Monthly Archives: March 2013

The GOP’s Small Government Problem at CPAC and Beyond

Photo Illustration by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Chicago, March 14, 2013- Senator Paul’s speech before CPAC was a call to reason and conservatism to the Republican Party. The future of conservatism does not have to be aligned with the GOP and were it to ignore Senator Paul’s admonishments and listen to the other speakers who may like Senator Rubio, invite the Republican Party, which has lost four of the six last Presidential elections, to feel proud of itself, it stands to lose the next Presidential election as well. Repeating the same statements in an echo chamber is not a winning strategy-Senator Paul is right to call for a re-assessment. One place to start is the oft-repeated if mythical notion that the GOP wants or stands for smaller government.

GOP candidates talk about being distinguishable from the Democratic Party because they prefer small government. The facts do not bear this out to be true. Take for example, Paul Ryan’s budget. During the 2012 Presidential campaign, Paul Ryan and Governor Romney asked for an additional $2 trillion for defense spending, on top of the increases in defense spending that already existed, but refused to say where the $2 trillion extra would go. A lot of Ryan’s cuts were in toto relatively speaking – small, but they disproportionately benefited corporate interests and wealthier Americans. This presents an optics problem not necessarily erased by the mantra of the rich being job creators, others takers and lower tax rates for the wealthiest Americans leading to economic prosperity-the latter a subject onto itself and deservedly outside the scope of this post.

Rand Paul offers CPAC a vision for a gRand New Party


Senator Rand Paul delivered a speech today about the direction of the Republican party. He offered the message of Civil and Economic Liberty as key narratives. He argues serious points on the economy and the Bill of Rights. But overall the vision he presents is a hopeful, broader base of ideas for a more appealing GOP which welcomes people from the left, right and middle.

“This Government’s completely out of control, we desperately need a new course and new leadership. The path forward in the Republican Party is rooted in respect for the Constitution and respect for the individual.”…”We need to jealously guard all our liberties”

Then speaking directly to the young people-

The Facebook generation can detect falseness and hypocrisy a mile away…they are the core though of the Leave Me Alone coalition…they want leaders that won’t feed them a line of crap or sell them short. They aren’t afraid of individual Liberty…

…The Republican party has to change by going forward to the classical and timeless ideas enshrined in our Constitution, when we understand that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Then we’ll become the dominant national party again. It’s time for us to revive Reagan’s law for Liberty to expand Government must shrink…


Rand Paul Is “One of the Most Dangerous” Politicians of His Generation


I stumbled upon an article in The New York Post last week titled “Rand Paul’s Triumph”and was surprised to see something positive about the libertarian senator from Kentucky in a neo-conservative newspaper. The headline gave me hope that perhaps after the last election, the Republican establishment might give up on its egregious trade-your-rights-for-security “core principle.”

I should have known better than to hope when the name of the article’s author, John Podhoretz, rang a bell.

Neo-conservatism was the brainchild of Norman Podhoretz and his protégé Irving Kristol decades ago, and Irving Kristol’s son Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard continues his father’s tradition today. So I suspected that John Podhoretz might be Norman’s son, similarly carrying on his father’s tradition and indeed he is. As a matter of fact, I quickly discovered that Podhoretz is part of the neo-conservative inner sanctum and was actually a co-founder of The Weekly Standard.

Hope does spring eternal, however, so I read on. After gushing with praise over Senator Paul’s intelligence, courage and determination (I was really hooked by then!), Podhoretz delivers his punch:

The logic of Paul’s view is that the United States is the aggressor in the war on Islamist terror rather than a bystander unwillingly drawn into a battle that has not yet been won.

Rand Paul, who turned 50 this year, is one of the most talented politicians of his generation. And one of the most dangerous.

While in my mind nothing justifies a massive attack on civilians like 9/11, I must sadly differ with the view that the United States was targeted for no reason whatsoever.


Former Newark Airport TSA screener says the job does little to keep fliers safe


It is perhaps America’s most unsafe airport. Despite being the launching point for one of the planes hijacked on 9/11 — Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania — Newark Airport has had numerous security violations since. The latest: a fake bomb that made it past Transportation Security Administration officers. Here, a Newark TSA screener who recently left the agency tells how silly policies and lazy workers do little to stop real threats:

A LOT of what we do is make-believe.

I’ve had to screen small children and explain to their parents I had no choice but to “check” them. I would only place my hands on their arms and bottom half of their legs, and the entire “pat-down” lasted 10 seconds. This goes completely against TSA procedure.

