Earlier this week, the Patriot Post’s daily digest hit several current hot topics brilliantly, so much so that I thought it was worth just re-posting here without further comment. Dig in…there’s a ton of red meat here:
“[A] rigid economy of the public contributions and absolute interdiction of all useless expenses will go far towards keeping the government honest and unoppressive.” –Thomas Jefferson, letter to Marquis de Lafayette, 1823
TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
Hope & Change Tops $7 Trillion
Barack Obama, the man who chastised George W. Bush’s “unpatriotic” spending binge, has now added more than $7 trillion in debt to the federal deficit. “That is more than the debt increased under all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Bill Clinton combined,” CNSNews reports, “and it is more debt than was accumulated in the first 227 years of this nation’s existence – from 1776 through 2003. … By the close of business on July 31, 2014, [the deficit] had risen to $17,687,136,723,410.59 – up $7,060,259,674,497.51 since Obama’s first inauguration day.” Put another way, all 115,097,000 U.S. households owe $153,671.57 each. $61,341.82 of that has come under Obama’s presidency. Hope & Change™ is mighty expensive. More…
12 States Provide EPA Some Feedback – By Suing
Last week, the EPA was asking for feedback on its new law regulating carbon emissions. How’s this for feedback: New EPA standards are being contested by West Virginia, Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wyoming and Indiana. “At issue is the EPA’s move to dramatically cut greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants via new standards to be imposed under the Clean Air Act,” reports The Hill. “The regulation … aims to cut carbon pollution from plants by 30 percent by 2030. The states contend that the Clean Air Act prohibits the EPA from regulating emissions from existing sources.” While the Obama administration continues to wage a war on the economy, others see the writing on the wall: a potential energy crisis this coming winter. To make matters worse, an impending EPA ozone regulation may be the worst yet. Since Congress won’t stem the tide, states are left doing what they can to reign in this rogue agency. For the sake of us all, let’s hope they succeed. More…
Holder, the ‘Activist Attorney General’
Attorney General Eric Holder proudly declared himself an activist during an interview with reporter Juan Williams, saying,“If you want to call me an activist attorney general, I will proudly accept that label. Any attorney general who is not an activist is not doing his or her job. The responsibility of the attorney general is to change things [and] bring us closer to the ideals expressed in our founding documents.” The AG’s job is not to “change things” (or in Holder’s case, bluntly ignore laws) that don’t comport with personal sentiments; it’s to uphold Rule of Law. And herein lies the issue: Holder & Co. believe in the leftist ideology of a “living constitution.” So the very man who for all intents and purposes circumvents the Constitution thinks that changing the rules as he sees fit is moving America “closer to the ideals expressed in our founding documents.” This fallacy – the rule of men – is the very thing the Founders warned against. More…
Economy Grew by 4% in Second Quarter? More Like 2%
Last week, the Commerce Department announced the GDP grew 4% in the second quarter, but it looks like that might be the result of somebody cooking the books. Most of the economic growth last quarter came from companies replenishing stockpiles, not actually moving products. If that economic activity is taken out, then the nation’s economic growth is more like 2%, according to Jeffrey Rosenberg, an economist at Briefing.com. “It is obvious the economy is not growing at a 4% clip,” he said. “Unless things suddenly surge forward, 2014 economic growth will likely be the lowest yearly gain since 2011.” The second quarter GDP report is turning into every other GDP quarterly report during Obama’s term: an indictment on his management of the economy. More…
Hillary Let Hamas Build Tunnels
Hillary Clinton could have prevented the current war between Gaza and Israel if she did nothing. Back in 2012, Israel and Hamas were at it again. Yet, Clinton forged a peace deal. Success, right? Sure, temporarily. As part of the deal, Israel agreed to allow building supplies back into Gaza. Hamas pinky-promised the building material would be used to build hospitals and schools (aka human shields in Hamas-speak). But the concrete and steel went underground to build Hamas’ tunnels instead. Investor’s Business Daily reports, “Yet, laughably, Clinton is using her 2012 cease-fire deal to shore up her presidential bona fides. She boasts in her new biography that ‘my diplomatic intervention was the only thing standing in the way of a much more explosive confrontation.’” Didn’t her husband label Hamas a terrorist organization? More…
For more, visit Right Hooks.
