Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Rand Paul’

McConnell tries to unify GOP


Reported 

Friction among Senate Republicans on the next round of coronavirus relief legislation and a suddenly shaky stock market has eroded President Trump’s leverage in the ongoing standoff with Democrats.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was still searching Tuesday afternoon for 51 Republican votes for a half-trillion-dollar economic relief package that he hopes will put pressure on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) to soften their demands.

Meanwhile, the stock markets in the past week have suffered their worst one-day drops since the coronavirus first froze the U.S. economy in March. On Tuesday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 dropped 632 points and 95 points, respectively — more than 2 percent each — while the tech-heavy Nasdaq composite dropped 465 points, or 4.11 percent.

While the stock markets surged upward through July and August, the start of September has brought a stark shift in sentiment. Coronavirus infections are expected to spike when the fall temperatures drop and there doesn’t appear to be a clear path to getting another federal relief package.

“Trump needs a package just because the stock market has been declining. There is a possibility that COVID infections will increase in the fall and we know the economy is a big variable in how people vote,” said Darrell West, director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution.

“Republicans want to protect the Senate and protect the presidency and they’re going to need a deal,” he said.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell warned Congress during testimony in June that “significant uncertainty” remained in the economy and that “support would be well-placed at this time.” The recent big drop in the stock indices is a significant political development because Trump often cites Wall Street to argue that the economy is making a strong recovery.

“The Dow Jones Industrial just closed above 29,000! You are so lucky to have me as your President. With Joe Hiden’ it would crash,” Trump tweeted exuberantly on Sept. 2, just before the markets started tumbling.

Another relief package passed by Congress, especially one as large as what Pelosi and Schumer want, is expected to give another boost to the markets.

“You live by the sword and you die by the sword. If you’re claiming credit when the market is high, you have a problem when the market drops,” West said.

One Republican senator who wants a larger relief bill said the market turmoil “ought to” put pressure on the White House and colleagues to agree to more federal aid. But the lawmaker, who requested anonymity to discuss Trump’s motives, conceded “I’m having trouble mapping out a scenario one way or another.”

Pelosi on Tuesday seized on calls by Fed officials for more fiscal stimulus from Congress as well as divisions among Republicans to press her growing leverage.

“The chairman of the Fed and other Fed leaders around the country have said clearly that we need a stimulus, that we need a boost,” she noted in an interview with Bloomberg’s “Balance of Power.”

At the same time she slammed McConnell’s revised relief bill, which is estimated to cost around a half-trillion dollars, as “pathetic.” She pointed out it is roughly “half of what [Treasury] Secretary [Steven] Mnuchin has proposed.”

“They are not even in agreement. They are in disarray,” she said of Republicans.

The Senate Republican bill needs 60 votes to overcome an anticipated Democratic filibuster and pass. It will fall well short of that threshold, but McConnell is hoping to get at least a simple majority in favor of it so he can argue that Democrats are acting as obstructionists.

He said on the Senate floor Tuesday that he will schedule a vote this week and indicated to reporters in the hallway that it would happen Thursday.

“Republicans are making yet another overture,” McConnell said.

Conservatives such as Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) are skeptical about spending hundreds of billions of dollars in more federal aid and are pushing for concessions from the GOP leadership. With all Democrats likely to oppose the Republican bill, McConnell can only afford three defections.

Paul on Tuesday said he would oppose the measure.

“We don’t have any money up here. I’m not for borrowing any more money,” he said.

Johnson on Tuesday afternoon said he would support the bill after McConnell and Mnuchin agreed to repurpose about $350 billion in funding from the $2.2 trillion CARES Act passed in March to new relief measures. He said the revised bill would add only $150 billion to $300 billion to the deficit, though he cautioned the numbers aren’t final yet. Johnson said he worked closely with the GOP leadership and Mnuchin to make changes to the measure to make it more appealing to conservatives but didn’t know if it would get 51 votes.

“We’ll see what all ends up happening. We’ll probably have a discussion. There might be some further arm twisting,” he said.

Hawley, a rising conservative star, is pressing for a fully refundable tax credit for homeschooling expenses such as books, technology and laboratory equipment. His proposal was not in the bill as of Tuesday afternoon and he remains undecided. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) used his leverage with Republican leaders to gain two years of tax credits for individuals and businesses that donate to nonprofit scholarship funds, a proposal designed to help subsidize private school tuition.

There are also questions as to whether more-moderate Republicans in tough reelection races such as Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Cory Gardner (Colo.) will be satisfied with the smaller price tag for the revised package, and the lack of additional federal aid for state and local governments, other than money set aside for schools.

Without the repurposed federal funding offsetting some of its cost, the package would be in the range of $500 billion to $700 billion, according to Senate GOP aides. The Republican bill, which McConnell unveiled Tuesday, would provide $300 a week in federal unemployment assistance, a second round of Paycheck Protection Program loans, $105 billion to help reopen classrooms and $16 billion in more money for COVID-19 testing.

Failure to win a simple majority vote for a largely symbolic bill would be another setback for the White House and Senate Republicans, who declined to put the $1.1 trillion coronavirus relief proposal they drafted in July on the Senate floor because of divisions within their conference. Plans to vote during the first week of August on proposals to extend federal unemployment assistance and to fund a second round of small-business loans were scrapped after disagreements again broke out among Republican senators.

Democrats, however, have stayed unified behind their own proposal, the $3.4 trillion HEROES Act, which the House passed in May, as well as a trimmed-down $2.2 trillion proposal that Pelosi and Schumer offered to White House negotiators in late August.

Pelosi and Schumer on Monday said McConnell’s bill was “headed nowhere” and dismissed it as a “political” gesture.

