Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON - WHY THE FBI MUST BE DISMANTLED

​Victor Davis Hanson offers comprehensive and articulate reasoning why it's essential that the FBI be broken up for freedom to endure in the U.S. 

WATCH: 65-Year-Old Woman Violently Arrested in Texas Bank of America for Not Wearing Mask, Despite Mandate Being Lifted

From The Gateway Pundit:

A 65-year-old woman was violently thrown to the ground and arrested in a Texas Bank of America for not wearing a mask — despite the fact that the mandate was lifted in the state.

Shocking body camera footage of the incident was released by Galveston police.   Story below the video:

The woman, 65-year-old Terry White, went to the bank on Thursday without a mask, the day after Gov. Greg Abbott lifted the mandate. In the footage, a bank manager directs the officer to White, who explains that the state has lifted mandate.

The officer tells the woman that under Gov. Abbott’s directive, businesses can still require people to wear masks inside.

The Gateway Pundit report continues:

YORAM HAZONY - TO AVOID CIVIL WAR IT IS NECESSARY FOR ONE POLITICAL PARTY TO GRANT THE LEGITIMACY OF AN ELECTION VICTORY TO THE OPPOSING SIDE

Yoram Hazony, President of the Herzl Institute, a citizen of both the United States and Israel, currently makes his home in Jerusalem.  He is a brilliant scholar, the author of several books, including The Philosophy of Hebrew Scripture,  The Virtue of Nationalism and God and Politics in Esther.   He recently wrote a MUST READ essay, "The Challenge of Marxism," which I will write about  another time.  For now, watch the following fascinating interview and note especially what Hazony says about "the only way to avoid civil war."   I will produce the text of his statement below. 

 (The bolding below is mine)

 10:45 mark:    I am sure that we have never seen in our lifetimes this degree of hatred.  That's not to say there wasn't hatred.  I remember when Ronald Reagan was president people hated him, and when the Bushes were president, people hated them.  And they certainly talked as though they were fascists and monsters, and all the rest, but what's changed, I think what's clearly changed, is the next step which is the willingness to withdraw legitimacy from a Republican president. That's something that we have never seen before.

THE DEADLIEST VIRUS IN THE WORLD: COMMUNISM

 

 

THE FEDERALIST - JAMES COMEY HAS A LONG HISTORY OF QUESTIONABLE OBSTRUCTION CASES

This article by Mollie Hemingway, for whom I have great respect as an analyst and writer, digs into the history of James Comey's judgments
and comes to some reputation-shattering conclusions (at least to my mind).  Her work is never mean-spirited and always factually insistent -- a quality much lacking in journalism today.   See for yourself and draw your own conclusions.

SEN. TED CRUZ RIPS OBAMA JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IN CONFIRMATION HEARING FOR SEN. JEFF SESSIONS

Senator Ted Cruz in his questioning of Sen. Jeff Sessions for Attorney General of the United States provided a litany of the lawlessness practiced by President Obama and his Department of Justice during the past eght years.  This video should be referred to again and again as an accurate historical record of a particularly disgraceful (and dangerous) period of American history which hopefully no future generation will experience again. 

QUICK TAKES

-- Good idea of the day - relocate a number of federal bureaucracies out of D.C. and to the Midwest

-- Free speech is not a Dutch value: Geert Wilders convicted of hate speech.   Charlie Cooke: "Cherish the First Amendment, Americans.  It's exceptional."

-- French government votes to criminalize prolife websites

-- A major reason for Trump's victory - the progressives went too far in denying religious liberty and created a backlash.

QUICK TAKES

   ** Robert Epstein - Your brain is not a computer   The "information processing" metaphor (IP), now dominate, when it is finally abandoned ("the IP metaphor is not even slightly valid"), will be seen as silly.

   ** David French's speech to homeschool graduates  - How to Live a Life of Privilege    Truly valuable reflections, observations, and exhortations.

   ** Andrew Strattaford - War on Cash - Besides the privacy it affords, cash serves "as a vital element in the preservation of the rights of the individual against the presumption of the state."

   **  Rod Dreher - "Transgender McCarthyism"  - Useful coverage of an asserted "right" that has left many of us further questioning the sobriety/sanity of the contemporary culture mindset

   **  Tyler Streckert - What It's Like to Be Gay at Wheaton College  -  "During my student years at Wheaton, I became healthier mentally, intellectually, socially, emotionally, and spiritually. When I tried to keep my orientation secret, I isolated myself from the very people who would love and accept me."  Streckert has devoted himself to celibacy.

SEN. MIKE LEE'S NEW BOOK - "LOST CONSTITUTION: RESURRECTING AMERICA'S BASIC LIBERTIES"

 

CBN News:  Utah Sen. Mike Lee believes that nearly every abuse of federal power today is rooted in one overarching issue: the failure to properly interpret and follow the Constitution.

In his new book, Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America's Founding Document, Lee says entire sections of the Constitution have been discarded and forgotten.

He also shows why it's not too late to resurrect and restore our fundamental liberties.

FEDERAL COERCION

Bosch Fawstin cartoon:

SPECIAL FORCES SET TO SWARM SOUTHWEST AND OPERATE UNDETECTED AMONG CIVILIANS IN MASSIVE MILITARY EXERCISE

** Update 5/14/15 - This is from Infowars, often accused of being a conspiracy website.  I don't know the truth of the matter.  The link below is provided by the Drudge Report:

       Marines Practice Subduing Citizens Inside Internment Camp...

      The above included the following link:  July 6, 2012  

    ARMY MANUAL OUTLINES PLAN TO KILL RIOTERS, DEMONSTRATORS IN AMERICA

 

 

** Original post:

Is this cause for alarm?  Who knows?  I wonder if posting this will put me under government surveillance.  That would be weird since the article (and the title of this post) is from the U.K. Daily Mail!   (HT: Drudge)  Article's subpoint:

The so-called Realistic Military Training has some residents fearful the drill is a preparation for martial law

U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT PRIORITIZES LGBT ISSUES OVER RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

The Family Research Council notes: 

. . . With 13.6 million people displaced in the Middle East, and men and women of faith on the run in Africa, the State Department decided to weigh in with its third “Conference to Advance the Human Rights of and Promote Inclusive Development for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Persons.”

Instead of tackling one of the most fundamental human rights crises of our time -- international religious hostility -- administration officials zeroed in on “the specific needs of transgender persons; how to best engage faith communities to support the human rights of LGBT persons; and the best ways to integrate these priorities into development programs.” This week, the State Department will be spending time on homosexuality while people are literally dying for the right to practice religious liberty. The State Department has been aggressively leaning on foreign governments to abide by their values -- which, as the last election proved -- are inconsistent with the vast majority of Americans.

As I’ve said before, persecution abroad is directly related to our religious intolerance here at home. And until Congress and the White House make this an issue, the spike in persecution will only climb higher. What America does publicly communicates our priorities to the world. And what we’re communicating now is that the United States is too consumed with the radical sexual agenda of 2.7% of the population to help millions of hurting Christian men, women and children.

This, by the way, is in total contradiction to duly-enacted federal policy. The Obama administration is ignoring the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 which states: “it shall be the policy of the United States…to condemn violations of religious freedom, and to promote, and to assist other governments in the promotion of, the fundamental right to freedom of religion.”