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor
Here’s yesterday’s edition, Immigration vs. Invasion.
If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.
Report on Benghazi Doesn’t Answer THE Question
Libya lies in ruins and Benghazi is caught in the hands of Ansar Al-Sharia, an Al-Qaida-linked group, who have declared Libya an Islamic emirate. This is the same group who stormed the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, killing four Americans on September 11, 2012.
Now, the House Intelligence Committee announced it would declassify its report on the Benghazi attacks. The committee spent thousands of hours investigation. After 20 briefings and hearings, interviews including eight people protecting the consulate that night in Libya and countless intelligence reports, emails and notes, the American people will finally learn what truly happened. Barack Obama will get his due. Hillary Clinton will be culpable. There will be justice for Ambassador Chris Stevens.
Except, this report does not find the Obama administration at fault for the Benghazi tragedy. The report may, when it’s declassified and eventually released to the public, show a more nuanced view of the day, but the information coming out of the House Intelligence Committee today only serves to cloud the real question of fault.
Ranking member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) sketched the major findings of the committee in a statement. America did nothing wrong, he concluded.
“This bi-partisan report,” Ruppersberger said, “adopted unanimously on July 31, 2014, and sent to the Intelligence Community for a declassification review, recognizes that only with a full accounting of the facts, separate from the swirl of rumors and unsupported allegations that have surfaced, can America ensure that tragedies like this don’t happen again.”
According to Ruppersberger, here are the committee’s major findings:
- American Intelligence was working fine, up until the attack. Ruppersberger wrote, “Our investigation found the Intelligence Community warned about an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened, Americans [sic] which is consistent with testimony that the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.”
- The attack was done by Al-Qaida and its buddies. Ruppersberger alleged those who breached the consulate’s walls were “a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias.”
- The American response outside Benghazi was appropriate because “there was no ‘stand down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, and no American was left behind.” Except for, you know, “Chris Stevens and three other brave Americans.”
- The lame YouTube video excuse was okay because it was a mistake. Ruppersberger again: “The report also shows that the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”
- The Obama administration was never, at any point, motivated by the 2012 elections. “[T]here was absolutely no evidence, in documents or testimony, that the Intelligence Community’s assessments were politically motivated in any way,” Ruppersberger concluded.
However, Ruppersberger’s assessments might have a political impetus. There are many political advantages to spilling the contents of the report now. Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) did not release any statement about the declassification of the report. If Democrats spin the contents of the report, they deaden the actual report’s release. (When the report comes out, will it be old news?) Finally, this comes at a time when Democrats need to discredit Republicans because of election season and all.
Furthermore, the assessment only serves to cloud the facts at this point. Even Hillary Clinton’s horse-puckey detector was going off when she heard the YouTube story. According to the book “Blood Feud,” Obama called Hillary and told her the talking points. According to an excerpt of the book, “Hillary told Obama, ‘Mr. President, that story isn’t credible. Among other things, it ignores the fact that the attack occurred on 9/11.’ But the president was adamant. He said, ‘Hillary, I need you to put out a State Department release as soon as possible.’” She considered resigning, but that would only result in her political suicide. She told the fib.
Weeks later, Obama won the 2012 election, raking in 51% of the popular vote. Obama’s watch, at that point, was free from terrorism. The lie held.
Now, the question remains: Who wrote the talking point placing blame on the YouTube video and placing a wet blanket over the whole debacle until the votes were counted?
The Daily Caller has a theory. In an article that can only be called pure gonzo journalism, the publication levels its pen against Ben Rhodes, Obama’s national security advisor. There is one more committee investigating the Benghazi attacks led by Trey Gowdy’s (R-SC). The story of Benghazi is not over until America sees the real reports from both Gowdy’s committee and the House Intelligence Committee.
