New York Times And Google Take Propaganda Past Soviet Levels

The New York Times has sunk to a point where they simply reverse the facts.

Cantor’s Lesson: Hedging on Immigration Is Perilous

The lesson that immigration advocates say they gleaned from Tuesday’s election results is, simply put, that hedging on such an intensely charged issue can be politically fatal

Cantor’s Lesson: Hedging on Immigration Is Perilous –

They say that Cantor got killed in a Republican primary because he wasn’t enthusiastic enough about his support the creation of 11 million new Democratic voters. That makes sense. Google News highlighted this as their #2 story.

Meanwhile, Ann Coulter explained what really happened.

Economics professor Dave Brat crushed House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican primary Tuesday night, in a campaign that was mostly about Cantor’s supporting amnesty for 11 million illegal aliens.

Ann Coulter – June 11, 2014 – CANTOR LOSES BY 11 MILLION VOTERS

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

81 Responses to New York Times And Google Take Propaganda Past Soviet Levels

  1. Gail Combs says:

    With an unemployment level of ~24% we need MORE workers flooding into the country to fight for scarce job opportunities. But only if you want to lower the wages still further and buy more votes with government handouts.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Pro-immigration is the new pro-slavery.

      • Gail Combs says:

        The goal has always been to reinstate feudalism IMHO.

        Marxism is just a philosophy used to make the return to serfdom more palatable to the serfs. If the philosophy was not useful to the elite, it would never have become so popular.

        When you strip away all the fancy rhetoric, Communism is really just a return to a two class system where the serfs are denied the right to own property or to keep the wealth they create. The reason for this is because the Bourgeoisie or middle class is a threat to the elites power structure and therefore has to go.

        That is why Stalin and all the rest of the Communist leaders found it necessary to wipe out millions to enforce serfdom. Got to get rid of the upstarts that might challenge your power structure.

      • _Jim says:

        +1; by the institution of sub-standard wages for .. dare I say it? Substandard citizens?

  2. philjourdan says:

    Immigration is a national issue. But it was not a deciding issue in the Cantor race. Cantor losing his ideals since going to Washington, and the impotence of Republican leadership were the 2 “national” issues that did him in. The biggest factor was that he stopped representing his district, and instead was representing the country,

    I voted against him for the first reason. But many were tired of the fact that he was rarely around for his constituents,.

  3. Jason Calley says:

    “Immigration ADVOCATES say that hedging on such an intensely charged issue can be politically fatal.”

    “Gun control ADVOCATES say that hedging on such an intensely charged issue can be politically fatal.”

    “Carbon mitigation ADVOCATES say that hedging on such an intensely charged issue can be politically fatal.”

    “Income equality ADVOCATES say that hedging on such an intensely charged issue can be politically fatal.”

    “Nationalized healthcare ADVOCATES say that hedging on such an intensely charged issue can be politically fatal.”

    No matter who is elected, advocates will claim that their issue is the important issue.

  4. There Is No Substitute for Victory. says:

    In large part Cantor lost because Virginia is an open primary state and a lot of Democrat Voters crossed over in the primary election and voted for a Tea Party candidate who the Democrat Party thinks that they can label a Racist, an Extremist, a Cold Hearted Scrooge, a Scientific Ignoramus, A Xenophobe, a Snake Handling Religious Extremist, a Gun Wearing Revolutionary, a Rent Seeking Right Wing Pal of Big Business, a Flat Earth Believer, and just for good measure, All of the Above.

    In the aftermath of the passage of the ACA and before the 2010 Election, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada was asked how he could so confidently predict his own reelection almost a year before the General Election and with the poles showing Senator Reid trailing someone named, “Any Republican” by a 2 to 1 margin. “Simple,” answered Senator Reid, “The Tea Party will help nominate a Republican who is so out of touch that I can easily win.” Well the Tea Party nominated Sharon Angle who immediately told the unemployed voters of Nevada, “When I am your United States Senator don’t call my office for help finding work, that isn’t my job description.” It didn’t matter what Ms. Angle’s job description was because with that one little sentence Ms. Angle’s own job description changed from, “Senator Elect from the Great State of Nevada, to house wife and soccer mom.”

    As the low information Tea Party Voters have yet to figure out, winning a Republican Primary is an exercise in futility unless you can close the deal in November with a victory where it matters, in the General Election. Since 2010 the political landscape is littered with Republican incumbents who have lost primaries to Tea Party insurgents who have then mostly gone on to embarrassing and crushing defeats at the hands of Democrat Congressional Candidates of even lower statue than their Tea Party opponents. These Democrat candidates had no hope of winning other than running against a Tea Party candidate.

    This same scenario has been repeated in state after state since 2010. Oh how fast the Tea Party Voter forgets when they are ashamed to remember. If there wasn’t already a Tea Party, to stay in office Obama would have to invent one. Now its time to find out who the low information Tea Party Voters are by seeing how much spume they manage to spew when they attack this epistle.

    • Jason Calley says:

      If mainstream Republican politicians actually voted for the same principles they campaign on, there would be no Tea Party.

      Let’s use illegal aliens as an example. When W was president, he refused to secure the border or take meaningful actions against the millions of illegal aliens in the country. He could have made one phone call and said “enforce the laws!” But he did not. Instead, when a conservative group went to the border in an attempt to assist in patrols there, W called them dangerous vigilantes.

      The Tea Party is not responsible for allowing the Progressive agenda to be implemented. The Republican Party leadership has done more toward that end than the Tea Party has.

      • There Is No Substitute for Victory. says:

        Before I wised up, I attended a bunch of Tea Party rallies at my state capital. They were conducted more like a “Native” American attack on a wagon train than a political rally. I am not saying that there was anyone there with me using racist language or stereotypes because there wasn’t any of that. But the sum total of the rally was angry and negative from the perspective of the independent voter. None of the Tea Party types seems to know how to win and influence Independent voters, scaring them with an open carry gun isn’t going to work.

        Besides that the Tea Party message is negative in the extreme, no pun intended. You or I are not going to win any elections by promising the voters that we are going to “GIVE” the voters back less of their taxes in the form of Federal Pork Barrel Projects. I’m sorry but anyone who believes that fairy tail belongs up there with Steven’s Climate Change Alarmist. Even Tea Party Congressman and father Ron Paul has better sense than that. He supposedly once said that if there was only $435.00 dollars in the Federal Treasury (one dollar for every member of Congress) that he would see to it that at least $1.01 of it was coming home with him to Texas to help his district or that he would know the reason why.

