s total disregard for the U.S. Constitution. This was illustrated by comments like “I have a pen and a phone.” Well, the President may have a pen and a phone, but that is not the way the American political system is supposed to work. The U.S. Constitution establishes three distinct branches of government designed to check and balance each other. Hopefully the results of yesterday’s election will move the country closer to the government our Founding Fathers designed.

Katie Pavlich at Townhall.com posted an article today about President Obama’s reaction to yesterday’s election.

The article reports:

The President was asked about whether he will be changing his personal political agenda to accommodate a new Republican Senate and House. He danced around the issue and refused to say specifically what he’ll do differently in the future to get things done but did say he is “open to Republican ideas.”

“Congress will pass some bills that I cannot sign and I will take some actions that Congress will not like,” Obama said. “To everyone who voted I want you to know I hear you, to the two thirds of Americans chose not to participate, I hear you too.” 

Obama failed to take any responsibility for the massive rebuttal of Democrats at the polls yesterday as Democratic and Republican presidents have typically done in the past after wave elections against their Party. Further, he argued messaging about policy was the reason why Democrats lost yesterday, not because of the policies themselves.

Democrats in Congress will have a decision to make. Many of their colleagues lost their jobs yesterday after almost always voting for President Obama’s policies. President Obama will not be in office after 2016. Do the Democrats want to continue to support an agenda that cost their colleagues their jobs? Also, I have not yet been able to find out what percentage of eligible voters voted in this election, but I suspect it was higher than one-third. I don’t think two-thirds of Americans stayed home, and if they did, they chose not to have a voice.

This is a chance for a new beginning for America. It is a chance to get our debt under control and to allow bipartisan bills from the House of Representatives to be voted on in the Senate. It is a chance for Congress to stop playing political games and actually get something done–even with a President who will probably continue to play political games.

When You Bury Your Head In The Sand, Something Else Is Exposed

Posted on by

In recent weeks, I have heard many Democrat party pundits (some disguised as news reporters) explain why the Democrats should not worry about the 2014 mid-term elections. Obviously these pundits have been proven wrong, but it might be a good idea to take a look at the reasons behind the statement.

Byron York at the Washington Examiner posted an article today entitled, “Voters‘ Verdict Explodes Democratic Myths.” These are the four myths the 2014 mid-term election destroyed:

1) The election wouldn’t be a referendum on President Obama.

2) Obamacare wouldn’t matter.

3) An improving economy would limit Democrats’ losses.

4) Women would save Democrats.

5) The ground game would power Democrats to victory.

So let’s take a look at these ideas. Most of the Republican candidates for Congress used campaign ads that tied the Democrat candidate to President Obama–often citing how often the Democrat candidate voted for President Obama’s policies. You could argue that it wasn’t a referendum on President Obama, but it was a referendum on his policies.

ObamaCare was not passed in a regular legislative process–the Democrats had to play parliamentary games to get it through–without one Republican vote. I believe the voters resented that, and that they will resent it even more when they see their new premium hikes. Many voters also resented the fact that they were not able to keep either their health insurance or their doctors (as they were promised).

Although President Obama claims that the economy is recovering due to his policies, Americans are not convinced. Under the Obama Administration, voters have seen the workforce shrink, the gap between rich and poor increase, and the income and wealth of middle class families decrease. The stock market may be roaring, but the average American is not seeing prosperity.

Women did not bring the Democrat Congressional candidates across the finish line. There are many women who do not feel that the government has to be their caretaker. Some of us resent the fact that the government is requiring private corporations to provide forms of birth control that include abortion. Not every woman wants the government to be her sugar daddy–some of us think we can make it on our own.

About that Democrat ground game. The ground game doesn’t work if you are selling a product no one wants. The special interest groups that voted for President Obama in 2012 have not been able to collect on what they were promised. The youth vote can’t find jobs and the unemployment rate in the black community is still very high. The naive youth vote has now lost its naivety. They are not likely to be fooled by empty promises again. Also, contrary to what the media has tried to tell us–Republicans are not stupid–they are as capable of getting out the vote as the Democrats–they just need to make sure they have a salable product.

This is a beginning. A beginning is nice, but more important is where we go from here. The national debt is spiraling out of control, the government takeover of healthcare is a disaster, and over regulation is stopping economic growth. It’s time to deal with these issues.

 

 

Supporting Election Fraud

Posted on by

On October 21, Judicial Watch posted an article about a preemptive strike on North Carolina’s requirement for voter identification in the 2016 election.

