So, Governor Dayton leads a protest against the Washington Redskins for their “offensive” team name. Question: Who is lily-white Mark Dayton to suddenly be offended by somebody’s long-time team logo? Granted there were Native Americans at the protest who might legitimately be offended by the term, by itself, but the presence of Dayton, the new Minneapolis mayor and Betsy McCollum made this a political event, which it didn’t have to be. It tells us something about liberals, though, doesn’t it? They get a bee in their bonnet about something—who decides the “injustice of the week” I don’t know, but it IS coordinated, somehow—and they yammer and mewl about it until something [political] is done to satisfy them. But then, they immediately lose all interest in the subject. Right or wrong, “something” was done and it’s on to something else. (Notice that far too much legislation is done that way?) They can never be happy! I say we should quit trying.
Larry Kudlow points out what everybody OUGHT to know, but doesn’t. That is, that all of this talk about “default” if the debt ceiling is not raised is just another of Obama’s grand deceits, sometimes called an abominable lie, and yet it is succeeding so well that even Republicans who understand the imperative to cease running up the nation’s credit card bill are using that language. The simple fact is that, unless Obama forces it, as he has with the unnecessary “pain” of the partial shutdown, there can be no default. Here’s Kudlow:
Earlier this year, House Republican Tom McClintock and 106 co-sponsors introduced the Full Faith and Credit Act, which would protect the payment, principal, and interest on U.S. Treasury securities, including those held by Social Security funds, even in the event that the federal debt reaches the statutory limit. In other words, by law, not default. Two years ago Senator Pat Toomey introduced similar legislation. And more recently, House Financial Services chairman Jeb Hensarling renewed the campaign for that bill. But Obama and the Democrats have always opposed it. And how bizarre is it that Obama opposes the one piece of legislation that would make it impossible for him or anybody else to make Treasury-default accusations?
And if Obama’s lies were just that, attempting to tar Republicans to “get his way” and continue his unconscionable deficit spending (that even HE said repeatedly was irresponsible), that would be one thing, but all of this gloom and doom is “talking down the market,” and worse! Failure to raise the debt ceiling may, in fact, be even less dangerous to our personal, national and world financial health than this entirely false Democrat doomsaying. Shameful!
I’m sorry, but there can be no other conclusion: the people who are queried for these ubiquitous opinion polls can no longer be allowed to express their opinion, in polls or otherwise. It is obvious that these polls are radically distorted because far too many of the respondents are members of the PNPA-- the People Not Paying Attention. How else can you explain such things as the plurality opinion that Republicans are responsible for the “government shutdown”? Anybody paying attention knows that it is Republicans in the House of Representatives that passed 3 different continuing resolutions (CRs) to keep the government open, and that Democrats in the Senate summarily rejected all of them. Republicans have also passed CRs to reopen parts of the government and Democrats in the Senate won’t even consider them. Meanwhile, Obama threatens to veto any and every attempt by Republicans to keep the government open while simultaneously creating more pain for the public than is necessary. Worse still, this entire performance of the political Theater of the Absurd could have been avoided if Senate Democrats had passed a real budget for the year 6 months ago when Republicans did. All of this ought to be common knowledge to anybody paying attention, but the PNPA by definition do not. People ought to have some basis in factual information for their decisions and opinions or else just vote “present.” If they won’t pay attention to the facts, we shouldn’t pay attention to them.
Keith Ellison (D) staged a shutdown "rally" at the Federal Courthouse in Minneapolis this morning at 9:30 a.m. — while the rest of us working class-types were on the clock to pay for his salary, higher taxes - or figuring out how to work more to pay for higher health insurance premiums. WCCO's Pat Kessler tweeted this with a photo:
MN Dem Cong Ellison at Mpls rally w furloughed fed workers: says GOP "irrational".
Looks like it was a sparse turnout, and a percentage are not furloughed federal workers. Note the man in the SEIU sweatshirt, and a Representive Phyllis Khan (D-60B) to his right. How many are Federal workers, and how many are Ellison staffers or supporters? I asked Kessler to ask them.
