Thursday, June 30, 2011

PPP Poll: Obama's NM Approval at 50%, "Dark Horse" Gary Johnson Fares Best Among GOP Possibles

Via Gary Johnson Grassroots Blog

Who says Gov Johnson can't beat Obama?
"New Mexico's former governor Gary Johnson actually does better against Obama than Romney

... one GOP candidate who is an asterisk in national polling actually comes closer to Obama than he [Romney] does- the state's former Governor Gary Johnson who trails by only 3 points at 46-43. Although Obama leads the rest of the Republican candidates by 16-26 points with independents, Johnson actually tops the President with that voter group at 46-37. He also picks up more than 20% of the Democratic vote.

... Johnson's unusually popular for a Republican...with voters who aren't Republicans...his problem is the primary voters who hold the key to the nomination. Numbers we'll release tomorrow show he's not doing terribly well on that front even in his home state.
- http://networkedblogs.com/jOwkv"
What PPP's poll shows is Gary Johnson has the best chance against Obama when voters get to know him, his honesty, his integrity, and his record.

His issue is winning the primary, but if the media starts giving him the coverage he deserves and covers him as the candidate with the best chance to beat Obama, then Republican voters will start paying attention and voting for him.

[Note: PPP conducted a similar poll in early February prior to Johnson declaring his candidacy, and Johnson was trailing Obama by 15 pts (51-36)]

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

DeMint, Lee, Paul Offer Bill To Begin Restoring Sound Money

H/T C4L

At least there are still some members of Congress that get it. Our currency is going to hell in a handbasket and even the UN sees it's collapse coming, calling to scrap the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

From Senator Mike Lee's website
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) introduced the Sound Money Promotion Act, legislation that would remove the tax burden on gold and silver coins that have been declared legal tender by the federal government or state governments. On May 9, the State of Utah became the first state to recognize such gold and silver coins as legal tender for use within the state, and similar legislation has been introduced in 12 other states, including South Carolina.

“Thanks to the government’s reckless over-spending, continued bailouts, and the Federal Reserve’s easy money policy, this year the purchasing power of the dollar hit an all-time low in the several decades since we went off the gold standard,” said Senator DeMint. “In order to rebuild strength and confidence in our economy, we need both the fiscal discipline to cut wasteful spending and the monetary discipline to restrain further destructive monetizing of our debt. This legislation would encourage wider adoption of sound money measures, and that’s a step in the right direction.”

“Good monetary policy is an important part of a healthy and prosperous economy,” said Senator Lee. “Since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the dollar has lost approximately 98 percent of its value. This bill is an important step towards a stable and sound currency whose value is protected from the Fed's printing press."

Senator Paul added, "As the government runs massive deficits, uncontrolled spending, and an increasingly unsustainable debt, governments and the bureaucrats in charge are often forced to take an easier approach: to monetize the debt, inflating the currency. These implications can be devastating, leading to higher interest rates, which lead to higher borrowing costs and slower economic growth, but most importantly, destroying the savings and standard-of-living of all Americans. This bill will hold politicians and the Federal Reserve accountable; acknowledging that states are serious about an alternative to a weakening dollar.”

The warning signs for our economic problems can no longer be ignored:

* While the value of a dollar is at historic lows, the value of gold is at historic highs

* Recently Standard & Poor’s downgraded the U.S. outlook from “stable” to “negative,” meaning there is a 1 in 3 chance of an actual credit downgrade in the next two years

* The world’s largest bond fund has dumped its U.S. debt-related holdings, over concerns that we will not get our fiscal house in order

* The Federal Reserve is now buying 70 percent of U.S. Treasuries, set to surpass the holdings of both China and Japan combined

Happy Birthday Tenth Amendment Center

Michael Boldin, founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center, shares a few thoughts on TAC’s 5 year anniversary, how political winds shift, and how you’ll always be under attack when standing for the Constitution: Every issue, every time. No exceptions, no excuses.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Benzinga Radio: Governor Gary Johnson Talks Reform Platform For Presidential Run

Benzinga Radio

Matthew Boesler of Benzinger Radio had the opportunity this past week to speak with former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson on his decision to run for the Republican nomination in the 2012 presidential election. They talked about some of Governor Johnson's key platforms, such as his plans for fixing the economy and making the country's health care system sustainable. He also decided to throw in some discussion of Dodd-Frank and campaign finance for good measure. Here is what Governor Johnson had to say.
On why he's running for president:

"I find myself outraged over the fact that we are bankrupt. I think the biggest issue facing this country right now is that we are on the verge of a financial collapse. It's going to be the bond market that collapses, because there is no paying $14 trillion in debt given the $1.65 trillion deficit, this year, last year, the year before, and the years going forward. We need to balance the budget, and I'm proposing a balanced budget for the year 2013."

On taxes:

"When it comes to jobs in this country, I am proposing eliminating the federal corporate income tax, believing that would reestablish this country as the only place to start up, grow, and nurture a business."

"It's a double tax. We as individuals own the corporations. When that money gets distributed to you and I, that's when that money gets taxed."

"I would also be advocating eliminating the income tax, eliminating the IRS, and replacing that with a fair tax, which by all accounts free-market economists believe a fair tax would be just that, a fair tax. Everyone would pay their fair share and it would absolutely promote savings by doing that."

"The consumption tax that's being proposed is approximately 20% as a value-added tax that would replace all other taxes--with the exception of property tax--and that would get applied to everything it is that we purchase. By doing that, it would be fair because everybody would pay their share of that. There is also a component built in to the fair tax proposal that would exclude you from paying that tax if you didn't have a certain threshold level of income. For the most part, everyone would pay this tax and it would very much promote savings because that would be the difference between what you earned and consumption."

On spending:

"I would be proposing cutting spending by 43%, that being the amount of money that we are currently printing and borrowing. I would start off by talking about Medicaid, Medicare, and military spending, those being really the big three."

"Social Security would really be reforming Social Security; it wouldn't be about cutting Social Security. Without raising taxes, we could make Social Security solvent into the future by raising the retirement age, having a means testing--there being all sorts of options available in the means testing area--and then changing the escalator built into Social Security from the wage index to the inflation rate, which in and of itself would make Social Security solvent into the future."

On health care:

"For Medicare and Medicaid, the federal government should block-grant the states a fixed amount of money--43% less than what we're currently spending--to give health care to the poor and those over 65 to the state. Fifty laboratories of best practice, fifty laboratories of doing things in a better way. I am believing that there would be best practices. We're all very competitive; we would emulate the best practices. There would be failure. We would do everything we could to avoid the failure."

"The reform to health care needs to be free-market reform. I think that health care in this country is as far removed from the free market as it possibly could be."

"Why should there even be insurance in a health care system that was absolutely free-market driven? I would argue that 40% plus of health care right now is bureaucratic, that it doesn't need to exist. I would suggest that within health care, all sorts of tests and procedures are being mandated from a liability standpoint, not from a cost-benefit standpoint. Really, you're talking about fundamental change in how we purchase insurance, which would be you and I going out and shopping for what it is that we need and want, coupled with the marketplace delivering what we need and want in more cost-effective ways."

"I would hope [to see the health insurance industry marginalized]. The notion that we have insurance to cover ourselves for ongoing medical coverage flies in the face of cost effectiveness. It would be analogous to having grocery insurance. We don't buy grocery insurance because, number one, why would anyone sell us grocery insurance? If we had it, you would go to the grocery store and there wouldn't even be prices advertised because you and I wouldn't pay for groceries--grocery insurance would. Why would we buy ground round when we could by filets, because we don't pay for it, grocery insurance does?"

Read the rest of the interview here

The audio version of the interview can be found here

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

It's a Perfect Storm: Poll Finds Massive Libertarian Shift in America

By the Left Coast Rebel

Nate Silver at the New York Times points to polling that shows some pretty shocking news: more and more Americans consider themselves libertarians these days (and that is bad news for both progressive-statist political parties):

Since 1993, CNN has regularly asked a pair of questions that touch on libertarian views of the economy and society:

Some people think the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses. Others think that government should do more to solve our country’s problems. Which comes closer to your own view?

Some people think the government should promote traditional values in our society. Others think the government should not favor any particular set of values. Which comes closer to your own view?

A libertarian, someone who believes that the government is best when it governs least, would typically choose the first view in the first question and the second view in the second.

In the polls, the responses to both questions had been fairly steady for many years. The economic question has showed little long-term trend, although tolerance for governmental intervention rose following the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The social libertarian viewpoint — that government should not favor any particular set of values — has gained a couple of percentage points since the 1990s but not more than that.

But in CNN’s latest version of the poll, conducted earlier this month, the libertarian response to both questions reached all-time highs. Some 63 percent of respondents said government was doing too much — up from 61 percent in 2010 and 52 percent in 2008 — while 50 percent said government should not favor any particular set of values, up from 44 percent in 2010 and 41 percent in 2008. (It was the first time that answer won a plurality in CNN’s poll.)

Silver provides a graph showing the libertarian surge:


http://wac.0873.edgecastcdn.net/800873/blog/wp-content/uploads/CNN-libertarian-poll.jpg
Wow!

Through the media, entertainment and academia they do their best to hammer it out of us decade after decade but most Americans still believe in the simple Jefferson adage, "the government is best which governs least."

Nearly every ill that our nation faces today has been caused by the heavy hand of an out-of-control government, far astray from the limited constraints of the Constitution. That's why we see such a huge paradigm shift to the libertarian way of thinking -- I speak for myself as a former table-pounding G.O.P. partisan (years and years ago).

More
discussion @ Points and Figures and Cato @ Liberty. Cross posted to LCR.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Warmonger McCain: GOP Moving Toward Isolationism

John McCain is a little confused and a little afraid.

On "This Week" with Christiane Amanpour, the AZ Senator claims that some GOP Presidential hopefuls and the party in general are moving toward isolationism because of their criticism of our current foray into Libya and calls to get out of Afghanistan. McCain believes that we need to be the world's policeman or else risk a repeat of 1930's Germany.

First off, McCain is dead wrong on his assertion that we are moving toward isolationism. That is just fear mongering. What we are seeing instead is a move toward non-interventionism, there's a big difference between the two, with the realization that our interventionist policies have created unintended consequences and have led to many of the situations that we are faced with today.

It is time that the Neocon wing of the party wake up and accept the reality that our intervention into the affairs of other nations has created the situations that have forced us to commit troops all over the globe where no risk is posed to our national security. This goes for the war-loving Democrats too.

Whether it be backing the Shah in Iran, our support of Saddam, our bankrolling of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan along with propping up a number of other dictatorships, they have all backfired, leading to the unrest we now face in the Middle East.

You would think that Senator McCain would know better having spent nearly 6 years as a POW in Vietnam, another military action that we had no business being involved in, but he obviously doesn't.

Politicians like McCain and his ilk are afraid and rightfully so. The paradigm is shifting away from interventionism, just as it is in Keynesism on the economic front, and the Neocons don't know what they will do without our enormous military-industrial complex.

As the GOP moves toward more libertarian principles you can expect to see more and more statements like this from the old guard who are happy with the status quo.

Via Memeorandum

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Rand Paul Blasts Obama On Libya

Once again Rand Paul is taking the administration to task for it's attempt to circumvent the War Powers Resolution and continue the use of our military in the now NATO led "kinetic action" without Congressional approval.

Senator Rand Paul
Sen. Paul Responds to Obama’s Mishandling of Libyan War

Jun 16, 2011

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Sen. Rand Paul issued the following statement regarding President Obama's mishandling of the situation in Libya.

"The Obama Administration has failed miserably in its attempt to justify their unconstitutional war in Libya. Their attempt yesterday to convince Congress that we are in fact not engaged in hostilities was breathtaking in its implications for both Libya and for future presidential war authority.

"The argument that our military is not engaged in hostilities because the Libyan military is unable to effectively retaliate has two major problems. First, according to the Administration's report, attacking Libyan air defense is one of the primary roles our military is playing. Of course they aren't shooting back well, we blew up their air defense system.

