Gov. Brewer Endorsing RINOs

With the Arizona primary election only a few weeks away, lame duck Gov. Jan Brewer is endorsing every liberal Republican she can find.

Brewer endorsed RINO State Senator Michele Reagan for secretary of state: “I’ve had the pleasure of working with Senator Reagan for years crafting sound public policy for Arizona.”

Crafting sound policy? Not for the unborn children the abortion-supporting Reagan would condemn to death with her unyielding support of abortion.

It is crucial that Reagan not be elected secretary of state. If a governor does not complete his/her term, the secretary of state becomes governor. This is how Brewer gained the governor’s office.

Brewer endorsed Sen. Bob Worsley, the RINO who called Arizona “a police state.” Worsley also voted for HB 1062, then cowardly switched sides when the radical homofascists started screaming. They also stampeded Gov. Brewer into fearfully vetoing the religious freedom bill.

The governor endorsed RINO Rep. Heather Carter: “I am honored to endorse Representative Heather Carter in her re-election campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives. In the face of the worst economic downturn in our state’s history, Heather Carter has continuously proven to be a conservative leader, fighting for commonsense economic policies and smaller, responsible government.”

However, in Rep. Carter’s House tenure, she has earned a dubious failing grade from Americans from Prosperity: “friend of big government.”

Incidentally, this is the same failing grade Gov. Brewer earned from Americans for Prosperity, a watchdog group for taxpayers.

I had Masha Gessen’s dream of five parents… and it sucked

By Jennifer Johnson, Director of Outreach for the Ruth Institute
Around March of 2013 I came across the words of a prominent LGBT activist named Masha Gessen:
I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.

 

Imagine having five parents! Here’s what it means: it means going back and forth between all those households on a regular basis, never having a single place to call home during your most tender and vulnerable years. It means having divided Christmases, other holidays, and birthdays–you spend one with one parent, and another with the other parent, never spending a single holiday or birthday with both parents. Imagine having each of your parents completely ignore the other half of you, the other half of your family, as if it did not even exist. Meanwhile, imagine each parent pouring their energy into their new families and creating a unified home for their new children. These experiences give you the definite impression of being something leftover, something not quite part of them. You live like that on a daily basis for 18+ years.

Does this look like a fun way to spend your childhood?

 

I don’t have to imagine, because I had five parents. I had five parents because my mom and dad divorced when I was about three; my mom remarried once and my dad remarried twice. So I had a mom and two step-moms, and a dad and one step-dad. In this day and age children can already have five parents. That’s how badly marriage has deteriorated already. The main difference between what Gessen advocates and my experience is that my step parents were not legal parents; she advocates for all of the adults in her situation to be legal parents.

 

Having more than two legal parents will be a nightmare for a child. Of course, I am making the reasonable assumption that the legal parents will not be living under the same roof, because there is no longer any societal accountability for adults to create a unified home for children. Thus, adding additional legal parents will create more disruption for children’s daily lives, more chaos, more confusion, less unity. And why are we doing this? So that adults can have the sexual partners they want.

Masha Gessen had a mom and a dad, so it appears that she benefitted from the socially conservative family structure--it appears she was not raised under the family structure she advocates. That sounds about right. I’ve talked to many people who think deconstructing the family in favor of adult sexual choice is a good thing… and these very same people lived under the socially conservative family structure with their one mom who spent her life with their one dad, and they all lived together in their unified home. Since I lived under the family structure they advocate, I will sometimes ask them: would you trade childhoods with me? They either say no or they don’t reply.

 If what I had is so great, then why don’t they want it as children? Here’s my conclusion: they want it as adults but not as children. They want the benefits of the socially conservative family structure when they are children. But as adults, they want sexual freedom, or at least they want to appear “open minded” and “tolerant” about others sexual choices, even at the expense of children, even though they themselves would never want to live under what they advocate. It’s a bizarre sort of a “win-win” for them, I guess.

 It’s very painful for me to have conversations with these people. They don’t understand what they advocate, and they don’t seem to want to understand.

Administration Requests Budget Increase for Immigrant Bedding

By John Semmens – Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Folder2 104Asserting that “it would be inhumane for us to force these innocent immigrant children to sleep on substandard beds,” Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell has requested an appropriation of “$1,000 per migrant in order to fund minimally acceptable accommodations.”

“Many of these immigrant children have already suffered from improper sleeping arrangements for most of their lives,” Burwell said. “In the countries they come from it is common for multiple children to be crammed into a single bed of straw, be slung on hammocks, or simply left to sleep on the ground.”

Burwell characterized the “military style cots and bunks we have been providing for them sends a message that says they’re not really welcome in America, that their stay here is temporary and that a good night’s sleep isn’t a right we are willing to extend to these refugees.”

While acknowledging that $1,000 is more than many Americans spend on a bed, Burwell argued that “Americans are free to decide how much to invest in their sleep arrangements, these children are not. These immigrants are desperately poor. Many are plagued with debilitating diseases. They don’t have the means or education to select proper bedding. It is our obligation to do that for them.”

President’s Texas Itinerary Defended

President Obama has faced criticism for refusing to visit sites in Texas where hordes of illegal immigrants have been flooding into the country. The criticism has been especially pointed in light of the fact that he has traveled to the state to participate in political fund raisers at the home of Austin-based filmmaker Robert Rodriguez and two other in-state locations.

Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest explained that “the President’s presence at the border would not be a good use of his time. It’s not as if anything he might see there is going to change his mind about immigration reform. The people on the ground there that he might meet—Border Patrol agents and local politicians—have a peculiarly narrow perspective. They’re going to urge him to do more to secure the border. He doesn’t need to hear this advice.”

“On top of this it has been widely reported that many of these immigrants are carriers of serious and infectious diseases,” Earnest pointed out. “It would be imprudent for the most important person in the world to be needlessly exposed to such a risk.”

“While many of those critical of the President are willing to make light of his assiduous efforts to raise funds for the Democratic Party, there can be no debating that this is an obviously higher priority for him than putting on a show of concern for a crisis he is ill-disposed to resolve,” Earnest contended. “If Democrats are under funded control of Congress could pass to Republicans. That would be a much more serious consequence for the President’s agenda than anything that might transpire from the influx of even millions of new immigrants.”

Dems Seek Legislation to Overturn Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Ruling

Outraged by what they characterized as the Supreme Court’s improper application of the Constitution’s freedom of religion clause in the Hobby Lobby case, Senate Democrats are drafting a bill to overturn the Court’s ruling.

Sponsor of the bill, Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash) declared that “a boss’s role in health care is confined to paying for it. He has no business deciding that he won’t pay for certain medical therapies because they offend his sense of morality. My bill restores the full authority over which medical treatments will or won’t be covered to the government where it belongs.”

Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) sought to bolster the legislative push, saying that “the Constitution protects an individual’s right to believe and worship as he sees fit. If an individual thinks there is a conflict between his beliefs and what the law requires him to do he is free to continue to believe what he wants, but he must still obey the laws passed by Congress. The right that is protected is a mental right to hold a belief not a blank check for non-compliant behavior.”

“Where the Court went wrong was in allowing an employer’s opposition to abortion to negate his obligation to fund this medical treatment,” Schumer continued. “In America the right to an abortion is an inalienable right possessed by every woman. This means that no one can refuse to acknowledge this right or attempt to impede a woman’s exercise of this right under the procedures stipulated by statute. The Affordable Care Act says that it is the employer’s duty to pay for a woman’s exercise of this right. If this troubles the employer’s conscience, well, no one has to operate a business if the tasks assigned by government conflict with his religious beliefs.”

Hillary Clinton’s Early Legal Work Stirs Controversy

The emergence of an audio tape of a young Hillary Clinton bragging about helping a rapist get off easy has jarred her image as an advocate for women’s rights. It seems that Clinton succeeded in discrediting the rapist’s accuser even though she was convinced that he was guilty. When a panel of liberal pundits on MSNBC appeared to agree that Clinton seemed insensitive and cavalier on the tape, the aspiring 2016 presidential candidate tried her hand at damage control.

“First of all, let me remind everyone that this tape was made 40 years ago,” she pointed out. “It’s old news. The minor child who was raped is now an old woman. She survived the experience. Raking up the story at this late date could only cause her pain I’m sure she’d rather forget.”

