Something You Might Like: March 2013

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

The American Royals’ Lavish Lifestyle

As Mel Brooks says in one of his movies, “It’s good to be the king!”

His Royal Majesty Barack Obama for all his “concern” for the poor and demonization of the rich believes himself entitled to every privilege of royalty. Even though he himself is rich, it is pointed out that even he couldn’t afford the luxuries he enjoys. But with the help of the American taxpayers and the printing press, he can. Michele Bachmann (interviewed at CPAC) summarizes his extravagance:

I’m not sure every statement is 100 per cent mathematically accurate, but it illustrates quite correctly the level of personal service the Obamas feel they should, and routinely do, receive, including frequent and very expensive vacations.

Meanwhile, Vice President Joe Biden has enjoyed some similar luxuries, his hotel tabs for one night each in London and Paris in February, for himself and a very substantial entourage, totaling over a million dollars.

As reported by the Daily Mail U.K., (citing prices reported by The Weekly Standard)

Paris may be known as the City of Light, but that title certainly doesn’t mean that visitors are light on spending as Vice President Joe Biden’s one day trip cost taxpayers more than half a million dollars.

When Mr Biden and his hefty entourage stayed in Paris for an evening in early February and it cost $585,000.50 for that single night.

The Vice President likely rented out more than 100 rooms in the Hotel Intercontinental Paris Le Grand, though they must not have gotten a group discount rate.…

For some reason, the pound must be at a better level than the euro as his hotel bill for one night at the Hyatt Regency in London was only $459,388.65, more than $100,000 less than his night in Paris.

The article reports that the VP and his group used 136 rooms in London and a similar number in Paris. (See photos at the Mail website). Five-star accommodations, of course.

Seems he narrowly beat the sequester, or might have needed to cut this expense by 10 per cent!

[Biden story via Liberty Crier]

Photo: President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden look toward the guests in the First Lady's box at the State of the Union address in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., Feb. 12, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza). (No. 14 in gallery).

Saturday, March 16, 2013

It’s Too Late; Now We’re Past the Point of No Return, Mark Steyn Says. Problem Is, He May Be Right.

The ongoing saga of ridiculous panic responses to “gun-shaped” things in kindergartens and elementary schools is very ably targeted by Mark Steyn, a commentator of high caliber, on the Rush Limbaugh Show:

I saw this YouTube item on the Daley Gator blog, where it was posted on March 11.

Some further analysis of what the episode of the pop-tart bitten into a gun-like shape signifies can be found here. Jon Rappoport has some interesting insights on how this is more important than it may appear. The article is well worth reading.

People must wake up, or we soon could become a society gone and forgotten.

You try to be optimistic …

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Rand Paul and His GOP Critics: Who Are the Real “Wacko Birds”?

Senator Rand Paul (official portrait)

Rand Paul’s heroic filibuster against the nomination of John Brennan as CIA Director, and the objections voiced by Senators McCain and Graham have done much to illustrate the problems of the Republican Party.

The New York Times reported,

But [Senator Rand Paul] was assailed by two of his party’s most prominent national security hawks, Senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. They took to the floor on Thursday to defend President Obama’s aggressive use of drones against Al Qaeda and its affiliates and to suggest that Mr. Paul and his backers had engaged in scaremongering.

“We’ve done, I think, a disservice to a lot of Americans by making them think that somehow they’re in danger from their government,” Mr. McCain said. “They’re not. But we are in danger from a dedicated, longstanding, easily replaceable-leadership enemy that is hellbent on our destruction.”

Mr. Paul won particular support from two other Tea Party-backed Republicans, Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah. The three spelled one another during the filibuster on Wednesday afternoon and evening, drawing in part from a huge positive response on Twitter to their efforts.

The establishment (RINO) wing of the party will always be content to remain in the minority and offer only token opposition (if any at all) to the Marxist/Fascist administration now in Washington. Only upon receiving significant pressure from conservative colleagues and constituents are they likely to behave in anything close to a conservative manner.

Usually, this passivity seems to be because the establishment Republicans in Congress currently, and for some decades, have been of the mindset that what the GOP must do the win elections and serve the public good is to strive for common ground with Democrats, demonstrate bipartisanship, and avoid rocking the boat. So this is not so much an issue of character or intentions as it is of inertia.

Election results have shown that “moderate” Republicans do not usually win national elections (e.g., Dole, McCain, Romney), the exceptions being the Bush family. G. H. W. Bush rode the coattails of Reagan, and G. W. Bush beat inferior candidates Al Gore and John Kerry. Although he barely squeezed out a victory over Al Gore (Gore has since been shown to be an example of real political weirdness), his victory over the radical Kerry was more decisive. But when actual conservatives and libertarians come along and talk about reducing the size and scope of government, it sounds like a foreign language to the entrenched establishment of both parties.

While GOP accommodation of Obamaism is somewhat understandable, if not acceptable, sometimes it’s downright offensive. Case in point: Senators McCain and Graham’s harsh criticism of Rand Paul’s filibuster, with McCain even calling Paul, and Senators Cruz “Wacko Birds.” Not funny, Senator. Apparently, neither McCain nor Graham would have the courage to actually criticize the Obama Administration in any such dramatic way. Paul’s filibuster forced the Attorney General Eric Holder to declare that the president indeed does not have the authority to order drone strikes on Americans in America, who are not at the time engaged in battle against America. This is what it took to get such an admission in answer to a very simple and appropriate question.

While establishment GOP members of Congress seem ready to be swayed by Obama’s wining and dining them, it is offensive that McCain and Graham would criticize Rand as they did while just having partaken of Obama’s “charm offensive.” The real question, as I see it, is whether the RINOs can comprehend the threat to civil liberties posed by the issue of drone strikes on Americans in this country. It runs absolutely counter to the Constitutional due process protections (as does the claimed ability to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial or the right of habeas corpus).

It’s not difficult to see that Rand Paul connected with many people, even of differing political views. He addressed an issue of the basic right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and stood against an arrogant, stubborn, and lawless administration that otherwise would have never said that Obama didn’t have the right to put on his kill list anyone he pleased and act on it at any time, and anywhere. For those not familiar with civics or the Constitution, these things violate the most basic protections citizens are supposed to have, and they smack of tyranny, which is very much a part of what the Obama Administration is all about.

An interesting read is the transcript of Senator Paul’s conversation with Rush Limbaugh, when he called in to Limbaugh’s show on March 7. Besides the concern over drone strikes in the U.S., Paul also expressed concern over the administration’s general attitude of suspicion of American citizens.

PAUL: Well, the Bureau of Justice has come forward with some criterion for people you need to report on if you know these people. These are people with missing fingers, stains on their clothes, people who like to pay in cash, people who have weatherized ammunition, and more than seven days of food. These are people who are potential terrorists. And if that's the list, I know a lot of people on that list. I'm a little concerned that they ought to get a trial before they get a drone strike ordered.

RUSH: I'm on that list! ….

And, concerning Senators McCain and Graham’s response:

PAUL: You know, I think we've struck a nerve, and there is a little bit of a difference within the Republican caucus and a growing sort of division on some of these issues. Their side believes that the battlefield is everywhere. And this is what John Brennan believes here. He says there's no geographic limitation to the battlefield. And that means that if the battlefield is America also, then the people, you know, like Senator McCain and Graham, they believe that the laws of war apply. The problem is that the laws of war don't involve due process. And I understand when you're in war, you don't get due process. So in the battlefield you don't ask your opponent, you know, for Miranda rights, you don't present them with warrants. You shoot your opponent.

I strongly recommend reading the entire transcript, where he elaborates on the reasoning behind his actions. Overall, Senator Paul keeps a courteous and civil tone, states that his filibuster is not about individuals but issues, and gives a reasoned and convincing explanation for what he did.

I am happy to see it demonstrated thus that it’s possible to criticize the policies of the Obama Administration and even to see some results. Unless there is effective pressure on them, we will continue to see an unabated effort to marginalize civil liberties and to threaten Americans who disagree.

The delaying of the Administration’s answer to Senator Paul’s question suggests that they are not far from being OK with murdering American citizens on American soil, without trial, whom they deem to be somehow affiliated with terrorists. As noted previously, they would act as policeman, judge, jury and executioner, operating in secret. Chilling, and worth attention.