        The Tea Party is not some new grass roots phenomenon, 35 years ago I worked for a US Senator who had the mindset of a Tea Party Patriot. By the end of his first term he was widely despised by the Independent Voters as well as many of the GOP voters of our state. He richly earned and deserved this enmity for making himself unavailable to the voters and for beggaring the voters of his state in the Appropriations Committee. I can truly and fairly promise you that any Member of Congress who rigidity adheres to the TPP’s line will be a one term wonder and that the voters of his state or district will forever be well vaccinated against contracting the ravages of the Tea Party Disease for rest of that voters’ life. Is this what you want?

        This is not written to argue with the Tea Party. The TP and myself are already in agreement on most subjects. I posted this in the hope that I can help the TPPs or other TP groups realize some of their more realistic goals. Regardless of the harm done to this country by Moderate North-East Republicans like George H W Scrub and George W Shrub, you still got to win elections in this country if you have a chance of ruling or implementing your policies, and don’t you forget it!

        Now then, I will be watching Eric Cantor’s former Virginia Congressional District 7 race this November with baited breath. You should be watching it too. Were the 7th district is located there are tens and tens of thousands of jobs that not only depend on Federal Tax money there are even more citizens who depend on Federal Employees sending a little of that Federal lard their way. If a Democrat wins the V7 seat I expect to see a lot of hat folding, foot shuffling, and eye diverting from my Tea Party friends. If I am wrong I’ll write a contrition post, if I am right I expect you to do a little self abusing of your own on this blog. How about it people? Are you as game as you think you are or are you dunghills?

        • _Jim says:

          re: “There Is No Substitute for Victory.” June 12, 2014 at 7:32 pm
          Besides that the Tea Party message is negative in the extreme,

          Look who got off the bus at crazy town.

          Doodlebops Bus to Crazytown

        • philjourdan says:

          You need a lesson in geography. The 7th is NOT part of the beltway bandit league. It is centered around Richmond, which has NOTHING to do with the federal government other than being part of a state in the Union.

          Cantor won the district in 2012 with over 2/3rds of the vote against a well funded democrat opponent. You can watch it if you want (if you can find it), but most will not. I doubt Trammel will get much national support.

        • Jason Calley says:

          ” I can truly and fairly promise you that any Member of Congress who rigidity adheres to the TPP’s line will be a one term wonder and that the voters of his state or district will forever be well vaccinated against contracting the ravages of the Tea Party Disease for rest of that voters’ life. Is this what you want?”

          No, that is not what I want. What I want is a limited Constitutional Republic and the rule of law. You are telling me that neither party will deliver that because there are not enough voters who agree with me. If the Republicans are only 95% as evil as the Democrats, that is not good enough. We would be better off helping to bankrupt the system quicker rather than slower. Maybe we should all vote Democratic. Why not? I have been voting Republican for decades and it has not worked. They say one thing, then do the opposite. (Not that very many voters seem to notice. I have spoken to more than a few Republicans who have assured me with great certainty that “Reagan shrank the government and balanced the budget!”)

          Remember how Lucy always pulled the football from Charlie Brown when he ran to kick it? “Trust me, Charlie Brown! I have changed! I will hold the ball. I won’t pull it away! Trust me, just this one more time!”

          You can be a Charlie Brown Republican if you want to — but I won’t. It does not work.

        • philjourdan says:

          Actually, No sub confuses the “Official” Tea party line with his own prejudices. The “Official” Tea party line says nothing about religion or moonbats. It states government is too big, spends too much and taxes too much. All must be reduced. So a candidate adhering to that (and not becoming a DC Pol) will win many elections and be in Washington for a long time.

          Unfortunately, No sub is a dinosaur. He is losing his grip on the party and he knows it. That is why he is lying so much. He has run out of facts to persuade, and like Cantor, must now run on lies.

        • _Jim says:

          re: potted plant known as “There Is No Substitute for Victory.” June 12, 2014 at 7:32 pm
          Regardless of the harm done to this country by Moderate North-East Republicans like George H W Scrub and George W Shrub, you still got to win elections in this country …

          This little potted plant may not have been born until after the Reagan administration (or not old enough yet to understand the events of the day at the time) or he would not make such asinine statements in public.


        • philjourdan says:

          Sorry, you did not “wise up”, you dumbed down.

          And that was a very racist comment about Native Americans. But then since you dumbed down, I doubt you realize that.

    • _Jim says:

      In large part Cantor lost because Virginia is an open primary state and a lot of Democrat Voters crossed over in the primary election and voted …

      Assertion with no cite or substantiation.

      Now having said that, I can continue: the democrats even don’t want amnesty then, it appear by your assertion, now do they?

      As the low information Tea Party Voters have yet to figure out …

      No, no, you have it backazzwards. You dems are the low-info MSNBC watching drones who only ever pull the “D” lever.


      • Gail Combs says:

        “As the low information Tea Party Voters have yet to figure out … ”

        ‘No, no, you have it backazzwards. You dems are the low-info MSNBC watching drones who only ever pull the “D” lever.’

        Jim is correct even the Democratic Think Tank whose polling was specifically designed to label the Tea Party as “RACISTS” agrees that the Tea Party is a well informed voting group.

        The Blair-Rockefeller poll – University of Arkansas – Clinton School of Public Service
        Tea Party Distinguished by Racial Views and Fear of the Future

        …Nearly half of Tea Party members (49.9%) are middle class, with an annual household income of 40 to 100K, another 13.9% make over 100K. Tea Party members are less likely to fall below the poverty level than Non-Tea Party members. The majority (65.3%) of Tea Party members have some college training, with 27.5 % having earned a Bachelor’s Degree or higher (Figure 2).

        Moreover, only 7.2 % of Tea Party members have less than a high school education, as compared to 13.4 % of Non-Tea Party members. Only 8.6 % of Tea Party members are not working because they have either been laid off temporarily or have lost their job and are looking for work, compared to 10.7% of Non-Tea Party members.

        So the Tea Party are the producing class, not the political class or the parasitic welfare class.