“Secondly, let’s not lose sight of the skill I demonstrated in that case,” Clinton added. “Even the most inept lawyer can get an innocent defendant off. Getting a guilty client off, though, requires much more cunning and effort. The fate of the relatively unimportant principals in that case is of less significance than the part it played in helping me ascend to a leading role in the governance of this country in the decades that followed.”

Mexico and Guatemala Reach Accord to Expedite Transit of More Illegals to the US

This week Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina held a joint press conference to announce they have reached an accord to cooperate in the shipment of more illegal migrants from Central America to the United States.

“This agreement is a win-win for both of our countries,” Peña boasted. “Guatemala rids itself of people they cannot adequately care for. By assuring that these migrants have guaranteed transportation through Mexico we avoid becoming the repository of these undesirables.”

Perez insisted that “we are only responding to America’s invitation to send our tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to live free. We do not have the means to enable these people to live for free in our country. America, though, is wealthy. It is long past time for them to share their wealth with our less fortunate children.”

Peña speculated that “given enough time we may inject a sufficient number of Latinos into the United States to peacefully and democratically reverse the conquest of our ancient lands by the United States in the 19th century. Many Americans are ignorant of the fact that their great President Lincoln condemned this conquest as unjust. Righting this wrong by whatever means we can is long overdue.”

Hamas Counters Israeli Efforts to Reduce Collateral Damage

Israel’s attempts to minimize collateral damage while seeking to respond to Hamas’ repeated missile launches against Israeli civilians were sternly countered by Hamas this week. While Israel has been warning Palestinian civilians of impending air strikes in order to prompt them to move out of targeted areas, Hamas has forbidden civilians from taking Israeli advice.

Hamas’ Khaled Meshaal explained that “it is every Palestinian’s duty to sacrifice himself if required to do so in our never ending battle against the Jewish occupiers. The Jews would like nothing better than to separate our fighters from the women and children who we honor by making them our shields.”

Meshaal urged Palestinian civilians “to grasp the opportunity to become a dead martyr for a glorious cause rather than accept the sordid fate of a live refugee from Jewish aggression.” Meanwhile, it has been reported that Hamas combat units have used the Israeli warnings to vacate targeted zones.

Obamacare Costs Comparisons “Unfair”

A recent report from the Manhattan Institute showing that Obamacare has raised insurance costs by 52% to 119% was rejected as an “unfair comparison” by Health and Human Services Secretary Silvia Burwell.

“Policies under the Affordable Care Act cost more because they cover more,” she maintained. “Many of the policies available before the ACA was in place didn’t cover preventive care like birth control or abortion. Virtually none of them covered gender-reassignment surgery. So of course those policies were cheaper.”

“The Manhattan Institute study overlooks the added value achieved by the ACA,” the Secretary asserted. “Their before and after analysis is, therefore, misleading. We are confident that when the American people comprehend the broader coverage we’ve given them under the ACA they’ll thank the Democratic Party at the polls in November.

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire column for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties that our nation’s Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit, and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Cong. Franks Speaks on Obama’s ‘Act of Cowardice and Betrayal’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-08), co-chair of the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus and a ranking Republican member of the House Armed Services Committee, today took to the House floor to slam Obama for an “unprecedented act of cowardice and betrayal” in the Administration’s response (or lack thereof) to the barrage of rockets that have been launched at Israel this week. Video of the full one-minute floor speech and a transcript is included below:

Transcript

Mr. Speaker, last month, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas openly united with the evil terrorist group, Hamas, and this very moment they are raining rockets down upon the innocent citizens of Israel. Half of all Israelis have sought cover in bomb shelters across their tiny country. And the Obama Administration has had the reprehensible gall to praise Abbas as someone who is “committed to non-violence and … cooperation with Israel,” and to further proclaim in an Israeli newspaper that, quote “Finally, peace is possible!”

Mr. Speaker, I thought nothing this president could say or do would surprise me anymore, but his flushed and breathless rush to embrace terrorists launching rockets at Israeli children is an unprecedented act of cowardice and betrayal.

America’s fleet should this minute be off the coast of Israel, and the world, including Abbas, Hamas, and Hezbollah, should know that America’s arsenal of freedom stands ready to defend our most precious ally in the world.

