THE PATRIOT POST 09/03/2015

Right Analysis | Right Hooks | Right Opinion Patriot Headlines | Grassroots Commentary Daily Digest September 3, 2015    THE FOUNDATION "There is not a more important and fundamental principle in legislation, than that the ways and means ought always to face the public engagements; that our appropriations should ever go hand in hand with our promises. To say that the United States should be answerable for twenty-five millions of dollars without knowing whether the ways and means can be provided, and without knowing whether those who are to succeed us will think with us on the subject, would be rash and unjustifiable." —James Madison, Speech in Congress, 1790 TOP RIGHT HOOKS Predetermined Outcome Now Inevitable on Iran Congress was never going to be stop Barack Obama's deal with Iran. Not when he deliberately negotiated a treaty and didn't call it a treaty specifically so as to avoid Congress. And certainly not when Sen. Bob Corker crafted a deal to guarantee congressional review but with a huge caveat — Obama didn't need a two-thirds majority to ratify a treaty, but rather only one-third to sustain a veto. A couple of Democrats — Chuck Schumer and Robert Menendez — made a show of bucking Obama, but in the end it was only a matter of Minority Leader Harry Reid granting a few no votes to Democrats whose electoral fortunes depended on it. The rest would fall into line with Obama. That wagon circle was completed Wednesday when Sen. Barbara Mikulski became the 34th senator to announce her support for the deal, virtually guaranteeing its passage. Now Obama just needs 41 Democrats to sustain a filibuster so he doesn't even have to bother vetoing. The predetermined outcome is why Obama felt so free to slander Republicans as making "common cause" with Iranian hardliners. Well, that and his narcissistic personality disorder. There are a couple of important points here. First, Obama's vote count charade has never been about national security or Iran; it has been about cutting back room deals for votes. His "defining legacy" was always secure. Second, and to that point, Democrats now own Iran. Rep. Patrick Murphy had the complete lack of historical awareness to unwittingly quote Neville Chamberlain in declaring the deal would bring "peace in our time." But when — not if — Iran obtains nuclear weapons, Democrats have now affixed their names to that Obama legacy. Obama admitted as much, saying "it's my name on this" for an Iranian bomb. Giving Iran $100 to $150 billion in sanctions relief with which the ayatollahs will continue funding terrorism is also Obama's legacy. And Congress won't do anything about it. Comment | Share 307,000 Veterans Died Waiting on the VA About three times as many veterans died while trying to enroll for care at the Department of Veterans Affairs than died while fighting World War I, a new report by the VA's inspector general shows. While 116,516 Americans lost their lives in The Great War, when the inspector general looked at the pending enrollment system records in September 2014, it discovered that 35% of the applications, or 307,000 veterans, belonged to people who died. Part of the problem, it seems, is how the VA manages its information. "[D]ue to data limitations, we could not determine specifically how many pending [enrollment system] records represent veterans who applied for health care benefits," the VA's Deputy IG, Linda Halliday, wrote. "These conditions occurred because the enrollment program did not effectively define, collect, and manage enrollment data." As program specialist at the VA Health Eligibility Center Scott Davis told CNN, the VA's inability to process applications cost more than one combat veteran from the War on Terror his ability to receive VA care because it took more than five years for the VA to get the soldier enrolled. If this is how the government treats those that risked life and limb for it, we can't wait for when ObamaCare reaches its zenith. Comment | Share Chick-fil-A Is Coming to Denver Airport After All Chick-fil-A, the fast-food chain that soars in customer satisfaction surveys, recently bid to open a restaurant in the Denver International Airport, but it was initially denied due to "concerns" that a local franchise could generate "corporate profits used to fund and fuel discrimination." The unforgivable sin, of course, was Chick-fil-A founder Dan Cathy's 2012 defense of biblical marriage. The Denver City Council's opposition was completely absurd, but, fortunately, sanity prevailed. Well, perhaps we should rephrase: Fear of losing a lawsuit prevailed. National Review's John Fund writes, "[C]ity-council members