November 28, 2014

Watcher's Council Results

"Now dis HTML is an offer you just can't refuse. I know you're gonna do the right thing, put it on yez websites and not disappoint me and my friends, right?"

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

"Cowards die many times before their deaths;
The valiant never taste of death but once. "
- William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar Act II, Scene 2

"There comes a time when silence becomes betrayal" - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

""America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, 
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."- President Abraham Lincoln

This week, we had a tie between two pieces that both dealt with President Barack Hussein Obama's plan for amnesty for illegal migrants by executive order.

Joshuapundit's -Strangling the Eagle - Barack Obama And Amnesty, Part I was my analysis of exactly what this president is proposing, and its ultimate effect on the country,much of what was hidden with President Obama's obtuse rhetoric and serial prevarication.

Bookworm's fine essay Brit Hume's loud silence reveals the ugly secret about Obama's immigration amnesty announcement goes a great deal deeper in revealing her first person account with one of the major obstacles in dealing with what the president is attempting to impose on the country -sheer cowardice in unexpected places..and as usual, she takes us right to the heart of the matter.

Since I break the ties, Bookworm's insightful piece takes the honors this week. Here's a slice:

There are some words that, as a writer, Ive always wanted to use. One of those words is cadaverous, which I think is just a lovely, almost Dickensian word. Having attended last nights delightful PRI Gala dinner, I finally have that chance. But let me start at the beginning.

I dont usually attend galas. Indeed, I dont ever attend galas, since I am almost pathologically cheap and, no matter how much I admire the speaker or expect the company to be delightful, I simply cannot make myself pay several hundred dollars for a dinner and speech. Add to that the fact that its disrespectful for me to spend huge sums of money on a political cause that my husband finds distasteful, and galas and I are not a common pairing. I only was able to attend the PRI event thanks to the incredible generosity of a local Marin conservative who sponsored a table and invited me to be one of his guests.

The event was held at the Fairmont, atop Nob Hill, which is one of the truly grand dame hotels in the world. The Fairmont was in the process of being built when the 06 quake struck, causing severe damage. Once the dust cleared, building on the hotel resumed with help from architect Julia Morgan (of Hearst Castle fame), who had all sorts of wonderful ideas about reinforced concrete for structural integrity. In 1945, the Fairmont hosted the meetings that culminated in the United Nations creation. The hotel is sufficiently charming and magnificent that I forgive it for being the venue that gave birth to that appalling antisemitic, anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-freedom, and anti-individualism organization. But as I so often do, I digress.

For me, there were only two problems with the evening: First, the table at which I sat was so large, and the volume of conversation so loud, that I was only able to speak to the men (very nice, interesting men) to my immediate left and right, which meant that there was a whole table full of manifestly intriguing people with whom I did not exchange a single word. Second, Steven Hayward, from Power Line, was supposed to speak there, but an attack of bronchitis kept him away. Im a big admirer and was disappointed that I couldnt meet him. The fact that those were was my only disappointments tells you that it was a damn fine evening indeed.

The food was exquisite (I love filet mignon), the speeches ranged from interesting to very interesting, and I was delighted to see former California Governor Pete Wilson receive the Sir Antony Fisher Freedom Award. I have a special reason for that delight. You see, just as in the 1980s I was a Democrat who utterly failed to appreciate what an extraordinary man, thinker, and politician Reagan was, I was still a Democrat in the 1990s, and therefore utterly failed to appreciate what an extraordinary man, thinker, and politician Wilson was. I grossly underestimated the measure of the man back then, and was therefore so pleased to stand up and applaud him now. (To appreciate what a great governor he was a fact that the MSM successfully obscured in the 1990s for unthinking young Democrats like me check out the Wikipedia articles incomplete list of his accomplishments.)

After Gov. Wilson received his award and gave a short talk, the mike was turned over to the evenings featured speaker, Brit Hume and this is where I get to use the word cadaverous. I need to start out by explaining that, since I watch TV only occasionally (to satisfy my low passion for Dancing With the Stars or to see Maggie Smith in Downton Abbey), I had no idea who Brit Hume was sufficient to justify his role as a keynote speaker at a PRI gala. You probably know that hes a former ABC correspondent and a current Fox News analyst. I did not know that.

My ignorance about Hume extended to his looks. I had no idea what he looked like. When I realized who he was, I went over to introduce myself and shake his hand, which took all of 10 seconds. (At NOUS events, protocol is to greet the speaker, and there are penalties for those who fail to do so. Having become familiar with this requirement, I like it and, if I can, extend it to all events that I attend.) Hume is very tall, and quite thin, and he has a slightly hound-doggish face, with a grayish cast to his complexion. He is a very nice looking man but he is also somewhat cadaverous looking. (And theres that word.) Hes not cadaverous in the sense of corpse-like but in the sense of haggard and thin. You TV watchers also already know what else I discovered about him, which is that he has a deep, lovely voice with a very slight Southern drawl.

Hume spoke about politics; Juan Williams; his start in an old-fashioned newspaper, complete with clattering typewriters and cigar-chomping copy editor; and Obamas planned amnesty. It was this last that riveted my attention. Hume, whom I would describe as a very centrist Republican, had put together a laundry-list of things that Republicans shouldnt do once Obama announces his amnesty. It was a comprehensive list. He started by noting that, because Republicans lack a Senate majority, Hume says its unlikely that theyll be able to put together a veto-proof anything to block the amnesty and, failing that ability, any bills the Republican Congress passes will be a waste of time and the media will use any such efforts to paint Republicans as racist and selfish.

Hume also argued strongly that the House most certainly shouldnt try to use the power of the purse to block Obama from putting the amnesty into effect because doing so will only precipitate another stand-off and shutdown. According to Hume, polls consistently reveal that voters hate shutdowns and, thanks to the media, that they always blame the Republicans, even though the president is arguably the true proximate cause. (I have a different feeling about shutdowns and the accompanying theater. Hume, incidentally, made clear that he has the lowest possible opinion of Cruz and the Tea Party.)

Impeachment, said Hume, is a no-go. The last time Republicans did that, it ended very badly for them. Just as with shutdowns, the public is hostile to this type of thing and, thanks to the media, its always the Republicans fault.

A lawsuit? Well, its true that Obama is acting outside of his Constitutional authority, but Hume believes that Congress will be found to lack standing to sue because it will not have sustained a direct injury as a result of the amnesty.

Much more at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Dennis Prager We Have a Moral Divide, Not a Racial One submitted by Joshuapundit. It's one of the better observations I've seeninprint about what ails America.

Here are this weeks full results. Only Bookworm was unable to vote this week,but was not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 06:07 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 26, 2014

Obama Admits Usurpation Of Congressional Powers!

If Democrats cared more about the country than about their party, we would see impeachment and removal before Christmas based upon this statement.

President Obama was slightly annoyed after illegal immigration advocates interrupted him during his speech on his executive actions on immigration reform.

Dont just start yelling, young ladies, Obama said as multiple women stood up to demand that Obama stop deporting people.

I let you holler, he said as they continued shouting. Youve got to listen to me too.

Obama said that the protesters were right about a lot of illegal immigrants getting deported but that he was acting to change it.

What youre not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law, Obama said.

Obama is president -- and therefore lacks the authority or the power to change the law. He has therefore publicly admitted to an act that he knows to be unconstitutional. Congressional Republicans need to take any and all efficacious actions to undo his unconstitutional usurpation of congressional power. As noted above, though, that does not include impeachment, because Democrats in the Senate will not do their duty and vote to remove Obama for high crimes and misdemeanors. But this statement is evidence that should be used as a part of any lawsuit to overturn Obama's unlawful executive order.

|| Greg, 08:45 AM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 25, 2014

Some Thoughts On Ferguson

Some may notice that I've said very little about matters in Ferguson, Missouri. Such reticence may surprise some people, since I voice my opinion on so many controversial issues. Others may assume it is due to cowardice, fearing that I would say the wrong thing.

But there are a number of reasons I've been quiet about the shooting of Mike Brown by Darren Wilson.

One of them is that my brother is a cop -- albeit in another part of the country far from Ferguson -- and I hope and pray there would be no rush to judgment if my brother ever had to fire a shot in the line of duty. I would hope and pray that there were not charges filed against him simply because a howling mob demanded them.

Another is that I teach in a school where my students are poor and minority (though more likely to be named Miguel Moreno than Mike Brown). I wasn't ready to rush to judge Mike Brown without evidence. Even as late as last night, when we began to officially receive details about what the evidence showed, I was prepared to accept that Mike Brown had not tried to grab Darren Wilson's gun and that he had not turned around and come back toward Wilson in an aggressive manner.

A third is that I used to live not far from Ferguson, and used to regularly shop and visit friends in that community. I know it has changed in the last 25 or so years, but that area still holds a special place in my heart. I wished to day nothing to dishonor that community.

Lastly, during my St. Louis days I knew a number of folks involved in this ongoing drama. A couple of old friends work in the DA's office in St. Louis County. I'm acquainted with Brown family advisers Erick Vickers and Anthony Gray -- indeed, I recall one particularly intense argument with Vickers over beers in which we expressed sharply differing views over race relations. Congressman Lacy Clay and I have shared a meal together, and I know him to be an honorable man even if I do find myself in disagreement with him here.

As you can see, I have had reasons for holding my tongue.

But after last night's announcement, I have a few words to say.

First, I think that Robert McCulloch got things right when he decided to give the grand jury the evidence without recommending charges. That is historically how grand juries have been used, and we would do well to go back to the days when grand juries made decisions rather than simply rubber-stamping the District Attorney's recommended charges. A group of citizens heard the evidence -- all of it -- and made the decision, not one politically motivated government official.

Second, I think the decision not to charge Darren Wilson was correct. We know know that he did know about Michael Brown's earlier robbery and that he did have his description at the time Brown and his accomplice were confronted. We know from the forensic evidence that shots were fired inside of Wilson's car and that this was due to Brown's effort to get Wilson's gun. We know that the eyewitness testimony most in line with the forensic evidence unambiguously states that Mike Brown did not have his hands up and that he was advancing on Officer Wilson. One can argue whether or not shooting was the best course of action, but one cannot deny that it was legitimate and lawful for Wilson to do so.

Third, I believe that there has been a systematic attempt to foment violence since August 9. From lying witnesses and fake witnesses in August to rabble-rousing "community organizers" and activists over the last three months to camera-hungry politicians today, there has been a false narrative constructed designed to make it appear that Ferguson in 2014 is the Jim Crow South that is six decades in the past. The sad thing is that despite their being morally responsible for the violence that has taken place, there is no way to hold them legally responsible for the directly foreseeable consequences of their words and actions.

And then there are the parents of Michael brown. On August 9 I felt great sympathy for them -- and I did for a very long time afterwards. It is a terrible thing to lose a child, all the more so when that child dies due to an act of violence that was preventable. However, they have spend the last 100 days pushing the false narrative that their son was an innocent and that he bore no responsibility for his death. the reality is that their son's last minutes were spent engaging in acts of theft and violence that led directly to his death. Rather than condemning Darren Wilson, they should be apologizing to him for their son's actions and for their own words vilifying him. Instead, they continue to engage in a course of conduct that shows that the apple did not fall far from the tree as they continue to make threats to "make Darren Wilson pay" for shooting their son. No wonder their son had no morals and no respect for authority -- it is apparent that he was raised by parents who lacked those character traits.

