Hillary Unfazed by Mounting Evidence of Email Crimes

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

JohnFormer Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brushed off new revelations that the 30,000 “personal” emails she deleted may have included official Department business as “nothing to concern the American people.”

A deleted email of particular note was a memo from her Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin to Clinton’s State Department subordinates regarding problems caused by Clinton’s use of a private unsecured email server. The former secretary claimed to have “no knowledge of either the original email or its illegal deletion,” but offered a hypothesis suggesting that the IT specialist who set up the server “may be the guilty party.”

Earlier this week Bryan Pagliano, the man who set up my off-site email system ‘took the 5th‘ over 125 times during a 90-minute, closed-door deposition,” Clinton pointed out. “While not admissible in court, this is practically a confession. Rather than harassing me, wouldn’t it make more sense to pursue this ‘smoking gun?’”

Missing emails aren’t the only problem. Comparison of what Clinton attempted to pass off as undeleted official records with planning schedules assembled by the secretary’s aides show major discrepancies. Specifically, the names of more than 100 outsiders who were scheduled to meet with Clinton were scrubbed from her version of what she was doing. Most of the missing names turned out to be executives of firms that were seeking government favors and had donated to the Clinton Foundation.

Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill maintains that “these discrepancies are no big deal. People need to understand that a secretary of state could have valid reasons for keeping selected meetings and communications secret. Instead of casting suspicions on a great American who has devoted her entire adult life to the difficult job of governing this country, the media and the voters ought to be showing more trust.”

In related news, Clinton warned Americans “not to get any ideas from the Brexit vote. I will not abide presiding over a ‘rump republic.’ Any state or states that imagine they might vote their way out of our North American Union should remember they won’t be dealing with a weakling like Cameron at the helm. I had no qualms about taking down Gaddafi and, like Lincoln, I will not hesitate to use every weapon at my disposal to preserve this Union.”

Illinois to Create Advisory Council of Muslims

A bill approved by the state Legislature creates a 21-member Illinois Muslim-American Advisory Council. Co-sponsor of the legislation Sen. Jacqueline Collins (D) hailed the measure as “a sensible way to ensure that the activities of state government have a chance to get Muslim buy-in at an early stage. A lot of what we do without thinking is offensive to the followers of Islam. Clearing policies and programs ahead of time will prevent Muslims from having to resort to violence after-the-fact as a means of expressing their displeasure.”

Republican Rep. Barbara Wheeler voted against the bill, calling it “a wrong turn down a dangerous road. We don’t have a Catholic Advisory Council or a Jewish Advisory Council. Making a special effort to set up a council for one particular religion strikes me as an inappropriate mingling of church and state.”

Collins labeled Wheeler’s views “short-sighted. If we mess up and pass policies that offend Catholics or Jews they’ll just take us to court or vote us out of office. If we mess up with Muslims we could end up getting killed. Muslim’s dedication to their faith is passionate. Many have no hesitation in martyring themselves to defend their beliefs. Unfortunately, this martyrdom usually entails suicidal attacks on unbelievers. Rather than let things get out of hand it is better to establish a mechanism to assuage their sensibilities before blood is shed.”

In related news, the US Department of Homeland Security announced plans to ban the use of the words “jihad” and “sharia” in its anti-terror campaign. Secretary Jeh Johnson said “the use of these foreign words conveys the wrong message and diverts our attention from the much larger threat from home-grown enemies. As nasty as the few attacks carried out by persons with some connection to Islam may be, there are millions of armed non-Muslims with anti-government views. Even worse, these right-wing zealots are the tip of an ice berg of tens of millions who oppose what we are trying to do for this country and who may overthrow us at the ballot box.”

Dems Stage Sit-in Against Guns

Democratic members of the House of Representatives staged a sit-in to publicize their quest for stricter gun controls. Distressed that the murder of 50 night club patrons by an Islamic terrorist in Florida has not sufficiently weakened GOP support for the Second Amendment, more than two dozen Democrats seized the House floor for more than a day, vowing to block House business until their demands are met.

Sit-in participant Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa) used the event to call for “a major revision of the Second Amendment, because Americans don’t agree with it and we’ve had it. The Amendment may have made sense when the average person needed a firearm to shoot dinner or resist the oppression of King George, but it’s clearly outdated today. We get our food from the supermarket and no one needs guns as protection against a government elected by the voters.”

Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga) brushed aside charges of hypocrisy among the well-guarded members of the government. “The average person is at low risk compared to us,” Lewis contended. “Poll after poll shows the members of Congress are held in very low esteem by the general population. If that population is armed we are all in grave danger. The people are many and we are few. We need the protection of armed bodyguards and a general disarmament of the rest of the population just to even things up.”

The claimed “reasonable” proposal to bar those on the government’s “no fly” list from obtaining firearms has some significant flaws. For one, the list is secret. Only the government knows who’s on it. Placing a person on the list is solely at the discretion of the government. Errors appear to be frequent. Awareness that one is on this list often comes unexpectedly as a person tries to board an airline. Getting off the list involves lengthy and expensive court proceedings. Chris Anders, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU, characterized the proposal as “unreasonable and unfair. It is akin to a ‘secret enemies list’ that can be used by the government to selectively deny the Constitutional rights of individuals it doesn’t like.”

Ironically, the trend in gun ownership is inversely related to the murder rate. In the 20-year period from 1993 to 2013 gun ownership rose by 54% while homicides committed with guns fell by 49% and the non-fatal injuries inflicted by armed criminals fell by 76%. However, according to sit-in protester, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif), “these nonsensical numbers will never persuade me to accept private gun ownership as a normal or useful behavior in our modern society.”

Samaritan Billed for Aiding Injured Family

When Derrick DeAnda helped a family escape from their rolled-over car he was just trying to be a good Samaritan. He didn’t expect to be billed $143 by the late-arriving EMTs for “medical care.” “I didn’t need any ‘medical care,’” DeAnda said. “I had one small cut on one of my hands. The EMT gave me a band aid. I can’t see how that could possibly cost so much.”

The bill from Cosumnes Community Services District was described as “standard practice” by Cosumnes Deputy Chief Mike McLaughlin. “If you’re at the scene of an accident that we attend you’re going to be billed. The $143 assessed to Mr. DeAnda was the minimum charge. Whether he got a band-aid or not is irrelevant. As a verified participant at the site we have to extract a fair share of our costs from him.”

McLaughlin dismissed concerns that his agency’s billing policy might deter others from stopping to help. “First of all, no one knows in advance that they will be charged a share of the cost if they get involved,” he said. “Second, even if they did, most people are not mercenary enough to put such a possibility ahead of aiding an injured party. Finally, even if people were to refrain from assisting due to fear of the financial consequences it would further serve to bolster the case for a bigger allocation for us in next year’s budget.”

