Category: Politics

Hey, Bloomie. C’mon Down to Mississippi. I’ll Buy You a Barbeque Sammich and a Sweet Tea Big Gulp.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

bloombergobamaAs I have related before, I live in DeSoto County, in the Northwest corner of Mississippi. I moved across the state line from Memphis, back in 1997, after the Mayor of Memphis told me that hard-working taxpayers, like myself, were no longer wanted there. But I digress…

My state made me very proud yesterday, as it took a stand for freedom.

NationalReview.com reports

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s soda ban may have been struck down yesterday, but lawmakers in Mississippi have taken action to prevent similar initiatives in their state by passing what is being called the “Anti-Bloomberg Bill.” The bill would prevent Mississippi counties, cities, and towns from passing laws that require restaurants to post calorie counts, limit portion sizes, and bar toys from kids’ meals. Republican Governor Phil Bryant is expected to sign the bill later this month, according to National Public Radio.

The bill has attracted bipartisan support, with members of both parties rallying behind the cause. It sailed through Mississippi’s state Senate by a 50 to 1 margin earlier this month. “If you want 1,000 sodas, you can still do that,” said the Democratic congressman who introduced the bill.

The bill has its detractors, though. Critics cite the fact that Mississippi is ranked among the unhealthiest in the country and boasts the nation’s highest obesity rate.

The bill, SENATE BILL NO. 2687, begins

1 AN ACT TO RESERVE TO THE LEGISLATURE ANY REGULATION OF

2 CONSUMER INCENTIVE ITEMS AND NUTRITION LABELING FOR FOOD THAT IS A

3 MENU ITEM IN RESTAURANTS, FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS AND VENDING

4 MACHINES; TO SPECIFY THAT THE ACT WOULD NOT AFFECT THE FEDERAL

5 REGULATION OF NUTRITION LABELING UNDER EXISTING FEDERAL LAW; AND

6 FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

Meanwhile, up in The Big Apple, where Liberalism is out of control, Judge Martin A. Tingling told Nanny Mayor Bloomberg that his decree banning Big Gulps was way out of line.

As the New York Times reports,

In his ruling, Justice Tingling concurred with much of the beverage industry’s legal arguments. He said the Board of Health, which is appointed by the mayor, had overreached in approving the plan, and wrote that the City Council was the only legislative body with the power to approve such a far-reaching initiative.

The administration, Justice Tingling wrote, had interpreted the board’s powers broadly enough to “create an administrative Leviathan,” capable of enacting any rules and “limited only by its own imagination.”

The judge also criticized the rules themselves, noting they would apply only to certain sugared drinks — dairy-based beverages like milkshakes, for instance, would be exempt — and be enforced only in certain establishments, like restaurants and delis, but not others, like convenience stores and bodegas. The rules, the judge wrote, would create “uneven enforcement, even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole.”

…On Monday, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association said that the court decision “provides a sigh of relief.”

“With this ruling behind us, we look forward to collaborating with city leaders on solutions that will have a meaningful and lasting impact on the people of New York City,” the spokesman, Christopher Gindlesperger, said.

It is unclear if the appeal of the case will be resolved before Mr. Bloomberg leaves office at the end of this year. His would-be successors are mixed in their views of the measure and may not share his zeal on the issue.

The mayor appears increasingly preoccupied with his legacy, and recently hired two public relations advisers — a former Times editor, Arthur Pincus, and a former television reporter, Andrew Kirtzman — to shape the public perception of the Bloomberg era.

Asked on Monday if he was concerned that a drawn-out legal battle over the soda limits could spill into the administration of a successor who does not favor them, Mr. Bloomberg, sounding a bit irked, muttered, “All of our time is running out,” before saying, “I don’t know who is going to be my successor.”

The mayor added: “People are dying every day. This is not a joke. This is about real lives.”

Speaking of “real lives”, I am certain that the majority of New Yorkers are glad that Rudy was their mayor on September 11, 2001, and this idiot, Bloomie, was not. While Rudy showed decsive, prudent leadership in a time of crisis, this babbling fool would have been running around like a chicken with his head cut off, trying to apologize to the murderous Muslims, for putting up the Twin Towers, which obviously offended them.

Thomas Jefferson wrote

Our greatest happiness does not depend on the condition of life in which chance has placed us, but is always the result of a good conscience, good health, occupation, and freedom in all just pursuits. 

First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt wrote

Freedom makes a huge requirement of every human being. With freedom comes responsibility. For the person who is unwilling to grow up, the person who does not want to carry is own weight, this is a frightening prospect.

All I heard from the Liberal Main Stream Media yesterday, when the news about my state’s Anti-Bloomberg Bill was announced, was how Mississippi was “the fattest state in the Union”. Nothing was said about how Bloomberg’s ludicrous ban was a out-of-bounds restriction on New Yorkers’ freedom as Americans.

As we are experiencing during the beginning of the second term of The Lightbringer, with his attacks on our right to bare arms and our country’s Judeo-Christian belief system, upon which our Founding Documents were written, and his fellow Liberals, like his wife, Michelle’s and Mayor Bloomberg’s, desire to control what we eat and feed our children, and even our pets, Mrs. Roosevelt is being proven to have been exactly right.

The Personal Freedom that Americans have enjoyed since the birth of our nation is as abhorrent to Liberals as a crucifix is to a vampire.

Until He Comes,

KJ

“Sequester” Must Mean “Party” in Kenyan

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

marie-antoinette-obamaSo, here we are , in the middle of a sequester, which is predicted to last a decade. Obama has cut services to our Armed Forces, and other necessary government functions, in a macabre effort to make his own suggestion, sequestration, as painful to average Americans as possible, in order to (in his egocentric mind) garner popularity for his Tax and Spend Economic Policies.

TheHill.com reports that

President Obama warned Saturday that automatic spending cuts known as the sequester threaten to stifle the surge in job growth the nation saw in February.

Switching from the adversarial tone he has used to pressure Republican leaders in recent weeks, the president appealed to what he called the vision both parties share for the country.

“As Democrats and Republicans, we may disagree on the best way to achieve our goals, but I’m confident we can agree on what those goals should be,” Obama said in his weekly address.

He cited a vibrant middle class, an education system that gives more workers the skills to compete in the job market, a reformed immigration system and “safer streets for our children,” a veiled reference to gun-violence reforms.

Obama acknowledged that progress on these issues “won’t be easy,” but sounded an optimistic tone.

“I still believe that compromise is possible. I still believe we can come together to do big things. And I know there are leaders on the other side who share that belief,” he said.

The president touted the February jobs report from the Labor Department showing the economy grew by 236,000 jobs and the unemployment rate fell to 7.7 percent.

Wall Street analysts had predicted a job spurt between 150,000 and 160,000. In response, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rallied 67 points on Friday to close at an all-time high.

Obama noted the unemployment rate is now lower than when he took office after businesses created 6.4 million jobs over the past three years.

