THE FOUNDATION

“The best service that can be rendered to a country, next to that of giving it liberty, is in diffusing the mental improvement equally essential to the preservation, and the enjoyment of the blessing.” —James Madison, letter to Littleton Dennis Teackle, 1826

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Secrecy Surrounds Dennis Hastert’s Indictment

The Department of Justice unveiled an indictment against former House Speaker Dennis Hastert Thursday, accusing him of lying to the FBI and withdrawing cash in such a way as to hide the fact he was paying someone “$3.5 million in order to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct.” It’s stunning enough that federal prosecutors brought charges against a politician of Hastert’s caliber. But the question of the hour is why he was so willing to pay someone $3.5 million. Before entering politics, Hastert taught high school history and coached wrestling in Yorkville, Illinois. Someone in the U.S. attorney’s office apparently believes paying a bribe is a greater crime than Hastert’s misconduct. So they covered up the information because it’s embarrassing to the former politician. He was once one of the most powerful politicians in the country and we are denied the ability to know whether this affected his leadership. More…

Comment | Share

Surprise! First Quarter GDP in the Tank

A month ago, the government pegged GDP growth at a tentative 0.2% for the first quarter of 2015. However, as we noted at the time, revisions knocked last year’s first quarter GDP down by a staggering two percentage points — from 0.1% to -2.1% — meaning the economy actuallycontracted to start off 2014. That inevitably raised the question: Is a repeat in the offing? We now know the answer to that question, and it’s a resounding yes. Today, Commerce Department revisions showed first quarter GDP was lower than initially reported. Instead of 0.2% growth — an already sluggish number — January-March GDP now stands at -0.7%. The Wall Street Journal reports, “The latest downgrade came after new data showed a wider trade deficit and a slower pace of restocking by firms than earlier estimates, damping demand at factories and service providers. Those developments added to an already bleak picture of weak consumer spending and a downturn in business investment.” And according to Reuters, “With growth estimates so far for the second quarter around 2 percent, the economy appears poised for its worst first-half performance since 2011.” A myriad of rehashed excuses are already flooding in — from winter weather woes to flawed government methods to a mere hiccup — but it’s not like the economy ever gained much footing under the Obama recovery to begin with.

Comment | Share

Los Angeles Labor Leaders Want Minimum Wage Exemption

Oh the irony. Fourteen Los Angeles council members recently voted to incrementally raise the city’s minimum wage to $15 an hour. Considering a whopping 50% of the city’s workforce makes minimum wage, the new law is bound to have significant ramifications — which may explain this oddity from the Los Angeles Times: “Labor leaders, who were among the strongest supporters of the citywide minimum wage increase approved last week by the Los Angeles City Council, are advocating last-minute changes to the law that could create an exemption for companies with unionized workforces.” Rusty Hocks with the Federation of Labor defended the proposed exemption by opining, “With a collective bargaining agreement, a business owner and the employees negotiate an agreement that works for them both. The agreement allows each party to prioritize what is important to them.” Yet, as the Times notes, “For much of the past eight months, labor activists have argued against special considerations for business owners, such as restaurateurs, who said they would have trouble complying with the mandated pay increase.” In other words, labor leaders want the flexibility to negotiate a mutually fair hourly wage — one that may very well fall below $15 — while forcing non-unionized businesses to comply with an admittedly harmful law. The Left, it seems, doesn’t want to raise the minimum wage so much as coerce businesses into joining a union, which would then translate into political capital.

Comment | Share

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

The Debate Over the Death Penalty Has Just Begun

By Lewis Morris

Nebraska lawmakers voted Wednesday to make that state the 19th to ban the death penalty. Republican Governor Pete Ricketts vetoed earlier in the week the bill that sought to repeal the state’s death penalty statute. According to Nebraska law, it takes 30 of 49 senators in the unicameral legislature to override a gubernatorial veto. And 30 votes are exactly what death penalty opponents got. The original bill was passed last week and sent to Ricketts with 32 votes.

Ricketts stated in his veto of the original legislation, “Repealing the death penalty sends the wrong message to Nebraskans who overwhelmingly support capital punishment and look to government to strengthen public safety, not weaken it.”

The governor burned phone lines and called in favors in an effort to sustain his veto, but he was ultimately unable to do so. Still, with a thin majority supporting the original ban, and the thinnest of majorities overriding Ricketts' veto, it is almost guaranteed that this issue will come up again next term. The governor vowed, “While the legislature has lost touch with the citizens of Nebraska, I will continue to stand with Nebraskans and law enforcement on this important issue.”

Nebraska’s rejection of the death penalty is certainly being heralded in liberal circles as a victory. Advocates for the rights of convicted criminals — often acting without any regard for the rights of victims and their families — have been marching forward to make America a death penalty-free country for decades. And they have been experiencing some success lately.

Of the states without the death penalty, a third have banned it after 2007. Many of those actions have been motivated by concerns that capital punishment is cruel and unusual, grossly misapplied across various cases, and inherently racist. (This last reason is patently false. White defendants make up 55% of all executions since 1976, with blacks and Latinos comprising 34% and 8%, respectively. Seventy-five percent of the victims have been white, with 15% black and close to 7% Latino.)

