Shredding the Constitution: from suspending elections, less democracy to Super Committee's

I know that there are some people out there today that would just rather bury their heads in the sand than acknowledge the signs of people on the Left wanting to take our Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights and shred it into little tiny pieces.  It's also frustrating that the media seems to be one of the ones whose head is stuck in the ground.  Well let me re-phrase.  Either the media is actively ignoring the stories about our sacred documents being denigrated or it is complicit and is helping accomplish it's very destruction.

Take for example the recent article by Peter Orszag, former director for the Obama administration for the Office of Management and Budget, entitled, "Too Much of a Good Thing" from The New Republic magazine.  In the article, Orszag decries the partisan bickering going on in Congress and blames it for nothing getting done at a government level.  His primary example is the recent debt-limit debate that had Congress and the President at odds.

What's his solution to the situation?  In his words, we need to "minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions.  In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic."

Well, you're right about one thing Mr. Orszag, it DOES sound radical.  Let me clarify your desire a little more for people.  What you would really like to have happen is to take away the Constitutions ability for "Checks and Balances" that prevent crazy ideas and policies from both the Left and the Right from being passed.  Mr. Orszag,  there is a reason the Constitution was written the way it was and this issue is expressed clearly in what is known as the Separation of Powers.  If you were familiar AT ALL with the Constitution you would realize that what you are so eager to get rid of is EXACTLY why we need it.

Unfortunately for all of us, and I'm sure Mr. Orszag is pleased with this, we are already bypassing the Separation of Powers with the new 12 member Congressional "Super Committee" made up of 6 Republicans and 6 Democrats.  Why is the "Super Committee" important?  Here are a few things that it has the ability to do:

1. Bills created by the committee are guaranteed an up or down vote.
2. When the bills reach the floor they cannot be modified with amendments by House or Senate members.
3. Bills created by the committee cannot be filibustered.

In other words, this committee gives 12 people the power of the entire Congress with no opportunity for dissent or change and whatever they come up with will be greased  straight through to the President.  So much for Separation of Powers.  This "Super Committee" could essentially eliminate the power of Congress altogether.

But if none of that works, there is always the idea by N.C. Governor Bev Perdue.  (The Blaze)She stated yesterday that, "I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won't hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover.  I really hope that someone can agree with me on that," she said, "You want people who don't worry about the next election."

Gee Bev, that sounds like a great idea.  After all, if we can't bypass the Constitution and show these horrible policies down the American peoples throats any other way, maybe we can just suspend the elections so that we can make sure we stay in power....  I think the last time I heard about this type of action was when I was studying Communist Russia or Nazi Germany.  After all, we all know that the people at TOO STUPID to be able to elect a representative form of government that will push forward our hard leftist plans.

Sorry Bev.  On that you are wrong.  2012 is going to be the year where the sane people will take back the asylum and put you all back in your padded cells.  It's time to stop this craziness.  It's time to re-institute common sense back into our government.  Folks, it's time to take back our Constitution and get back to it's basic principals.  2012.

Racial Politics and the . . . Right? I Don't Think So.

When you don't have anything left to argue and don't have a leg to stand on . . . just pull the race card!

It seems that every day I keep hearing how people on the Right and Republicans are racists.  Just ignore the fact that there is never any evidence that this racism is occurring.  Also, ignore the fact that generally the only time you EVER hear anything about race in the media is when someone on the Left is making an accusation about how racist the Republican Right is.

Take for example the comments of Congressional Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX).  On one hand she makes comments about how the media on the Right and Conservative Bloggers (like myself) should "shut up" and "stop playing racial politics" while on the other hand moments later says that President Obama's "buy American" comment should be "buy African-American" and that if Obama's Jobs Bill passed that any contractors who "do not look like" her need to make sure that if they get federal money their employees "better be reflective of those suffering double-digit unemployment". (from The Blaze)

To me, not only does this sound like the words of a hypocrite and herself a racist, but it also sounded like a threat.  Besides the fact that no one, not even President Obama, think that his Jobs Bill is going to pass.  It has become patently obvious to all of us that he has only put this on the table in order to be shot down by a Republican House so that later, when the economy flushes further down the toilet, and he is in the heat of campaigning, he can bring it up again and blame Republicans for not passing it.  I'm sure the accusation of Republican racism will come into play then also . . . but I digress . . .

