Ambassador Alan Keyes, Move-On-Up.org co-founder Christopher Arps, Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri House Shane Schoeller at a St. Louis fundraiser for Schoeller’s secretary of state bid.

Comments

comments

“Whenever rules are not enforced, you create the opportunity for somebody to believe they have been singled out,” Cleaver said. “You see during late night votes, people stand in the back with jeans and no jackets and no ties.”

Really Congressman? You don’t see a difference between members (off camera and in the back of the gallery) not having jackets and ties on to a member purposely breaking the rules while making a political statement on camera?

Comments

comments

The Washington Post reports today, “The national average [gasoline price] is $3.91 [per gallon], compared with about $3.70 last month and just below $3.59 this time last year. Across the country, the price of gas has risen for 20 consecutive days, with only three days of decline in three months.” Yet Senate Democrats and President Obama are pushing a bill that will do nothing to lower the price of gas and will instead raise taxes on American energy producers.

Speaking on the floor before the Democrats’ bill fell far short of the needed 60 votes, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell wondered, “Is this the best we have to offer folks who are staring at $4 a gallon gasoline?  A bill that even Democrats admit won’t do anything to lower the price of gas? And a process that blocks any other idea from even coming to the floor for a vote? Does anybody think the Senate’s really done its job on this issue?”

Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) blasted the exercise earlier this week, telling reporters, “We should have a real energy debate, not this show and tell for campaigning purposes.” He explained, “[W]e will have wasted 2½ days doing nothing on real energy policy in this country, and people are still going to be paying higher gasoline prices.”

A recent Gallup poll shows 65% of Americans say they personally worry “a great deal” about gas prices and 67% say they’ve cause financial hardship in their household. Eighty-five percent would like to see “immediate” action by the president and Congress on gas prices.

But all Senate Democrats have shown Americans is a retread of a bill they’ve introduced before: a tax increase on American energy companies. No one can explain how raising taxes is supposed to lower gas prices. Democrats never even tried, admitting, “This was never intended to talk about lowering prices,” as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told CNN. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) said, “You know, this is not going to change the price at the gasoline pump. That’s not the issue.  I don’t see that as an issue at all.” Disgusted, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) took to the Senate floor the last time her fellow Democrats were pushing this plan to declare, “It will not reduce gasoline prices by one penny.”

Rasmussen Reports:

63% Say Shale Oil Development Possible Without Hurting the Environment

48% Say Feds Should Drop Gas Tax Until Prices Come Down

57% Favor Use of ‘Fracking’ To Find More U.S. Oil and Gas

62% Think Offshore Drilling Likely To Lower Gas Prices

Comments

comments

First we learned that Missourians are throwing Claire under the bus by not supporting her campaign financially. And now we see more evidence that her support for Obama policies are figuratively “killing” her chances for reelection.

Human Events:

“Outside the beltway, polling indicates a massacre of Senate Democrats is in the offing in the 2012 elections. Currently, Rasmussen’s polls have Republicans leading Democrats for eight Senate seats now held by Democrats. Bill Nelson is six behind Connie Mack in Florida; Claire McCaskill is 10 behind Sarah Steelman in Missouri; John Tester is three behind Denny Rehberg in Montana; Sherrod Brown is four behind Josh Mandel in Ohio.” Read more…

Comments

comments

Hat tip: SusanMontee

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/OLKc0eMtHEg" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Really? “Margarita” Montee wants another chance at responsibility in State government when she can’t even control her bad ass kids?

Related:

The Pitch: Susan Montee’s children arrested after altercation outside bar

Dem Susan Montee’s Son Facing Drug Charges (2008)

More Excuses From Montee After Filing Amended Campaign Finance Report

Comments

comments

Missouri Record:

“So far this year in Kansas City, 25 people have been murdered—none of the previous four years had a higher murder rate at this point. There is no word yet on when any of these victims, most of whom were black men under the age of 34, will have vigils held in their honor.” Read more…

Major mistake by the GOP brewing here.  They’re heading straight for another Sandra Fluke moment :

“Young said black caucus members have been asking all Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee — “white and black” — to participate. Black caucus chairman Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) plans to testify. It appears no Republicans are attending. Jackson Lee spokesman Michael McQuerry said committee Republicans “have been made aware” of the briefing. Kim Smith, a spokeswoman for Judiciary Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), said she thought the event was a “press availability” and wasn’t sure GOP members would attend.” Read more….

