Unbecoming of an Officer…in this case the Secret Service

The Obama administration seem to be grasping at straws.  Clutching and clawing at any idea to keep the White House
out of the hands of  former Governor Mitt Romney.  Amid the scandals of the Secret Service, lets be clear that there have been
incidences under prior administrations, George W. Bush and even Bill Clinton. Read more

Clinton to Obama: First plug the hole

Clinton’s exclusive interview on CNN with Wolf is being framed as the former President voicing support for the current one. But that’s not exactly how I heard it. True, he starts with an Obama attaboy, but it doesn’t end that way.

Read more

White House “comes clean” on Sestak allegations

Friday afternoon, after most Americans left work early to begin their long Memorial Day weekend, the White House finally issued its long-awaited explanation on the Sestak matter.  Although the timing of the release is suspect, the facts disclosed are even more so.

Congressman Joe Sestak (D. Pa.) has maintained since at least February that the White House offered him a high ranking position in the administration if he would withdraw from the Democratic Senate primary election  in Pennsylvania.  Sestak was running against Arlen Specter (D. Pa.), the republican, turned democrat, who was Obama’s choice for that seat. 

But, Friday’s revelation from the White House casts even further doubt on what actually happened.  According to Robert Bauer, White House counsel, what actually took place was that former president Clinton, at the behest of White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, spoke with Sestak to determine if Sestak would be interested in an “alternative path to service”, and raised the possibility of an “uncompensated advisory board” position if Sestak would drop out of the race.  And, Sestak quickly confirmed that that, in fact. was what had really happened.

I don’t know about you, but, the White House’s “recitation” of the facts seems a bit odd.  Sestak’s original statement was that he was offered a high level job by the White House.  By the time the administration circled the wagons, it was an unpaid position on an advisory board.  We are also asked to believe that the White House actually thought that Sestak would give up a very good chance of becoming a United States Senator in exchange for a non-paying advisory board position offered by a former president.

Of course, those pesky details may not matter, as both versions of the story provide the predicate for a clear violation of federal law.  And, in that conclusion, I have some support.  Before the White House released its version of the events, David Axelrod, a senior White House advisor, said,

that offering a job in exchange for Mr. Sestak’s withdrawal would constitute a serious breach of the law.

Anyone think we’ll see a special prosecutor?

Sunday funny

At least he didn’t say … SHE isn’t getting any younger. Bill on Hillary’s chances of running for President in 2012 or 16.


Hey, it’s not like the former President was in Las Vegas for his birthday while his wife was sweating in the Congo or something.

Have A Smoke … Please

Your weekend funny. Line of the day comes from Charles Krauthammer on a day when both Bill Clinton and Charles tell the young President to “cool it” with the world is coming to an end rhetoric. First Charles … 


The Ex-President goes a little easier but the message is the same. You’re the President … xnay on the epressionday.

Federal government spending, where to cut and trim

It’s been 16 years since President Clinton took office, and at the time he asked the public for suggestions on how to reduce the deficit. If I remember correctly, Al Gore was tasked to find inefficiencies and redundancies in government and squash them.

It never happened. The federal budget has ballooned from about $1 trillion to an estimated $3 trillion in 2009. To be sure, Republicans, Democrats and Independents in Congress and the Executive Branch are all to blame.

But we are to blame as well. The voters placed politicians in power and kept them there as they continued to jack up federal spending, all along taking more of our freedoms away.

Our town centers do need those brick crosswalks after all, and since the federal government is willing to give us money to build them, we may as well take the cash. If we don’t some other small town will.

After my dad passed away, I found a letter on his computer that he had written to Clinton after he was inaugurated in 1993. I’m not sure if I even knew what the difference was between a conservative and liberal back then, I just knew what values – both economic and moral – my parents had instilled in us.

As an example, I needed cash to buy my first set of scuba gear back in 1989. My dad was happy to loan me the money from some extra cash he had available from his small business, but I paid a 9 percent interest rate on the money and was expected to make prompt payments for the next 12 months. He was smart and made a modest profit since the bank was paying less than 9 percent. I learned a lesson in banking.

My memory is terrible, but I do remember stopping into the shop where he worked and telling him he needed to tune into this guy on the radio – AM radio. My dad enjoyed listening to the FM oldies station at work and we switched the station. That’s the way I remember it, but it’s possible that my dad had me listen to this new guy on the radio. Again, my memory stinks.

Either way, we were listening to Rush Limbaugh and found out I was a conservative. Not a Republican, but a conservative. A conservative defines who you are, a Republican is just a political party you join.

thumbnail-deficit-solutionsSo on to the letter. What makes this special is that the same letter written almost 16 years ago applies today. This is how conservatives need to think when it comes to federal government budget policy. I’m not sure if the prose is particularly eloquent, but it gets to the point pretty darn quick.

Yes, times have changed since 1993, but the overall point is right on target.

To make this letter search engine friendly, I’ve transcribed it here since I only have a hard copy, but attached is the scan of the original.

Mr. President,

This letter is in response to your request for deficit solutions.

A few weeks ago I sat down to re-read the Constitution of the United States of America. The document is very clear to me. Apparently, it is not clear to many lawyers, judges and politicians. Certain Powers are given to each of the three branches of the federal government, All others remain with the individual states and the people. (Please reference Amendment Ten.) Powers in the following areas are NOT given to the federal government. Therefore all federal spending in these areas can be eliminated.

Some are listed here.

  1. The Departments of Agriculture, Education, and Energy
  2. The Department of Housing and Urban Development
  3. The Federal Emergency Management Administration
  4. The Social Security Administration
  5. Federal Unemployment Administration
  6. Medical and scientific research is not directly related to the federal responsibility for national defense
  7. The National Endowment for the Arts

Additionally, all Federal revenue sharing and grants must be eliminated. Revenue Sharing is inter-governmental graft, a corruption which causes State and Local Governments to abandon their Constitutional Powers in exchange for Federal Money. This evil is so intense that the framers of the Constitution and the brave Colonists who fought for independence would certainly wonder why they separated from England. Local governments justify spending Federal money by saying the money will be spent by other local governments if they do not accept and spend it. Thus the People lose the ability to prevent unnecessary spending. Hear the Founding Fathers howl “Taxation without representation!”.

Mr. President, please sit down today to read the Constitution of the United States of American which you swore to uphold just a few weeks ago. If the Presidency, the Congress, and the Federal Courts will not live and operate within the Powers granted, or withheld, by this document, then can we expect the People to respect and obey the laws written under those Powers?

Jim McGough