Obama to Push New Spending

President Barack Obama will call for new government spending on infrastructure, education and research in his State of the Union address Tuesday, sharpening his response to Republicans in Congress who are demanding deep budget cuts, people familiar with the speech said.

Mr. Obama will argue that the U.S., even while trying to reduce its budget deficit, must make targeted investments to foster job growth and boost U.S. competitiveness in the world economy. The new spending could include initiatives aimed at building the renewable-energy sector—which received billions of dollars in stimulus funding—and rebuilding roads to improve transportation, people familiar with the matter said. Money to restructure the No Child Left Behind law’s testing mandates and institute more competitive grants also could be included.

While proposing new spending, Mr. Obama also will lay out significant budget cuts elsewhere, people familiar with the plans say, though they will likely fall short of what Republican lawmakers have requested.

In arguing that U.S. competitiveness is at stake, Mr. Obama plans to use his nationally televised speech to try to frame the spending debate with Republicans that is expected to dominate Congress in the coming months. “We seek to do everything we can to spur hiring and ensure our nation can compete with anybody on the planet,” Mr. Obama said Friday after touring a General Electric Co. plant in Schenectady, N.Y. He cited clean-energy manufacturing, infrastructure and education as keys to competitiveness.

Previewing the expected theme of his speech, Mr. Obama on Friday appointed GE Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt to lead a new President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

Commenting on the new advisory panel, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said that unless its “first recommendations are to reverse the damage the policies of the last two years have done to the business climate, job creation and the exploding national debt, I fear it will do more to create good public relations for the White House than good jobs for struggling Americans.”

Read more here Continue reading “Obama to Push New Spending”

Nullifying Obamacare, State by State

Idaho, the first state to sue the federal government over the health care overhaul, has announced plans to resort to an obscure 18th century legal remedy that recognizes a state’s right to nullify any federal law that the state has deemed unconstitutional.

The doctrine, known as nullification, has its roots in the brand of governance practiced by the nation’s founding fathers. It was used as early as 1799 by then-law professor Thomas Jefferson, who wrote in a response to federal laws passed amid an undeclared naval war against France that

nullification, by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts … is the rightful remedy.

As a legal theory, nullification is grounded in the assumption that states, and not the U.S. Supreme Court, are the ultimate arbiter in cases where Congress and the president have “run amok.”

In Idaho, use of the doctrine to invalidate the health care reform bill is being championed by both state Sen. Monty Pearce and Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter speech, who recently told Idaho residents, “we are actively exploring all our options — including nullification.” Pearce plans to introduce a nullification bill in the state legislature early next week.

Idaho is not the only state considering nullification as a remedy. Six others, including Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming, are also considering bills that would in essence nullify the president’s signature on the reform law.

Pearce, who has expressed optimism that the law will pass, becoming the law of the land in Idaho, is quoted by FOX as having saud:

There are now 27 states that are in on the lawsuit against Obamacare. What if those 27 states do the same thing we do with nullification? It’s a killer.

One potential fly in the ointment for Idaho and other states considering nullification is the 1958 U.S. Supreme Court decision reaffirming that federal laws “shall be the supreme law of the land.” If nothing else, these moves will result in some interesting legal battles

Mexican Hypocrisy

During all of the furor over Arizona’s SB1070 immigration enforcement law last spring, one of the most egregious attacks on the sovereignty of the border state came in the form of a highly inappropriate and insulting speech by Mexican President Calderó n before the U.S. Congress.

As the Democrat dominated chamber applauded the attack on Arizona, our hapless commander in chief and his constitutionally challenged attorney general were threatening legal action despite having not taken the time to have read the 10 page bill.

Comparisons were made to Nazi Germany and liberals expressed outrage over the mere thought that Arizona police officers would be demanding to see the papers of anyone who appeared to be Hispanic. Naturally the new law (which mirrors federal statutes) included appropriate constitutional protections and did not allow for the indiscriminate checking of papers, but never-the-less the Democrats and their fellow travelers in the MSM pressed their agenda driven attack and legal action from the federal government is still ongoing.

Fast forward nine months. The UK Telegraph reports that the Mexican government of President Calderó n is instituting a high-tech new I.D. system which will be in place by 2013. The new cards which will include an iris scan, fingerprints, photo and signature are said to be 99% reliable.

