The Fake Congress: All Sound and Fury

Friends, it appears that there is no longer a reason ever again to vote for GOP Congressional incumbents since their leadership will not act to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to reflect the will of the people.

Why have a Congress if the will of the voters leads to (in)action by the Senators and Representatives so that a mandate has no effect on how the government operates?

Online commentators are betting strongly that House Speaker Boehner will fold soon and support amnesty just as he did when he fully funded the government and got nothing in return.

Obama presents the check and the Congress pays it, all the while whimpering about how unfair it all is.

A new age of Progressive governmental management has emerged.

In the old days, as Josef Stalin said: “It doesn’t matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes.”

How primitive.

Now it doesn’t matter who counts the votes.

It doesn’t even matter who won.  The Congress stands aside shuffling its feet and staring down at its shoes and quietly wringing its hands while Obama does as he pleases.

Within the Federal agencies, amnesty is proceeding at full speed despite an adverse court ruling that should have stopped it cold. Given the refusal of the FCC leadership to meet with Congress on ‘net neutrality’ before the new rules are enacted and the threat of the DHS to shut down homeland defense if Congress takes any defunding action, what makes anyone believe that a ruling of any court will stop amnesty being put in place as though it is law?

Confronted by Obama’s lawless action to proceed with amnesty despite the court ruling, we now see that he can direct any action by fiat (no longer is an Executive  Order required). It appears that the head of a Federal agency can issue a memo that has the power and effect of law with no congressional approval and no judicial review.  Where do we go now to get this redressed?

Consider how millions of new illegals/citizens will vote as soon as their driver licenses, income tax ‘refunds’, Medicaid and public assistance payments begin to flow.

Conservatives will never win a national election again.

The politicians of both parties are betting that this illegal monstrosity will be forgotten when it is time to solicit campaign funds from the vile ignorant American electorate in two years.

Are they going to be right?

Headline oxymoron: powerful House committee

Today I have called all the contact numbers for Speaker Boehner and left voicemail strongly requesting that he defund all Federal agency actions related to amnesty. Further, I have sent the messages below to both the Speaker and to Senate Majority Leader McConnell:

Speaker Boehner,

Since the GOP landslide that gave you the Speakership of the House, your actions have caused me to be critical of your loudly vocal commitments to resist Obama’s usurpation of the Constitutional powers of the House. So far I am very disappointed in you and in Senator McConnell.

Headlines today give me a glimmer of hope that for some reason you have decided to stand up to Obama’s lawlessness despite the cave-in of the Senate.  I hope with all my heart that this is truly representative of your plans. If so, I may reconsider my criticism of your reluctance to block Obama, pending further developments.

You have not shown yourself well thus far and headlines are just headlines, but this is your chance to show that you can lead real conservatives.  Please do not fail.


Don Lewis


Senator McConnell,

Since the GOP landslide that gave you the leadership of the Senate, you have surrendered and now show that you have  no will to stand up to Obama’s lawlessness despite the overwhelming mandate that brought you to power.  Even now the Senate Minority leader rubs your face in the dirt despite ‘losing’ to you.

Why? Because you have thrown away the tools that the Constitution grants to you. Obama has neutered you and you are revealed as truly a weak and pathetic person. I am sure that I will hear your tiny voice again when you insist that you have not lost your cojones. Don’t expect anyone to believe that.

I cannot account for your failure except to conclude that you either have guilty secrets that would undo you if revealed or you are a sociopath and liar who has hoodwinked your fellow Kentuckians.

For shame!


Don Lewis


Fellow citizens, keep the events of these days in mind when you hear from the RINOs in two years asking for your support despite how they withheld their support from you today. Vote against incumbents.

Hah! Fooled You Again.

Headline: “Senate GOP Leaders Preparing to Cave on Amnesty”.

Color me doubtful. I know that cannot happen.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell promised me that he would fight amnesty. I have letters from him in my mailbox making that exact commitment.  And from House Speaker John Boehner, too.


There is NO way that illegals would be permitted to remain in the USA.

There is NO way that illegals could receive a Social Security Number.

There is NO way that illegals could get a driver license.

