Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) disagrees with Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) assessment of the tense situation in southern Nevada between the Bundy family and the federal Bureau of Land Management.
Reid told reporters this week that the situation isn’t over, despite the federal agency’s decision to stand down over the weekend. “We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it,” he said. “So it’s not over.”
Paul, however, says that Reid has it wrong. In an interview with a Kentucky-based radio station, the potential 2016 presidential candidate questioned the need for armed federal agents threatening the Bundy family and explained some of the history of the situation.
“I think there’s an opposite thing to what Harry Reid said, and that’s that the federal government shouldn’t violate the law,” Paul told WHAS, “nor should we have 48 federal agencies carrying weapons and having SWAT teams.”
A Fox News poll released this week found that 61 percent of Americans believe President Barack Obama lies to the country about important matters, while just 15 percent believe that he always tells the truth.
As one might imagine, Republicans and Democrats have differing views on the question. For example, 85 percent of Republicans believe President Obama lies most or some of the time on important matters, while 59 percent of Democrats believe he lies only now and then or never. Independents, however, are more likely to side with Republicans.
The more interesting figure is the percentage of Millennials who believe President Obama has a lying problem. The poll found that 63 percent of registered voters under the age of 35 believe he lies to them most or some of the time.
The Republican Senate primary in Mississippi has become ground zero for the battle between the GOP establishment and the grassroots.
In one corner there is Sen. Thad Cochran, who first went to Washington in 1973 and has fallen in love with the smell of the marble on Capitol Hill. In the other is state Sen. Chris McDaniel, a conservative seeking to shake up the status quo.
McDaniel, 41, is the one conservative primary challenger who has a legitimate shot of taking down an incumbent Republican. He’s saying the right things on the campaign trail, pushing fiscal conservative ideas and constitutional principles that appeal to base voters in Mississippi.
What helps McDaniel’s case is that Cochran has become one of the most squishy Republican in the Senate. The long-time Senate Republican recently earned a dismal 63% rating from the American Conservative Union, far worse than GOP colleagues facing primary challengers.
It would seem that McDaniel’s message is making headway, though polling out of the state has been scant. The most recent poll, conducted by Harper Polling, found Cochran’s lead in the race has fallen to 17 points from 23 points in December. Other polls, however, have found that the race is within single digits.
The man who oversaw an energy crisis has come out strongly against the Keystone XL pipeline. In a letter with other Nobel laureates, former President Jimmy Carter urged President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to reject the pipeline, claiming that allowing the project to move forward would worsen climate change:
“You stand on the brink of making a choice that will define your legacy on one of the greatest challenges humanity has ever faced – climate change,” Carter and the others wrote in an open letter to President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry.
Carter and the other Nobel Prize winners suggest to Obama that rejecting the $5.4 billion project would help the environment.
“You know as well as us the power of precedence that this would set,” states the letter, published in Politico. “This leadership by example would usher in a new era where climate change and pollution is given the urgent attention and focus it deserves in a world where the climate crisis is already a daily struggle for so many.”
Rejecting Keystone XL “would signal a new course for the world’s largest economy,” added the group of Nobel laureates, which includes South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu and landmine activist Jody Williams.
Once upon a time, there was an idealistic notion in this nation that the people should speak up when they recognized that government was not serving the people. Politicians theoretically had to answer to constituents, and the press. The press honestly did act as a watchdog, making sure that the government and politicians didn’t overstep boundaries or engage in unlawful practices.
And then the people elected Barack Obama.
Instead of the people speaking freely about the ills of government, it has become “racist” to suggest that the president could possibly make a mistake. Tolerance is acceptable, as long as one agrees with the president’s supporters. Government agencies may be used to harass, monitor, or otherwise bully detractors into silence.
And when someone has the audacity to speak against the president’s agenda in his presence, apparently that person can expect to be asked to apologize for it.
Ben Carson delivered a speech last year that was hailed by conservatives because it shredded quite a few of Obama’s policies, and the hated ObamaCare. The bonus was to watch the president squirm while those words were spoken, and then paint a smile on his face at the end while shaking Carson’s hand. But someone obviously wasn’t amused.
It’s come to light that Carson received a phone call from the White House stating that he should apologize to the president for his remarks. The poor president was offended.
Campaign for Liberty is doing everything it can to fight back against harassment from the Internal Revenue Service over access its donor list, but former Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) warns that fines the organization faces could be “devastating.”