Just the same, Nebraska’s case is unique. It is the most conservative state to ban the death penalty, and the reasons that motivated lawmakers to support the ban are varied.

State Sen. Mark Kolterman, a self-professed conservative, reasoned that support for the death penalty ran afoul of his commitment to protecting life. He also expressed fiscal concerns: “The state has spent approximately $100 million on death penalty related cases since 1976, but has only executed three people.”

The fiscal argument rang true for a number of senators who supported the ban, but the lawmakers who wanted to keep the punishment in place reasoned that Nebraska has executed few criminals under the statute. Ricketts wrote in the Omaha World-Herald, “In Nebraska, there are only 10 inmates on death row. Unlike California or Texas, which have hundreds on death row, we use the death penalty judiciously and prudently. Retaining the death penalty is not only important to the integrity of criminal prosecutions but also vitally important to good prison management and protecting our prison officials.”

A majority of Americans support the death penalty, although that margin has been declining over time. As might be expected, Republicans overwhelmingly support it, while a majority of Democrats do not.

Liberals should not be heartened by Nebraska’s sudden turn as a conservative state. The reasons for voting against the bill are practical in scope — consider the fiscal arguments. This is something Democrats are not known for. The final chapter in Nebraska’s death penalty saga remains unwritten despite this latest vote. Like many states across the country, the battle in Nebraska will continue to rage over whether capital punishment is just or cruel.

Recent advances in DNA research have exonerated a number of people wrongly accused of crimes that would have led to their execution, casting a dark shadow over the judicial system and its application of the death penalty. Additionally, there is the argument over method, with many now claiming that lethal injection is a cruel form of execution. Some states such as Utah, Tennessee and Oklahoma have looked into alternative methods.

Nebraska’s ban of the death penalty is not the beginning of the end of capital punishment in the United States, nor is it a last gasp for the movement to end it. It is, more appropriately, another salvo in an ongoing battle in which both sides air their grievances and continue their work.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: SCOTUS Agrees to Define ‘One Person, One Vote’
• George Pataki Faces Impossible Odds to the Presidency
• Al-Qaida in Syria Says It’s Not About to Attack the West
• Hillary: We Democrats Inherit Republican-Caused Messes
• Here’s How the Clinton Foundation Took Care of Blumenthal

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Mona Charen: Obama Not Offended Enough by Anti-Semitism
• Charles Krauthammer: Why Doctors Quit
• Jonah Goldberg: Absence of a Smoking Gun Doesn’t Equate to Innocence
• Michael Barone: Colleges and Universities Have Grown Bloated and Dysfunctional
• Michelle Malkin: Who Built the Brooklyn Bridge?

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Mona Charen: “Iran’s leaders are infected by a disease of the mind that prevents them from perceiving the world accurately. Their anti-Semitism is Nazi in intensity. They believe, as Hitler did, in a worldwide Jewish conspiracy that is responsible for wars, sectarian conflict among Muslims (!), disease and oppression. The regime hosts Holocaust denial conferences. They ceaselessly refer to Israel and Jews as ‘cancers’ or ‘rabid dogs.’ What do you do to cancers and rabid dogs? You kill them. … It’s profoundly worrying that Obama can shrug off the abundant evidence that the Iranian regime is in the grip of dangerous illusions about Jewish power and Jewish evil, and casually compare it to the kind of anti-Semitism found in modern-day Europe and America. It’s also morally offensive. The mullahs' anti-Semitism, along with their threats, should be enough to cause Obama, or any decent person, to recoil in disgust. Instead, he has made it the cause of his second term to reach a rapprochement with Iran. He has invited the regime to take the ‘path’ he’s offering to become "a very successful regional power. …Obama’s morality is always in service of his politics, not the other way around.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “We do not consider an individual disciplined when he has been rendered as artificially silent as a mute and as immovable as a paralytic. He is an individual annihilated, not disciplined.” —Italian physician and educator Maria Montessori (1870-1952)

The BIG Lie, Part I: “At minimum, the recent downpours in Texas probably offer a glimpse of what certain parts of the U.S. can look forward to in the coming decades. As the planet continues to get hotter, in large part due to human activity, warmer air in the atmosphere will hold more moisture. This is expected to alter weather patterns and lead to more frequent and more intense instances of extreme precipitation.” —The Huffington Post’s James Gerken (Ironic, considering most of the state was in the midst of a severe multi-year drought.)

The BIG Lie, Part II: “The best climate scientists in the world are telling us that extreme weather events like hurricanes are likely to become more powerful. When you combine stronger storms with rising seas, that’s a recipe for more devastating floods. Climate change didn’t cause Hurricane Sandy, but it might have made it stronger.” —Barack Obama (How then do we explain the Great Colonial Hurricane of 1635 — nearly 380 years ago — that was considerably stronger than Sandy? Or any number of similarly strong pre-21st century storms?)