But he warned partisan battles in Washington could disrupt the recovery:

“The last thing we should do is allow Washington politics to get in the way,” he said. “You deserve better than the same political gridlock and refusal to compromise that has too often passed for serious debate over the last few years.”

He touted his recent outreach to Republicans, including a dinner with a dozen senators at the Jefferson Hotel in downtown Washington on Wednesday.

He said the group discussed “smarter ways to grow our economy and reduce our deficits than the arbitrary cuts of the so-called ‘sequester’ that recently went into place.”

Average Americans’ jobs are not coming back any time soon, under this Administration’s Failed Economic Policy.

However, Obama’s staff is doing just fine, thankyaverymuch.

Per FoxNews.com:

The latest 2012 salary figures released by the White House show 20 staffers were making the maximum $172,200. Many of them are well-known President Obama aides, including Press Secretary Jay Carney and senior adviser Valerie Jarrett. Most carry the title of “assistant to the president.”

But underneath them are dozens of “deputy” assistants and “special” assistants to the president, most making six-figure salaries — like the climate change advisers. A review of the 2012 salaries by FoxNews.com shows 139 White House staffers making $100,000 or more.

The White House often attracts top-tier lawyers, bankers, security experts and others who were making far more in the private sector. Any administration wants to offer good money in order to lure the right people into — or back into — public service.

But the payroll under the Obama White House has expanded since the Bush administration. The payroll went from $33 million in 2008 to $39 million in 2009. Since then, the Obama administration has scaled back its White House staff expenses, but the payroll was still at $37.8 million in 2012.

There are two more employees making the maximum salary now than in the final year of the Bush administration. Two ethics advisers each make close to $140,000.

The chief calligrapher makes $96,725. Another calligrapher makes over $94,000, while another makes close to $86,000.

On Friday, White House Deputy Press Secretary John Earnest said the White House will be affected by the sequester much like other agencies — and in some capacity will impose furloughs.

“We’re also faced with making some tough decisions when it comes to ongoing projects, when it comes to purchasing equipment and supplies. But we’re also a pretty personnel-heavy agency, if you will. So that means … there will be employees of components who work here at the White House that will be facing pay cuts, that will be facing furloughs,” he said.

Hey…no worries in the Former “People’s House”…the Obamas are not about to let poor stewardship of our nation’s economy and a minor problem like average Americans struggling to survive, stand in the way of a good par-tay!

According to Ben Shapiro, in an article, posted on Breitbart.com,

The same week that President Obama’s administration announced that due to sequestration, White House tours would be cancelled, sources at the White House announced that it would be hosting megastars Adele and Beyonce at Michelle’s 50th birthday party next year. “America’s First Lady will be holding a huge celebrity-packed party for her birthday at the White House next year and, as she adores Adele and Beyonce, she has asked them both to sing,” the source told the UK Daily Mail. The source did say that “The Obamas will pay Adele’s expenses as it’s a private party, not a State one.”

But will they pay all the expenses of the party? Security arrangements? Food? Cleanup? White House parties are expensive affairs.

It’s obvious that the White House’s priorities don’t lie with the people. They lie with the personal party predilections of the Obamas.

While the Secret Service protection during White House tours costs some $74,000 per week – the cost the White House brags it is saving on the cancelled tours — Air Force One costs $175,750 per flight hour, not including pilots, airmen, and Secret Service. (Some sources say the cost for the tours is $18,000 per week.) Obama has taken several pricey jaunts to locations including, most recently, Florida in the past few months. And those parties at the White House? They certainly cost a fair bit of money, but we’ll never hear how much; as the Washington Post put it back in 2012, “getting a straight answer about the cost of any White House party is almost impossible.”

There is little chance that the taxpayers will not foot some of the expense of Mrs. Obama’s magical 50th. And there is no chance that the “people’s house” will be open to the “people” nearly as much as it is to the Obamas’ celebrity superfriends in coming weeks.

As I’ve written before:

OUR Income = HIS Revenue

Let them eat arugula!

Until He Comes,

KJ

Karzai Links Obama to the Taliban. This is Smart Power?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Obama-Shrinks-2Back in January , President Karzai of Afghanistan and U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) had a meeting, where it was decided to speed up America’ s military withdrawal from that war-torn nation. The two presidents seem to have gotten along famously.

Well…that honeymoon’s over.

Bloomberg.com reports that

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was greeted on his first visit to Afghanistan since taking office by suicide bombs, threats and Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s accusation that the U.S. is colluding with the Taliban.

As Hagel prepared to leave a U.S. military compound in Kabul on March 9, a Taliban suicide bomber blew himself up outside the Ministry of Defense, and another suicide bomb detonated in Khost province. Yesterday, Karzai said that those attacks, which together killed 19 people, aided U.S. goals. A joint Hagel-Karzai press conference at the presidential palace was canceled for what Pentagon officials said were security reasons.

While the Taliban said the attacks were aimed at sending a message to Hagel that the insurgents remain a powerful force, Karzai said in a speech yesterday that the U.S. is holding peace talks with the radical Islamists and the bombs were in the “service of America.”

“On the surface and to this outside observer, it appears that Karzai has gone way off the reservation, perhaps more so than he has in the past,” said David Maxwell, a retired U.S. Army colonel who’s associate director of the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. “I cannot see how we could work with such an apparently delusional leader much longer, but unfortunately I do not know if we have any other good options.”

Karzai’s allegations and the suicide attacks gave the new defense secretary, who took office March 1, a close-up view of the military and political obstacles the Obama administration faces as it tries to extricate the U.S. from a war it’s been waging for more than 11 years, train Afghan forces to take over the fight, root out official corruption, curb opium trafficking, and develop the Afghan economy.

President Barack Obama has ordered the withdrawal of 34,000 of about 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan by February. Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said last month that the drawdown will occur in stages, with the force dropping to 50,000 by November, after the summer fighting season, and then to 34,000 by February. More troops will come home after Afghan elections planned for early 2014, Panetta said.

“When you spend 48 hours in Afghanistan or any part of the world that’s still dangerous, you again recognize the complications that exist every day in these parts of the world,” Hagel, a combat veteran of Vietnam, told reporters at a U.S. military base after he met with Karzai yesterday. Asked about Karzai’s accusation that the U.S. was colluding with the Taliban, Hagel said he “spoke clearly and directly” to Karzai on the matter. Hagel didn’t elaborate.

Earlier yesterday, Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford, head of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s International Security Assistance Force, said the Afghan president’s comments were “categorically false.”

Perhaps, Karzai is a just a  wee bit torqued over all the unmanned drones flying over his country:

With debate intensifying in the United States over the use of drone aircraft, the U.S. military said on Sunday that it had removed data about air strikes carried out by unmanned planes in Afghanistan from its monthly air power summaries.

