US House Of Representatives

The Likelihood Of An Obama Impeachment Grows, But It Will Not Lead To Removal From The Presidency!

Ronald 11 Comments

With the growing possibility that the Republicans MIGHT win control of the US Senate, and keep control of the House of Representatives by a tight margin, the likelihood of President Obama facing impeachment, as Bill Clinton did in 1998, grows.

But there is no case for impeachment, as Barack Obama has NOT committed high crimes and misdemeanors in office!

He has not even had an illicit love affair as Bill Clinton did, and he has not lied under oath, as Bill Clinton sadly did when asked about his love life by a prosecutor under oath, once the Paula Jones accusations came to light.

Obama has been accused of abusing power, but nothing he has done is any different than what George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, or other Presidents did, without the invective that the 44th President has had to deal with.

Obama has faced a constant assault like no one since Richard Nixon, who deserved it, due to his illegal actions. So much of what is said is outrageous, and disrespectful of the office he holds.

But remember that all that is needed for impeachment is a majority of the House of Representatives to vote on one or more articles of impeachment, and the charges need not be substantial or legitimate, as impeachment is a political action, not based on the law, as it was not based on law with Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.

The likelihood of an impeachment, therefore, is very high, but as stated at other times by this blogger, it will never lead to the removal of the President, since even if the GOP gains the Senate majority, there will never be a situation where enough Democrats, or in fact, any Democrats, would vote to remove him from office!

The effect of an impeachment will be, simply, to besmirch the record of Barack Obama, making him the fourth President to face impeachment charges, but it will only matter as part of his obituary, since it will certainly be one of the key points always remembered if it ends up happening.

The impeachment battle would also cause a dramatic rise in Obama’s popularity, much like Bill Clinton experienced.

It would also help to undermine, ever further, any legitimacy that the Republican Party has with the American people at large, and it would further insure that a Democratic President will be elected in 2016.

Impeachment would be seen as petty, vindictive, and unfortunately, racist, and it would reflect badly on Republicans who wish to run for President.

No good could come out of such an action, but it would be a high moment for those who wish to divide America ever further, but with no satisfaction of their desire for blood.

And the true beneficiary of all this, if by some miracle, Obama was forced out, would be Vice President Joe Biden, who by becoming President with less than half the term left, would have a step up for the Presidency in 2016 and 2020, thus destroying the last opportunity for Hillary Clinton or any Republican to become President before 2025!

And anyone who thinks Joe Biden is a “joke”, who is not to be taken seriously, will have their comeuppance when they discover they might have created the monster of a President Biden for the next decade!

Senator Rand Paul Becomes Poll Leader For GOP Presidential Nomination: What Does It Mean?

Ronald 16 Comments

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, the son of libertarian favorite Ron Paul, former Congressman from Texas, has suddenly emerged as the leader in two polls–the CPAC straw poll and the New Hampshire straw poll, both in the past ten days.

This is seen as very surprising to many observers, and it certainly upsets Establishment Republicans who see Rand Paul as far from who they prefer to be the Republican Presidential nominee in 2016.

Rand Paul seems to appeal to young people, who also liked his dad, due to their desire to cut down American involvement in overseas interventions, but that is seen by critics as an unrealistic isolationism, which becomes more problematical with the Russian takeover of Crimea, and the possible intervention in the rest of Ukraine.

Rand Paul’s desire to cut the federal government and spending dramatically in a downward spiral also appeals to many young people, but worries those concerned about the growth of poverty and the decline of the middle class.

And Rand Paul’s statements about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in regards to the dislike of “forcing” businesses to serve customers they do not want to serve, is also alarming to ethnic minorities, particularly African Americans and Latinos.

Rand Paul’s opposition to women controlling their own reproductive lives also is an alarm bell to many.

There are many who think Rand Paul is a shallow person, who should not even be considered Presidential material.

Are we ready for a libertarian isolationist in the 21st century, after the growth of government in the 20th century, and engaging in wars to promote freedom and liberty and justice in the world?

Are we ready to negate TR, Wilson FDR, and LBJ in domestic affairs, and turn inward in foreign policy?

These are the questions all Americans have to consider, and the thought of Rand Paul possibly becoming President terrifies many Republicans, as well as American citizens who feel that he cannot walk in the shoes of our greatest Presidents!

Paul Ryan Self Destructs Any Chance To Run For President!

Ronald 10 Comments

Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, who this blogger spent a lot of time working to undermine his Vice Presidential candidacy in 2012, and got blasted for it by right wing websites and bloggers, has again shown further evidence of what a terrible choice Mitt Romney made in his Presidential race, in selecting Ryan to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency!

Ryan, who knows nothing about budgets, except that the poor, the elderly, the disabled, veterans, and the young should see cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other social programs; and there should be no extension of unemployment compensation for desperately unemployed people; and there should be no rise in the minimum wage, now has gone off the “deep end” with his assertion that those who live in the “inner cities” have no sense of the importance of work, and have not worked for generations!

This is a direct and racist assault on African Americans in particular, but also on Hispanics and Latinos, who are a majority of the poor in the urban areas of our nation.

But Ryan acts as if it is only minorities who are poor, and are unemployed, and in some cases, have not worked in a long time. From this statement, one would think that whites are not poor, that they all work, that they all have a heritage of understanding the point of work, and nothing could be further from the truth!

It is a fact, and always has been, that the vast majority of the poor do not live in cities, and are not minorities, although one would think so from a stereotype!

The fact is that there are millions of whites who live in the rural and suburban areas of the nation, and many are them do not work, have no hope of work, and live in depressed conditions often worse than urban slums. Many of these people are living in “Red” states, where Republicans vote to hurt their own constituents, while making it seem as if only minorities do not work, or have no work ethic. They live in Appalachia, the Great Plains, the Rockies, in comparatively sparsely populated areas, as compared to the urban areas on the East and West Coasts.

More whites receive food stamps, and the level of poverty percentage wise is higher in such places as Kentucky, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, and Alaska.

It is the lack of education; the tendency to have large families which are also dysfunctional; the reality of drugs and alcohol; the refusal of these state governments to give a damn about their white poor, along with minority poor; and the tendency to turn poor whites against poor minorities so that the GOP can keep power in the House and in the state legislatures, which is destroying generation after generation of deprived people of all races!

Only when there is a REAL war on poverty, instead of exploiting the issue based upon race, as Paul Ryan has now done, will we ever be able to guarantee a good future for millions of whites, as well as African Americans and Latinos!

And Paul Ryan, your potential Presidential candidacy is dead in the water, and while you might run, you have forfeited any realistic chance to be President of the United States, but that was clear, anyway, in 2012!

The Coming GOP Battle Between Ted Cruz And Rand Paul: Neither Good For The Republican Party!

Ronald 6 Comments

It is now clear, after the CPAC convention, that the battle for the soul of the Republican Party is, most likely, to be between Texas Senator Ted Cruz and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul.

Cruz represents the aggressive, in your face, bombastic image of the Tea Party, while Paul represents the libertarian, isolationist view of the same Tea Party.

Both hate the national government, and both want to cut domestic social spending, and have no desire to deal with the problems of the working class and the poor.

Both want to undermine the GOP establishment, and work against the idea of working with President Obama, and accepting that part of politics is negotiation and compromise.

Both men have very little ability to win a national election, as both are seen as extreme, and unable to take “Blue” states away from the Democrats.

Both appeal to those who want to put America back in the age of laissez faire of the Gilded Age, and want to assist the one percent who have become more wealthy and powerful at the expense of the middle class.

Cruz has a demagogic manner about him, reminding many of Joseph McCarthy in appearance and style, but he is seen as dangerous because despite his egotism, he is clearly very smart. However, he is willing to throw other Republicans “under the bus”, with his working against fellow Texas Senator John Cornyn, and also resisting Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, as well as attacking past Republican Presidential nominees Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. Cruz has no ethics when it comes to pursuing his own ambitions, and he is extremely vain and arrogant. Imagining him dealing with foreign leaders is an absolute horror!

Paul, on the other hand, supports the idea that businesses should be able to reject customers based on race, being critical of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He is a libertarian like his dad, former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, and believes that philosophy is realistic in the 21st century. He would love to cut defense spending enough so that we would withdraw from many of our bases around the world , an appealing idea, but not a realistic one. He comes across as more a visionary than Cruz, more pleasant than Cruz, willing to give respect to the elder statesmen of the party, and work with Establishment Republicans in the Senate, while disagreeing with them. He seems, overall, not as bright and ambitious as Cruz is.

Both are horrible choices for President, and both would lose, but the feeling is that Cruz is more of a threat, although the belief is that he would crash and burn, once the election campaign was in full swing. It seems likely that Paul would do better in electoral votes, and would be more liked personally, but still could not win a national election.

