Supremes Considering Striking Section V of Civil Rights Act...

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

The Supreme Court is considering striking down Section V of the voting rights act. The conservative members of the Court, along with swing vote Justice Kennedy, question whether the specific section has outlived its usefulness. Appears the President concurs. At least partially. Striking Section V would remove the need for certain states and counties to get federal government approval before changing their voting laws.

THE HILL - President Obama also seemed to signal earlier this week that a loss at the Supreme Court was possible, if not likely. Obama said in a local television interview last week that losing Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act would not cause people to lose their right to vote.

“People will still have the same rights not to be discriminated against when it comes to voting," Obama said. "You just won't have this mechanism, this tool, that allows you to kind of stay ahead of certain practices." {Read the Details}

Via: Memeorandum

Will the Sky Come Falling Down...

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


The whole sequestration issue is sort of amusing really. Two parties of adult legislators plus one President playing politics again. Rather than governing effectively and in the best interests of the nation as a whole. The following is quite informative.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL - And when the Republicans opened the seventh seal of the sequester, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black and the stars fell unto the Earth; and our nation's ability to forecast severe weather, such as drought events, hurricanes and tornados, was seriously undermined. Lo, and the children were not vaccinated, and all the beasts starved in the zoos, and the planes were grounded.

Or so President Obama and his Cabinet prophets have been preaching ahead of the automatic budget cuts due to begin Friday. The bit about the weather is a real quote from the White House budget director.

But if any of these cataclysms do come to pass, then they will be mostly Mr. Obama's own creation. The truth is that the sequester already gives the White House the legal flexibility to avoid doom, if a 5% cut to programs that have increased more than 17% on average over the Obama Presidency counts as doom.

According to Mr. Obama and his budget office, the sequester cuts are indiscriminate and spell out specific percentages that will be subtracted from federal "projects, programs and activities," or PPAs. Except for the exemptions in the 2011 budget deal, the White House says it must now cut across the board regardless of how important a given PPA is. Food inspectors, say, will be treated the same as subsidies for millionaire farmers.

Not so fast... {The Rest of the Article}

Indeed. There is a reason why most Americans distrust their government.

Via: Memeorandum

Checking In With Bob Woodward of Watergate Fame...

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

Bob Woodward, the very same investigative reporter that along with Carl Bernstein was ultimately responsible for bringing down President Richard M. Nixon in the early seventies is reporting the White House is responsible for the looming sequestration. Hm, anybody else hear the scrambling of liberals ardently and strenuously denying Woodward's allegations?

What Woodward is reporting is very plausible, in fact it is more likely than not in the world of dirty political gamesmanship. And for those who believe the democrat party is above dirty politics one only needs to harken back to the days of LBJ and Mayor Daley to realize the democrats are primo at dirty politics in the furtherance of their agenda.

The Washington Post - Misunderstanding, misstatements and all the classic contortions of partisan message management surround the sequester, the term for the $85 billion in ugly and largely irrational federal spending cuts set by law to begin Friday.

What is the non-budget wonk to make of this? Who is responsible? What really happened?

The finger-pointing began during the third presidential debate last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”

The White House chief of staff at the time, Jack Lew, who had been budget director during the negotiations that set up the sequester in 2011, backed up the president two days later.

“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger,” Lew said while campaigning in Florida. It “was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure.”

The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.

Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.

Nabors has told others that they checked with the president before going to see Reid. A mandatory sequester was the only action-forcing mechanism they could devise. Nabors has said, “We didn’t actually think it would be that hard to convince them” — Reid and the Republicans — to adopt the sequester. “It really was the only thing we had. There was not a lot of other options left on the table.”

A majority of Republicans did vote for the Budget Control Act that summer, which included the sequester. Key Republican staffers said they didn’t even initially know what a sequester was — because the concept stemmed from the budget wars of the 1980s, when they were not in government. {Read More}

Spin as they may the reality is Obama and his administration in a stroke of almost genius proportions figured out a way to almost pin sequestration on the opposition party. A master plan they hoped Americans would fall far. As I said, DIRTY politics is nothing new to the democrat party. dEmocrats and rEpublicans are essentially cut from the same soiled cloth.

Via: Memeorandum

As the Games Continue, the Truth on Who is Responsible for Sequestration... (?)

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

Sequestration. Who's responsible for the idea? I personally do not know, so I will leave the discussion to someone with a tad bit more klnowledge than I posses on this matter.

The New York Times - On July 26, 2011, Jack Lew, then the White House budget director, went to Harry Reid’s office for a budget strategy session. According to Bob Woodward’s book, “The Price of Politics,” Lew told the Senate majority leader that they had come up with a trigger idea to force a budget deal.

“What’s the idea?” Reid asked.

“Sequestration,” Lew responded.

Reid folded himself over with his head between his knees, as if he were going to throw up. Then he came upright and gaped at the ceiling. “A couple of weeks ago,” he exclaimed, “my staff said to me there is one more possible” enforcement method: sequestration. Reid said he had told his staff at the time, “Get the hell out of here. That’s insane. The White House surely will come up with a plan that will save the day. And you come to me with sequestration?”

Sequestration may have seemed insane back then. But politicians in both parties are secretly discovering that they love sequestration now. It allows them to do the dance moves they enjoy the most.

Democrats get to do the P.C. Shimmy. Traditional presidents go through a normal set of motions: They identify a problem. They come up with a proposal to address the problem. They try to convince the country that their proposal is the best approach.

Under the Permanent Campaign Shimmy, the president identifies a problem. Then he declines to come up with a proposal to address the problem. Then he comes up with a vague-but-politically-convenient concept that doesn’t address the problem (let’s raise taxes on the rich). Then he goes around the country blasting the opposition for not having as politically popular a concept. Then he returns to Washington and congratulates himself for being the only serious and substantive person in town.

Sequestration allows the White House to do this all over again. The president hasn’t actually come up with a proposal to avert sequestration, let alone one that is politically plausible.

He does have a vague and politically convenient concept. (Tax increases on the rich!) He does have a chance to lead the country into a budget showdown with furloughed workers and general mayhem, for which people will primarily blame Republicans... {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Senator Ted Cruz, a new McCarthy or Just Undiplomatic?...

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

Senator Ted Cruz

There has been just a bit of an uproar by the liberal media and blogs over Senator Ted Cruz and his methodology with respect to questions over former Senator Chuck Hagel's income and the sources from whence they came. He has been characterized by many on the left as the "new McCarthy"." After listening to the following several times I find no reason to characterize Senator Cruz as a "new McCarthy".



