The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense

“…I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.… It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell

(c) copyright 2011-2016 Doug Johnson All Rights Reserved. All site content is copyright protected and subject to penalties for infringement of copyright laws.

Monday, May 26, 2014

Will Amnesty Be An Independence Day Gift To Illegals?

Here's the Nonsense:  Amnesty for illegal immigrants is still a long way off and will have to go through a major battle to become reality.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Don't fool yourself.  Amnesty is right around the corner and most likely will become reality sooner than you think.

Last Thursday Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid informed Republicans in the House of Representatives that they have 6 weeks to pass legislation granting amnesty to illegal immigrants or the president would use executive actions.  Politico reports that Reid said, "We've waited 329 days, we're willing to wait another six weeks, but at the end of six weeks, if something hasn't been done, then there's gonna have to be a move made.  And it's too bad we have to do that, because we all know things can be done administratively, but it's better to change the law."  Six weeks from last Thursday is July 3rd.  That would be right in time for the president to claim "independence" for those illegals by granting amnesty and try to portray his actions as patriotic.  He'd call it a patriotic act that is much-needed, and a right-thing-to-do action of acceptance of undocumented citizens into their rightful place as part of our nation.  But in the end, it will be nothing other than amnesty, a free ride to citizenship for people who are here illegally.

In his comment Reid said that "things can be done administratively,"  which clearly would be another executive action that is at best questionable and, more likely, illegal.  It would be just like so many other things that the president has done illegally with no one stopping him (even though the Constitution gives that responsibility to Congress).  (If you scoff at the claim that the president has broken the law, just take a look at a list of 76 times he's done so as cited in this recently released report from Senator Ted Cruz by clicking here.)

By pushing for it to be done legislatively instead of administratively, Reid knows that legislative action would eliminate the potential of a court challenge if it were done administratively.  After all, he knows full well the president's actions are illegal and certainly doesn't want a court challenge of an executive action to send this to the courts.  

It would be just like the progressives to use something like our great national holiday of July 4th that celebrates America's independence and freedom to twist the laws and grant amnesty to millions of illegals.  Granting amnesty was a mistake once made by Ronald Reagan when he let himself get talked into granting amnesty to illegal immigrants and he lived to regret it.  But at least he admitted that he regretted it.

I might be off in my suggested date of Independence Day because The Hill is reporting that Senator Chuck Schumer also talked about this on Thursday.  It said he mentioned that the last Republican primary for the upcoming midterm elections in November will be held on June 10 and that there's 6 weeks from then until the August recess of Congress.  It does make some sense that they'd wait until after the Republican primaries so that establishment Republicans can complete their sweep of the primaries and not be held accountable by the voters regarding immigration.  So, it could possibly wait a few weeks after Independence Day, but if it does it appears that it would be shortly thereafter.

But the July 4th date just seems so perfect that part of me thinks that may be the date for which they are planning.  Regardless of whether it's July 4th or just before the August congressional recess, the idea is to push it through before recess so that by the time voters start to pay attention for the midterm elections they will have forgotten about it.  Politicians know that voters never start to pay attention until after Labor Day.  And they also know that if they do not get it through this summer, there's the possibility that the conservatives may have too much success in the midterms thereby eliminating the progressives' chance of getting amnesty put through at all.

Do you see how they do this?  This is the way they work.  They sit down and figure out just when and how they must move things forward so that they can get what they want and maintain control.  And they get away with it because most Americans don't know what's going on in this country.  That's the reason for us to have major concern.  It's the very reason we will lose the America we have known unless people wake up.

I think that Sam Malone, a friend of mine who is a talk radio and TV host in Houston, has it pretty well figured out.  Sam believes that only 10% of Americans really are aware of what's happening in our government and 90% have no clue.  He supports that by reminding people that Congress only has an 11% approval rating and yet they still keep getting reelected.  He's right.  In the primaries that have already been held this year not one incumbent has lost yet.  If Americans were truly aware and concerned they'd be voting these people off the ballot and out of office.

So, what are you doing about it?  You don't have to have a large platform to do something about it.  Whether you're a talk show host or just an average citizen, you have power to reach people in ways that can make a difference.  For those with a platform, like talk show hosts, I have to ask what you've done lately besides rant on your show about what's wrong in America.  How many events have you been holding, leading, or participating in to educate and inform people about what's going on and what they can do about it?

And if you're an average citizen, how many people have you talked to about these things lately?  Do you speak to those you meet at work, in public places like stores and other places?  If every one of us aren't talking to the people we meet and engaging them about what's happening in America and what to do about it, we can kiss the freedoms we have goodbye.