So in the end, we have a tragedy. A community lies in ruins for the second time in three months because of the misdeeds of a thug, the lies of his accomplice and a few fame-seekers, and the incitement of activists. My prayer is that Ferguson recovers -- but one has to question what sensible business owner would rebuild their business there, and how they could afford the insurance premiums necessary to protect their investment after the last few months of violence. In the end, it will be the innocent, non-violent people who suffer the consequences of these last weeks. And that is the real tragedy, not the death of a young thug at the hands of a police officer who he decided to attack.

|| Greg, 07:54 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 24, 2014

Houston Texans Screwed Again On QB Front

Well damn.

Last week it appeared that the Houston Texans had a new franchise quarterback in Ryan Mallett.

Yesterday it looked like Mallett was highly overrated.

Today comes the word that Mallett was playing hurt yesterday and now he is out for the season.

And what, we long-suffering Houston Texans fans are asking, do we do now?

Quarterback Ryan Mallett is out for the season with a torn right pectoral muscle that will require surgery, according to two familiar with the situation.

The Texans have refused to comment today. Coach Bill OBrien has his regularly scheduled Monday news conference at 2:30 today.

Ryan Fitzpatrick, who started the first nine games and compiled a 4-5 record, is expected to start against Tennessee on Sunday. Rookie Tom Savage is the other quarterback on the roster. Its unclear if the Texans will sign a third quarterback.

A torn pectoral muscle affects the entire chest and shoulder.

Mallett was originally injured preparing for his first start at Cleveland, where he played well in the 23-7 victory. Last week, he was participated in practice and was listed as probable on the injury report with a chest injury.

So, does this mean the return of Ryan Fitzpatrick?

Does it mean that we see Tom Savage start?

Or does it mean that the franchise will be signing a new quarterback to help us finish out the season?

Regardless, it seems like the team's flickering playoff hopes are being snuffed out.

Of course, this does lead some of us to wonder if there is this possibility.


|| Greg, 01:29 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Watcher's Forum -- November 24

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What was your reaction to the President's New Executive Order On Immigration?

GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD : Kinda shocked at the lawlessness. I mean, if a GOP pres decided to Executive Order a Berlin Wall type barrier along the South 40 - ppl would totally freak. Methinks the GOP will NOT fall into an over reaction trap - instead they'll use the Cruz Maneuver:

Step number one that I have called for is the incoming majority leader should announce that if the president implements this lawless amnesty, that the Senate will not confirm any executive or judicial nominees, other than vital national security positions, for the next two years, unless and until the president ends this lawless amnesty, Cruz told Chris Wallace on Faux News Sunday. If the majority leader would announce that, it would impose real consequences on the president and the administration.

Cruz didnt say if he regards the attorney general as a vital national security position, leaving open the question of whether he wants the GOP to block confirmation of Loretta Lynch, 44s nominee to replace Attorney General Eric The Red Holder.

The second constitutional power weve got is the power of the purse, Cruz continued. And we should fund, one at a time, the critical priorities of the federal government, but also use the power of the purse to attach riders.

By riders, Cruz is likely referring to an appropriations bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security but stipulate that none of the funds appropriated may be used to implement 44s recent executive orders. And, following Cruzs thinking, if 44 vetoes that bill next year, it wouldnt result in a government-wide shutdown because Congress will have passed bills funding other parts of government.

Cruzs plan is very similar to the one he hoped to execute during the fight to defund the health care thing, with one crucial difference: Republicans now control the Senate, so Harry Reid, in theory, cant block the bills that would fund the rest of government.

Also, tired of the tired refrain that somehow deporting 11 million ppl is undoable. Au Contraire mon frer!

Mass Deportation is very doable - after all - if the Germans can tote off over half that many folks and kill them - we can certainly carry off that many folks to their nation of origin and ensure they have a sack lunch on the bus.

Think of the economic boom the nation would enjoy - thousands of busses, drivers, relief drivers, petrol, safety officers, translators, sack lunch fixer uppers, paper pushers etc etc.

Or how about fining sanctuary cities for helping craft and continue the entire sorry mess to begin with? And the sudden stoppage of the drain on municipalities resources for illiterate and semi literate unskilled workers and families as they shed the 'shadow dwellers' by the bus loads simply raises quality of life for citizens.

The Right Planet : So often times those of us who want a secure border and current immigration laws to be enforced are labeled as xenophobes, racists, and the like, by the rampagin open borders crowdthe implication being were anti-immigrant. Hey, I have no problem with legal immigration. I think its a good thing. But we have immigration laws, like most nations do, thank you very much. George Stephanopoulos asked the president, "If you can selectively enforce immigration law, what prevents another president from not enforcing tax laws?" Obama's response? Oh, that would be wrong. And how do legal immigrants feel about Obama's imperial decree to grant executive amnesty after they followed all the rules? You can read more about that here. Back out quiet.

JoshuaPundit: First we have to start by understanding this. This was not about compassion, or fairness or the good of the nation. It was about politics. The president's aim here is to create a brand new bloc of government-dependent Democrat voters. See if in one year or so there isn't a push by the Democrats and this president to provide these people with a streamlined 'path to citizenship' and voting. "After all, they're here, they're paying taxes..."

The other reason it was done in this way is because the president hopes to provoke the Republicans into a government shutdown come December 12th and recreate what happened previously, where he deliberately shut down things that would most impact and inconvenience the American people while blaming it on the GOP while his media sycophants sing the same song.. In his mind, he's still as popular as he was back then and the midterm elections meant nothing.

I think the Republican caucus did exactly the right thing by getting out of Dodge just now. They need to plan a cohesive strategy, some of which I explored here.And they need to feel out who's really on board and whom isn't. For instance, Senator McCain, the creature of his biggest financial backer UniVision cannot be trusted.

Lawsuits are not only useless but take far too long. First, everything connected with the president's new executive diktat can be defunded by congress, and anyone whom believes the nonsense that entities like the USCIS can't be defunded 'because they operate using fees rather than appropriations' needs to click on the above link to find out exactly how ridiculous that is.

They can halt any of his nominations and appointments, saying quite frankly that since this president has shown his contempt for the incoming congress and the separation of powers, they feel under no obligation to cooperate with him on anything.

They can pass common sense legislation that forces him to use his veto pen and shows whom the real obstructionists in congress are. They can block anything he plans to do including his planned global warming $3 billion slush fund and honestly say that until he reverses himself, that's simply how things are going to be. This can easily apply to ObamaCare also if the Supreme Court doesn't gut it first, since the president has said he will never sign any legislation repealing or changing it in any way.

I personally would extend the defunding to the president's discretionary funds. No more lavish fundraisers and vacations on the public's dime, severe cuts in his and the First Lady's personal more personal chefs, masseuses, hair stylists and 'assistants.' No more pricey state dinners and parties featuring Hollywood entertainers, no more greens fees for his golf games. Let the president pay for these himself, if he likes.

And most important of all, the very first thing the new House and Senate need to do is pool their resources and hire a special prosecutor and staff to collect evidence so the House can prepare articles of impeachment.

I think a lot of people get confused and think that impeachment is a legal remedy because it has a legal process. It is actually a political remedy, and only works when a president has gone so far off the rails as to be unpopular enough with the American people that it can succeed. I think the president (whose approval ratings I think are at least 5-10% exaggerated in his favor) is at that point now, and that will become even more obvious if the articles are prepared properly and the American people get a good summation of everything this lawless, would-be autocrat has done to disgrace his office.

At that point, even many Democrats are likely to urge him to resign to save themselves, dangling a pre-arranged pardon okayed by soon to be interim President Biden as an incentive.

Once he's gone, Congress can simply reverse what he's done. And a far better solution to illegal migration can be formulated, one that protects the borders and deports people here illegally whom do not benefit America in the 21st century while importing other immigrants who do.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason: President Obama knows once the newly elected Republican led Senate and House members convene in 2015 they will not pass a comprehensive immigration bill he would sign, which is why he issued this executive order. This action defies the powers granted to the executive branch in our Constitution. Even President Obama acknowledged on many occasions he did not have the power to act unilaterally on this issue.

The President is correct in saying that rounding up and deporting millions of illegal immigrants in this country is not practical. He said that by issuing this executive order he was being fair and just. The Republicans should appeal to the immigrants who have waited for years to come here legally, and to every American citizen whose hard earned tax money will be used to pay for this illegal amnesty. Is the President being fair and just to them?

I would love to see the Republicans put forth a bill building on this executive order to enforce and enhance border security, assure criminals who are caught are deported immediately, and those given permission to stay under this executive order should never be permitted to become American citizens unless they leave the country and apply through the proper legal channels to do so.

The goal of the left in granting amnesty to illegal immigrants is to create a new voting block of millions of voters who will vote for Democrat candidates. The Republicans can stop this by not allowing them to become citizens. Let them work here legally, out of the shadows, and take advantage of the opportunities available to them. They should not be rewarded for their crimes by being given a special path to citizenship. I believe this is fair and just, not just to the illegal immigrants, but to those of us who are American citizens by birth or who went through the proper legal channels to become American citizens.

The President will not sign such a law, but the Republicans can show the American people that the purpose of this executive order is to gain millions of new Democrat voters and has nothing to do with compassion.

Well, there you have it!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 12:48 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (17) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Watcher's Council Results

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

This morning in Jerusalem Palestinians attacked Jews who were praying in a synagogue.To have this kind of act, which is a pure result of incitement, of calls for days of rage, of just irresponsibility, is unacceptable.

People who have come to worship God in a sanctuary of a synagogue were murdered in a holy place in an act of pure terror and senseless brutality and murder. - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry

There are two races of men in this world but only these two: the race of the decent man and the race of the indecent man. - Victor Frankl, Auschwitz survivor, in 'Man's Search For Meaning'

"It's not enough for us to say: There are those carrying out Ribat (religious war over land claimed to be Islamic). We must all carry out Ribat in the Al-Aqsa [Mosque]. It's not enough for us to say: The settlers have arrived [at the Mosque]. They have come, and  we have to prevent them, by any means necessary, from entering the Sanctuary. They have no right to enter it. They have no right to defile it. - Mahmoud Abbas, inciting violence on Official Palestinian Authority TV, Oct. 19, 2014

This week's winning essay was Joshuapundit's -The Blood Of Zion Cries Out My reaction on the day four rabbis and Druze traffic cop who tried to stop the killers were murdered with guns and meat cleavers in a Jerusalem synagogue. Here's a slice:

Early this morning, four Jews at morning prayers were murdered in a synagogue in Jerusalem after two Palestinian broke in and assaulted the worshipers with gunfire and meat cleavers.

Many others were wounded and four are in critical condition.

The terrorist attack took place in Har Hof a predominantly Orthodox neighborhood at the at the Kehilat Yaakov synagogue on Agasi Street.

The Murder victims were identified as Rabbi Moshe Twersky, the head of the Torat Moshe yeshiva, 59; 40-year-old  Rabbi Aryeh Kupinsky; 50-year-old Rabbi Kalman Levine; and 68-year-old Rabbi Avraham Shmuel Goldberg(HY"D). Rabbi Kupinsky, Rabbi Levine and Rabbi Twersky were all American citizens, while Rabbi Goldberg was a British subject. A Druze policeman, 30-year-old Master Sergeant Zidan Sif subsequently died of his wounds as well, and all Israel will mourn and honor him.

The killers stormed the synagogue at 7 AM local time. There was no warning and no way for the victims to defend themselves.The rabbis were murdered during the sacred prayer of Shimoneh Esrei, with siddurim (prayer books) in their hands and their tefillum on.