The ultimate question is why the Republican Party seems incapable of finding a truly great Presidential candidate, although in the long run, that does not matter as the Electoral College math dooms them in 2016, as long as they continue to alienate many major voting groups.

So the decline of the GOP, by a massive electoral defeat in 2016, seems more likely as the clock ticks toward the election year!

50 Years Of Republican Vice Presidential Nominees Tells Us A Lot About The GOP!

Ronald 14 Comments

When one looks back at the history of Republican Vice Presidential nominees in the past 50 years, one realizes a lot about the attitude of the Republican Party toward that office, just a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

The Republican Party has chosen true disasters for an office that has seen two people in that office go on to become President, and three others run for and lose the Presidency in the past fifty years.

Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush are the two Vice Presidents who went on to become President, while Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale and Al Gore were defeated for the Presidency.

But look at the Vice Presidential nominees chosen by the GOP since 1964:

William E. Miller Congressman (NY) 1964
Spiro Agnew, Governor (Maryland) 1968, 1972
Bob Dole, Senator (Kansas) 1976
George H. W. Bush, former Congressman (Texas) 1980, 1984
Dan Quayle, Senator (Indiana) 1988, 1992
Jack Kemp, Congressman (NY) 1996
Dick Cheney, Congressman (Wyoming) 2000, 2004
Sarah Palin, Governor (Alaska) 2008
Paul Ryan, Congressman (Wisconsin) 2012

Out of this group of nine Vice Presidential nominees, the ONLY ones that could be considered truly competent and qualified to be President would be Bob Dole, George H. W. Bush, Jack Kemp, and Dick Cheney. And many might consider Kemp more glorified since his death than in life, and Cheney as a corrupt, arrogant, dangerous man in office, the true motivator of the Iraq War. Also many might consider Paul Ryan competent, but when one examines his hypocrisy and lack of compassion for those less fortunate on a broad scale over his years in Congress, one has to wonder.

The others are true disasters, with Miller considered mediocre at best; Sarah Palin purely stupid and ignorant; Dan Quayle an embarrassment to the office of Vice President, making many shudder when President Bush had health issues in office; and Spiro Agnew a crook, as well as being totally terrifying in his nearly five years as Vice President, until his criminal activity was known and he was forced to resign. Imagine having to pray for Richard Nixon’s health during Agnew’s Vice Presidency, and being relieved by Gerald Ford becoming the successor to Nixon, instead of Agnew!

Also notice that five of the above nine, along with Gerald Ford, came from the House of Representatives, when usually no one would consider the lower chamber a place for future Presidential leadership! By comparison, the Democrats have never nominated a House member for Vice President since the disaster of John Nance Garner, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first two terms Vice President from 1933 to 1941, with the one exception, also a disaster, of Geraldine Ferraro being the VP nominee for Walter Mondale in 1984.

So when one compares the Democratic nominees for Vice President, we see true competence and a sense of their understanding of the importance of that office:

Hubert Humphrey 1964
Edmund Muskie 1968
Sargent Shriver 1972 (after Thomas Eagleton withdrew)
Walter Mondale 1976, 1980
Geraldine Ferraro 1984
Lloyd Bentsen 1988
Al Gore 1992, 1996
Joseph Lieberman 2000
John Edwards 2004
Joe Biden 2008, 2012

All of the above, except the disastrous Ferraro, and Shriver were US Senators, and even if one does not agree with Edwards’ ethics and morals, it can be honestly said that all nine, including the withdrawn Eagleton, were totally competent and qualified to be President of the United States, if such responsibility had been thrust on them! No one would contest Shriver’s qualifications for the office either, as he stands out as the most prominent non elected office holder ever to be in public life since World War II!

So the lack of respect for the Vice Presidency of the Republican Party in the past 50 years reveals another problem for the party, the promotion of mediocrity by a party once proud of its leadership, and the likelihood of another GOP Vice Presidential nominee in 2016, who will make us roll our eyes and pray for the Presidential nominee’s good health, being highly likely!

CPAC Convention: The Lunatic Right Displays Itself!

Ronald 39 Comments

Watching, listening, and reading about the Conservative Political Action Conference makes anyone with a stable mind roll his eyes in wonderment at what conservatism has become!

