Just a Thought

One of the worst problems with the IRS targeting political opponents as it is obvious they are doing is that it creates a culture of doing so. Even if and when they are not being directed to do so, which it is fairly obvious they are, they will continue to do so. Forget about enemies of a president or any particular political party what about perceived enemies of the IRS?

A giant institution develops self preservation attitudes and practices, this is what is happening throughout our bloated Federal government, the Department of Education's needs a SWAT Team, really?

What the left either fails to recognize, ignores or hopes it controls is that it is not just a matter of whether government can do "good" things, or even if it can do them efficiently both of which are highly debatable, it is a matter that big government can do ANYTHING. Unlike other institutions in society, there is nobody that can stop them, government especially the national government is God on Earth, the final authority. If We The People lose control of it, it controls us and eventually it does not matter which party you belong to because you belong to them. If you don't believe me just ask the NSA, they'll hear you.

Just a Thought

For those lamenting the the current state of the GOP and the conservative movement, let me give you some hope.

Come 2016 it is very likely that the three most likely front runners for the Republican nomination will be (in no particular order) Paul Ryan, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio. There will probably be be others, Chris Christie being a strong possibility but as it stands right now those three have the inside track to be the favorites.

In that likely scenario Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio will be considered the "establishment candidates" and Rand Paul would be considered the "grass roots" candidate. Think about that for a minute! Consider how far to the right the Republican Party has shifted in the past five years to even have such dynamic conservatives considered the front runners.

Think of the optics of those three being the front runners and for all practical purposes the spokesmen for the GOP debating one another on the national stage. If people like (my personal favorite) Mike Pence get into the race or even a woman or two like Susan Martinez or Kelly Ayotte jump in, the field would indeed be quite impressive. The mere fact that the only RINO on the list of serious potential candidates is Christie just goes to show how far the Republican Party has been shifted towards the conservative view.

If Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio are indeed considered "establishment" by 2016, I for one will be ecstatic......then there is always Benjamin Carson.

Just A Thought

With the recent revelations by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta that he had no communications with President Obama after the initial pre-scheduled meeting ninety minutes after they learned the American consulate in Benghazi was under attack, a very important question is not being asked. According to Panetta, Obama told him to do whatever was necessary to protect American lives. This is all well and good, Panetta would be the man to take charge of a response, but the question is this:


Did Obama authorize Panetta to send United States aircraft into Libya airspace without Libya's permission?

Putting aside the obvious lack of concern that Obama showed by not keeping up with the situation, the fact of the matter is that only the President of the United States can authorize the violation of another nation's sovereign territory. If he did not give Panetta that authority then for all practical purposes, Panetta really could do nothing. I would also suggest that such an order would have to be in writing, a verbal command would not suffice.

The fact that the only rescue mission that eventually did go to Benghazi was sent from Tripoli tends to lead one to believe that Obama did not give such an order and in fact one must wonder if he did not specifically deny such a request since everyone involved would know that his authorization would be required and certainly they would have asked for it.


Why the Senators during the hearing did not press him (Panetta) on this is curious. Perhaps they did not have time to think through the implications of what Panetta revealed, but nobody seems to be asking the right questions that would get to the bottom of this. So we probably never will.

Just A Thought

There is a very important lesson to be learned from what happened when John Boehner pulled the Sandy Emergency Funding bill the other night and it has nothing to do with that particular situation. The lesson is simply this, the Federal Government depends on the US House of Representatives for money...period.

When Boehner pulled the bill, no money was going to New Jersey or New York or any of the pork projects included in the bill. If the House of Representatives wants to cut off funding for something, all that they have to do is do it. It just takes political will. If the House does not want Obamacare, it can very simply not allocate funds for it. A previous congress can not dictate to a future congress. If the House of Representatives does not want to run up trillion dollar deficits, all it needs to do is not spend the money.

If the House truly wanted to put a stop to this it would just simply pass their budget, send it to the Senate and when Harry Reid ignored it, the House could refuse to participate in any more continuing resolutions until the Senate did their job and passed a budget...period. Let the government shut down until the Senate did its job.

Actually what Boehner did the other night in this case was the right thing, he should do it more often..

Article 1 section 7

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Just A Thought

A Very Bright Silver Lining (I Think)

I have a busy day today so I will not be posting or updating much until later but I wanted to put something out that has occurred to me since the vote last night. It had been on the back of my mind but really hit home with something that Grover Norquist tweeted last night:

gdnight. When Dems wake up they will realize they just made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent and lost their leverage for the next 4 yrs.
— Grover Norquist (@GroverNorquist) January 2, 2013

As much as I hate the idea of caving in, especially to higher taxes and to increasing the deficit, both of which happened last night, there truly is a silver lining in this very dark cloud.

After all what are Obama and the Democrats going to say when this really does not solve the big problems we face economically, "Tax the rich more?" Peter Ferrera has a good article out today where he makes the point that this does not prevent Republicans from seeking Tax reform as a larger economic bargain. I always thought that Mark Levin's idea for these negotiations for the House Republicans to pass a tax cut on the middle class and then just leave town and let the Dems and Obama argue against it was the way to go. They can still do it only on a grand scale. They now have the leverage and Obama has shot his wad.

From here on out it can only be about spending cuts and major reforms, the tax sideshow is off the table. Conservatives and the Tea Party ought to focus on using their influence to enact real change going forward and not get too hung up on the pickle John Bohner (who needs to go) got the right into by not being a good negotiator.

Most important we need to recognize that there are some 'inside Washington" crowd that are actually on our side but know the ground that they play on better than we do, I still think Paul Ryan is such a person, we will find out when the next battle takes place in the coming months.

As irritating as it is to watch Obama and the Dems chortle over this victory, it very well may be that while their smiling and patting themselves on the back, they are secretly in dire fear since they realize they are now running very low on ammunition.

I would also direct your attention to Erick Erickson's piece"A New Agenda" in The Road Forward sidebar where he makes some good points.

Jer

Just A Thought

I am a firm believer in planting seeds. I sincerely believe that when a light is shown in a dark place it will often direct people in a direction they had not previously observed. Although the seed of truth may take years to find fertile ground in a closed mind, when it does it usually becomes a passion for the individual. It is as if being awakened from a self imposed slumber, the person works tirelessly to make up for lost time.

Nancy (numberwise) who visits here often says correctly that I (we) are pretty much preaching to the choir, and she is right. Most people who visit here or sights like this are already conservatives, libertarians , constitutionalist, etc. Although we may disagree on specifics, or methods, for the most part we agree on the big picture issues and all we are truly doing is reinforcing our beliefs and supporting one another in what seems to be an increasingly darker world. Although this is needed, I suspect it is not enough to have a real impact on moving America back towards sanity ie: freedom.

I have a thought that perhaps people who do truly care about the future of liberty in America ought to step into the lion's den. Not with the intention of confronting or arguing with those ill informed about the truth of freedom's light but rather as teachers or more aptly as sowers of seeds.

My idea is this, to create an internet handle, an anonymous identity on the internet, and go to leftist and progressive blogs and sites and communicate with the enemy (so to speak). Not to confront them but to just listen to their ideology and to toss out seeds of truth, not in a confrontational manner but humbly, with the hopes of opening minds.

It is doubtful that anyone who attempts this will see the fruits of their labor directly, as i said it usually takes years to open a closed mind, but not always. When people begin to question their own beliefs, especially the young whom we are truly out to change, it can often happen quickly.

The left is constantly creating all sorts of organizations and groups in order to get their message out, usually it is pure propaganda based on lies, I have read much of it over the years. Why shouldn't we attempt to spread the truth of liberty in a similar matter?

The key I would think would be to stay above the fray and to not be drawn into long drawn out ideological discussions where a herd can develop but rather to just throw out nuggets of truth into ongoing discussions so as perhaps change the trajectory of someone's thought process. Perhaps engage in a discussion with a single individual for a time if it appears that they are receptive, but not to try to "take on" the leftist blogosphere but rather to

Just plant seeds

Just a thought

Jer

Oh if you think this is a good idea, link to this post and pass it on to others who might be receptive (Anonymous for Liberty)

Just A Thought

Although I would love to see John Boehner replaced as Speaker, I have always felt it was unlikely to happen. You don't become Speaker of the House without maintaining a lot of connections and clout within the "establishment". However when I saw this besides being taken aback, I can see just how far out on the "edge of the cliff "  Boehner is.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the incoming chairwoman of the House Republican Conference, says she opposes House Speaker John Boehner’s offer to raise taxes on wealthier Americans to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff.

“Raising those top two rates is really a straw man. It doesn’t solve the problem,” the Washington State congresswoman told C-Span on Sunday.

“We could raise the top rates to 100 percent and it would fund the government for 91 days.

“It’s a false promise.”

For those who might not be aware of who Cathy McMorris is, this picture which you have seen the likes of a thousand times on TV should remind you.

Just A Thought

I had a prior "thought" on Romney actually losing the election during the primary when I wrote:

I believe Republicans lost the Presidential election during the primaries. Not that they were hard fought, which they were, but that in the end they nominated a candidate that was opposed to by their base...

And

...In fact during the whole primary season the entire narrative was about the "anyone but Mitt" candidate that would save Republicans from nominating Romneycare .

I admit I was almost violently opposed to Romney during the primaries, as too were millions of others on the right. I came to like him during the general election process but even I am not sure if this wasn't due to comparing him to the alternative rather than an actual conversion....