Because the cameras are recording our every move, we have to do something. If someone isn’t checked or even screened properly, the entire terminal would shut down, as this constitutes a security breach.

But since most TSA supervisors are too daft to actually supervise, bending the rules is easy to do.

Did you know you don’t need a high-school diploma or GED to work as a security screener? These are the same screeners that TSA chief John Pistole and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refer to as a first-class first line of defense in the war on terror.

Read full article here

People in NYC celebrating that they can drink their Big Drinks

Mayor of NYC is sure that he can get the government to reverse the supreme court ruling that the Mayor cannot ban big sodas. An ABC reporter tells the story.

Judge Napolitano ‘First Patriot to shoot down one of those drones will be an American Hero’


Remember,  almost a year ago, when Judge Napolitano appeared on FOX News discussing the drone program in the United States? Recently, we’ve seen an outcry from Americans across the political spectrum supporting #standwithrand filibuster over the potential that the President would violate the US Constitution and due process by killing non combatant American citizens on US soil.

During the now infamous filibuster, Senator Paul argued that we still have the Fifth Amendment right to a trial and due process-that no one can appoint themselves judge jury and executioner. This in reaction to Eric Holder’s letter stating:

Yes, the president does have the authority to use military force against American citizens on US soil—but only in “an extraordinary circumstance,”

After the 13 hour Rand Paul filibuster Eric Holder answered the question:

“Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?” The answer to that question is no.

However, the government drone program domestically (and probably abroad) must be thoroughly examined, does it meet the Bill of Rights muster?

In the video below Judge Napolitano discusses if there’s legal authority by the government to use drones to spy on the American people. Can the government fly over your back yard and take pictures of you without a warrant? He points out the unwavering American standard of Constitutional search warrants, in other words, search warrants issued by a Judge. He argues that it’s unacceptable for the any government national or local to violate our Fourth Amendment rights.

The Judge also agrees with Charles Krauthammer that the First Patriot to shoot down one of those drones will be an American Hero.

Shooting down the idea of using drones to violate our Liberty is exactly what Senator Rand Paul and other Senators did on March 6th 2013.


Questions remain after Rand Paul’s filibuster

rand-paul-14TAMPA, March 10, 2013 – First, the good news. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul squared off in a 13-hour game of chicken with the White House on Wednesday. At stake was the bedrock American principle that no one will be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Early Thursday morning, the White House blinked.

“It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: “Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?” The answer to that question is no. Sincerely, Eric H. Holder, Jr.”

It took “a month and a half and a root canal” to get that carefully worded answer, according to Senator Paul, and even then some obvious questions remained.

Does the president have the authority to use manned aircraft to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? How about a rifle? A bow and arrow?

Perhaps due to the popular support for Paul’s filibuster, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney attempted to clean up Holder’s overqualified answer.

John McCain & Lindsey Graham Justifying The NDAA Bill Over the Constitution


Lindsey Graham and John McCain demonstrate their lack of constitutional expertise…

Air Force reportedly removes drone strike data from website

USDroneCensus_main_0709 (2)

Amid a growing debate over U.S. policies for using drones, the Air Force has reportedly reversed its policy of sharing the number of drone strikes in Afghanistan and erased previously published statistics from its website.

The Air Force Times reports that the Air Force began publishing monthly data on airstrikes launched from remotely piloted aircraft in Afghanistan in October and made the statistics available in November, December and January.

The statistics report for February contained an “empty space” where the data on drone strikes had previously been and reports from previous months had been scrubbed of drone strike data, according to the paper.

Pentagon spokesman Cmdr. Bill Speaks told the Air Force Times the Defense Department was not involved in the policy change. Air Forces Central Command did not respond to a request for comment.

Read more:

Gun Control: It’s Faith & It’s Fascism


The leaders of the collective are not calling for a gun ban because they have concluded it will reduce the number of killings in this country–they don’t start from scratch like that.  They are doing it because their religion is Faith in Government. They believe without question that government can cure all the ills in the world, including insanity, and that it will if it is controlled by the “right” people.  The logical implication of this belief is at odds with democracy, though, because true believers can’t risk letting the power fall into the wrong hands.  (This is not theoretical, either.  Remember during the Obamacare debate, Bill Maher, a high priest of the faith, implored Congress to forget the democratically established rules for a supermajority and just vote up or down; and Michael Moore, another high ranking church member, urged Obama to