        In three specific categories, Tea Party Members significantly distinguish themselves from Non-Tea Party members. First, Tea Party Members report voting in record numbers during the 2010 mid-term elections. Specifically, 87.6 % of Tea Party members voted in 2010 for a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives as compared to 59.3% of Non-Tea Party members. Results in the U. S. Senate races were similar (Table 1). This mass turnout among Tea Party members may account for the substantial media coverage that this relatively small movement has experienced. A second contributing factor may be the political knowledge demonstrated by Tea Party supporters. When asked a battery of “political sophistication” questions—factual questions about the contemporary government—Tea Party members outperformed Non-Tea Party members repeatedly. Specifically, Tea Party members were more likely to correctly identify the jobs held by Attorney General Eric Holder, Chief Justice John Roberts, and Vice President Joe Biden (Table 1). Finally, Tea Party Members share a pessimistic view of the future. 36.9% of Tea Party members think their personal situations will get worse or much worse in the next year, as compared to 23.6% of Non-Tea Party members. Specifically 39.2% of Tea Party Member believe their own personal financial situation will be worse in a year, as compared to 21.9% of Tea Party members. And 62.1% of Tea Party members think the country will get worse or much worse in the next year, as compared to 38.8% of Non-Tea Party members (Table 1).

        The RACIST label comes from asking questions that start with:
        “Do you think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure that…” With few exceptions the Tea Party member will answer NO! no matter how that sentence is finished.

        Lets look at that pessimism point.

        Here is the 2007 to 2011 Graph of changes by payroll sector – total non-farm jobs are down by 6.5 million. So I guess they had reason to be pessimistic.

        This is backed up by the Graph: total private payroll employment We are still not up to the level we were in 2008 when the Shrub left office and unemployment continues to creep up. Graph: Unemployment

        • There Is No Substitute for Victory. says:

          Gail Combs wrote:
          “The RACIST label comes from asking questions that start with:
          “Do you think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure that…” With few exceptions the Tea Party member will answer NO! no matter how that sentence is finished.”

          I other words Gail, from out of your own mouth your have labeled every Tea Party adherent in America that you know and who knows you as an ignorant, one dimensional, knee jerk voter. Thanks for proving my point Gail.

          However I have a more favorable view of the TP than either of you Clicking and highlighting factoids from the Internet is hardly rocket science. I expected a more rigorous debate from you, but you disappointed me Gail. You and Jim have both fell into your own trap by not being able to defend your ideas and positions with facts. Now many people finished High School with a C minus average has no bearing on anything we are discussing.

          Besides, if what you posted about the educational level of Tea Party voters has any validity there should have been a Tea Party President and a Tea Party Congress elected in 2012 seeing that the Tea Party Patriots and other Tea Party groups have been around for about as long as the GOP was in existence before Lincoln was elected in 1860.

          In 2009 or 10 I told a local Tea Party leader, Neighbor, and Friend to get the National Party to burst the IRS scandal wide open because by law a Non-Profit is not required to divulge their membership list to the IRS to get tax free status like Obama and his minions in the IRS were demanding. But NOOOOO, the Tea Party Patriots trusted Government to do the right thing. I have nothing Back-Ass-Wards, however it seems that Jim and Gail are the ones who are not firing on all cylinders. Maybe a brain tune-up is in order for the both of you.

          As a matter of fact I was instrumental in removing three Tea Party members from my state and county GOP executive committees. The reason was that they tried to establish a religious test for Conservative Protestant Christians no less before these citizens could join the State and/or Local Republican Executive Committees. Is this indicative of every TP voter? NO…. EVEN HELL NO. But it is indicative of enough Tea Party supporters to spell trouble, and to lose elections. In the end winning elections should be every TPP’s first, only, and last concern. Anything else is just pure horse hockey, as two members of this blog just demonstrated. Any takers yet on my Virginia District 7 race challenge?

        • philjourdan says:

          No tinsfv – that comes from your dumbing down process. She did not label anyone that way. She said the racist term comes from the ignorance of those who think that way. Kind of a self reflection on yourself.

      • There Is No Substitute for Victory. says:

        The Democrat Party wants to win. The Republican Party wants to win. However the TP wants to fund raise, evidently so they can buy a more luxurious motor home to ride in to their next demonstration. There was no secret that Canter was in trouble other wise he would not have campaigned so negative. As Gail demonstrated the Tea Party didn’t do diddley squat aly

        “But it’s worth noting that many of the national tea party groups that have been the most pugilistic about this year’s intra-party fights have not invested much money into helping the candidates on the ground. As we reported earlier this year, organizations such as Tea Party Patriots and the Madison Project are spending huge sums on fundraising, salaries and consultants, while just putting a tiny fraction of the millions of dollars they have raised into political expenditures.

        The fact that Brat took off without the help of those organizations now makes it harder for them to claim his victory as their own.”

        Like the Senator I mentioned who was elected in 1980 and by 1986 proved a bust as a politician, Canter lost because he failed to keep sight of the “little” picture by ignoring his constituents, while pursuing the “big” picture.

        OK people, my offer of a little wager on the V7 General Election race is still open if any of you have the convictions of your politics to debase yourselves on the pages of this blog if I am correct, or enjoy gloating when I am forced to eat crow? The offer will remain open for 48 hours starting at 7:00AM 6/13/2014.

        I will say again that I am incredulous that someone would “think” to use an excuse so lame that they think and say that the Democrat Party not fielding a candidate in the primary would in any way discourage a Dem. from Crossing over and vote in the
        GOP primary to defeat a GOP leader. Where on EARTH did you people get your Political Science Degrees, from a box of Cracker Jacks?

        • philjourdan says:

          You suffer from tunnel vision. You make a claim, but provide no evidence whatsoever. Indeed, the only evidence goes against your hypothesis. Then you whine about “not supporting” Kind of like O’Donnell and Angle.

          So when a conservative beats an establishment candidate, what does the Republican hierarchy do? Cut them lose. No support, and indeed they are campaigned AGAINST.

          So who wants to win? Not the republicans,.

    • philjourdan says:

      I am sure the democrats hope they can label Brat that way, but there was very little cross over vote. The democrats did not even field a candidate until the day of the primary! So democrats were ignoring the race.

      • There Is No Substitute for Victory. says:

        No PJ. The Democrats were free to cause as much mischief as they could on election day and it seems that they did so.

        • philjourdan says:

          Ignorance on display. Unlike you, I have not decided to dumb down. But that is how the republican establishment thinks. Your stupid challenge for the 7th is proof of that. In the democrat precincts of the 7th, voter turnout was abysmally low! Because the democrats DID NOT cross over.