In the congressional hearing over Mariam Ibraheem, Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.) was one of many leaders frustrated by the status quo. “We need to ratchet up, I think. And Mr. Perkins, your point about other issues becoming prioritized, frankly, I have been shocked and dismayed by how many Ambassadors and foreign leaders have told me to my face that the LGBT agenda is what trumps everything in the U.S. foreign policy. So religious freedom, in a way, is seen as an impediment to the advancement of that.” The new Congress must hold this Obama administration accountable to the law, which includes religious freedom.  [my bolding]

GEORGE WILL - "WE HAVE MUCH MORE TO FEAR FROM EXCESSIVE FAITH IN GOVERNMENT, THAN FROM TOO LITTLE FAITH IN GOVERNMENT"

 

Text summary from NRO:

Can we trust the government to do its job? On Fox News Sunday columnist George Will parried: “What isn’t its job nowadays?” Will offered a quick run-through of governmental prerogatives in the early twenty-first century: “It’s fine tuning the curriculum of our students K-12. It’s monitoring sex on campuses. It’s deciding how much ethanol we should put in our gas tanks. It has designed our light bulbs. And it’s worried sick over the name of the Washington football team. This is a government that doesn’t know when to stop.”

Overreaching government is the natural consequence of progressivism, said Will, the “distilled essence” of which is that government is “a a) benign, that is, disinterested force — that’s false — and b) it is stocked with experts who are really gifted at doing things.”

Can we have faith in government? “I think we have much more to fear from excessive faith in government than from too little faith in government.”

- To which I completely agree.  Government cannot sustain the faith people place in it.  Simply cannot.

U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT DOESN'T SUPPORT OVERSEAS AMERICANS - ESPECIALLY CHRISTIANS

Update 6/5/14 -  Consider sending a card or letter to Miriam

*Assuring her of your prayer and support and her witness of Jesus Christ. *Congratulate her for the birth of her daughter Maya. *Praise her for her stand and testimony for Christ. *Feel free to share if you want the impact this had in your life and relation with God.   Her Address: Dr. Meriam Yahia Omdurman Prison for Women P.O.Box 65, Omdurman, Sudan

Update 5/28/14 - From the Family Research Council:

American Children Imprisoned in Sudan: Does Obama Care?

TAKE ACTION

Share this Alert:

• Twitter
• Facebook
• Email

Sign the petition at WhiteHouse.gov to pressure the Obama administration to act in the case of Meriam Ibrahim in Sudan and her baby and toddler in prison.

 

May 28, 2014 - Wednesday

Today, as you read this, two innocent children -- a toddler and a newborn baby, who based upon available evidence are American citizens -- lie in a Sudanese prison while their mother awaits execution for the "crime" of following Jesus.

Already mother of 20-month old named Martin, Dr. Meriam Ibrahim gave birth to her second child, a daughter, in the prison clinic in Khartoum. This unusual delivery venue is because Meriam recently was sentenced to death in Sudan for refusing to renounce her Christian faith. Meriam was born of a Muslim father, but her father abandoned the family. Meriam became a Christian and married a Christian man who is a United States citizen -- a fact that makes her two children eligible for American citizenship.

At this point the Sudanese government has refused to entertain Meriam's release, and has refused to turn over the children to their father upon the claim that her marriage is not valid because she married a Christian. Now, Meriam and her two American babies languish in Khartoum's Omdurman Prison -- a place which a 2008 United Nations report said had an infant mortality rate of one infant death per day in the summer months.

The situation is critical. The lives of the babies and their mother hang in the balance. While many international groups have taken up efforts to pressure the Sudanese government to release Meriam and her children, the Obama administration has said little, and done nothing.

Think about this: two innocent American children are imprisoned abroad as their life hangs in the balance. If President Obama will not act in a situation like this, what will he act upon? Does Obama care?

The President has at his disposal the means to quickly grant Meriam and the children the ability to come to the U.S.; once here, she could seek permanent asylum. He could also put great pressure on the Sudanese government over this gross human rights violation. He could do any number of things, but President Obama's inaction speaks volumes about his diminished view of what being an American means. Apparently the latent American citizenship of these children is not a status the President sees as worth acting upon.

Help us today pressure the Obama administration to take action. Join me in signing a petition we have created on the White House website to move the President to pave the way for Meriam and her children to seek asylum in the U.S. If it reaches 100,000 signatures in 30 days, the White House, according to the guidelines they have established, must respond to the petition.

We may not have 30 days. Please sign the WhiteHouse.gov petition.

Me:  I signed the petition.  Please do so as well.  

** Original post 5/21/14: What good is the State Department and U.S. Consulates if they won't stand up for American citizens abroad?  

From the Family Research Council: 

For three months, a young Christian wife -- now almost eight and a half months pregnant -- has been shackled in a Sudanese prison on death row. Authorities, who refuse to recognize her marriage to a Christian man, have sentenced her to 100 lashes for adultery and execution for her faith.

As if that weren't horrifying enough, her stateside husband, Daniel Wani, an American citizen, says their 20-month-old toddler is behind bars with her, enduring unspeakable horrors at the hands of the oppressive Sudanese. Her frantic husband, who continues to plead with the U.S. Embassy for help, flew from New England to Khartoum to visit his wife, Meriam Ibrahim -- and was beside himself to find her bound up and swollen. For now, authorities refuse to release his son to Daniel, because of his faith. Although the court gave Meriam days to recant her Christianity, she refused, saying, "I am a Christian, and I will remain a Christian."

And while the court does allow pregnant women to give birth before their hanging, the international community is pressing to overturn the verdict. Unfortunately for Daniel, his home country has barely lifted a finger to help the family, saying only that it was "disturbed" by the case. Yesterday, in a shocking exchange with CNSNews.com, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki showed the absolute indifference of the Obama administration toward this family's nightmare. Asked if Daniel was in fact a U.S. citizen, Psaki told CNSNews, "Typically we don't confirm those type of details, but I'm happy to check and see if there's more to share." "You don't know whether that little boy in prison is a U.S. citizen?" CNS fired back. "I don't have any more details to share," Psaki answered.

NEW DINESH D'SOUZA JULY 4TH DOCUMENTARY WILL TAKE ON AMERICA'S CRITICS

From Dinesh D'Souza's website:

On Monday night, Dinesh D’Souza was in the studio with Megyn Kelly for The Kelly File. In this exclusive interview, D’Souza discussed one the primary objectives of America, his latest film:

“We answer the central moral challenge of America’s critics, which is that America’s greatness is based on theft, plunder and oppression.”

Watch as D’Souza explains how "America" the movie will take the destructive arguments of progressives head on:

  

In conjunction with The Kelly File spot, D’Souza released a new trailer for "America."

In this new preview of the movie, D’Souza gives viewers a glimpse into the minds of America’s critics at home. America stands at a crossroads, and the way we understand our past will determine our future.

Are we complicit in a national history of oppression and murder, or is America still the hope of the world? Watch the brand new trailer below:

 

"America" is scheduled for national release on Independence Day. 

Me: I, for one, plan to see the movie as soon as it is released.  From the trailers, it looks exactly like the kind of response we desperately need today.

THE IRS TARGETS ADOPTIVE FAMILIES

I am filing this blog post under the category: "Things I didn't know before".  David French recounts the various evils of the contemporary United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) under the current Democrat administration and includes the following item, which I find unbelievably mendacious on the part of the IRS:

Maliciousness: How else can one interpret the IRS’s effort to audit adoptive families? In a two-year period almost 70 percent of adoptive families were audited (including, by the way, my family) without any indication of fraud or misconduct. By contrast, the normal chance of an audit for a middle-class family is roughly 1 percent. And what did the IRS get for this dragnet — a dragnet that caused real financial hardship to families who’d financially extended themselves to adopt? Not much: ”The IRS disallowed less than 2 percent of the total tax credits claimed.”