Senators Demand to Know Where Companies Keep Their Cash

Concerned that some of the nation’s resources may be out of their reach, Sens. Al Franken (D-Minn) and Chris Coons (D-Del) are demanding that “all businesses fully disclose where all their money is.”

As President Obama said when he was nominated for his second term, government is the only entity we all belong to,” Franken recalled. “It is every business’ and every individual’s duty to do the utmost to ensure the survival of this single unifying entity. At a minimum, this means making all of their financial resources known to the government so they may be appropriated if the need to do so arises.”

Franken professed to understand the need for privacy, but maintained that “it is one thing to insist on privacy from the prying eyes of business rivals. It is quite another to keep secrets from the government. Should we sit by and allow the government to default when we could save it by seizing the money businesses and individuals are hoarding? How could we justify letting the selfish interests of the private sector impede the collective obligation of all of us to support the government?”

In related news, President Obama averred that “entitlements are necessities of a 21st century economy” and that “we need to retool our laws to ensure that this vital cog in the machine is well-oiled. Knowing where all the money can be found is a crucial component of making this happen.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our 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.

Declaring Sage Grouse Endangered Species Raises Concerns in Arizona

Big Government calling again. Now it wants to list sage grouse as an endangered species, restricting access to 167 million acres of land. Arizonans are rightly concerned because it could have a huge, detrimental impact on our state. Some of them visited our congressional delegation in Washington, D.C. Here’s the story in the Mogollon Rim News, by Cindy Sietz-Krug; it’s a worthy read.

 

And if the Republican Nominee Can’t Win Arizona …

A polling firm known as OH Predictive Insights has Mrs. Bill Clinton leading Donald Trump in Arizona, 46.6 percent to 42.2 percent. The poll was taken June 20.

It’s still early, yes, but Democrats usually never lead in Arizona presidential polls.

And if the Republican doesn’t win Arizona, he has absolutely no chance to win the November election.

The poll surveyed 1,060 likely voters based on a projection of the November turnout.

Breaking down this poll,  Trump is leading by six points in rural Arizona — which is not a good indicator.

Mrs. Bill Clinton, an ardent socialist advocating for over-control of the American individual, family and private business, has a whopping 17-point lead in Pima County, and that’s no surprise because it’s dominated politically by leftists.

Another bad indicator for Trump is a tie in Maricopa County, the county where Republican candidates can usually count on running up the score and overcoming deficits elsewhere in the state.

Women in Arizona gave Mrs. Bill Clinton a 12-point edge, despite her history of looking the other way while her husband used and abused women and her state department underpaying women.

OH Predictive Insights is a subsidiary of Owens Harkey Advertising. It’s located in Phoenix.

 

 

Mrs. Bill Clinton: ‘We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good’

Now that Mrs. Bill Clinton has wrapped up the Democrat Party nomination for the presidential election, it’s time to examine her past and who she really is:

As U.S. Senator from New York, Mrs. Bill Clinton’s chief accomplishment was winning a debate against her Republican election opponent.

As secretary of state, she intentionally lied when she insisted America’s consulate in Benghazi was attacked because of a Youtube video that was critical of Islam.

Mrs. Clinton is currently under investigation for using a private server to store classified government documents.

Also, Clinton is a member of the “National Organization for Women Who Approve of Elected Male Officials Who Have Abused Women but Support Abortion Rights.”

Clinton supports Planned Parenthood, which is on defense in several courts for refusing to protect under-age girls from rapists, under investigation for defrauding the government of millions of dollars and under investigation for illegally selling baby body parts. She says abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

She said the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in favor of Hobby Lobby’s religious freedom is a slippery slope for women – even though the nation has no history of forcing employers to violate their consciences and provide abortion drugs.

Fought in 1993 for the U.S. to fast-track government approval of RU-486, a dangerous drug which has killed several women and girls and caused complications for many more.

She supported the grisly, barbaric practice of partial-birth infanticide.

She supposedly supports women’s rights, but paid her women staffers at the Department of State less than men.

She is a big fan of the late Saul Alinsky and practices his Rules for Radicals – the book he dedicated to Lucifer — in all of her political activities. He invited her to work for him as a community agitator. Clinton says she believes in tactics over principles.

As First Lady, Mrs. Clinton attempted – in secret meetings — to force socialism and government medical insurance on the nation, but failed.

She made up lies to try to justify the firing of White House Travel Bureau employees, allegations which were proven false.

She said the unborn have no rights.

Mrs. Clinton enabled her husband’s rampant womanizing by trashing the women who were used and abused by himd – rather than sympathizing with them and acknowledging  a very serious problem.

Clinton wanted the U.S. to apologize for slavery.

She supported the Defense of Marriage Act, then said she “evolved” on same-sex marriage.

Also, she supports “hate” crimes laws. Even though all crimes are commited with contempt for the victim.

She wrote an op-ed claiming Common Core was recycled Clinton policy from the 1980s and 1990s. She opposes school vouchers.

Clinton believes in so-called manmade “global warming” and supports the Kyoto Treaty and cap and trade policy.

Plagiarized the title of the book “It Takes a Village.” Author Jonah Goldberg said of the book: “No more thorough explication of the liberal fascist agenda can be found than in Hillary Clinton’s best-selling book, “It Takes a Village.” All the hallmarks of the fascist enterprise reside within its pages.” Clinton learned from Marian Wright Edelman how to use children as propaganda tools for her ideological agenda: childhood is a crisis, and the government must come to the rescue. “I cannot say enough in support of home visits,” Clinton said.

Big government advocate.

Clinton said Wall Street donates to me because I rebuilt them after 9/11.

She voted against voter ID, though the Democrats require photo ID to attend their national conventions.

Clinton wants tough gun control and says gun manufacturers should be subject to lawsuits (for individuals’ behavior).

She says that because she is a woman she is a political outsider.

If elected president, Mrs. Clinton says Bill Clinton will advise her and represent the U.S. abroad.

She considers herself a member of the “Christian Left.” It’s a religion whose “god” is government.

She voted against the confirmation of John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Clinton is proud of the controversial nuclear agreement with Iran in which the U.S. got taken for a ride.

As a U.S. Senator, Mrs. Clinton delivered a half-billion dollars in earmarks to 59 corporations. Then 64 percent of those corporations donated to her campaign.

She said she flew into Bosnia in 1996 and ran through sniper fire on the ground. Video showed a calm, peaceful deplaning, and Clinton later called the lie a “minor blip.”