          And your claim of “support” is a bald faced lie. The problem with the republican establishment (other than the lack of cajones) is that they abandon Tea Party candidates when they DO win. And that is why democrats had 60 seats in the senate in 09. The problem is not the Tea Party, It is the democrat lites – otherwise known as the Republican Establishment.

          I live in the 7th. I know what I am talking about. You just read the MSM and THINK you know, but they are as clueless as you. Your echo chamber fails you.

    • Tel says:

      “When I am your United States Senator don’t call my office for help finding work, that isn’t my job description.”

      So how did the Reid option work out for those people trying to find work? Given up yet? Dropped out of the employment market all together?

      • There Is No Substitute for Victory. says:

        Senator Reid didn’t make that statement. That statement was made by Sharron Angle the Eric Cantor want a be Tea Party nominee for US Senate from Nevada on the GOP ticket in 2010. I find it quirky justice that the TP is almost solely responsible for Democrat Senator “Dirty” Harry Reid still serving in the US Senate little less Senator Reid still serving as MAJORITY Leader of the US Senate almost 4 years later. The TP should either LEAD, FOLLOW, or GET OUT of THE WAY.

        • philjourdan says:

          No Sub, Sharon is not responsible – YOU ARE. The republican establishment’s lack of support for non-establishment candidate is both documented and well known. You cut her adrift.

          And let me tell you another thing. You are stupid. You come on here, spouting stupidity and ignorance, insulting YOUR base and expect us to vote for your clowns? We do not need a democrat lite here or anywhere. And right now that is all you support. So you are welcome to it. Someone said that the difference between the parties is just how fast you are being driven over the cliff, not the direction of the bus.

          You are an idiot. You should be reaching out to your base. instead, you are insulting and denigrating them and blaming them for YOUR mistakes and problems. I can see why the republicans are doomed – all America is doomed – because the main opposition to the socialists democrats are a bunch of idiots who would rather suck up to the democrats than win an election.

          Get off this site. I have no more time for morons like you.

    • TINSFV, your points about the Tea Party being ineffective because they can’t win enough elections are well taken, but you make it sound like you have a solution that will be effective. Where has your approach actually worked to reduce the size of the federal government, reduced spending, debt, eliminated problems with entitlements, and so on?

  5. Bob Greene says:

    Both the NYT and Coulter are cluelessly agenda-driven and wrong. Maybe it was the Fox meme that the rain reduced voters that they were still on yesterday. (It was sunny, clear and hot in Glen Allen on Tuesday.)
    Cantor didn’t connect well with his constituents. He also created quite a bit of political discord trying to replace county chairmen with his own folks and failure to support the Republican candidate for governor. He was seen as the insider, beltway old-guard Republican. May folks were unhappy with him and he did nothing to correct this. His campaign ads cost him votes. Immigration was a piece, but my guess is Cantor would have lost without immigration.

    Brat and his volunteers out hustled Cantor and Brat had a consistently clear, to the point message.
    Cantor thought he couldn’t lose and pretty much acted that way.

    • _Jim says:

      HWGO (Here We Go Again); Bob is going to set us ‘straight’.

      • Bob Greene says:

        So, set me straight. I have the disadvantage of having lived in Cantor’s district since he has been in Congress and know a lot of people who got increasingly angry with him about things other than immigration.

        • _Jim says:

          You made a mistake of lumping Coulter’s opinion in with the NYT’s opinion on this subject. Still waiting for you to review her written piece included in this thread and posted below. Help us all out and tell us where she is wrong. I already know the NYTimes is wrong … easier to keep track of when they are ‘right’.

        • philjourdan says:

          {Raises Hand}


        • _Jim says:

          I don’t think you guys have read her piece; it would not be the first time someone argued from an uninformed POV, however … BTW, I don’t have Fox or cable, all I have to go on is the internet; maybe that’s where the difference is, y’all catching just bits and pieces of the network feeds and perhaps interpolating or extrapolating incorrectly based on snippets of info and/or sound bites. It would _not_ be the first time that has occurred on the face of this planet either …


        • philjourdan says:

          If you are referring to Coulter – I did. Like I said, I greatly admire and respect her. But she was wrong in this instance.

    • _Jim says:

      re: Bob Greene June 12, 2014 at 3:40 pm
      Both the NYT and Coulter are cluelessly agenda-driven and wrong.

      Can you point me to the paragraph where Coulter agrees with the NYT and is therefore “wrong”?

      I’ll number them for you too, to make it easier for you to ‘cite’ those paras you think echo the NYT’s …

      June 11, 2014

      1. Economics professor Dave Brat crushed House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican primary Tuesday night, in a campaign that was mostly about Cantor’s supporting amnesty for 11 million illegal aliens.

      2. This marks the first time a U.S. House majority leader has ever lost a primary election.

      3. His crushing defeat reinforces a central point: Whenever the voters know an election is about immigration, they will always vote against more immigration — especially amnesty.

      4.Cantor spent more than $5 million on his campaign. Brat spent less than $150,000. But Brat made the election about Cantor’s support for amnesty, so he won.

      5.The pro-amnesty crowd — i.e., everyone except the American people — promptly lost its collective mind. The amnesty shills went on the attack, insisting that Cantor’s historic defeat had nothing to do amnesty. Brat’s triumph was touted as simply a victory for the “tea party.”

      6. Of course, these are the same people who also try to persuade us that amnesty isn’t “amnesty,” illegal aliens aren’t “illegal aliens” (they’re “undocumented workers”!), and that there are 30 million jobs Americans won’t do at any price.

      7. In fact, however, the tea party had nothing to do with Brat’s victory. Only the small, local tea party groups stand for anything anymore, but they’re as different from the media-recognized “tea party” as lay Catholics are from the Catholic bishops.

      8. National tea party groups did not contribute dime one to Brat. Not Freedom Works, not Club for Growth, not the Tea Party Express, not Tea Party Patriots. They were too busy denouncing Sen. Mitch McConnell — who has consistently voted against amnesty.

      9. As I have been warning you, the big, national tea party groups are mostly shysters and con-men raising money for their own self-aggrandizement. (Today, they’re blast-faxing “media availability” notices to television networks claiming credit for Brat’s victory.)

      10. The Tea Party Express, for example, “represents” the views of ordinary Americans by supporting Chamber of Commerce demands for cheap labor through amnesty.