2013 IN REVIEW - A DISASTROUS YEAR FOR THE REPUBLIC

Senator  Tom Coburn (R - Oklahoma) wrote a cogent summary titled,  "The Year Washington Fled Reality."  [my bolding]

. . . In both the executive branch and Congress, Americans witnessed an unwinding of the country's founding principles and of their government's most basic responsibilities. The rule of law gave way to the rule of rulers.  . .  Taking unilateral, extralegal action—like delaying the employer mandate for a year when Mr. Obama realized the trouble it would cause for businesses—is part of a pattern for this administration. Immigration and border-security laws that might displease certain constituencies if enforced? Ignore the laws. Unhappy that a deep-water drilling moratorium was struck down in court? Reimpose it anyway. Internal Revenue Service agents using the power of the state to harass political enemies? Deny and then stonewall. Unhappy with the pace of Senate confirmations for nominees? Ignore the Constitution and appoint people anyway and claim that the Senate is not in session. . . .

To speed the approval of executive appointments and judicial nominations, Sen. Reid resorted to raw political power, forcing a vote (52-48) that allows the Senate majority to change the rules whenever it wants. In a republic, if majorities can change laws or rules however they please, you're on the road to life with no rules and no laws. . . .  The supermajority safeguard that prevented senators from destroying the institution in which they serve is now largely gone. Gone also are members of the majority who understood the need to protect minority rights. . . .  Instead, we have a majority leader who has appointed himself a Rules Committee of one. Referring to the right of the minority to offer changes to bills under consideration, Mr. Reid said: "The amendment days are over." Like President Obama, Mr. Reid is great at message discipline but weak on the rule of law and reality

How the nation's leaders perform in Washington is a reflection of the country, and culture, they represent. Moral relativism and postmodern disregard of truth has been promoted by academia for decades; sometimes it seems that the best students of that thinking can be found in Washington. We live in a time when laws and rules are defined however the holders of power decree, and "messaging" is paramount, regardless how far the message is from reality. [Read more . . .]

MEDIA COVERAGE OF GOVERNMENT SOCIAL PROGRAMS INVARIABLY POSITIVE

Always at the beginning, with no follow-up later.  Jason Richwine spells it out:

Skeptics of government social programs have long been frustrated by a familiar pattern of media coverage. It starts with a new social program portrayed as the key to fixing problems like poverty or low test scores. The media proceed to either ignore the long history of similar initiatives found to have little effect, or they acknowledge the history but report that this program is fundamentally different from everything that has come before.

Either way, the media trumpet the positive results from early evaluations of the program, even when those results are based on small samples, short time horizons, non-experimental data, or all of the above. Years later, researchers find that a randomized experiment shows that the program has no effect, or that the effects quickly fade, or that the effects cannot be replicated on a larger scale. These findings are quietly reported in a technical article, with no fanfare and little public attention. By that time, the media have already moved on to promoting another new social program.

CLARENCE THOMAS, GETTYSBURG, AND AMERICAN LIBERTY AND OPPORTUNITY

I consider Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas a great man, and Ken Klukowski's article offers a superb window into Thomas' mind and heart:

When asked last week how he ended upon the Supreme Court of the united States, Justic Clarence Thomas said, 'It was totally Forrest Gump,' in a revealing--and hilarious-on-stage interview at last week's Federalist Society Natinal lawyers Convention.

This full-length interview was a window into the soul of America’s most conservative High Court justice—whose remarks on Gettysburg could not draw a more stark contrast with President Barack Obama.

Thomas was the keynote speaker at last week’s annual gathering of the brightest conservative legal stars in America. He sat down opposite Judge Diane Sykes of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. While constitutional conservatives would love to see Sykes—one of the finest judges in the nation—elevated to the Supreme Court herself one day, most are unaware that before she was a judge, Sykes actually earned a college degree in journalism. And it showed, as she conducted a fascinating interview that showed people a side of Thomas rarely seen by anyone except his close friends.

Sykes took Thomas through his childhood years, where he and his brother were raised in Pin Point, Georgia, until age seven by his mother (his father had abandoned them), until she could no longer provide for them and sent them to Savannah to be raised by their grandparents.

As he discusses in his candid memoir, My Grandfather’s Son, Thomas was raised in extreme poverty, in a house with no running water and only a single electrical light. Yet he considered his life idyllic, not even knowing the standard of living that many Americans enjoyed by comparison.

SEN. TED CRUZ SPEAKS AT THE VALUES VOTERS SUMMIT

The 2,200-plus who attended the 8^th annual Values Voter Summit took a presidential straw pol which Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) won with 42 percent of the votes.  Dr. Ben Carson finished second with 13 percent, with only one vote separating him from former Sen. Rick Santorum. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) came in fourth, with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fl.) right behind at six and five percent respectively.  (Click here for a complete list of straw poll results.)  Senator Cruz's speech to the Values Voter Summit follows:  (Note how deftly he handled his opponents' interruptions). 

 

MARK STEYN - RETURN GOVERNMENT PARKS TO THE STATES

Mark Steyn:

There is a sickness in the regulatory bureaucracy that Americans should be ashamed of. The NPS [National Park Service], like the IRS, is corrupt and should be abolished — and the government’s parks (they’re clearly not the people’s) returned to the states.

Me:   Yes.  The Federal Government under the Obama Administration has used thug tactics in shutting down access to the people's parks.  Steyn is right.  The government's parks should be returned to the states.  

U.S. GOVERNMENT OUT-OF-CONTROL EXPENDITURES

Big government throws around taxpayer money without any sense of responsibility or sanity.  Larry Edelson notes:

As our country heads toward another midnight fiscal brawl, let me give you some examples of how completely irresponsible our leaders are:

In 2010, the Internal Revenue Service spent $4.1 million on a lavish conference for 2,609 of its employees in Anaheim, California. Expenses included $50,000 for line dancing and “Star Trek” parody videos, and $64,000 in conference perks for employees, plus free meals, cocktails and hotel-suite upgrades.

In 2012, the Department of Agriculture spent $300,000 on activities pro­moting caviar produced in Idaho.

The Federal Communications Commission spent $2.2 billion in 2012 to provide phones to low-income Americans, up from $819 million in 2008. A review found that 41 percent of over 6 million recipients were either ineligible or failed to prove their eligibility for the program.

The Department of Energy’s Savannah River facility spent $7.7 million on severance pack­ages for 526 temporarily hired contract workers instead of issuing layoff notices. That’s over $14,600 per “temporary” employee.

Taxpayers spent $700 million in stimulus funds on the Department of Energy’s Smart Grid Demonstration Program. An audit found that $12.3 million in reimbursements lacked required supporting documentation.

IDEOLOGICAL CORRUPTION AT THE IRS

Family Research Council reports:

Deep in the Heart of Taxes...

If you want to engage in free speech, prepare to be taxed! That's the message from the IRS, where new documents are showing just how deep the roots of ideological corruption go. In the most powerful display of political profiling yet, USA Today leaked new paperwork proving that IRS was not only targeting conservative groups, but any groups that participated in "emotional" or "anti-Obama rhetoric." A whopping 162 groups were flagged by IRS agents for extra scrutiny on their tax exempt applications -- only 11 of them liberal.

The scandal, which grabbed plenty of headlines when it first broke, fell off the radar during the Syria crisis. Unfortunately for the Obama administration, these new revelations are putting the agency where it belongs: on the hot seat. Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.) made sure of that today in a Ways and Means Committee hearing with acting IRS Director Daniel Werfel. "Four months after the IRS admitted to targeting applicants for tax-exempt status, there are still many outstanding questions about when the targeting started, who knew about it, and why it was allowed to continue." Boutany's goal -- like ours -- is to ensure this abuse never happens again.

