Fourteen Republicans voted against the Grassley plan, including Sen. Ted Cruz (TX), who lamented, “The plans that are before the Senate right now — I think they don’t make any sense at all. We should not be granting citizenship to people here illegally.” He pointedly added, “DACA was just a work permit. Why would Republicans be galloping to the left of Barack liar-nObama?”
          After the votes, Sen. rino-Lindsey Graham (R-SC) opined, “I don’t think the president helped very much, but the bottom line is the demagogues won again on the Left and the Right.”
          So, after all the bipartisan efforts to pass an immigration deal before Trump’s March 5 deadline for the ending of DACA, lawmakers find themselves back at square one. But ironically, even with both Trump and Republicans willing to move to the left by considering some form of amnesty for illegal alien “Dreamers,” Democrats won’t budge on ending the visa lottery or chain migration, and they have cynically reversed course over the last few years regarding funding for a border wall. It’s clear that Democrats have no real desire to stop illegal immigration, nor do they wish to solve the DACA problem when it’s far more useful as a campaign issue. And this is the crux of the entire problem.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/54194-immigration-reform-dies-in-senate

          Those connections include Iranian President Hassan Rouhani — whose nation is considered a state sponsor of terror — and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. This week it was reported that in September 2013, scum-Ellison, also a Muslim, met with Rouhani and Farrakhan privately over dinner just outside the UN headquarters. He has had additional rendezvouses with Farrakhan, the most recent reportedly being 2015, but their affiliation dates back to at least the mid-1990s.
          scum-Ellison knew his relationship with Farrakhan was a problem, which explains his penning a Washington Post op-ed in December 2016 in which he said, “I glossed over the hurtful and divisive language he [Farrakhan] directed at other communities” and “neglected to scrutinize the words of those such as Khalid Muhammad and Farrakhan who mixed a message of African American empowerment with scapegoating of other communities.”scum-Ellison’s op-ed was not received well by Farrakhan, who critiqued it as “deceitful.” And why shouldn’t he have? There is ample evidence that there was far more to their relationship than scum-Ellison cares to admit.
          The Nation of Islam is a hateful, anti-Semitic cult that high-profile Democrats yearn to associate with, just not publicly. In 2005, Barack liar-nObama was depicted in a photograph meeting with Louis Farrakhan. But as we noted, the media obligingly overlooked some of liar-nObama’s other sordid connections to guys like Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers. The media would have treated his photo of Farrakhan the same way. scum-Ellison’s situation is no different. The consequence is that the Democrat Party is being molded by a man who wants to destroy the West as we know it.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/54165-ellison-joins-list-of-dems-with-connections-to-farrakhan

          Nevertheless, courtesy of a 71-28 vote of approval in the Senate, and a 240-186 thumbs up from the House, deficit spending will likely hit $984 billion in FY 2018, and once again top $1 trillion in FY2019, paving the way to $30 trillion of national debt within the next 10 years.
          Columnist Andrew Malcom spells it out, writing, “Remember Republicans’ enduring commitment over most of our lifetimes to eliminate the federal budget deficit and trim the national debt? Well, forget it.”
          Forget it indeed. And it’s not just Republicans. The irresponsible mindset of both parties is the same, albeit for different reasons. Republicans want more money for the military, Democrats for the social welfare state.
          Hence, the chest-puffing. “This is a great victory for our men and women in uniform. Republicans and Democrats joined together to finally give our troops the resources and our generals the certainty to plan for the future,” crowed House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI). “What makes Democrats proudest of this bill is that after a decade of cuts to programs that help the middle class, we have a dramatic reversal,” boasted Sen. Chuck clown-Schumer (D-NY).
          Cuts? When liar-Bill Clinton left office, the federal debt was $5.8 trillion. When George W. Bush left office, it was $11.6 trillion. When Barack liar-nObama left office, it was $19.5 trillion.
          Moreover, most of the spending is on mandatory automatic pilot. In 2018, the federal government will spend 27% of its budget for health care, 26% for pensions (federal employees and Social Security), 22% for the military — and 8% servicing the existing debt.
          That’s 82% of the entire outlay. Debt service must be paid or we’ll precipitate worldwide financial Armageddon. Moreover, despite massive spending levels, both Medicare and Social Security face insolvency over the next two decades. How do we solve the problem? Absent serious reform, we don’t.
