Merry Christmas from Cleveland Tea Party Patriots

Wishing everyone a very Merry Christmas!

President Obama's "Christmas" card

The BookwormRoom has a perceptive take on President Obama's family Christmas card:

There’s been a fair amount written about the Obama Christmas card. It’s a pop-up card, which has an expensive look that’s unseemly as millions lose their insurance and millions more have joined the ranks of the perpetually unemployed.  It’s colors are cool, not warm, which seems to refute the warmth that Christmas brings to people in the dark of winter.  It shows a vacant building, which seems symbolic when one considers that Obama invariable answer to all the scandalsrevealed in the past year is to disclaim knowledge or responsibility.  And lastly, despite going out at Christmas time and despite Obama’s claims to be a Christian, the card makes no mention of Christmas.  Keep in mind with this last point that the card ostensibly comes not from “the government” but from a man and his family.  George and Laura Bush were not ashamed that they celebrated Christmas and always sent out cards that included Biblical verses.

Amidst all the buzz about the Obama Christmas card, there’s one thing I haven’t seen.  No one is talking about the card’s peculiar message:  “As we gather around this season, may the warmth and joy of the holidays fill your home.”

Am I being a pedant, or is it bizarre to “gather around” a “season”? People gather around hearth fires and Christmas trees, and infant cradles and birthday cakes, and classic paintings in museums and street buskers making beautiful music.  That is, people gather around tangible objects.  People do not gather around something as abstract as a season.  It’s the same as saying “As we gather around this air” or “As we gather around this ambiance.”  Yes, those are nouns, but they’re not the type of nouns one “gathers around.”  In trying to create a card that is all things to all people (never mind that it coincidentally goes out at Christmas), the White House has managed to create nothingness. 

(To be charitable, it is possible to read the opening phrase as a muddy version of "As we gather around [tangible objects during] this season." Whatever.) Read the rest here. 

# # #

John Boehner's Betrayal

Below is an Op-Ed by Jenny Beth Martin, Co-Founder of Tea Party Patriots, addressing Speaker Boehner's latest attacks on the groups that allowed him to become Speaker by default. 

It should also be noted -- these are the same groups that will take Boehner's gavel!

From The New York Times --

WOODSTOCK, Ga. — THERE’S a political axiom that says if nobody is upset with what you’re doing, you’re not doing your job. We’ve seen this proved time and again in the liberal attacks on conservatives like Sarah Palin and Dr. Benjamin Carson, who provide principled examples to women and minorities and are savaged by the left for doing that job so well.

But cheap-shot politics isn’t relegated to Democrats. Last week the House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, attacked conservative groups who criticized the budget deal, hashed out by Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, and Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, for failing to reduce spending and for raising taxes.

“They’re using our members and they’re using the American people for their own goals,” he said, calling the opposition “ridiculous.”

In one way, Mr. Boehner is correct. The goals of groups like ours are those that congressional Republicans once espoused: smaller government, less spending and lower taxes. Alas, those who demand such things today from their elected officials face unfounded attacks.

Make no mistake: The deal is a betrayal of the conservatives who fueled the Republicans’ 2010 midterm shellacking of Democrats.

It raises discretionary spending above $1 trillion for 2014 and 2015. It reneges on $63 billion of sequester cuts. Its $28 billion in deficit reduction over the next decade is a pittance compared with the $680 billion deficit piled up in 2013 alone. And it raises taxes, particularly on airplane passengers through new travel fees.

Perhaps most troubling is that the deal locks in spending for President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, ensuring that the worst parts of Obamacare will continue unfolding to the shock of increasing numbers of Americans.

But the budget plan is about more than taxes and spending. It was a slick means by which Senate Republicans could appear to oppose the deal while in fact allowing it to sail through the chamber.

Take Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, the minority leader, who opposed efforts to defund Obamacare earlier this year while claiming to do everything possible to stop it.

After attacking conservative groups for their efforts to prevent the funding of Obamacare, Mr. McConnell, who is facing a primary challenge in his 2014 re-election race, is now seeking to portray himself as a conservative darling, championing fiscal austerity by voicing opposition to the budget proposal. (My organization has not endorsed a candidate in that race.) Doing so gives him some nifty talking points that align with most conservative groups, but it is little more than parliamentary sleight of hand.