Eye witness Ya'akov Amos said: 'The terrorist moved to within a metre of me then started shooting. One, two, three, bang, bang, bang. I immediately hit the ground and tried to protect myself with a prayer stand. He kept screaming 'Allah hu'Akbar'.


There was blood everywhere, so much that one of the medical workers slipped in it and broke his leg.

The international reaction was interesting. Even U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry seemed shocked, with his voice quavering. He even used the "T" word and called for an end to incitement against Jews.

Phillip Hammond, Britain's Foreign Secretary contented himself with a bloodless statement that 'both sides' should seek to 'reduce tension.' President Obama, of course, said much the same thing. Somehow, I doubt they would have merely talked about both sides reducing tension if four imams had been murdered by a Jew and Qu'rans profaned in this way.

Israel's economics minister Naftali Bennett was interviewed by the BBC today, and provides us with another indication of exactly how sick and depraved Britain has become when it comes to Israel and the Jews.

(just a hint - when Bennett mentions Abu Mazen, he is using Mahmoud Abbas's nom de guerre, the terrorist name he used as Arafat's second-in-command.)

Notice how the interviewer doesn't even address the issue of Abbas inciting terrorism, but pulls the case of an Arab bus driver who died yesterday, as though that made the savage murder of four Jews at prayer legitimate. That Arab driver, by the way, had a full investigation and an autopsy done on him and there is no doubt he committed suicide. Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israel jails murderers no matter who they are.

I really felt like saying 'Kol Hakavod' when Bennett held up a picture of one of the victims, which the interviewer hastily told him to put down lest he upset the gentle sensibilities of her viewers. I think it is absolutely essential to do just that - to let the British public see what their government is funding and supporting. And I hope it upsets them to the point of utter shame.

At the end of the interview, Bennett says that Britain is going to have to make a choice of whether they support the Free World or not. As I'm sure Bennett knows, the British Government has already made that choice.Which is why, perhaps, they feel compelled to put up with soldiers being beheaded in broad daylight and no go areas for police and non-Muslims in London and other large British cities.

The murderers were both killed in a shootout with police at the scene. They were Ghassan and Oday Abu Jamal from the Jabal Mukaber neighborhood in east Jerusalem. Needless to say, they were acclaimed as heroes and martyrs by all the factions of the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians.

A Palestinian woman scatters sweets as she celebrates with others an attack on a Jerusalem synagogue

Palestinian supporters of The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, (PFLP), a small militant group, dance while waving their flags, after they heard the news of the shooting

 "We responded with shouts of joy when we received the news about their deaths," Ala'a Abu Jamal said of his cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal to Yedioth Aharonoth. "People here distributed candies to guests who visited us, and there was joy for the martyrs."

In a message published on its official new website Al-Resalah, Hamas said the attack was a quality development in fighting the occupation. We highly value the heroism of its operatives. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri praised the attack on Qatari news channel Al-Jazeera as heroic, calling for more attacks of the same kind.

 Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri happily wrote on Twitter that Jerusalem has nothing but men who love martyrdom. The heroes of the knife are in Jerusalem. The heroes of the run-over [car attacks] are in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem men take revenge.

And he posted this on his Facebook page:

A cartoon posted on the Facebook page of Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri has perpetrators of the Jerusalem attack dressed in religious Jewish garb asking 'where are they?' (photo credit: Facebook)

The Arab killer is asking 'Where are they hiding?" Needless to say, in spite of what this cartoon shows none of the worshipers were armed.

And Fatah? Mahmoud Abbas, AKA Abu Mazen issued a 'condemnation' that wasn't one. In a statement (in English, not Arabic)it said that The Palestinian presidency" condemns violence "from whatever source" and "demands an end to the invasions of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the provocations of the Settlers."

In other words, 'So sorry, but unless you surrender Jerusalem to us expect more of the same.'

This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who accused Jews of contaminating Al-Aqsa Mosque last week, who just a few days ago was telling his people, in Arabic, to 'defend Jerusalem' by any means necessary. This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who said nothing when Fatah published cartoons and Facebook posts encouraging terrorist attacks on Jews and days of rage to defend the 'threatened' Al-Aqsa.

Tawfik Tirawi, former chief of the Palestinian General Security in the West Bank and a member of Fatahs Central Committee made it even plainer, and in Arabic. Today he told a radio station in Hebron that the attack was nothing but a reaction to the recent crimes of the occupation and the settlers in occupied Jerusalem and across the nation. The threats of the occupation against our people and the Palestinian leadership, represented by the president, will only increase our efforts in safeguarding our rights.

His remarks were reprinted on Fatah's official Facebook page.

I should make something clear here. This is not the fault of Abbas, or Hamas, or any of the Arabs who identify themselves as Palestinians.

It is the fault of the Israeli government.

A significant number of the Palestinians are simply acting as they have always acted since the 1920's, and these tendencies were unleashed even further once Arafat and the PLO were allowed in to take over after Oslo.

Israeli governments since Oslo have always allowed themselves to be pressured to ignore these instances of sheer release  convicted murderers, to make concessions to the terrorist entities on Israel's borders, and most of all to avoid  finishing them off entirely when their violence and bloodshed mandated a response. This has been especially true since Barack Obama, who styles himself as the Palestinian's very own community organizer entered the White House.

Is it any wonder that this sort of thing continues to happen? Is it really so puzzling that after allowing Hamas to continue in Gaza and maintaining any kind of relationship with Abbas and the PLO once they allied themselves openly with Hamas that they would resort back to Arafat's tactics?

Yasser Arafat himself outlined for his followers what this war was really about. On Jordanian TV, right after signing the Oslo Accords he was criticized for signing a peace agreement with the Jews. He responded by reminding his audience of the Peace of Hubidiyeh, a treaty Mohammed made with the Quraysh tribe that he violated as soon as he was strong enough to massacre them, a story every Muslim knows. And then he outlined exactly what this war was about, saying that "either the Jews will push us into the sea or we will push them into the sea."

Arafat, the leaders of Hamas and numerous members of Fatah have sung the same songs for years. Is it their fault that Israeli governments for years have refused to take them seriously?

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Victor Davis Hanson A Moral primer submitted by Joshuapundit. Hanson is an old classicist among his other virtues.In this essay, he looks at the state of America and the world, and especially the president who leads us and sees a lack of political and personal morality as a deadly problem, possibly a terminal one for our republic. Do read it.

Here are this weeks full results:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 12:48 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Weasel Of The Week

Hello and welcome to the Watcher's Council's 'Weasel Of The Week' nominations, where we award the famed golden plastic Weasel to a public figure who particularly deserves to be slimed and mocked for his or her dastardly deeds during the week. Every Tuesday morning, tune in for the Weasel of the Week nominations and check back Thursday to see which Weasel gets the votes and walks off with the statuette of shame!

 Here are this weeks' nominees...

House Minority Leader Nancy 'What VISA IPO?' Pelosi!!

 The Independent Sentinel :    Nancy Pelosi was so very weasley this past week.

I do not believe what happened the other night is a wave, Pelosi said about the election, she described it as an ebb tide.

She can say any dumb thing she wants because the imbeciles who vote for her will continue to vote for her no matter what she says.

She went into a crazed rant about sexism and ageism last week because CBS news reporter Nancy Cordes asked her if she gave any thought to stepping down as the leader.

After she was asked the question, Nancy said, What was the day, she replied to Cordes, when any of you said to Mitch McConnell when they lost the Senate three times in a row . . . Arent you getting a little old, Mitch? Shouldnt you step aside?

Its interesting that, as a woman, to see how many times that question is asked of a woman and how many times that question is never asked of Mitch McConnell, Pelosi added.

The rant continued: I was never on the front of Time magazine even though I was the first woman wasnt that a curiosity? Then the Republicans win and [House Speaker John] Boehners on the front of Time magazine. Mitch McConnell wins, hes on the front of Time magazine. . . . As a woman, its like, is there a message here?

Best yet was her big lie about Jonathan Gruber.

She said she didn't know him but there is video of her referencing him in 2009.

President Barack Hussein Obama!

The Noisy Room : Barack Obama for his thuggish response when questioned if he has the lawful/Constitutional authority to sign an Executive Order giving Amnesty to at a minimum of 5 million illegal aliens and a more realistic estimate of 34 million:

Showing no signs of backing down, President Obama today strongly pushed back against critics questioning his authority to bypass Congress and act unilaterally to reform the nations immigration system.

There is a very simple solution to this perception that somehow I'm exercising too much executive authority: pass a bill I can sign on this issue, he said at a news conference at the conclusion of the G20 Summit in Brisbane, Australia.

If Congress does act, Obama said, Metaphorically, I'll crumple up whatever executive actions that we take and we'll toss them in the wastebasket because we will now have a law that addresses these issues.

The president said he has received legal advice from his attorney general about the limits of his executive power to act on immigration, but would not comment further.

In other words, my way or no way. Amnesty will happen, according to the dictator, either by a bill he approves or by decree - his choice is no choice at all. It is a mafia-style threat. And you'll find out if I have the authority when I do the dirty deed. A bigger weasel never scurried the earth.

Obama campaign manager David 'Red Diaper' Axlerod!!

  The Right Planet:David Axelrod, who tweeted, "As one who worked hard to make ACA and its benefits clear, let me say: if you looked up 'stupid' in dictionary, you'd find Gruber's picture." Huh. Imagine that--throw Gruber under that bus. An interesting comment coming from Axelrod, considering he was present with Jonathan Gruber at a July 20, 2012, meeting at the Oval Office where they discussed how to get around the CBO scoring of Obamacare.

Via ABC News:

In addition to the president and Elmendorf, present in the meeting were White House officials such as Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs Phil Schiliro, Director of the White House Office of Health Reform Nancy-Ann DeParle, Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag (a former CBO director himself), National Economic Council Director Larry Summers, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers Christy Romer, senior adviser David Axelrod, and press secretary Robert Gibbs.

Others were there as well, including Department of Health and Human Services adviser Meena Seshamani, Harvard University economist David Cutler and Alice Rivlin of the Brookings Institute, who was founding director of CBO from 1975-1983.

Although the ABC piece did not mention Gruber by name, White House Logs show Jonathan Gruber entered the White House at the same time as David Cutler for the meeting in the West Wing.,0,214,317_AL_.jpg
Hollywood Used-To-Be and ber Progressive Norman Lear!!

 Virginia Right! : I nominate Norman Lear for his remarks on MSNBC. Lear was asked what Archie Bunker would think about the TEA Party:

When asked if Archie Bunker would be a member of the Tea Party today Lear said, "Archie would have denied the Tea Party. He would started the coffee party. He was not a hater and that was the secert of Archie Bunker, he was not a hater. He was much more afraid of progress then he was um of a bigotry. Black people moving into the neighborhood, wait a minute that never happened before."

Well, there it is! Are these worthy weasels or what? Check back Thursday to see which Weasel walks off with the statuette of shame!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum.

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 12:44 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Watcher's Forum -- November 17

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What Direction Do You See The Democrats Going In 2016?

The Independent Sentinel : The entire party has been brought to the far-left. There are only far-left and those who obey the far-left.

If it has anything to do with deceit, non-transparency, divisiveness, promoting legislation that weakens our economy and diminishes our stature in the world, that's where it will go.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason:The Democrats are going to push the first woman president in 2016. Our choices will be new doting, giddy grandmother Hillary Rodham Clinton or Native American woman Elizabeth (Liawatha) Warren. Hillary Clinton will campaign as a woman familiar and sympathetic with the plight of the common people and all about family values. She and Bill were so broke after they left the White House they could barely afford to pay the mortgages on their two homes, if we remember.

