The pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, freedom
and individual liberty
"There
is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it
steadily." --George
Washington
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EPA Head: 'Climate Change...Is One of
Most Significant Public Health Threats'
EPA
Administrator Gina McCarthy on Friday discussed the agency’s 493-page proposed
regulation that would, for the first time, restrict carbon emissions from new
power plants, including coal plants.“Climate change – caused by carbon
pollution – is one of the most significant public health threats of our time,”
McCarthy said at the National Press Club. “That’s why EPA has been
called to action.”McCarthy cited power plants as the nation’s worst
polluters.“Power plants are the single largest sources of carbon pollution,”
McCarthy said. “New power plants can minimize their carbon emissions by
taking advantage of modern technologies.”
You don't remember Congress passing any legislation to do
this? Why? They did not! Obama and his liberal cronies
prepared to KILL the economy!
~~~~~~
Pelosi on Defunding Obamacare: Children are Going to Die!
by Philip Hodges
She also said that the House GOP’s voting to defund
Obamacare was “one of the most
intentional acts of brutality.” Yes, worse than partial-birth abortion; worse than bombing Syria; worse than
giving terrorists in the Middle East war weapons to use to terrorize innocent
Syrian civilians. Worse than all that is voting to defund what Obamacare author
Max Baucus called a “train wreck.” Predictably, Pelosi pulled the “for-the-children” card:
If the underlying bill were not bad enough, if there
were not reason enough to say, ‘No, are you kidding? No,’ then they cloak it in
wolf’s clothing and say they are going to defund the Affordable Care Act. And
you know what that’s about? That’s simply about putting their friends the
insurance companies back in charge of medical decisions for your families. But
it goes farther than that. If that were not bad enough, it slashes the strongly
bipartisan Children’s Health Insurance Program by 70%, effectively eliminating
an initiative that provides much needed healthcare to millions of low-income
children. Let me remind my colleagues that that bill passed the United States
Senate in a bipartisan way with a veto-proof majority. A veto-proof majority.
But that’s not good enough for you. You’ve got to slash it by 70% to harm those
children… Either you don’t know what you are doing or this is one of the most
intentional acts of brutality that you have cooked up with stiff competition
for that honor. It cuts billions of dollars again I say, from the National
Institutes of Health, delaying important research and denying medical
breakthroughs for future generations. The Children’s Health Insurance Program
(CHIP) that she referred to was set to expire at the end of this month, but Obamacare
renewed it. So, by the GOP’s “brutal” act in voting to defund Obamacare, they
also voted to let CHIP expire.
CHIP is a program that’s intended for those who
don’t have insurance, and who make too much money to qualify for Medicaid but
not enough to afford their own private insurance. Children, especially poor
children, are easy political targets. They’re
an important voting bloc worth buying. It’s sort of an early
investment. If you start the
government dependency at a young age, those taking advantage of it will be more
likely to vote for more socialism when they get older. Don’t think for
one second that all these politicians decrying the GOP’s vote to defund
Obamacare has anything to do with taking care of poor kids. Remember, these are the same politicians who
have so little conscience left that they think nothing of butchering unborn,
partially born or even completely born babies (think Gosnell). And most of
those babies would have been born poor. And they’re the most innocent and
helpless of poor children. If these politicians want that butchering to
continue on millions and millions of babies, what makes anyone thing they care
about other kids? They don’t. They’re
just trying to buy votes. And not to mention, the state providing health
insurance for anyone is unconstitutional. Plus, we’re flat out broke. We’re already being told again that the GOP
are holding America hostage with the debt limit. We’re nearly $17 trillion in
debt. And politicians like Pelosi think we can just keep borrowing and spending
ad nauseam? That’s why Obamacare needs to be defunded. It’s unconstitutional
and unaffordable.
~~~~~~
Sunday has been the single deadliest day for the Christian minority in Pakistan.
A pair of suicide bombers detonated bombs outside a historic church in Peshwar killing at least 78 innocent people and
wounding hundreds. The Islamic war on Christians is in full force all
over the Middle East. With each passing day it intensifies. Where is the international outrage? Where is
President Obama? He's busy arming Al-Qaeda in Syria, and the rest of the world
is busy praising Islam for its peacefulness.
~~~~~~
Income Redistribution: Food Stamp Cuts
Republicans passed a modified part of the farm
bill yesterday, 217-210, cutting 5% from food stamp funding over the next
decade, about $40 billion. Democrats
are apoplectic, crying that the GOP wants to see some three million people
starve. Rep. James McGovern (D-MA) called it "one of the most
heartless bills I have ever seen." This
overblown reaction is inevitable from statists who would like nothing more than
to increase the number of people beholden to federal "generosity."
But phony fear that millions of people will be left to starve is simply craven political theater meant to
secure their own political base. The
cuts Republicans passed would result from tightening eligibility requirements
that would restrict participation for able-bodied workers.
It's not surprising to see an uptick in enrollment
during the Obama "recovery," but the program has ballooned out of control. Enrollment doubled between
2001 and 2007, a period of relative economic prosperity. It doubled
again between 2008 and 2012, in part because
eligibility requirements were significantly loosened. There are now
nearly 50 million people on food stamps, and many of them don't need to be. Tightening the reins and cutting spending by
5% won't result in mass starvation. It may just restore some much needed
dignity and self-reliance to a significant chunk of the American people.
~~~~~~
Hillary Unfit for Presidency
Hillary Clinton is unfit to be president because of
her role in the Benghazi scandal when she was Secretary of State. If it doesn’t have an impact on the 2016
presidential election if she is becomes a candidate, then she would proven my disappointment
in the country’s electorate. Clinton
should never be considered as Commander-in-Chief because she helped throw away
200 years of military ethos and left our men behind to be murdered in Benghazi.
Clinton had initially claimed last year that the four Americans who
were killed by terrorists died because of a YouTube parody video of Muhammad. She
lied then and continues to assist with the cover up. How can the Officer Core respond or respect
such a person?
~~~~~~
33%: Harry Reid Is Congressional Leader With Lowest
Approval
Only 33 percent of Americans say they approve of how
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) is handling his job, according to
a Gallup poll released Friday. That gives Reid the lowest approval
among the four top leaders in Congress. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
(R.-Ky.) had the approval of 35 percent, said Gallup, while House Speaker John
Boehner (R.-Ohio) had the approval of 37 percent and House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) had the approval of 39 percent.
~~~~~~
Second Amendment: Another Push for Gun Control
|
|
Barack Obama once again stood on the caskets of
innocent murder victims to call for gun control. His shamelessness knows no bounds. The president spoke at the
memorial service for the 12 people killed in the Navy Yard shooting, and seized the opportunity to rail against those
who defend Second Amendment rights by opposing his gun control agenda. "We
cannot accept this," he declared, meaning the defeat of his agenda. "The politics are difficult, as we saw
again this spring," Obama told the gathering. "And that's sometimes
where the resignation comes from -- the sense that our politics are frozen and
that nothing will change." But, he insisted, "We're going to have to
change. We don't take the basic common sense actions to keep guns out of the
hands of criminals and dangerous people." Actually, Aaron Alexis passed a
background check for buying a shotgun, just like Joe Biden told him to do, and
another check for a security clearance. Clearly, background checks are not a
panacea.
We might also point out
that Obama's hometown of Chicago just took over as murder capital of the nation.
The Windy City has some of the nation's strictest gun control laws -- laws that
don't curb gang violence on the Democrats' inner city poverty plantations. At the
memorial service, Obama continued: "These families have endured a
shattering tragedy. It ought to be a shock to us all. It ought to obsess us. It
ought to lead to some sort of transformation." Indeed, he is obsessed --
obsessed with trampling the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens in response to the acts of evil men.