“Well, they’re after us,” Paul, a three-time presidential candidate, told Neil Cavuto on Wednesday. “They want money from us. They fined us almost $13,000 with daily penalties if we don’t cough it up.”
In an email to supporters on Thursday, Paul, who founded Campaign for Liberty in 2008, explained that the IRS had handed liberty-minded nonprofit with “a hefty fine” and “demanded” that it “turn over sensitive contributor information.”
Paul told Cavuto that the IRS asked for Campaign for Liberty’s donor list two years ago, but that the organization managed to get the tax agency to back off, citing a civil rights-era Supreme Court decision.
“[T]he NAACP fought this way back in 1958 and it was ruled by the Supreme Court [that] you don’t have to turnover names for privacy reasons,” he said. “And they asked us to do that two years ago. We didn’t do it. They accepted our letter, but they’re back at it again.”
“If the grassroots, conservative activists, and tea parties are going to change Washington, they must change the GOP. To change the GOP, its incumbent faces must be changed. These are the three incumbent races that matter most. Right now, the grassroots are behind. They have to make up ground.” — Erick Erickson
— Democrats apparently serious about Sebelius: It’s not a joke, folks. Democrats are serious about their efforts to draft former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to run for the U.S. Senate seat in Kansas. “I can’t think of a person who’s in a better position to defend Obamacare than Sebelius,” a Democratic strategist told The Hill. “If she runs and she becomes a viable and serious candidate for Senate, that really throws a wrench into the Republicans’ playbook and certainly their narrative that there’s this kryptonite out there called Obamacare.” People closest to Sebelius doubt she’ll run, largely because it’s just too soon after her tumultuous tenure in the Obama administration. Also, President Obama and Obamacare just aren’t that popular in Kansas.
Not even a week after she resigned her post in President Barack Obama’s cabinet, The New York Times reports that former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is considering a bid for U.S. Senate in Kansas:
Several Democrats said this week that Ms. Sebelius had been mentioned with growing frequency as someone who could wage a serious challenge to Mr. Roberts, 77, who is running for a fourth term and is considered vulnerable. One person who spoke directly to Ms. Sebelius said that she was thinking about it, but added that it was too soon to say how seriously she was taking the idea.
Democrats say that Ms. Sebelius would be their best hope at winning in a tough state, especially if Mr. Roberts loses his primary to Milton Wolf, a Tea Party-backed radiologist who has alarmed mainstream Republicans with some of his actions, such as when he posted gruesome pictures of gunshot victims on Facebook.
Perhaps more significant, Ms. Sebelius would force Republicans to spend money in Kansas as they tried to fight off her challenge. Her family has a long history in the state, and she was a popular, twice-elected governor. In 2006, she was re-elected with 58 percent of the vote.
The dispute between the heavily-armed Bureau of Land Management agents and the Bundy family may have deescalated over the weekend, but it’s not over, according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). He says Americans can’t ignore the law and get away with it:
“Well, it’s not over,” Reid told NBC’s Nevada affiliate KRNV on Monday. “We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over.”
Bundy gained headlines over the weekend after the BLM rounded up his cattle on federal land, citing unpaid grazing fees. The situation intensified after protesters supporting Bundy — some of whom were reportedly armed — faced off against the BLM. However, on Saturday, the BLM returned Bundy’s cattle “due to escalating tension,” according to The Associated Press.
Here’s the video via the Free Beacon:
When the people get annoyed with a milquetoast incumbent, invariably there are at least a few calls to primary the person, to get them out. Most times it’s all bluster, out of pure frustration, that won’t lead to anything. That’s typically the case because of the one thing that keeps incumbents in office - name recognition. People get used to seeing that name, and out of a sense of not wanting to step into the unknown by trusting a new one.
That’s the case when the first calls to primary an incumbent happen, because people that haven’t been deeply involved in running for public office anywhere tend to throw their hats in the proverbial ring. As time goes by, and disillusionment grows, candidates that the people recognize start being considered as viable options.
John McCain will likely be facing a primary challenge, if any of the people mentioned in a recent Citizens United Victory Fund poll decide to run. Arizonians are most likely to end up with a new Senator if Gov. Jan Brewer or Rep. Matt Salmon decide to run. Based on the current numbers from that poll, either one would easily win against McCain in a primary today.
If both Brewer and Salmon would choose to run against McCain in a primary, it would be an historic race. It’s not very common to see a three-way race involving two challengers and an incumbent, with the challengers being in the fight to win, while the incumbent is the irrelevant candidate.