Thursday, January 31, 2013

RHINOS at Work, Need One Say More?...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny




I like Chuck Hagel. In fact I fully support his nomination by President Obama to the position of Secretary of Defense. He is ultimately qualified and capable of executing the duties of said position. Senator McCain's views aside.

Actually the biggest reason to support this nomination is because it riles the establishment RHINOS to the point of frenzy. Indeed the modern rEpublican party is working hard at attaining irrelevancy.

ABC World News - Facing a rocky confirmation process, Chuck Hagel today defended his record before his former Senate colleagues, including an openly impatient Sen. John McCain.

"I'm on the record on many issues, but no one individual vote, no one individual quote, no one individual statement defines me," Hagel said in his opening statement at his first confirmation hearing for secretary of defense.

"My overall worldview has never changed: that America has and must maintain the strongest military in the world, that we must lead in the international community to confront threats and challenges together," Hagel said. {Read More}

Via: Memeoranmdum

Majority Now See Federal Government as a Threat to Personal Rights...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


I found the chart and article from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press quite interesting. It is indeed true the federal government has become an increasing threat to individual individual freedoms and rights. That being said, what I found most interesting is the year GWB was elected to his first term on the heels of the Clinton presidency only 30% of the people believed this to be true. Every year since 2001 the percentage of the people viewing the federal government as a threat to their rights has been growing. It is easy to understand why when you think about the Patriot Act, TSA, ObamaCare, the current efforts to strengthen firearms control (an effort I support to a point - see prior posts on this issue), and the overall general trend for more government involvement in every aspect of our lives. President Obama seems to be continuing on the trend line started by GBW following his election in 2001. If we are fortunate President Obama will begin a gradual reversal of the trending that begin in 2001.


As Barack Obama begins his second term in office, trust in the federal government remains mired near a historic low, while frustration with government remains high. And for the first time, a majority of the public says that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Jan. 9-13 among 1,502 adults, finds that 53% think that the federal government threatens their own personal rights and freedoms while 43% disagree.

In March 2010, opinions were divided over whether the government represented a threat to personal freedom; 47% said it did while 50% disagreed. In surveys between 1995 and 2003, majorities rejected the idea that the government threatened people’s rights and freedoms.

The growing view that the federal government threatens personal rights and freedoms has been led by conservative Republicans. Currently 76% of conservative Republicans say that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms and 54% describe the government as a “major” threat. Three years ago, 62% of conservative Republicans said the government was a threat to their freedom; 47% said it was a major threat.

By comparison, there has been little change in opinions among Democrats; 38% say the government poses a threat to personal rights and freedoms and just 16% view it as a major threat.

People who say they have guns in their households continue to be more likely than those who do not to say that the government is a threat to their personal rights and freedoms. About six-in-ten (62%) in gun-owning households see the government as a threat, compared with 45% of those without guns; this gap is no larger today than it was three years ago.

The survey finds continued widespread distrust in government. About a quarter of Americans (26%) trust the government in Washington to do the right thing just about always or most of the time; 73% say they can trust the government only some of the time or volunteer that they can never trust the government. Explore a Pew Research interactive on Public Trust in Government: 1958-2013.

Just 20% of Americans say they are basically content with the federal government; 58% say they are frustrated while 19% say they are angry. For the most part, these views have changed little during Obama’s presidency. However, the percentage saying they are content with government sank to a low of just 11% in August 2011, following protracted negotiations between the president and congressional leaders over raising the debt ceiling. The same survey found that the percentage expressing anger at government had reached 26%, and just 19% said they trusted the government at least most of the time. {Read Much More}

Via: Memeorandunm


Thursday, January 24, 2013

Responsible Government or Intrusive Big Brother Nanny State Mentality on the March...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


If anyone doubts the presence of Nanny State Progressive Mentality in the nation's democrats one need look no further than Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland Oregon and his ridiculously absurd anti smoking legislation that he introduced in Oregon.

Don't get me wrong. As an aspiring personal fitness trainer I advocate a healthy and active lifestyle. Certainly smoking does not lend itself to a healthy lifestyle. Quite the opposite.