          Unfortunately, an utter lack of seriousness rules. “Republicans believe that tax cuts and regulatory reform will negate the need for spending reductions because the first two policies will ignite the economy, allowing for economic growth to outpace debt creation (and the larger growth would also mean the more money that companies and citizens paid to the government in taxes without an actual tax increase),” explains columnist Brandon J. Wiechert. “Republicans say this was precisely what happened during the Reagan boom. The GOP is correct.”
          Being correct is irrelevant, because with the exceptions of Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, every administration, from Woodrow Wilson through Barack liar-nObama, added to the national debt. In other words, despite increased levels of revenue — including revenue increases spurred by the Kennedy, Reagan and Bush administrations’ tax cuts — spending outlays have consistently outpaced revenue intake. And they’ve done so for over a century.
          Democrats? Just as in Europe, American leftists would rather dodge serious welfare state reform and instead import a younger workforce of immigrants — who also have higher birthrates than native populations — to support the increasing demands of an increasingly older native population. That several studies done on both sides of the Atlantic reveal immigration provides no net surplus to the economic pie means little to a Democrat Party with visions of securing a permanent majority of voters.
          The searing irony? Like Democrats, immigrants want bigger government, which will inevitably make the problem worse.
          The general public? As columnist Nathanael Blake explains, young voters with the most to lose “are often disengaged and besotted with adolescent socialist fantasies,” while retirees and near retirees who vote religiously “aren’t keen on politicians who raise taxes or cut military spending, and they will annihilate any politician who threatens their government checks and health care.”
          True enough, but much of the public is also blissfully ignorant, or angrily so. For the blissful, $20 trillion of debt is little more than a chimerical number, representing a crisis that has yet to occur. Or in a more selfish sense, one that will occur “long after I’m gone” so as not to affect them in any way. For the angry, one often hears the familiar refrain about “solving” the crisis by cutting off funding “to countries that hate us,” even though the nation’s entire foreign aid budget comprises less than 1%of our annual spending.
          If the public won’t make intelligent or hard choices, why should the people they vote for do so?
          There was a time when the politicians tried. In 1982, President Ronald Reagan issued an executive order establishing “The Private Sector Survey on Cost Control” (PSSCC), more commonly known as the Grace Commission. It was led by industrialist J. Peter Grace, who tasked approximately 2,000 business executives with the project of getting rid of federal waste and inefficiency. Two years later, the group presented its findings to Congress: if their recommendations were followed, the government could save $424 billion over a three year period.
          In 1985, the federal government spent $946.3 billion. If one simply divides the Grace Commission saving totals by three (instead of factoring in year over year increases in the budget and commensurate savings) government spending could have been reduced by approximately 14% per year. Trump has proposed a $4.4 trillion budget for this year. Fourteen percent of that comes to $616 billion. Congress completely ignored the Grace Commission’s findings.
          Nothing has changed. Thus, for example, the fact that the Pentagon can’t account for $800 million in construction project spending, or that Medicare and Medicaid fraud costs the nation approximately $120-$150 billion per year, or that a third annual “Federal Fumbles” report released last Nov. by Sen. James Lankford revealed the government wasted $473 billion on frivolous spending, still fails to resonate with our free-spending political class.
          Why? Because spending “other peoples’ money” coupled with the need to get re-elected virtually guarantees indifference. “The electoral math suggests that there will be no reform or restraint except what will eventually be forced on us by the pitiless math of accounting and economics,” Blake warns.
          Unless the nation demands term limits. Only genuine statesmen can save us now, and budget epitomizes the difference between them and the terminally self-interested career politicians in both parties. Republicans who routinely abandon oft-stated fiscal principles, and Democrats who never had them to begin with. That’s how you get $20.5 trillion of national debt — with no end in sight.
          And as for the looming debt crisis, it will be gradual trouble until it’s sudden catastrophe.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/54145-budget-betrayal

          Pulosi’s hypocrisy is nothing new, but it is a reflection of the worst in our culture. As we and many other defenders of Americans’ Second Amendment rights have pointed out time and time again, firearms are merely tools — the intent of the individual wielding the tool is where the problem lies. To attack the Second Amendment is to attack Americans’ Liberty itself. But political opportunists like Pulosi ignore the real cause of the problem and attack freedom.
