Friday, October 29, 2010

Congratulations, Barack on Your Stimulus Success(?)

So, we compare US unemployment rates to Germany,
Germany did not enact a massive stimulus.  We did.

What sort of success do we show for the massive US stimulus?

Looks to me like negative success, known as FAILURE!

Thanks, Barack.

It's Official: Communist = Democrat

The Communist Party USA endorses Democrats, because the Democratic party "supports us":

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Vote Liberty to Overcome voter Fraud

Democrats and their fellow travelers committing voter fraud:

Nevada Voters Complain Of Problems At Polls.

Voter reports problem with ballot machine.

For Some Immigrants, Voting Is a Criminal Act.

More at Instapundit.

Harry Reid and Cronies buying votes.

Vote for Liberty in November

Hint: The socialist Democrats (a redundancy this year) do not promote liberty. The Republicans have not been great at promoting liberty either, but they are the best opportunity this year. We must pray and pressure the Republicans to promote and vote liberty after the election.

Stephne Broden Update

I agree with Pastor Broden. I do not want to see a violent revolution, but I also do not want to see the continuation of an complacent, arrogant ruling class in Washington that believes it can oppress people and run roughshod over people's rights without consequences.

I remember a Bill Cosby line (I think it was) speaking to one of his television children: "I brought you into this world. I'll take you out of it." The same goes for would-be government oppressors. We can and must do that at the ballot box.

I advocate and desire ONLY revolution by election. But, I would rather have government fear the people than the other way around.

By the same toke, it is vital that we have confidence that our elections are honest. Nothing is more likely to provoke violence than a belief that there has been widespread election fraud.

Democrat Alex Sink Cheats at CNN Debate

From the Florida gubernatorial debate, Democrat Alex Sink receives a message contrary to the debate rules contract everyone signed:

The Republican Rick Scott got it wrong. The Democrat did not cheat with an ipad or iphone. It was really a Droid.

Ms. Sink claims that the aid who sent the offending message has been "removed from the campaign" whatever that means.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Nancy Pelosi's Fantasy

From The Blaze:
In an interview with Politics Daily posted Monday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi claims that Democrats “haven’t really gotten the credit for what we have done,“ adding that the negative attention surrounding her proves she has been ”effective” and suggesting that voter discontent is simply due to misinformation.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Sarah Palin Blasts the Democrats Porkulus Programs

Fun With Senator Ma'am

Barbara Boxer is a terrible woman and worse senator. Even John McCain, who complimented then Senator Obama on a personal basis during their debates, says Ma'am Boxer was horrible to work with.

Friday, October 22, 2010

First Ever: Gay Conservative Anti-Democrat Ad

Too Much Spending, Too Much Government

This is great:

And scary.

Crowd Forces Pledge Of Allegiance At Debate

Something good is happening in America. Watch this:

This was better, but removed:

On the Juan Williams - Fox News Contract

Fox News today proved that it is far more "fair and balanced" than NPR.

NPR fires a left-of-center, but not left enough, commentator for truthfully expressing the emotional reaction of most Americans when Muslims enter an airplane acting too Muslim. Fears of 9/11. Even some Muslims share that reaction. Not the ultra-left NPR management, though. (See the Moron of the Day, below.)

In contrast, Fox News gives the left-of-center commentator a new contract, despite Fox News's obviously right-of-center editorial positions.

Unlike the likes of NPR, Fox News takes pride in presenting the opposing point of view to its editorial position.

Of course being publicly funded one would hope (in vain it turns out) for actual balance on its airwaves.

One commentator at the American Thinker goes further. It is E.W. Jackson Sr.'s thesis that NPR is acting like a slaveholder whose slave has left the plantation. Read it all here.

I just want again to say that my observation of Juan Williams over the years is that he is decent and honest man with whom I generally disagree. But unlike most left-of-center folks, I genuinely respect his point of view and his expression of it, and I appreciate hearing it. Juan Williams did not deserve the firing, but I am pleased for him that he has already landed on his feet.

As for the Huffington Post goofballs who are whining about calls to defund NPR in the name of a free press: Listen up. Government funded media is antithetical to a free press. There is no press less free than government funded and/or run press. If you cannot understand that, shame on you.

Moron of the Day: NPR CEO Vivian Schiller

Amid widespread calls to defund NPR, NPR CEO Vivian Schiller makes a snarky public comment about how Juan Williams should keep his feelings about his firing between him and his psychiatrist.


She later apologized, but the arrogance displayed demonstrates yet another reason for ending NPR's government funding.

Congratulations to Vivian Schiller, our Moron of the Day

Pastor Stephen Broden Running Against Corruptocrat Bernice Johnson

Interesting race in Texas's 30th district:

Republican candidate and Pastor Stephen Broden says that if ballot box revolution does not fix the government, everything is on the table, including revolution.

Leftists beware. There is anger in this country over our loss of freedom due to excessive government. No one wants a violent revolution, but reasonable people can decide that they will not suffer more erosion of the freedoms that we as Americans cherish, either.

Let us make our revolution at the ballot box in November 2010 and November 2012. We can save the country without violence.

Among other thinks, Obamacare must be repealed.

Anti-Barney Frank Campaign Ad Goes Viral

It is no wonder that this campaign ad about Bawney Fwank has gone viral:

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Ibrahim Hooper, What a Jerk

Ibrahim Hooper is a real bozo. He proves it here. I agree with exactly one statement he made that is absolutely correct. He says that NPR is a editorially left wing. So, why is it being partly funded by the federal government?

Mohammed Cartoons

Nobel Peace Prize Satire

No one in his or her right mind really believes that Barack Obama's 2009 peace prize was deserved based on any actual accomplishment. That award was an embarrassing spectacle. The committee voted to make the award even before President Obama took office. It embarrassed even President Obama it appeared. Here is a satire on the Nobel prize:

Value Added Tax? Repeal the 16th Amendment First!

Krugman's Broken Window Debunked

Once upon a time, we thought that winning a Nobel prize meant something. Paul Krugman won a Nobel prize for economics. It turns out that his Nobel prize is no more descriptive of excellence than was the Nobel peace prize given to Barack Obama, voted even before he took office in January 2009.

Krugman once declared that the ghastly 9/11 attacks might be good for the economy. This false Keynesian thinking is called the broken window theory explained in the following video:

Paul Krugman's regular lunacy (published as a New York Times commentator and Obama Administration supporter, if not advisor) is routinely refuted (refudiated?) in the Krugman in Wonderland Blog.

If you enjoy economics, check out Paul Murphy's latest at the Mises Institute.

Don't Vote If You Don't Study The Candidates and Issues

From an article by Selwyn Duke in The American Thinker:
It has become apparent that most Americans simply don't take voting very seriously. This is especially true of those who encourage voting. They'll tell us that walking into a polling place and pulling a lever is our civic duty, but this isn't true. Our civic duty is to cultivate wisdom in ourselves and become conversant with the issues; the walking and pulling part is just a natural byproduct of that.

Yet so many try to pull others to the polls, claiming that mass participation in the electoral process somehow makes our country better. I guess it is in the way that having everyone take a turn in the cockpit of a 747 would make air travel better or having everyone try his hand at brain surgery would make brains healthier. The latter is hard to imagine, of course, but it would increase the likelihood that those brains would vote Democrat.
Read it all.

If you attuned to politics in Ohio, you know that "Brown" is a great name to get elected. People recognize "Brown" and pull the lever (touch the screen).

You don't think that goofy Senator Sherrod Brown would actually get elected if Ohio voters really knew what he stands for, do you?

How the Chicago Democratic Machine Bullies Voters

On the video below, Democratic Congressional Representative Jan Schakowsky admits how the Chicago Democratic machine bullies voters:

Get that? “I don’t get off your doorstop until you get out to the polls and vote!” With bullying like that, do you really believe she won't also be demanding that voters vote for the Democrats?

NAACP Dishonesty On Video

In our blog post yesterday, we condemned the racist elements within the NAACP.

For a report on who wrote the report alleging racism in the tea parties, go here.  Does anyone really think that the reports conclusions were not pre-ordained?


Google Pays Only 2.4% Because of Excessive US Tax Rates

The headline sounds contradictory, doesn't it?  It is true, though.  High personal and corporate tax rates in the United States force profitable companies to engage in high-end tax planning.
Google’s income shifting -- involving strategies known to lawyers as the “Double Irish” and the “Dutch Sandwich” -- helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4 percent, the lowest of the top five U.S. technology companies by market capitalization, according to regulatory filings in six countries.
Source:  Bloomberg.

Fat chance that the media and other Obama-ites will recognize that the true cause of Google's low tax rate success is incentive to escape the high tax rates imposed by the United States.

First, let us understand that corporations do not pay taxes. People do. Corporate taxes are simply reflected in higher prices.

I understand that it is politically unpopular to eliminate corporate tax rates. However, if government wants to promote business, corporate tax rates should be low, low, low. If they are not low, a rational corporate governance will dictate exploring the system to find ways to save money. That is their job. That is their duty. They owe that to their shareholders.

Congratulations Google for a job well done. Shame on you, Congress, for creating a situation that forced Google to become to tax-aggressive.

Time to Defund NPR

Yesterday NPR terminated the contract of generally liberal commentator Juan Williams who, while arguing for tolerance the clearly distinguished between ordinary Muslims and radical Islam, admitted he get nervous when people in Islamic garb get on an airplane with him.

On September 11, 2001, radical Muslims killed three thousand people using passenger airlines as weapons. Juan Williams admitted to being human. For this he gets canned?

When publicly-funded radio enforces speech codes contrary to First Amendment principles (it is significantly government-funded after all), you know it has outlived its usefulness (if it ever had any).

What is the federal government doing funding even in part a radio station anyway? Exactly what enumerated power authorizes that funding?

Juan Williams is one of the more rational liberals in the media. I mostly disagree with him, but respect his reasoning, because unlike many, he uses reason to support his positions. NPR's action was reprehensible.

Defund NPR, now.  Or just after the 11-2-10 revolution.  Refudiate it.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Commandeering the People: Popular Sovereignty and the Individual Insurance Mandate

Sit back and enjoy this hour, twenty-three minutes:

Corruption: Chris Coons Sued for Retaliation Against Political Speech

Doe the First amendment mean anything to the self-described bearded Marxist Chris Coons?

Not only was he unable to identify the five freedoms inherent in the First Amendment in his debate with Christine O'Donnell that other night, he apparently does not believe in one of them:  Freedom of political speech.  At least that was the accusation in no fewer than three lawsuits between 2005 and 2007 filed against Coons for job retaliation against supporter of Coons's political opponents..


That said, I have no idea how these suits were resolved.  Were they settled as most suits are?

So far there is smoke and only suspicion of fire.

Racism and Antisemitism in NAACP Condemned

The Voice of Reason hereby condemns all racism and antisemitism in the ranks of the NAACP and urges the NAACP to take effective and public steps to rid itself of these bad elements..

The racism of the NAACP is well documented (example here) and need not be repeated further.  The NAACP antisemitism is best exemplified by its embrace of Louis Farrakhan at one of its summits where Farrakhan jabbered nonsense about whitey and the Jews.  Report here..