U.S. Central Command, which oversees the Afghanistan war, said in a statement the data had been removed because it was “disproportionately focused” on the use of weapons by the remotely piloted aircraft as it was published only when strikes were carried out – which happened during only 3 percent of sorties. Most missions were for reconnaissance, it said.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration has increasingly used drones to target against al Qaeda-linked militants overseas.

Civilian casualties from drone strikes have raised ethical concerns and angered local populations, creating tension between the United States and Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Some U.S. lawmakers have also questioned the legality of targeted killings and whether drones would allow the killing of American citizens inside the United States.

The debate was intensified by Obama’s decision to nominate his chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan, an architect of the drone campaign, as the new director of the CIA.

The Air Force Times said air force chiefs had started posting the drone strikes data last October in an attempt to provide more detail on the use of drones in Afghanistan.

The newspaper said the statistics were provided for November through January, but the February summary released on March 7 had a blank spot where the drone data had previously been listed.

“A variety of multi-role platforms provide ground commanders in Afghanistan with close air support capabilities, and it was determined that presenting the weapons release data as a whole better reflects the air power provided” in Afghanistan, Central Command said in its statement.

“Protecting civilians remains at the very core of AFCENT’s (Air Force Central Command’s) mission,” it said. “The use of all AFCENT aerial weapons are tightly restricted, meticulously planned, carefully supervised and coordinated, and applied by only qualified and authorized personnel.”

The statement said the decision to stop reporting the drone strikes was taken with the International Security Assistance Force – the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan.

Brennan was sworn into office on Friday following a protracted confirmation battle that saw Senator Rand Paul attempt to block a vote on the nomination with a technical manoeuvre called a filibuster, in which he tried to prevent a vote by talking continuously.

Paul held the Senate floor for more than 12 hours while talking mainly about drones, expressing concern that Obama’s administration might use the aircraft to target U.S. citizens on home soil.

Back in 2009, Joseph S. Nye, Jr. , wrote the following in an article for ForeignPolicy.com:

In her confirmation hearings, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America. . . . We must use what has been called ‘smart power,’ the full range of tools at our disposal.” Since then, editorial pages and blogs have been full of references to “smart power.” But what does it mean?

“Smart power” is a term I developed in 2003 to counter the misperception that soft power alone can produce effective foreign policy. Power is one’s ability to affect the behavior of others to get what one wants. There are three basic ways to do this: coercion, payment, and attraction. Hard power is the use of coercion and payment. Soft power is the ability to obtain preferred outcomes through attraction. If a state can set the agenda for others or shape their preferences, it can save a lot on carrots and sticks. But rarely can it totally replace either. Thus the need for smart strategies that combine the tools of both hard and soft power.

Judging by their appeasement of our enemies, and their total naivete (at least, I hope it’s just naivete) of the Muslim World, Obama and his State Department have Nye’s “Smart Power” down pat. The only problem is, the only things those barbarians understand are strength of will and brute force. Therefore using unmanned drones, instead of traditional Armed Forces, only solidifies their opinion of Obama as a wimp.

Therefore, Karzai and his friends in the Muslim Brotherhood, are not impressed.

God protect us.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

Obama Hypocricy: Abu Ghaith and Unmanned Drones

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

obamabillofrightsHave you ever thought about where our rights as Americans come from? Are they rights that are common and applicable to every individual born 0n this terrestrial ball? Or, are they unique to those of us, graced by God, with the gift of having been born in the greatest country on the face of His green Earth?

Evidently, President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Attorney General believe that the previously mentioned rights are universal.

The Obama Administration has captured Abu Ghaith, a Kuwaiti member of Al Qaeda,a member of Osama bin Laden’s family, believe it or not, and, instead of interring him in Gitmo, where he belongs, they have conferred upon this enemy combatant the same rights as you or I, American citizens, have. Obama and Holder have brought him to the United States for a civilian trial in a Manhattan courtroom, ironically, one mile from Ground Zero, where he’s already appeared in court to plead not guilty to charges of conspiracy to kill Americans.

According to Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), in an op ed he has written for foxnews.com,

Enemy combatants should be interrogated relentlessly, not given Miranda warnings.

Enemy combatants shouldn’t be tried in civilian courtrooms in the middle of a densely populated city – creating a much softer target for a spectacular and symbolic terrorist attack than a fortified military base like Guantanamo Bay.

Moreover, if we’re going to make the legal argument at home and abroad that we’re at war, why play right into our critics’ hands by suddenly and arbitrarily treating our war like an episode of “CSI: New York”?

Our enemies, working with their allies on the international left, want America’s hands to be tied, for us to use police methods and – more importantly – police weapons and tactics even while they arm themselves to the teeth and work tirelessly to kill as many Americans as they can.

Already our military is under extreme pressure, even from some of our allies, to adopt a law-enforcement approach even in the conduct of our military operations in Afghanistan.

Our rules of engagement are sometimes so restrictive that they can lead to loss of American life and grant actual battlefield advantages to the Taliban.

While we’re in the midst of an international argument over the law of armed conflict, we just handed our ideological opponents something more than a significant propaganda victory – we handed them a real-life example to use as the foundation for a new “customary international law” that is the form of binding international law created by nations’ actual policies and practices in fighting terror.

In addition, the Obama administration is demonstrating that it exists as an “imperial presidency.” One that is more arbitrary than the Bush administration it so self-righteously criticized. Under this Obama doctrine, the ultimate questions of war and peace, life and death, appear to follow no principle or pattern beyond the administration’s own whims.

This administration has failed to articulate a coherent approach to fighting deadly enemies. It brags about its “kill list” during a presidential campaign, yet after the campaign it doesn’t seem to mind when Egypt denies us access to the Benghazi suspects (by the way – where is the retaliation for that dreadful attack?).

Simply put, Bin Laden family members should not get their day in court in Manhattan.

The distinguished barrister is absolutely correct.

By conferring American rights on a barbaric, murderous, Islamic Terrorist, who would just as soon behead us Infidels as look at us, Obama has given our enemy the right to remain silent, which shuts down our intelligence agencies’ ability to get any information from him which may save American lives in the future.

Not to mention the fact that he is putting the people of New York City in danger from the very same Jihadists who killed over 3,000 in that very same city on that horrible day of September 11, 2001.

Furthermore, the Manchurian President has conferred upon this barbarian, rights and privileges bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers, in the magnificent document they wrote for us to govern ourselves by, known as the United States Constitution.

In the section which contains the first Ten Amendments to this living and breathing document, known as the Bill of Rights, are the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, it states,

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

By bestowing upon this murderous Islamic Thug, and those like him, the rights and privileges of the very citizens they are trying to slaughter, Obama and Holder have proven themselves to be the world’s biggest hypocrites.

Because, at the same time they are wrapping these murderous Muslims in a Constitutional blanket of rights, woven by our Founding Fathers, specifically for American citizens, they have been intimating the fact that they plan to violate the Constitutional Rights of actual Americans, by using unmanned drones to hunt them down and kill them on American soil without due process.

