What are the limits of partisan support?

Repeatedly during the February 2nd  ”Fast and Furious” hearings led by the Chairman of the House Oversight committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) , Democrats were coming out in force praising Holder for his excellent work. Democratic Congresswoman Maloney from California commended Holder for his favorable accomplishments as the acting Attorney General. Even if Holder is not found guilty of a crime, is he not guilty of incompetence over his ineptitude in running the Department of Justice?  But his party members continue to exalt him and one can only wonder for how long.

This was Eric Holder’s sixth time testifying with the investigation and in attendance offering words of support was Rep. Elijah Cummings, a Democratic member of the House Oversight Committee and Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio who informed Holder at the hearing “I prayed for you this morning.”

(more…)

Shame on Big Labor Bosses! For years they have used the tactic of “shame” in an effort to pressure, bully and demonize employers who might stand against their efforts. They have used “shame” in their efforts to misinform the public – to create a misperception that their target is guilty of an unconscionable act and should bear the scarlet letter of these acts. These attacks have been not just against the targeted employer, but against anyone who might oppose them, including the employer’s customers and advertisers, non-union employees, even their own membership if it suits their purposes. Recently, Big Labor has taken the weapon of “shame” to the political arena, both in Wisconsin and now in Indiana.

“Shame” was the word of the day when the SEIU ran one of its Corporate Campaigns against EMS across the Midwest in 2005-2007. The Big Labor bosses never shirked from using the phrase to intimidate loyal EMS employees and customers as they attempted to cross SEIU picket lines. With banners in hand they would publicly attack EMS with incorrect statements and half-truths.

“Shame” was on display constantly last year when Big Labor bosses poured millions of dollars and thousands of foot soldiers into Madison, Wisconsin in an attempt to intimidate Governor Walker and the General Assembly into withdrawing the needed measures to restore fiscal responsibility to a state deeply in debt (see America at a Crossroads! As Wisconsin Goes, So Goes America!). Now, as we approach The Most Important Non-Presidential Election of the Decade, Big Labor bosses are at it again, attempting to “shame” the electorate into replacing Governor Walker via a recall election and then reversing the bills that have arguably put Wisconsin on a path to solvency.

(more…)

As Obama basks in the warm fuzzy glow of positive recent jobs numbers, all the while avoiding the pesky shadow of the soaring national debt, which now has so many zeros I can’t even input it on my calculator. And the negative campaigning for the GOP race has become as messy as a molting Wookie; it’s very easy to become discouraged.

Put down the Ben & Jerry’s, it’s not over. As a matter of fact, it’s only just begun.

With the inundation of negativity abounding for conservatives over our depressing whimpers of lament, here are three reasons you should not give up hope for a big change in November of 2012.

1. “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” ~ Abraham Lincoln

It’s very easy to become convinced through main stream media that all hope should be abandoned.  However, you can always seek out evidence proving otherwise.

Rasmussen Reports produces Daily Presidential Tracking Polls.  Admittedly, this is similar to weighing yourself every day.  Certain circumstances on a day-to-day basis, like a late night left over pizza binge, can affect the numbers greatly.  As of Friday February 3^rd, current GOP front runner Mitt Romney was polling neck in neck with the President at 45% in a potential election match-up.  This is the first time Romney has polled this high against Obama since late in December.  The numbers are issued daily and you can have them delivered directly to your inbox each morning. Defeating an incumbent is never easy, but these numbers show it’s possible.

(more…)

During a White House press conference earlier today, a reporter confronted White House Press Secretary Jay Carney about Occupy Wall Street protestors “taking things too far.”

Carney supported the US Park Police’s (USPP) decision to continue balancing First Amendment concerns with public safety and health concerns.

The exchange was as follows:

Reporter: Occupy Wall Street protestors are making headlines again as you know over the weekend. Four hundred protestors were arrested in Oakland and now today the NPS are expected to clear out protestors potentially as we speak… here in DC. What is your reaction? Is the administration concerned that some of these protestors are taking things too far?

