George Rebane

On this election day I remind you to vote, and am also reminded by all that is going on in a Washington that now sidesteps what I have voted for over the decades – the imperial presidency ascendant.

We just heard about EPA’s new initiative to cite a little-known, otherwise-purposed Section 111(d) of the 1970 Clean Air Act to begin the socialization of America’s energy industry.  Regulations initiating the banning of fossil fuels – beginning with coal – will “skyrocket” electricity and other energy prices in the land.  It is all done under the Big Lie of hindering climate change, which by EPA’s own accounting will serve to reduce temperatures by about 0.05 deg F in 100 years.  But this federal power grab will first hurt the poor, and eventually it will beggar the nation by increasing all costs and cutting jobs, thereby hurting all of us if a succeeding wiser administration does not roll back the damage.  In the interval we can always dream of a Congress that reclaims its pawned balls from the White House, and resumes its constitutional functions.  (more here)

Eric Holder’s DOJ is fulfilling its part in the imperial presidency.  Its latest assault on the Second Amendment is to include gun and ammo dealers as businesses subject to Operation Choke Point.  This little piece of sleaze was initiated for the salutary purpose of denying the nation’s financing and banking services to porn shops, drug paraphernalia outlets, escort services, …, and wouldn’t you know it, arms and ammo retailers.  The House is aware of this latest shortcut to autocracy, but in the interval the innocent will be punished, assuming that arms and ammo escape from Choke Point.  Contact your representatives.

More on how the Left seeks to silence dissenting voices.  The asymmetric assault by the country’s collectivists on free speech has long been argued here.  The latest dollop of evidence comes from Senate Democrats who “have promised a bote this on a constitutional amendment to expressly repeal the free speech protections fo the First Amendment.”  Yes, 41 Democrats are co-sponsoring Tom Udall’s (D-NM) to give Congress the power to regulate ‘political speech’.  Their broad initiative is based on two propositions “money is not speech” and “corporations have no free speech rights”.  Both propositions are patently false and contradict not only US laws, but also seminal western cultural tenets that arguably over the centuries contributed much to the primacy of western civilization and all that it has and continues to contribute to the world.  In its slide toward autocracy, socialism cannot tolerate dissenting ideas, especially in the public forum.

An illuminating essay – ‘The Democratic Assault on the First Amendment’ – on this latest foray against the Constitution and liberty is penned by Sen Ted Cruz (R-TX), darling of the tea parties and nemesis of the Left.  Let’s see if our progressive friends will counter the salient points of the message instead of continuing to pillory the messenger.

Glad to see the Bergdahl repatriation case moved off center court to let discovery of the VA scandal resume its rightful place in the public eye.  Off course, the lamestream lackeys will continue to drag their journalistic feet on this, but continuing to poke what is turning out to be another foreign policy cowpie will only increase the smell and draw attention to the others on this administration’s resume.

The issue itself has several distinct (orthogonal) factors which Team Obama and the lamestream obfuscate for obvious reasons, but which outlets like Fox News and the more conservative blogs seem also to not distinguish.  Each of these must be addressed separately to decide the issue –

1. Given Bergdahl’s known sentiments about America and its role in Afghanistan, why was retained in a frontline combat unit?

2. Under what conditions did then Pfc Bergdahl walk away from his unit?  Basically, did he go outside the perimeter with or without authorization?  Statements from his comrades in arms who describe his departure indicate that he deserted.

3. No matter the nature of his departure, President Obama is lying when he characterizes Bergdahl’s captivity as having been “left behind” during ongoing combat.  At his departure his unit was on a stand down within a secured perimeter.  This markedly changes the nature of why and when we risk people, materiel, and mission.

4. What was the cost of searching for him in casualties and materiel, and where did authorization come from for the extra effort to suffer this cost?

5. Trading the Taliban’s strong suit of Gitmo prisoners for Bergdahl without the advice and consent of Congress, violating the law, and countermanding the administrations explicit promises to consult with Congress before releasing any Gitmo combatant prisoners is a legal matter in its own right.

6. Evaluating this ‘trade’ in concert with Obama’s long list of dubious/failed foreign policy initiatives confirms our early and subsequently verified assessments of this community organizer’s talents playing in the big league.  But this is a political matter which needs to be viewed in terms of how much support he receives from Democrats up for re-election.  We can count on the lying here to equal at least the level devoted to the Banghazi cover-up.