I am not sure how this story did not make any headlines when it first happened two months ago, but it is now being reported that a group of students who decided to sing the national anthem in front of the Lincoln Memorial could not do so because is constituted an illegal demonstration. Read more…
As I wrote about yesterday, Keith Halloran–a Democrat running for the New Hampshire House–posted on his opponent’s Facebook page a statement lamenting the fact that Sarah Palin and Levy[sic] were not aboard the downed plane that killed former Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens.
This led promptly to most New Hampshire Democrats to denounce this vile statement. Kathy Sullivan–a former chairman of the New Hampshire Democrat Party–quickly called for his resignation as a candidate for office, and urged voters to write in another candidate is he refused to resign.
I said most Democrats denounced Keith Halloran’s statement, but not all of them did. Read more…
John Shadegg introduces the “Enumerated Powers Act” to provide a constitutionality check on all future legislation
According to this article, Arizona congressman John Shadegg has introduced a bill called the “Enumerated Powers Act” which would require every bill introduced in the Congress to include a statement that explained where the constitutional authority came from for the proposed bill.
Article 1 Section 8 of the constitution lays out the specific, enumerated powers of the Congress, and this bill would require all future bills to include which of these enumerated powers grants the federal government the power to implement the newly introduced bill before it can become law.
My first thought upon hearing of this bill was that this was just another election year ploy designed to gain support with the Tea Party and other groups who feel that the government has grown much too big and bloated. Read more…
First and foremost let me offer my condolences to the family of Ted Stevens and everyone else that lost a loved one on the plane that crashed in the Alaska wilderness.
According to the New Hampshire GOP website, Democrat candidate for the New Hampshire House–Keith Halloran–is also sorry about the plane crash, albeit for different reasons. According to an entry that he made on Facebook, Keith Halloran’s biggest regret is the fact that Sarah Palin and Levi Johnston were not on the plane as well. Read more…
Yesterday Nancy Pelosi called House members back into session in order to quickly pass the state bailout bill. Originally I thought that the reason for the quick action on this bill was twofold. The first reason being the fact that they wanted to give a quick kickback to Democrat special interest groups shortly before an election in an attempt to buy votes; the second reason being the fact that this was an attempt to mask exactly how bad the economy–and Barack Obama’s economic policy–is. By providing the states these funds states are not going to have to make tough decisions and budget cuts right before an election. This money is probably just enough to hold off these tough decisions and layoffs until after the election to fool the American people into believing the economy isn’t as bad as we know that it is.
But upon further review it has become obvious to me that the reason Democrats were in such a rush to pass this bill is actually threefold.
Many people on the far left have problems with the president because they do not feel that he has been radical enough (I know how insane that sounds considering Barack Obama is the most radical president ever to hold the office, but that is what they believe). The far left is upset with Barack Obama on a number of issues ranging from his broken promise about closing GITMO, his continuance of the Iraq war, his ramping up of the war in Afghanistan, and his failure to insist on a public option in the healthcare takeover bill to name but a few.
Some on the far left have even begun to say that Barack Obama is no different than George W Bush, and when you consider Iraq, Afghanistan, warrantless wiretapping, military tribunals, and GITMO you can see their point. He is continuing some of the very same controversial Bush policies that the left was against–as was Barack Obama–during the campaign.
So really when you think about it, the far left may have a bit of a gripe here, however White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs does not agree, in fact he thinks those on the far left who oppose what this president has done to this point are crazy and should be drug tested.
I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy
For once I have to admit, I agree with Robert Gibbs…..the people on the far left ARE crazy and they SHOULD be drug tested.
But all kidding aside, those on the far left should be offended by these comments because it should prove to them what many of us have thought about this president for quite a while–on top of being a bully, he is a condescending, arrogant know it all who feels he is above criticism. While Barack Obama didn’t come out and say these things himself, Robert Gibbs speaks for the president and we can assume that Barack Obama’s press secretary is echoing his own feelings.