Demo-gogues: “It is a liberating feeling in the sense that the amount of time I have left, it concentrates the mind, and I think a lot of folks have been surprised at the degree to which we are moving and pushing and trying whatever we can to advance the goals of making sure that every American in this country and every child in this country, if they’re willing to work hard, can get ahead, and that opportunity and prosperity is broad-based.” —Barack Obama, a.k.a. The Food Stamp President

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.

THE FOUNDATION

“[O]f those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.” —Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 1, 1787

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

EPA Expands Authority Over America’s Waterways

More than a year after initially proposing it, and despite efforts by congressional Republicans to block such a move, the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Crops of Engineers, citing authority under the Clean Water Act, enacted a new rule that gives the federal government additional control over waterways. “The Obama administration issued a rule on Wednesday putting more small bodies of water and wetlands under federal protection to ensure clean drinking supplies,” The Wall Street Journal reports, a power grab that “is estimated to put about 3% more waterways throughout the U.S. under new federal jurisdiction.” Obama officials say they’re simply maximizing existing legal authority. According to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, “This rule is about clarification, and in fact, we’re adding exclusions for features like artificial lakes and ponds, water-filled depressions from constructions and grass swales.” However, the Journal adds, “The rule seeks to require those kinds of permits for only those waterways that have physical features of flowing water.”

And that’s exactly the concern, explains Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw: “The physical feature of flowing water? Depending on the conditions, the slope of the land and how much it rains on any given day, that could apply to pretty much anything.” Moreover, “People who own property adjacent to or including swampy areas with poor drainage can (and already have) run afoul of the feds if they want to improve the drainage to dry out a section for construction or just a better looking lawn.” As Mark Alexander wrote last month, Democrats, led by the powerful EPA, leverage environmental concerns to conceal their real agenda — the constriction of free enterprise. Their objective is to incrementally implement centralized economic control through regulatory requirements justified by ever-expanding “mandates.” In implementing its newest rule — “one of nearly 10 that the EPA is slated to complete in coming months,” the Journal notes — the agency is essentially saying, “Trust us.” That’s a dangerous thing to oblige when Liberty is at stake.

Comment | Share

Krauthammer: How Amnesty Smackdown Hurts Republicans

Fox News political analyst Charles Krauthammer offered his two cents on Tuesday’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to keep a temporary injunction in place blocking executive amnesty. According to Krauthammer, “For the Republicans, it’s a problem.” Here’s why: “It’s like the case going forward on ObamaCare and the thing about the exchanges and the subsidies. The problem is what happens if you win? Because if you win then the issue gets thrown back into the political arena.” He argues, “If somehow this would be completely tossed out, then the question will be, ‘what’s your plan on immigration reform,’ if anything. I think up until now, you can say, ‘well it’s in the hands of the courts.’ But at a certain point it’s not going to be and you’re going to have to answer.” Like or not, he’s right. Immigration is a sour topic, but taking Barack Obama’s diktats to court isn’t enough. Lest they want to commit political suicide, conservatives will eventually have to rally around viable solutions to the illegal immigration problem and present them in an articulate manner.

Comment | Share

Santorum Announces Second Attempt at Presidency

Rick Santorum, the former senator from Pennsylvania who appealed to conservative evangelical voters during the 2012 presidential election, announced Wednesday he will once again seek the GOP nomination for the White House. Traditionally known for his value-voter stance on same-sex marriage and abortion, Santorum may try to broaden his appeal this time around. On May 21, Santorum told the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, “We are not going be successful unless we have a message that talks to the people who are struggling to rise.” But while he came second place to Mitt Romney four years ago, he faces longer odds this time around. Statistics blog FiveThirtyEight says Santorum is running in a more crowded field this time around. This places him around 10th place in the popularity polls, right around the cutoff of the number of candidates Fox News and CNN says they will invite to preliminary presidential debates. In other words, Santorum does not only have to fight about issues, he’s running an underdog fight that may be felled by the arbitrary rules created by a media company. More…

Comment | Share

Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column

Read Memo to the GOP: Get Iraq Right, on how every Republican candidate should answer the Iraq question.

If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email, update your subscription here.

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

Your Viewing Guide to Sunday’s Showdown Over the Patriot Act

By Allyne Caan

In the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, passing the Patriot Act seemed the inarguably patriotic thing to do. Nearly 14 years later, however, the lines of patriotism are less clearly drawn. Up for reauthorization, the act is facing staunch opposition — and creating strange bedfellows — in the wake of increasing concerns over government spying on the American people.

Last week, the House, by a vote of 338-88, passed not a reauthorization of the full Patriot Act but the equally patriotic sounding USA Freedom Act, which would continue the Patriot Act’s surveillance powers but end specific practices including the NSA’s data collection program (recently deemed illegal by a federal court), roving wiretaps and so-called lone-wolf surveillance tactics. Among other things, the USA Freedom Act would move the storage of telephone data from the federal government to telecommunications companies.

Between the House and president, however, the Senate stands. With 60 votes needed, the upper chamber came up short of passing the USA Freedom Act, producing just 57 votes before heading home for Memorial Day. At issue are competing views of liberty within the Senate.

