The Patriot Post Digest 10-9-2015

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 10-9-2015
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Daily Digest

Oct. 9, 2015

THE FOUNDATION

“The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.” —James Madison, Federalist No. 57

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
With McCarthy Out, Is Ryan Up?1

By Nate Jackson

Kevin McCarthy abruptly dropped out of the race for House speaker Thursday when it became evident he didn’t have the votes, and the Republican conference vote has been postponed indefinitely. “I don’t want to go to the floor and win with 220 votes,” said the current majority leader, who might not have reached even that threshold. “I think the best thing for our party is to win with 247 votes.” That’s the total number of Republicans in the House — important because, if McCarthy had needed Democrat votes to win the speakership, it would have meant concessions to Nancy Pelosi.

“This was for the good of the team,” he said. So McCarthy’s 11th-hour withdrawal is a laudable display of a little humility rare among Swamp-dwellers.

“For us to unite, we probably need a fresh face,” McCarthy added. “If we are going to unite and be strong, we need a new face to help do that.”

There are rumors2 that McCarthy was engaged in an extramarital affair with Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC), and his decision was brought about by a letter from Rep. Walter Jones3 (R-NC) calling on any candidate who has committed “misdeeds” to withdraw. But McCarthy dismissed those rumors, and there is little reason at this point to believe them. Going forward, we’ll see.

More important, his recent gaffe, a boneheaded explanation of the Benghazi committee’s purpose4, was a priceless gift to Hillary Clinton and her fellow Democrats, and it rendered him unfit for the speaker’s post in the eyes of many colleagues. That and John Boehner’s endorsement — many conservatives were quite pleased to be rid of Boehner5, and few were keen on immediately passing the reins to his right-hand man.

Had the leadership actually led instead of looking for ways to bow to Barack Obama’s agenda, the Right wouldn’t be so divided.

National Review’s Rich Lowry explains6, “The Republican nervous breakdown is entirely self-inflicted. Understanding the House caucus is less Politics 101 than scorpions in a bottle. The right of the caucus hates and distrusts the leadership, while most of the rest of the caucus hates and distrusts the right, and no one has the standing to bring all sides together in a semblance of unity.”

The 40-plus member House Freedom Caucus had just endorsed Daniel Webster7 (R-FL) for the post, and Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) likewise was making a push in the race8.

Neither of those candidates, however, has anywhere near the necessary majority at this point, which has led to some speculation about who else might rise up for the post. Namely, Paul Ryan, the current chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and Mitt Romney’s VP pick in 2012.

Ryan so far has categorically denied interest or intention in running for the post, preferring the policy details of Ways and Means — not to mention seeing his young family once in a while — to wrangling votes from a rambunctious Republican conference.

For the record, we think Ryan would make an outstanding speaker, and he may be the most logical choice to unite the House Freedom Caucus with the rest of the conference. Ryan is a solidly conservative deal maker.

Bloomberg columnist Ramesh Ponnuru writes9, “Ryan is respected by most people on both sides of the divide. Many of the Republicans who were against Boehner and McCarthy would listen to him, and trust him to listen to them. They sometimes disagree with him, but they trust that he is in politics because of conservative ideas. No other House Republican has the same reservoir of goodwill. No other House Republican is considered as good a spokesman on such politically perilous issues as entitlement reform.”

Now what? The speaker election has been postponed and Boehner will likely remain until someone gets to 218 votes. The trouble is, leadership is a thankless job and few seem to want it.

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Blumenthal Pushed Clinton to Go to War in Libya10

The perception of modern politicians is that they stay in office by wielding a soft power, issuing a few well-placed grants and voting for the things that will tickle the constituency come election season. But as some of Hillary Clinton’s emails reveal, the Obama administration is not below creating havoc in a foreign country to secure an election at home. Rep. Trey Gowdy, chair of the House Benghazi Committee, recently described the situation in a letter11 to the ranking member on the committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings. It was 2011, just after the United States helped intervene in Libya and imposed the no-fly zone over the country. Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton lackey, was whispering into his lady’s ear. Obama was sagging in the polls. Blumenthal’s solution? Escalate the America’s intervention in Libya. “Obama should think about the political effect here in the US of defeat by Qathafi’s [sic] puny forces,” Blumenthal wrote. “He wants to be re-elected? It would be interesting to see how his prospect would be affected by Qathafi’s continuing presence in Tripoli in November 2012 and the mockery that the Republicans will rain down on him over his present weakness.” We know what happened next: Libyan rebels killed Gadhafi and the region was plunged into chaos. The U.S. consulate in Benghazi was attacked and the ambassador killed. But hey, Obama was re-elected. For Blumenthal, he promoted war because he had a chance of benefiting financially. His business venture, Osprey Global Solutions, stood positioned to do business with a new Libyan regime. And Hillary Clinton greased the skids.

Iran Nuclear Deal Hits Snag With U.S. Law12

The Obama administration will have a bit of a problem giving Iran its $150 billion from the deal granting the group nuclear power. Turns out, one way Barack Obama was going to provide sanctions relief is illegal — per a law Obama previously signed. The Iran nuclear deal says that American companies can do business with Iran, provided they conduct that business with a non-American subsidiary. Problem is, Obama closed the loophole in 2012 by signing the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act. Sen. Ted Cruz told13 Fox News, “It’s a problem that the president doesn’t have the ability to wave a magic wand and make go away. Any U.S. company that follows through on this, that allows their foreign-owned subsidiaries to do business with Iran, will very likely face substantial civil liability, litigation and potentially even criminal prosecution. The obligation to follow federal law doesn’t go away simply because we have a lawless president who refuses to acknowledge or follow federal law.” Now the talk is on what Obama can do. Can he ignore the law? Good luck trying to defend that against a court challenge, as statutes trump executive actions (as they well should). Well, there’s always going back to Congress to ask them to change the law… Still, the Obama administration insists everything is A-Okay. Will U.S. companies take the risk?