Why, if you believe that, you are so foolish that you would believe that illegals will get a check from the IRS for earned income tax credit for the past three years even though they did not file a tax  return or pay any taxes. What a ridiculous idea.

There is NO way that illegals could get to vote in 2016.

Stop, stop, you’re killing me. I’m laughing so hard that my sides are cramping. What you are saying sounds like a Jon Stewart routine. Boy, is he funny and cool and edgy and hip. You are such a doofus to try to use ironic humor like Jon.

How can you even believe any of that?  If you do, you are a right-wing, fringe extremist hater, clinging to your Bible and your guns. You do not deserve to be heard in the marketplace of sane ideas.  So shut up.

Anyway the news reports  are simply wrong. I will not abandon my faith that the GOP will do the right thing for America. Especially now that they have just had the leadership of the Congress handed to them.

How can any of the claims of the haters  be true?  Well, that’s  an easy answer.

None of it is true.

I have thought deeply about this mystery.  I now understand the secret plan that the Republican leadership is following. How obvious it is and how strategic.

Pretend to roll over to Obama on executive amnesty. When all the rules are promulgated, all the amnesty instructions to the Federal agencies are in place and all the rubes think that liberty is lost, RINOs will jump up and confront Obama when he is least expecting it.  Then he’ll cave.  Amazing plan. That’s gotta work. It’s so creative and so original.

Wait, wait. I have a better idea.  Let’s hold off until all 5 million new illegal/citizens have voted and elected President Fauxcahontas Warren or President Inevitable Clinton and then we’ll file suit in the Supreme Court. In three years, Justice Roberts will rule and that will settle the election. That will show the Progressives who is boss. You bet old Obama won’t even see that coming.

Now for the bad news back here in reality-ville.

The RINO surrender has been in place for a long time; only just now being confirmed.

The RINOs have no energy or spirit to support America or to honor their oath to support the Constitution. There are many options they could use to block this now but they are such namby-pambies that they will not risk being blamed for anything.  Better to be compliant and quiet than resist Obama and be crushed in the Least Significant Media and have to give up their cozy jobs and perks.

No action will follow at all.  RINOs will mouse down and complain that Obama is such a meanie and so lawless that nothing can be done.

Meanwhile, His Royal Highness Barack bin Hussain al-Obama II bestrides the land like a colossus, denying the 2014 citizens’ mandate to the GOP and shunning the Nation’s allies while destroying our national sovereignty.  According to what the RINO Congressional ‘leaders’ say, we have reached a point where nothing can be done to impede RHBHO’s plans.

Two more years.  Two years of this ongoing executive lawlessness.  What will be left of a Nation of laws then?

With 5 million new Progressive citizen/voters on the rolls by 2016, Patriots must make plans now to support (read ‘send money to’) real conservatives and to vote against incumbents regardless of party affiliation.

It is last-call time.  And the bar is about to close.

It’s time to pick somebody to go home with.

Personality Journalism

Oxymoron. A combination of two contradictory words. Like military intelligence and jumbo shrimp.

So it is with journalistic integrity. This is now an oxymoron; integrity is rare in journalism. For this reason I will not mention journalism further; reporting will suffice.

Sins of omission, slanting the facts or telling a lie can create false indictment; this is as old as news reporting. Past American political campaigns have relied heavily on claims that a candidate had committed murder, adultery or embezzlement to affect elections. These claims have generally been revealed so close to Election Day that there was no time to investigate or refute the claim. This practice continues today.

So, is integrity in reporting suddenly such a problem? Yes and here is why.
Everyone wants a 30-second sound bite on the 9 o’clock news. No time to hear a 60- or 90-second item. The reporter’s opinion fills that time. Few facts mostly opinion.

Reporting has changed over the last century and that change has greatly increased a citizen’s difficulty of arriving at an informed opinion.


• J-schools pretend to teach the tools of reporting, but promote the idea that a reporter does not just report the facts, but ‘shapes the news’. This has the same decadent effect on news that an education degree has on teaching; the focus is not on informing the facts but on forming opinion.

Under this regime, facts are largely irrelevant – the objective is to have both the news and the trained mind reach the ‘proper’ conclusion.

• News resources have changed dramatically in quantity, immediacy and content.