“The legal, technical and financial conditions are ready to start the process of issuing this identity document,” Felipe Zamora, responsible for legal affairs at the Mexican Interior Ministry, told journalists Thursday.

The new system will be implemented gradually beginning with children over the next two years and then the adult population by 2013. The system will help the Mexican authorities to keep track of their citizens and should help Mexico to secure its borders against illegal immigration. The cost of the project is estimated to carry a price tag of $25 million.

Human rights advocates have expressed concern that the new system will be used for the gathering of personal information which could be used to violate individual rights and privacy. In the meantime it will be interesting to see if the Mexican government, which has published guide books on how to illegally cross the border and elude the authorities in the United States will warn its citizens not to show their I.D. cards to the gringos in Arizona (or elsewhere).

‘SO, YOU SAY YOU WAN T YOUR COUNTRY BACK? ’

Dear Readers, Can you help me spread this most important article and question wide and far?
Thank you!

‘SO, YOU SAY YOU WANT YOUR COUNTRY BACK?’
Source: Managing Editor – (1/18/11)
Wanting your country back is not the same thing as working to take it back. One is a wish, the other, a viable plan in action.
Years ago, when asked if anyone was ever going to stop the insanity in this country, I’d answer, I sure hope so! Now, my answer is – I don’t know, what are you doing to stop it? Because if it isn’t you and me, the answer is nobody!
As patriotic Americans wait to see if the new Republican House majority is truly going to repeal ObamaCare, or shrink into some inside the beltway capitulation and collusion effort under the guise of repeal, I have to ask – what if they don’t repeal… then what?
For years now, patriotic Americans have protested, petitioned, rallied, faxed, emailed, called and even confronted their so-called representatives face-to-face in town hall meetings that most elected officials dare not even attempt today.
Still, their government has marched against the people and their states, shoving anti-American policies and laws down the throats of Americans, a majority of whom stand wholly opposed. Now that the people have put Republicans back in control of the people’s House, what if they fail to force the nation in a new pro-American and pro-freedom direction?
House Republicans have to be willing to run over Democrat opposition, just like Democrats ran over them for the last six years. Then they have to find support in the Senate, or what they accomplish in the House is moot.
Last, if they have the backbone to get past the House and Senate, they have to get the White House to sign off on what they pass. This is what the people elected Republicans to do, but can they do it? The repeal of ObamaCare is only the first test.
The list of anti-American policies in need of repeal is almost without end, thanks in large part to Democratic Socialist control of all branches of government. I understand—Rome wasn’t built in a day. But it sure didn’t take Rome long to collapse under ill-advised policy decisions and America is on the ropes.
Wanting your country back is one thing—Taking it back is quite another. Allow me to point out that the other folks won’t just give it back without a fight. In fact, there is NO limit to what they are willing to do to retain control. Unlike the political right, the political left has no rules of engagement!
All Politics is Local
Before we can take our country back, we must take our local communities back and position our states to do battle with and liberate themselves from the over-reaching federal government.
It’s almost a hundred years now, that the false assumption of supreme federal powers has been the lay of the land in all three branches of the federal government. How dare the people challenge that false assumption at this late date.
The people’s catch-all amendment, the Tenth, states unequivocally – “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
In short, any powers not specifically delegated to the federal government in the US Constitution, are powers that belong to the states and/or the people. Therefore, any executive orders, legislation or judicial precedents from the federal government that are not powers delegated to the federal government, are by definition, unconstitutional.
Most of what the federal government intrudes into today is by this definition unconstitutional, and neither the people nor the states have any legal, moral or ethical obligation to accept or adhere to those intrusions, according to the Tenth Amendment.
It’s Called Nullification
In accordance with the Tenth Amendment, the states have the right to nullify any federal statute, executive order or judicial opinion which is wholly at odds with the US Constitution or beyond the scope and authority delegated to the federal government therein.
Several organizations have put forth issue oriented nullification bills at the state level, like the nullification bills designed to nullify ObamaCare or federal gun laws at the state line. However, the political left is attacking on a thousand fronts daily, not one or two policy initiatives.
For this reason, state nullification powers must be broad enough to nullify any and all unconstitutional acts by the federal government, it must be able to reach back to nullify previous unconstitutional acts, it must itself be constitutional and it must put the power squarely in the hands of the states and the people, in compliance with the Tenth.
Conservative patriot organization The United States Patriots Union, through its Constitutional Justice Division, drafted and released a broad-based state nullification bill last week. Partnered with Stand Up America, the two organizations have early support for the measure from legislators in twenty-six states, as we await support from the Tenth Amendment Center and new media publishers.
The Model Legislation includes;
• Reclaims and reasserts both Ninth and Tenth Amendment Rights
• Provides the Constitutional grounds for state nullification power
• Defines “constitutional” as the powers delegated and enumerated in the Constitution
• Rejects all “unconstitutional” acts by the federal government
• Addresses abuses via the commerce clause, necessary and proper clause, and general welfare clause
• Requires that all federal actions pass US and State Constitutional muster
• Rejects abusive judicial law making practices via precedent and procedure as without authority
• Establishes a state Constitutional Review commission to recommend case-by-case nullification
• Establishes rules and time limits in which the state must nullify upon determination of unconstitutionality
• Reaffirms that the U.S. Supreme Court has “original jurisdiction” in all matters between the Federal and State
governments, in accordance with Article III – Section II
• Reaffirms state referendum authority as the final word of the people, in the event of improper adjudication
• Positions each state legislature to protect and preserve for the people of their state, freedom from federal executive,
legislative or judicial tyranny
For those serious about taking their country back, this is how it can be done, not by elected politicians in Washington DC, most of whom will oppose this measure even though they campaigned on these principles and values.
This is how the people take their country back, via their state elected officials, who must force the federal government to live within the confines of the Constitution.
Patriots, Tea Partiers, conservative pundits, true constitutionalists and conservative new media outlets can and should support the concept of constitutional government a number of ways.
Those who want to directly engage taking their country back can join in the unification of American patriots at The United States Patriots Union and strategic partner Stand Up America.
Those who want to support this initiative can do so by donating to the organizations and spreading the word to other patriots, especially in their state legislatures.
People serious about taking their country back are serious about developing clear and constitutional strategies for accomplishing that goal.
Dreaming about taking your country back is not the same and setting the goal of taking it back. A goal requires a coherent strategy for achieving that goal. Without a working strategy, it’s just a dream that will end in a nightmare.
JB Williams
http://thepatriotsnews.com/indx.php/content/80

