It’s Wednesday, February 6th, 2013….and here’s The Gouge!

Leading off the midweek edition, it’s the “What’s Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander” segment:

Next up, Newark Mayor Cory Booker injects an exceedingly rare shot of common sense into the Left’s discussion of gun control:

In a related item, if you haven’t visited our home page today, you owe owe it to yourself to check out the latest Cover Story forwarded by Carl Polizzi.  Just don’t view it on a full bladder!  😉

Meanwhile, back at the ranch with The Gang That Still Can’t Shoot Straight, Phil Klein, writing at the The Washington Examiner and courtesy of Conn Carroll, reports….

Kasich’s cave on Obamacare shows how hard it is to beat big government

 

 

Getting to do this one more time is more important to me than my Conservative principles.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who campaigned as a limited government Republican, on Monday announced that he would implement one of the costliest provisions of President Obama’s health care law by expanding the state’s Medicaid program. His decision, a huge victory for the White House that will provide cover for more Republican governors to do the same, serves as a great case study on how difficult it is to impede the growth of government.

When Obamacare was making its way through Congress in 2009 and 2010, the proposed expansion of Medicaid was one of its most controversial elements. As things stood, the program was crushing state budgets, so governors in both parties feared that expanding it to 15 million to 18 million beneficial would be unsustainable. Then Sen. Ben Nelson was infamously given the “Cornhusker Kickback” — expanded federal funding for Medicaid to Nebraska — to win help secure the 60th vote to get Obamacare through the Senate.

The backlash against the “Cornhusker Kickback” cemented the idea in the public consciousness that the process used to pass Obamacare was corrupt, helped elect Scott Brown to the Senate in Massachusetts and added fuel to the Tea Party. Ultimately, lawmakers substituted the special Medicaid treatment for Nebraska in favor of increased federal funding for all states instead. Under the law, the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost of the Medicaid expansion at first, and then 90 percent after 2020. This comes at a cost to federal taxpayers — $932 billion over a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. To be clear, that’s if all states participate. But last year, 26 states led by Florida won a suit challenging the federal government for coercing states into the Medicaid expansion and the Supreme Court left states with the option of rejecting it. This brings us back to Kasich and his decision.

Kasich was the Republican House Budget Committee Chairman during the Clinton-Gingrich government shutdown fights of the 1990s and a former guest host for Bill O’Reilly. He rode the backlash against big government into the Ohio governor’s mansion in 2010. A regular speaker at Tea Party rallies, Kasich boasted, “I think I was in the Tea Party before there was a Tea Party.” Days before his election in 2010, he argued, “Obamacare must be blocked.”

What chance do my Conservative principles stand against the pursuit of personal political opportunities?

This morning, Kasich announced he was joining four other Republican governors in agreeing to expand Medicaid under Obamacare and pass the bill on to federal taxpayers. “It makes great sense for the state of Ohio because it will allow us to provide greater care with our own dollars,” he said at a news conference, as reported by the Huffington Post’s Jeffrey Young.

Whatever justifications Kasich may give, the actual explanation for his embrace of the Medicaid expansion is political cowardice. Chastened by his failed attempt at public sector union reform and Obama’s victory in the state, Kasich is up for reelection next year. And he’s afraid to stand up to the inevitable onslaught of attacks from Democrats who would charge that he was refusing to accept free money to bring health care to poor Ohioans. The end result is that a politician who ran for office claiming to have been “in the Tea Party before there was a Tea Party” is now actively embracing a policy that the Tea Party movement was born to oppose.

This should serve as a sober reminder to conservatives that no matter how big of a disaster Obamacare is when it’s implemented in 2014, the nation is almost certainly stuck with it. More broadly, it’s a demonstration of how difficult it is to defeat big government.

And further proof, as if any were needed, term limits are perhaps the only way to turn this ship around.  Yo, Kasich!

Welcome to the herd….or “crash” as it were….or whatever the term is for a group of self-serving, spineless douchepumps.

Since we’re on the subject, Marc Thiessen, writing at the WaPo and courtesy of AEI, poses the question….

Are ObamaLeaks an impeachable offense?

 

Imagine if The Post broke a story about the biggest scandal of the Obama-era — and Washington responded with a collective yawn?

