House Speaker John Boehner purges conservatives from powerful committees

1 Comment

You know I think this is the last straw….John Boehner must go!!!

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Tuesday that she thinks House Speaker John Boehner’s purge of conservatives from powerful committees is a sign the GOP establishment is out of touch with America.

“We send good conservatives to D.C. to fulfill the promises they made to the electorate, and yet when they stay true to their word the permanent political class in their own party punishes them,” Palin said in a Facebook comment. “This won’t be forgotten come 2014. Right now the GOP establishment is more concerned about the opinion of the media and the Georgetown cocktail circuit than they are ‘we the people’ who hired them. For all this new talk of how the GOP needs a ‘populist movement,’ it would do them good to remember they already have one; it’s called the Tea Party movement, and it won for them the majority they now enjoy in the House.”

 

On Monday, Boehner pulled conservative GOP Reps. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas and Justin Amash of Michigan from the House Budget Committee. The Speaker also removed conservative Republican Reps. David Schweikert of Arizona and Walter Jones of North Carolina from the House Financial Services Committee.

The members believe they were pulled from those committee assignments – from which they would be able to influence fiscal policy – because they have solid conservative voting records.

Boehner spokesman Kevin Smith scoffed at the concerns Monday night in a statement to Breitbart News, saying: “The Steering Committee makes decisions based on a range of factors.”

But in a story on the matter, Roll Call quoted an anonymous GOP leadership aide who said the moves were indeed retaliation for member not being in lockstep with Boehner. “You want good things in Congress and to have a good career? Better play along nicely,” the aide said.

Read more

Advertisements

David Gergen: Democrats would rather humiliate GOP than solve fiscal cliff

Comments Off on David Gergen: Democrats would rather humiliate GOP than solve fiscal cliff

Via Eliana Johnson at NRO, David Gergen comes to the same conclusion that most of us did after the election — that Barack Obama and the Democrats aren’t really interested in solving the massive number of problems in the fiscal cliff coming in less than four weeks.  Their priority is to inflict as much damage on House Republicans as possible, and if that inflicts damage on America, well, you gotta break a few eggs to make omelettes, too.

But since this election, there’s been — I think it’s the Democrats are the ones who are really trying to rub it in and almost humiliate the Republicans, and that’s not going to get to a bargain.  Again, I think it has to be win-win. … You hear among some Democrats right now, and it’s disturbing, that maybe we ought to just take it over the cliff, that’ll, we’ll score political points against the Republicans, that will force their hands in the new year.  That is a very, very, dangerous risk.

Is it?  Only if the media reports on it.  So far, though, the media seems more focused on Republicans and their supposed intransigence, even though John Boehner’s opening offer put the supposed “grand bargain” of August 2011 back on the table — and Obama demanded twice as much revenue with half the cuts in some gauzy point in the future.  At least for now, the media is making brinksmanship a relatively risk-free strategy while Obama campaigns rather than negotiates in good faith.

Hotair

Fiscal Cliff Debate Is About Size Of Government, Not Taxing ‘The Rich’

Comments Off on Fiscal Cliff Debate Is About Size Of Government, Not Taxing ‘The Rich’

Amid all the political and media hoopla about the “fiscal cliff” crisis, a few facts are worth noting.

First, despite all the melodrama about raising taxes on “the rich,” even if that is done it will scarcely make a dent in the government’s financial problems.

Raising the tax rates on everybody in the top 2% will not get enough additional tax revenue to run the government for 10 days. And what will the government do to pay for the other 355 days in the year?

All the political angst and moral melodrama about getting “the rich” to pay “their fair share” is part of a big charade. This is not about economics, it is about politics.

Taxing “the rich” will produce a drop in the bucket when compared with the staggering and unprecedented deficits of the Obama administration.

No previous administration in the entire history of the nation ever finished the year with a trillion-dollar deficit. The Obama administration has done so every single year. Yet political and media discussions of the financial crisis have been focused overwhelmingly on how to get more tax revenue to pay for past and future spending.

The very catchwords and phrases used by the Obama administration betray how phony this all is. For example, “We are just asking the rich to pay a little more.” This is an insult to our intelligence. The government doesn’t “ask” anybody to pay anything. It orders you to pay the taxes it imposes and you can go to prison if you don’t.

Then there are all the fancy substitute words for plain old spending — words like “stimulus” or “investing in the industries of the future.”

The theory about “stimulus” is that government spending will stimulate private businesses and financial institutions to put more of their money into the economy, speeding up the recovery. But the fact that you call something a “stimulus” does not make it a stimulus.

Americans Arming Themselves With Coming Ban On Guns

Comments Off on Americans Arming Themselves With Coming Ban On Guns

In 1833, thirty-four year member of the Supreme Court Joseph Story wrote: “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic.”

That “palladium of liberties” has never been exercised more frequently than during the four years Barack Hussein Obama has been in the White House. According to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), “…the top 10 record gun sales days have occurred since Barack Obama’s election in 2008, and gun ownership has skyrocketed over the last four years.”

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) reports that in 1944 there were approximately 192 million firearms owned by 44 million Americans. By the end of 1996, the ATF reports that “…approximately 242 million firearms were available for sale to or were possessed by civilians in the United States.”  In 2007, that number had increased to 294 million. Clearly there are now well over 300 million firearms in the hands of  American citizens, all thanks to concern that the far-left Administration is a threat to 2nd Amendment and other rights of the American people.

A week ago, Mark Alexander of The Patriot Post was asked “…if Patriots have an obligation to arm themselves — to be gun owners, and be proficient at the use of arms.” He responds by saying it is “self-evident” that Liberty is an “unalienable right,” innately assured as “endowed by our creator…” That is, “it is not awarded by men or government; it is the birthright of all people.”

Throughout history, countless individuals have assaulted those rights “…using the power of government to arbitrarily revoke Liberty and invoke tyranny…” In defense of that liberty, James Madison wrote in the Federalist # 46, that “the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.”

Barack Obama has proven himself a would-be dictator in virtually every executive order and end-run around the authority of the Congress. But his ambition for unlimited presidential power can only be fully realized upon the disarming of the American public. Understanding this, millions of Americans have armed themselves in anticipation of an eventual, outright ban on gun ownership.

But as Americans, are we compelled to do more than just own firearms? Are we also obligated, as a result of our unique heritage, to use those weapons against any force which threatens the annihilation of our rights and liberty?

Two hundred and forty years ago, approximately one third of colonists took up arms against the British, one third joined the Brits against the revolution and the rest remained neutral. After two centuries of American history and the death of countless men in battle for the preservation of the rights and liberty earned in the Revolution, the time for neutrality or for joining those who would destroy that liberty is over.

Just as millions of arms have been collected in anticipation of an Obama led assault on our God-given rights, it is incumbent upon Americans to use those arms when the time comes. Those who refuse to do so will no longer be Americans, they will be the enemy.

Western Journalism