America, are you insulted yet?

So America, are you sufficiently insulted yet? Democrats want to take your tax-money and give it to illegal aliens to buy votes.

Democrats want to create entitlements for illegals — or illegal entitlements if you prefer. We are beyond pandering, they are just buying votes now with our money.

How about giving Dems a big round of applause? I mean they stood right there on the stage and said their federal single-payer healthcare plans cover illegal aliens, to cheers. I’m sure they heard that all the way to Guatemala and beyond. Your tax-money will lure them.

The only real message to any of this — whether it is free college or medical coverage for illegals — is that all they have to do is get here and presto they become instant recipients. But we should be perfectly agreeable to this vote purchasing scheme?

It is bad enough that illegals are already costing us so much and Dems will not do anything to stop it. Democrats want to double down on ignorance at your expense.

Right Ring | Bullright

Seize, See, Weaponize, Attack

No Secret, Democrats want Trump’s tax returns. I mean they really want them. So listen up, people, there are new rules now. Why? Because Trump is president, which is always more than enough reason to change the rules and even the law.

But Democrats don’t tell the other real part about why they want or need them.

See current state of agument CNBCFriday 5/10/19

“The subpoenas came four days after Mnuchin said that he would not allow Trump’s personal and business tax returns to be released to Congress because he had determined that the request “lacks a legitimate legislative purpose.”

And the new rules are that the House Inquisition Committee — aka House Ways and Means Committee in Congress — demands you must turn over your tax returns to them. But they want them so they can weaponize them and use them against you. No problem. (why else would they need them?) Should you run for public office, particularly president, these are the new rules. See Inquisition’s rule.

That is not in the Constitution but so what? It doesn’t need to be. Now if you do not comply, Inquisitors will force the state to cough them up. (in the case of NY at least) They will have made new law about your taxes and complying, but there is no law that says they need to have them. Just that if they want them, then they must have them. There is no law that says they need them for that purpose. That doesn’t matter.

This bothers no one on the Left. They see this as perfectly normal. Why, because Trump is president and they don’t like it. Therefore change election rules. NY legislators cannot say it is only for Trump because that would be illegal, to make bills of attainder for one person, so statist lawmakers make it a blanket rule to say it applies to everyone.

And what Congress wants, congress shall have. Never mind the reason they want it. Never mind due process. Of course the reason is to weaponize it against you, publicly.

Maybe it just matters who is controlling the Inquisition Committee, or maybe it doesn’t? If you are a Republican running for President, then expect your tax returns to be pulled, weaponized (spread) and used against you. Nothing personal. If not they will subpoena you and/or lock you up, basically to prevent you from running.

That is the next part, what is the enforcement mechanism? For one thing they set the precedent that a conservative cannot run for prez unless you comply with that. So they added a fiat requirement to the Constitution.

Seize taxes, see info, weaponize it, to attack you with it. What part of Article I is that?

Not to worry, supposedly none of this could apply or be used against Democrats.

Right Ring | Bullright

DNC Melltdown

As midterm elections start to heat up, with all the primaries going off in every state, you might see enthusiasm among Democrats. You might even think they are the ones with the unified momentum. Well, you may be wrong if you do. I’m not spinning it, I don’t need to.

Here’s why, first. Take a good look at the bare cupboards in the DNC. Then take a glance at their big funders. You know who they are: Tom Steyer to George Soros and a basket of others. It is not as important who they are as what they are. They are the hair on fire, far-left radicals that drive the Party. But more importantly, drive any base. DNC is out.

–(Open Secrets)———-Total Raised——–Total Spent——Cash on Hand——–Debts
Democratic Party——–$510,732,825—-$405,218,739—-$139,922,483—-$11,902,719
Republican Party——–$630,554,660—-$426,703,807—-$150,139,527—–$1,650,056
Demo National Cmte —$110,040,264—-$112,645,182——$9,185,284——-$6,353,378
Repub National Cmte –$213,054,677—-$187,695,079—–$50,687,610————$0

And now there is a fairly new big player, not really new. The ACLU has been stepping in, or should I say kicking in to drive many races. So they are in more than ever. We are literally now running against ACLU and Planned Parenthood.Chelsea tipped their hand. Twist Roe into economics, if your economic message is as vacuous as your political one.

But then look at the DNC coffers. They aren’t just empty, they are in big debt. Not only are they on the financial verge of bankruptcy but the Party is bankrupt on ideas as well. They still blame Obama who left the Party in shambles. Then Hillary. There is very little cash on hand and a lot of debt. What do these factors mean?

Enter my opinion and just that. They will manage because they always find a way to flow some money. However, what is happening is the big funders, i.e. special funders and special interests will fill the gap. People are not funding the party, instead putting gas in the tanks of candidates and causes. Money is flowing around the DNC. Read again, Democrats are not funding their own Party. It is all but irrelevant, at least as any central Party apparatus. By design? I doubt it. They just cannot fund it. And who would put much confidence in it after the way it worked in 2016? So they are going around it. No credibility is telling.

Don’t just take my word for it, listen to others make the case. A WaPo opinion piece by Ed Rogers in June described the dire Democrat Party conditions as unraveling. (I refuse to call it Democratic) And now good reason to use that term instead of their preferred one.

In the meantime, the Democratic Party appears to be dismantling itself. Outside groups are fighting their own fights, donors are being pulled away, and potential Democratic presidential candidates show no sign of being party-builders. If you believe in the two-party system, you know this isn’t good. Party discipline has eroded, and that makes it harder to govern once a party is elected to power. We need reforms that empower parties and candidates and diminish the influence of deep-pocketed plutocrats and narrowly focused interest groups.

Well then, is the fat lady warming up her vocal chords? All he can do is make the case for the “two party system”. But is it really a two party system anymore, I mean really? Regardless of how the DNC finances look, is it half of a two party system? I don’t think so. Even the author points to the non cohesive and unconventional funding. What does that say? I don’t see a party unity. It’s a grab bag of mostly socialist ideas bickering for turf. While Bernie might be ecstatic, when the dog finally catches the car what happens?