The Clinton Foundation has accepted millions of dollars in exchange for political favors by Hillary and Bill Clinton, and it is still happening today. The Clintons have accepted illegal campaign cash from convicted criminals like Mauricio Celis, of Mexico, and Norman Hsu, of Hong Kong. They pardoned Mark Rich after his wife gave them a huge donation

In his book, “Liberal Fascism,” Jonah Goldberg wrote: Clinton “is a representative figure, the leading member of a generational cohort of elite liberals who brought fascist themes into mainstream liberalism. … What follows, then, is a group portrait of Hillary and her friends – the leading proponents and exemplars of liberal fascism in our time.”

She was offered an internship in the Berkeley office of attorney Robert Truehaft, a communist who fought for the Stalinist faction the California labor movement.

As an attorney in Arkansas, Mrs. Clinton wrote articles in favor of children’s “rights” to divorce their parents. Goldberg wrote: “Hillary Clinton’s writings on children show a clear, unapologetic, and principled desire to insert the state deep into family life – a goal that is in perfect accord with similar efforts by totalitarians of the past. … She condones the state’s assumption of parental responsibilities … because she is opposed to the principle of parental authority in any form.” She believes families hold children back and the state sets them free. “Hillary Clinton’s ideas are, in general, fascist.”

Hillary’s guru was Rabbi Michael Lerner, who authored The New Socialist Revolution. He wrote of the coming socialist take-over.

One of Hillary Clinton’s most outrageous statements: “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

 

Former Senator Questions Need for So Many Armed Federal Agents

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

JohnFormer Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) wrote an op ed for the Wall Street Journal in which he raised the question of why so many federal agents are authorized to carry weapons. In the op ed, Coburn wondered why the IRS needs assault rifles, why the Department of Veterans Affairs is arming 3,700 employees, and why the number of non-Defense Department federal officers authorized to make arrests and carry firearms (200,000) exceeds the number of U.S. Marines (182,000).

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen responded that “it should be readily apparent why my agency needs to be armed. Taxes are very unpopular. Taxpayers who aren’t sufficiently intimidated by liens and confiscations of their property are especially dangerous elements. We can’t afford to let ourselves be out-gunned by them.”

Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Robert McDonald said “it should be obvious that considering our client base is comprised of former military—people trained in lethal skills—that we must be prepared to use deadly force if circumstances arise warranting it.”

Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest labeled the former Senator’s concerns “paranoid and short-sighted. He tries to make too much of the fact that armed federal agents now out-number armed Marines. Well, armed Marines don’t face as large a threat. There are over 300 million Americans who could potentially pose a threat to the government. There are over 100 million firearms in the hands of this population. As the President sees it, we are substantially out-gunned by domestic enemies. Clearly, we need more armed agents.”

In related news, a recent Department of Homeland Security report calls for “refocusing anti-terror efforts away from possible jihadis and toward millennials.” Secretary Jeh Johnson pointed out that “there are an estimated 75 million millennials. This number dwarfs the one million persons on the terror watch list. It’s only logical that we should devote more of our energy toward confronting this bigger threat.”

ISIS Group Praises Orlando Massacre

Despite President Obama’s uncertainty concerning the motives of the man who murdered 49 patrons of the Pulse night club in Orlando Florida, both the assailant and ISIS had no doubts. Shooter Omar Mateen pledged his allegiance to ISIS both before and during his killing spree. Similarly, the Al-Battar Media Foundation, reportedly an operation of the elite ISIS Libyan unit Kalibat al-Battar al-Libi, hailed the “slaughter of infidels” and urged “all true Muslims to emulate this lion of the Caliphate.”

Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest emphasized that “the president’s focus on America’s gun culture has the numbers behind him. There are 100 million guns in private hands in this country. In contrast, there are only a handful of proven fanatics that have been involved in recent shootings. Many more people have been killed by guns wielded by non-Muslim attackers than by attackers sharing the Muslim faith.”

In Chicago alone, more than a thousand people have been shot to death this year,” Earnest pointed out. “This is 30 times the death toll of the Orlando massacre. Rather than get swept up in the anti-Muslim hysteria propagated by Donald Trump and the NRA, the president is keeping his eye on the main threat—widespread firearms ownership in this country. If only government officials and agents were armed all shootings by non-government individuals would be illegal and could be more easily suppressed. That is the key lesson to be learned from this tragedy.”

In related news, the Obama Administration announced the appointment of Laila Alawa to the Department of Homeland Security. In 2014 Alawa insisted that “9/11 changed the world for good.” While many might think that such an endorsement of the murder of 3,000 innocents ought to disqualify the speaker from a job supposedly oriented toward protecting against terror attacks, Earnest maintained that “keeping a diverse roster of persons with differing viewpoints within the halls of government is the best way of combating the kind of disaffection that could lead to hostile attitudes towards America.”

Administration Expands Student Loan Default Options

The Department of Education expanded the grounds under which students may be freed from their obligation to repay college loans. Under the new rules, students may be absolved from the obligation to repay loans if the education they received was inadequate.

Secretary John King, Jr. explained that “much of what passes as education in our major universities is just crap. Universities know that majoring in ‘women’s studies,’ ‘gender studies,’ philosophy, and the like, won’t prepare graduates for high-paying jobs. Why should naive and ignorant young people have to bear the consequences that could have been avoided if they had received better advisement from the university they attended?”

The cost of the loan defaults is estimated to amount to $43 billion over the next decade. This cost will be borne by taxpayers—a shift of liability that King insists is “the fairest way to distribute the burden. Making the universities eat these losses would endanger their financial survival. By spreading the cost over the broader base of taxpayers the incremental burden on each person would be tolerably smaller. As someone once said, ‘it takes a village to raise a child.’ This is a case where the ‘village’ needs to step up and shoulder its responsibility.”

Democrat Wants Taxpayers to Pass Drug Test to Qualify for Deductions

Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) has introduced legislation that would require taxpayers to pass a drug test before being allowed to itemize deductions on their 1040 tax forms. The bill is in retaliation for state laws that require welfare recipients to pass drug tests in order to receive benefits.

I am sick and tired of Republicans forcing poor people to jump through hoops to receive the money they are entitled to under the law,” Moore complained. “We enacted these programs to help the unfortunate. Few members of society are as unfortunate as drug addicts. They are slaves to chemicals that their bodies crave. Compelling them to choose between a welfare check and their substance abuse is unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.”

If the GOP is going to cut the money going to this deprived set of society’s victims then we should also cut the money going to taxpayers via the deductions allowed on their income taxes,” the Congresswoman asserted. “As the President has pointed out on numerous occasions, people with incomes, businesses, and jobs didn’t earn it. Somebody else made that happen. Letting them keep this money is a privilege that the government can revoke. Let’s see how they like it when government cuts the money they get to keep because they can’t pass a drug test.”

Wisconsin is one of 15 states that require welfare recipients to submit to drug testing in order to receive benefits. Gov. Scott Walker defended the requirement calling it “an additional incentive designed to help people escape a cycle of dependency. Consuming illegal drugs is an incapacitating behavior. Not only does it sap an individual’s motivation for becoming self-reliant it also undermines competency. Either of these effects will deter an employer from hiring the substance abuser.”