Which begs the question: Why are they protecting the rights of our enemies and are so loathe to protect the rights of American citizens, whom they are sworn to protect “from enemies foreign and domestic”?

Anti-American, treasonous, or just plain Impeachable…or all of the above?

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Vichy Republicans Vs. The New Conservatives

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

grahamandmccainYesterday, I wrote about Sen. Rand Paul’s 13 hour filibuster he delivered on Wednesday to bring to light President Barack Hussein Obama’s refusal to answer the question of whether he would use unmanned drones to hunt down and kill American Citizens on our soil, and to block the vote on Obama’s nominee for CIA Director, dhimmi John O. Brennan.

Unmanned drones killing American Citizens…sounds like a bad science fiction movie, doesn’t it?

Well, the good news is: He finally received an answer from Attorney General Eric Holder, who wrote him a short message, stating, “No”.

The bad news is: Yesterday morning, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, fresh from being treated to an outrageously expensive dinner by Obama on the very evening Sen. Paul was delivering his inspiring filibuster, verbally attacked Rand Paul for his efforts. They mocked him and ridiculed him, saying that he “violated the Rules of the Senate”.

The Washington Times reports that

Mr. McCain quoted from a Wall Street Journal editorial: “The country needs more senators who care about liberty, but if Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms. He needs to know what he’s talking about.”

The senator went on to say that he didn’t “think that what happened yesterday was helpful to the American people.”

And where Democrats praised Mr. Paul for using Senate rules properly to launch a filibuster, Mr. McCain said it was an abuse of rules that could hurt the GOP in the long run.”What we saw yesterday is going to give ammunition to those who say the rules of the Senate are being abused,” the Arizona Republican said.

Mr. Paul said he was filibustering to get the administration to affirm it won’t kill non-combatant Americans in the U.S. — and his effort was joined by more than a dozen other senators who said they, too, supported his effort to get answers.

Mr. Graham said asking whether the president has the power to kill Americans here at home is a ludicrous question.

“I do not believe that question deserves an answer,” Mr. Graham said.

Mr. Graham and Mr. McCain led a Republican delegation that held a private dinner with President Obama on Wednesday, as Mr. Paul was holding the floor with help from other GOP colleagues.

Mr. McCain even joked about Mr. Graham’s “behavior” at the dinner.

“He was on his best manners and everyone was impressed,” Mr. McCain said.

Speaking to reporters after he came off the floor Wednesday, Mr. Graham said he defends Mr. Paul’s right to ask questions and seek answers, but said the filibuster has actually pushed him to now support Mr. Brennan.

Mr. Graham said he had been inclined to oppose the nomination because he’d found Brennan to be qualified for the job but also “arrogant, kind of a bit shifty.” He said he wasn’t going to filibuster him but would have voted against him on final passage, but now he’ll vote for him.

“I am going to vote for Brennan now because it’s become a referendum on the drone program,” he said.

Later in the day, Sen. “Grahamesty” did just that, helping to  bring about the approval of Brennan’s nomination.

Why did “The Sunshine Boys” attack Sen. Paul like that?

Rush Limbaugh, as he always does, had the answer:

It’s just that there’s nobody that we see that has any courage to stand up to the people who are doing the damage. Even when we have the White House, there’s no standing up to the people assaulting the country. Even when we’re campaigning, the candidate doesn’t stand up. Now, I know the president’s race frightens a lot of people away from criticizing him. (No two ways about that. It’s just the way it is.) But Rand Paul did it last night, and nobody’s calling him a racist today. Nobody’s calling him an extremist, and nobody’s calling him names — and he doesn’t care anyway.

But he [Sen. Rand Paul] stood up for freedom. Last night people finally had somebody to rally around. Somebody finally spoke up and reflected what you all think and what you all fear. And somebody, in addition to speaking up, was actually trying to put the brakes on the direction this country’s being taken. So, yeah, it made perfect sense for people to rally behind it and rally to it. And then today after that we get the old guard, the ruling class, Republican establishment types belittling what happened last night. Casting it aside. It’s insignificant. Violated the rules of the Senate. Bad image. Silly to say that the president wants to launch drone strikes on America. Why do we even have to answer that question. That’s so absurd, it’s silly. Why, it was embarrassing last night.

…You cannot have this many millions of Americans continually ignored and unrepresented in a representative democracy without a price to pay for it.

So Rand Paul does his filibuster, and people flock to it. Even Democrats flocked to it, all over Twitter, which is normally owned, run, and operated by the Democrats. All over Twitter last night, Rand Paul had people saying, “Well, wait a minute, I understand this.” I mean, the left, this should be a natural for them. This is the kind of stuff, this is why Code Pink exists, for example, among other things.

The administration ought to be just taking it on the chin over this. And they may be. Time will tell. My whole point here is I understand why people are rallying to Rand Paul and Rubio and Ted Cruz. And that’s going to continue. And the Republican establishment, as long as they continue to pretend this is 1990, ’98, 2000, as long as the old rules which guarantee defeat continue to dominate, then at some point something’s gotta give.

Rush is right, as usual.

Sen. Graham actually made the arrangements for the swanky meal, enjoyed by 12 Republican Senators Wednesday Night, which was hosted and paid for by Obama (which means you and I actually footed the bill). For them to be snuggling with the Manchurian President, while Rand Paul and others held the Senate Floor in defense of our Constitution, is despicable. Their love for their Capital Hill way of life took precedence over their service to their constituents and their Constitutional Duty.

McCain and Graham attacking Rand Paul reminded me of “Blazing Saddles”:

We must protect our phony baloney jobs, gentlemen! Hrumph!

The greatest U.S. President of our Generation, Ronald Wilson Reagan, once said,

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and other “New Conservatives” seem to be willing to do just that.

If the old guard Vichy Republicans care more about their Capitol Hill way of life than their country and their constituents, then it is time for them to get out of the way, and allow Sen. Paul, and his allies to lead the battle against this corrupt anti-American Administration.

Because, as the old saying goes,

If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Senator Rand Paul: Taking a Stand for Freedom

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

rand paulAs I woke up this morning, I learned that Senator Rand Paul (R, KY) had wrapped up, at the thirteenth hour, what had been nicknamed the Filiblizzard, brought about by the nomination of John O. Brennan to the post of CIA Director and the plans by President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to use unmanned drones to hunt down and kill American Citizens on American soil.

The Washington Times has the story:

After years in the shadows, the administration’s secret drone program burst into very public view Wednesday with lawmakers grilling the attorney general over legal justification for targeted killings and Sen. Rand Paul launching an old-style one-man filibuster to demand answers from President Obama.

The Kentucky Republican held the floor for almost 13 hours, effectively blocking a vote on the nomination of John O. Brennan, whom Mr. Obama has tapped to be CIA director. He said he would relent only if the administration publicly vowed not to target Americans on U.S. soil.