Rand Paul Blocks Vote on House Measure Condemning Trump’s Syria Withdrawal


Written by Joshua Caplan | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/17/rand-paul-blocks-vote-on-house-measure-condemning-trumps-syria-withdrawal/

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., walks to the Senate as an 11th-hour Republican rescue mission to keep President Donald Trump from a Senate defeat on his signature issue of building barriers along the southwest border seems near collapse, at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, March 13, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), one of Congress’s most prominent non-interventionists, blocked a move on Thursday to bring a House-approved measure formally condemning President Donald Trump’s withdrawal of U.S. troops from northern Syria.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) attempted to gain consent to introduce the measure to the upper chamber’s floor, but because it requires unanimous consent, any senator has the ability to thwart it.

“The most important thing we can do right now is send President Trump a message that Congress, the vast majority of Democrats and Republicans, demand he reverse course,”Schumer said.

Paul argued Schumer was attempting to circumvent the U.S. Constitution by bringing the measure to a vote.

“He should come to the floor and say that we are ready to declare war. We are ready to authorize force, and we are going to stick our troops in the middle of this messy, messy, five-sided civil war where we would be ostensibly opposed to the Turkish government that has made an incursion,” he said.

The House had passed a resolution Wednesday condemning President Trump’s decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria in a 354-60 vote.

The move by Paul comes as U.S. officials said Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has agreed to stop its offensive in Syria, signaling an end to a military campaign that has so far killed dozens of Kurdish fighters and drawn international condemnation.

Vice President Mike Pence announced the agreement for a five-day cease-fire after hours of bilateral meetings in Ankara among U.S. and Turkish officials — which included Erdogan and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The situation will be re-evaluated at the end of the five-day deal.

Erdogan’s forces began Operation Peace Spring a week ago in northeast Syria, to clear border territories of Kurdish fighters so Ankara can send back Syrian refugees who fled to Turkey. The Turkish leader has previously insisted he would accept no cease-fire.

“The United States and Turkey have both mutually committed to a peaceful resolution and future for the safe zone, working on an international basis to ensure that peace and security defines this border region with Syria,” Pence stated.

The UPI contributed to this report. 

Senate Republicans unveil revised healthcare bill


Reported

Senate Republican leaders on Thursday unveiled a revised version of their bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare as they race toward a high-stakes vote next week. The measure includes changes intended to win over additional votes, with leadership making concessions aimed at bringing both conservatives and moderates on board. (READ THE BILL HERE.)

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is facing a tough task in finding enough votes to pass the bill. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) appear to be firmly against the measure, and one other defection would kill the bill. Overall, McConnell appears to have shifted the revised bill more toward the conservatives than the moderates.

Importantly, the bill largely keeps the Medicaid sections the same, meaning that deeper cuts to the program will still begin in 2025, and the funds for ObamaCare’s expansion of Medicaid will still end in 2024. The changes to Medicaid have emerged as a top concern for moderates such as Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that those Medicaid changes in the original bill would result in 15 million fewer people being enrolled in the program and cut spending by $772 billion over 10 years.

Collins said she still plans to vote against a motion to proceed to the bill, adding that the legislation should move through the normal committee process.

“My strong inclination and current intention is to vote no on the motion to proceed,” Collins told reporters after leaving a briefing on the legislation.

“The only way I’d change my mind is if there’s something in the new bill that wasn’t discussed or that I didn’t fully understand or the CBO estimate comes out and says they fixed the Medicaid cuts, which I don’t think that’s going to happen.”

For the conservatives, the measure includes a version of an amendment from Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Mike Lee  (R-Utah) aimed at allowing insurers to offer plans that do not meet all of ObamaCare’s regulations, including those protecting people with pre-existing conditions and mandating that plans cover certain services, such as maternity care and mental healthcare.

Conservatives argue the change would allow healthier people to buy cheaper plans, but moderates and many healthcare experts warn that premiums would spike for the sick people remaining in the more generous insurance plans.

Cruz said he will support the bill so long as the provisions he sees as a priority are not changed in amendment votes on the floor.

“If this is the bill, I will support this bill,” Cruz told reporters after a meeting of GOP senators. “Now, if it’s amended and we lose the protections that lower premiums, my view could well change.”

Senate Republicans had vowed to not change the ObamaCare protections for people from being charged more based on their health in their bill, which is why the debate over the Cruz-Lee amendment has been heated. A Senate GOP aide said Thursday it is possible that the Cruz amendment would not be analyzed by the CBO in time for the vote next week. It is possible the Department of Health and Human Services could provide an alternative analysis.

Lee cautioned that he was not involved in the changes to the proposal, including the amendment, and would have to review the new language before deciding whether to support it. The bill does include new funding, $70 billion over seven years, aimed at easing costs for those sick people remaining in the ObamaCare plans.

However, the new measure does not boost the generosity of the tax credits, as some moderates wanted. It still replaces ObamaCare’s tax credits to help people afford insurance with a smaller, scaled-down tax credit that provides less assistance.

The Kaiser Family Foundation found premium costs would increase an average of 74 percent for the most popular healthcare plan, given the reduced assistance in the GOP bill.

The new measure will leave in place two ObamaCare taxes on the wealthy, in a departure from the initial bill.

That original measure lacked the support to pass, as more moderate members pointed to the CBO’s finding that 22 million fewer people would have insurance over a decade.

Senate Republicans are now awaiting a new score of the revised legislation from the CBO, which could come early next week.

The new bill does include $45 billion to fight opioid addiction, but moderates such as Capito and Portman who hail from states where the problem is rampant have said they also want changes to the Medicaid portion of the legislation.

Portman said his position on the bill had not changed, but he did not give a clear answer on whether he’d back his party on the procedural vote.