No one can be sure of that now, in an administration that uses the IRS as a hired thug to punish and silence conservatives. Ed Morrissey at HotAir.com is just one of the voices demanding accountability. "When the IRS starts targeting political dissent for scrutiny, they have stopped being a revenue collector and have become instead a political enforcer. That's dangerous for all Americans." If the IRS is going to wage a secret war against conservatives, then it's time for the House to wage an open one against corruption.

WAS IT VALERIE JERRETT, OBAMA'S ADVISOR, WHO GAVE THE ORDER TO STAND DOWN IN BENGHAZI?

WOW.    This is big news if it turns out to be true.  Rush Limbaugh devoted a segment of his radio program to Doug Ross's post, "Benghzi Bombshell: Valerie Jarrett, Commnder in Chief."

Confidential sources close to Conservative Report have confirmed that Valerie Jarrett was the key decision-maker for the administration, the night of the Benghazi terrorist attack on 9/11/2012.

The chronology of the evening of 9/11 are as follows:   [more...]

THE CREEPING AUTHORITARIANISM OF BARACK OBAMA

Dennis Henninger of the Wall Street Journal hits the nail on the head with his piece, subtitled, "Imposed law replaces checks and balances."  Anyone paying attention to Obama's demagogery, lawlessness, and tactical manipulations will find Henninger's piece a well-written presentatiom of what many already recognize and abhor.  Here's what Henninger writes: [my bolding]

If we learned anything about Barack Obama in his first term it is that when he starts repeating the same idea over and over, what's on his mind is something else.

The first term's over-and-over subject was "the wealthiest 1%." Past some point, people wondered why he kept beating these half-dead horses. After the election, we knew. It was to propagandize the targeted voting base that would provide his 4% popular-vote margin of victory—very young voters and minorities. They believed. He won.

The second-term over-and-over, elevated in his summer speech tour, is the shafting of the middle class. But the real purpose here isn't the speeches' parboiled proposals. It is what he says the shafting of the middle class is forcing him to do. It is forcing him to "act"—to undertake an unprecedented exercise of presidential power in domestic policy-making. ObamaCare was legislated. In the second term, new law will come from him.

Please don't complain later that you didn't see it coming. As always, Mr. Obama states publicly what his intentions are. He is doing that now. Toward the end of his speech last week in Jacksonville, Fla., he said: "So where I can act on my own, I'm going to act on my own. I won't wait for Congress." (Applause.)

The July 24 speech at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill., has at least four references to his intent to act on his own authority, as he interprets it: "That means whatever executive authority I have to help the middle class, I'll use it." (Applause.) And: "We're going to do everything we can, wherever we can, with or without Congress."

WASHINGTON HAS MADE A FARCE OF THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

So says (rightly) Andrew C. McCarthy, who says further (of the immigration bill):

...no “important legislation” should be 100 pages long, much less 1,200 (or the even more mind-boggling girth of monstrosities like Obamacare). . . . 

You cannot have a functioning democratic republic when the laws are so voluminous no one can know what the law is. And that is especially the case when (a) the rationale for passing new laws — according to “reform” proponents like Senator Marco Rubio and Rep. Paul Ryan — is that we don’t enforce the laws currently on the books; (b) key parts of legislation consist of commitments to do what previously enacted law already commands; and (c) the president, notwithstanding his oath to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, claims the power to refrain from enforcing whatever laws he disapproves of. Washington has made a farce of the legislative process and of the once proud boast that we are ”a nation of laws not men.” 

In his excellent little book A Matter of Interpretation, Justice Antonin Scalia recalls that the emperor Nero would post edicts high up on the pillars — it was a pretense of having the rule of law that barely camouflaged the reality of arbitrary and tyrranical enforcement. That is what we have now. It is what happens when a government gets so big no one any longer recognizes either the limits or why it is essential to have limits.

Whatever the merits of the legislation (and who can say with confidence what they are?), the senate process alone is reason enough to vote against it. World’s greatest deliberative body? It is astounding that any lawmaker could vote for this beast and still call himself a conservative supporter of limited government. 

Shades Of “Mr Smith Goes To Washington”: Rep. Trey Gowdy Dresses Down IRS For Reckless Conference Spending

From Weasel Zippers who says

This is from a few days ago, but really deserves not to be missed. What we need are clones of Trey Gowdy, who exudes “Mr Smith Goes To Washington” when, perhaps, we are most in need of it.

He notes it is not a question of “training”, but a question of character.

I totally agree.  Heartfelt.  Honest.   Real.   Gowdy (R-SC) should be interviewed on news shows to remind us how tawdry the "slick ones" are by comparison.

 

PEGGY NOONAN - "THIS IS NO ORDINARY SCANDAL"

Echoing my own sensibilities concerning the scandals rocking the Obama Administration, Noonan published today a MUST-READ column.  She subtitles her article, "Political abuse of the IRS threatens the basic integrity of our government."  Right!

How serious is it that the mess be cleaned up?  Noonan correctly says:

Everyone involved in this abuse of power should pay a price, because if they don't, the politicization of the IRS will continue—forever.  If it is not stopped now, it will never stop. And if it isn't stopped, no one will ever respect or have even minimal faith in the revenue-gathering arm of the U.S. government again.  . . .  This is not about the usual partisan slugfest. This is about the integrity of our system of government and our ability to trust, which is to say our ability to function. [my emphases]

It's that serious.   Read the whole piece here.

LET THE LIGHT SHINE ON THE LAWLESS, ABUSIVE, INTIMIDATING OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

My thoughts:  

Anybody paying attention to the practices (scandals) and behavior (cover-ups) of the Obama administration should be outraged to apoplectic proportions.  The Obama Administration with its disregard for law, its intrusiveness, and its intimidating tactics, has subjected citizens of the United States to the brink of dictatorial tyranny.  Can liberty-loving people survive this Administration?  Only, I think, if Congress rises up and successfully asserts its authority over an out-of-control, power-mad, lawless Presidency and bureaucracy.  The dormant, sleepy, "see-no-evil" press needs to move beyond a brief moment of indignation and adopt a sustained will to uncover truth (yes, there is such a thing as "truth" despite postmodern philosophical idiocies) and keep the searchlight shining brightly until people are either thrown out of office or thrown into jail (or both, as the case might be).  The future of the Republic depends on just such a massive rooting out of the rottenness that pervades this administration and continues to threaten our liberty.

- G.K. Chesterton - “Sound historians know that most tyrannies have been possible because men moved too late.  It is often essential to resist a tyranny before it exists.”

- In addition (update), can we please stop the Obama administration's aggressive, growing hostility towards Christians in the military? 

SARAH PALIN: "LET THE LIGHT SHINE ON THE CORRUPTION AT THE HEART OF BIG GOVERNMENT"

I have friends who can't stand Sarah Palin, and for the life of me that hatred makes no sense to me at all.  She released the following statement this evening on her Facebook.  I think it sensible and agree with it wholeheartedly.   (via the Right Scoop)   [my bolding]

Let the Light Shine 

Today we learned that our government targeted and harassed conservative Americans who simply wanted to be involved in the national discussion. Is it any wonder why Americans are so distrustful of D.C.? I'm sure President Obama is grateful for all the help the IRS gave his reelection campaign, but, still, you have to wonder how the bureaucrats who tried to pull this off can sleep at night. 

So many Americans knew this was happening, but many felt defenseless and even helpless against a government that seems to roll along without accountability or sense of obligation to the people it’s supposed to serve. These Americans were mocked for being concerned about this, but now we see light shining on the truth, finally.