The hypocritical NAACP has released a report claiming that there is bigotry in the tea party movement.  Guess what?  There are conservative bigots, liberal bigots, progressive bigots, black bigots, white bigots, red bigots, yellow bigots and green bigots scattered throughout society, and can be found in any movement or large organization.  The Democratic party for instance.

If the tea part is so bigoted, why is Herman Cain so popular among the tea partiers?

The NAACP has abandoned all pretense of credibility, in my opinion.

The Principles of '98

Our government schools apparently no longer teach the Principles of '98, a landmark event in American Constitutional history. These principles were actually legislative actions of Kentucky and Virginia in 1798 asserting the states' right to ignore unconstitutional act by Congress, in this case the hated Alien and Sedition Acts that criminalized any criticism of Congress or the President. Here is an interesting video on the Principles of '98:

Many Blacks have been brainwashed into thinking that "states rights" and nullification were about slavery. Remember that before the Civil War, Massachusetts attempted nullification asserting its state's rights to oppose slavery, specifically the federal Fugitive Slave Act.

State of Wisconsin v. Joshua J. Schultz

A Judge in the Circuit Court of Clark County Wisconsin has struck down Wisconsin's prohibitions on concealed carry in State of Wisconsin v. Joshua J. Schultz. Click on the case name for a copy of the opinion. Among other things, the court described to overbroad prohibitions of Wisconsin's law:,
Heller and McDonald, recognize the fundamental and personal right written, in plain English, in the Second Amendment. These two decisions reinforce the need for the sec. 941.23 to be narrowly tailored and, in addition, the least restrictive means of the State achieving its goal. The statute is neither. As written, sec. 941.23:

1. Prohibits a gun or knife owner from storing his weapons out of plain sight, such as in a gun cabinet, closet or drawer in his own home.
2. Prohibits a store owner from storing his weapons out of plain sight at his place of business, a store in a “rough” neighborhood.
3. Prohibits the logger, hiker, cross country skier and other outdoors person from keeping his weapon out of plain sight, but available, in the event of a wolf, bear or other wild animal attack.
4. It prohibits judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, court staff and child support agency workers (and many others) that have received legitimate death threats from carrying a concealed weapon for personal safety.

The court could continue this list ad infinitum
The holding:
In sum, sec. 941.23 is unconstitutional on its face as overly broad in violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXVII

Amendment XXVII. Congressional Pay Limitation

No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened
This prevents Representatives from from voting pay raises for themselves without an intervening election. Of the 435 seats, in a normal election, close to 400 seats are relative safe for incumbents. There are many fewer safe seats this year (maybe 336), but at least if the voters get outraged by a voted pay raise, it has the opportunity to vote the bums out. Senators, apparently because they have the longer six year terms, are no so handicapped.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Lefty Tweeters Prove They Really Are as Stupid as They Seem

The left believes in government schools. Maybe that is why the left is so weak on history.

Yesterday they uncourteously and foolishly mocked Sarah Pail when she told tea partiers not to "party like its 1773" just yet, not until Washington was flooded with conservatives.

The historically challenged on the left went "har, har, doesn't Palin know the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776?"

Well, that is right, but when was the tea party? You guessed it. 1773.

Compendium of idiot tweets here.

Keynes v. Hyek, Hip Hop Style

Not your usual economics debate:

Guy gets revenge on ex-girlfriend on CSPAN2

Gone viral. I can't imagine why, ha, ha. The whole entertaining story complete with full video is at Daily Caller.

Republican Promise to Listen to Tea Parties; Democrats in Denial

This is an excellent ad.

We, the tea party people, are left wondering if this will be just another broken political promise.

The Democrats on the other hand, deny the legitimacy of the tea parties as the Democrats have done consistently over the last 18 months.

I say, take a chance with the party that recognizes the legitimacy of the tea party concerns.

Decriminalize Drugs? Check Out Portugal's Experience

I have frequently ranted about the failure of the so-called war on drugs. That so-called war wastes valuable taxpayer resources and causes crime, burglaries, robberies, murders etc by desperate druggies trying to get money for their illegal drugs.

The drug laws impose excessive cost on the consumers of legal prescription drugs by limiting supply and suppliers.

As is typical, naysayers of decriminalization paint terrible scenarios. We now have an example of actual real-world experience with decriminalization in Portugal (from the Politico):
By any metric, Portugal’s drug-decriminalization scheme has been a resounding success. Drug usage in many categories has decreased in absolute terms, including for key demographic groups, like 15-to-19-year-olds. Where usage rates have increased, the increases have been modest — far less than in most other European Union nations, which continue to use a criminalization approach.

Portugal, whose drug problems were among the worst in Europe, now has the lowest usage rate for marijuana and one of the lowest for cocaine. Drug-related pathologies, including HIV transmission, hepatitis transmission and drug-related deaths, have declined significantly.
Read it all.

Read more:

Why Obama Administration Economics is Wrong

Dr. Mildred Jefferson, R.I.P.

Dr. Mildred Jefferson passed away at age 84 last Friday.  From
Dr. Mildred Jefferson, the first African-American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School and the first female surgical intern at Boston City Hospital, broke many race and gender barriers during her long career as a doctor. But it was when she turned to politics, emerging four decades ago as a eloquent leader of the antiabortion movement, that she began to win a following.
 Despite Dr. Jefferson's ground breaking career, her passing is being ignored by most of the major media.  I suppose it is because of the obvious.  The major media have become so issue-driven that the achievement of Dr. Jefferson must be smothered under her politically incorrect belief that unborn children should not be murdered.  Dr. Jefferson was a board member and three term president of National Right to Life.  (I differ with Dr. Jefferson and National Right to Life on the proposed remedies to the abortion problem, but this is about her, not me.)