Consider how he handled the vote on the bill. To defeat a filibuster, its supporters needed 60 senators to win cloture and move to a final vote. Instead of rallying his troops against the vote, Mr. McConnell allowed a handful of Republicans in battleground states — who needed to be seen as supporting the bill — to vote for cloture, while he and the rest railed against it, casting themselves in the role of budget hawks.

With cloture accomplished, a dozen Republicans were then free to vote against final passage if they need wiggle room when they’re confronted on the campaign trail next fall by voters demanding action on government spending. Mr. McConnell and many Senate Republicans used the vote to manipulate the system, allowing them to cast themselves as deal makers or principled conservatives, depending on their audience.

This is not principled policy making; what we’re seeing is simple gamesmanship that raises legitimate questions about which values Republicans truly hold and which are merely interchangeable with those of Democrats.

The job of Tea Party groups and other conservatives is pretty simple: to inform Americans about the need for restraint in spending, tax relief, pro-growth economic policies and individual liberty — and to support the men and women who pledge to promote these positions. To the extent that the speaker of the House and Senate Republicans are attacking such groups, it looks as if we’re doing our job.

But after this budget vote, our job expands to include informing Americans about who keeps their word in Congress and who does not.

When establishment Republicans call spending increases spending cuts, deny that raising taxes is a hike, and champion deficit reduction that doesn’t scratch the surface of our nation’s debt, it suggests a detachment from the facts. But when those who voted for them criticize their elected officials for not keeping their promises, and are then attacked for doing so, it suggests that Kurt Vonnegut was right in observing, “A sane person to an insane society must appear insane.”

Jenny Beth Martin is a co-founder of Tea Party Patriots.

Protect 501(c)(4) organizations’ freedom of speech

Photo credit: planet.infowars.com

Protect 501(c)(4) organizations’ freedom of speech

Tea Party Patriots and most liberty groups are classified as 501(c)(4) by the IRS. The NumbersUSA outfit (whose sole mission is to educate voters on any legislative action that impacts immigration) sent out an alert concerning a new IRS regulation that will muzzle all 501(c)(4)’s — in the days leading up to an election. There’s a new website called Protect C4 Free Speech http://www.protectc4freespeech.com/ and here is the home page information:

Tell the IRS to Protect Free Speech!

The Internal Revenue Service has quietly announced a new rule that strictly limits the ability of 501(c)(4), tax-exempt organizations from working on their core missions in the months leading up to federal, state, and local elections. The proposed regulations would prohibit these organizations from engaging in candidate-related political activity, which, by the proposed rule's definition, includes any mention of a candidate's name or political party even if presented in a non-political context. Further, organizations would have to ensure that any references to candidates in past communications are not publicly available, including online, during the pre-election window. These regulations would, in effect, prohibit organizations from providing the public with candidate comparisons and voting records, engaging in get-out-the-vote activities, or encouraging informed civic participation, among other activities. They would severely limit both the organizations' First Amendment free speech and the public's ability to hold elected officials accountable for their actions.

“Under the proposed definition, any public communication that is made within 60 days before a general election or 30 days before a primary election and that clearly identifies a candidate for public office (or, in the case of a general election, refers to a political party represented in that election) would be considered candidate-related political activity.”

Without your input, these proposed regulations will take effect and the rights of all Americans will be curtailed. It is our duty as Americans to make our voices heard and insist that our rights are protected. Please take a look at the sample comments and then submit yours directly to the federal government. The deadline for all comments is February 27, 2014, so act now!

Among the organizations participating with NumbersUSA are The Sierra Club, the pro-Amnesty National Council of La Raza (strange bedfellows!), and The National Rifle Assoc. If you go to C4 the website, you will find sample letters to the IRS (or members of Congress) to raise your objections to this latest regulation to chill free speech. 

# # #

Sen. Portman votes YES on Ryan-Murray budget

Photo credit: Business Insider

Sen. Rob Portman voted YES on the budget bill. The Hill reports: 

The Senate on Wednesday gave final passage to a two-year budget plan in a 64-36 vote.

Nine Republican senators voted with 55 Democrats and Independents to pass the budget deal, which sets top-line spending levels for 2014 and 2015, allowing appropriators to get to work on an omnibus spending bill for the current fiscal year.

. . .