However, I do not support the state as being the vehicle to control the individuals choice with respect to fitness and health practices. Certainly not beyond the aspect of education and requiring the accurate representation of the health risks associated to risky behavior.

SALEM, OR (KPTV) - If you're a regular smoker, you may want to keep an eye on a new bill in the Oregon Legislature.

Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctor's prescription.

Under the proposal, offenders would face maximum punishments of one year in prison, a $6,250 fine or both.

Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids.

Watch KPTV news video HERE.

Be very leery of Big Brother and the Nanny State Mentality. Just sating...

Via: Memeorandum

Governor Bobby Jindal Making Sense...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal

I have previously posted on Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal as being one of the forward thinking politicians (and bright lights) in the present rEpublican party. A party that frankly IMNHO is essentially void of new ideas and blind to the reality of changing demographics and national concerns. I was pleased to see Governor Jindal getting the press he needs and deserves from the Washington Post.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal will deliver a forceful denunciation of his party’s Washington-centric focus in a speech to the Republican National Committee on Thursday evening, arguing that the GOP is fighting the wrong fight as it seeks to rebuild from losses at the ballot box last November.

“A debate about which party can better manage the federal government is a very small and short-sighted debate,” Jindal will tell the RNC members gathered in Charlotte, N.C. for the organization’s winter meeting, according to a copy of the speech provided to The Fix. “If our vision is not bigger than that, we do not deserve to win.”

Jindal’s speech — and his call to “recalibrate the compass of conservatism” — is the latest shred of a growing amount of evidence that the Louisiana governor is positioning himself to not only run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016 but do so in direct (or close to it) opposition to his party in the nation’s capital.

In the speech, Jindal will repeatedly caution that Republicans in Washington have fallen into the “sideshow trap” of debating with Democrats over the proper size of the federal government.

“By obsessing with zeroes on the budget spreadsheet, we send a not-so-subtle signal that the focus of our country is on the phony economy of Washington, instead of the real economy out here in Charlotte, and Shreveport (La.), and Cheyenne (Wyo.),” Jindal is set to say at one point in the speech. At another, he will argue that “Washington has spent a generation trying to bribe our citizens and extort our states,” adding: “As Republicans, it’s time to quit arguing around the edges of that corrupt system.”

Running against Washington — and the Republicans who inhabit it — is smart politics for Jindal. Congress, viewed broadly, is at or close to all-time lows when it comes to approval ratings. In a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted earlier this month, just 24 percent of those tested approved of the job that Republicans in Congress were doing.

Even more stunning, among self-identified Republicans only 39 percent offered a favorable rating for their own party’s representatives, while 58 percent viewed their own elected officials in an unfavorable light.

Jindal is far from the only 2016 Republican hopeful to use his party’s Washington contingent as a foil to bolster his own political prospects. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s (R) rant against House GOPers for failing to bring up a funding bill on Hurricane Sandy – an instant classic — was another prime example of congressional GOPers being triangulated by their party’s future leaders.{Read More}

If the rEpublican party is to avoid complete irrelevancy it will need to listen to, understand, and act upon the message Jindal and others are sending. In as much as the dEmocrat party does not have all the answers to the nation problems it is unquestionable that the rEpublican party has failed to fill the void of leadership.

Via: Memeorandum


Friday, January 18, 2013

Nancy Pelosi Showing Again She Has Little if Any Grasp of Reality...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


This from the Queen of gimmickry.

The Hill - House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Friday rejected the House GOP’s three-month plan to increase the debt ceiling.

A spokesman for Pelosi said that the bill coming to the floor next week, which would raise the debt ceiling with the condition that Congress will not get paid if the House and Senate fail to pass a budget, is a "gimmick."

“This is a gimmick unworthy of the challenges we face and the national debate we should be having. The message from the American people is clear: no games, no default,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said.

He called for a “clean” debt-ceiling increase without conditions.

