Neutering Harry Reid Much Better Than Higher Minimum Wage





Harry Reid SC

The other night, having cut the cable cord, I was watching Slapshot on my Apple TV box via Netflix ($7.99 a month); and a line in the movie hit me particularly hard.

To set the scene, Slapshot is a 1977 Paul Newman film about a minor league hockey team, the mythical Charlestown Chiefs in the mythical town of Charlestown, somewhere in the not so mythical rust belt.

Paul Newman is the player-coach of the Chiefs, and he is walking up the hill past a steel mill with his college educated scoring ace played by Michael Ontkean, telling Ontkean that he doesn’t believe that the rumored mill closing will happen because the company was just “jacking up the workers to make them happy they have a job.”

Ontkean tells Newman that, in fact, the closing had been announced that morning.

“10,000 mill workers placed on waivers.”

For those of you who don’t remember 1977, Jimmy Carter was more or less the President, and the economy was not totally dissimilar to today.

And the point was made that when 10,000 mill workers don’t have jobs, they don’t have the money to buy tickets to follow minor league hockey teams—especially teams with a losing record.

Now back in those days, we were losing our domestic steel industry to the Japanese and the United Steel Workers.

These days, we have lost much of the manufacturing sector to countries where the workers are not unionized and much less expensive than those here in the good old U S of A.

Yet who even Democrats will privately admit only has a passing relationship with intelligence, Harry Reid, is worried about “income inequality” as opposed to just putting people to work.

His solution?  Raise the minimum wage to $10.15 an hour.

Reid (D-Ritz Carleton, Washington DC) genuinely appears to think that you solve income inequality by, in the words of Michael Ontkean, placing them on waivers.

Because that’s exactly what is going to happen if Reid somehow manages to shove this through Congress the way he shoved Obamacare through. (And how’s that working out for him?)

This is from the Department of Labor’s website history of the Carter Administration:

In 1978 Congress passed and the President signed the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act, better known as the Humphrey-Hawkins Act. Drafted with assistance from the Department, this law did not create any specific programs. Rather, it called for government-wide planning and action to achieve reduced unemployment and, eventually, zero inflation. This Act found strong expression in many aspects of the Department’s employment and training program, including: targeting assistance to reduce long-term unemployment; improving coordination with private business; reducing youth unemployment, and; assisting adult workers dislocated because of foreign competition. Occupational safety and health programs were significantly redirected during this period. … Enforcement became much stricter as inspectors cited more and more employers for “serious” and “willful” violations of standards and assessed heavier fines against them.

Just what they needed to fix the economy, right?

For the record, that crap was a complete and utter failure despite what some public school teachers tell their students.  It took President Ronald Reagan’s administration about three years to undo the damage that Carter did and put the economy back on an even keel, mostly by lowering taxes and reducing regulations.

So here we are in 2014.  About 90,000,000 people have been “placed on waivers”.  Many for so long that they have said “the hell with it” and just stopped looking (or, as it might be put in the movies, become free agents.)

And Harry Dimbulb (twisted fluorescent) thinks this can be fixed by the government.

Ronald Reagan has already given us the template.  There is no such thing as “trickle up” economics.  You don’t create jobs by breaking investors and discouraging employment.

Neutering Harry, however, would be a good start.

 





Harry Reid Gutted, Turned Into Shark Bait





Harry Reid Jawbone SC

The 2014 primaries are still months away, but I want to make an early prediction.

I predict that the Democrat-led U.S. Senate will look substantially different next year. In fact, I believe the Senate won’t be Democrat controlled at all.

You see, Republicans smell blood in the water. They’re well-positioned to capture the majority in the 2014 elections, and it has them dreaming of Harry Reid hopping a plane for Nevada.

Truthfully, the math is working against the Democrats. Republicans only need to seize six seats to derail what’s left of the Obama socialist agenda. Meanwhile, the left must defend 20 seats, including seven in states that President Obama lost in 2012.

Better yet, a host of Democratic incumbents have already thrown in the towel. Why fight another grueling campaign when you could retire to fat pensions and lobbying contracts?

But not every race will be so easy. So how will some other important swing states vote come election season?

Alaska

Democrats control this seat with a weak freshman, Senator Mark Begich. But Obama lost Alaska in both 2008 and 2012, and Begich’s win was a fluke. He won by just 1% of the vote, despite longtime Senator Ted Stevens being under a U.S. Justice Department investigation at the time.

Anti-Obama sentiment will likely be Begich’s undoing. Plus, several strong Republican candidates are vying for the primary, including 2008 GOP Senate nominee and Tea Party favorite, Joe Miller; Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell; and Alaska Natural Resources Commissioner Dan Sullivan.

Early prognosis: The Republicans pick up this seat (+1).