The vote in the Senate was closer than in the House, where majorities in each party backed the compromise negotiated by Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and her House counterpart, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).

GOP Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas), Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Rand Paul (Ky.), seen as possible 2016 presidential candidates, all voted against the deal, as did GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ken.), who faces a tough primary challenge. That contrasted with the House, where GOP leaders and Ryan, another possible White House hopeful, backed the deal.

And from the Senate website, here are the Senators who voted NO on this bad budget "deal":

Alexander (R-TN)

Ayotte (R-NH)

Barrasso (R-WY)

Blunt (R-MO)

Boozman (R-AR)

Burr (R-NC)

Coats (R-IN)

Coburn (R-OK)

Cochran (R-MS)

Corker (R-TN)

Cornyn (R-TX)

Crapo (R-ID)

Cruz (R-TX)

Enzi (R-WY)

Fischer (R-NE)

Flake (R-AZ)

Graham (R-SC)

Grassley (R-IA)

Heller (R-NV)

Inhofe (R-OK)

Johanns (R-NE)

Kirk (R-IL)

Lee (R-UT)

McConnell (R-KY)

Moran (R-KS)

Paul (R-KY)

Risch (R-ID)

Roberts (R-KS)

Rubio (R-FL)

Scott (R-SC)

Sessions (R-AL)

Shelby (R-AL)

Thune (R-SD)

Toomey (R-PA)

Vitter (R-LA)

Wicker (R-MS)

In voting YES, Sen. Portman was keeping company with, among others, Orrin Hatch (UT), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Susan Collins (ME), and John McCain (AZ). Ugh.

12 Republicans Vote to Advance Budget Deal

12 Republicans Vote to Advance Budget Deal That Boosts Spending 

And of course Sen. Rob Portman was one of them. Make sure he does not vote YES again. CNS News.com reports:

(Susan Jones at CNSNews.com) - The Senate voted 67-33 Tuesday to advance the Ryan-Murray budget compromise that conservatives oppose as fiscally irresponsible.

Helping Democrats get the votes they needed, 12 Republicans voted with all 55 Democrats to begin debate on the measure.

Republicans joining Democrats to invoke cloture include Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Roy Blunt (Mo.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Susan Collins (Maine), Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), John Hoeven (N.D.), Johnny Isakson (Ga.), Ron Johnson (Wis.), John McCain (Ariz.),  Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), and Rob Portman (Ohio). [emphasis added]

The two-year deal will ease the mandatory spending caps (sequester) imposed by Congress in 2011. This will allow a $63 billion increase in the discretionary budget, but it does nothing to reform entitlement programs, which are the main drivers of growing deficits and debt, The Heritage Foundation reported.

The deal also raises certain "fees," or taxes.

A simple majority is needed for passage, which is expected to happen later this week.

Tea Party Patriots: Call / email / tweet Sen. Rob Portman’s office

Senator Portman

DC Office: (202)224-3353

Contact: Click Here

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/senrobportman

Twitter: https://twitter.com/portmanpress

Portman's Chief of Staff

Rob Lehman 

Email: Rob_Lehman@Portman.senate.gov

Portman's N/E Ohio District Representative

George Brown

PH: (216)522-1095

Email: George_Brown@portman.senate.gov

There's hope yet

Alec Torres at National Review Online reports :

Senator Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) told CBS’s Bob Schieffer this morning that the Ryan-Murray Budget deal that passed the House earlier this week still doesn’t have enough votes to pass the Senate.

“The struggle is still on in the United States Senate,” Durbin said. “We need bipartisan support to pass it.”

He said the Senate needs only a “handful” of Republicans to pass the bill, but that Republicans are wary of signing the deal because they are either planning to run for president and don’t want such a “yes” vote on their record, or they are being threatened by the Tea Party and the Heritage Foundations to vote against it.

Cleveland Tea Party Patriots: Call / email / tweet Sen. Rob Portman’s offices. Vote NO.

Senator Portman

DC Office: (202)224-3353

Contact: Click Here

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/senrobportman

Twitter: https://twitter.com/portmanpress

Portman's Chief of Staff

Rob Lehman 

Email: Rob_Lehman@Portman.senate.gov

Portman's N/E Ohio District Representative

George Brown

PH: (216)522-1095

Email: George_Brown@portman.senate.gov