Then there are the accusations from my neck of the woods by Maxine Waters (D-CA) on 9/22/11 stating that Republicans "eat his food and drink his beer and leave, then they go and try to kill him [on Capitol Hill]".  What happened to stopping the negative rhetoric Maxine? (from The Blaze)

And on the flip side of the racist rhetoric you have the main stream media complicit in covering up acts of overt racism on the Left.  Take for instance the CBC event where Andre Carson (D-IN) stated that the Tea Party wanted to see him "hanging on a tree".  (the Blaze).  Not only were these comments despicable but it has also come to light that News Anchor Tamron Hall from the MSNBC program "NewsNation" was the moderator of this CBC event.  Why then wasn't this story broken and reported by MSNBC instead of The Blaze? (The Blaze)  Isn't it newsworthy to a reporter that a Congressman is accusing a huge organization like the Tea Party of wanting to lynch him?  It sounds newsworthy to me . . . but then again, I am a Tea Party supporter and member.

These things don't surprise me though.  In fact, they encourage me and are a constant reminder that we are winning the war of ideas, ideals, values and morals.  You see, it is only when you realize that you can't win the war of ideas that you resort to name calling.  Be encouraged.  Once the Left starts yelling "Racist! Racist! Racist!" you know you've won.  So the next time you are having one of those heated conversations with your favorite lefty friend and all they have in response to your facts and reasoning is that you are "uncaring" and you hear "racist" bigot" "homophobes", just relax and smile.

Raising Cain

It’s 2012.  The drive for the Presidency has begun and once again we are looking at a host of candidates that we are trying to figure out.  Who are the candidates that are the straight shooters?  Who are the career politicians looking to climb the next rung of the ladder?  Who is playing politics and is willing to say anything in order to be elected?  Who has experience at . . . running anything!?

Here is how I see the current slate of candidates and potential candidates.

Michele Bachman:  Michelle was one of my favorites from early on.  She’s a Tea Party favorite and shares the same values held by the Tea Party; smaller government, a reduction in taxes and a revamping of the Tax Code and in general she supports the government getting out of the way of business and the lives of the American people.  Here is where I fall away from her, and this comes from her recent debate appearances.  First off, she doesn’t seem to have a solid plan on what she would do as President.  I agree with the generalities but tell me what you are going to do.  Also, and figuring more prominently in my decision, she is coming across as someone who is willing to do or say anything in order to claw her way into the presidency.  This has been especially apparent in her attacks on Rick Perry, and although her points regarding Perry have been valid, the way she has gone about attacking him have really turned me off.

Rick Perry:  There are things that I like about Perry and things that I don’t.  I like his track record on Texas with regards to the economy but really question his stance on illegal immigration, the border, education for illegals and his HPV vaccine decision and the question that has been brought up of “crony capitalism”.  Also, Perry gives me a “Big Government” vibe.  I think we really need to reverse the big government course in this country.  These issues concern me.

Newt Gingrich:  I like Newt.  He is definitely one of the most intelligent candidates running.  He is witty and some of his responses during the debates have really put the moderators in their place.  I like how he doesn’t fall into the moderators traps and doesn’t play the game.  He’s got experience in the political arena and he’s got a proven track record during the Clinton administration of getting the job done and making changes.  I think he needs to be clearer on whether he is a big government guy or wants to shrink the size of government.  I think he is a “common sense” candidate and is willing to do what is necessary to get our economy and this country moving again.  If I have a major problem with him it’s that he is on the environmental wacko side of the man made Global Warming issue.  Standing side by side with Nancy Pelosi on Global Warming (or ANYTHING for that matter) really puts him in the “questionable”  category for me.

Jon Huntsman:  When I think of Jon Huntsman I think wishy washy.  Although his economic ideals seem to be in line with what America needs, his environmental policy and ideology are right out there with Al Gore and the rest of the environmentalist wacko’s.  This bodes badly for ANY kind of regulatory changes making it easier for our own energy independence which in turn bodes badly for our economy.  I can’t see him making changes with the EPA to make it easier for businesses and I don’t see any easing of regulatory reform under him.  Definitely a MODERATE Republican along the lines of McCain and we don’t need another McCain as a nominee.

