Monday...

"...and the next...President of the United States..."

I always hate it when people say that too early in campaigns.  But I always like it when the nomination is locked up, after the conventions, when I start thinking of all the things a new President could do.

If things continue the way they are, and there is no reason to believe things would change for the good when the government keeps doing bad, an Obama victory would be historic...not because his father was from Africa, but because nobody has ever been re-elected (save FDR) with things this bad.

So.

Who will his opponent be?

Chris Christie...not now.

Paul Ryan...I guess not now.

Newt...done.

Rick Perry? 

We already have a Rick Perry running.  His name is Tim Pawlenty.  I have pretty much said, so far, "I like what he says, I like what he has done, but I don't think he can beat Obama." 

Pawlenty gave a speech last week, and par for the course, I didn't hear any of it, it didn't get much MSM fanfare...but like a good movie, its getting alot of traction. 

Unlike Obama, the SUBSTANCE of his speech is what people are talking about.  READ IT HERE.

It starts out, "How are you enjoying your recovery Summer? That’s what the President said we were having. And that was last year. Now, gas is nearly $4 a gallon. Home prices are in the gutter. Our healthcare system — thanks to ObamaCare — is more expensive. And less efficient. Unemployment’s back over 9%. Our national debt has skyrocketed. Our budget deficit has grown worse. And the jobs and manufacturing reports are grim. If that was a recovery — then our President needs to enter economic rehab. And the American people need to stop his policies. Cold turkey."

Pawlenty goes on to suggest...IN THE MIDST OF WHAT HE ACKNOWLEDGES IS A DISMAL ECONOMY...a target growth rate of 5%.  When others refer to 2% annual growth as "the new normal", Pawlenty says that is "not the American way."

He said we could get there by:

Cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%...when Obama wants to raise taxes on oil companies and "obscene profits"...

NOT taxing American corporation's overseas earnings...when Obama wants to tax them more, to stop 'outsourcing'...

Abolishing the taxes on capital gains, interest, dividends, and estates, saying "Government has no moral or economic basis to claim a second share of the same income..."

Further, in his speech, he took on the fight of Wisconsin and of California, "I cut state spending in real terms for the first time in our state’s history. We did it with priority-based budgeting. We did it by setting a record for vetoes.  It took a government shutdown. And a long government union strike. But we got it done. We didn’t close our schools. Or empty out our prisons. We cut spending where it needed to be cut. We can do the same thing in Washington..."

He even suggests privatizing the US Postal Service, Amtrak, and Fannie and Freddie...

One thing he hinted on, and I think could be a successful counter point, is to speak of Obama's audacity to speak of sitting down with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea without preconditions...and contrast with a willingness to sit down with the leaders of South Korea, Columbia, Panama, and other allied Democracies and discuss free trade agreements.

I guess what I'm saying is, this guy may actually have a chance...

Outside the box...

...or oval.  This is from May 1, 2010.  Chris Solinsky, a 5k runner, ran a 10k against some of the fastest 10k runners in the country.  There had been alot of press about the others planning on breaking the American record.  From the interviews afterword, one would never know, but I think all the talk about the others put a spark in Solinsky's mind...

Providence...

Last November's election results were a rebuke of the left's overstepping.  In retrospect, its good they overstepped.  Would they have continued at the normal bureaucratic pace, had the Tea Party not "rung the alarm bells", had some Washington fixtures not been sent packing, we might be further away from the republic we started out as, and closer to their dream of a socialist utopia.

Many on the Right (and a few on the Left) ran, won, and were sent to Washington with the goal of repealing Obamacare. They didn't repeal it.  If the Right had won the Senate...I wouldn't be writing this post...

Many, including smart people on the Right, said it could not be repealed (not enough votes in the Senate, and certainly not enough to override Obama's veto), so why talk about that?  Others, forced the vote in the House, and made their voices heard.

So what happens when Washington does what Washington wants regardless of the voice of the people? How can Washington be stopped?

The States.

Over half the States are suing the Federal Government to stop Obamacare (yes, the Federal Government is now spending our money to fight...us).

Who would have ever thought... 


"...It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty..."   

 - Alexander Hamilton, December 26, 1787

Hamilton wrote that in Federalist 28.  The Federalist Papers were written by him, John Jay and James Madison - they were fighting for the ratification of the Constitution.  The CREATORS OF THE CONSTITUTION were telling the people, that the States were the check on the LIMITS of the Federal Government.

Oh What a Tangled Web...

Ten Years ago, or maybe not that long, which would you have believed would be a future headline:

A)  Congressman Twitter Acknowledges Weiner Pics

B)  Wiener Congressman Pics Acknowledge Twitter

C)  Pics Acknowledge Congressman Twitter Weiner

D)  Congressman Weiner Acknowledges Weener Twitter

Congressman Twit

Sarah's Weekend Ride...

Race Based Justice...

Atty. Gen. Holder Proposes Retroactive Breaks in Crack Cocaine Convictions

Summary:   Last year congress reduced FEDERAL sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine.  The sentencing guidelines are used by judges to sentence people after being convicted - its based on the amount of drugs they were found responsible for, their criminal history, and their cooperation after arrest.  Many argued that the sentencing guidelines were RACIST, because they were much harsher for crack cocaine than they were for powder cocaine. 

The racist part comes in because of the view that crack cocaine is favored by blacks.  Which is a racist view.  The sentencing guidelines matched that of meth - which is favored by whites. 

The harsher sentences were meant to deter people from using the far more dangerous form of the drug.  A point I agree with - is that the users don't care - so enhanced sentencing has not worked as a deterrent.  So, for that reason, I don't care much either way.

However...these are FEDERAL guidelines.  People in prison for FEDERAL drug charges are not targeted because they use drugs - they are targeted because they DISTRIBUTE, SELL, or TRANSPORT drugs. 

That is the part that the ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES fails to mention in his sob story...