Warren will campaign against the corporatists - the 1% (knowing firsthand their evil capitalist ways having lived among them for much of her adult life) and bring voice to the 99% remnants of the #Occupy movement.

These two will be positioned to address the response of the voters after the 2014 mid-term elections. If President Obama is perceived to be taking us too far left over the next two years, Hillary will be the moderate nominee. If the country is docilely swept along with the hard left then Elizabeth Warren will be the nominee.

The Republicans face the challenge of nominating a candidate who can clearly state the need for a restoration to the founding principles of the Constitution and the rule of law and who will appeal to a majority of Americans in order to defeat the Democrats. There must be a clear distinction between the two parties. Im going out on a limb here and saying the choice between a moderate Hillary Clinton and a moderate Republican will result in a Clinton win.

 GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD: If Hillary does not run, Cuomo seems to be in a better position. Serving in a state that is much larger than Maryland, Cuomo has enjoyed a higher national profile and his fight for same-sex marriage received greater media attention. The firm, PPP, released a poll this week showing Hillary at 64% and Andrew Cuomo at 3% (fourth after Hillary, Vice President Biden, and recently elected and liberal hero U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren).

Maryland Gov Martin O'Malley polled at 1%. The same poll found that without Hillary, Cuomo would be at 10%- and at 22% with neither Hillary nor Biden in the primary. OMalley still remained at 1% without Hillary and was at 8% without either Hillary or Biden.

JoshuaPundit : A lot of ifs here. There are various points to consider in what amounts to a civil war.

While it's almost a certainty that Barack Obama's popularity will continue to decrease even if he isn't impeached or forced to resign ala' Nixon,  he is still going to remain a very powerful figure behind the scenes. He controls the Democrat database that's invaluable in turnout and fundraising and  has already told the DNC in response to their request that he's keeping it after he leaves office, but that parts of it are available for lease for the right price.Also, no matter whether he finishes his term or not, he is still going to be a key endorsement needed for black support.While his animosity towards the Clintons is well known, if  Hillary runs for president, his support will be vital to her  - or any other Democrat- winning in 2016. There's absolutely no way of telling which way he'll go.

And the racial complement is huge. While articles on how Republicans have lost the black and Latino vote (demonstrably untrue about Latinos, but I digress) are a dime a dozen, there are very few articles about how the Democrats have largely lost the white vote. So a massive black turnout in Democrat urban enclaves is a key component.

Another factor is a fairly thin Democrat bench. Two bad midterms in a row have wiped out a whole generation of younger Democrats capable of running and having a shot at winning a national election as well as competing in future state elections. Some of the few more moderate Democrats (relatively speaking) still left like Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Tim Kaine of Virginia and Mark Warner of Virginia are too conservative for the Democrat's leftist base, or lack sufficient name recognition.

So aside from Hillary, there's not much left besides Elizabeth Warren, Andrew Cuomo or Joe Biden, whom I don't see as a serious candidate.

I doubt Senator Elizabeth Warren or Andrew Cuomo, the current governor of NY has the fundraising clout to compete with the Clinton machine...if Hillary runs. I think that's still an open question. But if she does, she will run on three themes - being the first woman president, income inequality, and a revisionist portrait of 'the good old days' of the Clinton years. Her problem is that she will have to run to the Left in order to woo the party's base, which is not fond of her. So she would have to find someone like Elizabeth Warren, Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin, Deval Patrick, NY mayor Ric DeBlasio, Martin O'Malley or maybe Al Franken as a running mate. A lot of the others are simply too old..Elizabeth Warren herself is 65 and Al Franken is 63.

If Hillary doesn't run, it will be a sheer nutroots campaign, with Cuomo and Warren as the two main competitors.

Harry Reid is already showing that he recognizes this by creating a Dem leadership position as yet unnamed for Elizabeth Warren, as a bridge to the progressive fascist wing of the party.

The Republicans are going to have to field someone who can articulately voice conservative principles, point to the misery of the Obama years and make a credible case for real change. Another 'moderate' like Chris Christie, Mitt Romney redux or Jeb Bush would not be good choices at all.

Well, there you have it!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 12:43 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

"He Wasn't Up To The Job"

I find this assessment of Chuck Hagel to be ironic, given the administration he is a part of.

The New York Times broke the news early Monday morning, reporting that Hagel was resigning under pressure and was quickly confirmed by administration sources.

According to NBC News, senior defense officials said that Hagel was forced to resign.

He wasnt up to the job, one senior official said.

Hagel took office in Feb 27, 2013 with heavy praise from Obama when he was first nominated.

Let's be honest -- many Obama appointees were not "up to the job."

You know, like the ones who couldn't file their taxes correctly.

Or the one's who couldn't comply with subpoenas.

Or the ones who couldn't administer the law impartially and instead targeted political opponents.

Heck -- let's not forget the one who declared that it really didn't make any difference who screwed up and was responsible for the deaths of American diplomatic personnel.

And then there was the first selection made by Obama -- Joe Biden -- who isn't up to the vice presidency, a job that is the moral equivalent of Mr. Irrelevant in the NFL draft.

To be honest, we've seen for six years that Obama himself is not up to the job.

So why pick on Hagel?

|| Greg, 11:51 AM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 22, 2014

Mexico Demands Entrance Fee From Foreigners!

The hypocrisy! It burns!

If you are a United States citizen and cross the border frequently you may have to pay a fee to go into Mexico.

The National Immigration Institute in Mexico (INAMI) has started a pilot program in which foreigners that enter Mexican territory for more than seven days or they will be involved in paid work, they will have to pay 306 pesos, or about 28 US dollars.

We are doing what should be done, said Rudolfo Figueroa, representative of INAMI in Baja California. Foreigners who enter Mexico have the obligation to register; if they will be in national territory for more than seven days, they have to pay the right of non-residents.

But we Americans aren't even allowed to keep Mexicans from illegally entering our country or sending them back when they do without being called hateful and racist.

|| Greg, 02:48 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

If Bill Cosby Allegations Are Career Ending, How Can Bill Clinton Campaign For Candidates Or Become First Husband

Seriously -- how can any elected official who campaigned with Bill Clinton be allowed to take office after using a known sex-criminal as a part of their campaign? How can Hillary Clinton be elected President and bring Bill back to the White House with her? Why are Democrats engaged in such a despicable War on Women?

BILL COSBYS career as a beloved comedian is in shambles in the wake of decades-old accusations of rape and sexual assault. In the past week alone as more and more women come forward with allegations NBC has called off a proposed new Cosby comedy, Netflix has canceled a 77th Cosby birthday celebration, and the cable network TV Land has pulled reruns of The Cosby Show.

Yet, amid this media uproar, Bill Clintons career as revered statesman soars.

* * *

Juanita Broaddrick, a Clinton campaign volunteer from the early Arkansas days, accused Clinton in 1998 of raping her when he was attorney general. Clinton eventually settled a sexual harassment lawsuit filed in 1994 by Paula Jones, relating to incidents she said happened when he was governor of Arkansas and she was a low-level state employee. Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer who worked on Clintons 1992 campaign, accused him of groping her in the White House in 1993.

Maybe we expect more from a sitcom fantasy figure than we do from real-life politicians.

Then, of course, there was Clintons affair with Monica Lewinsky. While consensual, the details showcased the huge power differential between a president and a White House intern, and the deniability Clinton believed it gave him. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky, he famously declared.

Come on, liberals -- why don't you "believe the victims". The "preponderance of evidence" shows Bill Clinton to be a serial sexual abuser. And the evidence against Bill Clinton is at least as compelling -- and at least as serious -- as that against Bill Cosby. So why isn't the media -- both serious journalists for big-name networks and newspapers and hyperventilating screamers like Nancy Grace -- probing the Clinton allegations again, seeking out more victims, and demanding that the careers of both Bill Clinton and his rape-apologist spouse be be cast on the ash heap of history?

|| Greg, 12:04 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Look At Which Convicted Criminals Get To Stay Under The Despot-In-Chief's Imperial Decree Granting Obamnesty To Illegals

Foreigners who are just committing the crimes that Americans won't commit.

According to rules being prepared by the Department of Homeland Security, lower deportation priority will go to

aliens convicted of a "significant misdemeanor," which for these purposes is an offense of domestic violence; sexual abuse or exploitation; burglary; unlawful possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or trafficking; or driving under the influence; or if not an offense listed above, one for which the individual was sentenced to time in custody of 90 days or more (the sentence must involve time to be served in custody, and does not include a suspended sentence).

Now the proposed rules do say such folks "should be" deported -- but deportation is optional and may be waived if a bureaucrat decides that the criminal alien can stay. The standard for making that determination is quite low, and under this administration will likely mean that deportation is not going to happen. So here's what that means.

Indeed, you can have done time for any number of other serious offenses and the Obamnesty decree will protect you. And you only get bumped up to the mandatory deportation list if you commit three such offenses -- but only if they arise out of three separate and distinct incidents.

So much for Obama's speech telling America that his actions only protected those who can "pass a criminal background check". Obama lied -- but then again, Obama has lied to Americans time and again and this is just the latest example.

|| Greg, 10:53 AM || Permalink || Show Comments (276) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 21, 2014

Bar Obama From Addressing Congress For State Of The Union!

That is my counter-proposal in response to the interesting suggestion found in this article.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton tells Breitbart News that Congress should boycott President Barack Obamas next State of the Union speech as part of its response to Obamas executive amnesty for five million or more illegal aliens.

That seems to be one appropriate response, Fitton said in an email. Imagine if half of the chamber is empty.

I disagree members of Congress should not shun the House chamber when Barack Obama comes to call. Instead, they should bar his entry to the chamber altogether and refuse to proffer an invitation for him to come and speak at all.


Now wait, I can hear some of you saying. Isnt delivering the State of the Union Address a constitutionally mandated function of the President?

And the correct answer to that question is that it is not.

Article II, Section 3 contains only this requirement:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient

Notice, there is nothing there about a presidential address to Congress. While George Washington and John Adams did make such addresses, Thomas Jefferson discontinued the practice and instead communicated with Congress in the form of a letter or written report to the Legislative Branch, on the grounds that the speech appeared to be too similar to British practice of the monarchs Address from the Throne. That remained the practice until Woodrow Wilson decided he wished to speak to Congress in person, and subsequent presidents have continued that practice.

But the situation today is different.

Last night, Barack Obama announced a course of action unprecedented in American history. In direct defiance of Congress, which has been unwilling to pass legislation to change our immigration laws, Obama chose to engage in an action of dictatorial hubris unprecedented in this age of the imperial presidency. He has declared that he will not see to it that the nations immigration laws are faithfully executed and that he will instead create a new legal status for many of those who have broken our nations immigration laws and shown contempt for American sovereignty.

In light of his attack upon the very framework of our Constitutional Republic, why should Barack Obama be permitted to address the elected representatives of the American people? Why should he be permitted to appropriate the House chamber for his dog and pony show after having infringed upon the legislative prerogatives of the House of Representatives? Why should he be permitted to summon the Senators to hear him speak after having dismissed them as irrelevant? Last night he attacked and denigrated one of the three branches of government established by the Constitution, and there is no reason to think he will not further insult the dignity of the Legislative Branch if given this platform. After all, this is the man who has in the past insulted used the occasion of the State of the Union address to insult the justices of the Supreme Court -- the pinnacle of the third of the three co-equal branches of our government -- for having dared to interpret the Constitution in a manner which protected political speech.

