The Dirty Dozen Democrats Who Could Have Prevented the Downgrade
William E. Been, FloydReports.com
While watching the debt ceiling increase by $2.4 trillion just to cover spending until the next presidential election, the scam perpetrated on the American people could not have been any more obvious. While the Republican-controlled House of Representatives negotiated with itself for weeks in an attempt to propose something that might save our great nation from financial disaster, neither the U.S. Senate nor the White House proposed any plan at all. Even worse, while listening to Barack Obama’s rhetoric about the need for a bipartisan solution, the Majority Leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate announced that bills coming from the House were “dead on arrival.” In fact, nothing coming from the House was even allowed to be debated by the overly partisan Senate leadership. This resulted in another crisis-not-to-be-wasted. As the administration-imposed deadline of August 2 approached, the Democrats’ rhetoric followed a familiar pattern as they attempted to frighten the American public with false accusations that grandma won’t get her medical care, seniors will lose their Social Security, sick children will be turned away, and that a major calamity will occur if no increase in the debt ceiling is approved by August 2.
In attempting to understand how and why our government has become so blatantly irresponsible, I heard an interview with Orrin Hatch on FOX News. Senator Hatch spoke of his past attempts to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment, specifically one in 1997 that failed to pass by a single vote. I could not help but wonder what that one vote would have meant to the current situation. With the debt being $5.4 trillion in 1997 and heading for $15 trillion in 2011, it is clear that holding at the 1997 levels would have assured that no crisis would have occurred and that the spending being generated by the Obama administration would have been dramatically reduced. As a result, it is important to understand who those senators were who accounted for the missing vote that would have facilitated financial soundness.
A familiar pattern was again evident. The vote was 66-34, with a super majority of 67 votes required to pass the Amendment. Upon review of the senators’ vote, it was once more aggravating to see the partisan politics that has ruled this country since the early 1990s. The “one vote” that killed the bill was cast by 34 Democrats as a block. They collectively killed the chance for financial sanity. Even more remarkable, every GOP senator voted for the bill, joined by 11 Democrats. Yet, the 34 Democrats blocked a bill that could have prevented the debt ceiling crisis of 2011.
Sadly, 18 of these 34 senators are still in the Senate, and still blocking all attempts to reduce spending and debt. This Group of 18 has destroyed the financial stability and strength of the greatest nation in history. Every American needs to know these senators, who will be listed as the “Dirty Dozen plus 6” at the end of this document.
Having documented the Democrats’ destruction of mortgage lending standards during the 1990s, this irresponsible destruction of a bipartisan Balanced Budget bill in 1997 coupled with the mortgage lending debacle should be an indictment of the entire Democratic Party. No theft of wealth at any level can even begin to approach what the Democrats and their allies in the Progressive movement have committed against our country. The Democrats have destroyed our financial reputation, the reserve status of our dollar, and are continuing reckless spending at the….
The Budget Control Act Of 2011 Violates Constitutional Order
Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson, FloydReports.com
In a Constitutional Republic of the sort that we thought we had, the process by which laws are made is at least as important as the laws that are enacted. Our Constitution prescribes that law-making process in some detail, but those who voted for the “Budget Control Act of 2011″ (“BCA 2011″) were wholly unconcerned about trampling upon required constitutional processes on the way to the nirvana of “bi-partisan consensus “to avert a supposed crisis. At least two titles of the bill now being rushed through Congress are unconstitutional.
First, the “Debt Ceiling Disapproval Process” in BCA 2011 Title III unconstitutionally upends the legislative process.
The Constitution’s Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 vests in Congress the power “to borrow Money on the credit of the United States.” As two of America’s leading constitutionalists, St. George Tucker and Joseph Story, observed, the power to borrow money is “inseparably connected” with that of “raising a revenue.” Thus, from the founding of the American republic through 1917, Congress — vested with the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties and imposts,” — kept a tight rein on borrowing, and authorized each individual debt issuance separately.
To provide more flexibility to finance the United States involvement in World War I, Congress established an aggregate limit, or ceiling, on the total amount of bonds that could be issued. This gave birth to the congressional practice of setting a limit on all federal debt. While Congress no longer approved each individual debt issuance, it determined the upper limit above which borrowing was not permitted. Thus, on February 12, 2010, Congress set a debt ceiling of $14.294 trillion, which President Obama signed into law.
However, a different approach was used when BCA 2011 was signed into law on August 2, 2011. Title III of the Act reads the “Debt Ceiling Disapproval Process.” Under this title Congress has transferred to the President the power to “determine” that the debt ceiling is too low, and that further borrowing is required to meet existing commitments,” subject only to congressional “disapproval.” For the first time in American history the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States has been disconnected from the power to raise revenue. What St. George Tucker and Joseph Story stated were inseparable powers have now by statute been separated.