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

The VA Scandal Shows Us Future Of Obamacare

Here's the Nonsense:  The VA healthcare mess is just that, a mess.  It is simply a situation where some problems need to be fixed.  It has nothing to do with Obamacare, it's an anomaly and not indicative of where healthcare is going in the U. S.

Here's the Horse Sense:  The VA healthcare scandal is a perfect example of what the future holds for Americans under Obamacare.  Wake up America while you still can.

Some are rejecting the idea, but the simple fact is that the scandal at the VA is a perfect example of what awaits Americans in the future with Obamacare.  While some say the problems at the VA were not "death panels" per se, the reality of the situation is that the mess at the VA has resulted in exactly what those of us who were against Obamacare from the start warned about.  Delays, rationing, and denied healthcare is the future of healthcare under Obamacare whether people like it or not.  Just as we've read happens in nationalized healthcare systems in other countries (click here and here for just two examples from Britain, whose healthcare system Obamacare is based upon), people will not get the care they are used to or deserve in America as Obamacare takes control over the next few years.

The Veterans Administration has had problems with delays, and possibly denials, in the care it gives our veterans for some time.  There were concerns about it under President Bush that, according to the Washington Times, the Obama administration was warned about.  So, we can't say that this situation was caused by the Obama administration.  But the scandal is that now we're in Obama's sixth year in office and the problems still exist.  And now it's come out that over 100 people have died (that we know of so far) due to this problem that Senator John McCain says is in 10 states (and my guess it's actually probably in far more, but we just don't know how deep the problem goes yet).

On April 14 CNN reported that 40 veterans had died while waiting for care at the Phoenix, AZ VA.  This followed CNN's report in January that said 19 vets had died in VA hospitals waiting for colonoscopies and endoscopies, which were part of a list of 82 who'd died that were listed in an internal Veterans Administration report about care in 2010 and 2011.

The list of warnings and problems goes much deeper with Senator Rob Portman writing a letter in April 2013 seeking answers to these problems and he followed it up with another letter in June 2013 that demanded answers as to why VA healthcare workers were doing union work instead of their healthcare work, which obviously reduced the availability of those employees to take care of patients.

What I'm writing here just scratches the surface as to the problems that seem to be plaguing the VA healthcare system.  Obama has claimed over and over again that he's concerned and angry over what's been happening to our veterans at the VA.  But nothing has happened to improve care.  

Rush Limbaugh, like many of us, has compared the delays in care to the death panels that are in Obamacare (they're denied by the administration, but they're in there as Howard Dean has now admitted).  Limbaugh said, "When you have government employees receiving salary bonuses for ostensibly saving money by virtue of shrinking the number of people on the list, how does that happen?  How do people end up off the list and not treated?  They pass away.  And if you're gonna have government employees bounced on that basis, then you would be not that far out of whack to assume there might be some death panel at work here.  If you don't want to go that far, at the very least, there is rampant incompetence here and inability to run the medical treatment of the Veterans Affairs system." 

That's the point.  The VA scandal may just be the sheer incompetence of government bureaucracy, which in itself shows how bad healthcare will get as it's nationalized in that same bureaucracy.  But whether it's incompetence or planned, it shows exactly what will happen to American citizens under Obamacare.

But don't discount the idea that this is planned under Obamacare.  Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the architects of Obamacare and brother of Chicago Mayor and former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has openly talked about the plan to reduce care for Americans.  He, for example, believes that the death of a 20 year old is far worse than the death of a 2 month old. He believes that people from their late teens through their forties are the most valuable so they should get the most care.  Those younger or older should get far less care.  That is the plan that is being implemented through Obamacare.  So, don't be surprised when you see what's happening in the VA start happening throughout our healthcare system in this country.

The future is bleak for American healthcare.  Some brave souls like Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are still fighting to repeal it. I'm not sure it can still be repealed.  The establishment GOP has accepted that it's here to stay, which they prove by their lack of effort to support efforts to repeal it.  This, once again, shows how far our nation has fallen.  Your rights have been taken away and stopping it will take far more than just saying you won't stand for it.  The question is what will you do about it?  What are you doing beyond just saying you're against what's happening in America to stop the fall of our nation?

Sunday, May 18, 2014

The Triple Crown vs. The NFL on Political Correctness and Freedom

Here's the Nonsense:  Professional sports are filled with excitement, entertainment, and fun. The good thing is that they're free of the political correctness that's destroying America.

Here's the Horse Sense:  As exciting as professional sports may be, political correctness has even infiltrated some sports and is causing them to be part of the terrible damage being done to America.  It's another front on which we must fight.

There's a professional sport in America for just about everyone's taste.  They can be a great form of entertainment, excitement, and fun.  But some have moved from that proper place to actually helping the left in their efforts to destroy America and take away our rights.  If we're serious about taking America back, then we have to consider everything we do, even the sports we support.