Libertarian-leaning Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has long opposed the Patriot Act and would shed not a tear at its demise. He also believes the USA Freedom Act needs amending to ensure stronger protections for Americans against the government.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), on the other hand, believes the Patriot Act’s powers are requisite to security and had pushed for reauthorization of the act at best, a temporary extension at worst. He failed on both counts. Somewhere in the middle are senators who would keep much of the act but allow certain portions of it to expire.

Now, the Senate is set to reconvene this Sunday for a rare, holiday-recess vote in advance of the Patriot Act’s midnight expiration date May 31. Due to the political dance, the Senate is faced with the option of either passing the USA Freedom Act exactly as delivered by the House or allowing all provisions of the Patriot Act to expire, as the House is not slated to reconvene until Monday, several hours after the clock strikes midnight.

The FBI, for its part, has argued that the powers granted by the Patriot Act are invaluable for fighting terrorism. FBI Director James Comey pointed particularly to roving wiretaps, pursuing lone-wolf threats and provisions that allow the FBI to get court orders to track hotel and travel records as part of terrorism investigations. Attorney General Loretta Lynch echoed Comey, opposing the expiration of “vital and uncontroversial tools we use to combat terrorism and crime.” Of course, the meaning of “uncontroversial” is quite controversial.

For his part, Barack Obama is backing the House and urging the Senate to pass the USA Freedom Act, stating, “Make sure we don’t have on midnight Sunday night this task still undone, because it’s necessary to keep the American people safe and secure.” Please note: Obama’s sentiments apply only to government surveillance and not to border security.

Meanwhile, Obama spokesman Josh Earnest reassured the American people that the White House has no Plan B should Congress fail to extend parts of the Patriot Act. This is particularly comforting given executive action would be far worse, regardless of what the Senate and House agree or disagree upon.

Although the USA Freedom Act failed to meet the 60-vote muster the first time around, its prospects may be slightly better on Sunday. According to Politico, Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), who voted “no” initially, has suggested he may back the bill; Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) missed the first vote but is being eyed as a possible “yes”; Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and John Boozman (R-AR) are also considered possible “yes” votes. And even McConnell admitted backing for the USA Freedom Act “makes it pretty challenging to extend the law as it is.”

In a world of increasing terror threats, it’s critical that the federal government fulfill its constitutional obligation to “provide for the common defense.” However, it’s up to the American people to ensure this clause does not become the next “general welfare” clause, abused beyond recognition in the name of the public good. While security is critical, liberty is essential. We would do well to remember that fully ceding the latter has never guaranteed the former.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Who Knew Bill Clinton Liked Soccer So Much?
• DOD Accidentally Sends Live Anthrax Around the States
• Cleveland Police to Do Paperwork if They Pull Out Their Gun
• Christianity in Decline? Not Exactly
• Santa Monica Bans Residents From Renting Out Short-Term

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Joe D'Aleo: Winters, Not Summers, Increase Mortality and Stress the Economy
• R. Emmett Tyrrell: A Modest Proposal for Education Reform
• Stephen Moore: Using Tax Dollars to Lobby for More Tax Dollars
• George Will: The Separation of Campaign and State

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

R. Emmett Tyrrell: “[F]rom Atlanta … comes a plan for alternative state funding of the school system that would provide widespread reform. … Glenn Delk wrote about the plan last week in The American Spectator. Here is the plan in a simplified form. The state legislature passes a law allowing families to establish an Education Savings Account for each child, placing up to $8,000 per student into a tax-free account. The money is there to use purely for educational purposes. Any funds left unspent in a year may be rolled over to the next year or for college. Additionally, the state applies for a waiver from the federal government so the state can apply the $1 billion it already gets to Education Savings Accounts of $10,000 each for the state’s poorest children. What is more, the state spends $8,000 per student from the $8 billion it has already set aside for students without regard for family income. Thus, the state could fund one million students without increasing funding. If you assume that the 150,000 students currently attending private schools would qualify, then 850,000 public school students would qualify. Assuming 100,000 of them use federal funds, and 850,000 public school students use state funds, that leaves 650,000 public school students to attend schools run by traditional school districts, with $8 billion in local property tax funding. … I think it is worth a try.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “When individuals and nations have once got in their heads the abstract concept of full-blown liberty, there is nothing like it in its uncontrollable strength.” —German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831)

Non Compos Mentis: “I will say that there does seem to be a pattern. Democratic presidents — and there’s two in particular I’m thinking about — over the last 35 years seem to inherit a mess of problems. Have you noticed that? So then they have to dig us out of the ditches they find themselves in and put us back on the right track. And of course, I’m talking about Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. … Are we going to hand over our country once again to the people and policies that crashed our economy before and that will shred the progress that we’ve made?” —Hillary Clinton

Annals of the absurd: “Do you think the #TexasFlooding is related to climate control or God’s rebuke?” —Al Sharpton

Village Idiot: “Last weekend, more than 1.2 million Irish voters took a courageous stand for love and family when they overwhelmingly chose marriage equality. … And here in the United States, in just the past three years we’ve gone from six states recognizing marriage equality to 37 states, comprising 224 million Americans.” —Joe Biden (The overwhelming majority of those states were forced by the courts to recognize same-sex marriage.)

