Boehner Goes on Book Tour, Attacks Cruz in Book and on Tour…Cruz Verbally Eviscerates Cryin’ John in Response

“Please don’t cry.” – Sen. Ted Cruz to Former Speaker of the House John Boehner

FoxNews.com reports that

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz doubled down on his response to former House Speaker John Boehner after he told the Texas Republican to “go f**k yourself” in a leaked audio recording.

“I think he was probably recording at nine or ten in the morning so obviously he had too much wine that day already,” Cruz told the Daily Caller on Saturday. “This guy is a little unhinged.”

Cruz on Friday mockingly tweeted that he wears Boehner’s “drunken, bloviated scorn” proudly alongside a clip from an upcoming CBS News interview with Boehner in which he calls Cruz a “jerk” and accuses him of “making a lot of noise” but not being especially productive in Congress.

“The Swamp is unhappy,” Cruz tweeted. “I wear with pride his drunken, bloviated scorn. Please don’t cry,” the lawmaker joked, referencing Boehner’s reputation for appearing publicly emotional at various points throughout his career.

The ex-speaker has taken several shots at Cruz, including while recording his audiobook when he reportedly told Cruz to “f—” himself in several off-script moments.

In the CBS interview, Boehner says he doesn’t like to “beat anyone up” but he’d make an exception for Cruz.

“Perfect symbol, you know, of getting elected, making a lot of noise, draw a lot of attention to yourself, raise a lot of money, which means you’re gonna go make more noise, raise more money,” Boehner told CBS of how he views Cruz’s political career.

Boehner, an Ohio Republican who served as House speaker from 2011-2015, has been making the interview rounds promoting his book, “On The House: A Washington Memoir,” which comes out next week. Boehner represented Ohio’s 8th Congressional District from 1991-2015.

Cruz made a joke of it at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Florida in February, saying, “John Boehner made some news. He suggested that I do something that was anatomically impossible. To which my response was, ‘Who’s John Boehner?'” according to The Hill.

Cruz on Saturday noted that the “lead insult on the back on the back of the book is a different insult he directed at me.”

He seems to have a bit of an obsession,” Cruz said.

Asked whether he planned to write a book about Boehner in response, Cruz said plainly, “I don’t anticipate writing a fortune cookie about him.“

Here is some information you may not have known about the Former Speaker of the House, courtesy of sourcewatch.org, from a blog I wrote in March of 2013…

In 1981 Boehner served on the board of trustees of Union Township, Butler County, Ohio. In 1984, he served as president of the township board of trustees.

Boehner served as a Ohio state representative from 1985 to 1990. In 1990, when U.S. Rep. Donald “Buz” Lukens (R-Ohio) was caught in a sex scandal involving a minor, Boehner challenged Lukens in the Republican primary and defeated the incumbent, while also upsetting the district’s former representative, Tom Kindness, who Boehner declared had abandoned his district to become a lobbyist. Boehner went on to victory in the 1990 general election and began serving in the U.S. House of Representatives the 102nd Congress.

He was a member of the Gang of Seven, a group of seven freshmen Republicans who assailed the Democratic leadership with accusations of corruption and arrogance over the misuse of the House Bank. According to a 1992 San Francisco Chronicle article the Gang “set the match to the bank scandal that has now engulfed the House, blackened its leadership and sparked a ‘spontaneous political combustion’ that many analysts say will fuel a record turnover in Congress.” (San Francisco Chronicle, 3/30/02)

Boehner told the Cleveland Plain Dealer: “I came as a reformer. But when people in charge don’t want to reform – the only way…is revolution.” (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2/15/93)

The banking scandal involved 355 members, Democrats and Republicans, writing 8,331 overdrafts to the bank. The Gang pounced on the issue and forced the Democrats into a corner and eventually led to the tidal wave Republican Revolution of 1994.

Boehner came to Congress as one of the most pro-business, anti-government members in 1990. He advocated a flat tax and abolition of whole government agencies including the Department of Education and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Boehner quickly rose to the fourth highest position in the Republican leadership – Republican Conference Chairman – after chairing Newt Gingrich’s 1994 run for the Minority Leader post.

Boehner was on of the principal architects of the Contract With America. He also championed the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act.

When Newt Gingrich resigned his post as Speaker in the wake of the GOPs loss of seats in the 1998 election Boehner’s leadership post was challenged by J.C. Watts, the only black Republican congressman. Boehner lost to Watts 121-93.

…Boehner was elected House Majority Leader on February 2, 2006, following Tom DeLay’s departure because of a criminal indictment.

…According to the Washington Post “From illegal immigration to sanctions on China to an overhaul of the pension system, Boehner, as chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, took ardently pro-business positions that were contrary to those of many in his party. Religious conservatives — examining his voting record — see him as a policymaker driven by small-government economic concerns, not theirs….. [He opposes] a tough illegal immigration bill that passed in December [2005] with overwhelming Republican support over Boehner’s opposition. One provision in the bill would mandate that every business verify the legality of every employee through the federal terrorism watch list and a database of Social Security numbers. For the bill’s authors, the measure is central to choking off illegal immigrants’ employment opportunities. To business groups and Boehner, it is unworkable.” Feb 12, 2006

The professional politicians on both sides of the aisle up on Capitol Hill live in a bubble, totally and purposely oblivious from the wants and needs of the American Voters who gave them their cushy jobs.

Moderate Republicans , like Cryin’ John Boehner, have been a barrier to Republican victory for as long as I can remember. Like Quakers, Establishment Republicans seem to believe that passive resistance and reaching out to their sworn enemies, friends, is the way to defeat those who oppose you.

When Donald J. Trump came down that golden escalator, along with his beautiful wife Melania, a loud thunderclap could be heard emanating from Capitol Hill and Democrat and Republican Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

That sound was the sound of the sphincters of all the “Keepers of the Washington Status Quo” slamming shut in unison.

You see, boys and girls, the Vichy Republicans in Washington had made a lot of money being “buds” (i.e. servants) with the Democrats.

Of course, they never won Presidential Elections, but, why should they care?

They were getting filthy rich from all of the stock tips and other perks which came from “reaching across the aisle”.

They knew that Trump was going to change all of that.

He was not coming to Washington to make money. In fact, he was not even going to take a salary.

He could not be bought.

And, by the way, that is just one of the reasons that Cryin’ John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and the rest of the Never-Trumpers among the Republican Elite hate our Former President so much.

He refused to take their money and play their games.

He would rather hold a MAGA Rally and speak directly to thousands of average Americans, that to attend some political soiree full of the Washington Elite.

Cruz is right, Boehner is a long-time member of the Washington Political Elite, better known as The Swamp.

All of those Republicans, who are still on Capitol Hill, and who worked against Former President Trump during his tenure in office and who still stand against him to this day, needed to be voted out of office in the 2020 Midterm Elections.

Perhaps then, American Voters will have placed in office Republican Representatives and Senators who actually want to work for and serve US…instead of themselves.

Until He Comes,

KJ 

DONATIONS ARE WELCOME AND APPRECIATED.

 

Establishment Republicans Pushing Ryan For Speaker. Want Conservatives to be “Reasonable”.

The Establishment Republicans are pushing hard to make Paul Ryan the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Yesterday, the 2012 Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate received an unsolicited endorsement.

Politico.com reports that

Harry Reid just gave Paul Ryan an unwelcome endorsement for speaker.

The Democratic leader offered his surprise backing for Ryan (R-Wis.) to assume the House speakership, saying he hopes Ryan runs and wins the job because he’s a “Paul Ryan fan.”

“He appears to me to be one of the people over there that would be reasonable. I mean look at some of the other people,” Reid said. “I don’t agree with him on much of what he does. I think what he’s done with Medicare and Medicaid, what he’s wanted to do I disagree with. But generally speaking we’ve been able to work with him.”

Indeed, Ryan’s work with Reid lieutenant Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on a two-year budget deal in 2013 remains a bipartisan highlight for a Congress otherwise beset by gridlock. But did Reid hurt Ryan by praising him?