"If you take the Administration's logic to its natural, if extreme-sounding, conclusion, the bigger problem is this: Under their logic, the President could attack a country, even with nuclear weapons, and not consider it to be a war needing Congressional approval if the country is unable to retaliate. This policy completely violates his constitutional authority. It also sends a dangerous signal to rogue nations and schoolyard bullies alike: If we hit you hard enough that you can't hit back, it doesn't count as an attack."
Not satisfied with issuing a simple press release, the junior Senator from Kentucky also penned an op-ed in the Washington Times which further expands on his opposition the the administration's position that Congressional approval is not required. It should be noted that the administration is even going as far as rejecting Pentagon and DOJ opinions that the action does indeed require approval.
America was flung into a war that lacks congressional approval and fiscal discipline. The administration’s complete disregard for the Constitution has bothered many Americans, for the Constitution clearly states that it is Congress that has the power to declare war, not the president. The War Powers Act also clearly states that U.S. armed forces are to engage in immediate hostilities only if the circumstances are “pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”

Absent these criteria, the president has no authority to declare war. Even if the president believes he has such authority, the War Powers Act goes on to require the president to seek congressional approval within 60 days of conflict. That deadline has come and gone, and only last night did Mr. Obama belatedly begin providing Congress and the American people with answers. The mission in Libya does not comply with the requirements outlined in the War Powers Act. Therefore, I demand an explanation.
Read the rest of the op-ed here

Like Senator Paul, I believe that Obama is is in violation of the War Powers Resolution and like Presidents before him is usurping powers not granted in Article II Section 2 of the Constitution. The Founders intentionally put checks in the Constitution, namely Article I Section 8 Clause 11 to prevent the President from entering into wars at will.

Via Memeorandum

Cross posted at the Left Coast Rebel

The Cost Of The War On Drugs

Great video by the Foundation for Economic Education which shows what the War on Drugs costs not only in dollars but in the costs to the freedoms of Americans.

On this 40th anniversary of the War on Drugs, it is time we heed the calls of FEE, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, GOP Presidential candidates Gary Johnson and Ron Paul, former President Jimmy Carter and the many others who are calling for an end to prohibition.

The War on Drugs is really an assault on our liberties and along with the War on Terror, frequently used as a convenient excuse to strip us of our freedoms by the ever expanding police state. Decriminalization is only the first step, the government needs to be out of the prohibition business completely.

It is time that we stand up and demand an end to the hostilities so that we can reclaim our individual rights to decide what is best for ourselves.

Ron Paul Wins RLC Straw Poll

No surprise here given that his supporters always attend these events in droves. The big surprise is that Jon Huntsman finished with a decisive 2nd place showing but Politio suggests that he too had a get out the vote effort.

I'm very disappointed that Gary Johnson only received 10 of the 1542 votes cast.

RLC 2011 straw poll results

Bachmann 191
Cain 104
Gingrich 69
Huntsman 382
Johnson 10
McCotter 2
Palin 41
Paul 612
Pawlenty 18
Roemer 9
Romney 74
Santorum 30

Via Memeorandum

Audio - Gary Johnson At Strong America Now Event In Iowa

H/T Gary Johnson Grassroots Blog
O.Kay Henderson

Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson is the second Republican presidential candidate to speak at today’s Strong America Now event in Des Moines.

He pledged to present a balanced budget to congress for 2013.  “And that means cutting $1.65 trillion from the federal budget,” Johnson said, getting applause.  “We’re on the verge of a financial collapse…This is not a problem for our kids and our grandkids. This is a problem we’ve got right now and it needs to be addressed.”

He got the biggest crowd response of the day (so far) when he laid out his proposals regarding tax policy. ”‘This is what we should be cussing, discussing,” Johnson said, then he told the crowd he’d eliminate the federal income tax and the I.R.S., replacing it with the Fair Tax (a national sales tax).

Johnson talked about foreign policy as well, saying he “initially” thought the U.S. mission in Afghanistan was warranted.  “Let’s get out of Iraq and Afghanistan tomorrow,” he said, getting a smattering of applause. “…A through Z I’m opposed to what we’re doing in Libya.”

Johnson also got a huge burst of applause for his call to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and return the responsibility of education to the states.  “It’s kind of a no-brainer,” he said, drawing more applause.

Johnson got some applause for his proposal on immigration reform.  Work visas would secure the borders, according to Johnson, who added beefing up border security would be a wasted investment.  It was a seque to his call for decriminalizing drugs, as he said 90 percent of the nation’s drug problem is “prohibition related.”

Listen to Johnson’s speech: JohnsonJune18

During the Q&A section, Johnson was quizzed about his call to cut defense spending by 43 percent and pressed hard about his stand on drugs.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Ron Paul at the Daily Caller: "Why I’m suing the Obama administration over Libya"

Ron Paul
Image credit: Gage Skidmore

By the Left Coast Rebel

Ron Paul, writing at the Daily Caller today:

There is no issue more serious than war. Wars result in the loss of life and property. Wars are also expensive and an enormous economic burden.

Our Founders understood that waging war is not something that should be taken lightly, which is why Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress — not the president — the authority to declare war. This was meant to be an important check on presidential power. The last thing the Founders wanted was an out-of-control executive branch engaging in unnecessary and unpopular wars without so much as a Congressional debate.

Unfortunately, that’s exactly the situation we have today in Libya.

That’s why I’ve joined several other members of Congress in a lawsuit against President Obama for engaging in military action in Libya without seeking the approval of Congress.

(SNIP)

If a president does go to war unilaterally, the War Powers Act requires him to seek Congressional approval within 60 days. The president can get an extension of up to 90 days if he asks for more time — but President Obama did not do this.

Be sure to READ THE REST.

Via Memeorandum, cross posted to Libertarian Patriot.

"Fairness"

By the Left Coast Rebel


This post was inspired by "What is "Fair"?" at Liberty Unbound, which got me a-thinking this morning.

Just What is This Fairness I keep Hearing About and Where can I get Some?

Any of the numerous times that I have heard the chief collectivist in the White House proclaim how much the United States values "fairness" in our tax system, markets, "national" income, etc., I cringe, wince, yell and throw things at the television and/or perform repeated face palms.

I get so irritated by the uses of a anti-concept like "fairness" because it is an incredibly subjective term dependent upon one's worldview.

How Can a Guy as "Smart" as Obama Believe in Such a Fallacy?