Dezinformatsia: “Marriage, honeymoons and welfare: @AP exclusive shows Islamic State membership has its privileges.” —tweet from the Associated Press promoting an article titled, “For an IS fighter, a paid honeymoon in caliphate’s heart”

Late-night humor: “I’d love to have Hillary Clinton as a guest on the show, but I can’t afford her speaking fee.” —Conan O'Brien

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.

THE FOUNDATION

“[H]onesty will be found on every experiment, to be the best and only true policy; let us then as a nation be just.” —George Washington, Circular letter to the States, 1783

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Obama Amnesty Suffers Another Stinging Rebuke

The Obama administration’s legal woes continued on Tuesday after government lawyers failed to convince a federal appeals court to overturn a temporary injunction against executive amnesty issued by U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen. In February, Hanen blocked the first phase of the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability program and reaffirmed his decision in April partly because government lawyers misled the court, granting work permits to 100,000 illegals before the executive action was temporarily blocked. Two of the three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit — Jerry Smith and Jennifer Walker Elrod — “found that the states had sufficient legal grounds to bring the lawsuit and that the administration had not shown that it would be harmed if the injunction remained in place and the programs were further delayed,” The New York Times reports. Tuesday’s ruling isn’t a final verdict — the case could eventually make it to the Supreme Court — but the administration is now 0-for-2, and it’s looking likelier it will strike out. Obama spokesman Brandi Hoffine responded to the decision by insisting they know the Constitution better than anyone, saying Judges Smith and Elrod “chose to misinterpret the facts and the law in denying the government’s request for a stay.” If that’s the case, how do Democrats expand this nugget from The Washington Post? “Obama’s second-term agenda, it seems, is in the hands of the courts. Same-sex marriage. Obamacare. Climate change. And now immigration. And in many cases, there is significant doubt about whether his signature initiatives will stand legal scrutiny.” Tell us again who “chose to misinterpret the facts and the law”?

Comment | Share

IRS Data Breach Leaves Tax Info of 100K in Hackers' Hands

Using the service to request former tax returns and filings from the IRS, a group of hackers stole confidential information on over 100,000 taxpayers. Using the information, the hackers can file false tax returns, stealing directly from the American taxpayer. “Eighty percent of the identity theft we’re dealing with and refund fraud is related to organized crime here and around the world,” IRS Commissioner John Koskinen said. “These are extremely sophisticated criminals with access to a tremendous amount of data.” It’s easy to see that the agency is running damage control. It’s not saying if the hackers were foreign or domestic, and Koskinen said people filing fraudulent tax returns only netted $50 million this year. However, the IRS gave identity thieves $5.8 billion in 2013. As Hot Air’s Mary Katharine Ham notes, only 6% of Americans believe the U.S. government does a good job protecting their information. With this news, we guess the IRS will get a budget boost in the next few months — whether it needs it or not. More…

Comment | Share

Now’s a Good Time to Develop a Strategy Against ISIL

With the fall of Ramadi, it may be a good time for the Obama administration to pause, take a step back and reconsider what it has tried and what that has done against ISIL. On Sunday, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter blamed the fall of the strategic city on the Iraqi army. “The Iraqi forces just showed no will to fight,” Carter said on CNN. “They were not outnumbered. In fact they vastly outnumbered the opposing force and yet they failed to fight and withdrew from the site. … We can give them training, we can give them equipment. We obviously can’t give them the will to fight.” Meanwhile, it appears the U.S. has the equipment, but it too doesn’t have the will to fight. The New York Times reports that U.S. planes only fly 15 strikes a day against ISIL, compared to the 800 flown every day during the 2003 Iraq War. Furthermore, only during one out of four flights does the pilot fire munitions. Part of this is due to concern that any civilian deaths would translate into propaganda for ISIL. Part of the hesitation is because the pilots cannot rely on soldiers on the ground pointing out targets and delineating allies. There’s plenty for Carter and the rest of the Obama administration to consider. How about sending arms and training to the Kurds? Or sending more U.S. troops to spot U.S. airstrikes? More…

Comment | Share

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

GOP, Prepare for SCOTUS’s ObamaCare Ruling

By Jim Harrington

If the Supreme Court rules against the “Affordable” Care Act in King v. Burwell sometime in late June, it could leave the act in deep water, or it could leave Republicans with the dilemma of fixing a problem they didn’t create. So says conventional wisdom.

SCOTUSblog.com writer Amy Howe discusses the case: “There are three key parts to the ACA. The first is the ‘non-discrimination’ rule… The second is the individual mandate, which the Court upheld three years ago… Third, because everyone has to buy insurance, there are tax subsidies to make sure that lower- and middle-income Americans can afford to comply with the individual mandate by buying insurance.”

David King is the primary plaintiff in King v. Burwell. He and three other Virginians, for their own reasons, decided they did not want to buy insurance. Virginia, incidentally, joined the federal marketplace, and King has insurance that would cost him $648 per month, but with his subsidy, costs $275. His suit was tossed out of a lower court, but with the help of the American Enterprise Institute he got a writ of certiorari, and he and his fellow plaintiffs' case was picked up by the Supreme Court.