CAP: Hobby Lobby and 1062

By Cathi Herrod, President, Center for Arizona Policy

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to affirm the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) rights of the Green Family (who own Hobby Lobby) and the Hahn family (who own Conestoga Wood Specialties) had a very real tie to Arizona’s SB 1062.

One of the primary purposes CAP supported SB 1062 was to clarify Arizona’s own Religious Freedom Restoration Act to ensure that every Arizonan is not forced to surrender their religious beliefs merely because they start a business.

In the majority opinion, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito echoed this fundamental principle when he wrote:

“Business practices compelled or limited by the tenets of a religious doctrine fall comfortably within the understanding of the “exercise of religion” that this Court set out in Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. Smith.

Any suggestion that for-profit corporations are incapable of exercising religion because their purpose is simply to make money flies in the face of modern corporate law.”

Make no mistake, this was no small victory for religious freedom, but it also is not the final word. There is still much to be done to ensure every Arizonan is free to live and work according to their faith.

As with SB 1062, opponents have launched a massive misinformation campaign about the decision. Take time to understand what government mandates were objectionable to the Green and Hahn families. The federal government attempted to compel the family-owned businesses to provide and pay for abortion medication in their employee health insurance plans. Hobby Lobby did not object to providing 16 of 20 contraceptive medications mandated by the government – it’s the other four that can function to cause an abortion that were objectionable.

See the Movie ‘America’!

Hobby Lobby Wage Boost Rankles Democrats

By John Semmens – Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Folder2 104With the liability of being forced to finance employees’ abortions taken off its back by the recent Supreme Court voiding of the Obamacare mandate, Hobby Lobby announced it is raising the minimum wage of its full-time employees to $14.50 per hour.

Aspiring presidential candidate Hillary Clinton dubbed the move “a callous and insensitive slap in the face to American women. This company went to a lot of effort to deny its responsibility to insure the reproductive health of its female employees. Now that they’ve won a totally unfair verdict in court they’re insulting these imperiled women by investing the costs averted into boosting the pay of their entire workforce. This is wrong on so many levels.”

One of these levels according to Clinton is “the attempt to destroy worker solidarity. The timing of the hike in wages conveys the message that the benefits the Government is trying to secure for women impede the pay the company is able to offer other employees. This insidiously pits one employee against another and undermines the incentive for all to band together against management for the common good.”

Another wrong cited by Clinton was “a blatant disrespect for the role Government is trying to play in raising the minimum wage across the board. The $14.50 figure exceeds the $10.10 targeted by Congressional Democrats in the Fair Minimum Wage Act (HR 1010). In effect, Hobby Lobby’s management is telling their employees that the Government’s efforts are irrelevant. If left unchecked it could create an environment where each company’s labor and management are persuaded that wages are a private rather than a public issue.”

Sponsor of HR 1010, Representative George Miller (D-Calif) lamented “the negative impact this rogue decision by an arrogant employer will have on our push to enact a federal hike of the minimum wage. Hobby Lobby has parlayed its triumph over the Government’s Affordable Care Act into an opportunity to flout its independence from our regulatory power over wages.”

Feds Say Businesses Can’t Require Employees to Speak or Understand English

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is suing Wisconsin Plastics, Inc. of Green Bay, Wisconsin for discriminating against non-native persons by insisting that employees must be conversant in English in order to hold jobs with the company.

Jacqueline Berrien, EEOC Chairperson dismissed the possibility that some minimal competence in the English language might be a legitimate skill required of an employee. “Whether an employee understands English is a matter of convenience for the business,”:Berrien explained. “Granted, conducting business in a single language might be more efficient. But the individual’s right to speak whatever language he chooses is a human right. And human rights take precedence over economic efficiency.”

“The employer has the option of hiring translators to act as intermediaries between workers and managers who speak different languages,” Berrien pointed out. “They can also purchase insurance to cover any damages that might occur due to mishaps springing from miscommunications rooted in language barriers.”

Berrien conceded that barring firms from requiring English comprehension among employees would raise the cost of doing business, but insisted that “this is a small price to pay for preserving individual human rights. Besides, the extra costs imposed on Wisconsin Plastics would be offset by the added employment of translators, insurance vendors, and tort lawyers.”

