|
 Last August, the EPA’s hazmat team breached a retaining wall at an abandoned Gold Rush-era mine near Durango, Colorado. With that breach, three million gallons of toxic
sludge flowed into a creek that is a tributary of the Animas River. “New evidence suggests the government isn’t coming clean about what happened,” writes the WSJ.
The House Natural Resources Committee last week released a report detailing EPA’s cascade of failures at the Gold King Mine, and new evidence suggests the EPA is not being candid about the chain of events that led to this environmental nightmare. As the WSJ notes, “The crew made more bad decisions than characters in a horror movie.”
Bill Wehrum, a former administrator at the Environmental Protection Agency, writes in the WSJ, “The agency (EPA) often criminalizes actions that are nothing more than accidents, many far less damaging to the environment than the Animas River disaster.” There is a serious problem within the EPA in how it conducts business.
“EPA wouldn’t tolerate ducking and deliberate obfuscation from the private businesses the government so routinely punishes, and the House should continue to hold the agency to the same standards.” Read more from the WSJ here.
FLASHBACK VIDEO: Animas River State of Emergency
|
| >> read more |
|
 Pat
Buchanan makes it clear that Barack Obama must not get to replace Antonin Scalia.
But no one can replace Justice Scalia.
He was a giant among jurists. For a third of a century, he led the conservative wing of the high court, creating a new school of judicial thought called “originalism.”
…
Scalia believed in going back to the founding documents of the republic and discerning from them the original meaning and intent of the framers.
He would look at the purpose of the authors of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and post-Civil War amendments, and conclude that it was an absurdity to discover there, or read into them, a constitutional right to have an abortion or to marry someone of the same sex.
…
What kind of Supreme Court do the American people wish to have? That is a question to be decided in 2016 — not by a lame-duck president, but by the American electorate in November.
|
| >> read more |
|
 Here, the very excellent Liberty Classroom undresses the revisionist history books that promote the folly that Teddy, FDR, and Truman are individuals whom our kids should admire.
LC tells readers that Teddy Roosevelt issued 1,006 executive orders. When Teddy couldn’t get a treaty through the Senate, he dubbed it an executive agreement and enacted it himself.
On FDR, Liberty Classroom writes, “Franklin Roosevelt blamed the Depression on greedy rich people (now there’s a sophisticated business cycle theory for you). “
On Truman, LC tells readers, “He seized the steel mills from their owners—because, hey, he’s the president! He took the country to war on his own say-so, ignoring the Constitution. He was awesome, kids.”
|
| >> read more |
|
 If you look at the back of your iPhone it
reads: “Designed by Apple in California. Assembled in China.” And there in a nutshell you have a fortune cookie sized explanation of our service/design vs. China’s manufacturing/assembly economy. Which one is more perishable? How long will it take for a call center in India to turn another U.S. service into a commodity? For the U.S. to compete on a global scale she needs to be able to compete in a way that protects her self-interests. Donald Trump gets this as
does Pat Buchanan where he explains:
Yet, with the exception of Trump, none of the GOP candidates seems willing to debate, defend or denounce the policies that eviscerated America — and empowered the People’s Republic.
Workers, however, know what our politicians refuse to discuss.
They are being sold out for the benefit of corporate elites who pay off those politicians with the big cash contributions that keep the parties flush.
Politicians who play ball with Wall Street and K Street know they will be taken care of, if they are defeated or when they retire from public office, so long as they have performed.
Free trade is not a zero-sum game. The losers are the workers whose jobs, factories and futures are shipped abroad, and the dead and dying towns left behind when the manufacturing plants shut down.
America is on a path of national decline because, while we have been looking out for what is best for the “global economy,” our rivals have been looking out for what is best for their own nations.
|
| >> read more |
|
 Pat Buchanan outlines this startling “free trade” fact about China: “Last year,
China ran up the largest trade surplus in history, at our expense, $365 billion. We exported $116 billion in goods to China. China exported $482 billion worth of goods to us.”
With the exception of Trump, none of the GOP candidates seems willing to debate, defend or denounce the policies that eviscerated America—and empowered the People’s Republic. … America is on a path of national decline because, while we have been looking out for what is best for the “global economy” our rivals have been looking out for what is best for their own nations.
This is pure price fixing, but we all understand self-interest. Controlling the largest market on earth, we might impose on foreign producers a cover charge, an admissions fee, a tariff to get into our market.
