The fix is in

That President Obama personally intervened to ensure that members of congress and their aides would have the federal government pay for their healthcare coverage premium increases due to the Affordable Care Act, in absolute total violation of the Grassley Clause, tells me the fix is in.

The GOP has once again caved-in to Obama and the Democrats to the detriment of the U.S. Constitution.  In return for the illegal political maneuver, Obama will see passage of comprehensive immigration reform, tax increases, greater federal spending, debt-ceiling increases, and Cap and Trade.  And ObamaCare will be fully funded as there will be no will in Congress to either defund or overturn it while Obama is in office regardless of voter pressure to undo it.

So yes, from now on, if you hear the GOP taking a stand on any of the issues I mentioned above (or any other future issue), it'll all be for show as the fix is in for Congress will fight to keep its "Affordable" Care Act exemption regardless, rather than rock the Obama boat and risk the chance that Obama would pluck away the exemption at will. 

That is the carrot that presidents from here on now will dangle over Congress, because this particular Congress has refused to do its job for fear of letting their constituents know where they truly stand on ObamaCare.  Talk is cheap, but actions speak louder. 

Talk about an imperial presidency, it's already here.

The U.S. Congress and Obama win, you lose. 

Marc Anthony is as American as flan

By now most Americans who follow the news know that during baseball's annual All-Star Game held at Citi Field in New York City a few days ago, the bigots came out swinging Tweeting horrible, silly, stupid, racist and ignorant things about Marc Anthony singing God Bless America.

Tweeters called him un-American, a spic, a Mexican, a foreigner -- you name it.  Really dumb things, and I got to laugh my butt off at the nonsense.  How many stupid people out there actually think all this to be true about one of America's most famous cross-over artist?

For one, Marc Anthony, as we all should know by now, is an award-winning American singer born in New York City to Puerto Rican parents.  Both New York and Puerto Rico are part of the United States.  One is a state; the other is a territory with all the rights of citizenship bestowed upon its residents by the U.S. Constitution (except federal voting rights because it's not a fully incorporated state of the Union) and the Jones-Shafroth Act of 1917.

Why a number of Americans do not understand this part of their history is quite simple.  The caliber of education in this country, despite untold billions poured into this giant rat-trap, still produces idiots regardless of race and ethnicity.  Do we not teach social studies or American history anymore?  Or, have those subject matters been replaced by feel-good subjects like Radical Protests 101 and Man-Made Climate Change 102?

However, no matter that we celebrate every January and hold dear to the legacy, wishes and dream of Dr. Martin Luther King to be a country where color doesn't matter, hatred still persists though not to a greater extent that it did before the 1970's.  Some of it is hidden, but no one side can claim to be clean for there are black, Hispanic, and Asian bigots as well.

So the question:  Where do we, as a nation, go from here?  Granted, the Tweets do not represent a majority of whites in this country any more than if the same were to happen a ta basketball or soccer game and the tweeter's race were reversed.  It would be silly to believe that.  But we can admit that there are bigoted idiots walking our streets.

That said, having watched the video of Marc Anthony singing God Bless America (written by a Russian-born Jew named Irving Berlin in 1918, who went on to become an American citizen and popular composer), how can anyone be seriously offended?  Offended by seeing an American of Puerto Rican origin sing one of America's greatest patriotic melody?

So I have to ask, would those Tweeters prefer the non-Hispanic, full-blooded white American named Roseanne sing God Bless America or the national anthem again at a baseball game and at the end hock a loogie on the mound for good ole sakes?

In conclusion, let's not turn America's favorite pastime sport into a racial cauldron.  Mariano Rivera deserves better!

A case driven by media and racial hucksters for profit

So let's delve into this George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case in a realistic manner, without emotions getting in the way as it tends to do often in controversies.  How many of you would be truly angry if Zimmerman's surname was Cruz, Rodriguez, Nieves, Lopez, Burgos, Martinez, Hernandez, Ochoa or Alonso?

There is a case up in Boston where an NFL player is charged with murdering his black friend who was also a semi-professional football player.  Aaron Hernandez allegedly killing Odin Lloyd.  Not a self-defense case either.  Just clear cut simple murder of an unarmed black man, according to the state prosecutor.

Where is the national uproar and demands by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson demanding an end to the deaths of black men?

Face it, the US media is guilty of attempting to foment racial rioting in this country, because it makes for big ratings, and big ratings means a larger share of viewership which in turn means a whole lot of money into the pockets of big media. 

Indeed, the legacy of William Randolph Hearst is still alive and doing quite well today in the newsroom where reporters furnish the pictures and stories so that the moguls can furnish the race war.

The folks driven to defend Trayvon Martin and calling for justice have been driven by the lies of the liberal mainstream media.  They are guided by such because it's good exposure, and is also guided by big contributions to various "leaders" of the community like Sharpton and Jackson and their respective organizations.

According to the facts in the Zimmerman case, you have an Hispanic who was pursuing a person he thought was acting suspicious.  There had been numerous robberies in the gated community.  Zimmerman thought Martin was up to no good.  He dials 9-1-1 to alert the authorities, and then he was told to back down, which he did as he was engaged in foot pursuit.  On his way back to his car, he gets pummeled from behind and fearing for his life he shoots the unarmed 17-year old.  Mind you, Zimmerman did not throw the first punch, according to him, and since there is no one else to substantiate his claim, neither witnesses nor Martin who is now dead, the claim stands.

So what would you do if you were under assault? 

Any human being would rightfully defend oneself from further physical harm.  That is what Zimmerman did.  He did nothing wrong legally in the eyes of the law pursuing Martin.  This entire matter about racial profiling is a non-starter since it is not illegal for civilians to do such.  Racial profiling laws prevent law enforcement officers and non-uniform civilian government bureaucrats in departments from engaging in such activities.  Zimmerman was neither a uniformed officer, nor was he acting in the capacity of a civilian government employee.  Which is why he wasn't charged with racial profiling.

And get this, the FBI concluded in its investigation of Zimmerman that he was not and did not act out of racial hatred.  Not only that, but his defense didn't even bring up the Stand Your Ground law as reason for his pulling the trigger in self-defense.

Therefore, what is one to conclude after all this?

Zimmerman has been pilloried and  his good moral character as a citizen denied by those who want to make a political statement about the state of race relations in America.  A statement that says blacks are under assault from white America (Zimmerman is half-white, but looks more like actor Esai Morales), even though the opposite is true; that more blacks are under penalty of death by other blacks in black communities. 

In conclusion, beware of the power of the US media and its telling of stories.  Beware of activists promoting hysteria with the assistance of a sycophantic media.  Beware of the smoke and get the facts before jumping to hysterical and emotional outbursts.

Obama is in trouble

Here is another one of my predictions.  President Barack Hussein Obama is TOAST in DC, and here is why.  Too many things are happening way too fast for a town that likes to move at a snails pace.  For starters, ObamaCare is causing consternation with Democrats like Max Baucus, the out-going senator from Montana who sold his vote to Obama for some earmarks.  Next year will bring the full weight of ObamaCare tax increase on the public, and it is also an election year in which many Democrats, especially those in the senate,  feel the noose tightening around their necks.

Then there's the Benghazi fiasco where the smell of cover-up is gaining noxious speed.  Then the Justice Department's wiretapping of AP outlets around the nation has brought a sudden chill between the mainstream media (which adores Obama) and the White House.  And the IRS audits of conservatives, conservative non-profits and anything TEA Partyish has even brought the ire of a number of Democrats as well as the ACLU.  

And that is on top of Fast & Furious, Solyndra and Fisker which were pre-election scandals the liberal mainstream press ignored and squashed.

Lastly, the fact that Obama put all his political capital on his gun control legislation which was roundly defeated in the senate last month suggests that Obama's luster has worn.  Obama has crashed and he's now thrashing the political sea to stay afloat.  

It's over, Obama.  Your second term is a thud.  And there's still three more years of this embarrassment we have to deal with, unfortunately.

Obama to play Texas

So President Obama is planning to visit the Lone Star state today to play up the economic growth of that state as if he's responsible for creating such conditions.  Heck, why not, he's president and if he wants to take credit for it, so be it.  But, in the real world, we know Obama has had nothing to do with anything that's happened to Texas economically.

Texas confounds many liberal progressives who see its rich diversity and electoral map as something they can take to the blue column, if only they could convince a group of people to believe in the Democrat party again.  Namely, convince enough minorities and women to vote their way.....and often in one election.

Turning the Lone Star state blue is certainly in the works.  Has been for a couple of years without gaining sufficient grounds.  Why not work at it?  Why not work harder to turn the state from its present growth into another welfare basket case like California?  

Texas has no state income taxes, the people support the Constitution and especially the 2nd Amendment.  Basically, Texans cherish liberty, personal freedom and individual entrepreneurship.  Texans love to work and keep their keep.  How on earth will Democrat operatives be able to convince Texans otherwise?

Obama will be touring a high school and a chip machine manufacturer in Austin.  Seems like whenever Obama tours a company, the company folds a year later.  

That said, here's a question I have for Obama and the Democrats:  Why work to screw up Texas by making it a blue state knowing full well that blue states are struggling with job losses and population flight to the south and southwest due to ever-increasing higher taxes and cost of living?

Dems forget about Obama, focusing on Hillary 2016

It didn't take long for the Democrat party honchos to abandon Barack Obama for someone "fresher", as in Hillary Rodham Clinton who is expected to launch her 2016 bid for the presidency in 2014, or maybe earlier.  

With Obama now recognized as a lame duck president, the very fact that he could not muster enough votes in the Democrat senate to pass gun control legislation showed the nation how politically weak he has truly become since his re-election last November.

Not only is Obama's stardom imploding right before us, but as we get nearer to the full implementation of ObamaCare in 2014 (a midterm election year) with the added costs, cuts to medicare and tax increases, many in Obama's party are now considering abandoning the entire program, altogether, out of fear that it will become the reason why they lose their seats in the house and especially in the senate, where they hold a slim majority.  

The Democrats are now realizing that rather than having bedded with Obama in his first term to get ObamaCare passed (without GOP support), they should have done their homework.  Instead, those Democrats sided with then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi who famously quipped:  "We have to pass the [healthcare] bill so you can find out what's in it."

Well, we know what's in it, for the most part, and it seems like every week we are hearing more and more about regulations that all the more makes us angry that the Democrats and Obama supported this boondoggle monstrosity.

So what are Democrats doing to have us forget all this?

Right, they are now promoting Hillary 2016 for us.  Trying to get us into that lovey dovey fawning mood that got the nation in trouble in 2008 in the first place with Obama.  So we have the first mulatto president, and now we have to have the first woman president, and then eight years down the road, a GLBT president.  All Democrats.  Oh, goody!!!

Now if Hillary wants to run again, I can see it now.  The mainstream uber-sensitive liberal press throwing softballs, avoiding asking hard hitting questions like Benghazi.  Slick Willie standing next to her smiling and laughing ala Yeltsin to throw off anybody who dares criticize his wife's performance at State.  All in an effort to swoon the public again.  Who knows if it will work again, but rest assured, liberal women groups will be out in full force trying to get one of their own, a liberal woman, mind you, to the top post in DC.

Should this nation risk another four years of a Democrat in the White House serving the special interest groups like NOW, NARAL and the Kermit Gosnell Infanticide Institute?

The Unites States of America needs a president who knows how to lead, and who knows about economics, jobs creation, investments, and above all, the Constitution, and who respects that sacred document which binds us all as one people.

We don't need cheap suits with empty heads and forked tongues who double speak to throw us off our guard.  We simply can't afford another wasted four years, period.

Why armed citizens are good for society

Just fished this bit of news out of the internet involving an armed civilian stopping a knife-wielding thug at a Salt Lake City supermarket last night who had stabbed two people.

Now, we often hear about stories like this on the local news, but hardly ever on the national news, and I wonder why?

Another thing that irks me is that we often hear congressional testimony from victims who call for stricter gun control, but very seldom do we hear about gun-owners, specifically conceal carry permit holders, testifying before congress about how they stopped a crime.

We all know that on average roughly 2.5M crimes are stopped annually by gun owners, but we only hear about those violent crimes and the need for gun control.  It's time the voices of the 2nd Amendment supporters are heard in congressional testimony.

Why the flu should cripple Congress

Here's a good one to shake your head.  A bipartisan group of congressional hacks have decided to add a .75-cent flu vaccine tax to help fund the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, which they admit is no where near financial collapse as are Medicare and social security with $3.5B in the bank.  And given the fund has paid out $2.5B since its inception in 1988, that means that conceivably the amount it has banked can last another 25 years without a problem.

Oh no, the savants in Washington figure that with 135M Americans expected to receive flu injections this year (me included), that it could pilfer an additional $100M even though the trust fund is not on the verge of insolvency.  

So why add a tax that will take from the working middle class?  Because it's an easy and simple tax they can get away with without incurring the wrath of the American people.  It's a service tax or much like a sales tax. You buy, you pay. 

But since the VICTF is not bankrupt, are we to believe the entire $100M will flow into its coffers?  Or will  the additional funds be diverted to some other government project or favored earmarks never to be seen again?

That is the $100M question.

But wait, since this is all about funding a government trust fund, I thought there wasn't such a thing as a government trust fun?  You know, like social security, etc.

So writes Jeryl Bier, "As is the case with all government 'trust funds,' there is no cash set aside to pay out claims. According to the November 2012 report on the vaccine trust, the $3.5 billion balance is invested in 'US Treasury Securities.'  In other words, financing a portion of the $16.5 trillion national debt."

And so, folks, there you have it.  Congressional brilliance at work to siphon off more money.....ever more money from you and me. 

And these are the same folks who voted for and against ObamaCare, and are now working to exempt Congress and their aides from the dreaded and costly effects of ObamaCare.  

Help us, Lord!!!

Reliving the left's Bush Derangement Syndrome

Eugene Robinson, writing in the Washington Post, helps Americans divert their attention on the ineffectiveness and failures of the Obama administration by focusing on former President George W. Bush's presidential library opening.

In his latest screed, Robinson reminds Americans why we are still supposed to hate Bush after four years.  He writes, "Hiding behind the euphemism 'enhanced interrogation techniques,' Bush made torture official US policy."  And he goes on to use the recent 576-page report from the Constitution Project to make his point that no matter what, Bush was the worst of all American presidents.

Look, I've had my issues with the former president.  I didn't like the prescription drug law and TARP among a few others.  But when it came to handling the war against Islamic terrorism Bush was spot on.  I remain apprehensive about Iraq still even after reading Decision Points, however I was never privy to top secret intel reports as he was.

That said, I do see and respect that Bush helped free 25 million Afghans and another 25 million Iraqis from oppressive regimes, and set about a course for democracy in that part of the world.  Whether democracy's roots take hold of that soil remains to be seen, and it is both of those goals (freedom and democracy) that liberals like Robinson refuse to accept for they will never ever forgive Bush for the 2000 election.

However, Robinson does end his anti-Bush rant by lauding the number one cause of liberals.  That of AIDS and of Bush's effort to bring anti-viral AIDS drugs to Africa to save the lives of millions.  Therefore, it's okay to fight AIDS but not okay to fight terrorism using military force which then helps to free 50 million people from oppressive governments.

Look, President Bush did what he thought was right for this nation and so we must live with his war decisions and all the consequences.  But remember this, 19 radicalized Muslim men brought us to where we are today.  And we live still in a very dangerous world, and thus we cannot let our guards down one bit, or we may face an even greater peril ahead.  Far greater than what happened on 9/11 and in Boston last week.

Improving federal background gun checks? Sure!!!

The Obama administration and congressional liberals want to pass legislation that would "improved" federal background checks conducted by the FBI on all gun purchases, but when it comes to background checks on foreign nationals and potential domestic terror suspects like Tamerlan Tsarnaev, they just can't get it right.

And we're supposed to believe that a new and improved federal firearms check will stop criminals and the mentally ill from purchasing guns at stores, gun shows or private transfers?

The 2nd Amendment is your right, and not the governments!

The Daily Caller's Christopher Bedford has a very good column on why President Barack Hussein Obama lost the gun control battle, and that is quite clear given the enormous expense of capital (both financial and political) Obama used to reach out to the American people after Sandy Hook.

However, Obama's fanatical crusade to enlist millions into his cause proved ineffective, in part, because he continues to believe that he is the lord and savior of the American republic.  For all you liberal, hardcore leftist progressive Democrats out there, Obama is not the lord king savior or ruler of America.  Obama is simply president, and presidents must act responsibly with the powers entrusted in him by the U.S. Constitution.  Something Obama does not consider when attempting to obstruct and steamroll laws and people who get in his way.

Americans know how to respond effectively when politicians think they are above the law. At times, such responses do not work such as when New York City's Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg illegally won a third term as that city's chief executive in 2009.

We Americans love our lives, our liberties, and our pursuit of happiness.......and owning firearms protects our lives, our liberties, and allows us to pursue happiness as we see fit for ourselves.

The 2nd Amendment is a right as cherished as the nine other Bill of Rights.  The Bill of Rights are simply the rights given us by nature, by God, and simply codified to ensure that it remains so, to be read, to be understood, and not be denied by government.

What is it about the right by law-abiding citizens to possess firearms that so annoys progressives?

How about leftwing terrorism?

And one wonders why the American mainstream press is a total joke.  After the Boston Marathon Bombing, Chris Matthews and company were salivating over the possibility, in fact, the likelihood that the terror attack that killed three and injured hundreds, was concocted by a bunch of rightwing, gun-toting kooks, because it occurred on Tax Day.

Where's the apology?

I won't hold my breath, but I will report on this piece of information.  That of the August 2012 terror shooting at the Family Research Council's by a thug who wanted to inflict as much harm to the conservative organization simply because it opposes same-sex marriage.

The terror subject, Floyd Lee Corkin III, wounded a security guard before being apprehended by him.  Corkin chose to attack the FRC because he had found that the Southern Poverty Law Center had named it as a hate group.  Corkin is a leftwing fanatic.  Where's the outrage?

Why does the Right not fight harder when it comes to leftwingers like Matthews defining the right as terrorist-prone?  Bill Ayer's must be laughing ever day and night at the obvious double standard.

Say again, Mayor Bloomberg?

So New York City Mayor Nanny (aka Michael R. Bloomberg) wants the country's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution to change after the Boston Marathon Bombing. I say no, because the ulterior motive this mayor has is to strip the Bill of Rights to the point where we, the people, become something less than a citizen. I do not support the Collectivist position (which Bloomberg does) which denies individual rights. There is something called the Common Good, but such notion must be specific and lead to a tangible good in the end, and not strip the individual of anything that is inherent. Namely, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, all of which are anathema to the progressive agenda of absolute total control of one's life.

The Constitution was written specifically to limit the federal government from encroaching on the individual, thus the Bill of Rights. If anybody is to change, it is Bloomberg, but that will never happen. He's been steamrolling the rights of New York City citizens since he was able to secure an illegal third term. He hates guns, hates salt, hates soda, hates smokes, hates fat, hates conservatives and the tea party, and hates just about anything and anyone that gets in his way of achieving his progressively radicalized agenda on the national level.

Personally, I'm all about security and improving security where needed by government using its policing powers in a balanced approach, and that includes law-abiding individuals personally owning firearms (as many as one can afford) for that is our constitutional right. I've got no problems with public square cameras so long as they are not used to abuse citizens, but rather to safeguard the public and to pinpoint criminal activity and terrorism such as Boston Marathon Bombing. But let's not throw ourselves at the mercy of Big Brother as if we're lilliputians requiring government to be our savior. Yes, the number one priority of the government at all level is to protect the nation and its people, but it cannot do so by taking our rights away. And that is where I draw the line since I know Bloomberg, judging from what he's done in the recent past, is way off base. He's got bigger things in mind, and that scares me.

Here's a reminder to Mayor Bloomberg from The Preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

What Mayor Bloomberg has in mind is to re-write the Preamble (and the Constitution) to begin with the words "We, the Government,........."  That is unacceptable, and I will fight it to the hilt!