The Nevada Democrat shrugged when asked if he was giving Ryan a kiss of death as the Wisconsin lawmaker weighs a speakers bid amid ever-growing criticism from the right for his policy positions.

“I just speak the truth,” Reid said.

“If it helps him fine, if it doesn’t that’s too bad.”

Okay, so the Senate Minority Leader approves of Paul Ryan becoming the Speaker of the House.

Big whoop.

It would seem to me that Dinghy Harry’s is one endorsement that a Republican Leader, who actually wishes to rally the Conservative Base, would not want to have.

Later yesterday, Paul Ryan started his “exploratory campaign” for the position of the Speaker of the House.

The Washington Post  reports that

Rep. Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) moved closer to the House speakership Tuesday, telling fellow Republicans that he would consider taking the job if he could be assured that the caucus would stand behind him.

Ryan faced his colleagues — and his political future — at a private evening meeting of House Republicans in the Capitol basement. He said he would be willing to step up and meet the calls to serve, ending weeks of GOP leadership turmoil, as long as disparate factions moved in the coming days to unite around him.

“I hope it doesn’t sound conditional, but it is,” he said, according to members inside the room. He paused after saying the word “conditional,” they said, for effect.

Ryan, the 45-year-old chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and a 2012 vice presidential nominee, has long resisted pressure to assume a higher-profile role in party leadership. And he signaled Tuesday that his decision to serve was far from assured.

Much depends on what assurances of support he can win from Republican hard-liners. Before entering the evening meeting, Ryan met privately with leaders of the House Freedom Caucus, an influential group that helped push Speaker John A. Boehner out of his post and derailed Majority Leader Kevin O. McCarthy’s bid to succeed him.

That meeting ended without firm commitments, and at the subsequent GOP conference meeting, Ryan made clear he would need a formal endorsement from the Freedom Caucus before moving forward.

In remarks to reporters, Ryan laid out his vision for moving the House GOP from “being an opposition party to being a proposition party” and set terms under which he would assume the speaker’s post. Those terms effectively put the onus on his colleagues to coalesce behind him rather than forcing Ryan to campaign for the job.

“This is not a job I ever sought; this is not a job I ever wanted,” he said. “I came to the conclusion that this was a dire moment.”

Should he agree to assume the speaker’s post, Ryan would once again emerge as a leading force in national politics, three years after serving as his party’s vice presidential nominee and amid mass unrest in GOP ranks.

“If Paul Ryan can’t unite us, no one can. Who else is out there?” said Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), a moderate. “That’d be a sign of utter dysfunction, total madness.”

Ryan’s demands reflect a desire to lead the House GOP as its spokesman and agenda setter without the threat of revolt from the right, halting a dynamic that has dominated the tumultuous speakership of Boehner (R-Ohio), who announced last month that he would leave Congress at the end of October. Another aim would be to delegate some of the job’s travel and fundraising demands so that Ryan could spend enough time with his wife and school-age children.

“My only caution is that he should go very slow and make sure that the whole conference is coming to him,” said former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R). “Don’t underestimate the degree of getting chewed up. We are not like the Democrats right now. They are relatively cohesive. . . . We are a movement in enormous ferment, with enormous anger and enormous impatience.”

Looming over Ryan’s deliberations is a churning frustration among Republicans nationally about the party’s ability to oppose President Obama and a presidential primary field led by anti-establishment outsiders who have made common cause with the House GOP’s right flank.

Those conservative House members have pushed for a suite of rules changes, ranging from an overhaul of the party’s internal steering committee to a more open process for considering legislation. Ryan, they say, would not be exempt from those demands, which, if adopted, could give the new speaker less control.

Ryan’s allies say his conditions for becoming speaker are likely to include an understanding that he would have a free hand to lead without a constant fear of mutinous reprisals.

Peter Wehner, a former adviser to President George W. Bush, said Ryan wants House conservatives to make clear that they would not seek to “cripple him” from the start.

“He doesn’t have a moral obligation to get Republicans out of the rubble they’ve created for themselves,” Wehner said. “Asking for their goodwill is completely reasonable.”

“Reasonable”.

There’s that word…again.

Why is it always us Conservatives, who are called upon to be “reasonable”, i.e., whether in dealings with the Democrats or the Establishment Republicans, to compromise the Traditional American Values which we hold dear, for the sake of Political Expediency?

Why can’t the Vichy Republicans be “reasonable” and actually start representing the wishes of the Conservative Base, which gave them their phony-baloney jobs?

In 1975, Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech which sums up our present situation and how we, the Conservative Base of the Republican Party, need to handle the Republican Party leadership, quite well.

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing — adjusting the brackets to the cost of living — so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

I believe that the Republican Party is stuck in a cycle in which their desire to protect their own hindquarters and cushy “jobs” have lead to a self-imposed isolation from the very American Citizens who were responsible for their having those cushy “jobs” in the first place.

I believe that average Americans, like you and me, have the power to relieve them of the burden of such a stressful job, and send others to Washington, who will listen to their “bosses”.

Just as Ronaldus Magnus said those 39 years ago, it is time to “let them go their way”.

Cryin’ John Boehner’s “resignation” was a good start.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Cryin’ John Boehner to Go Sobbing Into the Sunset. That’s a Good Start.

Yesterday, Cryin’ John Boehner, the Vichy (Moderate) Republican who assumed the mantle of Speaker of the House of Representatives, after the Conservative-powered Political Tsunami, known as the Mid-term Elections of 2010, announced his resignation yesterday, effective at the end of October.

Hallelujah. And don’t let the screen door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya, O Spine of Jello.

Here is some information you may not have known about the Speaker of the House, courtesy of sourcewatch.org, from a blog I wrote in March of 2013…

In 1981 Boehner served on the board of trustees of Union Township, Butler County, Ohio. In 1984, he served as president of the township board of trustees.

Boehner served as a Ohio state representative from 1985 to 1990. In 1990, when U.S. Rep. Donald “Buz” Lukens (R-Ohio) was caught in a sex scandal involving a minor, Boehner challenged Lukens in the Republican primary and defeated the incumbent, while also upsetting the district’s former representative, Tom Kindness, who Boehner declared had abandoned his district to become a lobbyist. Boehner went on to victory in the 1990 general election and began serving in the U.S. House of Representatives the 102nd Congress.

He was a member of the Gang of Seven, a group of seven freshmen Republicans who assailed the Democratic leadership with accusations of corruption and arrogance over the misuse of the House Bank. According to a 1992 San Francisco Chronicle article the Gang “set the match to the bank scandal that has now engulfed the House, blackened its leadership and sparked a ‘spontaneous political combustion’ that many analysts say will fuel a record turnover in Congress.” (San Francisco Chronicle, 3/30/02)

Boehner told the Cleveland Plain Dealer: “I came as a reformer. But when people in charge don’t want to reform – the only way…is revolution.” (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2/15/93)

The banking scandal involved 355 members, Democrats and Republicans, writing 8,331 overdrafts to the bank. The Gang pounced on the issue and forced the Democrats into a corner and eventually led to the tidal wave Republican Revolution of 1994.

Boehner came to Congress as one of the most pro-business, anti-government members in 1990. He advocated a flat tax and abolition of whole government agencies including the Department of Education and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Boehner quickly rose to the fourth highest position in the Republican leadership – Republican Conference Chairman – after chairing Newt Gingrich’s 1994 run for the Minority Leader post.

Boehner was on of the principal architects of the Contract With America. He also championed the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act.

When Newt Gingrich resigned his post as Speaker in the wake of the GOPs loss of seats in the 1998 election Boehner’s leadership post was challenged by J.C. Watts, the only black Republican congressman. Boehner lost to Watts 121-93.

In 2001 Boehner was named the Chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee where he would oversee numerous agencies that he planned on abolishing in the early 1990s. Boehner worked diligently to pass [[President Bush]]’s No Child Left Behind Act, reaching across the aisle as a conference committee chairman to work with Democrat George Miller (D).

Boehner has also been a strong supporter of school vouchers for private and religious schools and helped to push through the school voucher program for the District of Columbia.

Boehner has repeatedly tried to get a pension reform bill, favored by business leaders, passed by Congress. It has passed the House multiple times, but has consistently failed in the Senate.

Boehner was elected House Majority Leader on February 2, 2006, following Tom DeLay’s departure because of a criminal indictment.

There was brief controversy on the first ballot for Majority Leader. The first count showed more votes cast than Republicans present at the Conference meeting.[22] However, this turned out to be due to a misunderstanding on whether or not Congressman Luis Fortune was allowed to vote on leadership.

Boehner campaigned as a reform candidate who could help the House Republicans cleanse and recover from the political damage caused by charges of ethics violations, corruption and money laundering leveled against prominent conservatives such as DeLay and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, in spite of his own ties to Abramoff.

He bested fellow candidates Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri and Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona, even though he was considered an underdog candidate to House Majority Whip Blunt. It was the most contested election among House Republicans since 1998. Boehner received 122 votes compared to 109 by Blunt in a run-off vote. Rep. Shadegg dropped out of the race after a loss in the first round of voting and his supporters backed Boehner.

Blunt kept his previous position as Majority Whip, the No. 3 leadership position in the House. Boehner has a strong pro-business reputation but the social conservatives in the GOP are questioning his commitment to their values. According to the Washington Post “From illegal immigration to sanctions on China to an overhaul of the pension system, Boehner, as chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, took ardently pro-business positions that were contrary to those of many in his party. Religious conservatives — examining his voting record — see him as a policymaker driven by small-government economic concerns, not theirs….. [He opposes] a tough illegal immigration bill that passed in December [2005] with overwhelming Republican support over Boehner’s opposition. One provision in the bill would mandate that every business verify the legality of every employee through the federal terrorism watch list and a database of Social Security numbers. For the bill’s authors, the measure is central to choking off illegal immigrants’ employment opportunities. To business groups and Boehner, it is unworkable.” Feb 12, 2006

Boehner has since backtracked on his reform platform, stalling on lobbying and ethics reform proposals put forward by Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier (R-CA). Boehner stated on “Fox New Sunday” that Congress may be overreacting to the current lobbying scandal and voiced his opposition to a proposed congressional travel ban and a ban of earmark projects. The Washington Post writes that Boehner’s ascension to the Majority Leader post “make[s] it less likely that the more far-reaching proposals to restructure lobbying will become law.”  Boehner called the travel ban proposal “childish” in another interview.

Boehner is one of the top recipients of private travel, ranking 7th out of 638 members and former members at American Radio Works Power Trips. His trip totals cost $157,603.85.

So, why is Boehner vacating his cushy, phone-baloney job?

Perhaps he hears footsteps behind him, leading to the embarrassment of being fired.

Foxnews.com reports that

Most Republicans feel betrayed by their party — and show their displeasure by supporting outsiders over establishment candidates in the GOP presidential race. 

Real-estate mogul Donald Trump and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson are the favorites in the Republican race in the latest Fox News national poll on the 2016 election.  Neither has held elected office before and yet the two of them — together with businesswoman Carly Fiorina — capture the support of more than half of GOP primary voters.

On the Democratic side, support for Vice President Joe Biden — who is still considering a run — has almost doubled since August.  But make no mistake: Hillary Clinton remains the frontrunner. 

Trump stays on top with 26 percent among GOP primary voters, followed by Carson at 18 percent.  Fiorina and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio are next, tied at 9 percent.  All four have gained ground. After the August Fox News debate, Trump had 25 percent, while Carson had 12 percent, Fiorina 5 percent and Rubio 4 percent. 

Trump holds his leader status even though he was once again rated in the poll as having done the worst job in the debate. Fiorina, Rubio and Carson receive positive marks for their performances.

The appeal of outsiders comes from significant dissatisfaction with the party establishment:  62 percent of Republican primary voters feel “betrayed” by politicians in their party, and another 66 percent say the recent Republican majorities in Washington have failed to do all they could to block or reverse President Obama’s agenda.  For comparison, 40 percent of Democratic primary voters feel betrayed by their party.  

Frustration with party leaders has been a recurring theme for one sitting GOP senator in the race, Ted Cruz of Texas, who is next in the poll at eight percent.  He was at 10 percent in August. 

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush garners seven percent, a new low for him in the Fox News poll.  He had 15 percent support as recently as early August. 

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is up a couple of ticks to five percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich gets four percent.  Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee receives three percent and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul two percent.  All other candidates receive one percent or less. 

The favorites among white evangelical Christians voting in the Republican primary are Trump (29 percent), Carson (21 percent) and Cruz (12 percent).

The top picks among self-described “very” conservatives voting in the GOP primary are Carson (23 percent), Trump (22 percent), Cruz (13 percent) and Rubio (11 percent).

Straight talk is part of Trump’s outsider appeal — but does he go too far?  Not for GOP primary voters: 65 percent of them say Trump just tells it like it is, compared to 30 percent who think he is “too mean and blunt” to be president.  Trump’s style may be a liability in the general election, though. Overall, 49 percent of voters find him too mean and blunt, while 44 percent say we need his directness. 

Moderate Republicans have been a barrier to Republican victory for as long as I can remember. Like Quakers, Establishment Republicans seem to believe that passive resistance and reaching out to their sworn enemies, friends, is the way to defeat those who oppose you.

It has been especially bad since Boehner gained the Speakership in January of 2011, as the House and Senate Republican Leadership apparently cherish their friendship with the Democrats more than they do the wishes of the folks back home. Yes, they talk a good game, but so did Jon Lovitz in those “Liar Sketches” during the old days of Saturday Night Live, back when that show was actually funny.

Yeah,  my wife Morgan Fairchild. Yeah, that’s it. That’s the ticket!

In 1975, Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech which sums up our present situation and how we need to handle the Republican Party leadership, quite well.

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing — adjusting the brackets to the cost of living — so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

I believe that the Republican Party is stuck in a cycle in which their desire to protect their own hindquarters and cushy “jobs” have lead to a self-imposed isolation from the very American Citizens who were responsible for their having those cushy “jobs” in the first place.

I believe that average Americans, like you and me, have the power to relieve them of the burden of such a stressful job, and send others to Washington, who will listen to their “bosses”.

Just as Ronaldus Magnus said those 39 years ago, it is time to “let them go their way”.

Cryin’ John Boehner’s “resignation” is a good start.

It’s time for Mitch “The Turtle” McConnell to pack his bags, as well.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

The Tyranny of the Minority: What Happens When Our System of Checks and Balances is Bypassed

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.- Thomas Jefferson

Politico.com reports that

Buoyed by the success of his nuclear deal with Iran, President Barack Obama is preparing to move aggressively on other long-delayed priorities, including a major climate change summit this winter and his elusive quest to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

The National Security Council’s directorate of strategic planning has been quietly building an agenda of action items for the closing year of Obama’s presidency, in a White House that sees its work as far from complete, administration officials say.

“We have no intention of resting on our laurels,” said one senior administration official. “We have an ambitious foreign policy agenda that we’ll continue to pursue aggressively throughout the remainder of [the] fourth quarter of the administration.”

Part of that agenda includes striking a calmer post-Iran deal relationship with Israel — including a November visit to the White House by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that officials announced on Friday.

Also high on the to-do list: completing a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal to which Congress gave “fast-track” approval in June; bolstering counter-terrorism partnerships in Asia and Africa; and putting U.S.-China relations on a firmer footing, a project that will include a state visit to Washington by Chinese President Xi Jingping this month.

As Obama’s presidency draws to a close, he will focus increasingly on the policies his successor will inherit after he’s gone, according to sources familiar with the administration’s thinking.