That’s precisely what happened recently when The Post reported on its front page that senior Obama administration officials were being investigated by the FBI and Justice Department for the leak last summer that the president had personally ordered cyberattacks on the Iranian nuclear program using a computer virus developed with Israel called Stuxnet.

The Post quotes a source who says that FBI agents and prosecutors are pursuing “everybody — at pretty high levels.” The paper further reports that investigators “have conducted extensive analysis of the e-mail accounts and phone records of current and former government officials” and that some have been confronted “with evidence of contact with journalists.”

This is big. And former senior government lawyers I spoke with recently explained why it could get a whole lot bigger:

The leaks clearly came from someone in the president’s inner circle. As The Post explains, “Knowledge of the virus was likely to have been highly compartmentalized and limited to a small set of Americans and Israelis.” Moreover, whoever leaked the information was present when the president discussed this covert action program in the Situation Room. There is a tiny universe of individuals who could have shared the details of President Obama’s personal deliberations on the covert program with the press.

This means there are essentially two possibilities for how the information got out.

Possibility No. 1: A senior administration or White House official disclosed the information to the press without the president’s personal approval.

That would be a potential crime and certainly a violation of the official’s oath of office — and in the case of a White House official, a violation of their contractual commitment to the Executive Office of the President. As one former senior Justice Department official told me, “It would be grounds for firing and likely prosecution, and it would definitely call into question the competency and security of the president’s supervision of his White House staff.”

Possibility No. 2: The president personally authorized a senior official to disclose classified and sensitive national security information regarding ongoing intelligence or counterterrorism operations.

This is potentially an even bigger scandal. Since the president has ultimate declassification authority, this would mean no crime was likely committed. But it is hard to imagine a credible argument that such a disclosure was made to advance the national security interests of the United States.

Quite the opposite, the Stuxnet leak was incredibly damaging. It exposed intelligence sources and methods, including the top secret codename for the program (“Olympic Games”). And it exposed the involvement of a U.S. ally, Israel. At one point in the New York Times story, a source says the Israelis were responsible for an error in the code who allowed it to replicate itself all around the world. The Times directly quotes one of the president’s briefers telling him “We think there was a modification done by the Israelis,” adding that “Mr. Obama, according to officials in the room, asked a series of questions, fearful that the code could do damage outside the plant. The answers came back in hedged terms. Mr. Biden fumed. ‘It’s got to be the Israelis,’ he said. ‘They went too far’” (emphasis added).

So a person who was “in the room” when the president and vice president were briefed publicly confirmed Israeli involvement in a covert action against Iran. The damage this did — both to the operation and the trust between our two countries — is incalculable.

There are no credible national security grounds for such a disclosure. The only person whose interests could possibly be served by such a disclosure was Obama. The leak appeared six months before the president stood for reelection and was clearly intended to make Obama appear strong on foreign policy and counterterrorism. (One anonymous senior official is quoted by the Times as saying “From his first days in office, he was deep into every step in slowing the Iranian program — the diplomacy, the sanctions, every major decision.”)

If the president authorized the disclosure of national security secrets that exposed a covert action and undermined a U.S. ally in an effort to gain a political advantage in his reelection campaign, that would be a scandal of gigantic proportions. (Only if the MSM decides to cover it….which they won’t!) As one former top Justice Department official told me “if done for political gain, rather than for a bona fide purpose advancing the public interests of the United States, it could be grounds for impeachment.”

In other words, at best ObamaLeaks may be a crime; at worst, they could be an impeachable offense. So the question is: What are those senior Obama administration officials telling investigators when confronted “with evidence of contact with journalists”? Were the leaks unauthorized? Or are they defending their disclosures by invoking the president’s personal authority to declassify national security information without formal process?

If the former, then we could see senior Obama administration officials put on trial. If the latter, then it is the president who should be on trial — in the chamber of the United States Senate.

Should….which is far cry from actually being there.  And even were the Republican majority in the House to pass articles of impeachment based on irrefutable evidence, the chances the Senate would convict on a 2/3 majority vote are non-existent, regardless of what The Obamao might have done.

Then again, as this related item, courtesy of the WSJ, suggests, if author Thomas Fleming and Newark’s Cory Booker are any indication, there may be hope for Dimocrats yet….though we wouldn’t bet on it:

A Jersey Lesson in Voter Fraud

My grandmother died there in 1940. She voted Democratic for the next 10 years.