~~~~~~
The goal of the leftist teaching agenda
by Walter Williams
The new
college academic year has begun and, unfortunately, so has student indoctrination.
Let’s look at some of it.
William Penn, Michigan State University professor of creative writing, greeted his first day of class with an anti-Republican rant. Campus Reform, a project of the Arlington, Va.-based Leadership Institute, has a video featuring the professor telling his students that Republicans want to prevent “black people” from voting. He added that “this country still is full of closet racists” and described Republicans as “a bunch of dead white people – or dying white people.”
To a student who had apparently displayed displeasure with those comments, Professor Penn barked, “You can frown if you want.” He gesticulated toward the student and added, “You look like you’re frowning.
Are you frowning?” When the professor’s conduct was brought to the attention of campus authorities, MSU spokesman Kent Cassella said, “At MSU it is important the classroom environment is conducive to a free exchange of ideas and is respectful of the opinions of others.” That mealy-mouthed response is typical of university administrators.
Professor Penn was using his classroom to proselytize students. That is academic dishonesty and warrants serious disciplinary or dismissal proceedings. But that’s not likely. Professor Penn’s vision is probably shared by his colleagues, seeing as he was the recipient of MSU’s Distinguished Faculty Award in 2003. University of Southern California professor Darry Sragow shares Penn’s opinion. Last fall, he went on a rant telling his students that Republicans are “stupid and racist” and “the last vestige of angry old white people.”
UCLA’s new academic year saw its undergraduate student government fighting for constitutional rights by unanimously passing a resolution calling for the end of the use of the phrase “illegal immigrant.” The resolution states, “The racially derogatory I-word endangers basic human rights including the presumption of innocence and the right to due process guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.” No doubt some UCLA administrators and professors bereft of thinking skills helped them craft the resolution.
The New York Post (8/25/11) carried a story about a student in training to become dorm supervisor at DePauw University in Indiana. She said: “We were told that ‘human’ was not a suitable identity, but that instead we were first ‘black,’ ‘white,’ or ‘Asian’; ‘male’ or ‘female’; ... ‘heterosexual’ or ‘queer.’ We were forced to act like bigots and spout off stereotypes while being told that that was what we were really thinking deep down.”
At many universities, part of the freshman orientation includes what’s called the “tunnel of oppression.”
They are taught the evils of “white privilege” and how they are part of a “rape culture.” Sometimes they are forced to discuss their sexual identities with complete strangers. The New York Post story said: “DePauw is no rare case. At least 96 colleges across the country have run similar ‘tunnel of oppression’ programs in the last few years.”
University officials are aware of this kind of academic dishonesty and indoctrination; university trustees are not. For the most part, trustees are yes men for the president. Legislators and charitable foundations that pour billions into colleges are unaware, as well. Most tragically, parents who pay tens of thousands of dollars for tuition and pile up large debt to send their youngsters off to be educated are unaware of the academic rot, as well.
You ask, “Williams, what can be done?” Students should record classroom professorial propaganda and give it wide distribution over the Internet. I’ve taught for more than 45 years and routinely invited students to record my lectures so they don’t have to be stenographers during class. I have no idea of where those recordings have wound up, but if you find them, you’ll hear zero proselytization or discussion of my political and personal preferences. To use a classroom to propagate one’s personal beliefs is academic dishonesty. Vladimir Lenin said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” That’s the goal of the leftist teaching agenda.
William Penn, Michigan State University professor of creative writing, greeted his first day of class with an anti-Republican rant. Campus Reform, a project of the Arlington, Va.-based Leadership Institute, has a video featuring the professor telling his students that Republicans want to prevent “black people” from voting. He added that “this country still is full of closet racists” and described Republicans as “a bunch of dead white people – or dying white people.”
To a student who had apparently displayed displeasure with those comments, Professor Penn barked, “You can frown if you want.” He gesticulated toward the student and added, “You look like you’re frowning.