I think they have big problems. Maybe they are all smoking some real good stuff over there but how about the unity and love? It’s not there. While the Republicans are unified, to some greater degree on issues and a platform, Democrats are flailing about making a lot of noise, with no central theme or purpose. Many years ago I would have prayed for this scenario, a disunited party and bad if any leadership. Worse yet for them, seems no one can reign in the Party or their dire finances. It’s broke. But the people of the party are broke apart too. The screaming and yelling make up for, or paper over, the empty shell that remains of a party. There’s nothing there.

They can trot out the Alinsky stuff, bring out the Marxist ideas, plug in their socialist values, get fired up for a few key races, do a few marches and fundraisers; but in the end, what do you really have? A hot mess that’s what. The great divide in overdrive.

It would be a mistake to try to run an election against an empty bankruted party. What do you focus on? There is nothing there? Call it what it is. Before you get too excited, we still run against the socialist party they are, only we are not running against a party structure. You are basically running against all these splintered special interest groups. Though the only thing that does tie any of it together is a socialist agenda. That is where the energy is. You can no longer say or talk to the moderate, sane ones, or adults in the room. peel off a few. There are none. Everyone is just out for their thing, whatever bad acid trip it is. But they are a long way from any resemblance to unity, virtually on anything.

Sure they agree on issues here and there, but not on direction or a central vision. They want to abolish ICE and do something to cops and hate Trump. They are the anti-party now. Their resistance is all that defines them or unites them. That may be where the solidarity is but there’s a random hodgepodge everywhere else, including in funding which does matter. That funding is a collection of special interests. You could call them a party of special interests, but even that wouldn’t be really fair. Even special interest have more cohesive unity than that. The people are not really united. It’s a giant illusion. We shouldn’t fall for thinking that it is some solidly united party. What is missing?

Any defining leadership – MIA. Nancy Pelosi recently made statements to reinforce her leadership but then she blamed the press and media for trying to divide them. Wow, a tell that is. Blaming the press now? Bad when you have to blame the strongest allies of the Party. And media has drifted along its own far left course. Nancy may be on an isle all by herself. Does she dare take on media? She can’t. They are all she has to try to control it.

In the last almost two months, I see nothing that has improved or changed for Democrats. It’s still a party of misfits. Interesting that this whole meltdown happens at this time, when Republicans are unified in issues and a message with Trump having consolidated his approval. It looks like a time to close the deal. I mean any questions have been resolved and Party unity high, we now know what he can do, we’ve seen it. All we need is the how. And that is where the midterms come in, with a new Supreme Justice on the way, and tax cuts in the rear view, we have a good economic message. So there are problems, so what? There are always problems. But this kind of unity can’t be wasted at such a time when our enemy (opponents) have none.

Put it this way, politically, the trends on the other side are not positive. They are negative. And what they are really running on is all negative. Who can get behind that with any enthusiasm? I know, never underestimate the Party of Stalin. But Republicans seem to have found their voice, finally, and the fog is lifting. They’re perpetually underestimated.

The fork is ready….the lady is standing in the wings getting anxious. Someone could say but in the end, the Democrats always unify. Except on what this time? There’s nothing cohesive there, like their bank accounts.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Shove It and Shove Off Casey Tour

Tell me this: what politician would ever go into Wilkes Barre, Pa to Casey Plaza and take a broad axe to Sen. Bob Casey Jr., with no exceptions or apologies — only to be cheered and applauded? Who? Who dares to do that? Donald Trump, that’s who.

Pa Blitzkrieg. He’s not of Washington, he’s not of normal fare. Even in the WH, he is still “The Donald.” No one does it like him.

Someone’s got a bad case of heartburn in Scranton. “Sleeping Bob.”

 

Lou Barletta is coming.

1831 US Senate Seal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Right Ring | Bullright

Brilliant Deductions

Since it is the end of the year, it is time to recognize the most influential people of the year. My nomination of year has been finalized. It must be the Deep State, even over Trump.

If you thought the Deep State was a conspiracy ruse, then you must have noticed they removed all doubt. Seems Trump has exposed that for the cabal it is. There was so much evidence this year, no one can rationally deny it exists.

The fact that libs want to cover up for it, only further validates it is alive and well.

So congrats, Deep State, in my mind you get the person of the year award — collectively.

Class warfare is really in season. Economics of tax cuts are raging. On the left, the politics of tax cuts are surging. The mainstream media and left only care about election politics, not the people affected by them. It’s all politics.

In light of the current economic issues, this quote happened to be on Spurgeons Daily Devotional for December 20th. (an old resource)

“Call thy labourers, and give them their hire.” — Matthew 20:8

Lastly, engaging in sexism is something most conservatives frown on. Especially when they are hyped up charges. Well, it is nuts when conservatives are blamed for being sexist. That doesn’t happen much. However, what we hear are sexism charges leveled against conservative women.

That should not make sense. Yet the sexism police on the left always use sexist attacks on Republican or conservative women. Just think of Sarah Palin, Kellyanne Conway, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Betsy Devos. Or remember Condoleezza Rice? Okay, but they do have favorites and make exemptions for moderate liberal tools, who are useful.

Contrast this with the latest charge of Kirsten Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren that a tweet from Trump was a sexist attack on her. First ones to squeal “sexism” against Republicans. So why would they be the ones to make sexism attacks on women? Now Susan Collins has the nerve to call the media left sexist over the way she was treated for supporting the tax cuts. Well, this is what happens when you consistently side with the left on issues, they get very agitated when you don’t go along with them. Then they revoke your woman-pass card.

Politico reported the story:

“I believe that the coverage has been unbelievably sexist, and I cannot believe that the press would have treated another senator with 20 years of experience as they have treated me,” she told reporters in the Capitol. “They’ve ignored everything that I’ve gotten and written story after story about how I’m duped. How am I duped when all your amendments get accepted?”

Collins, whom Obamacare supporters earlier this year hailed as a hero for blocking GOP repeal legislation, has faced intense criticism from those same voices for supporting the repeal of the law’s individual mandate as part of the tax bill.

