 |
| This is what awesome looks like |
Sunshine State Sarah | Meet Ted Cruz a.k.a. The Marco Rubio of TexasAnyway, the event will be at the popular Versailles Restaurant from noon to 1:30 pm. All the details are on the flyer (click to enlarge):
 |
| Sláinte! |
It’s St. Patrick’s Day, so I thought it would be fun to share with you the story of President Reagan’s surprise visit to Pat Troy’s Irish pub in Alexandria, Va.
The event, which occurred in 1988, was retold beautifully by Tom Purcell in 2003.
Here’s an excerpt:
When Troy was finished, he handed the president the microphone. The normally raucous crowd - remember, this was St. Patrick’s Day – became extraordinarily quiet. “They were spellbound,” said Troy. “I’ve never seen a large crowd that attentive in more than 20 years.”Reagan spoke off the top of his head. He graciously thanked Troy for having him for lunch. He said it was his great surprise — that his advance men set it up, and he was thankful. He talked about his father, an Irishman.“When I was a little boy, my father proudly told me that the Irish built the jails in this country,” he said, pausing expertly, “then proceeded to fill them.”
The crowd laughed heartily.“You have to understand that for a man in my position, I’m a little leery about ethnic jokes,” he said. The crowd roared. “The only ones I can tell are Irish.”He told a story about his visit to Ireland. He went to Castle Rock, the place where St. Patrick erected the first cross in Ireland.“A young Irish guide took me to the cemetery and showed me an ancient tombstone there,” he said. “The inscription read: ‘Remember me as you pass by, for as are you are so once was I, and as I am you too will be, so be content to follow me.”As Reagan paused, the crowd eagerly awaited his follow up.“Then I looked below the inscription,” he said, “where someone scratched in these words: ‘To follow you I am content, I wish I knew which way you went.’”The crowd roared loud and long, causing the president to deadpan to his advance men: “Why didn’t I find this place seven years ago?”
 |
| Running for Senate or just running his mouth? |
John suggested last month that I consider running for the Senate against Bill Nelson. His intent was clear and unambiguous and echoed his quotes in The Hill. However, I love the job I have and have no intention of running for the Senate.
 |
| Scarborough for Senate? Just kidding! |
@NRSC - THE NRSC is not courting Joe Scarborough for #FLSEN. The story is not true. http://j.mp/ey22AW
@JohnCornyn - Rumor control: Last cycle, Joe and I talked about his interest in NY, not FL Senate race, so this story is wrong.... http://fb.me/txwcxXh6
 |
| Burning bridges? |
In his past conversations with Senator Cornyn, Joe Scarborough had expressed an interest in perhaps running for a U.S. Senate seat in New York. To quote Joe’s own words today, his intent was ‘clear and unambiguous’ and we took him at his word that his interest was, and is, in New York. So not only did Senator Cornyn not ask him to run for the Senate in Florida, but for a number of reasons it stretches the bounds of credulity to even see why he would be considered a strong, viable candidate in Florida this cycle. There are already a number of far stronger candidates looking at the Florida Senate race and we are confident that any one of them can beat Bill Nelson in 2012. But we wish Joe the best of luck in his New York Senate pursuits and we remain fans of his cable show.Oh, snap! Jesmer doesn't stop at calling Scarborough a liar, he takes it a step further and says he'd be a lousy candidate. A liar and a loser? The sarcasm just drips from Jesmer's words. Sounds to me like even if the NRSC had an interest in Scarborough, they are dropping matches and a gasoline can on that bridge now.
Republicans in Washington are trying to recruit Joe Scarborough to run against Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) next year.
Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), who heads the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), told The Hill on Thursday that he has talked to Scarborough a couple times about a Senate bid. And he indicated he’s still working on persuading the MSNBC host to run for the upper chamber...
|
| Believe it or not, this guy was once elected to Congress as a Republican. |
 |
| Please forget we supported Charlie! Look, we have a huge Marco picture! |
This bill proposes [an] amendment to the Florida Constitution—one that would change the method by which Florida appellate judges are chosen. When the great treatise is eventually written on the History of Bad Ideas, an entire volume will be devoted to this one.John is absolutely right.
Currently, appellate judges (the judges on Florida’s five District Courts of Appeal and the justices on the Supreme Court of Florida) are selected through a constitutionally-mandated process that uses bodies known as Judicial Nominating Commissions (or JNCs). The JNCs—one for each appellate court—consist of attorneys and laypersons who are essentially appointed to the commissions by the governor. When a vacancy appears in an appellate court, an applicant for that seat submits an application for appointment to the court. The JNC then considers all of the applications, interviews the applicants, and deliberates. It then submits a list of at least three names, but no more than six, to the governor, who must then select the new judge from that list.
When this system was instituted in the 1970s, it replaced a system in which the governor alone selected the appellate judges. The purpose of the JNC system was to fix a judicial system that was broken—a system that had become a laughingstock because it was far-too-often tainted by appellate judges who were corrupt, incompetent, or mere political cronies of whoever happened to be governor. Often, judges fell into more than one of those categories. The JNCs were thus created “to screen applicants for judicial appointments within their respective jurisdictions and to nominate the three best qualified persons to the Governor for his appointment. The commissions were to be an arm of the executive appointive power to supplant, at least in part, the Governor's so-called ‘patronage committee’ composed of political supporters, to insure that politics would not be the only criteria in the selection of judges, and to increase generally the efficiency of the judicial appointive process.” In re Advisory Opinion to Governor, 276 So. 2d 25, 29 (Fla. 1973) (emphasis omitted).
In other words, “[t]he purpose of the judicial nominating commission is to take the judiciary out of the field of political patronage and provide a method of checking the qualifications of persons seeking the office of judge.” Id. at 30. “One of the principal purposes behind the provision for a nominating commission in the appointive process was . . . to place the restraint upon the ‘pork barrel’ procedure of purely political appointments without an overriding consideration of qualification and ability. It was sometimes facetiously said in former years that the best qualification to become a judge was to be a friend of the Governor! The purpose of such nominating commission, then, was to eliminate that kind of selection which some people referred to as ‘picking a judge merely because he was a friend or political supporter of the Governor’ thereby providing this desirable restraint upon such appointment and assuring a ‘merit selection’ of judicial officers.” Pleus v. Crist, 14 So. 3d 941, 944 (Fla. 2009) (quoting Spector v. Glisson, 305 So. 2d 777, 783 (Fla. 1974) (emphasis omitted)). The JNCs have, and were always intended to have, “constitutional independence.” Advisory Opinion, 276 So. 2d at 30.
This idiotic bill would return Florida to its failed past by eliminating JNCs for appellate judicial positions. If approved as an amendment to the state constitution, it would provide that appellate judges would merely be chosen by the governor, subject only to the approval of the state senate. The inevitable result of this would be a judicial system that is worse, weaker, less effective, and less honorable—one conducive to graft, corruption, cronyism, political patronage, and incompetence. No legitimate interest is served by such a change—none at all.
If anyone has a sufficient amount of shamelessness to try to defend this abomination, he or she will likely put forth an inapt, intellectually dishonest comparison to the method of selecting federal judges under Article III of the United States Constitution (under which judges are chosen by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate). Once again, don’t be fooled. The state of Florida and the United States are not interchangeable, and what is brilliant on a national level is ridiculously unsuitable for the state level. That isn’t a mere guess; we already KNOW that from past experience.
Now no one needs to say or think that my views on this subject should be taken with a grain of salt. I freely concede that my objectivity could reasonably be questioned by those who don’t know me well, given that I have recently been selected twice by the JNC for the Fifth District Court of Appeal as one of the six nominees to fill vacancies on that court. And yes, the second occasion was the debacle when Governor Crist unconstitutionally refused to make the appointment from the JNC’s list, until the Supreme Court of Florida was ultimately required to compel him to do so through a mandamus action.
But those who know me, even superficially, will realize that my own JNC experiences do not influence my opinion on this issue in the slightest. I revere the law. I regard the judicial system as a co-equal branch of government, just as our Founding Fathers intended. I prize the genius of the separation of powers and checks and balances that are so indispensable to our system. And I know that attacks upon the independence of the judiciary are attacks upon a cornerstone of our liberty...
In my two short months in office, it has become clear to me that the spending problem in Washington is far worse than many of us feared. For years, politicians have blindly poured more and more borrowed money into ineffective government programs, leaving us with trillion dollar deficits and a crippling debt burden that threatens prosperity and economic growth.Rubio is correct when he points out that Florida's balanced budget rules have served as a valuable restraint on our Legislature. A significant source of the problem in Washington is the federal government's ability to print more money and essentially write itself a blank check. Let's be direct: elected officials - regardless of party - often spend taxpayers' money irresponsibly. Any sort of defined limitation on their spending power forces legislatures to set priorities and make decisions because they cannot buy everything they want. Mandating balanced budgets is one of the most simple and direct restraints on wasteful spending.
In the Florida House of Representatives, where a balanced budget is a requirement, we had to make the tough choices to cut spending where necessary because it was required by state law. By no means was this an easy process, but it was our duty as elected officials to be accountable to our constituents and to future generations of Floridians. In Washington, a balanced budget amendment is not just a fiscally-responsible proposal, it’s a necessary step to curb politicians’ decades-long penchant for overspending.
