Rand Paul: “Today Is The Day We Begin To Fight Back” (Video)

On a day that that the GOP threw in the towel on the debt ceiling fight – these are welcome words.

Senator Rand Paul’s PAC announced today that he is suing the Obama administration over the NSA’s illegal  surveillance of American citizens.

“The Constitution is not a disposable piece of parchment to be ignored and abused at the president’s whim,” he said in a video statement, earlier today.  “Washington leaders are expected to obey, and protect what they took an oath to uphold. And if this means taking them to court over it – so be it. If the seizure and surveillance of Americans’ phone records across the board is now considered a legitimate security precaution, there’s literally no protection of any kind guaranteed to any American citizen. We cannot allow this administration to continue to treat the Constitution as a dead letter. I will continue to fight this overzealous government surveillance program, and I invite you to join me. Today’s the day we begin to fight back.”

Via PJ Media:

Paul will file his lawsuit on Wednesday morning at the U.S. District Court in D.C., joined by former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe.

The class-action lawsuit will be filed against Obama, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Director of the National Security Agency Keith Alexander and FBI Director James Comey.

The complaint? “I am filing a lawsuit against President Barack Obama because he has publicly refused to stop a clear and continuing violation of the 4th Amendment,” Paul said in a statement. “The Bill of Rights protects all citizens from general warrants. I expect this case to go all the way to the Supreme Court and I predict the American people will win.”

You can join Paul’s class action lawsuit, here.


Since we’re talking about “Big Brother” sticking his nose where it doesn’t belong.

AoSHQ: The FCC Will Begin Investigating Bias In the Media (and By That, They Mean Conservative Bias)

The transformation of America continues apace.

News organizations often disagree about what Americans need to know. MSNBC, for example, apparently believes that traffic in Fort Lee, N.J., is the crisis of our time. Fox News, on the other hand, chooses to cover the September 2012 attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi more heavily than other networks. The American people, for their part, disagree about what they want to watch.But everyone should agree on this: The government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.

Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission, where I am a commissioner, does not agree. Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.

The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

How does the FCC plan to dig up all that information? First, the agency selected eight categories of “critical information” such as the “environment” and “economic opportunities,” that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their “news philosophy” and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information.

I was wondering when they get to work on a new version of “the Fairness Doctrine”.


I understand that leftists, of course, have the right to agitate politically for their preferred policies. I do not deny that.

But we are witnessing here the government — the government! — actively seeking to create a hostile and frightening legal environment for anyone who disagrees with the leftist cause.

They are basically putting people on notice that there is a “right” way to report the news, and a “wrong” way, and the right way will let you keep your broadcasting license, and the wrong way might just lose it for you.

The Obama administration targeting critics and punishing its enemies? Who could have seen this coming?

America Loses An Icon


I grew up watching old Shirley Temple movies on TV, and so did my girls. When my oldest daughter was in first grade, she was given a Thanksgiving assignment to write a story about a Turkey using a real or fictional character. Of course she chose Shirley Temple Turkey, and made the story about her travails getting ready for the big Turkey Show at Thanksgiving. It was the cutest thing, ever.

A couple of years ago, I had an argument with a friend about Shirley Temple. I was talking about how she had been such an extraordinary talent – and there would never be another child star like her. She had it all: looks, talent, personality. She could sing, she could dance – but most of all she had enough charm and charisma to be the nation’s top star from 1935 to 1939. She was bigger than Clark Gable and Greta Garbo combined. She was the “it girl.”

She went on to star in a few more movies as a young adult, but eventually quit showbiz and became active in Republican politics (another reason to love her.) She represented the country well as the Ambassador to Ghana, and later Czechoslovakia.

But I was talking about her life in the past tense – sad that she was no longer with us…

“But she’s still alive,”  my friend said.

“No, she isn’t, I replied. “She died years ago. I remember – it made me sad…”

“No, I’m pretty sure she’s still alive,” he insisted, whipping out his iPhone to look it up.

Damn if he wasn’t right. And I was glad he was right. It was nice to know that the world still had Shirley Temple in it.

Alas, news came out today, that the great Hollywood icon breathed her last Monday night at her home in Woodside, Calif. She was 85.

Rest in peace, dear Shirley. Truly, there will never be another one like you.

Here she is singing and dancing in one of her earliest flicks, 1934’s “Baby Take a Bow.” She would have been just 5 or 6, here.

Shock: Hidden In WH Employer Mandate Delay – Employers Not Allowed To Fire Anyone (Video)

On Monday night’s Kelly File, Megyn Kelly covered the  ObamaCare Employer Mandate delay, focusing “on one little nugget” that was “found under a mountain of new regulations” which stipulates that in order to be eligible for this gift from the White House, “the employer may not reduce the size of its workforce or its overall hours of service of its employees.”

“Basically”, she continued, “what the government is telling employers is that you will not fire a single person. You will not lay off a single person – if you want to take advantage of our gift. And you have to certify it under penalty of perjury to the IRS that you didn’t do that!”

How is this not fascism as defined as “a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc.”

Marc Thiessen says it’s an “act of desperation,” but desperate or no –  the situation calls for the attention of Congress right away. The government has no business managing the affairs of private businesses. “We have a free market economy, Thiessen later noted, “it’s not a command economy!”

But ever since the Democrats shoved ObamaCare down the  throats of the unwilling American public – we’ve all had to play along with the Little Dictator’s little diktats – whether we wanted to or not.

Thiessen went on to expose a little known nugget he found in the CBO report.

“I dug through the CBO report and on page 118, appendix C, there’s this nugget, this little bombshell,” Thiessen said.

The report reads: “CBO estimates that the ACA will cause a reduction of roughly 1 percent in aggregate labor compensation over the 2017-2024 period, compared with what it would have been otherwise.”

“That means that Americans will face a 1 percent pay cut due to the law.”

“Obama is giving workers a 70 billion a year pay cut through ObamaCare, he explained. “And worse, it’s going to come from low and middle income workers who are the ones who are dependent on the subsidies of ObamaCare.

Kelly had Judge Andrew Napolitano to talk about Obama’s  latest abuses of executive power.  Very quietly on Friday,  Obama unilaterally changed the immigration laws set forward by Congress to allow refugees seeking asylum into the country that have supported terrorists in a “limited” capacity.

“If the Congress of the United States had written the laws that limit the entry of terrorists into the United States that way, there’s an argument in favor of it and there’s an argument against it,” he said. “But the Congress didn’t write the laws that way. The Congress forbade from permitting to come into the United States anyone who has aided a terrorist or a terrorist organization, voluntarily or involuntarily.”

Napolitano continued, “But to this president, if he disagrees with the law, he can change it on his own … it seems to be getting worse and worse.”

All eyes turn to Congress to see if they actually do something about this latest spate of alarming lawlessness on the part of our president – or do they merely post more stern tweets and photoshops?

“His job is to enforce the law faithfully, meaning as it was written, not as he would like it to be,” Napolitano said.

“All of this comes down to a president who believes he is majestic … who believes that he has a certain ability far beyond what the Constitution has given him,” he said.

Hat tip: Geo

Linked by Doug Ross, and Tea Party Command Center and Adrienne’s Corner, and The Lonely Conservative, and Viking Pundit, and The Hayride,  thanks!