In an op-ed for USA Today, Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, writes, “President Obama’s appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unacceptable because it violates both the letter and spirit of the Constitution. The framers saw the dangers of power grabs by any one branch of government. The president upended years of Senate practice and more than 90 years of Justice Department precedent by bypassing the Senate to appoint his nominee to direct the new bureau. Overturning this sort of precedent is a major shift in the constitutional separation of powers. If there’s a legal rationale, the White House needs to make it public.”
Unfortunately little legal explanation has come from the White House about this outrageous maneuver. As The Wall Street Journal editors wrote last week, “A President has the power to make a recess appointment . . . . The Constitutional catch is that Congress must be in recess. The last clause of Section 5 of Article 1 of the Constitution says that ‘Neither House’ of Congress can adjourn for more than three days ‘without the Consent of the other’ house. In this case, the House of Representatives had not formally consented to Senate adjournment. It’s true the House did this to block the President from making recess appointments, but it is following the Constitution in doing so. Let’s hear Mr. Obama’s legal justification.”
Apparently Claire’s moderate charade is not resonating back home. Time to go to the playbook and bring out the fear card:
The last two times U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill has come to the Hannibal area, the amount of personal protection offered to the Senator has been less than one would have expected, considering the fact that U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot during a meeting with constituents in Arizona less than one year ago. Could the same thing happen in rural Missouri that happened in Tucson?
While we shudder to think of that possibility, security is on our minds as the election season heats up. Shouldn’t a high-ranking U.S. Senator be afforded the same protection as the governor, who is accompanied by the Missouri State Highway Patrol when he visits the region? Read more…
Has there been any specific threats against Sen. McCaskill? Wasn’t the Arizona shooter well known to Rep. Gifford’s office?
Coonery:Antics and behavior displayed by certain underclass individuals in the Black culture, the end result being the embarrassment of the rest of the upstanding Black community.–Urban Dictionary
The words “coonery” and Jamilah Nasheed go together like peanut butter and jelly and ham and eggs. (sorry for the pork reference Lil Niecey) Now, before you take offense of our use of the word coonery, we’re just borrowing it from the son of Nasheed’s primary opponent in senate district five, Sen. Robin Wright Jones. Mr. Jones took offense at Nasheed announcing at a nightclub, in the middle of a jam probably, that she was running against his mother. We know that good Muslims don’t drink, so Lil’ Neicey can’t blame alcohol for her ghetto fabulous faux pas, so it looks like it was just good old fashioned coonery at work! Below are a few more past examples of Lil’ Neicey coonery.
“Speed is important….Debate starts at 10 in am. Votes late tomorrow aft or early eve. Holding flight home tomorrow night. Hope I make it.” – Sen. Claire McCaskill on Twitter during the ‘stimulus’ debate
In a complete act of random journalism we’re sure, St. Louis Post Dispatch reporter Bill Lambrecht actually pens an objective piece on Chameleon Claire’s many flip flops over the last six years:
McCaskill’s profile in the waning days of the 2011 Congress suggested a politician getting ready for a re-election campaign in 2012 — preparing for the riptide of attacks that already have begun and trying to better position an appeal to a Missouri electorate that has tilted right in recent years.
But in an interview, McCaskill argued that she’s the same centrist Democrat that she has been during the first five years of her Senate term, and her record of frequently breaking with her party largely bears that out.
She pointed to her vote in 2007 to derail immigration reform, her opposition as early as 2008 to climate change legislation, and her efforts to ban earmarks — pet spending projects inserted in legislation — that started soon after she arrived in Washington.
Still, her votes with most members of her party for health insurance reform and stimulus spending provide Republicans with plenty of ammunition. Read more….
Can’t be good for the moderate charade when you receive the coveted “Porker of the Month” award:
(Washington, D.C.) – Today, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) named Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) its September Porker of the Month for suggesting that the United States Postal Service (USPS) could solve its financial problems by embarking on a new ad campaign….“I really believe that if somebody would begin to market the value of sending a written letter to someone you love, you might be surprised [by] how you could stabilize first-class mail.” She admitted that her comments were “corny, naïve and pollyanish;” the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart agreed. Read more…
Or, when you put out REALLY BAD propaganda videos supporting Obamacare:
At Hot Air today, Ed Morrissey notes a story in Canada’s National Post newspaper about an interview where Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper discusses the still-languishing Keystone XL pipeline.
According to the National Post, “Canada could sell its oil to China and other overseas markets with or without approval of the Keystone XL oil pipeline in the United States, says Prime Minister Stephen Harper. In a year-end television interview, Harper indicated he had doubts the $7-billion pipeline would receive political approval from U.S. President Barack Obama, and that Canada should be looking outside the United States for markets. ‘I am very serious about selling our oil off this continent, selling our energy products off to Asia. I think we have to do that,’ Harper said in the Monday interview with CTV National News. Harper’s comments were released a day after the White House sent signals it might kill TransCanada’s oil sands pipeline if it is forced to make a decision on the project in 60 days, saying there wasn’t sufficient time to complete a new environmental review.”
In the Weekly Republican Address last week, Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) warned that Canada can’t keep waiting on President Obama for approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. “After repeatedly saying, ‘We Can’t Wait’ for American job creation, the President now wants Americans to wait on the jobs from the pipeline until after next year’s election. Canada has made it clear—if we don’t build this pipeline, the United States will lose these jobs and Canada will sell the oil to China. And we will be forced to get more of our energy from the Middle East,” Sen. Barrasso said.
Americans need jobs now, and everyone agrees that the United States should get more energy from our allies. Can we afford to wait any longer?
The Daily Beast’s Eli Lake reported on Saturday, “As it formally wrapped up war operations in Iraq, the Obama administration handed over terrorism suspect Ali Musa Daqduq to Baghdad’s government, dealing a blow to U.S. military and intelligence officials who wanted him tried by a U.S. tribunal on charges he plotted the killings of five American soldiers. The White House said Friday night it has tried to secure assurances from Iraq that Daqduq will be tried in that country for his role in the January 2007 killings, but U.S. intelligence fears he will eventually be released to Iran, where he has been linked to Hizbullah and the notorious Quds Force. . . . Daqduq was one of hundreds senior Shiite and al Qaeda suspects kept in detention centers on U.S. bases when Obama took office. But slowly, most of those prisoners were released. . . . One reason Daqduq could not be sent to the United States is that Obama had not allowed new detainees to be sent to the Guantánamo prison in Cuba. Intelligence officials are frustrated by the outcome. ‘This is one of many things we just dropped,’ one intelligence officer told The Daily Beast, predicting that some of those turned over by the U.S. in recent days will be released and ‘will go back to the Iranian terror machine.’”
Ranking Senate Armed Services Committee Republican Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Senate Homeland Security and Government Affair Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) in a statement blasting the Obama administration’s decision. “It is disgraceful that Ali Musa Daqduq, a Lebanese Hezbollah terrorist believed to be responsible for the deaths of at least five U.S. servicemen in Iraq, will be handed over to the Iraqi government, rather than transferred to the custody of the United States to stand trial for his crimes in a military tribunal under the laws of war. Coming on the heels of the Administration’s failure to maintain a small American military presence in Iraq to support the fragile peace there, this failure to keep a committed murderer of Americans in U.S. custody sends exactly the wrong message to our allies and enemies in the region. The real test regarding Daqduq was not whether the United States should violate our security agreement with Iraq in order to maintain custody of him outside of the country. The real test was whether the United States could exercise our influence effectively with the Iraqi government to ensure that a committed killer of Americans would be held accountable for his crimes in the U.S. system of justice. The Administration has clearly failed that test. As a result, we are deeply concerned that Daqduq will never have to answer for his involvement in killing U.S. citizens, that he could be released from Iraqi custody for political reasons, and that he would then return to the fight against the United States and our friends.”
In a must-read editorial from Saturday, The Wall Street Journal writes, “The Administration also thought of bringing Daqduq to the U.S. for trial in federal court or a military tribunal. Both ideas would have meant taking political heat, but at a minimum it showed that the status-of-forces deal was not an insuperable obstacle to keeping Daqduq in U.S. custody provided the Administration was determined to do so.
“Alas, it wasn’t. The one place Daqduq unquestionably belongs is in the prison at Guantanamo, which also happens to be the one place the Administration wouldn’t countenance having him. By now, even Mr. Obama understands that Gitmo serves a vital role in housing terrorists who either can’t be safely released or easily tried. Daqduq, the most senior Hezbollah figure in U.S. custody and a man who conspicuously disdained the laws of war, fits that bill.
“But even if Mr. Obama can’t close Gitmo as he promised, neither can he bring himself openly to acknowledge its benefits. Leftist furies are more than he’s willing to face. Instead, the Administration has made the calculation that one more terrorist kingpin on the loose with American blood on his hands is an acceptable price to pay for not establishing the precedent that new prisoners may again be brought to Guantanamo.”
Late Friday night, Democrats gave in to demands from Republicans that any payroll tax cut extension must include a provision expediting a decision from President Obama on the Keystone XL pipeline.
As Politico recounts, “[D]uring a marathon day of closed-door negotiations on Friday, Senate Republicans won a major concession: The compromise package includes a provision prodding Obama to make a decision on the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline, which has pitted two traditional Democratic backers – organized labor and environmental groups – against one another. Obama had tried to push a decision on the pipeline until after the 2012 elections, but Republicans, sensing an opening, demanded the president act sooner.”
Recall that at the beginning of the month, Senate Democrats were demanding tax increases on job creators accompanying a payroll tax cut and President Obama actually threatened to veto a bill including the Keystone XL language as recently as last week. Yet the bill the Senate passed this morning both includes the pipeline provision and contains not one dime in tax increases.
Writing at Townhall.com, Guy Benson calls the inclusion of the Keystone XL provisions “A TKO decision for Republicans.” From the Left, the liberal news site TPM acknowledges, “In a political hit for Democrats, Republicans insisted on and secured a provision that requires the Obama administration to either greenlight the Keystone XL oil pipeline or for President Obama to publicly nix it by declaring it not in the national interest.”
The Washington Post reported, “Senate Democrats emerging from a closed-door meeting Friday night were of two minds about the payroll tax cut plan negotiated by party leaders – at once acknowledging that the deal handed Republicans a victory on the Keystone XL oil sands pipeline but at the same time arguing that the short-term package would put Democrats on offense come the new year. Asked whether the deal amounted to a win for Republicans, Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) responded, ‘Oh, absolutely.’”
Hugh Hewitt wrote, “Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have succeeded in making the president’s job-killing environmental extremism the central issue at the close of 2011 and it will reappear early in 2012, not long after the GOP primaries begin and perhaps even identify the likely nominee to stand against Obama. The two-month deal struck by the Senate yesterday obliges the president to approve or kill the crucial Keystone XL pipeline, and to do so in early 2012 after another two months of having it play the role of stand-in for the president’s entire economic theory which is the crony capitalism of government-manipulated decision-making for preferred constituents.”
At Ace of Spades, Gabriel Malor points out, “Press Secretary Jay Carney was reluctant to repeat Obama’s veto threat over Keystone XL, so the President is in the hot seat now. Democrats and unions . . . were freaking out over being put in a position to oppose the thousands of jobs represented by Keystone XL.” He adds, “Can I get a big ‘good job’ for Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell? The Hill reported earlier today that McConnell was making a big push on this. It paid off.”
Hot Air’s Tina Korbe sees that the environmental groups who were pressuring Obama to kill the pipeline are not happy. She links a Politico story reporting, “Senate Democrats accepted a provision Friday forcing a decision in two months on the Keystone XL oil pipeline as part of the must-pass payroll tax cut package, leaving the White House on the brink of a meltdown with environmental groups. ‘It’s bulls—-,’ said Sierra Club President Michael Brune. ‘This is no way to run a government. We’ve got Republicans in Congress who are willing to hold the entire government hostage simply to give a Christmas present to industry.’ . . . For greens, the fact that the Keystone pipeline was back on the table five weeks after Obama had seemingly punted it until 2013 is causing considerable heartburn with an administration that hasn’t been as green as they once wished.”
Every year in the United States (U.S.), people are forced into homelessness because of their inability to pay real estate tax. Every year hundreds of parcels of land are auctioned off for back taxes at the St. Louis County courthouse. Age is no barrier to this onslaught; even the elderly are susceptible to this victimization. As if sheep led to slaughter, people pay real estate taxes without question. What options are available to those who cannot afford to pay the tax? Is it constitutionally legal? Who does not have to pay? Is it the land owners’ responsibility to educate the public through real estate taxes? How is it legal then, for the government to extort ransom from its citizens by holding their homes as ransom to pay real estate taxes? What does the land of the free mean? What happens to those whose homes are confiscated by the government, and sold for unpaid real estate taxes?
The United States Constitution states that its citizens have the right to be secure in their homes (Amendment IV). Yet the threat of having their homes taken constantly looms over their heads as a hostage to pay a real estate tax. Webster’s College Dictionary 10th Edition states that ‘hostage’ is “a person taken by force to secure the taker’s commands.” In this situation, the home is hostage for the real estate tax. The real estate tax became law through legislation in the State of Missouri for the assessment tax on real estate in 1820. A phone interview with Richard Robison of the St. Louis County assessor’s office revealed that six hundred forty parcels of land were auctioned off for back taxes in 2007. This sale takes place on the fourth Monday of August every year. According to www.stlouisco.com in 2011, approximately eight hundred thirty parcels were auctioned off for back taxes. The properties that do not sell are held over until the next August, and if not sold then, they are held until the next August sale. If after three times the property fails to sell, the property is turned over to a trustee who tries to sell them privately. During all this time, the taxes still accumulate year after year along with penalties and interest. Article V of the U.S. Constitution states that if a person’s property is seized, the person from whom it is taken is to be justly compensated for the value of said property, according to due process. The people who lose their homes for back taxes receive absolutely nothing at all. For example, if a person has $70,000 invested in their home when it is seized and sold, they get no compensation even though Article XIV of the U.S. Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Article V guarantees the right to be justly compensated. When asked what happens to those who lose their homes Robison said, “I don’t know, there is no record kept of what happens to the occupants once the property is sold.” Thus another issue occurs: there is no record kept of what happens to these people and their possessions once ejected from their homes. The U.S. Constitution protects its citizens from cruel and unusual punishment (VIII Amendment). What could be crueler than a family being forced out of their home by a government that guarantees the right to be secure in their home? As a matter of record, not all of the properties seized are occupied; a small percent have been abandoned or foreclosed on.
The argument is that the money goes to public education and for public services, i.e. police and fire protection, sewer lines, zoo, libraries and parks. However, the biggest portion of the real estate tax goes to support public schools. It is a beautiful blessing to be educated and advantageous to society as a whole, is the argument raised to justify the portion of real estate tax which supports the public schools. How can it be legal for a person to pay child support for children they did not sire or adopt? In essence, this is what the school tax imposes on innocent citizens. Read more…
Claire McCaskill’s support for a $1.9 million earmark for a Pleasure Beach Water Taxi Service in the abandoned and empty Pleasure Beach, Connecticut was exposed today in a new web video by the John Brunner for U.S. Senate campaign.
The Pleasure Beach Water Taxi earmark was originally included in the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill. But when senators offered an amendment to specifically eliminate the Pleasure Beach Water Taxi earmark, McCaskill specifically voted to keep it. (Senate Amendment 610, 03/04/09) Pleasure Beach, located in Connecticut, has been abandoned for more than a decade.
Message posted today on the MOPNS Facebook page