What else would you expect from the radical, fire-breathing left but to try to shame anyone who doesn’t go their way, then weaponize womanhood against her? Par for their course. And do it while calling the right sexist.

Right Ring | Bullright

Food and Taxes cookoff

I anticipate that aroma wafting ahead. Every time you want to count on Congress doing something, inevitably it seems to end in disappointment. Why is that?

The trick in cooking some foods is the seasoning. Now we find key in cooking up a tax reform plan is the use of SALT. (state and local taxes) It is also what causes the most argument among chefs. Some prefer salt free and others don’t want to change habits.

How this plays out across America is the largest debate we’ve seen so far. Yes, there are always class warfare warriors. They’ll use anything they can to make the rich vs poor paradigm the whole issue. And they’ll be those who only look at it from the corporate or wealthy side — not particularly concerned about lower or middle income. (as if government is not doing plenty already) The fair people’s minds look at the whole reality.

Taking away something, we see, creates a reality unto itself. The same applies on taxes. Take away and someone surely complains. It is someone’s bread ticket. And we are taught to think and act out of our own self-interest, whether that is on voting or on policy. We are supposed to stay in our lanes, which mostly is how we got into this predicament.

The fight and debate goes on.

You heard much of the debate about taking away SALT deductions; or keeping them in place to protect people in high-taxed states. There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground. Now I’m no moderate, but there is no position to please both sides. Or so we are told.

There are creative things they can do like capping that deduction. Maybe halve the amount one can claim? Or how about cut it off by income so the wealthy do not get the deduction? No, do away with it all at once is a tough pill for some to swallow. But why, at last report, will corporations still get to claim SALT deductions?

Except for one thing: if these states are exorbitantly high taxed, then they have been that way for some years and didn’t suddenly become high. That means those people have been reaping the rewards of high-tax deductions for years and years. While low tax states, or no tax states, have not had that big deduction — meaning they kept more of their income out of state coffers. This is the difference in the states, they say. Right, on one hand many people make more in those states while more is taken in taxes, then deduct it on their federal income taxes.

If you look at the whole picture it is a dramatic difference in policy. We have catered to the high taxed states. I think Ron Paul says what government subsidizes it gets more of.

The good news is that taking away the SALT deductions from high-taxed states puts incredible pressure on those states. What we need. Already they are moaning about it. It could be the biggest lever against higher taxes.Their raising taxes gig would be up.

So the point to remember is that the high-tax states have been benefiting on that paradigm for years. They get government to reimburse or subsidize their tax policy. Taking that away sends shutters up their liberal elitist spines. Yet they have benefited for years on that spending, by offloading their costs to the federal government.

Now the truth has hit the fan

But to start with it is a pill to swallow, doing away with that deduction. It does take something away from some people, who are already paying a lot of taxes. Obviously, I never liked what legislators and liberals used to call targeted taxes. Why don’t they call it ‘targeted-voter tax cuts?’ Those were canards meant to apply to a narrow populace. Little bang for the buck. And the I got mine’s cheered it. No one ever cared to address the mass imbalance on taxpayers. So if you are making a lot of money, why shouldn’t you get relief? Sure people at the bottom need some help as well. Loosening the chains on the economy also helps that.

I suppose it is still up for debate and people can have different positions, based on their factors. If we are honest conservatives, we should not want those deductions — or the high taxes for that matter. Both are real. Pull out the rug and the panic begins in state capitols. Good you say. But some people do get hurt. Leave then im place and the game never changes, does it? The elitists and establishment crooks continue on their road, unabated. No, change needs an appropriate force or resistance. Could this be it?

Now if the object was to strike some balance, there could be ways of doing that. So far, it appears there is no list of options.

Also missing in all the highlights of both tax plans is the issue of carried interest loophole, or the infamous hedge fund loophole. When it was such a prominent part of the debate and campaign, even on the left, its absence speaks volumes. People want to see that and loopholes closed. Now that is popular. Why make it all about SALT when they aren’t yanking hedge fund loopholes? Seems money talks and so do interests of donors. Republicans have barely mentioned it. They still need better P/R to cut the clutter.

Its a smorgasbord of interests.

Right Ring | Bullright

Stunning, Hypocritical Statements

Over the last few days there have been a series of stunning and hypocritical statements. Even more than normal, and from high places. This was supposed to be a short one.

Start with Juanita Broaddrick who is amazed lately by high profile people that suddenly tell her they believe her now. Okay, stunner that they can even admit it. Give them credit. She saw it as kind of a validation, finally. She declared Hell has frozen over.

Erstwhile do-gooders may have their political reasons for a change of tune now. But it does not reconcile years of looking down on these Clinton victims, and making excuses for Bubba and Hillary, which allowed them to continue to corrupt and enrich themselves. They simply believe Juanita — and presumably others — all is better, no harm? Everyone is happy? All because it is politically convenient now when Hill and Bill are private citizens hiding under a fictional exemption from accountability. Leaves a bad taste, no?

 

Sleazy Senator Bob Menendez just walked on his corruption case. Well, he walks and the jury hangs. (great pun) But in his deadlocked debacle he made two remarkable statements. (there were more but who has time?)

1) “To those who were digging my political grave so they could jump into my seat, I know who you are and I won’t forget you”

Ouch, can’t help seeing that as a threat. Wonder what vengeance he has in mind? And who are they, since most of the media ignored the whole thing? The MSM was making sure no one could dig his political grave, if they don’t tell people what is going on.

There still is an Senate ethics investigation Mitch McConnell called for. So it isn’t done.

2) Menendez said another stunner. Paraphrased, he has a fear of abuse of government power. He has a new appreciation and respect now for those who suffered from the hands of abusive power. So he’s going to turn into a fierce advocate? Don’t wait for that.

Wow sort of strange for someone who lived and breathed hiding behind, enabled and enriched by, the abuse of power. Then has a hung jury at his trial.

No, I don’t think you get to say that when you were not convicted for some strange reason — after all he did. I don’t think you call that abuse of power, you call that luck of draw.