“We need a clean debt ceiling increase and a bipartisan and balanced budget that protects Medicare and Social Security, invests in the future, and responsibly reduces the deficit,” he said. “This proposal does not relieve the uncertainty faced by small businesses, the markets and the middle class.”

Democrats want a budget that has a “balance” between spending cuts and tax increases.

GOP leaders said Friday that they will hold the debt-ceiling vote next week and that they are backing down from a previous demand that all debt-ceiling increases be accompanied by an equal amount of actual spending cuts.

Instead of concrete cuts, the GOP plan tries to force the Senate to pass a budget for the first time in four years. The GOP is banking that cutting off an unpopular Congress's pay will poll well with the public and be hard for Democrats to oppose.

The Pelosi reaction to the plan is more negative than that of the White House and Senate Democrats.

President Obama’s spokesman said Friday it is encouraged by the GOP shift.{Read More}

Ya know the person is out their when even their own progressive party is in opposition at certain levels.

Via: Memeorandum

rEpublicans and "Consevatives" Once Again Vying For Irrelevancy... ...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


President Obama has nominated Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) for Secretary of Defense. As expected in a typical knee jerk reaction conservatives have come out in opposition to Hagel. Qualifications be damned as the only reason given are 1) his prior support for negotiation with Iran, and 2) Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) supports his nomination.



The Hill - The conservative American Future Fund group is questioning Sen. Charles Schumer's (D-N.Y.) decision to back former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) for secretary of Defense.

The group, which launched a media campaign earlier in the week, released a new ad Friday focusing on Schumer's decision to back Hagel.

On Tuesday, after meeting privately with Hagel a day earlier, Schumer said he supported Hagel for secretary of Defense. Schumer had previously refrained from saying whether he would support or oppose Hagel's nomination.

The American Future Fund ad, "How Badly" asks "how badly does Chuck Schumer want to be the Senate Majority Leader?"

Schumer is the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate.

"And what did President Obama promise him?" a voiceover in the ad continues. "After a career of supporting Israel, Schumer now backs Chuck Hagel for Defense Secretary. The Same Chuck Hagel who supported direct negotiations with Iran after Iran's president threatened to wipe Israel off the map. The same Chuck Hagel who complained about 'the Jewish lobby.' Even the liberal Washington Post writes 'Hagel is not the right choice for Defense Secretary.' "

The ad concludes: "No on Chuck Hagel."

Critics of Hagel for secretary of Defense have regularly cited his past comments accusing a "Jewish lobby" of strong-arming lawmakers. Opponents have also said Hagel is too soft on sanctions on Iran meant to deter the country from getting a nuclear bomb. Hagel has expressed regret for his comment about a "Jewish lobby," calling it a "poor choice of words."

The American Future Fund ad is part of a multi-pronged media campaign in opposition of Hagel for secretary of Defense.

American Future Fund spokesman Stuart Roy told The Hill on Wednesday that its anti-Hagel campaign would be "very visible nationwide" by Tuesday or Wednesday of next week.

Just the fact the Neocons and rEpublican party fake conservatives are speaking out against Mr. Hagel is enough to support his nomination for the position.

There is no reason to stand in opposition to this nomination. Other than to be obstructionists for the sole purpose of being obstructionists. Pathetic really...

Via: Memeormndum

Thursday, January 17, 2013

President Obama and the Federal Firearm Control Debate...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


A proper government can accomplish positive things for the society it governs. In fact the founding fathers realized this and recognized that government indeed has a role in establishing and enforcing the rule of law. Law determined to be desirable by the majority of the citizens governed by said government.

Finding a proper balance between the government's authority to impose it's will on the people is the rightful domain of the governed to determine. With respect to firearm control and the President's determination to impose increased federal restrictions the nation finds itself in the middle of this debate.

In as much as our government bears the responsibility to insure the general welfare and safety of it's citizens it must also guarantee it preserves the freedoms and liberties protected in the Constitution.

Freedom and liberty carries with it a great and awesome responsibility.

Listen to, and read the following with the above in mind.

