Showing posts with label Protecting America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Protecting America. Show all posts

Thursday, November 07, 2013

Establishment GOP vs Grassroots: Civil War or Growing Pains?

Guest post by Stephen Kruiser

Because I am a nice guy and don't want anyone to waste their time, here is a quick list of those who won't enjoy this post: 

1) People working for Mitch McConnell's reelection.

2) People who come from families that internalize everything rather than fight it out and get it over with. 

3) People who are Mitch McConnell. 

The last several weeks have brought to the fore some ugly realities that the establishment GOP was hoping it could deal with using its go-to conflict resolution strategy: put it off, hope the problem goes away and then perhaps a nap. 

1966 Republican PartyLed by a host of Republican senators whose most notable achievement is getting elected a lot, the old guard has been busy publicly admonishing the more Tea Party-minded additions to the fold that they don't know anything. 

Because they haven't been elected a lot. 

Now, I will concede that, yes, the establishment dinosaurs do have a knack for winning elections. However, the gaps in between those victories tend not to be filled with much to crow about unless you're a fan of things like the Department of Homeland Security, Medicare expansion or being part of a team that's only won the popular vote in a presidential election once in twenty five years. 

A school of thought is emerging amongst us extremists that it might be rather refreshing if they applied some of that ability to battle and prevail over Democrats in elections to the legislative process. 

So a schism is erupting that sees one side yelling, "Hey, we win elections and stuff!" and the other side responding, "Yeah, but you're kind of hosing us once you do!" 

The eruption, however, isn't from a new source of conflict. In fact, this is a decades-old ideological volcano in the GOP that has had spectacular consequences after blowing up in the past. 

This New York Times article almost deserves a sentence by sentence examination but let's just grab a couple of chunks and look at them. 

Wednesday, November 06, 2013

RUSH GOES BALLISTIC: Attacks on Cruz, North, West and Palin are Attacks on Me      

Rush has officially drawn a line in the sand and we Constitutional conservatives, Tea Party activists, and Reagan Democrats all need to join up to support him.

...over [my] 25 years, when anybody, any conservative, Ollie North, I don't care who it is, when they've come under assault, Clarence Thomas, I don't care, whether I knew 'em or not, I ran in there and I defended 'em to the hilt because of the cause, because I knew exactly why they were being targeted. Sarah Palin. I went in there and defended these people because I know that it's an effort to undermine everything I believe. They attacked Palin, they attacked Ollie, they attacked Clarence Thomas, they're attacking us, me.

Well, it's not enough just to come here and tell you, "Oh, look what they're saying about Palin. See ya, folks, have a great day." Then tomorrow, "Oh, look what they said about Newt. See ya, folks, have a great day." Why am I doing this? And the reason I wrote this [children's] book is to try to counter what's going on. Why would you write a book on how the left has corrupted education if you didn't have some desire to fight it? And this is what has frankly stunned me ever since Barack Obama's election. I understand there's a fear of the media, and I understand there's a fear of Obama's race, but it's time to get past that. The guy's president. He's destroying the foundations of this country, as founded. He's literally setting his sights on transforming this country into something it was never founded to be.

I don't think that should happen, and I've been under the impression that everybody else that's not part of the Democrat Party has been of the same mind-set, and that's where I've been wrong. So those of us who fight back upset the applecart, are those who just want to sit there and accept it and try to manage their lives and careers in the midst of this mess because we're upsetting the applecart. So we have to then be attacked as whatever.

That's why they're going after Cruz. What are they going after Ted Cruz for? What's he done to anybody? It's Obama they ought to be going after! Why are they going after Mike Lee? That's why we defend these guys. They're out there actually trying to beat this stuff back, and they're doing it because they love the country. They're doing it because they're shocked and saddened by what they're seeing happening here, and they don't think it's time to give up.

Look how rare that is! Sarah Palin, the same thing. Look at what happens to people that do that. I mean, even Republicans go after 'em. They went after Reagan, too. It's the same thing, but Reagan was able to overcome it. It's a sad thing that there's only been one of him, but that's because they've done everything they can to revise history from that era and make people think it was the exact opposite of what it was. But, folks, the whole point of this latest book has been to join people, 'cause I know there are a lot of you.

This is the thing I know. A lot of you are fighting back, the Tea Party is. A lot of you do want to arrest this stuff and stop it and reverse it. A lot of you do want get rid of the current liberal power structure that's destroying the fabric of the country, cultural, politically, societally, economically, you name it. It's a wrecking ball that's been unleashed each and every day, and I know all of you in the Tea Party and most of you in this audience are trying to stop it.

Rush has written a children's book -- "Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans" -- that makes a great gift for the holidays. It can be used to start fighting the insane collectivist rhetoric of the Far Left Democrat Party at a very young age.

Which, all things considered, could be one of the most important things we can do.


Tuesday, November 05, 2013

Thanks to D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, First Amendment Still Hanging on By a Thread

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

First Amendment: A federal court has ruled that the ObamaCare contraception mandate violates the guarantee of free exercise of religion and forces some to choose between their religious conscience and bankruptcy.

The Supreme Court's decision in June 2012 that ObamaCare was constitutional because its fines for not complying with its mandates made the law a tax within Congress' authority to impose did not end the constitutional or court challenges to this attempt at redistribution of health and wealth.

On Friday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Gilardi v. HHS that ObamaCare's contraception mandate violates the constitutional rights of plaintiffs Francis and Philip Gilardi, two Catholic brothers who own Freshway Foods and Fresh Unlimited.

The two companies plus Freshway Logistics provide health insurance for their 400 employees through a third-party administrator. The court ruled that they face the choice of violating their religious beliefs in providing insurance to their employees or closing up shop.

Monday, November 04, 2013

SMART POWER: China Openly Publishes Map of American Cities as Nuclear Targets While Russia Boldly Tests ICBMs

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Global Power: Moscow launches four ICBMs in a large-scale nuclear drill as Chinese state media, brandishing detailed maps, show how Beijing's nuclear submarines can attack U.S. cities. We press "reset," they press "launch."

In March 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a red "reset button" to symbolize improved ties. The era of confrontation when American presidents demanded the tearing down of walls was over. From now on, we would make nice.

Fast-forward to 2012, when President Obama met with Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's then-president and now prime minister, at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea.

That was when Obama assured Medvedev he'd have more leeway after his re-election to weaken missile defense. This would help him achieve his dream of U.S. disarmament and bring about, as he expressed in Prague in 2009, "a world without nuclear weapons."

Apparently the Russians and the Chinese do not share that dream. On Wednesday, Russian strategic forces carried out a large-scale surprise military drill that included the test launch of two land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles and two submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

So while Russia expands and tests its offensive and defensive missile capabilities, President Obama lets our missile capabilities wither and caves to Russian demands to halt previously planned expansion.

To placate Moscow, Obama has already betrayed our allies in Poland and the Czech Republic by abandoning plans to deploy ground-based interceptors and missile defense in those countries.

Our Chinese friends have also noticed that the famous "reset" button has been replaced with one marked "easy." China's military carried out on July 24 a third test of a long-range DF-31A road-mobile ballistic missile capable of hitting the U.S. with nuclear warheads.

According to a recently published report by the Air Force National Air and Space Intelligence Center, "China has the most active and diverse ballistic missile development program in the world."

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

OUTRAGE: Nearly 200 Officers Purged From U.S. Military to Ensure Ideological Purity

Guest post by Investor's Business daily

Defense: What the president calls "my military" is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving the compliant and fearful.

We recognize President Obama is the commander-in-chief and that throughout history presidents from Lincoln to Truman have seen fit to remove military commanders they view as inadequate or insubordinate. Turnover in the military ranks is normal, and in these times of sequestration and budget cuts the numbers are expected to tick up as force levels shrink and missions change.

Yet what has happened to our officer corps since President Obama took office is viewed in many quarters as unprecedented, baffling and even harmful to our national security posture. We have commented on some of the higher profile cases, such as Gen. Carter Ham. He was relieved as head of U.S. Africa Command after only a year and a half because he disagreed with orders not to mount a rescue mission in response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.

Rear Adm. Chuck Gaouette, commander of the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group, was relieved in October 2012 for disobeying orders when he sent his group on Sept. 11 to "assist and provide intelligence for" military forces ordered into action by Gen. Ham.

Other removals include the sacking of two nuclear commanders in a single week — Maj. Gen. Michael Carey, head of the 20th Air Force, responsible for the three wings that maintain control of the 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles, and Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, the No. 2 officer at U.S. Strategic Command.

From Breitbart.com's Facebook page comes a list of at least 197 officers that have been relieved of duty by President Obama for a laundry list of reasons and sometimes with no reason given. Stated grounds range from "leaving blast doors on nukes open" to "loss of confidence in command ability" to "mishandling of funds" to "inappropriate relationships" to "gambling with counterfeit chips" to "inappropriate behavior" to "low morale in troops commanded."

Nine senior commanding generals have been fired by the Obama administration this year, leading to speculation by active and retired members of the military that a purge of its commanders is under way.

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, an outspoken critic of the Obama administration, notes how the White House fails to take action or investigate its own officials but finds it easy to fire military commanders "who have given their lives for their country." Vallely thinks he knows why this purge is happening.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Benghazi Whistleblowers: Obama Went to Sleep Refusing to Authorize Rescue; Commanders Relieved of Duty for Trying

The Right Scoop has the full interview of Benghazi whistleblower attorney Joe DiGenova. DiGenova appeared to confirm our worst suspicions regarding the unconscionable behavior of Barack Obama on the night of 9/11/2012.

…There is more to learn about Benghazi. Panetta has never told the full story.

Here’s an interesting question. Remember General Ham and what happened the night of the assault on the American embassy? We have reason to believe that things happened that night in the chain of command where people were relieved of their duties because they insisted that there be a military response. We’re working on trying to establish that with some news organizations but there’s very, very good evidence that people were actually relieved of command because they refused not to try and dispatch troops and some response.