Actually, details were even worse from the government side:

[ABC] Jury member Edward Norris said 10 jurors wanted to acquit Menendez on all charges, while two held out for conviction.

“I just wish there was stronger evidence right out of the gate,” the juror said. “It was a victimless crime, I think, and it was an email trial. I just didn’t see a smoking gun.”

Menendez can take that as a compliment. It is tough not to leave a trail. Victimless?

 

Finally, there is Hillary. always making the news. Hillary said that an investigation into the Uranium One would be “such an Abuse of Power”misuse and abuse of power. It must be that, but Trump and his campaign cannot be investigated enough.

[Clinton called the proposed investigation] “a disastrous step into politicizing the Justice Department” and “such an abuse of power.”

“If they send a signal that we’re going to be like some dictatorship, like some authoritarian regime, where political opponents are going to be unfairly, fraudulently investigated, that rips at the fabric of the contract we have, that we can trust our justice system,”

Here we go with the talk of dictatorships and rogue, out of control regimes that… I don’t know, use IRS to attack their political enemies, or silence their opponents with threats. That sort of thing. Ones who would stand down law enforcement to let innocent people or businesses suffer anarchy; or who turn felons out on streets because there is no room in jails for them. Maybe regimes that pardon terrorists. Ones that are more concerned with politics and elections than national security. What kind of regime would use government to make deals that benefit themselves and silence anyone who opposes them?

She also said “It will be incredibly demoralizing to people who have served at the Justice Department…who know better.” Whew, they know better? Isn’t that the way we got to this point? So it would be terrible for those public officials to have to follow and enforce the law. How demoralizing? Why should a justice Department stand up for blind justice as opposed to biased injustice? Leaders meeting on a tarmac days before getting an investigation is squashed. How demoralizing when an attorney General is held in contempt by Congress for not complying with….wait for it, justice!

Yes, they know better than that. Yet we saw no whistle blowers stand up to expose Obama’s injustice. In fact, we saw officials and staffers line up to take the 5th amendment to protect those who abused power and authority. She says they know better? Yes they do. Now I know why she has such faith in the Deep State swamp microbes.

We need a real Department of Know Better.

No, she said it would be a giant “abuse of power.” Wait, what she did was an abuse of power: from first lady right on up through the Senate to the State Department. Not to mention her reign of corruption and control over the DNC. Then that whole theater investigation of her abuse revealed how deep those corrupted roots go. She and her campaign manager were pushing for a special counsel on Trump. And they already suggested he should be investigated for obstruction of justice. Abuse of Power? Enemies, political enemies, do we really need to talk about Hillary and enemies?

Let’s not forget Hillary is a walking, talking, flame-throwing obstruction of justice. (and probably everyone around her) So now Hillary and Menendez sound like twins. She is getting around to claiming to be a victim of government abuse of power, which she wants to use against Trump, her political enemy. That’s what she’ll be blaming Trump for.

Now Obstruction of justice was a year and a half of Hillary covering her backside for her illegal server. But somehow she’s concerned about power being corrupted and abused? Yes, tell us all how scary that could be. Sends shivers down my back. (and shivs in the backs of her enemies)

 

CNN for its part set up a clock asking how long it will be, after he returned, for Trump to comment on the Roy Moore situation? Apparently upset he hadn’t already.

If they hadn’t noticed, he’s been kind of busy. Well, with Trump trying to avert that inevitable WWIII, nuclear Armageddon, and with rehearsing the nuclear codes he shouldn’t be trusted to have, and having secret meetings with Putin and all. Either we’re on the precipice of Nuclear Holocaust or we are not. Make up your mind!

I can’t leave out the narrative change. We remember the last 25 years. Democrats, a little late to the parade, now act like the party of protecting and listening to women. The suddenly woke folk on women victims try to define the narrative. Dems are the good guys, after standing in the way of any moral responsibility. You guessed it, Republican are the bad guys. That is meant to deflect and erase their political history for the last 25 years.

One more laugh for the road. Orin Hatch had a moment of outburst at Sherod Brown in committee. Orin called out their class warfare garbage about Republicans are doing it “all for the rich.” I guess the Utah Senator finally had enough. It didn’t stop Ohio Senator Sherod Brown from spouting off back to him that the rich are just getting richer. Great for people who actually want to raise all our taxes, let alone block this tax cut. And they have such righteous objectives.

Right Ring | Bullright

My Dear John letter

I think a letter is in order to McCain. He McCan’t do anything that might help the GOP even though he had them all helping drag him across his last election.

Now, what GOP, what help? “I don’t need any stinking GOP.” No, he is happy basking in the glow of the left as a proud member of the Resistance.

Last repeal he said was not in AZ’s state interest. This time the governor endorses it and McCain finds an excuse to oppose it on process. Well, John, process this!

You used your conscience for your excuse. Your conscience would not allow you to support it. Maybe you shouldn’t have used that excuse.That very convenient, expedient conscience of yours that most of us didn’t know you ever had.

Those chilling words, “I cannot in good conscience…” Funny how look at everything else his conscience allows him to support. How about the help for those other missing POWs? His conscience was fine with burying all that, and he used as much of “the process” as he could for the means to do it. In fact that is what the process was for, to bury inconvenient things. Process he created to obstruct and confuse the process. How about the process of Campaign Finance Reform, where he used the process to try to control free speech?

McCain was the willing dupe that the left used over and over again through the years. He was media’s go to darling to attack the GOP, since McCain never attacks the left but reserves all his animosity for his own party. (his own party is being generous)

Maverick McCain — nothing Maverick about selling out or trading out. The Maverick who referred to Evangelicals and the right as Agents of Intolerance. We always deserve broad brush names but liberals deserve his best compliments, like Chappaquiddick Ted.

That is another point, John constantly told us that he came in under the Reagan Revolution. Indeed, Reagan had already won and laid the groundwork. All McCain did was attach himself like a leach to the Reagan train. A foot soldier he calls himself. What did he fight for? What part of that Revolution was his? He promptly started a revolution within against the revolution that helped usher him in. And he’s a keeper?