The article obtained a copy of a letter from a lawyer for the State of North Carolina to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

The article reports:

…a speaker at a recent NAACP conference in North Carolina urged audience members to mislead the NAACP’s own members into believing they do not need to register to vote in advance, or that they do not need to vote at their assigned polling place. Why?  The letter alleges: To create confusion and animosity during the upcoming mid-term elections in North Carolina, and to use the evidence of that confusion in the ongoing litigation between Eric Holder’s Justice Department and North Carolina and to show that North Carolina’s election integrity laws are discriminatory. From the letter:

It is also our understanding that during the [NAACP conference], Rev. Barber urged those in attendance to take unregistered voters to vote during the Early Voting period and to engage in get-out-the vote activities that included transporting registered voters to vote in precincts in which they are not assigned to vote on Election Day, or words to that effect. The stated purpose for these activities, as I understand it, was to gather evidence for and thereby enhance plaintiffs prospects of success in the litigation involving [North Carolina’s Election Integrity Laws].

Why are liberal groups fighting so hard against laws that guarantee the integrity of the vote?

The article at Judicial Watch details past and present actions on behalf of voter integrity in North Carolina:

Judicial Watch has been actively involved in this sprawling North Carolina election litigation for the past two years. Judicial Watch has filed two amicus briefs in this case, one in 2013 and one in 2014, supporting North Carolina and election integrity. On both occasions, we were joined in our brief by our partner the Allied Educational Foundation and by local political activist Christina Merrill.  We also gave oral arguments and submitted an expert witness report to the trial court explaining that no one is harmed by these election integrity laws, but rather, these laws prevent fraud and ensure all Americans are confident that election results are fair and honest.

If true, the fact that the NAACP’s leaders appear willing to risk the confusion and disenfranchisement of their own members in order to deceive a Court about common sense election integrity laws speaks volumes about the intellectual bankruptcy of the left’s arguments.  The left’s weak arguments also explain why the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 7 to 2 vote, recently overruled the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ temporary injunction and held that North Carolina’s laws comply with federal law and should be used during the November 2014 election.  The litigation between North Carolina and the DOJ is expected to proceed further in 2015.

North Carolina’s voter identification law is supposed to be in effect for the 2016 presidential election. It will be interesting to see how much of a fight the political left is going to put up to prevent North Carolina’s voter identification law from taking effect. The law is obviously needed (see previously posted video of James O’Keefe being allowed to vote twenty different times in North Carolina). The question remains, “Why is the political left fighting to preserve voter fraud?”

Using The Internal Revenue Service To Target Conservative Speech

Posted on by

We still don’t know exactly what went on with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the targeting of conservatives and conservative groups. I can tell you that after making a small donation to the Tea Party a few years ago, my husband and I were audited for the first time in 45 years (nothing in our taxes had changed). Well, evidently the targeting of conservatives was aided and abetted by some members of Congress.

Yesterday The Daily Caller reported that they had obtained copies of correspondence between Senator Jeanne Shaheen and the IRS showing a plan to harass conservative groups during the 2012 election.

The article reports:

“The IRS is aware of the current public interest in this issue,” IRS chief counsel William J. Wilkins, a White House visitor described by insiders as “The President’s Man at the IRS,” personally wrote in a hand-stamped memo to “Senator Shaheen” on official Department of the Treasury letterhead on April 25, 2012.

The memo, obtained by TheDC, briefed the Democratic senator about a coordinated IRS-Treasury Department plot to target political activity by nonprofit 501(c)(4) groups. The plot was operating out of Lois Lerner’s Tax Exempt Government Entities Division. 

 …Shaheen got the inside info from the IRS, making it clear she was the point person in a group composed of six close Democratic colleagues including Chuck Schumer and Al Franken, who joined with Shaheen in quietly writing a letter to then-IRS commissioner Doug Shulman expressing their concern about new nonprofit groups engaging in political activity in 2012.

The Democratic senators’ publicly available March 9, 2012 letter asked the IRS to “immediately change the administrative framework for enforcement of the tax code as it applies to groups designated as ‘social welfare’ organizations” by introducing a new “bright line test” for how much a tax-exempt group can invest in political activity and by setting a new rule that at least 51 percent of a group’s activity must non-political. The senators called for more elaborate disclosures about finances and “undertakings” in groups’ form 990 submissions and sought new rules about how much donors could write off as business expenses.

The problem here is that the new rules would be specifically aimed at conservative groups. There was no effort made to be even-handed about putting restrictions on liberal PAC’s, unions, or other groups on the left side of the aisle.

Unfortunately many Democrats do not endorse the concept of free speech when it does not conform to their ideas. The Democrat party has also shown that it is not above using the full weight of the government to stifle conservative speech. Using the government as a political weapon is not an idea that belongs in a representative republic.

One Of The Reasons Behind Common Core

Posted on by

Yesterday a website called TopRightNews posted a story quoting Dr. David Pook, a professor at Granite State College and chair of the history department at the Derryfield School in Manchester, New Hampshire. Dr. Pook stated that he helped write the controversial Common Core State Standards and was motivated to do so because he wanted to end “White privilege.”