Several senators have proposed balanced budget amendments that ensure Congress will not spend a penny more than we take in, while setting a high hurdle for future tax hikes. I am a co-sponsor of two balanced budget amendments, since it is clear that these measures would go a long way to reversing the spending gusher we’ve seen from Washington in recent years.
During my Senate campaign, while surrounded by the employees of Jacksonville’s Meridian Technologies, I proposed 12 simple ways to cut spending in Washington. That company, founded 13 years ago, has grown into a 200-employee, high-tech business, and the ideas I proposed would help ensure that similar companies have the opportunity to start or expand just like Meridian did.
To be clear, our unsustainable debt and deficits are threatening companies like Meridian and impeding job creation. In addition to proposing a balanced budget amendment, I recommended canceling unspent “stimulus” funds, banning all earmarks and returning discretionary spending to 2008 levels.
Fortunately, some of my ideas have found their way to the Senate chamber. The first bill I co-sponsored in the Senate was to repeal ObamaCare, the costly overhaul of our nation’s health care system that destroys jobs and impedes our economic recovery. Democratic leaders in the Senate have expressed their willingness to ban earmarks for two years after the Senate Republican conference adopted a moratorium. I have also co-sponsored the REINS Act, a common-sense measure that would increase accountability and transparency in our outdated and burdensome regulatory process. These bills, along with a balanced budget amendment, would help get our country back on a sustainable path and provide certainty to job creators.
While Republicans are proposing a variety of ideas to rein in Washington’s out-of-control spending, unfortunately, President Obama’s budget for the upcoming fiscal year proposes to spend $46 trillion, and even in its best year, the deficit would remain above $600 billion. Worst of all, the President’s budget completely avoids addressing the biggest drivers of our long-term debt – Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
Rather than tackle these tough, serious issues, President Obama is proposing a litany of tax hikes on small businesses and entrepreneurs, to the tune of more than $1.6 trillion. These tax increases destroy jobs, make us less competitive internationally and hurt our efforts to grow the economy and get our fiscal house in order.
A balanced budget amendment would be a necessary step in reversing Washington’s tax-borrow-spend mantra. It would force Congress to balance its budget each year – not allow it to pass our problems on to the next generation any longer.
 |
| What Congress does with your money |
 |
| We're broke. Broke, broke, B-R-O-K-E, broke. |
) was a great success, with over half of the list becoming law. Rubio has years of experience making tough budgetary decisions, under the constraint of that wonderful balanced-budget rule. I'm thrilled to see him continue this work in the U.S. Senate. |
| My Senator is cooler than your Senator. |
...It's not about partisanship or protests, but pride.
It is time to take out the trash... literally. In true Flash Mob fashion, on Sunday at exactly 1300 hours (1:00 pm for you non-military types) we will do an extensive police call (pick up the trash) around the capitol square. Regardless of the state the grounds are in, we will do this as both a literal and symbolic way to show our respect for our home.
TEA Partiers know how this is done. It is time to show OUR pride for OUR state OUR way and be the example.
Even if you cannot attend, please share this and invite all of your sane friends who share our love of Wisconsin.
No signs, no screaming, just a necessary cleaning.
Brutal reviews for Charlie Sheen’s Saturday night Webcast. Chris Nashawaty called it “a sloppy, self-indulgent bit of cringe theater” featuring “a posse of chuckleheads and enablers.”OK, so I'm not going to claim that was insightful social commentary. But I will say this, if anyone ever applies for a job with me and I see a "WINNING" wrist tattoo like Sheen shows off in this video, there is no way in H-E-double-hockey-sticks I'm hiring that person.
About 115,000 people tuned in to watch the godawful disaster, according to USA Today. One of the viewers, Michael van Poppel said, “Wish I could get my 50 minutes back.” Another viewer, Sarah Rumpf, said: “I don’t have the expertise to diagnose Sheen as bipolar but somethin ain’t right with that boy.”
...Yeah, [CBS and Warners Brothers] got their money’s worth out of Charlie and he gave them an easy out at just the time when they needed an easy out.
An acquaintance of mine shot these photos from the Titusville, FL causeway. They were spectacular enough that I thought I would send them to a few people...This was Discovery’s last flight.
The current launch manifest for the Shuttle program is [currently] only funded for one more shuttle flight. We will have a second flight set of hardware built and available, so the current thought is that if we can get the funding to continue operations for a few more months, we will have the second flight. That’s it. The end. No more shuttle program, and for the foreseeable future, no American manned spaceflight program.
I’ll call that the end of an era and shed a few tears.
 |
| No, the movie's not about me. But maybe it should be! |