Eventually he would hookup with his stepbrother, Ted Kennedy. Never realizing he was a useful mark for the left, always was. But his heart was in it. That is where his true loyalties lie, with the left. Democrats had him figured better than he did them. Then Republicans granted him wide berth because he called himself a Maverick. More like the 1970’s ford Maverick — cheap, dated, unwanted and obsolete. A Maverick, what’s he given us?

In the 80’s McCain and fellow Senators gave us the Keating five scandal on Lincoln Savings and Loan. That cost the taxpayers over 3 billion and many people lost their life savings. But McCain wasn’t gone. He was worried about himself, not investors or losses. He was one of two Senators who survived to run for reelection. But then he went right back to being the stab in the back Senator.

Then he’d go on to run for president. Kids, don’t try that. He jokes about having lost a few expensive aircraft in his Navy days. He’d go on to basically throw the election for Obama, whom he could not criticize. Sarah Palin could not make up for his compromised campaign.

Failure McCain goes on to deliver the dossier to the FBI in 2016. He flirted with not endorsing or voting for Trump. He came around to run on the same platform declaring he would lead the repeal and replace charge to Obamacare in the Senate. That saved his tough reelection. But afterwards, he promptly went back to opposing Republicans.

So on Obamacare repeal, he claims his conscience just wouldn’t allow him to vote for it. But then he knew his was the decisive vote to kill it. Even prior to taking that vote, McCain went over to huddle with Democrats telling them he was a “No.” That overjoyed Chris Coons, as just one in the group with Chuck Schumer. And he told Dems to take up the defense bill as soon after that vote as they could. He was already maneuvering and moving on after leaving American people in the lurch by his pompous vote. That conscience….

Not quite done wrecking our agenda, he now plans on upending the tax reform bill, if he can. And on and on for the foreseeable future, as long as he is there.

So it’s time, John McCain, to bid you farewell, good riddance. Your so-called conscience has put you way beyond remediation on anything else. A conscience I cannot recognize.

On Tuesday’s election, McCain tries to validate himself — using the left’s talking points:

(CNN)”I predicted this, OK? And unless we get our act together, we’re going to lose heavily,” said Sen. John McCain, …pointing to two recent speeches he’s given where he warned about the President’s divisive rhetoric and impact on the Republican Party going forward.

Your conscience called and wants its excuse back… with interest. Maverick Maniac.

Right Ring | Bullright

McCain planning a hit job on tax cuts

John McCain Planning on Killing Tax Reform

Katrina Pierson | November 8, 2017

Here we go again. John McCain is apparently working hard on cementing his legacy as President Trump’s chief obstructionist.

It’s no wonder that McCain is now more popular with Democrats than Republicans.

As reported in the Hill, Forty-four percent of Republicans surveyed in the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Wednesday hold a negative view of McCain, while only 35 percent have a positive view of him.

Meanwhile, 52 percent of Democrats surveyed now see him in a positive light.

It’s official: The Republican tax reform bill is dead on arrival in the Senate now that John McCain has become the third Republican senator to confirm that he plans to vote against it.

What’s worse for the Trump administration, McCain reportedly wants the bill to receive input from both parties – a criticism that he cited as his reason for voting against the Trump administration’s plan to repeal and replace Obamacare.

More: https://katrinapierson.com/john-mccain-planning-killing-tax-reform/

Now John McCain is the the head of the resistance. First he goes against people’s healthcare, then he opposes their tax cuts. Both for selfish, bureaucratic reasons. And all that in only a year after getting reelected on the pro-repeal, pro-tax cut agenda. But you knew what he was.

DOJ says what? IRS cabal stand down

Why? Wait, is someone playing a sick joke? Alice just stepped through the looking glass.

Jeff Sessions’ DoJ Will Not Investigate IRS Suppression of Tea Party Groups

Breitbart — by Neil Munro | 8 Sep 2017

Republicans slammed the Friday announcement by President Donald Trump’s justice department that it will not investigate the official who allegedly oversaw the IRS’ secret sabotage of Americans’ civic groups before the 2012 election.

“This is a terrible decision,” said a statement from Texas Rep. Kevin Brady, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees taxes and the IRS. His statement continued:

It sends the message that the same legal, ethical, and Constitutional standards we all live by do not apply to Washington political appointees – who will now have the green light to target Americans for their political beliefs and mislead investigators without ever being held accountable for their lawlessness. Not only has the Department of Justice chosen not to hold [IRS manager] Lois Lerner criminally liable for obstructing an official investigation by the Inspector General, the Department continues to defend the Internal Revenue Service’s unconstitutional actions against taxpayers in ongoing civil litigation.

“The decision not to prosecute Lois Lerner is a miscarriage of justice,” said an accompanying statement from the chairman of the tax policy subcommittee, Illinois Rep. Peter Roskam. He continued:

On top of Ms. Lerner’s actions against taxpayers – denying tax-exempt status to groups for political gain and failing to protect taxpayer information – the Department’s response blatantly ignores our most troubling finding: that Ms. Lerner intentionally misled federal investigators in a flagrant violation of the law. This is unacceptable and Ms. Lerner must be held accountable. Our democracy is injured when those who taxpayers entrust with great authority ignore the law to advance their own political agenda without repercussion.”

Tom Fitton, head of the Watchdog law firm Judicial Watch, joined the criticism, saying:

The scandal has been underway since 2013 when the IRS admitted that its officials had slow-rolled and blocked routine requests for tax-exempt status from conservative Tea Party groups while giving quick approval to liberal groups. That obstruction of tax-exempt status made it difficult for the conservative groups to raise funds needed to campaign against then-president Barack Obama during the 2012 election. Under Obama, the IRS and the justice department stonewalled and blocked subsequent investigations, via many tactics such the destruction of email records.

GOP officials and members of the non-profit groups hoped that Trump’s deputies would investigate and prosecute the wrongdoing.

But the September 8 letter from the Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department said it would not even reopen the investigation because officials require “proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a government employee intentionally discriminated against an applicant for a tax-exempt status based on viewpoint.”