 

Some youthful memories were stirred by the news this week that the president plans to use his State of the Union speech next Tuesday to urge Congress to make voter registration and ballot-casting easier. Like Mr. Obama, I come from a city with a colorful history of political corruption and vote fraud.

The president’s town is Chicago, mine is Jersey City. Both were solidly Democratic in the 1930s and ’40s, and their mayors were close friends. At one point in the early ’30s, Jersey City’s Frank Hague called Chicago’s Ed Kelly to say he needed $2 million as soon as possible to survive a coming election. According to my father—one of Boss Hague’s right-hand men—a dapper fellow who had taken an overnight train arrived at Jersey City’s City Hall the next morning, suitcase in hand, cash inside.

Those were the days when it was glorious to be a Democrat. As a historian, I give talks from time to time. In a recent one, called “Us Against Them,” I said it was we Irish and our Italian, Polish and other ethnic allies against “the dirty rotten stinking WASP Protestant Republicans of New Jersey.” By thus demeaning the opposition, we had clear consciences as we rolled up killer majorities using tactics that had little to do with the election laws. (Gee….sound familiar?!?)

My grandmother Mary Dolan died in 1940. But she voted Democratic for the next 10 years. An election bureau official came to our door one time and asked if Mrs. Dolan was still living in our house. “She’s upstairs taking a nap,” I replied. Satisfied, he left.

Thousands of other ghosts cast similar ballots every Election Day in Jersey City. Another technique was the use of “floaters,” (“floaters” is right!) tough Irishmen imported from New York who voted five, six and even 10 times at various polling places. Equally effective was cash-per-vote. On more than one Election Day, my father called the ward’s chief bookmaker to tell him: “I need 10 grand by one o’clock.” He always got it, and his ward had a formidable Democratic majority when the polls closed.

Other times, as the clock ticked into the wee hours, word would often arrive in the polling places that the dirty rotten stinking WASP Protestant Republicans had built up a commanding lead in South Jersey, where “Nucky” Johnson (currently being immortalized on TV in HBO’s “Boardwalk Empire”) had a small Republican machine in Atlantic City. By dawn, tens of thousands of hitherto unknown Jersey City ballots would be counted and another Democratic governor or senator would be in office, and the Democratic presidential candidate would benefit as well. Things in Chicago were no different, Boss Hague would remark after returning from one of his frequent visits.

I have to laugh when I hear current-day Democrats not only lobbying against voter-identification laws but campaigning to make voting even easier than it already is. More laughable is the idea of dressing up the matter as a civil-rights issue.

My youthful outlook on life—that anything goes against the rotten stinking WASP Protestant Republicans—evaporated while I served in the U.S. Navy in World War II. In that conflict, millions of people like me acquired a new understanding of what it meant to be an American.

Later I became a historian of this nation’s early years—and I can assure President Obama that no founding father would tolerate the idea of unidentified voters. (As if The Obamao gives a fig for what the Founding Fathers might tolerate.) These men understood the possibility and the reality of political corruption. They knew it might erupt at any time within a city or state.

The president’s party—which is still my party—has inspired countless Americans by looking out for the less fortunate. No doubt that instinct motivated Mr. Obama in his years as a community organizer in Chicago. Such caring can still be a force, but that force, and the Democratic Party, will be constantly soiled and corrupted if the right and the privilege to vote becomes an easily manipulated joke.

Several thoughts come to mind.  First, Fleming is a poor historian if he ignores the overwhelming evidence Liberal schemes to help the less fortunate have done anything but.  Second, Fleming lacks even a modicum of common sense if he believes The Obamao’s years as a community organizer were anything but a means to an end….that being power.  Finally, were he really as concerned about integrity and corruption, he couldn’t possibly remain a Dimocrat.

And in International News of Note, another amazing Islamic achievement in science and technology:

Ahmadinejad unveils Iran’s newest combat jet 

 

“It doesn’t actually do anything, your Emminence; it’s a mock-up.”

Iran unveiled on Saturday its newest combat jet, a domestically manufactured fighter-bomber that military officials claim can evade radar. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a ceremony broadcast on state TV that building the Qaher-313, or Conquerer-313, shows Iran’s will to “conquer scientific peaks.” (Or more likely, assuming it ever gets off the ground, simply run into a mountain.)

Is this an actual functioning prototype….or an Iranian attempt at “Let’s Make a Deal”?