With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections. (Applause.) I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. (Applause.) They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.

House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell need to make it known immediately that there will be no invitation for Obama to address the Congress until and unless he is prepared to rescind his executive order, apologize to the assembled Legislative Branch for his unconstitutional action, and accept a formal censure for his misdeeds. If Obama is unwilling to accept those conditions, then he can put his report in writing and send it down Pennsylvania Avenue via courier. If that practice was good enough for great presidents like Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, Grant, and Teddy Roosevelt, then it is certainly good enough for a would-be despot like Barack Hussein Obama who is unfit to be mentioned in the same breath with those great Americans.

Congress is a co-equal branch of the federal government, granted certain powers under our Constitution. The Capitol and the two legislative chambers therein are their turf. Rather than give up that ground, they should stand it in the face of the would-be king, as an assertion of their proper and constitutionally-defined place in our system of government.

|| Greg, 04:07 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (498) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 20, 2014

Some Nights We Need A Happy Ending

And tonight is one of them.

Reminds me of an eternal truth shared with us by one of our nation's foremost experts on the nature of the American Republic.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure." -- Thomas jefferson

|| Greg, 09:16 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (285) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Somebody Tell Obama He Needs To Know His Role

And this isnt it.

President Obama decided to move ahead with executive action on immigration partially because Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) wouldnt commit to holding a vote on reform legislation in the new Congress, a spokesman said Thursday.

Just two weeks ago, when Speaker Boehner was doing his post-election news conference, he was asked by reporters in that news conference if he would commit to bringing up immigration reform legislation in the next Congress, and he wouldnt do it, Josh Earnest said during an appearance on MSNBC.

Earnest said GOP leadership was scared to allow a vote because they know, as we do, that if that bill were allowed to come up for a vote, it would actually pass in bipartisan fashion.
The president simply isnt going to tolerate that, Earnest said.

Wow. Just wow.

Barack Effin Obama isnt going to tolerate the legislative branch deciding how and when to exercise its constitutional prerogative to legislate or not legislate on a given matter. You know, something found in the first substantive words of the US Constitution.

Article I Section 1 All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Besides, Obama hasnt had a problem in the past with the leadership of one house refusing to allow bills to come up for support because doing so would lead to the passage of legislation with bipartisan support. After all, in the current Senate we have seen Harry Reid refuse to allow over 300 pieces of House-passed legislation come to the floor for a vote despite many of them having bipartisan support. Why has Barack Obama been tolerating THAT situation? Oh, thats right because the bills in questions are ones that he doesnt support and/or that would have required senators of his party to cast tough votes that required them to choose between following the will of the American people or the leadership of the Democrat Party. In such cases, the President tolerates such obstructionism because it serves his purposes. But when Congress refuses to give him what he wants, the Toddler-in-Chief pouts, stomps his feet, shouts Gimme gimme gimme! and then yanks the object of his desire out of the hands of the co-equal branch to which the power to act belongs.


Will we still have a Constitution and a Republic in four hours?

|| Greg, 03:34 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (2) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 19, 2014

Obama Prepares To Rip Up Constitution!

The Constitution? Rule of Law? Clearly they don't matter when you are Obama.

President Obama said in a video that he will lay out his proposal to overhaul the nations immigration system Thursday and will travel to Las Vegas following that announcement to rally support for his initiative on Friday.

Tomorrow night Im going to be announcing here from the White House some steps I can take to start fixing our broken immigration system, Obama said in a video posted on Facebook Wednesday afternoon.

Everybody agrees that our immigration system is broken. Unfortunately Washington has allowed the problem to fester for too long, Obama said. So what Im going to be laying out is the things I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better even as I continue to work with Congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill that can solve the entire problem.

Translation: "Give me what I want or I'll take it -- Constitution be damned!"


Sadly, the Dictator-in-Chief isn't listening to anyone who recognizes that his proposals are a violation of the US Constitution and antithetical to entire American political tradition. He won't even listen to this former law school faculty member who once edited the law review at an Ivy League institution.


Given those claims, I'd like to know when Obama believes he got the authority to issue this executive order and how he got it. After all, as recently as last year he was saying he did not have the authority to do what he is doing.

Michael Austin of National Review notes that this action is part and parcel of a "slow, irreversible slide towards ever-more destruction of laws and customs" -- something that is truly dangerous for America, as it was for the Roman Republic some 2100 years ago. He further notes:

That, then, leads to the obligatory Rome reference. No, we are not Rome and Barack Obama is not Julius Caesar. But he is, perhaps analogous to Sulla, whose crossing of hitherto sacrosanct lines and blatant disregard for timeless norms set the Republic on a dangerous path into chaos. What Sulla represented was the idea that anything was now conceivable, even though he justified his actions as responses to those taken by his political opponent Marius. Yet what he did could well be called the tipping point, and only inertia in the Republics system kept it going for another nearly half-century. As Julius Caesar crept towards the Rubicon, all of Rome could see it coming; all knew that two irresistible forces (Caesar and Pompey) were about to collide, yet the norms of restraint had been so eaten away, and creative politics so attenuated, that there was no chance of avoiding the explosion.

In other words, for all the talk of Obama as king or emperor, Obama's actions here make him neither. Instead, he is merely the harbinger of the day, a generation or two from now, when some future leader will dispense with the trappings of our constitutional system completely and become a despot. But rest assured that if Obama's actions are allowed to stand unchecked, some future historian will lament the impotence of Congress and the fecklessness of the people in a work likely to be titled titled "The Decline and Fall of the United States". The judgement that will be cast upon our generation will be a harsh one -- for though a majority of Americans oppose Obama's actions, we will have stood by and let them take effect without active resistance by that majority. So We the People must make our voices heard and force our elected officials to stand up against this power grab.

|| Greg, 10:35 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (252) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 18, 2014

Democrats Declare Mary Landrieu To Be Toast In Louisiana Senate Runoff, Vote To Stop Americans From Getting Cheap Oil And High-Paying Jobs By Stopping Keystone XL Pipeline

Obstructionism, pure and simple, by the party rejected by the voters only two weeks ago.

Sen. Mary Landrieus bid to pass a Keystone XL pipeline bill fell short by the slimmest of margins Tuesday, leaving the $8 billion pipeline still on the table for the ascendant Republican Party to push the project to President Barack Obamas desk in January.

The 59-41 Senate vote was just shy of the 60 votes needed to pass the bill, following a dramatic six days of whipping by the embattled Louisiana Democrat on an issue that almost all of Washington had expected to sit idle until next year.

This means several things, as I see it:

And the downfall of the Democrat Party continues.

|| Greg, 08:52 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (2) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Outrage In Jerusalem

Four dead , including three Americans, for the crime of being Jews worshiping in the holiest city in Judaism.


Two Palestinians stormed a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday, attacking worshippers with meat cleavers and a gun during morning prayers and killing four people before they were killed in a shootout with police, officials said.

The attack, the deadliest in Jerusalem in years, is bound to ratchet up fears of sustained violence in the city, already on edge amid soaring tensions over a contested holy site.

For once, the leader of the Palestinians terrorist Abu Mazen condemned the attack. Hamas, however, praised the murders by members of the terrorist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. And the Palestinian people did likewise.


Palestinians in the Gaza Strip celebrated the an attack on a Jerusalem synagogue that left four Jewish worshiper dead.

Two Palestinians armed with a meat cleaver and a gun killed four people in a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday before being shot dead by police, the deadliest such incident in six years in the holy city.

Gazan reveler in Rafah handed out sweets and brandished axes in praise of the deadly attack.


Got that peaceful worshippers murdered in a holy place is something to celebrate, not condemn. But then again, given that a Palestinian Authority official only a couple of days ago declared that Jerusalem needs blood to purify itself of the Jews, why should we be surprised by either the attack or the celebration of it?

Which is why the supposedly unequivocal condemnation of the attack by American officials ring hollow after all, the Obama Administration is still giving the Palestinians American tax dollars in order to keep them involved in the so-called peace process (which has brought no peace) while insisting that the Israelis time and again compromise and make concessions to the Palestinians. In other words, our government is funding the murderers in the name of the American people while insisting that the victims quit provoking the attacks simply by existing. Seems to me that this policy has failed, and maybe it is time to demand that the side responsible for the violence bring it as a condition of receiving even one penny.

|| Greg, 03:38 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (286) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

An Observation On Net Neutrality


And dont just believe me and Admiral Akbar believe one of the FCC commissioners who will be responsible for overseeing net neutrality if Obamas proposal is adopted.

Internet users would be forced to pay a new federal tax on their monthly bills if the government approves regulations recently endorsed by President Obama, a member of the Federal Communications Commission predicts.

Commissioner Mike O'Reilly addressed what's known as "net neutrality" at a Washington seminar on Friday. He spoke after Obama backed stricter rules by calling for preventing service providers from charging more for speedier service and for regulating them like telecommunications companies under a decades-old law.

That law requires telecommunications companies to pay into the FCCs Universal Service Fund -- and would likely require the same of Internet companies. But O'Reilly says history clearly shows that the fees would quickly be passed off to customers, just like they are now on monthly phone bills.

Consumers of these services would face an immediate increase in their Internet bills, O'Reilly said Friday during the seminar held by the non-partisan Free State Foundation. Lets accept a truism: Consumers pay [the fund], not companies.

And let there be no doubt about what the new tax would go for paying other peoples internet bill. You know, an online version of the ObamaPhone lets call it the ObamaNet. So in other words, you will pay more so that others can pay nothing. But then again, thats how Obama rolls!

|| Greg, 03:31 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (2) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

I Sympathize But It Doesnt Change My Mind

The story is designed to tug at your heartstrings.

I came home from school to an empty house. Lights were on and dinner had been started, but my family wasnt there. Neighbors broke the news that my parents had been taken away by immigration officers, and just like that, my stable family life was over.

Not a single person at any level of government took any note of me. No one checked to see if I had a place to live or food to eat, and at 14, I found myself basically on my own.

While awaiting deportation proceedings, my parents remained in detention near Boston, so I could visit them. They would have liked to fight deportation, but without a lawyer and an immigration system that rarely gives judges the discretion to allow families to stay together, they never had a chance. Finally, they agreed for me to continue my education at Boston Arts Academy, a performing arts high school, and the parents of friends graciously took me in.

What the author, Orange is the New Black star Diane Guerrero, wants you to do is support amnesty for illegals. But what Guerrero ignores is that the fault is not with the government it is with illegal aliens like her parents, who have broken the law.

But, Guerrero and her supporters would argue, what about the children whose lives are disrupted by deportations? In response, I ask a different question. What about all the children of Americans who break the law and who are arrested and sent to prison -- shouldnt we excuse their law-breaking so that they dont suffer the disruption of being separated from their parents?

Any reasonable person, of course, would recognize that the question I asked is an absurd one. The blame for any trauma inflicted upon a child by having parents incarcerated lies not with the government, but with the parent who chose to break the law despite knowing the potential consequences of their choice for themselves and their children. Why, then, do we allow advocates for immigrant rights to get away with asking their question and presuming that law-breaking non-citizens get a free pass that we do not give to American citizens?

