Obama Administration Files Motion to Stop Judge’s Request for Info on Immigrants
Texas is one of 26 states currently suing the administration over Obama’s executive action.Read More »
Arlen Specter is no more. Hahahahahahaha. This makes the fourth person in a statewide race to lose after Barack Obama campaigned for him.Trey Grayson went down in flames to Rand Paul, who openly embraced the tea party label.Tim Burns lost the special election in PA-12, but will now run in the general election for November against the Democrat. It is important to note that the Democrat, Critz, to get the win had to run to the right, repudiating large portions of Barack Obama’s agenda.In Arkansas, it looks like Blanche Lincoln will make it into a runoff, but her margin of victory is so close to Lt. Gov. Halter, she could lose the run off. She too ran against Barack Obama.The only Democrat to survive out and out the night running to the left was Joe Sestak. And Pat Toomey is going to beat him in November.Oh, and on Saturday, Charles Djou, a Republican, is going to win in a heavily Democrat district in Hawaii.Please click here for the rest of the post.
Let me draw up a scenario for you. You’re a long-term incumbent Republican in a purple state that may or may not be trending blue. You’ve always been a moderate and coasted to easy elections in the general. However, a bunch of rabble-rousing conservatives and tea partiers, the kind of people you never liked anyway, have propped up some firebrand conservative candidate, and the polling seems to indicate that you’d have trouble winning a primary election. In your own party. The unkempt, church-going rubes; you never really liked them anyway.You’re approached at the same time by the then-wildly-popular Democrat President who carried your state handily, and your State’s Democrat governor, who has a fabled turnout machine. These two guys promise you that if you jump ship and switch parties, they’ll throw you their support. Sure, there’s already a Democrat in the race, but they promise you every bit of their formidable monetary and establishment power. The President assures you that he’ll offer this upstart Democrat a position as a diplomat or cabinet undersecretary or something, and you’ll coast to a primary victory. Then, since you’ll be the nominee of the state’s preferred party anyway, the general election will be a breeze.Sure sounds better than trying to mollify those icky tea partiers for two years, doesn’t it? A little easier to swallow? Sounds like a safer route to travel, to boot?Please click here for the rest of the post.
Possibly AG Richard Blumenthal (D CAND, CT-SEN) should not have used a VFW hall to host his explanation of why he wasn’t always lying about serving in Vietnam? – Because the local organization is not happy about that. Its head (Richard DiFederico) calledBlumenthal’s claims “false” and “outrageous,” and Blumenthal’s choice of venue won’t help that any.Please click here for the rest of the post.
A paragraph in today’s Politico article detailing Mark Souder’s resignation over his affair struck me as odd:“A hard-line conservative, Souder recently survived a tough GOP primary in the Hoosier State, edging two opponents who held him under 50 percent. Souder’s Republican rivals criticized Souder over his support for the Troubled Asset Relief Program and Cash for Clunkers programs.”I take exception to that description: no real conservative would have voted for TARP or Cash for Clunkers. The mistake made is the assumption that because someone is pro-life means he or she is a conservative. Someone who is pro-life, but votes to expand the state and state spending, is in fact not a conservative, but a pro-life statist.As someone who is deeply pro-life, and became even more so when my daughter was born four months premature, I absolutely believe in the sanctity of life. But I have a problem with many elected officials who call themselves social conservatives, as though that were all that mattered, and then go and vote for more government and more government spending.Please click here for the rest of the post.
It’s widely rumored that Jon Huntsman (former Republican governor of Utah, and current ambassador to the People’s Republic of China) has future political ambitions: I submit that those ambitions will quickly die the True Death if he does not address the recent ridiculousness over our State Department apologizing to the People’s Republic of China for Arizona’s enforcement of the government’s own illegal immigration policy. Because it’s now officially part of the national discussion.Please click here for the rest of the post.
The Exxon Valdez, it ain’t. But when I say that, itseems to upset some people.Only by being rational about assessing the environmental threat from the Deepwater Horizon spill can we be prepared to deal with the consequences.Journalists, scientists, Congressmen and bureaucrats have been jockeying to see who can make the most calamitous prediction. As an engineer, I compulsively check their claims (because I know that the journalists are incapable of it, the environmentalists refuse to do it, and those in government are motivated by a power-grab).Please click here for the rest of the post.
Citizens, attention! The government makes hundreds upon hundreds of rules every year using a vast network of agencies and bodies and other such wondrous government words. And that is great, because you might hurt yourself if we didn’t. So make a video telling us how awesome it is that we make rules for you! Maybe we’ll make making rules videos a rule!! RULES!!!!!!From the EPA site overview: “This video contest provided an opportunity for the public to explain federal rulemaking and motivate others to participate in the rulemaking process. Entrants created a short video, not exceeding 90 seconds in length, explaining why rules are important, why the average American should care about federal regulations, and how people can participate in the rulemaking process.”Please click here for the rest of the post.
This article (H/T: The New Ledger) says absolutely everything that you need to know about the messianic zealots assailing the Food and Drug Administration right now. Quick context: somebody in North Carolina (quick, North Carolinian voters: how does your legislator feel about wrecking the taste of your bacon?) noticed that the FDA is gearing up a set of rules on sodium levels that might have an adverse effect on North Carolinian foodstuffs, like country hams. And by ‘adverse’ I mean ‘endangers consumers’.Please click here for the rest of the post.