“This is a long, drawn-out day, but it’s to try to get some answers,” Mr. Paul said after he crossed the eight-hour mark late Wednesday evening. “It’s to try to shame the president into doing the right thing.”

Democrats, who control the chamber, were forced to delay a vote on the Brennan nomination until at least Thursday, and it could go into the weekend, depending on what other blockades Republicans erect.

At issue is the administration’s argument that it can kill those it suspects have ties to terrorism, including U.S. citizens, without having to put them on trial.

The fulcrum of the debate is the drone program, started under President George W. Bush and expanded by Mr. Obama, which many lawmakers said gives too much power to the executive branch — and raises tricky questions about whether drones could be used to execute Americans in the United States.

The administration has only recently acknowledged the drone program and says it is seeking a public debate in order to find common ground on what Americans are ready to accept.

“I think there is going to be a greater effort at the transparency. A number of steps are going to be taken. I expect you will hear the president speaking about this,” Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. told the SenateJudiciary Committee on Wednesday morning.

But he faced bipartisan demands for more information and more clarity on what is and what isn’t allowed.

“You can hear almost unanimous concern about transparency and wrestling with how to move forward here in a way that protects both our constitutional liberties and our security as a nation,” Sen. Christopher A. Coons, Delaware Democrat, told Mr. Holder.

Under close questioning by Sen. Ted Cruz, Mr. Holder repeatedly said American citizens on U.S. soil were not “appropriate” targets for extrajudicial executions.

Mr. Cruz said that wasn’t good enough.

“You keep saying ‘appropriate.’ My question isn’t about propriety. My question is about whether something is constitutional or not,” the Texas Republican said.

“Let me be clear: Translate my ‘appropriate’ to ‘no.’ I thought I was saying no, all right? No,” Mr. Holder said.

Mr. Holder also said he is not sure Congress could ban the president from using drones to kill Americans on U.S. soil.

But, of course, as Obama said, “I am not a dictator”. Yeah, right.

The longest spoken filibuster in American history was by Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, who went on for 24 hours and 18 minutes in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Thurmond began speaking at 8:54 p.m. on August 28, 1957 and did not stop until 9:12 p.m. on the 29th.

That rhetorical marathon took a lot of preparation, though. Here are some of the details, according to the Associated Press:

Thurmond took a steam bath earlier in the day to rid his body of excess liquid. This avoided the potential for any “accidents” in the chamber.

He went to the floor armed with cough drops and malted milk tablets.

He allowed others to make short remarks and ask questions during his time, allowing him to sneak off to the cloakroom to gobble a sandwich.

He had his aide wait in the cloakroom with a pail when he was about to step down from the dais in case of an emergency evacuation.

So far, Paul’s discussion has been much more lively than Thurmond’s speech, with heavy ad-libbing and contributions from seven different Senators, including Democrat Ron Wyden.

A major question, though, is what exactly did Thurmond talk about for 24 straight hours? Most of the content of the then-55-year-old’s speech was about the right to a trial by jury.

Via Michael McGraw-Herdeg on Quora, here’s what Thurmond talked about for one straight day:

Thurmond read, verbatim, the voting laws of each one of the 48 states.

He read the U.S. criminal code

He read a Supreme Court decision, followed by more laws. A friend brought him a glass of orange juice.

He allowed Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson to conduct some minor Senate business, such as preparing to swear-in the new Senator from Wisconsin, with a promise that Thurmond will be allowed to resume his filibuster.

At 1:40 a.m., Thurmond talked about jury trials.

By 6:45 a.m., Thurmond was having a back and forth with an arriving Senator about the bill. The Senator then left for breakfast with President Eisenhower.

Thurmond fielded questions from sympathetic Senators looking to give his voice a break.

Thurmond read the Declaration of Independence.

Thurmond allowed Johnson to swear in the new Senator from Wisconsin at roughly 1 p.m.

Thurmond welcomed Italian dignitaries to the chamber and then resumed discussing jury trials.

Thurmond took questions from sympathetic Senators again, as well as abuse from adversaries.

A letter from the President Dwight D. Eisenhower momentarily interrupted the discussion of jury trials.

The Senator finished up with a summary of his opposition to the bill. “Mr. President, I urge every Member of this body to consider this bill most carefully. I hope the Senate will see fit to kill it. I expect to vote against the bill. [Laughter.]”

The Senate later passed the bill. Thurmond’s oratorical marathon didn’t change a single vote.

Senator Paul’s filibuster may not , either. But, at least he did something.

Which is more than I can say for the RINOs up on Capitol Hill.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Sequestration: Palin and the Petulant President

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

palin-newsweekobamababyObama has locked the American People out of  “The People’s House”.

The Washington Times reports that

The White House announced Tuesday that it is canceling tours of the president’s home for the foreseeable future as the sequester spending cuts begin to bite and the administration makes good on its warnings of painful decisions.

Announcement of the decision — made in an email from the White House Visitors Office — came hours after The Washington Times reported on another administration email that seemed to show at least one agency has been instructed to make sure the cuts are as painful as President Obama promised they would be.

In the internal email, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service official Charles Brown said he asked if he could try to spread out the sequester cuts in his region to minimize the impact, and he said he was told not to do anything that would lessen the dire impacts Congress had been warned of.

“We have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be,” Mr. Brown, in the internal email, said his superiors told him.

In a related story, posted at washingtonexaminer.com:

House investigators learned Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials developed plans to release about 5,000 illegal immigrant detainees, although Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has denied responsibility for the decision.

“An internal document obtained by the House Judiciary Committee shows that Administration officials at ICE prepared cold calculations to release thousands of criminal aliens onto the streets and did not demonstrate any consideration of the impact this decision would have on the safety of Americans,” committee chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced.

The ICE document contains a table that proposes “reduc[ing] invoiced daily population by 1,000 weekly.” Between February 22 and March 31st, this plan would drop the number of detainees from 30,748 to 25,748.

“The decision to release detained aliens undermines the Department of Homeland Security’s mission to keep our homeland secure and instead makes our communities less safe and more vulnerable to crime,” Goodlatte said. “[R]egardless of sequestration, DHS actually has plenty of funding to pay for the detention of criminal aliens. Unfortunately, it seems Administration officials are more interested in using sequestration to promote their political agenda than as an opportunity to get our nation’s fiscal house in order.”

Napolitano said that it wasn’t her decision, even though ICE is part of DHS. “Detainee populations and how that is managed back and forth is really handled by career officials in the field,” she told ABC.

She also confirmed that the releases would continue. “We are going to manage our way through this by identifying the lowest risk detainees, and putting them into some kind of alternative to release,” Napolitano said at a Politico event, per The Daily Caller.