“The last 16 months actually can be very important not only for this president’s legacy, but for setting up the next president’s administration,” said Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who is close to Obama foreign policy officials. “No matter what people say in campaigns, you’re most likely to see incremental change from administration to administration.”

Even as the Iran deal gets implemented in the months ahead, a potentially thorny process that will occupy significant bandwidth in the White House, Obama will shift his focus to climate.

An international climate summit kicks off at the end of November in Paris, where Obama hopes to find agreement on meaningful new limits on carbon gases. The summit is expected to be one focus of Xi’s visit.

Beneath the heady talk of agenda-setting, however, is the grim reality of a global stage where multiple fires burn despite Washington’s efforts to extinguish them. Obama could spend much of his final year performing triage on issues like the Islamic State, Syria’s civil war and the conflict in Ukraine.

Officials are also braced for possible new crises, including in Afghanistan, as U.S. troops withdraw from a country whose government and security forces remain fragile.

One of Obama’s post-Iran deal projects has already run into trouble as Secretary of State John Kerry has begun new diplomacy to find a political resolution to Syria’s civil war. Russia, a key backer of Syrian President Bashar Assad, has recently sent military personnel and equipment to the country—a dramatic escalation that has surprised and angered Obama and Kerry and may derail that project.

“We continue to believe that there needs to be a political solution to the conflict in Syria, and that support for the Assad regime, particularly in a military way, is unhelpful to achieving that goal,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said Friday.

And although the White House been working on a new plan to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, a key promise from Obama’s 2008 campaign, it has been bedeviled by old obstacles, including political resistance to the transfer of detainees from Cuba onto U.S. soil.

Some Pentagon and intelligence officials remain deeply wary of freeing other detainees cleared for release, and some top officials are skeptical that the camp can be shut down as long as a Republican Congress remains in power.

When our Founding Fathers sat down to provide form and substance to the laws and procedures for governing this new country, which they had fought and won a bloody war over, by pledging their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, they were very aware of the price of tyranny.

They determined that this new nation would be a Constitutional Republic, having had their fill of monarchies.

In order to ensure that no leader of this new nation would go mad with power, and become a tyrannical despot, our Founders set up a System of Checks and Balances, overseen by Three Branches of Government: the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial, with each branch having a distinct and LIMITED  role.

In an effort to keep this simple (in deference to any Modern American Liberals, who may be reading), here is a description of their powers:

The Legislative Branch is given the powers to make the laws. It has the following checks over the Executive Branch:

• May override presidential vetoes with a two-thirds vote
• Has the power over the purse strings to actually fund any executive actions
• May remove the president through impeachment
• Senate approves treaties
• Senate approves presidential appointments

The Legislative Branch has the following checks over the Judicial Branch:

• Creates lower courts

The Executive Branch is given the power to carry out the laws. It has the following checks over the Legislative Branch:

• Veto power
• Ability to call special sessions of Congress
• Can recommend legislation
• Can appeal to the people concerning legislation and more

The Executive Branch has the following checks over the Judicial Branch:

• President appoints Supreme Court and other federal judges

The Judicial Branch is given the power to interpret the laws. It has the following checks over the Executive Branch:

• Judges, once appointed for life, are free from controls from the executive branch
• Courts can judge executive actions to be unconstitutional through the power of judicial review

 The Judicial Branch has the following checks over the Legislative Branch:

• Courts can judge legislative acts to be unconstitutional.

The situation, which we as a nation, find ourselves in today, is one which our Founding Fathers sought valiantly to avoid.

We are suffering under an Imperious Presidency.

One in which the President of the United States does not care about the “Will of the People”, but, rather, is intent on implementing and enforcing his own Far Left Policial Ideology, resulting in a “Tyranny of the Minority”.

For example, the “victory” of The Iran Deal, which the Liberal website, i.com, was lauding in the article posted earlier in this blog, is one which, according to a poll from Pew Research, is supported by only 215 of Americans.

That’s a victory?

Climate Change is the Fool’s Gold of the “Politically Hip”. It is the biggest Con Job since P.T. Barham hung up a sign to fool the rubes, which read

This way to the Egress.

The Syria/ISIS/Middle East Situation is an erupting volcano of Radical Islam, which endangers the whole civilized world. And, make no mistake, boys and girls, it is Obama’s responsibility.

However, the situation which our nation finds itself in, could have been avoided…if there had been EFFECTIVE POLITICAL OPPOSTION to the plans and Machiavellian Machinations of Barack Hussein Obama.

Like the Tin Man, the Scarecrow, and the Cowardly Lion, who accompanied Dorothy down that fabled Yellow Brick Road to the Emerald City of Oz, if the Congressional Republican Elite, led by John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, had only had heart, brains, and courage, they could have used our System of Checks and Balances to thwart, or, at least, to slow down, all of Obama’s Plans, which have succeeded in, literally, “radically changing” the Shining City Upon a Hill, into something almost unrecognizable.

It would have helped if they had found some spines, too.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Ramadi: Obama’s War By Remote Control Has a “Minor Setback”

 

 

In a Sept. 13, 2007, Oval Office address, United Stated President George W. Bush warned that “Iran would benefit from the chaos” after U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

Current United States President Barack Hussein Obama should have heeded that warning before he experienced his “premature evacuation”.

Fox News reports that

The fall of Ramadi to Islamic State forces — despite Obama administration efforts to downplay it as a short-term setback — has kicked up a sandstorm of problems for the White House: 

— The possibility that Iran-backed Shiite militias will take a lead role in the fight to retake the city; 

— Fresh political fallout over President Obama’s decision to withdraw virtually all troops in 2011 — against the advice of his top military commanders — only to watch hard-fought U.S. gains undone by ISIS; and, 

— Congressional pressure from both sides of the aisle to rethink the current anti-ISIS military strategy. 

Taken together, the problems pose a political and strategic migraine for an administration trying to manage the Iraq-Syria madness — while also forging a nuclear deal with Iran, seeking a resolution in war-torn Yemen and keeping tabs on the rest of the tumultuous post-Arab Spring nations, including Egypt and Libya. 

On Tuesday, congressional pressure mounted over the course of the U.S. military’s anti-ISIS strategy. 

House Speaker John Boehner said Obama should “start over” with his congressional request for use of military force against ISIS — a request that has stalled on Capitol Hill. Boehner said Obama needs to come up with a clear strategy, adding: “We know that hope is not a strategy. The president’s plan isn’t working.”

While skepticism from GOP leaders is hardly new, the criticism took on a bipartisan streak Tuesday as the top House intelligence committee Democrat piled on. 

“Alarm bells should be going off,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., according to The Daily Beast. Schiff reportedly questioned the current strategy that relies largely on airstrikes, and also voiced concern that the on-the-ground approach relies too much on Iran-backed militias. (At the same time, Schiff said he was “deeply disappointed” by Boehner’s call to restart talks on the authorization for use of force.) 

He’s not alone in his concerns over strategy and Iran’s role. On Sunday, House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told Fox News the Shiite militias will only inflame the Sunni tribes in Iraq. As they did in the battle for Tikrit, the Shiite militias once again are being looked to by the Iraqi government to help in Ramadi.  

“I think this is a prescription for disaster,” McCaul said. 

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and John McCain, R-Ariz., voiced similar concerns. 

“I think they may be able to take Ramadi back, but you know who they’re going to take it with? The Shia militias, which are Iranian-run, sponsored, trained and equipped,” McCain told Fox News. “And they are going to go into a Sunni area and they’re not going liberate, my friend. The Sunnis will never reconcile with the Shia militias, which are sponsored by the Iranians. 

“… And that, of course, will mean a lot more bloodletting.” 

Aside from concerns about Iran taking a lead role in the battle to retake Ramadi, the weekend’s defeat of Iraqi security forces marks a troubling reversal of U.S. gains in the region — Ramadi is part of the so-called Sunni Triangle, which saw heavy fighting in the intermediate years of the Iraq war. 