All the losers of the past were there and ranting and raving their insanity, including Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Paul Ryan, and Mike Huckabee. The “newcomers”,” people not yet defeated but soon to be, including Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal and Chris Christie, also appeared, and made fools of themselves. Of course, the ultimate lunatic and embarrassment, Donald Trump, also spewed his sick mind and constant need for attention. And to top it off, Sarah Palin is making an appearance, as if any sane, intelligent person cares! And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, desperately trying to keep his seat, showed up brandishing a rifle, a horrible image for a Senate leader to display just a year after the Sandy Hook Massacre!

Jeb Bush and Scott Walker stayed away, for both a smart move, and Jon Huntsman was also not there, and at least for Bush and Huntsman, who are the most mainstream of this group of characters, it made sense NOT to be there!

Speaker of the House John Boehner was not invited, which should really be seen as a blessing, as he has upset right wingers by being exasperated with the Tea Party Movement, for making his job absolutely impossible in the lower chamber.

It is still reality that ONLY Jeb Bush and Jon Huntsman would have ANY chance to be elected over Hillary Clinton in the Presidential Election of 2016, but not very good odds for either of them. And again, let this author repeat, that the Electoral College strongly favors ANY Democrat to win the White House, and as long as the GOP alienates African Americans, Latinos, women, and many young voters, it will not win the White House. And as long as it fights the idea of national health care coverage for all; acceptance of gay rights and same sex marriage; opposition to immigration reforms; favors the energy industry over the environment; and continues to fight against a living wage for the poor and middle class, it will lose for the long term future! And if it continues to promote religion and theocracy, it will NEVER win the White House ever again, in a nation that believes in separation of church and state!

So those of us who care about our fellow Americans can sit and observe the CPAC Conference, and feel good that the potential candidates and the Republican party are sealing their doom for 2016 and beyond!

The Tea Party Movement At Five Years: What Has It Accomplished?

Ronald 8 Comments

The Tea Party Movement reached five years of age in the last few days, and the question is what has been accomplished?

The Tea Party Movement has led to the following:

Complete stalemate and gridlock in both houses of Congress.

The weakening of the power of the Speaker of the House John Boehner to the level it was in 1910 after the “House Revolution” against Speaker Joseph Cannon.

The loss of a potential Senate majority for the Republican Party twice, when it seemed possible.

The undermining of the American economy and America’s image in the world.

The promotion of racism, misogyny, nativism, and hate and confrontation.

The undermining of national government in favor of sectionalism and secession.

The growing inability of President Obama to gain any kind of cooperation from the opposition party, unseen since the time of Andrew Johnson.

The loss of any reasonable civility between the leaders of the Republican Party and the President of the opposition party.

The growing split between the two major political parties in a manner unseen since the Civil War-Reconstruction Era 150 years ago.

The growing personal threats of assassination against President Obama, unseen at this level since the time of Abraham Lincoln.

But there are signs that the American people have had it with the Tea Party Movement in the Congress and in the state governments.

This is a clear cut warning for those promoting this divisiveness and anarchy, that the time for return to civility has arrived, and that if those in government now refuse to see the handwriting on the wall, then they will be repudiated in 2014 and 2016!

What If The US Senate Goes Republican In 2014? What Would Be The Effects?

Ronald 7 Comments

The battle for the majority control of the US Senate is in full swing, with the Republicans needing to pick up six seats in order to gain control in the MIdterm Elections of 2014.

The odds are seen as good, IF the establishment Republicans coming up for reelection are able to hold off the Tea Party challengers they face in primaries.

The Democrats are on the defensive, since about two thirds of the seats up in 2014 are Democratic, and particularly in the South, the small number of Senate Democrats from that section are under assault.

This blogger will examine the Senate races over time, but right now, the key issue is the effect IF the Senate goes Republican.

The likely scenario would be the following:

The Senate would work against any immigration reform.

The Senate would block any attempt at any gun regulation

The Senate would be likely to attempt a block of any Supreme Court nominees of President Obama, and probably battle more than ever over any judicial appointments at the lower levels of the courts, along with clear opposition to Presidential appointments to the cabinet or other key positions.

The Senate would probably help to encourage a Republican House of Representatives to draw up charges of impeachment against President Obama, but would be unable to gain a two thirds vote in the chamber, to convict and remove him from office.

Senate attempts to override Presidential vetoes would become more common, but the President would continue to have the advantage in that regard, as gaining a two thirds override is highly unlikely.

Overall, more gridlock and stalemate would occur, and more disillusionment with our national government would grow, and cause a likely return to Democratic control of the Senate in 2016, when Hillary Clinton or any other Democratic nominee wins the White House!

Other Than Hillary Clinton, What Woman Could Be A Viable Presidential Nominee In 2016?

