Nick Popaditch "Cigar Marine"

JAMES SIMPSON: A common complaint we hear about members of Congress is that they have never served in the military. A total of 95 veterans of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and the National Guard are current House members (the 96^th, John Murtha just died). This represents a mere 20 percent of sitting Members of Congress and is a record low. We can chalk this up as one good reason for Congress’s stunning ignorance regarding military matters.

“I will go to Washington to do battle against Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Steny Hoyer and the rest of them. They have never seen anything like the Southern fried butt whipping that’s coming at them!” Lt. Col. Allen West (Ret.)

Among the many encouraging signs for the nation as we head into the 2010 midterm elections is the number of first-time Republican candidates for Congress who are recent military veterans. There is even an organization supporting them: Iraq Veterans for Congress (IVC).
IVC was created in the 2008 election cycle to assist Marine Corps veteran Kieran Lalor in his bid to win New York’s 19^th congressional district. While Kieran lost that year, the organization assisted the successful candidacies of Duncan Hunter, Jr. (CA-52) and Mike Coffman (CO-6).This year, IVC is supporting 36 vets. 33 are running for U.S. House seats, one is running for governor, another for lt. governor, and one for U.S. Senate. There are also a number of others running independently. If just those 33 House candidates won, it would increase veterans’ representation in the House by over 30 percent. Such a win could provide a backstop against the lunatic, anti-military policies of Congressional Democrats and the White House, and may add some much-needed spine to the House Republican caucus. A list of those running is provided at the end of this article.

These people are exemplary models of the best America can produce, but space considerations prevent me from describing them all in detail. There are a few among them however, whose stories are a bit “more equal,” so I am going to pick out one or two for special focus in the next few columns. Here’s the first:

Nick Popaditch

“Gunny Pop” Nick Popaditch, enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps 1986, a year after graduating high school. He served as a tank commander during the first Gulf War and was honorably discharged in 1992. He re-enlisted in 1995, and from 1998 – 2002, served as a Drill Instructor at MCRD San Diego. In 2003, Nick shipped off to the Gulf to participate in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) again as tank commander. Upon entering Baghdad, his unit became famous the world over for helping to topple Saddam’s statue. The picture of him above, smoking a cigar with Saddam’s statue in the background, earned him the moniker “Cigar Marine.”

Gunnery Sergeant Popaditch returned to Iraq for a second tour in 2004, and participated in the first assault on Fallujah in April. During that battle, Nick was hit in the head by a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG). This was actually caught on camera by nearby news crews. Nick was blinded by the wound, but due to the tireless efforts of medical staff and his indomitable spirit, his left eye was saved. Nick wrote a book, with co-author Mike Steere, about his experiences, Once a Marine: An Iraq War Tank Commander’s Inspirational Memoir of Combat, Courage, and Recovery. The book made the Commandant of the Marine Corps recommended professional reading list for all ranks, won The Military-Writers Book of the Year for 2009, and was a national book club selection. Nick’s unique command tactics and leadership in Iraq earned him the Silver Star.

Nick is running for a seat in the 51^st Congressional District of California, a seat currently held by Bob Filner, one of the most liberal Democrats in the House and a founding member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (read socialist). The choice couldn’t be clearer: a patriotic American versus a radical leftist who has been wreaking havoc in Washington, DC since 1992.

Time for regime change once again! And Gunny Pop is the one to topple this slug. Future issues will examine the testimonials of Allen West, Dan Gilyeat, Katherine Jenerette and others. With folks like these on board there may yet be hope for our teetering Republic.

Here is a list of all IVC candidates. Check them out! U.S. House:  Justin Bernier (CT-5^th) USN, Will Breazeale (NC-7^th) USA, Diggs Brown (CO-4^th) USA, Kevin Calvey (OK-5^th) USA, Dan Gilyeat (KS-3^rd) USMC, Tim Griffin (AR-2^nd) USA, Wayne Harmon (IN-7^th) USMC, Dr. Joe Heck (NV-3^rd) USA,Jesse Kelly (AZ-8^th) USMC, Adam Kinzinger (IL-11^th) USAF, Todd Lally (KY-3^rd) USAF, Patrick Murray (VA-8^th) USA, Andrew “Rocky” Raczkowski (MI-9^th) USA, Brian Rooney (MI-7^th) USMC,William Russell (PA-12th) USA, Steve Stivers (OH-15^th) USA,Scott Taylor (VA-2^nd) USN, Vaughn Ward (ID-1^st) USMC, Allen West (FL-22^nd) USA, Michael Crimmins (CA-53^rd) USMC, Dave Evans(TN-6^th) USA, Mike Grimm (NY-13^th) USMC, Katherine Jenerette (SC-1^st) USA, Quang Pham (CA-47^th) USMC, Les Phillip (AL-5^th) USN, Lang Sias (CO-7^th) USN, Rick Barber (AL-2^nd) USMC, Rick Crawford (AR-1^st) USA, Steve Pearce (NM-2^nd) USAF, Mike Pompeo (KS-4^th) USA, John Loughlin(RI-1^st) USA, Willie Vaden (TX-27^th) USMC. U.S. Senate:  Conrad Reynolds (AR) USA. Candidates for governor/lt. governor:  Allen Weh (NM) USMC, Bill Connor (Lt Gov-SC) USA.