And by the way, this notion that the administration has put out – it’s this little straw-man that [the] military couldn’t have landed in Libya, Greg Hicks has testified and so have some other military people that if there had only been a flyover, that would have dispersed these crowds because they remembered what the American military did its flyovers and its assaults.

There were planes in Croatia that could have been there by the time of the attack on the annex and no planes were ever sent. That was because the president of the United States refused to issue an order allowing for the dispersal of military into Libya because that was considered an act of war. The president, himself, who went to sleep, refused to issue some order.

You know, Panetta is not a bad man. He knows what went wrong that night. He’s never been properly questioned about this and pressed. And if he were he would admit all of this stuff.

In addition to Panetta, perhaps someone should subpoena Frau Jarrett?


Hat tips: BadBlue News and BB.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

THINKING OF SITTING THINGS OUT IN 2014? Consider That Mainstream Democrats Now Openly Call for Arrests of Political Opponents

For those of you as disgusted as I am with GOP leaders, consider the ramifications of sitting out the midterms. Should Nancy Pelosi regain the Speakership, well, in six words, they'll be coming for your guns. That's a guarantee.

For the first time in American history, mainstream Democrats are openly calling for the arrests of their political opponents. Yes, the hard left Democrat Party's tactics come straight out of the playbooks of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Castro, Pol Pot, and Mugabe.

They will be coming for anyone who expresses dissent against their Marxist policies, but before they do, they'll be coming for your guns.

If Democrats regain control of the House, rest assured that your Second Amendment rights will be eviscerated as they very nearly did following the mass shooting by the lunatic in Sandy Hook. Dianne Feinstein -- the loathsome and brazen crook from California -- had her gun ban bill in place, just waiting for a nice, bloody tragedy to exploit.

These are some truly frightening portents.

Democrats are openly calling for the arrest of Sen. Ted Cruz "for sedition". Never mind the Constitution explicitly grants the power of the purse to Congress, not the President. Never mind that James Madison himself described that the House could, in fact, shut down any program it wanted to. Never mind all that: the Constitution doesn't matter to these hard left sixties retreads. They don't want any political opposition. They want you gone. They want you silent, or in prison, or dead (what do you think Obamacare is really about?).

MSNBC plainly calls lawful dissent "sedition", presumably punishable by death.

Democrat Congressman Steve Cohen (TN) labels conservatives "domestic enemies", alluding to presidential actions to secure the country from the Tea Party, veterans, and Constitutional conservatives.

A public MoveOn.org petition calls for the arrests of Republicans in Congress by the Holder DOJ.

These are some dangerous times, my friends.

I'm voting Republican in 2014 if for no other reason than to keep our Second Amendment rights intact. Yes, I support the most conservative candidates possible (Matt Bevin over Mitch McConnell, for example). But I'm not sitting anything out in 2014.

I'm not going AWOL, even with the feckless boobs running the GOP, because they're the last line of defense. Let the RINOs form a third party. The grassroots can and will succeed by avoiding the GOP, the NRSC, the NRCC, and other establishment entities, instead working through independent groups like the Senate Conservatives Fund, FreedomWorks, and Americans For Prosperity.

I urge you to do the same next November and to marshal all the conservatives you can. If you aren't motivated to continue electing conservatives like Ted Cruz... if you aren't pumped up to save your Second Amendment rights and preserve the last vestiges of the Constitution... if you aren't interested in staying on the political battlefield in 2014, well, then don't be surprised when they do come for your guns.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Saturday, October 19, 2013

The Most Terrifying Chart You'll See All Week

At the excellent econ blog Q&O, Dale Franks illustrates what should be obvious to even the most obtuse observer (which excludes all Democrats and Utopian Statists).

[In 2012 we] spent $3,795.55 billion, while taking in $2,469 billion in taxes and receipts. That gave us a deficit for the year of $1.326.55 billion.

Much of the spending is required by law. Mandatory spending includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and retirement benefits for the military and federal workers. In addition, interest on the national debt of $227.73 billion must also be paid, by law. Overall, $2543.51 billion in spending was legally required. That’s 67% of all federal spending.

Keen observers will note that revenues of $2,469 billion do not cover that amount of mandatory spending. So, we missed being able to pay for required spending alone by by $74.51 billion. Essentially, we borrowed money to pay one-third of the interest on the money we’ve already borrowed.


Actually, we’re pretty lucky when it comes to the whole interest payments deal, because the average interest rate on the debt is hovering at around 2%. Every additional percentage point in that interest rate translates to about $115 billion dollars in additional interest charges every year. If interest rates were to rise to the historical average of 6%, that would add about $575 billion per year to cost of servicing the debt. That would raise the annual debt service costs from $228 billion to $803 billion. That’s about $44 billion more than we currently pay for defense. So, let’s hope for a weak, struggling economy, right? Gotta keep those interest rates at historical lows.