I do think there was a better and more diplomatic way to have enunciated his very legitimate concerns. Giving the benefit of the doubt to Senator Cruz at this point seems prudent as he is is a freshman senator and likely will learn better diplomacy as he settles into his senatorial duties. The following from Lanny Davis, former Clinton White House Counsel confirms my sentiments.



Maybe it's just me, however, with our overly heated national partisanship both sides are much too quick to cast judgment and immediately start to spin every situation so as to gain the upper hand in the hopes of galvanizing their own power. This my fine readers is a sure way to our mutual demise. Something I, as a patriotic American frankly find unacceptable.

So, what's the alternative? Given the intelligence of those who do me the honor of visiting this humble site I have no doubt but what you know the answer...

Via: Memeorandum

Huntsman Supports Marriage Equality...

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

John Huntsman - Former Governor of Utah and Ambassador to China

There are many things to like about Jon Huntsman. A fiscal conservative Republican with libertarian leanings on some issues he has come out strong for marriage equality. This is one issues the republican leadership and representatives in Congress would do well to follow his lead.

THINKPROGRESS - Former GOP Presidential candidate and Utah governor Jon Huntsman has endorsed marriage equality. Huntsman, a Mormon whose previous support for civil unions set him (and libertarian Gary Johnson) apart from an otherwise virulently anti-gay field, came out in favor of equal marriage rights in an essay in The American Conservative entitled “Marriage Equality Is a Conservative Cause.” In the piece, Huntsman argued that if the Republican Party wants to survive, it needs to be able to appeal to gay Americans and the growing majority of all Americans that support marriage equality:

"[I]t’s difficult to get people even to consider your reform ideas if they think, with good reason, you don’t like or respect them. Building a winning coalition to tackle the looming fiscal and trust deficits will be impossible if we continue to alienate broad segments of the population. We must be happy warriors who refuse to tolerate those who want Hispanic votes but not Hispanic neighbors. We should applaud states that lead on reforming drug policy. And, consistent with the Republican Party’s origins, we must demand equality under the law for all Americans…"

"Today we have an opportunity to do more: conservatives should start to lead again and push their states to join the nine others that allow all their citizens to marry. I’ve been married for 29 years. My marriage has been the greatest joy of my life. There is nothing conservative about denying other Americans the ability to forge that same relationship with the person they love." {Read More}

I don't normally link to ultra progressive site like Think Progress, but when you're right you're right. On this issue they are,well, right.

Via: Memeorandum

Obama Winning the Debate on Cutting the Budget Deficit...

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

The Republican Party leadership, those who guide the political strategy in Washington, need to take a long look at what the public is saying. When a USA TODAY/Pew Research Center Poll shows a majority of Americans, including republicans as being more supportive of Obama's plan for cutting the deficit than their own party's plan for the future it certainly spells trouble for limited government/fiscal stability advocates. Having a good sensible plan and marketing it well is certainly something the republican leadership has failed to do, on both counts.

WASHINGTON — President Obama starts his second term with a clear upper hand over GOP leaders on issues from guns to immigration that are likely to dominate the year, a USA TODAY/Pew Research Center Poll finds. On the legislation rated most urgent — cutting the budget deficit — even a majority of Republican voters endorse Obama's approach of seeking tax hikes as well as spending cuts.

The survey underscores the quandary for the GOP as it debates the party's message in the wake of disappointing losses last November for the White House and in the Senate.

Now just 22% of Americans, nearly a record low, consider themselves Republicans.

And those automatic spending cuts, known as the sequester, that are poised to take effect next week?

If no deal is reached to avert them, half of Americans say congressional Republicans will be more to blame. Less than a third would blame Obama first.

"On many of the issues, President Obama has staked out positions that seem to be closer to the public's thinking than the positions Republicans have staked out," says Michael Dimock, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The poll is the first in a new partnership between Pew and USA TODAY. "The challenge for him is in building the public's sense of immediacy on some of these issues, particularly on climate change and guns."

Republicans have the opposite challenge. "Their focus on the deficit is in tune with the public's priorities right now," he says. "Yet their positions are not quite in step with the kind of compromises that the public tells us they want to see."

To be sure, Obama faces his own challenges.

His approval ratings for handling seven specific issues are no better than lukewarm, ranging from a low of 34% on the deficit to a high of 46% on the situation in Afghanistan. On the central issue of managing the economy, 40% approve and 56% disapprove. Americans also continue to be deeply unhappy with the country's direction. By 2-to-1, 64%-31%, they are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States.

Even so, those surveyed say by narrow margins that Obama has a better approach than congressional Republicans for dealing with the deficit and guns. By double digits, they favor his plans on immigration and climate change, including limits on emissions from power plants.

The president's overall job approval rating is 51%, a bit higher than it typically has been for the past three years. The approval rating for Republican congressional leaders is a dismal 25%. Democratic congressional leaders stand in-between, at 37%. {Read More}

Opportunity always presents itself during difficult and trying times. Given the results of this poll I'd say opportunity is knocking at the door of both the party of the elephant and the donkey alike. Of course the larger challenge rests with the republican party. Responding to the opportunity and challenge will require SIGNIFICANT change within the power base of the republican party. Something they may very well be incapable of, or unwilling to do.

Click here for the full USA TODAY/Pew Research Center Poll.

Via: Memeorandum

The Looming Sequester and the Republican Strategy...

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

The rEpublicans are getting their strategic plan in place as to how and when to strike. By this I mean how to push the issue (or maybe better stated ignore the issue until it serves their purposes)of possible sequestration to the cliffs edge. All in the hopes that Obama and his fellow democrats cry uncle and become more malleable in the the enlightened rEpublicans.

The Hill has a good article laying it all out that really focuses ones attention on the issue. There is a time to stand and fight and there is a time to sit back and wait for the right time to fight. To the rational observer it definitely appears that the rEpublican party doesn't really understand the difference.

Republicans have decided that the sequester scheduled for March 1 — not a government-funding bill due at the end of March — is where they’ll make their stand on spending cuts.

After the bruising political battles of the last Congress, GOP leaders have decided the looming automatic spending cuts provide the best leverage to move President Obama to negotiate on costly entitlement programs.

“Republicans are not going to take a stand on a government shutdown. We’re not going to take a stand on the debt ceiling. We’re going to take a stand on the sequester,” said a Republican senator, who requested anonymity to discuss his party’s strategy.

Could it be this gentlemen can't self identify out of fear of party leadership (Karl Rove?) repercussions thay could result in pigeonholing his aspirations?

“The sequester affects programs President Obama likes and we think it’s the best chance of getting his attention on spending,” the lawmaker added.

GOP leaders see the spending sequester as the political inverse of the fiscal cliff. Republicans felt they had little choice, at the end of 2012, but to agree to tax increases because if they did not compromise, all of the Bush-era tax rates would have expired.

Hm, the Clinton tax rates didn't seem to be a burden on growth and economic expansion. Perhaps that is a reasonable place for discussion to take place?

Republican aides say the onus is now on Obama and the Democrats to give ground because if there is no deal, federal programs will see an $85 billion reduction between March 1 and the fiscal year’s end.

While Republicans want to avoid cuts to military spending, they believe Democrats are more eager to spare social programs from across-the-board reductions.

A Senate GOP aide said Republicans will take the sequester before agreeing to any tax increases to offset the cost of stopping it.

Well, there is little question in the reasonable persons mind but what there is room for cuts. Both defense and domestic social programs could stand to have their nails trimmed. But to the degree the sequester would result in? Fools gold IMNHO.

“Is it designed the way you’d like it to be designed? No. Is it a guaranteed reduction of spending? It is, and we’ll take that,” said the aide.

Bravo! We know it's not good, but it is better than a possible Obama success so by God we're going for it! Is this a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face? Sure seems like it to this armchair political junkie.

A few Senate Republicans say they are willing to consider tax increases to pay for a package to stop sequestration from hitting.

Wow! A breath of fresh air. Work on your associates in the other chamber cause you guys just may have a chance at actually accomplishing something that serves two purposes.

But even the most centrist members of the Republican Conference say the package introduced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week is tilted too heavily toward tax increases.

“I would not support increases in income tax rates because we’ve already settled that issue. It sounds like it’s weighted way too heavily on the tax side given what we’ve already done,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

Collins said she would support eliminating tax subsidies for major oil-and-gas companies.

Not a real fan of Collins but here she is making ultimate sense.

But Reid left that proposal out in part because of opposition from Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska), who represent oil-rich states and face reelection next year.

The Senate Democratic package would raise about $55 billion in new tax revenues and cut $55 billion in spending to stop the sequester through the end of the calendar year.

“Half? I don’t think it gets there. You’re just not going to have the [needed] level of support,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said on Fox News earlier this month that he might consider ending some tax breaks to stop defense cuts.

Ex Maverick of the Senate John McCain weighing in on behalf of keeping the Military Industrial Complex funded beyond what is required to secure and maintain the "national defense." It is too bad Dwight David Eisenhower was largely ignored back in 1961 when he warned of the very thing we are witnessing today.

But altogether, a senior GOP aide said, the total number of Senate Republicans willing to support tax increases to pay for the sequester “is probably a population under five.”

On that note I'll turn it over to you, my fine and varied readership to fill in the balance of the blanks.. There is more HERE so please continue reading.

Via: Memeorandum

Something To Consider...

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

President Obama is taking a lot of heat from the presumably "conservative" element in America. While I wish I understood completely why this is so, primarily because I find myself in disagreement with at least 50% of his positions if not more, I find myself in realization that America in majority voted for exactly what the President espouses. So, in my rather individualized mind, as uncomfortable as it is, I must acknowledge that America has spoken. In their affirmation of the President's views and policies it is reasonable to expect he would continue to pursue the policies and agenda that the citizens of the United States voted in majority to embrace.

As I see it the lion's share of the problem can be found in the "conservatives" unwillingness to recognize that the realities confronting our nation today are vastly different than those confronting the Patriots of 1776. Now I realize that the hard core socon, neocon, and just plain cons of the rEpublican party will likely skewer me for the saying. But as they say it is what it is and somebody on the right (preferably many) need to pull their heads from out of their arses, stand up and make it clear they understand we live in a pluralist society. There is no changing that and to a great degree the very people on the right who are bemoaning this reality are in fact responsible for it.

Logic and rational thought does not rest solely with conservatives or libertarians, it also resides in many reasonable and rational individuals that are to the left of us. Maybe it is just me, but it seems irrational to not consider the rational and logically based thoughts of those who may disagree with us. If I've learned one thing of importance from business management it is to consider listen and honestly consider the view points of those you might disagree with. or if you fail to do so it is quite possible, and likely, you may just miss an opportunity that will benefit your company and it's employees.

Government cannot be run precisely as a private business because government in America, to govern effectively requires the public's trust. However, it is justifiable and proper to understand and believe the principles adhered to in a ethical and successful bushiness, when applied properly to governance will lead to a more prosperous and productive nation.

The following article, with all its patriotic verbiage is precisely what is ailing this nation. Please everyone don't get me wrong here, the left has as many publications (and blogs) that are just as full of fluff and BS as the right does. What needs to be acknowledged by both sides is that this is true, it is damaging to the national conscience, and allowed to proceed unchecked will result in splitting the nation apart along partisan political and ideologically driven likes. Forgive me if you will but we owe our founding fathers by far more more, even if wee seem unwilling to understand how they ultimately created this nation.

Enough of me, here is the article that prompted this post.

Townhall - The grotesque spectacle of the State of the Union address, with its lengthy receiving line of adoring sycophants, demonstrates why the President is operating under the delusion that he is more than just our President. Like him, many people seem to fundamentally misunderstand his role. He’s not our “leader,” or our “ruler,” or our national “daddy,” no matter what his adoring fan, comic Chris Rock, thinks.

Let’s clarify things for those folks with the unseemly desire to offer up their personal sovereignty to some government hack. Unlike Hollywood geniuses better known for exposing their breasts than exposing their brains, I'll never pledge to be a servant of any politician.

I'm an American citizen. As such, no mortal man may presume to lead or rule me.

And I already have a father, one who incidentally has a better track record of job creation than Barack Obama by the mere fact that he hasn’t destroyed several million of them. Nor has he left any ambassadors to die, or surrounded himself with kids in a sick circus of political exploitation designed to steal the fundamental rights of law-abiding citizens.

Hell, now I’m thinking “Dad 2016.” I mean, if that’s cool with Karl Rove.

As for Barack Obama, and I say this with no disrespect, but he’s just an employee. There’s this thing military people know as the “chain of command.” When it comes to American citizens, we’re at the top of the chain. Done. That’s the entire chain of command for an American citizen, and the President’s not in it. Should he presume to suggest a course of action, with a few rare and well-defined exceptions, it is just that – a suggestion.

Now, the President is the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces, but command in a military context is quite different. Command is a circumscribed function, strictly limited to military personnel engaged in their military duties and focusing not on the prerogatives of power but on the dual responsibilities of accomplishing the mission and taking care of those warriors he leads.

A commander is by no means some sort of rock star, at least if his self-regard is properly kept in check (There is a reason every commander at every level in the military has a grizzled noncommissioned officer assigned to him or her, and it isn’t for ego-boosting).