      11. As Eric Hoffer said, “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”

      12. Nonetheless, the claim that Brat’s victory was a win for the tea party is everywhere — pushed with suspicious insistence by people who do not usually wish the Republican Party well. Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schulz, for example, said: “Tonight’s result in Virginia settles the debate once and for all — the tea party has taken control of the Republican Party. Period.”

      13. Liberals apparently want Brat’s victory to be seen as a win for the tea party, and not a defeat for amnesty.

      14 .At least acknowledging the obvious — Brat’s victory was about amnesty — New York’s Sen. Chuck Schumer said: “Cantor’s defeat does not change the fundamental fact that Republicans will become a minority party if they don’t address our broken immigration system.”

      15. And if anyone has the Republican Party’s best interests at heart, it’s gotta be Chuck Schumer!

      16. Is Schumer’s harangue enough to convince the bubbleheads in the GOP to say: Let’s take it to the Democrats on this issue! They could start by asking Schumer: “How come we don’t get to have the same immigration policy that Israel does?”

      17. I like Israel’s immigration policy: instant, unapologetic, unsentimental deportation of illegal aliens. Schumer obviously supports that policy, too. It’s one of many Israeli policies we might try here at home, if only Schumer would let us.

      18. Could it be that Schumer cares more about the survival of Israel than he does about the survival of the Republican Party?

      19. On Fox News, Mark Thiessen assured viewers that Brat’s victory was not about amnesty at all, but was an expression of the same anti-establishment sentiment we’ve seen elsewhere this year. He specifically cited Ben Sasse’s victory in the Nebraska Senate GOP primary, and Chris McDaniel’s forcing incumbent Sen. Thad Cochran into a run-off in Mississippi.

      20. Let’s take those:

      (1) Ben Sasse was running for an open seat — there was no “establishment” Republican to defeat.

      (2) McDaniel has made his opposition to amnesty the centerpiece of his campaign.

      21. We’re 0 for 2, so far. What else you got?

      22. There were, in fact, a couple of tea party challenges this year to so-called “establishment” Republican incumbents such as McConnell and John Cornyn. They both voted against the Schumer-Rubio amnesty. They both won.

      23. That’s 0 for 4.

      24 .Sen. Lindsey Graham’s win last night is hardly a counter-example. His $8 million war chest discouraged serious challengers, he ended up with six opponents and, as a result, that race attracted no national anti-amnesty attention. Graham sure didn’t stress his support for amnesty during the campaign. (He’s saving that as a surprise!)

      25. Fox News’ Carl Cameron blamed Cantor’s loss on the rain: “It’s worth noting that the weather was foul here yesterday and today as well. So some of it may have been nature helping out David Brat.”

      26. Similarly, The New Yorker explained Cantor’s loss by saying, “Low turnout undoubtedly played a role.”

      27. Sixty-five thousand ballots were cast in the Cantor-Brat contest. That is not a large turnout for a congressional primary election — it’s gigantic. In Cantor’s 2012 primary, 47,037 people voted. In the only other two congressional primaries in Virginia on Tuesday — the day with all that rain! — 38,855 people voted in one and 17,444 in the other.

      28. Every excuse in the book is being trotted out to claim this election was about anything but amnesty. Cantor was “arrogant.” He was “out of touch.” Democrats crossed over to vote for Brat. Cantor was “overconfident.” (Also, the sun was in his eyes!)

      29. It’s all the same boilerplate used to rationalize any election loss. Let’s take one. Overconfident? Are you kidding me? Cantor spent more than $5 million on a congressional primary!

      30. Cantor’s idiotic statements about amnesty lit up talk radio, were denounced daily on major websites such as, and were the dominant theme of Brat’s campaign, especially in the last few months. The influential became a one-man Eric Cantor Rapid Response Team on amnesty.

      31. Brat didn’t just win; he walloped Cantor, 55.5 percent to 44.5 percent.

      32. Still not convinced Brat’s victory was about amnesty? Then tell me why The New York Times ran this headline on Wednesday: “Why Did Cantor Lose? Not Easy to Explain.”

      – – – – – –

      Okay, we’ll be waiting, Bob.


      • James the Elder says:

        Living next door to the 7th District, I got to watch the blood sport without getting cut. Bob’s “agenda” comment is way off, but the 2nd paragraph is spot on. Cantor spent his years in DC amassing a small fortune and got caught in the “money and power” trap. He smelled the money and ignored the rot. Cost him.

        • James the Elder says:

          Also attending an anti-tea party meeting funded (reportedly) by George Soros came back to bite him.

        • philjourdan says:

          BIG TIME

          That probably was the biggest factor in showing his district he was no longer a real conservative.

        • _Jim says:

          2nd para in not in dispute.

        • _Jim says:

          errata; change to: 2nd para is not in dispute.

        • _Jim says:

          re: James the Elder June 12, 2014 at 4:21 pm
          Cantor spent his years in DC amassing a small fortune and got caught in the “money and power” trap. He smelled the money and ignored the rot. Cost him.

          Where was this in Brat’s campaign? Got any ads you can point us towards where he brings up this issue about Cantor?


        • philjourdan says:

          That was the most effective ad (I do not know where you can find it on the Internet). It starts out with a guy who said he lost his business during the Obama years, while Cantor’s net worth increased 7 fold! All because Cantor rewrote the insider bill that allowed congress and their families to profit from insider trading.

          Cantor called it a lie. I am not sure Cantor rewrote it himself, but he voted for the exception, so at worse it was an exaggeration.

        • _Jim says:

          re: James the Elder June 12, 2014 at 4:21 pm
          Cantor spent his years in DC amassing a small fortune and got caught in the “money and power” trap.

          Funny … the same can be said of most of these guys, yet, it does not seem to be the big ‘issue’ that can take these guys out. Take ‘Ol Mitch McConnell, he’s done okay for himself being in Washington and it seems he won his primary, but, he is against amnesty … ya getting my point yet?

        • philjourdan says:

          All politics are local. What worked in the 7th may not (and has not) worked in other areas. I cannot say “all” insider trade. But Cantor did – and while Brat’s ad on that was not a big factor to me, Cantor calling it a lie was. It showed that he was the dishonest one. And that was what pushed at least one morning drive time radio host to vote for Brat.

        • James the Elder says:

          And Lindsey Grahamnesty won his primary too. So what’s your point?