What a great opportunity they’re missing to turn it back on the Dems and talk about ALL the black on black crime in their districts that they’re ignoring. Astounding!

Related:

The Washington Free Beacon: Registered Dem Killed Trayvon

Yahoo.com: Trayvon Martin shooting: New details emerge from Twitter account, witness testimony

Comments

comments

This morning, oral arguments at the Supreme Court resumed in the landmark case where multiple states and the National Federation of Independent Business are challenging President Obama’s massive health care law. The focus of today’s hearing is on the constitutionality of the controversial, unpopular mandate that every American must purchase health insurance. The states and the NFIB are challenging this power-grab from the then Democrat-run Congress.

Senate Republicans, led by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that the Court should rule the mandate unconstitutional. In their brief, they write, “Put simply, Congress acted without constitutional authority in enacting the Individual Mandate of the [Democrats’ health care law] … Because the Individual Mandate regulates a simple decision or choice not to purchase a particular product, it exceeds the proper scope of the Commerce Clause.” They add, “The step from regulating market participation to mandating participation in a market is novel and unprecedented. … The fact that Congress in 200 years has not attempted to regulate inactivity to force market participation also strongly suggests it never has had such authority.” Further, Senate Republicans argue, “If Congress may punish a decision to refrain from engaging in a private activity (namely, the purchase of health insurance) because the consequences of not engaging in it, in the aggregate, could substantially affect interstate commerce, then the Congress can require the purchase of virtually anything.”

Discussing Commerce Clause precedents, the Senate GOP brief points out, “none even suggests that, under the Commerce Clause, Congress has the power to affirmatively obligate otherwise passive individuals to engage in a particular economic activity – to purchase a particular good or service – and to punish them if they choose not to do so. What the [Obama administration] urge[s], therefore, is frankly an unprecedented interpretation of the Commerce Clause – an interpretation that, if adopted, would result in a dramatic expansion of Congressional power without any realistic limitation on its reach. Because the Individual Mandate regulates a simple decision or choice not to purchase a particular product, it exceeds the proper scope of the Commerce Clause.”

Several lower courts have agreed with this argument. The 11^th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded, “Economic mandates such as the one contained in the Act are so unprecedented, however, that the government has been unable, either in its briefs or at oral argument, to point this Court to Supreme Court precedent that addresses their constitutionality. Nor does our independent review reveal such a precedent.” The D.C. Circuit Court noted, “The Government concedes the novelty of the mandate and the lack of any doctrinal limiting principles; indeed, at oral argument, the Government could not identify any mandate to purchase a product or service in interstate commerce that would be unconstitutional, at least under the Commerce Clause.” According to the 6^th Circuit Court, “The mandate is a novel exercise of Commerce Clause power. No prior exercise of that power has required individuals to purchase a good or service.” Further, the court said that “Congress crossed a constitutional line in imposing this unprecedented requirement.”

Even independent offices in Congress have recognized the unprecedented nature of the powers Democrats claimed for Congress in passing this bill. The Congressional Research Service wrote, “This is a novel issue: whether Congress can use its Commerce Clause authority to require a person to buy a good or a service and whether this type of required participation can be considered economic activity.” And back in 1994, the Congressional Budget Office noted, “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

Seventy-two percent of Americans think the individual mandate imposed by President Obama’s health care law is unconstitutional. And even a New York Times poll finds, “Two-thirds of Americans want the Supreme Court to overturn some or all of the health care law . . . . At the heart of the opposition is the individual mandate requiring Americans to obtain health insurance, the least popular part of the bill and a crucial piece at the center of the court arguments, which began Monday and will turn to the mandate on Tuesday.”