If the GOP is "irrational", then Rep. Ellison is delusional and a hypocrite. While many of his colleagues are forgoing their pay during the shutdown, Keith is keeping his.
Rally for federal workers, or free earned media for public sector unions and Democrats? Dogs and ponies with donkeys.
Ever since the US Supreme Court found Obamacare Constitutional, using the convoluted reasoning that the mandates and penalties constituted a “tax,” Democrats have been screaming that Obamacare is the “law of the land” and must be held forever sacred. Never mind that Obama and the Democrats absolutely INSISTED that this was NOT a tax while pushing it through Congress and then insisting that it WAS a tax before the Supreme Court. Never mind that the Obama administration has ignored, delayed, failed at or perverted almost every single provision of the law as Congress passed it. Never mind that all the promises made for it have been broken or that all the critics have been proven correct to some degree; the Democrats insist that lawmakers in Congress must never, ever alter the “law of the land.”
Now, however, thanks to our own Citizens Council for Health Freedom and others, Obamacare may again be before the Supreme Court. Because the Court has ruled it a tax, then according to the “origination clause” of the Constitution, the bill must first pass the House of Representatives, while Obamacare, in its entirety, clearly originated in the Senate! Wouldn’t that be a delicious irony, to have the body which made it the law because of Obama’s tortured argument, then nullify it as a result of that same argument?
Oh, you foolish Republicans! You think that once people find out how horrible Obamacare really is, they will demand that it be repealed. But they will never find out! Obamacare will be a tremendous success, because Democrats and their co-conspirators in the popular press will not accept any other narrative. Already, Obamacare has broken every single promise made for it. Insurance costs have gone up by 30, 50, or even 200%. Millions have lost the insurance they liked-- they couldn't keep it. Only about 25% of those promised to be insured, if all goes perfectly, will have insurance. Small business pools will not be available on time. Lifetime caps on payouts still remain. The cornerstone-- the exchanges-- aren't ready and many won't be, for years. Patient privacy has already been lost. On top of everything else, millions of people either can't find jobs, or have had their hours cut, or lost their employer-paid insurance because of Obamacare. Yet you hear it every day. "Millions of people now have access to health care." "Prices have come down." "Insurance companies have been required to blah, blah blah." Not a PEEP about the massive failures, except from a few "extremist Republicans." Some people, maybe 60% according to polls, may have figured it out already, which is good. The only question is how long it will take the other 40%, including Democrats in Congress, to figure out what a total disaster it is and act accordingly. Don't get your hopes up.
Well, the IPCC has released its latest report, starting with the “Summary for Policymakers” and followed by the full report of (supposedly) supporting scientific evidence. It is another version of the legal philosophy of “hanging now, trial later.” There are many who will ably and diligently dissect both documents and point out the fallacies, fables and flaws, but I want you to be aware of one absolutely glaring leap of illogic that appears in every one of these reports, and in almost every pronouncement by the “Warmists.” First, let me offer an analogy: If I say “Creation (the world, the universe) exists” I have stated an undeniable fact. If I then say “God created all of Creation.” I have NOT stated a fact, but rather a faith statement. I have no scientific evidence even for the existence of God, let alone that He created the world. But you constantly hear the Warmists say, “the world is getting warmer, it’s undeniable” when in fact there is considerable skepticism about the reality of that statement, depending on what’s meant by “warmer” and what time frame, measurement method, and analysis tools one employs. But then the very next statement is “WE have to do something about it,” implying that human activity, specifically the release of CO2, is RESPONSIBLE for this observed warming. That is a faith statement, with essentially zero scientific evidence to support it! There is no direct way to get, scientifically and logically, from the first statement, even if true, to the second! Watch for it the next time a Warmist talks. You’ll swear it’s an evangelical preacher, not a scientist.