      • philjourdan says:

        I am not Bob. And I do admire Coulter. But she is wrong. It was not about Amnesty. He lost my vote because he lost who he was. He was part of the problem as he sought to acquiesce to Obama instead of fighting him. And that is what killed him.

      • James the Elder says:

        Best I could do on short notice: There’s an MP3 at the bottom of the page. Only spending $150-200K means no rash of ads. He did this one ad I heard and sent out a mailer or two. He used the local and national talk radio and Cantor’s ads to get name recognition.

    • Gamecock says:

      Glen Allen . . . Green Top Sporting Goods still there?

      What about Crossings golf course?

    • philjourdan says:

      Pretty much the way I saw it (and it was clear on the North side as well). But his playing with the party people and his refusal to support Cuccinelli was probably not a factor. It was the rank and file that defeated him, not the party elite.

  6. Bob Greene says:

    Ok, you win. From now on I’ll let the experts tell me what to think rather than my on lying eyes as a resident of VA-07

    • _Jim says:

      Cop out; refusal to admit you knee-jerked on Coulter is awful damn telling too …

      • Bob Greene says:

        Nope. I live in VA-7 and yet my observations have less value than experts who do not.
        Here goes.
        NYT. Dismissed out of hand. The only thing I’ve found interesting in the NYT is the Sunday Crossword that I started doing in 1967. The only notice I take of the NYT is when someone gets the vapors over some outrage.
        Coulter: Her acumen dropped significantly in my opinion with her rather shameless push for Christie. As for her article. I’ll ignore anything she said outside VA-7. She didn’t really recognize this was an election that hinged on very local issues as much as national big picture. So, in my opinion, all the out-of-district stuff is fluff. She mentioned Cameron’s comment about rain and then used it in the following paragraph. I hope it was facetious, if not, then her analysis failed to check facts. In a majority of the precincts, IT DID NOT RAIN. She seems to downplay TEA Party. The nationals thought Cantor was going to win and stayed out. The locals were more active and Coulter didn’t do that well enough. As far as money, Cantor wasted the money on a terrible ad that he wouldn’t get off, it was also his talking points.

        The “immigration” issue is, I believe, media group think. They weren’t paying attention to the election, got surprised and had to come up with something quick.

        Now for my observations:
        As majority leader Cantor paid more attention to Washington and national than the district. It was noticed in the district.

        VA Republicans nominate statewide candidates at a convention. Activists were able to nominate Cucinelli instead of Lt. Gov Bolling, who thought the nomination was his due. Bolling and his supporters not only didn’t support the nominee but some supported the Dem candidate. Cantor, at best, stood on the sidelines and didn’t actively support Cucinelli. It was noticed among the conservatives.

        There has been a long-running snit between Cantor and gun rights activists. Cantor has refused to answer their annual candidate survey for 4 years. (Brat quickly responded). Cantor’s annual “Republican Roundup” was held in a gun-free location. He wouldn’t move ti to a gun friendly location. VCDL doesn’t sponsor candidates, but their PAC does. The Henrico members were very unhappy with Cantor.

        Cantor took a shot at replacing grassroots county chairmen with his candidates. He also tired to select convention nominees by putting up a slate of his supportors. It failed, but it really got on the wrong side of his active constitutents.
        Cantor was sure he would win and acted that way. He wasn’t even in the district on Tuesday morning.

        Cantor’s main ad was patently false and recognized as such. It turned people off and he never got off it and kept it in his talking points.

        Brat’s campaign was totally grass roots. Lots of volunteers, door knockers, 20-40 person neighborhood meetings. Brat has the ability to make complex subjects very clear. He is a convincing speaker. He takes the Virginia Republican Principles and makes them very clear .

        Brat has been “anti immigration” mainly from an economic standpoint. That is, illegal alien labor harms unemployed and underemployed Americans. That stuck home. His overall economic message and the message of sticking to Republican principles struck home.

        Cantor didn’t recognize the groundswell of dissatisfaction and remained the Beltway insider.. His opponent excited volunteers who were out in the neighborhoods. We didn’t see the Cantor supporters.

        Cantor didn’t do basic district politics. His opponent did.

        Of course I just live here and don’t have the insight that New York and Beltway experts have. Obviously I don’t know what was going on. I thought the sun was shining on a dau the experts said was rainy Tuesday and rode around in a Miata with the top down.

        • James the Elder says:

          And I was having a cold adult beverage sitting in the lawn chair. But, like you said, who you gonna believe; the lyin’ NYT or your lyin’ eyes? And a Miata? I was solidly with you until that.

        • philjourdan says:

          @Bob – excellent! Succinct and accurate. What you said, either I have seen first hand, or heard on the local talk radio programs. You summed it up well.

    • philjourdan says:

      Bob, you were right for the most part (I disagree with your editorial about Coulter – but agree she was wrong as well). Actually, while we know what happened with ourselves and friends in the 7th, the fact that everyone in the 7th is basically saying the same thing is all the affirmation we need. Not only you and I, but every caller into Jeff Katz and on the national shows (from the 7th) that I have heard have said the same thing.

      Wednesday morning, Jimmy Barrett, who admits he is conservative, but never talks about his actions in the polling booth, greatly insinuated he voted for Brat as well. And the reason? He was upset with the Cantor ads that were demonstrably false. That is clearly a symptom of Cantor having lost touch with his district.

  7. David D. says:

    Tell me why the GOP is so terrified of Hispanics? They are our greatest resource. The 11+ million living here are hard workers, pay taxes, raise families and provide a beautiful, dynamic and creative culture. We need their energy. The Hispanic population is growing by leaps and bounds. Those 11+ million have not just been sitting around singing Mariachi songs. They’ve been making babies. All legal babies. Why can’t the GOP see it’s inevitable that amnesty and citizenship will be the law of the land. My organization alone is able to get 25,000 illegals per month into the country. There is so much sympathy for Hispanics. Look: even the government bends over backwards to feed, clothe and provide them with medical care, driver’s licenses. The white trash know this and can’t stop it. I recognize the white conservatives are angry and resentful, but they are also guilty of racism and impeding progress, so any damage they suffer is well-deserved. They fear being displaced which they are. They have only themselves to blame. VIVA LA RAZA!!!!!

    • Gamecock says:

      Your group politics is the problem. Freedom and liberty are for everyone. As soon as you identify people as different, you create the opportunity, or even demand, for discrimination. Your invasion force will be stopped. It will be stopped when the government gets the will to stop it. And it will be easy to stop.