Are you frowning?” When the professor’s conduct was brought to the attention of campus authorities, MSU spokesman Kent Cassella said, “At MSU it is important the classroom environment is conducive to a free exchange of ideas and is respectful of the opinions of others.” That mealy-mouthed response is typical of university administrators.
Professor Penn was using his classroom to proselytize students. That is academic dishonesty and warrants serious disciplinary or dismissal proceedings. But that’s not likely. Professor Penn’s vision is probably shared by his colleagues, seeing as he was the recipient of MSU’s Distinguished Faculty Award in 2003. University of Southern California professor Darry Sragow shares Penn’s opinion. Last fall, he went on a rant telling his students that Republicans are “stupid and racist” and “the last vestige of angry old white people.”
UCLA’s new academic year saw its undergraduate student government fighting for constitutional rights by unanimously passing a resolution calling for the end of the use of the phrase “illegal immigrant.” The resolution states, “The racially derogatory I-word endangers basic human rights including the presumption of innocence and the right to due process guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.” No doubt some UCLA administrators and professors bereft of thinking skills helped them craft the resolution.
The New York Post (8/25/11) carried a story about a student in training to become dorm supervisor at DePauw University in Indiana. She said: “We were told that ‘human’ was not a suitable identity, but that instead we were first ‘black,’ ‘white,’ or ‘Asian’; ‘male’ or ‘female’; ... ‘heterosexual’ or ‘queer.’ We were forced to act like bigots and spout off stereotypes while being told that that was what we were really thinking deep down.”
At many universities, part of the freshman orientation includes what’s called the “tunnel of oppression.”
They are taught the evils of “white privilege” and how they are part of a “rape culture.” Sometimes they are forced to discuss their sexual identities with complete strangers. The New York Post story said: “DePauw is no rare case. At least 96 colleges across the country have run similar ‘tunnel of oppression’ programs in the last few years.”
University officials are aware of this kind of academic dishonesty and indoctrination; university trustees are not. For the most part, trustees are yes men for the president. Legislators and charitable foundations that pour billions into colleges are unaware, as well. Most tragically, parents who pay tens of thousands of dollars for tuition and pile up large debt to send their youngsters off to be educated are unaware of the academic rot, as well.
You ask, “Williams, what can be done?” Students should record classroom professorial propaganda and give it wide distribution over the Internet. I’ve taught for more than 45 years and routinely invited students to record my lectures so they don’t have to be stenographers during class. I have no idea of where those recordings have wound up, but if you find them, you’ll hear zero proselytization or discussion of my political and personal preferences. To use a classroom to propagate one’s personal beliefs is academic dishonesty. Vladimir Lenin said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” That’s the goal of the leftist teaching agenda.