No, the President works for me, and for you. Too often, Americans seem to forget that. Sure, he has a big job. He’s an executive, with lots of people (civilian and military) working under him. He deserves the same respect as any decent superior should show a subordinate – and make no mistake, the President is a subordinate of even the most humble American citizen. {Read More}

I am not sure what I may be missing here but; in as much as the President works for you and me at some point he must make recommendations to the legislative branch, including sending bills for their consideration, as well as making executive decisions that are in the interests of the people who elected him. In this I know of no better way to govern than by erring in favor of the majority vote. President Obama was duly reelected President as well as the nation electing a dEmocrat Senate. At the same time the nation elected a rEpublican house. It seems to me our system of checks and balances is functioning as intended. Perhaps it would do the nation and all it's citizens a good turn if the ideologues on both sides of the aisle begin listening to that which they have heretofore choose to tune out.

Via: Memeorandum

Is Time Running Out for the Republican Party?...

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

The future does not look bright for either the Republican Party or it's Tea Party faction. There are more than just a couple of reasons I make this statement, but perhaps the biggest reason is found in the changing demographics of the United States. I touched on this issue in priors posts here, here, and here, but the issue deserves revisiting as it is very likely the single most important factor that will determine the future fate of the Republican party.

Demographic changes as well as other issues the Republican party will need to address effectively if the party is to remain relevant is outlined in some detail by Michael Gerson & Peter Wehner writing for Commentary.

Excerpt: -The first factor is America’s changing demographics. Much has been written on this topic, but the essential datum is the long-term shrinking of those demographic groups, especially white voters, who traditionally and reliably favor the GOP: from 89 percent of the electorate in 1976 to 72 percent in 2012. This decline is partially an artifact of a change in the way the Census Bureau classifies Hispanics, who used to be counted among whites before being placed in a separate category. But it has much more to do with a real, ongoing change in the composition of the American populace. In any given contest, the GOP can overcome this obstacle. Over time, however, the obstacle will grow ever larger.

Consider the performance of Mitt Romney, who carried the white vote by 20 points. If the country’s demographic composition were still the same last year as it was in 2000, he would now be president. If it were still the same as it was in 1992, he would have won in a rout. If he had merely secured 42 percent of the Hispanic vote—rather than his pathetic 27 percent—Romney would have won the popular vote and carried Florida, Colorado, and New Mexico. Republicans, in short, have a winning message for an electorate that no longer exists. {Continue Reading}

The plight of the Republican Party is not hopeless, however, unless it's members do some honest and deep introspection and admit that times are changing what is now only a possibility WILL become REALITY.

Via: Memeorandum

President Obama Makes a Gutsy Call and Stands by His Man...

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



Unfortunately Chuck Hagel gave less than a stellar performance during his confirmation hearings.Therefore it is reasonable to expect many, especially in the rEbublican and neocon camp to have grave reservations with his nomination/confirmation. Taking a step back and reviewing his background and qualifications I find no reasons not to confirm. Perhaps reason will prevail in the Senate (unlikely) and Hagel will be confirmed.

POLITICO - President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have fiercely defended the nomination of Chuck Hagel, despite advisers and Hill Democrats who questioned the move and predicted a firestorm, according to Democratic sources.

That opinion was validated, at least for the moment, by events Thursday as Senate Republicans narrowly blocked cloture on Hagel’s nomination. Obama immediately slammed the filibuster — which could be broken after a 10-day congressional recess.

But an irked Obama is dead set on installing his pick at the Pentagon — even though the bitter battle over his confirmation is likely to leave lasting scars on his nominee at a time of looming military cuts and dangerous new developments in Iran and North Korea.

“We’ve never had a secretary of defense filibustered before … there are only a handful of instances in which there’s been any kind of filibuster of anybody,” the president said during a Google+ chat after the Senate vote.

“My expectation and hope is that Chuck Hagel … will be confirmed as our defense secretary,” he said. “It’s just unfortunate that this kind of politics intrudes at a time when I’m presiding over [a war in Afghanistan].

Senior White House officials predicted that a battered Hagel would manage to limp over the finish line and take the job of defense secretary later this month. But others pointed to the cost after weeks of absorbing criticism about his previous statements on Israel, his personal finances and unanswered questions about Obama’s personal response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

“It’s going to put him in a difficult position once he gets there,” said Bill Cohen, a former Republican senator from Maine who served as defense secretary under President Bill Clinton. “I’m sure there will be some lingering discontent on the part of some on the Hill. That, however, speaks to the process we’re talking about. ... [Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

The Simple is to Difficult, For Congress Anyway...

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



I have long wished the penny would disappear. It has very little, if any practical purpose in today's marketplace and they only take up space in your pocket or pocketbook. Finally we have a President registering his agreement.

Los Angeles Times - President Obama on Thursday said he supports eliminating pennies, but that it’s unlikely to happen because it’s so low on the list of congressional priorities.

In a Google Plus “Hangout,” Obama was asked why the U.S. Treasury continues to mint pennies even though the cost to mint them is more than they’re worth.

“I got to tell you, I don’t know,” Obama said. “It’s one of those things where people get attached emotionally to the way things have been.”

The president said the penny was a good metaphor for other inefficiencies in Washington that become institutionalized.

“Any time we’re spending money on something people aren’t going to use, that’s something that should change,” Obama added.

He argued he has asked Congress for the authority to reorganize inefficient agencies to perpetuate a more modern federal infrastructure, but said until Congress grants him that authority, it was up to them to act on eliminating the penny.

“The penny is something I need legislation for, and frankly given all the big issues, we’re not able to get to it,” he said.

Indeed! A simple legislative initiative that makes ultimate sense, saves dollars, and Congress won't find time to "get to the simple." So typical.

Via: Memeorandum

Is the Grand Old Party a Bit Behind the Times? Some Believe So...

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

Something to think about rEpublicans and Tea Party enthusiasts...



Indeed. h/t to Robert Draper of The New York Times.

Via: Memeorandum

Wayne Lapierre and the NRA, More Hyperbole and Spreadin the Fear...

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

Is it just me or is anyone else tiring of the seemingly never ending drone of guys like LaPierre and Nugent? Mostly they are just blowing smoke and trying their damnedest to spread fear with all their hyperbolic, please forgive me, bullshit. We all understand you guys despise the President, but at least try and use some intelligence, commonsense, and cut the BS about how the sky is falling on our second amendment rights all because Obama is a commie and has no greater desire than to strip us of our liberties. The dude might me a lot of things but just in case you've failed to notice in many ways he's not all that different than any other mainstream politician and leader. I suppose I have most likely wasted the keystrokes, but at least I got it off my chest.