Bringing up "fairness" (specifically in taxes and the iron fist of government power) begs several questions. Every time you hear King Obama mention it, think of a few simple scenarios and questions:

Fair to whom? A Republican-appointed bean counter? A Democrat-selected Czar? A committee that has control over your life, public life, a city or state? Fairness determined by a compromised President? Your neighbor? A Che Guevera-lusting college professor that thinks communism is fair? An idiotic, brain-cell-challenged teenager that is just lazy and likes to think that "fairness" is an 24/7 X-Box-playing government-subsidized lifestyle? A union-thug demanding the overwhelming majority of your income simply because they wake up in the morning? (pictured at right).

Isn't it so much better for markets and individuals to be the final arbiter in deciding that which is fair? For instance, I don't think that it is "fair" for me to pay progressively higher tax rates on my personal income simply because I work 12 hours-a-day and put a lot more effort into my career than my fat, lazy 12-pack-a-day neighbor does. I think that progressive taxation limits my income potential, choices and liberty. I, as a responsible adult individual should be allowed to pursue my career without fear of penalization via. progressive overlord concepts of that which is fair. My income is my property and without it, I am deprived of my personal freedom.

Again, "fairness" is an anti-concept, paraphrased by the Ayn Rand Lexicon site, as:
An anti-concept is an unnecessary and rationally unusable term designed to replace and obliterate some legitimate concept. The use of anti-concepts gives the listeners a sense of approximate understanding. But in the realm of cognition, nothing is as bad as the approximate . . . .

I've Seen Fair and Her Name is Socialism


Effectively used by our progressive overlords, fairness replaces and obliterates the unyielding, uncompromisable, nearly forgotten concept that this nation was founded upon: liberty. That's why a government focused on such a non-tangible subjective credo is so dangerous. There is literally nothing in its path to keep it in check. From Barack's pseudo communism to Fidel Castro's real deal, collectivist notions to rob you of your pay check, life and liberty at gunpoint always begin with selling "fair" to a non-thinking public unwilling or unable to weigh the trade off of socialism versus human freedom.

For further reading on this topic, please read, "What is "Fair"?" at Liberty Unbound and "C’mon Time to Give Something Back" at Allied Liberty News.

Cross posted to LCR, Libertarian Patriot, Allied Liberty News and Rational Nation.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Mittens Romney Strikes Out

Ok so it's not a big deal and it doesn't rank up there with Obama not being able to name a player on his "favorite team", the White Sox, or Massachusetts Senate wannabe Martha Coakley saying that Curt Schilling pitched for the Yankees but come on Mitt, seriously?

When asked about attending a Red Sox game against the Tampa Bay Rays at Tropicana Field, a domed stadium, Mittens said.
“It’s cool – I had no idea, I thought I was going to be in sweltering heat, but instead it’s cool, and a responsive and warm crowd.”
Baseball is a religion in Boston and just about any true blue Sox fan knows just as much about their rivals as they do the hometown nine. To not know that the Rays, who host the Sox for around 8 games a year, play in a dome does not make him much of a fanboy.

But that's Mitt, always pandering. He flopped more than a dying fish in his various runs for office in the Bay State, always supporting what he thought would get him elected.

Here's a tip Mitt; you're not one of us, and you never will be. You probably throw like a girl too.

Via Ballbug

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Rolling Stone: Meet Gary Johnson, The GOP's Invisible Candidate

H/T Gary Johnson Grassroots Forum

Meet Gary Johnson, the GOP's Invisible Candidate

Gary Johnson is the Rodney Dangerfield of the GOP’s 2012 field. He gets no respect. Despite being a successful former two-term governor of New Mexico who shrank state government by wielding his veto pen with fervor, an entrepreneur who sold the 1,000 person construction business he built from scratch, and an accomplished athlete (who else in the field has summited Everest?) Johnson has struggled to break through – with voters or the press.

The latest insult? CNN – which saw fit to invite Herman Cain, the former CEO of a third-rate pizza chain who has never held elected office, to its debate in New Hampshire the other night – told Johnson to take a hike because he's polling below 2 percent.

That’s a shame, because in an interview with Rolling Stone, Johnson proved himself to be one of the more honest – and certainly more unorthodox – politicians in the running.

Johnson calls himself a "classical liberal," though others might prefer "libertarian." He favors legalizing marijuana (he says he toked up as recently as 2008) and prostitution and supports a woman’s right to choose, liberal immigration reform and an anti-war foreign policy – even as he’s called for draconian spending cuts and for dropping the corporate tax rate to zero as a means to jumpstart jobs creation.

Get Johnson talking and he’ll prove to you that he’s no joke. Perhaps in the next round the august political tastemakers at CNN will see fit to find him a podium – if only to subject him to John King’s incisive "this or that" questioning.


Read the complete interview here.

Cross posted at Gary Johnson Grassroots Blog and the Left Coast Rebel

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Gary Johnson Participates In 6/13 CNN Debate

CNN my have thought they excluded him but this is the internet age and Gov Johnson is able to make his opinions heard.

GaryJohnson2012

Legal Plunder Explained

You and I know what plunder is, it's theft, plain and simple. We wouldn't allow someone to walk into our house and take our stuff without putting up a fight yet we allow the government to steal from us all the time in the name of taxation. What makes the government any different than a common thief?

Here is what Frédéric Bastiat had to say about the government's legalized form of theft and how we would recognize it.
But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.
Check out this great video by the Future Of Freedom Foundation on the concept of plunder.

Monday, June 13, 2011

FBI To Further Shred The Fourth Amendment

It's been a bad month for the Fourth Amendment.

First, the Indiana Supreme Court rules that you have no right to resist law enforcement when they want to enter your home without a warrant, then the SCOTUS rules that the agents of the state only need to announce themselves before they can enter your home without a warrant and then for good measure we had the PATRIOT Act extended for 4 years. And how could we forget the Pima County AZ SWAT gunning down an ex-Marine in his home on a specious warrant.

Now comes word that the FBI is going to expand it's rules (yes, they get to write their own rules) to give themselves more leeway in investigations. Evidently the current rules are too "cumbersome" because they expect the agency to have some actual suspicion wrongdoing.

NYT
Some of the most notable changes apply to the lowest category of investigations, called an “assessment.” The category, created in December 2008, allows agents to look into people and organizations “proactively” and without firm evidence for suspecting criminal or terrorist activity.