President Urges Israel to Exercise Restraint

This week’s discovery of the decomposing bodies of the three Israeli teenagers kidnapped and murdered by members of the Hamas terror organization last week sparked diverse reactions from key leaders.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed retribution. Hamas’s Khalad Mashaal blessed the hands of the murderers. President Obama urged Israeli leaders to “exercise restraint and not take action that would destabilize the situation.”

While admitting that “from a Western perspective the murder of innocent civilians appears an inexcusable atrocity,” President Obama cautioned that “this is not the only perspective worthy of consideration. As the Palestinians see it, all Jews living in the region are legitimate targets. Given that Hamas is too weak to directly confront the Israeli Army its tactic of striking at softer targets is understandable.”

“From a historical point of view, Jews being victimized has been pretty much the norm all over the world,” Obama recalled. “That is the stable condition. Jews striking back is abnormal and, as such, would tend to be destabilizing. I think the Israeli leaders should weigh accepting a few casualties as the price of preserving stability rather than flying off the handle and risking a greater loss of life on both sides.”

While Obama was eager to dampen down Israeli outrage over the murder of the Jewish teenagers he seemed to have no qualms about inflaming Palestinian passions over the murder of Arab teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, calling this crime “heinous.” Secretary of State John Kerry added that “there are no words to convey adequately our condolences to the Palestinian people.”

Though Hamas, Obama, and Kerry appear to have assumed Khdeir was killed in retaliation for the murdered Jewish teens, suspicion has arisen that he may have been killed by his own family members for dishonoring them via his gay lifestyle.

Senator Suggests President “Borrow” Power to Solve Immigration Problem

Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill) suggests that President Obama “borrow some of the unused legislative power Congress is sitting on to solve the immigration problem.”

“I know some of my Republican friends across the aisle will insist that the power to enact laws is exclusively reserved to Congress under our Constitution,” Durbin acknowledged. “However, an even older common law principle is that a right left dormant for an extended period lapses and may be taken up by a more energetic party. The need for immigration reform has been known for a long time, yet Congress has neglected to pass legislation. So it seems to me that Congress has effectively abandoned its property in legislative authority. Why shouldn’t the President borrow this authority and do what Congress has failed to do?”

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) promised that any attempt by the President to further infringe on legislative prerogatives would be added to the lawsuit he is planning to bring against his usurpation of authority. “We may be powerless to stop this country’s slide into tyranny,” Boehner said. “But I want us to go on record as not in favor.”

Doctor/Patient Confidentiality Gains New Partner

It used to be that what transpires between a doctor and patient was considered confidential. Under the Affordable Care Act the Government has now been added as a participant in observing communications between doctor and patient.

Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell justified the expansion of those in the know as “only prudent. The Affordable Care Act has made the federal government responsible for the health of everyone in America. We can’t adequately do that job if information on anyone’s condition is withheld from us.”

“Unenlightened individuals may think that their health is their own concern,” Burwell said. “They may think consulting a doctor is purely their own decision. But the ACA has transformed health from any individual responsibility into a social responsibility. All—patient, doctor, and Government—must cooperate in an assessment of what actions, treatments, and medications best serve the collective interests of the nation.”

“The information passed along to us by the doctor will be analyzed in order to determine what course best meets the needs of the whole,” Burwell continued. “In some cases this will entail surgery or medications. In some cases it will entail mandatory behavioral adjustments. In others benign neglect akin to that practiced by the Veterans’ Administration may be the best option for culling the weakest from the aggregate national family.”

Congressman Barred from Immigrant Holding Area

Representative Jim Bridenstine’s (R-Okla) attempt to gain some first-hand knowledge on the 1200 illegal immigrant minors housed in his Congressional District was blocked by officials of the Department of Health and Human Services.

“It’s for the Congressman’s own good,” Health and Human Services Secretary Silva Burwell insisted. “Many of these youngsters are carrying infectious diseases and parasites. We cannot allow unnecessary contact with unauthorized persons.”

