Thursday, January 5, 2017

Trey Gowdy Kicks Obama Out The Door With Brutal Message About His Presidency

ETF News ^ | Jan 3, 2017 

Conservatives who are sick of the tyranny of President Barack Obama and wary of the corruption of failed Presidential wannabe Hillary Clinton have had no better ally for the past few years than Congressman Trey Gowdy of upstate South Carolina.
Gowdy recently stood up with a national advocacy group for veterans and brutally criticized lame-duck President Obama for his sickening neglect of the VA healthcare system and for the way Obama’s government retaliated against whistleblowers both within the Internal Revenue Service and the VA.
Said Gowdy, standing shoulder to shoulder with Concerned Veterans for America, “I don’t like bullies. Government against whistleblowers is an unequal fight. Free speech is the ability to speak truth to power without consequences.”
Continued Trey, “With very few limitations, you have the right to say what you want to say. But as a responsible citizen, I have to use that right judiciously. There are people in the media who are professional and there are some who have lost all pretense of objectivity.”
Added Trey, destroying Democrats for perverting the Constitution, “Constitutional equilibrium is out of whack. I wish my colleagues would just read the document and not confuse it with the Declaration of Independence or a poem by Robert Frost.” Ouch! Do you agree with Trey about the scandalous way Obama and the Democrats have run our country into the ground?

Josh Earnest Heading for Surgery!

 by Hillbilly sage

Gender neutral Presidential spox Josh Earnest is scheduled for surgery in about two weeks when he leaves the White House.

Doctors at Hillside Veterinary Clinic say it will be a two step procedure. The second step will be to remove more than a foot of excess growth from his nose, the first will be to extricate it from Obamas' posterior.

In a somewhat related story, both the Ex-Pres & Ex-First Ho will both receive medical attention for conditions related to over exertion. Obama will be treated for a problem similar to carpal tunnel, known as "Selfie Finger". Moochelle will undergo an orthodontic procedure that will allow her to keep her mouth shut.

While Ex-Presidents receive free lifetime medical, Mochelle's procedure will be paid for by children's donations collected in school lunch rooms.

Seven Tests That Can Keep Republicans from Screwing Up

Fiscal Times ^ | 01/05/2017 | Ed Morrissey 

It didn’t take long for Republicans to make their first tin-eared mistake after winning a broad victory in November. In fact, they had barely opened the new session of Congress before performing a pratfall that called into question whether they learned anything from the populist revolt that struck both parties over the past two years.
On Monday night, House Republicans met to consider their top priorities for the 115th Session of Congress, after an election in which voters made clear their displeasure with the Washington DC establishment and the status quo. Instead of focusing on moves to improve accountability within the Beltway, they instead put their efforts into limiting the independence of the Office of Congressional Ethics.

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have complained about alleged abuses from OCE, and there may well be defensible changes to reduce the potential for future reforms. However, as Paul Ryan reportedly warned the caucus, this self-interested focus was hardly what voters expected of the new Congress, and it didn’t take long for Ryan to be proven prescient. The media gleefully reported that House Republicans had “gutted” ethics accountability, and even Donald Trump tweeted out his disapproval. Less than 24 hours after their vote to change the House rules on OCE, the GOP caucus reversed course and threw in the towel.
The Washington Post headlined this as “a day of chaos.” It certainly wasn’t a propitious start to the ambitious session planned by president-elect Trump and Republican leadership. The fumble left the impression that many Republicans still thought voters would accept business as usual, and perhaps even assumed that their lopsided victory at all levels in November signaled a specific embrace of the Republican Party and carte blanche to act on the agenda of its politicians.
That would be a dangerous assumption. Voters did not suddenly embrace Republicans as much as they rejected Democrats, with the GOP benefiting from the binary political system. Democrats made a similar assumption after winning sweeping victories in the 2006 and 2008 elections, and have paid for it ever since. Democrats failed to understand that and spent the last six years reducing their party to its worst political position since the 1920s, and possibly since Reconstruction.

Voters did not elect Republicans as much as they elected for a change – and want it to result in positive action, economic revival, a secure and strong America, and most of all greater accountability from Washington DC. Had they articulated among themselves a set of tests for proposed actions that reflected those principles, they might have avoided this debacle entirely. These seven tests, in descending priority order, will provide Republicans on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue insight into whether their actions reflect their understanding of that mandate:
  1. Does it serve to bring accountability to the political establishment in Washington DC? – No other value mattered more to voters in both parties in this cycle. Donald Trump ran explicitly on a promise to “drain the swamp,” a promise he has reaffirmed after his election. Had Republicans internalized this properly, they never would have dared to make OCE changes as their Day One action item.
  2. Does it add to the economic power of the US and create good jobs for Americans? – Populists on the Left cared more about attacking corporate and individual wealth, but on the Right, the main driver was economic stagnation outside of the coastal enclaves and Washington DC. Twenty-five years ago, James Carville said, “It’s the economy, stupid,” but now it’s the making sure the economy produces winners across the board. That may matter most in trade agreements, but the expected regulatory and tax reforms have to take this into account as well.
  1. Does it address the most critical needs of the country ahead of the ideological agendas of the parties? – Voters increasingly see Republicans and Democrats in Washington as a separate species, not as members of their communities. They want the government to fix what’s truly broken and stay out of what’s not. Voters expect politicians to find solutions rather than conduct the same endless debates we have had for decades. Delivering practical solutions that benefit their communities will go a long way in establishing credibility.

  2. Does it enhance national security and the defense of Americans both at home and abroad? - Voters demand both liberty and security as part of making America great again. They want national security tailored to our needs rather than those of other nations, or a very good explanation of why the latter falls within our national interest.
  3. Does it serve the rule of law equally applied to all? – Perhaps no more corrosive belief to well-functioning self-governance exists than the assumption that power and privilege result in favorable treatment from the government. That manifests itself in many ways – law enforcement as well as regulatory and tax policy, but also in accountability. Restoring confidence in the system requires a renewed commitment to the rule of law rather than the rule of whim or cronyism. The failure to adhere to this principle is a key factor in the rise of populism.
  1. Does it restore the proper balance of power between the executive and legislative branches? – Braggadocio about pens and phones might have proven satisfactory for the outgoing president, but the legislature is the most accountable branch of government to voters. Regulatory reform must account for a massive shift in power to executive agencies when it comes to rule-setting and law enforcement over the last several decades, much of which leaves Americans at the whim of bureaucrats without due process to protect them. Congress needs to exert control over the bureaucracy as part of reducing regulation as an end in itself.
  2. Does it restore the proper balance of power between Washington DC and the states? – Voters feel disconnected from self-governance because the government has increasingly become disconnected from them. A renewed push for federalism and subsidiarity will allow voters more control over policies in their own communities and states, while at the same time reducing the opportunities for cronyism and corruption in Washington DC. Republicans promised this the last time they had single-party control in the Beltway, and instead delivered the K Street Project and more federal programs that crowded out local and state initiatives. They can ill afford another failure.
Republicans don’t have a great deal of time to prove to voters that they have learned this lesson. Both the Trump administration and the GOP on Capitol Hill need to earn their credibility by adhering to the principles on which voters put their trust in them. If Republicans fail to learn from the Democrats’ failures in 2010 forward, and especially their own failures in 2006 and 2008, voters will turn on them just as quickly.

The "Russian Hacking" Story Changes Again ^ | 5 January 2017 | Tyler Durden 

Today at 9:30 am, senior U.S. intelligence officials face questions at a Senate hearing that will be dominated by the intelligence community's assessment that Russia meddled in the presidential election to help Donald Trump win. Participating will be James R. Clapper, Jr., Director Of National Intelligence. Marcel J. Lettre II, Under Secretary Of Defense For Intelligence and Admiral Michael S. Rogers, USN, Commander, United States Cyber Command.
The Armed Services Committee's cyber threats hearing on Thursday comes a day before the president-elect is to be briefed by the CIA and FBI directors — along with the director of national intelligence — on the investigation into Russia's alleged hacking efforts. Trump has been deeply critical of their findings, even appearing to back controversial WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's contention that Russia did not provide him with hacked Democratic emails.
The committee's session is the first in a series aimed at investigating purported Russian cyber-attacks against U.S. interests and developing defenses sturdy enough to blunt future intrusions. "We will obviously be talking about the hacking, but the main thing is the whole issue of cybersecurity," the committee's Republican chairman, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, said ahead of the hearing. "Right now we have no policy, no strategy to counter cyberattacks."
More importantly, however, the hearing comes hours after Reuters reported overnight that U.S. intelligence agencies obtained what they considered to be conclusive evidence after the November election that Russia provided hacked material from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks. However, in the latest change of the narrative, this time the allegation is that Russia provided the hacked data through a third party, three U.S. officials said on Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Understanding Your Most Fundamental Rights

The Coach's Team ^ | 1/4/17 | Bill Norton 

Suppose you, as a good neighbor, noticed an imbalance between a couple of families down the street. The Smiths — husband and wife, no kids, yet they have two cars. Then there is the Jones family — husband and wife, five kids and no car. A difficult life the Joneses have, hard to get to work or to the store, difficult to get the kids to school. You would like to help, because you are a kind, compassionate and merciful individual, but you only have one car for yourself, your wife and three kids.
You decide one day to talk to Mr. Smith about this perceived injustice. “I have a suggestion for you Mr. Smith,” you say. “Why don’t you give one of your cars to the Joneses?” “Well, that’s a suggestion alright,” he responds, “but I think I will keep my cars.” This infuriates you because you cannot understand his lack of compassion. “Actually, I insist,” you exclaim. “You insist” objects an exasperated Mr. Smith? “Get out of here! I’m not going to just give a car to the Joneses.”
This situation has you quite flustered. You can’t even sleep at night. So, you get up late one evening, go to the Smith’s, hot wire their car and drive it over to the Jones. You knock on the door and out comes Mr. Jones to see his new gift. “For me?” he asks. “Sure,” you say.”Now you can get the kids to school easier, get to work and the store easier, sorry I don’t have a key, but if you just touch these two wires together…” You go home feeling so good, because you are a kind, compassionate, merciful individual and you sleep...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The problem with Obama’s last-minute moves

Yahoo News ^ | 01/05/2017 | Matt Bai 

I love a good real estate analogy, so naturally I had to admire the way Erick Erickson, the conservative blogger, recently described the last-minute flurry of actions emanating from the Obama White House. “Obama and John Kerry,” Erickson tweeted, “are like tenants who trash a place as they are being evicted.” Except, in this case, the analogy is a few degrees off. The president isn’t really trashing anything. It’s more like he’s hurriedly adding the bold, modernist touches his landlord always resisted — repainting walls, recessing lights, tearing up carpets and restaining floors — in hopes that the guy who’s moving in next won’t have the time or tenacity required to undo them. […]
Kerry should not have given his speech denouncing Israel. Obama should not be filling jobs at the last hour. It’s tempting to exploit the time you have left for maximum impact, but it’s also self-serving, and it’s bound to be fleeting. Because if there’s one thing Obama should have learned from his futile strategy of governing by “phone and pen” — if there’s one thing that should be clear as Republicans prepare to obliterate much of his second term in a matter of hours — it’s that you can’t build anything lasting by executive fiat. Sooner or later, whatever you achieve with the flourish of a single pen is erased with about the same casual effort.
What history will most remember, unfortunately, is that you refused to stand down when the verdict was in. That’s no way for an otherwise graceful president to go out. …
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

In Uniform!

American Presidents in Uniform

Posted on 1/4/2017, 11:59:08 PM by rickmichaels

His Legacy




Electoral College


Get Out!


Alpha Males




No School Named




Taking out the trash


Best Gift








When you realize...