By Wayne LaPierre - Before I tell you how the NRA and our members are going to Stand And Fight politically and in the courts, let’s acknowledge that all over this country, tens of millions of Americans are already preparing to Stand And Fight to protect their families and homes.

These good Americans are prudently getting ready to protect themselves.

It has always been sensible for good citizens to own and carry firearms for lawful protection against violent criminals who prey on decent people.

During the second Obama term, however, additional threats are growing. Latin American drug gangs have invaded every city of significant size in the United States. Phoenix is already one of the kidnapping capitals of the world, and though the states on the U.S./Mexico border may be the first places in the nation to suffer from cartel violence, by no means are they the last.

The president flagrantly defies the 2006 federal law ordering the construction of a secure border fence along the entire Mexican border. So the border today remains porous not only to people seeking jobs in the U.S., but to criminals whose jobs are murder, rape, robbery and kidnapping. Ominously, the border also remains open to agents of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Numerous intelligence sources have confirmed that foreign terrorists have identified the southern U.S. border as their path of entry into the country.

When the next terrorist attack comes, the Obama administration won’t accept responsibility. Instead, it will do what it does every time: blame a scapegoat and count on Obama’s “mainstream” media enablers to go along.

A heinous act of mass murder—either by terrorists or by some psychotic who should have been locked up long ago—will be the pretext to unleash a tsunami of Gun Control.

No wonder Americans are buying guns in record numbers right now, while they still can and before their choice about which firearm is right for their family is taken away forever.

After Hurricane Sandy, we saw the hellish world that the gun prohibitionists see as their utopia. Looters ran wild in south Brooklyn. There was no food, water or electricity. And if you wanted to walk several miles to get supplies, you better get back before dark, or you might not get home at all.

Anti-gun New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg had already done everything he could to prevent law-abiding New Yorkers from owning guns, and he has made sure that no ordinary citizen will ever be allowed to carry a gun... {There's More Right Here}

Just shaking my head.

Via: Memeorandum

Ted Nugent's Response Should Be Interesting, Given His Past Rants...

Excerpt from Huff Post Politics, Ted Nugent's response to President Obama's state of the union address tonight promises to be very interesting. My money is with those who suspect Nugent will do more harm than good to advocates of firearm rights, which obviously includes the NRA.

... "We know that the president will have the State of the Union stacked and jammed with props, children and victims of violent crime," Nugent said. "And my friends wanted me to attend to counter that the way that I do: with facts, statistics and common sense and logic and a celebration of self-evident truths. So I will be taking on the media orgy following the State of the Union Address."

Nugent went on to promise to "remain respectful to the office of the presidency and the event itself," but suggested that he wouldn't tone down his rhetoric.

While Nugent laughed off critics whom he said doubted his ability to form "cognitive thoughts," a number of members in the gun control community are predicting that the flame-throwing conservative's highly anticipated presence will be a public relations disaster for pro-gun advocates.

The decision by Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) to invite Nugent certainly draws a stark contrast. A number of family members of victims of a mass shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school will also be in attendance Tuesday night, as guests of members of Congress and first lady Michelle Obama.

Nugent has argued that there is no reason to look at guns as part of the problem in the wake of the massacre. Shortly after the mass shooting, he instead blamed the nation's "spiritual bankruptcy" and its "politically correct" mentality for allowing such atrocities to happen. He's since depicted gun control efforts as preliminary steps in a broader plan to confiscate firearms from law-abiding owners. {Read The Rest Here}

Via: Memorandum

Dick Cheney the Old Guard Neo-Con...

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

Ex Vice President Dick Cheney continues to advocate for United States intervention into every conflict across the globe while criticizing Obama's nominations for cabinet posts to key national security positions. In essence supporting the idea that the USA ought to be the world's police force and arbiter of ethics and mortality.

It seems to me the prior administration did nothing to either enhance our nations world standing or create a safer world environment by their ill conceived excursion into Iraq. But perhaps the more we get it wrong the more right it will eventually turn out to be. Old Guard Neo-Con logic 101.

CBS - Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Saturday night that President Barack Obama has jeopardized U.S. national security by nominating substandard candidates for key cabinet posts and by degrading the U.S. military.

"The performance now of Barack Obama as he staffs up the national security team for the second term is dismal," Cheney said in comments to about 300 members of the Wyoming Republican Party.

Cheney, a Wyoming native, said it was vital to the nation's national security that "good folks" hold the positions of secretary of state, CIA director and secretary of defense.

"Frankly, what he has appointed are second-rate people," he said.

John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, has been confirmed as secretary of state. CIA designate John Brennan and defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel are still awaiting U.S. Senate confirmation.

Wyoming's two U.S. senators, Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, voted for Kerry's confirmation. Both Enzi and Barrasso gave introductory speeches for Cheney Saturday night.

Cheney said Hagel, a former Nebraska U.S. senator, was chosen because Obama "wants to have a Republican that he can use to take the heat for what he plans to do to the Department of Defense."

He said Obama's plans are to allow severe cuts in U.S. defense spending, which would limit the capability of the U.S. military to respond to future foreign crises well after Obama has left office.

"He is today ... establishing what limitations will be on future presidents," Cheney said. {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

As The Fed Peers Ever Deeper Into Your Lives...

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

It looks as though the Obama Administration, not satisfied with enacting a flawed national health plan that even unions are becoming leery of has decided to tell Americans what to do to make their homes safer. Sure to follow will be new mountains of regulations and costs associated with this benevolent and loving plan. Certainly the Federal Government needs more to do as it increases control over the lives of every individual and business in the country.

But I best shut up because the Feds just hate naysayers now din;t they?

HUD No. 13-011
Shantae Goodloe
(202) 708-0685 FOR RELEASE
Monday
February 4, 2013

FEDERAL AGENCIES WORKING TO MAKE HOMES HEALTHIER
Improving housing quality can dramatically affect the health of residents

WASHINGTON—Several federal agencies today unveiled Advancing Healthy Housing – A Strategy for Action. White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Chair Nancy Sutley, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Shaun Donovan, Surgeon General Regina Benjamin, M.D., and Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman discussed the new plan during an event at the National Building Museum this morning.

The initiative represents a bold new vision for addressing the nation’s health and economic burdens caused by preventable hazards associated with the home. The Strategy for Action encourages federal agencies to take preemptive actions that will help reduce the number of American homes with health and safety hazards.

People in the United States spend about 70% of their time in a home. Currently, millions of U.S. homes have moderate to severe physical housing problems, including dilapidated structure; roofing problems; heating, plumbing, and electrical deficiencies; water leaks and intrusion; pests; damaged paint; and high radon gas levels. These conditions are associated with a wide range of health issues, including unintentional injuries, respiratory illnesses like asthma and radon-induced lung cancer, lead poisoning, result in lost school days for children, as well as lost productivity in the labor force. The health and economic burdens from preventable hazards associated with the home are considerable, and cost billions of dollars.

TheStrategy for Action unifies, for the first time, federal action to advance healthy housing, demonstrating the connection between housing conditions and residents’ health. It also promotes strategies and methods intended to reduce in-home health hazards in a cost-effective manner.

“It is clear that unhealthy and unsafe housing has an impact on the health of millions of people in the United States,which is why we must do everything we can to ensure that individuals and families have a healthy place to call home,” said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. “Today’s announcement will help the federal government unify action to controlling and preventing major housing-related exposures and hazards.”

“Thanks to unprecedented collaboration across the federal family and among our many partners, we now have a specific plan for action to address radon and other preventable hazards found in homes across the country. This is important progress, especially when you consider that people spend an estimated 70 percent of their time inside a home,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “At EPA we’re committed to ensuring Americans in all communities have healthy places to live, work and play, and the strategy we announced today is a critical step toward reaching that goal.”

“Healthy homes and communities are essential to our quality of life, our productivity, and our economic vitality,” said Nancy Sutley, Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality. “Through this plan, Federal agencies have committed to working together to make sure all Americans can count on safe, healthy places to live, grow, and thrive.”

Dr. Mary Jean Brown, Chief of CDC’s Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch added, “Healthy homes lead to healthier lives. People can take simple steps to protect themselves from health hazards in the home.”

“Energy efficiency and healthy homes are inextricably linked,” explained U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman. “We cannot, in good conscience, pursue one in the absence of the other. DOE is committed to ensuring that our efforts towards creating an efficient national housing stock also strive to maximize the health and safety of the families we serve.”

The overall vision for the Strategy is to reduce the number of American homes with residential health and safety hazards, achieved through five goals:

1}Establish healthy homes recommendations
2}Encourage adoption of healthy homes recommendations
3}Create and support training and workforce development to address health hazards in housing
4}Educate the public about healthy homes
5}Support research that informs and advances healthy housing in a cost-effective manner

For more on the Strategy for Action, visit the interagency Healthy Homes website, http://healthyhomes.hud.gov.

Big Brother IS watching...

Via: Memorandum

Maher Responds to the Donald

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

I am not a big fan of Bill Maher, nor do I agree with much that Crooks and Liars puts out for the public's perusal. However, priding myself on being fair and balanced I figured this one deserved a play here at RN USA. It is really funny, portrays the "Donald" perfectly, and besides he had it coming. That and personally I don't care for the "Donald." He may not be an Orangutan but he certainly is a buffoon.

Via: Memorandum

A Powerful Message From Dr. Benjamin Carson...

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

Every so often you hear a messages such as the one from Dr. Benjamin Carson that strikes a cord because it is a message of ultimate truth. Whether one is Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, a non believer, or whatever, the basic truth Dr. Carson speaks to is universal. As I listened to the good doctor's message I couldn't help but thinking our elected leadership, starting with the President on down needs the message perhaps most of all.

The presentation is 27 minutes long, but if you haven't seen it yet it is well worth the 27 minute of your time. And that from a non believer.



ht: FreeThinke

Dr. Benjamin Carson is a leading pediatric neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins, where he is a renowned authority on separating Siamese twins. He was raised in the Detroit inner city by a single mom who worked multiple jobs to get him through school. He is a professor of neurosurgery, oncology, and plastic surgery as well as pediatrics… and he holds over 50 honorary degrees on top of that. He’s been the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins since he was just 33 years old. In 2008, he received America’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, from George W. Bush. He and his wife Candy run the Carson Scholars Fund, which hopes to “name a Carson Scholar in every school within the United States.” {Continue Reading

Is American Ingenuity Lacking? Do We Need to Import Talent? It Is an Open Question the Nation Must Answer...

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

It seems like a reasonable means of bringing more high tech talent to the USA, thus helping to make us more competitive in the global marketplace. Some however disagree.

The New York Times - WHILE genuine immigration reform has the potential to fix a seriously broken system, four senators have introduced a bill to solve a problem we don’t have: the supply of high-tech workers.

The bill’s authors, led by Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, argue that America would benefit from letting more immigrants trained in science, technology, engineering and math work in the country, with the sponsorship of high-tech companies like Microsoft and I.B.M.

But the opposite is the case: the bill would flood the job market with indentured foreign workers, people who could not switch employers to improve their wages or working conditions; damage the employment prospects of hundreds of thousands of skilled Americans; and narrow the educational pipeline that produces these skilled workers domestically.

The impetus for the bill, which would give six-year visas to as many as 300,000 foreign high-tech workers a year, is the longstanding lament by business leaders that they cannot find the talent they need in the American labor market. In their version, there is a shortage of scientists and engineers, and the United States is failing to keep substantial numbers of foreign students in the country. As a result, our position as the world’s leading high-tech economy is in danger.

Fortunately, they argue, H-1B visas — our guest-worker program for high-tech workers — brings us “the best and the brightest” in the world. We just don’t give out enough of them.

But America’s technology leadership is not, in fact, endangered. According to the economist Richard B. Freeman, the United States, with just 5 percent of the world’s population, employs a third of its high-tech researchers, accounts for 40 percent of its research and development, and publishes over a third of its science and engineering articles.{Read More}

Perhaps we are all set without Senator Hatch's plan. However I can not help but wonder...

Via: Memeorandum

The Issue of Voter Fraud Raises Its Ugly Head, Again...

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

I have been skeptical of the rEpublican cries of voter fraud that never seems to go away. However, one must question if the following is but a isolated incident or whether it goes much deeper as some have claimed. The explanation seems plausible perhaps but then again...

ABC - CINCINNATI - The Hamilton County Board of Elections is investigating 19 possible cases of alleged voter fraud following months of investigation after the 2012 election.

Twenty-eight subpoenas have been issued as a result of the investigation, which includes 19 Hamilton County voters and nine witnesses who still need to answer questions to satisfy the board.

The board started with 80 suspicious cases and now are down to 19. Officials say the majority of the cases turned out to be simple misunderstandings.

Melowese Richardson, a Madisonville resident, first learned of the allegations when approached by 9 On Your Side reporter Tom McKee Wednesday. Even though she admits to voting twice in the last election, she said the news came as surprise.

"I would think that something this important would come to me first and that I wouldn't have to be enlightened about this through you," said Richardson.

According to county documents, Richardson's absentee ballot was accepted on Nov. 1, 2012 along with her signature. On Nov. 11, she told an official she also voted at a precinct because she was afraid her absentee ballot would not be counted in time.