That is not to say that our immigration laws do not need to be changed. They do. But that change cannot be predicated upon the notion that somehow an injustice is done when we impose the prescribed penalty for violating the law. Instead we need to ask what is best for America going forward, not how we can reward the criminal aliens with that which our law reserves for foreigners who follow out laws legal status and a pathway to citizenship. Otherwise we would be equally bound to allow the bank robber and the drug dealer to keep the fruits of their criminal enterprises because to do otherwise would be to deprive their children of an intact family and the comfortable lifestyle provided by their parents crime.

|| Greg, 03:28 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (3) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

The State Of The Texas Democrat Party

Forget the spectacular failure of Battleground Texas. Forget the nomination of statewide candidates who lost virtually every Democrat constituency on Election Day. Instead consider these statistics and realize just how far the Texas Democrats are from being a viable political party in this state.

This lack of a bottom-up strategy was particularly glaring on Dec. 9, 2013, the filing deadline for 2014 candidates. Far from attracting a number of qualified and vigorous candidates to the Democratic banner, Battleground and the party ended up ceding much of the field to the Republicans without even a whimper. In fact, Democrats failed to recruit anyone to run on their ticket for more than 40 percent of all state legislative positions on the ballot. The end result would be almost a two-to-one Republican majority in both the Texas Senate and the House. Even more depressing was the partys showing at the county level. Democrats could not find anyone willing to run for County Judge (chief elected official in the county) in 165 of Texas 254 counties, ceding almost two-thirds of all counties to the Republicans without an election. Thus, by 2015, while the Democrats will retain the county judge in four of the six largest counties, the GOP will hold all 29 suburban county judge positions, 18 of 21 in the other metropolitan counties scattered around the state, and 150 of the 198 small town county courthouses. Of all the major counties in Texas, only Dallas, Bexar, El Paso, Jefferson and Travis, along with the border counties of Webb and Hidalgo, will have a Democratic county judge.

And even more depressing than that was the fact that not a single Democratic candidate could be found who was willing to run for any county office in 86 countiesmore than one-third of the total. These 86 included the heavily populated suburban counties of Denton, Johnson and Parker (outside Dallas-Fort Worth), Montgomery (suburban Houston) and Comal (north of San Antonio) as well as the other urban counties of Bell (Temple), Randall (Amarillo) and Grayson (Sherman). As the saying goes, you cant win a game if you dont field a team.

Lets be honest we Republicans did not have to win the election on November 4, 2014. We had already de facto won the state legislature and a great many counties eleven months previously when the Democrats didnt bother tor run candidates for office. Lets be honest the Libertarians and Greens may have been more effective in recruiting candidates than the Democrats were though those two parties did not entertain the delusion that they would actually elect anyone to office. That leaves one to question whether the Democrats deserve to be considered a major party here in Texas and whether Democrat leaders can even be viewed as having contact with reality.

|| Greg, 03:27 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 17, 2014

Stupid Democrat Congresswoman Claims GOP Insults Americas Intelligence By Not Caving To Obama After Winning

Remember Queen Sheila is the idiot who wanted the Mars rover to find Neil Armstrongs flag.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said the GOP is delivering an insult to the American peoples intellect through its opposition to immigration reform.

Jackson Lee, the ranking member on the Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee of the House Homeland Security Committee, rallied with local leaders in Houston on Sunday for President Obamas promised executive action on immigration.

Hold on the American people are opposed to the sort of amnesty plan that Obama is going to decree. So who is insulting the intellect of Americans?

|| Greg, 05:23 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

A Reminder To Those Who Claim Racist Southern Democrats All Became Republicans In 1964

That is a lie sort of like if you like your doctor and your insurance you can keep your doctor and insurance. The racist Southern Democrats stayed racist Southern Democrats until a different electorate composed of younger voters and transplants from the North replaced them.

The evidence for this is clear.

The accepted wisdom is that the Democrats hamstrung themselves many years ago, when they passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and thereby lost the Solid South forever. Its a nice story, one that allows everyone to feel good: liberal Democrats, who would like to believe their party was martyred in as noble a cause as there could be, and Clinton-Obama Democrats, who have long cited it as proof that the party needs to move to the right and start appealing to conservative Southern whites again.

The only trouble is, its not true.

Yes, the South was never solid for Democrats again after 1964, and the party lost five of six presidential elections from 1968 to 1988. But at every other level of government, Democrats remained highly competitive, even dominant, in the South for years to come.

Going into the 1994 elections, Democrats still held 16 of the 30 United States Senate seats from the 15 Southern states (which I define as the 11 states of the Confederacy, plus Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri and West Virginia), and nearly two-thirds of the Southern seats in the House. On a state level, the figures were even more one-sided. Democrats held 12 of the 15 Southern governorships, and 29 of the 30 state legislative chambers.

Its only in the last two decades that these numbers flipped. In the next Congress, fewer than a third of the Souths representatives will be Democrats; if Mary Landrieu loses her seat in Louisiana, there will be seven Democratic senators in the region. Democrats there will hold four governorships and both chambers in just one legislature.

Did you catch that date, folks? It is 1994, some three decades after the racist Southern Democrats supposedly became Republicans. According to statistics from 1994, older voters aged 60 and above cast 48% of their Congressional votes for Democrats! This was roughly the same percentage of Democrat voters as the 19-20 age group. So who was voting Republican at that time? My generation a group born in the 1950s and 1960s who never were voters for the Jim Crow Democrats and which was inspired by Ronald Reagans vision of smaller government. The big government supporting Jim Crow Democrats were still voting Democrat until they died and todays older white voters are those of us who voted Republican in 1994 (and 1984, for that matter) and have simply aged a couple of decades.

|| Greg, 05:11 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Why Do Congressional Republicans Need To Pass An ObamaCare Repeal Bill?

This is why.

Support for Obamacare continues to decline, with the law hitting a new low in approval, and a new high in disapproval, as the second enrollment period has opened for Americans, according to Gallup.

Just 37 percent approve of the Affordable Care Act, 1 percentage point less than the previous low recorded in January, Gallup found in a new survey released Monday.

In other words, the American people are overwhelmingly against ObamaCare. Since Senators and Representatives are supposed to you know represent us, it is high time to pass a repeal measure and send it to the Presidents desk. That he will veto the bill and that overriding that veto is likely impossible -- is irrelevant. His doing so merely makes it clear that he and his party are unwilling to do the will of the American people even when over 60% of Americans do not approve of his signature accomplishment.

|| Greg, 05:09 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

November 15, 2014

CAIR Officially Designated A Terrorist Organization!

By an Arab Muslim nation, no less -- so can we quit treating them like they are some sort of civil rights organization?

The United Arab Emirates has officially designated 83 groups as terrorist organizations, including two based in the U.S., the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim American Society.

UAEs cabinet made the announcement following a meeting on Saturday.

Other groups designated as terrorists include al-Qaida, al Nusra, Boko Haram and the Muslim Brotherhood.

CAIRs designation is interesting given its high profile here in the U.S.

The group was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case in 2007. Leaders of the Holy Land Foundation were found guilty of aiding Hamas, which the U.S. has designated as a terrorist organization.

Round'em up and shut 'em down!

|| Greg, 06:56 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Watcher's Council Results

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

"The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it." - Thucydides

"They have healed also the hurt of my people lightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace". - Jeremiah 6:14

"Let there be no mistake. We will not be intimidated. Canada will never be intimidated." - Canadian PM Stephan Harper, addressing the nation after the Ottawa jihad attack on parliament, Oct. 23, 2014

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - George Santayana

This week's winning essay,Joshuapundit's -The Day The World Stopped was written on Armistice Day (called Remembrance Day in Canada, Australia, the UK and other parts of the Commonwealth)and consists of my reflections on that day, then and now. Here's a slice:

In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

- Lt. Colonel John McCrae, Canadian Army Medical Corps(1872-1918)

The poem above is a product of World War One, the great scar of history that changed the world and differentiated between ages. As you can tell by the dates, the writer became one of the millions who died in the carnage.

96 years ago today, November 11, 1918 started out as a day like any other day. Men sat in their trenches, looking at each other over the blasted and tormented ground that was No Man's Land where so many of their comrades had fallen, where the very earth was gorged with blood and pain.

According to the accounts of those who were present, there was no air of celebration. The orders had come through that the Great War was to end on November 11th, 1918 at precisely 11 AM local time, the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, but many of the soldiers refused to believe it, thinking it was a trick to lure them into exposing themselves to enemy fire.

The gods of war held sway until the last minute. Among the soldiers of the British Commonwealth,there are 863 who are recorded as having died on that November 11th. The constant din of machine guns, cries, small arms fire and artillery continued.

Colonel Thomas Gowenlock, who served as an intelligence officer in the American 1st Division was in the trenches that day.The orders had come through, but no one was completely certain they would be obeyed by either side, or that the armistice would last:

Official Radio from Paris - 6:01 A.M., Nov. 11, 1918. Marshal Foch to the Commander-in-Chief.

1. Hostilities will be stopped on the entire front beginning at 11 o'clock, November 11th (French hour).
2. The Allied troops will not go beyond the line reached at that hour on that date until further orders.
5:45 A.M.

Colonel Gowenlock wrote later that he drove over to the bank of the River Meuse to see if the war would really end. He wrote later that even with the orders for an armistice, the shelling was heavy on both sides.

"It seemed to me that every battery in the world was trying to burn up its guns. At last eleven o'clock came - but the firing continued. The men on both sides had decided to give each other all they had-their farewell to arms. It was a very natural impulse after their years of war, but unfortunately many fell after eleven o'clock that day."

" the front there was no celebration. Many soldiers believed the Armistice only a temporary measure and that the war would soon go on. As night came, the quietness, unearthly in its penetration, began to eat into their souls. The men sat around log fires, the first they had ever had at the front. They were trying to reassure themselves that there were no enemy batteries spying on them from the next hill and no German bombing planes approaching to blast them out of existence. They talked in low tones. They were nervous.

After the long months of intense strain, of keying themselves up to the daily mortal danger, of thinking always in terms of war and the enemy, the abrupt release from it all was physical and psychological agony. Some suffered a total nervous collapse. Some, of a steadier temperament, began to hope they would someday return to home and the embrace of loved ones. Some could think only of the crude little crosses that marked the graves of their comrades. Some fell into an exhausted sleep. All were bewildered by the sudden meaninglessness of their existence as soldiers - and through their teeming memories paraded that swiftly moving cavalcade of Cantigny, Soissons, St. Mihiel, the Meuse-Argonne and Sedan.

What was to come next? They did not know - and hardly cared. Their minds were numbed by the shock of peace. The past consumed their whole consciousness. The present did not exist-and the future was inconceivable." *

We, who have grown up with the memory of wars like Vietnam with its 50,000 dead and Iraq with its 4,000 can barely conceive of what 5 years of total, merciless war was like. A whole social order overturned and a generation literally cancelled out, with over one million dead from the British Commonwealth and Empire, almost a million and a half Frenchmen, over one hundred thousand Americans and over 2 million Germans - something like 10 million military dead on both sides, and probably 6-7 million civilians who joined them.

It was a horror so complete that for the men who fought it, it became a way of life to the point where many of them had difficulty adjusting to any other, even if they survived.When the guns stopped it was as if the world had stopped.

And yet, as Lt. Colonel McCrae's poem tells us, that sacrifice was not meaningless. And today is a day to remember that.

In Canada, where Veteran's Day is called Remembrance Day, there was a special ceremony.

In Britain and Australia, Canada and other Commonwealth countries, today is known as Remembrance Day, a name that dates from the Great War so many never came home from. The red poppies, mentioned in Lt. Colonel McCrae's poem are a symbol worn by millions - to remember.

Today, Canadians rededicated their memorial to those whom fell in the Great War in honor of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, who were casualties of a newer as yet undeclared, but no less of a sacrifice for freedom.