I still believe this to be true and Jay Cost has written a piece in The Weekly Standard which in some ways supports this. He shows how badly Romney under performed among whites, which like it or not make up the bulk of the Republican base. This failure to turn out the white vote, was a bigger factor in Romney's loss than Obama's large edge among Hispanics and blacks. Cost concludes that it really came down to both candidates.

On balance, what does this all mean? While analysts have been slicing and dicing the data showing the behavior of this bloc and that group, the forest has gone missing for the trees. Romney’s underperformance relative to Bush’s is notable, but so is Obama’s underperformance relative to his 2008 haul. Combine this with the decline in turnout, particularly among white voters, and it appears that the country at large was dissatisfied with the choice offered.

Cost puts a lot of emphasis for this under-performance on the negative campaign run against Romney, which I am sure played a significant role with some "swing" voters. I contend however that many conservatives just "turned off" after the primaries and just said to themselves "OK America and the GOP you've made your bed now sleep in it."

As I have said I was vehemently opposed to Romney as the nominee, but I am now a political junkie who keeps very close tabs on everything going on in America and realized just how disastrous another four years of Obama will be, so I could swallow my principles, so to speak, and vote for the"greater good". Looking back on my life and my previous disinterest in the political process, though my ideology has not drastically changed in the past ten years my interest level has greatly increased. A decade ago I too might have just said "the hell with it, there is no difference."

I suspect many conservative leaning voters, watching the GOP nominate "Romneycare" just shut down and took a pass on the election. This is part of the reason why Romney had the sudden surge after the first debate,. Yes some of was that people who only had the Obama campaign's negative stereotype of Romney saw that he wasn't as bad as Obama commercials of him portrayed him to be, but I suspect a great deal of the post debate surge had to do with Republican's who were committed to the "anybody but Mitt" crowd during the primaries giving him a second look. Some of these disaffected conservatives did "come home" but many more watched as Romney played it safe and he did not reel them in by pressing his advantage.

I sincerely believe that Romney lost not due to a minority demographic shift in the electorate, but rather his inability to "connect" with the GOP base. As bad as this election loss is, and it is terrible for the country, I don't believe that we have lost America, but rather that the GOP lost America. I am hopeful that this is going to change in the next two years.

Just A Thought

On the recent Israel/Hamas dust up

One reason that I believe that the world is heading head first into a period of utter chaos is how far we have veered away from logic and reason when it comes to the basics of.... well logic and reason.

I understand the reason that this has come to pass, the leftist/progressive intellectual/ media complex has so corrupted society with false narratives to promote their agendas that truth is no longer  a necessary ingredient in forming public opinion.

I could write volumes on this deception but the problem at its core is that far too few people care about truth when forming their judgement anymore, false narratives are far easier and easier to digest.

Take the recent dust up between Israel and Hamas, right there is something that was lost in the false narrative, it was Israel versus Hamas not Israel versus the Palestinian people. It was a vibrant health democratic nation state defending itself
from a recognized terrorist groups attack on its sovereign territory. That is truth, though you would be hard pressed to hear it expressed so simply in all the commentary about it.

Consider how far we have traveled down the road towards chaos when the Israel Prime Minister has to actually thank the American President for recognizing "Israel’s need to defend itself, and Israel’s right to defend itself." A terrorist organization that as a plank in its charter calls for the destruction of Israel, uses missiles provided by Iran to wantonly attack innocent Israeli citizens is instead portrayed as the victim by a corrupt and lying media complex.

I have read no better summary of the culmination of this distortion than by David Goldman when he points out the obvious

It is astonishing that American officials and the world media have hailed Morsi simply because he first sicced his dog on his neighbor, and then called the dog off.

This sort of distortion of reality and the defense of evil can not go on indefinitely without dire consequences to a stable societal structure. If the world's leaders and "opinion makers" continue to promote agendas that are so diametrically opposed to truth, dark days lie ahead-

Truth Matters

Just A Thought

Although deeply disappointed in and in fact very scared for my country as the result of the re-election of Obama, as a political junky there are some things to look forward to.

The whole Fiscal cliff dilemma is going to be very interesting to watch unfold. I have absolutely no idea how it will be resolved if in fact it is resolved at all. There is always the possibility though I suspect a small one that everyone will call everyone else's bluff and they'll jump off the cliff together holding hands with one hand while pointing fingers with the other.

Then there is the whole Benghazi scandal which is morphing into the Petreaus/Benghazi scandal and all that will come out with that. I actually think this has the potential to be bigger than Watergate without the impeachment and without the coverage which will create even deeper divisions in the country. There are also a few other scandals out there that will begin to draw more attention as time goes on and since this is the most inept and corrupt administration in American history, more shall be revealed I am sure.