Prior investigations had found mismanagement that disproportionately hurt conservative groups, and the recently appointed department officials reviewed the new reports and concluded that “reopening the criminal investigation would not be appropriate based on the available evidence,” said the Friday letter from Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd.

That answer was a response to an April 12 letter from the two GOP leaders on the tax committee, which included more information about Lerner’s activities, and a request that the department “take a fresh look at the evidence presented in the attached referral.” The referral is provided here.

“I have the utmost respect for Attorney General Sessions, but I’m troubled by his Department’s lack of action to fully respond to our request and deliver accountability,” Bray said in his Friday statement. “Today’s decision does not mean Lois Lerner is innocent. It means the justice system in Washington is deeply flawed.”

 

My outrage meter shattered. When WTF becomes the only viable response to events….

Oh, so there is not enough things going on now at present that we have to import a scandal from Julio Obama’s residency. Like didn’t Obama cronies run out of free passes long ago?

And while they are at it, maybe someone should explain to all of us why Obama’s lying John Koskinen is still Commissioner of IRS?

Redistribute this….

This has circulated the Internet but worth reading.

College Student Ashamed Her Father Is A Republican, Until He Said THIS…

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn’t even have time for a boyfriend, and didn’t really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, “How is your friend Audrey doing?”

She replied, “Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She’s always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn’t even show up for classes because she’s too hung over.”

Her wise father asked his daughter, “Why don’t you go to the Dean’s office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.”

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father’s suggestion, angrily fired back, “That wouldn’t be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I’ve invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!”

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, “Welcome to the Republican Party.”

Think of that the next time you hear “fair share” or “level playing field.”

H/T Allen West and The Federalist Papers

What message Brexit sends

Once again the infamous CNBC anchor puts his finger on the button — or trigger. Rick Santelli, who kicked off the Tea Party movement by his trading floor statements on taxes, said the Brexit vote was a decision against globalism. Not the market kind of globalism but the elite political type of globalism — or Globalist control.

But there was the problem with the diagnosis. If the political ruling class elite going out of control in its many regulations was the problem, then what could be the solution? Well, it is a little hard to call for reform of an abject global elite ruling class — unaccountable to the masses. That does not seem a viable option. How do you reform an elitist political power who by its own definition and existence thinks it knows better?

“Bureaucrats in Brussels” is a political power that is out of control, operating on its own as a sovereign, unaccountable authority. Exit seems like the only option. And who wants Brexit to be successful? That all sounds familiar.

Oligarchy is ” government by the few, especially despotic power exercised by a small and privileged group for corrupt or selfish purposes.” (Britannica)

Brexit was the equivalent of the Declaration of Independence. The words in the DoI echo those sentiments.

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Typically, the results of the vote was blamed on things like a hard line group of people. It was xenophobia, nationalism, racists, anti-immigration types according to Brexit critics. When even advisers on the Cameron side admitted that most of those voting to leave the EU were not of that sentiment. But it makes for great labeling. In fact he claimed most weren’t associated with the branded “controversials” like Nigel Farage — the effective campaigner and leader of a leave the EU movement in the UK.

Some call this a “nativist politics,” short for ugly nationalism which they despise. That’s funny, isn’t it? Aren’t “all politics local?” They resort to names and pejoratives. Why the rush to demonize the rational voices who call for an EU exit, or who question the entrenched political power here in the US? They have to blame it on something, and cannot blame global elites and their arrogance of power. Much easier to blame the people who resent it.

Tony Blair said the anger replaces the more rational voices. But it is the more rational voices calling into question that entrenched, elite power which is speeding out of control. The elites are out of touch — not the solution to the problem. Leave it to the Gobalist and liberal elite mindset to define our resentment as the central problem.

Now they all worry about the “fallout” from the Brexit decision. Well, we have all been experiencing the “fallout” consequences from the strangleholds of elite Globalists, and their all-encompassing agenda.

Interesting too was who the supporters were. All the cast of clebs and famous, including political elites, were stuck in the remain in the EU position. At any cost? They did commercials and ads to stay in. Leftists and liberals lined up, surprisingly. ^

Hillary twists the referendum result into a US mandate for her experience and calmness.(achem) But if it is a referendum on anything, it is an indictment on the very elite ruling class like heiress Hillary, and her world-wide trail of failures. It makes the case for her?

It does illustrate her big problem in this election. She cannot now associate herself with a movement for sovereignty that calls out elitists or globalists. She is one of them, the poster child for globalists — with no spine, only a bank account and family Fundation. So they turn to demonizing the very people who use rational reason to get out of such entanglements. She represents the entanglement culture of political Globalism. Expect nothing else but for Hillary to demonize anything that may oppose her as sexist, xenophobic, racist, misogynist, ignorant or crazy. So she is also calling the majority of Britons the same.

RightRing | Bullright

Facebook’s thumbnail taxes down under

Facebook pays tiny tax bill

Nick Sas – The West Australian on May 12, 2016 | Yahoo

Facebook Australia has restructured its local business in the face of the Federal Government’s multinational tax crackdown, as the US giant revealed it paid just $814,000 in tax last year.

The West Australian has obtained the 2015 financial figures of the Australian arm of the social media company, revealing gross revenue of $33.5 million, up from $26.4 million in 2014 — a 26 per cent jump.

More: https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/31580302/facebook-pays-tiny-tax-bill/

Debate theatrics? Live or Memorex

I held off and thought about the last debate and let it soak in, but I just wanted to throw this out there.

Now I still wonder if maybe that performance by CNBC may have been planned that way? I mean it is sort of odd that it was supposed to be on the economy, which happens to be Republicans strong suit. Taxation and budget as well. I can almost hear someone say “we don’t want to make them look good.”

It was on the heels of the Benghazi hearing with Hillary. Paybacks you know. Then I wonder if they’d stoop that low to create an ordeal over it and have theatrics so they could blame it all on Republicans? Well, I never put anything past the Left or the media.

Would they think it through to consider hurting themselves and counting it worth it just to attack the Republicans? They still got the ad revenue, either way. Is it possible this thing was planned? Maybe not our whole reaction it got but in a way I am starting to think there was some premeditation there. No candidate in particular, but toward Republicans generally to set them back.

They knew there would be another NBC debate, and this could have been a setup for that? I can’t say for sure but it is a question I consider. A hit job or a mishap? Either one take your pick, same result.

Trump calls Dem agenda on debate

For months now we’ve been asking Debbie Wasserman Schultz what the difference is between a Democrat and a Socialist? She danced around to avoid answering the question. Now we know why, or let’s say the first debate proved what we already knew. There is none. Socialism is the central component in the left.

But they made sure to demonstrate it loud and clear for any in doubt. The question was never what is socialism but what are Democrats? Socialism for a thousand, Alex.

Dems handled the first Marxist debate how you’d expect. The only thing not open to debate was the state of the Socialists Party. Bernie would not attack Hillary’s email discretions or sever scandal, and Hillary would not condemn Sanders’ socialism.(was there a debate prenuptial?) Thou shalt not attack socialism, and historically an indictable felony is no problem to Democrats. Seeing is believing.

Trump calls Bernie Sanders the ‘C-word’

October 15, 2015 | Michael Dorstewitz | BizPac Review

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump used the “C-word “ to describe Democratic presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, at a rally Wednesday. That’s right, he called him a Communist.

“I watched Hillary last night with, ‘We’re gonna give this, we’re gonna give that, we’re gonna give that’ “ he said, describing the Democratic presidential debate, at a campaign stop in Richmond, Virginia.

“The poor woman, she’s got to give everything away because this maniac that was standing on her right is giving everything away so she’s following. That’s what’s happening. This socialist slash Communist. OK. Nobody wants to say it.”

Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/10/15/trump-calls-bernie-sanders-the-c-word-264121/

Oh, why don’t they just rename it the Progressive Party at least? That’s what they call themselves. PP is same initials as Planned Parenthood. It’s still too early to call it the Marxist or Communist Party that it is, so Progressive Party sounds better.

What’s a Liberal Mayor to Do?

Well, if you are Rahm Emanuel and it is Chicago, there can be only one answer to that question? Raise taxes… it’s always the solution.

So Rahm proposes raising taxes a half-billion dollars, or a measly 500 million, just to tide them over until, well, the next tax increase.

He suggested a choice between drastic cuts and raising taxes. Now who always wins that battle? Right. It could have something to do with big union contracts and the inability to keep these big lucrative contracts flowing like wild honey. Incidentally, the one business probably thriving above all others in Chicago are the Funeral parlors. (another story)

Good thing “Chicago is thriving” as he called it, otherwise it might not be able to afford the tax hike.(sort of a joke) It’s what Rahm calls “progressive” so at least there’s that.
Rahm Emanuel gave a speech where he said:

AOL

“In short, if we were to fund our pensions with cuts alone, our city services would become unreliable. Our city would become unlivable. And that would be totally unacceptable.”

Isn’t that one hell of an admission? (think about that) Outrageous. I mean if the cost to float those contracts requires a 20% cut to the police force, losing 48 fire departments and 40% of firefighters — just to afford them — then what in the world is in those contracts? Wouldn’t any sane person say wonder if and how they could afford those contracts?

So the answer is to raise the taxes — good thing they can afford them, uh? Right, rather save the contracts by raising taxes. No losses there. Or tell people that they will lose all their services they already paid for, if the city doesn’t raise taxes.(Is there a hostage negotiator in the house) Don’t worry because he calls it a “progressive” approach — who can dislike anything progressive? Guess what? Even Chicago Dems do not like hikes.

Breaking-bad Baltimore mayor wants riot bailout

You knew it was coming and now Baltimore planners are back at the public trough looking for relief for the riot damage.

The mayor who told the police to give them room to loot is scheming with her cohorts (aka partners in crime) to get Federal coffers via FEMA to pay for at least 75% of the damage, they are now pegging to about 20 million. (for opening bid)

See Washington Times

The planners are named Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, and Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, a Democrat. They are the ones responsible for the calculations, and the signatories of the request.

The payees are red-blooded Americans who keep FEMA afloat for such natural disasters as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and Superstorm Sandy, and FEMA, as you may or may not know, is no tightwad.

Why should they pay for their own malfeasance when the Federal Government can pick up the tab?

On a dual track with the economic damage, Rawlings stand-down order and the following charges from the prosecutor, had the effect of neutering the police. Since the riots the skyrocketing crime and murder rate are the direct results. And right on clockwork, they are complaining about police’s reluctance to enforce the law. Go figure. What a tangled web of lunacy Baltimore concocted.

But the 20 million is just a proposed starting estimate on the riot damage. At the same time they are asking for de facto bailout from taxpayers, Baltimore’s financial officer says the fiscal shape of the city is very good and strong. But why worry themselves over the expenses?

Now that I know that I think I’ll start calling her “super cell” Stephanie Rawlings-Blake.

Ref: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/1/deborah-simmons-stephanie-rawlings-blake-larry-hog/

Ouch, this is gonna hurt

Obamacare enrollment appears to have hit the wall

By Thomas Lifson — April 7, 2015 | American Thinker

John Merline of Investor’s Business Daily has been examining the numbers on Obamacare enrollment and discovers that, contrary to predictions of millions more signing up, new enrollments are dying up.

Earlier this year, the Obama administration hoped to boost ObamaCare sign-ups by offering a special enrollment period for millions who didn’t know about the individual mandate penalty until they filed their taxes.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/04/obamacare_enrollment_appears_to_have_hit_the_wall.html

Evidently the same geniuses designed Obamacare as the global warming agenda. Obama sycophants say “you just want to see it fail.” Well, the problem is what failure means: the more it fails, the more expensive it will get. No one is hoping for that.

But it was entirely predictable when Dems did a bill called the affordable care act. I guess this explains Obama shifting his emphasis to his unconstitutional executive amnesty. One scandal or diversion after another.