Anyway, the remaining spending is all discretionary, so, we chose to spend another $1,252.53 billion in discretionary spending. $759.11 billion was spent on killing foreigners. Everything else the Federal Government does—all of the executive departments, science and medical research, the Judicial branch, and giving money to heathen foreigners to try and make them our friends—cost us $492.42 billion. Giving money to the heathen foreigners—also known as foreign aid—accounted for about $38 billion for the year, or 1% of federal spending.

So, what can we extrapolate about the future? Well, we know that, even in interest rates stay steady, mandatory spending on entitlements will rise as the huge population bolus that is the Baby Boom generation begin retiring. Without either significant new taxes and/or significant entitlement cuts, re. That means that, in the not-too-distant future, revenues will not cover even the cost of mandatory entitlement spending.

We can—and probably will—ameliorate this by slashing defense. It’s what the Europeans have done, after all...

Here's the executive summary: the core function of the federal government -- national security -- will be sacrificed on the altar of redistributionist, Utopian fantasies.

The Chinese are creating a nuclear-capable Navy. The Iranians are practicing launches of EMP nuclear weapons. And Hezbollah is operating in the American southwest, thanks to the Democrats' open borders policies.

All is going according to plan. That is, if you seek the destruction of the American Experiment.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Liberalism vs. Conservatism: Political Speech

Guest post by Dinesh D'Souza


There is some overlap in the moral vocabulary that liberals and conservatives use. Both speak of “equality,” although they mean different things by the term. Conservatives emphasize equality of rights, and they are quite willing to endure inequalities that are the product of differential capacity or merit. Liberals emphasize equality of outcomes, and they tend to attribute inequality to the unequal opportunities that have been provided by society.

Since conservatives and liberals have different conceptions of the good society, their priorities are different, and this leads to contrasting policy positions. Conservatives emphasize economic growth, while liberals emphasize economic redistribution. Conservatives like to proclaim their love of country, while liberals like to proclaim their love of humanity. Conservatives insist that force is required to maintain world order, while liberals prefer the pursuit of peace through negotiation and dialog.

At root, conservatives and liberals have two different conceptions of human nature that cause them to see the world so differently. Liberals tend to believe in Rousseau’s proposition that human nature is intrinsically good. Therefore they believe that people who fail or do bad things are not acting out of laziness or wickedness; rather, society put them in this unfortunate position. Since people are innately good, liberals hold that the great conflicts in the world are not the result of good versus evil; rather they arise out of terrible misunderstandings that can be corrected through ongoing conversation and through the mediation of groups like the United Nations. Finally the liberal’s high opinion of human nature leads to the view that if you give people autonomy they will use their freedom well.

Conservatives know better. Conservatives recognize that there are two principles in human nature—good and evil—and these are in constant conflict. Given the warped timber of humanity, conservatives seek a social structure that helps to bring out the best in human nature and suppress man’s lower or base impulses. Conservatives support capitalism because it is a way of steering our natural pursuit of self-interest toward the material betterment of society at large. Conservatives insist that there are evil regimes and destructive forces in the world that cannot be talked out of their nefarious objectives; force is an indispensable element of international relations. Finally conservatives support autonomy when it is attached to personal responsibility—when people are held accountable for their actions—but they also believe in the indispensability of moral incubators (the family, civic institutions) that are aimed at instructing people to choose virtue over vice.

I am a conservative because I believe that the conservatives have an accurate understanding of human nature and the liberals do not. Since the liberals have a wrong view of man, their policies are unlikely to achieve any good results. In some cases they even subvert liberal objectives. For all its grand proclamations, today’s liberalism seems to be characterized by a pathological hostility to America, to capitalism, and to traditional moral values. In short, liberalism has become the party of anti-Americanism and economic plunder. By contrast, conservative policies are not only more likely to produce the good society, but they are also the best means to achieve liberal goals such as peace, tolerance, and social justice.


Excerpted from Dinesh D'Souza's Letters to a Young Conservative. Hat tip: Papa B.

Who Are the Gang of Five Funding Radical Leftist Terry McAuliffe?

Click the illustration to see a great ad.


If you have the means, please consider helping out Ken Cuccinelli, a true stalwart in the fight against Obamacare's destruction of jobs and health care.


Friday, October 18, 2013

BOOM: Senate Conservatives Fund Endorses Matt Bevin, Rejects Minority Leader Mitch McConnell

Guest post by Senate Conservatives Fund


ALEXANDRIA, VA — The Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF) endorsed Louisville businessman Matt Bevin for U.S. Senate in Kentucky on Friday. Matt Bevin is challenging U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in the Republican primary election on May 20, 2014.

SCF Executive Director Matt Hoskins made the following statement:

"Matt Bevin is a true conservative who will fight to stop the massive spending, bailouts, and debt that are destroying our country. He is not afraid to stand up to the establishment and he will do what it takes to stop Obamacare. We know that winning this primary won't be easy. Mitch McConnell has the support of the entire Washington establishment and he will do anything to hold on to power. But if people in Kentucky and all across the country rise up and demand something better, we're confident Matt Bevin can win this race."