The left is now finding out what happens to you if you oppose one or more of the president’s policies, you are called names and marginalized–typical Obama regime and Saul Alinsky tactics are on full display here, only the target is different. This regime does not want to debate people on the issues–even people who are sympathetic to the president–so instead they try to delegitimize the person making the accusations.
Robert Gibbs is now trying to back away from these statements–even going so far as to blame the media for his woes–but the fact is, he has exposed the true feelings of the Obama regime to the left in a way that should have all of them scratching their heads, after all these were his supporters that he was ridiculing. Just think about what we who didn’t vote for him are subjected to by the Obama regime and Democrats in congress on an almost daily basis.
In a moment of candor Robert Gibbs let his–and those of the regime– true feelings known, and even if these words were spoken in jest it should be an eye-opener to those members on the far left–oppose the president at your own peril. This is how the president truly views you; the comment may have only been a joke, but the sentiment behind the comment is real.
Its getting a little crowded here under the bus.
Barack Obama signs $26 billion state aid bill
With out of control spending by the federal government being one of the foremost reasons why Democrats appear poised to suffer heavy losses in the November elections, Nancy Pelosi has called a special session in order to do what Democrats do best–spend even more money.
Last week the Senate passed a $26 billion “state aid bill,” today in a special session the House passed the bill and it was promptly signed into law by Barack Obama. While Democrats are touting this bill as a means to help states pay for Medicaid as well as saving the jobs of teachers, firefighters, and policemen; let us call this bill what it is–a union payout (and state bailout) directly preceding an election designed solely to attract voters to help stave off the predicted slaughter awaiting Democrats in November.
It says something about how out of control the spending has been in the federal government when a $26 billion spending bill somehow seems like a mere pittance, but this goes to show us that Democrats just can’t help themselves. They have to spend money and their answer to sagging poll numbers is the same as it is with every other issue–throw a few billion dollars around in an attempt to buy more votes and payoff a few loyal special interest groups.
Democrats are claiming that by closing a tax loophole this legislation will not add to the deficit, but as Larry rightfully pointed out on Political Realities, $11.9 billion of this bill is paid for by a cut in food stamps. So while the Democrats are hoping to use class warfare to gain support for this bill by closing the tax loopholes, they are neglecting the fact that they have just taken $12 billion away from the people who need it the most. And they have done it all just to please a few union buddies. SHAMELESS!
I have a feeling that this will backfire on them even in light of the feel good “do it for the children” spin they are trying to put on it, because the fact is that people are fed up with this regime spending money that they just don’t have and many people will see this additional spending as salt on the wound; one last kick in the ass to the American people and one more kickback to the unions before they are voted out of office.
I have had a tough time deciding who I was going to support in the New Hampshire Republican primary for the United States Senate. There are four main candidates; Kelly Ayotte, Bill Binnie, Joe Bender, and Ovide Lamontagne. My decision came down to either Kelly Ayotte, Bill Binnie, or Ovide Lamontagne.
All of these candidates have been trying to “out conservative” each other claiming that they are the one true conservative in the race. So who really is the true conservative here? Let us take a look.
Bill Binnie has run a slick campaign in New Hampshire and I had given him some serious thought over the last few weeks, but then we began to learn more about his past(?) positions on some issues–including abortion, gay marriage, and the Value Added Tax. Couple these positions with the fact that he has also donated money to Democrats Jeanne Shaheen and Martha Fuller-Clark in the past, and I had no choice but to eliminate him from consideration– I simply do not trust him. He is not a true conservative.