McCain noted that hundreds of Americans died trying to wrest Ramadi from Al Qaeda in Iraq, out of which spawned ISIS. 

“I can’t imagine what some of the troops are thinking as they see where they had such terrible sacrifices,” former Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Fox News. 

He said, at this point, sending in a “huge new U.S. force” would be a mistake, but said the U.S. could “more effectively” use the assets it has in the region. 

“Getting [ISIS] out of these cities is going to be incredibly tough,” Gates acknowledged. But he said if ISIS is allowed to keep the territory permanently, “What you have is a cancer in the middle of the Middle East.” 

With the Obama administration again facing criticism for not keeping a residual force on the ground after 2011, Gates said the reason the country was better off in 2010 and 2011 was “we had a presence on the ground.” 

A Pentagon spokesman vowed Monday that “we will retake Ramadi.” 

A senior defense official also denied there were plans to change the approach to fighting ISIS in light of the weekend’s takeover. 

“There are no plans to change our strategy,” he said. 

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday that “overall,” the U.S. strategy to fight ISIS has been a success. 

In a glimmer of good news, Iraqi forces reportedly were able to repel an ISIS attack overnight in a location west of Baghdad. 

For President Barack Hussein Obama to continue to attempt to prosecute the war against ISIS by remote control, and by not even calling it “Radical Islam’, with apparently no military strategic input in place at all, is one of the silliest, and most dangerous,things I’ve ever seen in my life.

And, to compound their incompetency, they referred to this major victory, the taking of Ramadi by ISIS, as a “minor setback”.

As has been noted by several military analysts, eventually, Obama is going to have to put troops on the ground. That is, additional troops to the troops which he already has on the ground in the role of “military advisors”.

Meanwhile, Obama’s bombing runs are doing minimal damage, at best.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot bomb buildings and expect to kill your enemy, when the enemy is a guerrilla force, which does not stay in any building for any period of time. Just like their Nomadic Barbaric Ancestors, these guerrillas keep moving, regrouping, and attacking.

Obama truly believed that he could count on “our Muslim Allies” in the Middle East to be our “boots on the ground”.

President Pantywaist chose to ignore the fact that they hate “The Great Satan” (us) more than they do their fellow Muslims from ISIS.

As I wrote, back when all of this started,

Welcome to Iraqi-Nam.

Where’s King Richard the Lion-Hearted when we need him.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Today’s the Day. Bibi’s ‘Bout to Burst Barry’s Bubble.

Today is a very historic day in the history of our nation.

The Prime Minister of one of America’s most steadfast allies will speak to a Joint Session of Congress…without the invitation or the blessings of The President of the United States of America…who is defending a Rogue Nation who continues its quest to build a nuclear bomb, which it plans to use to annihilate both the United States and Israel.

Grab your popcorn. This is gonna be good.

Reuters News on Yahoo.com reports that

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu clashed over Iran nuclear diplomacy on Monday on the eve of the Israeli prime minister’s hotly disputed address to Congress, underscoring the severity of U.S.-Israeli strains over the issue.

Even as the two leaders professed their commitment to a strong partnership and sought to play down the diplomatic row, they delivered dueling messages – Netanyahu in a speech to pro-Israeli supporters and Obama in an interview with Reuters – that hammered home their differences on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Neither gave any ground ahead of Netanyahu’s speech to Congress on Tuesday when he plans to detail his objections to ongoing talks between Iran and world powers that he says will inevitably allow Tehran to become a nuclear-armed state.

Netanyahu opened his high-profile visit to Washington on Monday with a stark warning to the Obama administration that the deal being negotiated with Tehran could threaten Israel’s survival, saying he had a “moral obligation” to sound the alarm about the dangers.

He insisted he meant no disrespect for Obama, with whom he has a history of testy encounters, and appreciated U.S. military and diplomatic support for Israel.

Just hours after Netanyahu’s speech to AIPAC, the largest U.S. pro-Israel lobby, Obama told Reuters that Iran should commit to a verifiable freeze of at least 10 years on its most sensitive nuclear activity for a landmark atomic deal to be reached. But with negotiators facing an end-of-March deadline for a framework accord, he said the odds were still against sealing a final agreement.

The Reuters interview gave Obama a chance to try to preemptively blunt the impact of Netanyahu’s closely watched address to Congress.

Previewing his coming appearance on Capitol Hill, Netanyahu told a cheering audience at the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC): “As prime minister of Israel, I have a moral obligation to speak up in the face of these dangers while there’s still time to avert them.”

At the same time, Netanyahu said the relationship between his country and the United States was “stronger than ever” and not in crisis.

EASING TENSIONS

Obama also sought to lower the temperature by describing Netanyahu’s planned speech to Congress as a distraction that would not be “permanently destructive” to U.S.-Israeli ties and by saying the rift was not personal.

Obama refused to meet Netanyahu during the visit, on the grounds that doing so could be seen as interference on the cusp of Israel’s March 17 elections when the prime minister is seeking re-election against a tough center-left challenger. On Monday, the president said he would be willing to meet Netanyahu if the Israeli leader wins re-election.

But he said Netanyahu’s U.S. visit gave the impression of “politicizing” the two countries’ normally close partnership and of going outside the normal channels of U.S. foreign policy in which the president holds greatest sway. Netanyahu’s planned speech has driven a wedge between Israel and congressional Democrats. Forty two of them plan to boycott the address, according to The Hill, a political newspaper.

Netanyahu, who was given rousing bipartisan welcomes in his two previous addresses to Congress, is expected to press U.S. lawmakers to block a deal with Iran that he contends would endanger Israel’s existence but which Obama’s aides believe could be a signature foreign policy achievement.

The invitation to Netanyahu was orchestrated by Republican congressional leaders with the Israeli ambassador without advance word to the White House, a breach of protocol that infuriated the Obama administration and the president’s fellow Democrats.

The partisan nature of this dispute has turned it into the worst rift in decades between the United States and Israel, which normally navigates carefully between Republicans and Democrats in Washington.

Netanyahu wants Iran to be completely barred from enriching uranium, which puts him at odds with Obama’s view that a deal should allow Tehran to engage in limited enrichment for peaceful purposes but under close international inspection.

Obama said a final deal must create a one-year “breakout period” for Iran, which means it would take at least a year for Tehran to get a nuclear weapon if it decides to develop one, thereby giving time for military action to prevent it.

Netanyahu has said such a deal would allow Iran to become a “threshold” nuclear weapons state, that it would inevitably cheat on any agreement and that the lifting of nuclear restrictions in as little of 10 years would be an untenable risk to Israel. He has hinted at the prospect for Israeli military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities as a last resort, though he made no such threat in his AIPAC speech on Monday.

So, today, the Prime Minister of Israel, who, unlike the present occupant of our White House, actually excelled on his own at Harvard University, addresses a Joint Session of Congress to speak about the plans of the current American Administration to allow Iran to, after a 10 year waiting period, develop a nuclear bomb.

By the way, how in the world does Obama believe that they can stop the Mad Mullahs of Iran from working on developing a nuclear bomb, while his flimsy proposed sanctions are in in place, anyway?

Obama is acting positively Chamberlain-esque in his naiveté, as regards the true intentions of the Religious Leaders of the Barbaric Muslim Rogue Nation of Iran.

Why have Obama and his minions been so relentless in their attack of Prime Minister Netanyahu?

It is well known, through his words and actions, that America’s current (P)resident Barack Hussein Obama, cares more for Israel’s enemies, than he does for God’s Chosen People. If it were up to Obama, Israel would be forced to give the nomadic people known as Palestinians, half of the land that the nation of Israel sits on. Not only that, but he and his talking horse, (at least he has the face of one) Secretary of State John F. Kerry,”are negotiating”, and I use the term loosely, an agreement with the Mullahs of Iran, to stop building a nuclear bomb, in exchange for allowing them to continue their Uranium Enrichment, an agreement which makes about as much sense as Pee Wee Herman starring in the title role in the next “Terminator” movie.

