The Patriot Post® · Daily Digest
“Will it be sufficient to mark, with precision, the boundaries of these departments, in the constitution of the government, and to trust to these parchment barriers against the encroaching spirit of power? … [E]xperience assures us, that the efficacy of the provision has been greatly overrated; and that some more adequate defense is indispensably necessary for the more feeble, against the more powerful, members of the government.” —James Madison, Federalist No. 48, 1788
TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
In a snub to Barack Obama’s precious United Nations and the remaining shreds of security in the Middle East, Russian President Vladimir Putin approved the potential delivery of $800 million worth of surface-to-air missiles to Iran. If Iran kicked out the inspectors and ramped up its centrifuges, a robust missile defense system would compound the difficulty the U.S. or Israel would have in knocking Iran’s nuclear facilities offline. In 2007, Russia signed a contract with Iran to provide S-300-class missiles, but Russia decided it wouldn’t deliver after the UN Security Council passed a 2010 resolution that sought to limit the non-proliferation of nuclear arms in the country. It was part of Obama’s “reset” with Russia, according to a fact sheet published at the time. “UNSCR 1929 imposes restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities; its ballistic missile program; and, for the first time, its conventional military,” The White House wrote. “This was a particularly important step for Russia, which has confirmed that it will not deliver S-300 missiles to Iran, in accordance with the new resolution.” Admittedly, it’s a great business move for those with vodka-smashed scruples. If Obama decides to pursue the deal anyway, Russia will be one of the first to profit. More…
The new batch of emails Judicial Watch uncovered surrounding the Exempt Organizations Branch of the IRS isn’t pretty — for the agency or certain members of Congress. In emails, former IRS official Lois Lerner wrote she would get the axe if the matter of conservative nonprofits was ever investigated. In other emails, she warned her colleagues not to give Congress too much information. In February 2012, Lerner wrote to a fellow IRS official, “Our filed folks are not as sensitive as we are to the fact that anything we write can be public — or at least be seen by Congress. We talked with Nan [Downing — Director of EO Examinations] and she thought it would be great if R & A could put together some training points to help them understand the potential pitfalls, as well as how to think about referrals.” In other words, opacity training. Furthermore, the emails revealed the IRS had a quiet meeting with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) about the Exempt Organization Branch, possibly because he and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) opposed SCOTUS’s just-decided Citizens United ruling and wanted the IRS to take matters into its own hands. The story about IRS impropriety broke, and McCain issued a statement of shock, shock! When the IRS doesn’t follow the law, it follows the agenda of whatever administration is in power. More…
In December, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen was preaching doom and gloom about the 2014 tax-filing season. The agency was going to start enforcing the ObamaCare fine for not buying health insurance. Koskinen said he needed billions more dollars to process tax returns on time. But that’s not what happened. “You could have made a lot of money betting last January, 15 months ago, on that result,” Koskinen said days before the April 15 deadline. “The system has worked flawlessly. It’s gone smoothly. And everyone seems to be comfortable, preparers and taxpayers, in preparing their returns.” All the filers who had to pay extra because either they didn’t bend to the will of the Obama administration or government paid them the wrong subsidies would beg to differ with his rosy view. More…
During last year’s Ebola scare, the Obama administration unveiled a so-called strategy to contain the deadly virus in African nations — a strategy that, as Republicans warned it would, proved futile. According to the latest available data from the CDC, the current outbreak took the lives of more than 10,500 victims, and by the time America responded most of the damage had been done. Over the weekend, The New York Times reported, “[A]fter spending hundreds of millions of dollars and deploying nearly 3,000 troops to build Ebola treatment centers, the United States ended up creating facilities that have largely sat empty: Only 28 Ebola patients have been treated at the 11 treatment units built by the United States military, American officials now say. Nine centers have never had a single Ebola patient.” So far, nearly $1.4 billion in taxpayer money has gone toward African Ebola relief — and for what? “The American response, it turns out, was outpaced by the fast-moving and unpredictable disease,” the Times claims. But as Mark Alexander noted in October, “Obama and his fellow Democrats thrive on manufactured crises, and the current endless loop of hyperbolic rhetoric about the ‘Ebola epidemic crisis’ from all corners of the 24-hour news recyclers has diverted voter attention from the real national security crisis — the re-emergent epidemic of terrorism in the Middle East.” Fast forward to today, and there’s nary a peep about Ebola. But at least the midterms are over.
Over the weekend in Ohio, a three-year-old picked up a handgun and fatally shot a one-year-old boy. In a press conference about that tragic accident, Cleveland Police Chief Calvin Williams decided it was high time to take down America’s love of guns. “Everybody has to know [that] this fascination with handguns, not just in the city, but in the country, has to stop,” he lectured. “We need to take a long look at what we’re doing on the state, local and national level to keep these guns out of our communities.” As usual, those who hate guns blame the tool and, in this case, the entire pro-Second Amendment population of the U.S. That said, there’s no doubt the one who left an unsecured gun in the reach of a three-year-old was not following good safety practices, and all gun owners should be ever vigilant and diligent when it comes to exercising our rights responsibly.