Businessman and Examiner.com columnist Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst. His writings have been published in American Thinker, Washington Times, WorldnetDaily, FrontPage Magazine, DefenseWatch, Soldier of Fortune and others.

JAMES SIMPSON:

We may have found out. It’s called universal voter registration. The Wall Street Journal’s John Fund described the Democrat plan recently at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum.

Read more…

Our models were showing their nomination in the lead until a White House staffer nominated President Obama and forwarded this video to us. So it is anyone’s guess at this time who will win in the end.

Let us know who you think should receive the prestigious 2009 Prevaricator of the Year™. We have developed a very advanced proprietary algorithm to make the final decision, but our readers’ nominations are assessed heavy weighting. Email, leave comments here, tweet us, contact us, call us, just get your nominations in before it is too late.

‘‘(B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE 6 BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLATION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report (other than pursuant to this section) that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the Board if that change would fail to satisfy the requirements of sub-paragraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2). ‘‘(C) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THIS SUBSECTION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.

Senator Jim DeMint explains it a whole lot better than we can. Here is a transcript of the video below:

This is not legislation. it’s not law. this is a rule change. It’s a pretty big deal. we will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law.

I’m not even sure that it’s constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don’t see why the majority party wouldn’t put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates.

I mean, we want to bind future congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future congresses.

What is going on here? This Senate is trying to make permanent their laws, to make it nearly impossible to ever have this radical agenda overturned. This is simply unprecedented in the history of Senate law-making.

asdf

asdf

The "Unsinkable" Titanic

Democrats and a few Republicans must harbor the same mistaken assumption concerning American fiscal policy as that of Philip A. S. Franklin, Vice President of White Star Line when he made a comment in response to the sinking of his company’s ship, the RMS Titanic. He said “I thought her unsinkable and I based [my] opinion on the best expert advice available.” America has hit a fiscal iceberg and the ship is rapidly flooding with debt that will soon drag it to the bottom of the sea floor, and instead of bailing water over the bow, Congress is widening the hole allowing more debt to flood in.

Over the weekend Congress gave final approval to a $1.1 trillion omnibus spending measure that increases budgets for federal government agencies an average of 12 percent and gives federal workers a 2 percent pay increase. The bill also includes 5,224 pet projects known as earmarks at a cost of $4 billion. But what’s a few billion when you’re spending over a trillion dollars; we can afford it, right? (To get an idea of what a trillion dollars looks like, check out this link.)

Here is a small sampling of the disclosed earmarks:

• $2.7 million to support surgical operations in space.
• $200,000 for the Washington National Opera.
• $30,000 for the Woodstock Film Festival Youth Initiative.

The organization Taxpayers for Common Sense is meticulously searching through the bill looking for additional, undisclosed, earmarks. Check them out over the next few weeks to find out what else is being funded.

Democrats are not the only ones to blame for the included earmarks. For example, Republican Sen. Thad Cochran is responsible for the $200,000 Washington National Opera earmark and Republican Sen. Judd Gregg pushed for a $1 million earmark for a renovation of the Portsmouth Music Hall. Lets give these “fiscal conservatives” the recognition they deserve.

America’s debt ceiling now stands at $12.1 trillion. This means America can borrow up to $12.1 trillion and put it on America’s credit card. With such a high credit limit, you would think it very unlikely that Congress would ever exceed this and need to increase its own debt ceiling. Doesn’t Congress’s budget work the same as yours and mine? When you and I reach our credit limit, we have to pay it down before we have credit available to use again. You see, there is an expectation that you and I are responsible with our debt, but these rules do not apply to Congress. With this latest spending bill, Congress will have to increase the debt ceiling to around $14 trillion in order to have enough credit to pay for the increased spending.

If all this spending concerns you, then know this, there are a few fiscally conservative Democrats and Republicans who have your back. This group is claiming that they favor a deficit task force and they want any increase in the debt ceiling to be tied to a creation of this task force. So if I understand this correctly, the debt ceiling will have to be raised in order to create this deficit task force? I don’t know about you, but this concept does little to bolster my confidence in Congress’s ability to control spending.

