Category: Politics

A Majority of United States Foreign Aid Is Used for Military Purposes

The United States gives a lot of money to foreign countries in the form of aid. Truthfully this aid is usually a cheap way of buying off allies in other countries. If you don’t believe me then you should read this:

A new bill approved by Congress last week would again make the Defense Department the premier funder of security assistance to foreign countries, giving it more than double the comparable budget of the agency popularly associated with America’s foreign aid, the State Department.

The $17 billion Pentagon aid budget for the 2012 fiscal year is the second in a row to exceed the State Department’s by $10 billion, a disparity that has begun to provoke debate among foreign policy experts in Washington. Seven years ago, circumstances were reversed, with the State Department spending triple the amount the Pentagon spent on such aid.

Your country doesn’t have enough money to build buildings? No problem, let us give you some money to blow up some of the buildings you already have!

Obama Believes Himself Above the Law

I know you read the title of this post and thought, “No shit Sherlock.” While the title of this post is pointing out the bloody obvious overall, this post is referring to a recent development:

The funding provision for the federal health agency says that “none of the funds made available in this title may be used, in whole or in part, to advocate or promote gun control.” The language aims to ban taxpayer dollars from supporting gun safety research.

“I have advised the Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient,” Obama said in a statement as he signed the bill into law.

The president’s signing statement also says he could end up ignoring a provision that bars taxpayer funds for paying for the “salaries and expenses” of so-called White House czars, including the director of the White House Office of Health Reform. The office was abolished earlier this year.

That provision “could prevent me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibilities, by denying me the assistance of senior advisers and by obstructing my supervision of executive branch officials in the execution of their statutory responsibilities,” Obama said. “I have informed the Congress that I will interpret these provisions consistent with my constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Did Obama seriously claim he has the Constitutional authority to ignore Congress? That’s how I interpreted his statement. While I’m not a “constitutional scholar” as Obama claims himself to be I can read and comprehend basic English. Let’s look at what the Constitution has to say about federal funding:

Section. 7.

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

I read two things in this section; any bill involving money must originate in the House of Representatives and if a President finds any legislation passed by the House and Senate not to be to his liking he can refuse to sign it and send it back. In other words Obama doesn’t get any say in how money is spent and if he didn’t like the prohibition against using money to advance gun control he can only refuse to sign the legislation and tell the House and Senate why he doesn’t approve.

When a bill saying money can’t be used for a specific task hits the President’s desk it doesn’t mean he can simply say, “LOL, this part doesn’t apply to me.” Upon signing the bill the President must either agree to the entirety of the document or toss the entire bill back to Congress. It’s all or nothing.

I Think the Obama Reelection Headquarters in Minneapolis Looks Much Nicer Now

There seems to be almost universal hatred of the Occupy movement within the gun blogging community. I still maintain a fairly neutral stance as for every anti-capitalist mouth breather that gets air time on the major media news shows there are protests like this that I fully support:

Think bad thoughts about the government and you could go to jail…forever. That may sound like a Soviet-era law, but civil libertarians say it’s possible under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which is awaiting President Obama’s promised signature.

The NDAA, was passed by the US Senate 86 to 13. Minnesota senators split on the act, Franken opposing and Klobuchar voting for it.

OccupyMN organized a pre-Christmas protest at the Minneapolis Obama Reelection Headquarters.

Part of their protest involved taping signs to the front window of the headquarters. My favorite sign is the one that reads, “POLICE STATE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.” The Occupy movement still seems to be a bring your own grievance movement and there are times when the grievances brought are ones I entirely agree with. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) should never have been voted for or signed into law. Its passage demonstrates the fact our “representatives” don’t care about defending the values this nation was founded on but prefer to strangle the populace with ever more draconian laws.

Kudos to OccupyMN for protesting this legislation and making a little trouble for the local Obama reelection robots. If you still believe Obama deserves to be reelected then I can honestly say you’re not paying attention to his actions. Granted most of the alternatives don’t look to be any better but if we start voting out bad politicians perhaps we can send a message and they’ll keep their tyrannical desires a bit more in check (by a bit more I simply mean they’ll be less blatant, there is no way to stop them from attempt to increase their power over us).