The Canadians are not the only ones who have lost men and women to this undeclared war that, at least here in America, doesn't dare speak its name..not yet. Instead, there are attempts to hide it behind names like 'workplace violence.'

There are defining moments in history. Sometimes, many of the men and women involved in them are aware of it as much as those whom come after them. Others remain unseeing of what is unfolding, and it is only revealed to them later.

We are in the middle of such a defining moment, whether we realize it or not.

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Andrew McCarthy in the NORO with Amnesty and Impeachment submitted by Nice Deb

McCarthy, a very skilled former federal prosecutor as well as a brilliant writer (full disclosure..I'm halfway through my review copy of his new book, Faithless Execution)answers the question on many people's minds right now - if President Obama orders amnesty for illegal migrants by executive order, can he be impeached? His answer may surprise you.

Here are this weeks full results. Only The Razor was unable to vote ths week,but was not subject to the 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 06:13 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Weasel Of The WeeK

It's time to present this week's statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!

 Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption theyve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week's nominees were all slime-worthy,but in the end the winner was..the envelope please...
 Obamacare Architect Jonathan Gruber!!

  The Right Planet: Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber, who bragged about deceiving the American people in order to get Obamacare passed. According to Mr. Gruber, Americans are just too stupid to know what's good for them. Fortunately, for us, we have "experts" like Mr. Gruber to help save us from ourselves. That's why the ends justifies the means, according to Mr. Gruber, et al. I guess the "most transparent administration in history" ain't so transparent after all. Huh. Imagine that. Go figure. ALL HAIL THE EXPERT!

 The Independent Sentinel :My choice for Weasel of the Week for lying about Obamacare and counting on a lack of transparency and the stupidity of the American people to pass it.

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 its 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 Id rather have this law than not.

You have to absolutely love this weeks' Weasel.

Here he and his prog fascist chums put together a bill that was deliberately designed to be deceptive, murky and hard to understand..not that congress was actually given time to read this monstrosity anyway. Then he did a little chest thumping about it with some of his lefty pals in academia, and was outed when a video surfaced and went viral.

On Rowan Farrow's MSNBC show, in true weasel fashion,  Gruber 'apologized'

Not for causing millions of people to lose their healthcare, see the premiums and co-pays skyrocket to where they effectively had no coverage or are paying a lot more for a lot less coverage.

Not for causing the loss of thousands of jobs or the conversion of full time jobs into part time jobs with part time income.

Not for the huge loss of capital and manhours by businesses and individuals.

No, he apologized for bragging about it and getting caught.

Ah well,as Barack Obama would say, you won. So come up to the stage, Dr. Gruber.

Whatever do you mean sir? No, of course we don't actually have a specific  Golden Weasel for you.You should have read the 1,500 page memorandum we sent you along with your invitation, where in the footnotes to section 3a, paragraph 2 subsection c, while it says a Golden Weasel will be awarded, it certainly doesn't specify that it would be awarded here, on this specific date or to you, now does  it?

Oh, now no need to get so upset. You know, we had to phrase it in an opaque, non-transparent fashion to get you to come tonight. Things like this always work better that way politically, and if you spent money for transpo, meals and a hotel thinking you were going to get a Golden Weasel here tonight, well I guess you're simply mistaken.Anyway it's all for the Greater Good, and of course you can't blame us if it didn't go the way you assumed it would based on what we wrote.  Although I have to admit,  to paraphrase someone whose name I can't quite recall just now, without the stupidity of some of our nominees, no Golden  Weasels would ever be passed out. Or something like that.

Is that the kind of language they taught you to use at MIT, Dr. Gruber?

Well, there it is! 

Check back next Tuesday to see who next week's nominees for Weasel of the Week are!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum, and  remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

|| Greg, 06:11 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Watcher's Council Forum

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What Is Your Take On The Election? What Do You See In The Future?

The Independent Sentinel : Mr. Obama said the election was a referendum on his policies and 70% of Americans believe we are headed in the wrong direction. Therefore, the election was a vote against his policies and the American people want to change direction.

Over the next two years, Mr. Obama will put out memorandums, executive orders, and rule changes but he will not work with Republicans. We have no history of him trying to work with anyone but Iran and other enemies of the United States.

He met with Republican leaders today and told them again he was going to legalize millions.

The first thing Mr. Obama did the day after the election was invite Al Sharpton up to the White House for advice. That says it all.

He's dangerous and nothing will stop him.

The Noisy Room : I see the election as the last chance for the Republicans to get their act together and remember who put them in power - the voters. They have a mandate to stop Obama, period. The Republicans know that the American people want Obamacare gone... they want the IRS gone... they want the borders secured and Amnesty nixed. We, the voters, want smaller government, less regulations and intrusions and a return to Constitutional principles. Will we get it this time around? Not likely. The only sure thing here is that McConnell will become Senate leader, which is a disastrous turn of events. But the mafia of leadership in the Senate is not just on one side of the aisle.

Unfortunately, what I see transpiring is that the Republicans will betray us once again. The very first day after the election, McConnell gave the power of the purse back to Obama -- declaring that there would be no government shutdowns, etc. That was your first clue as to how this will go. I hear lots of proclamations that the Republicans won't stand for Amnesty - that Obama is playing with fire and could be impeached. But that is a total switch up for the RINOs in charge. Not a month ago, almost all of them were for Amnesty and actively pushing it in league with the National Chamber of Commerce. So, let me translate bullcrap here. The Republican leadership will strike a grand bargain with Obama over Amnesty, if he doesn't do Executive Orders first, which he could very well do. If the RINOs strike a deal, it will be at the last moment and they will claim they had no choice. They will give the Dems most or all they want on the Amnesty issue, while claiming victory for the Conservatives which will be non-existent. The Republicans will most likely pound the final nail into the American coffin. Hope I'm wrong on that. I really do. If I'm wrong, it will be due to somebody's extraordinary efforts - probably Tea Party. The Tea Party that the Republicans will do all they can to shut out, no matter the cost.

Republicans have already been in negotiations on the budget and will tout what they claim is another victory, but it won't be. It will still increase spending and the debt. Very little will be done on taxation either, except possibly that the corporate tax rate will be rectified and the pharmaceutical equipment tax will be done away with. There will be no job growth and inflation will keep rising as will the national debt. The unemployment numbers are total fiction and will continue to be such, as more and more propaganda is spewed from Obama's minions. In reality, the unemployment rate will continue to skyrocket and unrest will grow among the people. I would not be surprised to see a false flag event or the Bubba Effect come into play that causes even more widespread chaos.

Terrorism will increase as I predict the Republicans will not actively address Obama's executive orders as they pertain to the military or to the Jihadist threat. Our enemies will not be brought in line and Iran will go nuclear. Israel will stand alone in the end as foretold.

Ebola and the Polio-like virus hitting children will spread. The media has agreed to keep mum on both and if something is not done, we could see more and more deaths across the US. I do not see the media becoming more friendly or transparent any time soon -- look to the bloggers, Drudge and foreign sources for reliable news.

I guess what I am saying is that there is the serious potential of things getting much worse over the next two years. And if the Republicans try to elect a moderate, they will lose to the Dems. We need a Constitutional Conservative to run and not be afraid to say what he or she believes in and stand against the powers-that-be. We need a miracle. I'm not holding my breath.

JoshuaPundit : A few things I noticed about the last election...first, the historic nature of it, much more of a game changer than 2010. The GOP gained major ground in every category and at every level of government. Races that were supposed to be close turned out to be blowouts. According to the polls, Mitch McConnell was supposed to be barely hanging on - he won by fifteen points. Pat Roberts in Kansas was supposed to be dead and gone - he won easily by almost 10 points, and that was with a fake Democrat-funded 'libertarian' third party candidate taking over 4% of the vote. Joni Ernst, who was supposedly in a race too close to call romped to victory by 9.5 points. The Republicans increased their margin in the House and  gained so many seats in the state legislatures that there are only five states that still have totally Democrat controlled state legislatures..and those states no longer include California, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania or even Massachusetts.

This was a total rejection of President Obama and his policies, rather than a love affair with the GOP. Despite the media happy talk, people are desperate,  we only have a two party system and one party has obviously failed in all areas.  Even much of the the president's  core constituencies 'voted' by staying home, regardless of gender baiting and race baiting attempts to scare them into going to vote. And in case no one's noticed, the media sponsored polls were part of it.

Most of these polls stopped releasing their mechanics back in 2012, after they were busted for cooking the results to vastly oversample Democrats. The normal tactic they use  is to pump up Democrat numbers but tighten things up just before the election to retain a semblance of credibility. This time, in order to help the Democrats scare certain groups like blacks into hitting the voting booth, the numbers were deliberately kept very close, coupled with mailers likening the GOP to the KKK and claiming that if the Republicans took the Senate they'd impeach the president. Keeping the senate to avoid a reckoning on this president's policies was deemed important enough to risk that credibility, and I hope it's a lesson people remember in the future.

And the future? The president has already showed he's not only arrogant and narcissistic,but frankly stupid. Anyone who saw his presser after the election saw that. Both Mitch McConnell and John Boehner threw him what amounted to an olive branch and his response was to be combative, telling them he is going to impose amnesty for illegal aliens by executive order and nominating a new radical attorney general candidate who is in the same mold as Eric Holder and trying to shove her through during the lame duck session.

Rather than waste time trying to work with him, the Republicans, if they're smart ( a big if, perhaps) will block any new appointments this president wants to make in committee, use the nuclear option to appoint their own nominees especially on judges, dismantle ObamaCare the way McConnell suggested by outlawing the individual mandate and starving the exchanges of funding, and pass a steady stream of legislation starting with the bill Harry Reid tabled and kept from coming to a vote in order to do what they were elected to do -  destroy and roll back this president's agenda.Yes, the president will veto these bills, but the perception, no matter how the media tries to spin it will be that it is this president and those of his party that vote in lockstep with him that are the obstructionists keeping the people's business from being done.

At the same time, congress should also turn the heat up on him by a appointing their own special prosecutor to begin gathering evidence for an impeachment trial. Amnesty by executive order, a clear Article 2 violation would be a good place to start, but by no means the only area.

Many of the Democrats whom survived last weeks' purge and have future political ambitions are already angry with this president for endangering them.  Although few openly express it, he has become toxic for them, which is why few of them wanted him campaigning for them and many were upset because he kept referring to 2014 as a referendum on him and his policies. If the Republican majority passes common sense bills this president refuses to sign and compelling evidence is put before the House on impeachment, don't be at all surprised if a Democrat delegation has a chat with the president some time in 2015 similar to the one the GOP senators had with Nixon at the height of Watergate.  In that case, we could definitely see Barack Obama's resignation, followed by a pre-arranged full pardon for 'any offenses he may have committed' by interim president Joe Biden.

GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD : GOP should rapidly move to kick off the Keystone pipeline and begin the process of dismantling the Environmental Protection Agency - after all, we are so high tech and green now - we could certainly handle any incidents that Fracking Unlimited may pose.

Control the border. As in sealing the border. Way back in the last millennium - East Germany (with Soviet resources) sealed off a tiny tiny border maybe 40% the size of Texas. True - the Wall was a death trap of mines, guards, dogs and nasty general purpose device made to kill. America could certainly seal the border in a fun to be with friendly way that is non lethal - yet pretty much produce the same results, i.e., controlling the border.

Roll back Sequestration mainly for the Defense Department.

Smaller Government

Aside from the EPA, real Departments need to be placed on the chopping block. Department of Energy, Department of Education and Homeland Security (as Maureen Dowd once LOL'd - "We have a Homeland Security Department - it's called the D.O.D.")

