The House Budget Proposal: Vichy Republicans Capitulate. Sell Out Conservative Base.

boehnercryingDo you realize that since 1988, a Republican Party Presidential Candidate has won the Popular Vote only once? And, that was George W. Bush in 2004.

There is a reason for that, and it is not what the Liberals, of both political parties would have you think.

Like Reagan before him, Dubya exuded a “Optimistic Conservatism”, which appealed not only to The Republican Party Conservative Base, but to Conservative Democrats, as well.

After losing twice in the Presidential Election to a Far Left Ideologue in the person of Barack Hussein Obama, by now, you would think that the Republican Party would return to the “Optimistic Conservatism” which actually has won both Congressional and Presidential Elections for them in the past, but no….

According to thehill.com…

Speaker John Boehner called it “ridiculous” Wednesday that outside conservative groups oppose a budget deal crafted by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.).

RSC Chairman Steve Scalise dismissed Teller later in the day over accusations that Teller was leaking intel to the groups.

“We are saddened and outraged that an organization that purports to represent conservatives in Congress would dismiss a staff member for advancing conservatism and working with conservatives outside of Congress,” the leaders’ statement reads. “Paul Teller is one of the true heroes of the conservative movement. For over a decade, he has been the guiding light of conservatism on Capitol Hill. No one has done more to advance conservative principles and block the liberal agenda than Paul Teller. In the tradition of President Reagan, he is a true happy warrior who is both forceful and courageous.”

The effort was put together by the Conservative Action Project, a weekly gathering of more than 100 CEOS of organizations representing conservative movement, economic, national security and social groups. Co-signers include: Ed Meese, former attorney general under President Ronald Reagan; former Rep. David McIntosh (R-Ind.); Brent Bozell, chairman of For America; Mike Needham, CEO of Heritage Action for America; and Colin Hanna, president of Let Freedom Ring.

Conservatives have a right to be upset, as reported on cnbc.com,

House Republicans “capitulated” in agreeing to the two-year budget deal reached last night and left the country to deal with an unsustainable fiscal situation until the peak of the presidential primaries in 2015, when nothing will get done, former federal budget director David Stockman told CNBC on Wednesday.

“First, let’s be clear—it’s a joke and betrayal,” Stockman, who served under President Ronald Reagan, said on “Squawk on the Street.” “It’s the final surrender of the House Republican leadership to Beltway politics and kicking the can and ignoring the budget monster that’s hurtling down the road.”

Stockman added that the budget deal means lawmakers would take a “two-year vacation” from dealing with the country’s fiscal situation and revisit it in 2015 at around the same time as the Iowa straw polls. Without an incumbent in the presidential race, both political parties will be too busy to touch the budget, he said.

While some hailed the budget deal as a breakthrough in Washington’s political gridlock, Stockman compared the accord to “kicking the can” into “low Earth orbit.”

“There’s plenty of room, but they’re unwilling to make the tough choices,” he said. “Now, I understand Democrats doing that. The only hope of getting our fiscal situation under control is if the House Republicans stand up. And they’ve totally capitulated.”

The two-year deal averts deeper cuts to military spending, but Stockman said that’s where lawmakers should have looked for savings. The U.S. no longer faces threats from developed countries and has been “fired as the world’s policemen,” he said.

Any meaningful changes to the budget wouldn’t happen until nearly 2020 if lawmakers don’t address them now, he said. Washington still has a chance to duel over the debt ceiling this February, however, and over unemployment benefits in the shorter term.

Conservative Radio Talk Show Host Rush Limbaugh thinks that these Vichy Republicans are scared of another Shutdown:

The Republicans in Congress — and I would say that this is probably true of the Republicans in Washington. They are suffering shell shock.

They are not moved at all by Obama’s plummeting poll numbers. They are not moved at all by the problems people are having with Obamacare. They are in shell shock. I’ve described it as posttraumatic stress disorder. Whatever, they are literally afraid of one thing, and that is being blamed again for the government shutdown. That was the objective, to make sure there wasn’t a government shutdown, and it didn’t matter what was required.