Perhaps this statement by Majority Whip Richard Durbin will massage your fears of excessive spending; “Yes, we are spending more money to keep cops on the street, to keep neighborhoods safe so that families feel secure. I think it is money well spent.” Well, I feel safer already knowing that my security merely depends upon Congress spending money that it does not have.

America is a large ship equipped with the greatest financial engine that the world has ever known. But any ship, no matter how large will eventually succumb to an uncontrolled flow of water rushing in through a breach in the ships hull. Congress must stop the spending, it must cut up its credit cards and exercise fiscal discipline, else we as a country will find ourselves in a deep, crushing financial abyss.

This interpretation may go a long way toward effectively neutralizing ACORN’s funding prohibition, and it is a questionable interpretation at best. The actual ban reads as follows:

None of the funds made available from this joint resolution or any other prior Act may be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations. H.R. 2918

The Justice Department has decided that the phrase “provided to” is unclear and “has no established meaning in appropriations law.” They cite terms more frequently used, such as “obligate” and “expend,” that have widely accepted meaning in spending legislation. They go on to arduously defend their point by exhaustively listing the many definitions of “provide” given in Websters, Oxford and American Heritage dictionaries and even Roget’s Thesaurus. Like Bill Clinton, they probably could have found as many definitions for the word “is…”

Read more…

Me? Well perhaps it was the catchy tune and the vocally gifted piece of parchment paper begging for my sympathy (after all the bill just wanted to be signed), I felt at ease that those writing the bills were honorable citizens and disinterested legislators.

Now, a few years later amidst the cloudy and uncertain debate of health care, my mind is catapulted back to the elementary depiction of our government at work, and one question stands forefront in my mind. Who are the people that are writing the health care bill? Ordinary citizens? Unbiased legislators? As it turns out, the beloved cartoon of American educators everywhere failed to depict the true scribes of many of our laws.

According to a U.S. House of Representatives publication entitled “How Our Laws Are Made”, the source of legislation originates from diverse quarters. The source may come from constituents, representatives, the Presidents administration, and citizen groups, among others. But one source that is not mentioned are special interest groups.

Many special interest groups are composed of unions, political think tanks and conglomerates of like-minded corporations. Where as others, like the National Rifle Association (NRA) or Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) represent grass root citizens who seek protection of certain rights or promotion of single issues. These groups write legislation that is then presented to congressmen and senators, who then introduce it in their respective chamber. Note, I have no real objection to proposals these groups may write, and, in turn serve as a basis or a starting point for legislation. The reason being that these organizations are acutely aware of the issues, and regardless of your political leanings, it is likely that at some point, legislation that you yourself supported originated or was supported by a special interest group.

What I do object to is the commandeering of the legislative process by these groups. Take for instance the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. As part of the $787 billion stimulus package, the act doles out billions to clean energy and green-collar job programs. Who wrote this piece of legislation? You guessed it, a special interest group, in particular the Apollo Alliance.

What exactly is the Apollo Alliance? Well, according to it’s website, the Apollo Alliance is a coalition of labor, business, environmental, and community leaders who seek to revolutionize America’s energy sector. Apollo’s goals are clean energy, green-collar jobs, and the reduction of carbon emissions. And did I mention that the Apollo Alliance is funded by the progressive George Soros?

So what’s the big deal you might say? Even if a special interest group writes a bill, it still has to go through a committee, a floor vote by both houses, and be signed by the President. This provides ample opportunity for senators and congressmen to read and debate the bill before it is sent to the President, and the President can always veto the bill. Right?

Well… the problem is this. While in committee, the bill is shaped with the help of special interest groups, like the Apollo Alliance, Acorn and SEIU, rather than by those most affected by the proposed bill. Next, when the bill comes to the house floor, Congress is voting on the bill without ever having read it. Don’t believe me? Ask Rep. John Conyers who recently said “What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”. And as for the President, he has stated that when considering subjects like the environment and health care, he seeks the help of special interest groups like Acorn, SEIU, and the Apollo Alliance.

So again I pose the question, exactly who is writing the health care legislation? The answer is, outside of a tight circle of legislators and the Obama administration, no one is really sure. Thus we are left to rely upon the Presidents promise that it is the Apollo Alliance, SEIU and the like who are directing the work, and this should cause you and me concern.

The legislative process as we understood it has been usurped by narrow minded organizations whose political objective is to consolidate power. Perhaps it is time that the School House Rock Classic is updated. Except in this version, the vocal little bill will be led hand-in-hand by baseball bat wielding union thugs who shepherd the defenseless little bill from house to house until it reaches the Presidents desk. What do you think?