The fight is about four words — “established by the State” — just a few found in the 2,700-pageact.

Now pundits and party operatives are scrambling to figure out what will be the outcome if the plaintiffs win or lose. Popular opinion sides with Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, a health care reporter for the Associated Press, who thinks it’s “Republicans — not White House officials — who have been talking about damage control. A likely reason: Twenty-six of the 34 states … most affected by the ruling have Republican governors, and 22 of the 24 GOP Senate seats up in 2016 are in those states.”

He cites Sandy Praeger — a Republican — saying the fallout of SCOTUS striking down the law will be “ugly.” Praeger said, “People who are reasonably healthy would just drop coverage. Only the unhealthy would keep buying health care. It would really exacerbate the problem of the cost of health insurance.”

Alonso-Zaldivar also cites a crucial issue: This decision is “bad timing.” Governments' fiscal years are ending, and state legislatures are readying their summer recesses. Arranging a quick fix would be very difficult, and Obama will veto any Republican bill.

But New Yorker staff writer Jeffrey Toobin sees it differently. If the plaintiffs win, 13 million people in 34 states will be profoundly affected. “[I]t’s likely that most of them will no longer be able to afford their insurance,” he says. Toobin then paraphrases Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn axiom. (Many of us know it as: You break it, you bought it.)

Toobin writes, “Obama will have broken health care, so he owns it. To the vast mass of Americans who follow politics casually or not at all, Obamacare and the American system of health care have become virtually synonymous … The scope of the Affordable Care Act is so vast, and its effects so pervasive … if millions lose insurance, they will hold it against Obamacare, and against Obama.”

But one problem Toobin ignores is the Democrats' twin propaganda mills — the schools and the media. Republicans will have to toughen up for this popularity contest.

How did four words undo the greatest legislation in America? According to The New York Times, there were two different Senate committees working on writing the law. Now for some excuses:

“I don’t ever recall any distinction between federal and state exchanges in terms of the availability of subsidies.” —former Republican Sen. Olympia J. Snowe

“As far as I know, it escaped everyone’s attention, or it would have been deleted.” —former Democrat Sen. Jeff Bingaman

“I remember meeting after meeting in which we went through the language of the legislation line by line. I do not recall any discussion of a distinction between federal and state exchanges for the purpose of subsidies.” —Robert D. Greenawalt, former senior tax advisor to Sen. Harry Reid

Obviously, we have trouble with members reading “line by line.” We know there wasn’t a handful in Congress that even read the bill before it passed. Oh, that’s right! Republicans didn’t get a chance to. This is a classic study of Big Government’s incompetence and corruption.

However SCOTUS decides, Obama will still be in the driver’s seat. With his veto pen in hand, he can keep Republicans at bay.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Will Pope Francis Influence the GOP?
• Charter Thinks It Can Woo FCC in Proposed Merger
• High School Graduate Publicly Prays for Ailing Woman
• Bernie Sanders Endorses 90% Tax Rate
• Memorial Day 2015 Immortalized for All the Wrong Reasons

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Stephen Moore: What Will Drive Illinois to Ask Washington for a Bailout
• Michelle Malkin: Bernie Sanders' Foul Socialist Odor
• Terence Jeffrey: When Did America Peak?
• John Stossel: Don’t Go!
• Michael Barone: How the World Has Changed Since World War I
• Walter Williams: Liberals Respect Me

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Stephen Moore: “Earlier this month the Illinois Supreme Court overturned a state law that would help fix the state’s notorious pension crisis. … Illinois has one of the deepest public employee pension holes in the nation. The long-term deficit is estimated at above $110 billion and the red ink rises every year. Even in California — where several cities have declared bankruptcy — the pension sink hole isn’t as deep on a per capita basis. … Thanks to this ruling, there is no way out of the pension calamity absent a repeal of the pension clause in the Illinois Constitution. The state can’t borrow — it already has the worst credit rating in the nation. It has to borrow less — not more. … If courts won’t allow states to trim pension costs, eventually states like Illinois will rush to Washington for federal bailout money. With more than $1 trillion in unfunded public pensions nationwide, Illinois is looking like the canary in the coal mine. What a tragedy if courts in other states prevent legislatures from defusing these fiscal time bombs.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Upright: “From the equality of rights springs identity of our highest interests; 
you cannot subvert your neighbor’s rights without striking a dangerous blow at your own.” —Senator Carl Schurz (1829-1906)

Braying Jackass: “I don’t think that Congress ought to have any right to circumvent the president. … I will say to my friends, be very, very careful about how you treat this president, because turnabout is fair play. And I think that this president has not been treated with dignity and respect that he should be treated with.” —Rep. James Clyburn

Village Idiots: There is no role whatsoever for American soldiers on the ground to go back [to Iraq], other than in the capacity as trainers and advisers.“ —Hillary Clinton

Non Compos Mentis: ”[Benjamin Franklin] liked to have a really good time, folks. And he didn’t spare the booze, and while he was in Paris he led a life that clearly meant that had he lived today and been nominated, he would never have been confirmed for office.“ —John Kerry

Dezinformatsia: ”[D]o we have too many scientific deniers in our country or do we give too much prominence to those who want to look the other way on science?“ —PBS’s Charlie Rose

And last… "On the White House’s list of 34 effects of global warming: allergies, asthma, downpours, poverty, and terrorism. They left off #35: million-dollar climate study grants.” —Fred Thompson

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.