If it meant funding Obamacare, which has happened, that’s what they’d do. It’s this simple. The Republicans didn’t like the idea of defunding Obamacare. They didn’t like the idea of a partial government shutdown. They’re living in a different world. They believe that the country despises and hates them.

They believe that Obama is still universally loved and adored and that there is nothing they can do to overcome that.

They think that anything that goes against Obama’s way is going to result in them being blamed, and it’s an election year next year, and they don’t want to get anywhere near another government shutdown. No matter the principle involved. No matter the issues involved. They just weren’t gonna go there. I’ve never seen anything like this. I have never seen this degree of shell shock or whatever else you want to call it.

…Preventing another shutdown is all that mattered. They really, to this minute, believe that they may have been irreparably harmed by being blamed for the shutdown a couple of months ago. They are paralyzed. The fear of what the media will say and do and report has them paralyzed. I think, in large part, that’s also why so many of them are talking about moving ahead with amnesty and so forth.

…they hate the idea of another partial government shutdown. They just do. It isn’t gonna happen no matter what, because they still haven’t gotten over what they think is being blamed for it. Most people don’t even remember. This is the thing. The disconnect with their own voters and base, I have never seen anything like it. They are so frightened of being blamed for another shutdown that they gave up parts of the sequester, which had been a hard line on spending.

I have some news from the Heartland for the Vichy Republicans who have politically barricaded themselves from the American citizens they are supposed to be serving: 

They have good reason to be afraid. 2014 is close than they think. and given the way they are treating American Conservatives, 2014 is going to make the Political Massacre of 2010 seem like a co–ed pillow fight.

The Mid-Term Elections of 2014 are on their way to looking like the opening Battle Scenes in the movie “Gladiator” with Russell Crowe.

And guess what, Speaker Boehner? You ain’t Maximus and your fellow Vichy Republicans aren’t the victorious Roman Legionnaires.

I hope you guys have a trade to fall back on.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Gives Money to Syrian Rebels, Threatens to Cut OUR Veterans’ Services

veteranflagand wheelchairIt has been a long, hot summer. Especially for those Americans, who have been punished by our Petulant President’s “Sequester”.

According to the White House Office of Management and Budget, om a memorandum they sent to House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner in February, Obama’s Sequester will cut $55 billion from defense in 2013 and $27 billion from the non-defense discretionary budget.

  • Defense 
  • * A reduction in readiness of many non-deployed units
  • * Delays in investments in new equipment and facilities
  • * Cutbacks in equipment repairs
  • * Declines in military research and development efforts
  • * Reductions in base services for military families
  • Non-Defense
  • * Education grants to states and local school districts supporting smaller classes, after-school programs, and children with disabilities would suffer.
  • * Number of FBI agents, Customs and Border Patrol agents, correctional officers, and federal prosecutors would be slashed.
  • * FAA’s ability to oversee and manage the nation’s airspace and air traffic control would be reduced.
  • * Department of Agriculture’s efforts to inspect food processing plants would be curtailed.
  • * Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to protect the water we drink and the air we breathe would be degraded.
  • * National Institutes of Health would have to halt or curtail scientific research, including needed research into cancer and childhood diseases
  • * Housing programs and food assistance for low-income families would be cut

Those threats and disruptions are still not enough for our Petulant Present. Now, he has to try to intimidate our Brightest and Best, in hopes that they will put pressure on their Republican Representatives, to allow Obama cart blanche to spend OUR money as he darn well pleases.

Fox News reports that

President Obama took his case for ending the sequester to hundreds of disabled veterans Saturday, saying he protected their benefits from the “reckless” cuts to the federal budget but suggesting next year might be different.

“It’s hurting our military. I made it clear that your veteran’s benefits are exempt from this year’s sequester,” the president said to the applause of hundreds at the Disabled American Veterans’ convention in Orlando, Fla. “But I want to tell you going forward the best way to protect the VA care you have earned is to get rid of this sequester altogether.”

The president but the blame squarely on Congress, which returns in about four weeks to work on a new federal budget and increasing the federal debt limit.