sat through a closed-door briefing from Denver's city attorneys, where they were warned that barring a business on the basis of political prejudice would be a one-way ticket to a successful First Amendment lawsuit. Minority groups spoke up against the council, noting that Chick-fil-A's local partner was a minority-owned business named Delarosa Restaurant Concepts." And eventually they caved, though none walked back their original reasons for opposing the lease. In other words, it's good news of a sort, but leftists will simply wait for a more opportune time to browbeat anyone who doesn't fall in line with "tolerance." Comment | Share Don't Miss Alexander's Column Read USAFA — A Final Visit, on how "So Help Me God" has now been rightfully restored to the USAFA oaths. If you'd like to receive Alexander's Column by email, update your subscription here. FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS Melting Glacier National Park? By Allyne Caan Obama's Alaskan adventure The power to tax may be the power to destroy, but the power to regulate is equally dangerous. This week, Barack Obama stood in front of a receding glacier in Alaska to once again raise the specter of catastrophic climate change. His real agenda, of course, is to push for more environmental regulations that are already killing jobs, crushing industry and hurting hardworking families. Speaking in Alaska to the Conference on Global Leadership in the Arctic, Obama warned, “If [current] trend lines continue the way they are, there’s not going to be a nation on this earth that’s not going to be impacted negatively. ... More drought, more floods, rising sea levels, greater migration, more refuges, more scarcity, more conflict.” This, of course, according to indisputably settled science. Or not. For example, The New York Times editorialized on Obama's trip to Alaska this week in a piece titled "Mr. Obama’s Urgent Arctic Message." It was accompanied by a photo of Margerie Glacier, ostensibly to demonstrate the magnitude of the state's receding ice. One small problem: That particular glacier isn't receding at all. Writing for the National Park Service, Dr. Daniel E. Lawson says Margerie Glacier "has been advancing about 30 feet per year for the past couple of decades." To be clear, other glaciers are melting. But for a newspaper that prides itself in supposed journalistic integrity, you'd think it would research basic information. But never mind all that. After renaming America's tallest mountain, Obama staged photo ops with glaciers to herald imminent global demise and sophomorically ridiculed those who disagree with him for being "on their own shrinking island." In truth, “very substantial disagreement about climate change” exists, according to Judith Curry, professor at Georgia Institute for Technology and a participant in the International Panel on Climate Change and National Academy of Sciences. In fact, data from both the UN and the U.S. fails to show higher frequency of extreme weather including floods, tornadoes and drought. People just think these things happen more because of the 24-hour news cycle. Nevertheless, Obama cries endangered wolf, and here comes his EPA, ready with a slew of new regulations to save the planet. Just what will his plans accomplish? Well, aside from regulating the coal industry towards extinction, upping the ranks of the unemployed, and reducing overall income levels, not much. In fact, according to EPA modeling, Obama’s Clean Power Plan would avert rising global temperatures by a minuscule 0.02 degrees Celsius. But we all know this was never about global warming; it’s always been about control. Obama doesn’t want to grow glaciers so much as he wants to put the federal government in every backyard in America. And he’s doing just that, the law be melted. This past weekend, the EPA implemented new regulations related to the Clean Water Act that pretty much give the federal government control over every pool of water in the country. Astoundingly (or not, given this administration), the EPA went ahead with these rules even though a federal judge had already suspended them in 13 states. But in Obama’s fundamentally transformed America, who cares what the law says? We’re already seeing what happens when the EPA is truly unleashed. One farmer in Wyoming is facing $16 million in federal fines for building a small dam across a tiny creek on his property — despite the fact that he obtained all necessary state permits. As Hot Air's Jazz Shaw so eloquently notes, “Because the creek feeds into the Green River the EPA seems to feel that they hold jurisdiction over it, though calling that stream ‘navigable waters’ would require expanding the definition of ‘boats’ to include ‘galoshes.’ Also, the ‘dam’ in question was composed of sand, gravel, clay and concrete blocks, which the agency decided met the criteria for ‘pollutants.’ (Aside from the cinder blocks, those materials are also locally known as ‘the ground.’)” None of this is surprising in the least. From day one, Obama has disregarded law, ignored facts and ridiculed the American people to push his agenda. And his overreach is making Americans crave a return to Rule of Law. Indeed, in an op-ed this week in National Review, Senator and Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio laid out where every presidential contender should stand on this and every issue: “The Constitution grants very specific powers to the federal government, and if something isn’t on that list, it falls under the purview of the states. So when I take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, I am going to take that oath very seriously — and that will include allowing the states to control their own energy futures.” Well said, but watch out, Senator. Pretty soon your speech will be dubbed carbon emissions — ripe for EPA regulation. Comment | Share Share MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS: What's a County Clerk to Do? Government Says Repealing Oil Export Ban May Be Beneficial Summer Brings Crime Spike Across U.S. Cities Meme: Logo Tweaks BEST OF RIGHT OPINION Victor Davis Hanson: The Exhausting Ms. Clinton Jonah Goldberg: Superheroes No More Todd Starnes: Church in Hot Water Over Football Field Baptism For more, visit Right Opinion. TOP HEADLINES Surprise! Former Clinton Aide Who Helped Set Up Server to Plead the Fifth Trump to Bush: 'Set the Example by Speaking English' Despite Scandal, Planned Parenthood Gets $1M in ObamaCare Grants OPINION IN BRIEF Victor Davis Hanson: "[Hillary Clinton's] imbroglios raise more issues. Was Sen. Barack Obama, largely a political unknown at the time, really all that unstoppable in 2008? Or did Hillary simply blow a 30-point lead in the polls because then as now she proved a lousy candidate? ... Hillary’s latest troubles reflect a quarter-century of Clinton habits that transcend time and space. Both Bill and Hillary seem to have always believed they should be exempt from the law. Both seem needlessly tawdry in their avarice. Their cover-ups often prove even more damaging than their indiscretions. Bill was always the far better speaker and political schmoozer than Hillary. And now Hillary is proving — again — that she prefers slandering accusers rather than refuting accusations. Are Hillary’s first four and a half months of campaigning a glimpse of the next 14? If so, the Democratic Party — and the country — are going to be utterly exhausted." Comment | Share SHORT CUTS Insight: "Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile." —Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King (1874-1950) Upright: "[V]iolence is a tool. It’s not a good tool — in the moral sense — nor is it a bad tool. Surgery to save a life is laudable. Surgery to inflict pain is torture. A hammer can smash in someone’s skull, or it can build a house. To say that all kinds of violence are equally bad isn’t high-minded morality; it is amoral nihilism wrapped in a kind of gauzy, brain dead sanctimony." —Jonah Goldberg Nothing more than a vast right-wing conspiracy. Move along: "I think that the Clintons basically are better people than their enemies. ... Trey Gowdy, who is a tool of the Koch Brothers, just feeds the New York Times stuff and they put it in the paper... You would think that at some point people who are supposed to know better would learn their lesson. But they never do, and so, therefore, I have to keep coming out of retirement to point this kind of stuff out." —Clintonista James Carville Birds of a feather?: "[Kanye West] has said very good things about me. Extremely positive things. ... He’s actually a different kind of a person than people think. He’s a nice guy. I hope to run against him someday." —Donald Trump Stumbling into the truth: "I don’t think that we should expect that anything that we’re going to enact in Washington is going to stop shootings." —Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) during a lengthy rant about — what else? — why we need more gun control Late-night humor: "NBC just announced that President Obama will appear on an episode of 'Running Wild With Bear Grylls' later this year. Yeah, I guess the episode features Obama roughing it on a golf course that hasn't been mowed for a couple of days." —Jimmy Fallon 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.