For more, visit Right Hooks.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING FOR LIBERTY?
Sometimes readers ask us what good a donation to The Patriot Post will do in the fight for Liberty. Good question. The answer is that we’re a leading advocate of Liberty and limited government through our hard-hitting daily news analysis. By covering the latest headline stories from a constitutional perspective, we provide grassroots Patriots with the ammunition needed to spread the word and make a real difference.
But we need your financial support to keep that coming. Our voice is your voice — make it heard with a secure online donation today. We still need to raise approximately $42,000 by April 19th. Thank you for standing with us! —*The Patriot Post* Editors & Staff
Director of Advancement
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor
Check out Hillary’s New Campaign Headquarters.
If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.
Sen. Marco Rubio formally announced his candidacy for president Monday, making him the third Republican to enter the 2016 presidential race. Against the backdrop of Miami’s Freedom Tower, a location symbolic to Cuban refugees fleeing an oppressive regime, Rubio laid down a challenge for America to reclaim its place in the world.
“Before us now is the opportunity to author the greatest chapter yet in the amazing story of America,” Rubio declared. “But we can’t do that by going back to the leaders and ideas of the past.” This was a not too subtle jab at Hillary Clinton, who Rubio later mentioned more directly as the wrong choice for America. “Just yesterday,” he said, “a leader from yesterday began a campaign for president by promising to take us back to yesterday. Yesterday is over, and we are never going back.”
Rubio has outlined some policy proposals in the past that include expanding the Child Tax Credit and giving states more say in their federally funded health care and poverty programs, but it is national security where Rubio seems to be staking his claim for the presidency.
In his four years in the Senate, Rubio has served on the Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees. He has sought the advice of foreign policy experts from the administrations of George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. He has spoken often of the importance of Liberty in the world and for America to project its foreign policy decisions from a position of strength. His background as the son of Cuban immigrants — a bartender and a hotel maid who lived the American Dream — is widely considered to be a principal motivator in his concern for freedom.
“I am humbled by the realization that America doesn’t owe me anything,” Rubio said, “but I have a debt to America I must try to repay. This isn’t just the country where I was born; America is the place that changed my family’s history.”
Former Reagan senior diplomat Eliot Abrams said, “The whole question of the expansion of freedom of democracy is of greater interest to [Rubio] as a foreign policy theme than it is for many other people.”
Rubio openly questioned Barack Obama’s overtures to the Castro regime in Cuba, and he was among the first to point out that Obama was giving away the store to the Castros while getting essentially nothing in return. Of the recent gathering at the Summit of the Americas, Rubio wrote in National Review that the appearance of Raul Castro made a mockery of the gathering of leaders of the hemisphere’s democratic nations: “Allowing a brutal dictator to attend undermines the future of democracy in the region. Already we’ve seen more evidence of the summit’s being influenced by Cuba than of Cuba’s being influenced by the summit’s principles supporting democracy.”
Rubio has accomplished much in his young political career, but his road to the White House is a steep climb. His youth and energy are attractive and have given him name recognition, but many people are skeptical of giving the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to another freshman senator (a status shared by the other two announced candidates). Rubio’s age advantage is also blunted by the relative youth of the entire Republican field.
Rubio displays prodigious fundraising talent, but he will be competing against Jeb Bush’s massive operation. Even though Bush has yet to formally announce his candidacy, he has locked up key supporters and established a national fundraising operation that will be tough to beat.
Rubio’s laying it all on the line. Florida law demands he give up his Senate seat in order to run for president. Should he lose, he will have to fight his way back into politics, though a Rubio governorship isn’t out of the question — especially considering that would set him up for a stronger White House run in the future.
Rubio is also an attractive vice presidential candidate. He was on Mitt Romney’s short list in 2012, and we could see him matched up this time around with Scott Walker or Rick Perry. But a Bush win ends Rubio’s VP chances because the Constitution precludes the president and vice president from calling the same state home.
Whatever the outcome, Rubio’s entrance into the race furthers a broader debate with fresh perspectives about the direction of the country. That’s never a bad thing.
Barack Obama must be ecstatic. With all of the media coverage of candidates entering the presidential race and the Leftmedia virtually giving the administration a pass on the bad Iran nuke deal, other important news gets pushed to the back of the list — like Obama’s EPA working to make the price of electricity skyrocket.
Part of Obama’s quest in “fundamentally transforming America” is to combat climate change, which according to this administration is a greater threat to our national security than terrorism, illegal immigration or a nuclear armed Iran. Obama has less than two years left in office, but there is more of his agenda to be completed. And he’s enlisting the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out his goals on energy policy.
The EPA is expected to finalize a new rule this summer that will require states to regulate the “production, distribution and use of electricity” in order to meet carbon-reduction targets. The Wall Street Journal says, “This is an unprecedented federal usurpation of what has been a state responsibility since the invention of the modern steam turbine in the 1880s.”
Under Obama’s Clean Power Plan that he issued last year, the EPA will set carbon-reduction mandates on every state, with the goal of reducing emissions by 30% by 2025. It fulfills Obama’s promises in 2008 that under his plan “energy prices would necessarily skyrocket” as coal plants are shutdown to meet this regulatory burden.
Regulations supposedly beneficial for the environment might seem harmless enough, but there is much more to this mandate that is quite concerning to those who love Liberty.
According to Chris Prandoni of Forbes, in order for states to reach the proposed carbon-reduction mandates, the EPA “told states there are four different tools each state can use to meet these mandates: improve the efficiency of coal plants, force fuel switching from coal to natural gas, bring more renewables online, and reduce consumer electricity consumption.”
We bet the EPA is hoping the last “tool” — to require states to “reduce consumer energy consumption” — is the one most states primarily employ. If implemented, this tool would be pure tyranny. Consider not being able to heat or cool your house to the temperature that you so desire. How about using what the EPA deems too much electricity?
The EPA doesn’t have the legal authority to force states to comply with the proposed Clean Power Plan, but, if states were to submit a State Implementation Plan, it would give the EPA the power to use the “tools” instead of the state. Why? Because if the EPA doesn’t like a State Implementation Plan, then the EPA would have the power to revise it or throw it out entirely. What happens if a state decides it doesn’t want to submit a State Implementation Plan? Then the EPA gets to issue a Federal Implementation Plan, therefore giving the EPA the “tools” to make that state meet the mandates. It’s a lose-lose situation for state sovereignty that sounds remarkably like ObamaCare exchanges.
Fortunately, several states are already saying no to the EPA. And, according to The Wall Street Journal, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is “urging Governors to wait before cooperating” with the hopes that the courts will intervene and rule the EPA can’t force the states to do something they can’t or don’t want to do.
Of course, Obama scolded McConnell for getting in the way of his climate agenda, which is ironic because Obama seems to have no qualms about interfering with congressional authority, state sovereignty or individual freedom.
Obama has also enlisted the help of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The Heartland Institute’s Paul Driessen reports the council has been tasked with “dramatically retooling the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act,” which “requires that federal agencies consider the impact of their significant decision-making actions on ‘the quality of the human environment’ any time they issue permits for projects, provide government funding or conduct the projects themselves.” This is politi-speak for shutting down fossil fuel production.
Obama and the EPA have been relentless in their quest for power, all in the name of saving the planet. The states, the courts, Congress and We the People must fight against the climate change lie. We have already sacrificed far too much Liberty on the religious altar of environmental protection.
For more, visit Right Analysis.
TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS
- Dennis Prager: Why Hillary Clinton’s Candidacy Is Depressing
- Tony Perkins: Clinton Typo Reveals Hard Truth
- Arnold Ahlert: A Modern Golfer With Old School Class
- Ed Feulner: Achieving True Tax Reform
- Thomas Sowell: The New Inquisition
For more, visit Right Opinion.
OPINION IN BRIEF
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (1925-2013): “America, my friends, is the only country in the world actually founded on liberty — the only one. People went to America to be free.”
Columnist Dennis Prager: “There was a time when most Americans voted for president out of the belief that the person would be best for the country. Now, at least for the American left, it is primarily about being the ‘first’ — the first black, the first woman, the first gay, the first Jew, the first Native-American, the first transgender, the first atheist (so long, of course, as each is a Democrat). And once they are all elected, presumably it will be important to elect the first gay black female Jewish Native-American transgendered atheist (again, so long as s/he is a Democrat). And until we do, the left will continue to label America bigoted. … Compare Hillary Clinton to Carly Fiorina, a woman who went from small-town girl to CEO and Board Chair of Hewlett-Packard, one of the world’s largest companies. The comparison should be embarrassing. Yet how many liberals who are preoccupied with having a woman president would vote for Carly Fiorina? Zero. … Nevertheless, [Hillary’s] mendacity and her lack of accomplishments count for nothing in the eyes of Democrats, feminists and others on the left. She is, after all, a woman (who’s liberal). What else matters?”
FRC president Tony Perkins: “For once … Hillary Clinton may be telling the truth — and on her campaign website, no less! In one of the most ironic blunders of the First Lady’s career, her new Hillary Clinton for President website stated, ‘She’s fought children and families all her career.’ Newsbusters caught the mistake — which conservatives would argue was anything but. Over her long career as a senator and America’s top diplomat, Hillary Clinton has been a global advocate for abortion-on-demand and the complete demolition of the natural family, making her anything but an ally of children or the family. … We need a leader who will not apologize for America’s exceptionalism, but embrace the source of it. And we need a leader who will contend with those in far away places trying to kill people because of their religion — while also contending with those here at home who want to kill the freedom of religion. In this year’s field, there is reason for optimism with candidates who have fought for children and families.”
Comedian Conan O'Brien: “In a recent interview, Michelle Obama said that the Secret Service taught Malia how to drive. In exchange, Malia taught the Secret Service how to throw a party when her parents are away.”
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform – Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen – standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.