“We’ve got these reckless, across-the-board budget cuts called the sequester that are hitting a lot of folks hard,” Obama said. “Congress needs to come together and agree on a responsible plan that reduces our deficit and keeps our promises to our veterans and keeps our promises to future generations.”

The cuts went into effect in March after Congress and the White House failed to agree on a more balanced plan to cut government spending.

Some Republicans have meanwhile said the president shares in the responsibility, considering he signed the 2011 Budget Control Act that raised the debt ceiling and led to sequester.

The president also told the veterans the government is making progress in reducing the backlog of disability claims but acknowledged the slow pace.

“It hasn’t gone as fast as I’ve wanted,” he said.

The staggering backlog of disability claims for compensation for illness and injury caused by military service has been a main concern for veterans.

The number of claims waiting to be processed ballooned under Obama, largely because the administration made it easier for Vietnam veterans who were exposed to the Agent Orange defoliant to get benefits.

However, Obama always seems to find some of OUR money to give his friends….

Israel National News reports…

U.S. President Barack Obama announced on Wednesday [of last week] that the United States would increase the humanitarian aid it provides to civil war torn Syria.

In a statement on the occasion of Eid al-Fitr, which marks the end of the month of Ramadan, Obama announced more than $195 million in additional humanitarian assistance to provide life-saving food, medical care, and relief supplies for people affected by the ongoing conflict in Syria.

The new contribution brings U.S. humanitarian aid to over $1 billion dollars since the Syrian crisis began, noted the statement.

“The United States remains the single-largest contributor of humanitarian assistance for the people of Syria. The United States is providing humanitarian aid to help 3.5 million people across all 14 governorates in Syria and continues to work through all possible channels to deliver aid to those in need in Syria, including through the United Nations, international and non-governmental organizations, and local Syrian organizations,” said the statement.

The new U.S. humanitarian assistance includes over $155 million to increase food assistance, expand life-saving emergency medical capacity, and provide additional hygiene kits, clothing, and household supplies in Syria.

U.S. assistance will also increase gender-based violence response services and referral through women’s health centers, mobile clinics, and outreach teams providing health and psychosocial services in Syria, including home-based support to vulnerable women and children.

“This new funding also includes nearly $41 million to provide food vouchers, in-kind food distributions, and ready-to-eat meals for approximately 245,000 refugees in camps and host communities in Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, and Egypt,” said the statement.

“The United States supports and appreciates the countries hosting the nearly 1.9 million refugees who have fled the brutal conflict in Syria and commends host-nation efforts to provide protection, assistance, and hospitality to all those fleeing violence. The United States recognizes the significant strains on host communities and the economic impact of providing refuge to such a large number of people. We call on all host governments to keep their borders open to all those still fleeing violence in Syria.”

Several months ago, Obama announced an extra $155 million dollars to aid refugees fleeing what he said was “barbarism” propagated by the Assad government against Syrians.

Meanwhile it remains unclear whether the U.S. is providing military assistance to the rebels fighting President Bashar Al-Assad.

Uh Huh. Oh…it seems pretty clear to me, my friends.

It all has to do where President Barack Hussein Obama’s Priorities and Allegiances lie.

Until He Comes,

KJ.

Did Budget Cuts Lead to Throats Being Cut?

Evidently, the money designated for Ambassador to Lybia Chris Stevens’ protection had to be used for something more important: like Michelle’s vay-cays or improving Obama’s Golf Game.

Fore!

The Washington Times reports that

Investigators looking for lessons from the fatal terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi might want to start on Capitol Hill, where Congress slashed spending on diplomatic security and U.S. embassy construction over the past two years.

Since 2010, Congress cut $296 million from the State Department’s spending request for embassy security and construction, with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts, according to an analysis by a former appropriations committee staffer.

Rep. Michael Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, made clear Wednesday that congressional staff will be looking into the attack, in addition to a probe by the State Department’s inspector general and another State Department investigation required by federal law.

The cuts to the embassy construction, security and maintenance budget was almost 10 percent of the entire appropriation for that account over those two years, said Scott Lilly, now a scholar at the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

“Anytime we cut that account back, we are putting people’s lives at risk, people who are serving the country” in dangerous places abroad, said Mr. Lilly.