Gary Johnson:  RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO.  Pro-choice, Pro-immigration, weak foreign policy.  Without ANY regard for what we have going on in the Middle East, he wants to bring home all of our troops from overseas.  This is definitely NOT the way to go.

Ron Paul:  I love the entertainment value of Ron Paul and agree with him about 75% of the time.  He’s great on his tax policy and his views on the Federal Reserve but his foreign policy is SO far out there and SO crazy that he is absolutely un-electable as a serious candidate.  When he started quoting Osama Bin Laden during the recent debate and implied that our foreign policy is what brought about acts of terrorism and the current hatred towards the United States throw him right into the wacko conspiracy theory category.

Mitt Romney:  I like Mitt but he comes across as a Big Government politician.  I like his business experience but the whole RomneyCare thing has me worried.  His also seems like someone willing to say anything in order to be elected.  In addition, he has switched positions on too many things for me.  Now, would he be a better President that Obama?  Hell yes!  And if he is the candidate for the Republican Party I will support him 100%.  As for the whole Mormon thing?  Get over it people.  It’s not an issue and shouldn’t be an issue.

Rick Santorum:  I REALLY like him on all of his policies and with regards to his Conservative values and beliefs I had nothing bad to say about him.  What I don’t like about him is this:  He comes across as negative in how he speaks and very negative towards the other candidates.  When he’s not being negative about the other candidates he is too self centered about himself.  He turns debate questions around about how he is “the only electable person here” and how he “was consistently elected in primarily democratic Pennsylvania.  Stop talking about yourself Rick and stop bashing the other candidates.  Instead, start talking about “specific” things that you would do as President to start changing things around.  Right now I think he would be a GREAT Vice Presidential pick, but I’m not convinced he’s the nominee for the Presidency.

Herman Cain:  Out of ALL the potential candidates, Herman Cain is by far my favorite.  He’s a straight shooter and I know EXACTLY what his positions are on every topic.  He doesn’t pull any punches and he tells it the way he sees it.  He’s NOT a politician. 

• He’s for STRONG national security and a limited government and that we must stand strong with our allies throughout the world and never be fooled by our enemies.  He understands the threat of terrorism and the need for a strong stance and military might.  In terms of war, if you are going to fight a war, you fight to WIN the war and not for political reasons.  
• He believes that government spending is out of control and understands that major cuts need to be made in entitlement programs and government bureaucracy.  There are no sacred cows as far as spending cuts go for him.  
• On illegal immigration he is for closing our borders, enforcing our current laws and promoting an “existing” path to citizenship.  
• On energy, he is for less regulation and taking advantage of our own natural resources in order to become energy independent.  He is against subsidies for agricultural products including corn for ethanol production and believes in the power of the free market.  He is also for new forms of energy production but believes that private industry should take the reins and that we should be thinking about its long term (as opposed to immediate) energy benefits.  
• On the economy he believes in less legislation, less regulation, lower taxes and business friendly policies.  He is a huge proponent of Tax reform and is the ONLY candidate who has proposed a solution through his 9-9-9 tax reform plan, which is a three part flat tax plan with a 9% corporate tax, a 9% income tax and a 9% consumption tax.  Not only would this reduce the countries tax burden but it would make the United States the country with the lowest tax rates on corporations which would encourage foreign companies to do business in the U.S.  It would also repatriate businesses that have left the country by suspending their tax burden.  
• On healthcare, he would REPEAL OBAMACARE  and institute patient centered free market reforms.  Institute Tort reforms for frivolous lawsuits and loosen restrictions on HSA’s.  
• He is against the entitlement mentality and urges reform on entitlement programs.  
• In education he is for school vouchers and decentralizing education from the federal government.

It's unfortunate that I don't see Herman Cain being treated as a serious candidate by the media.  To me he is the most viable candidate that embodies all of the values that I have as a Conservative.  He's not a politician.  He's a business man that I feel confident would turn our economy around and balance our fiasco of a federal budget.


It's time to take a closer look at Herman Cain as a serious candidate, leader and Presidential contender and I think it's time to "Raise a Little Cain!!"