“I’m the same position I’ve been in. I’m looking at the language,” he said.

Capito also said she doesn’t know whether she’ll vote to proceed to the bill.

“We have another meeting this afternoon on the Medicaid cuts,” she told reporters. “I need to really look at it, look at the score; I still have concerns.”

Asked if she would vote for the motion to proceed next week, she said, “Wait and see.”

In a change that could appeal to Murkowski, the bill sets aside 1 percent of the stability funds for states with costs that are 75 percent above the national average, which would benefit high-cost states like Alaska.

— This story was updated at 3:15 p.m. Alexander Bolton contributed.

Rice denies Obama administration inappropriately unmasked Trump team


Reported

Former national security adviser Susan Rice on Tuesday categorically denied that the Obama administration inappropriately spied on President Trump or members of his transition team.

“The allegation is that somehow, Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes,” Rice told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. “That’s absolutely false.”

Rice had requested that at least one Trump transition team member be “unmasked,” Bloomberg View reported Monday, leading to claims that the Obama White House had intended to use that intelligence to damage Trump’s transition. While Rice did not deny making any such requests — declining to comment on specific reports — she denied that her actions went outside the scope of her job.

“It was not uncommon, it was necessary at times to make those requests,” she said. “I don’t have a particular recollection of doing that more frequently after the election.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“The notion, which some people are trying to suggest, that by asking for the identity of the American person is the same is leaking it — that’s completely false,” Rice said.

Rice also flatly denied exposing Trump’s own former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, who was forced to resign in February after media reports revealed that he misled Vice President Pence about the contents of his discussions with the Russian ambassador.

“I leaked nothing to nobody,” she said.

Two anonymous U.S. officials told Bloomberg’s Eli Lake that the former Obama national security adviser was the one who requested unmasking Trump administration officials in raw intelligence files since viewed by Reps. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the heads of the House Intel Committee.

Trump immediately exhorted the press to “start talking about the Obama SURVEILLANCE SCANDAL” — but intelligence experts caution that the reports don’t mean that Obama or even Rice surveilled Trump officials.

Normally, when government officials receive intelligence reports, the names of American citizens are redacted to protect their privacy. But officials can request that names — listed as “U.S. Person 1,” for example — be “unmasked” internally in order to give context about the potential value of the intelligence. The national security adviser has the authority to request the unmasking names if there is a compelling national security reason to do so.

“I don’t solicit reports,” Rice said Tuesday. “They’re giving it to me, if I read it, and I think that in order for me to understand, is it significant or not so significant, I need to know who the ‘U.S. Person’ is, I can make that request.”

Nothing in the Bloomberg report, Rice emphasized, backs up President Trump’s claim that the former President Obama “wiretapped” Trump Tower.

“There was no such collection or surveillance on Trump Tower or Trump individuals, it is important to understand, directed by the White House or targeted at Trump individuals,” Rice said.

Republicans have treated the revelation that Rice requested names be unmasked as proof that the Obama White House was inappropriately surveilling the Trump transition team.

“Smoking gun found! Obama pal and noted dissembler Susan Rice said to have been spying on Trump campaign,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) tweeted, citing the Bloomberg report.

Republicans have called for Rice to testify under oath, a request she sidestepped on Tuesday.

“Let’s see what comes,” she told Mitchell, when asked if she would testify on the matter. “I’m not going to sit here and prejudge.

Citing the multiple “very important and very serious” investigations into Russian interference in the U.S. election,  Rice said, “As a formal U.S. official, I would want to be helpful in that process if I could.”

The House and Senate Intelligence Committees, as well as the FBI, are all conducting probes into Russian interference. While the Senate investigation has continued apace, largely behind closed doors, the House probe has been bogged down in partisan fighting over Nunes’ discovery of the documents he says reveal inappropriate unmasking of transition team names. Onlookers have suggested that the exposure of Rice’s actions explains Nunes’ mysterious decision to view the documents at the White House, rather than the House Intelligence Committee’s secure location — because they belonged to the National Security Council. Nunes raced back to the White House the day after viewing the documents there to brief the president on his findings, which were reportedly brought to his attention by White House staffers.

Democrats have accused the White House of “laundering” intelligence through the committee in order to provide justification for the president’s wiretapping claims.

 —Ben Kamisar contributed. Updated at 1:02 p.m.

The Stupid Party: Republicans Will Destroy Both Trump AND Their Party if They do Nothing About Obamacare


waving flag disclaimerAuthored By Warner Todd Huston February 27, 2017

Death of the GOP

Donald J. Trump was swept into office on several key issues, one of which was to put a merciful end to the odious Obamacare. So far the Republican Party has thoroughly failed to move on any of Trump’s issues and in the case of Obamacare in particular, if they do nothing or only tinker around the edges, it will sink both Trump and the Party.complete-message

Trump was made president of the United States on several fronts. He was against illegal aliens infesting the U.S.A. and for building a wall on the southern border, he was in favor of lowering taxes and re-building the economy, he was pro-U.S.A. (i.e. “make America great again”), and he was going to end Obamacare.

On the latter issue, the Republican Party stood fully behind Trump and have for several years now said they, too, rnc-passing-repeal-and-replace-obamacarewant to put an end to one of the worst, most destructive laws ever to ooze out of D.C. But, now, only a month into the era of Trump, now that they are fully in charge and have a president ready to join the effort to quash the socialist take over of one sixth of the nation’s economy, we have already seen they are losing their spine on the matter.

Despite so many who are crowing that the Democrat Party is dead — and, yes, they are in the worst shape they’ve ever been in — and despite those who assume Democrats are now in the permanent wilderness, it is idiotic to assume the Dems are down and out. The fact is, right this minute the GOP has more power than it has had in generations and now is the time to act on Obamacare. We can’t expect the GOP to ever be in a better place to put an end to President Obama’s signature nightmare.