This is the exact quote:

“The reason why I helped write the standards and the reason why I am here today is that as a White male in society I am given a lot of privilege that I didn’t earn.” 

Dr. Pook also stated that all children deserve the opportunity to learn to read and write. No one is debating the fact that all children deserve the opportunity to read and write, but let’s take a look at some of the problems facing our children as they attend school today. A large percentage of our children, particularly in minority communities, come from one-parent homes. That one parent is working hard to keep bread on the table and is probably not involved with the child’s school. Minority children are also faced with a culture that does not encourage them to learn and do well in school. It seems to me that the solution of the problem is not ruining education standards for the children who are doing well, but helping deal with the cultural issues that hinder minority children in school.

Bill Cosby explained a lot in a video he made six years ago. It is posted on YouTube:

I think Bill Cosby has a much better understanding of the problem than Dr. Pook.

One Perspective On The Mid-term Election

Posted on by

Michael Goodwin at the New York Post posted an article with an interesting perspective on the mid-term elections. Mr. Goodwin noted that even as a daily misstep is coming from the Obama Administration, President Obama seems to be saying that he is blameless in whatever disaster is unfolding.

The article notes:

We are witnessing the total collapse of a bad idea. Obamaism, a quasi-socialist commitment to a more powerful government at home and an abdication of American leadership around the world, is being exposed as a historic calamity. It is fueling domestic fear and global disorder and may well lead to a world war.

If there is a smidgen of a silver lining, it is that the unraveling, complete with Obama’s shameless attempts to duck responsibility, is playing out on the eve of the midterm elections. Fortunately, voters seem ready to respond by giving Republicans control of both houses of congress.

…He was aided and abetted by every Democrat in Congress. They marched in lockstep with his cockamamie policies, from ObamaCare to open borders. They protected corrupt leaders in numerous federal agencies, from the IRS to the Genera Services Administration. They stymied efforts to find the truth about Benghazi and the Fast and Furious gunrunning debacle.

They ceded their constitutional obligations and allowed Obama to crash the system of checks and balances. The vast majority stood silent while he gutted the military and abandoned our allies, including Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and courted Iran, the most menacing nation on earth.

With painfully few exceptions, Democrats put their loyalty to him above their duty to America.

And now they must be punished. All of them.

Mr. Goodwin notes that he is a registered Democrat. However, he suggests that what is happening in the country at this moment is a national emergency and the only solution is to vote Republican for every federal office. I understand where he is coming from–I used to be a Democrat.

There Are Consequences To Open Borders

Posted on by

One of the problems with the Obama Administration has been the refusal to enact even common sense measures to provide border security on our southern border. There have been reports of OTM’s (other than Mexicans) from terrorist countries coming across as well as Islamic paraphernalia found on the American side of the border. What some of us didn’t expect with the thousands of children coming across the border last summer was germs that American children had no resistance to.

On Friday The Daily Caller posted an article stating that there is evidence that the EV-D68 enterovirus that began affecting American children this fall, was the result of the thousands of children who came into America illegally across the southern border last summer.

The article reports:

Officials ”have to do the genetic analysis” to disprove or prove the link, Nora Chapman, an enterovirus scientist at the University of Nebraska, told The Daily Caller.

But there’s already more than enough statistical evidence for American citizens to demand that scientists test the viruses to see if Obama’s progressive border priorities spread the dangerous contagion throughout the country during 2014.

So far, that virus has been found in nine people — including at least three American kids — who died from illness. It has apparently inflicted unprecedented polio-like paralysis in roughly 50 kids, and it has put hundreds of young American kids into hospital emergency wards and intensive care units throughout more than 40 states. Most of the dead have not been publicly identified.

As President, President Obama is responsible for the safety and security of America. By not enforcing border security last summer, he has opened the door to suffering and death for hundreds of American children.

From The Campaign Trail

Posted on by

This was posted on Hot Air yesterday:

Louisiana Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu said Thursday that the issue of race is a major reason that President Barack Obama has struggled politically in Southern states.

“I’ll be very, very honest with you. The South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans,” Landrieu told NBC News in an interview. “It’s been a difficult time for the president to present himself in a very positive light as a leader.”

Noting that the South is “more of a conservative place,” she added that women have also faced challenges in “presenting ourselves.”

First of all, Senator Landrieu has not lived in the South for some time–she lives in Washington, D.C. Her parents live in Louisiana, and she claims their address as her residence, but she does not live there. It has been more than fifteen years since she has lived there. Hopefully during that time some progress has been made in Louisiana in race relations and women’s rights.

Has it ever occurred to any of President Obama’s supporters that the problem might be his policies rather than his skin color? Or that Senator Landrieu might be losing support because she has supported President Obama’s policies?