THE FOUNDATION
“It is not honorable to take mere legal advantage, when it happens to be contrary to justice.” –Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on Debts Due to Soldiers, 1790
TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
Get ready for a “conversation on race” courtesy of the Obama administration. Attorney General Eric Holder, who once said Americans are “cowards” on racial issues, said Monday at Martin Luther King Jr.’s church in Atlanta: “In the coming days, I will announce updated Justice Department guidance regarding profiling by federal law enforcement. This will institute rigorous new standards – and robust safeguards – to help end racial profiling, once and for all. This new guidance will codify our commitment to the very highest standards of fair and effective policing.” Holder is absolutely not the authority on what’s “fair and effective,” much less what constitutes proper Rule of Law. Holder and his boss have inflamed the racial tension that boiled over in Ferguson, Missouri, focusing as always on the color of skin instead of content of character. Yet now they want to be seen as the voice of reason. No sale. More…
The politics of Ferguson have bled over to the football field, with several NFL players showing “solidarity” with protesters/rioters before a game Sunday. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports, “Several Rams receivers created a stir during pregame introductions at the Edward Jones Dome by striking the ‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ pose when they came out of the tunnel for Sunday’s game with the Oakland Raiders. The group consisted of Tavon Austin, Stedman Bailey, Kenny Britt, Jared Cook and Chris Givens. They hatched the idea before the game.” Somewhat ironically, Britt had his own run-ins with the law, most recently in June when he was still with the Tennessee Titans. Britt said, “We just wanted to let the [Ferguson] community know that we support them.” By using the gesture popularized by those destroying the community? The St. Louis Police Officers Association condemned the display, calling it “tasteless, offensive and inflammatory.” The football field is the place for one thing: football. Beyond that, these guys might want to note that it isn’t the hooligans burning down Ferguson who are paying their salaries.More…
Like a college freshman just now realizing the end of term is nigh, Harry Reid has realized he has a few short weeks until he is no longer majority leader of the Senate. He’s warning senators he might not let them go home for Christmas, and they may have to work weekends – although Congress hasn’t worked Friday, Saturday or Sunday for quite some time. “We may have to be here a third week and everyone should understand that,” Reid warned Monday. “Our most important task at hand is to pass bills to fund our government, keep it from shutting down. We have a lot to do. And there isn’t much time to accomplish it. … We may have to be here the week before Christmas … and hopefully not into the Christmas holiday.” Reid, who has spent much of the last four years obstructing bills passed by the Republican-controlled House, only wants to use his last fleeting moments of power holding the purse strings of Congress to fund Obama’s agendas – something voters clearly rejected. And by the way, didn’t Senate Democrats pass ObamaCare on Christmas Eve 2009? More…
ObamaCare may have helped cause a slight decline in the uninsured in America (depending on how you count the statistics), but that doesn’t mean people are getting more health care. The Washington Times reports, “A third of Americans say they have put off getting medical treatment that they or their family members needed this year because of the cost. That’s in line with the roughly 30 percent figures seen in recent years, but still among the highest readings in the 14-year history of asking the question, according to a Gallup poll released Friday.” In other words, at best, ObamaCare hasn’t made health care more affordable – just the opposite, as a matter of fact, as insurance rates around the country skyrocket. And it’s not only the uninsured delaying care. According to the Times, “[T]he number of Americans with private health plans who put off medical treatment because of cost jumped from 25 percent last year to 34 percent this year.” But at least if you like your plan you can keep it, right? More…
The presidential pardon of a turkey or two every Thanksgiving is just one of the silly events the Washington elite do every year – just like the softball games in summer and the cherry blossom princesses in the spring. So let’s not blame Barack Obama’s daughters Malia and Sasha Obama for being bored by the event. Elizabeth Lauten, the Communications Director for Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-TN), critiqued the two teens on Facebook, writing, “Dear Sasha and Malia, I get you’re both in those awful teen years, but you’re a part of the First Family, try showing a little class. At least respect the part you play.” It was a cheap shot, but the Leftmedia jumped down Lauten’s throat: How dare someone say such a thing to the children of the president. Lauten apologized and then resigned from her position. Yet her criticism was nothing compared to the mockery Slate spewed about Rick Santorum’s daughters, and let’s not forget how the Leftmedia cackled over the Palin family’s birthday party brawl or speculated over Trig Palin’s parentage. Double standard much?
