The Cain Oath of Loyalty

When Presidential candidate Herman Cain said he would require any Muslim appointed to his Cabinet to take a loyalty oath liberals went crazy. They screamed about how "un" American it was to require such an oath. After all, they said, this is America, land of the free, so why should a loyalty oath be required? From the liberal perspective this is certainly understandable. After all when government employees leak confidential information it is a good thing; right? Well maybe. If it is about mismanagement, political firings, and inappropriate activity I can see that. But if it is about information that informs our enemies such as the exposure of wire tapping methods, CIA "black camps" used for questioning terrorists and secret military strategy information, maybe that is different. So obviously it then becomes a question of discretion, which requires thoughtful consideration and adherence to the law. That is, no government employee is required to break the law for a superior. I understand there is a grey area here, but that too is governed by internal agency rules and regulations. The point is that, Cain's statement aside elected and appointed officials and military volunteers already take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Those that fall short violate that oath, regardless of race, color, creed, or gender.

I Think Someone Forgot the Rules

Up until the Obama Presidency the federal government seemed to operate by a set of rules established by the Constitution. Now it seems many of these rules have been turned on their heads, so to speak, to accommodate a President that either doesn't care about the rules or just ignores them. Take the current Debt Ceiling and Budget debate; there are rules that govern the raising of the debt ceiling and approval of a budget. The House of Representatives proposes a raise in the debt ceiling or a budget. When passed it is sent to the Senate that accepts or modifies it. When the House and Senate pass the same version of the bill it is sent to the President for his signature and it then becomes law. That is the procedure written in the Constitution. While it has become customary for a President to submit a budget proposal, it is also customary for Congress to originate its own proposal with some consideration of the President's priorities. So for the record, the debt ceiling and budget debate should be between the House and the Senate, not the House and the President. So far the only piece of legislation (Cut, Cap and Balance) has been produced by the House. The Senate hasn't acted and the President has not even offered a proposal in writing. Americans need to insist that the President and the Congress follow the rules.

The Gang of Six, Real Cuts in 2012 and Polls

@RepFredUpton So far Cut, Cap and Balance is the only bill passed in Congress. The Senate plan is just a plan and the President has offered nothing.
Obama loves the Senate plan because it has new taxes, no spending cuts and empty promises about future cuts. Where is the Third Estate?
The gang of six plan is incomplete and is not in legislative form. It cannot even be voted on. More importantly it contains no cuts in 2012.
For those that care: The Gang of Six Plan does not cut spending in 2012. The only bill with any cuts in 2012 is the House plan.
Why doesn't the press ask Dem Senate why they have failed to submit a budget proposal? The gang of six plan will not pass the House.
@SpeakerBoehner Mr Speaker: We must continually point out that Obama does offer any spending cuts in 2012. We can win on that issue.
@SenatorKirk Any deal must have cuts in 2012 or it is meaningless. Republicans will be called on this.
@RepDanBurton Any deal must include cuts in 2012 and Republicans must make MSM report that Obama wants no cuts in 2012.
@Politisite Why am I never surprised when NBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, CNN, PEW and Gallup polls show Obama favored over Republicans?

MSM in Traction

@thenewnarrative George Rudolph
@stephenfhayes the major pitfall of the McConnell plan is Obama.
The New Narrative Daily is out! http://bit.ly/g30bmL ▸ Top stories today via @repdennisross @examineropeds @heardonthehill @jimpethokoukis
@EmilyMiller @cefilby The GOP must defeat these Dems one vote at a time. We need the R's to act like a machine, stand together and vote.
@washingtonpost And you all ate it up porridge and never contested Obama's lack of process knowledge or his veracity. Shameful
@DavidLimbaugh It is discouraging they are afraid to confront his lies.
@TheKudlowReport I hope Russert can do better than just repeating Obama's talking points.
@NancyPelosi There is no jobs bill, there is just a no-jobs President.
The liberal media knows Obama is not serious and McConnell is just stating it plainly. Spending is the heroin and the MSM is the needle.
@GOPWhip @natresources because the war on fossil fuel continues.
@newtgingrich McConnell is just saying Obama won't deal honestly because spending, not cutting is his goal.
People who know how SSI and debt ceiling work know the President is just selling "woof" tickets. That's trash talking for you youngsters.
@LadyFyreAZ @gopleader The press is really failing in it's major role to keep gov't in check. The failure to be embarrassed is scary.

The Spend Now, Save Later Trap

According to remarks by David Vitter on Larry Kudlow’s talk radio show, the “deficit reduction” group with VP Joe Biden, and House and Senate members are using the 10-year window for spending cuts. For Republicans this is the Spend Now, Cut Later Trap. Because the current Congress cannot lock future Congresses into spending targets spending cuts are always pushed to future budgets and spending in the current budget is usually increased. This is the way Congress has operated for several decades, and that is why despite all the lip service given to spending cuts, they never materialize. Cuts made by this Congress must be made in the current budget year, if raising the Debt Ceiling is to have any real meaning. While the real cuts in the 2010 budget only translated into $350M at least they were real cuts. We need more in 2011. The House Leadership must not fall into the “Spend Now, Save Later” trap.

Obama and The ME Peace Process

The President has walked back from what seemed like an obvious desertion of Israel last week, but he has not walked back from the one statement that is the key to Israeli security and its very existence. "The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state." After listening to his Arab Spring speech last week and reading his AIPAC speech today one thing is clear. Despite the President's rhetoric his declaration that a Palestinian State must be "contiguous" means Israel must give up the Southern half of Israel or the Palestinians must give up the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. In truth the only real solution is for the Palestinians to trade the West Bank for an enlarged Gaza to form a nation between Israel and Egypt. Without that trade there is no peace.

The Alternative Energy Pipedream

American taxpayers are providing $2 million for a wind turbine energy project that will save a municipal bus company $35,000 a year in energy costs. At the current cost of energy it will take 57 years of energy savings to pay for the project, while the turbines have an expected lifespan of 20-25 years. In truth there are no savings because the turbines will have to be replaced before the savings are achieved. So in the final analysis alternatives such as wind and solar are far more expensive per kilowatt hour than fossil fuel. Although this is a small project it demonstrates all the shortcomings of alternative energy in a neat little bundle. The equipment is expensive, the “return on investment” is negative and the entire system requires a fossil fuel backup system to insure constant energy generation. America must continue to use fossil fuel until these alternatives are developed to the point where they are competitive without subsidies because while the location in question will save $35,000 a year in energy costs, it will cost the American taxpayer $2 million it will never get back. So once again the taxpayer is the victim of the alternative energy pipedream. America must continue to exploit its carbon-based fuel resources or find itself in the economic dustbin of failed nation states.