~~~~~~~
Why Republicans are desperate to shut down the government
by E.J. Dionne
The coming battles over budgets, the debt ceiling, a
government shutdown and Obamacare are not elements of a large political game. They
involve a fundamental showdown over the role of government in stemming rising
inequality and making our country a fairer and more decent place. [Translation;
more wealth redistribution; more free stuff]
Anyone who doesn’t see this should be forgiven. The stakes in this battle are almost always buried in news accounts about tactics and obscured by an unquenchable desire across the media to provide the latest take on whether President Obama is growing “weak” and has already become the lamest of lame ducks. Yes, Obama has work to do in quelling doubts about his leadership. [Yes, he dashed any belief he has leadership skills]
But little of what we’re hearing offers enlightenment as to why this big argument is happening in the first place, and why it matters. To begin with, this is not just a fight between Republicans and Democrats. The GOP is clearly divided between those who take governing seriously – they still believe in government enough to accept responsibility for keeping it open – and those who see in every issue the “final conflict” that Marxists kept predicting. [more propaganda. There is a role for government, but not unlimited government]
Stopping Obamacare, in their view, is necessary to prevent the country from reaching the end of the road to serfdom. Compared with this hellish prospect, who cares about shutdowns? What’s fascinating, and this speaks to the perceived power of the tea party in primaries, is that it’s taking only a small minority of House Republicans to push toward Armageddon. [More political hyperbole] The Washington Post’s Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane estimated that roughly 40 conservatives revolted against their leadership’s efforts to keep the government open past Sept. 30. That’s 40 in a 435-member House of Representatives. What’s become of us when less than 10 percent of one chamber of Congress can unleash chaos? What does this say about the House Republican leadership gap? [notice the "plausible" lie? No one wants to shut down the government. Have you heard anyone say that? As a consequence likely, but not the goal]
But it’s also important to understand why the Republican right is so fixated on killing or delaying Obamacare before it goes into effect. Their central worry is not that it will fail but that it will succeed. In an interview on Fox News this summer, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, a leader of the stop Obamacare forces, gave the game away. After ritualistically declaring that “Obamacare isn’t working,” he said this: “If we’re going to repeal it, we’ve got to do so now or it will remain with us forever.” Why? Because once the administration gets “the (health insurance) exchanges in place ... the subsidies in place,” people will get “hooked on Obamacare so that it can never be unwound.” [Get that? Once people get "hooked" or more free stuff, it is hard to stop it]
In other words, Obamacare, like Medicare and Social Security, could work well enough and improve the lives of enough people that voters will get “hooked” on it. And for fear of this, the tea party’s champions would shut down the government and risk financial calamity over the debt ceiling? Even the Wall Street Journal’s reliably anti-Obama editorial page on Tuesday upbraided the “kamikazes” of the right. There is a thread running through the antics of the kamikaze caucus. [Yes, lets let the "getting hooked" few dominate what is best for all. That really makes sense]
Almost everything they are doing is designed to keep government from acting against inequality and addressing the stagnation or decline of incomes among both poor and middleclass Americans. [Blatant lie. That is NOT what the government and Democrats are up to] Foiling Obamacare, which would relieve economic pressure by getting health insurance to 25 million Americans who wouldn’t have it otherwise, is part of this larger story. [while taking the economy and destroying care for the rest of Americans]
As Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, pointed out, this week’s census figures showed the poverty rate “remaining unchanged at a high 15.0 percent in 2012” and median household income was “unchanged at $51,017, some 8.3 percent – or $4,600 – below its level in 2007, before the recession.” Things would be even worse without food stamps which, as Greenstein pointed out, kept 4 million Americans out of poverty last year. And what is the House’s main priority this week? To toss 3.8 million people off the program next year. [Another blatant lie. That was not the goal]
More generally, conservatives want to keep reducing government spending at a time when what the unemployed need most is public policy that stimulates growth rather than dragging the economy down. Continued cuts will mean more economic sluggishness. [Notice he did not describe anything the government is doing to boost private sector employment. He simply makes disparaging Conservatives]
It’s hard to decide which is worse: Utter indifference on the right wing to the damage that win-at-all-costs politics could cause the overall economy, or its genuinely coldhearted effort to block any attempt to ease the burdens on Americans who are struggling. One way or the other, this is what we should be talking about. [The left can only win by making the opposition the "boogey man". So, E.J. skips around the map and closes with a typical blame - the right wing is NOT indifferent to economic growth and jobs for all. They simply disagree with the Socialist approach of the Left]