Obama is indeed making the same mistake that Neville Chamberlain made in dealing with Adolph Hitler’s Nazi-led German Occupation of Europe.

Obama believes that his superior intellect, combined with his acceptance of the word of blood-thirst Radical Islamists. will cement this ill-conceived agreement with Iran and his Presidential Legacy.

Today, Bibi is about to burst his bubble and tell the American people just how badly both of our nations are being screwed by “The Leader of the Free World”.

And, that is what ol’ Scooter is afraid of.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Petulant President Pantywaist’ s Protocol Pity Party

It was announced recently that Speaker of the House John Boehner had invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak before a Joint Session of Congress.

I wrote about this subject in a blog earlier this week.

Since then, the 44th President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, his administration, and his mindless minions in the Main Stream Media, have reacted as if John Boehner had taken a hunting rifle and killed Barack Hussein Obama’s Family Dog, Bo.

Obama got his knickers in a twist and threw an unparalleled Presidential Temper Tantrum all this last week over this.

First, of course, he and his minions all decried the action, saying that it was a breach of protocol, for the president not to have been informed before the public of such an event.

Of course, that was just them whining because John Boehner actually showed some intestinal fortitude and went around the president by inviting Prime Minister Netanyahu, in order to learn more about the Iranian Nuclear Program, that President Obama is basically doing nothing about.

Obama threw a temper tantrum because he is being shown to be exactly who and what he is.

He is what an older lady, who happened to be a Director of Medical Records in a world-renowned hospital, whom I used to work with, called a “lightweight”.

A “lightweight” is someone who has the title but does not bring the knowledge, experience, and gravitas needed to an important position.

This petulance and immature behavior, which Barack Hussein Obama has shown in the last 6 years, is more reminiscent of a picked-on school boy than it is of a world leader.

Let’s face it, folks. Obama is an embarrassment.

Later in the week, Obama, still fuming from this “breach of protocol”, had his Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, pitifully explain that the president would not be meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister when he visits Washington, as it was too close to the Israeli elections, which will be held within three weeks of the visit, and the President does not want to make it look like he is backing Netanyahu.

Whatever helps you sleep better at night, Scooter.

The hard, cold fact of the matter is that every time the president of United States, Barack Hussein Obama, and the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, meet, Netanyahu makes Obama look like a punk.

It is a sad situation, to say the least.

Obama knows this. That is why he does not want to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Obama also knows, that Netanyahu will chew him up and spit him out, over his coddling of the rogue Iranian state.

As I have written previously, Obama’s pussyfooting around with Iran is not only disrespectful to Israel, but very stupid, to say the least.

Since Israel was born, they have been a friend of the United States. Our previous presidents have respected that friendship, or at least acted like they did, in the case of Jimmy Carter.

Our current president, Barack Hussein Obama, does not even put up the pretense of liking Israel. Oh sure, he says the words, when he makes his speeches, but as he himself said,

Words. Just words.

Actions speak louder than words. And Obama’s actions, including his mollycoddling of Iran, and the generally wimpy and ineffective Foreign Policy effort that he has put forward, known as Smart Power!, has not only put that friendship at risk, but it has made the world a more dangerous place, as well.

As I have said before, when President Obama meets with Prime Minister Netanyahu, the difference between the two leaders is stark. Netanyahu, on the one hand, is self-assured, bold, eloquent, and is deeply concerned for the safety of his nation. Obama, on the other hand, always appears bored, petulant, and distracted, as if he’s trying to figure out when he can get his next golf game in.

If you ask the Radical Muslims, you know, the guys that Obama refuses to call Islamic terrorists, who they fear more, the President of the United States of America or the Prime Minister of Israel, who do you think they would say?

There are a couple of reasons that the little country of Israel is still standing, even while they are surrounded by Radical Muslims, who wish to destroy them.

The first reason has to do with its leadership and the resolve of its people.

The second reason?

12 Now the Lord had said to Abram:

“Get out of your country,
From your family
And from your father’s house,
To a land that I will show you.
2 I will make you a great nation;
I will bless you
And make your name great;
And you shall be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you,
And I will curse him who curses you;
And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” – Genesis 12: 1-3

Obama can jump up and down and hold its breath until it turns blue, but getting the best of Israel is beyond his capabilities.

Someone has already decided that. Someone Who is way above his pay grade.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Boehner Invites Netanyahu to Speak to Congress. Doesn’t Tell Obama.

If you were the Speaker of the House, and you want to cut through the b.s. coming from the Administration, in regards to our mortal enemy, the rogue nation of Iran, what would you do?

You would invite an expert on the country of Iran. Somebody that will shoot from the hip and tell the whole unvarnished truth about that rogue nation.

Sound good? Well, that’s exactly what the Speaker of the Republican-controlled House of Representatives did.

Nationaljournal.com has the story…

President Obama warned Congress Tuesday night that he would veto any new sanctions legislation on Iran, saying it would derail U.S. negotiations in the Middle East. But John Boehner isn’t ready to sit out the battle over Iran’s nuclear program.

“[Obama’s] exact message to us was: ‘Hold your fire.’ He expects us to stand idly by and do nothing while he cuts a bad deal with Iran. Two words: ‘Hell no!'” the House speaker said during his weekly press briefing on Wednesday. “We’re going to do no such thing.”

President Obama warned Congress Tuesday night that he would veto any new sanctions legislation on Iran, saying it would derail U.S. negotiations in the Middle East. But John Boehner isn’t ready to sit out the battle over Iran’s nuclear program.

“[Obama’s] exact message to us was: ‘Hold your fire.’He expects us to stand idly by and do nothing while he cuts a bad deal with Iran. Two words: ‘Hell no!'” the House speaker said during his weekly press briefing on Wednesday. “We’re going to do no such thing.”

Instead, Boehner has invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress next month. He didn’t consult with the White House before extending the invitation, and administration officials are not happy. Press secretary Josh Earnest said Wednesday afternoon that Boehner’s invitation is a breach of normal diplomatic protocol. Typically, a nation’s leader would contact the White House before planning a visit to the United States, he said. The White House heard about the invite from Boehner’s office, not from the Israelis. 

According to pool reports, Earnest called the invite “interesting,” and when asked if the White House was annoyed because Boehner did not reach out first, he said, “No.”

Earnest said the White House is reserving judgment about the invite until U.S. officials talk to their Israeli counterparts. Boehner’s office confirmed that Netanyahu has accepted, and will give a speech to a joint session of Congress on Feb. 11. The date is significant: It’s the 36th anniversary of the Iranian Revolution.

The Boehner decision may be unprecedented, especially if the bigger breach of protocol is not that the White House didn’t know, but that the White House wasn’t involved in the invitation.

However, this isn’t the first time a House speaker has reached out to a world leader despite a White House request to stay back. In April 2007, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi traveled to Syria to meet with President Bashar al-Assad despite the Bush administration’s objections. Pelosi wanted to start a dialogue with Syria, as diplomatic relations had broken down in the 1990s; President George W. Bush rejected such negotiation, saying, “Sending delegations doesn’t work.”

The speaker said in a statement Wednesday that he invited Netanyahu “to address Congress on the grave threats radical Islam and Iran pose to our security and way of life.”

A yearlong effort led by Secretary of State John Kerry to reach a deal with Iran to dismantle parts of its nuclear program failed in November, forcing the U.S. and its allies to declare a seven-month extension on negotiations. Republicans say these kinds of concessions—and any future ones—are putting U.S. security at risk, according to a House leadership aide.

Kerry said Wednesday afternoon that Netanyahu is “welcome” to speak in the U.S. any time, but learning of the prime minister’s next visit from Boehner’s office was “unusual,” reports CBS News’ Margaret Brennan.

Boehner’s invite adds fuel to a potential showdownbetween Congress and the White House over Iran, one that could lead to the first successful veto override of Obama’s tenure as president. Twelve Democrats in the Senate have previously cosponsored legislation to impose sanctions on Iran. If they continue to call for sanctions alongside their Republican colleagues, the Senate may have the two-thirds majority necessary to override an Obama veto.

