Skip

I could only shake my head when I read this Op-Ed over at the UL:

Another View — Ovide Lamontagne: Why conservatives should support Kelly Ayotte

It was one thing when, after she had won the 2010 US Senate Primary here in NH, he waltzed her around the state in a show of unity.  Certainly she had “sounded” good and said the right words, but there were reasons why we had endorsed Ovide over her in that Primary; she wasn’t as good as the others running and her grasp on the issues that mattered to the base were more tenuous than the others – it just seemed that she wasn’t a natural conservative.  All she really had behind her was a ton of Establishment money and oomph pushing her along.  Even with that

Six years down the line, we now know that to be true.  But for Ovide to continue “the waltzing”, well, he has lost his mind.  WHY, in God’s green earth, would he try to encourage movement conservatives to vote for someone who has shown that generally doesn’t care about Conservative Principles?  All she really had behind her at the time was a ton of Establishment money and oomph pushing her along.  Even with that, she barely won over a surging Ovide – another week in the campaign and he might have beat her.

Here’s the comment I left:

Read more

“GOP Wants ‘To Emasculate Gov’t At Every Possible Turn”

In a lot of cases, yes, the Federal Government should be emasculated – it is too large, too powerful, too intrusive.  The problem is, however, is that it sticks itself into areas into which it has no Constitutional authorization to do.  For instance, where in the Constitution does it say it should be in charge of school breakfasts?  Is that one of the enumerated Powers listed?  And if so, please show me where it is?

Read more

The Administrative State – as I’ve said for years, it is the end goal of Progressives and we see too many Republicans (right, Ovide?) supporting other Republicans in moving the Overton Window leftward in achieving it in diminishing the power of the Legislative Branch by the empowerment of the Executive Branch’s agencies.  The only way to forestall this is to lessen this “Fourth Branch of Government” which in a lot of ways is acting like a complete government on its own: it makes its own rules, enforces its own rules (legislature), its own law enforcement, has its own administrative courts and judges (judiciary) for fines and jail time, and increasingly, levying its own set of fines AND taxes.  And now this (and near the end, lets the BIG cat out of the bag) (emphasis mine, reformatted):

Senate Dem: ‘I fear for the Union’ if Congress limits bureaucratic power

A debate about whether Congress should pass a law that would restrain federal bureaucrats from taking action without clear legal authority provoked one senator to wonder if Congress would be able to handle the extra workload.

Well, isn’t that the ACTUAL problem – that bureaucrats do this BECAUSE

Read more

For the want of a nail, a shoe was lost.  This is not a nail but a huge spike:

“The truth is that modern liberty depends on the power of the purse. All of the great battles in England in the 17th century between the Crown and Parliament turned ultimately on the power of the purse. The members of Parliament were elected at least in part with an eye to achieving a redress of grievances, and that redress was the price they exacted for funding the Crown. Our legislature has given up that power. Our congressional leaders claim – once the election is over – that they have no leverage. If that is really true, then elections do not matter, and a redress of grievances is now beyond the legislature’s power. Absent that capacity, however, the legislature is virtually useless. Absent that capacity, it is contemptible — and let’s face it: the President and those who work under him have showered it with contempt.” Which is why we have Trump.

Paul Rahe is correct – it is amongst the most powerful of the limited tools that the Legislature has over the Executive Branch.  But over the last 100 years, we have seen the Progressives use

Read more

Rick Manning is the President of Americans for Limited Government.

Ayotte joins the GOP Senate majority

Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) got it right when she walked back her open door to Obama’s Supreme Court nominee today stating that she supports Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) position to not consider the nominee and let the people decide.

The people of New Hampshire have one of the most important roles in the presidential nominating process, and New Hampshirites should have their votes count in determining the direction of the Supreme Court for the next twenty years.

Nothing less than the Second Amendment is at risk, as Obama’s nominee has proven in his current judicial role to be a certain vote against the Heller decision overturning this landmark assertion that law-abiding citizens have an individual right to keep and bear arms. Can any thinking person after watching the current president’s constant barrage against guns and gun ownership honestly doubt that repealing Heller would be at the top of his nominee’s agenda?

Read more

And they keep on saying that the TEA Party is dead and gone and that the Establishment Republicans have won.  Last laugh?

Shot: former US House Speaker Boehner endorses Paul Ryan

Former Speaker of the House John Boehner has endorsed current Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) for president, in the event that no Republican candidate achieves a majority on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July.
Politico reports that Boehner, speaking at a conference in Boca Raton, Florida, said: “If we don’t have a nominee who can win on the first ballot, I’m for none of the above. They all had a chance to win. None of them won. So I’m for none of the above. I’m for Paul Ryan to be our nominee.”

Chaser: The TEA party swipes John Boehner’s seat

…Warren Davidson, a businessman and former Army Ranger, won a 15-way Republican primary Tuesday in the special election for Ohio’s 8th Congressional District. The tea party candidate rather easily bested more moderate candidates, including two state lawmakers, in a campaign that quickly became ground zero for the party’s ongoing identity struggle in the House that Boehner used to run. The winner of a June special election will serve out the rest of 2016 in Boehner’s seat, and in such a deep red congressional district, that winner is likely to be Davidson.

Read more

Three:

“I believe strongly that the people of New Hampshire must have a say in this extraordinarily important debate. With so much on the line for the future of our country, the Senate should not proceed with a confirmation process until the American people have spoken by electing a new president in November.”

Two:

And what does now US District Court Judge, thanks to Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Wilhelmina Marie Wright hold on the Right to Personal Property?  Right out of the Critical Race Theory (that EVERYTHING, knowable and unknowable, always proves racism):

The practice of American racism is based on two principles: the sanctity of property and the belief in the hierarchy of races. The first of these principles is firmly protected by the words and action of the Constitution; the second is proscribed by the words of the instrument, but not by its effect. History shows that when these two principles are juxtaposed (which happens constantly), property rights are given absolute priority.

…And why would Kelly Ayotte give her consent if so?

One:

Read more

Quickie roundup:

1. Garland is considered anti-Second Amendment. As the National Review noted last week: “Back in 2007, Judge Garland voted to undo a D.C. Circuit court decision striking down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation” and voted “to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement.” Obama will use his pick to pursue a gun control agenda.

2. Garland has favored environmental regulations. As SCOTUSblog noted in 2010: “On environmental law, Judge Garland has in a number of cases favored contested EPA regulations and actions when challenged by industry, and in other cases he has accepted challenges brought by environmental groups.” That could be very important, with Obama’s Clean Power Plan in the balance.

3. Garland’s positions on abortion and social issues are murky. Some liberals are worried that Garland may not be unambiguously pro-choice. Richard Wolf of USA Today writes: “During 19 years at the D.C. Circuit, Garland has managed to keep a low profile. The court’s largely administrative docket has left him without known positions on issues such as abortion or the death penalty.”

Read more

After all, she is running to be the Second Coming of Obama in being his third term.  So why shouldn’t she be following in his footsteps?

“You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”

But he did declare coal to be bad.  Have you ever known a President, once smack down by Congress by NOT voting for a Cap N Trade, just on his own try to put an entire industry out of existence on his (and his EPA’s) say so?  And now Hillary is going that one next step further – she has promised to finish off the proud people of coal country.  And her utterance couldn’t be any more full of irony with the question being asked at the CNN’s Democrat town hall event:

Make the case to poor whites who vote Republican why they should vote for you and your economic policies

Sigh…

Read more

Update: ‘Grok friend Seth reminds me that Flanagan stepped down from being the Majority Leader.  So, mentally stick a “former” below and it will still read as badly.

***************

So, Steve posted this tidbit from those Republicans who vote with Democrats and CERTAINLY don’t vote the Republican agenda according to the Establishment’s cri de coeur of the mantra of voting 80% of the time with Republicans:

• Flanagan, Jack (R, Brookline) cast 28 votes with Democrats, 42 votes with Republicans, mainstream score 60%

Jack Flanagan is the NH House Majority Leader – and can barely nick 60%? Jack Flanagan is the NH House Majority Leader – are leaders supposed to protect the Republican agenda and Platform/Principles?  Jack Flanagan is the NH House Majority Leader – and he wants people to send him to Congress from CD-2?

Read more

We’e had discussions with folks that have lived under real Socialism – almost all immigrated from the former Eastern Bloc countries.  In each and every case, they just could not understand HOW and WHY native Americans can even think about wanting Socialism.  They understand, all too well, that the blitherings of this doddering (but unrepentant) Socialist has no clue what happens to the people who are forced to live under a centrally planned and coercive State (which demands ALL is for The State) that treats its people as mere objects.  They understand that the rhetoric spewed by their countries was mere propaganda – but certainly appealed to those that hold the idea that it was truth – the Utopia promised by Marx and his ilk had come to fruition. Our friends knew the real truth.

Like Gary Kasparov – former Soviet Union citizen and world champion chessmaster:

I’m enjoying the irony of American Sanders supporters lecturing me, a former Soviet citizen, on the glories of Socialism and what it really means! Socialism sounds great in speech soundbites and on Facebook, but please

Read more