For more, visit Right Hooks.
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor
Check out That Turkey.
If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.
Help Us Help You
The Patriot Post’s Digest is a one-of-a-kind collection of brief analytical news combined with the best quotes from conservative analysis on hot-button issues. Our team works tirelessly to consolidate all this content into a quick-reading information buffet you won’t find anywhere else.
We depend on your support to keep this priceless resource coming to your inbox every week. By Christmas Day, we must raise $179,185.
Help us by making a secure online donation towards the Christmas Day Goal for the 2014 Campaign. If you prefer to support us by mail, please send your donation with our printable donor form.
RIGHT ANALYSIS
Just before the Thanksgiving holiday, the Obama administration announced it will seek tighter restrictions to curb industrial emissions to lower ozone pollution. It’s the first of many new rules the EPA will be rolling out in the next few months – all sure to do more harm to the economy than good for the environment.
Rules to reduce methane emissions are expected soon. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas said to trap heat 25 times more than carbon dioxide, is a byproduct of hydraulic fracturing, a.k.a. fracking – the technique often used to extract oil or natural gas from the earth. Environmentalists claim methane leaks have the potential to cancel out the benefits of natural gas production. Of course, years before the natural gas boom, these same environmentalists heralded natural gas as the solution to America’s energy problems. It’s cleaner than oil, it’s plentiful and it’s easy to reach. Now that we are actually harvesting more energy, however, the environmental lobby wants to shut it down. It’s a common pattern – constantly moving the goal post to make anything good for the economy seem bad for the environment.
Coal ash is another target for the EPA. The agency may not label this byproduct of burned coal in electricity generation a hazardous waste, but the new rules for how it is stored and handled will hit the embattled coal industry with significant new costs. It’s yet another salvo in Obama’s ongoing war to shut down coal production in America.
The EPA temporarily tabled its new fuel-blending requirements for the Renewable Fuel Standard. But the welcome news of this delay is more than offset by coming government restrictions on fracking on federal lands and offshore drilling in the Arctic.
Industry and private citizens are paying a hefty price for these regulations. The agency maintains we’ll save $67 billion on energy. But they arrive at this phony conclusion by using a complex model illustrating the supposed damage done to the environment by unchecked carbon emissions and tallying the costs to be incurred by cleaning it up. Yet if rabid environmentalists have taught us anything over the last several years, it’s not to trust their predictions. Whether they’re wrong because of faulty analysis or outright lying, the end result is the same.
Energy Ventures Analysis, a private industry consultancy, estimates the EPA carbon rules will add $284 billion in energy costs over the next five years. Between 2012 and 2020, the average annual household gas bill will increase by $680, while electricity bills could increase by $340. The industrial sector could see a 92% hike in electricity and natural gas bills by 2020, costs that will assuredly be passed on to consumers in higher prices for goods and services.
The Supreme Court recently agreed to take on the question of whether the EPA should have considered costs in determining the regulation of hazardous air pollutants. The question is central to three separate suits against the EPA that the Court consolidated into one. There’s no reason to believe, however, that this case will curb the EPA’s overreach into the economic sector. The Supreme Court has a sad history of validating the agency’s broad use of power. In 2007, the Court ruled that the EPA had the power to regulate gases it associates with “climate change.” This year, it affirmed the EPA’s plan to regulate greenhouse gases at large industrial plants.
There really is only one way to check the imperial overstretch of the so-called Environmental Protection Agency: Elect a president in 2016 who knows the real difference between creating environmental regulations that make sense and issuing edicts for the sake of attaining power.
It has been a week since the resignation/ouster of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and yet there still appears to be no clear choice for Barack Obama as to who should next head the Pentagon. The reasons for this are many.
Rather than speculate on the next secretary, perhaps the question should be: Who wouldwant to be the next Pentagon chief? Certainly there is a pool of people from which Obama could choose, but those who should be considered for the position won’t be, and several potential candidates have already declined.
For example, Michèle Flournoy was seen by many policy pundits as the frontrunner for the job, as she served as undersecretary of defense from 2009 to 2012. She could have been the first female appointed to the position, but she declined. Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed was also viewed as an option to succeed Hagel, but he plans to stay right where he is.