Under current rules, agents must open such an inquiry before they can search for information about a person in a commercial or law enforcement database. Under the new rules, agents will be allowed to search such databases without making a record about their decision.

The new rules will also relax a restriction on administering lie-detector tests and searching people’s trash. Under current rules, agents cannot use such techniques until they open a “preliminary investigation,” which — unlike an assessment — requires a factual basis for suspecting someone of wrongdoing. But soon agents will be allowed to use those techniques for one kind of assessment, too: when they are evaluating a target as a potential informant.
You see Citizen, in this new America you are either a potential threat or a potential informant in Leviathan's war against liberty, get used to it.

Via Memeorandum

Gary Johnson On Freedom Watch 6/13/11

"The talk of the town is that Governor Johnson is not here [the debate] because CNN wouldn't permit it."

GaryJohnson2012

Sunday, June 12, 2011

"Climb Mt. CNN" Moneybomb

Via Gary Johnson Grassroots Blog

Despite his exclusion from the CNN debate in NH, we know that Gary Johnson is still a viable candidate, that he is not some dark horse, and that he has the resume that qualifies him for the job. He polls nationally at 2-3%, meeting CNN's criteria. Polling shouldn't be an issue, as both former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton polled at 1% at this point in their respective election cycles. Gary also polled at 2% a mere 4 months before the first NM Republican primary and still managed to come out on top.

So we ask all Gary Johnson supporters to donate what ever amount they can on June 11-13, which is the weekend prior and going into the debate. Gary has faced many great obstacles before, whether it is the challenge of running his successful business that he started from literally nothing; running for governor of a state with absolutely zero name recognition and winning the primary and general elections; or climbing Mt. Everest, no obstacle is too great, and we must persevere past setbacks and use them to our advantage. Help Gary climb "Mt. CNN"!

Visit https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com/ and donate your most generous amount, and remember that there is no such thing as a donation too small. Even a $10 donation goes a long way.

(Facebook users can join the event here: "Climb Mt. CNN" Moneybomb on Facebook)

Thursday, June 9, 2011

Jim Rogers - "It’s Gonna Be Worse The Next Time Around."

The writing is on the wall.

As much as the administration and the LSM try to put a positive spin on the sagging economic indicators, at some point reality is going to set in and we are going to be in a world of hurt. Unfortunately the Keynesians will never admit they were wrong and will just keep the printing presses running until our currency is worthless.

We're so screwed.

CNBC
The U.S. is approaching a financial crisis worse than 2008, Jim Rogers, chief executive, Rogers Holdings, warned CNBC Wednesday.

"The debts that are in this country are skyrocketing," he said. "In the last three years the government has spent staggering amounts of money and the Federal Reserve is taking on staggering amounts of debt.

"When the problems arise next time…what are they going to do? They can’t quadruple the debt again. They cannot print that much more money. It’s gonna be worse the next time around."

He called Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke a "disaster" who has "never been right about anything" since he's been in Washington. "I hope he doesn't come back with QE3 but that's all he knows. The only thing he knows is to print money."

He predicted that after the Fed ends its quantitative easing program, known as QE2, this month, it may come back under another name.

"They're gonna bring it back because [Bernanke will] be terrified and Washington will be terrified," he said. "There's an election coming in November 2012. Washington's gonna print more money."

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Barack Obama: Your War President

How's that hopey change working for the anti-war left now?

Candidate Obama ran as the anti-war candidate, slamming Hillary Clinton's decision the vote for the war in Iraq whenever the chance arose.

Now President, Obama has us involved in two inherited wars and upped the ante with a "kinetic action" in Libya; boots soon to be on the ground no doubt. Now there is word that air-strikes are commencing in Yemen. The irony being of course that the War President is bombing a despotic tyrant to support the rebels in Libya and bombing the rebels in Yemen to support a despotic tyrant, yet the rebels in both places play for the same team.

So how much war is too much for the current Warmonger-in-Chief? He has already proven that he has no regard for the limits on his war powers; are we going to add war number five to the mix soon?

But let's cut him some slack. After all he does have a Nobel Peace Prize in his trophy case.

NYT
The Obama administration has intensified the American covert war in Yemen, exploiting a growing power vacuum in the country to strike at militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets, according to American officials.

The acceleration of the American campaign in recent weeks comes amid a violent conflict in Yemen that has left the government in Sana, a United States ally, struggling to cling to power. Yemeni troops that had been battling militants linked to Al Qaeda in the south have been pulled back to the capital, and American officials see the strikes as one of the few options to keep the militants from consolidating power.

The extent of America’s war in Yemen has been among the Obama administration’s most closely guarded secrets, as officials worried that news of unilateral American operations could undermine Mr. Saleh’s tenuous grip on power. Mr. Saleh authorized American missions in Yemen in 2009, but placed limits on their scope and has said publicly that all military operations had been conducted by his own troops.

Even as senior administration officials worked behind the scenes with Saudi Arabia for a transitional government to take power in Yemen, a State Department spokesman on Wednesday called on the embattled government in Sana to remain focused on dealing with the rebellion and Qaeda militants.

“With Saleh’s departure for Saudi Arabia, where he continues to receive medical treatment, this isn’t a time for inaction,” said the spokesman, Mark Toner. “There is a government that remains in place there, and they need to seize the moment and move forward.”
Via Memeorandum

Gary Johnson 2012: "Tell CNN"

GaryJohnson2012



Online Petition to get Gary Johnson in the debate.

CNN
(404) 827-1500 or (202) 898-7900
Text: CNN (space) and your news tip to 772937 (don’t forget the space after CNN). http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html
Twitter: @CNN or @teamCNN

WMUR
http://www.wmur.com/contact/index.html
(603) 669-9999
Twitter: @WMUR9

Union Leader
publisher@unionleader.com
http://www.unionleader.com/tip
(603) 668-4321 Twitter: @unionleader

Monday, June 6, 2011

The New Gary Johnson Grassroots Blog

There's a new blog in town dedicated my choice, and hopefully yours, to be the next President of the United State, former NM Governor Gary Johnson called the Gary Johnson Grassroots Blog.

Right now the blog is in it's infancy and will be mainly news, video and Governor Johnson's positions on the issues, with the plan to expand into a site for all things Gary Johnson. More importantly it will be a place for you to leave your comments about the man that Reason Magazine once called America’s Most Dangerous Politician.

So please drop on by, follow along and don't forget to visit the official campaign site GaryJohnson2012.com. And if you want to get together with other Gary Johnson supporters, hop on over to the Gary Johnson Grassroots Forum

Also, there are only a few days left before the June 13 New Hampshire debate and Governor Johnson needs your help to get CNN, WMUR and the Union Leader to reconsider their decision to exclude him from the debate. It only takes a few minutes to let them know that they cannot dictate which voices should be heard in such an important election.

Thank you

Online Petition to get Gary Johnson in the debate.

CNN
(404) 827-1500 or (202) 898-7900
Text: CNN (space) and your news tip to 772937 (don’t forget the space after CNN). http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html
Twitter: @CNN or @teamCNN

WMUR
http://www.wmur.com/contact/index.html
(603) 669-9999
Twitter: @WMUR9

Union Leader
publisher@unionleader.com
http://www.unionleader.com/tip
(603) 668-4321 Twitter: @unionleader

Sunday, June 5, 2011

Nullification In Connecticut - Senate Passes Marijuana Decrim Bill

Connecticut is attempting to join a number of states, including neighboring New York and Massachusetts, who are standing up to the federal government and nullifying federal penalties for simple possession of cannabis through decriminalization.

While decriminalization is not the same as legalization, it takes away the threat of a criminal record and jail time for simple possession of marijuana; instead making it punishable by a fine.

This is great to see although the measure has only passed the Senate and still needs approval by the House before it goes on to the Governor for a signature. This vote also comes days after the Global Commission on Drug Policy issued a report calling for the legal regulation of cannabis.

What is lost in the translation of these decriminalization efforts by the states is that this is an overt act of nullification; which by definition is the right of a state to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional.

This is no different than a state passing a law to prevent the implementation of ObamaCare, for example, except that the proponents of nationalized health care will pull out the race card; claiming that here states' rights advocates want to return us all back to the days of slavery. Whatever that means.

The irony is that the supporters of decriminalized marijuana on the left and the supporters of health freedom on the right agree with each other more than the realize and are arguing for the same thing; the right to decide what is best for themselves on a state by state basis.

The same goes for just about every civil liberties issue whether it be reproductive rights, same-sex marriage, food regulations and so on. It is none of the federal government's business and if I live in a state that has regulations I don't care for, I'm free to move to somewhere where the rules better suite my beliefs. That is what the founders intended.

So kudos to the CT Senate for their standing up to Leviathan, Tenthers everywhere are with you.

Via Memeorandum

Herman Cain On States' Rights - FAIL!

H/T RedStateEclectic

Sorry Herm, I'm as big a fan of state's rights as they come but you are not doing us Tenthers any favors with your misinformed statements.


You see, the United States federal government, folks, has no jurisdiction over bankruptcy law. States do!
I hate to break it to the Hermanator but Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 explicitly gives Congress that power.
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
People need to wake up to the fact that Cain is an empty suit who gives a good speech and will pander to the Tea Party at every opportunity, but once he gets into specifics he proves that he either doesn't know what he is talking about or is in favor of big government.

Please don't be fooled, he is not a viable candidate for anyone who is pro-liberty and for limited government.

Via Memeorandum

Payback - Homeowners Forclose On Bank

Sweet justice indeed for the Collier County, FL couple.

Maybe this will put the banks on notice that they are not above the law, but somehow I think that they will just lobby Congress to get a law passed to prevent this from happening in the future.

digtriad.com


Via Memeorandum

My Email To The Union Leader - RE: Gary Johnson

Amazing that in less than a month how opinions can change.

In a May 8 editorial the Manchester Union Leader chides the national media for it's coverage of the SC GOP Debate and their need to dictate to us who the acceptable candidates are for the party's nomination.

Fast forward to today and the Union Leader, along with other debate sponsors CNN and WMUR, is guilty of the same favoritism toward the media selected candidates that they wrote against by excluding a viable, nationally recognized candidate in Gary Johnson.
In a May 8 editorial your paper published an editorial entitled Tier talk: Pundits predict the primary with the following statement

The national media have already settled on a narrative for the 2012 Republican presidential primary: It’s the nationally known candidates who dress, talk and act like Washington insiders vs. everybody else.

The first Republican presidential primary debate of the 2012 cycle took place last Thursday in South Carolina. Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Donald Trump and Mike Huckabee declined to attend. That left the national press breathlessly proclaiming that the debate pitted “top-tier” candidate Tim Pawlenty vs. “lower tier” candidates Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum and Gary Johnson. Interesting.
...
The national media would do themselves and the voters a favor if they stopped trying to predict the future and just reported the facts. It is up to primary voters, not the Washington press corps, to decide who can, should and will win the nomination.

Yet as we sit today, The Union Leader, along with CNN and WMUR, is guilty of the same thing that it wrote against less than a month ago; determining "who can, should and will win the nomination" by excluding former NM Governor Gary Johnson from the June 13 debate.

Governor Johnson is a recognized national candidate for President who polled at 3% in the most recent Gallup poll, ahead of invitees Jon Huntsman and Rick Santorum and participated in the May 5 SC debate as well. To not invite Gary Johnson to the NH debate, which you are sponsoring, is hypocrisy at the highest level.

As a former New Englander, with friends and family who live in the Granite State, I would hope that you reconsider your decision and extend a belated invitation to Gary Johnson to let his opinions be heard in Manchester on June 13.

Thank you

Chris Walsh
San Tan Valley AZ
Please continue to apply pressure to CNN, WMUR and the Union Leader to include Gary Johnson in the June 13 debate.

Online Petition to get Gary Johnson in the debate.

CNN
(404) 827-1500 or (202) 898-7900
Text: CNN (space) and your news tip to 772937 (don’t forget the space after CNN). http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html
Twitter: @CNN or @teamCNN

WMUR
http://www.wmur.com/contact/index.html
(603) 669-9999
Twitter: @WMUR9

Union Leader
publisher@unionleader.com
http://www.unionleader.com/tip
(603) 668-4321 Twitter: @unionleader

Via Memeorandum

Cross posted at the Left Coast Rebel

Nullification: The Movie!

H/T Principles of 98

From the Tenth Amendment Center Blog



This yet to be released documentary from the Foundation for a Free Society and the Tenth Amendment Center features Thomas Woods, Michael Boldin, Debra Medina, Stewart Rhodes, Sheriff Richard Mack, Charles Goyette, Kevin Gutzman, Robert Scott Bell, Mike Adams, Jason Rink, John Bush, Bryce Shonka, Mike Maharrey, and others. Song “The Message of Freedom”" by Jordan Page

Ron Paul Money Bomb: The R3VOLUTION vs RomneyCare

R3VOLUTION v. ROMNEYCARE

Help Ron Paul reach his goal of $2M today by making a donation here

And while you have your credit card out, make a donation to Gary Johnson as well.

Both of these pro-liberty candidates need your support against the establishment candidates.

Saturday, June 4, 2011

McJobs And The McRecovery

Unemployment continued to tick up this month to 9.1% with the news that only 54,000 private sector jobs were created while 28,000 public sector positions were cut. Economists had been looking for a gain of 125,000 after a "strong" April so May's numbers come as a big disappointment.

Lost in this report however is that of the 54K new jobs gained, half of them could be attributed to McDonald's hiring push in April.

MarketWatch
McDonald’s ran a big hiring day on April 19 — after the Labor Department’s April survey for the payrolls report was conducted — in which 62,000 jobs were added. That’s not a net number, of course, and seasonal adjustment will reduce the Hamburglar impact on payrolls. (In simpler terms — restaurants always staff up for the summer; the Labor Department makes allowance for this effect.) Morgan Stanley estimates McDonald’s hiring will boost the overall number by 25,000 to 30,000. The Labor Department won’t detail an exact McDonald’s figure — they won’t identify any company they survey — but there will be data in the report to give a rough estimate. There’s a case to be made for the benefit of fast-food restaurant employment, but it’s obviously not the foundation for sustained economic growth.
Talk about making bad news even worse. Half of the new jobs were low paying positions in the service industry, with little or no benefits.

Would you like some QE3 with that?

My Hour With Gary Johnson

On Wednesday morning I had the unique opportunity, with other members of the blogosphere, to spend an hour with GOP Presidential hopeful Gary Johnson where we were given the chance to ask him questions about his views on various topics.

The thing that has always impressed me the most about the former NM Governor is that he has an everyman characteristic about him. He gives straight answers to questions based on what he believes instead of coming across as your typical politician who will give you a campaign speech when you only asked for the time.

Aside from the standard issues questions that were asked; you can find all his positions at GaryJohnson2012.com, Johnson addressed the media's fascination with his outspoken stance on marijuana. While the LSM has latched on to him being the pro-pot candidate, he points out that is just a small part of his overall pro-liberty stance but they continue to focus on it the most.

When asked about his lack of support among social conservatives given his libertarian views on social issues, Johnson pointed to his campaigns in the NM Governor's race where he did not receive their support while winning the primaries and gaining their overwhelming support in the general election. He also noted that his positions are consistent with his limited government, pro-individual liberty views and that matters such as reproductive rights and the institution of marriage are not something for the government to meddle in.

Another topic that came up was his opinions on the recent Indiana Supreme Court ruling and the tragic murder of Jose Guerena by the Pima County AZ SWAT. Gov Johnson stated that he is a strong supporter of the Fourth Amendment and is concerned that our rights are being taken away. He was also asked about his criteria for judges given that Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer and Ginsburg are all in their 70's and could retire during his term, should he be elected, he stated that he would select people who believe in the original intent of the Constitution.

In all, the hour was very informative and gave me a more in depth view into Gary Johnson's positions. It was indeed an honor and a privilege to be invited and I thank Gov Johnson and his campaign for the invite.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Gary Johnson Excluded From CNN June 13 Debate In NH

All I have to say is Whiskey Foxtrot Tango!

Citing his failure to meet "objective criteria", the Communist News Network has decided to silence the voice of Gary Johnson in their upcoming GOP Presidential Debate in Manchester NH on June 13.

This is total BS especially given the fact that the former NM Governor consistently polls just as well as invitee Rick Santorum. What this says to me is that CNN is the one to decide who we get to vote for. I'd even be willing to bet that if they could figure out how to keep Ron Paul out of the debate the would do it in a heartbeat.

At least Gov Johnson is taking the high road.
"I respect the right of CNN and the other sponsors of the June 13 New Hampshire Republican presidential primary debate to apply their own criteria and invite who they choose. It is, however, unfortunate that a significant segment of the Republican Party, and more importantly, millions of independent voters who might be Republican voters, will not have a voice on the stage in Manchester.

I wish the participants in the debate well. And I sympathize with the millions of Americans whose beliefs will not be on display in Manchester on June 13."
We can still make our voices heard. Whether you support Gary Johnson's candidacy or not, let CNN and the other debate sponsors, WMUR-TV and the Manchester Union Leader, know that you will not stand for their decision.

CNN
(404) 827-1500 or (202) 898-7900
Text: CNN (space) and your news tip to 772937 (don’t forget the space after CNN). http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html
Twitter: @CNN or @teamCNN

WMUR
http://www.wmur.com/contact/index.html
(603) 669-9999
Twitter: @WMUR9

Union Leader
publisher@unionleader.com
http://www.unionleader.com/tip
(603) 668-4321 Twitter: @unionleader

Cross posted at the Left Coast Rebel

Cato's Dan Mitchell on the Fallacy of Keynsian Economics

By the Left Coast Rebel

This morning's horrible jobs data underscores the ongoing failure that is Keynsian economics.

But, just what is so-called "Keynsian" economics?

Some basics on Keynsian economics per Wikipedia:

Keynesianism economics is a macroeconomic theory based on the ideas of 20th century English economist John Maynard Keynes. Keynesian economics argues that private sector decisions sometimes lead to inefficient macroeconomic outcomes and therefore advocates active policy responses by the public sector, including monetary policy actions by the central bank and fiscal policy actions by the government to stabilize output over the business cycle.

