THE FOUNDATION
"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence ... the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government." --George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
How Many Uninsured?
Ostensibly, the purpose of ObamaCare was to insure the uninsured. At least that's what Barack Obama and his leftist cadres repeatedly told us. Well, so much for that. The CBO estimates that at the end of this year, 42 million Americans will still lack insurance. A decade from now, the number will be 31 million. And the CBO's estimate is likely too good because it's based on their calculation that of the supposed eight million enrollees in ObamaCare, six million were previously uninsured. Other estimates put that number as low as two or three million. But it gets worse, Fox News reports: "Not only that, but starting in 2018, the CBO report projected the total getting coverage from the exchange will hit 25 million, although at the same time 12 million will lose coverage." If you like your... oh, never mind.Comment | Share
IRS Awards Its Tax Evaders Bonuses
As if you needed yet another reason to despise the IRS, the Associated Press reports on an inspector general investigation revealing that between October 2012 and December 2012, tax evaders within the agency were awarded $1 million in bonuses and $2.8 million overall was given "to employees with recent disciplinary problems." The AP notes, "[The] report said the bonus program doesn't violate federal regulations, but it's inconsistent with the IRS mission to enforce tax laws." Those would be the very tax laws that land ordinary citizens in deep trouble for evading. But laws are for the little people; breaking the law in the public sector earns you a reward. The report adds that these bonuses "create a conflict with the IRS's charge of ensuring the integrity of the system of tax administration." Did the agency ever have any integrity? The targeting of conservative groups should put any such assertion to rest.Comment | Share
Chicago Violence Heats Up
Now that the Windy City has thawed from this winter's perpetual deep freeze, crime is once again heating up. Over Easter weekend, nine people were fatally shot and another 36 injured in the murder capital of America. Chicago police chief Gary McCarthy blames guns, saying, "We need help with the gun laws, because the national averages for gun violence, we are way above it as far as murder by gunshot goes." Memo to McCarthy: This is Chicago, home of strictest restrictions on gun possession in the country. The problem is not "gun violence" but the culture of violence bred on statist "poverty plantations."Comment | Share
'Under God' Under Assault
Francis Bellamy, an American Socialist, wrote the Pledge of Allegiance in 1892. Congress formally adopted it in 1942, and the words "under God" were added in 1954. Today, that phrase gives modern Socialists serious heartburn. The American Humanist Association, an atheist group, is suing a New Jersey school district over the words "under God," saying the phrase "marginalizes atheist and humanist kids as something less than ideal patriots." There are some who will not rest until God is expelled altogether from public life.Comment | Share
Pelosi on the Rigged Process
Naturally, Nancy Pelosi didn't care much for the Supreme Court decision on racial preferences in Michigan. In fact, she tweeted, "Today's #SCOTUS decision is another regrettable step to rig the political process against efforts to constitutionally advance diversity." It's amazing she packed so much Non Compos Mentis into one tweet. Michigan voters decided not to discriminate, so there's no "rigging" of anything. Diversity is not "constitutionally advanced" by the Left's racial preferences, either. But when it comes to race, Democrats still think it's 1955.Comment | Share
For more, visit Right Hooks.
Don't Miss Alexander's Column
Read Women Voters Are Ignorant Dupes, on what Democrats really think of women.If you'd like to receive Alexander's Column by email, update your subscription here.
|
RIGHT ANALYSIS
Three States, Three Governors, Three Gun Laws
|
| This sign won't cut it |
First the good news. In Georgia, Republican Gov. Nathan Deal on Wednesday signed into law the "Safe Carry Protection Act." Critics labeled it the "guns everywhere" bill, while the National Rifle Association calls it "the most comprehensive pro-gun reform legislation introduced in recent history." The law, effective July 1, does indeed remove some old and unnecessary restrictions on gun rights. As Deal said, "Our state has some of the best protections for gun owners in the United States. And today we strengthen those rights protected by our nation's most revered founding document."
The bill permits licensed gun owners, either Georgia residents or visitors from 28 states with which Georgia shares reciprocity, to bring firearms into bars and some government buildings if no security measures are in place. Furthermore, school districts are empowered to decide on allowing armed employees, while places of worship can likewise opt to allow the carrying of firearms.
