The (Un)Impeachment of Barack Obama

The impeachment of President Barack Hussein Obama has become a hot button topic since the beginning of his second term, but sadly, it is but a fantasy. Conservatives will rail that they have the "proof" of high crimes and misdemeanors, starting with Benghazi, they would claim, and running through just about every alleged scandal reported on since then.

I could list each one, the IRS, Fast and Furious, the VA Scandal, to name some, and each would prompt a nodding head from many who feel the President is certainly failing in his responsibilities and allegedly guilty of incompetence. And they might be right.

But, impeachable? Not based on what we know.

The Constitution does not address the issue of incompetence as a reason for removal. Only "treason, bribery, or high crimes and misdemeanors" are reasons for removal, as specified in Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

Understand, as well, Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached, i.e., formally indicted, by the House of Representatives, as required under the Constitution, but in each case, the Senate voted not to convict, because ultimately, reasonable people recognized that the impeachment of each man was politically motivated. And since Articles of Impeachment were drawn, but never voted on against Richard Nixon because he resigned, we can never really know the outcome of that exercise.

The process is fairly straight-forward. A simple majority of the House of Representatives is sufficient to impeach a President or other executive branch officer, but two thirds of the Senate is required to convict. Under the current political make-up of both Houses of the Congress, the House could impeach, but the Senate would not convict.

Even if the House maintains a Republican majority, and if the Republicans gained control of the Senate, there would be 67 votes needed to convict President Obama of something, anything. It will never happen.

The Founders were brilliant in this regard. They made certain that it would almost be impossible to remove a sitting President because the chances to have one party dominate so strongly would truly be impossible. They also looked at the (dis)functionality of Parliament, which was an entity they knew so well, and decided to go in a whole other direction.

The only thing that is certain during an impeachment process is that the President will be hampered in his ability to govern, since all his efforts will be focused on preparing himself for trial. In this era of current events, is this what we really want to do to our country? Put it essentially on hold while the politicians, not statesmen, fight over the minutiae of dotted i's and crossed t's, watching our economy falter and having our adversaries run rampant over other nations, much like Russia is presently doing to Ukraine? Or, heaven forbid, drop the ball on terrorism throughout the world? Did we learn nothing from the Nixon and Clinton impeachment nightmares?

I don't think so, and other reasonable people will see it as I do.

The fault here, truly, is the Media for not reporting on this man's failings during his first term, and bending over backwards to help him win re-election. Had he been a more centrist or Conservative man, the Media would have glaringly reported every hiccup which was contrary to the Media's left-wing ideology, much as they did to Nixon. They worshipped him, instead, and failed in its responsibility to be a free and independent press.

And finally, if the impeachment process did succeed in removing Barack Obama from office, look who would replace him. Would we be any better off?
Remember the disaster we would cause to our nation if the Congress went through with the Impeachment of Barack Obama. God help us if it does.

A "Plane" Waste of Time and Money

Interestingly, on Wednesday it was reported on CNN.com, of all places, that investigators searching for Malaysia Flight 370 have finally determined that the "pings" believed to have been coming from black boxes spread about 329 miles in the south Indian Ocean, are not.

According to the CNN article, when asked by CNN if this conclusion was reached by other nation’s investigators, the U.S. Navy's spokesman, Michael Dean said, "Yes. Our best theory at this point is that the pings were likely some sound produced by the ship or within the electronics of the Towed Pinger Locator."

You know what? I think he is right. In fact, back on March 24, I wrote that they would not find the plane anywhere in the Indian Ocean because I believe it didn't crash.

Instead, in my commentary "What Happened To Flight 370?”, I proposed that this flight was hijacked by the pilot and the co-pilot, along with the two Iranian passengers with the stolen passports. I outlined my scenario with cogent and equally logical reasoning for why I felt the plane was flown to Somalia and taken apart.

Understand that I am not one who rushes into conspiracy theories to justify a hypothesis. It took me over two weeks to reach my conclusion, after listening to hours of news stories and reading many articles on this subject.

Now, we are just about 10 days shy of three months and where are we? Still listening to the Malaysian Prime Minister, who has nothing in hand except a diplomatic crisis with China he is trying, unsuccessfully, to quell. So, he is of no use to the investigation.

We have several countries who have partnered with the United States, who have all spent millions of dollars in treasure searching fruitlessly for nothing that will be found. The U.S. and its partners have tactfully not voiced, at least in public, "hijack conspiracy" because the rest of the world would think us crazy.

Who would want to use a plane as a terrorist tool, right? We have been told, after all, that bin Laden is dead, al-Qaeda is on the run, and the "War on Terror" is over. If you believe that, I have a bridge I can sell you. So, a hijacking is out of the question.

Instead, we have spent millions of dollars chasing phantom plane crashes because that makes more sense. Yeah, right! (Note the sarcasm)

As we approach the three-month mark in this futile exercise, perhaps finally, our efforts should be used to explore the possibility that Flight 370 was hijacked and the plane was not destroyed. At least, it is more plausible than chasing debris that does not exist.   

 When this plane is used in the future as a weapon of mass destruction in some horrible attack on Israel or worse, the United States, just remember all the time that was wasted looking for something that didn't exist; and the next time someone mentions "terrorism" and "hijack" in the same conversation, in the same sentence, believe it is possible.

 Because it just may come to pass. 

Congressional Salaries (revisited)

On May 26, 2014, Term Limits for US Congress began the process under Article V of the Constitution to persuade at least 34 states (2/3) to call for a Constitutional amendment to limit terms of Representatives and Senators. On July 15 and 16, 2013, I wrote a two part commentary discussing Term Limits and also Congressional Salaries.

I have republished both of these yesterday and today in support of such an Amendment to the Constitution. As always, your comments are welcome. Thank you.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Congressional Salaries

Yesterday, I discussed Term Limits for Representatives and Senators. Essentially, we need to force Members of Congress to put forward and pass legislation which will prohibit any American from serving more than 12 years in either position.

There is, I admit, one flaw in my proposal that I failed to address and that is crossover. What I mean by this for example, if a Representative wishes to run for Senator and he hasn't exhausted the 12 year rule, he may run, and if he is re-elected and serves his remainder of 12 years as a Senator, he MAY NOT  run as a Representative again. He has given more than enough to the country, with our thanks. Basically, the person serves up to a total of 12 years and that's it. At no time may the MC exceed 12 years between the House and Senate.

With regard to salaries, the 27th Amendment discusses how and when Congressional salaries are adjusted. Since Members of Congress maintain businesses outside their role in the Congress, there is no need to bankrupt the country with exorbitant salary increments. Instead, the salary increment may not exceed 1/2 of 1% of the average private industry increase.

This formula is pretty straight-forward. Remember that a Representative or Senator ran for this position to devote time to the country, not to get rich off the taxpayer. In addition, by limiting salary increments this way, one would want to leave and move on to other ventures, leaving room for new blood to take the reins of power. "Fresh minds have fresh ideas," Kirk said to Scott in Star Trek II, The Wrath of Khan.

Medical benefits would not be the high priced package that MC currently enjoys. Even if Obamacare is repealed and replaced, a congressional benefits package would be equal to that of an average American family, with co-pays, deductibles and employee paid premiums the rest of us pay. The benefits are lost when the Member leaves office, whether by election or retirement. There is no COBRA eligibility with a congressional position.

With regard to pensions, it is absolutely disgraceful that a Member of Congress continues to be paid his salary as a pension after he leaves office. Instead, since the MC will serve only serve 12 years, as in private industry there is vesting time to be applied to how the pension is awarded.

No pension is paid to anyone who serves less than 5 years, and since the MC can serve only 12 years, the most he or she will be awarded is 1/3 their average salary as a pension. And since an IRA participant generally may not receive the benefit without penalty before 59 1/2 years old, neither may the retired Member of Congress. But the pension will only be paid on a program of 10 Year period certain.

Finally, should the retired Member of Congress choose to take a position with a company, agency or any other type of employment or consulting that is recognized as one who is a lobby company to the Congress or any other Federal Department or Agency, the pension rights are lost forever.

With regard to existing and retired congress men and women, they will be affected by this change, as well. Effective at the time appropriate legislation is passed, the 10 year period certain will kick in for all, at 1/3 of their average salary for time served, up to 12 years. Again, if they served less than five years, any existing pension or pension rights will expire as of December 31 of the effective year. If they are lobbyists or other positions not permitted to get pensions, their payout will cease at the end of the month of enactment.

This legislation will begin to cut into unnecessary expenses that the country can no longer afford. And isn't everybody's goal to cut the deficit? Let's start with those who allowed this to happen.

What do you think?

Originally published in frankmchalesviews.blogspot.com on July 16, 2013

Term Limits (revisited)

On May 26, 2014, Term Limits for Congress began the process under Article V of the Constitution to persuade at least 34 states (2/3) to call for a Constitutional amendment to limit terms of Representatives and Senators. On July 15, 2013, I wrote a two part commentary on Term Limits and also Congressional Salaries.

I am republishing both of these over the next two days in support of such an Amendment to the Constitution. As always, your comments are welcome. Thank you.   

Monday, July 15, 2013

Term Limits

I remember on December 31, 2011, the late Ed Koch and I debated the issue of term limits for both members of the House of Representatives and the Senate. This is clear to me because I was sitting at my oncology center getting another chemo treatment for my cancer. And, of course, it’s either TV, read or play with your phone or iPad. You haves to pass the time away and keep your wits about you.

Anyway, I emailed him a commentary why term limits for Members of Congress was essential, and of course, as a former Congressman, he viewed the issue as a non-starter. His view was that while it made sense to term the Congress, no member would voluntarily limit their own power or control of the government.

My answer to him was that I read the Constitution forward, backward and inside out, and nowhere did it say that this was a civil service position that one had for life unless he or she was voted out. Incumbency, I said, was at least 2/3 of the reason people were elected again and again, even when they did nothing or did not act in the best interests of their constituents.

In addition, I continued, the Framers' intent, while not written, was inferred and implied that a citizen would devote some of his time and abilities to the good of the country and then, after a fashion, return to private life. Keeping in mind that the Congress met only for a brief time each year, this made eminently good sense, unlike now where it meets approximately nine months, spread out across the entire year.

I even reminded him that it was the Congress who brought forward, passed and ultimately was successful in creating the 22nd amendment, which limits the President to two four year terms, or a total of 10 years, in the event of a succession to the presidency by the Vice President or other key person in the line of succession, such as, the Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, etc., as outlined in the Constitution.  And of course, the language was not politically motivated, as it did not affect the person in office at the time it was passed by the states.

Surely, if you knew him or knew of him, Ed was a very strong-willed man, and as such, was unyielding in his position. I thanked him, of course, and we remained friends and continued to correspond right up until a few days before he died in February. I enjoyed our discourse and our debates, although on many issues, we did agree or at least, understood and respected each other when we didn't.

So now, having laid out the premise, finally, of this commentary, this is what I propose:

- A Constitutional Amendment to change the term of a Representative from two years to four years. The purpose of this is to provide for efficiency and productivity, so that the incumbent isn't beginning his next campaign six or eight months after his or her term began. The representative will be limited to two more elections thereafter, for life. Since the entire House is subject to election at the same time, this will be effective upon the first election after passage.

- In the same Amendment, change the term of a Senator from six years to four years, for the same reasons as outlined above. The Senator will be limited to two more elections, thereafter, for life. Any term not yet completed Includes the remaining years of the current term. This will be effective with the first election after passage.

- At no time, however, will a Representative or Senator's term exceed 12 years.  This includes terms created by appointment, special election or any other unlisted reason as the Member has an opportunity to be elected up to two more times on his or her own.

This is, of course, subject to review and debate. But it is essential that we begin to take back our government and put its controls into the hands of the governed, not the governors. Now is the time to start.

What do you think? I am sure the Members of Congress would want to know, if they want what's best for the country and the people. Right?

Originally published in frankmchalesviews.blogspot.com on July 15, 2013

The Meaning of Memorial Day (revisited)

This commentary was originally published on May 24, 2013 in honor of Memorial Day, and to give it its proper due for all of us to remember why we celebrate it. You can find this commentary and others in my personal blogsite, Frank McHale’s Viewpoints, Frankmchalesviews.blogspot.com. Your comments are certainly always welcome. Thank you and enjoy! -FM

Friday, May 24, 2013

The Meaning of Memorial Day

It's Memorial Day weekend and many of us will be at BBQs, at the beach, in the mountains or visiting with friends and relatives. It is the "unofficial" start of summer, where leisure time is treasured and the warmer weather makes us feel so alive. As Americans, we live mostly in temperate climates, although Alaskans will say "where?", Floridians will have something to say about the humidity, and Hawaiians will say they are in weather paradise.

However, it seems we have lost some of the meaning of Memorial Day. Sure, we know it is one of our federal holidays, like Labor Day, Columbus Day and Presidents' Day. But do we understand the history and significance of this special day?

Initially, it was created after the American Civil War to honor those soldiers who died, whether Union or Confederate, as they were all Americans. The holiday was called Decoration Day, because it was felt, that friends and families would go to the gravesites of the deceased and adorn the grave with flowers, plants, ribbons or other appropriate decoration. By the early 20th century, the holiday evolved not only to honor Civil War dead, but any member of the Armed Forces who died in battle. The name was changed, as well, to Memorial Day and moved to May 31 throughout the country in order to be consistent.

This holiday's purpose should not be confused with Veterans Day, initially called Armistice Day to celebrate the end of WWI, which honors all veterans, living and now deceased. These honorees did not have to die in battle to be so honored, only that they served.

In 1970, Memorial Day was moved to the last Monday in May. This was done so that we would have several three-day weekends to make our work weeks somewhat more

Days Of Thunder (Photo credit: Glyn Lowe Photoworks.)

efficient for business. Other holidays which fall on Mondays for this purpose are MLK Day, Presidents' Day, Labor Day and Columbus Day.

The remaining holidays stayed on their calendar date. These are New Year's Day, Independence Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Initially, Veterans Day was moved to the last Monday in October, but veterans' groups complained, so the Congress moved the holiday back to November 11th.

So, while you are in your backyard, the park or other site enjoying your Memorial Day party, take a moment to close your eyes, say a prayer, and thank all the deceased military who gave their lives protecting our freedom, preserving our liberty and allowing us to live in the most democratic country the world has ever seen.

It is the least we can do as Americans. Our Founding Fathers would expect as much.

The Sad Case of Pastor Saeed Abedini

Have you heard about Pastor Saeed Abedini? Do you know who he is? If you do, then you certainly know what the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is, don't you? I know I do and anyone who even gives a minute and a half a week to Fox News knows the story of Pastor Abedini.

For those of you who don't, I am not going to bore you with all the details. Suffice to say, I definitely know you never heard his story on Lame Stream Media news channels.

Why not? Well, perhaps it would upset the narrative that the Obama Administration is spinning about the Muslim Theocracy of Iran. It is certainly not a republic, at least any Republic to which I pledge my allegiance.

It has been reported, it seems forever, by the ACLJ and its founders, Jordan and Jay Sekulow, the horrid treatment Saeed has received for well over a year for having preached Christianity in Iran. The latest article filed by Jordan Sekulow in the ACLJ JOURNAL  reveals that the Pastor has been beaten again in prison, shackled in the hospital and beaten again.

Naghmeh Abedini, Pastor Saeed's Iranian-American wife, has petitioned Barry and John, and Hillary before him, to help her husband gain his release, to no avail. When Kerry had the opportunity in December and January to force linkage of the Pastor's release to the easing of sanctions, he did NOTHING to gain the Pastor's freedom.

Barry could have made a public show of support for Pastor Abedini, and his wife's pleas and what did he do? That's right folks; instead he flew to Hawaii for HIS family's Christmas vacation, while the Abedini children and Mrs. Abedini did not enjoy theirs because their daddy and husband were abandoned by our government in Rajai Shahr Prison in Iran.

This is just another disgrace by this President and his stooges to ignore the needs of American citizens for some unrealized goal he has with radical Islam. 

Pastor Abedini, an Iranian-born American, was captured on September 26, 2012 (note the date) for preaching a religion he converted to 15 years ago and he was sentenced to eight years in prison for this "crime" against this theocracy. Attempts to speak with various Iranian officials by ACLJ and others have fallen on deaf ears, usually ending with the statement "the government does not want to get involved in an ongoing criminal process." Sound familiar? Yes, it did to me, too.

Now, it is fast approaching two years in prison for the Pastor and there is still no conversation by Barry and his gang. Why not? Why isn't the LSM holding Barry's feet to this fire? There is no liberal v conservative, Democrat v Republican, special interest at stake here. Only the freedom of an American citizen from one of the worst prisons in the Middle East, if not the world, is at stake here. 

So, why no coverage?

To those of you who have supported Naghmeh and the Pastor, there is no amount of thanks they can ever share with you which would convey their gratitude to

American Center for Law & Justice (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

you. For those of you who feel Barry and John and Hillary will help an American and his family in distress, I would suggest you think that idea again. 

As for Iran and its supporters, if you think Allah or God thinks this is appropriate behavior for a religious man, no matter what his faith, to be treated, you are sadly mistaken. No religion's God teaches torture and inhumane treatment toward anyone for expressing an alternate belief system. 

 At worst, if the Mullahs and Ayotollahs are so afraid of the message of Jesus Christ, they should have put Pastor Saeed Abedini on the first plane out of Teheran. Then, at least, their actions would have displayed the best aspects of Islam to the world. Instead, they are using Islam as a convenient cover for their despicable behavior, totally un-Muslim.

As for our government, well, what can I say? It doesn't support our veterans, our basic guaranteed rights, or our national security. And now, it has proven it doesn't support Americans illegally imprisoned in foreign jails. 

What will it take for the LSM to finally, FINALLY, report this story and shame Barry to be a President, rather than an ostrich? It is getting old fast. He can still make a difference before he becomes totally irrelevant. 

How about starting with Pastor Saeed Abedini?

Where have all the Leaders Gone? Long Time Ago

There are times when a writer draws a blank, unable to find the inspiration in his usual suspects. For me, I have a plethora of online newspaper apps on my phone which I use as referral tools.

In addition, during the day I generally have Fox News playing in the background from early in the morning, like 5 AM, starting with Fox and Friends First,  right through a to a show called The Five.

So on Tuesday, after dinner, I sat down and went through the online apps. Needless to say, nothing. Nada.  I couldn't find anything which interested me, and if I'm not interested in a story, there is nothing I can do to make you feel interested in that story, either.

Certainly, just about anything Jay Carney says these days are fodder for me to write something snarky about him, but like Ron Ziegler 40 years before him, after a while even that grows tiresome. He has lost all respect of the White House Press Corps, a powerful fraternity to which he once belonged, but now will be forever ostracized because he has lost all credibility.

Then, there is Joe Biden, the great gift that keeps on giving to late night comedy writers everywhere. Every time he opens his mouth, a new faux pas pops out and surprises even him. He is as astounded as his audience. And looks it. Maybe he has a career in stand-up when this gig is up. You never know.

Or Barry. Man, he has become a ghost, almost the ghost of Richard Nixon. Oh, yeah, he comes out of his protective cocoon, like Nixon did, babbling about nonsense, like Nixon did, trying unsuccessfully to act Presidential. Instead, again like Nixon did, he sounds more like he doesn't even believe the nonsense he is spewing himself and neither do we anymore, not that we ever did.

The supporting cast, well, you know them as Nancy, Steny, Harry, Chucky and Dickie for the Democrat "leadership"; and Eric, Mitch and Kevin for the Republican crowd. To me, they have become the Clowns of Congress. Can you respect any of these fools anymore? Neither can I.

But, you cannot forget the most powerful (?) man in this group. Yes, that's right, folks.               “H-e-e-e-r-e's Johnny!”  Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the ringleader of this esteemed group of stooges (apologies to Moe, Larry and Curley) the one, the only, Weeper of the House, WEEPER JOHN! So grim. So perfectly fitting! The Grim Weeper!!

This is what represents us and our country to the rest of the world. No wonder Vlad the Impaler has no plans to back down from his goal of Eurasian and perhaps, European domination. I mean, who is afraid of Bozo?

That's what we look like now to the world. After all, who looks up to a clown for guidance?  “Am I funny? Why? Do I amuse you?”  (courtesy: Goodfellas) Sadly, quite the opposite. This is just so pitiful.

We don't have leaders anymore. We have, instead, the sorriest bunch of buffoons and egotists that ever disgraced the halls of Congress or disrespected the Oval Office. Not one of them deserves or is qualified to sit in the office he or she presently holds.

As I said, I couldn't find any inspiration today from any of my usual suspects, my phone news apps. But the fools in Washington can give you that help, just because they are all fools. That is the saddest part of this commentary.

Too bad I couldn't find anything to write about. Imagine if I did.

The Important California Primary

Two weeks from today, on Tuesday June 3, the all-important California primary will take place, with various Federal, State and local offices in contention. The most important of these primary races is that of the Office of Governor.

Unlike many other primary races in the various states, California is unique in that the top two primary winners face off in the general election, regardless of Party. Presently, Jerry Brown, the Democrat incumbent, is being challenged by two Republicans, Tim Donnelly, and Assemblyman from Encinitas, and Neel Kashkari, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability, from Sacramento.

 Based on the most recent polls, Mr. Brown and Mr. Donnelly are the two top leaders, which appear to be headed for a showdown in November. All other candidates, Democrat, Republican and other third party candidates are far behind, and will not likely factor in to the final result.

It's a funny thing about polls, though. They really don't mean much, since the polls, whether newspaper, television or professional, don't decide the winners; instead, the vote taken on Primary Day is the one that matters.

Recently, I had an opportunity to speak with Mr. Donnelly. I found him to be an engaging, intelligent and sincere individual.

We talked about many issues, social, economic and governmental. As voters, you know what your issues are and how they affect you on a daily basis. Let me share, instead, my perception of Mr. Donnelly.

First and foremost, I believe he is a Fiscal Conservative, one who doesn't want to continue to throw good money at non-working programs. He recognizes that the taxpayers' hard-earned money is limited at best and is it not fair to waste that precious asset because "we always have."

Then, my next impression is that he is a Libertarian, one who believes in smaller government, you know the one, "of the people, by the people and for the people." Government is supposed to work for the people, not that the people must conform to the wishes of the government; that the government exists with the consent of the governed.

Finally, he is a Constitutionalist. All throughout our conversation, that theme seemed to flow on each issue. He believes that both the State and National Constitutions are documents which must be followed as written, because they outline the law, and not to be taken merely as suggestion lists.

Part of these themes includes the wishes of the voters, whether by ballot initiatives, propositions or other voter-approved measures. Mr. Donnelly believes that in each of these core values, the legislature writes the laws and the chief executive takes care that they are followed. He does not feel executive orders should be used to change or amend law, and that voter-wishes are paramount.

California, in my view, is a microcosm of the Nation as a whole. The political demographic breaks down like much of America.

There is a large rural area, more conservative than the rest of the state, which encompasses not only a huge land mass of the state but includes a substantial part of the population;  then, there is a more moderate business population which includes not only technology, but also  the financial and communications industries.

Finally, the entertainment industry is the most liberal of all, but not a monolith. As with other groups, there are quite a few surprises which are not necessarily evident at first blush.

So to sum up, an important primary is going to take place in two weeks, not the least of which is the primary for the next Governor. I am supporting Tim Donnelly for Governor, and I hope you turn out in large numbers to make a difference in how California will look over the next four years.

Just remember this: the future of California, and probably the Nation, is at your fingertips as you cast your vote.

If you want real change for California, Tim Donnelly is the man who will deliver it to you.

The General, the President, the Failure of Duty

It is a shame that the United States Department of Veterans Affairs has no regard for its primary client, the American veteran. Sadly, as we have seen with other federal agencies under this administration, there will be no accountability, other than the dismissal of an administrator who was scheduled to retire next week.

Is that how Barry and the boys want to play this? That this is "unacceptable" and will get "to the bottom of this" latest Obama scandal?

Where have we heard that line of "I got caught but I am blameless" diatribe? The IRS? NSA? GAO? FAST AND FURIOUS? AP? ROSEN? BENGHAZI?  The list goes on!

General Eric Shinseki, as reported in various media, including the ARMY TIMES via USA Today, has been aware of this unfolding failure of compliance for years, since he is the person who has the final review and approval of the GAO reports. Apparently, he also is finding this behavior in the various VA hospitals "unacceptable" (there is that word again) NOW. Why wasn't it "unacceptable" for the last five years?

Was it because he and his team were finally found to be unprepared and, ultimately, incompetent? And only Under Secretary Dr Petzel is the one to bear the consequences of this incompetence? And he was scheduled to retire on May 31? Please! Spare us another gratuitous line of false anger, Barry!

English: Eric K. Shinseki, Official portrait as Chief of Staff of the Army (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Why isn't General Shinseki also being dismissed? Does he know too much about some of the failures and why they were permitted to occur? Was he, as a good soldier, following orders from his deceitful, dissembling and incompetent Commander in Chief? 

In the meantime, the doctors, nurses and administrators at the various hospitals altered documents, reports, schedules, etc., and because the statistics looked better than the reality, what was that result? Of course, my friends, bonuses for everyone! Just like at the IRS, the GAO and elsewhere.

In my view, if one wants to work for a bonus program as part of a total compensation package, perhaps working in private industry is the way to go. Then, you can be held accountable for your incompetence and failure to comply with the rules and regulations; and be fired for it. 

Certainly, this latest scandal just proves that the government could save billions of dollars annually by immediately eliminating ANY BONUS PROGRAM FOR ANY FEDERAL EMPLOYEE, not just the VA.

What about the families of the veterans whose lives ended so tragically without any proper medical treatment or end of life care? Will there be compensation for them? Probably not, since miraculously, there is no documentation other than the family member's word. Good job, Barry! You hate the military anyway, so this is ok in your little book. 

Friends, if you think this is an incompetence scandal exclusive to the VA and America's veterans, think again. This is the model of the federal program that will affect each of us under that panacea, lovingly called "Obamacare". Remember when Barry said during the 2012 campaign that he was "proud to have my name attached to" this piece of garbage? Well, this is what it will look like on a broad national level. Now we really know what was in that "signature piece of legislation."

Finally, how can the Lame Stream Media continue to stand idly by, knowing full well that the men and women who fought for the freedom of the press are being abused by a corrupt and totally incompetent administration? Will this FINALLY be the straw that forces the LSM to take a long, hard look at the gilded lily, to admit that the blooms have fallen off the bouquet of thorns? 

I hope so. Americans have lost faith in the Fourth Estate over its failure to report on all the scandals of this administration since January 20, 2009. What will it take for it finally to do its job, if not reporting EVERYTHING it knows about the mistreatment of our cherished veterans by Barry and his boys?

If not this... then what?

A Taxing Issue for Marijuana in Massachusetts

In Thursday's late online edition of the Boston Herald, it was reported that State Senator Brian A. Joyce — who wants all pot sales to be subject to the 6.25 percent sales tax — said he’s adding his amendment to the Senate budget that was released yesterday.

The entire article can be found in the Boston Herald link.

I wrote on April 14 in my commentary, Mary Jane's Business Model that states should certainly consider taxing marijuana, whether it is used for medical or recreational purposes. It is a tax which will be rolled (no pun intended) into the cost of the product sold at the dispensary. The add-on of 6.25% that Senator Joyce is writing into law seems to conform to the other States and the District of Columbia which have legalized marijuana for medical use. Only Illinois has not applied a sales tax at the point of sale from the distributor to the dispensary.

As of this writing, 22 States and the District have legalized it  for medical use and are in various stages to implement its sale, with more States ready to get on board.

English: Medical Marijuana surrounding a vaporizer for healthy intake of the medicine. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Certainly, debate on this bill will be spirited since advocates on both sides of the proposal have raised legitimate arguments both for and against a tax on medical marijuana. The proponents for the tax understand it cannot be too high or buyers will continue to use the streets to purchase, while opponents feel additional taxes will prove to be burdensome for those already financially strapped due to higher medical costs.

In the end, compromise and common sense must prevail in Massachusetts. We will see how this plays out as legislators resolve next year’s budget and the various amendments attached to it.

Hopefully, in the end, this issue will be resolved with little fanfare and less stress than most people anticipate. After all, Massachusetts does not want to see its marijuana law take an unnecessary hit as it tries to get its law off the ground.

Otherwise, those who medically need marijuana as a solution will instead see their panacea to pain and suffering go up in smoke.

Finding the Truth: Watergate and Benghazi

To my Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative and Independent friends: we are Americans first and as Americans, we should welcome the investigation to be made by the House Select Committee on Benghazi, no matter where it leads.

For those of us who remember the current events of 1972, which ultimately led to the resignation of a President in the face of certain impeachment, and deservedly so, Republicans screamed witch hunt much like Democrats are screaming now. But as we discovered to our collective horror that such despicable action and activity could be made by one who was sworn to uphold the Constitution, and didn't, we were all satisfied that the Committee did the job it was supposed to do.

Find the truth, wherever it leads.

During the Watergate investigation, we learned new terms like, abuse of power, stonewalling, follow the money, obstruction of justice, and terms that cannot be published in this family-rated site. We also learned that the chief law enforcement officer of our nation actively directed a third-rate burglary from his offices inside the Department of Justice, and that the Counsel to the President acted as a messenger between the burglars and the Chief of Staff to the President, and even to the President himself, all to assure the President's re-election in what was considered a close race in early 1972.

Yes, many laws were broken, but no one died.

What are the supporters of this President afraid of with a similar investigation of a terrible event in our history? That he abused his power? Obstructed justice? Lied for political advantage? Manipulated the truth for his self-serving ego?

Richard Nixon was quoted as saying that the American people had to right to know if their President was a crook. It took some time, but in the end, while he didn't actually steal money or goods, he nearly stole the sanctity of what we all held near and dear: that the idea of the Constitution, you know, the document which makes us who we are, was almost stolen away in the dead of night on June 21, 1972. Or, at least, inside the Oval Office during a conversation that day between the President and his advisors.

Wouldn't this President's supporters want to make certain the same thing did NOT happen between September 11, 2012 and at the point Susan Rice went on the Sunday morning news shows on September 16? Certainly, if the President were misled by someone on his staff or within the Administration, wouldn't even the President want that individual revealed who committed the crime which is now hampering his second term? Wouldn’t we all want to know who gave the order to our military to stand down, leaving an American ambassador and three key members of his team on the field of battle to die a horrible death, with nary a finger lifted to attempt to save them?

 Wouldn't that, at this point, be the difference it really makes?

So, who can stand there now, with a straight face and say that Benghazi and Watergate are really any different? Anyone? If you still do, then you either enjoy being lied to by your "government" or you will believe anything blindly which is spoken by Jay Carney, the modern-day Ron Zeigler, who ultimately has destroyed himself and his credibility, by lying for this Administration, much like Zeigler did for Nixon's until August 9, 1974.

Face it, folks. It is time to be honest with ourselves, even if our government isn't honest with us, and admit we were lied to by key members of the Obama Administration, in order to protect individuals who have now caused this second Constitutional crisis in forty years. We have, as we learned by Watergate, the right to believe that our constitutionally elected officers, and that administration, are held to the same standard of law as the rest of us. Otherwise, what is the point?

If the Minority Leader and her minions still wish to abrogate their duties not to serve on the Select Committee that certainly is their right. But, she has no right to prohibit or prevent other sincere individuals of her party from serving their Nation to request to the Speaker to serve, without prejudice, on a Committee, Constitutionally authorized, whose sole purpose is to find the truth, no matter where it leads. Those who do finally serve will show that Country before Party is one of our highest ideals.

Let us end the partisan bickering of an event, which is threatening to irreversibly divide us along party lines, and instead, unite us as Americans to find the truth, no matter where it leads. That really is the American way, isn't it?