This IRS revelation is another step in the unraveling of the Obama administration's self-proclaimed “hope and change.” Between the Benghazi cover-up and the IRS targeting Obama’s political opponents, we see the corruption at the heart of big government. 

Americans should remember that this same corrupt IRS will be in charge of enforcing Obamacare. And this same inept and corrupt government will supposedly secure our now unsecured borders in advance of immigration reform and will implement a completely ethical and non-political IPAB panel to make life and death health care decisions for you and your family. Forgive me for not trusting these big government promises any more than I trust the White House’s latest Benghazi spin or the IRS’ fairness.

Despite all of this, I still believe that this “fundamental transformation of America” is temporary. This attempted transformation into a disheartened, weakened, unrecognizable nation is so far below anything Americans deserve. It becomes permanent only if we throw up our hands and surrender to the corruption and cover-ups.

We must demand more light shine on all that’s transpiring in D.C.’s self-absorbed bubble. On the IRS scandal, we must have accountability and a full investigation. On Benghazi, Speaker Boehner must create a Select Committee with full investigative and subpoena authority to get to the bottom of the cover-up.  Keep the faith, friends.

Me:  Who is it who thinks they can lie to the American people and continue governing as if this is acceptable practice? Government is "of the people, by the people, for the people."  Anyone serving in Washington does so as a servant of the people, as an elected representative.   We are not pawns to be manipulated at will by our betters.  If anyone lies to the American people, that person should be thrown out of office.  Bureaucracies should be accountable to Congress.    I like Sarah Palin's call to keep the faith and do all in our power to expose the corruption and recover the nation's moral moorings.

HAVE SEGMENTS OF THE U.S. MILITARY TURNED ANTI-CHRISTIAN?

Carefully ponder the following FRC collation of recent actions of the U.S. military.  Unless our Senators and Representatives step in and call a halt to this trend, the future look ominous for Christians in the United States.  

What are America's biggest threats? Hamas? Al Qaeda? According to recent statements by U.S. military officials--including an Army briefing on "religious extremism," the military should be just as concerned with Evangelical Christians and Catholics as threats to America.

In another example, it was discovered that Lt. Col. Jack Rich of the U.S. Army highlighted FRC and American Family Association (AFA) as specific groups who do not share "our Army Values." Rich warned his subordinates "When we see behaviors that are inconsistent with Army Values--don't just walk by. Do the right thing and address the concern before it becomes a problem." The 14-page email goes on to smear FRC and AFA by name, lumping us in with the real extremists of the Ku Klux Klan, Black Panthers, and neo-Nazis--as labeled by the anti-Christian Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which was connected in court to the terrorist shooting at Family Research Council's headquarters on August 15.

This type of inflammatory rhetoric is not isolated. As Fox News correspondent Todd Starnes reported this week, these incidents follow a long line of recent military missteps:

• A Fort Leavenworth War Games scenario identified Christian and Evangelical groups as potential threats
• A 2009 Dept. of Homeland Security memo identified Evangelicals and pro-life groups as potential threats to national security
• The U.S. Military Academy's Combating Terrorism Center released a study linking pro-lifers to terrorism
• Evangelical leader Franklin Graham was uninvited from the Pentagon's National Day of Prayer service
• At the National Cemetery in Houston, Christian prayers were prohibited at the funeral services for military veterans
• Distribution of Bibles was banned for a time at Walter Reed Army Medical Center
• Christian crosses and a steeple were removed from a chapel in Afghanistan because the military said the icons disrespected other religions
• Catholic chaplains were prohibited from reading a letter to parishioners from their archbishop regarding the Obama HHS mandate.

A number of lawmakers, led by Congressman Doug Lamborn (R- Colo.) are demanding answers. In a letter to the Secretary of the Army, he and other Members of Congress are calling on the Army to apologize for attacking Christians and labeling them as extremists.

Join us in standing by these lawmakers by co-signing the letter to the military and show these officials that Evangelicals and Catholics should not be marginalized as "extremists."

DHS PURCHASES 21.6 MILLION MORE ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION

I wonder what's going on.  Does anybody else find this news eery, worrisome or suspicious?  Infowars reports (HT: Drudge):

The Department of Homeland Security is set to purchase a further 21.6 million rounds of ammunition to add to the 1.6 billion bullets it has already obtained over the course of the last 10 months alone, figures which have stoked concerns that the federal agency is preparing for civil unrest.

A solicitation posted yesterday on the Fed Bid website details how the bullets are required for the DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Artesia, New Mexico.

The solicitation asks for 10 million pistol cartridge .40 caliber 165 Grain, jacketed Hollow point bullets (100 quantities of 100,000 rounds) and 10 million 9mm 115 grain jacketed hollow point bullets (100 quantities of 100,000 rounds).

The document also lists a requirement for 1.6 million pistol cartridge 9mm ball bullets (40 quantities of 40,000 rounds).

An approximation of how many rounds of ammunition the DHS has now secured over the last 10 months stands at around 1.625 billion. In March 2012, ATK announced that they had agreed to provide the DHS with a maximum of 450 million bullets over four years, a story that prompted questions about why the feds were buying ammunition in such large quantities.

To put that in perspective, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month. Extrapolating the figures, the DHS has purchased enough bullets over the last 10 months to wage a full scale war for almost 30 years.

DOES LARCENY IN THE HEART MOTIVATE TAXING THE RICH?

Doug Wilson thinks so.  He makes a good and generally unrecognized point:

[...]  We have thieves in Congress and in the White House because we have thievery in our hearts. Because we have larceny in our hearts, wanting to pay off 2012 debts with 2022 money, we put up with Bernake's monkeyshines at the Fed. Because we have larceny in our hearts, we hear a politician say that the rich should pay their "fair share" and we reflexively say yeah! -- in the name of justice. Thus we call rank injustice justice (Is. 5:20), and we do it because there is larceny in our little piggy hearts. Because we have larceny in our hearts, we call it greed when someone wants to keep the money he made, and we don't call it greed when we want to take it away from him. But we are the ones with sticky fingers -- and we have sticky fingers because of our sticky hearts. . . .

By the way, and I simply make this point in passing, it will do no good to get off this charge by appealing to our cultural memories of Robin Hood. He was not robbing the rich to give to the poor. He was robbing the tax collectors in order to get the money back to the people who had earned it in the first place. The Sherwood Forest hideout had a Gadsden flag flying over it.  [more . . .]

EVERYONE IN U.S. UNDER VIRTUAL SURVEILLANCE - NSA WHISTLEBLOWER

Read about it here.  (HT: Drudge)

ABBOT AND COSTELLO ON UNEMPLOYMENT

The following is how Washington fudges reality.  From an email (JS):

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the Unemployment Rate in America. ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It’s 9%. COSTELLO: That many people are out of work? ABBOTT: No, that’s 16%. COSTELLO: You just said 9%. ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed. COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work. ABBOTT: No, that’s 16%. COSTELLO: Okay, so it’s 16% unemployed. ABBOTT: No, that’s 9%… COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 16%? ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work. COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed. ABBOTT: No, Obama said you can’t count the “Out of Work” as the unemployed.You have to look for work to be unemployed. COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!! ABBOTT: No, you miss his point. COSTELLO: What point? ABBOTT: Someone who doesn’t look for work can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair. COSTELLO: To whom? ABBOTT: The unemployed. COSTELLO: But they are ALL unemployed! ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work gave up looking. If you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed. COSTELLO: So if you’re off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment? ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Of course! COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don’t look for work? ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That’s how it gets to 9%.If you counted them ALL it would be 16%. He doesn’t want anybody reading about 16% unemployment. COSTELLO: Now that would be tough on his reelection? ABBOTT: Absolutely. COSTELLO: Wait a minute. Does that mean there are two ways to bring down the unemployment rate? ABBOTT: Two ways is correct. COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job? ABBOTT: Correct. COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job? ABBOTT: Bingo. COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to have Obama's supporters stop looking for work. ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like the Obama Economy Czar. COSTELLO: I don’t even know what the hell I just said! ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like Obama!