The Qaher is one of several aircraft designs rolled out by the Iranian military since 2007. Tehran has repeatedly claimed to have developed advanced military technologies in recent years but its claims cannot be independently verified because the country does not release technical details of its arsenals.

A twin-tailed version of the cutting-edge F-5E; the “F” stands for “Fifties”….as in when the technology originated.

Tehran has repeatedly assured other nations, especially regional neighbors, that its military might poses no threat to other countries, stating that its defense doctrine is merely based on deterrence.

We can’t speak for the Israelis, but Iran’s defense doctrine certainly seems to have deterred America’s present Administration.

Next up, news concerning another organization which never seems to deliver on its promises:

Postal Service says it’s immune from local traffic laws, report says

 

 

A government lawyer is attempting to get dismissed almost $700 in traffic tickets given to U.S. Postal Service employees in Cleveland, claiming it is immune from state and local regulations, Yahoo! News reported.

Postal Service attorney Jennifer. S. Breslin says the infractions, which include speeding citations and red-light infractions, should be ignored. “In providing mail service across the country, the Postal Service attempts to work within local and state laws and regulations, when feasible,” she said in a letter responding to a summons for payment, according to Cleveland.com. “However, as you are probably aware, the Postal Service enjoys federal immunity from state and local regulation,” Breslin wrote.

The attorney for American Traffic Solutions, the company that enforces East Cleveland’s camera citations, referenced the Postal Service’s own safety manual, which says truck drivers should and have been held accountable, Yahoo! News reported. “By attempting to hide behind an immunity claim, you are aiding and abetting your drivers in their blatant disregard for the traffic laws in East Cleveland, which have endangered other drivers, pedestrians and school children,” ATS attorney George Hittner said in a response to Breslin. 

East Cleveland Mayor Gary Norton told Cleveland.com he questions why the Postal Service did not decide to make their drivers pay for the infraction. The mayor said he is unsure about the validity of the agency’s immunity claims. “I was unaware that the post office doesn’t have to stop at red lights or obey the speed limit,” he told Cleveland.com. “But since they are, I wish I’d get my mail faster.”

If wishes were fishes, we’d all cast lines.  And the day the USPS does anything faster, other than approaching insolvency, is the day we date Kate Upton. 

And in today’s Money Quote, yet another Hollywood celebrity who’s made millions from violence, in this case Sylvester Stallone, offers a wholly untutored opinion no one really cares to hear:

“I know people get (upset) and go, ‘They’re going to take away the assault weapon.’ Who … needs an assault weapon? Like really, unless you’re carrying out an assault. … You can’t hunt with it. … Who’s going to attack your house, a (expletive) army?“

We know some Korean retailers in Los Angeles who might be happy to answer that last question.  But hey, you’re right, Sly; contrary to everything sportsmen like Bill Meisen know to be true….you know, the guys who actually shoot guns in real life….you can’t….

….hunt with it.  But you can effectively fire an M-60 from the hip….

….at least in your horribly-scripted….and acted….movies.

On the Lighter Side….

 

Finally, we’ll call it a day with the Psychology Section, courtesy of James Taranto and Best of the Web:

Why Do Bad Things Always Happen to Me?

 

Here’s an excerpt from a jaw-droppingly self-indulgent Puffington Host piece by Jeanne Goshe, a co-blogress at the counterfactually named site EveryoneGetsDivorced.com. It seems that her marriage collapsed after her mother-in-law was diagnosed with a brain tumor:

It was early December when his mom called to tell him the news. . . . He was, understandably, upset. And when he told me, I remember thinking, somewhat selfishly, “Please don’t let her die.” Now, I genuinely wanted her to be okay, for the normal reasons. But it was also selfish. I had been slowly realizing over the last few months that I was not happy with my life. And a large part of it was that I was not happy with who I had married. I hadn’t yet admitted out loud that I was thinking about divorce, but I was on the brink. And when I learned that his mom might have brain cancer, of all things, I saw a future flash before my eyes. I saw tragedy and grief and I saw myself unable to escape. Because you can’t ask someone for a divorce when their mother has brain cancer.

I tried my best to comfort him. I desperately wanted to convince him that she would be fine. And I did want her to be fine–I needed her to be fine.

The story has a happy ending: “They removed the tumor and it wasn’t cancer”–and the husband escaped the marriage.

Proof again why we’d rather be lucky than good!

Magoo