To their credit — and just, at that — many Republicans do understand that ObamaCare needs to be eliminated. Remember, many Republicans were heard claiming that repealing Obamacare would be a “day one” task. And on that subject, Trump did, indeed, make a “day one” move to begin the rollback of Obama’s law. Hours after taking office, Trump signed an Executive Order instructing federal agencies to grant relief to Americans negatively affected by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

But, Executive Orders are not “laws” passed by Congress nor do they have the full force of law. We need to have Congress move to end the law. Yes, Republican leaders in Congress have continually mouthed their desire to end Obamacare in line with Trump’s campaign promises. The media is full of these pronouncements.

For instance, last year, when Speaker of the House Paul Ryan was not able to muster enough votes to override Obama’s veto of a bill designed to begin dismantling Obamacare, Ryan insisted that if a Republican were to win the White House, they would still do it.

“We have now forged a path — that is a clear path — to repealing Obamacare without 60 votes in the Senate. So what we are proving today is if we have a Republican president next year, we will repeal Obamacare. And we will replace Obamacare,” Ryan said at a press conference in February of last year after the vote to override Obama’s veto failed.kick-em-out-of-office

Just before Donald Trump was inaugurated as our 45th president, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell also ripped into Obamacare, said it has failed America, and promised to dump it.

“The Senate is currently working to pass the legislative tools to bring relief to the middle class by repealing this partisan law,” McConnell said of Obamacare in an op-ed January 9.

“We’re acting quickly because ObamaCare is collapsing under its own weight, and things will continue to get worse otherwise. That doesn’t mean the law will end overnight. There will be a stable transition period, and once repeal is passed we will turn to replacement policies that cost less and work better than what we have now,” McConnell promised.

Sadly, there has been much talk but little concrete action.amen

Indeed, there are hints all over the media that the Republican Party is backing down from concrete action as fast as they rush to microphones to claim otherwise. For instance, only about a week before his inauguration, Trump was listening to Kentucky Republican, Senator Rand Paul, who was already cautioning that the party should slow down of the repealing of Obamacre until there was a “replacement” ready for introduction.

Now, before I go on, if you don’t believe that the GOP has several replacement bills already written, then you are a fool. Rand Paul has probably even been part of the drafting of at least one of them. So, there is no reason to wait for some mythical bill to be “written.” There are several to choose from already. Just frikkin pick one and go!amen

Even conservative Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark) has been blathering about waiting until a “replacement” is ready.

“I think when we repeal Obamacare we need to have the solution in place moving forward,” Cotton said on MSNBC show in January. “Again, the solution may be implemented in a deliberate fashion, but I don’t think we can repeal Obamacare and say we’ll get the answer two years from now.”more-blather

And orange-faced former House Speaker John Boehner is even back in the media insisting that the GOP will never repeal Obamacare. Just last week Boehner claimed “it is not going to happen.”

Notice what all this means? It means that Republicans are looking for a reason to tell voters that they aren’t ready to fight to repeal Obamacare.

This “let’s wait and see” attitude is a common refrain in Washington belched out by Republicans who are looking for ways to avoid doing what they promised or were elected to do. They’ve been throwing this line of nonsense around for decades. The GOP said they couldn’t reign in government, lower taxes, or fight Obama because they didn’t have the House of Representatives. Then they got the House. After that they said now wasn’t the time to fight for anything because the GOP didn’t control the Senate. Then they got the Senate. Then they said they couldn’t forge ahead because Obama was president and they needed a Republican in the White House. Then Trump won. Today they have no excuse not to plow ahead… but what are they saying? They are saying now is not the time to fight. Now is the time to cool our jets and slow things down.amen

This never, ever happens when Democrats are in power. When Democrats are in power they launch into their agenda with full steam ahead quite regardless of whether or not they have an electoral “mandate.” Sadly, the Republican Party hasn’t had the spine to lead since it finally lost its post civil war lock on power when the socialist FDR era finally sent them packing.

Like I said, the GOP should assume that it will never have this much power again and at light speed they should sweep the Democrats and their legacy into the wastebasket of history with all haste. Not only is it what the Democrats would do — and have done decade after decade — but it is exactly what Republicans were sent to Washington to do.amen

Right now the Republican Party has a very weak coalition despite the cliff the Democrats fell off of. The GOP is at an uneasy crossroads between its weakling, past self, and its possible new, stronger self led by Trump. But right now it does not have a successful identity and if it slows Trump down and refuses to repeal Obamacare, refuses to lower taxes and improve our economy, won’t vote to build the wall, or won’t work to pass any of Trump’s main agenda, then it will not succeed. It will instead give the undeserving, un-American Democrats an easy path right back to power.

By refusing to support Trump, the GOP will commit suicide.

death-of-the-gop

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com and BigJournalsim.com along with all Breitbart News sites, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, and many, many others. He has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs across the country to discuss his news stories and current events and has appeared on TV networks such as CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and various Chicago-based news programs. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

Ann Coulter Letter: “‘Immigrant’: The New N-Word”


waving flag Ann Coulter 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2015/08/12/immigrant-the-new-n-word/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

'Immigrant': The New N-Word

Americans have got to drop their weird verbal tic of inserting “illegal” into any discussion of immigration. After I pointed out on “Fox News” that the dispute between Sen. Rand Paul and Gov. Chris Christie over spying on “Americans” was entirely a problem of immigration, “Fox Insiders” put these two sentences together: 

“[Coulter] explained that halting illegal immigration would help solve other key issues such as the economy and national security. ‘Don’t make terrorists citizens through immigration, and we’ll have a lot less of a national security problem,’ Coulter said, pointing to the attacks at the Boston Marathon and in Chattanooga.” (Emphasis added.)