As a physician, she remained true to her Hippocratic oath:
“I am at once a physician, a citizen, and a woman, and I am not willing to stand aside and allow this concept of expendable human lives to turn this great land of ours into just another exclusive reservation where only the perfect, the privileged, and the planned have the right to live,’’ she told [American Feminist] magazine.
She must have been a very interesting person:
Dr. Jefferson broke many barriers yet didn’t have a driver’s license. “The story was that she was always thinking about so many interesting things that she wouldn’t be paying attention to the road,’’ [close friend Anne] Fox said. 
Thank you, Dr. Jefferson, for showing that everyone with the skill, intelligence and determination can become successful and serve society, despite artificial barriers such as race or sex.  Thank you for your life of service.

Rest in peace.

Join "The Rent is Too Damn High" Party in NY

Is it any wonder the election time is called the silly season? The clip below is from a New York gubernatorial candidates debate, the speaker is candidate Jimmy McMillan:

New York City is infamous for its rent control laws. How is that working for them?

Rent control is a disincentive for the building of (or conversion to )residential rental units. Fewer residential units means higher rents -- at the point the rents can be raised. The system as I understand it results in tenants trying to manipulate the system to keep the rents under control and the landlords trying to manipulate the same system to bring the rents to a market rate (which is artificially high due to ... the depressive effects of rent control systems on creating new units). I doubt that the "Rent is Too Damn High" party understands the economics underlying the problem, though. At least Mr. McMillan does not articulate that understanding.

Here is the Rent is Too Damn High Party website.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXVI

Amendment XXVI. Reduction of Voting Age Qualification

SEC. 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

SEC. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The older I get, the more foolish this amendment seems.

I remember in November 2004 standing in a long line waiting to vote. A young woman voting for the first time was there. She had no idea who to vote for in any race but president. A Democratic operative deliberately and in violation of the election law solicited her vote for Democratic candidates. It was disgusting. Not only was the Democratic operative disgusting, but it was disgusting that anyone would go in to the voting booth totally clueless on the candidates who were running and for what offices. (I understand that there are often many minor candidates, but each election is important. Too many people vote simply on the name. "Brown" is a big one in Ohio. No one should get elected merely because they were born with the right last name.)

Of course, this problems is not simply about recent high school graduates from union-dominated, government schools. I cringe every time I hear some vacuous television person urge everyone to get out and vote.

No. Get out and learn about the candidates and issues. After you have worked hard and gathered enough information to have an informed vote, then and only then go vote.

Monday, October 18, 2010

Herman Cain Speaks For Americans

Opinion by Herman Cain, a tea party favorite for president of the United States in 2012.
America, we have a problem
9:56 AM 10/18/2010

In a New York Times interview last week, President Obama acknowledged that there’s “no such thing as shovel-ready projects.”

This was one of his main selling points for the $862 billion stimulus package. He now admits they don’t exist, and the stimulus is clearly not working.

The public was told that unemployment would not go above 8 percent if the stimulus package passed. They passed it and unemployment went to over 9.6 percent and stayed there. So now the president and his economic advisors say we might have to just get used to high unemployment. And they want to spend even more money.

Another New York Times article titled “Obama on Defensive at Forum” was buried in the lower left corner of Page 17 of the October 15, 2010 edition. It reported that a recent black college graduate “complained that despite the government’s costly actions, our unemployment rate still rises, and businesses uncertain about taxes are not hiring college graduates like me.”

“Mr. Obama said that most of the unemployed had lost their jobs before he took office,” the Times reported. He’s right. But he failed to mention that the number of unemployed has increased by over 40 percent since he has been in office. Those that are unemployed don’t care when they lost their job. They want a job.

Four of the five top advisors who developed this flawed economic advice have now moved on to other endeavors, while nearly 15 million people are still unemployed. People expected things to get better, not worse.

The public was told that the health care deform bill would lower health care costs, increase access to health care and lower the national debt long term. Early implementation has resulted in increased costs, not quite everybody getting health insurance and a mass of confusion about the bill as we gradually discover what’s really in the bill. The majority of Americans want the legislation repealed.

The public was told repeatedly by the president that if you like the insurance you have then you can keep it. It turns out that you can keep your insurance only if the company you work for gets a special waiver from the administration. At last count, more than 30 major corporations have been granted special waivers.

We were promised transparency in government. Oh well! I guess it depends on your definition of transparency. But we now know that the administration’s definition is not the same as us regular folks.

Broken campaign promises disappoint us. Bad legislation and policies hurt us, the economy and the nation. Most presidents keep some of their promises and get some decisions right. Unfortunately, this president is having trouble getting even some decisions right. I stopped counting the broken promises.

A caller to my radio show last week said she was going to back President Obama no matter what. And when I pointed out these disturbing results, she said it did not matter to her.

That’s part of the problem. In spite of President Obama’s failed policies and lack of leadership, some people will still follow him right off the proverbial cliff.

But it gets worse! He actually thinks he’s doing a good job. Here’s what he said in an interview with the NewYork Times:

I think they (people) could say, on a bunch of fronts he (the president) still has an incomplete. But I keep a checklist of what we committed to doing, and we’ve probably accomplished 70 percent of the things that we talked about during the campaign. And I hope as long as I’m president, I’ve got a chance to work on the other 30 percent.

Accomplishing 70 percent of the wrong things is not an incomplete grade. It’s failure.

America, we have a problem. This problem cannot be solved for another two years. But it can begin in November of 2010.

Herman Cain is a former CEO, a radio talk show host on AM 750 and 95.5 FM WSB in Atlanta, and a FOX News contributor.