          The reality of the world is that people hurt others. And no matter the number of laws passed, nothing will change this fact. Taking away people’s rights to protect themselves doesn’t stop the evil; in fact, it only allows for the evil to grow. Too many people in Western culture have bought into the lie that people are essentially motivated by good, selfless impulses, when in truth the opposite is the case. How else does one explain evil?
          With this latest atrocity, individuals who knew the killer were quick to acknowledge that they were not shocked that he would perpetrate this mass murder. It goes beyond his being described by several people as “weird.” In fact, a YouTube producer reportedly notified the FBI months ago regarding a comment he made claiming, “I’m going to be a professional school shooter.”
          President Donald Trump also noted this, tweeting, “So many signs that the Florida shooter was mentally disturbed, even expelled from school for bad and erratic behavior. Neighbors and classmates knew he was a big problem. Must always report such instances to authorities, again and again!” He’s absolutely right. When you see something, say something. And those warnings must be heeded.
          The questions will be raised about what should have or could have been done to prevent this violent young man from engaging in this mass murder. What we do know is that Americans’ Second Amendment rights did not create this monster, and fixating on limiting gun rights as a “solution” to the problem only serves to punish the innocent for crimes of the guilty. This is a moral problem of the heart that politics is powerless to solve. Yet politicians like Pulosi chastise conservatives for defending Americans’ Second Amendment rights, while ignoring the blatant hypocrisy of demanding citizenship rights for illegal aliens who by definition are law-breakers.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/54164-florida-shooting-reflecting-the-worst-in-our-culture

According to The Washington Times, “RINs work to ensure that refiners — who hold the ‘point of obligation’ under law, meaning they are responsible for blending ethanol with gas — meet the yearly biofuels quotas set by the EPA. But many refiners, such as Philadelphia Energy Solutions, don’t have the infrastructure to blend the fuels. In such circumstances, companies use a system that somewhat resembles a cap-and-trade approach: buying unused RINs from larger refineries that have blending capacity and have extra credits to spare. The price of those RINs fluctuates wildly. Just a few years ago, RINs were sold for just a few cents, but they have skyrocketed to well over $1 recently.”
          This process is unfair and elicits corruption from major industry players that have better resources and can sell credits for their own benefit. As one energy-sector official explained it: “It’s picking and choosing winners within the oil industry in a way that’s causing some to go bankrupt.” Moreover, when used to support large-scale operations, that money adds up quickly. In fact, PES says crude oil accounts for its biggest expense, but, amazingly, that’s followed in second place by RIN compliance costs. Yet Renewable Fuels Association CEO Bob Dinneen asserts, “If refiners truly want lower RIN prices, the answer is really quite simple: blend more ethanol.” He added, “The very purpose of the [mandate] is to drive expanded consumption of renewable fuels, and the RIN provides a powerful incentive to do just that.”
          This is a baffling and self-defeating position to take. Anyone who owns an older vehicle or lawn care equipment knows the mechanical damage that ethanol causes. Despite this, congressional leaders like Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) remain diehard fans of the mandate. According to Grassley, “I’m confident that the Renewable Fuel Standard isn’t harming refineries, that other factors are at work and that the RFS law is working as Congress intended. Once these facts are known, there ought to be an end to the misleading rhetoric blaming the RFS.” Grassley is so invested in this ruse that last October he threatened to sideline Trump’s nominees unless they left the mandate alone.
          Unfortunately, Grassley’s support is shared by the Trump administration. Last May, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced the mandate would stay intact. At least EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt recognizes the RIN catastrophe. He recently said, “We need RIN reform. It’s something I’ve talked to Congress about. We have to take steps to address this, and I think there are many that understand that.”
          But even he went on to explain, “This isn’t getting rid of the ethanol requirement; this is the accounting mechanism to ensure that a certain percentage of our fuel actually has ethanol. So it truly is an enforcement mechanism that is being used in ways that it really wasn’t intended. We need to get reform around that.” What all of them miss is that the RIN situation is just a symptom of a very bad law. The U.S. is awash in oil, but that production can’t be maximized unless the biofuel mandate is repealed in its entirety. At least the Philadelphia Energy Solutions ordeal provides another good reason to keep trying.   
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/54112-more-evidence-the-ethanol-mandate-hurts-the-economy