My choices were now narrowed down between Kelly Ayotte and Ovide Lamontagne. I like Kelly Ayotte, as Attorney General she was no nonsense, seeking and receiving the death penalty for cop killer Michael Addison. When a federal judge ruled that New Hampshire’s parental notification law–a law that required the parents of an underage girl be notified before she was allowed to get an abortion–was unconstitutional, Kelly Ayotte realized how backwards the state had become; a student cannot even get an aspirin at school without parental consent, yet that same student could get an abortion without the parent’s permission, so she challenged this ruling all the way to the Supreme Court where she personally argued that a parent had the right to know if their underage daughter was going to get an abortion. Her argument to the Supreme Court landed her–and parents across the state–a partial victory.
For these two reasons I greatly admire Kelly Ayotte.
But then came the news that Kelly Ayotte failed to act quickly on a major Ponzi scheme that cost thousands of New Hampshire residents millions of dollars. The lone Democrat candidate for the senate seat–Paul Hodes–has tried to claim that when resigning as Attorney General to for office, Kelly Ayotte deleted all of her emails in an attempt to cover this scandal up.
These accusations appear to be baseless and Kelly Ayotte has ordered the release of her emails to prove her innocence. This will be a major campaign issue if she wins the nomination and I do not feel that the Republican party needs this at a time when we have seen how ethically challenged the Democrats in the congress are. We need to be able to stay above this.
But that alone was not enough to eliminate her from consideration, so I dug a little further into her past.
Kelly Ayotte has always stated that she is a firm believer in the second amendment; she has always claimed that she believes in the individual’s right to keep and bear arms, but at the same time she opposed “no-duty-to-retreat,” otherwise known as the “Castle Doctrine” which states that when defending your home your first duty is not to try to escape before using lethal force. The “Castle Doctrine” gives you the right to defend yourself in your own home. Her position on this issue is concerning.
Kelly Ayotte has stated that she probably would have voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court (although she opposed Elena Kagan), and she supports a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan.
But here is the kicker. I have written in the past about Governor John Lynch’s attempt to balance the state budget by taking $110 million in private funds from the Joint Underwriting Association, claiming that this money belonged to the state; a notion that was struck down by the state Supreme Court. It was a legal brief written by Kelly Ayotte that Governor Lynch used to justify the attempted theft. While she now claims that she would have used spending cuts to balance the budget while leaving the JUA funds alone, one cannot ignore Kelly Ayotte’s role in this nefarious scheme. Kelly Ayotte is no true conservative.
The choice is now clear; there is only one true conservative in the Republican field and that candidate is Ovide Lamontagne.
Today I pledge my support, my vote, and my endorsement to Ovide Lamontagne. I hope that New Hampshire voters will do likewise and elect Ovide Lamontagne to the United States Senate.
Here is Ovide Lamontagne’s 15 point pledge to the citizens of New Hampshire, followed by twenty minutes of vidoes (sans teleprompter):
OVIDE’S OATH TO THE VOTERS OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
1. I pledge that I will use every means possible to repeal the trillion dollar Obamacare takeover of our country’s health care system that will increase healthcare costs, harm small business and decrease the quality and availability of care;
2. I pledge that I will refuse any earmark requests, and lead the effort to enact a permanent ban on these corrupting influences, while fighting daily to cut federal spending and government waste at all levels. I further pledge that if elected, my office expenses and schedule will be transparent and posted for all to see, so the people of New Hampshire can trust that their Senator represents their interests alone;
3. I pledge that I will introduce legislation that will repeal the failed $787 billion stimulus, and use the unspent portions of it to reduce our bloated national debt and reduce taxes for hard working Americans;
4. I pledge that I will introduce legislation establishing a constitutional Line-Item Veto for the President. The Governors of 43 states have this essential tool to veto individual examples of wasteful pork-barrel spending. It is time the President is given the same tool, to help eliminate budget busting spending programs;
5. I pledge that I will work to amend the Constitution to establish term limits for all Members of Congress, to end the cycle of entitlement and inside dealing with the special interests. Our Forefathers envisioned a citizen Legislature, not a permanent political caste of powerful insiders insulated from regular Americans. In addition, I pledge to limit myself to only two terms in office, if elected;
