BluegrassBulletin.com

McConnell's Great Commission

When Mitch McConnell becomes the next majority leader of the United States Senate he will have achieved a life long dream.  Not only will he deserve the job, but he should enjoy the credit for having created the majority that will elect him.

Mitch McConnell is a master of the political process.  It was he who made the 2014 mid-term elections a referendum on Barack Obama which ended up being the force beneath the ground swell of discontented voters who swept republicans into office in greater numbers than anytime since the reign of FDR converted so many to the democratic party where they have remained ever since.

Not only did Mitch substantially outperform the polls which nearly all predicted that a win in Kentucky, by either candidate, would be within the margin of error.  Not only did he exhibit great poise and leadership in his acceptance speech in contrast to what even liberal pundits are saying about how ungracious his opponent was in defeat.  But Mitch McConnell helped orchestrate the national conversation we all have been having for the last few years which conversation became the sentiment which was then mobilized into the movement that has now demanded that someone turn the direction we are heading around.  And as reward for all of those things Mitch McConnell won not only his race, but an incredible, historic obligation.

It is he who told America that there is a better way forward than the path our current president and his troops in the Senate and the House have been marching us down.  It is he, McConnell, who has promised to repeal Obamacare "root and branch".  It is he who has promised to get the Congress working again, to bring matters to a vote, to pass a budget and to improve the prosperity of our country.  These are huge tasks, and they are now his burden.

I once had the chance to meet Karl Rove when I was a candidate for office and asked his advice.  He actually grabbed me by my necktie, pulled me close and gave me his wise insight.  He looked me right in the eye and said, "remember, if you win this, you asked for it."  McConnell has really asked for it.

Not only will he have the burden of a victor on his shoulders as well as the burden of defining his own legacy on his mind, but the architect of the republican party in Kentucky will have the fate of the republican party of America in his hands.

It was McConnell who motivated and moved the electorate by his carefully planned campaign talking points which were repeated with great discipline by the candidates that he, the NRSC, and other influential republicans all working together helped to put into place by winning primaries for those candidates who they deemed could eventually and did win November.

To accomplish this these so-called mainstream republicans had to go out and defeat the kind of fringe candidates that had been buoyed through primaries by the seething discontent of many republicans who had left the fold, formed splinter groups and ran as much against the GOP as they said they would against the democrats.  That hadn't worked out so well and so the adults in the room had to bring order back to the process.  They did, and they won.

But that doesn't mean McConnell will get the unanimous support of every one of his republican members.  Grandstanders like Ted Cruz and presidential hopefuls like Rand Paul will certainly take shots at their own party and its leaders in order to get the kind of attention they crave and to appeal to those fragile parts of their own coalitions they perceive to be necessary to their own political survival.

And Mitch will have to weather the criticism of many others elected under the GOP banner who came to Congress just to be troublemakers and who will not be able to control their rhetoric because it has become indistiguishable from their identity.

But perhaps the greater battle Mitch has won is the obligation to direct the battle to save the republican party.  While Rand Paul goes about trying to build a new kind of GOP in much the same patchwork quilt manner that the democrats have done for years, Mitch can look out over the groundswell of support given to his candidates and see that a much more congruent mindset joins the republicans and democrats and independents alike who joined their votes to give the GOP the victory they achieved.

While many would be right to say that the outcome was a repudiation of Barack Obama and his agenda, it was also at the same time, and by virtue of that repudiation, a collective agreement that if the republicans say they really can turn the country around, now is their chance to put up, or shut up.

As crass as it is when LBJ pushed so hard to create his "great society" he admitted that he had a political motivation behind him when he stated "

“I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years” as he confided with two like-minded governors on Air Force One regarding his underlying intentions for the “Great Society” programs. liveleak.com

What is really at stake for McConnell is nothing less than the future of and the relevance of the republican party.  Unless he and his fellow republicans deliver what the voters want, he may end us casting the GOP into the dark abyss for a century or more to come.

And those who know this is what is at stake and who want him to fail in that quest will bring incredible forces and resources to the battlefield in order to prevent him from succeeding.

Gridlock is not dead, it will be like the undead, nearly impossible to kill, raging out of control, incorrigible on all levels, defiant to a fault, relentless and vicious.  For McConnell to save the nation and the GOP he will face a battle on a scale not unlike a world war.  And I do not use that comparison lightly. 

 

As in all prior wars where the American people rallied in support it was in defense of liberty, human rights, freedom and western prosperity that was threatened by socialist movements, dictators and those that opposed our way of life.  That's just how the voters on Tuesday see the world today and McConnell has been elevated to be our supreme commander in that war.

 

He and the republicans must succeed and success will not be measured in small accomplishments.  The mindset of McConnell's generation does not resonate today.  The notion of working hard, saving a little, and watching progress come to your own life a little at a time isn't shared by many any more.

 

America today is filled with the "me generation", people convinced that they are the center of the universe, who refuse to accept that they can't have everything they want just for the asking, who through an ignorance taught to them for generations deeply believe that anything they want is a "right".

 

If McConnell believes that he can re-train America to accept incremental progress after six years of perceived decline he may lose his grip on the tiller before the ship of state crashes.  He must make big moves, bold moves and each and every one must succeed.

 

He should sponsor legislation immediately to create jobs in America while at the same time reducing corporate taxation, ending our dependence on foreign manufacturing as a national security measure and get America working again.  How?

 

Pass legislation giving not just a tax deduction, but a dollar for dollar tax credit for wages paid in America to companies that bring manufacturing jobs back from overseas.  Tie this commitment to a three year term of guaranteed American employment. 

 

Sure, our treasury would suffer the loss of corporate taxes, but the taxes on the incomes of workers would help to offset that.  In addition, those wages being paid to American workers will be spent in America boosting the economy, resulting in a better standard of living for every one.  As money circulates in America it too produces revenues to offset the corporate tax credits.

 

As manufacturing in America increases investment in buildings, equipment, housing and all sectors will improve.

 

On a political level this appeals to the corporate players, the out of work Americans, the housing, banking, manufacturing, tooling and other interests who are clamoring for bold initiatives.  It could end up, after more careful analysis than some lowly blogger in Kentucky has given it, as nearly revenue neutral, but because it is founded on such a strong nationalistic and patriotic core it could marginalize opposition.

 

How about being even bigger and bolder and legislate away the IRS?  Replace it with a fairer system eliminating the abusive power so many Americans perceive that this one private army of the government wields?

 

Big, bold moves include putting a bill to allow the Keystone XL pipeline on the president's desk but only AFTER other bold moves.  The people know when special interests jump line and get ahead of their own and this has been the criticism of the GOP for a long, long time.  Don't let that happen Senator.

 

Big bold moves include a total repeal of Obamacare being passed at the same time as a balanced budget.

 

These are the kinds of things people expect to see out of McConnell's party,  now in power.  And I predict they will accept nothing less.

 

Yes Mitch deserves great credit for what he has accomplished.  But in exchange he has also now received a great commission.  There is much riding on what he does.

 

And so Senator, as one who has backed you in all your races, let me at this moment while you are enjoying the after glow of your victory, remind you that you are standing on the threshold of an historic era.  And as you go forward let me repeat for you what Karl Rove once said to me, "remember, you asked for it."

Update On Obama's Reaction To State Sovereignty

Yesterday I commented upon the Obama administration's request for over $1 Billion to impose gun control.  Today I was alerted to this development:

The National Guard is following a direct order — but it’s not happy with it.

All of the Guard’s AH-64 Apache helicopters are scheduled to go to the active Army, and there’s nothing its top brass can do about it. [Washington Times]

Some have interpreted this move by the POTUS to have more sinister implications.

As if the Obama administration's purchase of more than 2 billion rounds of ammunition, and nearly 3,000 urban tanks, along with their unprecedented (and highly illegal) domestic spying program was not enough to convince you that the federal government is about to suspend the Constitution once and for all, the man who once vowed to run "the most transparent administration in history" has just rather inexplicably, ordered the U.S. Army to seize every Apache attack helicopter currently in use by the National Guard.

In all, the Defense Department will confiscate 192 Apaches from National Guard units around the country and give them to the active duty Army.

In exchange for the heavily armed and highly maneuverable choppers, Guard units will receive 111 UH-60 Blackhawktransport helicopters from the Army, Defense One reports.

Last week, U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, claiming that the measure will save taxpayers $12 billion, over the next three years.

So, what could be another, more reasonable explanation?

The Apache, which began service in 1986, is armed with a 30 mm M230E1 Chain Gun (with 1,200 rounds), Hellfire anti-tank missiles, and 70 general-purpose 70 mm rockets. In short, it is capable of fending-off any enemy, foreign or domestic.

Obviously, these helicopters could pose a substantial obstacle to say, a tyrant drunk on his own power, with an army at his disposal. [Washington Examiner]

Time and time again this administration gives the impression that something is afoot which has bad written all over it.

According to one group the BLM agents at the Bundy ranch were in fact supposed to engage in violence in order to incite a larger scale crackdown centered around the expected death of some of the agents after a shootout.

Where does your state stand on the growing tension between "The People" and the Federal Government?  And perhaps to my fellow Kentuckians, which candidate for the US Senate has been tapped by none other than the First Lady as a reliable vote in favor of her husband's gun control efforts?

Stand Your Ground Update

When the Bureau of Land Management surrounded Cliven Bundy's ranch in Colorado in an effort to reclaim land upon which he and his family had been grazing cattle for generations, the armed forces of the United States took aim at citizens with their weapons.

Some say that revelations implicating Harry Reid and the Chinese in a plan to use the land for other purposes caused the BLM and the armed agents to stand down.  Not so says the rancher's son.

A show of force was necessary to stop the government seizure and sale of embattled cattle rancher Cliven Bundy's cows, his son said on Sunday, a day after an armed standoff between federal agents and hundreds of Bundy's supporters. [Reuters]

The armed standoff came after a contingent of militia groups headed for the ranch in support of Bundy and in opposition to the military like maneuvers of the BLM and other agents.

Under the Obama administration there has been a rise in the number of states which have created a separate militia unit under the control of the governor alone without any requirement that the  members treat the president as their commander in chief.

Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have reestablished “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. [Politcalvelcraft.org]

And just how has the president responded in the face of the increase in militia groups, state military units and private citizens having the ability to defend themselves?

President Obama has requested $1.1 billion and the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked for $382.1 million for gun control "to protect Americans from gun violence." [Foxnews]

Is it just me or do you hear echoes of "The Concord Hymn"?

Your Land, My Land?

I'm not a big fan of Alex Jones or his hysterics, but I have been following this developing story and what you read below should give you a glimpse of how the government really sees you and me when we don't agree with them.  It also raises a question:  Is this land really your land, is this land really my land?

Federal snipers with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) trained guns on members of a family yesterday after they dared to stop and take video footage of cattle outside the bounds of a designated “First Amendment Area,” before arresting one of the men for non-compliance.

The cattle were being rounded up by BLM officers as part of a crackdown on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who has refused to pay “grazing fees” demanded by the feds as a result of a re-classification of 600,000 acres of federal land in northeastern Clark County which Bundy claims has been in his family for generations.

Fears that the confrontation may turn violent and concerns that Bundy is drawing increased support from liberty activists and the local community prompted the feds to tape off two ridiculous “First Amendment Areas,” outside of which free speech in support of Bundy is banned. A sign placed inside the area reads “Welcome to Amerika – Wake Up” alongside a hammer and sickle logo.

When Bundy’s family members violated that rule yesterday in an attempt to peacefully document the cattle roundup, they were met with a barrage of loudspeaker warnings and four BLM snipers with their guns trained on the dissenters.

None of the family members were armed, but as soon as Dave Bundy began filming the cattle in the distance, 11 BLM vehicles each with two agents arrived and surrounded him.

“They also had four snipers on the hill above us all trained on us. We were doing nothing besides filming the area,” said Ryan Bundy.

The family were told to leave the area via loudspeaker because they had violated the crudely established “First Amendment Area”. [Infowars]

UK Hospital Abuse Of Power?

Did you know that if you have an unpaid bill at UK Hospital you might get a letter threatening seizure of your assets, foreclosure of your home and/or confiscation of your tax refund from the Kentucky Department of Revenue?  Unlike other businesses who have to pursue collection of their unpaid bills through the courts, UK apparently gets special treatment.

In the normal course of business for hospitals and doctors the majority of their billings first go through some insurance company for "reimbursement".  Any co-pays or unpaid balances then become a civil debt of the patient.  If the patient won't or can't pay the provider must bring suit in court, obtain a judgment and only then can they put a lien on property or seek to collect by forcible means.

But unpaid bills at UK hospital are given special treatment.  According to the Department of Revenue since the hospital is owned by Kentucky the government can circumvent the civil collection procedure and immediately seize your assets, without any formal declaration by a court that you in fact owe the bill.

This is all according to one cancer patient who has been rendered disabled by his condition, incapable of working full time and now struggling to get by on a very small part time income.  Though tens of thousands of dollars of treatment was payable under his insurance policy, a few small balances of a couple hundred dollars each were not paid by the company and now the Department of Revenue has threatened to attach his tax refund, take his house and seize his property, all without a court order and all under the draconian authority of the government and its unbridled power.

So to all of our legislators who are probably not aware of this abusive use of government authority, what are you going to do about it?  While the town doctor struggles to collect his unpaid bills, while seriously ill people struggle to get by and while other private hospitals must use the civil court system to collect their past due accounts, UK gets special treatment and the government swoops down on sick people to collect a few measly bucks?

This is a travesty and must end immediately.

Spying Is Out Of Control

Consider this.  The kids who were starting first grade the year Nixon resigned are now 50.  That means only those of us over 50, in our 60's, 70's and 80's remember what the whole Watergate thing was about.  The rest of you only know what it was about by what you've been told.

We were just coming out of the tumultuous 60's when riots ostensibly inspired by opposition to the Viet Nam war were proven to be calculated propaganda efforts instigated as part of an effort to split the nation, keep us from doing battle with China, the sponsor and real enemy of the Viet Nam War, and eventually to overthrow the entire government.  These aren't some far out beliefs, they are the facts of history and the main actors were then the same people who are now the wind beneath much of the Obama agenda.

Many people now under the age of 50 have been taught that Nixon went down for spying.  Actually Nixon recognized the presence and activities of subversive communists early in his first term and though tempted to do so actually withdrew his support for more pervasive FBI and CIA spying.

But from 1968 until 1972 he was locked in a battle in Viet Nam, not of his own making, but a war started by JFK and escalated by LBJ.  As it turns out, the public had been intentionally misled by both of his predecessors as to the reasons we were at war.

In 1967 then Secretary of Defense under LBJ Robert McNamara commissioned a secret compilation of papers directly from the Pentagon setting out the truth behind the war prosecuted by Johnson.  The conclusion of these "Pentagon Papers" was that the real purpose of the war was not the liberation of South VietNam, but rather the containment of Communist China which the USA at the time believed was determined to organize all of Asia against us and begin a much greater war.

Daniel Ellsberg who had worked on the "Pentagon Papers" decided to turn them over to Nixon's administration hoping they would publish them.  Nixon declined because he did not want to embarass either Kennedy or Johnson.  Ellsberg eventually published the papers in the New York Times.

Nixon's administration sought court orders to prevent their disclosure arguing that they were classified.  While granted an initial injunction against the Times the Supreme Court ultimately ruled that they could be published.

The world was really not much different then than now.  Communist, socialist and other tyrannical political systems are at work trying to undermine our national identity, destroy our national purpose, call into question our dedication to civil liberties and to eventually rape and pillage our nation for all of it's resources not the least of which includes our people.

So how does the current level of spying square with our historical battle with subversives?  Is there a real and present danger that groups of individuals are planning to over throw the government?  Is there a real and present danger that there are groups who have been propagandized by those out to over throw our government into thinking that by further dividing our nation they are some how helping to save it?

Or have the really bad guys gotten so close to the levers of power that spying isn't about protecing us at all, but rather just one more way in which the government can be portrayed as evil, conspiring against its own citizens and destroying civil liberty in the process?

Might someone with a desire to cause citizens to revolt first have to get close enough to the power to create the reason for revolution?  Could expanding and then defending pervasive government spying be calculated to be the kind of pressure that could cause the whole thing to blow up?  And wouldn't that require that the spying be "leaked" after the fact rather than explained in advance?

I keep telling you this, remain situationally aware at all times.

If anything happens in politics, you can pretty well be sure somebody planned it that way.

***THE ARMED CITIZEN*** An Every Friday Feature

Colby Patout and Debra Richard were witness to a vicious dog attack. “They were mauling this guy’s leg,” Patout said. The man was cycling when two dogs attacked, biting his legs and eventually pulling him off his bike. Patout and Richard rushed to help the man. Richard blocked traffic with her vehicle and Patout grabbed his gun. Patout tried to help the man, who was already seriously injured and bleeding excessively, but was forced to fire at one of the dogs, killing it. Patout said, “I knew this guy needed his life saved at this point. I would want you to stop and do the same for me.” Animal Control officials arrived a short time later and retrieved the second dog. Patout said, “This is what our firearms and the United States is all about. [It is about] saving lives.” (KATC.com, Lafayette, LA, 12/23/13)

Reprinted with the encouragement of the NRA

Obama Fires Direct Attack On Liberty

This my friends is a direct attack on Liberty.

From Forbes:

"President Obama’s Kansas speech is a remarkable document. In calling for more government controls, more taxation, more collectivism, he has two paragraphs that give the show away. Take a look at them.

there is a certain crowd in Washington who, for the last few decades, have said, let’s respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. “The market will take care of everything,” they tell us. If we just cut more regulations and cut more taxes–especially for the wealthy–our economy will grow stronger. Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers. But if the winners do really well, then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, well, that’s the price of liberty.

Now, it’s a simple theory. And we have to admit, it’s one that speaks to our rugged individualism and our healthy skepticism of too much government. That’s in America’s DNA. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. (Laughter.) But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked. (Applause.) It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression. It’s not what led to the incredible postwar booms of the ’50s and ’60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade. (Applause.) I mean, understand, it’s not as if we haven’t tried this theory.

Even you, dear reader, are probably wondering how on earth anyone could challenge things like Social Security, government schools, and the FDA. But that’s not the point. The point is: these statist, anti-capitalist programs exist and have existed for about a century. The point is: Obama is pretending that the Progressive Era, the New Deal, and the Great Society were repealed, so that he can blame the financial crisis on capitalism. He’s pretending that George Bush was George Washington."

Here's How To Gain The Right To Arrest Law Abiding Citizens

From the Hartford Courant:

Everyone knew there would be some gun owners flouting the law that legislators hurriedly passed last April, requiring residents to register all military-style rifles with state police by Dec. 31.

But few thought the figures would be this bad.

By the end of 2013, state police had received 47,916 applications for assault weapons certificates, Lt. Paul Vance said. An additional 2,100 that were incomplete could still come in.

That 50,000 figure could be as little as 15 percent of the rifles classified as assault weapons owned by Connecticut residents, according to estimates by people in the industry, including the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation. No one has anything close to definitive figures, but the most conservative estimates place the number of unregistered assault weapons well above 50,000, and perhaps as high as 350,000.

And that means as of Jan. 1, Connecticut has very likely created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals — perhaps 100,000 people, almost certainly at least 20,000 — who have broken no other laws. By owning unregistered guns defined as assault weapons, all of them are committing Class D felonies.

"I honestly thought from my own standpoint that the vast majority would register," said Sen. Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, the ranking GOP senator on the legislature's public safety committee. "If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don't follow them, then you have a real problem."

Any doubts as to why you need to oppose any gun registration legislation of any sort that comes down the pike?

How will Connecticut deal with all of the unregistered guns owned by the thousands of new felons they just created?

The problem could explode if Connecticut officials decide to compare the list of people who underwent background checks to buy military-style rifles in the past, to the list of those who registered in 2013. Do they still own those guns? The state might want to know.

So how would the government arrest and detain so many gun owners?  That would be a good subject for conspiracy theorists to discuss, but in reality disarming the people by making them felons isn't really all that hard.  Felons cannot own guns, legally.

In 1763 [General Thomas] Gage was appointed commander in chief of all British forces in North America—the most important and influential post in the colonies. Headquartered in New York, he ran a vast military machine of more than 50 garrisons and stations stretching from Newfoundland to Florida and from Bermuda to the Mississippi. He exhibited both patience and tact in handling matters of diplomacy, trade, communication, Indian relations, and western boundaries. His great failure, however, was in his assessment of the burgeoning independence movement.

Thus Gage is chiefly remembered in the U.S. as the protagonist of the British cause while he served as military governor in Massachusetts from 1774 to 1775. In this capacity, he ordered the march of the redcoats on Lexington and Concord (April 1775), which was intended to uncover ammunition caches and to capture the leading Revolutionary agitator, Samuel Adams who escaped.

As the folks over at Truthaboutguns.com reminded us:

First they came for the ARs
and I didn’t speak out because I had other guns.

Then they came for the high capacity magazines,
and I didn’t speak out because I wanted to keep my guns.

Then they came for all semi-automatics,
and I didn’t speak out because I had a revolver.

Then they came for my revolver,
and I couldn’t speak out because I’d lost my ability to speak.

What Happens In California Comes Here In .....

No doubt you've heard it said that what happens on the west coast happens here in the heartland 10 years later.  Well let us hope and pray that what is happening in Los Angeles county never happens anywhere else.

Residents are complaining that the police, dressed in military armor, have a pattern of behavior "oppressive" to the people they are supposed to be serving.  And as in this case, many times the police raids are based upon "anonymous" tips.

You will recall how law enforcement behaved after the Boston Marathon bombings.  Now, in this video, you will see how an innocent 80 year old man was gunned down in his bedroom.

I've asked these questions of you before, but now you need to be asking yourself again, when will we take back our country?  What will you do?

Here's the 7 minute video that should wake you up.  It is very hard to do damage control once the flood breaks out of its banks.