I reported, earlier this year, that President Obama had been sending secret letters to the Head Ayatollah in Iran, a country who sponsors Islamic Terrorism, with whom we have not had diplomatic relations since the Radical Muslims took over, after they revolted against the Moderate Government of the Shah in 1979.

Petulant President Pantywaist is pussy-footin’ around with a nation run by Radical Muslims, who hate our ever-lovin’ guts.

Reuters News-Canada recently reported that

Iran could become a “very successful regional power” if Tehran agrees to a long-term deal to curb its nuclear program, President Barack Obama said in an interview with NPR News.

“They’ve got a chance to get right with the world,” Obama said in the interview, which was taped at the White House on Dec. 18 and is set to air this week.

More than a year ago, Iran agreed to an interim plan to halt higher-level uranium enrichment in exchange for a limited easing in financial sanctions pending negotiations on a long-term deal. Those talks have now been extended to next June.

Iran has said its nuclear program is for peaceful energy use, but the United States and five other powers want to make sure that Tehran cannot quickly develop nuclear weapons.

Obama told NPR that Iran should seize the chance of a deal that could lift crippling sanctions.

“Because if they do, there’s incredible talent and resources and sophistication inside of Iran and it would be a very successful regional power that was also abiding by international norms and international rules – and that would be good for everybody,” he said.

Obama insisted a nuclear deal was possible, although Vice President Joe Biden earlier this month said he thought there was a “less than even shot” of an agreement.

Obama said he recognized that Iran has “legitimate defense concerns” after it “suffered from a terrible war with Iraq” in the 1980s. But he criticized Tehran for its “adventurism, the support of organizations like Hizbollah, the threats they’ve directed at Israel.”

Why doesn’t he just go ahead and help them with their “Nuclear Enhancement Program”, so they can launch one at us quicker, while he’s at it?

He negotiates with those who want to kill us, and gives ultimatums to his own countrymen.

Some observations…

1 The Iranian Government is not secular. It is the product of a fanatical political ideology, disguised as a “faith”. The Ayatollahs rule Iran. The President and “Secular Government” carry out their wishes, and are simply figureheads.

2. Nowhere in Obama’s Negotiations with Iran, has he or Secretary of State John Kerry called for the halt of Uranium Enrichment in Iran.

3. A Christian American Pastor, Saeed Abedini, has been held in jail by the Iranian Government, since the summer of 2012. Why does the Obama Administration care more about negotiating appeasement with a hostile, barbaric Foreign Government, than securing the freedom of an American Christian Pastor?

Wars have been started for less than that.

President Reagan advised to “Trust, but Verify”.

Evidently, Obama’s message is to “Trust Islam…Alienate Israel”.

I am glad that Boehner finally grew a spine and asked Prime Minister Netanyahu to come and speak about the barbaric nation of Iran.

At least, Boehner is trusting our friend and not our enemy.

Unlike the Manchurian President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The “Cromnibus” Bill: Palin Reacts. Coburn Retires. “Vichy Republicans” Surrender…Again

To know how to reach a destination, you must first know where you are. Without oversight — effective, vigorous oversight — you’ll never solve anything. You cannot write a bill to fix an agency unless you have an understanding of the problem. And you can only know this by conducting oversight, asking the tough questions, holding the bureaucrats accountable, find out what works and what doesn’t and know what has already been done. Effective oversight is an effective tool to expose government overreach and wasteful spending, but it also markedly exposes where we lose our liberty and our essential freedoms. True debates about national priorities would come about if we did effective oversight. It is the senate, once hailed as the world’s greatest deliberative body, where these differences should be argued. Our differences should be resolved through civil discourse so they’re not settled in the street. Just as the constitution provides for majority rule in our democracy while protecting the rights of the individual, the senate must return to the principles to gain the trust of the electorate. And it can. – Retiring US Senator Dr. Tom Coburn

Breitbart News asked Former Alaska GovernorSarah Palin what she thought ofSpeaker of the House John Boehner’s recent actoions in facilitating the passage of the Government-Funding “Cromnibus” Bill

1. What do you think of Speaker Boehner having President Obama ‘whip votes’ from the White House in order to pass this bill?
It stinks to high heaven. Did arrogant politicians not get the memo that Obama’s agenda was decisively defeated in last month’s historic midterm landslide? Good Lord, America said loud and clear not just “no” but “hell no” to Obama’s failed policies. Americans who pay attention said absolutely no to Obama’s amnesty for illegal aliens. 

We also said no to the mother-of-all unfunded mandates, Obamacare, and voters believed promises that they would ratchet down the $18 trillion debt. Well, our bad for apathetically trusting politicians. No, on second thought, it’s not “our bad.” Some of us warned and worked hard to elect candidates who would buck the status quo. Many conscientious Americans did all they could to open the eyes of low-information voters. It was tough going up against Obama’s lapdogs in the media and the power liberals have to play their politics of personal destruction against commonsense conservatives. 

But really how out-of-touch do these politicians have to be to misunderstand our recent mandate to stop Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation of the greatest nation on earth? 

2. Only 162 Republicans voted for this bill–a bill that will take decision making away from a Republican controlled Congress in 4 weeks–does that strike you as outrageous?

It’s baffling really. The Republican Leadership in the House just flipped American voters the bird by sidelining the new Congress we just elected. I want the names of all 162 yahoos who would squander the opportunity to respect the will of the people and get America on the right track. Please print their names so we can ask them, “What the heck are you thinking?!”

And thank you to the 67 House Republicans who did vote no. Let’s remind everyone of their names also.

3. Do you believe that the 162 Republicans that voted for the bill will face a backlash by conservatives?

Hope so! I’ll do my part and I call upon every citizen to do their civic duty to save our country. It’s easy; understand RINO season opens soon and don’t hold back. 

4. Do you believe that Speaker Boehner working with President Obama effectively tried to ‘nullify’ the sweeping Republican victory in the 2014 mid-terms?

That’s the result thus far, so yes. This is an example of the GOP establishment campaigning one way and then governing another. It’s quite nauseating. They promised they would do everything in their power to stop Obama’s executive amnesty – I heard their darn campaign speeches promising to do so! – and yet when they have the power to do so (power that we the voters just gave them) they tacitly endorse Obama’s failed agenda. They’re shining that boot that liberals have on the neck of our economy. They’re carrying Barack Obama’s water even more so than Nancy Pelosi if you can believe it. 

5. Do you think John Boehner should be re-elected Speaker of the House given his actions over the pass few days? 

Constitutional conservatives who understand government’s balance of power and the grave danger in Obama’s lawlessness, and those of us who want smart and principled leadership, should be perplexed and disappointed if stale leadership is re-elected, considering that the midterm election was all about “the status quo has got to go.” It’s time for new energy and steel-spined commitment to stop Obama’s bizarre behavior against this country! Surely there are more of us than not who know that our Founders’ memory, our vets, and our children deserve better that what we’re underneath today. Keep the faith that there are more of us than there are of them who think broken campaign promises and a broken government are just dandy. 

Boehner has to be the biggest blooming idiot of a Congressman that I have ever seen.

Boehner and his fellow Vichy Republicans believe that the American people want them to acquiesce to Obama and the Democrats, giving them everything they want, in the spirit of “compromise”.

That is NOT what Dr. Coburn was so eloquently speaking of, in his retirement speech on the Floor of the Senate.

The Vichy Republicans believe that, by presenting themselves as “Democrat-Life”, and possibly running Jeb Bush as their Presidential Candidate, they will be remembered fondly at the voting booth in November of 2016.

Oh, we will remember them all right. But not in the way they want us to. We will not remember them as leaders. Oh, no. Rather, Americans Conservatives will remember them with all of the fondness that the French Resistance remembered the Nazi collaborators, or Vichy French, after World War II.