SCF recently asked its members for their views on the Kentucky Senate race. Nearly 70,000 members completed the survey and 90% said SCF should endorse Matt Bevin over Mitch McConnell.


MATT BEVIN — COURAGEOUS CONSERVATIVE
  • Louisville businessman Matt Bevin (R-KY) is a full-spectrum conservative with the courage to stand up to the Washington establishment.
  • Matt Bevin grew up in a rural, working class family, where he and his five brothers and sisters worked to help the family make ends meet.
  • Bevin earned a ROTC scholarship and worked year-round to pay for his college education. After college, he was commissioned as an officer in the Army, rising to the rank of captain.
  • After military service, Bevin founded and invested in many successful companies ranging from manufacturing to money management.
  • Matt Bevin is a constitutional conservative who believes that America’s greatest traditions are seriously threatened today by irresponsible Washington politicians who are bankrupting our country.
  • Bevin not only supports SCF's top policy goals, he has demonstrated the courage to stand up to one of the most powerful politicians in the country even in the face of personal attacks.
  • Bevin is 46 years old, and has been married for 17 years. He and his wife have nine children, four of whom are adopted from Ethiopia.

MITCH McCONNELL — WASHINGTON INSIDER
  • U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the Senate Republican Leader, has a liberal record and refuses to fight for conservative principles.
  • McConnell voted to fund Obamacare this year, voted to let the Democrats fund Obamacare next year, and says parts of Obamacare are "okay."
  • McConnell worked with Vice President Biden to write the fiscal cliff tax deal that resulted in higher taxes for 80% of American families.
  • McConnell voted for billions of dollars in wasteful earmark spending, including Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere."
  • McConnell voted to bail out Wall Street banks and said it was one of the Senate's "finest moments."
  • McConnell voted to increase the national debt limit at least 10 times. Since he's been in Washington, the national debt has increased from about $1 trillion to more than $16 trillion dollars.
  • McConnell voted against term limits and to raise his own pay.
  • McConnell did nothing to fight the amnesty bill that passed earlier this year and he voted to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants back in 1986, which helped create the problem we have today.
  • After 28 years in office, voters in Kentucky are not enthusiastic about re-electing Mitch McConnell. He trails his Democratic opponent in recent polls and Cook Political Report rates Kentucky as a "Toss Up" despite it being a solid red state that Mitt Romney won by 23 points.
  • Democrats hope McConnell is the Republican nominee because he will be easier to defeat next November.

Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF) is an independent, grassroots organization that promotes conservative policies in Washington and helps elect true conservative leaders to the U.S. Senate. SCF has also endorsed Chris McDaniel (R-MS) for the U.S. Senate in Mississippi.


Note: Please consider contributing to the Senate Conservatives Fund. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are among its success stories.

NEWS FLASH: There Is No Split In the Republican Party

You heard that right. There is no split in the Republican Party. In spite of the hyperbole and breathless cheerleading on the part of Democrats and old media, there is no split in the Republican Party.

And I can prove it.

When Republican candidates are running for office, no matter how moderate, "adult", or centrist they really are, they pretend to be conservative.

In fact, even Democrats in most places pretend to be far to the right of where they really are in order to win general elections.

But, I digress: this is about the Republican Party.

The only split Republicans have is between the grassroots and the leadership elites. The grassroots (and much of America itself) identifies as conservative.

The leadership rejects the base, focusing instead on luring a small number of well-heeled donors, corporate contributors, consultants and media cronies.

When John McCain last ran for reelection, did he run as a bipartisan, open-borders maverick? Of course not. His TV ads depicted him reciting the phrase "build the dang fence" and other homages to conservatism. Those positions were quickly abandoned once he was returned to the Beltway.

When Kelly Ayotte and Jeff Flake and a host of others emerged from nowhere to garner attention, did they market themselves as Obamacare supporters who would accede to an out-of-control Executive Branch's bizarre dictates? Of course not. They pretended to be conservatives to win not only their primaries but their general elections as well.

The majority of the Republican base -- and we must include those independents and Reagan Democrats who have exited the party in large numbers -- are conservatives.

The war inside the Republican Party is not a war at all.

It is a fundamental disconnect between the base and a feckless leadership that is besotted with power and corporate cash.

While we must fight at every level to remove and replace the leadership -- "root and brach", to paraphrase Mitch McConnell -- there is another course.

I refer of course to an Article V convention of the states as described in Mark Levin's new book, which is entitled "The Liberty Amendments - Restoring the American Republic".

I'll be posting a full-fledged review of the book in the near future. But the executive summary is easy enough to understand: Washington is an enormous black hole. It sucks in money, media, and power, which it never relinquishes. And always it seeks more. Trying to fix the black hole from inside the black hole is impossible.

A political battle is coming for the GOP. And it is not between factions of the grassroots; it is instead between the grassroots and an out-of-touch leadership structure that is just as doomed as the Detroitocrat Party.

It just hasn't come to grips with it yet.


Related: The Lying GOP Establishment.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

THE LYING GOP ESTABLISHMENT: Gee, why do they pretend to be conservative when they're running for office?