Carney: Well, in regard to Oakland, that’s obviously that’s a local law enforcement matter. Here in Washington uh, I would refer you for specifics to the US National Park Service and the US Park Police. And uh, our position has been and continues to be that we need balance First Amendment concerns of the right to demonstrate, the right to speak freely, and with public safety concerns and public health concerns and we understand that whether that… whether that… local law enforcement as well as in the case, in this case you have the National Park Service and the US Park Police are weighing those considerations and that’s appropriate.

(more…)

As Washington, D.C.’s Democrat-dominated government attempts to evict Occupy protestors from their McPherson Square encampment, only a few blocks from the White House, the protestors have found an unlikely ally: the U.S. Park Police (USPP).

The federal-municipal confrontation has sparked speculation that President Barack Obama is protecting the Occupy protestors from city administrators.

The Occupy activists, however, seem to believe otherwise.

Big Government headed into the heart of the snow-bound encampment for an exclusive on-site interview with an Occupy DC demonstrator who does not believe the USPP is acting on orders from the Obama administration.

The Occupy DC Encampment under Washington, D.C.'s first snowfall

The activists are familiar with the details of the political fight that began when the D.C. Mayor and the District Council wanted the Occupy sites finally shut down for health reasons, but USPP refused to do so in the name of the First Amendment.

The theory that the White House was pressuring USPP not to enforce District of Columbia statutes emerged Tuesday, January 24, during a Congressional hearing, when National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis fielded questions from Republican lawmakers.

U.S. Representatives were mystified as to why the USPP has not responded to District requests to finally shut down the encampment, and why the overnight sleeping ban in federal parks had not been enforced.

“Each of our First Amendment demonstrations (is) a little bit unique. And this one is, let’s say, unprecedented. The core of their First Amendment activity is that they occupy the site,” Jarvis told lawmakers. “We felt that going in right away and enforcing the regulations against camping could potentially incite a reaction on their part that would result in possible injury or property damage.”

(more…)

President Obama recently unleashed his first campaign ad for the 2012 election year.  The 30-second spot is described as such:

President Obama has taken steps to make us energy independent and create an economy that’s built to last. He’s been a strong supporter of domestic energy production, has made historic investments in clean energy technology, and has nearly doubled fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. Because of the progress we’ve made, our dependence on foreign oil is the lowest it’s been in 16 years.

The Washington Post gave the ad a rating of “three Pinocchios” for misleading viewers with a suggestion that Obama was responsible for creating 2.7 million clean energy jobs and for cherry-picking certain citations to back up its claims.  The resulting descriptions of the ad included such words as “slippery,” “slick,” and “misleading.”

The Obama administration in a nutshell.

(more…)

President Obama has decided to make “income inequality” — one of Occupy Wall Street’s central themes — the focus of both his State of the Union address and 2012 presidential election campaign, according to CNN.

In his last State of the Union speech before the 2012 election, President Barack Obama will pitch a series of proposals and will address the topics of economic inequality and a government that should ensure “a fair shake for all.”

And…

Given the treacherous state of the economy, the president’s campaign aides are attempting to make the theme of the upcoming election a choice about the role of government and the future of the middle class — not a referendum on the president’s handling of the economy.

They say this speech and its underlying theme — income inequality — go a long way to shaping that message.

The Obama Campaign has posted a video this morning that hits on this theme of “Income Equality”, which means the President is piggybacking the central theme of his re-election campaign on the framing that Occupy Wall Street created. That is the major reason to keep a close, critical eye on the #Occupy movement.

(more…)

Labor union membership continues to be blind to the fact that the support of its “leadership” to President Obama and his political allies is coming at the cost of the members. Big Labor bosses and their political allies are happy to continue to throw the membership under the bus for their own personal gain. For President Obama, this is the prospect of re-election; for the labor bosses, this is the survival of their “way of life.” This can be seen through the President’s actions and comments over the past three years.

Early in his presidency, President Obama made disparaging remarks about business owners whose companies had corporate jets. This was done in a blatant attempt to incite class warfare, despite the fact that the country was in a deep recession. By his words, the President willingly sacrificed the jobs of the very people who supported him through union dues. He knew the liberal media would not expose the tragic result his words would have on the private jet and airplane manufacturing industry.