Isn't it amazing the an organization that is as racist as claimed by the left has among its favorite candidates an African American man? He is man who has proven leadership in the corporate world and if far more qualified than the current white House occupant. Unlike the current white House occupant, Herman Cain shares our best American values: liberty, economic freedom, smaller government, spending within our means.

Megan McCain Represents ...

I saw parts of Megan McCain on a roundtable discussion on This Week. Both she anbd that awful Christine Amanpour claimed that Megan McCain "represented young people."

Huh? Did I miss an election?

I had no idea that "young people" had representatives. Self-appointed, I suppose.

As far as I could tell, Megan McCain "represents" the views of her father, but expressed in more vapid fashion. She is an embarrassment.

If Megan McCain actually represented "young people," I would fear even more for the future of our country.

Clearly, I am not the only observer unimpressed by her.  Perhaps the media's employment of Ms. McCain on news/opinion programs as purportedly representing young Republican people is a plot to make Republicans look unintelligent.

How Obama Discourages Investment

Investment causes jobs. The Obama Administration acts to discourage investment by raising taxes on investment and by refusing to index the capital gains tax:

Jack Conway's Scummy Politics (Kentucky Senate Race)

What is this all about? Apparently Rand Paul was part of some college hazing prank nearly 30 years ago, described as follows (from The Washington Post):
The woman said that much of the subsequent coverage of her allegations missed a key nuance: As a participant in a college ritual, where lines between acquiescence and victimization are often blurry, she was largely playing along with the notion that she was being forced to follow Paul’s orders.

“I went along because they were my friends,” she said. “There was an implicit degree of cooperation in the whole thing. I felt like I was being hazed.”…

She reiterated that they took her to a room filled with pot smoke and told her to partake, but she emphasized that she hadn’t been forced. “He did not drug me,” she said. “He did not force me physically in any way.”

She said they then “took me out to this creek and made me worship Aqua Buddha.” And she added that the whole thing was so “weird” that afterwards she ended relations with Paul and his friends.
Here is the ad to which Rand Paul refers:

As an aside, it is interesting that in Kentucky, Jack Conway thought it prudent to tell people that Rand Paul was not Christian enough. In California or New York City, the ad would have not negative effect on the accused bad Christian.

Here is how Rand Paul ended th debate:

Remember at the end of the first clip, Jack Conway, when asked if a had no shame about the ad, said, "No, we're going to move on."

You decide: Is Jack Conway's ad the politics of scumbaggery? Or not?

Update:  Jack Conway tries to defend the indefensible.  He is the type of lawyer that no one wants to see in the courtroom, the type of person no one wants so see on one's life, because he is unable to admit when he is wrong.  Narcissistic personality disorder maybe?  Not the kind of guy you want in the Senate.  Clip below:

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXV

Amendment XXV. Presidential Vacancy, Disability, and Inability

SECTION. 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

SECTION. 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

SECTION. 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

SECTION. 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
After providing for appointment of a new vice president after the vice president assumed the office of president, this amendment provides the procedure, including a procedure for permanent removal of the president in the event of a disability preventing the president from performing the duties of the office. "disability" is undefined and its determination is left up to the vice president, a committee of executive officers, and then 2/3 of both houses of the Congress. Note, it does not say 2/3 of each house, so apparently the houses would combine and vote as one.

I see potential interpretation problems on the "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide." Who are these "principal officers?" When may congress provide for "such other body?" After the problem has arisen?

Could this amendment be used as an excuse to get rid of a bad president?

Friday, October 15, 2010

The Right to Make A Living

Will Republicans Fail Us, Too?

As an apparent electoral tsunami approaches, the question for us voters is whether the Republicans will attack the problems of excessive government and excessive spending, or whether they will simply stick their snouts into the public trough as usual.

We are being told that the Republicans are nervous about the tea parties, even as the tea parties are predicted to help sweep the Republicans into office. The squishy RINO's should be nervous.

I hope the tea parties have traction. If the Republican vote for bigger government and more spending and fail to reduce both, they should be voted out. We need to keep voting out the big spenders until the politicians get the message.

It is really unhelpful and short sighted to vote for Republicans merely because they are not as bad as the Democrats. Republican strategists do not seem to get that concept.

It is not much of a campaign slogan, either: "Vote for us, we are not as bad as the Democrats."

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXIV

Amendment XXIV. Abolition of the Poll Tax Qualification in Federal Elections

SEC. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

SEC. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The poll tax was used to prevent poor blacks (and other poor people) from voting.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Democrat Liars Refuse Pledge to Defund Health law

If someone tells you something that is technically the truth but deliberately misleading, guess what, they are lying.

That is exactly what certain Democrat incumbents are doing (videos below) when they claim that they voted against the health care bill. TEchnically true, but deliberately misleading. They want the voters to believe that they are actually against the health care bill. That is a lie. If they were really against it, they would sign on to the pledge to defund the health care law. As of today, none of them has. Because they are liars.

In fact the vote was "managed." Meaning they knew they had to vote "no" knowing the bill would pass without their vote because their districts were against it, but they were not really opposing the bill in truth.

Did I mention that they are liars?

Obama Learns Shovel Ready Projects Nonexistent

This is what you get when you elect a president with no real world experience. Community organizing isn't actual experience.

President Obama committed billions of dollars as a stimulus for "shovel ready projects." Now he learns, after uselessly committing the money, that there is no such thing. There is no construction project without planning and design, which takes months, sometimes years.

[Leave aside the problem that government spending is a major part of the problem, not the solution. Stimulus spending is like caffeine to the economy, the effect is temporary and then you come down, usually further than before the caffeine was administered. And it is addicting.]

On the job training may be OK in some jobs, but not as President of the United States.

