GOP To Harry Reid: Go Nuclear, And It’ll Bite You In 2014


Republican Senators have threatened Majority Leader Harry Reid that they’ll stall every attempt at passing legislation until after midterm elections, if he invokes the so-called “nuclear option” that would change Senate rules to allow a simple 51-vote majority vote to end a Republican-threatened filibuster.

“If Senator Reid changes the character of the Senate, then the Senate ceases to function. We’ll take our case to the people, we’ll argue for a new majority and then Republicans will be in a position to do whatever Republicans with 51 votes want to do,” said Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) Thursday.

Reid’s “nuclear” threat stems from GOP Senators’ warnings that they’ll use a filibuster to halt the nomination of several of President Barack Obama’s nominees.

In other words, turnabout is fair play – and if the Republican Party regains control of the full Congress in 2014, expect Obama’s final two years in office to be a prison sentence, as the President watches Congress dismantle signature legislation like the Dodd-Frank Act and Obamacare.

H/T: The Hill

Personal Liberty

Ben Bullard

Reconciling the concept of individual sovereignty with conscientious participation in the modern American political process is a continuing preoccupation for staff writer Ben Bullard. A former community newspaper writer, Bullard has closely observed the manner in which well-meaning small-town politicians and policy makers often accept, unthinkingly, their increasingly marginal role in shaping the quality of their own lives, as well as those of the people whom they serve. He argues that American public policy is plagued by inscrutable and corrupt motives on a national scale, a fundamental problem which individuals, families and communities must strive to solve. This, he argues, can be achieved only as Americans rediscover the principal role each citizen plays in enriching the welfare of our Republic.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • manuel

    Good for Cruz, Lee and Paul. It damned sure was not mcconnell leading this mini revolution. That has been couldn’t lead a cow to water.

    • ExGOP

      Actually, it is good for Democrats. They are going to have a field day with this. Have these guys been bought by Democrat money?

      • Nadzieja Batki

        The wheels of God grind slowly, but they do grind. Republicans nor Democrats will get by with willful destruction of this country.

      • ChiefBoring

        Dear Not: By and large, the Tea party is not comprised of nuts, as your handle seems to indicate. BTW, what kind of nut are you, if not a Tea Party one? Just asking. Congress, and this Administration, have lost sight of the fact that they work for us. We the People Rule; we need to remind the PTB of that basic fact.

        • ExGOP

          Actually, they ARE working for the majority of Americans, not the Tea Party minority. You are right; WE the People (the majority) Rule, not the Tea Party.

          • ChiefBoring

            You might be surprised, Not. The majority of people identify themselves as conservative. They are just not as lock-step oriented as the democrats are. There’s always hope. If the press would stop being one sided it’d be easier.

          • ExGOP

            It is true that the majority of Americans identify themselves as conservative. But they are more of the Reagan/Bush (Sr) type who believe government should be as lean as possible while providing fair and equitable living services to its citizens. Reagan eliminated the favorable treatment of capital gains that the Tea Party types hold so sacred. He also personally ensured the passage of the assault weapons ban. Today’s “conservatives” would be appalled and would never vote for him. However, his values, described by Bush (SR) as “compassionate conservatism”, represent most of Americans. If the Republican Party doesn’t eject the RINOS (Republicans in name, but Tea Party in reality)they won’t ever be the majority party again.

          • ChiefBoring

            The “assault weapons” ban was passed under Clinton, not Reagan. It was Bob Dole who caved. You have confused the Tea Party with the RINOs. It’s the Tea Party who want a lean, fiscally responsible government. The Establishment types are most like the dems, going along with big government and deficit spending. They are the reason the Tea Party sprang up. Reagan’s tax policy almost doubled the revenue over his two terms, but the democratic Congress out spent the increase. They also did not secure the border when he went along with the last “immigration reform”. Hence the no amnesty position of the Tea Party.

            As to your comment regarding “majority rule”; we are not a democracy, but a Republic. This precludes the majority running roughshod over the rights of the people.

          • ExGOP

            You are right, the assault weapons ban was passed during the Clinton Administration, but only because Ronald Reagan used his powerful influence and even then it was passed with a sunset clause (unfortunately for those in Sandy Hook)

  • Deerinwater

    So~ in other words ~ Republicans are actually “threatening” to continue what they have been doing? ~ Oh! dear! ~ What will they do if he doesn’t? ~ Just not show up for work?