In Wichita, Kansas, the home of private aircraft manufacturing has suffered tremendously, as thousands of union employees employed by Cessna and Beechcraft have been laid off, not to mention the thousands of jobs affiliated with general aviation lost across the country including manufacturers, part suppliers, fuel, pilots, mechanics, FBO services and insurance providers. Additionally, due to the loss of significant sales, use, income environmental and aviation tax revenues, thousands of local, state and federal employee positions, many of which were union jobs, have disappeared.

Adding insult to injury now the White House Defends User Fees of $100/flight on general aviation and corporate aviation to raise revenues in Obama’s continued class warfare and redistribution of wealth scheme in his effort to bring down America. Ironically this will cost more jobs, many of them union, as revenues ultimately will be reduced as fewer aircraft are purchased and general aviation travel is curtailed due to the added expense. The vicious cycle will continue to perpetuate itself at the expense of American jobs!

(more…)

Newt Gingrich has won the South Carolina primary. And just hours before ABC aired its interview with Newt’s ex-wife, Marianne Gingrich, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin appeared on Sean Hannity’s radio show. Gov. Palin predicted that the tabloid-style interview would only cause Speaker Gingrich’s ratings to soar.

Mocking the mainstream media, Gov. Palin said, “I call them dumbarses.”

Gov. Palin continued:

They, thinking that by trotting out this old Gingrich divorce interview that’s old news — and it does feature a disgruntled ex, claiming that it would destroy his campaign — all this does, Sean, is incentivize conservatives and independents who are so sick of the politics of personal destruction, because it’s played so selectively by the media, that their target, in this case Newt, he’s now going to soar even more. Because we know the game now, and we just won’t put up with it. Good call, media.

Good call, Sarah Palin. Debate after debate, it has been Newt Gingrich who has hammered the MSM on its preferential treatment of Barack Obama and his liberal agenda. And many conservatives across America are eating it up.

Starved for passionate expression of how the political and social dictates of the Obama “regime,” and its closely allied Media, have attempted to oppress and ridicule American voters with conservative leanings, Newt has let everyone know that the battle is on. He has articulated conservative ideas like no other candidate, though the other candidates may embrace those ideas themselves.

(more…)

Newt Gingrich has had his ups and downs lately in the Republican Presidential primary. Though much of the setback has been due to his own miscues, he recently hit the nail on the proverbial head when he proclaimed that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) should be defunded. There is no doubt that Obama’s recent recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were motivated by his desire to bring Big Labor on board for the 2012 Election run as recounted in last week’s blog Will the NLRB Decide the 2012 Presidential Election. Newt was correct in stating that defunding the NLRB is the right response to an imperialistic President who intentionally circumvented the spirit of the law for personal gain and philosophical ideology.

Besides legal measures, the only current means to defeat The Cold War Within: The Fight for America’s Future is for the Republican dominated congress to utilize its budgetary power and defund the Rogue NLRB. Such action is even more imperative now, according to Phil Wilson in his latest issue of Union Bailout Update, where he expresses that the two new Democratic appointees, Sharon Block and Richard Griffin, are even more radical than Craig Becker, which is unimaginable. Additionally, Mr. Wilson expressed that Board Chairman Mark Pearce is the true engine behind achieving Card Check, and that the recent appointments provide Pierce the radical majority he needs to achieve Obama’s and Big Labor’s coveted goal of an Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) style regulatory scheme, aka “EFCA Through the Backdoor,” in time to support Obama’s 2012 Presidential run.

The goal is to implement new regulations such as the “Persuader Rule,” “quickie elections,” and the Posting Rule,  as described in Phil Wilson’s 2012 Predictions that will allow Big Labor to utilize the Persuasion of Power to prosecute brutal Corporate Campaigns against employees and employers in time to raise money, register voters and put union foot soldiers on the ground for the 2012 Election. The frightening political machines behind them are recounted in my new book The Devil at Our Doorstep.