What slays me is the fact that the Establishment Republicans seem to be quite content, in their moderately left-leaning stupor, to be totally oblivious and tone deaf of their Conservative Base, average hard working middle-class Americans like you and me, even after we left no doubt as to the way we feel about the direction which the country is taking, through the political tsunami, which was the 2014 Mid-Term Election.

They keep on making bad choices.

Moderate Republicans have been a barrier to Republican victory for as long as I can remember. Like Quakers, Establishment Republicans seem to believe that passive resistance and reaching out to their sworn enemies friends, is the way to defeat those who oppose you.

It has been especially bad during the Obama Administration, as the House and Senate Republican Leadership apparently cherish their friendship with the Democrats more than they do the wishes of the folks back home. Yes, they talk a good game, but so did Jon Lovitz in those “Liar Sketches” during the old days of Saturday Night Live, back when they were actually funny.

Yeah,  my wife Morgan Fairchild. Yeah, that’s it. That’s the ticket!

In 1975, Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech which sums up our present situation and how we need to handle the Republican Party leadership, quite well.

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing — adjusting the brackets to the cost of living — so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

I believe that the “Moderate”, i.e. “Establishment” Wing of the Republican Party is stuck in a cycle in which their desire to protect their own hindquarters and cushy “jobs” have lead to a self-imposed isolation from the very American Citizens who were responsible for their having those cushy “jobs” in the first place.

I believe that average Americans, like you and me, exercised our power, a little over a month ago, to relieve them of the burden of such a stressful job, and send others to Washington, who will listen to their “bosses”.

Just as Ronaldus Magnus said those 39 years ago, it is time to “let them go their way”.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

The Illegal Alien Invasion: Boehner Talks Tough. Sessions Talks Tougher.

As the invasion across our Southern Border continues unabated, the GOP Establishment is working on presenting a bill to “address the problem” and keep their “friends”, like the US Chamber of Commerce, happy at the same time.

Speaker of the House John Boehner is “talking the talk”. But, will he “walk the walk”?

From the Office of Speaker of the House John Boehner:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said he would attempt to add comprehensive immigration reform to any House-passed bill to address the current border crisis:

“Senator Reid, embarrassed that he cannot strong-arm the Senate into passing the blank check President Obama demanded, is making a deceitful and cynical attempt to derail the House’s common-sense solution.  So let me be as clear as I can be with Senator Reid: the House of Representatives will not take up the Senate immigration reform bill or accept it back from the Senate in any fashion.  Nor will we accept any attempt to add any other comprehensive immigration reform bill or anything like it, including the DREAM Act, to the House’s targeted legislation, which is meant to fix the actual problems causing the border crisis.  Such measures have no place in the effort to solve this crisis, and any attempt to exploit this crisis by adding such measures will run into a brick wall in the People’s House.

“While the White House has abandoned all pretense of governing and the Senate is doing almost nothing to address our struggling economy, Republicans remain committed to addressing the American people’s priorities, and that includes passing a responsible bill this week to help secure our border and return these children safely to their home countries.” 

Okay, Mr. Speaker. What happens if the President of the United States decides to pass Amnesty by Executive Order?

It seems that I am not the only American concerned with that possible eventuality.

Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) trashed the proposed House Bill, yesterday, labeling it a “surrender to a lawless president” because it does not include any language to prevent President Obama from expanding his unilateral legalization of illegal immigrants.

Here’s the statement, courtesy of nationalreview.com:

The Obama Administration has openly declared its plan to implement a unilateral executive amnesty for 5–6 million more illegal immigrants. This unlawful amnesty—urged on by congressional Democrats—would include work permits, taking jobs directly from millions of struggling American citizens.

Any action Congress might consider to address the current border crisis would be futile should the President go forward with these lawless actions. Congress must speak out and fight against them. It must use its spending power to stop the President’s executive amnesty.

That the House leaders’ border package includes no language on executive actions is surrender to a lawless President. And it is a submission to the subordination of congressional power.

After years of falling wages and rising joblessness, American workers are pleading for someone to hear them. How can it be that our President is brazenly advertising that he will nullify and strip away American workers’ immigration protections, and their own elected leaders will not rise to their defense? Or to the defense of our laws and our Constitutional order?

There are other grave concerns with the Granger package as well: because it does not fix our asylum rules and loopholes, the end result of the additional judges and hearings will be more illegal immigrants gaining asylum and access to U.S. welfare. It is a plan for expedited asylum, not expedited removal.

Nor will this package make our rogue President actively enforce anything, coming nowhere close to the kinds of reasonable enforcement activities needed to restore the interior application of our immigration laws.

And finally, a package that is silent on blocking amnesty creates an opportunity for Senate Democrats to add elements of their party’s open borders and mass immigration agenda.

This legislation is unworthy of support.

Senator Sessions is a breath of fresh air, standing strong for Conservative principles, which Moderates like Speaker of the House “Cryin’ John” Boehner give lip service to, before they stab their Conservative base in the back.

What is a Moderate? You see that term being used all the time, exclusively among the Leadership of the Republican Party.

I believe that these “Moderates” are wannabe Democrats, who are content to work behind enemy lines.Vichy Republicans, if you will.

They have been working within the Republican Party for the last couple of decades, slowly pushing the party’s ideology further and further to the Left of the Political Spectrum, until now, when, except for actual Conservatives like Jeff Sessions,  the GOP seems to be just a slightly less radical extension of the Party of the Jackass.

The problem is, all of this jackassery is happening within the ranks of the Leadership of the Republican Party, while the base of the GOP remains solidly Conservative.

In 2010, as a result of the passage of Obamacare, by the Democrat Majority of both houses, Americans stood up on their hind legs, formed Grass Roots Tea Party Groups, holding rallies featuring Conservatives such as Lt. Col. Allen West, Sarah Palin, and, the now-Establishment Republican, Marco Rubio.

The result was a Mid-term Electoral Tsunami, in which Republicans regained control of the House, and made gains in the Senate.

However, since then, the Republican Establishment has turned their back on the Tea Parties, and the Conservative Base in general, showing their elitism by siding with the Democrats regarding such issues as the Debt Ceiling, Homosexual Marriage and “Immigration Reform”, i.e, AMNESTY.

The Republican Establishment had better think about which side their bread is buttered on. If they don’t, I hope they have a trade to fall back on.

At a time when the current president is going down in flames and taking our Sovereign Nation with him, instead of fulfilling the wishes of their citizenry, 77u% of whom want these “Little Rascals to be sent back to Latin American countries they came from, Vichy Republicans are “reaching across the aisle” to help save the Prevaricator-in-Chief, by bringing forth bills that do not adequately address the problem of Illegal Immigration.

These RINOs are so consumed by their avarice and quest to be just like their Democratic allies, that they have forgotten why they were elected in the first place. If their constituents had wanted to elect Democrats, they would have pulled the lever marked “DEMOCRAT”.

It’s time for Cryin’ John, Maverick, Grahamnesty, and the rest of the GOP Elite girly-men to put their big boy pants on, and do the job they were elected to do: work for the betterment of this country, not for its destruction at the hands of Barack Hussein Obama. He’s doing fine with that…all by his lonesome.

And, as I’ve said before, if the Vichy Republicans think that the new “Americans” they’re potentially creating will actually vote for them, replacing us worrisome members of the Conservative Base, I have two bridges over the Mississippi River at Memphis to sell them. 

And, in the spirit of the nickname I’ve given them, and the courage they are showing, I will throw in two French Rifles from World War II….dropped once…never fired.

It is time for Conservatives to stand up for ourselves and our country once again.

Please burn up the Congressional Switchboard today, with your calls to your Representatives, telling them not to pass the House Bill.

Remind these “public servants” that the Mid-Term Elections are in November, and these elections have the potential to dwarf the results of 2010’s, in terms of COnservative Backlash.

It is time for Payback. And, Payback is a…well…you know.

Until He Comes,

KJ