The New York Times profiled a “low risk” detainee released by ICE. The detainee was taken into custody “when it was discovered that he had violated probation for a conviction in 2005 of simple assault, simple battery and child abuse, charges that sprung from a domestic dispute with his wife at the time.” NRO’s Jim Geraghty asked, “If convictions for ‘simple assault, simple battery and child abuse’ make you ‘low-risk,’ what do you have to do for Janet Napolitano to consider you ‘high-risk’?”

Back on February 26th, Former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin posted the following on her Facebook Page:

D.C.: Cut the Drama. Do Your Job.

Americans are sick and tired of yet another ginned-up crisis. D.C. needs to grow up, get to work, and live within its means. The real economic Armageddon looming before us is our runaway debt, not the sequester, which the President advocated for and signed into law and is now running around denouncing because he never had any genuine intention of reining in his reckless spending.

Remember that this sequestration deal came about because of the long debt ceiling standoff in the summer of 2011. It wasn’t the ideal outcome for anyone, but it did at least include real deficit reduction of about $110 billion per year for 10 years, which is still nowhere near enough to close our massive deficit. Keep in mind that since the sequester passed, the President has already hit American families and small business owners with his tax increases, or “more revenue” as he likes to call it. The American public doesn’t want tax increases; we want government to rein in its overspending.

If we can’t stomach modest cuts that would lower federal spending by a mere 0.3% per year out of a current federal budget of $3.6 trillion, then we might as well signal to the whole world that we have no serious intention of dealing with our debt problem.

If we are going to wet our proverbial pants over 0.3% in annual spending cuts when we’re running up trillion dollar annual deficits, then we’re done. Put a fork in us. We’re finished. We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.

If we ARE serious about putting our fiscal house in order, then let’s stop the hysterics, tighten our belts, and take our medicine.

Governor Palin was prophetic. It now appears that, instead of working with Congress to come up with a compromise, Obama would rather live up to the nickname I gave him in 2009, acting  like “The Petulant President” that he is.

Now, he is locking us, the ones he is supposed to be serving, out of the house that we built and are still financing. 

Obama is determined to make his “Chicken Little” pretentious predictions about the Sequestration come true, no matter how much they hurt the people he is supposed to be protecting from “enemies foreign and domestic”.

Instead, our anti-American President, though his idiotic “Smart Power!” Foreign Policy, and his clueless Domestic Policy of unconditional amnesty and Obamanomics, which is is putting us all in the Poor House, has himself become the enemy of the American People.

This is not Presidential Leadership. This is Presidential  Sabotage.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Tax Revenues Set Record. Economy Still Stinks.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

monopoly2Obama’s second term economic policy is based on the Beatles song, Taxman:

Let me tell you how it will be. It’s one for you, nineteen for me.

CSMonitor.com has the story:

An impasse over the shape of the federal budget keeps boiling down to this basic plotline: Democrats say the solution to high deficits must include more tax revenue, while Republicans say the fundamental problem is spending.

Failure to reach a middle ground has prompted automatic spending cuts known as the “sequester” to go into effect. This wasn’t Plan A, or even Plan B, for either side.

As the politicians look for a way forward, conservative lawmakers say that new budget projections make their case for them. Federal tax revenue is forecast to hit a record $2.7 trillion this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

“Spending is the problem, which means cutting spending is the solution. It’s that simple,” said Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington State on Saturday, as she gave congressional Republicans’ weekly address to the nation. She cited the CBO forecast of record revenues.

Case closed?

Not so fast. The budget numbers tell a more complicated story – one that makes fiscal politics difficult for both parties.Yes, if $2.7 trillion in revenue materializes this year, that would set a record. It would surpass the prior peak of $2.6 trillion, set back in fiscal year 2007 before the recession began.

But that doesn’t mean federal tax receipts are fully back to normal.

Economists generally compare taxes and spending to the size of overall economy. That’s because demands on government often increase as the economy grows and population rises. And the value of tax receipts needs to be adjusted for inflation, to give a real sense of purchasing power.

Tax revenue will total 16.9 percent of gross domestic product this year, the CBO predicts, compared with 18.5 percent of GDP in 2007. It looks as if it will take another year, until 2014, for tax revenue to get back to 18 percent of GDP, which has been the average level since 1973.

But here’s the big issue: There’s no level of tax revenue or federal spending that’s automatically the “right” level. Yesterday’s averages don’t tell us what tomorrow’s should be.

And most signs point toward difficult choices ahead. Entitlement programs including Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are taking up an ever larger share of federal spending.

Is spending “the problem”? Yes, in one sense. If federal outlays could be steered permanently back to their 35-year average of 21 percent of GDP, much of the national-debt problem would be solved.

But the answer is no in another sense. In polls, Americans are generally reluctant to see cuts in those major entitlement programs. They don’t call Social Security or Medicare “the problem”.

That is because Baby Boomers, like myself, understand how a great president can turn around this nation’s economy. We lived through it and we told our children how it happened.

When President Reagan entered office in 1981, he faced actually much worse economic problems than President Obama faced in 2009. Three worsening recessions starting in 1969 were about to culminate in the worst of all in 1981-1982, with unemployment soaring into double digits at a peak of 10.8%. At the same time America suffered roaring double-digit inflation, with the CPI registering at 11.3% in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980 (25% in two years). The Washington establishment at the time argued that this inflation was now endemic to the American economy, and could not be stopped, at least not without a calamitous economic collapse.

All of the above was accompanied by double -digit interest rates, with the prime rate peaking at 21.5% in 1980. The poverty rate started increasing in 1978, eventually climbing by an astounding 33%, from 11.4% to 15.2%. A fall in real median family income that began in 1978 snowballed to a decline of almost 10% by 1982. In addition, from 1968 to 1982, the Dow Jones industrial average lost 70% of its real value, reflecting an overall collapse of stocks.

President Reagan campaigned on an explicitly articulated, four-point economic program to reverse this slow motion collapse of the American economy:

1. Cut tax rates to restore incentives for economic growth, which was implemented first with a reduction in the top income tax rate of 70% down to 50%, and then a 25% across-the-board reduction in income tax rates for everyone. The 1986 tax reform then reduced tax rates further, leaving just two rates, 28% and 15%.

2. Spending reductions, including a $31 billion cut in spending in 1981, close to 5% of the federal budget then, or the equivalent of about $175 billion in spending cuts for the year today. In constant dollars, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this nondefense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms! Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which won the Cold War without firing a shot, total federal spending declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989. That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%.

3. Anti-inflation monetary policy restraining money supply growth compared to demand, to maintain a stronger, more stable dollar value.

4. Deregulation, which saved consumers an estimated $100 billion per year in lower prices. Reagan’s first executive order, in fact, eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and aided by a strong dollar the price of oil declined by more than 50%.

These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.

During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989.

