The Right Lane update 5.16.13

The pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual liberty

"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington

To subscribe, see note below

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Time To Stop blaming Obama!

"0bama,,,,.."  Do you really believe this fake and fraud is orchestrating all the tyranny we are witnessing in this administration?  Take the big three; Benghazi, IRS and AP tapping.  Further, other actions by the IRS, FDA, State Department, EPA, Homeland Security and much more? The White house and other branches of government  are populated with extremist that have no regard for the rule of law and your Constitutional rights.  They are driven by an ideology that is an anathema to our the American core values and beliefs.  I read where one pundit wrote "No President or Secretary of State would...."  Ordinarily that would be true.  However, what we are witnessing is historical; an administration and government bureaucracies that are replet with like minded people committed to the same goals.  Goals that are not in America's best interest nor yours.  Where did they come from?  Have you asked yourself that question?  Have you looked at the backgrounds of the powerful people?  I would suggest that our puppet President has had plenty of help in placing these radicals throughout the White House and the Government.   All of these people work for you and only you can hold them accountable - now! However, like many you feel helpless and the situation hopeless.  That is true if you choose to believe that.  We have proof that when this Nation rises up in a singel voice the mice in government run for cover and change their ways.  Only our silence condemns us to ruin.    

~~~~~~

Benghazi, IRS, DOJ: Squirm, Barry, Squirm by Chris Graham

In light of White House Press Secretary Jay Carney’s indications that President Obama is completely aloof about everything that goes on in his government (“He doesn’t know anything about Benghazi,” “He knew nothing about collecting the phone records of AP journalists,” “He knew nothing about the IRS intimidating conservative and Catholic groups”), I feel it’s time to ask Obama voters, Where’s your god now? Either Obama is a man whose competence and benevolence rival only that of Abraham Lincoln, or he’s a bumbling, out-of-touch screw-up with no control over his own administration, the goings-on of which he is completely ignorant. The realization that it must be one or the other might be what is driving some Democrats to actually begin criticizing these scandals, as opposed to their usual habit of criticizing the whistleblowers of the scandals; they would rather Obama be looked upon as ineffectual than a Nixonian crook. “Obama didn’t know anything about anything, but he does need to fire some people” seems to be the general consensus among Democrats.

There’s a large part of me that hopes we don’t get to the bottom of these three scandals anytime soon, however; I get so much entertainment from watching the different members of this administration squirm and flounder uncomfortably now that some in the media have begun doing their primary function of asking questions. The denials, deliciously pathetic, reveal an arrogance the level of which we haven’t yet witnessed in Obama, which is saying something. Of course, the press is to blame for Obama’s over-confidence in his ability to get away with corruption, but now that one of their own has been the target of spying by the Justice Department—Obama’s Justice Department—some journalists are dusting off their journalism degrees and finally putting them to use, the temerity of which resulted in White House Press Secretary Jay Carney repeating ad nauseum, in an effort to sound convincing, the uncomfortably disingenuous statement that Obama is a “firm believer in the need for the press to be unfettered.” But of course Obama knew about the IRS and the Justice Department; what transpired there was classic Chicago politics. Obama is from Chicago; he knows how to play politics, as he has proudly stated in the past. And it was Obama, Commander in Chief, who (fine, “allegedly”) told American troops stationed just outside Benghazi to stand down and not to try to help the four diplomats being tortured and killed by Islamic savages, a non-story in Obama’s eyes (“There’s no ‘there’ there,” he said).  The head of the IRS may have been appointed by President George W. Bush, but, like Bush, he is obviously no conservative. The IRS has already admitted that they did exactly what they are being accused of having done, but Obama still felt confident to deny this reality, calling it outrageous only “if” it were true. (If it’s true that the IRS engaged in the criminal activity they already admitted they engaged in….) If Obama is comfortable living in that reality, can we please let him live there just a little while longer, if only for the enjoyment of seeing him twist and turn? It lends legitimacy to mascot of the Democratic Party.

~~~~~~

Lies About Libya  By Thomas Sowell
There can be honest differences of opinion on many subjects. But there can also be dishonest differences. Last week's testimony under oath about events in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 makes painfully clear that what the Obama administration told the American people about those events were lies out of whole cloth.

What we were told repeatedly last year by the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and the American ambassador to the U.N., was that there was a protest demonstration in Benghazi against an anti-Islamic video produced by an American, and that this protest demonstration simply escalated out of control.  Reports are leaking out in Federal documents, on what could be the biggest scandal in Barack Obama's entire presidency. Will this ruin the President? Will it dramatically change America? One wealthy Maryland citizen says it's definitely possible.