    • Nadzieja Batki

      What has Harry Reid been doing? Once a jackass always a jackass, oh excuse me, a donkey a Democrat donkey.

    • ExGOP

      We can only hope.

  • ExGOP

    How can they sit there and say they will refuse do their job and actively prevent any real work out of the Senate, and still hope people re-elect them at mid term. These are certifiable crazies.

    • leroy

      Do you really believe this country needs a Congress working full time to pass a multitude of laws day in and day out? It would be of tremendous benefit to the citizens of this country if not one single piece of legislation were to be passed during the next 3+ years. Considering the present environment and state/condition of our federal government, I am all for the dreaded “obstructionists”. 2,000 pages of rules & regs on the Affordable Health Care Act.(AKA Obamacare) ….and then 1,200 pages on immigration reform?? And not one congress person has read all of either one. No, I beg to differ, the “obstructionists” are very much needed to NOT do their jobs.

      • ExGOP

        Did you really think a one-page law would fairly apply to 250 million different situations?

        • fedupnhappy

          A ZERO page will definitely fairly apply to any number of different situations if and when the countless laws that we have right now were being applied.

          • ExGOP

            You seem to have no concept of the complexity of the United States. You live in a small bubble where you are the center and everything is interfering with you. Sad story, but all too common.

          • ChiefBoring

            The United States is not nearly as complicated as you seem to think. The Constitution is fairly simple. If it was followed, instead of the myriad regulations allowed by Congress, life would be far simpler than it is, and far better.

          • ExGOP

            The Constitution is very simple as you say. It provides that Congress may create its own ways of filling in the myriad of laws, rules and regulations it takes to run the nation. Congress has done so in the past, but currently is on strike.

          • ChiefBoring

            Two points: 1. Congress has allowed far to much power to the beauracracy in writing regulations. 2. Congress has presumed too much power unto itself by passing laws in areas denied to them by the 9th and 10th Amendments.
            Carter made a serious mistake in creating the Dept. of Education, and Nixon made a similar mistake with the EPA. Both have been allowed to run roughshod over the people.
            I am 75 years old and remember when this was a far freer country than it is now. For instance, when I was young, we would ride our bikes out to Willeo or Sopes Creeks to camp. We carried our .22 rifles with us, riding right through town. No one was surprised, and no one cared. We all had been taught responsible gun handling and safety. No one shot anybody. We had no accidents. We never commited any crimes.
            That sense of freedom and innocence is what I miss most. Try doing something like that now and the SWAT Squad would be called out. Sad

          • Yankeelouie

            Yes, your parents did the right thing by giving you the freedom and responsibility and surely it has served you well all your life. Today, they would charge your parents with neglect and as a child they would send you to a detention facility. The frog is finally boiling. Let’s find out what today’s citizens are really made of. I think we both already know but we can always hope.

          • ChiefBoring

            Well, well! Yankee doesn’t start with a “D”! LOL You’re right about times changing for the worse. My wife and I have taught our daughter to be a self respecting member of society. I hope enough other parents have done the same, and we can help them save the country. Three more years, and God save the Supreme Court til then.

          • ExGOP

            Just your opinion of those amendments. Article I gives broad power to regulate commerce. The days when the country was far freer were days when there were no terrorists trying to do us harm. Keeping us safe is the primary duty of government and in the process, total and complete libertarian freedom only means we will have many more 9-11s. The people overwhelmingly want that eliminated or reduced even if it means reduced liberty. Case in point is airline travel. This isn’t 1945 and never will be again, no matter how nostalgic you get.

          • Libertarian

            Regulate Commerce…NOT CREATE COMMERCE!!

            Understand the difference!!

          • ChiefBoring

            I have just gone back and read Article I in its entirity. I recommend it to you. BTW, Libertarian is right about Commerce. The Congress is granted power to REGULATE commerce between two or more states, not to CREATE it, or REQUIRE it.

            The 9th and 10th Amendments are very simple, and read as follows:

            Amendment IX

            The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

            Amendment X

            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.

            The 9th is very clear, and relates to the rights of the people. The 10th is germane to our discussion. If the power of Congress is not stated, then Congress does not have that power. Period, end of discussion.

          • ExGOP

            Not the end if you choose to believe that. Government powers are plenary, meaning unlimited. Constitutions can prohibit certain actions and require others. All other activities are the plenary powers of government. (Gov 101–Constitutional Law). That is why no one with any knowledge of constitutional law is challenging any of these laws. Just because you object to them does not make them unconstitutional or bad. These laws (EPA, etc.) have been a wonderful improvement to America. Some backward people don’t believe it. Just ignore them. The rest of us do.

          • ChiefBoring

            Amendment X

            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.

            Read it again, Not. Congress has ONLY the powers granted it by the Constitution. True, the power to exercise those granted is plenary, but only in the areas granted them.
            The EPA is being allowed to, and encouraged to, in some instances, to over reach. They have done some good, but are about to crash the economy for no good reason.
            And Education is a disaster we don’t even need to enumerate. Everyone who disagrees with you, or me, for that matter, is not backward. Just some of them.

          • ExGOP

            You have convinced me that free public education does not always produce educated people. Who told you that EPA is about to crash the economy? You listen to bad economists. EPA does have people that have occasionally made EPA has been a great thing for the country. Without public education, we would be a third world country. In fact, if you look around, effective public education is practically the definition of the civilized world.
            PS: If it is any consolation, the founder of the Democratic Party was also a Strict Constructionist. Strict Construction is not workable, and has been discarded. The traditional “plenary powers” (loose construction) has proved much more workable and is the system inuse in the United States.

          • ChiefBoring

            ” Strict Construction is not workable, and has been discarded.” Rather cavalierly, I’d say. It is workable, and did well for the first two hundred years or so.

            I did not denigrate public education, especially at the state and local levels. The US Dept. of Education has placed too many restrictions upon the classroom, and imposed too many administrative requirements. My education is complete enough, both formally and infarmally, to suit me.

            I read what the EPA is doing to the coal industry, and know on my own that it will be a disaster. Iknow a little about the history of the coal mines, so you needn’t remind me of the old days. My father in law’s dad died of black lung.

            Now the EPA is ready to impose calorix notification requirements on the food industry. For pizzas alone, that will mean posting, or having on the premises some 34,000,000 combinations of caloric amounts. Just plain stupid. Get ready to pay more for your local Domino’s.

            BTW, I am not a libertarian. Too much like anarchy.

          • ExGOP

            Actually, it wasn’t bad for the first 50 years or so. But laissez faire/strict construction made this a horrible country for Americans during the last half of the nineteenth century, unless you were a Carnegie or a Mellon or Chase or Morgan. The common man lived on the edge of starvation and homelessness. Read Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle”. It took a century of government action to get the kinder, gentler country we now have. The “good old days” never were.

          • ChiefBoring

            Not for everyone, surely. I have read Sinclair, and am familiar with Jacob Riis’ photography. And Dorethea Lange in a later period.

            Theodore Roosevelt is one of my favorites, as is Harry Truman. The former could have been one of your robber barons, but chose a different route. Truman was of a poorer lineage, but made a success of his life.
            Both chose a path of service, and raised up their fellow citizens through thoughtful legislation and good old political jaw-boning.

            No one wants to look backward for progress. Thomas Jefferson addressed that idea in comments about Native Americans looking to the past for a future.

            But progress must be engaged in by us all, not fed to us from on high. Just being elected doesn’t make one smarter than one’s constituents.

          • ExGOP

            In reading your responses, I find that you do a certain amount of critical thinking. That is refreshing, although I disagree with you on most issues. I will be somewhat more respectful in my answers. I have found all of the more fundamentalist entrants on this site (and others) to be devoid of any critical thinking. The motto seems to be “If I saw it on the Internet, and I agree with it, it is true”. None of them would have noticed that there has never in history been a successful Libertarian society. Almost all others have been temporarily successful, with Great Britain’s parliamentary system the longest and Rome followed by US. It is my belief that the ability of the American People to enact laws that the majority find good is the key to longevity. Strict construction would hamper the ability of government to do good deeds to the point where a majority might rebel because government could not fulfill its function. Currently there is a minority feeling the opposite. My belief is that they want to turn back the clock. Unfortunately history shows that never has a society regressed to a prior state successfully. Those who want to return to what they consider “the good old days” are living a fantasy. I lived in the “good old days” of the ’50s, and I believe that the “good old days” didn’t start until toilet paper was invented.

          • ChiefBoring

            Not, I think you’ll find TP was invented well before the 50s. At least the Sears catalog and corncobs were available. Yes, I spent summers on a farm, and am familiar with both.

            I do at least try and think critically, and thanks for your remark. I learned that over a number of years from a group of fine teachers who considered education a calling. Plus, my BS is in Communication, and my MS in Human Resource Management.

            And the University of Southern California, where I spent a year while in the Navy, used critical thinking in film production. Consider the way a film is shot in disjointed pieces. You must know where you want to go, and recognize if you arrived at your destination when finished. And it is a collaborative process.

            We may never agree totally, but perhaps may reach some common ground. At least we may enjoy the journey.

          • ExGOP

            Thanks. We were sharecroppers in South Dakota and didn’t get toilet paper ’till mid ’50s. I grew up in a Democratic household and voted for McGovern in my first election in1968. Soon reformed and was a Republican for 40+ years. I identified with the “Compassionate Conservatism” of Reagan/Bush. I was an enthusiastic supporter of the “Contract with America” whose centerpiece was a balanced budget amendment. Bob Dole missed by one vote (and had the audacity to point to his leadership as the reason for running for President; even then, I voted for him). I think that would have saved the country. To get his majority, Newt sold the party to the Religious Right, NRA, Tobacco and the Rich. Eventually they dumped Tobacco, but are still controlled by the rich and the NRA. The end started with McCain nominating Sarah Palin. Such poor judgment I couldn’t vote for, especially with her being a heartbeat away from the Presidency so I didn’t vote for him. But I could see that Obama was not up to the task, His management experience was a community association, not prepared to be the CEO of the largest organization in the world, and just couldn’t bring myself to vote Democratic anyway. But in 2012 Mitt Romney was my initial choice until he became very right wing, probably pushed into it, but it shows that he is not his own person and has no personal strength, so voted Democratic for the first time in over 40 years. Am now registered Independent. I think most of America is like me–moderately conservative in that we think the government should do good deeds but be frugal and efficient as well as effective. A similar candidate could sweep the country. Chris Christie is the only example I can see now. But the country would rather have a liberal than a Tea Party President, so Republicans are probably out of contention until some kind of reform. Democrats had the same problem. From Hubert Humphry for twenty years democrats were controlled by the far left (McGovern, Jesse Jackson, etc) and they lost every election except Jimmy Carter. Then Bill Clinton came along and was a moderate liberal and stormed the country. I didn’t vote for him, but he did balance the budget and got NAFTA, both very conservative goals. Someone like him has to come into the Republican Party, but will probably not happen for the next 20 years.

          • ChiefBoring

            “Obama was not up to the task, His management experience was a community association, not prepared to be the CEO of the largest organization in the world, and just couldn’t bring myself to vote Democratic anyway. But in 2012 Mitt Romney was my initial choice until he became very right wing, probably pushed into it, but it shows that he is not his own person and has no personal strength, so voted Democratic for the first time in over 40 years.”

            Does your background in Farm Labor Party country answer for such a poor choice in 2012? Romney was not an idealogue right winger. His business acumen would have been a far better choice than BHO, a totally incompetent arrogant narcissist. My first choice was Herman Cain, a fellow Georgian. Also a smart business man. I like Newt’s mind, but he has too much baggage to be President. The dems would butcher him, politically, of course.

            I’ve never voted for a democrat, but would have voted for Truman if I’d been old enough. Eisenhower was my first. Though I did not vote for Kennedy, I respected him. After all he was a Sailor. While a Navy Motion Picture Cameraman in D.C., my crew shot movies of State Visits to Washington for JFK. Robert gave me a PT109 tieclasp. I still have it. I left Washington one month to the day before Oswald shot JFK. I started for the west coast the day of the funeral. It was like driving through a ghost town. The country was practically closed that day.

            Even in 2008, Sarah Palin was far more experienced than BHO. If she had topped the ticket instead of McCain, who has overstayed his welcome, we might have won.

            Clinton did not balance the budget. The Republican House dragged him kicking and screaming into doing that. He at first claimed the budget couldn’t be balanced.

            He vetoed welfare reform twice before finally agreeing to do it. At that time I worked for the Georgia Department of Labor. Welfare reform worked because we worked with those on welfare and helped them transition to work.

            As to the assault weapon ban; that was a misnomer. Assault weapons are capable of automatic fire. They picked and chose rifles to be banned by their appearance. Silly. The CDC did a study of the ban period, and found no effect on gun crime. When the rights of honest law abiding gun owners are abridged, then only those who do not obey the law anyway will have the affected guns.

            The NRA is not a faceless monolth. It is almost 5 million members who believe in the efficacy of the 2nd Amendment. I am one of them; a Life Member. BTW, Hubert Humphery was a fan of the right to keep and bear arms. Look it up.

            I apologise for rambling, but I wanted to respond to some of your points.The Tea Party wing of the GOP wants fiscally responsible, smaller government, the same as you. I’m not a formal member, but like them, I do not agree with the RINOS, who are more like democrats. No one, I believe, wants to go back too far, as a lot of recent (past 40 years) changes have been for the better. But the Feds now are too much in favor of controlling us. Not my cup of tea.

          • ExGOP

            We disagree on two very significant people. It was transparent that McCain simply wanted to attract women voters. But Sarah Palin couldn’t even answer questions coherently on television. Elizabeth Dole and Condoleeza Rice stand out as excellent alternatives.

            Romney’s business acumen amounted to sending jobs to China to generate high profits, and sending that money to the Cayman Islands. Not my vision of American. I just couldn’t vote for him. Cain’s 999 program was poorly thought out but a nice sound bite. My most ambivalent choice was Ron Paul. The Libertarians have a good idea in legalizing drugs. We spend a kazillion dollars a year fighting drug traffic with virtually no result. In fact what we created is identical to Prohibition, but the names are different. If we taxed the drug trade generating revenue to mitigate other taxes and eliminated the DEA and redirected Customs to more useful pursuits we would be better off. Holland has done that for decades. They have some social problems, but can deal with them because they aren’t spending it fighting it. Never been a druggie, but let them have it. We can take 1% of what we now spend and still create massive rehab programs with a vast reduction in crime. Oh Well. On the other side, his original gold standard idea was poorly thought out. I think he eventually dropped it.

          • ChiefBoring

            Palin was not immediately aware of her public relations naivete, but learned quickly. She had the basic backgroundan, dw as/is far more capable than BHO.

            Elizabeth Dole might have been thought of as too regional, despite her natinoal noteriety. I’d vote for Condaleeza Rice any day of the week.

            Romney’s duty at Bane Capital was to make money for the investors. He did a very good job. Sending jobs to China is obvsiouly not illegal. Look at what Goverment Motorsh as done in that area. Nine plants to china, I think is the current count.

            The money Romney sent to the Caymans is his to do with as he pleases. If there were tax evasion issues, you can bet Harry Reid would have expolited them to the fullest.

            I agree about 999, but Cain is a very smart man, and would no doubt have done well as President. He has a good grounding in our country’s principles.

            Given the recent example of the total waste of Cory Monteith’s life, lost to drugs (and alcohol) at age 31, I cannot agree with the Libertarian position. I don’t think we should send users to jail, but any one who would exploit our youth by selling them drugs deserves to rot in jail. I know the problems with the war on drugs, but don’t have a good answer.

            My problems with Ron Paul stem from his libertarian ideas. His position to basically abandon Israel is dangerous. His son Rand has a far more sensible outlook. He might make a good President. Have a nice day.

          • ExGOP

            True that he can do these things as he pleases, but he can’t then point to that as good management for America. Concerning abandoning Israel, we will dump Israel in the next Arab-Israeli war. If it happens, then the Arabic powers will order us to stay out of it or shut off our oil. When gas goes to $10/gal, Americans (selfish lot that we are) will howl and we (and Europe) will back away. Not a doubt in my mind. The Israelis are currently living in a Western-support fantasy. Hope they don’t have to wake to it. They need to find a peaceful solution. So far they have won every war. But if they lose only once–.

          • ChiefBoring

            Romney would not have made the same decisions as President as he did for Bane. Different job, different loyalties.

            We have enough oil. coal, and gas reserves to be self sufficient, if BHO would get out of the way, and approve the keystone pipe line.

            I hope we are not so callow as to abandon Israel.

          • ExGOP

            If he would make different decisions than he would as a businessman, then he can’t point to his business experience as an example of his decisionmaking and why we should have voted for him. You are admitting that the way he ran his business is irrelevant to the way he would run the country. In that case, we don’t know what he would have done. It is like saying: “Look at what I have done as a reason to vote for me, but I’m not going to run the country that way”. Total disconnect.

            NOT EVEN CLOSE to enough energy to be self sufficient. Even if we have the resources, they could not be brought on line in any timeframe that would prevent price spikes. Just look at the variation in prices due to minor changes in expectations with a reliable supply. I think Israel is an important country in the Middle East, but I’m not optimistic about her long term future.

          • ExGOP

            I would assume that if drugs were legalized as in Holland, they would be regulated like alcohol. Licensed dealers and/or the ABC(D) stores.

          • ExGOP

            America’s problem with Romney and Cain can be summed up in their candidacies. Romney: “I have a long successful business career doing evil things to America–sending her money and jobs overseas. But if you elect me President I will use this business experience and bring jobs and money back to America, even though I have no experience doing that!@!!!!”. And Cain: “My candidacy is characterized by poorly thought out ideas covered by slick slogans. But if elected, I will magically transform into a serious and thoughtful candidate. No wonder they weren’t elected. Sort of like Palin: “I can’t manage to answer simple questions on television, but trust me–I can manage the largest organization in the world.” In fairness, Obama’s 2008 slogan: “I look good and talk good and will do something good–just trust me” wasn’t a great one either, but McCain/Palin were just worse. Sort of like 2004. Bush was an unpopular President in over his head in two wars and a poor economy. The Democrats nominated a Massachusetts man who was just awful and gave the election to the incumbent. 2012 was an instant replay in reverse.

          • ExGOP

            Two other observations. No such animal in SD as Farm Labor Party. Obama probably is narcissistic, but it is like saying lawyers lie. I worked all my life for elected officials, and I can assure you that people with small egos don’t run for office. Narcissism is rampant. It ranges from some people who are nearly humble to Newt Gingrich, who is in a class by himself. The only comparable extreme ego I can envision is Franklin Roosevelt, who might have been in Newt’s class.

          • ChiefBoring

            My question resulted from Hubert Humphery’s political origins, Minnesota not being far from SD. We agree on the Narcissism of pols. i just think BHO is the most overgrown case I’ve seen. Newt can back his up. I had not considered FDR in that light, but suspect you are correct in your assessment of him.

          • leroy

            NATPN…..During my lifetime I have come to realize that some people just can’t seem to think in simple terms and have a tendency to overcomplicate everything. Then again, some people think in simple terms, but tend to overcomplicate solutions to problems. If a handful of men managed to develop a couple of documents comprised of a surprising few number of pages to govern an entire nation, would it be so difficult to believe the laws subsequently passed could be just as simple and of very brief/concise content?
            I am sure I already know your answer.

          • ExGOP

            Yes, education has ruined that. There are not as many simpletons as there used to be. However, they are not completely gone. Look around the room. Most of the people you talk to see things very simply. Simpletons are not extinct.

  • Fedup

    Because there’s nothing but liberal socialist B.S. legislation coming from the Damnocrat-controlled Senate, Nota!

  • Alondra

    Sheriff Joe, Lead Obama ID Fraud Investigator, had an High-Level Meetings In Washington DC (The meeting was scheduled to go for One hour, but ended up going for about FOUR and a HALF hours)

    Soon, Soon the Korrupt Kenyan Kriminal will go to jail, where he belongs. And Reid should be his mate.

    “For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.” – Jesus Christ (Mathew 10:26; Luke 8:17)

    “Magna est VERITAS et praevalet” – “The truth is great and shall prevail”

  • FreedomFighter

    “In other words, turnabout is fair play – and if the Republican Party regains control of the full Congress in 2014, expect Obama’s final two years in office to be a prison sentence, as the President watches Congress dismantle signature legislation like the Dodd-Frank Act and Obamacare.”
    I say go for it, America could use a break from these gangsters in congress and the white house.
    Laus DeoSemper FI