Under the new process established by this bill, if the President determines, no later than December 31, 2011, that the nation’s debt is within $100 billion of the existing debt limit and that further borrowing is required to meet existing commitments, the debt limit automatically increases. The President need only to certify to Congress that he has made the required determination. Once the President acts, the Secretary of the Treasury may borrow $900 billion “subject to the enactment of a joint resolution of disapproval enacted” by Congress.
But this is not all. Title III also provides that if Congress fails to disapprove the debt ceiling increase in the amount of $900 billion, the President may again certify to Congress that he has determined that the debt subject to the new ceiling is within $100 billion and that further borrowing is required to meet existing commitments. So the Secretary of Treasury is authorized to borrow another $1.2 trillion. Indeed, the Secretary may borrow even more — up to $1.5 trillion if a proposed balanced budget amendment has been submitted to the states for ratification. As was true of the first round of ceiling raising and borrowing, the President and Secretary of the Treasury are constrained only by the possibility of a congressional resolution of disapproval which, itself, is subject to veto by the President.
By giving the President the authority to increase the debt ceiling and to determine that borrowing is necessary to meet the nation’s commitments, this bill….
Jon Huntsman Refuses to Rule Out Impeachment Over Libya
Ben Johnson, The White House Watch
Here is a measure of both this movement’s effectiveness and Barack Obama’s stark, brazen criminality: Even the RINOs are talking impeachment.
In Rochester, New Hampshire, on Monday morning, former Utah governor and Obama’s one-time ambassador to China Jon Huntsman told a citizen that Obama’s war in Libya may be an impeachable offense. ABC News posted the following transcript of the exchange between Huntsman and the “voter”:
Voter: You mentioned Libya, and you mentioned the Constitution a couple of times. The president has decided to make Congress irrelevant, go around Congress, not — not go to Congress and ask for whether permission to go to war for — with, with Libya. He takes, what he thought, a UN resolution as his mandate to be able to go to war in Libya, do you think that’s unconstitutional in what he’s doing in Libya right now?
Huntsman: Well, last I looked the UN was not our Constitution. We ought to recognize who’s responsible for declaring war and giving the approval for these kinds of things, and get back to the basics of who should be driving these decisions.
Voter: What should Congress be doing in the fact that he went around Congress and he’s, he’s not abiding to the War Powers Act?
Huntsman: I think, I think Congress is, is in a mild uproar about it.
Voter: It’s very mild.
Huntsman: I have a fundamental problem, generally, I mean beyond this decision, just with the decision that has been made to get involved, in Libya, in a tribal country, when we have no definable interest at stake, we have no exit strategy. Look in Afghanistan, you want to get involved in tribal government? How hard it is to extricate yourself once you’ve gotten involved? Let history be your guide. Thank you.
Voter: Do you think it’s impeachable?
Huntsman: I’ll let Congress make that decision.
The mainstream media, flexing its sagging muscles, tried to turn Huntsman’s words into a bigger scandal than the president’s unconstitutional war itself. To his credit, when pushed for a clarification, Huntsman replied, “Congress should do whatever Congress chooses to do.”
As proof of Republican “extremism,” that is pretty weak stuff. Uber-Democrat Jerrold Nadler has compared Obama to a king, a dictator, and “an absolute monarch” precisely over launching an unauthorized war — not in a barbecue pit in someone’s backyard but from the floor of the House. But the media have a love affair with Huntsman, the liberal Republican who supports homosexual civil unions and the debt deal. In their skewed world, Huntsman is John McCain-lite, the “straight-talking” candidate who tells the GOP base what it does not want to hear. To media talking heads, this is a dog whistle that, if “even” Huntsman refuses to “rule out” impeachment, then far-Right Tea Party “insanity” must have infected the entire party.
Thus, the media quoted Democratic operative Ty Matsdorf, who fumed “it’s sad to see Jon Huntsman abandon his convictions for a chance to appease the rabid right-wing base by refusing to rule out impeachment.”
Of course, as a private citizen, Huntsman is not in any position to “rule out” anything. As he properly noted, that is Congress’ job. Yet this tempest-in-a-teapot is a triumph for Matsdorf’s employer, American Bridge 21st Century, which ABC News describes as a “Super PAC,” and which captured the “damning” video. This anonymously funded 501(c)(4) opposition group was founded by Media Matters head David Brock, a major recipient of George Soros’ money. The secretive group has….
What’s Really “Unprecedented” in Obama-Soetoro’s America
Michael Oberndorf, FloydReports.com
For two-and-a-half years, the neo-fascist Democrats, led by Harry Reid, D-NV, and Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, willfully refused to submit a budget, despite controlling a large majority in both houses of Congress and the presidency. The government has thus been forced to operate on continuing resolutions, allowing them to play brinksmanship games over and over. And each time, they and their Ministry of Propaganda (the “mainstream” media) pour out a torrent of hysterical lies about how the Republicans are out to brutally kill old people, torture autistic children, starve the working poor, cut off medical care for the seriously ill, and any other far-fetched, hateful, rabble-rousing charge they can dream up.
In the meantime, they used their majority to increase the deficit to 400 percent what it was in the last year of the Bush presidency. Although they and the Propaganda Ministry demand that this insane spending be done without debate, without amendment, and without even reading the blatantly unconstitutional spending bills, they are still trying to blame it all on Republicans.
The Ministry of Propaganda is particularly fond of applying the term “unprecedented” to the usurper who currently is squatting in the White House. And I agree. Many things about his actions and those of his unindicted co-conspirators are unprecedented….
McConnell Prepares to Betray Tea Party, Aid Obama’s Debt Ceiling Power Grab
Ben Johnson, The White House Watch
(Presidential historian Doug Wead says, if Obama raises the debt limit on his own, he is “absolutely” impeachable.)
Even as freshman Congressmen passed the Cut, Cap, and Balance proposal last night, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell quietly planned to sell them out. Insiders report McConnell is going through the motions of voting on the House measure but has invested his energy in cutting a deal with Democrats and give Barack Obama unconstitutional and near-dictatorial powers to raise the debt ceiling.
The Hill newspaper exposed the betrayal:
Publicly, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) have made votes on the Cut, Cap and Balance Act and a balanced-budget amendment their priority this week.
But GOP aides say the leaders are already looking past those votes to a potential deal with Democrats to raise the debt limit before an Aug. 2 deadline and spare Republican lawmakers from a political backlash.
“McConnell is going to let cut, cap and balance have its vote and then immediately move to plan B,” said a GOP aide in reference to the fallback debt plan McConnell is negotiating with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
McConnell’s “Plan B” would allow Barack Obama to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling in three portions over the next year. Only a supermajority of more than two-thirds of Congressmen could override him.
The plan is the apparent preference of the inside-the-Beltway crowd, as they have already launched one of their typical campaigns to make it appear “centrist.” On Monday….
Message to Obama: Stop DREAM-ing and Seal the Border!
Joe Guzzardi, FloydReports.com
During a decade of trying to pass the DREAM Act, its supporters have continuously hit a brick wall. Since 2001, the DREAM Act has been shot down 13 times.
Advocates have tried every trick in the book. With the hope of slipping it past unsuspecting critics, the DREAM Act has occasionally been buried in part of broader legislation but without success. Even when the DREAM Act deck was heavily stacked in its favor as it was during last year’s lame duck session, the result was the same—no sale.
And yet…although Capitol Hill experts from both sides of the political aisle agree that the legislation has no chance of passing during the current immigration enforcement-minded Congress, the DREAM Act was re-introduced last month by its most tenacious Democratic Senate allies: Richard Durbin, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer.
The DREAM Act playbook is unchanged. Recent high school or university graduates with impeccable academic and personal resumes are paraded in front of Congress with the inference that all illegal alien students excel and accordingly deserve deep tuition discounts. Religious groups and ethnic identity lobbyists suggest that defeating the DREAM Act, and thus potentially denying the United States’ fastest growing minority an advanced education, would doom America to an uncertain future.
Throughout the ten-year battle against the DREAM Act, Americans have remained firm in their resolve against it. The DREAM Act is an amnesty, rewards illegal behavior and encourages more immigration. Taxpayers continue to be angry that, despite the multiple messages sent to Congress that have blocked the DREAM Act, the fight is on again.
Consider Maryland’s case. In April, the state legislature narrowly passed its own version of the DREAM Act. Scheduled to take effect on July 1, Maryland’s law allows illegal aliens who could prove they attended a state high school for three years and whose parents have paid taxes would qualify for in-state tuition rates at universities, colleges and community colleges.According to Maryland’s Department of Legislative Services, by 2016 the state would have to fund an additional $3.5 million annually to provide aliens….
George Soros’ Money Could Tip Elections in All 50 States
Michael Oberndorf, FloydReports.com
A little-noticed story in The Washington Times last week should scare the heck out of real Americans. George Soros, whose name should now be pretty familiar to most conservatives, is involved in a far-Left scheme to elect Secretaries of State, gaining control of each state’s election machinery and thus, be in a position to influence the outcome of local, state, and national elections.
As many have learned, Soros is an unrepentant, apparently sociopathic fascist, who got his training from the Nazis during WWII, confiscating the property of fellow Jews who had been shipped off to the death camps. He is the man who made billions manipulating currencies and wrecking the Malaysian and British economies. Soros is a major source of money behind a number of radical leftist outfits, like MoveOn.org, the Center for American Progress, the now-defunct but reorganizing ACORN, Apollo Alliance, the National Council of La Raza, the Tides Foundation, The Huffington Post, Southern Poverty Law Center, Sojourners, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, and the National Organization for Women. He is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and has participated in the Bilderberg Group.
The group in question here is the Secretaries of State Project (SSOP), formed in 2006, supposedly to “to stop Republicans from ‘manipulating’ election results.” Over the years, it has become clear that when the Left accuses conservatives or Republicans of something, it is a sleight of hand move to cover up the fact that it is the very thing it is doing.
They have been far too successful with this strategy, having won 11 of 18 elections, including….
Congress Ignores Obama’s War-by-Fiat
Ben Johnson, The White House Watch
When Barack Obama updated Congress on the war in Libya last Friday, he claimed our role is so limited it does not require Congressional authorization. However, on Monday Hillary Clinton told the European press, “Even today, the United States continues to fly 25 percent of all sorties,” and Obama has promised there will be “no let-up.”
Apparently Congress will have no vote on the matter, either. This week, leaders in the House and Senate have refused to vote for or against the authorization of the war, as the Constitution requires.
Although the Founding Fathers vested Congress alone with the power to make war, Obama launched Operation Odyssey Dawn on the approval of the United Nations and the Arab League. Some interpret the 1973 War Powers Resolution to say the president may send soldiers into harm’s way for 60 days before getting Congressional approval, but Congress has passed no authorization 66 days into the war.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Tuesday that the Senate will not vote on the measure before the end of this month.
A spokesperson for House Speaker John Boehner told CNN, “No decisions have been made about how to proceed.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was equally passive on Fox News Sunday, saying, “The administration is going to have to decide whether it thinks [the War Powers Resolution] was triggered and we’ll have to respond to that.”
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Monday….
The Donald’s Donations to Democrats
Zachary Newkirk, OpenSecrets.org
REPUBLICAN DONALD TRUMP’S PAST AND CURRENT GENEROSITY TO DEMOCRATS: Billionaire real estate tycoon Donald Trump’s recent speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference excited a number of Republicans, many of whom applauded his statement that Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has “zero chance” of winning.
Go Ahead, Shut Down the Government
Rich Galen, CNSNews.com
Over the 12 years of writing MULLINGS, I have often strayed — sometimes pretty far — from Conservative Orthodoxy.
Orthodoxy is defined in Merriam Webster’s Third Unabridged as: “Conformity to an official formulation of truth especially in religious belief or practice … contrasted with heresy.”
“Ah,” as someone smarter than I once must have written, “it is a sprinkling of that pesky heresy which provides the spice of discourse.”
But today, I am fully in the camp of the Tea Party when I say: “Shut ‘er down.” Shut down the government when the Continuing Resolution runs out on Friday.
Here’s why.
All those Republican freshmen who were elected to get their collective arms around government spending have been pretty good in sticking together and demanding that the Senate Democrats — and specifically Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) — pay attention.
He hasn’t. He says things like “we want to meet the House Republicans half-way” because it sounds so reasonable. The problem is, the distance between what the Democrats proposed for 2011 spending when they owned everything in 2010 is way, WAY higher than what the House Republicans are looking for — so Harry Reid’s “half-way” is … not.
If the House allows the Federal government to shut down because of Reid’s intransigence, then the freshmen can go home and tell their constituents they were true to their campaign pledge: Cut government spending or else.
The first two days of the shutdown will be Saturday and Sunday which aren’t big traffic days in Your Nation’s Capital under any circumstances. Monday is a so-so day because there usually aren’t any votes in the House or Senate which allow Members to mosey back from their taxpayer-funded trips home. Tuesday, though, is usually a full work day in Washington, DC.
If the leadership works over the weekend and gets a compromise acceptable to the House freshmen ready to go on Monday morning, it can be filed and voted on Wednesday or Thursday and the whole Federal system can be back to humming like a Lionel train set by late in the week.
This shutdown fight is just a small battle over spending limits for the remaining five months of the 2011 fiscal year which ends on September 30.
