Search This Blog


Monday, June 29, 2015

The Only Debt Limit That Matters Is The One Set By Creditors

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

So last week, I read an excellent post by my friend Cold Warrior concerning the situation in Greece, in which he predicted this week's events would play out, pretty much as they have thus far. In short, the Central Bankers, that same group of geniuses who extolled the virtues of deficit spending, quantitative easing, debt monetization, fiat currency, and all of the other benefits Keynesian Economic Theory promises, including telling politicians that it's actually beneficial for them to spend irresponsibly, have told Greece, more specifically their newly elected Socialist Stooge in charge, that the spigot will now be turned off. Hard Cheese for you Greece. You may now enjoy your imposed austerity, cold turkey.

To be perfectly clear, the Grecian people had a choice presented to them several times, dating back several years. This farcical tragedy which we get to witness in real time has been decades in the making. This is not some sort of a cosmic turn of bad luck which struck out of left field. It is the inescapable and inevitable end to be expected when following along the path Socialism. Greece, multiple times over the past several years, scoffed at, "austerity," and used cries of fairness to insist that their profligate spending habits continue, unabated, no matter what objective truth told them about their current economic circumstance. When pressed on the issue, most recently when they decided to elect a unabashed Marxist to be their leader, they chose to keep the drunken party going. It's as if they believed the old joke which said, 'that in order to avoid hangovers, one must continue drinking,' were some sort of ancient wisdom, handed down from Moses on the mount.

Margaret Thatcher once quipped that the problem with Socialism is that eventually, you'll run out of other people's money.

Now, for the scary part. I'm not talking about Greece's economy pulling down the world's economy, or even Europe's economy. Even scarier than that, we here in our own country, have twice elected a man to the highest executive office in our land who has openly stated that this is the economic and political system he envisions for our nation, rather than the hardhearted evil capitalism that has created the wealthiest nation in Earth's history. Worse still, he has made tangible strides towards that end. The good news is that those strides are of the variety where reversal is still a possibility. Elections have consequences, and the only way that positive change will be affected, is if enough of them are won by those who agree with liberty and a limited government constrained by the consent of those governed.

As the Greek people line up at ATM's across their tiny useless island that produces nothing beyond being a place for people with nothing better to do to vacation there, waiting patiently for their turn to procure 60 Euros a day of their own money, (about $65,) it still hasn't dawned on them exactly how big their crisis truly is in scope. Let's just say, it's nothing $65 will be able to solve. I give each one of my clients, when they become clients, a piece of some former foreign currency. I have $50 Billion Zimbabwe Notes, drawn on the Central Bank of Zimbabwe, worth a little less than a penny in U.S. currency. I also have some from Yugoslavia in denominations so large, it's comical. Soon, I'll be able to add Greece, or even the Euro to that mix.

I get a kick out of the Left's ability to put out their spin on these types of events though, and by the end of this week, mark my words here, they'll be trumpeting the Democrat Party's version of why this is an indictment on Capitalism's failures from every alphabet media source with two watts worth of broadcasting power anywhere within the Fruited Plains. Sometime over the next three months, we here in our own little nation, will have our 8000th debate about our debt limit. Should we raise it once again, granting our President the authority he needs to borrow more money on our behalf, in order to keep our very own drunken spending spree going. The usual arguments will be made, red meat will be doled out to the rabid bases of both major political parties, and none of it will matter. In the end, the imaginary debt limit will be increased. I say imaginary, because as the Greek People just learned, what you imagine your debt limit to be amounts to less than a hill of beans to those who are lending you money. The only debt limit that truly matters is that limit imposed by those to whom your hand is out.

One of the laughingly dishonest talking points dished out from Addicting Info, Being Liberal, and the Moveon lunatics these days is the concept that Barack Obama single handedly reduced our annual deficits by half. (I know some of you just shot coffee through your noses, and I say own it!) If nothing else, our Liberal friends have embraced the spirit of Common Core Math. So, how does a man who's smallest deficit is 50% greater than his predecessor's largest deficit get credited with cutting deficits in half? Well you see, after tripling Bush's deficit early on, when sequestration kicked in, and spending got reigned in against his will, the deficits of today are about half of those experienced during his high water mark. It's all a matter of perspective I suppose, and the total lack of an adult memory that makes this sophistry seem reasonable.

Unfortunately, those who make loans are still using that form of math which requires answers be based on objective fact, as well as having some sort of bizarre expectation that they be repaid with interest, in a currency that carries a value commensurate with the funds loaned to begin with. It will take us longer to implode than Greece, since we have a vast amount of wealth left to cannibalize before we run out of other people's money. It took the Soviet Union 85 years to crash and burn, but their life style was never so extravagant to begin with. When you start listing cars, houses, gasoline, healthcare, cellular telephones, and household appliances among your basic human rights or things to which you're entitled, the length of time it takes to cannibalize the wealth created, regardless of how vast said wealth was to begin with, shortens dramatically.

So don't laugh at Greece, nor even consider yourself to be superior. It's where we're headed ourselves, and we're doing it on purpose.

Friday, June 12, 2015

With Objective Truth Rattling Off Its Final Breaths, Let Us Rejoice In the Bizarre, "One-Upsmanship," That Will now Follow.


So I woke up to something that had me laughing for a good little bit this morning. Apparently, somewhere in the Liberal Mecca known as the Left, or West Coast, depending upon who your favorite cable news service happens to be, there exists a chapter of the NAACP who's President happens to have been born with a lighter shade of pigmentation than one would expect for someone holding that position. Now, I'm not one for identity politics, and indeed I find the whole concept to be not only exasperating, but down right destructive to our national soul. I get that racism exists in American in some fashion, and I get that this is fundamentally wrong. I'll go a step further and say that any decision or preconception based upon some shallow concept does more harm to the person clinging to that shallow compass that those at whom such idiocy is directed. With that being said, and I can not stress this point enough, it is every American's God given right to be shallow. Allow me to repeat that. It is every American's God given right to be shallow.

Now, let's take this a step further. The only result of any of the social justice remedies designed to legislate away such forays into the world of politically incorrect thinking is that the economic cost of such idiocy will be reduced to zero. Ultimately, the Social Justice warriors are guilty of creating and magnifying the very problems they claim to care so much about. The lens of history has been crystal clear on this point, and we only have a few hundred real life examples of what happens when Democrats get their way in any community for decades, unchecked by those who are sane. Detroit, Saginaw, Chicago, Washington DC, New Orleans, Los Angeles, Jacksonville, Pontiac, Cleveland, Flint, Baltimore, St. Louis, Houston, Philadelphia, Patterson, Newark, are just a few examples of once nice cities which have been turned into cesspools after decades of unchallenged rule by the political left. Such is our lot in life however my fellow Conservatives. Our ideas and economic systems will always be compared to Utopia, and theirs will draw comparisons to Hell on Earth. Never mind that Hell on Earth often looks better than Detroit, St. Louis, or Washington DC, Social Justice dictates that all must be equally miserable.

Give them enough time however, and they'll find a way to destroy themselves, along with everything else that they touch. Now, we've had our share of chuckle at them moments, like Ward Churchill being outed as a fraud, living the hard life of academic non-reality, preaching to the young skulls full of mush about how his Native American Heritage was a cruel cross he had to bear, watching the white man rape and pillage his ancestral homeland, decrying every sports franchise and NCAA member university that sported a culturally insensitive mascot. Of course, he turned out to be a whiter than snow phony, with not even a slim trace of DNA that couldn't be traced to Europe's least culturally diverse Gene Pools. Then we had Elizabeth Warren, who also used the Affirmative Action Laws to secure herself a couple of cushy gigs suckling off of the tax payer's teat found within the system of academia, based upon her Native American Heritage, which of course was always a complete fabrication.

But maybe we have this all wrong. Maybe there is a mental disorder out there, where whiter than snow flake white people feel as though they're black people trapped inside of a white body. I mean, there are way too many, "lesbian bloggers," that have turned out to be straight male college professors just pretending to know about the struggle, and were believed by the way, to not see that maybe, something is afoot here. I mean if Bruce Jenner can bravely come forward and allow the entire population of adult and adolescent humans who possess the skill of reading to witness in real time his complete and utter departure from reality, (which I'm sure has not one gosh darned thing to do with the cool half billion bones one marketing guru has declared this exercise in public mental illness to be worth,) by declaring himself to be Caitlyn trapped in the body of a former Gold Medal Winning Decathlete, then a white girl who's name should be Whitey McWhiterson could very well be a strong black woman trapped in a whiny brat's weakling white body.

Bruce baby, (I refuse to call him Caitlyn until he changes his name legally, and further refuse the female pronouns until he finalizes his transformation,) this is for you.

I found this gem on Twitter today.

Embedded image permalink

the possibilities here are literally limitless. This, is just the tip of the iceberg, and the only question now that we as a society have decided to start celebrating lunacy as something to which people should aspire, is how far and how quickly this thing will take off? I was born an Earthling, and I feel like a person from the planet JM27qrxpjspacemodulator trapped in an Earthling's body. We're just getting warmed up here. I've always felt like a dolphin myself. Yes, South Park already did that one.

But why stop at other ethnic groups, planets of origin, or even disparate animal species? I read a seriously written article last week in which people felt that they deserved some sort of handicap, because they just didn't feel right with both arms and both legs. I believe that I read transcapable or transhandicapped as the politically correct name for this particular psychotic break. There may be some poor soul among us who feels that he or she should have been born as a potted plant, or a Timex Watch. I mean now that truth itself is all relative anyhow, and each of us gets to have his or her own reality, where exactly are any lines to be drawn? Dan Rather's fake but accurate news reporting, (and I still say he deserves more than the ubiquitous 'gate' appended to his name,) makes perfect sense in this Serlingesque dimension. The question we need to ask ourselves, and ask sooner rather than later, is do we really want to live here?

A world where objective truth has no more meaning than anyone who demands such will now be identified as a big meanie, comes with some pretty horrific consequences attached. A place where laws are interpreted by a factious subordination of various victim classes, and applied according to the whims of those who feel emotionally aggrieved at any particular moment, is also a world where the Bill of Rights, and more to the point, natural rights granted by God and not a central government, simply will no longer exist.

Please enjoy this video clip of Rachel Dolezal, President of the Spokane NAACP and recently outed as white by her parents, describing in full detail some of the various hate crimes allegedly perpetrated against her and her children, her struggles as a black woman facing racial hatred daily, (in the liberal mecca known as Washington State by the way,) as the reporter leads her straight to the payoff, about 7 minutes and 50 seconds in.

Exit request to God: Please let me see this woman appear on a stage with Condoleezza Rice, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Mia Love, Janice Rogers Brown, Clarence Thomas, et al., and discuss with them the fact that she knows, better than they, the true black experience of growing up as a person of color in the United States of America.

Friday, March 13, 2015

The Coronation Of Hillary: Not So Inevitable After All

I believe that it's important to note Hillary's first appearance in public life. She worked as Associate Council for the House Judiciary Committee, while they were investigating the Watergate scandal. Her boss was a lawyer named Jeffrey Zeifman. While Snopes has labeled this story as false, it is important to note that the only point of contention was whether Zeifman actually fired Hillary, or if she quit her job prior to being fired. The particulars of Zeifman's assertions have never been questioned, let alone declared fictitious.

During the investigation, Ted Kennedy, (the guy who killed a pregnant staffer and got away with it,) came up with a plan to deny Richard Nixon his right to obtain legal council in order to face criminal charges for his involvement in the coverup of the Watergate scandal. Hillary Clinton, who was legally prohibited from discussing the issue with anyone in the Senate, (as the Senate was to be the jury for any such trial,) wrote a legal brief which concluded that Richard Nixon could be legally prohibited from obtaining representation for his upcoming trial. In this brief, she cited a previous court case and ruling, as is done by lawyers every day in almost every brief filed with any court anywhere in America. The problem with Hillary's Brief was that the judge whose opinion she cited did not exist, nor did the case referred to. She made it up, case, judge, outcome, opinion, all of it.

One of the other associates realized the lie prior to Hillary ever filing the brief, and reported it to Zeifman. Shortly thereafter, Hillary no longer worked for the House Judiciary Committee. (In the intervening years, Zeifman has asserted, recanted, and reasserted that he fired Hillary over this.) Hillary still brags about helping to investigate Nixon, but fails to mention that she herself would have been facing jail time had Jeffrey Zeifman not prevented her from filing the Brief in question. Hillary was only 27 years old at the time, and Lord knows that I myself did a stupid thing or three when at that age. However, in Hillary's case, it was not merely the hubris of youth rearing its moronic head, but the establishment of a long pattern of sociopathic behavior. As I got older, I learned not to do those idiotic things any more. Hillary learned how to cover them up better. It's not that Hillary thinks that she's above the law that upsets me, it's that she knows it to be true.

Putting aside for the moment that Hillary Clinton's only two qualifications for becoming our next President seems to be that a) it's time for us to have a Woman serve in that capacity and b) her husband Bill is remembered fondly by a plurality of Americans, let's take a moment to think about this woman's bona fides, and what that would mean to our nation when she is given the reigns of most powerful nation on Earth. Hillary Clinton is the only First Lady to have ever faced criminal indictment, and only escaped prosecution when the lead witness against her, Vince Foster, mysteriously committed suicide days before her arraignment. (I'd also like to point out here that Mr. Foster had actually served as Deputy White House Council during the early days of the Clinton Presidency.)

Ultimately, I had written previously about Ken Starr's ill advised prosecution of Bill Clinton for lying about his sexual proclivities in the Oval Office, stating unequivocally that I disagree with the prosecution of any process crime, should the original allegations remain uncharged. I've never backed off of that position. It was wrong when Scooter Libby faced it. It was wrong when Martha Stewart faced it. It was wrong when Bill Clinton faced it. I will however qualify the last case just a little.

I feel bad for Ken Starr. His investigation into White Water led him past a series of dead bodies, including two 14 year old teen aged boys who were found dead on a set of railroad tracks near Little Rock, Arkansas. Even in the worst gangster movie spoof ever made, you couldn't make this crap up. The boys in question had their deaths ruled as accidental, despite multiple stab wounds in their backs. The Coroner was of course a long time friend and political ally of Bill Clinton, who had made so many similarly bizarre rulings in his official duty as coroner that State Police Commissioners and FBI officials had taken to the habit of regularly calling for his ouster. He managed to maintain his position until Clinton was sworn in as President. Many of those who had perished under bizarre circumstances, including those two boys, and had their deaths ruled natural or accidental were of course publicly connected to the White Water case being investigated. Ken Starr was faced with multiple years of documenting a very serious pattern of felonious activity which followed the Clintons everywhere, without ever having a potential witness survive long enough to tell their story in open court, or even on the record. Think for one moment, what would have happened if a Republican were in any way connected to anything like this? Faced with that as the backdrop, I can most certainly why Ken Starr would choose to grasp the Blue Dress, and pin something upon this crooked pair.

Any time any of that is brought up, it is immediately decried as old news, and the defense tactic of whining about the, "mean Republican attack machine," gets trotted out and put on display with Ringling Brothers, and Barnum and Bailey precision. At the center of each one of these very real scandals however is not only Bill Clinton, who himself has been able to escape justice largely due to his personal charm, but Hillary as well. She's always been the pit bull and chief cleaner, the one who actually embarks on moving the Clinton machinery in such a manner so as to not only scare critics into silence, but to destroy their lives publicly in order to scare future potential problems. The starkest example of this in action is the Travelgate scandal. What should have been a true, not-much-to-see-here piece of partisan hackery, turned out to be a living hell for at least one family at the center of it. People often point to that scandal as not much to see here, and will often ask why anyone cares that Hillary fired a bunch of long time domestic staff in favor of her own associates and family friends. Let's not gloss over the fact that not only was Billy Dale fired from his position, after serving the White House in some capacity for over 20 years, he was prosecuted after he refused to go quietly. He was forced to spend over $750,000 he hadn't earned yet, in order to defend himself against trumped up embezzlement charges. (It took a jury less time to acquit him than it did to organize themselves in the jury room and make a pot of coffee.) By the end of his ordeal, not only had he been forced to spend a vast fortune he didn't actually have in order to defend himself, but Mr. Dale also got to watch as the IRS audited his wife and adult children each and every one of the three years that his saga played out. Not only is Hillary Clinton crooked, but she's mean as well. Her pursuit of adversaries is as ruthless as it is savage. Remember, as Clinton scandals go, this one was pretty small potatoes. As a matter of fact, had it just been allowed to drop entirely, I think it's pretty safe to say that it would have been long forgotten by now, by those on the right politically as well as those on the left. What gave this scandal any staying power at all was the force brought to bear on a guy who served basically as a travel agent, a non political worker bee who did the mundane work for others who wielded the levers of power. A man had his life destroyed, and saw his family destroyed, for no other reason than that Hillary Clinton found it momentarily expedient.

Now, many others share my horror with the contemplation that a woman this evil stands anywhere near the precipice of being placed in charge of the IRS, NSA, FBI, ATF, EPA, and every other Federal Agency held within the Executive Branch. Unfortunately, they also feel as though she's inevitable, and that nothing can be done to prevent her election as our President. Friends, I have two things to say to this.

One, it's not whether we can do anything to prevent it, it's that we have no choice. If you think Barack Obama is bad for the country, wait till you get a load of this woman being placed in charge. The Bamster is a piker when compared to Hillary. At least he's incompetent, Hillary unfortunately is not. The damage done by a potential Hillary Clinton Presidency will not only be devastating, but permanent as well. With Barack, we still have the ability to reverse what he's done.

Two, Hillary is not so inevitable as you might think. I woulk like to invite all of you to read Ed Morrissey's analysis at Hotair dot com. Morrissey in his article links to two graphs from Gallup. It is the second one that gives me hope. It shows Hillary Clinton's favorability numbers over time, spanning back some 23 years, from the beginning of Bill Clinton's initial run for the Presidency through today. I notice a trend, even apart from the one Morrissey points out. Hillary's polling numbers decline every time she speaks or appears in public. She is not likeable. People can see through her disingenuous attempts at charm, and what they see is someone who genuinely does not like them either. As Morrissey notes in his article, Bill Clinton felt our pain, and that was appreciated. Hillary Clinton feels a sense of self entitlement, which comes through plain as day, and that will never be appreciated.

People's declared intention to vote for Hillary is based solely upon nostalgia for the 90's, a time which they equate with her husband's Presidency. It does not take long after a campaign begins for an alternative to be found for those votes, which is how we got a President Obama. Hillary was inevitable in 2008, which for those of you who possess adult memories, was also to be a Clinton Coronation in terms of that year's Presidential Election. People got a glimpse of Hillary up close, no longer clinging to the accomplishments and charming coat tails of her husband, and they opted for someone else. Hillary has a problem, in that she's only ever been popular when hiding from the American People. Her popularity plummets with each syllable uttered in public. Her challenge in the run to be our next Chief Executive will not be with developing stump speeches or policy positions, but with how to deliver those to the entire electorate without ever being seen in public.

Two videos here for you. The first is that Hillary Clinton documentary that was forced out of movie theaters just as the first 2008 primaries were beginning to come around to voting booths near you. It's pretty well put together, factual, and not at all the conspiracy fest I was expecting. The second is a palate cleanser. It was put out by the Clinton people, a designed campaign piece, and it still makes me laugh hysterically every time I see it. It is that perfect testament as to how completely out of touch with reality and the people who live there the Clinton folks truly are.

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Those Who've Violated The Logan Act Repeatedly Accuse The GOP Of Treason? Iron Pot Meet Stainless Steel Kettle

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

First, here's the text of the act itself:

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

Before we tackle the above law in the context of today, (and please note the refreshing brevity of laws written in 1799, before we got really smart and decided to complicate things to the point where only 7 years of post secondary education could help us to decode our national registry,) let's look at several recent violations of this law which went unprosecuted.

First a little note here. The Logan Act itself has never been the reason for anybody's prosecution, in its entire 216 year history. So, there's that. The reason of course is that it's a political nightmare. Even when there is a clear violation, any prosecution will be immediately decried as partisan hackery, no matter how egregious the violation.

In 1977, Billy Carter, the brother of President Jimmy Carter danced with members of the Libyan Government for a nice publicity release on the evening news and stated that he was great friends with Muammar Gaddafi, Libya's terror sponsoring dictator. He announced that the Libyan Government had given him a large amount of cash so that he would be able to influence his brother's foreign policy decisions and lobby on behalf of the Libyan interests.

In 1984, Senator Ted Kennedy, the drunken liberal lion of the Senate himself, went to the Soviet Union and met with Mikhail Gorbachev. In that meeting, he apologized for Ronald Reagan's foreign policy, promised a tangible change should Walter Mondale win election as our President, gave specifics of those changes, and requested campaign donations from the Soviets for Mondale's efforts to defeat Reagan, complete with a promise to pay back those donations via future increases in foreign aid.

Also in 1984, Democrat Jesse Jackson traveled to both Cuba and Nicaragua in order to negotiate with the Communist Leaders of those respective nations, promising that he could affect foreign policy with his self styled and by the way not asked for peace mission to those nations.

In 1987 and 1988, Democrat House Speaker Jim Wright traveled to Nicaragua and also conducted negotiations with the Communist regime in power, based upon a Democrat winning the White House in 1988's Presidential Election. His promise was that if they would simply talk nice for the remaining couple of years of a Reagan Presidency, then the Democrat successor would not pursue the same policy of aiding the Contras in their efforts to rid themselves of an oppressive Sandinista rule.

In 1985, John Kerry, the current Secretary of State, traveled to Nicaragua and conducted negotiations with the Sandinista Government, after expressly being warned off of doing so by the Reagan Administration.

In 2007, Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi traveled to Syria in order to conduct foreign policy negotiations with that great friend to the United State, Bashar Al Assad, again promising a change in foreign policy with a Democrat in the White House, and won't he please write them an illegal campaign contribution check.

In 1974, Senator George McGovern was accused publicly by members of the Nixon Administration, but as Nixon's own legal eagles pointed out, Nixon's Administration approved the travel visas for McGovern and his entourage, making any claim that those talks were taking place without his O.K. a hard point to prove in court.

In 1941, Sumner Welles, then an Under Secretary of State for Franklin Roosevelt, publicly accused former President Herbert Hoover of violating the act for telling European Leaders that he would convey a request for food relief in war torn nations. America's involvement in World War Two, plus Roosevelt's own desires to get America involved in that war made his accusations moot rather quickly.

The only indictment under the act came in 1803, when an ambitious man named Francis Flournoy attempted to convince the Germans and French that a separate nation called Louisiana that would ally itself with France and Germany would be advantageous to both of those nations. He was never prosecuted, as France had made the decision to sell the Louisiana Territory in its entirety to the United States, and end her colonial ties to the Western Hemisphere.

There is something similar in each of the above examples of Logan Act violations. In each case, with the exception of Herbert Hoover's, (and it should be noted that Roosevelt refused to back his Under Secretary in that accusation,) the offending party was a Democrat. That's some track record.

Today I learned that there's an actual petition up at the official White-House-file-a-silly-petition website which demands that the 47 Senators who sent an open letter, (meaning they published it in local news papers but addressed it to someone else,) to Iran's ruling Mullahs. That letter basically served as an informational text, for those unfamiliar with the U.S. Constitution. I states quite correctly that while Presidents have the authority to negotiate treaties, said treaties are not official unless they are approved by the Senate. Now the petition in question conflates the Logan Act with Treason and Sedition, but we'll put that aside for the moment, and circle back to the issue of Treason later.

Just for reference, here is the text from the U.S. Constitution, Article Two, Section Two, Paragraph Two:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent
of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the
Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and
with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint
Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges
of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United
States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise
provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but
the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior
Offi cers, as they think proper, in the President alone,
in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

In terms of violating the Logan Act, there's no way that anyone with two functioning grey cells could ever in a Million Sundays come to the conclusion that the aforementioned 47 Senators came anywhere close to that threshold. They have the authority of the United States to affect foreign policy. They may not have the right to negotiate treaties, but they do have Constitutional Authority to veto any Treaty negotiated and then proposed by our President. Publicly stating that fact, either through an open letter published world wide, or through personal correspondence does nothing other than to point out a very real and important fact for all concerned parties to know. In this particular instance, seeing as how our President seems hell bent on national suicide, I consider it to be an important fact for the world, most especially Americans, the Iranians, and even our President, to know ahead of time that he's not likely to garner the consent of the Senate for a treaty likely to further that suicidal end.

All the 47 Senators have done here, far from acting to undermine the Chief Executive, is to remind him and everyone else for that matter, that they intend to exercise their Constitutionally mandated authority, by rejecting a pact that is clearly bad for the nation and the world as a whole. Accusing them of Treason is at best silly. Barack Obama campaigned on, twice by the way, a promise to do whatever was necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a Nuclear Weapon. Since his election in 2012, that promise made by Barack Obama, like every other promise made by Barack Obama, reached its expiration date. His new policy, never approved of by the American People, was that Iran should be allowed to obtain a Nuclear Weapon, but should be forced to wait until after Barack Obama leaves office, so that a Republican can be blamed for it. That's closer to an act of Treason than anything that 47 Senators with Constitutional Authority to veto any proposed treaty have done.

Oh, there's some treason being committed here, but it isn't by anyone in the Senate. Our President, that guy who's twice taken the oath to protect and defend our Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, has sat down at a negotiating table with the single greatest purveyor of international terror, and coincidentally has openly declared war on our nation dating back to 1978, and basically agreed that we'll let them have whatever they want, including the means to destroy a key ally and kill every Jew on the planet. Now that's some treasonous activity right there, and something that must be dealt with. (Maybe a group of brave Senators who have finally had enough of watching a renegade President continue with his attempt to destroy our nation will act in an effort to stop the insanity, through an eloquent statement that they intend to perform their Constitutional duty and uphold the supreme law of the land.)

Of course, in a nation where suddenly facts themselves become malleable things, right is wrong and vice versa, those who would seek to protect our nation and allies are called out as treasonous, while those actively engaged in treasonous acts are busy claiming the mantle of patriotism. We have 19 more months of this, and in a morbidly sick sort of way, I can not wait to see what this group will come up with next.

Just to drive home the point of exactly how looney tunes the Left has turned over this, here's a gem I read from one of those annoying Addicting Info links so thoughtfully supplied to my facebook timeline against my will:

The letter states that, “the Senate must ratify [a treaty] by a two-thirds vote.” But as the Senate’s own web page makes clear: “The Senate does not ratify treaties. Instead, the Senate takes up a resolution of ratification, by which the Senate formally gives its advice and consent, empowering the president to proceed with ratification (my emphasis).” Or, as this outstanding 2001 CRS Report on the Senate’s role in treaty-making states (at 117): “It is the President who negotiates and ultimately ratifies treaties for the United States, but only if the Senate in the intervening period gives its advice and consent.” Ratification is the formal act of the nation’s consent to be bound by the treaty on the international plane. Senate consent is a necessary but not sufficient condition of treaty ratification for the United States. As the CRS Report notes: “When a treaty to which the Senate has advised and consented … is returned to the President,” he may, “simply decide not to ratify the treaty.”

So there you have it, don't worry so much about what the Constitution actually says, but take this interpretation of it instead, and allow the gibberish to wash all over you. That's the legal argument supplied to convince us that 47 Senators violated the Logan Act, where those previous cases of Democrats actually conducting face to face negotiations with bad actors against the express stated wishes of the Executive Branch, were not.

Saturday, March 7, 2015

Saturday At The Movies: Uncommon Knowledge With Thomas Sowell

As always, Sowell's revelations are worth the hour of your time. One of the brilliant economic minds of the last century, his empiricism lays waste to some of the more classroom-accepted-but-real-world-disastrous tripe that's been inflicted upon us by some of the more conventional purveyors of modern wisdom.