Ronald 4 Comments

Hillary Clinton is considered highly likely to be the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2016, and most think she will, ultimately, decide to run, although there are those who have doubts.

But if Hillary chose not to run, is there any other woman who could be seen as a viable candidate for the White House in 2016?

On the Republican side, really no one is ready and able to mount a serious race, as members of the House of Representatives have never been the nominee of a major political party, other than President James A. Garfield in 1880, and he was, tragically, assassinated in 1881, after serving only a few months in the Presidency.

Yes, there are a few Republicans women governors, but to believe that South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley or New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez or Kansas Governor Mary Fallin can be considered serious Presidential candidates is to be delusional.

As far as women Senators in the Republican Party, there are the highly qualified Susan Collins of Maine, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, but neither seems interested or, really viable, as a Presidential nominee. New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte might be interested, but is not seen by many as a heavyweight in the party apparatus, but rather a person who hangs around Arizona Senator John McCain and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham more than is wise to do.

Of course, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is loved by the Tea Party Movement, but it is laughable to imagine her running, and she has absolutely no chance to win the nomination.

Condoleezza Rice is well qualified, but the former National Security Adviser and Secretary of State under George W. Bush, has always turned down any pressure to run for high office!

So, realistically, if there is to be a woman President, and other than Hillary Clinton, it will have to be a Democrat–and realistically it would be a Senator–one of three, including Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, or Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar.

Warren would be popular with the leftist base in the Democratic Party, but has been in the Senate only one year, and would be 67 in 2016, just two years younger than Hillary Clinton. She inspires many people, including this author, and would fight Wall Street, which few others would.

Gillibrand has been in the Senate since 2010, and is very active and inspiring, but she comes from a state where Hillary Clinton and Andrew Cuomo compete for support, and it is hard to imagine her at age 50 in 2016, being able to mount a campaign for President in 2016. She has made the fight against sexual abuse in the military a major issue, which has been under the radar for much too long.

So that leaves Klobuchar, who has served in the Senate since 2007, and is regarded very highly for her state government experience as Hennepin County (Minneapolis) Attorney for eight years, and can appeal to the heartland of the nation in a way that neither Warren nor Gillibrand could do. Her personality and communication ability is just as good, if not better, than Warren or Gillbrand, and at age 56 in 2016, she is closer to the ideal age to run for President. She is someone with a great progressive record, who has been too often overlooked by news media and others who follow politics.

But one thing is clear: No one is as qualified or outstanding among women politicians as Hillary Rodham Clinton! She has her faults and shortcomings, but no one matches her credentials!

John Kasich For Republican Presidential Nomination? Not To Be Overlooked!

Ronald Leave a comment

As the Republican Party seeks a potential Presidential nominee for 2016, one that is starting to come to mind is Ohio Governor John Kasich, elected in 2010.

Kasich is a very engaging person, who served 18 years in Congress, including heading the House Budget Committee in the mid 1990s, and working for gun regulations against the wishes of the National Rifle Association. Kasich has always shown an independent streak, and also was a substitute on Fox News Channel talk shows for Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly, and briefly, had his own show, often making more sense than the typical right wing hosts on that cable channel.

Kasich has made mistakes as Governor, including the attempt to curb collective bargaining rights for labor, soundly defeated in a referendum; and rejecting funding for a high speed rail project; and his 2010 gubernatorial victory over Governor Ted Strickland was won by only 77,000 votes statewide. Like any politician, one can find weaknesses in his record and background, but he could give any Democratic Presidential nominee a good challenge, although the Democrat would still be heavily favored, ultimately, in the Electoral College.

Kasich had a business career in the first decade of the 21st century after leaving Congress, so he has had Congressional experience, business experience, and state government experience, and has decided, unlike most Republican governors, to allow expansion of Medicaid. He has also refused to align himself with the Tea Party Movement, which is in his favor.

Considering that Ohio is a true “swing ” state that could go either way in future Presidential elections, Kasich would have a good chance to perform better than many other potential GOP candidates, and considering that Ohio had six Republican Presidents from the 1870s to the 1920s, the “Buckeye” state cannot be ignored, so should Kasich win another term as Governor, he would have to be considered seriously for President, which he briefly sought in 1999 before dropping out.

Since personality and communication abilities really matter, Kasich should be in the front of the pack. Even if one does not agree with Kasich, it is hard not to like him personally, something one cannot say about many of the potential GOP Presidential candidates!