In response.
POLITICO - Sen. Rand Paul is pledging to undo some of President Barack Obama’s executive orders on guns that the Kentucky Republican believes overreach. “In this bill we will nullify anything the president does that smacks of legislation,” Rand said Wednesday on Fox’s “Hannity,” referencing his legislation that is slated to be introduced in Congress next week. “And there are several of the executive orders that appear as if he’s writing new law. That cannot happen. Rand’s comments came several hours after Obama unveiled his plan to curb gun violence, an initiative that included 23 executive actions he promised to take to address the matter. Unilateral actions from the president include pushing for research into the causes of gun violence, improving the federal background check system and calling on federal law enforcement to trace guns that are collected during criminal investigations. “I’m afraid that President Obama may have this ‘king complex’ sort of developing, and we’re going to make sure it doesn’t happen,” Paul said, adding that the Founding Fathers specified that Congress should make law. {Read More}
There exists reasonable measures to accomplish what the President and much of the nation wants to accomplish. At least in part. What must be avoided is knee jerk reaction to what is a very emotional issue. Some of the Presidents proposals make ultimate sense. Some are questionable. At the end of the day Rand Paul is correct. Final determination of law must rest with the people. Via: Memeorandum

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Obama Poised For Decision On Increased Federal Firearm Control...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


As President Obama moves to decisive action on increased firearm control he is aware, I'm sure, of certain limitations on his authority. If not things could get very interesting,



>TPM - Former Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese, now a prominent emeritus official at the Heritage Foundation, became the latest conservative to warn that President Obama could risk impeachment if he takes executive action on reducing gun violence in an interview Monday night.

Speaking with Newsmax, Meese said Congress may have to consider impeaching Obama if he were “to try to override the Second Amendment in any way” with an executive order. He did allow that there are some executive actions related to guns that Obama could take wouldn’t be impeachable.

“It would be up to the Congress to take action, such as looking in to it to see if, in fact, he has really tried to override the Constitution itself,” Meese told Newsmax. “In which case, it would be up to them to determine what action they should take — and perhaps even to the point of impeachment.”

He said that there are certain executive actions the White House can take without fear of impeachment.

“An executive order without specific congressional authority can only apply to those portions of the government that are under his control — in their words, the executive branch,” Meese said. “Now there are some things he can probably do in regard to the actions of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or some other governmental agency in its operations.”

“But to impose burdens or regulations that affect society generally, he would have to have Congressional authorization,” he said. {Read More}

As we are a nation governed by the rule of law, rather than by the dictates of a single man or a mob, I'm confident any attempt by this President to act outside the bounds of law, or act unconstitutionally will be met with sound rebuke by both the right and left.

Via: Memeorandum

Thursday, January 10, 2013

WOW! - When "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest"...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


As one of many many millions who support the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms I just can't imagine how the dude in the video, or others like him is helping the efforts of firearm advocates and preservation of the 2'nd amendment.

Reasonable restrictions on firearms (semi automatic assault weapons) high capacity (extended) magazines, more extensive back ground checks hardly seems unreasonable.

I could very well be wrong, but as far as I have been able to determine no one person or group has been advocating a total ban or elimination of 2'nd amendment rights. At least no one with any credibility or authority. If anyone can point me to information to the contrary I would love the link(s).





 Stability of the dude? A bit questionable...

I'm looking forward to Mr. Biden's final recommendations. One can only hope the debate following will remain civil and rational.

 Via: Memeorandum





Thursday, January 3, 2013

Illinois Democrats Move To Tighten Firearm Regulation/Restrictions...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny



As the country struggles to understand, and come to grips with random acts of firearm violence by unstable and unbalanced individuals Illinois is already taking action to further regulate firearms. Like the millions of law abiding citizens I am torn between the right to bear firearms and finding the point at which it makes logical sense to restrict that right. In a modern society in which the tools of warfare are advanced beyond what the founders could possibly have envisioned, and the efficiency of modern armies are such that the citizens would stand no reasonable chance against the modern army, does the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons have any real purpose for the homeowner and sportsman? If deemed they do should they not be highly regulated and restricted to HELP reduce the incidents of tragedies like Sandy Hook?