Oil illusions and/or delusions

(Part 1 of 2)
I posted a piece on the current oil price decline. I could be wrong on my interpretation. Now that I think more about it, I just don’t know.

There are many different angles and factors in the issue. I decided to list some of the variables in an attempt to put the pieces on the table to get a full view, not to prove one view or another. I just thought it would be interesting to see the components.

Basically there is a view catching wide reporting that the decline in prices have hurt the domestic oil industry, and in particular Texas. Some reports describe it as a Saudi war on Texas. The narrative is that Saudis are flooding the market with oil with the intent to hurt our production, namely shale and fracking businesses, which are more cost intensive than cheaper Saudi oil.

A lot of people believe that and follow that line of reasoning. I’m not so sure. I wrote the previous piece off the cuff in reaction to a couple reports I saw getting widely spread. A few days later and I see more reports from economists with the same perspective. It has me wondering am I the lone person who questions that? Did I miss something or am I making a mistake, as sometimes happens? Am I too quick to jump to conclusions or is my bias getting in the way? There can be different opinions.

By nature some reports are kind of hard to understand and complicated anyway. But then I am no economist, and many of these people are degreed academics. I generally have some healthy skepticism and especially when I see piling on a theme. In the end, maybe there is no correct view, and maybe it cannot be seen in just one way.

Supply and demand. This is the talking point that we have heard most in the last 6 or so years. They claim it is market forces driving the high consumer prices we have seen, and actually come to accept as the new normal. This explanation is so institutionalized that we had countless investigations on higher oil prices only to be told it is just supply and demand. Those investigations don’t reveal any gimmickry, so we’re told, and no market manipulation. In fact, reports are no one can manipulate the industry. The very idea would be absurd.

There are investors and traders and hedge funds, oh my. We hear they are the ones to blame for prices. They call them speculators. They bid the prices up to higher levels. There is an awful lot of trading going on.

Cheap oil flooding the market. In the latest analysis the Saudis are leveraging their low cost oil by flooding the market in an attempt to lower costs, making higher cost production less profitable, if at all. This will stop the investment in these processes and stop the industry in its tracks. This is the point of the current reports.

Consumer demand. We will buy something at a marketable price. But in theory the higher the price is the less you will buy, or the less you want to buy it. As prices moderate or come down, you sell more of it. So even in a down economy people will buy just what is necessary, sometimes taking from other expenses. Especially at rising, or higher prices, other goods are affected because they have less money to spend. So people cut back in discretionary spending or luxury areas to offset the higher prices at the pump. Plus they cut use of the product in any ways they can. But other areas of the economy have to be affected because a bigger chunk of the money is going to a particular necessity. For instance less for clothes, food, and less disposable income.

Subsidized economies. Some countries subsidize certain areas of the economy. Many oil rich countries have lower consumer prices due to government subsidies. Some governments own or control the resources and depend on those resources for revenue to fund their government.They make budgets and decisions based on price projections.

Taxes. the money paid to gov’t on refined goods. Higher prices bring higher taxes.

OPEC, a group of oil rich nations allying to make adjustments en masse on production etc.They meet frequently to discuss their issues and concerns. (That I compare them to the Genovese crime family is neither here nor there — they are what they are) They can move or function as a bloc. They have a union concept working for them.

Oil companies, international or domestic, that produce and explore for resources. (Or if you are a card carrying leftist, the bad guys) Private companies in this country making decisions based on a bottom line profit margin, which employ many people. They are involved in production, transportation, refining, storage etc.

Government, involved in regulating, making regulation, protecting resources and assets. Also dispenses permits and approvals, and has oversight capability. It also collects revenues on the business models, as well as on consumer goods, such as refined products.

Retail businesses: Stores that sell finished goods directly to the public consumers.

Fracking and shale oil newer and higher cost drilling operations.

Cost – benefit analysis study of the benefits derived from the cost of materials and production, and projections or decisions based on those factors.

Industry and bulk users corporations and industry that use a particular commodity as basic in their business models. Airlines, freight, energy companies.

Speculators or investors and put hedge funds in this bracket. People or companies investing in oil based on its price fluctuation or performance over a period of time. People buying futures as in any other market, who hope to make a profit. (Such as Hilary’s pork belly futures)

Now, the idea is not to make some grand conclusion by these factors. Just say these are some relevant tangents in the overall picture.

RightRing | Bullright

The Gruber story that didn’t exist does

There just has to be as much political posturing going on with MSM as Obama’s team did in Obamacare. First blood has now been drawn.

Hot Air has this nice, informative piece.

The hits keep coming: Gruber celebrates ‘mislabeling’ Obamacare in video #6

November 14, 2014 by Noah Rothman

The hits just keep on rolling in. After the previously unknown investment advisor Rich Weinstein established that there was a literal trove of videos featuring Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber speaking candidly and in strikingly impolitic ways about the health care reform law and the American public he helped deceive, the mainstream press is now getting in on the act.

The sixth installment in the series of videos featuring Gruber crucifying himself was uncovered by CNN’s Jake Tapper:

The issue at hand in this sixth video is known as the “Cadillac tax,” which was represented as a tax on employers’ expensive health insurance plans. While employers do not currently have to pay taxes on health insurance plans they provide employees, starting in 2018, companies that provide health insurance that costs more than $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family will have to pay a 40 percent tax.

MORE http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/14/the-hits-keep-coming-gruber-video-6/

Where do you go from there? MSM was definitely and defiantly not covering the story. Now CNN’s Trapper jumps on board. So there is a story there, what do you know. They probably just needed time to source it and all.

When all this kicks in, what a time it will be. Why did they pick the arbitrary date of 2018?

“But by starting it late, we were able to tie the cap for Cadillac Tax to CPI, not medical inflation,” Gruber said.

“This was the only political way we were ever going to take on what is one of the worst public policies in America, and every economist should celebrate this,” Gruber insisted.

“It’s on the books now,” Gruber added

Obama did the equivalent of planting a time bomb set to go off in stages. We just haven’t seen or felt the entire effects yet. I think GM ought to jump on a law suit for the name Cadillac tax, especially since they were using it to promote the program.