Arkansas

The president is very unpopular in Arkansas, where he received just 36.9% of the vote in 2012. Obama’s low approval rating will likely bring down Democratic Senator Mark Pryor. On top of that, Pryor voted for Obamacare, which is extremely unpopular in The Natural State.

Meanwhile, we learned from Sen. Pryor’s latest fundraising report that he’s spending more than he’s taking in, which is a terrible sign for an incumbent who’s also behind in the polls. Pryor lost about $200,000 between the third and fourth quarter.

Rep. Tom Cotton, a rising conservative star, will be a formidable challenger to Pryor. Cotton is an Iraq War veteran and a favorite of conservative groups including Club for Growth.

Early prognosis: The Republicans pick up a seat (+1).

Iowa

Senator Tom Harkin, a fixture in Iowa politics for decades, is finally retiring. So despite the fact that Obama carried the state in 2012, Iowa remains very competitive for Republicans.

However, this will likely be a bruising primary for the GOP. The competitors include former U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker, a former Chief of Staff to Sen. Chuck Grassley named David Young, State Senator Joni Ernst, and conservative radio host Sam Clovis. On top of that, the former CEO of Reliant Energy, Mark Jacobs, is preparing to enter the race, along with well-known pro-life leader Bob Vander Plaats.

Early prognosis: Republican infighting settles down, and the GOP rides Obama fatigue to victory (+1).

Louisiana

The Pelican State has been trending Republican, even though Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu was re-elected with 52% of the vote in 2008. As a longtime office holder, Landrieu has to be considered the favorite – but it’s not out of the question that the GOP could get the best of her.

The challenger preferred by the GOP establishment is Rep. Bill Cassidy. He will face a tough race from Rob Maness, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel and Tea Party favorite, in the Republican primary.

Early prognosis: The Republicans pick up a seat (+1).

Michigan

Nobody thinks of Michigan as Republican; but because of Detroit’s insolvency, the state has turned to the GOP for fiscal answers. Obama carried Michigan in the presidential race, but the GOP did very well down ticket.

On top of that, longtime Democratic Senator Carl Levin has decided to retire, providing Republicans with an opening. The race was supposed to be a cakewalk for Democratic Rep. Gary Peters, though in reality it’s anything but.

Emerging as a formidable candidate is former Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land. In fact, she’s taken a commanding, eight-point lead in the latest poll of Michigan voters.

Early prognosis: Between Detroit’s bankruptcy and a strong Republican candidate, the GOP gets another seat (+1).

North Carolina

Democrat Senator Kay Hagan rode Obama’s coattails into office in 2008 and defeated incumbent Senator Elizabeth Dole.

But in 2012, North Carolina swung hugely Republican. Now, every poll has Hagan below 50%, which is definitely a good sign for Republicans. Optimism is high in The Tar Heel State.

Early prognosis: The GOP should easily win here (+1).

South Dakota

Winds of change led three-term incumbent Democrat Senator Tim Johnson to tuck tail and retire. Popular two-term Republican Gov. Mike Rounds has announced his intention to run, and he should basically be a shoe-in.

Early prognosis: The Republicans will only lose this one if they really screw up (+1).

So there you have it. Six states that could see a decidedly Republican shift in the 2014 elections. I’ll be sure to keep you updated on these important races as the primaries get closer.

 

This commentary originally appeared at CapitolHillDaily.com and is reprinted here with permission. 





Fixing Immigration Shouldn’t Be Political





Obama Immigration Policy Leave The Light On SC

There are three things certain about our immigration system.

1) It is broken and desperately needs to be fixed.

2) There can be no fix until we are capable of stopping illegal immigration and come to the simultaneous realization that we are NOT going to deport 12 and a half million people.

3) There can be no fix until we whack any politician on any side of the issue who seeks to make a fix that results in a political advantage.

Let’s start with our President, the Senator Majority Leader, and the House Minority Leader.  You would have to go a long way to convince me that Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi have a humanitarian bone in their corrupt bodies.  They see this purely as a political way of ensuring the long-term survival of the Democrat Party.

On the other hand.

There are a whole lot of Republicans who represent constituents who find it very profitable to bring illegal immigrants to America to work for them because they work cheap and they’re scared of being deported.

Those folks are every bit as reprehensible as Harry Reid, whose only concern about illegals is how they might vote if the Democrats were to grant them citizenship.

The ONLY way to solve a problem that has been created by a dithering Congress, four dithering Presidents of both parties, and politicians of both parties seeking political advantage is to simultaneously seal the border, come up with a workable employment visa program, and grant a limited amnesty program to the good citizens among the 12 and a half million people who are already here (the vast majority) because of—let’s face it—our implicit encouragement.

Now is a good time to do it since the economy can only go in one direction from where it is today, taking the numbers of people wishing to emigrate to America in search of jobs with it.

I’ve come a long way on the subject of immigration over the years.

I started at “what part of illegal didn’t you understand?”

And then I realized that my own parents are first generation Americans whose parents came to America because it was a) the land of opportunity and b) an ill wind was blowing through Europe in the early 20th century—especially for Jews in eastern Europe.

Like it or not, there is no Ellis Island on the South edge of San Diego.  Or El Paso or Tucson.

We may not have welcomed the Irish, the Italians, the Jews, and the rest of the Europeans who streamed to this nation in the early part of the 20th century with completely open arms; but we didn’t treat them like we treat Mexicans today.

The truth is that the stream of immigrants—both legal and illegal—bears some resemblance to the stream through Ellis Island in the early 1900s.

Because the other reality is that Mexico is almost irretrievably broken in terms of allowing its own citizens to accomplish with their lives what America allows its citizens to accomplish with theirs.

Simply put, maybe we do need an Ellis Island in San Diego.

Whatever we decide along those lines, we need to gain control of the border if for no other reason than to keep the Mexican equivalent of the La Cosa Nostra out more effectively than we did in 1915 in New York.

And we need an immigration policy that is clear and can be understood by everybody.

Those are bi-partisan objectives.  There is nothing here that a Harry Reid can contribute to because he doesn’t care about anything that isn’t political.

And the folks at La Raza (who keep blathering about ‘taking back the southwest’) should, perhaps, concentrate their efforts on fixing the Mexican side of the equation.  They would have a lot more credibility if Mexico’s government wasn’t controlled by a bunch of mobbed up drug lords.

It would also be nice if the Republicans would stop worrying about a fundamentally conservative group of people (mostly Catholic, pro-life Hispanics) voting Democrat if we give them a path to citizenship.

We are where we are as a result of abject stupidity on the part of both parties.

Don’t you think that it is time for the grown-ups to fix the problem idiots like Reid and Obama are striving to make worse once and for all?





Obamacare’s Chickens Are Coming Home To Roost





Sebelius Admissions Obamacare SC

So Harry Reid (D-Ritz Carleton, Washington DC) wants to make the Senate into a replica of the House he has repeatedly bashed since its majority went to the Republicans.

A little Boehner envy, perhaps?

It’s entirely possible that the historical precedent for the filibuster is more contained in black and white Jimmy Stewart films than in actual history. But you would have thought that the personal representative of MGM to Washington would have thought this move through in the context of his last hardball move, which was passing what they no longer want to call Obamacare.

How’s that working out for him?

It’s only a matter of time before most of the people who supported Reid and Obama, but are now being clobbered by new rules Reid jammed through the Senate in 2010 on a party line vote, figure out it was really Reid who begat Obamacare.

Harry, famously, has the most flexible morals and ethics in Washington.

He’ll get a chance to display those when the madding crowd starts to roar in 2014 and 2016.

Gutting the filibuster has opened a clear path to de-fanging Obamacare, should the Republicans take the Senate and hold the house in 2014. 

Harry seems to be counting on one of two factors to prevent that.  First, that Obamacare will magically turn around in the peoples’ esteem and become as beloved as Social Security.  Second, that the Republicans are perfectly capable of destroying themselves.

If we had to guess, the second factor is far more likely than the first. But as far as the Republicans go, even a blind hog can find an acorn. And it’s likely, given the polling data, that they can unite against Obamacare long enough to establish some semblance of leadership in Washington.

The sad truth is that the far left and the far right, given the chance, will destroy their respective party’s appeal to the 60% of the voters who get to decide where this nation is headed.

Now you can argue about the relationship of the Congressional chambers to history, but here’s a point that is cast in stone.

20% of the voters are hardcore Democrats, 20% are hardcore Republicans, and the middle 60% decide elections.  Those are the people who Reid and Obama have to ask in 2014 about Obamacare, “Who are you going to believe? Us or your lying eyes?”

The problems with Obamacare are so systemic that the chances of working them out to the satisfaction of the middle 60% in the time before November 8, 2016 are close to zero.

It will take bipartisan support for a fix, and Reid just threw that away.

The media cares about things like filibusters and Federal Judgeships.

The actual public votes its checkbook.

And what the Obama Administration has never understood is that healthcare is a checkbook issue in its purest form. A crappy insurance policy that costs $1,000 a month and has a $12,600 yearly out-of-pocket limit is like buying a second house. And, that said, you cannot tell the average guy he has to pay another mortgage payment or deal with the IRS and get away with it.

Under those circumstances, the average guy will undoubtedly go to the polls and vote for the people who want to repeal that.

Had people been told that Obamacare was the requirement to go out and buy another house, it would not have been acceptable even to Democrats back in 2010.

Remember how Obamacare was sold.  It’ll be cheaper than your cell-phone bill and easier to buy than a book on Amazon.  And, by the way, if you like your current plan or your doctor, you can keep them.

Well, to quite its namesake’s favorite preacher, “America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

Now, the economic consequences are becoming clear, and the bill will be coming due.

Instead of trying to gain some bipartisan support to fix it, Reid, being the moron he is in everything except getting elected, decided to pour gas on the fire.

With some luck, that fire will consume him, Obama, and Nancy Pelosi for good.

One can only hope the Republicans—who also have trouble organizing a two car funeral—will avoid overplaying their hand long enough to actually fix things over the next five years.





America 2019: Death Camps, Revolution and Censorship





Photo credit: CTPEKO3A (Creative Commons)

What The End Of The Filibuster Could Mean For America

A person can win every game they play if they can always change the rules to their advantage. Harry Reid decided to do that for President Obama.

There were three judges Obama wanted to place on the Washington, DC federal bench to tip the advantage toward the Left. Many of the same Democrats, who thought the Republicans were wrong when they were in the majority and wanted to approve of judge selections by a simple majority of Senators, now want what they wouldn’t give to Republicans and President Bush. I call the cancellation of the filibuster the “Dictatorship of the Majority Act.”

Remember how Nancy Pelosi complained about Republicans obstructing what needed to be done when they were in the minority? I guess crashing the economy was something the Democrats needed to do when they regained control of Congress in 2007.

They also needed to pass Obamacare, which is now creating havoc in this country. I heard former Congressman Barney Frank complain about Republicans in Congress voting in favor of things they knew would not pass in the Senate. You could call his desire to have Republicans go along with the Democrats in the Senate the “Since Everybody Is Jumping Off A Bridge, You Should Do It Too” Strategy. When President Bush wanted to examine Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae and their lending policies to see if they were fiscally sound, Barney Frank told Bush there was nothing wrong. Frank sounded like a stock trader during the second week of October 1929 telling everybody that investing in stock was a sure bet to get rich since the stock market was sound.

America 2019

Here is a scenario that is possible since filibusters are no longer a weapon to prevent the majority from easily getting its way. It is 2019, and President Hillary Clinton decides she has too many political opponents. The Senate passes the Federal Anti-Defamation Act, which declares all people who protest against the government as criminals subject to fines and imprisonment. A federal judge appointed by the President decides it’s Constitutional; and the Supreme Court that is then split into six Liberals and three Conservatives (since the mysterious death of Justice Scalia) leans leftwards.

Conservative broadcasters and programs are shut down. Even common citizens who dare talk against the President and government are imprisoned because Democrats who control the Senate say it’s for the good of the country. The Public Safety Act of 2019 which is declared Constitutional by a judge appointed to the federal bench, and the Supreme Court allows camps to be built to “re-educate” those who oppose the government. People are disarmed because another judge feels that only the police and military deserve to be armed.

Millions revolt against the government and march toward Washington and state capitols. President Clinton declares marshal law and orders the troops out to confront the protesters around the nation. The DC federal court says the police and troops have the right to shoot and kill protesters if they feel that Washington and government entities are being threatened. Some of the judges that make that decision would have been filibustered by Republicans in the Senate. But with a majority of Democrats in the Senate, the filibuster is no longer a threat.

What if a Republican Congress and President gain power in 2033 after the state of emergency declared by President Clinton in 2020, and judged Constitutional by the DC federal court and Supreme Court, is ended to allow Hillary to serve four full terms? Don’t you think the Republicans will want revenge? The internment camps formerly occupied by Conservatives are now being occupied by Liberals who hate the new government. And with Obamacare being dismantled and the high tax rates coming down or abolished altogether, the economy soars. But the ones who most depended on Obamacare are more likely to die. America goes from being a Liberal police state to a Conservative police state; and it started with the Dictatorship of the Majority Act, as it has been nicknamed.

The Electoral College hasn’t been abolished so that small states still matter at election time instead of a handful of heavily populated states deciding who should be the President. The filibuster was meant to prevent the “wrong” people from controlling the justice system and perverting justice. Destroying a tradition that has worked for nearly two and a quarter centuries may bring down the Democrats because the public will consider them a bunch of dictators, with the “Dear Leader” being the most threatening. And if one day the Republicans regain total control of the government, you know the Democrats will want the law changed. And since many Republicans respect the Constitution and many traditions more than most Democrats do, the filibuster will make a comeback. Just hope and pray that the tyranny of the majority doesn’t have irreversible consequences.

 

Photo credit: CTPEKO3A (Creative Commons)