THE FOUNDATION

“[A]ll speculative politicians will agree, that the happiness of society is the end of government, as all divines and moral philosophers will agree that the happiness of the individual is the end of man. From this principle it will follow that the form of government which communicates ease, comfort, security, or, in one word, happiness, to the greatest numbers of persons, and in the greatest degree, is the best.” —John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Cleveland Settles With DOJ Over Policing Investigation

It’s become a trend in cases involving police shootings: While the individual officer is let off the hook for using lethal force and sparking protests in the community, the Department of Justice usually finds something wrong with the larger department. Cleveland has reached a settlementwith the DOJ after the agency accused the city’s finest of engaging in patterns of “unreasonable and unnecessary use of force,” including tasing and punching handcuffed suspects. The investigation was launched after a 2012 car chase involving 100 police officers ended with officer Michael Brelo standing on the roof of the Chevy Malibu used to flee from the police and firing 15 times into the vehicle. On Saturday, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge John O'Donnell found Brelo not guilty of killing the two suspects because it was not clear if it was Brelo’s rounds that killed them. When issuing his verdict, O'Donnell said, “Guilty or not guilty, the verdict should be no cause for a civilized society to celebrate or riot.” Still, on Saturday night, some protestors grew violent and 71 were arrested. It just goes to show that improvements still need to be made before we can have a civilized society. More…

Comment | Share

House Considers Fast-Tracking Obama’s Pacific Trade Deal

In the coming days, members of the House will decide whether Congress should fast-track approving Obama’s trade deal with Pacific countries, or whether to defend its constitutional role of advisor when the U.S. enters into treaties. Already, 48 Republicans and 14 Democrats in the Senate approved fast-track legislation Friday, a move that would only give the legislative body the ability to approve the treaty with a yes-no vote. While everyone from Obama to the GOP leadership agrees that a trade deal is needed and beneficial (especially because of China’s growing aggression in the South China Sea), lawmakers question the way it’s coming about. Rep. Jim Jordan said, “I’m concerned about giving this president the authority” to be the sole person negotiating deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Furthermore, the House is the young blood of the lawmaking body, as only 55 members were around when Congress deliberated over the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993. Members in office because of the 2014 Republican wave should remember they are in office because voters wanted change, not Obama’s status quo.

Comment | Share

Another Holiday Regulatory Dump

Friday was the dawn of a holiday weekend, which could mean only one thing: Time for another big regulatory release from the Obama administration. It wasn’t exactly a Friday news dump, as it came out Thursday, but, as The Hill points out, “The White House is notorious for releasing its Unified Agenda on the cusp of a holiday when most people are headed out of town to celebrate the long weekend. The release of the spring 2015 edition was no exception, coming one day before the long Memorial Day weekend.” According to The Daily Signal, there are 136 significant rules in this release: “These include an Environmental Protection Agency rule tightening already-tight carbon emission regulations for power plants, Food and Drug Administration regulations for all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes and cigars, and new Consumer Product Safety Commission safety standards for off-road vehicles.” The cost of Barack Obama’s enormous regulatory burden is a serious drag on the economy. In fact, compliance costs nearly $15,000 per American household, but it’s a cost that’s more easily hidden than taxes. Still, it’s no wonder Obama likes to bury regulation releases just before a holiday.

Comment | Share

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

Emails Cast More Guilt on Clinton and Obama

By Lewis Morris

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton attend the Transfer of Remains ceremony for the four Americans who died in the Benghazi attack Sept. 14, 2012.

On Friday, the State Department made public some 300 messages from Hillary Clinton’s email collection pertaining to Libya and the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi terrorist attack that left Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead. The Friday afternoon document dump was no doubt timed with the long weekend in hopes that the information contained in these emails would be downplayed in the holiday shuffle.

Fortunately, no such luck. The Benghazi attack and the cover-ups and stonewalling by the Obama administration and presidential candidate Clinton have made this particular embarrassment hard to bury. Despite the best efforts of the administration and its minions in the media, the hunger for more information at this point seems insatiable.

The batch of emails released last week shed a little bit of light on questions that the House Select Committee on Benghazi has been asking since it was formed in May 2014. A number of emails released from Clinton’s once-private collection include information about growing concerns over the deteriorating security situation in Libya going back to April 2011. In fact, Stevens, who at the time was an envoy, voiced concerns about safety.

“The situation in [the Libyan town of] Ajdabiyah has worsened to the point where Stevens is considering departure from Benghazi,” states an April 10, 2011, message. “The envoy’s delegation is currently doing a phased checkout.”

Stevens ultimately stayed in Libya, but his concerns and the concerns of CIA analysts ultimately fell on deaf ears.

Other information drawn from the emails include communications between Clinton and her team in the days following the attack, speech preparation, updates on press coverage, even coverage of how then-presidential candidate Mitt Romney was speaking on the issue.