If You Vote to Reelect Obama This is What You’re Supporting

Many of my progressive friends are still jumping on board the SS Reelect Obama. While their ship is most likely already sunk I have been informing them, in no uncertain details, that by reelect Obama they’re supporting this:

Shakira was one year old when Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Barack Obama ordered the 2009 drone strike in Pakistan’s Taliban-infested Swat valley that nearly killed her. With two other burned little girls, she was put in a trash bin to die. A volunteer doctor with House of Charity discovered the three babies and attempted to save them. Two of the little girls died from their injuries, but Shakira, who is now four, lived to be disfigured.

CNN reports that Shakira arrived in Houston last week with her caretaker for a series of surgeries that “will make it easier for Shakira to grow older.” (“She will never look fully normal,” CNN adds.)

Thanks to drone strikes ordered by Obama Shakira will live the rest of her life disfigured. Obama is a warmonger who is more than happy to send a drone off to blow up a tent full of people to nail one man. He even went so far as to assassinate Anwar al-Awalki, an American citizen, and his 16 year-old son without giving either so much as the benefit of a trial. I don’t think the previous Warmonger in Chief even went so far as to actually order the assassination of an American citizen (I won’t be surprised if I’m wrong about this though).

If you reelect Obama you’re saying, “I want four more years of innocent people being killed or permanently disfigured by hellfire missiles launched from automated drones.” With the exception of Ron Paul, the other options don’t looks much better but I can at least say they haven’t ordered the death of anybody yet (not because they don’t want to, but merely because they haven’t had the chance). Granted the first act Rick Santorum wouldn’t probably make as president is to launch a nuclear strike on the Middle East, which would be followed up by his second act, the rounding up and execution of every homosexual in the United States.

Unless Ron Paul wins we’re all fucked (while I don’t think he can save this sinking ship we call the United States, at least he wouldn’t be warring with other nations needlessly), but if Obama wins we know for a fact more innocent people will be murdered and disfigured because he has a pretty nasty track record of making such orders.

Democratic Political Action Committee Buys newtgingrich.com

I don’t care who you are this is funny:

The campaign of Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich has seen the domain name newtgingrich.com fall into enemy hands: a Democratic political action committee called American Bridge 21st Century.

The results are either amusing or not, depending on your politics and opinion of Gingrich. But in either case they are a cautionary tale about the importance of controlling your brand online, a task that’s about to get more difficult for everyone thanks to the impending expansion of generic top-level domains.

I’m pretty sure they stole this idea from us over in the Ron Paul camp, but kudos regardless. The last person I want as president it a person who openly advocates letting terrorist attacks succeed to scare the American people into obedience and charging judges who don’t rule in the way Gingrich wants them to.

Televising Supreme Court Hearings

C-SPAN televises a great number of congressional hearings and other political shenanigans but they do not broadcast Supreme Court hearings. A number of people have been advocating that Supreme Court hearings also be televised on C-SPAN and I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortuneatly these things aren’t up to me and some opponents believe televising these hearings will have negative side effects:

Senators from both parties have been pushing for decades to allow cameras into the Supreme Court’s chambers. But many of the justices fear their dense, aggressive questioning would be taken out of context, and that cameras would foster the public grandstanding often seen in Congress and the executive branch.

First of all this is bullshit. Why would the justices change the way they do their hearings? Who cares if anything they say is taken out of context? Claims that adding cameras will foster public grandstanding is also stupid because people already grandstand in the Supreme Court, just read through some of the rulings.

I think the Supreme Courts wants to keep its hearings as secret as possible because they don’t want to be caught doing anything naughty. The history of the Supreme Court as a defender of the Constitution (their job) is not very voluminous, they mostly work to advance the statist agenda. Were their hearings televised people would be able to see this and criticize their attempts to gain the government further control.

Many people believe the separation of powers in our government help protect us from tyranny. Unfortunately for us this isn’t the case because all three branches of our government work together to further empower themselves. Even though they each compose separate divisions they realize that they’re all in the game together and what grants additional power to on branch very likely grants additional power to the other two branches as well.

The ongoings of our government as supposed to be transparent because ultimately the government can only govern an overall consenting population. We the people are supposed to be the final judges of government action and that can only be properly accomplished if we know everything they’re doing. Members of our government also know this and thus fight tooth and nail against every attempt to further pull back the curtan concealing their doings.

We need to televise Supreme Court hearings because not doing so forces us to rely on the transcripts provided to use by government employees. I don’t trust any government employee to be honest or keep me property informed.

Again With the Race Card

Attorney General Eric Holder decided to take a card, a very specific card, from the Obama debate strategy book. With all the heat coming down on the Attorney general over Fast and Furious he’s now decided to play the race card:

Holder said some unspecified faction — what he refers to as the “more extreme segment” — is driven to criticize both him and President Barack Obama due to the color of their skin. Holder did not appear to elaborate on who he considered to make up the “more extreme segment.”

“This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” Holder said, according to the Times. “Both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

Right, because none of the criticism or the demands you resign have anything to do with your little false flag operation that involved smuggling guns into Mexico and arming the cartels. I have bad news Holder, your little game to advance gun control in this country failed miserably and many of us our a wee bit upset about the entire thing.

Honestly Holder should be grateful that members of Congress are only asking him to resign, I’d be demanding criminal charges if I was in Washington.

Under Newt Gingrich There Will be No Court of Appeals, Only the Court of Newt

Newt Gingrich has decided that the president is the law:

During an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Gingrich suggested the president could send federal law enforcement authorities to arrest judges who make controversial rulings in order to compel them to justify their decisions before congressional hearings.

When asked by host Bob Schieffer how he would force federal judges to comply with congressional subpoenas, Gingrich said he would send the U.S. Capitol Police or U.S. Marshals to arrest the judges and force them to testify.

So if Newt gets elected he will become the supreme judge in the United States. Tremble he who hath rule against the wishes of Newt for he will be collected and forced to answer for his actions. If Newt’s position doesn’t scream dictator I’m not sure what does.

The idea of having three branches of government was to prevent any one branch of obtaining supreme power. Obviously that has failed but to this day the courts have remained somewhat autonomous. Judge’s rulings are seldom the final word as decisions can be appealed to higher courts. Ultimately a case can make its way to the Supreme Court where a final decision will be made but a judge is never supposed to be under threat of violence for ruling “the wrong way.”

This action is no different than threatening jury members with punishment for ruling in a way opposed to the views of the state. At such a point the entire idea behind a jury trial is lost because juries no longer base their decision on whether or not they feel a crime has been committed but on whether or not they will be punished for the decision. If judges can be rounded up and force to justify their decisions then they to will make their decisions based upon whether or not it will lead to their punishment instead of whether or not they believe a crime has been committed.

In the end this is one of the most dangerous ideas a presidential wannabe could conjure up. It’s obvious if Newt became the president he would work fast to remove the few remaining constraints that prevent the Office of the President from being Supreme Dictator.

Apparently Romney Doesn’t Know About the United States Embassy in Iraq

Since the presidential campaign is next year everybody is on the war path. In the case of Republican presidential hopefuls there is a strong desire to blame anything and everything on Barack Obama. Romney is not happy with the United States “withdrawal” from Iraq:

He called the withdrawal “precipitous” and said the president should have left some US forces behind.

Apparently Romney is unaware of our Vatican City sized embassy in Iraq, you know, the one that houses some 15,000 personell. The place is a fortress and qualifies as a military base unto itself. There is no way to claim the United States has entirely withdrawn from Iraq unless you take into consideration the technicality that the embassy counts as United States sovereign soil.

I’m just brining it up because it’s a rather large thing to note.

We Missed the Government Shutdown Again

So much for luck, our glorious government “leaders” managed to compromise and avoid a federal government shutdown:

The deal averts the possibility of US federal agencies shutting down because of a lack of guaranteed funding.

The House of Representatives and the Senate are both expected to vote on the controversial $1tn (£643bn) spending bill on Friday.

Why is it those guys can only cooperate when it comes to fucking the American populace over?