So the meme circulating today in old media is that a small bunch of Conservative/Tea Party Republicans are disgusted with the Establishment GOP and are ready to splinter away like the fringe group of extremists they are. Yet what is never mentioned is that these old bulls -- these barnacles on the ship of state -- always pretend to be the tiny, fringe group of extremist conservatives when they're running for office.

Let's first visit with Molly Ball at The Atlantic, which is the leftist journal for leftists who love leftism:

The Conservative War on the GOP

What was once an uneasy alliance between Tea Partiers and Republican loyalists is increasingly marked by hostility—and many on the right now want a divorce.

...The recent government shutdown, and the infighting it laid bare between Republican factions, convinced many conservatives that the institutional GOP would rather sell them out than stick up for them. “There are two views on the right. One says more Republicans is better; the other says better Republicans is better,” said Dean Clancy, vice president of public policy for the Tea Party group FreedomWorks. “One view focuses on the number of Republicans in the Senate, the other on the amount of fight in the senators.”

...It will not be possible, Deace predicted, for the two factions to coexist. “This is going to end in divorce,” he said. “One side is going to win control, one side is going to lose, and the losing side will go do something else. There will not be a reunification.”

Perhaps. Perhaps not. What Ball neglects to mention is that this war has been going on since the 1970s, when Ronald Reagan was pilloried for challenging a sitting Republican President in 1976 (Gerald Ford). The GOP establishment despised Reagan and fought him tooth and nail.

What about the loony corporatists at The Wall Street Journal, who never met a big government program they didn't like? Here's Laura Meckler:

Business Voices Frustration With GOP

The budget stalemate that had the U.S. flirting with default has left business and the Republican Party, longtime political allies, at a crossroads.

...Many business executives say they were dismayed that some Republicans didn't heed their warnings that closing the government and risking default would hurt the U.S. economy...

...the conversation among businesses is "characterized by tremendous frustration and angst," said Dirk Van Dongen, president of the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, a trade group. "Because at the end of the day, the system is supposed to produce results, and the failure to produce results has consequences." ...

...The episode has prompted top business lobby groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to consider taking sides in Republican primaries next year in hopes of replacing tea-party conservatives with more business-friendly pragmatists...

Businesses are frustrated with the GOP? Hell, we're frustrated with the crony capitalists!

And just what the hell is a "Dirk van Dongen"? Oh and hey, Dirk, listen up: when the economy collapses as the country enters a fatal debt spiral, guess what: I don't think it's gonna be good for business.

...Even before the partial shutdown two weeks ago, Republican executives pressing for an immigration overhaul were venting frustration that the full House has been unwilling to consider any immigration legislation, including a bipartisan Senate bill, in the face of opposition from one wing of the party.

Norman Braman, a Miami businessman and GOP donor, said he is asking candidates who solicit campaign contributions for their position on immigration and will be reluctant to support those who don't back a revamp...

"Those of us who have been active and supportive of the party have a duty to express our feelings," he said...

Oh, and I guess we get to express our feelings, too, at least for the moment. Until Dear Leader does away with blogs, talk radio, and Fox News.

And say, Norman: if you're such a big GOP donor, perhaps you can tell me which way millions of low-skilled, largely illiterate workers from third-world countries -- who will be net drains on the taxpayer -- will vote? Here's a clue: it ain't gonna be for the Republicans.

Here's my message for the corporatist, crony capitalist backers of the GOP establishment-types: BRING IT.

These fakers, these losers like John McCain, Kelly Ayotte, and Jeff Flake -- to name but a few -- had to pretend to be conservative to get elected.

See, dummies, we're the real Republicans. We're not pretending to be that which we are not.

You're the charlatans, the fakers, the sellouts, the phonies. Join the damn Democrat Party if you want unbridled centralized government. Because we're having none of it.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

FreedomWorks Announces: "A Health Care Contract With America"

Guest post by Dean Clancy

For years, FreedomWorks has urged ObamaCare opponents in Congress to enunciate very clearly what they are “for.” 

We've also advocated a series of reform ideas, the top ten of which we are now pulling together into a single, easy-to-understand set of principles.

Here is what FreedomWorks is for:

A Health Care Contract with America

1) Allow everyone to maintain his current health insurance. No exceptions. (And treat everyone the same, including all Members of Congress and government employees.)

2) Allow people to own their own medical insurance and take it with them from job to job.

3) Allow all taxpayers to receive tax deductions for medical expenses, including personal Health Savings Accounts.

4) Allow insurance companies to compete across state lines.

5) Help people with pre-existing medical conditions through significant transitional block grants to states.

6) Provide all citizens advance knowledge of their health care costs (excluding medical emergencies).

7) Provide reasonable maximums for “pain and suffering.”

8) Avert Medicare’s bankruptcy by providing fewer benefits to the wealthy.

9) Allow the elderly and all doctors the choice between private insurance and Medicare.

10) Eliminate first-dollar coverage. Everyone should pay at least something for each medical service.