The shocking rise in inflation during the Nixon and Carter years was reversed. Astoundingly, inflation from 1980 was reduced by more than half by 1982, to 6.2%. It was cut in half again for 1983, to 3.2%, never to be heard from again until recently. The contractionary, tight-money policies needed to kill this inflation inexorably created the steep recession of 1981 to 1982, which is why Reagan did not suffer politically catastrophic blame for that recession.

Real per-capita disposable income increased by 18% from 1982 to 1989, meaning the American standard of living increased by almost 20% in just seven years. The poverty rate declined every year from 1984 to 1989, dropping by one-sixth from its peak. The stock market more than tripled in value from 1980 to 1990, a larger increase than in any previous decade.

For all of you Liberal idiots who dared tried to compare the Manchurian President to the Gipper:  Y’all need to quit smoking the Hopium.

Obama failed efforts toward “fixing” our economy, remind me of Rosanne Barr singing the National Anthem: tone-deaf, flat, and extremely painful.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

Sequestration? What Sequestration? Obama Gives OUR Money to Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

michelleobama2The Sequester has kicked in and Obama and his minions are still whining about how badly Sequestration with hurt our country. Evidently, great humanitarian that Obama is, he does not want to see his friends in Egyptian’s Musalim Brotherhood “hurting” as bad as we are.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday rewarded Egypt for President Mohammed Morsi’s pledges of political and economic reforms by releasing $250 million in American aid to support the country’s “future as a democracy.”

Yet Kerry also served notice that the Obama administration will keep close watch on how Morsi, who came to power in June as Egypt’s first freely elected president, honors his commitment and that additional U.S. assistance would depend on it.

“The path to that future has clearly been difficult and much work remains,” Kerry said in a statement after wrapping up two days of meetings in Egypt, a deeply divided country in the wake of the revolution that ousted longtime President Hosni Mubarak.

Egypt is trying to meet conditions to close on a $4.8 billion loan package from the International Monetary Fund. An agreement would unlock more of the $1 billion in U.S. assistance promised by President Barack Obama last year and set to begin flowing with Kerry’s announcement.

“The United States can and wants to do more,” Kerry said. “Reaching an agreement with the IMF will require further effort on the part of the Egyptian government and broad support for reform by all Egyptians. When Egypt takes the difficult steps to strengthen its economy and build political unity and justice, we will work with our Congress at home on additional support.”

Kerry cited Egypt’s “extreme needs” and Morsi’s “assurances that he plans to complete the IMF process” when he told the president that the U.S. would provide $190 million of a long-term $450 million pledge “in a good-faith effort to spur reform and help the Egyptian people at this difficult time.” The release of the rest of the $450 million and the other $550 million tranche of the $1 billion that Obama announced will be tied to successful reforms, officials said.

Separately, the top U.S. diplomat announced $60 million for a new fund for “direct support of key engines of democratic change,” including Egypt’s entrepreneurs and its young people. Kerry held out the prospect of U.S. assistance to this fund climbing to $300 million over time.

Recapping his meetings with political figures, business leaders and representatives of outside groups, Kerry said he heard of their “deep concern about the political course of their country, the need to strengthen human rights protections, justice and the rule of law, and their fundamental anxiety about the economic future of Egypt.”

Those issues came up in “a very candid and constructive manner” during Kerry’s talks with Morsi.

“It is clear that more hard work and compromise will be required to restore unity, political stability and economic health to Egypt,” Kerry said.Ever since November 22nd, when President Morsi issued a declaration that granted him broad powers above the reach of any court, Egypt has become increasingly tense and politically fractured. After Morsi’s declaration, a Brotherhood-dominated constituent assembly rushed to finish a draft of a new constitution. More than a quarter of the assembly members resigned in protest, and there were clear violations of protocol, but the document was rammed through in a sixteen-hour voting session. Despite months of work, some articles were introduced only in that final session. The result is a slippery foundation for the future: a number of basic rights—including freedom of the press, due process for justice, and equality for women and minorities—aren’t adequately protected.

We’ve already seen just how unstable the Muslim Brotherhood-lead Egyptian Government is. On December 24th, 2012, the New Yorker Magazine reported that

…Ever since November 22nd, when President Morsi issued a declaration that granted him broad powers above the reach of any court, Egypt has become increasingly tense and politically fractured. After Morsi’s declaration, a Brotherhood-dominated constituent assembly rushed to finish a draft of a new constitution. More than a quarter of the assembly members resigned in protest, and there were clear violations of protocol, but the document was rammed through in a sixteen-hour voting session. Despite months of work, some articles were introduced only in that final session. The result is a slippery foundation for the future: a number of basic rights—including freedom of the press, due process for justice, and equality for women and minorities—aren’t adequately protected.

But the most revealing moment of the crisis occurred a week and a half ago. With protesters camped outside the Presidential Palace, in Cairo, Brotherhood members led a group of men who attacked peaceful demonstrators and tore down their tents. The violence kicked off an evening of escalating counterattacks; in the end, nine people died and more than a thousand were injured, with both sides sustaining heavy casualties. Some protesters, women among them, were detained and tortured by civilian groups that included members of the Brotherhood. Morsi, in a clumsy and dishonest speech to the nation, blamed it all on “thugs” and a “fifth column” organized by the remnants of Hosni Mubarak’s regime. But there was no question who had started the fighting. It was the first clearly documented case of political violence in more than fifty years of Muslim Brotherhood activity in Egypt.

Nonviolence has always been a point of pride for the organization. Some of its offshoot groups, like Hamas, have engaged in terrorism, but the Brotherhood never endorsed acts of violence in Egypt, despite decades of oppression under Mubarak that included the imprisonment of most of its leaders. That restraint, however, like the talk of coöperation, seems to have evaporated with the first taste of power. Sometimes an organization is nonviolent on principle, and sometimes it is nonviolent simply because it finds itself in a position of weakness.

For many Egyptians, it’s been a depressing month. The military seems to be aligned with Morsi, at least for the moment, and the country lacks a strong and coherent political alternative to the Brotherhood. Nevertheless, there are some reasons for optimism. The public response has been impressive, with tens of thousands of peaceful protesters surrounding the palace on many nights. These crowds are largely middle class, but they comprise people from all walks of life, including many who identify themselves as former supporters of Morsi. There are more women than usual. And expectations have changed since the beginning of the revolution. For almost two years, the media have operated with a freedom that never existed under Mubarak, and Egypt has held essentially fair elections for both parliament and the Presidency. Such progress remains fragile, but at least certain demands are being established.