Also coming up, but seldom mentioned are two big items. The debt ceiling battle, wherein we probably get to watch the GOP once again sell out their principles , which is not true since they are bankrupt in that department and so there really isn't much left to sell off. The other big item, which ought to be fun to watch, if the judiciary branch doesn't once again sell out the American people, is the whole Fast and Furious scandal reawakening. Lest we forget Holder is still in contempt of Congress and a judge will soon issue an order on whether he has to release more documents. If he does, the revelations could be very explosive.

Finally we will get to watch over the next few years the assisted suicide of the United States as Obamacare is enacted. It will be sad but interesting to watch how the Democrats try to spin the ruin they have inflicted not only on our medical system and economy but on our liberties.

There is an old adage about good stories requiring conflict. Well I suspect the next four years will provide enough of that ingredient to fill a library. Unfortunately it will be like living in a Stephen King novel.

Just A Thought

I believe Republicans lost the Presidential election during the primaries. Not that they were hard fought, which they were, but that in the end they nominated a candidate that was opposed to by their base.

Remember all those primaries that Romney eked out a victory like Ohio and Michigan, hell it turned out he even lost Iowa after the fact. Remember South Carolina going overwhelmingly for Newt and most of the south going for an ex- Pennsylvania Senator Santorum. Remember all the excitement when Perry got in and he had huge support before he self destructed in 27 seconds. Remember 9-9-9 and Herman Cain of all people looking like someone who could finally dispose of the RINO Mitt. Do you remember all this and more, much more. Like Sarah Palin never endorsing anyone-especially Romney in fact who but fat Chris of New Jersey of the new breed of Republicans actually endorsed Mitt before it was virtually inevitable that he would win? Ryan did near the end, Rubio did not until the writing was unmistakable, certainly not during the Florida primaries when it would have cost him political capital in his home state and by the way neither did Jeb.

In fact during the whole primary season the entire narrative was about the "anyone but Mitt" candidate that would save Republicans from nominating Romneycare .

I admit I was almost violently opposed to Romney during the primaries, as too were millions of others on the right. I came to like him during the general election process but even I am not sure if this wasn't due to comparing him to the alternative rather than an actual conversion.

Romney, like so many others that the Republicans put up as their standard bearer was not the choice of the larger portion of their base. He won the nomination by division not by acclimation and I suspect many on the right, particularly those of libertarian leaning just said "not this time, no more." 

Do I agree with this sentiment, this "no more compromise" attitude? Not this time, it is too costly to the nation, perhaps even fatal, but I understand it and unless the Republican Party machine understands it rather than flaying around for other reasons, they and perhaps the US is doomed.

Just a Thought

I think one of the mistakes that was made in the past couple of years was the Tea Party Movement going pretty much underground. I very much do believe that they did need to morph into a political activist movement, but I believe they should keep up the visible demonstrations which was the initial catalyst for the enthusiasm.

I believe besides keeping the movement energized it would keep its message before the public, drawing in more "sideline" type individuals. By abandoning the streets it was easy for the media/the left to marginalize its importance with the general public and to create a narrative of what the TPM is. Out in public people are able to see who we are and that we are not the racist etc that we are portrayed to be. While doing the work that needs to be done for elections is important and critical, public exposure and putting a real face to what we are is too. The Tea Party movement allowed the media to define and portray us and then we went silent as if in hiding. I think this was a mistake.

Jer

Just a thought

Doesn't it seem a bit odd that not much is being made of the fact that 11 million less people vote in 2012 than in 2008? I am sure there are still votes to be counted which will go into the final totals but I am sure it won't come anywhere near making this election less participated in than 2008. As it stands now less people voted yesterday than in 2004. Going back 3 decades I can find no case where there were less voters from one election to the next less alone over two elections. I don't know, something doesn't seem quite right here. Why would so many people simply not vote from one election to the next. I can see Obama dropping off, but Romney didn't get as many votes as McCain in 2008 or even Kerry in 2004. This just seems weird to me.

Jer

Just a thought

On Benghazi

I have a feeling that once the truth comes out about Benghazi, and it will, that we will find out that the reason for not sending help was that whoever made the decision, I suspect Obama, was worried about all those missing surface to air missiles.

Although this might somewhat absolve the administration for not sending help, or at least give them a reasonable explanation for not doing so, it opens up bunches of other cans of worms which is probably why they did not reveal this in the first place. It was easier to lie and come up with a cover story that the You Tube video was the culprit than to explain that Obama's Libya policy was so inept that it has resulted in our Ambassador and others being dead and the reason we could not save them was because al Queda had acquired missiles that could shoot down gunships and planes that we could have sent to save them, not to mention civilian airliners.

The terrible irony in all this is that Glen Doherty, one of the ex SEALS killed in this fiasco was actually in Libya trying to track down these weapons. What may be even more ironic and tragic is that the US Government itself was/is funneling these weapons, the ones they can find, to Syrian rebels to fight another nasty dictator whose defeat will ultimately release even more and worse weapons into a incinerary region of the world.