These principles balance boldness with achievability, injecting much-needed “patient power,” choice, and competition into the system.

It lets people choose whether to have insurance or pay for health care with cash, lets them choose the kind of insurance that actually meets their real needs (including bare bones coverage, if that's what they want), and helps them save for medical expenses without being penalized by the tax code.

(Note that the plan doesn't "throw Grandma over the cliff" -- i.e., fundamentally change Medicare in such a way that the Left can easiliy mischaracterize the reform as "harming" seniors -- nor does it force people to buy health insurance they don’t want or need [ObamaCare's individual mandate].)

If fully implemented, this plan would lower health care costs and improve access to care (as well as reduce the number of uninsured Americans) -- by voluntary rather than coercive means.

We know this reform plan will work, because we know freedom works. 

TAKE ACTION -- HELP SPREAD THE WORD



Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

The Tea Party is Both Sensible and Victorious

Guest post by Keith Koffler

I realize that sounds quite delusional to many people, particularly here in Washington. But it makes total, absolute sense.

The muttering class Inside the Beltway is very pleased with itself: The doomed Tea Party strategy is foundering on the shoals of idiocy, just like they said it would. The Republican “brand” has been downgraded yet again. America looks foolish abroad: “The world has reacted mostly with disbelief that a superpower could fall into such dysfunction,” wrote the New York Times today. Reasonable people will soon be back in charge so they can do reasonable things in a reasonable way without all these Tea Party lunatics stirring up trouble.

Let me tell all of you something:

THIS COUNTRY IS ALREADY IN A STATE OF TOTAL DYSFUNCTION, AND HAS BEEN FOR YEARS.

A state of dysfunction, mind you, brought to you by the “reasonable” people who have been striking deals for years that have created $17 trillion in debt and a possibly irreversible degree of Socialism that is lobotomizing our tradition of independent thinking and creativity, crippling free enterprise, and carving the soul out of the moral, God-fearing ethic that has made this nation the greatest on earth.

You’ll see them all on the Sunday talk shows, concurring solemnly with each other about the need to avoid such shenanigans again so our system can resume functioning in a normal manner.

But as you and I know, “normal” has become a state of somnolence in which our leaders steadily sleepwalk us into the abyss.

We are adding new entitlements, even as the old ones are tens of trillions of dollars in debt. That’s right, tens of trillions. That’s what it will cost to make sure our children get the same Medicare and Social Security benefits their grandparents are enjoying.

We have begun a vast new economic arrangement, Obamacare, imposed by one ruling Party on the entire nation, that will ensure our children will one day die needlessly from a ruined health care delivery system and that will invite the federal government into countless aspects of our lives.

The “crisis” that would ensue if we breach the debt ceiling is not something caused by the Tea Party. It is a manifestation of the crisis that already exists. WE ARE ALREADY UNABLE TO PAY OUR BILLS WITHOUT THE HELP OF COMMUNIST CHINESE BUREAUCRATS. WAKE UP AMERICA!

That’s all the Tea Party is saying to people. That’s all that’s happening here. The economic chaos and harm that might ensue if there is breach of the debt ceiling is no more than a preview of the meltdown that is on the way once all the bills catch up with us and once the U.S. has declined to the point that the savages replace us as the world’s preeminent economic and military power.

Man’s ability to ignore uncomfortable truths and live in a preferred reality is remarkable. People spend years avoiding problems they know will cause them great harm down the road. But when it’s the government, this tendency is multiplied. No one really is responsible, and everyone will simply point the finger at someone else when things collapse and then go out and campaign for reelection as the only ones who can “fix” things.

The Tea Party, with its willingness to demand a stop to this freak show by shuttering the government and halting debt payments, is revolutionary, but not radical. Because sometimes revolutionary action is the reasonable course. The Tea Party is no more radical than were our Founding Fathers, who also staged a revolution when there was no other choice.

Summarizing some polling data, the Wall Street Journal today presents a picture of who the Tea Party regulars are:

Many frustrated liberals, and not a few pundits, think that people who share these beliefs must be downscale and poorly educated. The New York Times survey found the opposite. Only 26% of tea-party supporters regard themselves as working class, versus 34% of the general population; 50% identify as middle class (versus 40% nationally); and 15% consider themselves upper-middle class (versus 10% nationally). Twenty-three percent are college graduates, and an additional 14% have postgraduate training, versus 15% and 10%, respectively, for the overall population. Conversely, only 29% of tea-party supporters have just a high-school education or less, versus 47% for all adults.

Many tea-party supporters are small businessmen who see taxes and regulations as direct threats to their livelihood. Unlike establishment Republicans who see potential gains from government programs such as infrastructure funding, these tea partiers regard most government spending as a deadweight loss. Because many of them run low-wage businesses on narrow margins, they believe that they have no choice but to fight measures, such as ObamaCare, that reduce their flexibility and raise their costs—measures to which large corporations with deeper pockets can adjust.