"There's absolutely no intent on my part to commit voter fraud," said Richardson.

According to BOE records, her name appeared on an absentee ballot list prior to Election Day. The board's report states poll workers should have updated the signature poll book by flagging "absentee voter" next to the names of those who appeared on the list. Upon investigation it was found that none of the voters who appeared on the list were flagged, which included Richardson. The staff could not locate that supplemental list when asked.

Richardson voted at the Madisonville Recreation Center where she worked as a paid worker on Election Day.

She has worked the polls since 1988. Richardson said in her youth she would accompany her mother, who also worked at the polls, even thought she wasn't old enough to vote at the time.

"I, after registering thousands of people, certainly wanted my vote to count. So, I voted. I voted at the poll," she said.

The board's documents also state that Richardson was allegedly disruptive and hid things from other poll workers on Election Day after another female worker reported she was intimated by Richardson.

However, Richardson claims she was the one intimidated while doing her job.

"I think I was intimidated because she's new and wasn't doing her job very efficiently and like I said, I've been working the pools for several years. I let her know how it should have been taken care of," said Richardson.

During the investigation it was also discovered that her granddaughter, India Richardson, who was a first time voter in the 2012 election, cast two ballots in November. {Read More}

Via: Memorandum

As Big Brother Watches...

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

As Big Brother (Leviathan) watches... Complements of GWM and the Patriot Act.

WIRED - The Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security.

The DHS, which secures the nation’s border, in 2009 announced that it would conduct a “Civil Liberties Impact Assessment” of its suspicionless search-and-seizure policy pertaining to electronic devices “within 120 days.” More than three years later, the DHS office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a two-page executive summary of its findings.

“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” the executive summary said.

The memo highlights the friction between today’s reality that electronic devices have become virtual extensions of ourselves housing everything from e-mail to instant-message chats to photos and our papers and effects — juxtaposed against the government’s stated quest for national security.

The President George W. Bush administration first announced the suspicionless, electronics search rules in 2008. The President Barack Obama administration followed up with virtually the same rules a year later. Between 2008 and 2010, 6,500 persons had their electronic devices searched along the U.S. border, according to DHS data. {Read More}

Indeed our liberties are being slowly eroded away by Big Brother. And it is high time we begin to realize that rEpublicans are not true friends of liberty. Call me a rational skeptic but GWB did as much to rollback liberty as anyone in the last 80 or so years of our history.

Via: Memorandum

WJC the Godfather of Democrat Politics, and Rightfully So...

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

Bill Clinton, a man whom I did not vote for has, over time engendered a certain level of respect. While I do not agree with many of his positions I do admire his resiliency as well as the wisdom he has gained and so effectively communicates.

I cannot help but wonder why there is no one individual in the limited government classical liberal movement that can define precisely what those terms mean and why limited government and classical liberal principles are both workable and sustainable. I suspect it is because they do not really believe it themselves. After all, most of the so called "limited government liberty politicians" have been only too willing to take advantage of the very system and programs they criticize.

Being a true limited government, pro capitalist, and pro liberty individual is the furthest thing from the so called conservative movement of the present as one can get. Of course one needs to understand the motives of the big "R" rEpublican/Neoconservative movement of the present to understand this. Unfortunately there are many who will never take the time to analyze and understand the dangers their leaders and "heroes" are leading them into.

As a nation we are at a point in our history that depending on how we react to past errors, and respond to present challenges will determine the course of our future. Listening to either the socon-neocon rEpublicans or the far left progressive big "D" statist democrats will undoubtedly result in our eventual demise as a great and influential nation.

It would do the rEpublicans power base and aspiring Libertarians well to listen to the words of an elder politician and democrat party Ambassador. After listening it is incumbent on rEpublican/Libertarian leadership to determine how to apply what they learn to EFFECTIVELY sending the powerful message of limited governance and liberty to a populace who is desirous of both.

A cautionary note; the great majority of the general population wants to work and earn an honest living, every day of their lives. They do not want to depend on government to take care of them. And they wonder exactly why there is a 500:1 ratio with respect to executive compensation to the average workers income. They have a point worth considering.

Politico - Former President Bill Clinton had a message for House Democrats on Friday: come up with a plan.

Clinton, speaking to the caucus at their retreat, said that heading into the midterm elections Democrats couldn’t just run against Republican policies but craft their own message on jobs, the economy, immigration, and gun control.

“I think we’re going to be fine, but we’ve got to learn to compare ourselves to the competition in a way that is not threatening and is not negative. We have got got to have a jobs agenda that seems affordable and realistic,” he said. “We need a 10 year budget plan that doesn’t overdo the austerity… Do it all in a same spirit that you took out there in this last election.

“This last race was a referendum in large measure on what the American people did not want, we have to create a future that they do want,” he added.

The former president said that Democrats could even win the gun control debate, if they approach it in the right way, and urged them not give up trying to convince people “who aren’t supposed to be in our demographic.”

“They are thinking about this too. They were sick when those children were killed,” he said. “Treat these people like our friends, our neighbors, and people we share our country with.” {Read More}

Yep rEpublicans and Libertarians, we all share the same desires, hopes, and fears as do our democrat inspired countrymen. So, if we want to win the argument and the day it is, as William Jefferson Clinton would no doubt agree, our responsibility to convince the other side exactly why we have a better plan. The task is I fear monumental given the legacy of GWB ad leadership the likes of Karl Rove.

Via: Memorandum

Jesse Jackson Jr., a Chip off of the Old Block..

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

Former Illinois Representative Jesse Jackson Jr.

It seems the apple never falls far from the tree. Charlatans both...

The Hill - Former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D) has signed a plea deal over violations of campaign finance law, according to a report.

The former Illinois congressman agreed to the deal in the last few days, according to NBC News

Under the agreement, Jackson — who resigned from Congress in late 2012 citing health issues — would have to repay the campaign money he spent on furniture and other personal items.

According to NBC News, Jackson spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on items and travel unrelated to campaigning. Using campaign funds for personal use is illegal and punishable by a minimum penalty of five years in prison.

It is unclear how much time in prison Jackson is likely to spend. A federal judge for sentencing has not yet been assigned.

In response to the reported plea agreement, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) released a statement asking whether Jackson held onto his seat to use as a bargaining chip.