The emails released by the State Department that used to live on Clinton’s private server raise more questions than they answer, which helps ensure this issue will not go away soon. Several gaps in the timeline are evident, which leave open questions about Clinton’s role and input in shaping Libyan policy post-Qaddafi, how State was dealing with growing instability in the country, and the thought process that went into extending the Benghazi mission in early 2012.

Administration stonewalling on Benghazi is bad enough, but the fact the whole matter is tied in to how Clinton mismanaged her emails makes the issue that much worse.

Clinton’s now-famous private email server was politically motivated because she wanted to keep her work from the prying eyes of the “vast Right wing conspiracy.” Instead, she invested in a private server that was hacked at least once and was not nearly as secure as the government server that she was lawfully required to use for classified materials. Apparently, protecting data from the GOP was more important than protecting it from the Russians or the Chinese.

Clinton claimed two months ago that she never broke the law in maintaining her own private server. In Clinton-speak that is true — kind of. Documents related to Benghazi that have recently been reclassified as secret were not secret when they existed on her server. But they were certainly sensitive; otherwise there would be no need for the reclassification. Yet, there is no hard and fast rule that bars Clinton from storing sensitive documents on her server.

There are also different email addresses that Clinton herself used on her server, possibly to help categorize which topic or issue she was addressing. This is just a theory so far. Not enough emails have been released to detect such a pattern. Yet, it is clear that not only was the server itself politically motivated, but how she dealt with the information on that server was politically motivated as well.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), chairman of the Benghazi committee, put some perspective on Friday’s email release. “More than six months after the Select Committee first discovered Secretary Clinton’s unusual email arrangement with herself … State Department transferred 300 messages exclusively reviewed and released by her own lawyers. To assume a self-selected public record is complete, when no one with a duty or responsibility to the public had the ability to take part in the selection … strains credulity.”

Of course, the partisan wheels continue to turn despite Gowdy’s logical skepticism. Committee Ranking Member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) issued his own statement praising Clinton for being so forthcoming. “The American people can now read all of these emails and see for themselves that they contain no evidence to back up claims that … Republicans have made for years.”

So, according to Cummings, now that we have access to the slightest fraction of 50,000 emails that have been thus-far out of reach from the public record, we can plainly see that there is no smoking gun — therefore we should leave Hillary Clinton alone and elect her emperor president already.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• Dear GOP Candidates: Solve Rising College Debt
• Former IPCC Researcher Questions Fossil Fuel Claims
• Grand Jury Indicts All Six Baltimore Police Officers
• Cruz Hammers Local Reporter’s Stupid Question
• WSJ: ‘Hillary’s Supreme Court Litmus Test’
• Students Blame Boehner for Deflategate
• Telling a Story of Feminine Heroism

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

For more, visit Right Opinion.

• Ed Feulner: ‘The Last Full Measure of Devotion’
• Linda Chavez: Better Policing — Not Less
• Arnold Ahlert: Will America Abide a Nuclear Wakeup Call?
• Dennis Prager: Differences Between Left and Right: Part I
• Jeff Jacoby: Millionaire Ex-Presidents Can Pay Their Own Way
• Tony Perkins: Pomp and Circuit Stance

OPINION IN BRIEF

Linda Chavez: “Yes, [Freddie] Gray’s life mattered. Black lives matter, as protesters remind us following every such incident involving the death of a black man at the hands of police. But so, too, should the 87 black lives (and 13 others) lost on the streets of Baltimore this year. By focusing almost all of our national attention on the horrific death of one black victim while in police custody, we avoid the larger problem of violence within the black community. Worse, by making the police out to be the greatest threat to the black community, we risk allowing criminals to go unchallenged within those communities. Justice for Freddie Gray would best be served by better policing in the neighborhood where he lived — not by less policing.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

The Gipper: “In America, our origins matter less than our destination, and that is what democracy is all about.”

Demo-gogues: “This may be the first Memorial Day since the end of our war in Afghanistan. But we are acutely aware, as we speak, our men and women in uniform still stand watch and still serve, and still sacrifice around the world. Several years ago, we had more than 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. Today, fewer than 10,000 troops remain on a mission to train and assist Afghan forces. We’ll continue to bring them home and reduce our forces further, down to an embassy presence by the end of next year.” —Barack Obama

The BIG Lie: “I can say that no U.S. President, no administration has done more to ensure that Israel can protect itself than this one.” —Barack Obama

The annals of the absurd: “[Stopping ISIL’s momentum is] an enormous challenge. And we have to fight it on every front, including the front of social media. That’s a place where they have really made more advances than you would have suspected. And that is where we have to fight them, as well.” —Nancy Pelosi

Non Compos Mentis: “When you have people denying [science], and how we all got here, it’s offensive to me intellectually. And I happen to think it’s unpatriotic. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says the government shall ‘promote the progress of science and useful arts.’ So if you’re a politician looking to derail the progress of science, I think you’re not doing your job.” —Bill Nye (Context means everything, right? Importantly, the rest of the quote from Article I, Section 8 reads, “…by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” No wonder Nye left that part out.)

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.