Some conservative pundits have claimed that the House Republicans are fighting a losing battle trying to defund Obamacare, and that the proper tactic is to allow it to come into full force and “collapse of its own weight.” Surely, they say, once everyone sees how bad it really is, they will throw out Democrats by the score and the Republicans can come to power and undo it. Riiiight. Remember all those who said they couldn’t vote for McCain, or for Romney, and that “once Americans see how bad Obama is, they’ll throw him out? How has that worked for us? Choosing between the lesser of two evils is always better than waiting for your fellow citizens to figure it out. The best time to do the right thing is right now, when the opportunity presents, and hope that your leadership on the issue gets noticed by the many, many voters with short attention spans. Don’t count on them seeing “how bad” the wrong thing is but rather let them benefit from your doing right; it should be better for them AND for you. People should not be forced to learn things the hard way.
The punditry’s plaint does, however, offer one possible solution for the House Republicans-- a “compromise” as the Democrats keep calling for. It always sounds reasonable until you recognize that Democrats NEVER compromise what they want; it’s all take and no give with them. Here’s what the House should do: Agree to fully fund Obamacare (and the rest of government) for 60 days, but funding thereafter is dependent on the Obama administration fully complying with the law as written! That is: A) Congress and their staff fully participate in Obamacare and without subsidies, just like everybody else, B) the employer mandate is NOT delayed for a year as Obama illegally ordered. C) Sweetheart exemptions for unions and certain corporations are considered expired. D) Eligibility for insurance subsidies must be rigidly screened. E) out-of-pocket caps must be enforced, even if premiums skyrocket, which they will. F) The government-run “basic” health plan must be made available, and G) patient privacy must be assured. There are dozens of other illegal “fixes” the administration has thrown in to try to make it work. Maybe if Republicans let people see how bad it really IS without the cover-ups, it would get people’s attention. Democrats would either have to vote AGAINST Obamacare as they originally passed it, or vote FOR it in all its horribleness, once again. That should be a real eye-opener.
Hooray! Republicans in the US House of Representatives have finally found the spines to “do something” that stands better than a snowball’s chance of slowing the onrushing disaster-- the “train wreck”-- that is Obamacare. The real test of those spines, of course, will be how well they stand up to the avalanche of bullying, lying and demagoguery that is the ONLY known function of the Democrat party. The Democrats, of course, are confident that Republicans will “cave” once again to these scurrilous tactics, and indeed Senate Republicans have already done so. The only way Republicans succeed now is if their spines are finally stiff enough (don’t laugh, it could happen) to step forward 4 times a day (or more) and 5 times on Sunday and call some Democrat an outright liar. I propose some sound bites like the following: “Democrat [so-and-so] is lying when he/she says that Republicans want to shut down the government. House Republicans voted unanimously to keep the government open, and Senate Democrats refused.” “Democrat [so-and-so] is lying to say that a government shutdown will cause [whatever] to happen. Republicans in the House voted unanimously to fully fund every federal program. Social Security checks will go out, the military will get paid, every federal employee will stay on the job at full pay, parks will stay open, Medicare doctors will get paid [and etc.].” “The only reason Democrats want to shut down the government is because they want to continue to govern against the will of Americans and impose Obamacare on us all.” “They know it is a disaster but refuse to do even one small thing to prevent it, and are willing to cause a government shutdown to make this disaster happen.”
Sure, we can argue whether or not this is the battle we want and ought to have, or not, but that is a different subject altogether. What matters here is that, sometime, Republicans have to learn how to fight and win these battles against an unscrupulous and intractable Democrat party.
After the shipyard shooting, we have the usual suspects—Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama among them-- crying that we need new gun laws to prevent these senseless mass murders. But that seems like an indirect and ineffective approach, because we already have thousands of gun laws on the books, and every single one of these cases involves the deliberate breaking of one or more of them, resulting in tragedy. So why don’t we get directly to the problem, and pass a law against murder?!? Really, why didn’t we think of this before?
“Shipyard Shooter had mental health issues” reads the headline. Well, DUH! I have long believed that anybody that carries a bunch of guns into a place and starts randomly murdering as many innocent people as possible has offered proof positive of being nutty as a fruitcake. Sane people do not do that and the fact that it is against the law is only a tiny part of the reason why. On the other hand, sane people do not immediately clamor for more laws limiting the law-abiding populace but that have absolutely zero effect on crazies like this one. The Left, though, keeps searching for a rational reason—a “why”-- other than craziness, but that’s just crazy, isn’t it? Well, DUH.