(more…)

According to The Hill, in a CBS This Morning interview, New Hampshire Republican primary winner Mitt Romney, said that his work to increase profits for his investment firm, Bain Capital, “was no different from the Obama administration’s auto industry bailouts.” Mr. Romney said:

In the general election I’ll be pointing out that the president took the reins at General Motors and Chrysler – closed factories, closed dealerships laid off thousands and thousands of workers – he did it to try to save the business.

Mr. Romney’s comments came in response to criticism by fellow Republican candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, that, during his tenure at Bain, he engaged in “looting” start-up companies and “vulture capitalism.”

During his daily show on Wednesday, Rush Limbaugh urged his listeners who were driving to “pull over” as he played the audio of Mitt Romney’s response. Gov. Romney’s reply to the criticisms are just as unbelievable as the criticisms themselves. Aren’t true conservatives against the government auto industry bailouts and TARP, for that matter? Why draw that comparison, and no sharp contrast, instead, to the president’s socialistic policies? Oh…I forgot…Mitt Romney doesn’t believe the president is a socialist.

Is Mitt Romney’s point, “You did it, too, Mr. President, so you can’t criticize me?” Worse, does Mr. Romney believe that the president did, in fact, “save” the auto industry?

(more…)

Thomas Burrell, head of the Black Farmers Agricultural Association, Inc., is not ready to leave the Pigford settlement business without a fight.

Despite recent court setbacks, he is still threatening legal action. The fact that Burrell is calling out President Barack Obama seems to signal that Burrell feels he has to play hardball and threaten the tacit agreement that was made between candidate Obama and a number of self-styled “black leaders” about the Pigford settlement and the African-American vote several years ago.

This recent news report from Tennessee shows Burrell and local clergymen taking public aim at the President. Burrell correctly points out that the Pigford 2 settlement for black farmers has a number of restrictions on it that new settlements for women and Latino farmers do not have. The disparity is actually somewhat bizarre, and will be the topic of further reporting in the future.

However, Burrell’s refusal to go down quietly on the issue signals a potential problem for Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign strategy that would be missed by many observers who don’t understand the connection between Obama and Pigford.

(more…)

Washington (AP) Following is an edited transcript of Secretary of State Designate Joe Biden’s hearing today before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Moved by President Obama’s pleadings, Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton resigned their posts last week in order to switch positions and become America’s first Cabinet-level tag team.

On Monday, Clinton won Congressional approval to be the nation’s Number Two, adding a hefty bottom to the Democrats’ 2012 Presidential undercard.

CHAIRMAN JOHN KERRY:  Good morning, everyone.  The Committee is delighted to welcome former Vice President Biden, or, as he was referred to by White House pollsters, “Dead-Weight Joe.”

Once confirmed, he will oversee the steaming pile of dung that’s been our foreign policy under the capable Mrs. Clinton.  I assure you, Joe Biden can manage the load.

We all know America is a nation in decline, a nation hurtling toward the depths.  With his misplaced sense of humor, endearing ineptitude, and characteristic superciliousness, Joe is well-equipped to lead us into irrelevance.

Before we begin the questioning, I would like to offer a few thoughts about. . . .

. . . . defeating the worldwide scourge of male pattern baldness, preventing the unnecessary loss of trillions of innocent follicles. . . .

. . . . extraditing Dick Cheney to the Hague to account for his. . . .

. . . . returning Texas and California to Mexico, from whom we unjustly. . . .

. . . . calming Americans’ unreasoning dread of a Global Caliphate . . .

. . . . encouraging India to vaporize Pakistan, ushering in an era of peace in that troubled. . . .

Now, to save time, we’ll dispense with a self-serving statement from the Ranking Member and my esteemed colleague, Senator Lugar, and go right to questioning.  Suit you, Mr. Vice President?

(more…)

With the New Hampshire Primary just three days away, a Super PAC affiliated with Newt Gingrich has released a devastating film attacking Mitt Romney’s days at Bain Capital labeling him “more ruthless than Wall Street.” The film, called “When Mitt Romney Came To Town,” features multiple men and women who had lost their jobs and in some cases their homes, due to the corporate decisions of Romney’s investment firm.