Rep. Moore’s notion that income earned by working is the equivalent of income received from the government for not working is as wrong as it can be,” Walker added. “Getting oneself off the sofa and into the workforce makes a positive contribution to society. It is contributions like this that make it possible to provide benefits for those truly unable to support themselves. If we make it a practice to reward those who disable themselves from the possibility of working to continue to be supported by the government the resources to aid those who really need it will be needlessly depleted.”

President’s Economic Adviser Says Income Comparison Misleading

Data showing that the average man with a full time job makes less today than he did in 1973 was discounted as “an fair and misleading statistic” by the Chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers Jason Furman this week.

First of all, the premise that a full time job is desirable is debatable,” Furman maintained. “In 1973 many were forced to work because of the inadequacy of the social safety net. Today, many in a similar situation have been liberated from this tiresome fate by a more generous package of government benefits that enables them to work part time or to completely drop out of the workforce.”

Second, the statistic doesn’t account for the fact that many goods and services that had to be purchased with private money in 1973 are now provided free of charge by the government,” Furman added. “One example would be telephone service. Then, an individual would have to pay for a land line. Now, an individual can get a free mobile phone from the government. I call this an upgrade that comes at no cost to the beneficiary.”

I think we need to get away from these longitudinal measures,” Furman said. “They are inapt attempts to compare fundamentally incomparable eras. Times have changed. The transformation President Obama promised the American people is underway. It would be fallacious to try to judge it using such a discredited yardstick.”

Congressman Says “Ruling Class” Not Paid Enough

Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) complains that his $174,000 annual salary plus perks is “not enough to keep a man honest. We deal with an annual budget of over $3 trillion. Our piece of that action is a paltry .005 percent. High-ranking heads of departments don’t fare much better. Is it surprising that some are tempted to augment in ways that many find distasteful?”

Take former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill,” the Congressman said. “After decades of public service they left the White House nearly broke in 2001. What choice did they have but to try to reimburse themselves through soliciting donations from foreign governments? I’ve heard that Saudi Arabia has had to foot 20 percent of Hillary’s presidential campaign expenses. We shouldn’t be forcing our country’s leaders to have to stoop to such extreme measures to collect their due.”

Hastings suggested that “a one-percent set-aside to compensate those of us who have taken on the huge responsibilities of governing strikes me as appropriate.” Under his proposal, a one-percent set-aside would amount to about $37 billion. This would be equally split between the three branches, making each member of congress’ share $23 million per year, each Supreme Court Justice’s share $1.3 billion per year, and each cabinet member’s share $725 million per year.

Truthfully, there is probably no amount of monetary compensation that would adequately reimburse us for the sacrifices we all have to make when we serve,” Hastings contended. “But I think we owe it to the people who serve to make a better effort at evening things up.”

 

State Department Warns Israel Not to Inconvenience Palestinians

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

JohnMark Toner, spokesman for the US State Department, issued a statement condemning the terrorist attack on a shopping mall that killed four Israelis, but simultaneously warned Israel to “not overreact.”

In an effort to beef up security in response to the attack, the Israeli government rescinded 83,000 permits for Palestinians to visit relatives in Israel during Ramadan and sent an additional 600 troops to the West Bank where they will man border checkpoints and conduct raids against suspected terrorists.

That four innocent shoppers were murdered is tragic, but we want to caution the Israeli government against taking measures that might inconvenience a far greater number of Palestinians,” Toner said. “The total time lost due to more stringent security checks on Palestinians who want to visit Israel could very easily dwarf the number of life-years lost by those slain in the attack. This would be a disproportionate response.”

The region has been an area of tensions since Jews appropriated formerly Muslim territory in 1948,” Toner contended. “That ended 1200 years of relative peace under Islamic rule. We cannot begrudge Muslim efforts to reestablish what might be considered a ‘golden age.’ We wish their methods were less violent, but we must not allow our prejudices against their methods to blind us to the merits of their cause.”

The murders were followed by widespread celebrations—including chanting, fireworks, and the waving of Palestinian flags in the West Bank. Hamas spokesman Hussam Badran praised the attack as “the fulfillment of first prophecy of Ramadan” and “evidence of the failure of Jewish occupation of Palestinian land.” Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued a confusing statement “rejecting attacks on civilians no matter how justified they may be in retaliation for continued Zionist incursions on what has historically been Muslim territory.”

In other State Department news, Toner defended the agency’s estimate that it would take 75 years to process and release all of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails. “Look, everyone knows how unmotivated government workers are,” Toner reminded. “Getting a decent day’s work out of the slugs who clog the bureaucracy is next to impossible. So, I’d call 75 years an optimistic estimate. Obviously, the purposes to which access to these emails might serve would be a moot issue by the time the job is done. So why start?”

Bill Would Stop DOJ Funding Liberal Groups with Federal Money

Four Republican senators—James Lankford (Okla), Ted Cruz (Texas), and Utah’s Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee—have introduced legislation aimed at barring the Department of Justice from using settlement money to fund liberal interest groups.

Settlements obtained from banks found guilty for their role in inflating the mortgage bubble in 2008 ought to be used to compensate those damaged by these egregious practices,” Sen. Lankford said. “Instead, the Department of Justice has been funneling this money to favored liberal activists. This is a perversion of justice and an end run around the appropriations process.”

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) belittled the proposed legislation, calling it “an exercise in futility. No Democrat will vote for this bill. The idea that money liberated from one element of the private sector ought to be paid back to another runs counter to our Party’s agenda. The so-called victims of the mortgage bubble made unwise decisions. How can we justify returning money to such feckless dupes? Using these settlements to endow organizations active in progressive causes makes more sense. Congress should not intervene.”

Sen. Hatch found Reid’s argument to be “outrageous. In effect, the DOJ is muscling in on the loot stolen by the banks and using it to finance cronies of the Administration. This is not justice. It compounds the initial crime and leaves the wrongs unremedied. Such flagrant lawlessness undermines the legitimacy of the federal government.”

Clinton Demands Trump Delete His Twitter Account

Democratic presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton demanded that Republican rival Donald Trump discontinue his twitter account. The demand followed Trump’s tweet mocking President Obama’s endorsement of Clinton’s candidacy. In the tweet, Trump wrote “Obama just endorsed Crooked Hillary. He wants four more years of Obama-but nobody else does!”

Trump’s tweet was disrespectful to President Obama and to me,” Hillary complained. “This is further proof that he lacks the temperament to be president. Those of us with experience in government know that there are certain things you just don’t say in public. One of those things is that you don’t call your opponent a crook without concrete proof. President Obama has reassured me that there will be no proof of any criminal wrongdoing against me released by the Department of Justice. So Trump calling me a crook is slander.”