Bridenstine was advised to come back after July 21. “By that time all of the children will have been placed with other families or in shelters more suitable for the longer term,” Burwell said. “It will then be safe for the Congressman to enter the facility and ask whatever questions he wants.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire column for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties that our nation’s Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit, and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Barack Hussein Obama: ‘Coyote’ In Chief

Mad Libbing: Embittered Lefties Crying Rivers over Supreme Court Loss

 

By the Family Research Council

If you wanted to see fireworks in D.C., you didn’t have to wait for July 4th. Yesterday’s decision on the HHS mandate exploded on the media scene, lighting a fuse under the radicals of the Left. While most Americans watched with pleasure as a pillar of ObamaCare fell, liberals sulked at another loss for lawlessness. Democrats couldn’t fire off their press releases fast enough as they vowed to push their assault on faith in the marketplace by ending justices’ opt-out. Promising a legislative fix, Majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) insisted that Americans’ “right” to sex-on-demand trumps a company’s deeply held beliefs on contraception and abortifacients.

As out of touch as liberals are with the law, it turns out that they’re even more out of touch with voters. While the Left trotted out its tired “war on women” line, FRC’s Cathy Ruse pointed out that the majority of women opposed the mandate — including 60% of the lower court female judges who voted to stop it!

Our own survey, which helped shape the messaging for the entire movement, confirmed the trend. Back in May, WPA Opinion Research found in an FRC-commissioned poll that 53% of voters (including 50% of women!) disapproved of the idea that employers’ should have to pay for workers’ sexual decisions. So if there is a war, it’s on the facts.

While the Twitter world ignites with threats of burning down Hobby Lobby stores (and a record number of profane comments), most of the outrage is entirely unfounded. As Sean Davis explained, “The truth of the matter is that the case was about abortion, specifically four types of contraception that can result in the destruction of a fertilized egg. Hobby Lobby paid for 16 different types of non-abortive contraceptive coverage for its employees.”

As liberals try to spin this into a debate about denying women free “reproductive care,” the reality is that the federal government already gives out free birth control and abortion drugs at Title X clinics all across America. What the Court said was that it’s not right to order conscientious objectors to provide it, under threat of crippling fines, when there are other ways to get it to them. Plus, the Federalist jabs, there’s no such thing as “denying access” to birth control if these businesses are paying employees wages they can then use to buy whatever they want. But unfortunately, the Left never lets the truth get in the way of a convenient sound bite.

Meanwhile, the political debate goes on. House Speaker John Boehner, like more than two dozen other members, praised Monday’s ruling. “Today’s decision is a victory for religious freedom and another defeat for an administration that has repeatedly crossed constitutional lines in pursuit of its Big Government objectives. The mandate overturned today would have required for-profit companies to choose between violating their constitutionally-protected faith or paying crippling fines, which would have forced them to lay off employees or close their doors.”

For now, the President, who’s been on the losing end of a number of major Supreme Court decisions, is resorting to a childish response, warning that he’ll try another end-run around the Court to get his way. “They’re acting like the town bully,” Cathy Ruse said. “‘Hey Mother Angelica, you don’t wanna provide free birth control pills to all of these people? Well, then, you pay us $100 every day for every person you refuse to supply… until you change your mind.’ There’s an easier way, and the Court gave them a map: If the White House wants to give free birth control and abortion drugs to every woman in America, they should pay for it, themselves.”

Of course, the irony in all this is that Democrats are suddenly jumping on the transparency bandwagon, which might be funny if it weren’t so offensive. Senate Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said yesterday that he would “I will introduce legislation that requires all corporations using this Supreme Court decision to deny or limit contraception services to disclose this policy to all employed and applicants for employment. Workers have a right to know if their employers are restricting the availability of a whole range of family planning coverage.” This from a party that created an ObamaCare “secrecy clause” to stop Americans from finding out whether their plans cover abortion!

If the President’s party is demanding clarity, we’re all for it. In the meantime, one thing is clear: the days of the HHS mandate may be numbered. In the last 24 hours, seven more religious institutions won emergency injunctions against the order (including EWTN and Wheaton College), setting up phase two of the mandate takedown. As dozens of nonprofits fight on, the Becket Fund predicted “the death knell is sounding for the HHS mandate.” Thank goodness. One vote the other way in the Supreme Court, and the death knell would have been for the First Amendment.