I certainly do not have the answers, nor do I believe the anti-gun crowd has the answers either. Anymore than I believe Wayne LaPierre and the NRA has the answers. Reasonable minds from all sides however must come together and find answers to these questions and others. The American people are deserving of the effort. We can preserve the right to bear arms , and make our society a safer place for our children at the same time. At the same time recognizing that there will always be some level of violence even if firearms were to be banned as some advocate. There will always be criminals, unstable people, and a black market. The challenge is to reduce firearm violence to the lowest possible incident level AND protect the right to bear arms.

FOX NEWS - Illinois Senate Democrats advanced legislation late Wednesday to restrict semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity magazines, pressing forward with new gun control measures in the waning days of the session over the objections of firearms groups.

Amid the developments, the Illinois State Rifle Association issued an “urgent alert” to its members warning them that Democratic legislators were trying to push through last-minute anti-gun legislation.

“There would be no exemptions and no grandfathering,” the group stated in its alert. “You would have a very short window to turn in your guns to the state police and avoid prosecution.”

A Senate committee approved two bills, one dealing with the weapons and the other with magazines. Democratic supporters could face a tough sell in the full Senate.

One measure would ban the possession, delivery, sale and transfer of semiautomatic handguns and rifles. People who currently own such weapons could keep them but would have to register them. The bill would allow semiautomatic weapons to be used at shooting ranges, but those facilities would be regulated.

Skip

The other bill, introduced by Democratic state Sen. Dan Kotowski, would limit ammunition magazines to 10 or fewer rounds.

Those pushing for enhanced restrictions say stricter rules are needed in the wake of a string of high-profile mass shootings -- most recently the deadly school shooting in Newtown, Conn. Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn had been trying earlier this year to pass new legislation in the wake of the Colorado movie theater shooting, but lawmakers are taking another crack at it.

Kotowski sponsored legislation in 2007 that would have prohibited assault weapons and .50-caliber rifles. His bill made it through a Senate committee but died on the floor.

Another Democratic state lawmaker, Antonio Munoz, introduced the ban on all assault weapons “designed for war.” {Read More}

I welcome and encourage anyone, from either side of this issue to point out the issues with the Illinois effort as described in the article.

Via: Memeorandum

Avoiding the Cliff, Small Acts of Courage...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


The deal, such as it is, the kicking the can down the road a piece was finally hammered out so at least for now, the "fiscal cliff" was avoided. The nation can thank Mich McConnell and Joe Biden for it getting done.

Yahoo NEWS - If John Kennedy had not written “Profiles in Courage,” today we might have a more realistic understanding of political valor. But JFK’s 1957 Pulitzer Prize-winning book so raised the bar for bravery in public life that it now seems obvious that no modern figure can measure up.

Who in the 21st century could possibly match Daniel Webster’s oratory as he heroically struggled to save the Union? Or replicate Edmund Ross’ moral fortitude as he destroyed his political career to cast the decisive vote against impeaching Andrew Johnson? Where once legislators risked being burned in effigy and physically threatened, these days the likely consequence of a courageous vote in Congress is a new career as a high-priced lobbyist.

This week’s ungainly legislative compromise that merely delayed the fiscal apocalypse until March can be ridiculed as a Profile in Timidity. Rather than ratify a grand bargain that would reform taxes and spending for a decade, Congress in predictable fashion did as little as possible as late as possible. No one, Republican or Democrat, is going to brag in their memoirs about the fortitude they displayed, dangling over the abyss, as they scaled the Fiscal Cliff.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner deserve credit for the last-minute fortitude they displayed in ending the dispiriting deadlock over extending the Bush tax cuts. It wasn’t Kennedy-defined courage—and it doesn’t erase the prior stubbornness on taxes by the Republican congressional leaders—but their political moxie should be noted.