On top of his vicious slander, Trump also uttered an unspeakable lie,” Hillary continued. “My selection as the Democratic candidate for president shows that millions of voters want four more years of President Obama’s policies. Clearly, Trump’s tweet is untrue and is hurtful toward a man who has done great things in office.”

As a candidate, I don’t expect Trump to voluntarily obey my request for him to delete his twitter account,” Hillary added. “However, once I am president one of the issues we will look into is better regulation against the type of abuse of free speech engaged in by people like Trump. Just because a person can tweet doesn’t mean he should be allowed to without facing a consequence for making unacceptable use of this technology.”

In related news, Press Secretary Josh Earnest insisted that the president’s endorsement of Clinton “will not sway the FBI investigation. The president doesn’t have to ‘sway‘ anything. He is in charge of the entire government. It will carry out whatever orders he gives. So, no, the president won’t be ‘swaying‘ the investigation.”

Ninth Circuit Court Repeals Second Amendment

This week the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that government has a right to decide who will and won’t be permitted to carry a concealed firearm. The ruling came in the case of Edward Peruta v. County of San Diego. The County denied Peruta and his fellow plaintiffs concealed carry permits on the grounds that they did not prove a need for them.

Writing for the majority, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain asserted that “under California law, police authorities are empowered to determine who shall be allowed to bear arms and for what reasons. The plaintiffs’ contention that personal self-defense was a sufficient reason for them to be armed was rejected by county law enforcement officials. Their argument that police cannot provide adequate protection emanates from an elevation of selfish individual concerns over the society’s welfare. The collective body of California citizens has seen fit to elect a government that made the decision to grant authority to local governments to allow or deny firearm privileges as they see fit.”

The very fact that these plaintiffs contested local authorities lends support to the decision not to issue permits,” O’Scannlain continued. “One of the main duties of government is to protect itself from those who it construes as potentially dangerous to this objective. The plaintiffs’ assertion that police cannot be relied upon to provide sufficient protection raises a measure of doubt as to whether these individuals are reliable citizens.”

Dissenting Judge Barry Silverman contended that “the California law clearly violates the Constitution’s Second Amendment which affirms that ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ Having to ask permission of a government functionary to exercise this right eviscerates it. A state where the government has absolute control over who may or may not be armed is the very tyranny the Second Amendment was devised to prevent.”

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton hailed the Court’s decision as “an encouraging step toward the attainment of a ‘gun-free’ society. We can make allowances for those who want to hunt to check guns out of a government armory much like a person can check out a book from a public library. There is no need for anyone to own his own gun. Once I’m president we’re going to make that happen.”

Gingrich Makes Self Available for VP Spot

Saying he “is putting the country ahead of partisanship,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich announced his availability as a vice-presidential running mate “for either candidate.” Speculation about such a possibility heated up this week when Gingrich called Hillary Clinton’s speech after she clinched enough delegates for the Democratic presidential nomination “spectacular.” Earlier he had spoken favorably about GOP nominee Donald Trump.

Listening to Hillary the other night I realized what a strong candidate she is,” Gingrich said. “She’s got the experience and the gravitas that this country needs. That’s not to say that Donald Trump wouldn’t also be a good choice. He’s got a freshness and drive about him that offers people a sense of confidence in the future.”

Basically, I’m torn,” Gingrich lamented. “I’ve always been a Republican and would like to stay loyal to the Party. I could fill in the experience gap that Donald faces vs. Hillary if he puts me on the ticket with him. I think we’d make a great team. On the other hand, bipartisan tickets have had their place in American history. Lincoln, for example, chose a former Democrat as his first VP and another Democrat for his second term. If Hillary were to choose me it’d be one of the great pairings in our nation’s history.”

The former House Speaker admitted that “the decision, of course, is out of my hands. All I can do is offer my services on a ‘first-come, first-serve’ basis. It will come down to whoever is quicker on the draw. I’ll be standing by ready to answer whichever call comes first.”

Feds to Crackdown on Temporary Health Insurance

A clause in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) allows individuals who are between jobs to purchase temporary health insurance policies. The Department of Health and Human Services has announced it will change the rules to limit these policies to three months duration and ban renewals.

The problem with these policies according to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell is “they fall short of the President’s vision for how Americans ought to be insured. These temporary plans don’t cover everything we think should be covered. Notably absent from most temporary coverage policies are items like gender reassignment surgery, mental health, and drugs. The President has been adamant that these items are crucial components of comprehensive health insurance.”

A possible additional incentive for people to purchase these temporary plans is that they are cheaper than Obamacare. For example, an ObamaCare Bronze plan with a $6,000 deductible costs $184 a month while a short-term plan with a $5,000 deductible costs only $58 a month.

Burwell called the cost comparison unfair. “This temporary insurance is focused solely on the individual’s needs as he or she perceives them. Obamacare is focused on society’s needs. A self-centered individual may not appreciate the benefits to others from a plan that overcharges him in order to cover the needs of others. Changing this mindset is one of the key objectives of the ACA. The rule changes we are implementing will help correct this mistaken way of thinking by forcing everyone to comply with the ACA’s mandated coverage.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our 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.

 

 

Obama Says He’s Not a ‘Gun Grabber’

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

JohnIn response to an audience member’s concern that Democrats want to take guns away from law-abiding people, President Obama sought to reassure the man that his fears were exaggerated.

The notion that I, or Hillary or Democrats or whoever want to personally grab everyone’s guns is just not true,” he said. “I would never grab anyone’s gun, but I think we can all agree that there are some dangerous elements in our society who ought not to have them.”

What we need are sensible controls over who can and can’t have guns,” the president continued. “Who can better make this determination than law enforcement authorities? Police have to deal with the criminal population on a daily basis. Surely we can trust their judgment. I don’t see anything wrong with individuals having to prove to police their need to be personally armed before they are granted permission to have a firearm.”

The president rebuffed the argument that the high homicide rate in Chicago—a city with extremely strict control over gun ownership—undermines the “gun control” model he holds out as the solution. “Clearly, too many people are getting shot in my hometown,” Obama admitted. “What that tells me is that the controls that exist are insufficient. Obviously, stronger measures are called for. At a minimum we need to know where all the guns are. A universal registration database would enable us to move quickly to disarm those we deem a threat.”

There have been more guns sold since I’ve been president than just about any time in U.S. History,” Obama observed. “This is the exact opposite of what I would have liked to see happen. I regret not taking the actions necessary to have prevented this arms race.”

Thugs Attack Trump Supporters, Mayor Blames Candidate

Attendees of a Donald Trump presidential rally in San Jose, California were set upon and beaten by anti-Trump “protesters” this past week. Mayor Sam Liccardo blamed the candidate.