This "spontaneous protest" story did not originate in Libya but in Washington. Neither the Americans on duty in Libya during the attack on the consulate in Benghazi, nor officials of the Libyan government, said anything about a protest demonstration.  The highest American diplomat on the scene in Libya spoke directly with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by phone, and told her that it was a terrorist attack. The president of Libya announced that it was a terrorist attack. The C.I.A. told the Obama administration that it was a terrorist attack.  With lies, as with potato chips, it is hard to stop with just one. After the "spontaneous protest" story was discredited, the next claim was that this was the best information available at the time from intelligence sources.  But that claim cannot survive scrutiny, now that the 12 drafts of the Obama administration's talking points about Benghazi have belatedly come to light. As draft after draft of the talking points were made, e-mails from the State Department pressured the intelligence services to omit from these drafts their clear and unequivocal statement from the outset that this was a terrorist attack.

Attempts to make it seem that Ambassador Susan Rice's false story about a "spontaneous protest" was the result of her not having accurate information from the intelligence services have now been exposed as a second lie to excuse the first lie.  Despite Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's loudly proclaimed question "What difference, at this point, does it make?" the difference is between an honest mistake and a calculated lie to deceive the American people, in order to win an election.  Barack Obama's election campaign oratory had proclaimed the death of Osama bin Laden as an accomplishment of his administration, as part of a general defeat of Al-Qaeda and other terrorists. To admit that these terrorists were still in action, and strong enough to kill an American ambassador and three other Americans in a well-coordinated military style attack, would be a politically devastating admission during the election campaign.   Far better, politically, to come up with a story about a protest demonstration that just got out of hand. This could be presented as an isolated, one-time event, rather than part of a continuing pattern of terrorism by groups that were still active, despite President Obama's spin suggesting that they were not.

The problem with telling a lie, or even a succession of lies, is that a very small dose of the truth can sometimes make the whole thing collapse like a house of cards. The State Department's own foreign service officer Gregory Hicks was in Libya during the attack, so he knew the truth. When threats were not enough to silence him, it was then necessary to try to discredit him.  After years of getting glowing job evaluations, and awards of honors from the State Department for his work in various parts of the world, Mr. Hicks suddenly began to get bad job evaluations and was demoted to a desk job in Washington after he spoke with a Congressman about what he knew. The truth is dangerous to liars.

The Obama administration's excuse for not trying to get help to the Americans in Benghazi while they were under attack — namely, that it would take too long — is as shaky as its other statements. A small fighting unit in Tripoli was ready to get on a plane to Benghazi when they were ordered to "stand down." Other fighting units located outside of Libya are designed precisely for fast deployment — and nobody knew how many hours the attack would last.

But it will take more investigations to determine who gave the order to "stand down," and why. How many new lies that will generate is another question.  

~~~~~~

Feeding Frenzy: DC is Turning on Obama

The town is turning on President Obama — and this is very bad news for this White House. Republicans have waited five years for the moment to put the screws to Obama — and they have one-third of all congressional committees on the case now. Establishment Democrats, never big fans of this president to begin with, are starting to speak out. And reporters are tripping over themselves to condemn lies, bullying and shadiness in the Obama administration. Buy-in from all three D.C. stakeholders is an essential ingredient for a good old-fashioned Washington pile-on — so get ready for bad stories and public scolding to pile up. Vernon Jordan, a close adviser to President Bill Clinton through his darkest days, told us: “It’s never all right if you’re the president. There is no smooth sailing. So now he has the turbulence, and this is the ultimate test of his leadership.” Jordan says Obama needs to do something dramatic on the IRS, and quick: “He needs to fire somebody. He needs action, not conversation.”

Obama’s aloof mien and holier-than-thou rhetoric have left him with little reservoir of good will, even among Democrats. And the press, after years of being accused of being soft on Obama while being berated by West Wing aides on matters big and small, now has every incentive to be as ruthless as can be.  This White House’s instinctive petulance, arrogance and defensiveness have all worked to isolate Obama at a time when he most needs a support system. “It feels like they don’t know what they’re here to do,” a former senior Obama administration official said. “When there’s no narrative, stuff like this consumes you.” Republican outrage is predictable, maybe even manageable. Democratic outrage is not.

~~~~~~

Economic Throwdown! True Capitalism vs. Crony Capitalism vs. Socialism/ Communism By William Pauwels

Capitalism is often blamed for the ills of a society. This is grossly unfair and inaccurate. In fact, Capitalism has contributed more wealth and prosperity to the greatest number than any other economic system.  Capitalism is a system that … fosters competition. Competition is good for consumers. Competition encourages innovation, superior service, greater efficiency, greater productivity, lower prices, etc.

Socialism and Communism inhibit competition and foster dictatorial price controls and limited competition. Capitalism rewards the talented, the successful, the productive, the risk takers, the effective workers, etc. These individuals, in turn, contribute to the prosperity of a society – as long as Free-Market, Constitutional, Free-Enterprise is allowed to rule – and appropriate safety nets are provided for the security and safety of the sick and disabled. Unfortunately, the United States is not a true Capitalistic society, but rather a Crony Capitalistic society – the result of de facto Socialistic/Communistic ideologies promoted by Leftists, Democrats, so-called Progressives, and labor unions. Crony Capitalism has many of the failings of  Socialism/Communism. It rewards bigness and power – big government, big politicians, big companies, big unions, big media, and those who can deploy monetary power and influence to manipulate outcomes. This is not true Capitalism, which fosters intense competition and rewards excellence, accomplishment, and success.  Please watch the short video (and linked below). It deals with the three primary myths perpetrated about Capitalism. It’s easy to understand and will dispel the myths fostered by Socialists, Communists, Leftists, Democrats and Progressives. Watch

~~~~~~

Repeal This Monster! CBO: Obamacare Will Cost $1.8 Trillion in First Decade

When President Obama was selling his health care legislation to Congress, he declared that, “the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years.” But with the law’s major provisions set to kick in next year, a new analysis by the Congressional Budget Office projects that the law will cost double that, or $1.8 trillion.  What accounts for the dramatic difference? It’s true that at the time of passage, the CBO said the gross cost of the law’s provisions to expand insurance coverage would be $940 billion over a decade. But as many critics of the health care law pointed out at the time, this number was deceptive, because it measured spending over the 2010 through 2019 time frame even though the major spending provisions weren’t scheduled to go into effect until 2014. Effectively, the original estimate measured the cost of six years of Obamacare instead of 10. Now, as implementation approaches, CBO has released projections for the 2014 to 2023 budget window — the first actual decade of Obamacare — and the gross cost projection is $1.8 trillion. Have you called your senator and representative yet?

~~~~~~

The Joke That Wasn't

"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree." --James Madison

"President Obama famously joked in a college commencement address in 2009 that he could use the IRS to target political enemies but of course he never would. It appears that people at the Internal Revenue Service didn't think he was joking. That's become clear since IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner admitted on Friday that the agency targeted conservatives for special tax-exempt scrutiny during the 2012 election season. ... We've also learned that IRS officials knew about this earlier than they have let on. News reports suggest that Ms. Lerner knew about the targeting of conservatives in June 2011, and perhaps as early as 2010. That's a long time before IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman flatly denied any political targeting when he testified at a House Ways and Means subcommittee hearing in March 2012. ... Some Democrats took to the airwaves on the weekend to suggest that while the IRS shouldn't have been targeting conservatives, no one was harmed. ... The harm is in fact real, if hard to measure precisely, because any missive from the IRS is enough to chill political spending and speech. ... Oppose the Obama Administration or liberal priorities, and you too can become an IRS target. We're glad to see Congress mobilizing in response, including hearing plans by Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus and the House Ways and Means Committee that asked the IRS about this in 2012 and received denials. The subpoenas need to fly as thick as those IRS questionnaires." --The Wall Street Journal

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." --Greek philosopher Plato (c. 428-348 BC)

~~~~~~

Judge goes off deep end to shut up Christians - Suppression of speech fine if Muslims threaten violence

A federal judge has issued a startling ruling that suppressing Christian speech is allowed when Muslims threaten violence because they’re upset over the message. The ruling from Judge Patrick J. Duggan in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan granted Wayne County’s motion for summary judgment of a lawsuit brought by a team of Christians who were badgered, bullied and targeted with garbage thrown by Muslims who disliked their message at last year’s Arab Fest in Dearborn, Michigan.  Officials with American Freedom Law Center, who have been arguing the case on behalf of the Christians, also said the judge denied AFLC’s motion requesting that the court issue an order preventing the Wayne County Sheriff and his deputies from restricting the Christian evangelists from displaying their banners and signs on the public sidewalks outside of this year’s Arab Festival.

~~~~~~

RS Gave Confidential Docs to Lib Group

The progressive-leaning investigative journalism group ProPublica says the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office that targeted and harassed conservative tax-exempt groups during the 2012 election cycle gave the progressive group nine confidential applications of conservative groups whose tax-exempt status was pending. The commendable admission lends further evidence to the lengths the IRS went during an election cycle to silence tea party and limited government voices. ProPublica says the documents the IRS gave them were “not supposed to be made public”:

The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year… In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)

~~~~~~

Is the Unborn Child a Person?- What do the experts think?

 

An article in Obstetrics and Gynecology in September 2011 entitled ‘Abortion Provision Among Practicing Obstetrician–Gynecologists’ reveals some interesting trends, and encouraging for people who are pro-life. The authors surveyed ob-gyns from across the United States to see how many of them provided abortions to their patients. The questions were “1) in your practice, do you ever encounter patients seeking an abortion? (yes or no); and 2) do you provide abortion services? (yes or no).” The results were as follows:

Variable	Percent who offer abortions
Male	10.6
Female	18.6
No religion	26.5
Hindu	20.0
Jewish	40.2
Muslim	15.6
Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox	9.0
Evangelical Protestant	1.2
Non-Evangelical Protestant	18.7
High religious motivation	7.8
Medium religious motivation	16.1
Low religious motivation	25.9

In all, while 97% of ob-gyns encountered women seeking abortions, only 14.4% of them provide abortions. Furthermore, the survey did not differentiate between providing a medical procedure like removing an ectopic pregnancy or other unviable pregnancy (one where continuing the pregnancy would threaten the life of the mother with no chance of the baby’s survival), and abortions for no medical reason. So it is reasonable to assume that many of those who do provide abortions do not provide in all circumstances….

~~~~~~~~

Horror In Bangladesh

The news out of Bangladesh is horrific, but not surprising.  Many folks complain about outsourcing while not looking into the dark underbelly of the larger issue.  True, the cost of living is much lower in these countries and enables offshore companies to pay low wages.  However, have you asked yourself the question as to why these companies can afford to produce garments at such extraordinary low costs.  The answer is simple- no regulation.  The cost of regulation is not free and compliance costs are passed along to the consumer.  That is you.  Third world countries do not have these regulations.  With all the handwringing about the large retail and manufacturing companies in the US buying these goods, we do not hear about our demands for these low cost goods!  America wants all the perceived benefits of these regulations for U.S. manufacturers while wanting low priced clothing from these third world countries.  Then, when a horrific event happens we look for who is to blame in the U.S.  For unions that complain about outsourcing, they are not innocent either.  High labor intensive production follows low wages and cost of doing business.  One only has to look to the "rust belt" and read about the deplorable conditions in the city of Detroit for that reality to sink in.  Until Americans are willing or if they choose to pay the "true costs" of safe and environmentally sound manufacturing, by pulling our manufacturing out of these countries that are experiencing these disasters.  Now for the other end of the spectrum.  Are you willing to put all the people out of work?  How much are you willing to pay for that $10 shirt?  $30, $40, $50?

~~~~~~~~

IRS Sued for Stealing the Medical Records of 10 Million Americans

The last scandal dampening rods just failed, and the reactor core at the Internal Revenue service may be about to blow.  The Internal Revenue Service is now facing a class action lawsuit over allegations that it improperly accessed and stole the health records of some 10 million Americans, including medical records of all California state judges.  According to a report by Courthousenews.com, an unnamed HIPAA-covered entity in California is suing the IRS, alleging that some 60 million medical records from 10 million patients were stolen by 15 IRS agents. The personal health information seized on March 11, 2011, included psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual/drug treatment and other medical treatment data.

~~~~~~

Liberal Columnist Cheers IRS for Harassing Tea Party Organizations by Gary North

The business editor for the Huffington Post says that IRS was right in treating Tea Party groups differently. (The phrase “business editor” for the Huffington Post is an oxymoron.) I love liberals. They make such great targets! What about the rule of law? Ignore it whenever you can inflict damage on your ideological opponents! FDR started using the IRS against his critics. Why stop now? Lost in the latest political scandal is a simple fact: The Internal Revenue Service was acting in the public interest when it opted to train its auditing power on the Tea Party and affiliated groups. In castigating government as the root of all evil while portraying taxation as a form of tyranny, the Tea Party is no less than a mass celebration of the evasion of the basic responsibilities of American citizenship. Common sense alone tells you that people drawn to its ranks may feel extra temptation to find ways to limit what they surrender to the rogue federal bureaucrats who have supposedly seized the nation. The cover-up is the bad part here, as in nearly all Washington scandals. It’s not the act itself that delivered the real trouble — in this case, a campaign unleashed in the Cincinnati offices of the IRS to scrutinize with particular rigor the applications for tax-exempt status submitted by Tea Party-affiliated groups. Rather, it was what happened afterwards that poses the problem: Officials at the IRS lied to members of Congress about what was actually going on.