Once most major US cities had several newspapers, each with a different editorial slant and each with reporters who were digging for real news. An informed reader could read several papers to cull out the opinion and get the facts.

No more. Newspapers are dying; we can debate this, but the facts are as plain as the smaller format, fewer pages and the essential end of local reporters. For some years newspapers have just reprinted New York Times articles.

• Radio changed the news business by increasing immediacy and giving the illusion of the impartial news announcer. Television added the cachet of the all-wise anchor, a telegenic authority who always spoke the truth and could be relied upon for the ‘facts’.

Edward R. Murrow is perhaps the best example of impartial reporting. Murrow covered WWII and the Cold War by reporting what he had observed.

A sad counter to Murrow was CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite, once ‘the most trusted man in America’. Although the Communists were being soundly defeated on the battlefield, Cronkite gave the final judgement that America had lost the Viet Nam war. His liberal bias was not widely recognized but the damage was done.

• On the eve of the new century, the internet began to emerge as an alternate voice to television and newspaper reports. In 2007, the Boston College Law School published “Citizen Journalism and the Reporter’s Privilege” pointing out that blogging had become a conduit for legitimate news and opinion.

Whining reporters immediately decried the loss of the reporter’s privilege to ‘pajama-clad bloggers’ as the coming of the end times.

Why, anyone could report news and opinion, not just reporter-school grads.

The horror.

News has come full circle; newspaper editors once drove opinion, and now news anchors attempt that. Congress even debated deciding who was a reporter. This idea is not gone. Consider ‘Net Neutrality’ as yet another attack on citizen reporters.

What does this have to do with Brian Williams?

He, like Obama began to believe his own hype. He was bigger than the news. He could make news rather than report news. He was news.

He is not the only one, but just the most recent to be undone by his ego. More big newsreaders will follow down the road taken by Dan Rather who now hears mocking laughter wherever he offers an opinion.

Once you are caught in a lie, you can never go back. Once you sell your honor, you become just one of the working girls, available at a negotiated price.

The Greeks had a word for it.
Hubris, excessive pride or self-confidence.
Nemesis, the inescapable agent of downfall.

So it is with television newsreaders. Believe them at your peril. And don’t forget to laugh.

Burning Man Redux

When ISIS burned Jordanian Air Force pilot Muadh al-Kasasbeh alive, a chain of events began that may yet lead to the destruction of ISIS.

To defeat ISIS, Jordan is the right place to start and King Abdullah is the right man.

Why?  Here are the first few reasons:

  • No one understands the Arab mind like an Arab.
  • No one feels a greater demand for immediate justice than a wronged Arab.
  • No one but a King has the power to take immediate unilateral action.

(example: His Highness Barack bin Hussain al-Obama II, the boy king)

No one but an Arab King has the insight and the freedom to completely defeat a sworn enemy. Not only must the enemy be killed, but his wives, children, extended family, goats, donkeys, chickens, sheep and his house also must be destroyed.

Jordan has experience with this*.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, ruled by King Hussein (King Abdullah’s father) targeted the PLO fedayeen in 1970 when they threatened his rule. Fighters from various Palestine Liberation Organization groups were expelled from Jordan in an event commemorated as Black September.  The execrable Yasser Arafat fled Jordan just a jump ahead of the Jordanian Army and never came back.

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce [Karl Marx].

Today the King has begun the promised destruction of ISIS. It’s not really a fight, because the King apparently does not seek an armistice. At dawn today he hanged a failed female terrorist bomber (Progressive feminists were outraged) and a convicted terrorist Al Qaeda murderer.  He has committed to hanging several more captured ISIS criminals immediately.

Worldwide applause has been deafening.

A turning point? We shall see what follows, but this is a good start.

Go get ‘em, King Abdullah.  The world is with you.


(Not) Killing Them Softly

Our Mothers warned us: “Play nice”. In polite society we don’t make waves.

“Love your enemies”, says Jeb Bush, “and kill them with kindness”.

Turn the other cheek.

As a Nation, we have taken all this to heart.

A very civilized approach to politics and war after all, say the Progressives.

So this is how far we have come since Reagan days:

Obama on Benghazi: “Here’s what I’ll say. If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal”.

Not Optimal.

Obama about 9/11: “We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”

Just 2,977 dead Americans, that’s all. No big deal, right? We absorbed it. Just dead Americans.

As Hillary Clinton said, “What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”

Contrast the foregoing insane platitudes with the following events:

1. During the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan several military officers were taken hostage. The captor’s ransom demands were met with Russian silence, followed by kidnapping of the local warlord’s son. Shortly an unmarked package was delivered to the warlord, containing an ear.

2. Consider Imad Mughniyah who was wanted for a long list of crimes including, but not limited to:

• the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut,
• the 1983 attack on the embassy in that city which killed 63 people,
• the 1984 kidnapping, torture and murder of the CIA station chief in Lebanon. Mughniyah sent videotapes of the brutal interrogation to the CIA.
• the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847 and the slaying of U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem, a passenger on the plane
• the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.

In 2008, Imad Mughniyah was killed by a remote controlled directional bomb on a Damascus street; CIA and MOSSAD suspected.

3. During recent ISIS attacks, a Jordanian pilot was captured and threatened with execution. Elijah Magnier, chief international correspondent for Kuwait’s Al Rai newspaper, told the UK MailOnline: ‘I have a reliable contact in the Jordanian government who says a message has been passed to ISIS.’

“It warns that if they kill the pilot, Jordan will implement the death sentences for Sajida [wife of a former suicide bomber who killed 38 people at a Jordanian wedding reception] and other ISIS prisoners as soon as possible.”

Brutal? Yes. Effective? Also yes.

Recall the apocryphal story of the Texan accused of murder who, when asked by the judge if he had anything to say in his defense, replied, “Well, your Honor, I guess he just needed killin’…” Most Americans would agree that this was true for Osama Bin Laden.

But responding to the death of Mughniyah, international ‘legal scholars’ condemned the bombing, thus:

“It is a killing method used by terrorists and gangsters,” said Mary Ellen O’Connell, a professor of international law at Notre Dame University. “It violates one of the oldest battlefield rules.” Legal scholars see this as a violation of international laws that proscribe “killing by perfidy” – using treacherous means to kill or wound an enemy.

So killing bin Laden was justified, but not Mughniyah? Is it just the method that is wrong? Or is it that Progressives reserve the right to decide which killings are justified and which killings are not?

This is the result of lawfare having replaced warfighting in the American military and political leadership. There can be no proper response to any attack until Progressive lawyers approve.

Remind yourself that Obama has approved killing American citizens far away from any battlefield. Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, acknowledged in Congressional testimony that the administration reserves the “right” to carry out such assassinations.

This is a President who likes to personally select drone targets (remember  LBJ picking bombing targets during the Viet Nam war?). Deaths from collateral damage? No problem if Obama orders the strikes.

Progressives are not troubled. He’s our Progressive President and bears no responsibility for any actions he takes.

Is not Obama violating “international laws”? Progressive talking points don’t have to be consistent or make sense.

What to do now?

For the next two years America will just have to take the terrorist blows while the ‘leadership’ mouths meaningless threats of bringing to justice, drawing red lines, condemning in the strongest possible terms, building coalitions, invoking sanctions, demanding ‘don’t call my bluff’. This will continue until a terrorist catastrophe on American soil occurs, when we will raise the threat level to yellow. Obama will make really stern speeches, and John Kerry will voice righteous indignation, assuring that “this shall not stand”. (Kerry also briefly served in Viet Nam.)

The Republican majority in Congress will applaud politely and try to approve a meaningless ‘sense of the Congress’ that this unseemly man-caused violence has to stop. Or else.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid will effortlessly block the vote.  Boehner and McConnell will say that their hands were tied and nothing could be done.  Alas, that lawless Obama.

Longer term? A strong conservative President (think Reagan) will send the lawyers out of the room, make serious war plans, and take steps to kill terrorists starting as soon as possible wherever they are. Virtually all foreign aid will be reviewed and suspended as appropriate. Countries harboring terrorists will be paralyzed by any method needed. Paralysis will continue until terrorists are identified and ejected.

Progressives will wail about the uncivilized illegality of it all.

The President will smile and ask, “So what?” And the Nation will turn the corner on terrorism.