Pat concludes with a comment from a united Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck: “I see that those countries which possess protection are prospering, and that those countries which possess free trade are decaying.”
|
| >> read more |
|
 Michael Scheuer, former CIA bin Laden unit chief, offers an interesting
perspective on presidential candidate Hillary Clinton:
A likely felon/traitor who is utterly dependent on her sexual-predator husband, has accomplished nothing in her life except a superb talent for deceit, and the gains made by her family’s graft, influence peddling, and corruption. This is a person so devoid of integrity, honesty, and character that her two major concerns seem to be to pocket more lucre for herself, and to ensure that human babies
always can be profitably murdered, dismembered, and sold for parts right up to their due date.
|
| >> read more |
|
Donald Trump scored another win this weekend, this time in South Carolina. One of the key drivers of the win was his repudiation of globalism and interventionism. Americans are tired of losing their jobs, of wondering if their kids will get jobs, and of seeing their kids fighting futile wars for the elites in Washington. As Pat Buchanan correctly points out:
In the GOP nomination race, the chickens of a quarter century of Bush Republicanism have come home to roost. Trump’s triumphs to date are due to his recognition of, and identification with, the Middle American revolt against Bush family ideology and policy, and what it has produced.”
And he continues
Buchanan continues: “Trump’s success also represents a repudiation of a reflexively interventionist foreign policy that produced the longest wars in our history, cost us 6,000 dead, 40,000 wounded, and trillions of dollars. And the price tag rises monthly. We are now mired down in five wars — Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen — for what?”
“Contrast where we were when Ronald Reagan went home, with where we are, and it is easy to understand the revolutions raging in both parties, Buchanan concludes. “America’s establishment has failed America. The single clearest message in the presidential campaign of 2015-2016 is that the American people would like to cleanse our capital city of its ruling class.”
|
| >> read more |
|
 Bernie Sanders, despite losing in Nevada to Hillary Clinton, is crushing Hillary among young voters. Bernie won voters
aged 17 to 29 by 68 points and those aged 30 to 44 by 27 points, reports Jim Geraghty in NRO.
Democratic voters consistently say Mr. Sanders is more honest and cares more about people like them.
These are not the usual weaknesses for a Democratic nominee, and we haven’t even gotten to the FBI investigation yet. Sure, most of those 7 million Sanders voters will fall in line by November, but the more it looks like the Democratic National Committee stacked the deck in her favor, the angrier they will be at the “Washington establishment.” And as Jeb Bush learned in the Republican
primary, this is the wrong cycle to be seen as the “establishment.”
Yes, there are huge differences between Bernie Sanders, an aging white socialist from Burlington, Vermont, and Donald Trump, an ostentatious trust-fund baby.
But quite a few independent voters look at the two men and just see two outsiders willing to tear up the existing system, expressing their frustration with the state of the country in the same mad-as-hell-and-not-taking-it-anymore tone. There are some key differences between Trump and Sanders, but these differences don’t necessarily work in Clinton’s favor. For starters, Trump is a lot meaner
than Sanders. Sanders initially gave Hillary a pass on her private e-mail server, declaring that, “the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails!”
Clinton has proven herself slow-footed, clumsy on the attack, unfocused, laughably dishonest, and as quick to blame her staff as ever. Just imagine how she’d fare against the media-fueled Godzilla that is the Trump campaign.
Hillary Clinton’s weaknesses as a presidential candidate are not going to disappear if she wins the nomination. As Mr. Geraghty notes, Hillary is about the worst standard bearer Democrats could ask for.
|
| >> read more |
|
 The
American Conservative’s Daniel Larison explains to readers:
Trump can and does run very strongly in blue state primaries. (A new poll out today shows Trump with a large lead in Michigan. That makes sense since the profile of blue state Republican voters matches up fairly well with many Trump supporters in that they tend to be more moderate ideologically and less religious. It also suggests that Trump’s ceiling is not necessarily as low or as hard as
anti-Trump Republicans have hoped for. Finally, it tells us that blue-state primaries won’t be where Trump can most easily be stopped, and they are unlikely to save the day for Rubio.
Trump is already occupying most of the political space that the relative moderate front-runner normally fills. He receives support from all ideological groups in the GOP, but tends to do best with moderate and “somewhat” conservative voters.
In conclusion, Larison tells readers, “By the time most of the blue state primaries come around in April and May, he may have fewer opponents but can expect much broader support than he did in earlier races.”
VIDEO: Donald Trump talks New York Values
|
| >> read more |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