‘Explosive’ Food Prices

Overheating emerging markets, in China in particular, pose the biggest threat to the market and political situation in 2011 according to Philippe Gijsels, head of research at BNP Paribas Fortis Global Markets.

“These economies are clearly overheating and governments are putting measures in place to slow them down to fight inflationary pressure. More than anything else, food inflation is a problem,” Gijsels told CNBC.com.

“In countries were 70 percent to 80 percent and sometimes more of a family’s budget goes to food, explosive price rises risk to destabilize these societies. Remember the old saying: ‘hunger starves civilizations,’” he added.

“We believe that some of these governments will be quite aggressive in their inflation fight. And we do not even want to think about the consequences if this year were to have a disappointing monsoon,” Gijsels said.

He is worried that everyone is so bullish on China’s ability to engineer a soft landing.

“There is almost no emerging market bear to be found. And that in itself is already scary,” Gijsels said.

Read more here.

Freshman Senator Backing a Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment

Buoyed by strong Tea Party support during his campaign, freshman Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) has arrived in Washington and says he’s determined to take significant steps to rectify the staggering U.S. deficit. Lee talked to Fox News on Sunday about his proposed constitutional amendment to balance the budget.

In order to propose such an amendment, several steps would need to be taken. The first option, which Lee says is the path he will choose, is for both houses of Congress to pass a two thirds majority vote. The second option would be a Constitutional Convention, which would also require a two thirds vote from state legislatures. The proposal would then need to be ratified.

When asked about cutting government programs, including those that could be lifelines for Americans, Senator Lee took a strong stance, saying “no program will be held immune from review” and that Congress needs to consider “categorical across the board cuts” regardless of a program’s perceived importance.

If the U.S. government’s budget functioned more like a typical American household, Lee says “the credit cards would have been “cut to pieces” a long time ago. While acknowledging that a serious reduction in spending would not necessarily help ease existing debt, Lee said its still time to start “paying off the bill. It may take time but we need to stop accumulating new debt.”

Speaking during his weekly internet and radio address over the weekend, President Obama called for bipartisanship among both parties in Congress, citing reduction of the budget deficit as a top priority.