In other words, the Tea Party is comprised of SENSIBLE PEOPLE hoping to restore some sense to the nonsense prevailing in Washington. They have come to the conclusion that, faced with a president who wants nothing but to expand government and a Congress unable to impose the thorough restructuring necessary to save the union, extraordinary measures are needed.

And, with tears in my eyes as I write this, I tell you, I don’t know if they will ever succeed. I don’t know if good people with the values that would save this country can withstand the monumental, grinding combined force of a government that sucks the life from the nation so it can itself live and a population that has grown habituated to the guarantee that other people’s money will be – and must be – provided to them.

But the people comprising this movement are right to give it a try. Surprising things do happen. And what other alternative is there?

The Tea Party is making a stand. The pundits will say, if legislation reopening the government and raising the debt limit passes, that the Tea Party has been defeated today. But to the extent conservatives have revived a movement, drawn attention to the problem, and even forced a president with his eye on the next deadline into negotiations, there will be victory in defeat.

 
Visit White House Dossier for more of Keith Koffler.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

What's Really Behind Obama's Purge of Military Commanders?

Guest post by Investors Business Daily


Defense: The firing of two nuclear commanders in a week adds to a body count that suggests we have either the most corrupt and incompetent general staff in history or our military is being reshaped for other purposes.

The Obama administration, which has fired no one over scandals such as its Fast and Furious Mexican gun-running operation, its criminal negligence in the terrorist attack on our Benghazi diplomatic mission, or the use of the IRS to target and intimidate political foes, seems to have a curious obsession lately about ethics and competence in the U.S. military.

Last week the Air Force's two-star general in charge of the units responsible for its 450 nuclear missiles was fired "due to a loss of trust and confidence in his leadership and judgment," an Air Force statement said.

Maj. Gen. Michael Carey had commanded the 20th Air Force, responsible for the three wings that maintain control of the 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles scattered in missile silos across the northern plains.

The statement added that the decision to relieve Carey was based on information from an inspector general investigation into Carey's alleged behavior during a temporary duty assignment, which is the military's term for business travel. It was said to have nothing to do with the operational readiness of the ICBM force or recent failed inspections of ICBM units.

Sunday, October 13, 2013

OBAMA PRIORITIES: Veterans Greeted With Barricades and Riot Police; Illegal Immigrants Welcomed with Open Arms

Javier Manjarres relays photos of riot police engaging veterans at the #1MVetMarch:


Riot cops even showed up at the Lincoln Memorial to fend off dangerous interlopers like Sarah Palin:


Oh. And they needed armored vehicles to make their point.


Now I ask you to step back and consider the priorities of President Obama:

Immigration rally allowed on Mall despite shutdown


A week after World War II veterans struggled to gain access to a memorial on the National Mall due to the government's partial shutdown, thousands of people pushing for a new immigration law have been cleared by the government to proceed with a concert and rally Tuesday on the Mall.

The march, dubbed the "Camino Americano", or "American Road," is hosted by groups including the Service Employees International Union and Casa de Maryland...


..."It's bad enough watching these marches when we watch illegal aliens breaking our laws. Now they're being given free range on these public parks while we've seen the greatest generation military vets being turned away from their sacred memorials," said Bob Dane, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a group that opposes proposals in Congress to legalize the nation's undocumented immigrants. "It's offensive and it shows where their loyalties lie."

This administration appears to be something unique in American history. It continually flouts Constitutional limits, rewrites individual laws, defies American traditions, and undermines Judeo-Christian morals.

We have never seen its likes before and it could well take a miracle for the civil society to survive it.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

AWESOME: Vets Dismantle Fences Around War Memorials, Then Barricade the White House

Guest post by Tyler Durden

The "Million Vet March" in Washington D.C. appears to be escalating as reports of barricades being torn down, police in riot gear and snipers being deployed, and a growing crowd at The White House chanting for its shut-down suggest the people are growing restless.

Via Epoch Times,

Protesters have gathered in front of the White House in Washington, D.C. on Sunday, according to reports.

Park police in riot gear were deployed in front of the building.

“US Park Police have arrived in front of WH. Some in riot gear! Tea party/veteran protesters start booing,” wrote CNN’s Jim Acosta on Twitter.

A rally took place at the World War II memorial and headed to the White House, reported NBC Washington. Several thousand demonstrators came out, it said.

NBC reported that people were carrying barricades that were likely from the WWII memorial to the White House area.

The DC Police Department said its officers are on the scene.

“MPD is on the scene at White House with USSS & USPP concerning protest – marchers using sidewalk,” it wrote on Twitter.

Commentator Sarah Palin and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) were on the scene and spoke to demonstrators.

The organizers of the protest described themselves as the “Million Vet March.”

It said that veterans and military members are “being used a political pawns in the ongoing government shutdown and budget crisis,” its website reads.

Jeff Tompkins, a protester, told NBC that  “it should be open to everyone to come down here and see this … this is not just and not fair,” referring to the WWII memorial.

Snipers at the ready atop the White House as the crowds gather...

Via Twitchy,

Amazing.

Now, the protest continues outside of the White House.