Another potential replacement is former Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, an academic considered to be an expert on budgets and weapons in the Pentagon. However, there are two problems. First, Carter is an expert on budgets, of which Obama knows little beyondcutting the defense budget for America’s military while breaking the bank for everything else. Second, Carter is considered to be an aggressive and independent thinker, and, he admits, “I do not think they are looking for someone more aggressive and independent.”
So scratch him off the list too. Surely Obama would not want to appoint someone who can think independently and who would pursue an aggressive defense policy aimed at strengthening America’s military and developing a sound military strategy in the world.
Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey notes that Obama will likely pick a “technocrat without much political pull in Washington DC,” or perhaps put forward DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson. Morrissey asks, “Who else would want a job where all of the blame would fall on his or her shoulders for a set of policies over which he or she would have little influence?”
National Review’s John Fund likewise observes, “Too many people view it as a job not worth having in an atmosphere where the White House manages everything.” Fund explains that no one wants to contend with the likes of National Security Advisor Susan Rice, “who exercises an iron grip on key aspects of foreign policy,” or White House Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, “who seems to have both hands in every pie at the White House.”
Furthermore, who would want to tag team with Secretary of State John Kerry, who deems thatclimate change is our biggest national-security threat? Well, besides Hagel, who shared that view.
Anyone with any sense recognizes that Obama’s foreign policy is a failure and is devastating to our nation, and anyone who even attempts to voice dissent against the president is pushed away.
It would be refreshing for Obama to tap someone for the Pentagon post who understands the threat of the Islamic State and other terrorist networks around the world. It would be desirable if Obama would choose someone who understands the geopolitical threat Russia presents to the world. It would be wonderful if he would pick a person who would strengthen the U.S. military and put an end to the leftist social engineering that weakens troop morale and unit readiness. However, the prospect of such a choice is dim.
Based on the record this president and his administration have established over the last six years, during which time three people have held the Pentagon post, the likelihood of Obama picking the right person now is slim to none. Even if the right person were picked, would he or she want to serve for the next two years under this president and his policy failures? It’s unlikely, but we can hope – better yet pray – for change.
For more, visit Right Analysis.
TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS
For more, visit Right Opinion.
OPINION IN BRIEF
English author Auberon Herbert (1838-1906): “How should it happen that the individual should be without rights, but the combination of individuals should possess unlimited rights?”
Columnist Arnold Ahlert: “Early Sunday morning, 32-year-old Bosnian man Zemir Begic was killed in a hammer attack in the Bevo Mill neighborhood of St. Louis, MO. The murderous assault was perpetrated by three or four teens, described as ‘black and Hispanic.’ … And while [Begic] is clearly of the Caucasian persuasion, the media that have covered the story prefer to use the term ‘Bosnian’ to describe him. More than likely that is the case because the word ‘white’ would force them to consider the possibility that Begic was killed because of his race, or as a spillover reaction to the jury verdict and subsequent rioting in Ferguson. … Justice has a split personality these days. The racialist undertones that from the heart of the Ferguson protests have already been dismissed here. The same media that descended on Ferguson en masse, in all their fact-free, hysteria-inducing, narrative-perpetrating glory, will be nowhere to be found. The thugs who roamed the streets with hammers, ‘just for the fun of it,’ will never have a bounty placed on their heads, or be forced to go into hiding in fear of their lives. Attorney General Eric Holder will not descend upon the scene to determine the motives of those thugs, or conduct a follow-up investigation to see if Begic’s civil rights were violated. Al Sharpton and his traveling band of racial arsonists will make no grand gestures or statements about the black American thug culture that drives such attacks. Attacks whose percentages dwarf those of every other ethnic group. Attacks in which black-on-white murders far outnumber white-on-black murders. President Obama will not inject himself into the incident, nor will he hold three separate White House meetings to address the concerns of a Bosnian community living in fear. There will be no white equivalent of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan urging his followers to ‘tear this godda– country apart!’ or telling the parents of white teenagers to ‘teach your baby how to throw the bottle if they can,’ in reference to Molotov cocktails. … Progressive bankruptcy is unsustainable and headed for the ash heap of history. One race-bating, riot-inciting demagogue after another.”
Twitter user @AnthonyCumia