      – first offense, illegal presence in the U.S., 6 months in prison.
      – second offense, 2 years in prison
      – third offense, 20 years in prison.

      Your fine people will find their own way back over the border without assistance.

    • _Jim says:

      re: David D. June 12, 2014 at 6:55 pm
      Tell me why the GOP is so terrified of Hispanics?

      It’s your ‘friends’ in the media who coined this meme; you’re the nutcase here, not us …

      “Overcoming Liberalism: A 12-Step Program”

      Here, I’ll get you started with the first three steps:
      – – – –
      The Program:

      Step 1: Admitting that you’re a liberal. This is the first step for every liberal on the way to recovery. It is important to understand that you’re not “progressive,” “moderate,” or “enlightened.” You’re a liberal, and you need to be honest with yourself about that fact.

      Step 2: Pledge to support your beliefs with facts. Realize that truth is more important than moral superiority and is the only way to come over to reality. You must research beyond propaganda from the Sierra Club, Hillary Clinton, and CNN (the Communist News Network) to understand things as they really exist in the world. You can no longer argue based on “feelings” or emotion. You will actually need to back up your arguments with real information. This is a difficult step, because it means you can’t be lazy any more.

      Step 3: Love America. This may be the most difficult step for those of you who are hippies and peaceniks. Admitting that the country you hate actually stands as a beacon to defend freedom throughout the world can make some of you physically ill. You might want to make a visit to a military cemetery to better understand that these men and women gave their lives so that you could spew hatred. Otherwise, you would currently be living in a police state that would never let you wear that nasty patchouli oil, let alone speak out against your government.

      – – – – – –

    • James the Elder says:

      VIVA LA RAZA? So you’re good with an extremist group wanting to take the southwest back into Mexican territory by any means possible? Just be sure you’re on that side of the border when it comes.

      • philjourdan says:

        He is also ignorant. The southwest was never a “part” of Mexico. It was owned by Spain until they pulled out, and allowed Mexico to “govern” it in their absence. it is like saying that Mexico should own all of Central America.

    • James the Elder says:

      Steve, send this fool’s IP address to ICE and let’s see if they might want to talk to him.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Tell me why the GOP is so terrified of Hispanics? …
      Oh good grief.

      I am not at all “terrified” of Hispanics. I consider them my best customers and my husband and I have gone out of our way to learn some Spanish to communicate with them. (I am absolutely rotten at languages so that is a very big deal.)

      So what is my gripe? They are ILLEGAL period. Three out of four of my grandparents were LEGAL immigrants and the same with my husband.

      And yes I do understand the USA had a major hand in the issues that are causing illegal immigration in the first place. You can thank Bill Clinton BTW.

      This is just ONE of those issues.

      Small Farmers And The Doha Round: Lessons From Mexico’s NAFTA Experience
      …Whatever be the gains that have been achieved, and as we have seen, there have been some, the very nature of these gains has adversely affected small farmers. And the reasons are fairly straightforward[14]. 12% of Mexico’s arable land is devoted to agriculture and 54% to cattle ranching. Of the cultivated land, 71% is devoted to grains and oilseeds and only 9% to fruits and vegetables. Therefore the bulk of cultivated area is adversely affected by import competition. 85% of Mexico’s farmers are small and marginal and grow largely grains and oilseeds. About 16% of farmers grow fruits and vegetables and most of these are medium and large farmers, largely because the investment required for growing fruits and vegetables is beyond the reach of most small-farmers. Therefore it is small farmers that have borne the brunt of import competition….

      The vacuum created by retreat of the Mexican state from agriculture was filled by large US and Mexican agribusiness. In the post-NAFTA period the bulk of FDI in agricultural sector has been in the agri-business and agro-processing rather than agriculture[15]. As a result a few large trans-national agribusiness firms, mostly US and Mexican, dominate storage, flour milling, grain trading[16] and meat processing. Put differently they dominate the intermediation chain that takes crop or cattle and makes it a marketable commodity. Transnational agribusiness has used this dominant position and a process of vertical and horizontal integration to establish an overwhelming presence in the market for wheat, rice, corn, soya, poultry, meat, pork and eggs. Transnational agri-business tends to have much closer links with larger farmers and producers, who have better access to land, irrigation and credit, all of which are scarce commodities for small farmers[17]….

      Alongside this, as hoped for by designers of NAFTA, has been ‘modernisation’ – a sharp decline in the share of agriculture and allied sectors in the workforce. From nearly 27% in 1991 it declined to slightly less than 15% in 2006, losing more than 2 million jobs[18]. Again small and marginal farmers and agricultural labour bore the brunt, as evidenced by very sharp decline in the number of rural households. According to a study by Jose Romero and Alicia Puyana carried out for the federal government of Mexico, between 1992 and 2002, the number of agricultural households fell an astounding 75% – from 2.3 million to 575, 000[19].

      There has been a significant increase in migration out of rural areas as livelihoods are lost and farms have been abandoned. The hope was that this migration out of low-productivity agriculture would be absorbed into higher-productivity non-agrarian urban employment. But anemic employment growth in the post-NAFTA period, particularly in manufacturing[20], put paid to that. And what little employment there has been has largely been in the informal sector. As a result there has been a change in the pattern of rural out-migration. In the 1980s the likelihood of migrating to urban Mexico was higher than that of migrating to the USA. Today, as a result of anemic employment growth, the likelihood of migrating to the USA is significantly higher[21].….

      • Jason Calley says:

        Great post Gail! My brother was one of the people here in the US who lost his job because of NAFTA; his company closed their US plant and shifted production to Mexico.

        At the risk of beating a dead horse, I will just briefly mention a few facts about the implementation of NAFTA. Yes, Clinton and Gore pushed it through. One of the main ways they got it passed was (shades of GISS!) by withholding or altering economic data associated with the change. So…. definitely blame Clinton. But blame Bush as well. Although Clinton pushed it through, Bush was the person who actually negotiated NAFTA; he had an agreement with Congress that the Executive Branch would negotiate the treaty, and that Congress would then give an up or down vote with no Legislative feedback, no modifications, no changes. Congress would pass it or refuse it, but only the Executive Branch could decide what went into it. When Congress saw it, there were not enough votes to pass it; treaties require a supermajority vote (I think it is 3/5 to pass). So, what to do? Suddenly, the powers that be claimed that NAFTA was NOT a treaty, but was an “agreement.” Voila! All that was needed for a non-treaty “agreement” was a simple 50% — and Clinton got that passed!