6. I pledge that I will work to amend the Constitution to establish a Balanced Budget Amendment, a tool nearly every state has, to compel legislators and the government to balance its checkbook and end the all too familiar DC culture of debt, deficit spending and bailouts;
7. I pledge that I will work to fundamentally reform the IRS and scrap the incredibly complicated and loophole filled federal tax code, replacing it with a fairer, flatter, simpler tax code that frees families and small businesses held hostage annually by high tax rates and complicated rules and regulations;
8. I pledge that I will support the appointment of only those judges who have proven that they will adhere to the Constitution and rule of law, shown due regard and respect for private property rights, and who have shown that they will not legislate from the bench. With that in mind, I have publicly opposed the nominations of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court without hesitation, because they are activists who do not pass this fundamental test;
9. I pledge that as Senator, one of my top daily priorities will be the security of our country and her people. In particular, I pledge: (a) to continue support for our operations against terrorists abroad, and provide support for our troops in the field with the resources they need to defend freedom, while ensuring that they receive the finest care and treatment possible upon their return home; (b) to work to ensure that we treat foreign terrorists as enemy combatants subject to military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay, not as criminal defendants; and (c) to stand firm against allowing a nuclear Iran to emerge, while supporting our proven allies throughout the world, including our staunch friend Israel;
10. I pledge that I will read and understand the legislation that I am asked to vote upon, to respect and advocate for the principles of federalism articulated in the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, and look first to the Constitution for guidance on whether any proposed federal legislation is constitutionally permissible;
11. I pledge that I will not move to Washington to become part of the establishment culture there. If elected, I will live in my home in Manchester – the same home that I grew up in – and commute to my job each week on behalf of the people of New Hampshire. I further pledge that I will hold regular town hall meetings with my constituents, understanding that elected officials must be held accountable to the voters and prepared to explain their actions to them;
12. I pledge that in all aspects of my job as U.S. Senator, I will work to uphold and support the dignity of human life, from conception to natural death;
13. I pledge that I will work tirelessly to end illegal immigration. While I support the recently enacted Arizona immigration law, the federal government must finally live up to its obligation to address this serious issue. As Senator, I will work to see that our borders are secured once and for all, that we turn off illegal immigration magnets by aggressively enforcing laws against employers who hire illegal aliens, and that we ensure there is no amnesty for illegal aliens;
14. I pledge to be a strong and unrelenting advocate for the individual right to keep and bear arms, as embodied in the 2nd Amendment, and to ensure that this fundamental right is not infringed upon;
15. I pledge to oppose any iteration of the ‘Employee Free Choice Act’ and its card check provisions, which would deny workers the right to a secret ballot when considering unionization. I believe inthe private ballot, and I further believe in right to work laws that give workers the right to decide for themselves whether to join a union or not.
Will Hillary Clinton be Barack Obama’s running-mate in 2012?
As this article states, Democrats are beginning to look for a scapegoat on whom to blame Barack Obama’s falling poll numbers and Joe “big F’ N deal” Biden might just be the fall guy. There appears to be a move afoot to remove the gaffe prone Joe Biden from the presidential ticket in 2012 and replace him with Hillary Clinton.
As President Obama sinks in the polls, Democrats and liberal pundits inevitably are searching for a scapegoat. The most likely victim appears to be gaffe-prone Vice President Joe Biden, who has become the focus of speculation that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just might replace him on the 2012 Democratic ticket.
Former Virginia Gov. Doug Wilder, his state’s first African-American governor, touched off the controversy. Writing at Politico.com last week, Mr. Wilder argued that Mr. Biden’s tenure has been undistinguished and chock full of “too many YouTube moments.” He charged that Mr. Biden “has continued to undermine what little confidence the public may have had in him.”