I personally would never physically attack a political opponent,” Liccardo reassured. “But neither am I ready to absolve Trump for his role in provoking the violence. California was once part of Mexico before it was illegally seized by the United States in 1848. Donald Trump hasn’t denounced this thievery. To the contrary, he has stridently threatened to eject Mexicans who are trying to repatriate this territory.”

San Jose is a sanctuary city,” Liccardo pointed out. “We have promised immigrants that they are safe here. By coming here and flaunting his anti-Mexican views Trump has threatened their safety. It should not be surprising that some of them would try to fight back. The injuries suffered by Trump’s supporters could’ve been avoided if he had stayed in his own country.”

Liccardo said he was thankful that “this whole Trump thing will be just a short-lived phenomenon. Hillary Clinton will put an end to it in the November election. She will bestow voting rights on Mexican immigrants and they will peacefully reestablish Mexican sovereignty over the stolen land.”

In related news, George Mason University professor David Alpher warned that “Trump supporters are worse than ISIS and al-Qaeda. These Islamic terrorists pose no significant threat to our government. Trump, on the other hand, could, with the support of a sufficient number of voters, seize control of our government. This is what we progressives must unite against and do everything in our power to prevent.”

Administration “Not Disappointed” with Job Numbers

Though the Bureau of Labor Statistics report for May showed an anemic 38,000 new jobs were created during the month and a record 94,708,000 Americans were not in the labor force, Obama Administration Press Secretary Josh Earnest insisted that “we are not disappointed with these numbers.”

Those who can’t grasp the president’s goals for the transformation of this country harp on the point that 38,000 new jobs are far too few to accommodate this country’s monthly 200,000 population increase,” Earnest complained. “Likewise, they see the expansion of the contingent not in the workforce as a negative. They’ve got it exactly backwards. The President sees these figures as proof of progress.”

Work is a disutility,” Earnest explained. “People only do it because they have to. If they could get everything they want without having to work that would be ideal. Well, the president’s program has made this possible for more people than ever before in our history. A better way of looking at the numbers is to see that fewer than 20 percent of the additional 200,000 persons in the population will be forced to take jobs. More than 80 percent are spared this fate. Nearly 95 million Americans are now freed from the rat race. The president is proud of this achievement.”

Proud as the president may be, he realizes there is still much work to be done,” Earnest added. “Sadly, more than 62 percent of the adult population are still employed. This is an improvement over the nearly 66 percent in this predicament at the start of the president’s first term. But the gains have been painfully slow and could easily be reversed if current policies aren’t continued in the next administration, as seems likely if the GOP retakes the White House.”

Albright: “No Proof Clinton Emails Hurt Anyone”

Former Clinton Administration Secretary of State Madeleine Albright suggested that the inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s email practices during her tenure as Obama’s Secretary of State “has gone far enough.”

Okay, she made a mistake and some laws may have been broken, but there’s no proof that the way she handled her email has hurt anyone,” Albright contended. “It’s time for the persecution of this great American to end.”

The possibility that Hillary’s unsecured emails containing classified material might have been hacked and, thereby, exposed covert operatives to potentially fatal risk was brushed aside. “There’s no definitive proof that her emails were hacked,” Albright argued. “Even if there were there would be no way to tell if the deaths of any US assets were the result of such a breach or due to other causes. Who knows for sure whether it was Hillary’s careless handling of his communications regarding the gun-running operation or a video insulting Islam that caused the attack that led to Ambassador Stevens’ death?”

While Albright remains confident that no harm was done, federal records reveal that Hillary Clinton posted and shared the names of concealed U.S. intelligence officials on her unprotected email system. State Department spokeswoman Nicole Thompson said the Department “has no comment on this matter. Some of those in a position to know say they do not recall. Others have asserted their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.”

Albright said she was much more concerned about the danger of Donald Trump becoming president. “He’s completely outside the mainstream of foreign policy thinking,” she asserted. “He doesn’t see the need to confront Russia. He criticized President Obama’s deal with Iran. He demands that other countries pay the United States for the cost of defending them. No one else shares these views. If he is elected the last 20 years of US foreign policy could be completely undone. That would be dangerous.”

In related news, the State Department professed itself to be at a dead-end regarding who authorized lying to the media about the Iran nuclear deal. Spokesman Mark Toner admitted that “obviously, someone told the video technician to delete that information from the briefing, but no one will own up to doing it.” State Department Press Secretary Jen Psaki may have come closest to an admission by suggesting “there are times when diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress.”

Convicted Felon Backed by Obama AG

President Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have joined former director of the Phoenix VA Medical Center Sharon Helman’s suit against wrongful termination. Helman was fired in 2014 following the nationwide VA scandal that erupted after it came to light that veterans were dying while waiting for care at the facilities she oversaw. She was also subsequently convicted of a felony after pleading guilty to accepting bribes.

Despite this blemished performance in her job, Helman is now contending that her firing was too hasty. Lynch agreed, saying that “the 21-day limit for filing an appeal of the firing was too short a time. Typically, the whole process of reviewing a government employee’s status takes months or even years. This is the standard that employees like Ms. Helman had come to expect. The legislation passed in 2014 expediting the process overturned these expectations and is, therefore, unconstitutional.”

Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga), chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, characterized Lynch’s claim as “creative fiction. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a government employee’s job status is immune to changes in legislation. Just because these bureaucrats have imagined themselves to be entitled to perpetual employment doesn’t make it a right. For the Administration to side with this miscreant is an outrage.”

Bill Would Criminalize Undercover Filming at Abortion Facilities

California State Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles) is sponsoring legislation that would criminalize undercover reporting of misdeeds occurring at abortion facilities. The bill A.B. 1671, imposes penalties of up to a year behind bars and/or a $2,500 fine for a first offense.

Abortion is an endorsed practice in this state,” Gomez said. “We need to protect its providers from harassment by those who oppose it.”

Gomez cited “the horrendous invasion of privacy perpetrated by the Center for Medical Progress’ undercover videos of Planned Parenthood’s negotiations for the sale of baby parts as the primary inspiration for this legislation. The contention that these sales were illegal doesn’t justify the despicable methods used to expose this great organization to unwanted publicity and potential prosecution.”

The actions of the Center for Medical Progress have already had a ‘chilling effect’ on the industry,” the Assemblyman warned. “If we do not act an incalculable number of unwanted children could be born to who knows what cumulative destructive consequence.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our 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.

 

President Suggests Hillary’s Email ‘a Matter for Voters to Decide’

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

JohnIrritated that the media would dare to pose a question about the legality of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unsecured email communications, President Obama refused to comment, suggesting that “whether she did anything that was really wrong is a matter for voters to decide. And from what I’ve seen so far, she’s on her way to securing the Democratic nomination for president. I think that says the majority of Americans are okay with how she’s handled it.”