The Wait of the World Falls on Sudan
While Americans get ready to enjoy the long weekend, there’s one family overseas wishing they could join the 4th of July celebration here in the U.S. Meriam Ibrahim, her husband Daniel, and their two tiny children still wait in Khartoum for the green light to come to the states. Today, I again spoke with Sudanese officials, along with Members of Congress, and there is no substantial change in Meriam’s case. The fact that “administrative matters” continue to block her departure from Sudan is a reason for concern. The longer she’s detained in the country, the more dangerous it is for her and her family.

Knowing that she’s not yet left Sudan raises serious concerns about her safety and future fate. Please join me in lifting up Meriam, Daniel, Martin, and Maya in prayer — and continue to use your social media platforms to keep the pressure on U.S. officials to act. Meriam can’t afford for us to abandon her now!

President Tries to Fend Off Evidence of Incompetence

John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Folder2 104With a cascade of scandals dominating the news, a desperate President Obama pleaded with voters to “not give up hope. The mistakes of a tiny minority can easily overwhelm the good work of the many. Probably less than one percent of government workers are boneheads. The rest of us shouldn’t have to suffer because of it.”

To help illustrate his case Obama told a story about an unnamed federal employee “who foolishly put things in writing that she shouldn’t have. Despite explicit instructions that no documentary evidence be produced she negligently or maliciously, we don’t know, entrusted highly confidential material to email correspondence. Now my enemies are demanding copies of these emails. If it hadn’t been for the fortuitous crash of a number of key computers this material could’ve fallen into the wrong hands.”

Statistical experts place the odds of all these “fortuitous” crashes occurring at the same time as one in 80 billion—a long shot that Obama attributed to “the ‘Man upstairs’ looking out for our best interests.”

The President also sought to characterize recent criticism of EPA employees defecating in office hallways as “myopic. From a superficial perspective this practice looks idiotic. What many are overlooking is the fact that these excretions are perfectly natural and biodegradable. Furthermore, the health concerns raised place an inordinate value on conditions favorable to humans and totally disregard what might be beneficial to other life forms. The EPA’s mission is to preserve all creatures, even those some callously categorize as ‘germs.’”

In related news, Press Secretary Josh Earnest labeled Republican Representatives Louie Gohmert and Bill Flores’ proposed $1 million reward for any individual who can recover former IRS director Lois Lerner’s “lost” emails “an exercise in futility. Far more money is available to the Administration, if need be, to ensure that this doesn’t happen. And if money alone can’t do the job the President has the authority to take extreme measures to defend the government against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.”

President Denounces Boehner Lawsuit as “Stunt”

This week House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) announced he was going to sue President Obama for abuse of executive authority. “Time-after-time the President has acted without proper authority,” Boehner charged. “He has refused to faithfully execute laws that require his action. Worse, he has endeavored to exercise legislative authority that the Constitution relegates to Congress. We are going to ask the Court to put a stop to this.”

President Obama laughed off the lawsuit calling it “a stunt designed to cover for Congress’ failure to govern. If Congress were to do its job as pass the legislation I’ve directed them to pass I wouldn’t be forced to take matters into my own hands.”

“Aside from the substantive issues there is also the question of the appropriate procedural remedy,” the President added. “Under our Constitution it is not the Court’s job to take sides with one branch of government over another. If Congress believes that I am stepping on its prerogatives the prescribed course is for them to impeach me.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) concurred in the President’s analysis. “Clearly, Congress must be the guardian of its own powers,” Reid asserted. “It cannot punt the ball to the Court.” As for impeachment, Reid vowed that “the Republicans will get no cooperation from me in any effort to impede President Obama’s efforts to do what he deems necessary for the good of the country. As long as I’m running the Senate there will be no impeachment.”

Raid Characterized as “Routine Training Exercise”

A pre-dawn raid of a Florida home was characterized as “a routine training exercise” by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

The raid took place on June 10 when a dozen heavily armed Department of Homeland Security troops broke into Kari Edwards home and held her and her live-in boyfriend at gun point while they searched the premises. The invading DHS officers disabled the home’s security cameras as they thoroughly trashed the premises.