Democratic Corruptocracy Explained by Billboard

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXIII

Amendment XXIII. Presidential Electors for the District of Columbia

SEC. 1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

SEC. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment gives the District of Columbia influence in the election for president and vice president out of proportion to its population. Why? It get three electors, as many as the smallest state. All states regardless of size get two electors plus electors equal to the number of representatitves (Article I, Section 1), a minimum of three. Thus mathematically, small states and the District of Columbia have electoral influence out of proportion to their size.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Dems Campaign Ads Slam Nancy Pelosi

Here are two more Democrats slamming Nancy Pelosi in their campaign ads. One even brags about voting with the Republican leadership 65% of the time.

If it is good to vote with the Republican leadership, why not elect a Republican that would better that 65% record?

Have you ever seen such a think in any other election cycle? Don't you get the feeling that if President Obama were popular with the voters, these guys would be posing right along side him?

Hollywood Hypocrisy in Action

What’s the Difference Between a Tea Party and Oscar Night? You See Black People at Tea Parties, reported at

Of course it may be true that no black or other minority actors or actresses had remarkable performances this year. I am sure The Root would disagree. I am not a big enough movie-goer to assess any of the performances, nominated or not. I am not one to advocate for Oscar quotas based on race. Sometimes disparate impact outcomes are justified. That is not the story you usually hear from big liberal Hollywood types.

Will this year's dearth of Oscar nominated minorities lead to the Black Oscars or something? Wouldn't that be sad?

Obama v. Bush Job Creation/Loss

The graph above compares the mediocre job creation/loss performance of George Bush in eight years with the horrible job creation/loss performance of Barack Obama in only two years.  President Obama is constantly claiming that he is merely trying to dig the country out of a hole created in the last eight years, apparently forgetting that the most recent and worst two of the last eight years were on his watch.

Neither president is on the plus side with private jobs.  Both added federal government jobs.

President Obama said recently that people talk about him like a dog.  Well, in this case it is, "Bad Dog."

[Note: When referring "years" in this post, I am referring human years, not dog years.]

Democratic Party Sheds Principles for Power and Dirty Politics

The Democratic party has really changed. I can remember when the Democrats made semi-principled (although misguided) arguments about helping the disadvantaged who, the argument went, were unable to help themselves, protecting American workers and so on.

the principles have come off the arguments. Not the Democratic party is about power, about foul-mouthed insults to their enemies, and about the self appointed elites seeking enslavement of the rest of us.

It comes as not surprise that the organized crime syndicate of voter fraud known as ACORN was an unofficial arm of the Democratic party.

It comes as no surprise that the Democratic party ads this political cycle have focused on the nasty rather than issues.

It comes as no surprise that the Democratic party, being in power, is using the Internal Revenue Service as its secret police to intimidate and harass the political enemies of the Obama Administration/Democratic party. This horror show situation is well-summarized an excellent Wall Street Journal editorial. This evil strategy powerfully demonstrates the evils of mandating donor disclosure:
Democrats claim only to favor "disclosure" of donors, but their legal intimidation attempts are the best argument against disclosure. Liberals want the names of business donors made public so they can become targets of vilification with the goal of intimidating them into silence. A CEO or corporate board is likely to think twice about contributing to a campaign fund if the IRS or prosecutors might come calling. If Democrats can reduce business donations in the next three weeks, they can limit the number of GOP challengers with a chance to win and reduce Democratic Congressional losses.
I have long argued that our society would be better served by mandated secrecy in donations. Let the winner be prevented from knowing who gave them money, so they can neither reward their donor friends nor punish their donor enemies.

Our excessively intrusive and powerful IRS also argues for the Fair Tax system that is not based upon income, but upon retail sales only. We don't need a secret police in the guise of a tax collector in a free country.

Update: Dem Sleaze Campaign in Colorado. the Colorado Democrats are trying to make an issue out of Mark Buck's 2006 decision as a prosecutor to decline to prosecute a rape case that lacked evidence and that he could not win. On its facts, the case looks pretty weak as a rape case. The complaining woman got drunk and asked an ex-boyfriend to come see her. While they both agree she said, "no," the jury may well have concluded on the circumstances that it was a "no" that signaled "yes." The irrational Dems (Dumbs?) want to make a big deal of Mr. Buck's refusal to prosecute on those facts.

 Memo to the Democratic Party: sometimes it is better to defer prosecution, because time may give you new and better incriminating facts. If you prosecute prematurely and without the facts, you not only let a rapist go free, you also give him a double jeopardy defense if new incriminating facts later turn up.

Don't expect actual intelligence in nasty smears.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXII

Amendment XXII. Presidential Tenure

SECTION. 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

SEC. 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.
This amendment was proposed and ratified after the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was elected to four terms.

Under this amendment, neither Bill Clinton, nor Jimmy Carter nor George Bush may be elected president again. Reading the language, though, a question is raised. If Bill Clinton were elected vice president (which is not expressly prohibited), could Bill Clinton, having been elected president twice, become president again if the president dies in office? I think the answer is no based upon the Twelfth Amendment, but the answer is not entirely clear.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

DNC Ad Spreads Deliberate Lies

The Democratic National Committee proves itself to the a lying sack of excrement organization. But you already knew that.

In the ad below, the DNC makes the wholly unsubstantiated and now thoroughly discredited allegation that the Chamber of Commerce and taking foreign money to influence our election.

Analyses of the ad here and here.

Liars like these should be punished at the polls. Again and again. Refudiate them.

Another Dem Ad Pretending to be Conservative -- Updated

Notice that the party of the candidate is never mentioned. If it is true that the Republican is a RINO who does not support concealed carry. the Democrat would have my vote.

From Vicky Hartzler's web site:
I am 100% pro-life and a staunch supporter of our Second Amendment.
How can you be a Second Amendment supporter and oppose concealed carry?