Depart of Ed simply rewards a state's bad fiscal decisions by transferring wealth from states with decent fiscal policies to finance their educational systems. Let education sink or swim in it's own state.

Defunding. There are tons of stuff on the Federal Teat that need to be weened off. Planned Parent Hood for one. If people want to abort, why should anyone else pay for it? Finance it yourself.

Andmaybe, just maybeletting a Supreme Court seat sit vacant until after the next presidential election.

George Will has a wonky list of smaller things that would certainly help.

Laura Lee Rambeau, Right Reason: After six years of the Obama administration, the American people who came out to vote expressed their complete and utter disgust with the stagnant economy, countless scandals, the rising costs of energy, food, and health care, and demanded a change. The Republicans should introduce bills promoting economic growth which will provide tangible improvements in all of our lives.

  • They should approve and pass the Keystone XL Pipeline.

  • They should heighten security on our borders to keep out illegal aliens. There should be no discussion of comprehensive amnesty until we are convinced our borders have been secured. The President does not have the constitutional authority to issue an executive order granting blanket amnesty. If he attempts such an action Congress should engage Americans and show them how devastating such a move would be to our safety, security, and economy.

  • They should ease tax burdens and regulations on individuals and businesses to allow all of us to keep more of our hard earned money.

  • Since we know Congress does not have enough votes to repeal Obamacare, they should chip away at whatever they can to ease the burdens to individuals and corporations, such as eliminate the medical device tax, eliminate the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), and restore the 40 hour work week by repealing the employer mandate.

  • They should act to stop the EPA regulations that are closing coal plants across the country and causing energy prices to skyrocket.

  • It is also imperative that Congress eliminate the Common Core State Standards mandate and return public education decisions to the states and local school boards.

  • President Obama said he is looking for common ground with Republicans. I dont believe there is any common ground between Republicans and the president. It is up to Republicans to find common ground with Americans. It is important that what the Republicans do noticeably improves the lives of all Americans over the next two years to assure a Republican president is elected in 2016. Of utmost importance, if the Republicans do not want to see a replay of 2012 in 2016, they must engage conservatives and conservative members in Congress over the next two years and not marginalize them.

    Robert Avrech, Seraphic Secret:

    In a speech at Northwestern University last month, Barack Obama said: I am not on the ballot this fall.... But make no mistake: These policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them.

    Obamas bottomless vanity, his clinical narcissism, compelled him to tell the truth.

    Of course, when the polls saw the coming bloodbath the Democrats would suffer in the 2014 midterm elections, Obama quickly and characteristically played the victim, shifting the blame to an electoral map that was stacked against him.

    But everyone realized that Obama and his radical policies were on the ballot: first among them Obamacare, unfolding in terrible slow motion, a destructive Rube Goldberg monstrosity that is raising health care costs while degrading the quality of care for most Americans.

    And of course, there are the scandals: Fast & Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, the VA, the JV Islamic State, the nonexistent red line in Syria, the surrenders in Iraq and Afghanistan, amnesty for illegals, the refusal to secure the southern border, Obamas disgraceful appeasement of Irans Islamic fascists as he throws Israel into the snake pit, high taxes, lack of jobs, an ever-expanding welfare state, the suicidal budget cuts to Americas military even as Russia and China are on the march -- and, most recently, Ebola. Hows that Ebola czar working out, folks?

    And the lies the litany of appalling lies that spills from Obamas lips with such pathological ease.

    All of the above speaks to the corrupting and corrosive effects of bloated government, the refusal to recognize constitutional restrictions on presidential power, the incompetence of big government, and the naivety, if not the downright stupidity, of smart power.

    And, of course, Americans are sick and tired of the shameless race-hustling that is the centerpiece of Obamas world view.

    For the American people, the thrill is gone.

    As to the future: Obama will double down on executive action regarding illegal immigrants. It remains to be seen if the Republicans will be able to stand up to this postmodern totalitarian.

    And Obama will continue to demonize Bibi Netanyahu and the Jewish state, simultaneously aiding the Jew-hating, genocidal-yearning Iranians achieve their nuclear ambitions.

    In short, Obama's ghastly work is not yet done.

     Well, there you have it!

    Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watchers Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

    And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

    Its a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you wont want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

    And dont forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..cause were cool like that, y'know?

    || Greg, 06:09 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

    November 14, 2014

    Dems Looking To Make War On Minorities, Too?

    It seems that they are looking to abandon principles of seniority in committee assignments, right at the time that it would put members of the Congressional Black Caucus in top positions on important committees.

    Black lawmakers are promoting the notion that seniority should be the paramount factor in deciding ranking member posts ahead of next week's Democratic committee elections.

    In a letter sent Thursday to fellow Democrats, Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) said that, despite very limited cases when more junior members have jumped into top spots, the seniority system has worked well and should be honored.

    [T]hose who through years of service have gained significant expertise and knowledge should be given priority to lead our committees and sub-committees, Fudge wrote.

    And lets be honest -- seven members of the CBC ought to be getting those senior spots. One, Corrine Brown, is facing a challenge for ranking member from the lowest ranking member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. Using the Democrats' standard arguments on race, they ought to be protecting CBC members and should have been jumping them to the head of the line for ranking member positions. After all, affirmative action!

    || Greg, 05:22 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

    War On Women!

    Imagine if the GOP did this.


    H/T National Journal

    || Greg, 05:15 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

    November 13, 2014

    The Moral Case For Fossil Fuels A Review

    We hear an awful lot about climate change indeed, the language that is used to talk about the subject qualifies as apocalyptic. Humanity is destroying the planet, we are told, and therefore we must modify our lifestyles in order to save the earth. Fossil fuels, of course, must be dispensed with because they are dwindling non-renewable resources that release carbon into the atmosphere and therefore are accelerating the warming of the planet. Dissent is not allowed.

    Ive always responded to this with a hearty cry of Bullsh*t!

    After all, my own knowledge of history and climate science has led me to question the degree to which the warming of our planet, if it is actually taking place, is related to human activity. Climate changes, but the changes are cyclical and resemble a sine wave. We saw warming and cooling long before industrialization took place and even before humanity came into existence. Besides, the same scientist who tell us that increasing temperatures were going to destroy the earth in the next generation told us that the catastrophe would already be upon us back during my college days in the 1980s. Whats more, only a decade before that some of these experts (and their mentors) were telling us that Science showed that a massive cooling trend would send the world in the world spiraling into a new ice age. The so-called consensus on global warming simply didnt convince me.

    Ive found a kindred spirit in Alex Epstein, who has written The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. In it he looks at the so-called consensus and its advocates and notices that they have been wrong time and again about what is happening and what is supposed to be happening with our climate. He also notes that these scientists start with a presumption against the human race that humanity is somehow a cancer on the earth rather than a part of the diversity of life on the planet. If everything that people do is presumptively bad, Epstein notes, then it becomes quite easy to take an anti-human stance and advocate policies that will not only result in tens of millions of needless deaths annually but which will also destroy civilization as we know it.

    It takes Epstein only one chapter to demolish the anti-fossil fuel argument. Our use of fossil fuels has gotten cleaner over the last several decades as scientific research has found cleaner ways to use coal, petroleum, and fossil fuels. On the other hand, the proposed substitutes (wind and solar power) are notoriously unreliable and significantly more expensive to produce. Whats more, our scarce fossil fuels have gotten more plentiful as we have discovered new reserves or technology to access resources that could not previously be exploited. Oil shale and tar sands, anyone?

    It is what comes next that makes this book even more of a gem. Epstein presents a series of well-reasoned moral, ethical, philosophical and scientific arguments in support of our continued use of fossil fuels. These are arguments we don't often here. For example, the Greenhouse Effect has the advantage of increasing world food production, making it possible for us to sustain the planet's increasing population at a level of caloric intake unprecedented in world history. What's more, despite the claims that climate change is killing people, Epstein demonstrates that the number of climate related deaths has decreased even as the world's population has increased. Epstein then lays out a strategy for making energy companies heroes rather than public enemies -- a daunting task in today's political climate, but one that is well-earned if one looks at the facts rather than the propaganda of the purveyors of the faulty science of apocalyptic anthropomorphic climate change. In other words, this is the book that those of us who take a contrarian view have been waiting for.

    || Greg, 09:15 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (4) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

    Steve Stockman Going Down

    And it couldnt happen to a more deserving fraud.

    Outgoing Rep. Steve Stockman and three staffers in his Capitol Hill office have been served with grand jury subpoenas for testimony and documents in a criminal investigation in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

    The Texas Republican who has been under scrutiny for campaign contributions from his staff hasnt decided whether to cooperate.

    I am consulting with counsel to determine whether and to what extent compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the privileges and rights of the House, Stockman formally informed Speaker John A. Boehner in a notice that was read by the House clerk when the chamber reconvened Wednesday after six weeks of recess.

    Stockmans office did not respond to phone or email inquiries on Monday.

    Ive been sitting on this story for some time now. You see, his is not the first move in the investigation of Stockman and unsavory. A friend who is a former Stockman staffer was recently interviewed by the FBI regarding the matters related to Stockmans fundraising activities and the operation of his Congressional office. This friend was also called to testify by this same grand jury that issued these subpoenas. My take on the matter is that there will be multiple indictments related to campaign fundraising and illegal activity in Stockmans Congressional office that is not related to fundraising, and that Stockman himself will likely be one of those indicted. Dont be surprised if these indictments involve Stockmans official travel as well as his campaign.

    Im proud to say that I didnt vote for Steve Stockman in 2012 I voted for a third party candidate rather than validate the election of a man I considered to be a fraud, a charlatan, and personally unfit for office. While I have from time to time found myself in agreement with Stockman on issues, I was pleased when he announced his plans to leave the House and even more pleased when he was crushed in the senatorial primary last spring. I cant wait to see Stockman back behind bars where he belongs.

    || Greg, 03:56 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

    His Standard Is Their Standard

    It only seems appropriate that a school named for a failed president would be no more successful than he has been.

    MILWAUKEE, Wis. It is a sad twist of political irony with serious consequences for students. The only school in Wisconsin currently named for President Barack Obama rates quite dismally on a state report card designed to measure school success.

    President Obama himself, according to the latest statewide survey by the Marquette University Law School, has an approval rating of only 41.4% in the state.

    The Barack Obama School of Career and Technical Education is part of Milwaukee Public Schools. It is located on North Sherman Boulevard in Milwaukee and during the 2012 presidential election the school served as a polling location.

    According to data from the state Department of Public Instruction, for the 2013-2014 academic year the school, listed as Obama Elementary, scored 39.4 out of 100.

    On a grading scale, that means Obama Elementary is well below failing. Only 14 schools faired worse on the state report card.

    Ive been unable to determine if the schools mascot is the flying unicorn.

    || Greg, 03:51 PM || Permalink || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

    November 09, 2014

    A Note On 2014 SuperPAC Spending

    As I noted the other day, for all there are complaints of conservative "Big Money" bringing about the GOP victories last Tuesday, the numbers don't show that. While I showed some contributors, I didn't show the SuperPAC numbers. Here they are.


    This was every SuperPAC that spent over $1,000,000 during 2014. Notice anything? Expenditures by conservative groups don't even come close to those by the top group, which is a liberal one. Therefore it is safe to say once again that the big money favored the Democrats. Throw the numbers back in their faces when liberals try to tell you otherwise.

    || Greg, 04:01 PM || Permalink || Show Comments (1) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||