“I realize that from Ms. Edwards’ perspective the incident may have been harrowing,” Johnson acknowledged. “But we mustn’t lose sight of the big picture. Inflicting momentary fear and indignities on a few individuals is a small price for the nation to pay in our quest to combat potential threats to the government.”

“The notion that we need evidence that someone has done something wrong before we can take the steps necessary to protect against possible threats confuses judicial processes with those required to ensure security,” Johnson continued. “The goal is not to punish the guilty, but to neutralize our enemies in the most efficient way we can. Besides, even if we want to consider the judicial angle, it seems to me that a surprise raid might be the most effective way to obtain evidence of wrongdoing.”

Clinton Defends $225,000 Speaking Fee

Elias Benjelloun’s, the UNLV student body president, and Daniel Waqar’s, the student government’s public relations director, protest that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s $225,000 fee for a single speech is excessive was slapped down by the lady herself.

“Students angry that their tuition fees are being increased shouldn’t try to take it out on me,” Clinton angrily exclaimed. “I have unique credentials. I’ve been a First Lady and co-president, a United States Senator, and Secretary of State. Audiences should expect to pay more to hear me.”

Clinton compared her fee with the $230,000 per game salary paid to the NBA’s LeBron James. “Considering the relative importance of the contributions each of us has made to America I think it’s pretty clear that I’m the one being grossly underpaid,” she complained. “As skilled as LeBron may be, he’s never had to make the hard choices I have. He doesn’t have to worry that someone might die because he makes a bad decision. I did.”

Hefty speaking fees (over $100 million since 2001) have been the mainstay of the Clintons’ battle to escape poverty since leaving the White House in early 2001. The $16 million the Clinton’s have received from the federal government since 2001 has been “woefully inadequate when you consider the lifestyle we are forced to maintain,” Hillary contended. “For example, we had to pony up $3 million for our daughter’s wedding. The fact is, we can’t live like ordinary people—shopping at WalMart, eating home-cooked meals, scrimping on expenses. The people of America want us to enjoy the perks befitting the service we have rendered to the nation.”

President Offers More Flexibility for Federal Employees

President Obama is seeking to make being employed by the federal government a more pleasant experience. Along these lines he is introducing more flexible work hours.

“Analysis by the best work management experts shows that it doesn’t really matter how many hours government employees spend on the job,” Obama said. “Whether they’re at their desks or not doesn’t seem to make any difference in the output of meaningful work. So why not reduce the burden of reporting to work?”

Not being required to actually go in to work in order to earn a federal paycheck was described as “a major hike in the benefit of a government job for the employees affected” said the report referred to by the President. “The disutility of having to invest so many hours in preparing for work, traveling to work, and sitting at a desk for 8 hours a day can be significantly reduced if the number or employees required to make this investment is lower.”

Benefits for employees weren’t the only upside cited in the report: “The more federal jobs that are converted from ‘no-work’ to ‘no-show’ status the less stress will be placed on urban traffic. Those who must actually produce a product or service in order to earn a living will face less traffic congestion traveling to work.”

President Obama rejected the report’s implication that a considerable amount of expense could be avoided if the unneeded employees were terminated. “The idea that the government should simply release unneeded employees fails to take into consideration the impact that would have on our economy,” the President argued. “The money we spend on the salaries of these redundant workers is vital to sustaining our GDP. Think of all the businesses that depend upon the money federal employees spend. If they lose these customers our economy will tank.”

Constitutional Amendment to Curb Speech Pushed by Democrats

Sparked by fears that “many dedicated incumbents could be run out of office by well-financed campaigns by dangerously anti-government factions,” Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) and 42 Democratic co-sponsors have drafted a Constitutional Amendment that aims to curb free speech.

“Right now as long as a person has enough money to afford it he can take out an ad, publish a broadside, or fund a TV spot against a sitting member of the Government,” Udall pointed out. “The men and women who have devoted their lives to serving the citizens of this great republic don’t deserve this kind of treatment.”

Under Udall’s proposed Amendment freedom of speech would be subject to whatever limits Congress determines would best suit the needs of the Government. “We want competition for office,” Udall agreed. “But it must be fair competition. Congress needs to have the flexibility to make rules that will ensure fairness.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire column for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties that our nation’s Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit, and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 149 other followers