Hartzler’s campaign accuses Skelton of distorting her concealed carry vote, which it says she opposed “because she felt conceal-and-carry should be the right of individual Missourians and not subjected to a referendum. She took that principled stand and was praised for doing so by gun lobbyists, gun owners and the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance.”
Source: Daily Caller. If what the Hartzler campaign says is true, I just hate it when politicians distort ("spin") their opponents positions into making it sound the opposite of what it really is, even if the precise statement used is literally factual. If you use a statement that is technically true to convey a message that is the opposite of the truth, it is dishonest.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XXI

Amendment XXI. Repeal of Eighteenth Amendment

SEC. 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

SEC. 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

SEC. 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
Section 1 is good, but section 2 has been the cause of a horrible patchwork quilt of state liquor laws, and has been thought to authorize discriminatory commerce practices otherwise invalid under the commerce clause.

In 2005, the Supreme court reigned in some of the patchwork craziness in Granholm v. Heald, 544 U.S. 460 (2005), holding,
States have broad power to regulate liquor under § 2 of the Twenty-first Amendment. This power, however, does not allow States to ban, or severely limit, the direct shipment of out-of-state wine while simultaneously authorizing direct shipment by in-state producers. If a State chooses to allow direct shipment of wine, it must do so on evenhanded terms. Without demonstrating the need for discrimination, New York and Michigan have enacted regulations that disadvantage out-of-state wine producers. Under our Commerce Clause jurisprudence, these regulations cannot stand.
Wine lovers rejoiced!

Monday, October 11, 2010

Manchin Campaign Commercial

Another Democrat running against the Obama agenda. Not just running against cap and tax, but literally shooting a rifle at it. Watch:

Market Succeeds, Print Media in Trouble

Does it bother anyone else that the Federal Trade Commission sees it as within its job description to promote newspapers?

I happen to like newspapers. Not enough to subscribe to one regularly. Sometimes I take the local newspaper (football season), sometimes the Wall Street Journal. Sometimes none.

Let us put the decline of the newspaper industry in perspective. It is a true market success. The print newspaper industry is not succeeding, but the market is. Internet news is beating out print newspapers in the market. That is what a market is all about: : the best and fittest surviving and the others adapting or failing.

Parents.  Teach this to your children: failure is a good thing. We all learn more by failure than we ever do by success.  (Schools that avoid winning and losing in competition are actively harming our children.)

The newspaper industry needs to learn to adapt to survive.

In today's twisted environment, I fear that the watchdog over the political class is more likely to go begging for handouts. I can only imagine the evil concessions the political (criminal) class will impose. If the print media go for government hand-out, could the print media ever be credible after that? (Not that is has all that much credibility to begin with.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XX

Amendment XX. Terms of President, Vice President, Members of Congress: Presidential Vacancy

SECTION. 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

SEC. 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

SEC. 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

SEC. 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

SEC. 5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

SEC. 6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

Friday, October 08, 2010

Harry Reid's Viagra For Sex Offenders Problem -- Exposed

Sharon Angle's new ad points out that Harry Reid opposed a health care bill amendment that would have prohibited sex offenders from obtaining coverage for viagra-type drugs:

The truth:
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., has released the memo from the Congressional Research Service regarding sex offenders and Viagra coverage under the new health care reform law.
Coburn asked the CRS to look into whether convicted sex offenders can get taxpayer-funded coverage for erectile dysfunction medication under the new health care law and CRS's response indicates they are eligible for those benefits.

According to CRS, the new health care law includes nothing "which would require qualified health plans to limit the type of benefits that can be offered based on the plan beneficiary’s prior criminal convictions. Additionally, there do not appear to be any provisions that would specifically restrict qualified health plans’ coverage of drugs prescribed to treat ED.”
The CRS goes further to state specifically that "a convicted rapist, child molester, or other sex offender who is not incarcerated would not appear to be excluded from enrolling in a qualified health plan offered through an American Health Benefit Exchange in their state solely because of that conviction.”

When the Senate was considering the health care bill, Coburn offered an amendment that would have prohibited sex offenders from obtaining coverage for erectile dysfunction under the reform plan, but it was defeated mostly along partisan lines, 57-42.
Read more at the Washington Examiner:

Cool Hand Luke Explains Democrat "Successes"

Chidike Okeem at the American Thinker has identified the latest Democratic talking point to explain their failures in polling and likely failure at the electoral polls. The latest talking point is that the Democrats have not skillfully explained their legislative "successes."

Of course those successes are the widely unpopular destruction of everyone's health care freedom, the wasteful overspending porkulus bill that has predictably failed to solve our economic stagnation, the massive corporate welfare n the form of bailouts, and the nationalization of two of our finest automobile manufacturers, and the expansion of fraud and waste in the form of earmarks.

If these are successes, give me failure every time.

Here is where I disagree with Mr. (or Ms. as the case may be) Okeem. This talking point, this claim of a failure to explain is nothing new. President Obama has been saying the same thing about the awful health care plan for over a year.

Memo to Democrats: You can't make terrible legislation any better by explaining it again and again. When it is bad, it is bad. And these "successes" are worse than that. If you think there has merely been a failure to communicate, you remind me of the evil Captain in Cool Hand Luke, who said in the movie a coule of times, what we've got here is a failure to communicate. He also said,
Captain, Road Prison 36: You gonna get used to wearin' them chains afer a while, Luke. Don't you never stop listenin' to them clinking. 'Cause they gonna remind you of what I been saying. For your own good.

Luke: Wish you'd stop bein' so good to me, cap'n.
Shades of Obamacare and the Nanny state.