A sport more popular than many people realize is that of horse racing.  The sport is most known in America for the Triple Crown, which is a series of three races (the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness, and the Belmont Stakes) that are called the Triple Crown.  The Kentucky Derby, the first of the 3 races, is considered the most exciting 2 minutes in sports and regularly has about 150,000 attendees and millions watching by TV.

Since the Triple Crown started in 1919 there have only been 11 horses to win it.  The last one was Affirmed in 1978.  Two other horses, Seattle Slew and Secretariat also won in the 1970s.  Prior to that you have to go back to the 1940s for a winner (see complete list of winners below).  It is a rare thing for a horse to win the Triple Crown.  People all have their favorites.  Whether it's Secretariat, who won the Belmont by 31 lengths (and is considered by many to be the greatest racehorse in history), or Sir Barton, the first winner of the Triple Crown, or any of the others, with it being 36 years since there's been a winner, the fans are long-ready for another one to come along.  Super-athletes, and that's just what these horses are, don't come along that often and when they do they are a pleasure to watch.

I'm not a gambling man.  I don't believe in gambling.  I'm drawn to watch a horse race just because of the beauty of running horses and their incredible ability.  They're truly one of God's greatest creations.  And this year horse racing is extremely exciting.  First, a little background on what's going on: 

A little colt named California Chrome is the offspring of a mare named Love the Chase that was purchased for a mere $8000.  The owners were told they were crazy to buy her, but they did anyway.  They paid a $2500 stud fee to breed her with Lucky Pulpit, who had only won 3 of his 22 starts.  Then Love the Chase gave birth to California Chrome who is now a contender for the Triple Crown.  

California Chrome has gone from an unknown of little value to multi-million dollar worth with his performances.  This little horse blasted past all competitors in the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness this year making him one of those rare contenders for the Triple Crown.  It's an exciting thing to watch.  Anticipation is high as the final leg of the Triple Crown, the Belmont stakes, will be run in early June.  

But USA Today is reporting that California Chrome may not run in the Belmont, eliminating his chance to be the next Triple Crown winner.  The reason?  New York bans the use of nasal strips on racing Thoroughbreds.  They are the only state in the country that bans them.  They are used with no restriction in racing, rodeo, and other equestrian events.  And that may cause the owners of California Chrome to keep from running him in the race.

The nasal strips (called Flair ® Equine Nasal Strips) are very similar to the Breathe Right ® strips that humans wear.  Whether it's the guy who snores too much trying to keep his wife from losing another night's sleep or athletes in virtually all sports, humans wear these things to allow them to breathe easier.  They are purely mechanical and simply help hold the nasal passage open to allow better air flow.  Just like the similar version for humans, they use no drugs of any kind.  Since horses berate through their noses and not like humans, who breathe through both our noses and mouths, this can be beneficial during heavy exercise. 

Even though New York allows the jockeys to wear them, the horses cannot.  The steward who made the decision is said to have been approached to discuss the matter.  When approached he was asked to talk about it and the science behind the use of the nasal strips, but his response was that he didn't care about science.  Wow, now that's open-minded, isn't it?  (I wonder how he feels about global warming?)

Saying a horse cannot use a mechanical device that is also used by the jockeys seems crazy.  It would be like telling an Olympic runner that he can't wear modern running shoes, but must run using shoes that were in use when the modern Olympics first started in 1896, or maybe that he couldn't wear shoes at all.  (And, by the way, the Olympics does allow these devices to be used by horses in equestrian events. Human Olympians are also allowed to use their version of the device.)  It's not like anyone is asking to drug the horses, they just want to use some modern technology.  But New York won't hear of it.  And so California Chrome's chances of winning the Triple Crown may eliminated because of a ridiculous rule.

This horse has an opportunity to show a level of performance not seen in decades.  It's a disappointment to see that taken away from him over an irrational rule.  But then I'm not surprised because the logic some people use to make any decisions these days defies rationality. (see update to California Chrome story at end of post)

I gave up watching most professional sports years ago.  Most of it happened when the irresponsible and narcissistic attitudes of athletes not only took over sports, but were encouraged.  When the NFL players started dancing around the end zone after a touchdown I knew it was over.  I was raised to believe in good sportsmanship.  That didn't just mean being a good loser, but even more it meant to be a good winner, which meant not rubbing a victory in your opponent's face.  Allowing that sort of behavior was not only in poor taste, it allowed a very bad role model for Americans, especially children.  Say what you will, but everything that we allow our children to watch influences the values they develop in their lives.  

Role models in many professional sports are rare to come by anymore.  When a positive role model like Tim Tebow comes along he is ridiculed and vilified, while others in professional sports are seen as heroes even though their behavior both during sporting events and in their personal lives is disgusting.  

In fact, with the narcissism we encourage in our society, it's amazing we have any role models left at all.  The idea that the Miami Dolphins would send Don Jones to get more education about personal comments he made regarding the picture of the NFL's first openly gay draft pick (Michael Sam) celebrating his draft by kissing his boyfriend defies what America is supposed to be about. Yes, we're a pluralistic society and that means people have the right to do things with which each of us may agree or disagree.  That's part of what our society and freedom are about.  But we've now become a society where people must think and speak a certain way or they will be punished and reeducated.  That's what the Miami Dolphins did to Don Jones.  Doesn't he also have a right to his viewpoint, no matter how much we agree or disagree with him?

The NFL has become nothing more than politically correct thought police.  Yet they encourage bad behavior on the part of players by allowing such things as the antics on the field that go on and the lifestyles many of these people live.  Ultimately this undermines our society because of the influence we allow them to have in our lives and the lives of our children.  As far as I'm concerned, any person serious about saving America would think twice about watching or supporting the NFL or any organization that promotes thought control.  

I'm sure, though, that most people aren't willing to give up their entertainment, of which sports like the NFL are a big part.  You who are reading this may be one of them.  (In fact, I'm sure I'll lose a lot of readers due to their resulting anger at me for even suggesting this.)  But something we have to understand is that we don't win if we keep supporting them.  We only win if we, by lack of support, force them to change their ways to truly American ways that allow for free thought and speech.  

Whether you like it or not, it's a first amendment issue.  That's what you're standing for or against by supporting them.  What are you willing to give up to stand for freedom?  If we won't give up something as simple as a game, then it shows how doomed our nation really is.

So how does the NFL and the Triple Crown compare when it comes to political correctness?  Are the stupid rules New York has set for their horse racing the same as an NFL team sending a player in for reeducation on their thoughts?  No, they're not.  The New York officials have set a rule which we can disagree about, but they're not forcing anyone to think politically correct thoughts.  But the NFL (and I'm sure other professional sports will follow suit) is promoting thought police to control the way people think and act.  My questions to them would be:

1.)  What is their guideline for determining what behavior is acceptable?
2.)  Who sets those guidelines?  
3.)  When new politically correct rules are developed and they demand that the NFL support things those who control the NFL disagree with, will the NFL then think it's unfair or will they give up their ways and go along because it's the politically correct thing to do?  

It's not just the NFL or select groups where this is happening.   U. S. Senate leader Harry Reid has scheduled a meeting for June 3 to put forth an amendment to the U. S. Constitution that would limit political speech by citizens.  Breitbart News is reporting"The proposed amendment includes a provision that 'Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress the power to abridge the freedom of the press.' So Breitbart News, The New York Times, and the mainstream media would be able to say whatever they want, but citizens and citizen groups such as the National Rifle Association could not."  If passed, that would be the first time an amendment has taken away a constitutional right from American citizens.

Freedom of speech and thought are the cornerstone of liberty.  America was founded upon that cornerstone, but the cornerstone is not just under attack, it's crumbling.  Unless we are willing to allow people to think as they choose and support their right to do it, we will lose all of our freedoms.  And sadly, that is a loss that is well under way.  We have already lost some of that freedom and we are a hair's breadth from losing the rest of it.  This must be fought on every level, not just in government.  Without change to our culture by standing against any and every effort to take away freedom, we have no chance at survival as a free nation.

We do not have the right to behave in ways that harm other people.  But we do have the right to think as we choose and express those thoughts.  Anything less is exactly what George Orwell wrote about in his book 1984.  If you haven't read it (or read it lately), it's about time you do so.  It's a quick read that will show you exactly where we're headed.  And it's not pretty.

UPDATE:  The story about California has taken a turn.  New York has granted California Chrome the right to wear the nasal strip in the Belmont Stakes.  This is both great news for the sport, for California Chrome and his owners, and for rational thinking.  

Monday, May 12, 2014

Donald Sterling, Marco Rubio, and John Boehner Are All Critical For America's Future

Here's the Nonsense:  America has problems, but they're few and far between.  

Here's the Horse Sense:  America's problems are so numerous it's hard to choose what to comment on.  Here are 3 that are bigger than people will probably realize.

Three topics in the news are critical for America's future:  Donald Sterling asks for forgiveness, should he get it? Marco Rubio says he's ready to be president, but is he? And, did John Boehner sell out the Benghazi Select Committee?  All of these are very important questions whose answers are important for America's future.

1.)  As most Americans know, LA Clippers owner, Donald Sterling, was in the news causing a firestorm recently for comments he made about blacks.  The result was the NBA commissioner fining him, restricting access to his team, facilities, and NBA events.  Now Anderson Cooper has interviewed him and he's asking for forgiveness.  Saying he was wrong and seeking to reconcile, Sterling has put himself out there to see if the trouble he's gotten himself into can be resolved.

The real issue with this story will be the response of the left.  Will they forgive a man who has admitted fault and asked to be forgiven?  That is the hallmark of the value system upon which America was created.  We are supposed to believe in redemption.  Sure, you might say that we can't trust him or what if he fails again, but forgiveness does not hold something against a person out of fear they may do it again.  That's not the issue.  

Sterling is seeking forgiveness and should be granted that from our society.  If he fails again, we will deal with that at that time. But at this point Sterling is trying to make things right.  My guess is that he won't be forgiven.  But is it the best thing for our society to hold things against someone so they cannot learn from their mistake and move forward?  How does anyone become a better person if we don't give them a chance to start over?

Mr. Sterling, it has been said, has other skeletons in his closet that he is not talking about.  This is the chance to address those with him and see if he is willing to change.  This is an opportunity for us to show what makes America different.  We are a nation that was founded on the belief that fresh starts are possible.

2.)  Senator Marco Rubio was interviewed by Jonathan Karl on ABC's This Week and said he felt he was ready to be president.  Really?  Ready to be president?  He even tries to stand on the fact that he's been in public office for 14 years.  Are we supposed to be impressed by that?  He has never worked at anything other than politics.  He's accomplished nothing and run nothing.  (Sounds a lot like our current Oval Office occupant!.)

Add to that, the Miami Herald reported some serious problems during the 2012 campaign when he was being considered as a possible VP choice saying:

Rubio’s 2010 Senate campaign was fined $8,000 by the Federal Elections Commission, according to a just-released report that said it received “prohibited, excessive and other impermissible contributions totaling $210,173.09.”
By itself, the fine is a pittance for a campaign that raised about $21 million. The errors appear to be relatively small and largely clerical.
Still, it’s sloppy. It’s also a surprise. And it feeds into a broader narrative that Rubio is risky.
The article went on to say:
Still, this isn’t Rubio’s first bookkeeping problem.
In 2008, The Miami Herald discovered he failed to properly disclose a generous home loan from a politically connected bank. About the same time, he appeared to ring up some personal expenses on a Republican Party of Florida credit card that was established for political purposes. The Herald and the Tampa Bay Times then discovered Rubio double-billed taxpayers and the RPOF card $3,000 for flights, the costs for which he then reimbursed the state.
Then, late last year, a Rubio critic alerted the press to the fact that the senator’s official website incorrectly said his parents fled Fidel Castro’s Cuba. They actually had fled dictator Fulgencio Batista’s Cuba.
Rubio is very young to be considered for the most powerful job in the world.  You may say, "But he's 43 years old and you only have to be 35 to be president according to the Constitution."  That's true, but that doesn't make it a good idea these days.  People had to mature much faster in those days.  Thirty-five years old today is different than it was in the 18th century.  At that time the average lifespan in America was 45 years.  Today it's up to 77.6 years.  So, adjusting for average lifespan, 35 years old in colonial America would be equal to 60.3 years old today.  That older age gives a lot more life experience to draw from.  

Senator Rubio has shown he has poor judgment with his embracing of immigration reform that is essentially amnesty.  Some say that Reagan granted amnesty and that's true, but Reagan admitted later that it was a mistake and he never should have done it.  He learned from his mistake, but clearly Republicans who support it haven't.  Rubio's views have exposed him as the RINO that he really is.

No, Senator Rubio is not ready to be president.  In fact, I read a comment on an article about his ABC interview that said he isn't even ready to run a lemonade stand.  I think the commenter is closer to being right than Senator Rubio is and Americans who would encourage his candidacy would be asking for trouble. 

3.)  The Hill is reporting that  in an interview on Fox this weekend, House Speaker John Boehner says he has "no interest" in arresting Lois Lerner, whom the House last week voted to hold in contempt over her refusal to testify about her role in the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups.

The report said “'I’m not sure we want to go down that path,' Boehner said. 'It’s never been used,' he said of the provision allowing Congress to arrest individuals and place them in the Capitol jail. The Senate has in fact used that power, but not in the last 80 years. 'I’m not sure that it’s an appropriate way to go about this,' Boehner said.  The contempt charge has been referred to the Justice Department, and Boehner said it is up to Attorney General Eric Holder to prosecute Lerner."

As I mentioned in my last post, the chances of the Justice Department prosecuting her are nil.  And just because something hasn't been used in 80 years (even though Boehner thinks it has never been used so he either is denying history or ignorant of it) doesn't mean it shouldn't be used. But Boehner's past performance shows he isn't interested in making waves.  He's interested in getting along with his buddies in the establishment GOP and the Democrat Party more than he is interested in standing up for what's right.  The Washington Examiner is reporting more proof of his establishment commitment saying he's pushing for immigration reform to be pushed through quickly and for Jeb Bush to run for president in 2016.

We are in serious trouble in this country.  Our values, our ability to pick appropriate leaders, and our willingness to get involved and demand change are questionable at best (Gallup's most recent poll shows voter enthusiasm is way down.).  It's time for some soul searching.  We must decide whether we want America to have the future it was created to attain or just want to let it continue in the downward spiral that is dragging us down the drain into the sewer.

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Select Committee On Benghazi Success Will Be Determined By Citizens

Here's the Nonsense:  The House Select Committee on Benghazi will hold the administration accountable and finally there will be justice for those who died in that attack.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Chances are very small that the committee will be able to hold anyone accountable. With John Spineless Boehner as House Speaker the real accountability will have to come from the American people.

Trey Gowdy has been appointed to head the House Select Committee on Benghazi.  Seven other Republicans have been appointed to serve on that committee.  Whether the Democrats will participate remains to be seen.  But in the meantime the Democrats are crying foul.  Why?  Because they know that Gowdy is a skilled and experienced former federal prosecutor whose ability to cross-examine is becoming something of legend in DC.  He is a bulldog not deterred by attacks, false allegations, and obstruction.  If allowed to pursue a case he will ferret out the truth no matter what the cost (Hmmm.... sounds a lot like the main character trait of true leaders that I address in my book The Leadership Secret).  The Democrats don't like the idea that Gowdy's on the case so they are resorting to their old fallback:  cover up, distort, lie, demonize the opposition, and change the subject.  The Democrat Party has a long history of these  kinds of actions and we shouldn't forget that when watching this scenario play out. (see Gowdy in action here)

If we want to understand what we are up against in getting to the truth in these hearings, then we need to understand who Gowdy and the Republicans are up against and what we must do to help.  This goes way back to Watergate and even before.   

Lee Edwards, in writing for the Heritage Foundation, tells us that when the Senate Select Committee was formed to investigate Nixon's Watergate scandal, the Republicans knew of "a political scandal of unprecedented proportions: the deliberate, systematic, and illegal misuse of the FBI and the CIA by the White House in a presidential campaign.  The massive black-bag operations, bordering on the unconstitutional and therefore calling for impeachment, were personally approved by the president.  They included planting a CIA spy in his opponent's campaign committee, wiretaps on his opponent's top political aides, illegal FBI checks, and the bugging of his opponent's campaign airplane."  But the president who had ordered all of this was not Republican Richard Nixon, it was Democrat Lyndon Johnson who ordered it against his opponent Senator Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign. 

So, when the Democrats formed the Senate Select Committee to go after Nixon and the Watergate scandal, the Republicans proposed investigating not just Nixon, but also Johnson.  The Democrats controlled the Senate and rejected the idea knowing that it would put a bad light on Democrats.  Then, to use it as a means to gain more power, they vilified Republicans by painting them as corrupt and the Democrats painted themselves as the heroic ones cleaning up Washington.

Does that sound familiar?  It should.  Anyone who's been paying attention to how progressives operate should recognize this as exactly what they do today when they attack their opponents.  They vilify them and discredit them so that they have no credibility to the public.  That's what the Democrats did when the Republicans tried to go deeper than just investigating corruption in the Nixon administration and open the probe to both parties.  But the Democrats were not interested in finding truth or cleaning up Washington.  They were only interested in controlling Washington and they knew that if they could paint the Republicans as corrupt it would give them enormous power with the voters.  And they were successful.

So, what does this have to do with the House Select Committee on Benghazi?  Plenty.

Trey Gowdy and the Republicans on his committee need to understand who they are up against when dealing with the Democrats. Democrats will lie, cover up, distract, and do everything in their power to point the finger back at the GOP instead of joining the GOP to find the truth.  They are not interested in truth.  They are interested in control.

And if you think that House Speaker John Boehner is going to be supportive of Gowdy's committee, don't bet on it.  This is the man who has proven over and over again that he cannot take a stand for principle.  He is most likely allowing this committee so he can claim during this year's reelection campaign that he pursued the issue.  But he is known for backing down.  Just this weekend The Hill reported that he has said that the House will not arrest Lois Lerner if the Department of Justice won't prosecute her in the IRS scandal.  And we all know the chances of the DOJ prosecuting Lerner are about as great as the chances of Al Gore's view on global warming climate change climate disruption being proven true.

So, it is up to us to keep the pressure on our elected representatives in Washington to hold this administration accountable.  It is up to us to make sure that everyone in Washington understands that we support Gowdy and his committee and they better support them, too, or there will be consequences at the ballot box in November.  The GOP leadership does not have Gowdy's back so it's more important than ever that we do.

Do I think there will be accountability resulting from Gowdy's committee?  Probably not.  That's not how Washington works because it's so corrupt on both sides of the aisle that truth is not their goal.  There are only a limited few like Trey Gowdy who really want the truth.  But what that committee uncovers can be used by conservatives running for office this November as a strong case to clean up Washington.

The future is not in Trey Gowdy's hands.  It's not in the House Select Committee on Benghazi's hands either.  It'd not in the hands of anyone in Washington.  It's in our hands and whether anyone is held accountable will be determined by what Americans do at the ballot box this November.  

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Time To Send The President On Another Apology Tour

Warning:  When reading this be prepared for an extremely sarcastic post.

Here's the Nonsense:  To some it may seem inconsequential, but we need to be careful not to offend others, even when it comes down to something like the naming of creatures and plant life.  How can we expect them to respect us if we don't show them consideration?

Here's the Horse Sense:  Grow up and get over it!  Most things are named based on science or historical admiration.  It's time to get over our political correctness and deal with real problems in our country.

In an extremely important move the Minnesota Senate has approved a bill to change the name of a fish from “Asian carp” to “invasive carp.”  Front Page Magazine is reporting that they are doing this because, according to the bill’s sponsor, Senator John Hoffman, “referring to the fish as 'Asian' was hurtful to some people...."  The Minnesota Senate is stuck, like too many in our nation, in a politically correct world that is destroying our society.  But if they're right, then we shouldn't leave a stone unturned and make sure absolutely every possible offense is avoided.  Let me suggest that we develop a complete list and then send the president on another one of his apology tours to make sure that everyone likes us.

Now let me see if I get this right.  Most animals, plants, etc. are named through the sciences.  In the case of the Asian carp it's named for the geographic area of the world where it originates.  Some other things are named for those who discovered them.  Others are named because of their appearance or many other reasons.  In the Minnesota Senate they are acting like the name "Asian carp" means that someone thinks the fish looks like an Asian person.  Talk about ridiculous!   But now we are seeing that political correctness overrides in science and we must be politically correct in the names that things are given so as not to offend someone.

Wait, that last paragraph was obviously an oversight on my part.  After all, we already have political correctness when it comes to global warming and climate change.  If you don't believe what the leftists believe, then you are to be shunned, belittled, and disregarded.  Remember last fall when the LA Times announced it would not publish comments from people who don't agree with their view on climate change?  That's a real forum for open and honest discussion, isn't it?

So, we're supposed to make everything politically correct, no matter what.  Well, I don't think the left understands what a chore they've chosen to take on.

Let's face it, if we're going to correct everything so that no one and nothing is offended, then we better not miss anything.  And while the Asian carp, er, um, I mean the invasive carp is known for the destruction it is doing in our waterways, we better be safe and change any name that refers to someone or something that could have the slightest chance of being offended.  Whether the animal, plant, or whatever, is destructive, dangerous, even if it's innocent, we dare not take a chance and should address anything with a name that might be taken incorrectly.

The president will need to head out on an apology tour immediately so that he can make sure that everyone and every creature and plant in the world knows that we are changing things so they will not be offended.  So, let's look carefully to make sure we miss nothing.  

Thinking of changes that need to be made, one that comes to mind is the whale shark.  Shouldn't that name be changed so that whales (often seen by the left as some kind of angels of the ocean) aren't offended for being referred to in the same context as the vicious predators that sharks have been known to be?  

In fact, we also need to change the name of the killer whale, don't we?  We don't want those gentle giants to think we see them as evil killers.  Then again, should we be worried about skinny killers being offended that we might be referring to them as whales?  Hmmm.... what a dilemma!

And what about the European starling?  Are we sure that no one in Europe will have a problem with this?  In fact, Americans of European descent could even be offended so this one better be a priority!

Of course there's the West Indian manatee.  Have we gotten agreement from the West Indians for this name?  While we're being politically correct, are the West Indians okay with being called "Indians" or is it only sports teams we have to worry about when it comes to that term?

As I wrestle with this major dilemma we are facing, I thought about the American crocodile, but since "American" is so generic a term we probably don't have to worry about it.  Although it is probably soon to become unacceptable as a description of our citizens as it would include all the racists (also known as Republicans and conservatives) so we may have to get the crocodile's approval at that point to continue using it.  Or we could just quit calling our citizens "Americans."

And then there's the Asian gypsy moth.  I think we have two groups there that we're potentially offending.  Someone please get the president on this right away.  Obviously his apology tour needs to start right away and this might be a good place to start.  Let's make sure the president bows and makes apologies to both the Asians and the gypsies.  In fact, the term "Asian" poses some real problems for us.  Just look at this list we have to deal with:

Asian Dowitcher
Asian Elephant
Asian Giant Softshell Turtle
Asian Giant Tortoise 
(Has anyone thought about how small tortoises and turtles might feel about these last two?)
Asian Golden Cat
Asian Golden Weaver
Asian Green Broadbill
Asian Leopard Cat
Asian Small-clawed Otter
Asian Tapir

And we can't leave it at "Asian" names, there's also the "Asiatic" designation we find with these:

Asiatic Black Bear
Asiatic Lion
Asiatic Short-tailed Shrew
Asiatic Softshell Turtle

Yes, the president will need to tour the world making sure our apologies have been given and that we are loved by even more than those to which he's already apologized (and we all know how well that went!).

For the African's (which according to the president's personal documents is an entire race of people) we should include apologies for an extensive list of offending names including:

African Black Oystercatcher
African Blind Barb Fish
African Butter Catfish 
(Here's another problem.  Butter brings up the question of whether cows and dairy farmers might need to be included in this apology.  And would we just apologize to African cows and dairy farmers?)
African Elephant
African Golden Cat
African Gray Parrot
African Green Broadbill
African Lion
African Penguin
African Skimmer
African Slender-snouted Crocodile
African Spurred Tortoise 
(Spurs?  I hope this doesn't mean we owe cowboys an apology, too. Especially Tuffy Gessling, that rodeo clown that was really offensive when he wore an Obama mask.  I guess he could wear the mask when the president apologizes to him so at least Barry will feel like he's talking to himself.)
African True Toad
African Viviparous Toad
African Wild Dog

It'll be easier on the president when he travels to Amersterdam.  The only apology there that I can think of is for the Amsterdam Albatross.  

Of course we know he'll be stopping in the Middle East to apologize for the Arabian Oryx, Arabian Tahr, and Arabian Woodpecker.  And he'll obviously have to apologize for the term "Arabian horse" even though I think that breed was actually named there and not here... but we better not take any chances.  (For the record, I asked my Arabian horse about it and he couldn't care less.  He just wanted more hay, but only because he was hungry.  He doesn't believe he's due any apologies.)

The president will have to travel to Argentina where they certainly deserve appropriate apologies for the Argentine Tortoise, Argentine Tuco-tuco, and the Argentine Water Frog.

Oh, and we can't forget that when he's in Asia he needs to make a quick trip down to the north island of New Zealand and let them know how sorry we are for the Auckland Island Rail, Auckland Island Shag, and the Auckland Island Teal.  

While he's down that way he needs to make a quick jump over to Oz and make sure they're not mad at us either.  An apology to them for the Australian Ant, Australian Bustard, Australian Grayling, Australian Sea-lion, and Australian Shepherd are just a few of the needed apologies to our friends down under.

Any apology tour would be remiss if it didn't include the Balkans where the president will need to extend the most sincere remorse for the Balkan Blind Mole Rat and the Balkan Snow Vole.

In fact, he might want to do an international webcast on this one so the entire world can watch as he makes sure to include the blind and visually impaired in the apology about the Balkan Blind Mole Rat and the African Blind Barb Fish.

Hmmm... some of these do get confusing.  I wonder who you apologize to for the Banana Bat?

We can't forget that Barbados is known as a golfer's paradise, so this one might be one he'll look forward to.  We'll need to have the president stop for a double-purposed golf/apology stop when he addresses our insensitivity for the Barbados Racer and the Barbados Yellow Warbler.

I wonder if he needs to apologize to all bearded persons for the Bearded Guan, Bearded Red Crayfish, Bearded Saki, Bearded Screech-owl, Bearded Tachuri, and Bearded Wood-partridge?  Somebody better call the Robertson clan over at Duck Dynasty to find out.

And speaking of wondering, the president probably won't be too thrilled with this, but he's got the big job of sometimes having to handle things he may not like.  However, even though it may be distasteful to him, he does need to apologize to Glenn Beck's family for the Beck's Petrel and Beck's Treefrog.  Actually he should probably apologize to my family, too, on this one since part of my ancestral family tree goes back to Denmark and the Beck family line. (No, I have no idea if Glenn and I are related.)

Well, as you can see, we've barely scratched the surface and we're only in the "b's" so we better get the White House Travel Office busy and get these trips going.  

Maybe if we're lucky it'll keep the president so busy for the rest of his term that he can't cause any more problems.  After all he's already caused enough to keep us, our children, and our grandchildren busy fixing things for our lifetimes.

See, there is a good reason for him to do a lot of traveling!