Keynesian economics advocates a mixed economy—predominantly private sector, but with a large role of government and public sector.


The "larger" role of government and public sector ushered in by unrelenting faith in central-planning largess is the key to the Obamanomic version of Keynsianism and the malaise inflicted upon the nation today. Bean-counting well-connected bureaucrats have showered cash and golden parachutes upon well-connected corporations while you and I on Main Street are shoved into the corner. The Federal Reserve continues to debase the dollar, delay a true recovery and skew economic data at every corner.

But that doesn't even scratch the surface of the fallacy that is Keynsian economics. Dan Mitchell from Cato offers up some of the basics behind the theory. Please pass it along:




Posted to Rational Nation and Libertarian Patriot.

(VIDEO) Woman Molested by TSA at Sky Harbor International in Phoenix

By the Left Coast Rebel

Just because the TSA (post "don't-touch-my-junk" incident) is not making headlines daily does not mean that the government agency is not violating American's constitutional rights.

In particular, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which clearly and simply states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

A story that took place over Memorial Day weekend at Sky Harbor International airport in Phoenix, Arizona highlights the fact that it is still Constitution-abridging, business as usual at the TSA.

Via Infowars:

Video of an incident recorded over the memorial weekend at Sky Harbor International in Phoenix, AZ, documents how the TSA deal with people who are traumatized by grossly invasive enhanced pat downs.

After a woman refused to go through a full body scanner she was pulled aside and made to undergo the pat down procedure. When the TSA agent touched the woman’s breasts, she broke down into tears and screamed for a police officer.

When police officers arrived on the scene they led the woman away and told her that unless she would submit to the full pat down procedure she would not be able to fly.

“Why won’t you help me? You’re a police officer why won’t you help me?” the woman asks in the video.

All the while the woman’s son was filming the ordeal on his phone, having to constantly fend off threats from TSA agents falsely claiming he was breaking the law. The agents also threatened to confiscate the man’s luggage, even though he had been through the screening process.


Lots more at the link.

VIDEO of the disturbing incident:




Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit thanks Barack Hussein Obama for this incident which begs the question: what year and by whom was the TSA created?

Hmm?

More discussion on this story at Alex Jones' Infowars, Scared Monkeys, Fox Nation and HotAirPundit.

Via Memeorandum, cross posted to LCR.

RINO Alert - Jon Huntsman

H/T Goomba News Network

Embraced crap & tax, believes health care is a right, gladly took his share of Obama bucks and supported John McCain.

Jon Huntsman 2012.

Not!

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Report: Global War On Drugs Has Failed

No surprise here, any liberty-minded person could have told you that.

All you need to know is that over half of the prison population in the US is incarcerated due to drug related offenses. What's more, the War on Drugs is big business and creates a financial windfall for the prison–industrial complex along with trial lawyers and law enforcement, among others. State and federal agencies are also more than happy to line up at the trough for their piece of the pie.

Furthermore, like the War on Terror, it gives Leviathan the excuse it needs to strip away our rights and expand the powers of the police state.

With this in mind, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, a high-level international commission comprised of an array of former heads of state and other luminaries, has issued a report detailing the failures of the War on Drugs, particularly when it comes to cannabis, and calls a new approach through the "experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs".

REPORT OF THE GLOBAL COMMISSION ON DRUG POLICY
The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. Fifty years after the initiation of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and 40 years after President Nixon launched the US government’s war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed.

Vast expenditures on criminalization and repressive measures directed at producers, traffickers and consumers of illegal drugs have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or consumption. Apparent victories in eliminating one source or trafficking organization are negated almost instantly by the emergence of other sources and traffickers. Repressive efforts directed at consumers impede public health measures to reduce HIV/AIDS, overdose fatalities and other harmful consequences of drug use. Government expenditures on futile supply reduction strategies and incarceration displace more cost-effective and evidence-based investments in demand and harm reduction.

Our principles and recommendations can be summarized as follows:

End the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but who do no harm to others. Challenge rather than reinforce common misconceptions about drug markets, drug use and drug dependence.

Encourage experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens. This recommendation applies especially to cannabis, but we also encourage other experiments in decriminalization and legal regulation that can accomplish these objectives and provide models for others.
The report goes on to to show just how much of a failure the drug war has been and comes to the conclusion that prohibition has led to too many unintended consequences including the escalation of violence by law enforcement and the growth of a "huge criminal black market".

But don't hold your breath waiting for the LSM to report on this because they to are beneficiaries of the drug war and the primary source of propaganda for the state.

What this report shows is that the tide of war is shifting in our favor. Public opinion already shows that the majority of Americans believe that the drug war has failed. We also have brave politicians, such as GOP Presidential hopeful Gary Johnson, who are at the forefront of the movement to end prohibition.

Chinks in the armor of the drug warriors are starting to appear and if we continue to press the issue we will be victorious. And we must prevail; our liberty and freedoms are at stake.

Cross posted at the Left Coast Rebel

GOP Hypocrisy On Libya

Remember a few weeks ago when the upstanding members of the GOP were calling out Obama for his failure to comply with the War Powers Resolution? Well fast forward to today as Speaker Boehner, while appearing to throw down the gauntlet, claims that Obama is "technically" in compliance with the war powers requirements. Couple this with the leadership's sandbagging of Dennis Kucinich's (D-OH) bill to remove US troops from the "kinetic action" and you can see that the talk by some members was just for show.

The War Party is proving that they are just politicing to gain public support while biding time to give Obama cover to continue US involvement in Libya in the hopes that the hostilities end before they are forced to vote.

Of course the party line is that the Kucinich bill would have ramifications for the mission in Afghanistan and would cause us to, as Boehner says "turn our backs against our NATO partners who have stuck by us for the last 10 years", but the real reason is that the neocons feared that the Kucinich bill would prevail, throwing a wrench in the gears of the perpetual war machine.

Fox
"[Republican leaders] hadn’t seen much of a threat from [the Kucinich bill]. He’s kind of this marginal figure and having his resolution go down narrowly would be no big deal and might even send a message to the administration," said one of the Republican aides. "But once they saw that there was substantial support, they were like, 'Whoa.'"
Via Memeorandum

Cross posted at the Left Coast Rebel
Related Posts with Thumbnails