JOBS REPORT NUMBERS UNDER ATTACK AND RIGHTLY SO

- Jack Welch, former head of GE, says "I was right about that strange jobs report." 

...the 7.8% unemployment figure released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) last week is downright implausible. And that's why I made a stink about it.  [more . . . ]

-- Rick Santelli at CNBC gets into a shouting match with Steve Liesman.  Santelli's the man:

Rick Santelli, the man widely regarded as the founding father of the Tea Party movement, got into an incredibly intense shouting match Tuesday morning with CNBC reporter Steve Liesman over recent comments regarding possible election-year manipulation of the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics jobs report.

 

 

 

 

"HOMELAND SECURITY" PURCHASES 200 MILLION MORE ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION

What's going on?!?   (HT: Drudge)  Read the article for yourself. 

Following controversy over its purchase of around 1.2 billion bullets in the last six months alone, the Department of Homeland Security has put out a new solicitation for over 200 million more rounds of ammunition, some of which are designated to be used by snipers.

A series of new solicitations posted on the FedBizOpps website show that the DHS is looking to purchase 200 million rounds of .223 rifle ammunition over the next four years, as well as 176,000 rounds of .308 caliber 168 grain hollow point boat tail (HPBT) rounds in addition to 25,000 rounds of blank .308 caliber bullets.

As James Smith over at the Prepper Podcast website highlights, “It is the type of ammunition and not necessarily the quantity that is troubling.”

Smith points out that the DHS’ acquisition of .308 rounds is of concern because they are set to be used by well-trained snipers.   . . .

The U.S. Army has also been preparing for domestic disorder.

A recently leaked US Army Military Police training manual for “Civil Disturbance Operations” outlines how military assets are to be used domestically to quell riots, confiscate firearms and even kill Americans on U.S. soil during mass civil unrest.       [more . . .]

Me:  Is there some explanation I am missing that would allay us from fearing our own government?

GOV. SCOTT WALKER'S RECALL VICTORY SPEECH

What a gracious, God-fearing, family-faithful, courageous, articulate man! 

Here's an Associated Press summary of the issues triggering the recall vote:

Walker entered the national spotlight last year when he unveiled plans to plug a $3.6 billion budget shortfall in part by taking away the union rights of most public workers and requiring them to pay more for their health insurance and pension benefits. It was one of his first moves in office, and it was explosive.

Democrats and labor leaders saw it as a political tactic designed to gut the power of his opposition. State Senate Democrats left Wisconsin for three weeks in a sort of filibuster, as tens of thousands of teachers, state workers and others rallied at the Capitol in protest.

But the tea-party supported fiscal conservative remained steadfast. Walker believed his plan would help him control the state budget, and his opponents could not stop Republicans who control the state Legislature from approving his plans.

Walker went on to sign into law several other measures that fueled the recall, including repealing a law giving discrimination victims more ways to sue for damages, making deep cuts to public schools and higher education, and requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls.

Both sides mobilized thousands of people and millions of dollars to influence voters, whom polls showed were more divided than ever. Signs calling for Walker's removal and those supporting the 44-year-old son of a minister dotted the state's landscape all spring at a time normally devoid of political contests.

More than $66 million was spent on the race as of May 21, making it easily the most expensive in Wisconsin history. That money was spent on an all-out barrage of television ads, direct mail, automated calls and other advertising that permeated the state for months.

Also Tuesday, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch and at least three Republicans in state Senate races survived recalls. Unofficial results showed the Democrat ahead in the other Senate race, the outcome of which will determine which party controls the Senate at least through the end of the year.

Walker avoided gloating in his speech and offered his adversaries a fresh start.

"Now it is time to move on and move forward in Wisconsin," Walker said in his speech. "Tomorrow is the day after the election, and tomorrow we are no longer opponents."

Me: This summary doesn't mention that Gov. Walker is solidly pro-life!

SHOULD WE START STOCKPILING INCANDESCENT LIGHTBULBS?

I think that would be a good idea.  From CBN News:

Text of the report:

HOLLOWVILLE, N.Y. -- For more than 130 years, Thomas Edison's incandescent bulb has lit up homes around the world. Now, the light bulb as we know it may soon be a thing of the past.

Beginning this year, the federal government plans to phase out traditional incandescent light bulbs. The first to go is the 100-watt bulb.

It's all a part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Republicans in Congress are fighting its enactment. But if they fail, the law will go into effect later this year.

Is this an energy-saving move or another example of a government power grab?

OBAMA'S "LAW OF THE SEA TREATY" - A TREATY THE U.S. MUST REJECT

The Family Research Council reports:  (the bolding is my emphasis)

Rule number one of federal lawmaking: When a Senator says his colleagues would be "more comfortable" voting on a bill after an election, it spells trouble. And in the case of Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), that trouble is spelled LOST, or Law of the Sea Treaty. It's been 30 years since President Reagan first sank the idea of a maritime bureaucracy, but that hasn't stopped big government advocates from dredging up the policy every few years and selling it to Congress as buried treasure. Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sen. Kerry, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta took turns pitching the 1982 treaty in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as a way to "bring order" to the world's oceans. The way they see it, LOST would help define the boundaries in international waters and create a "more peaceful" sea environment.

It sounds innocent enough, but behind those benign talking points is a dangerous agenda that would undermine U.S. security--and siphon away millions of dollars in the process. Lost in LOST's hearing were the facts. For one, proponents neglected to mention that the treaty would force America to release its hold on miles and miles of natural resources. Instead of profiting from the discoveries of oil or gas, U.S. companies would have to transfer those royalties to an international bureaucracy in charge of "redistributing" that wealth (sound familiar?) to needy nations. According to the U.S. Continental Shelf Task Force, those resources "may be worth billions, if not trillions, of dollars."

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), one of two dozen Republicans that oppose LOST, was emphatic about the threat. "[This] would be the first time in history that an international organization would possess a taxing authority, and it would amount to billions of American dollars being transferred out of the U.S. Treasury," he wrote. What's more, this "International Seabed Authority," or ISA, would have the power to haul the U.S. before global tribunals for perceived violations, order countries to share cutting-edge technologies, and bar the Navy from using global waterways for defense or military purposes. And if member nations decide to change the treaty? "There is no guarantee that the treaty will remain in the form that it is at the time of ratification. Under its terms, its content can later be changed by an amendment process that does not require the approval of the U.S. government."

Of course, most people recognized the bill was bad when Sen. Kerry announced during yesterday's hearing that he "would like to see this treaty stay out of the hurly-burly of presidential politics." Translation? I plan on pushing this bill after November 6 so that Senators can't be held accountable for passing such a controversial bill. Obviously, Sen Kerry and friends are hoping to follow the pattern of last year's START treaty, which is to wait until the lame-duck session to force unpopular and potentially unconstitutional policies on the American people.

Unfortunately for voters, this is a favorite tactic of the administration: using treaties to get radical policies through the country's backdoor. But, as FRC expert (and former ambassador to the U.N.) Ken Blackwell knows, this is exactly the kind of slippery slope that masks the destruction of American authority on everything from religious freedom to parental rights. What else could explain the Left's advocacy for the U.N.'s Convention on the Rights of the Child or the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women? They understand that once we dip our toe in the oceans, there will be no way to stem the tide.

- See also Frank Gaffney's commentary:

If, on the other hand, the members of the U.S. Senate trouble themselves to study, or at least read, the text of the Law of the Sea Treaty, they would immediately see it for what it really is: a diplomatic dinosaur, a throwback to a bygone era when U.N. negotiations were dominated by communists of the Soviet Union and their fellow travelers in the Third World.

DANIEL HANNAN - "A EUROPEAN'S WARNING TO AMERICA"

I have begun going through a pile of clippings that badly need sorting through.  Some clippings date back months,  and some even a couple of years.  That doesn't mean they are out of date.  Hannan's warning was printed in the Wall Street Journal a year ago.  He's a Brit who understands Obama's goals, and sees them as a program of comprehensive Europeanization.  If asked, Hannan says

He (Obama) would say he wants a fairer America, a more tolerant America, a less arrogant America, a more engaged America. When you prize away the cliché, what these phrases amount to are higher taxes, less patriotism, a bigger role for state bureaucracies, and a transfer of sovereignty to global institutions.

He is not pursuing a set of random initiatives but a program of comprehensive Europeanization: European health care, European welfare, European carbon taxes, European day care, European college education, even a European foreign policy, based on engagement with supranational technocracies, nuclear disarmament and a reluctance to deploy forces overseas.

Hannan's article spells out how disastrous such a program has proven in Europe and how it will prove the same in America.  Read the whole article.  It should be noted that his essay is adapted from his short, 48 page booklet, "Why America Must Not Follow Europe."

JAMES O'KEEFE STRIKES AGAIN: PROVES VOTER FRAUD OCCURS WITHOUT VOTER ID

Here's the story: (HT: Drudge)

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has declared that there is no proof that in-person voter fraud is a problem. He's about to see proof that even he can't deny.

In a new video (below) provided to Breitbart.com, James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas demonstrates why Holder should stop attacking voter ID laws--by walking into Holder’s voting precinct and showing the world that anyone can obtain Eric Holder’s primary ballot. Literally. [more...]

 

Response from Eric Holder's Department of Justice? "Evidence of Voter Fraud 'Manufactured'  

Me:  It wasn't so much "manufactured" as "revealed" and thereby made perfectly obvious for everyone to see.  The Department of Justice has no interest in justice, nor has it a concern that voter fraud be eliminated.  It sees itself as a tool of the Democrat party with the responsibility to insure Democrat candidates win.  What does this mean?  It means corruption at the highest levels of government, and the breeding of cynicism.

John Fund comments on the O'Keefe expose: "Why We Need Voter-ID Now"

There is something surreal about the voter-ID issue. As James O’Keefe demonstrates, it is comically easy to commit voter fraud in person, and, unless someone confesses, it’s very difficult to ever detect. . . 

Other than hypotheticals, there are very few cases of legitimate voters who were unable to have their vote counted because they lacked ID. People who show up without photo ID at the polls are allowed to cast a provisional ballot that is counted after proof of identity is offered.

“From voter fraud to election chicanery of all kinds, America teeters on the edge of scandal every November,” says Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia and author of a comprehensive survey of voter fraud called “Dirty Little Secrets.” The fact that so many people want to thwart legitimate and prudent efforts to improve ballot integrity has become a scandal in its own right. Attorney General Holder is unlikely to agree with that, but after what happened at his polling place last Tuesday, he should at least understand that voter fraud itself is a scandal worth investigating.

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S MT. OLYMPUS BUREAUCRATIC EDICT FROM "HUD"

We live in a top-down, in-your-face administration, that doesn't seek Congress' permission or support for its own edicts imposed on the American people.  (Is this government "of the people, by the people, for the people?")  I wouldn't have known about the latest domestic edict if I hadn't received an email report from the Family Research Council.  Consider:

If you think the administration is liberal now, just want until next year when the President is not facing reelection. For the most radical White House in history, there is no limit to the damage he could inflict on this country. Even now, in his third year, Americans are only slowly learning what the administration has already done in secret. New abuses are trickling out every day, including this latest announcement from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The President decided that if he can't pass a non-discrimination policy, he'll implement one anyway. On Friday, the administration handed down a new rule, ordering HUD to add "sexual orientation" to the non-discrimination policy on housing applications.

Under this edict, faith-based groups such as Catholic Charities, who operate housing complexes in partnership with HUD, would be forced to abandon their beliefs on marriage and accept homosexual couples--or end their grant with the federal government. Last year, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops urged HUD to not to create a "new protected classification" that flies in the face of congressional policy. But, once again, the administration proved that it would risk services for the most vulnerable just to advance their radical social agenda. Barbara McQuade, one of the lobbyists on the issue, congratulated the President for barging ahead on the new language without the legislature's approval. "I really applaud the administration, which isn't waiting around for Congress," she told reporters. Ironically, that was the fulfillment of another Obama promise--one that he made quite publicly. "Where they won't act," the President warned, "I will." Even, it appears, if he lacks the constitutional authority to do so.

Me: Why "wait around for Congress" when you can assume dictatorial powers?  That rhetorical question summarizes Obama's philosophy of governance.  It's what scares many of us, and should scare all of us.  We are in the process of throwing away our heritage of freedom and self-government.  We are living through a crucial historical testing point of whether we will survive as a free, self-governing people or as a nation of sheep shoved around by unelected bureaucrats posting edicts and mandates under Presidential direction. 

QUOTE OF THE DAY

Ken Blackwell -  [my bolding]

It would not be a stretch to call Mr. Obama’s health care Mandate a "kulturkampf."  If he can force Catholic institutions—hospitals, schools, and para-church ministries—to provide drugs that can cause abortions now, why wouldn’t his next move be to mandate they actually provide for surgical abortions next year? And why not force all of us to pay for sex change operations, too?

Me:  Why not indeed?  There is no logical stopping point to curtail government's expanding power to mandate whatever it wants over the will of the American people.

JOHN VENNARI - "WHAT OBAMA LEARNED FROM ALINSKY"

I'm grateful to a friend for passing along Vennari's important article.  (HT: bs)  I haven't read Saul D. Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," but see the need to do so.  If Alinsky advocated a radical relativism and amorality in furthering political goals as stated below, we have all the more reason to fear the current occupant of the White House since he is regarded as Alinsky's disciple.  Vennari writes:

Obama was a student of the ruthless tactics of Saul Alinsky, the left-wing agitator whose landmark Rules for Radicals was dedicated to the devil.[9] Mike Kruglik, Obama’s Chicago instructor in Alinsky methods, said Obama was the best student of Alinsky tactics he ever had.[10]

David Alinsky, Saul Alinsky’s son, applauded Obama’s successful implementation of Alinsky methods. Immediately after Obama’s acceptance speech at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, David Alinsky wrote a letter to the Boston Globe in full praise of Obama as one who learned well his father’s methods.[11]

Even Obama zealot Chris Matthews, in a December 2010 broadcast of “Hardball”, referred to Obama as “the guy who comes from Saul Alinsky”.[12]

As is stated in his Rules for Radicals, Alinsky’s foundational principles are:

1) There is no such thing as dogma, all truth is relative: “For the organizer, everything is relative and changing,” said Alinsky. The organizer “does not have any fixed truth.” This places the organizer in a superior position, Alinsky insisted, because he is “free from the shackles of dogma.”[13]

2) There is no such thing as a fixed rule of ethics. For Alinksy, the end justifies the means, and all ethics are elastic according to the situation you are in or the strategy you need to employ. Alinsky taught, “Ethical standards must be elastic to stretch with the times.”[14] If you need to lie, you lie. If you need to make promises you know you won’t keep, you do it anyway.