"With the writing on the wall well in advance of Election Day, and Rep. Jackson’s resignation just weeks later, it begs the question whether the former congressman held on to his seat to maintain a stronger bargaining position with prosecutors," CREW executive director Melanie Sloan said in a statement on Friday. "The people of Illinois deserve much more from their federally elected officials. While Rep. Jackson will be required to reimburse the government and may face jail time, the disservice to his constituents likely won’t be forgotten any time soon." {Read More}

As bad as some rEpublican lawmakers have been there certainly are big "D" charlatans out there working to scam the public as well, as Jackson Jr. has shown us. As so often happens, as well it should, Mr. Jackson was caught in his own misplaced belief he was beyond scrutiny. A perfect example of the old adage that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Via: Memeorandum

State Representative Daniel Winslow Considers a Run for U.S. Senate...

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

State Representative Daniel B. Winslow

State Representative Winslow, a relative unknown rEpublican is 99% certain he'll run in the special election for the Senate seat being vacated by John Kerry. He appears to be a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Winslow certainly merits a sincere look. If he is indeed that which he appears to be on first glance sending him to Washington as an offset to Senator Warren ain't such a bad idea.

Political Intelligence - State Representative Daniel B. Winslow, a former judge and onetime aide to Governor Mitt Romney, said Thursday he is entering the special election for the US Senate, the first Republican to officially declare his candidacy.

“I’m in,” Winslow said in a telephone interview. He had said earlier this week that he was “99 percent” certain he would run.

Winslow said he has donated $100,000 of his own money to jumpstart his campaign, which he estimated will cost between $4 million and $6 million.

On Monday, he said, he is flying to Washington to meet with Republicans on Capitol Hill and with the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which controls much of the party’s national fundraising. Nex month, Winslow said, he will resign from his law firm, Proskauer, where he is senior counsel in the litigation department.

“I’m going to be 100 percent running for the US Senate,” Winslow said. “This is a heavy lift. I’m going to give this race everything I’ve got.”

Winslow, 54, is a second-term state representative from Norfolk who served as Romney’s chief legal counsel from 2001 to 2005. Before that, he was a district court judge.

“I have a proven record of respect for Second Amendment constitutional freedoms,” Winslow wrote in an email announcing his candidacy to party activists and supporters. “My experience as a fiscal conservative and problem solver is experience we need in Washington DC. Our future depends on getting this right.” {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Alabama rEpublicans Determined to Shut Down Abortion Clinics in the State...

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

The heavy hand of big statist Socon rEpublicans in Alabama at work finding ways around the law. It is only a matter of time until the rEpublican party is irrelevant. Speaking frankly, perhaps it is time. When the state exercises power in this fashion liberty is indeed threatened. It is but one example demonstrating the rEpublican party has ceased to be the party of liberty that it once was.

By Adam Peck  - Republican lawmakers in Alabama took a crucial step on Wednesday towards their goal of shuttering the state’s last five abortion clinics, advancing a bill to the full house that would impose strict requirements on abortion providers.

The bill, the so-called “Women’s Health and Safety Act,” passed the Republican-controlled House Health Committee on Wednesday morning, and could come to vote in the full legislature as soon as Thursday. If passed, it would require clinics to meet certain architectural standards and have a physician present for all abortions — a provision Republicans claim is for the safety of patients, but is in fact a smokescreen designed to make compliance as difficult as possible:

But critics charged the bill sets impossible standards that have little to do with patient safety and that the bill stems from a template created by the pro-life group Americans United for Life.

“This bill targets regulatory standards of architectural structure, equipment and staffing that are totally unnecessary and cannot be met by the clinics,” said Gloria Gray, director of the West Alabama Women’s Health Center in Tuscaloosa. “How does requiring a six-foot hallway make it safer for a woman to have an abortion?” {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Update: This just in; Iowa bill would define legal abortion as murder. As one could guess the bill is sponsored by rEpublicans. A party who has not only lost it's bearings it has lost it's ability to think clearly and objectively. Irrelevancy is in the part's future. There is no doubt.

Ames Tribune - State Rep. Rob Bacon believes abortion is murder and he wants the Iowa Code to reflect that.

Bacon, R-Slater, and eight other Republicans introduced such a bill in the Iowa House Wednesday. It would alter the definition of a person in murder cases to “an individual human being, without regard to age of development, from the moment of conception, when a zygote is formed, until natural death.”

“It’s to protect the life of the unborn,” Bacon told the Tribune. “There’s still some of us that believe life begins at conception.”

Those charged with murder, under the bill, would include a mother who takes abortion-inducing drugs or a doctor who performs an abortion. It also grants no exceptions for rape, incest or to protect the life of the mother.

Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, D-Ames, was dismayed by the bill.

“We’re talking about the victim of rape would go to prison along with her rapist,” Wessel-Kroeschell said. “It’s very hard to understand the feeling behind it. It’s a health care issue, I mean, sometimes in order to save someone’s life a woman could possibly need an abortion. When we talk about being pro-life, my new question is ‘whose life?’”

Bacon defended the bill, saying, “for some reason, we can protect eggs of a spotted owl … but yet we don’t put the same emphasis on our children.”

Bacon concedes the bill has no chance of becoming law. The bill was sent to the judiciary committee, of which Wessel-Kroeschell is a member. She said it could make it out of that committee but would never become law.

“It will never be brought up in the Senate, we know that,” Bacon said.

Despite that, Bacon felt it was important to send a message that some Republicans remain committed to ending legal abortions. {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Morris Gets the Boot...

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

Interesting...

No more Fox News contributor Dick Morris. His contract to spout republic-damaging nonsense on Fox airwaves has expired, and the network isn’t renewing it.

Taken together with the news that Sarah Palin will no longer be contributing, the Morris development is strong evidence that Fox News has glimpsed the underside of allowing charlatans to brand its coverage. Palin was a roboto-contributor, who responded to everything with a little crack on the lamestream media and a reference President Obama’s socialist heart.

As for Morris’s misdeeds, well, everyone knows what they are. That’s because Fox News presented them so prominently in the run-up to last year’s presidential election. In his prime-time, pre-election appearances, Morris was among the few pundits who wouldn’t hedge his bets; who wouldn’t triangulate his way through the polling numbers; who wouldn’t rummage through scenario after scenario in his analysis.

No, Dick Morris was predicting a Mitt Romney landslide. Fox News fell for it, and surely millions of Americans did as well. After all, in the same breath that he was predicting landslides, he was citing his own expertise:

It’s not a question of being smarter than anybody else. It’s that I’ve done this for a living and there are very few people on television who talk about politics who’ve ever made a living doing it, and most of them are partisan and echoing a point of view, but when you get down to it, a guy like Karl Rove or Pat Caddell or me or even Joe Trippi, we make a living doing this and I’ve made a living doing it for 40 years. {Read More}

Is it really surprising? Morris did work for William Jefferson Clinton after all. Did he not?

Via: Memorandum