Were those guys illegals? Did Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev swim across the Rio Grande to get to Boston? Did Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez hire coyotes to sneak him across the border so he could shoot four Marines and a sailor in Chattanooga?

No. Our government invited them in.

Some of our other beloved legal immigrants include:

– Anwar al-Awlaki, the man whose death in Afghanistan provoked Rand Paul to stage a 13-hour filibuster in opposition to the use of drones against — I quote — “American citizens”;

– the Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan;

– the attempted Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad;

– all those Somali immigrants living in Minnesota, bloc-voting for Al Franken before flying to Syria to fight with ISIS;

– Sirhan Sirhan;

– the 9/11 hijackers;

– the Pakistani terrorist Daood Sayed Gilani, American anchor baby, responsible for four days of bombings in Mumbai in 2008;

– the New York subway bomb plotter, Najibullah Zazi;

– Pakistani terrorist Aafia Siddiqui, who shot a U.S. Army captain in 2010;

— the “local man” arrested this week for trying to organize an army of ISIS fighters in New York and New Jersey, Nader Saadeh — anchor baby “American citizen.”

ALL LEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR CHILDREN! Why were any of them in this country? What are we getting out of this?

It’s not just the Fox website. Wherever I go on this book tour, I find people injecting “illegal” into the discussion, as if they’re being polite, like saying “Jewish” instead of “Jew.” But all these “homegrown,” “American” terrorists aren’t Americans, at all — except as a result of recent government policy.

This week, Sens. Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz have sent a letter to the Obama administration asking how many “non-citizens, naturalized U.S. citizens and natural-born U.S. citizens have been involved in terrorist-related activity since 1993.” National Review’s headline? “Cruz, Sessions: How Many ‘Homegrown’ Terrorists Were Illegal Immigrants?” (The headline was later changed, after complaints.)

It’s a national neurosis! People simply refuse to see what’s right in front of their faces.Illegal Immigration Giant

Admittedly, the media hide the evidence, but did anyone read this 2010 New York Times headline, “2 New Jersey Men in Terrorism Case Go Before a Judge,” and think, Oh my gosh! What is America coming to?

The “New Jersey men” were Mohamed Mahmood Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte. Alessa, born to legal immigrants from Jordan and the Palestinian territories, told his Boy Scout troop, “Osama bin Laden is a hero in my family” and expressed a desire to mutilate homosexuals and subordinate women. (He was the first member of his troop to earn a merit badge in female circumcision.) Alessa’s co-conspirator, Almonte, is a legal immigrant from the Dominican Republic. (Raising suspicions, he doesn’t play baseball.) He could be heard on a wiretap saying that he wanted U.S. troops to come home “in caskets.”

He also attended an anti-Israel rally with a large sign reading “DEATH TO ALL JUICE,” which he posted to his Facebook page — a social media platform created by a juice. (Naturalization officials must have high-fived one another when they got that guy.)

CNN was so relieved to have a “homegrown” terrorist who wasn’t a Muslim, the network abandoned its own rule book and identified Almonte as the child of “Latino immigrants” — amid fulsome descriptions of him as “an all-American kid” and an “all-American altar boy.”

So the good news is: Not all “American” terrorists are Muslim immigrants. Some are Latino immigrants — who typically become radicalized after coming into contact with one of our prized Muslim immigrants.

In addition to “DEATH TO ALL JUICE” Almonte, there was Bryant Neal Vinas, whose parents were legal immigrants from Argentina and Peru. Vinas fought with al-Qaida in Afghanistan and, in 2008, plotted to bomb New York’s Penn Station.

At least he’s not one of those icky illegal immigrants!

I have a word limit, so I’ve limited today’s discussion of legal immigrants to the terrorists. But I note that the big news this week is about an illegal immigrant, Victor Aureliano Martinez Ramirez, who raped, then murdered 64-year old Marilyn Pharis with a hammer at her home in Santa Maria, California. Has anyone noticed that Martinez Ramirez’s co-conspirator in the rape-torture-murder was legal immigrant Jose Fernando Villagomez?

It’s getting to the point where we’re going to need cattle prods and shock collars to break people of the neurotic compulsion to slip “ILLEGAL” in front of the word “immigrant.” The reality of legal immigration cannot make a dent in the elite’s make-believe world, where legal immigrants are only hot Swedish models, Rupert Murdoch and Sergey Brin.cause of death

Instead of Christie and Paul sparring over government policy on search warrants in a post-9/11 world, could we reconsider the government policy of admitting legal immigrants who need to be spied on?

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Nancy Reagan invites 16 candidates to CNN GOP presidential debate


GOP presidential candidates from left, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Scott Walker, Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and John Kasich take the stage for the first Republican presidential debate, Aug. 6, 2015, in Cleveland. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Former first lady Nancy Reagan is inviting 16 Republican candidates to participate in the CNN/Reagan Library presidential debate. Candidates must achieve an average of at least 1 percent of support in three national presidential polls before Sept. 10 to be included in the Sept. 16 debate at the Air Force One Pavilion at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California.

The top 10 contenders who made it into the first GOP debate last week on Fox News — Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, John Kasich — have all been invited, as well as six of the seven candidates who participated in the earlier debate: Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham and George Pataki. Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore has not yet been invited.

The CNN event will be broken into two back-to-back debates with two groups of candidates. CNN’s Jake Tapper will moderate both debate groups.

“Debates are a crucial part of the election process, and I’m thrilled that so many qualified candidates have the opportunity to be heard at the Reagan Presidential Library,” Reagan, the widow of late President Ronald Reagan, said in a press release.