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 10-9-2015
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Just What We Need: A Climate Alarmist Czar14

With Barack Obama’s remaining months in office dwindling, his focus is squarely on Paris, where representatives from around the globe will meet in late November and early December to negotiate a climate accord at COP21, the UN’s much-heralded climate summit. Last year was erroneously15 declared the world’s warmest yet, and 2015 is expected to follow suit thanks to an evolving El Nino. The result is a perfect culmination of rhetorical ammo heading into the summit, and it represents the UN’s best shot yet of finalizing a deal. But regardless of what happens in Paris, Democrats face obstacles in Congress and at the state level, where Republicans will do their best to derail any agreement. Obama is hoping to change that with a little swindle from his friends. The New York Times reports16, “The White House has appointed Thomas Reynolds, a top communications strategist at the Environmental Protection Agency and a seasoned political operative, to a new position dedicated solely to messaging Mr. Obama’s global warming agenda.” The two aren’t strangers, either. In fact, Reynolds helped Obama get re-elected, so the move is probably a “thank you” reward, much like appointing a major donor to an ambassadorship. But there’s another peculiar aspect to the Times report: “While Mr. Reynolds’s public relations campaigns elevated the issue of climate change, they sometimes got him into hot water. In trying to build public support for a new clean water regulation, Mr. Reynolds created a Twitter campaign urging people to speak out in favor of the rule. But some legal experts have contended that campaign might have tested the limits of federal lobbying laws, which prohibit a government agency from engaging in grass-roots lobbying for proposed policies or legislation.” So he’s been hired by Obama instead, where he’s shielded from possible ethics violations. It’s shrewd, cynical politics at its worst, and it helps explain why our government is so corrupt.

MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE

    ANALYSIS: A Conservative Pitch for Criminal Justice Relief17
    ObamaCare Program Shorts Insurance Companies Billions18
    Record Number of Gun Background Checks in September19
    Feds Spending Another $128 Million on Tobacco War20

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

    Rich Lowry: The House Republican Meltdown6
    Charles Krauthammer: Another Massacre, Another Charade21
    Arnold Ahlert: Taking on Sanctuary City Lawlessness22

For more, visit Right Opinion23.

TOP HEADLINES

    Obama Mulls More Unilateral Gun Control24
    Sanctuary Cities Explode to 34025
    Iran Loses Top Commander in Syria26

For more, visit Patriot Headline Report27

OPINION IN BRIEF

Charles Krauthammer: “[Barack Obama] made an oblique reference to Australia, never mentioning that its gun-control innovation was confiscation, by means of a mandatory buyback. There’s a reason he didn’t bring up confiscation (apart from the debate about its actual efficacy in reducing gun violence in Australia). In this country, with its traditions, public sentiment and, most importantly, Second Amendment, them’s fightin' words. Obama didn’t say them. Nor did he seriously address the other approach that could make a difference: more aggressive psychiatric intervention. These massacres are almost invariably perpetrated by severely disturbed, isolated, often delusional young men. Yet even here, our reach is limited. … The problem is that these mass-murder cases are fairly unusual. Take Roseburg. That young man had no criminal history, no psychiatric diagnosis beyond Asperger’s, no involvement in public disturbances. How do you find, let alone lock up, someone like that? There are 320 million Americans. Schizophrenia affects about 1 percent of the population. That’s about 3 million people. Only a tiny fraction are ever violent — and predicting which ones will be is almost impossible. … In the final quarter of his presidency, Obama can very well say what he wants. If he believes in Australian-style confiscation — i.e., abolishing the Second Amendment — why not spell it out? Until he does, he should stop demonizing people for not doing what he won’t even propose.”

SHORT CUTS

Braying Jackass: “Our freedom allows bad people to create criminal enterprises and also allows madmen opportunities to commit atrocious crimes.” —Bill O'Reilly, seemingly blaming Liberty for crime

Braying Jenny: “The real answer to [gun control] is for gun owners to form a different organization that supports the Second Amendment, supports their rights to own guns, use guns, go hunting, goes target shooting, but stands against the absolutism of the NRA. You know, the NRA’s position reminds me of negotiating with the Iranians or the Communists.” —Hillary Clinton

Upright: “Luckily for gun owners, the more Democrats agitate for restrictive gun laws, the worse the Democrats do in polling. Beta male gun control policies may be winners on editorial pages, but are losers in our national electoral system.” —Erick Erickson

Friendly fire: “[Hillary Clinton’s] great liability in this race so far has been the sense that she is inauthentic — and that of course is one of Bernie Sanders' strengths. And so, this lurch28 on this [Trans-Pacific Partnership] issue opens her up to another charge of inauthenticity” —former Obama operative David Axelrod

Non Compos Mentis: “The people in Illinois were looking forward to having some [inmates from Guantanamo Bay] transferred there. They saw it as economic opportunity, as you may recall.” —Nancy Pelosi (Obama’s open borders policy already allows terrorists to waltz right through; what’s a few more from Gitmo?)

Village Idiots: “They’re giving me a lot of credit for [Kevin McCarthy ending his speaker bid] because I said you really need somebody very, very tough and very smart.” —Donald Trump

Late-night humor: “Vladimir Putin celebrated his 63rd birthday [this week]. He had a nice party, but it got awkward when two of his friends got him the same country.” —Jimmy Fallon

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.