The cuts mean that “a lot of places you’d intended to secure better, you don’t reach” this year, he added.

He said he did not know whether the cuts had impacted security at the Benghazi consulate that was stormed on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks by heavily armed Islamic extremists, who burned down the building and killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

A State Department official told The Washington Times that there was no impact on security in Benghazi from the cuts.

Since 1999, the official said, the department has spent $13 billion on 94 new secure diplomatic facilities “and security upgrades to existing properties that have moved more than 27,000 people into safer, more secure facilities.”

The cuts were the latest in a series of squeezes on State Department spending. Congress has appropriated less money for the department than requested in every year since Fiscal 2007, according to budget figures.

“During both the latter years of the Bush presidency and throughout the Obama presidency, the administration has recommended boosting spending on foreign aid and [State Department] foreign operations, including security, and Congress has always cut it back,” said Philip J. Crowley, a former State Department spokesman.

“There is simply not a constituency on the Hill to increase spending on diplomacy and development. Resources do matter.” said Mr. Crowley, now a fellow at the George Washington University Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication.

In a completely unrelated story (I’m sure), published on July 25, 2012, at AmericanThinker.com:

…Walid Shoebat published this 37-page booklet entitled “Proof: Huma has Ties to Muslim Brotherhood — Countless Documents Surface” and this was followed up with Tuesday’s update that “Huma Abedin Served on Board with Al-Qaeda Godfather”. Shoebat states that the latest discoveries “include but are not limited to “[p]roof that Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin served on the Board of IMMA from at least 12/02/02 – 9/24/08” and that “Al-Qaeda Godfather Abdullah Omar Naseef served on IMMA’s Advisory Board from at least 12/02/02 – 12/03/03.”

…Besides extensively citing all of Huma Abedin’s family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Muslim Sisterhood, Shoebat maintains that “[n]either Huma Abedin, Hillary’s aid [sic] or any major western media even mention what is common knowledge in the Arab circles regarding Hassan Abedin, [and] his connections or activities.” Hassan is Huma’s brother.

Why the virtual silence?

Abedin’s brother had a strong working relationship with Abdullah Omar Naseef and Yusuf Qaradawi. Naseef “chaired other entities considered major security concerns for the United States and ran a charity front for terror.” There is no “six degrees of separation” among these men as has been maintained by the mainstream media. Central to Shoebat’s investigation are the overlapping ties of Abdullah Omar Naseef to a number of Muslim Brotherhood offshoots. One such group WAMY or World Assembly of Muslim Youth maintains that “[t]he Jews are humanity’s enemies: they foment immorality in this world.”

Saleha Abedin, Huma’s mother, through the Sisterhood branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, works to advance the Brotherhood agendas against Western interests and policies. In his report, Shoebat shows the interlocking tentacles among various Muslim Brotherhood members which leave “no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood is the author and the one setting policies and standards for the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC), which Saleha Abedin chairs. IICWC’s ‘official policies include marital rape, child marriage, female genital circumcision and polygamy.'”

In a 16 page letter, written last summer to Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison, Rep. Michele Bachmann wrote:

The concerns about the foreign influence of immediate family members is such a concern to the U.S. Government that it includes these factors as potentially disqualifying conditions for obtaining a security clearance, which undoubtedly Ms. Abedin has had to obtain to function in her position. For us to raise issues about a highly-based U.S. Government official with known immediate family connections to foreign extremist organizations is not a question of singling out Ms. Abedin. In fact, these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of anyone seeking a security clearance.

Of course, nothing ever happened, except for President Obama defending Ms. Abedin, in front of his Muslim guests, at his annual Ramadan Dinner.

Given the fact that the Muslim Terrorists seem to know more about the timing of Administrative Initiatives and inner workings of our government than do most of our elected representatives up on Capitol Hill, as proven by the attack on the Benghazi Consulate, I would say that it may be time to actually investigate Ms. Abedin, and any other Muslims with questionable familial ties, in key Administrative positions in our Government, wouldn’t you?