The Left Begins Counterattack on GOP Immigration Bill
A driver passing through a U.S. Border Patrol checkpoint July 29 was asked the usual questions: “U.S. Border Patrol, how many people on board?”
In the video posted to YouTube the driver replies, “Me.”
“U.S. Citizen?” The Border Patrol agent continues.
“Yeah, but does it really matter?”
The agent looks south, shakes his head and said, “Not anymore, unfortunately.”
With illegal immigrants and criminals crossing the Rio Grande, climbing aboard “La Bestia” train to hitch a ride North, or hiring a “coyotaje,” Barack Obama’s proposal is an ineffective, liberal response – to just throw money at the problem. America needs a sincere rethinking of the legislation that is inspiring continued illegal immigration, and to enforce the laws that are already on the books, but which this administration has arbitrarily chosen to shove aside for its own political gain.
However, House Republicans passed two bills Friday addressing the crisis at the southern border. The first, which passed 223-189 by a nearly party-line vote, approved $694 million in emergency funding for federal agencies dealing with the massive influx of Central American children. It was far below the $3.7 billion Barack Obama requested last month, but would provide $22 million for temporary immigration judges to handle deportation cases, $197 million for housing unaccompanied minors, and $35 million for border states looking to deploy National Guard units. It also would change a 2008 anti-trafficking law by giving the government the same flexibility in repatriating minors from Central American countries that it has with children from Mexico.
The second bill, which strips the Obama administration’s power to prevent deportations under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, passed 216-192, with 11 Republicans voting against it and four Democrats voting for it. This bill was driven largely by conservative Republicans who have seen DACA as an enticement for illegal immigrants seeking to come to the U.S.
During the debate, several House Democrats complained that the legislation is harmful to illegal immigrants, a large and growing group that the Left hopes to convert into a powerful voting block in years to come. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) claimed that Republicans “want to punish our community.” Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) said the Republican legislation “has only one message: ‘Deport! Deport! Deport!’”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi went so far as to interrupt Rep. Thomas Marino (R-PA) during his remarks, approaching the podium while he was speaking and calling him an “insignificant person.” Bipartisanship at its finest.
Sen. Harry Reid, whose own Senate failed to pass immigration legislation last week before hanging it up for the August recess, pronounced the House legislation dead on arrival.
White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer said last week that the president will be announcing some executive actions later this month to address the issue. Obama has said that he will act alone since there has been no action by Congress. This hypocritical stance is the latest in a long line of Constitution-shredding actions by the president who claims that he is dealing with a do-nothing Congress when in fact, Congress is acting, just not as he wants it to.
The president has refused to enforce existing border laws and has created a number of incentives, including DACA, to actually increase illegal immigration. Now that the border is swelling with Central American children, he wants to claim that it is Republicans’ fault, hoping to use the crisis to Democrats’ advantage in the midterms. Democrats are already running Spanish-language ads against six House Republicans.
Enforcement of existing border laws would be a good start at stemming the tide of illegal immigration. A recent Customs and Border Protection report reveals that the southern border is the primary gateway for illegal immigrants from 75 different countries – some of whom come from countries now stricken with Ebola.
As the Heritage Foundation points out, the right solutions for fixing the border mess would include defunding DACA and removing the incentive for illegal immigrants to come to the U.S. An increase in detentions and removals would also send a message that the U.S. will not tolerate illegal immigration. Expedited return of unaccompanied alien minors to their home countries is part of this strategy. Currently, these children are being shipped off to other states, with the promise that they will either be reunited with their families or receive hearings at which they never show up.
But the Left wants none of it. Republicans have the last word on immigration as Congress takes its five-week summer break. The GOP needs to be ready. The Left is playing the long-term game to win the hearts of Latino voters in an effort to keep power.
There’s my two cents.