Billboard in Wisconsin

Alan Grayson (D-FL) Faces Defeat

The latest news on mentally ill Alan Grayson's demented race against Daniel Webster here. It is good to see that Alan Grayson's deliberate lies about Daniel Webster are rebounding on him.

Why do I call Alan Grayson mentally ill? I think that he truly sees the world in the same twisted way that he communicates. Otherwise, I would have to conclude that he is intentionally evil. HE deliberately a quote from Daniel Webster that he had to know he falsely presented. His became famous for his crudely twisted statement in Congress that the Republicans' health plan was to let people die. (Actually, that is the inevitable effect of the Obamacare death panel.)

I think that calling Alan Grayson mentally ill gives him the benefit of the doubt and is being charitable.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XIX

Amendment XIX. Women's Suffrage Rights

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Women got the right to vote. Some women have been real assets in the political arena. Others voted for Nancy Pelosi and Mary Jo Kilroy.

Thursday, October 07, 2010

Entitlement Mentality

The Reason websites, and have interesting tidbits of information.

I was struck by one that illustrates the depths to which we have sunk into the Nanny state. It is not even a story about bad behavior by the government. It is about the attitude of certain recipients of Nanny state benefits. The entitlement mentality. Those who think they have special rights. Here is the report:
Two women have filed a complaint with the Florida Commission on Human Relations claiming they were denied service at a Lake Wales bar because they are black. Mildred Richardson and Ida Mae Royal said they went to the bar for a sandwich and when a waitress asked them what they wanted they said they wanted to order lunch. They say the waitress told them they didn't serve food, and they believe that constitutes racial discrimination. The bar's owner, Kerry Winkler, says he doesn't have a food license and no one—regardless of their color—can order lunch there.

Col. Allen West Challenges Obama to a Debate

Don't you wish Colonel West were running in your district?

Laws of Economics Trump Obamacare

From Reson's Hit and Run Blog:
Health insurers Wellpoint, Cigna, Aetna, Humana, and CoventryOne will stop writing policies for all children. Why? Because Obamacare requires that they insure already sick children for the same price as well children.
It gets worse of course.

In recent weeks we have heard about major companies, like McDonald's, planning to drop their employer health care coverage. Why? Obamacare coverage is too expensive.

I previously reported on the squealing heard 'round the country by Obama flunky Kathleen Sebelius, who threatened dire actions against companies that bowed to the laws of economics, rather than the desires of Obama.

Memo to President Obama: Contrary to the ideology of most Marxists (with whom you have surrounded yourself), Congress cannot repeal the laws of economics.

The Anti-Education President

Reason TV has identified President Obama as the anti-Eduction president, or maybe more accurately, the education union president (not president of the union, of course). See the entire article here. I want to highlight one point.

Money. The history of education advocacy has been all about money. The argument has been that the government education establishment needs more money to succeed. They pretend that the children need more money.

Adjusted for inflation, per pupil spending has doubled since the 1970's. Despite the doubling, DOUBLING, of funding, schools are not any better. They are worse.

Parents want choices. They want charter schools. They want voucher systems. President Obama's record? He aided Senator Durbin kill the DC voucher system.

It is too bad that the Constitution does not have a popular vote recall for the office of President. President Obama would be gone.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XVIII

Amendment XVIII. Prohibition of Intoxicating Liquors

SECTION. 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

SEC. 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

SEC. 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress
This is merely of historical interest, because it was repealed within twelve years. It was a bad idea and fortunately did not last long. The Drug War prohibition remains in place. Lesson not learned, I guess.

Wednesday, October 06, 2010

More Liberal Broken Promises

Before the passage of concealed carry legislation in each state, the liberal anti-gunners promised there would be blood in the streets. In fact what we got was less crime.

As a knuckle-dragging, gun-toter, I was looking forward to the OK Corral around every corner. Where is it? The liberals promised it to us, but we did not get it.

As far as I am concerned, that is just another broken promise by the liberal establishment.

[For future reference, knowing that liberal/progressives lack any sense of humor, this should be read with heavy irony. Of course, even this disclaimer would not stop the likes of Alan Grayson from out-of-context quoting me.]

US Constitution Series, Amendment XVII

Amendment XVII. Popular Election of Senators

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
Among libertarian circles, there is a move afoot to advocate for the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment. Why? Popular election of senators has upset the balance of power delicately created by the Constitution. When the Senators were appointed by the state legislatures, the Senators were careful to protect state interests. With the Seventeenth Amendment, that balance has been lost.

Tuesday, October 05, 2010

Balance the Budget

It is easy to balance the budget merely by conforming strictly to the constitutional powers of Congress:

Obamacare Breaks ALL Ten Commandments

It was a Herculean effort. It probably was not the goal, but Wendy Wright at the American Thinker explains how all ten get broken.

US Constitution Series, Amendment XVI

Amendment XVI. Income Tax

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Bad medicine. Needs to be repealed.

Monday, October 04, 2010

US Constitution Series, Amendment XV

Amendment XV. Rights of Citizens to Vote

SECTION. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

SECTION. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
There is nothing controversial about this amendment today, but it was necessary to protect the rights of former slaves and other Black citizens after the Civil War.

Sunday, October 03, 2010

Gloria Allred Proves herself to be an Unethical Lying *itch

I am not a Grete Van Sustern fan, but she skewers Gloria Allred who fully deserves the skewering, when Allred is obviously putting a client at risk for a felony charge and conviction to further Allred's political agenda.  At least that is the way it looks to me.

Go here.  For Mark Levin's skewering of Allred, go here.

In the horrible woman contest, Gloria Allred is making a run for Nancy Pelosi and Mary Jo Kilroy.  It may be a three way tie.

Gender Silliness