On September 3, 2015,
in Uncategorized,
by magoo1310
It’s Wednesday, September 2nd, 2015…and here’s The Gouge!
First up, courtesy of the WSJ, Lanhee Chen details what we believe should guide the decision of EVERY Conservative voter when casting their primary ballot for President: precisely how their candidate unambiguouslyguarantees to unconditionally and immediately effect…
“…On the next president’s first day in office, the president could simply issue an executive order revoking all of his predecessor’s executive actions, except those necessary for national security or the basic functioning of government. This includes Mr. Obama’s executive orders, but also a flood of presidential memorandums and directives, as well as informal guidance and orders from federal agencies, that he has used to reshape federal policy.
With a stroke of a pen, the next president could roll back efforts to expand the reach of labor unions, mandates requiring the expanded use of renewable energy by the federal government, and Mr. Obama’s foolhardy reconciliation with Iran and Cuba.
…Taken as a whole, Mr. Obama’s use of executive orders, presidential memorandums, agency directives and guidance to achieve his policy aims is without precedent in its disregard for the people’s elected representatives.
The president’s defenders note that he has issued an average of 33 executive orders a year, below the average 36 executive orders a year issued by President George W. Bush,and significantly below the average of 46 issued annually by President Bill Clinton. But a simply tally of the orders doesn’t reflect whether they were minor actions, as was often the case with presidents Clinton and Bush, or legislation-by-fiat during the Obama era.
Where Mr. Obama has exceeded all his predecessors, though, is in presidential memorandums.These directives have the same legal impact as executive orders and need not be published in the Federal Register…”
Which begs a brief bit of commentary. It recently occurred to us, like the Fonz…
…we might have been wrong in the way we’ve been viewing the 2016 GOP field.
Riddle us this, Bat-bloggers: his anti-American politics, consummate corruption and utter evil aside, who’s been the most effective (“effective” as regards enacting his agenda) President in our lifetime? You got it: the man who’s done…nothing; built…nothing; added value to…nada; contributed…zero; whose only achievement is…political office:
Barack Hussein O’Guevara himself. Sure, he couldn’t have done it without his skin color and a corrupt, sycophantic Fourth Estate; but, nonetheless, he’s done it. Not with any special talent or peculiar political skill; but with his pen…and the will to…
Which is more than we can say for these two…
…sorry, spineless excuses for leaders.
Which brings us back to a conversation we had with our Uncle Cliffy last week regarding Ben Carson. We responded to Cliffy’s positive impression of Ben by dismissing the good doctor for his lack of leadership/management experience.
That is, until it occurred to us during a subsequent discussion with G. Trevor, all that was necessary for The Obamao to ravage the Republic was a staff savvy enough to recognize the nature of the opposition, knowledgable enough to chart a course around the obstacles, and the guts to see the plan to fruition.
Here’s the juice: the Founding Fathers NEVER ENVISIONED even the faintest possibility America could ever foster fools such as these…
…let alone concurrently!
Consequently, forget political experience or managerial know-how; what America needs come November 2016 is a rock-solid Conservativewith the sense to recognize his/her weaknesses and/or areas of inexperience, the willingness to hire the best and the brightest to address same,and the balls to effectively utilize the power of the presidency to counteract the actions of our current Communist-in-Chief.
Turning from the hypothetical of the best and brightest to the reality of the dimmest and dullest, the Journal details the case of…
“Only weeks after a hack exposed the names and other confidential information about Ashley Madison’s mostly male clientele, it’s hard to see how the company can recover. By contrast, Hillary Clinton remains the Democratic Party’s likely 2016 nominee for president, even though we’ve known since at least March 2013 (thanks to a Romanian hacker named Guccifer) that she conducted State Department business over her private email, which has in turn helped her evade the normal oversight and accountability for White House appointees.
How can this be?
One big reason is that much of the back-and-forth about Mrs. Clinton’s emails has focused on secondary disputes: the latest batch of emails coughed up by State in response to a federal judge’s order, the classified information that may be on these emails, and whether what she did was akin to the mishandling of classified information that resulted in a deal for Gen. David Petraeus under which he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor.
These are all serious issues, and anyone who has worked in a White House and handled classified information (as this reporter has) understands how flimsy Mrs. Clinton’s excuses are.Not to mention how extraordinary her behavior was.
Even so, in a perverse way the public arguments over the classified content may be helping Mrs. Clinton in her continuing effort to confound and obscure. We now have two fresh examples. The first was a column last Thursday in the Washington Post in which the author concluded there was nothing criminal in how Mrs. Clinton handled classified info; the second was a Monday USA Today op-ed in which the former U.S. attorney who prosecuted Gen. Petraeus says there’s no comparison between the two cases.
Neither author addresses the smoking gun: Why Mrs. Clinton set up a private server for all her official email in the first place. Mrs. Clinton herself has avoided the server question, which is no surprise.Because there is no credible explanation that doesn’t implicate her in willful deceit.
It’s true that many officials have at one time sent emails over a personal instead of official account. But a personal email does not require a personal server. Nor does the Colin-Powell-Did-It defense apply here, because while Mr. Powell as secretary of state did send some work emails over his personal email, he never set up his own server.
Only one explanation makes any sense: Mrs. Clinton entered the Obama administration determined to put in place a system to help her avoid accountability…”
Actually, we still do use a dictionary. In fact, just today, we looked up “lying dickhead” in Webster’s online, and found this picture adjacent to the definition:
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.