The Right Lant update 6.21.13

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

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Republicans seek to kill “death tax”

Republican lawmakers renewed their push to scrap the federal estate tax this week, saying the move would create jobs and keep family businesses afloat. South Dakota Republican Sen. John Thune and Texas Republican Rep. Kevin Brady officially re-introduced the Death Tax Repeal Act. The bill would immediately eliminate the estate tax and repeal the generation-skipping transfer tax. It would also make permanent a 35 percent gift tax rate and $5 million gift tax exemption, to be indexed to inflation. The legislation would maintain existing stepped-up basis provisions.

~~~~~~

Pelosi Shrieks Uncontrollably Over Food Stamps: Republicans Are “Taking Food Out Of The Mouths Of Babies”

At a press conference Thursday afternoon, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi ripped Republicans for not spending enough money on food stamps. “They’re taking food out of the mouths of babies,” Pelosi said of her Republican colleagues following the defeat of the farm bill in a floor vote. “Two million families would lose their food under the bill, much less under the Southerland amendment.” Notice no facts were provided.  Leftist demagoguery!!

~~~~~~

Coburn asks USDA to explain spending thousands on alcohol and free lunches

There is such a thing as a free lunch – just ask the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Whether it’s fair or not is another question. The department is facing criticism from Republican Sen. Tom Coburn for shelling out massive amounts of money on subsidies for island homes for the wealthy, vodka and celebrity chef junkets. Also getting funded are free lunches for people who don’t seem to be in need. Coburn, the resident congressional waste watcher, outlined four programs in a letter dated June 19 to Agriculture Secretary Thomas Vilsack that he believes squanders taxpayer dollars. Coburn says since the sequester, the Agriculture Department has blown $45,000 on a West Virginia Bloody Mary mix company and spent thousands more to help vineyards across the country.

~~~~~~

House rejects farm bill, 195-234  By Pete Kasperowicz, Erik Wasson and Russell Berman

In a blow to House GOP leaders, the House on Thursday rejected a five-year farm bill. Members voted down the $940 billion bill in a 195-234 vote that only won 24 Democratic votes. Most Democrats voted against the bill because it cut food stamp programs by more than $20 billion. Many Republicans also voted no, but for a different reason. They said it was too expensive a bill to pass when the country has $17 trillion in debt.  Immediately after the vote, Republicans were apoplectic at what they characterized as a betrayal by Democratic leaders, who did not deliver the votes they promised.  "The Democrats walked away from this," Boehner, who cast a rare vote in favor of the bill, told The Hill as he walked off the House floor. 

Republicans had expected Democrats to deliver 40 votes for the bill. But a GOP aide said at the last moment, Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) said they could not produce that many because of pressure from Democratic leaders and the White House, which had threatened to veto the bill over the food stamp cuts. Peterson blamed the approval of two amendments for the failure. 

One of the amendments — backed by Boehner — ended production limits on dairy producers that were a part of the underlying bill. The second, sponsored by Rep. Steve Southerland (R-Fla.), allowed states to require food stamp beneficiaries to either work or look for work.  "There is going to be a staring contest now because unless Congress acts the 1949 farm bill goes back into effect," he said. The 1949 law contains archaic farm subsidy supports seen as unworkable in today's world. Currently, rural America is using the 2008 farm bill which was retroactively extended in the New Year's fiscal cliff deal. It expires Sept. 30.

Democrats have blasted the $20.5 billion in food stamp cuts all week as cruel, while Republicans said more cuts are needed to eliminate fraud and ensure people aren't becoming dependent on the program. "[W]hen we see the expansion of the dependency class in America, and you add this to the 79 other means-tested welfare programs that we have in the United States … each time you add another brick to that wall, it's a barrier to people that might go out and succeed," King said during Wednesday's debate.  "It always is a wonderment to me, that in this, the greatest country that ever existed in the history of the world, that one in four or one in five children goes to sleep hungry at night," Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said just before that vote, in an effort to encourage the additional funding. [more demagoguery, notice only children get hungry at night].

~~~~~~

Priests to Pelosi: condemn abortion or leave the Church

Nice to see someone have core values. A pro-life group called on California Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi to “exercise your duties as a public servant and a Catholic, or have the honesty to formally renounce them,” in a widely-circulated open letter Wednesday. “Public servants are supposed to be able to tell the difference between serving the public and killing the public. Apparently, you can’t,” wrote national director of Priests for Life Father Frank Pavone. “Otherwise, you would have been able to explain the difference between a legal medical procedure that kills a baby inside the womb and an act of murder.” Pavone’s letter was written in response to the Minority Leader’s argument with a reporter — The Weekly Standard asked Pelosi to clarify her position on abortion in the wake of the Kermit Gosnell case during a press conference Thursday.

~~~~~~

Obama Wants To Cut Nuclear Arsenal to Dangerously Low Levels  by Dave Jolly

Have you ever heard the expression that the best defense is a strong offense?  Not only does this hold true in sports, but it also holds true in national defense.  One of the best ways to defend one’s country is to have a bigger, stronger and better armed military than anyone else.  Might and power are the best deterrents against attacks. One of the US strongest defenses has been our arsenal of nuclear weapons.  During the days of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union, we amassed a nuclear arsenal that peaked at 31,225 in 1967.  By 1989, the number was down to 22,217.  In September 2009, we were down to 5,113 nuclear weapons.  A year later in 2010, Obama had eliminated over half of our nuclear warheads, reducing our number down to only 2,468.  But Wait!  There’s More! (sounds like one of those infomercials, doesn’t it?).  Our fearless leader didn’t double the offer, but in fact he reduced it by over 30% because our nuclear arsenal is now down to only 1,700.  But for a limited time only, Obama, speaking to a crowd in Berlin, told the world that he wants to cut our nuclear defenses even more, reducing them to 1,550 by 2018.

To be sure, the Russians were brought to their knees through the "Peace through Strength" strategy. Obama's liberal ideology is going to destroy that ability.

~~~~~~

MSNBC: Prohibiting Pre-Natal Murder After 20 Weeks is “Forced Birth” by Philip Hodges

There’s nothing compassionate about trying to prevent a pre-natal baby from having his skull crushed, his brains sucked out and his body torn limb from limb. In fact, placing any restrictions whatsoever after the 20-week mark is not even “pro-life.” It’s “bizarre.” And it’s nothing but “forced birth.” After all, it’s not like this “mass of tissue” has feelings. So says MSNBC contributor Joy Reid and host Martin Bashir. Here was Reid’s rant about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act:

 “It’s so disconnected from the political reality that Republicans face. Republicans face a tremendous deficit with women voters, and so they keep putting on this spectacle over and over and over again… They’re obsessed with this idea of making women — this isn’t pro-life; this is forced birth. They are obsessed with this notion of shaming, compelling, coercing, whatever they have to do to make women give birth. It’s bizarre, but it is what they are about. Most of the legislation that these members of the House of Representatives — mostly all men — have put forward have been about abortion… [W]hat they’re really doing is trying to force women to do what they want them to do. Forcible birth. It’s bizarre.”

 As I’ve said before, I’m not a big supporter of the bill. I understand that it’s being pushed by pro-life organizations and that it’s an attempt to incrementally outlaw abortion at the federal level, thereby potentially saving babies’ lives. I think pro-life legislation should be passed by the individual states, not the federal government. And not only that, if they’re going to outlaw abortion, they should go for it all the way, not with some arbitrary “20-week” threshold. If Georgia Representative Bobby Franklin were alive today, he’d say this legislation is “pro-abortion…with exceptions.” I tend to agree. At the same time, if it were signed into law, I wouldn’t complain.

~~~~~~~

Obama Serves 14-State Governors With Warnings of Arrest: And why is this not front page news? by Ken Larive
Barack Hussein Obama had served 14-State Governors in the United States, National Security Letters (NSLs) warning that the Governor’s actions in attempting to form “State Defense Forces” needs to be halted “immediately” or they will face arrest for the crime of treason. The employment of NSLs was authorized by the Patriot Act introduced by George W. Bush. Contained within the section related to these letters, it is forbidden for anyone receiving a NSL warning to even acknowledge the existence of said communication.  Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have reestablished “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. State Defense Forces are distinct from their state’s National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities.”

Mr. Obama is fearful of these State Defense Forces, in that he does not have control of said forces, and with the U.S. Military stretched to near breaking from multiple deployments and theatre actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, these State military forces would be under the direct command and authority of the Governors in which states have said forces. In essence, the Governors would have “de facto control” of the United States. The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Both of these State Governors stated they have: “…deep fear the President is destroying their Nation.” Governor Pawlenty’s fear of Obama is that since Obama took office he has appeased America’s enemies and has shunned some of America’s strongest allies, especially Israel. Governor Perry has declared that Obama is punishing his State of Texas by dumping tens-of-thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants into the cities and small towns of Texas. Governor Perry further recently stated: “If Barack Obama’s Washington doesn’t stop being so oppressive, Texans might feel compelled to renounce their American citizenry and secede from the union.” Obama fearing a revolution against him by the states, has moved swiftly by nationalizing nearly all National Guard Forces in multiple states; Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina – to name a few. The Governors of the Great States of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia still have under their Command-and-Control the State Defense Forces to go against U.S. Federal forces should the need arise. Also important to note: There are NO U.S. laws prohibiting National Guard troops from also joining their State’s Defense Forces. This dilemma occurred during the Civil War with many “citizen soldiers” choosing to serve their states instead of the Federal Government.

~~~~~~

Supreme Court's authority faces stunning challenge: 'This is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross' by Bob Unruh

A coalition of Christian organizations is warning that the U.S. Supreme Court does not have the power to redefine the institution of marriage, which predates government, churches and even religion. The statement comes just as the court is expected to release its ruling on the Proposition 8 case in California and the federal Defense of Marriage Act. In the Proposition 8 case, a homosexual judge in California ruled that the state’s voters did not have the right to limit marriage to one man and one woman. Voters approved an amendment in 2008 defining marriage only months after the state Supreme Court established same-sex marriage.  DOMA, which was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, states that for federal purposes, only marriage between one man and one woman is recognized. Homosexual activists challenged the law, and President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder announced that they simply would refuse to defend it, even though it is the law of the land and they are charged with enforcing it. The coalition today released a statement that left no doubt about the intention of its members should the Supreme Court step rule against traditional marriage. “As Christians united together in defense of marriage, we pray that this will not happen. But, make no mistake about our resolve. While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the true common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross,” they say.

~~~~~~

Obama bombs in Berlin

Is the worldwide awe of Obama wearing thin? When John F. Kennedy delivered his “Ich Bin Ein Berliner” speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate on June 26, 1963, 450,000 people flocked to hear him. Fifty years later a far more subdued invitation-only crowd of 4,500 showed up to hear Barack Obama speak at the same location in Berlin. As The National Journal noted, “he didn’t come away with much, winning just a smattering of applause from a crowd that was one-hundredth the size of JFK’s,” and far smaller than the 200,000 boisterous Germans who had listened to his 2008 address as a presidential candidate. JFK had a clear message when he came to Berlin a half century ago – the free world must stand up to Communist tyranny. 24 years later, President Reagan stood in the same spot famously calling on the Soviets to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s speech was a seminal moment that ushered in the downfall of an evil empire, and gave hope to tens of millions of people behind the Iron Curtain. It was a display of strength and conviction by the leader of the free world, sending an unequivocal message of solidarity with those who were fighting for freedom in the face of a monstrous totalitarian ideology.  In stark contrast to that of his presidential predecessors, Barack Obama’s message on Wednesday was pure mush, another clichéd “citizens of the world” polemic with little substance. This was a speech big on platitudes and hopeless idealism, while containing much that was counter-productive for the world’s superpower. Ultimately it was little more than a laundry list of Obama’s favorite liberal pet causes, including cutting nuclear weapons, warning about climate change, putting an end to all wars, shutting Guantanamo, ending global poverty, and backing the European Project. It was a combination of staggering naiveté, the appeasement of America’s enemies and strategic adversaries, and the championing of more big government solutions.

~~~~~~

America sidelined, barely relevant

 The war in Syria, started by locals, is now a regional conflict, the meeting ground of two warring blocs. On one side, the radical Shiite bloc led by Iran, which overflies Iraq to supply Bashar al-Assad and sends Hezbollah to fight for him. Behind them lies Russia, which has stationed ships offshore, provided the regime with tons of weaponry and essentially claimed Syria as a Russian protectorate. And on the other side are the Sunni Gulf states terrified of Iranian hegemony (territorial and soon nuclear); non-Arab Turkey, now convulsed by an internal uprising; and fragile Jordan, dragged in by geography.  And behind them? No one. It’s the Spanish Civil War except that only one side — the fascists — showed up. The natural ally of what began as a spontaneous, secular, liberationist uprising in Syria was the United States. For two years, it did nothing.

President Obama’s dodge was his chemical-weapons “red line.” In a conflict requiring serious statecraft, Obama chose to practice forensics instead, earnestly agonizing over whether reported poison gas attacks reached the evidentiary standards of “CSI: Miami.” Obama talked “chain of custody,” while Iran and Russia, hardly believing their luck, reached for regional dominance — the ayatollahs solidifying their “Shiite crescent,” Vladimir Putin seizing the opportunity to dislodge America as regional hegemon, a position the United States achieved four decades ago under Henry Kissinger. And when finally forced to admit that his red line had been crossed — a “game changer,” Obama had gravely warned — what did he do? Promise the rebels small arms and ammunition.  That’s it? It’s meaningless: The rebels are already receiving small arms from the Gulf states.

Compounding the half-heartedness, Obama transmitted his new “calculus” through his deputy national security adviser. Deputy, mind you. Obama gave 39 (or was it 42?) speeches on health-care reform. How many on the regional war in Syria, in which he has now involved the United States, however uselessly? Zero.  Serious policymaking would dictate that we either do something that will alter the course of the war, or do nothing. Instead, Obama has chosen to do just enough to give the appearance of having done something. But it gets worse. Despite his commitment to steadfast inaction, Obama has been forced by events to send F-16s, Patriot missiles and a headquarters unit of the 1st Armored Division (indicating preparation for a possible “larger force,” explains The Post) — to Jordan. America’s most reliable Arab ally needs protection. It is threatened not just by a flood of refugees but also by the rise of Iran’s radical Shiite bloc with ambitions far beyond Syria, beyond even Jordan and Lebanon to Yemen, where, it was reported just Wednesday, Iran is arming and training separatists. Obama has thus been forced back into the very vacuum he created — but at a distinct disadvantage. We are now scrambling to put together some kind of presence in Jordan as a defensive counterweight to the Iran-Hezbollah-Russia bloc.

The tragedy is that we once had a counterweight and Obama threw it away. Obama still thinks the total evacuation of Iraq is a foreign policy triumph. In fact, his inability — unwillingness? — to negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement that would have left behind a small but powerful residual force in Iraq is precisely what compels him today to re-create in Jordan a pale facsimile of that regional presence.  Whatever the wisdom of the Iraq war in the first place, when Obama came to office in January 2009 the war was won. Al-Qaeda in Iraq had been routed. Nouri al-Maliki’s Shiite government had taken down the Sadr Shiite extremists from Basra all the way north to Baghdad. Casualties were at a wartime low; the civil war essentially over. We had a golden opportunity to reap the rewards of this too-bloody war by establishing a strategic relationship with an Iraq that was still under American sway. Iraqi airspace, for example, was under U.S. control as we prepared to advise and rebuild Iraq’s nonexistent air force.  With our evacuation, however, Iraqi airspace today effectively belongs to Iran — over which it is flying weapons, troops and advisers to turn the tide in Syria. The U.S. air bases, the vast military equipment, the intelligence sources available in Iraq were all abandoned. Gratis. Now we’re trying to hold the line in Jordan. Obama is learning very late that, for a superpower, inaction is a form of action. You can abdicate, but you really can’t hide. History will find you. It has now found Obama.

~~~~~~

More evidence of slain U.S. ambassador's secret activities by Aaron Klein

Information may help explain deadly Benghazi attack. A Libyan weapons dealer from a group hired to provide security to the U.S. mission in Benghazi told Reuters he has helped ship weapons from Benghazi to the rebels fighting in Syria. The detailed account may provide more circumstantial evidence the U.S. Benghazi mission was secretly involved in procuring and shipping weapons to the Syrian opposition before the deadly attack last September that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.  According to informed Middle Eastern security officials speaking on multiple occasions, the Benghazi mission was a planning headquarters for coordinating aid, including weapons distribution, to the jihadist-led rebels. After the fall of Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi, the arming efforts shifted focus to aiding the insurgency targeting President Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. Two weeks after the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attack, WND broke the story that murdered U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens himself played a central role in arming rebels and recruiting jihadists to fight Assad, according to Egyptian security officials. In November 2012, Middle Eastern security sources further described both the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi as the main intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels, which was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Many rebel fighters are openly members of terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida. The information may help determine what motivated the deadly attacks in Benghazi. Yet, we still do not know the "official truth" and may never from this administration.

~~~~~~

"Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself, beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force."

--John Adams, Speech on Independence Day to the House of Representatives, 1821

Top of Form

† † † † † † † † † † †