Say it ain’t so, Joe. How quickly they have turned on him. Everybody knew who Joe Biden was when he was chosen by Barack Obama as his running-mate, nothing has changed–its just good ole Joe being Joe. But now somebody has to take the fall for Barack Obama–we have already seen how quickly he is willing to throw people under the bus–and it appears that there is at least a chance that Joe Biden will join dear old granny and the Reverend Wright under the bus.
If Barack Obama wants to blame anybody for his failures and his falling poll numbers he needs to look no further than the mirror when he wakes up in the morning. His policies, his arrogance, and Chicago type thuggery are the reasons why the president’s supporters are leaving him. Joe Biden provides us with a little comic relief in what has been a serious disaster of a presidency, we need the “big F’ N deal” around to relieve the stress of watching a president that is clearly over his head on a daily basis.
If he was honest with himself–and if Democrats wanted to lay the blame where it truly belongs–Barack Obama would be the one that would step aside for Hillary Clinton in 2012. As hard as it is to believe, this country would have been much better off if she was the nominee in the first place.
Utah Senator Orrin Hatch has introduced a bill that would draw down the size of the federal government–with exceptions granted to national defense–to the 2009 level and freeze it at that level.
If we are to get our deficit under control, we need to rein in the runaway growth of our federal government,” Hatch said. “Simply put, the federal government is growing at breakneck speed and it is time to apply the brakes before it bankrupts the nation and the taxpayers. My bill is a commonsense approach to putting a halt to big government.
The bill states that:
• Three months after enactment, the head of each government agency – other than the CIA, FBI, Secret Service and Executive Office of President – will report the number of civilian employees within that agency on Feb 16, 2009, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
• If the number of employees is greater than existed on Feb 16, 2009, then each agency (except the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security) must, through attrition, reduce the number of employees to Feb. 16, 2009, levels
• Once the number of employees reaches Feb 16, 2009, levels, the head of each agency must ensure that those numbers remain the same. Thus, a hiring of a full time employee would require the reduction of another employee.
• The OMB would publicly disclose the total number of federal employees, the number of federal employees in each agency, and the salary of each federal employee.
• The Director of National Intelligence can exclude any employee from the above requirements if the director determines that such a disclosure would pose a threat to national security.
Hatch’s bill legislation is supported by the American Conservative Union, Americans for Limited Government and Americans for Tax Reform
Many Republicans have decried the growth of the federal government and many have promised in the upcoming election that they would downsize the federal government, but one thing that we have learned is that once a political party is in power they never quite live up to this promise. George W Bush is the latest example of a president who has grown the federal government with excessive spending–contrary to his stated beliefs–but Barack Obama has dwarfed the federal deficits that George W Bush created. The time is now to reign in the federal government and their irresponsible spending.
This bill–if it ever comes to a vote–will hold politicians to feet to the fire. We will know once and for all which politicians are serious about downsizing the federal government and which ones are not.
I don’t think that this bill will ever see the light of day, but even if this bill never makes it to a vote we will be able to judge which politicians brought this bill down to defeat even before it was voted on and we can act accordingly with our voices in November.
The time to cut down on “big government” is here as people all across this nation grow tired of big, bloated government bureaucracy and politicians who oppose this legislation will do so at their own peril. Orrin Hatch has produced a master stroke here and once and for all we will know the truth about politicians who claim they are for smaller government.
You are either with us or you are against us, and this bill could provide us with the platform to discover once and for all which side the various politicians fall on.
If this bill fails we will know exactly which politicians to blame due to either their actions or their inactions on this bill. Orrin Hatch summed it up best when he said:
That is almost a fifty percent increase since 2008,” Hatch said. “In 1974, former President Gerald Ford said: ‘A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.’ Today, we have an administration that seems hell bent on doing just that. That is unacceptable
Truer words have never been spoken. It is time to bring America back to the principles that she was founded on; a limited government based on the consent of the governed.
Orrin Hatch has put his money where his mouth is, it is now up to the politicians to prove to us if they are with us or if they are against us.
America's Watchtower 