That’s how we got here, to this full-blown scandal with all the usual rituals — an event that lends validation to seemingly every crackpot idea a conservative group has ever leveled at the Obama administration. (The fact that the Justice Department simultaneously got caught on an overreach of its own, seizing a trove of correspondence from journalists, hardly helps the administration deflect the well-earned wrath of critics.)  But let’s get back to the primary act at issue here: The IRS — an agency loved by no one and responsible for stocking the Treasury with federal tax proceeds, due under the law — appears to have devoted unique effort to making sure that Tea Party organizations were not fudging the paperwork in their bids to secure tax exemption. Good for the IRS. Got that? Discriminating is good. Lying to Congress is bad.

~~~~~~

Liberal Myth of Separating God From the State by Jerry Newcombe

Virtually every week there is some outrageous story of an alleged violation of the separation of church and state. They’re becoming so frequent that they are often met with a collective yawn.

The crazy thing about all this is how removed these actions are from the clear intent of the founders — as seen in their documents, their actions, words, etc.

A lot of times when the pro-religious freedom side fights back, we win. (That’s because the constitution and history are on our side.) But that takes a lot of courage, energy, and money. And many people would rather just go with the flow and turn the other cheek, which is understandable. Yet over time, we find our liberties being chipped away piece by piece.   Liberty Institute of Plano, Texas, is one of those groups that fights for Christian expression in the public arena. They reported just the other day (May 9, 2013) on a victory of some brave high school cheerleaders standing up for religious freedom. The high school cheerleaders in Kountze, Texas, a small town in the eastern part of the state, have had the custom of writing encouraging Bible verses on the banners the players would run through. But the Freedom From Religion Foundation (based in Wisconsin) complained and threatened to sue. So last fall the superintendent stopped the practice. But with the help of the Liberty Institute, the cheerleaders won a victory in court to resume the practice. The legal group noted, “Liberty Institute is proud of these young women for taking a bold stand.”

Let me ask some questions about this case: Where’s the church? Where’s the state? Why is it that any sort of Christian expression in the public arena is not allowed, but virtually every other expression is? There is no question that we can find lots of evidence that the founders wanted the separation of the institution of the church from the institution of the state. They did not want to have a national state-church, as was most often the case in Europe. They saw the persecution that was often meted out to dissenters in such a scenario. Here in America the various denominations were forced to work with each other to prevent that from happening. They said in the first right listed in the Bill of Rights there would be no establishment of religion by the federal government and no denying the free exercise of religion.

But there is zero, zip, nada evidence for the idea that they wanted us to have the separation of God and State — which is what we have in effect today. The very men who gave us the Bill of Rights asked President Washington to declare a national day of thanksgiving (to God) for the right peaceably to create our government. Washington complied, and he made his proclamation on October 3, 1789. There’s even an oblique reference to Jesus (“the ruler of the nations,” based on Psalm 2 and Revelation 12) in that proclamation. It was understood for the first 150 years of American history under the constitution that the establishment clause did not mean to separate God and State — which is what we have now. Changes of interpretation began in 1947 when the Supreme Court took an obscure letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, and used it as the final arbiter of what the establishment clause meant. On January 1, 1802, Jefferson wrote to them:

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”

First, why should Jefferson be the final arbiter of what the establishment clause means? He was in France when the constitution was written. He was back in the US when the Bill of Rights was written, but he wasn’t there directly participating in the process. Why wouldn’t Madison or Washington or Fisher Ames (who wrote the final wording of the First Amendment) be better sources to reference? Second, such a wall was intended to protect everyone — including believers. Interestingly, even if the Supreme Court were correct to make Jefferson the final arbiter of the understanding of the First Amendment (from a letter?), then Jefferson himself violated the separation of church and state in the very letter that gave us the phrase. He ends the letter asking them to pray for him as he will commit to pray for them: “I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.” That’s ridiculous. It’s about as ridiculous as saying the constitution is unconstitutional because it mentions God in the signature part. It says that it was “done in the year of our Lord” 1787. It’s about as ridiculous as saying cheerleaders in a small Texas town can’t have Bible verses on their run-through banners.

~~~~~~

"The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal judiciary; an irresponsible body, (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one." --Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Charles Hammond, 1821

† † † † † † † † † † †