On Sunday, with the countdown clock ticking, McConnell made a direct appeal to Joe Biden when his negotiations with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid reached a dead end. Rather than setting up secret back-channel talks with Biden, a longtime colleague, McConnell announced on the Senate floor, “I also placed a call to the vice president to see if he could help jump-start the negotiations on his side.”

The Biden-McConnell agreement challenged Republican orthodoxy in two major ways: It raised taxes on families earning more than $450,000, and it did not extract spending cuts from the Democrats. But the White House also made a big concession: Barack Obama abandoned his mantra since 2007 that families earning more than $250,000 should pay more in taxes. {Continue Reading}

Every so often in this charged political era we see something that gives reason for possible optimism. But then again...

Via: Memeorandum

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

As the Melodrama Continues...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny



As the nation watches (as well as the world at large) the United States House, led by the rEpublican false conservatives have us serfs standing at the cliff's edge as we look into the abyss.

Perhaps, just maybe, the intransigent false conservatives are running out of time and their true motives are being recognized by the many who heretofore believed them. As more disgruntled past supporters turn their backs on the false conservatives maybe, just maybe they ought to look to history to find the ultimate result of their type of behavior and intransigence. Even a staunch Ayn Rand Objectivist has the ability to see beyond the present as he peers into the future. At least this one does. Echoes of our founding fathers are ringing in my ears as I write this.

Eric Cantor, the intelligent yet blind House Majority leader may very well, and soon find himself the object of ridicule. As difficult as it might be for some to accept the reality is he will have reaped the benefit of his intransigence.

A lifelong conservative/libertarian I have come to the realization that the party of Eisenhower/Goldwater/Reagan has morphed into something most rational and reasonable people now struggle, or even fail to recognize let alone understand. It is indeed unfortunate as the opposition party, the democrat progressives offer little of which one can be entirely hopeful of as well.

So hang on folks, the future ain't too hopeful or bright. All we can hope for is the smoothest ride down and hopefully a not to violent landing. The thing is, most of America won't even recognize, let alone understand they have been scammed. The Oligarchs however will be laughing and licking their chops all the way to the financial institutions and the seats of power they own lock, stock, and barrel.

BuzzFeed Politics - WASHINGTON — Less than 12 hours after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Vice President Joe Biden marshaled a strong 89 votes for their fiscal cliff plan, the agreement appeared on the brink of unraveling at the hands of a House Republican revolt that includes Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

During a closed-door meeting of the GOP conference Tuesday afternoon, Cantor told his colleagues that he would not support the deal — despite the fact that he and Speaker John Boehner the night before had vowed to “consider” the bill.

Although his remarks were brief, they sent shock waves through his conference, which was already extremely skeptical of the agreement, and perhaps looking for a leader.

Conservative opposition to the agreement stems from a host of issues, including the fact that the deal does not include any spending cuts, would significantly add to the nation’s deficit and raises taxes on those making more than $400,000 a year.

And Cantor’s not alone in opposing the deal: the agreement is universally disliked within Republican circles, and even Democrats in the House and Senate have voiced complaints about the deal.

The lack of spending cuts in the Senate bill was a universal concern amongst members in today’s meeting," said Boehner spokesperson Brendan Buck. "Conversations with members will continue throughout the afternoon on the path forward.”

Rep. Steve LaTourette, a Boehner ally, said there were “two schools of thought” expressed in the meeting: To accept the deal and “live to fight another day,” or amend the measure and send it back to the Senate.

The latter option clearly enjoyed support from the majority of the conference.

“I think it’s moving in that direction," LaTourette said.

Still, Cantor’s decision to come out against the agreement was unexpected.{Continue Reading}

It is indeed puzzling that students of political science and history, including economic history have brought us to this point. What is most interesting is it has been the party that should have been the champion of Friedrich A. Hayek that has LED us to record deficits and an unsustainable national debt. Rather than acting like the fiscal conservatives they would have everyone believe they were in fact our nation's biggest spendthrifts. There has never been greater enthusiasts of Keynesian deficit spending economics than the modern rEpublican party.

And folks, that IS a Fact.

Via: Memeorandum

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails