Posts Tagged ‘epic fail obama’

An ENEMY of the people…

December 18, 2010

Nearly two years into his term, President Obama finally chose a director for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Mr. Obama will submit the name of Andrew Traver, the special agent in charge of the Bureau’s Chicago field division, to the Senate, the White House said. However, he will face a confirmation fight—if his nomination is not filibustered, eliminating him from consideration.

Why? He is an anti-gun zealot. This is preposterous!

I can’t—nor can most Americans—comprehend the idea of an anti-gun zealot being in charge of the ATF. Even worse, Mr. Obama appears to be waiting to appoint him during the Christmas holiday recess because he knows he will face a brutal confirmation hearing by Senate Republicans and gun-rights moderate Democrats—if not an outright boycott of his nomination…

Insiders tell me it this appointment could, and likely will, happen when no one is thinking about it. It could be the last Christmas present you unwrap on Christmas morning; or perhaps, it will be the throbbing headache you wake up with on January 1. The bottom line is this: Andrew Traver is an ENEMY of the people, like you and me, who understand the Second Amendment is the cornerstone of liberty and, without the Second Amendment right to own and bear arms, we would be no more secure, no more safe in our homes, than the least safe and least secure people in the most despotic nations on Earth. The Second Amendment is what safeguards the entire Bill of Rights. Weaken the Second Amendment and the Constitution of the United States will easily be breached.

Let me give you Andrew Traver’s philosophical resume:

  • He favors banning ALL gun shows.
  • He opposes civilian ownership of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns.
  • He opposes private firearm sales.
  • He wants the Center for Disease Control to have oversight of the firearms industry. Apparently Mr. Traver believes guns are a disease. Or, maybe it’s the gun owners he believes are diseased.

This is a DIRECT AFFRONT to those of us who own guns and use them properly and lawfully.

A frightening as it is, Mr. Obama can legally make a “recess appointment” and commission Mr. Traver is the TOP law enforcement official over the gun industry without a single Senator voting to confirm him. By confirming him on January 1, 2011, Traver would head the ATF for the balance of Obama’s term in office. Now, that’s scary, too.


The ATF hasn’t has a director for almost four years. Former director Carl Truscott’s reign was marked by numerous complaints about misappropriation of funds and poor treatment of employees. Following his resignation in 2006, the parameters were changed, and Senate confirmation is now required for a nominee.

Mr. Traver is NOT a friend of the people who whole-heartedly believe in the Second Amendment rights in the U. S. Constitution. Yes, that’s you and me!

What he is a “friend” of is the “Chicago Machine” that spawned so many of your favorite Chicago-Washington “elites” who use the word “Chicago” as a synonym for cronyism. Cronyism was voted OUT in the November elections; but the message has not yet resonated at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Obama’s anti-gun friend will head the ATF if the American people don’t stop him. That’s why you and I must STOP this recess appointment.

The bottom line: We MUST let our voices and votes be heard. Traver is obviously NOT the man to head the most powerful firearms policing agency. His ANTI-GUN BIAS illustrates a clear conflict of interest on his part and his nomination proves that Barack Obama is openly hostile to your gun rights.

Anyone as clearly hostile to the Second Amendment as Mr. Traver is, has no business being allowed to head the powerful gun licensing and regulatory agency.

The nomination of the Naperville, Illinois native to be top gun cop is applauded by gun-control activists, who say the 5,000-employee ATF has lost ground in its regulation of the $28 Billion US firearms business, having labored under interim directors since 2006.

Quite frankly, Mr. Obama has chosen a very strong, anti-Second Amendment ATF head for an administrative job that has far more influence over the practical exercise of the Second Amendment rights than any other job in the country.

In spite of our economic uncertainty, Americans spent $11 BILLION MORE in 2009 than in 2008 to buy guns, ammo, and gear, etc. In an economy that needs every dollar in retail sales from every corner of the free enterprise system, killing $11 billion more in retail sales in a failing economy is not wise, the Second Amendment notwithstanding.

There are roughly 80,000,000 gun owners in our great country who, like you, must reject this presidential appointment. So we must GET INVOLVED NOW to fax every single Member of Congress to make sure that the appointment of Andrew Traver is TOTALLY BLOCKED.

Chris Cox, NRA spokesperson said this about Andrew Travers: “You might as well put an arsonist in charge of the fire department.”

The bottom line: Andrew Traver is an anti-gun zealot. His confirmation, recess or otherwise, MUST be blocked! Mr. Traver is clearly NOT the man to head the most powerful firearms policing agency in the world. His anti-gun bias illustrates a clear conflict of interest. Please help us at this very moment to block this travesty and adverse person who is AGAINST YOU and your ownership of a gun.

We must OPPOSE this confirmation right now.

This email from The Second Amendment Foundation has been modified in order to pass muster with spam filters. If you wish to donate to the cause, go HERE.

Allies like these: Italy serves up more than spagetti

December 16, 2010

It wasn’t all that long ago that Italy was being pounded on a regular basis by various terrorist organizations. The United States of America stood by Italy in it’s fight with the blood thirsty enemies of freedom and liberty. Often at our own peoples peril. This is how we are repaid for that loyalty.

ROME (AFP) – An Italian court upped the sentences for 23 CIA agents convicted in absentia of abducting an Egyptian imam in one of the biggest cases against the US “extraordinary rendition” programme.

The 23 CIA agents, originally sentenced in November 2009 to five to eight years in prison, had their sentences increased to seven to nine years on appeal in what one of the defence lawyers described as a “shocking blow” for the US.

SOURCE

Now, in all honesty I wouldn’t have bought into the Nuremberg style defense that was presented either. However, we are in a war, and have been for quite some time. Italy, is supposed to be a major ally, fellow member of the N.A.T.O. alliance and all that. So what do they do? Set their own people free based upon national security concerns that were just as involved as our own C.I.A. personnel but sentence our people to prison… Perhaps, in a juvenile sense it might be a bit fun to just let Italy sit and take it on the chin the next few times they get hit with terrorism. But “two wrongs don’t make a right.” Indeed, The United States of America should take the high road and maintain as cordial a relationship as possible.

That said there is a huge Italian demographic here, and those that still have ties to the old country should be talking to the officials in Italy about this issue, and do it like Americans. Loud and proud!

obamacare and the Courts…

December 14, 2010

Basic instinct as well as simple logic reveal that the mandated purchase of a product, any product, exceeds the power and authority of government. Yet, as expected, courts are issuing different rulings concerning this abominous assault on the personal liberty and freedom of all Americans.

I can already hear it though; you are just too stupid to be able to understand things like this. It’s just too complicated for you. To that I reply that when laws are beyond the ken of the common man then they are unenforceable, and violate the principles of natural and common law.

Within a fortnight of each other, two federal judges in Virginia, relying on identical precedents and hearing carbon-copy arguments, issued diametrically opposed decisions on the constitutionality of the federal health-care overhaul.

Read side by side, the two rulings reveal strikingly divergent views of what the case is about—and suggest that the fate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 will rest on which depiction best satisfies the Supreme Court.

Full Story HERE

So what next..? A Supreme Court ruling that will treat all of us as wayward children that are incapable of making our own decisions about life and death matters? If so, then what of Juries, and our entire system of laws?

Related Story


The facts, however, don’t stop the Left from their dishonest characterization

December 10, 2010

“Tax deal” is the buzz phrase of the week in Washington, as Barack Obama and congressional Republicans came to an agreement Monday on a two-year extension of current income tax rates for all Americans. Predictably, the Left went hysterical. House Democrats promptly held a voice vote to reject the compromise unless undisclosed changes are made to it, though the Senate began debate on a larded-up version of the proposal Thursday night with a test vote scheduled for Monday. As usual, the devil is in the details — and, in this case, the definitions.

Obama, his fellow Democrats and their acolytes in the media continue to frame the debate in terms of tax “cuts” versus the budget deficit — as if tax rates before 2001 were the natural order of things and to keep rates where they are is a “cut” that will increase the deficit. On the contrary, without the deal, everyone’s taxes will rise by hundreds or even thousands of dollars next year. With the deal, no one’s income taxes will be cut. In fact, some taxes will skyrocket. The estate (death) tax will be resurrected at 35 percent with a $5 million exemption — up from 0 percent this year, but down from the previous 55 percent. The only new cut would be a temporary payroll tax reduction of two percentage points.

The facts, however, don’t stop the Left from their dishonest characterization. “The far-reaching package … would add more than $900 billion to the deficit over the next two years,” The Washington Post lamented. Ditto for The New York Times, the Associated Press and others. This assumes that economic behavior won’t change if taxes go up, meaning federal revenue will increase by the exact amount of the tax increase. Ergo, if Congress prevents the tax hike, that lost revenue adds to the deficit. It’s a wrong assumption, demonstrable by the fact that federal revenue actually went up after the Bush tax cuts went into effect.

Meanwhile, Obama was so concerned about the “cost” that he insisted that unemployment benefits be extended for another year. Now that will actually cost nearly $60 billion, and it will cause the unemployment rate to remain higher than it otherwise should. On top of that, Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Tom Harkin (D-IA) secured various energy subsidies in exchange for their votes, and more pork is almost sure to follow.

The fact that Obama conceded to any deal is notable. The Wall Street Journal concludes, “Obama has implicitly admitted that his economic strategy has flopped. He is acknowledging that tax rates matter to growth, that treating business like robber barons has hurt investment and hiring, and that tax cuts are superior to spending as stimulus. It took 9.8% unemployment and a loss of 63 House seats for this education to sink in, but the country will benefit.” The flop is so complete that even former economic adviser Larry Summers warned of a “double dip” recession if taxes go up. John Maynard Keynes, call your office.

Though Obama did accept the deal with the GOP, he proved to be a rather disagreeable compromiser, calling Republicans “hostage takers” and the American people the “hostages.” Obama thus not only reneged on an oft-repeated campaign promise to repeal the Bush-era tax cuts “for the rich,” he also proved utterly ungracious to those lawmakers with whom he had just struck a deal. “[B]ecause of this agreement, middle-class Americans won’t see their taxes go up on January 1st, which is what I promised,” he said. “[But] I’m as opposed to the high-end tax cuts today as I’ve been for years. In the long run, we simply can’t afford them. And when they expire in two years, I will fight to end them.”

Some conservatives are opposing the bill because of the aded deficit spending. Club for Growth President Chris Chocola said, “The plan would resurrect the Death Tax, grow government, blow a hole in the deficit with unpaid-for spending, and do so without providing the permanent relief and security our economy needs to finally start hiring and growing again.”

Yet given that Democrats still control the White House and, until January, both houses of Congress, this deal may be the best we can hope for now. Republicans should fight to resist wasteful spending, but tax hikes must be prevented. If they are, taxpayers will keep billions of their hard-earned dollars over the next two years. With that renewed tax stability for small businesses, unemployment should go down, though not as much as if the rates were permanent. In 2012, Republicans could be in far better position to win a permanent solution.

Patriot Post

Remember ObamaCare?

December 8, 2010

GOA had managed to win some minor victories in the fight over this legislation last year.  At that time, the very-liberal Slate magazine lamented that GOA had won a skirmish over ObamaCare:

Score one for the Gun Owners of America, a lobby group positioned well to the right of the National Rifle Association…. [T]o pacify GOA, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [has inserted into the health care bill] a section titled “Protecting 2nd Amendment Gun Rights” [which prevents the] disclosure or collection of any information relating to gun ownership.  (Slate, December 20, 2009.)

But even after being “cleaned up” for some of its anti-gun problems, the ATF can still use ObamaCare to troll a federal database for your medical information.  It can identify people with common ailments such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) — and take away their guns by sending their names to the FBI as “prohibited persons.”

For these and other reasons, GOA is still committed to repealing the anti-gun ObamaCare law.

So GOA was not particularly thrilled when Republican leaders went on the Sunday talk shows right before the election to explain why they could not repeal ObamaCare because of the threat of a presidential veto.

In fact, some have speculated that these cowardly pronouncements could have cost Republicans control of the Senate.

But, never mind, say the Republicans.  If they can’t repeal it, they can just “defund” ObamaCare.

So it came as a bit of a shock to us that Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl appeared on the Greta Van Susteren program December 2 to announce that he would prefer to pass a stripped-down funding bill (a so-called Continuing Resolution) to fund the government until October 1, 2011.

In other words, money would flow for the next ten months — without ANY EFFORT WHATSOEVER TO DEFUND OBAMACARE.  This would take the pressure off Congress to act on ObamaCare for almost a year.

Do you want proof that Congress doesn’t like to act unless they have a “gun” put to their collective heads?  Consider a hot topic that’s been in the news lately:  tax cuts.  Congress has had almost 10 years to deal with this issue, but they’re only dealing with it now — as the time limit on the Bush tax cuts are about to expire on December 31.

We don’t want this to happen in our efforts to repeal the anti-gun health care law.  Putting off this issue would undermine the efforts of incoming congressmen who campaigned on getting rid of ObamaCare!  The will of the American people was made clear in the November elections.  If Congress extends the funding of the government beyond the first few weeks of 2011, it will pull the rug out from under the newly elected members and be a slap in the face to millions of voters.

Moreover, if Congress puts off dealing with ObamaCare until next fall, momentum for repeal will wane and the President will have won a significant public relations battle.  This may all sound a little like “inside baseball,” but if Congress passes another Continuing Resolution next October 1 — as they probably will — then it’s very possible that there will be no impetus to deal with repealing or defunding ObamaCare until after the 2012 elections.

This would allow Obama to run for reelection without the stain of public repudiation for his socialist policies.

The time to act is sooner, rather than later.  If Senate Republicans are serious about defunding ObamaCare, they need to fight to prevent a bill that funds the government beyond January or February.  If the funding measure is only for the short-term, then the new Congress can come to town and deal with nixing ObamaCare right away.

ACTION: Please urge your Senators to take action on repealing ObamaCare sooner, rather than later!  There are two different pre-written letters for this alert — one for Republicans and one for Democrats.

If you go to GOA’s Legislative Action Center to contact your Senators, the correct pre-written letter will AUTOMATICALLY be chosen.  If you choose to contact your Senators without going through the GOA website, then please make sure you choose the correct letter below for the correct Senator.

—– Pre-written letter to Republican Senators —–

Dear Senator:

Without question, repealing the anti-gun and anti-freedom ObamaCare legislation should be one of Congress’ top priorities next year.

Polls continue to show that an overwhelming percentage of the American people want to see this law repealed.

And this is why I was shocked to learn that Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl appeared on the Greta Van Susteren program December 2 to announce that he would prefer to pass a stripped-down Continuing Resolution to fund the government until October 1, 2011.

Even worse, it would undermine the efforts of incoming congressmen who campaigned on getting rid of ObamaCare!  The will of the American people was made clear in the November elections.  If Congress extends the funding of the government beyond the first few weeks of 2011, it will pull the rug out from under the newly elected members and be a slap in the face to millions of voters.

Furthermore, if Congress puts off dealing with ObamaCare until next fall, momentum for repeal will wane and the President will have won a significant public relations battle.  And, if Congress passes another Continuing Resolution next October 1 — as they probably will — then it’s very possible that there will be no impetus to deal with repealing or defunding ObamaCare until after the 2012 elections.

This would allow Obama to run for reelection without the stain of public repudiation for his socialist policies.

The time to act is sooner, rather than later.  If Senate Republicans are serious about defunding ObamaCare, they need to fight to prevent a bill that funds the government beyond January or February.  If the funding measure is only for the short-term, then the new Congress can come to town and deal with nixing ObamaCare right away.

Sincerely,

—– Pre-written letter to Democrat and Independent Senators —–

Dear Senator:

Without question, repealing the anti-gun and anti-freedom ObamaCare legislation should be one of Congress’ top priorities next year.

Polls continue to show that an overwhelming percentage of the American people want to see this law repealed.

Please do everything in your power to defund or repeal this law.

Sincerely,


Sign the Petition!

Please remember to stop by http://readtheusconstitution.org to encourage Congress to read the U.S. Constitution, out loud, upon convening in January.  Way too often our elected officials act without even considering the source of their authority.

http://gunowners.org

Lessons learned: Not much… December Seventh

December 7, 2010

As I perused the main news pages this morning one thing was painfully apparent. The “Day of Infamy” seems lost in the forgotten past. Google had a single story on the subject.

So then, what have we done. We allowed a President to gut our intelligence services. Then spent a period of national despondency while a nation that allowed itself to be taken over by a bunch of religious radicals held us hostage. That lasted until a new President was elected. One that made no secret that we would take them to the wood shed upon his being sworn in.

Later, we elected yet another “Great appeaser” that took apart what had been rebuilding, and we got smacked again, and the end results of that fiasco are not all in and we are coming up on the tenth anniversary of that failure to “read the tea leaves.”

Now, we have a Commander in Chief in name only that bows to kings and other assorted despots. Not to mention that Iran, and South Korea are more dangerous than ever along with various assorted groups of terrorists around the world…

Let’s take a cursory look at our recent history, and see what things may be found that seem to occur when things like this go haywire.

There appears to be a pattern. Apply Keynesian type economics during an economic down turn. The Great Depression, the economic tragedy of the seventies, and our current Great Recession. The Viet Nam War spawned it’s own sort of turmoil of a different type, Hyperinflation, and guess what? We are headed in that direction again. Now, I can’t blame that particular situation on John Kennedy, but I sure as hell can on his successor. So then in summery;

  • Socialist Economic Policy during hard economic times.
  • Cut backs in Military / Intelligence Services because of said times.
  • Weak Presidents; Either in foreign/ domestic policy, or both.
  • In each case it was a Democrat President.

So what will we Americans do? More of the same..? More appeasement and negotiation from a position of despair and weakness?

I submit that we should learn from the hard won lessons of our Fathers and Mothers. From the mistakes as well as from the victories. From strength of conviction as well as actual military / physical strength. From things that have happened in the past. The day of infamy being just one.

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Benjamin Franklin

So much for “openness.”

December 6, 2010

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is poised to add the Internet to its portfolio of regulated industries. The agency’s chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced Wednesday that he circulated draft rules he says will “preserve the freedom and openness of the Internet.” No statement could better reflect the gulf between the rhetoric and the reality of Obama administration policies.

With a straight face, Mr. Genachowski suggested that government red tape will increase the “freedom” of online services that have flourished because bureaucratic busybodies have been blocked from tinkering with the Web. Ordinarily, it would be appropriate at this point to supply an example from the proposed regulations illustrating the problem. Mr. Genachowski‘s draft document has over 550 footnotes and is stamped “non-public, for internal use only” to ensure nobody outside the agency sees it until the rules are approved in a scheduled Dec. 21 vote. So much for “openness.”

Full Story

ObamaCare Challenge Tossed

December 4, 2010

U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, a Clinton appointee, tossed out a challenge to ObamaCare in Virginia this week. This is the second victory for the Obama administration in a wave of lawsuits. Liberty University, the plaintiff in the case, has already decided to appeal in hopes of eclipsing Moon’s decision. “Congress does not have the authority to force every American to purchase a particular kind of health insurance product,” said Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty’s School of Law and an attorney on the case. Liberty argued that the law abuses the Commerce Clause of the Constitution in an attempt to provide the government strict control over the health care market. Their constitutional exegesis is completely sound, but Moon was blinded to that reality.

According to Moon, the law requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance falls legally under the Commerce Clause because the lack of the law would drive up costs, “precisely the harms that Congress sought to address with the Act’s regulatory measures.” To this we would ask, if the Commerce Clause can be melded to the whims of the backers of ObamaCare, what powers doesn’t Congress have to continue to shackle the American people?

Along the same lines…

A recent Investor’s Business Daily editorial calls it “the ultimate form of taxation without representation”: the continuing attempts by eco-fascists to force wealth redistribution upon the United States and other “rich” countries. This is all under the guise, of course, of saving the world from the scourge of global warming.

After its abysmal failure in wintry Copenhagen last year, the UN is holding another climate change conference in balmy Cancun, Mexico. There, surrounded by sun and sand, it will once again attempt to convince delegates from 193 countries that, a) the world is in peril and therefore we must drastically reduce emissions; and b) the U.S. and other developed nations must pay poor countries billions of dollars in retribution for the “damage” they caused in becoming, well, developed. The conference will feature the usual fanfare, including 250 presentations about the effects of climate change and proclamations that 2010 is tied for the hottest year since we began keeping records 131 years ago.

This is all smoke and mirrors. German economist Ottmar Edenhofer, who also serves as the pretentiously titled Co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, has openly admitted that “climate change policy is redistributing the world’s wealth.” This would be accomplished in the U.S. with cap-n-trade policies being pushed by Obama and his “progressive” pals in Congress.

Despite the sunny weather, the climate at this conference probably won’t be any friendlier than it was in Denmark. Even before the Republican landslide in last month’s elections, many lawmakers were leery of saddling Americans with more taxes during the recession, especially given the fact that China — the world’s biggest polluter — refuses to make any binding promises about emissions. In addition, in the wake of the Climategate scandal, emerging studies have shot more holes in climate change “science” than in Swiss cheese. Only time will tell, but it looks as if leftists will have to find another way to siphon America’s wealth to other nations.

In related news, House Republicans are set to eliminate the climate change committee created by soon-to-be-ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In Congress at least, the climate has changed.

And yet more commentary on epic fail obama’s choice of czar for BATFE

In another example of the “Chicago Way,” last week Barack Obama tabbed Andrew Traver, currently special agent in charge of the Chicago division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (better known by the ATF acronym), as the bureau’s permanent head. “You might as well put an arsonist in charge of the fire department,” quipped NRA spokesman Chris Cox.

While the gun grabbers at the Brady Center applaud the choice, Second Amendment advocates are predictably aghast. They criticize Traver because of his ties to the gun-control advocating Joyce Foundation and work during a 2007 conference on reducing gun violence sponsored by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, another fervently anti-gun organization. The IACP report includes a call for legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry. What Second Amendment?

Others question Traver’s lack of senior-level executive experience, but when has that ever stopped anyone in Washington? The Senate may get a chance to question and confirm Traver, who would take over an agency laboring under acting leaders since 2006, unless Obama decides to use him as yet another recess appointment. Certainly Traver would fit right in with the rest of Executive Branch Washington in an era where the president relies on regulation, as opposed to legislation, to enact his agenda.

SOURCE

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

December 4, 2010

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) is due out in 2013. Psychiatrists use the manual to diagnose mental illness. Among the changes in this edition will be the exclusion of five of the 10 personality disorders listed in the current edition. One of those five is narcissistic personality disorder. According to The New York Times, “The central requirement for N.P.D. is a special kind of self-absorption: a grandiose sense of self, a serious miscalculation of one’s abilities and potential that is often accompanied by fantasies of greatness.”

Many psychiatrists aren’t happy about the change. Dr. John Gunderson of Harvard calls the removal “unenlightened” and says, “They have little appreciation for the damage they could be doing.” But for some N.P.D. sufferers, the change brings hope. In two short years, for example, one particular occupant of a majestic white house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will likely be seeking new employment and new living quarters. Better, then, that he’s free to do so without the stigma of this dreadful disorder.

SOURCE

Congress is in session: Rut roh!

December 4, 2010

Our intrepid Congress returned from its Thanksgiving break Monday to take on several important items facing the nation, such as the looming tax increase for all Americans, fixes for some provisions of ObamaCare, the nuclear weapons treaty known as START and funding for the federal government itself. But before our elected representatives could tackle those important chores, they turned their attention to school lunches, a food “safety” bill and regulating volume for television commercials. Ain’t our republic grand?

First Lady Michelle Obama has made it her cause to fight childhood obesity. A fine goal, but not if it includes the $4.5 billion child nutrition bill headed to her husband’s desk. The legislation will supposedly improve the nutritional value of school lunches and take sugary snacks and drinks out of vending machines in schools. To pay for it, future funding for food stamps will take a hit. We’re sure that money will never actually be cut, but it looks good on paper.

The Senate, meanwhile, passed the Food Safety Bill, which would merely saddle the nation’s 2.2 million farms and 28,000 food producers with even more regulations and taxes. As The Wall Street Journal aptly put it, “maybe the bill won the votes of 13 Republicans because there was hardly any public controversy. These days, the government needs to take over entire industries to get anyone to notice.” However, House Democrats may block the bill — because it violates the Constitution. The legislation includes fees (a.k.a. taxes), and according to Article I, Section 7, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” Don’t be fooled, though. House Democrats aren’t concerned for the Constitution per se, only their own power to get this ball rolling.

Democrats are also set to vote on the quaintly named Commercial Advertising Loudness Mitigation, or CALM, Act, which will regulate the volume of ads on TV. The FCC received tens of thousands of complaints about blaring ads in the first quarter alone this year, but to those who say, “There oughta be a law,” be careful what you wish for — Congress is always willing to oblige.

In the meantime, a massive tax increase awaits all Americans if action isn’t taken to preserve current rates that expire on Dec. 31. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) engineered a rule-making vote that prevents Republicans from offering amendments to stop all of the Democrats’ tax increases from kicking in, and the House voted to extend rates for those earning less than $250,000 a year. Those earning more, i.e. small businesses, will be saddled with a job-killing tax hike. The White House and congressional Republicans are still trying to make a deal.

Senate Republicans have vowed to block legislation of any kind until bills dealing with taxes and funding the government are passed. It’s likely that a temporary extension of all tax rates will garner enough support from both parties to pass, but that merely kicks the can down the road. Rates should be lowered again and permanently, not raised, even if the economy improves. Congress should be focused on reducing taxes and cutting spending, not monkeying around in the school lunch room.

SOURCE