Picture1

(h/t CNN)

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

GOP candidates battle to stake their positions in first 2016 debate


waving flagPublished August 07, 2015; FoxNews.com

From fiery criticism of ObamaCare and the Iran nuclear deal to support for Israel and the rights of the unborn, the top 10 Republican presidential candidates did all they could to define and separate themselves Thursday night during the Fox News debate in Cleveland, Ohio.

The governors on stage, notably John Kasich of Ohio and Scott Walker of Wisconsin, touted their economic records. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz vowed to scrap the Iran deal. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson reminded voters in his closing remarks of the professional background that separates him from the rest: “I’m the only one to separate Siamese twins.”

Throughout the debate, Donald Trump was the unrivaled lightning rod, but the prime-time showdown made clear he’s not the only fighter on the stage – or in the race.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie reclaimed his reputation as a tough-talking executive, blasting his rivals for their positions on domestic surveillance and entitlements. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul traded barbs with several candidates, including Christie.

Meanwhile, one-time front-runner former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush found himself on defense several times and largely avoided tangling with Trump on the Fox News/Facebook stage.

Perhaps the most fiery moment came in an exchange between Christie and Paul. Long-simmering tension between the two exploded when Christie stood by his criticism of the senator for opposing NSA bulk collection of Americans’ phone data.

Paul said he’s “proud of standing for the Bill of Rights,” but Christie called his stance “completely ridiculous” – suggesting he wants to cherry-pick only some data.

“When you’re sitting in the subcommittee just blowing hot air about this, you can say things like that,” Christie said.

Paul fired back: “I know you gave [President Obama] a big hug, and if you want to give him a big hug again, go ahead.” Christie said the hugs he gave were to the families of 9/11 victims, and then accused Paul of playing “politics,” by using videos of floor speeches to raise money.

The exchange was striking, even in a debate that was tense from the start. Though several rivals stood out, Trump did not hold his fire, either – making clear he’s not softening his approach to campaigning as he picks up steam in the polls.

If anything, the debate signaled the primary race is about to get tougher and is still wide open as 17 candidates vie for the lead with months to go until the opening contests.

Trump, the billionaire businessman front-runner, sparred at the outset of the debate with Paul after refusing to pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee if it’s not him and to swear off an independent run.

“I will not make the pledge at this time,” Trump said.

Paul accused him of “hedging his bet on the Clintons.”

“He’s already hedging his bets, because he’s used to buying politicians,” Paul said. (Trump later acknowledged he gave money to the Clintons and demanded Hillary Clinton “be at my wedding” in exchange; he called this a sign of a broken system.)

Trump also stood firm on his vow to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. “If it weren’t for me, you wouldn’t even be talking about illegal immigration,” Trump said, blasting “stupid leaders” in the U.S. harboring illegal immigrants.

Bush said a comprehensive solution is needed, including a “path to earned legal status,” which he said is not “amnesty.”

Moments later, Cruz said some on stage support “amnesty”, while he does not.

A big question going into the debate was whether Bush would aggressively challenge Trump and try to knock him off his perch.

But he would only go so far as to question Trump’s tone, calling his language “divisive.” Hours before the debate, Politico ran a story saying Bush recently told a donor he thinks Trump is a “buffoon” and a “clown.” Asked about that report on stage, Bush denied it.

“It’s not true,” Bush said.

Trump then called Bush a “true gentleman.”

As for his tone, Trump said it’s “medieval times” in the Middle East, and, “We don’t have time for tone.”

But other candidates were able to stand out on the crowded stage. Carson called Hillary Clinton the “epitome” of the progressive movement.

“She counts on the fact that people are uninformed. The Alinsky model, taking advantage of useful idiots,” he said.

Walker also blasted the Iran nuclear deal, as did other candidates: “This is not just bad with Iran, this is bad with ISIS, it is tied together and once and for all we need a leader who is going to do something about it. It is yet another example of the failed foreign policy of the Obama-Clinton doctrine.”

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio landed laughs when, upon being asked about his faith in God, he said: “I think God has blessed us, he’s blessed the Republican Party with some very good candidates. The Democrats can’t even find one.”

Rubio also vowed to repeal and replace ObamaCare, and called the lack of accountability after the Veterans Affairs scandal “outrageous.”

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee vowed to defend entitlements and stood his ground on social issues. He blasted Planned Parenthood and defended his pro-life views, accusing abortion providers of “selling” fetal parts “like they’re parts to a Buick.”

Kasich, like Walker and Bush, tried to keep the focus on his record in his state.

“America is a miracle country and we have to restore the sense that the miracle will apply to you,” he said.

And Cruz vowed, if elected, to prosecute Planned Parenthood, cancel the Iran nuclear deal and nix Obama’s executive orders. “I believe the American people are looking for someone to speak the truth,” he said.

Trump was challenged several times on his conservative views. He previously was pro-choice, but said he’s “evolved” on the issue.

Also, under questioning from moderator Megyn Kelly about past disparaging comments he made about women, Trump interrupted to say, “Only Rosie O’Donnell.” He then said, “Honestly, Megyn, if you don’t like it, I’m sorry.”

The candidates squared off at the second of two kick-off debates, hosted by Fox News and Facebook in conjunction with the Ohio Republican Party.

The seven other Republican hopefuls spent much of the first debate doing their best to hammer home the message that Clinton represents four more years of Obama. In the earlier debate, the candidates largely avoided sparring with each other and instead trained their fire on the Obama years — with promises to roll back ObamaCare and undo the Iran nuclear deal.