        Ancient history… Water under the bridge.

    • Gail Combs says:

      David D. says: @ June 12, 2014 at 6:55 pm

      Tell me why the GOP is so terrified of Hispanics? They are our greatest resource. The 11+ million living here are hard workers, pay taxes, raise families and provide a beautiful, dynamic and creative culture.

      I think you over looked something while wearing your rose-colored glasses.

      Nearly 200 murderers, over 400 rapists, and 300 kidnappers in the U.S. illegally were released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement while awaiting deportation proceedings, according to a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies.

      A total of 36,007 criminal illegal immigrants that were being processed for deportation were freed in 2013. Together, they committed nearly 88,000 crimes, according to the report, published Monday.

      “I was astonished at not only the huge number of convicted criminals who were freed from ICE custody last year – an average of almost 100 a day — but also at the large number of very serious crimes they had committed,” said Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, in a statement….

      Besides violent criminals, ICE released nearly 16,000 illegal immigrants convicted of driving under the influence. The report also shows that ICE released nearly 2,700 illegal immigrants convicted of assault, 1,300 convicted for domestic violence, and nearly 1,300 convicted for battery….

      Don’t we have enough criminals without importing more?

    • philjourdan says:

      Rubio and Cruz are terrified of themselves?

      You can always tell a racist. They can only think about race, not about issues. Poor david thinks that all illegals are hispanics. That is very racist. The last figure I saw said about 60-70% were. Which left a large part of them NON-hispanic. Some are even {shock} Caucasian!

      So where do you get your white hood starched david D?

    • philjourdan says:

      O, BTW david. La Raza is very racist as well. It means “The Race”. But then all racists are stupid. Mexican is not a race.

  8. James the Elder says:

    Gail, I found different #s.


    “Note that these 36,000 offenders are separate from the 68,000 illegals with criminal records who were also released last year and whom CIS reported on back in March. The latter group consists of people whom ICE “encountered” (often in jails) but didn’t seek to remove; the former group is composed of people they did try to remove with formal deportation proceedings but who were released on bond or via some other mechanism while the proceedings played out. How many of them didn’t show up to their next hearing? Good question. We don’t know because ICE hasn’t said.”

  9. Gail Combs says:

    There Is No Substitute for Victory. says: @ June 12, 2014 at 8:36 pm

    Gail Combs wrote:
    “The RACIST label comes from asking questions that start with:
    “Do you think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure that…” With few exceptions the Tea Party member will answer NO! no matter how that sentence is finished.”

    I other words Gail, from out of your own mouth your have labeled every Tea Party adherent in America that you know and who knows you as an ignorant, one dimensional, knee jerk voter….
    No I have labeled the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT as an out of control bureaucracy that uses the Constitution as toilet paper. That is an entirely different statemen based on a heck of a lot of reading over the last decade or so.

    Here is a prime example:

    In the USA Jury trials were considered so important that the 6th and 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 3 Section 2 give US citizens the right to a trial.

    As Thomas Jefferson put it to Tom Paine in a 1789 letter:
    “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”

    One of the reasons for a trial by jury is it allow the people of the USA to have final say on a law. WE as Jurorists have the RIGHT and duty to judge not only the case by the LAW itself. We as Jurorists CAN set aside laws passed by Congress! SEE:

    This is the ultimate power of the people over the government and the Elite want to keep it deeply buried. Unfortunately this extremely important foundation of our country has been trampled by the very people who are SUPPOSED TO protect the US Constitution from encroachment by the Federal Government – the Supreme Court.

    “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved….” ~ Amendment VII

    Pretty darn clear isn’t it? But the Supreme Court didn’t think so.

    Here is how the Elite have gotten around the US Constitution to make sure the serfs are denied their right to a trial and “We The People” lost our right to nullify bad laws.

    Toward the end of the Constitutional Convention, Hugh Williamson of North Carolina noted that “no provision was yet made for juries in civil cases and suggested the necessity of it.”

    The Seventh Amendment, passed by the First Congress without debate, cured the omission by declaring that the right to a jury trial shall be preserved in common-law cases… The Supreme Court has, however, arrived at a more limited interpretation. It applies the amendment’s guarantee to the kinds of cases that “existed under the English common law when the amendment was adopted,”

    The right to trial by jury is not constitutionally guaranteed in certain classes of civil cases that are concededly “suits at common law,” particularly when “public” or governmental rights are at issue and if one cannot find eighteenth-century precedent for jury participation in those cases. Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission (1977). Thus, Congress can lodge personal and property claims against the United States in non-Article III courts with no jury component. In addition, where practice as it existed in 1791 “provides no clear answer,” the rule is that “[o]nly those incidents which are regarded as fundamental, as inherent in and of the essence of the system of trial by jury, are placed beyond the reach of the legislature.” Markman v. Westview Instruments (1996). In those situations, too, the Seventh Amendment does not restrain congressional choice.

    In contrast to the near-universal support for the civil jury trial in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, modern jurists consider civil jury trial neither “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” Palko v. State of Connecticut (1937), nor “fundamental to the American scheme of justice,” Duncan v. Louisiana (1968).!/amendments/7/essays/159/right-to-jury-in-civil-cases

    To add insult to injury a bureaucratic tribunal within the bureaucracy that is accusing a citizen is now who decides if the bureaucracy’s self-propagated regulations have been violated. That means We The People have been entirely cut out of the process. Now an unelected group comes up with the regs and then the same group finds you guilty of braking them and the entire matter is all contained within a small group in D.C. I do not think that is what Thomas Jefferson had in mind do you?

    So, if someone asks me do I think the Federal Government has usurped too much power? The answer is very likely going to be HE!! YES!

    The tenth amendment to the US constitution says:
    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    Unfortunately no one ever remembers that anymore. Liberals who want big government refuse to ‘Understand’ that the states and the people within them have a right under the Constitution to make laws and the Federal government should BUTT OUT.

    • James the Elder says:

      Not sure about all states, but in VA and CA (for polar opposites), the lowly county sheriff is the ultimate law. Unless martial law is declared, NOBODY overrides the sheriff. The Mack suit in CA against the Feds was ruled in favor of Sheriff Mack when he demanded the Feds get out of his county. Went to the SCOTUS where Scalia dropped the hammer on Federal intrusion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s