What is striking about the film and its style is that this attack could easily have been made by David Axelrod and the Obama re-election campaign next October. Considering Gingrich received heavy criticism last month for sharply criticizing Romney over “the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain,” this latest attack on Romney’s successful capital ventures is a risky and audacious gambit.

The film focuses on four companies Bain acquired during Romney’s tenure: UniMac, KayBee Toys, DDI; and AmPad. According to the film, each acquisition resulted in heart-ache and despair for the employees at the companies, and riches for Bain and Romney. Relying on tried and true class warfare themes like ordinary Americans losing their homes while Romney purchased large mansions and beach-front properties, one gets the feeling that Michael Moore and Van Jones could have directed and released this film.

(more…)

In a Washington Post editorial Thursday, Edwin Meese, the former U.S. Attorney General under President Ronald Reagan, and Todd Gaziano, Director of the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, wrote that President Obama’s unilateral appointment of three individuals to the National Labor Relations Board, and of Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, while the Senate was not in recess, is a “breathtaking violation of the separation of powers and the duty of comity that the executive owes to Congress.”

The authors asserted:

…never before has a president purported to make a “recess” appointment when the Senate is demonstrably not in recess. That is a constitutional abuse of a high order.

The beauty of this editorial is that Mr. Meese and Mr. Gaziano provide instruction to handle this rogue president who continues to thumb his nose at the Constitution. They continue:

President Obama’s flagrant violation of the Constitution not only will damage relations with Congress for years to come but will ultimately weaken the office of the presidency. There eventually may be litigation over the illegal appointments, but it will be a failure of government if the political branches do not resolve this injustice before a court rules…Congressional leaders of both parties must vigorously (though thoughtfully) defend their prerogatives. Senators could filibuster all presidential nominations, as Sen. Robert C. Byrd did in 1985 over a lesser recess appointment issue, until Obama rescinds these wrongful appointments. The House or Senate could condition all “must-pass” legislation for the remainder of 2012 on an agreement to rescind these appointments. The House also could require the attorney general to produce legal justification and testify at oversight hearings.

The authors conclude:

If Congress does not resist, the injury is not just to its branch but ultimately to the people.

(more…)

President Obama has not been defeated. He still occupies the White House, and that will continue until next November. But the nation is readying itself for what will prove to be a high octane race for the presidency. President Obama will have a mountain of cash to spend and will attempt to campaign energetically. I say “attempt” because he’ll find defending his administration will be much harder than his last campaign when he was a fresh-faced Senator billed as an outsider who used rhetoric and platitudes in place of actual accomplishments.

Team Obama will likely select only a few issues. The economy, of course, will be a big part, because he can’t very well ignore it. So he’ll spin it in a way to suggest he actually saved it from collapse. In the process, he will not even so much as mention our nation’s debt and deficits.

Instead, he’ll the talk up the bold raid into Abbottabad that killed Osama bin Laden and the recent withdrawal from Iraq. He’ll leave out things like Russia, China, Iran, and forfeiting our missile defenses and snubbing our allies in Eastern Europe, our strained relationship with Israel and the quickly deteriorating situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Domestically he’ll speak of progress, sacrifice, and the pains his administration helped to soften. He’ll not mention his divisive comments that he and Eric Holder have made and the social resentment he stirred through class warfare. Lastly, we can expect amnesia over our nation’s credit downgrade and the ever-climbing debt ceiling. (more…)

For some of us, it’s difficult to take the Occupy movement seriously. However, for once, let’s do just that and ask the simple question, “What if the Occupiers take power?” To answer that, I need to first address what they would need to do to rise to power (I will address the consequences of them in power in a later post). We need to understand the means through which the Occupiers will reach their ends — communism or anarchy. The answer can be discerned from the perspective of experts on mob mentality and mob rule.