 

waving flagHuckabee: ‘The Military Is Not A Social Experiment’ [VIDEO]

Reported by Steve Guest; Media Reporter

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/07/huckabee-the-military-is-not-a-social-experiment-video/#ixzz3iA7i4eqC

During the Fox News GOP debate Thursday, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee stated, “The military is not a social experiment.” Huckabee continued, “The purpose of the military is kill people and break things. It’s not to transform the culture by trying out some ideas that some people think would make us a different country and more diverse. The purpose is to protect America. I’m not sure how paying for transgender surgery for soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines makes our country safer.”

huck


 

Fiorina stands out in Republican ‘happy hour’ debate

Getty Images

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina stood out Thursday in the first GOP primary debate, taking shots at Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton while showing off her foreign policy acumen.

Fiorina, the only woman among the 17 Republican candidates taking part in Thursday’s two debates, shined as the seven candidates who didn’t make the Republican top 10 squared off in a 5 p.m. undercard.

Minutes into what’s being called the happy hour debate, she took a shot at GOP front-runner Donald Trump for his connections to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

“I didn’t get a phone call from Bill Clinton before I jumped in the race. Did any of you get a phone call from Bill Clinton? I didn’t,” Fiorina said, referencing reports that Trump spoke with Bill Clinton ahead of his presidential launch.

“Maybe it’s because I haven’t given money to the foundation or donated to his wife’s Senate campaign,” she added.

Fiorina further highlighted Trump’s policy inconsistencies, an attack that may return in the 9 p.m. debate.

“I would also just say this. Since he has changed his mind on amnesty, on healthcare and on abortion, I would just ask, what are the principles by which he will govern?” Fiorina asked.

Fiorina outlined an ambitious agenda for her first days in office if she were to become president. She would call Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Iranian supreme leader to express displeasure with the agreement, she said, then on the second day, she’d convene a summit at Camp David with Arab allies.

Fiorina, who has often been discussed as a possible vice presidential candidate for her party, closed her performance by taking a shot at Hillary Clinton, the Democratic front-runner for that party’s presidential nomination.

She criticized Clinton for dodging questions on topics including the 2012 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans dead.

“We need a nominee who is going to throw every punch, not pull punches,” Fiorina said.

Google reported that Fiorina was the most searched candidate during the early debate, and she also received the most Twitter chatter.

Pundits also gave her good reviews, with Washington Post columnist George Will saying she “stood out with precision and fluency,” and Fox News host Chris Wallace also praising her.

Fox News pundit Charles Krauthammer said she won the debate “going away.”

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry also maintained a steady performance throughout the debate, using his time on stage to tout his state’s economic performance and calling for the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by President Obama to be torn up.

It was a much stronger performance for Perry than four years ago, when his first presidential campaign quickly came crashing down after he was heard saying “oops,” when he forgot that he wanted to abolish the Department of Education in response to a debate question.

But Perry also seemed to boost Fiorina, by at one point suggesting she should have negotiated the Iran deal on behalf of the U.S. instead of Secretary of State John Kerry.

“I would whole lot rather have Carly Fiorina over there doing our negotiation than John Kerry. Maybe we would have gotten a deal where we didn’t give everything away,” Perry said.

Fiorina has not been shy about going after Clinton, whose allies quickly fired back on Thursday.

“Carly Fiorina sure seemed to like Hillary Clinton back when she spoke before the Clinton Global Initiative,” Correct the Record spokeswoman Mary Jennings said.

Correct the Record is a rapid-response organization allied with Clinton.

“In reality, Fiorina is just another cookie-cutter, out-of-touch far-right Republican — holding the same out-of-date positions as all the rest on stage, and willing to take shots at the positive, philanthropic work of others.”

The seven candidates for the initial debate performed before a mostly empty auditorium; tickets were not sold for the undercard to the 9 p.m. debate.

The Fox News hosts moderating the debate, Martha MacCallum and Bill Hemmer, essentially asked each candidate at the beginning why anyone should take them seriously.

MacCallum and Hemmer asked Perry why he’s ready to lead the country now after his failed 2012 bid; whether Fiorina comparing herself to Margaret Thatcher is “a stretch;” if former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum’s moment had “passed;” and why Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal should be president given his low popularity in his home state.

The seven underdogs spared each other from criticism, but aimed fire at two Republicans who will be on the prime-time stage: Trump and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Under questioning from the moderators, Jindal criticized Kasich for expanding Medicaid in Ohio under ObamaCare.

“I don’t think anybody should expand Medicaid,” said Jindal, who rejected the Medicaid expansion in his state. “I think it was a mistake to expand Medicaid everywhere, in Ohio and across the country.”

Kasich stands out among the Republican presidential candidates for accepting the expansion. Under ObamaCare, states have the choice of expanding eligibility for Medicaid, the government health insurance program for the poor, up to 138 percent of the poverty level.Complete Message

Former New York Gov. George Pataki sided with Jindal.

“I don’t think you expand entitlements when so many people are dependent on government,” he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who appeared loose and open in a New Hampshire forum earlier this week, seemed tense at the start of Thursday’s debate and rambled on an answer about Clinton’s comment that she and her husband were “dead broke” when they left the White House.

But near the end of the debate, Graham shared a compelling story of depending on Social Security after his parents died.

“Today I’m 60. I’m not married, I don’t have any kids. I would give up some Social Security to save the system that Americans are going to depend on now and in the future,” Graham said.

The Democratic National Committee panned the debate as a repeat of GOP candidates who ran for president four years ago.

“They are outdated, out of touch and out of line, but not out of company. If you missed the pre-show, these ideas will be on full display again in a few hours,” DNC spokeswoman Holly Shulman said in a statement.

Jesse Byrnes and Peter Sullivan contributed.

This story was updated at 7:46 p.m. 