The media’s unwelcome inquiry was spurred by an 83-page State Department Inspector General’s report calling Clinton’s email operation an “inexcusable and willful disregard of the rules. Contrary to the Secretary’s public statements, her use of a private server was not ‘allowed’ as she has alleged. It was in direct violation of State Department regulations that the Secretary had previously cited in issuing punishments to lower-ranking violators. There is no record of her receiving a valid exemption from these regulations from any higher-ranking authority.”

A key piece of evidence in the IG’s report cited Secretary Clinton’s warning to all State Department personnel that “personal email accounts could be compromised and officials should avoid conducting official Department business from personal e-mail accounts.”

Among the classified information showing up in the Secretary’s unsecured email was long-time Clinton family confidant Sid Blumenthal’s message urging Hillary “to expedite the overthrow of Libya’s Mohamar Qadaffi before his scheme of establishing a 7-billion dollar fund of gold-backed dinars undercuts the U.S. government’s ability to control the oil industry.” The overthrow was expedited. Qadaffi was murdered and the country thrown into a chaos that later resulted in the assassination of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens in 2012.

Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook denounced the IG report, calling it “as gross an invasion of privacy that any public figure has had to endure. The staff that were under Secretary Clinton’s direction were instructed to never speak to anyone, ever, on the topic of her private email account. That some of these staffers have talked to the Inspector General is a betrayal of the first magnitude. Those undertaking the tasks of governing this country need to know that their orders are heeded and obeyed. Sad to say, the Secretary’s orders on this matter were neither heeded nor obeyed. We’re confident that voters will correct this injustice by electing Hillary president in November.”

In related news, Judge Emmett Sullivan ordered that videos of Clinton aides’ testimony on the email scandal “be sealed so as not to unduly diminish Secretary Clinton’s chance of being elected president. If we want the best and brightest of Americans to seek and obtain the reins of power we need to protect them from excessive intrusion into their efforts to serve the public.” Judge Sullivan said he would allow “written transcripts to be released to the media” in order to “deflect charges of a ‘cover-up.’ The written word is a format with which the vast majority are not adept. Officially, the information will be available, but few will read it.”

Professor Resigns to Protest Freedom of Speech

Contending that “so-called free speech is delusional,” DePaul University sociology professor Dr. Shu-Ju Cheng has resigned her post in protest.

The event that spurred Dr. Cheng’s protest was the aborted speech of Milo Yiannopolis on the uiversity’s campus last week. Despite paying the university for security, student thugs were permitted to seize the stage and disrupt the speech. Cheng was outraged, not that thugs were allowed to drown out views with which they disagreed, but that Yiannopolis was invited “to air his anti-progressive message.”

The whole concept of freedom of speech is an antiquated idea derived from dead white men,” Cheng contended. “The University has a social obligation to protect students from exposure to such intellectual pollution. No one has the right to speak out against progressive ideas. No one has the right to oppose social justice. The University’s negligence in enforcing correct ideology forced the champions of progressive thought to violently suppress an odious advocate of racist oppression.”

Cheng rejected University officials’ arguments that “the disruption of Yiannopolis’ speech and the confiscation of his $1,000 security deposit” could be an acceptable middle ground. “There can be no compromise with the advocates of ‘white freedoms.’ Merely making them suffer a little bit falls far short of what should be our goal. Only when the enemies of social justice are crushed beneath a righteous wave of revolutionary action can we afford to relax our efforts.”

In related news, MSNBC pundit Chris Matthews praised violent anti-Trump protesters for “rising to the occasion. The prospect of a Trump presidency has got to be terrifying for these outcasts of white society. Just because they lack the skill to articulate their grievances in a civilized fashion doesn’t lessen the importance or legitimacy of their cause. In a way, cracking heads can be a very forceful way to change people’s minds.”

Iowa Supreme Court Bans Life Imprisonment for Teen Killers

In a 4-3 ruling, the Iowa Supreme Court banned lower courts from imposing life sentences for murders committed by teen-aged offenders. The ruling came in the case of Isaiah Richard Sweet, who was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder for fatally shooting his grandparents.

Justice Brent Appel wrote that “a life sentence for a crime such as this is disproportionate. The victims were old and fairly close to a natural death. For their grandson to be sentenced to a life term that could easily amount to multiple decades is a punishment that I believe the victims themselves would have deemed excessive and cruel.”

Appel also suggested that “completely neutralizing this segment of the population may have unforeseen long-term effects. Science has found uses for viruses that were not conceived of in earlier periods. Who is to say that there may not be a genuine need that teen-aged murderers might perform for the benefit of the human race in the future? Perhaps their winnowing of the human herd by eliminating the weak or the gullible is a useful element in the further evolution of the species.”

Dissenting Justice Edward Mansfield called the ruling “a usurpation of legislative authority. Elected representatives made the law that allowed for these kinds of sentences on a case-by-case basis. The court has overstepped its bounds issuing a blanket cancellation of the act of the voters’ representatives.” Dissenting Justice Bruce Zage characterized the ruling as “judicial activism at its worst.”

Law Would Let FBI Read Everyone’s Email

The 2017 Intelligence Authorization Act would enable the FBI to obtain anyone’s email records without a court order. All the agency would need is a National Security Letter, which would allow the FBI get information from companies without their customers knowing they were being investigated. The bill is co-sponsored by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and Vice Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif).

If we want the government to protect us we must let go of our obsession with personal privacy,” Sen. Feinstein urged. “The police are consummate professionals, not nosy busybodies. Unless you’re doing something wrong you have nothing to fear.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore), the lone dissenting voice on the 15-member Senate committee, said he wasn’t reassured by “the bland assumption that government can do no evil. History is replete with incidences of government spying on its citizens for the purpose of repressing dissent and accumulating power. Under our Constitution the Fifth Amendment was expressly intended to require a dispassionate judge to assess the justification before police officials were granted permission to intrude into private matters.”

Sen. Burr wondered whether “Sen. Wyden might be unduly paranoid. Doesn’t the bipartisan sponsorship of this legislation provide sufficient reassurance of its benevolent intent?” and suggested that “the numerous examples of illegal intrusion into private affairs by government agencies has shown itself to be unacceptably dangerous. Giving these intrusions a statutory foundation will protect government employees from unnecessary impediments to their law-enforcement duties and undesirable repercussions from breaking the law.”

VA Waits for Ailing Vets “Not So Bad”

This week, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert McDonald rebuffed critics of the agency’s long queues for medical treatment of ailing veterans, comparing them to the long lines to get on rides at Disneyland. “No one is on the Disney Corporation’s case for the lengthy wait-times at their theme parks,” McDonald asserted. “Why should we get worked up over wait-times at VA hospitals?”

You know, if people can tolerate waiting an hour for something as frivolous as a roller coaster ride shouldn’t they be willing to wait a reasonable amount of time for something as crucial as medical care?” the Secretary asked. “As every vet should be aware from his combat experience, sometimes you have to wait for the medic to get to you. Sometimes he can’t get there in time. It’s all part of the risk that each soldier took on when he enlisted.”

McDonald further insisted that “the veterans trying to get care at the VA are the lucky ones. They made it back. The unlucky ones died on the battlefield. I think it’s time for the survivors to count their blessings and stop whining about what, in the grander scheme of things, is really their good fortune.”

In related news, Reps. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass) and Bobby Scott (D-Va) have introduced the “Do No Harm Act” in Congress. The bill bars anyone from using a religious objection to decline to perform or participate in a medical procedure mandated by the government. “The health of everyone is of vital concern to the government,” Kennedy declared. “No one should be allowed to interfere with the implementation of this responsibility. For example, under our bill, no doctor or health care facility could refuse to perform an abortion requested by a patient. Likewise, no patient could refuse to undergo an abortion if it is determined to be necessary. We need to get past the notion that health is a personal matter. The collective well-being of the whole has got to take precedence over selfish individual prejudices. Our bill will achieve that.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our 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.

Sen. McCain in Lockstep with Obama on Drafting Women for Combat

By Tony Perkins, President
Family Research Council

After the last seven and a half years, it’s safe to say that the greatest threat to our military is the administration in charge of it. The legacy of the Obama administration will not be advancing the war against global jihad, but rather advancing the culture war — which started with the toppling of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and continued on to the latest phase of the military’s sexual revolution: open transgenderism and opening the draft to women. In this administration, gender isn’t just being redefined in bathrooms, but on battlefields, where this president seems all too content to assign America’s wives and daughters to the most dangerous ground combat units in the world.

And unfortunately, he’s had plenty of help. In the Senate, where members are debating the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Navy veteran John McCain (R-Ariz.) gave the effort a helping hand by including an amendment into the bill from three female Republicans, Senators Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Joni Ernst (Iowa), and Deb Fischer (Nebr.), that would require women to register for selective service — a decision that even his primary challenger couldn’t believe. Dr. Kelli Ward, who’s trying to unseat the longtime senator, is already making McCain’s position a campaign issue. Like most parents, she can’t imagine a nation ordering her child to war. “I have a 20-year-old daughter, Katie, and when I think of her being forced to go into combat, especially in the Middle East against the barbarians who are there. Who are basically salivating at the prospect of getting their hands on our young women… I have no qualms about women who want to volunteer and who want to go and do whatever they want to do in our military — but to force them to a draft is unacceptable in my opinion.”

As a father of three girls, I couldn’t agree more. I will support my daughters if they decide to serve in the military, but I will not stand by if the government tries to draft them in the military. What does it say about a nation that sends its mothers and daughters to fight its battles?

In part, this is all the unfortunate byproduct of opening infantry and other front line positions to women, which Defense Secretary Ash Carter approved earlier this year over the objections of military leaders. When the DOD removes the barriers to women serving in all positions, it removes most barriers to drafting them as well. And while some senators seem either oblivious to the risks or too frightened to fight the political correctness, plenty of conservatives are standing up to the members of both parties who want to use our military as the laboratory for social change.

“I cannot in good conscience vote to draft our daughters into the military, sending them off to war, and forcing them into combat,” Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) argued. Together with Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah), Cruz is doing everything he can to strip the language out of the high chamber’s NDAA. He’ll have the support of more than six dozen conservative leaders, veterans, and activists — including FRC’s Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin (U.S. Army-Ret.). In a letter representing hundreds of thousands of American families, the group urged every member of the Senate to join Mike Lee in pushing back on the real war on women.

“We strongly support the heroic, capable, and honorable women who choose and will serve our country in the military…” the group writes. “There are exceptional women who are capable of meeting or exceeding the combat standards put forth by each branch. We support them as we do all individuals willing to put their lives on the line for the greatest nation in the history of the world. However, the female draft discussion should revolve around combat readiness, efficiency, and national security, and weeding through applicants that are overwhelmingly biologically unable to meet combat standards would be a logistical nightmare and would force the lowering of combat standards. The capabilities of these rare women should not mean all appropriately aged women are involuntarily eligible for combat.”

Not to mention, they write, “Women are not clamoring for this ‘opportunity.’ Only 15 percent of our active-duty military forces are women. We find it demeaning to suggest that women who have instead chosen to serve our nation in other civilian roles — such as manufacturing, commerce, medicine or even caring for their children — are not contributing to our nation. They are indeed!” At the very least, this issue deserves to be a standalone bill, debated out in the open after a thorough and transparent review. Congress needs to decide: Is the military’s goal to be the great societal equalizer — or the most lethal fighting force in the world? Contact Republican Senators Kelly Ayotte (202-224-3324), Joni Ernst (202-224-3254), and Deb Fischer (202-224-6551), and let them know that it’s one thing for our daughters to choose to fight and quite another to force them to.

Arizona Joins in Federal Lawsuit against Obama’s Mandate Putting Children at Risk

Attorney General Mark Brnovich and Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas today announced that they have joined nine other states in a federal lawsuit to challenge President Obama’s mandate requiring all public K-12 schools to open up boys’ and girls’ locker rooms and restrooms to students of the opposite sex, based on student perceptions of their “gender identity.”

Since the president has threatened to deny federal funding to all schools that object to this outrageous decree,  Arizona has joined Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Maine, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin in a lawsuit filed in the United States Court for the Northern District of Texas. The lawsuit is focused on who should set these sensitive policies – the federal government via executive order or states and local school districts. The challenge seeks declaratory relief against a number of federal agencies in order to block the implementation of the administration’s unconstitutional interpretation of the law. The Heber-Overgaard Unified School District has also joined the state’s lawsuit as a plaintiff.

“President Obama has no business setting locker room and restroom policies for our schools,” said Attorney General Brnovich. “Deciding how to protect our children and preserve their privacy, while balancing these complicated issues, is best done locally and not by some knee-jerk decree from Washington.”

“When Arizona students attend school, they deserve a safe environment that is free from bullying and discrimination, regardless of their gender identity,” said Superintendent Douglas. “I know that our districts and schools have policies in place to ensure that is the case. The fact that the federal government has yet again decided that it knows what is best for every one of our local communities is insulting and, quite frankly, intolerable.”

On May 13th, the president issued so-called “significant guidance” to K-12 schools nationwide detailing how transgender students should be granted access to Title IX facilities including restrooms, locker rooms, and showers. The guidance came with the threat of withholding federal funding if schools are found by the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice to be out of compliance.