To stand any chance at gaining control over our nation, the Occupy movement would first need to disrupt our current system of governance and commerce. Jim Rawles, editor of Survivalblog.com, New York Times best-selling author, and a former US Army Intelligence Officer, offers a historical perspective on the matter by referencing the International Workers of the World (IWW) protests of the 1920s and 30s.

“In that situation, The IWW relocated people from very long distances. They intentionally overwhelmed the local police by relocating large numbers of protesters. It’s analogous to the military massing their firepower for an offensive…If there is an overreaction on the part of the police or conceivably the military, if the protests grow to a large scale beyond the police’s ability, there’s the potential for a lot of violence.”

Further violence from the Occupy movement is not a far-fetched expectation; it’s something we have already seen. Historically, mass sit-in protests, such as those of the 1960s or the Veteran’s Bonus Encampment of 1932, have the capacity to generate a violent and confrontational end result. After all, Occupy has already attempted to disrupt our economy on Black Friday through mass action protests (and miserably failed). History does repeat itself, by the way, as the IWW is heavily involved with the Occupy protests.

(more…)

On virtually every policy issue and in most sectors of the economy, the left’s solutions call for bigger government. The clear implication of that worldview: We should trust government bureaucrats more than private individuals to innovate, create and provide prosperity and general well-being.

President Obama argued in a recent speech on the economy, for instance, that we need to “make the investments … in things like education and research and high-tech manufacturing.”

And in his blueprint for energy for coming decades, Obama says government must fund and lead the way to new energy solutions: “We can get there by creating markets for innovative clean technologies … the Federal government needs to put words into action and lead by example [my emphasis].” Others on the left agree,  even some on the right and still others go even further, insisting that government must soup up its already pronounced role, and lead the way in medical research, transportation, education and more.

Whatever Barack Obama’s latest claims to Teddy Roosevelt’s progressive mantle, though, history dismantles the notion that without paternalistic governmental guidance, the economy would be left in a morass of confusion and stagnancy. In fact, just the opposite is the case. Government often lags, and even obstructs the ingenuity of the private sector.

(more…)

Naturally I disagree with much of the opposition and my well-meaning colleagues on the left in regards to Keynes and his school of economics. Many in this school of thought cannot accept the fact that Keynesian economics has never worked; it did not work in the depression nor has it worked any time since then. The only time stimulus has “worked” is after the economy has already recovered and then becomes overheated by the stimulus. Keynesian economics is an excuse for politicians to buy off special interest and voters with other peoples’ money. Let me address some of the opposition’s specific points:

Stimulus spending creates jobs

False, stimulus spending financed by taxes substitutes relatively inefficient government spending for private spending. In other words, government spending “crowds out” private spending. The opposition may disagree that public spending is less efficient but the recent analysis of the government spending does not support their point of view.

It is not taxation but debt that is financing the government spending

I maintain that government debt crowds out private borrowing and investment. Many of my anti-capitalist colleagues say that government spending is not crowding out private investment because interest rates are low. Therefore there is plenty of money to finance private investment. Unfortunately, in an attempt to protect depositors, and the government guarantee of such deposits, the bank regulators have increased the credit underwriting requirements on banks. Consequently, they are not lending to small and medium sized businesses.

(more…)

Oh contraire mon fraire. You were the one who caused fainting spells on your minions. It was you who said you would heal the planet and tame the rising seas. You set the standard. You made the promises. You would fundamentally change the country (sadly, you have nearly accomplished that one).

It is because of this empty rhetoric that exclusively targeted the grownup children of the country that President Obama should not be allowed a pass on his failings and shortcomings. Remember that everything was going to change in America and the world. Peace was at hand. Poverty would be a thing of the past and the nation would enjoy a new golden era ushered in by a post-partisan, post-historical Obama presidency. Obama possessed within him only the very best qualities of Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, FDR, Kennedy and, oddly enough, Reagan. All because Obama was a fresh face whose mom was a “white woman from Kansas and his father a black African from Kenya” and would be the nation’s first black president.

Would you like to see the bullet proof formula that catapulted him to victory in 2008?

1). Election

2). ???

3). Utopia

(more…)