Tea Party Patriots to Rally Nationwide Wednesday to Demand Congress End Its Obamacare Exemption


LOGO Don't tread on me

Wednesday at Noon, Tea Party voters and conservatives across the country will converge upon their Senators’ and Representatives’ local offices to demand that they abide by the laws they force on the American people – specifically the “Affordable Care Act” known as ObamaCare. It’s unbelievable that members of Congress are getting away with the scam of exempting themselves from this onerous and destructive law they’re foisted on American Citizens. Rarely do you have an issue which so many Americans from all stripes agree on:

Rising insurance premiums, folks losing their coverage, their doctors – IRS penalties and a miserable effect on production and employment has most of the country strongly against this none-too-veiled Federal power grab.

doctor-obamacare

ObamaCare stinks and Congress itself should get a whiff of it!

Congress originally was compelled to live under the ACA, but then through some parlor tricks, a little smoke and mirrors and a whole lotta hutspa – they exempted themselves from that obligation. Amazing! Rather than lose their cushy and taxpayer funded health care – as was originally written into law, Congress has shockingly re-classified itself as a “small business” – and therefore not subject to the law they themselves passed  – in order retain their porky and generous tax-payer funded health care subsidy.  No one else in the country receives this kind of special treatment.

President Obama hoped no one would notice, I guess, when he authorized (by executive fiat) the Office of Budget and management to treat Congressional offices on the hill as if they were a small business. What a scam!! That allowed them to join the D.C. small business exchange, which allows for taxpayer-funded subsidies to staffers ($5000 to individuals and $11,000 for families). These payments constitute a de facto waiver from Obamacare for Congress, their staffs and families.

This deceitful behavior must change and Tea Party Patriots are answering the call to demand Congress reverse the sneaky and shady change in the rules for themselves. Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) and Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) have proposed legislation in both the Senate and the House that would force Congress to live under the law as it was originally written.

Jenny Beth Martin, CEO and co-founder of Tea Party Patriots, organizers of the nationwide rally said; “If Obamacare is a law good enough for the American people, it ought to be good enough for the lawmakers and their staffers. Tea Party Patriots have remained steadfastly opposed to Obamacare since its inception in 2010, yet Congress went ahead and passed the bill into law without even taking the time to read it or understand the implications.  Now, more than five years later, Americans are suffering from the law’s provisions.  It’s only fair that Congress be forced to live under the same rules they set for the rest of us.”

National Review reported in May, 5 other Senators who claim to oppose Obamacare and the illegal Congressional exemption, did a complete flip-flop on the issue: Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Enzi (R-WY), James Risch (R-ID), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), and Deb Fischer (R-NE). We can only imagine the choice words Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) used to help them change their minds.

These Republicans need a kick in the pants and I say let’s give it to them today! From Tea Party Patriots:

End Obamacare Exemption

Join us at noon on Wednesday, June 17th
at one of your Senators’ or Representative’s local offices to demand that they abide by the laws that they force on the rest of us.

In Obamacare, it clearly states that Members of Congress and their staffs must abide by the law. However, they are ignoring the law in order to avoid its harmful effects which allows them to continue receiving their generous tax-payer funded subsidy. Which NO ONE else in the country enjoys!

Help us petition our elected officials to stop breaking the law. It’s time we put an end to the privileged, ruling class so that they too can feel the harms of Obamacare. Then we may be able to finally repeal this awful law!

Want to know where your local Congressperson or Senator has their offices? There’s an interactive map HERE:

freedom combo 2

Rand Paul wants values ‘revival’


Obamacare

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/219007-paul-weds-libertarianism-faith-in-values-voters-speech

By Cameron Joseph

September 26, 2014, 12:07 pm

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) sought to merge his libertarian-leaning philosophy with social conservative beliefs on Friday, telling the religious crowd at If my peoplethe Values Voters summit that the two go hand-in-hand.

“Where there is liberty there is always plenty of space for God,” Paul concluded at the end of a speech at times punchy and professorial that touched on abortion, foreign policy and religious liberty.

The likely 2016 presidential candidate sought to convince a socially conservative crowd wary of libertarians that he’s one of them, calling for a “revival” of cultural values.

What we need is something more than laws. We need something that civilizes a nation, and that is virtue,” he said. “What America really needs is a revival.”

The senator used that philosophy to defend his opposition to an intervention-first foreign policy mentality.

“Our foreign policy has too often accepted war instead of peace and intervention instead of strength, leading to unintended consequences,” he said before arguing against arming Syrian rebels, a decision backed by more interventionist lawmakers in both parties.

“One group of these so-called moderate rebels has stated publicly that when they’re done with [President Bashar] Assad, next they’re coming for Israel,” he said.

“You and I must stand with Christians in the Middle East … but that does not necessarily mean war and that certainly doesn’t mean arming both sides in every conflict,” he said to laughs from the crowd.

He also used the crowd’s fury at oppression of Christians abroad, saying that until Asia Bibi, a Christian sitting in prison in Pakistan, “is freed, Christian PersecutionPakistan should not receive a penny of U.S. aid.”

Paul also tackled abortion, a tricky issue for the senator following seemingly ambivalent comments earlier this year about Roe v. Wade.

“The debate isn’t really about whether government has a role in protecting life. The debate really hinges on when life begins,” the ophthalmologist told the crowd. “Don’t tell me that 5- and 6-pound babies have no rights simply because they’re not yet born.”

Speaking shortly after fellow Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who stalked the stage like a televangelist to huge cheers from the crowd, Paul stayed steady at the podium, approaching the speech more like a professor.

Imperial President ObamaBut he did take some opportunities to throw red meat to the crowd, saying President Obama “acts like he’s a king” and calling his announcements of executive orders “the exclamations of an autocrat.” 

rand

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article collective closing

 

 

 

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: