Archives for January 2016

Former Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman says the American people are “mad as hell” about a political culture that divides the nation and makes problems worse instead of rallying the nations behind common goals.

Lieberman served four terms in the U.S. Senate, three as a Democrat and one as an independent, although he still caucused with Democrats.  He was the vice presidential nominee for the Democrats in 2000 and ran unsuccessfully for the presidential nomination in 2004.  In 2008, he angered many Democrats by endorsing and campaigning for GOP nominee John McCain.

Lieberman is now affiliated with the No Labels movement, which on Monday announced that six presidential candidates had endorsed the group’s four major goals: creating 25 million jobs in 10 years, balancing the budget by 2030, preserving Social Security and Medicare for the next 75 years and making America energy independent by 2024.  Republicans Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Rand Paul and John Kasich endorsed the No Labels agenda, as did Democrat Martin O’ Malley.

However, the No Labels announcement also came on a day when a new Gallup survey showed only 29 percent of Americans identify as Democrats and just 26 percent identify as Republicans.

“These are numbers that politicians better read and listen to because ‘the answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind,'” said Lieberman, quoting the song made famous by Bob Dylan and Peter, Paul and Mary.

He says the public is disgusted with both parties in Washington and that is made obvious by the campaign success of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.

“The American people are fed up with the political status quo because they rightly believe it’s not uniting the country but dividing the country.  It’s not solving their problems.  It’s making them worse.  They’re pulling away from the two major parties.  Within those parties, more and more are turning toward unconventional candidates,” said Lieberman.

Lieberman says No Labels is trying to channel those frustrations toward specific goals.

“We’re mad as hell too but we’re trying to create pressure to disrupt the current system so that people get back to the days when they would compromise.  Reagan compromised with O’Neill, Clinton with Gingrich and they got some big things done.  We need to do that again,” said Lieberman.

The No Labels goals were taken from exhaustive polling done on a variety of issues, but Lieberman says recent events suggest national security ought to be added to the list.

“I bet if we polled today, one of the top four or five would be to protect us, support our national security and because of the threat of radical Islamist terrorism,” said Lieberman.  “We’re going to add a fifth goal, which we’re working on now that would deal with national security and terrorism.”

Known for his support for the Iraq War that cost him his party’s U.S. Senate nomination in 2006, Lieberman sees two major priorities for the next president.  One is a restoration of America’s position on the global stage.

“In a dangerous world, which this is, there is no substitute for American strength and American leadership to protect American security,” said Lieberman, who also wants a much more united front when it comes to confronting threats around the world.

“What I’m looking for personally in the next president is somebody who will try to restore the old traditional notion that partisan politics in America ends at the water’s edge.  In other words, we can disagree on foreign policy or national security, but when we’re facing a foreign challenge or even allies, we’ve got to pull together as Americans,” said Lieberman.

When discussing the No Labels goals on jobs, fiscal discipline, entitlements and energy, Lieberman says Americans support those pursuits by a wide margin and No Labels is not stating any preferences on how those objectives ought to be achieved.

But he says for anything substantial to get done, the next president will have to cooperate with the opposition party.

“We’re asking the presidential candidates and, over the next couple of months, congressional candidates to make a promise, which is about as good as we can do at this point, that they will work together across party lines to get something done on the big goals,” said Lieberman.  “There’s got to be bipartisan cooperation, which hasn’t happened much in recent years.”

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review react to a Hillary Clinton email that seemingly tells an aide to strip the the secure markings off a report and send it non-securely.  Jim explains why he believes a convention of the states to amend the Constitution needs to wait until the nation is more constitutionally literate.  And they slam Sean Penn for meeting with El Chapo while the drug kingpin was on the run.

Scores of European women were sexually assaulted by Muslim refugees on New Year’s Eve and instead of condemning the attacks, officials are making excuses for them, a problem that terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel says is headed to the U.S. soon unless we throw off political correctness and resist the tide of people hostile to our culture.

“When we see what is happening in Europe, it is beyond words.  This is a preview as to what’s coming into our own nation in the United States, once we start bringing and importing these refugees,” said Gabriel.

Gabriel, a victim of terrorism in Lebanon years ago, is founder of Act for America and author of “They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It.”

As of Friday afternoon, German authorities confirmed that 18 of the 31 men identified for sexually assaulting women in Cologne, Germany, on Dec. 31 are refugees.  Gabriel is not at all surprised.

“This is pretty much par for the course.  Remember these refugees are coming from societies that have no respect for women.  They treat women as property.  They treat women as a subject to be used and abused.  Men abuse their wives, beat their wives, rape their wives,” said Gabriel.

“In Islamic countries there is no such thing as rape because the Koran gives the right to a man to do whatever he wants to his wife because she is his property,” added Gabriel.

She says we are seeing those attitudes clash severely with western values.

“What we are seeing in Europe is the importation of a culture that is completely opposed to everything we stand for and believe in.  It’s a completely different way of thinking.  So when these refugees are looking at German women or Finnish women – or any lady – as something to be used, especially if they are infidel women,” said Gabriel.

Gabriel says the clash of cultures is getting far worse because European nations did not insist on Muslim assimilation decades ago.

“Europe didn’t make them assimilate.  They said, ‘Okay, we understand.  You’re different than we are.  We understand that as long as you live in your neighborhoods and your areas, do whatever you want, your own things, your own Sharia courts.  We don’t really care as long as you give us cheap labor,'” said Gabriel.

“This philosophy is coming back to bite Europe because the Europeans did not pay attention as to how Muslims were not integrating into European societies for the last 20-30 years,” said Gabriel.

While the allegations of rampant sexual abuse in Cologne, Stuttgart and other German cities last week as well as Finland and other parts of Europe are shocking to the conscience, the reaction of public officials is even more galling to some people.  Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker did not condemn the attacks.  Instead, she cautioned the women to act differently in public.  In addition, Germany is aggressively cracking down on internet criticism of refugees.

Gabriel is appalled but not surprised.

“It is disgraceful but they lost complete control and when you are fearful of those you have taken into your country because you know these refugees who came in are more powerful than your own police and more powerful than your own citizens, you recoil back and say, ‘Okay, we cannot rock the boat.  We cannot make waves because these people can really hurt us,'” said Gabriel.

That being said, Gabriel unloaded on Mayor Reker for chiding women and suggesting their conduct needs to change to avoid future sexual assaults.

“It is heartbreaking to see a female mayor who made these statements that, ‘You got too close to these Muslim men.  You should have run faster.’  To even hear those words spoken out of the mayor, who is female, is really shocking,” said Gabriel.

Gabriel says Reker’s comments are just as horrifying as telling a rape victim that she was asking for it because her skirt was too short or her cleavage was showing.  She also says this nightmare is coming to the U.S.

“This is a preview of what is coming to any country or society that imports Islamic refugees who come from the Middle East or any other Islamic country,” said Gabriel.

She says the first thing western nations must do is enforce their laws.

“We can fight back democratically by enforcing our laws and saying we cannot allow refugees here.  We do not know who they are.  We cannot vet them.  We have no intelligence about them,” said Gabriel.

Another mounting frustration for Gabriel is the refusal of officials in the U.S. or Europe to see the connection between such actions and radical Islam, as was on display Friday in Philadelphia.

On Friday,  Edward Archer walked up to the police car of Officer Jesse Hartnett and fired 13 shots.  Hartnett was hit three times but was still able to apprehend Archer.  Archer later told officers he attacked Hartnett in the name of Islam and he pledged allegiance to ISIS.

At a subsequent press conference new Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney was quick to absolve Islam of any connection.

“In no way, shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teachings of Islam have anything to do with what you’ve seen on that screen,” Kenney said. “That is abhorrent. It’s just terrible, and it does not represent the religion in any way, shape or form or any of its teachings,” said Kenney.

Gabriel is frustrated.

“We cannot have the blind leading the blind.  For elected officials to come in and say, ‘This has nothing to do with Islam,’ how does he know?” asked Gabriel.

“Has he read the Koran?  The Koran is very clear, talking about to lie and wait and ambush the infidel, kill wherever ye fight them, lay in wait for them.  A devout Muslim who is following in the footsteps of the prophet and following the commandments of the Koran, is doing exactly that,” said Gabriel.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review applaud the Republican Congress for getting an Obamacare repeal and a bill to defund Planned Parenthood to the president’s desk.  They also react to the Saudis starting to seek stronger ties with the Russians.  And they discuss John McCain’s suggestion that the eligibility of Ted Cruz deserves further scrutiny.

Repeals for major parts of Obamacare cleared Congress for the first time on Wednesday, and while Obama is sure to veto the package, one of the most powerful House Republicans says the move shows voters who is on their side and what could actually be done come 2017.

The legislation would wipe away the individual and employer mandates, the co-called “Cadillac Tax” and other provisions.

Congressional Republicans used a parliamentary procedure known as reconciliation to move the repeals through the U.S. Senate late last year with just a simple majority.  Wednesday’s vote in the House marks the first time Democrats have failed to block the plan on Capitol Hill.  Obama will veto the bill and Republicans do not have the votes to override it.  Nonetheless, the GOP sees this as a key victory.

“The American people by a real majority are opposed to this law.  What they will see is that there are folks standing up here in Washington, fighting as hard as we can for them,” said House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Ga.

“If there’s some epiphany and the president were to actually sign this repeal, it would be a wonderful thing.  But if or when he vetoes it, the American people will know who is standing in the way of real progress.  That’s an important distinction,” said Price.

Price says some Democrats actually support individual components contained within the repeals, but even before the vote he did not expect many crossover votes.

“We don’t anticipate any Democrat to support this.  They tend to represent their politics instead of the appropriate policy and their constituents when it comes to this kind of issue.  But there are a number of bipartisan portions of this bill that could be supported if they were to look at it objectively,” said Price.

Supports of repealing the mandates and other Obamacare components received a hot in the arm in recent days when the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office concluded this bill would slice half a trillion dollars off the deficit over the next ten years.

“That’s real money,” said Price, who says Obamacare is hurting America in multiple ways.

“We know that Obamacare does real harm to the health and wellness of the American people, but it also does real harm to our economy in decreasing economic activity, decreasing economic growth and increasing the deficits,” said Price.

In addition to the Democratic opposition, some conservative activists have argued that this legislative effort may do more than good by removing some of the most odious Obamacare provisions that could hasten its implosion if left in place.

Price isn’t buying it.  First, he says many of those same people thought the system would already have imploded.  Second, he believes this is a much smarter approach to making meaningful change.

“I think it’s incredibly important that we as responsible representatives of the people stand up and say, ‘This is what our constituents believe is the most appropriate thing to do, that is to repeal this bill and then move forward.’  This is just the next step in the process because, following this, is moving forward with an appropriate, positive, common sense solution to the challenges in our health care arena,” said Price.

He says Republicans are also clear that they do not want to go back to way things were before Obamacare.

“We don’t want to go back to the status quo ante, where we were before, because there were problems then.  The problem is Obamacare made things wore, not better,” said Price.

As a result, Price says Republicans are gearing up to craft replacement health care legislation and he believes House Speaker Paul Ryan is pursuing change in the best possible way.

“What he has done is charge all of us with real, positive solutions, legislative solutions to the problems we face.  Health care is right at the top of those challenges,” said Price.

He also says this will not be done in any way like the Obamacare bill was crafted.

“This isn’t going to a top-down model, like was done when Obamacare passed when people were dictated to and told what they’ve got to vote for and don’t even worry about reading it.  This is going to be a bottom-up process through the committees that deal with health care,” said Price.

That prospect is especially exciting to Price, who has offered his bill for patient-centered solutions ever since the Obamacare debate began.

“I can’t tell you how excited I am about being able to be involved in that process and representing our constituents and moving in a direction that they know needs to occur in our health care arena,” said Price.

President Obama rolled out a new slate of executive orders designed to prevent criminals from getting guns and made an emotional appeal for even more to be done, but a leading defender of the second amendment says Obama’s actions are a dishonest, unconstitutional overreach.

On Tuesday, Obama unveiled new executive orders to an enthusiastic response from supporters in the East Room of the White House.  Obama called for more money to be spent on developing smart guns that only work when they recognize a specific fingerprint.  He also wants more done to stop mentally ill people from getting guns.  However, the order getting the most attention is Obama’s effort to greatly loosen the definition of a gun seller.

The president argues more people should have to be licensed to sell guns and then more gun buyers would go through background checks.

“I’m not opposed to background checks.  My problem is the devil is in the details and he’s not really doing background checks.  What he’s doing is bait-and-switch.  He says background check, but what he really does it create a national registration system.  He wants to create a database of every gun owner in the United States that the federal government has access and control of.  That’s what the problem is,” said Second Amendment Foundation Founder Alan Gottlieb.

“Gun owners at this point have no trust in this president,” added Gottlieb.

On top of that, Gottlieb says this change wouldn’t have stopped a single mass shooting we’ve seen in recent years.

“All the cases he cited where guns were misused, those people went through background checks and bought the guns from licensed dealers who are licensed to sell those guns and conduct the background checks.  Obama is being disingenuous in nearly everything he said.  The impact is going to be nil,” said Gottlieb.

Not only that, Gottlieb says it’s odd for the Obama administration to plead for more background checks when its existing approach to the issue has been lackadaisical.

“When criminals go to a gun store now and flunk the background check and committed a felony in lying on the form, this administration has the worst record of any modern president in prosecuting those people,” said Gottlieb.  “Obama wants to get rid of people’s guns.  He doesn’t want to get rid of criminals.”

Gottlieb is also worried about Obama’s action that could lead to doctors getting involved with who should be able to own a gun.

“His part of the mental health (action), having doctors report people to the FBI to put them in the database to disqualify them from owning a firearm without any due process is a scary proposal here.  Once you’re in that database, there’s no way to get your name out of that database.  That’s an infringement on second amendments rights,” said Gottlieb.

In addition to those issues, Gottlieb says Obama has no authority to change the law on his own.

“If a person that is going to sell a gun out of their collection, under Obama’s definition that would make him a dealer and he’d have to get a license to sell the gun.  That’s not in his authority.  It’s not part of the act that Congress has passed and he’s going to have a hard time defending that in court,” said Gottlieb.

He also thinks Obama won’t be able to find much cooperation for this in Congress.

“I expect Congress to totally rebel against everything Obama’s trying to do here.  Obama talks about how he’s going to hire more people to do this and that and the funds for that are in his budget.  His budget has to be approved by Congress and those things are not going to be in the final budget approved by Congress,” said Gottlieb.

On Tuesday, Obama said he had great respect for the second amendment and rights of Americans to exercise their freedoms, but he he said other rights matter too, like the freedom to worship for Christians killed in Charleston, Jews in Kansas City, Muslims in North Carolina and Sikhs in Wisconsin.

In addition to pointing out Obama’s actions would not have stopped those killings, Gottlieb says if Obama was serious about stopping gun violence he would sue cities like Chicago and Washington for laws that prevent people from defending themselves due to strict gun control.  He also pointed out the major urban areas wracked with firearm fatalities are cities that have been under Democratic control for decades.

The moment that got Obama the most attention is when he wiped away tears while remembering the young victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary atrocity in 2012.  While Obama’s emotion is garnering rave reviews in the mainstream media, Gottlieb is unimpressed.

“That’s all he has because the facts are not on his side.  He can’t say that anything he’s proposing would have stopped these criminals and mass murderers from getting their guns.  He can only rely on emotion because he can’t rely on any facts or statistics,” said Gottlieb, who branded Obama’s presentation Tuesday as “phony baloney rhetoric.”