Anyone who doesn’t see this should be forgiven. The stakes in this battle are almost always buried in news accounts about tactics and obscured by an unquenchable desire across the media to provide the latest take on whether President Obama is growing “weak” and has already become the lamest of lame ducks. Yes, Obama has work to do in quelling doubts about his leadership. [Yes, he dashed any belief he has leadership skills]
But little of what we’re hearing offers enlightenment as to why this big argument is happening in the first place, and why it matters. To begin with, this is not just a fight between Republicans and Democrats. The GOP is clearly divided between those who take governing seriously – they still believe in government enough to accept responsibility for keeping it open – and those who see in every issue the “final conflict” that Marxists kept predicting. [more propaganda. There is a role for government, but not unlimited government]
Stopping Obamacare, in their view, is necessary to prevent the country from reaching the end of the road to serfdom. Compared with this hellish prospect, who cares about shutdowns? What’s fascinating, and this speaks to the perceived power of the tea party in primaries, is that it’s taking only a small minority of House Republicans to push toward Armageddon. [More political hyperbole] The Washington Post’s Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane estimated that roughly 40 conservatives revolted against their leadership’s efforts to keep the government open past Sept. 30. That’s 40 in a 435-member House of Representatives. What’s become of us when less than 10 percent of one chamber of Congress can unleash chaos? What does this say about the House Republican leadership gap? [notice the "plausible" lie? No one wants to shut down the government. Have you heard anyone say that? As a consequence likely, but not the goal]
But it’s also important to understand why the Republican right is so fixated on killing or delaying Obamacare before it goes into effect. Their central worry is not that it will fail but that it will succeed. In an interview on Fox News this summer, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, a leader of the stop Obamacare forces, gave the game away. After ritualistically declaring that “Obamacare isn’t working,” he said this: “If we’re going to repeal it, we’ve got to do so now or it will remain with us forever.” Why? Because once the administration gets “the (health insurance) exchanges in place ... the subsidies in place,” people will get “hooked on Obamacare so that it can never be unwound.” [Get that? Once people get "hooked" or more free stuff, it is hard to stop it]
In other words, Obamacare, like Medicare and Social Security, could work well enough and improve the lives of enough people that voters will get “hooked” on it. And for fear of this, the tea party’s champions would shut down the government and risk financial calamity over the debt ceiling? Even the Wall Street Journal’s reliably anti-Obama editorial page on Tuesday upbraided the “kamikazes” of the right. There is a thread running through the antics of the kamikaze caucus. [Yes, lets let the "getting hooked" few dominate what is best for all. That really makes sense]
Almost everything they are doing is designed to keep government from acting against inequality and addressing the stagnation or decline of incomes among both poor and middleclass Americans. [Blatant lie. That is NOT what the government and Democrats are up to] Foiling Obamacare, which would relieve economic pressure by getting health insurance to 25 million Americans who wouldn’t have it otherwise, is part of this larger story. [while taking the economy and destroying care for the rest of Americans]
As Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, pointed out, this week’s census figures showed the poverty rate “remaining unchanged at a high 15.0 percent in 2012” and median household income was “unchanged at $51,017, some 8.3 percent – or $4,600 – below its level in 2007, before the recession.” Things would be even worse without food stamps which, as Greenstein pointed out, kept 4 million Americans out of poverty last year. And what is the House’s main priority this week? To toss 3.8 million people off the program next year. [Another blatant lie. That was not the goal]
More generally, conservatives want to keep reducing government spending at a time when what the unemployed need most is public policy that stimulates growth rather than dragging the economy down. Continued cuts will mean more economic sluggishness. [Notice he did not describe anything the government is doing to boost private sector employment. He simply makes disparaging Conservatives]
It’s hard to decide which is worse: Utter indifference on the right wing to the damage that win-at-all-costs politics could cause the overall economy, or its genuinely coldhearted effort to block any attempt to ease the burdens on Americans who are struggling. One way or the other, this is what we should be talking about. [The left can only win by making the opposition the "boogey man". So, E.J. skips around the map and closes with a typical blame - the right wing is NOT indifferent to economic growth and jobs for all. They simply disagree with the Socialist approach of the Left]
~~~~~~
"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial
Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases
must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with
each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each. So, if a law be in
opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a
particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to
the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution,
disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules
governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty. If, then, the
Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary
act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must
govern the case to which they both apply." –John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison,
1803
No comments:
Post a Comment