Meanwhile, the Brotherhood has failed to evolve in the wake of the revolution. Traditionally, the organization’s strengths have been local religious training and charity work, which have made it effective at mobilizing grassroots support for elections. But for decades it was banned from full participation in Egypt’s government, so it has never been tested in the more subtle and complicated aspects of national politics. The leadership is dominated by people from technical fields: of the eighteen members of the Brotherhood’s Guidance Bureau, fifteen are doctors, engineers, or scientists. Their careers may not have taught them the arts of negotiation and compromise, and Morsi, an engineer by training, has shown no real flexibility in response to the unfolding crisis. Eight of his advisers and aides have resigned in the past three weeks. From the outside, it’s hard to distinguish between calculation and incompetence. On Sunday evening, the government suddenly announced major tax increases for a wide variety of goods, including gasoline, electricity, cooking oil, cigarettes, and alcohol—hardly a savvy move in a country with a ravaged economy and an ongoing political crisis. Later that night, after the decree had inspired a mad rush on Cairo liquor stores, Morsi cancelled it with a message posted on his Facebook page at 2:13 a.m.

The Brotherhood has “a huge ability to withstand negotiations that never reach anything,” Gaber Gad Nassar, one of the most prominent members who quit the constituent assembly, said last week. Nassar is a professor of constitutional law at Cairo University, and his analysis could be seen as either deeply pessimistic or perversely optimistic, depending on the tone of your inshallah. “They are extremely keen to take over power and use it,” he said. “However, the biggest problem they face is the lack of talent qualified to do that.” Critics have always made this point—that the worst thing that could happen to the Brotherhood might be a rise to power, because then their weaknesses would be exposed. But this is small consolation in Cairo. The world is full of bad regimes that survive just because they hurt others more than they hurt themselves. ♦

This Administration is having a hissy fit, claiming that they are not able to adequately fund our own government, while at the same time, they are giving money to an organization which is the Godfather of Muslim Terrorists Groups and hates our nation with an unholy passion.

Are Obama, Secretary of State Kerry, and the rest of the idiots in this administration tone deaf or dangerously stupid?

I vote for tone deaf and dangerously stupid. God help us.

Until He comes,

KJ

Surgeon General C. Everett Koop: A Man of Science. A Man of Faith

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

koopThe finest Surgeon General of the United States in our generation, C. Everett Koopp, passed away this past week.

The following very fair biography is courtesy of msnbc.com (Can you believe it?)

To judge from the reaction on the left, when Ronald Reagan announced his choice for Surgeon General 32 years ago, you would have thought the man he’d chosen had a horn and tail.

C. Everett Koop, who passed away this week at the impressive age of 96, had been the chief of surgery at Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia, where he’d pioneered revolutionary techniques that saved countless infant lives. He was also a committed Christian whose faith and medical work had made him a fervent opponent of abortion. Democrats roared in protest and sent months fighting the nomination. Reagan had been elected with a major assist from the burgeoning Christian Right, and Koop perfectly symbolized the hard-right, almost theocratic direction liberals believed the new president wanted to take the country.

“The nomination” The New York Times declared in one of many editorials condemning Koop’s selection, “is a disservice not only to the Public Health Service and the public itself, but also to Dr. Koop. He is being honored for the most cynical of reasons–not for his medical skills but for his political compatibility.”

But his opponents didn’t really know Koop. And actually, Reagan didn’t either. [ I disagree…but, let’s move on] Because he was also a man of science, and of immense integrity–and when he was finally confirmed in the spring of 1981, Koop set about confounding critics and cheerleaders alike, becoming the most consequential surgeon general in the nation’s history and probably the single most important public health voice of the last three decades.

Smoking was one of his first crusades. The tobacco companies and their powerful allies in Congress denied it, but the evidence was overwhelming: Cigarette smoking was killing Americans in droves. Koop had little official power, but he did have a big platform, and he used it fearlessly–issuing blunt reports on the fatal risks of cigarettes, a landmark warning about the danger of second-hand smoke, and barnstorming the country to urge Americans to change their habits. Jesse Helms–one of the conservatives who’d championed his nomination–turned on him. The governor of North Carolina screamed for his impeachment. It all made Koop’s boss in the White House uncomfortable–but the smoking rate went down.

Then there was AIDS. The earliest reports of the killer virus coincided with the start of Reagan’s presidency, but as the death rate spiked and the mystery deepened, the president and his administration said little and did even less. Except for Dr. Koop, who saw AIDS not as a niche concern of gay men–a constituency much of Reagan’s political base was openly hostile to–but as the public health crisis it was. ”It is time,” Koop said, “to put self-defeating attitudes aside and recognize that we are fighting a disease–not people.” He issued a report that shocked the nation and enraged the right: the AIDS epidemic was only getting worse, Koop said, and while abstinence was the only sure way to stop its spread, the use of condoms by those who opted for sexual activity was essential.

When Reagan asked Koop to study the health risks that abortion posed to women, the surgeon general complied. Ardent abortion foes were hopeful: finally, a way to tilt the abortion debate back in their favor. But Koop did his study and reported back with words that bitterly disappointed the president and his supporters: “I regret, Mr. President, that in spite of a diligent review on the part of many in the Public Health Service and in the private sector, the scientific studies do not provide conclusive data about the health effects of abortion on women.”

C. Everett Koop left office just as committed to his faith and just as opposed to abortion as he had been when he entered office. But his personal moral views never clouded his judgment, or his commitment to public health. He was–and still is–a model surgeon general and his legacy is a reminder that sometimes the worst thing you can do is to judge a book by its cover.

Of course, I disagree with MSNBC on one point. Dr. Koop’s “personal moral view”, aka his Christian Faith, guided the decisions he made, in all aspects of his life. This article first appeared in the March 6, 1987, issue of Christianity Today. At the time, C. Everett Koop was Surgeon General of the United States.

My mother was 87 when she died of uterine cancer. She was in a coma, during which people actually asked me if I wanted to put her on dialysis. That would have been ridiculous for personal, spiritual, and economic reasons.

I do not believe—and have never taught—that every patient should be kept alive for the longest time possible. Nor have I said every patient has to have the last bit of high-tech heroic treatment available. I do believe in the right of the patient to say, “I have lived my life,” and to choose his or her own treatment. But that question becomes complicated when we consider the decisions people make for others who are not cognitive and have not made their final wishes known.

Right now, I am 70 years old and in excellent health. If my kidneys shut down tomorrow, let’s say, after a severe infection, I don’t know how long I would want to be on dialysis. It would be foolish and a waste of resources for me to have a kidney transplant at my age. I would probably opt to clean up my affairs, say goodbye to my family, and drift out in uremia.

The important point is that my wife and I know exactly how each of us feels about the end of life. This will be crucial if the time comes to make such a decision and I’m not then able to do so.

Of course, all such talk has different connotations for the Christian than for the non-Christian. My wife knows I do not believe in being ushered out of this life with a lethal injection. I want to hang around long enough to be sure my family is taken care of. But after that, I don’t want my life prolonged in great discomfort when it is fruitless.

I don’t look forward to the manner in which I am going to die. But I do not fear death. Indeed, the way in which we face death is a matter of faith. For the Christian, it is not the end.

Thank you, Dr. Koop, for your service to this nation, and your love of God and Country. You will be missed, sir. Godspeed.

Until He Comes, 

KJ