The Georgia Municipal Association, which represents the state's 538 cities, sought a veto, saying, "Local elected officials are responsible for securing and maintaining public safety, and insurance coverage, in buildings owned and operated by the city. Therefore, they should have the authority to make a decision about whether to allow weapons in such buildings." If they don't have metal detectors or other security checkpoints, they have effectively made their decision because a sign won't stop a bad guy with a gun.
Which brings us to Tennessee, where Republican Bill Haslam recently expressed "major concerns" about a bill that would preempt city ordinances regarding carrying firearms in public parks. In 2009, the legislature passed a law expanding protection for Second Amendment rights but gave cities and counties the option of banning firearms in public parks. Unfortunately, all four major cities in Tennessee and numerous smaller ones took advantage of the option and posted signs banning guns in parks. But if Haslam is inclined to veto he may have to wait for a bill. Though the state Senate approved it in February, the House Finance Subcommittee placed it "behind the budget," which means it won't be considered until after the state budget near the end of this year's term.
Finally, in Arizona, Republican Gov. Jan Brewer did veto a pro-gun bill. It would have amended current preemption law to impose penalties on city officials who prosecute gun owners for violating ordinances out of line with state law. She said citizens can already sue over laws they consider unjust. Small comfort.
Brewer also vetoed a bill similar to Georgia's that would allow licensed carry in government buildings that have no security measures. Or, put another way, the bill would have required that "gun free" government buildings actually take steps beyond hoping people obey a sign to ensure that no one is armed upon entering.
"I am a strong proponent of the Second Amendment, and I have signed into law numerous pieces of legislation to advance and protect gun rights," Brewer wrote. "However, I cannot support this measure in its proposed form." Her given reason is that it would cost cities money to actually secure their buildings. Evidently she'd rather live with the illusion that a sign is security enough.
Are there places where guns shouldn't be allowed? Sure, but, again, it takes more than a sign to disarm anyone -- unless the objective is to disarm only the people who obey laws. We're glad to see the Second Amendment thrive in Georgia, but we're troubled by the roadblocks that Republicans have set up in Tennessee and Arizona.
Comment | Share
The Consequences of Leading From Behind
|
Read the rest of the story here.
For more, visit Right Analysis.
|
|
|
TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS
- George Will: The Adolescent President
- Victor Davis Hanson: A McCarthy for Our Time
- Burt Prelutsky: America Is Barely Hanging On
- Ben Shapiro: Why Bundy Ranch Is Just the Beginning
- Thomas Sowell: The High Cost of Liberalism: Part III
OPINION IN BRIEF
François Duc de La Rochefoucauld (1613-1680): "Most of our faults are more pardonable than the means we use to conceal them."Columnist George Will: "[Barack Obama] talks like an arrested-development adolescent. Anyone who has tried to engage a member of that age cohort in an argument probably recognizes the four basic teenage tropes, which also are the only arrows in Obama's overrated rhetorical quiver. ... Celebrating the ACA's enrollment numbers, Obama, referring to Republicans, charged: 'They said nobody would sign up.' Of course, no one said this. Obama often is what political philosopher Kenneth Minogue said of an adversary -- 'a pyromaniac in a field of straw men.' Adolescents also try to truncate arguments by saying that nothing remains of any arguments against their arguments. Regarding the ACA, Obama said the debate is 'settled' and 'over.' ... A third rhetorical move by argumentative adolescents is to declare that there is nothing to argue about because everything is going along swimmingly. ... Finally, the real discussion-stopper for the righteous ... is an assertion that has always been an Obama specialty. It is that there cannot be honorable and intelligent disagreement with him."
Comment | Share
Economist Thomas Sowell: "Most of the households in the bottom 20 percent of income earners have nobody working. There are more heads of household working full-time and year-round in the top 5 percent than in the bottom 20 percent. What this means statistically is that liberals can throw around numbers on how many people are living in 'poverty' -- defined in terms of income received, not in terms of goods and services provided by the government. ... 'Poverty' is in the eye of the statisticians -- more specifically, the government statisticians who define what constitutes 'poverty,' and who are unlikely to define it in ways that might jeopardize the massive welfare state that they are part of."
Columnist Burt Prelutsky: "For reasons I've never figured out, Presidents are expected to make an appearance at the site of natural disasters, be they floods, earthquakes or giant mudslides, such as the one that recently buried Oso, Washington. In the case of Barack Obama, I gather the purpose of his showing up is to remind people that there are far worse disasters than the one they just survived."
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment