Steve Wynn and Obama's Fiscal Policies

Steve Wynn, who calls himself a "Harry Reid Democrat", did not mince words this week, talking about Obama's fiscal policies. Wynn is a Las Vegas mogul, and head of Wynn Resorts, so he knows of which he speaks. He spent the last week on conference calls with investment analysts, and when the subject of expansion came up, Wynn was clear about why expansion in this economy is not happening.

William Lerner, of Deutsche Bank Securities, asked Wynn about adding more room and conference space in Las Vegas given the fact that there are times of the year that Vegas runs out of space. Steve Wynn answered:

Well, here's our problem. There are a host of opportunities for expansion in Las Vegas, a host of opportunities to create tens of thousands of jobs in Las Vegas. I know that I could do 10,000 more myself and according to the Chamber of Commerce and the Visitors Convention Bureau, if we hired 10,000 employees, it would create another 20,000 additional jobs for a grand total of 30,000. I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on, on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress. But everybody is so political, so focused on holding their job for the next year that the discussion in Washington is nauseating. And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems -- that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration. And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet. And until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, "Oh God, don't be attacking Obama." Well, this is Obama's deal, and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest or holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government, and there's no need soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. (Emphasis mine) And that's true of Democratic businessmen and Republican businessmen, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this country is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs.

It doesn't get much clearer than that. And it supports what we see as a country, namely there are no jobs and there is no recovery from the Great Recession.

Nice to have the other side finally figure it out.

Fourth Amendment Null and Void in Indiana

The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that people cannot resist illegal police home invasions. Their reasoning is that safety trumps the right to privacy given in the Fourth Amendment. The Amendment reads:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The Justices claim in a 3-2 Majority Opinion, that the safety of the home residents and the police is more important than the right of residents to protect their home against illegal invasion. The majority believes the place to contest illegal invasion by authorities is the court system. I agree with that part, I just don't agree that people have to let the police in whenever they want to get in.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers did not believe this was an argument that held any water when held up to the Fourth Amendment. Remember, this was written because the English were forcing their soldiers into private homes. They understood what we take for granted; a person's home should be inviolate. Period. No matter what behavior the resident of the home is engaged in, police cannot enter without permission of some sort; an invitation or a warrant. And warrants aren't easy to get due to the Fourth Amendment.

Now, stick with me here. The Fourth Amendment was used as rationale for legalizing abortion, and is frequently used as a defense of abortion. It's the reason minors can get abortions without their parents' knowledge. So, privacy protects people who murder unborn infants, but doesn't allow you to refuse the police entrance into your home. Privacy allows your 13 year-old daughter to go and get an abortion without telling significant adults in her life, but doesn't allow you to keep that same child safe in your home.

I'm sure this ruling will be appealed, and I hope the Supreme Court is still sensible enough to reverse this decision. Re-read that sentence. Because if the Supreme Court doesn't overturn the incredibly wrong ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court, that ruling will soon become the law of the land. I'm not willing to abide by it. Will you?

I have long said I will protect my home with deadly force if I need to. I have that right. I have also said I am willing to join a new revolution. In fact, I already have by being active in Tea Party rallies, working for political candidates I believe in, and working within the system to effect change. The system, however, is swiftly becoming something that true patriots will not be able to work within. I believe our government, from federal to local, is no longer working for the people, but panders exclusively to the groups with money.

It has to change. We need to get rid of activist judges who believe they know better than the Founding Fathers what they meant when the Constitution was drafted. We need to get rid of politicians who do not pay attention to the people of our country, state, and city. We need to understand the fight never ends, and that it is a true fight.

We may lose battles along the way, but the war isn't over by a long shot. We must win the war.

Own It, Shut Up, and Go to Hell

I haven't written for a while, but I have been compiling stories for this post. The things people do never ceases to amaze me.

Since Wisconsin, smartly, elected Scott Walker in November, my political activism has been on the rise. I actually worked the phones for Walker and Johnson before the election, and enjoyed it so much, I got myself more active. Which means, because I live in the belly of the beast; Dane County, Wisconsin; I have also opened myself up to the amazing rudeness of the lefties.

When the 14 Democrat Senators left the state on 2/17/11, I couldn't believe it. I figured they would be back in a day or two, after all here is where their presence was needed. When it became obvious by the next day they weren't coming back any time soon, I started thinking about what action was available to me as a constituent of the ring leader, Mark Miller. Recall. Perfect. I looked on line and found out what was needed, talked to a helpful individual in the Government Accountability Board office, and thought some more. I knew this was a task beyond just myself, so I reached out to a fellow I had made phone calls with, and he introduced me to the people I needed to be in touch with. I have been working hard since then collecting signatures for the recall effort. I have stories to share.

My favorite is the old hippie who drove past me squeezing a rubber chicken and flipping me off. Do you think he carries that chicken around? Did he have to go home and get it, then drive past me with it? There were too many people to count that flipped me off. Most were content with just drive by with the bird flying. Others were compelled to slow down, make sure I was looking, then whip it out. There were those who honked and flipped it out, and there were those who had to add obscenities to the bird. The most shocking were the little old ladies flipping me off. Do they cook for their grandbabies with that finger?

About a month ago, the local daily newspaper and one of the local news stations interviewed me about the recall effort I am putting time in for, so, for a lot of the unionistas, I became the face of the movement. That also made me a flash point for a while. I was told to get a job before I told other people what to do.??? I was told I am a pawn for the corporations, the rich, the Republicans, ... I had a postal employee tell me I couldn't have a sign on my vehicle because it was in their PUBLIC parking lot. I told her she was trampling my civil rights, and she was. I had a large man park, get out of his car and tell me I had to leave the PUBLIC sidewalk I was set up on in front of the Post Office. He told me he had called the authorities but wouldn't give his name. I'm pretty sure he called the local Police Department, because I was visited by an officer not 20 minutes later. Of course, I was within my rights and completely legal. Another man told me I couldn't have my temporary recall signs pounded in to the grass between the sidewalk and the street. He told me someone from city hall would be visiting. None did.

My signs had two sides: Side 1 said Recall Mark Miller, Side 2 said This is What Democracy Looks Like. A woman, who thought she was signing a recall petition for Scott Walker, told me my signs were misleading. (I didn't find out until after the reporter for the paper talked to her that she didn't know what she signed. She didn't know until the reporter told her.) I guess her reading vocabulary is limited to : "This is what democracy looks like." I had more people than I can count ask who Mark Miller is. OK, I get that he's just a state senator, but if you're going to sign something, shouldn't you have a clue? Especially since he's the Senate Minority Leader. It made national news. Hello.

On election day, we were allowed to collect signatures at polling places within the 100 foot "safe zone" because none of the people being recalled were on the ballot. Some old union guy yelled at me from the time he walked out of the polling place, all the way to his truck and then as he drove past me. One woman went ballistic. I had no idea what she was yelling about, but I'm pretty sure she had been off her meds for a while. Two other women told me I was too close to the door, and they would call the police to make sure I wasn't breaking any laws. The polling place I was working was inside a building that houses police offices.

Stupid, rude, insulting, close-minded, and intimidating was what I saw of the left during my 60 day adventure to collect signatures. What I saw at the Capitol during that time was more of the same, but when they gather all their finer points (stupidity...) increase exponentially. In contrast, I never swore, I never flew the bird, I wasn't insulting and I didn't intimidate anyone. i can be a little closed minded, but no one was going to change my mind about this action.

So, lefties, unionistas, Democrats, socialists: Own it, shut up, and go to hell.

Lessons I Need to Learn

When I look at my post from 1/9/11, I blush in embarrassment; not because what I wrote embarrasses me, but because a scant 3 days later I have to admit I totally forgot my own advice.

Let me start from the beginning: Right Kid No1 is getting married in March, and, like all weddings, as it gets closer, the stress level rises. I come from a family of six children, all of whom are very important to me and my children. So last night when I got a call from Right Kid No2, saying her older sister had just called in tears because my brother; her Godfather; was not coming to the wedding, I became angry. Right Kid No2 made me promise not to call my brother, that she would call later in the week when she wasn't so angry.

I didn't call. Instead I posted on my sister-in-laws Facebook wall. Be assured, it was a post designed to embarrass them and let them know I was not happy. A few minutes later, the post was gone, and I reposted that I wasn't going away, and that I was angry.

My brother called me, very upset, well within his rights to be, and instead of listening and caring about this man who is very dear to me, I got into a huge shouting match and said things designed to hurt him and his family. I am not proud of my actions, I am less proud of my words, and I am truly ashamed I didn't email or call to get the facts; especially since my information was at least 4th hand.

This post is an open apology to my brother, his wife and their children. I am sorry. I was wrong. Please forgive me.

Violence and Politics and Life

The shooting yesterday in Arizona was certainly a tragedy, and I join in prayer for the victims and the victims' families. The 22 year-old man who perpetrated the violence is certainly disturbed, angry, and frustrated. I believe this is an aberration rather than the norm. That being said, I also believe violence is more prevalent than it should be.

Last night six people were shot in Baltimore and two died, including a police officer trying to do his job. Fourteen headless bodies showed up in Acapulco just half of the 27 who were killed overnight. Home invasions, car-jackings, domestic abuse, animal abuse, drive-by shootings; these have all become fairly commonplace in our society. Let's not forget school shootings, a phenomenon that didn't exist 30 years ago.

Now, the blame game starts. The Left, predictably, is blaming the Right. The Right is, predictably, defending itself and pointing out the biased coverage of the Mainstream Media. Neither the Right nor the Left is culpable for this act of violence. The person responsible is Jared Loughner. Period. It's not his mother's fault, it's not his father's fault, and it's not Karl Marx's fault.

The "inflammatory rhetoric" and the "use of violent terms" that people are citing should not be scapegoats. We have had "inflammatory rhetoric" in politics since politics began. The "use of violent terms" have been a part of the American vocabulary long before Loughner decided to go on a shooting rampage. Instead of trying to blame language, politics, or ideology; let's find the real reasons. I don't know what they are, but Loughner has certainly left clues on the internet. We may never know exactly what precipitated this act of violence, which is hard to accept because we are a people who want answers for everything. Loughner, himself, may not know exactly why he did what he did.

Today, instead of playing the blame game, let's hold our families a little closer, let's appreciate our lives a little more, let's pray for peace, understanding, and justice. Let's look at our lives and attempt to rid them of as much violence as we can. Peace and justice start at home. This may be an overused phrase, but it's true, nonetheless.

Be safe, be healthy, and be thankful.

Evidence Shows Ruling of AZ Judge Illegal

This may be old news to some of the more astute readers, but here it's all together in one article.

July 31, 10:07 AM Anthony G. Martin

In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.

The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part,"Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don't read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 of our Constitution says:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction."

In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve a state.

This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco , to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue.

Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.
The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for Constitutional law in the article at Canada Free Press.

In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously. The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on the part of the federal government. This information was cited by United Patriots of America.

From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words:

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless Mexican invaders who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills, and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage in kidnapping, murder, 115 bodies recovered in AZ entry routes, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican border.

This is as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.

The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense.

This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal basis for attorneys representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance.

Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant, lawless federal government.

Now, Who is Really to Blame?

Here's an opinion piece by Chuck Green who writes "Greener Pastures" for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel...one of the more liberal papers in the country. Additionally, Mr. Green is a life long Democrat...so this is rather a stunning piece...

Obama is Victim of Bush's Failed Promises
Greener Pastures Column -- 5/ 15/10

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.

Largest budget ever. Largest deficit ever. Largest number of broken promises ever. Most self-serving speeches ever. Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever. Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow! Talk about change.

Just one year ago, fresh from his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America 's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault.

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America 's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes, it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending failed Bush administration. If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel. North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian. Two disastrous decisions. Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won the election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, capturing "the Ted Kennedy seat", President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. And they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts was George Bush's fault. Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats. It is all George Bush's fault. Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end and the time for hope and change ever arrive?

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something... - anything?

(Chuck Green is a veteran Colorado journalist
and former editor-in-chief of The Denver Post.)