3) Corruption in the leader is a kind of virtue: “To say that a corrupt means corrupts the ends is to believe in the Immaculate Conception of ends and principle”, Alinksy blasphemously asserted. “The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process. He who fears corruption, fears life.” Alinsky castigates the leader who places his personal conscience and personal salvation above the needs of the people, claiming that such a leader “does not care enough for the people to be corrupted for them”.[15]

This is the school in which Barack Obama was formed: no dogma; no objective truth; no fixed standards of ethics; the end justifies the means; and corruption in the leader is raised to the level of virtue.

How can anyone believe anything Obama says? There is no fixed standard of ethics preventing him from lying to achieve whatever aims he deems fit.

As a student of Alinksy (as is Hillary Clinton), [16] Obama will think nothing of stamping out those who stand in the way of his Party’s agenda. In his 1946 Reveille for Radicals: Alinsky wrote that if the radicals become stronger than the opposition, they must “crush the opposition”.[17]

Congressman Chris Smith and Tulsa’s Bishop Slattery appear aware of Obama’s aim to “crush the opposition”. As noted, Smith warned that Obama’s pro-abortion directives are designed so that “religious hospitals will be squeezed out.” Bishop Slattery observed the new mandate may end up “closing down every Catholic school, hospital and the other public ministries of the Church, which is perhaps their underlying intention.”

It is futile appealing the Constitution to Obama, since he publicly expresses support for its effective revision.

In a 2001 radio interview, Obama argued that the Warren Court, which started a long line of activist decisions in a number of areas, did not go far enough:

1) it failed to bring about “redistributive change” and a “redistribution of wealth”;

2) it failed to, in Obama’s words, “break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution”[18]

In his book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama had this to say:

“Ultimately, I have to side with Justice Breyer’s view of the Constitution – that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of the ever-changing world.”[19]

Obama belongs to the clique of doctrinal liberals whose basic tenet is, “the only law of the land should be what we say it is at the moment,” which is a formula for State Absolutism. . . .

Read the whole thing.  These facts should raise the fear factor of every freedom-loving America.

MICHAEL GERSON - "THE WAR ON RELIGION IS NOW FORMALLY DECLARED"

Michael Gerson, former speechwriter for President Bush and a Washington Post columnist, penned a column back on January 30th that I missed -- "Obama plays his Catholic allies for fools."  It's clear Gerson understood immediately the implications of Obama's "in your face" executive order putting a fist in the face of religious conscience.  Gerson in my mind has always been a restrained person, something of a "moderate" Republican, and a self-identified Protestant.  Yet he wrote:

Both radicalism and maliciousness are at work in Obama’s decision — an edict delivered with a sneer. It is the most transparently anti-Catholic maneuver by the federal government since the Blaine Amendment was proposed in 1875 — a measure designed to diminish public tolerance of Romanism, then regarded as foreign, authoritarian and illiberal. Modern liberalism has progressed to the point of adopting the attitudes and methods of 19th-century Republican nativists. . . .

And,

Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears.

Obama’s decision also reflects a certain view of liberalism. Classical liberalism was concerned with the freedom to hold and practice beliefs at odds with a public consensus. Modern liberalism uses the power of the state to impose liberal values on institutions it regards as backward. It is the difference between pluralism and anti-­clericalism.

The administration’s ultimate motivation is uncertain. Has it adopted a radical secularism out of conviction, or is it cynically appealing to radical secularists? In either case, the war on religion is now formally declared.  [emphases mine]

Me:  We are confronted with a serious and dangerous threat from our own President and his supporters.  Freedom in the United States is now under seige from a militant executive branch and its Democrat congressional allies intent on "reforming" (read: "deforming and obliterating") basic freedoms we have taken for granted all our lives.  These are serious developments indeed.

QUICK TAKES

- - Newt: Would ABC ever air a show that portrays Muslims the way "GCB" portrays Christians?

         - - George Will - As Government becomes bigger, it becomes more lawless.       

         - - Tina Kobe (a sharp young commentator at HotAir.com), takes Bill Maher to task for his vicious, ignorant attack on homeschoolers. This is a MUST READ if you want to know about homeschooling successes.

- - Newest Limbaugh advertiser: Twitchy.com   (Twitchy.com is a social media aggregator started by Michelle Malkin, a cracker jack of a blogger who began HotAir and has now added Twitchy to her entrepreneurial effort.    The full announcement of her new Twitchy.com ad buy with Rush Limbaugh is here.)

SENATE DEMOCRATS VOTE TO RESTRICT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN AMERICA

I've borrowed the title of this post from Jim Loft over at Gateway Pundit who wrote:

The vote today suports Barack Obama’s HHS Mandate that forces religious institutions to provide free birth control, abortion drugs and sterilizations. This goes against church doctrine.

He posted the following MUST VIEW video:

Loft further wrote:

Americans United for Life is launching this educational video along with a website to help people understand the manipulative policies in the pending healthcare law that are forcing both an abortion mandate and an abortion-inducing drug mandate on all Americans — regardless of their personal beliefs. In a public relations bait-and-switch tactic, the administration pretends that this is about contraception. It is not.

GLENN BECK - "WE'RE ALL CATHOLICS NOW"

Beck is absolutely right.  And the issue is huge.  He writes in today's Washington Post, "Why we are all Catholics now":

[..] The the state is telling the Catholic Church to violate its principles and teachings. So if you are a person of faith, you must call yourself a Catholic.

Today, the Catholic Church is defending a historic American freedom. We tend to forget that many of America’s earliest European settlers were religious refugees. Europe was not a kind place to the faithful if the state didn’t approve: Jews in Spain, Puritans in England, Protestants in France and so on. You were cast out, or worse.

Our Founding Fathers remembered this. They knew if you can’t serve God as you choose, you are not free. And so they enshrined that right in the First Amendment of the Constitution: The state “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

This is why Americans are offended by the ruling from the White House that would force church-run institutions to pay for birth control and morning-after pills, which are tantamount to abortion. The so-called compromise is no compromise – under government-approved health insurance plans that the church pays for, abortifacients would be covered. Sin by proxy – that’s the compromise.

This isn’t a fight over abortion or birth control. This is about whether the state can force someone to pay to have their religious beliefs violated.

GLENN BECK - "WE'RE ALL CATHOLICS NOW"

Beck is absolutely right.  And the issue is huge.  He writes in today's Washington Post, "Why we are all Catholics now":

[..] The the state is telling the Catholic Church to violate its principles and teachings. So if you are a person of faith, you must call yourself a Catholic.

Today, the Catholic Church is defending a historic American freedom. We tend to forget that many of America’s earliest European settlers were religious refugees. Europe was not a kind place to the faithful if the state didn’t approve: Jews in Spain, Puritans in England, Protestants in France and so on. You were cast out, or worse.

Our Founding Fathers remembered this. They knew if you can’t serve God as you choose, you are not free. And so they enshrined that right in the First Amendment of the Constitution: The state “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

This is why Americans are offended by the ruling from the White House that would force church-run institutions to pay for birth control and morning-after pills, which are tantamount to abortion. The so-called compromise is no compromise – under government-approved health insurance plans that the church pays for, abortifacients would be covered. Sin by proxy – that’s the compromise.

This isn’t a fight over abortion or birth control. This is about whether the state can force someone to pay to have their religious beliefs violated.