Leader McConnell said yesterday, “[A]s one of the many public officials who filed a brief before the court opposing this law, I believe strongly that the law is unconstitutional, and I hope the court agrees. But even if the court ends up disagreeing with me, the case for repeal has become increasingly difficult to refute. . . . [T]he bill [President Obama] gave us and that Democrats forced through Congress on a party-line vote just isn’t working. Instead of lowering costs, it’s increasing them. Instead of strengthening Medicare, it raided it. Instead of helping states, it’s created financial burdens they can’t even bear. Instead of lowering insurance premiums, it’s caused them to go up. When it comes to jobs, some have called the law the single biggest detriment to job creation in America right now. And most Americans believe it’s unconstitutional. This law is a mess, and regardless of what the court decides, it needs to be repealed and replaced with common sense reforms that actually lower costs and that Americans really want.”

Rasmussen Reports: 62% Think Health Law Will Cause Companies To Drop Employee Health Insurance

Comments

comments

Hat tip: AmericanFamilyAssoc1

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/KmxFSTci35o" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Comments

comments

The Wall Street Journal writes today, “Supreme Court justices on Monday weighed whether the challenge to President Barack Obama’s health-care law is ripe for a decision, opening three days of argument on the law with a string of skeptical questions for a lawyer who said the high court should wait. . . . The health-care law requires most Americans to carry health insurance or pay a penalty, starting in 2014. . . . News media packed the court Monday morning for the case, its most closely watched in years, and dozens of people lined up for as long as 2½ days to get seats in the courtroom. Hundreds of activists gathered outside the court. . . . The most closely watched issue in the case is whether Congress exceeded its constitutional powers by passing a mandate requiring most Americans to carry health insurance or pay a penalty. . . . The Supreme Court has scheduled six hours of oral arguments on the health-care law. The main attraction comes Tuesday, when the court considers the constitutionality of the insurance mandate. On Wednesday, the court will consider whether the rest of the health-care overhaul can remain intact if the insurance mandate is ruled invalid.”

Since Democrats jammed this law through Congress, Senate Republicans have argued that it is unconstitutional and should be struck down by the Supreme Court. GOP senators, led by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, filed amicus briefs with the Court earlier this year on behalf of the multi-state challenge to the law, after having twice submitted briefs to lower courts supporting challenges to the law. One Senate Republican brief argues, “Put simply, Congress acted without constitutional authority in enacting the Individual Mandate of the [health care law]. In so doing, it has damaged Congress’ institutional legitimacy and has triggered severe conflicts between state and federal governments that the Constitution was carefully designed to avert.” The other brief argues that if the Court finds the mandate unconstitutional, as Senate Republicans argue it should, then the Court should overturn the whole law, not just the mandate. Americans agree that the mandate is unconstitutional. A recent Gallup poll found that “Americans overwhelmingly believe the ‘individual mandate,’ as it is often called, is unconstitutional, by a margin of 72% to 20%.” And even a majority of Democrats in the poll agrees with this position.

Related:

Rasmussen Reports: 62% Think Health Law Will Cause Companies To Drop Employee Health Insurance

Comments

comments

Is Matt Hawkins part of the vast right wing conspiracy to disenfranchise Black voters by requiring identification to vote? Al Sharpton and his ilk’s rhetoric loses a bit of the heat when it’s another black person pointing out obvious voter irregularities due to no ID’s being shown at the polls:

“It’s amazing how many Missourians come to Illinois on election day,” Matt Hawkins, an East St. Louis election activist, told the Senate Executive Subcommittee on Election Law. He claimed that East St. Louis fills up with Missouri license plates during elections, and pointed to other indications of voter fraud in the city’s election system. He said that system “guarantees a certain vote output.”

Hawkins, president of the East St. Louis Alliance for Change, was a proponent of Tuesday’s failed referendum to dismantle the Election Board of East St. Louis. He testified tonight for a bill by state Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Highland, that would require voters statewide to show an official photo i.d. before being allowed to vote.

The move echoes legislation passed in more than two-dozen states recently, generally supported by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. Republicans say they are trying to weed out voter fraud. Democrats say they’re really trying to weed out voters who are most likely to vote Democratic, including the poor and minorities, who are statistically less likely to have photo identification. Read more…

Comments

comments