The KRA Blog Rotating Header Image

U.S. House

TRACKSIDE © by John D’Aloia Jr.

Apr 4th, 2011
by KRA ED.
No comments yet

TRACKSIDE © by John D’Aloia Jr.
3 April 2011 AD

Two quotes start off this TRACKSIDE, one from an early American statesman and one from a noted geopolitical analyst:

“The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.” –Senator Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

“Morally, committing the lives of citizens to waging war requires meticulous attention to the law and proprieties. … I am making the argument that the suspension of Section 8 of Article I as if it is possible to amend the Constitution with a wink and nod represents a mortal threat to the republic. If this can be done, what can’t be done?” – - George Friedman, STRATFOR

The failure of Congress to hold the President accountable for plunging us into war without a formal declaration by Congress does represent a mortal threat to our country. Congress whistles past the graveyard while the President shreds the Constitution. What Congressional authority will he usurp next? Maybe the budget. He could declare a national fiscal emergency that demands unilateral action, that a Congressional budget debate would take too long to keep the dollars flowing to his favored constituencies. Or will he just dismiss Congress as irrelevant? That in effect is what he has done by his actions.

The President has said that he wants Gadhafi to be ousted, but our mission is just to enforce the no-fly zone – he would not put “boots on the ground.” We now find that we do have boots on the ground – it was a hard swallow from Day One to accept “no boots on the ground” – somebody had to be providing time-sensitive targeting data, laser pointing for laser-guided weaponry, and battle space coordination with the rebels. To compound the folly, the Administration is talking about arming the rebels, who they admit, they do not know much about. Just what we need, more printing-press dollars being used to put weapons in the hands of al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood and to put our country deeper in debt. (But then, the Administration has experience with giving weapons to bad guys with its Operation Gunrunner on the Mexican border.)

And speaking of enforcing the no-fly zone, it would certainly be appropriate for NATO (or whomever is pulling the strings), to enunciate the enforcement rules of engagement. It appears that the no-fly zone was endangered by Libyan small craft in the harbor of Misratah. To take out this danger to our aircraft, a U.S. P-3 patrol aircraft launched one or more Maverick missiles at a 40-foot coast guard cutter that had to be beached, and an A-10 Warthog made splinters of one small boat with its 30mm Gatling gun. All in all, in the words of one commentator, it is silly to call it a no-fly zone when it is obvious that the target list goes well beyond just enforcing a no-fly zone.

The Patriot Post raised another question about the no-fly zone and the “humanitarian” basis for our undeclared war on Libya in the April 1st edition:

”Reasonable people have asked how Libya qualifies for a NATO-imposed no-fly zone and air strikes to neuter the Libyan military, but Syria is somehow different. Don’t the Syrians want exactly the same relief from a murderous, tyrannical government that the Libyans want? Isn’t the regime using deadly force against civilians? What happened to the “interests and values” about which Obama so sanctimoniously opined?”

And it is not just Syria that belies the veracity of the President’s stated rationale for taking us to war against Libya. Scan the news and you can find repressive regimes slaughtering people: Ivory Coast, Bahrain, and Yemen to name a few. Why just pick Libya? An easy target to build 2012 election campaign points? Doing the will of Europe for oil? Or something more devious? The President has said that the mission is not regime change, but it has been reported that a European diplomat admitted that the no-fly zone was but a diplomatic smokescreen designed to get Arab states on board with a military operation that had regime change as the real goal. I do not doubt it in the least. An author on the American Thinker website, in the same vein, ends his article asking:

“How do voters feel about Congress being sidelined to serve the interests of the Arab League?”

The President lies to the American people and gives Congress the mushroom treatment. Articulated or not, we are in a Constitutional crisis. When is Congress going to stand up and be counted? When is Congress going to act to protect the supremacy of our Constitution, the bulwark of our freedom?

See you Trackside.

Where were you Raj?

Sep 7th, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

Democrat Raj Goyle’s latest TV ad begs for one question to be asked of the candidate; Where were you?

Where were you Raj when your party was passing stimulus after stimulus, bailout after bailout of corporations that deserved to go under? Where were you while your party took over one industry after another? Where were you while your President advocated (and continues to advocate) centralization of the US economy, lead by an ineffective government?

After all Mr. Goyle, you are a prominent politician, a former ACLU lawyer who, according to your own campaign finance records, has numerous political contacts in Washington D.C. When your party was heading up the take over one industry after another, what were you doing to stop it? You say you want to represent the people of south-central Kansas, but in reality that is something you can do without a title or an office in D.C., isn’t it? So what have you done besides produce an ad to get yourself elected to stop the bailouts, to stop the madness?

Nothing Mr. Goyle. You’ve done nothing.

You’ve done nothing because you are 100% in lockstep with Speaker Pelosi and President Obama. Your lower than the corporations you skewer in your ads, a politician who will do anything, say anything to get elected.

Take a look at the ad and decide for yourself. Goyle has been described as charismatic and charming by some, but this ad certainly doesn’t show it. Goyle comes across as so wimpy he must feign anger at policies his party continues to support.

Moore calls self a “moderate conservative”

Aug 25th, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

Click for Moore's full letter to supporters

In an email to supporters today, Stephene Moore called herself a, “moderate and fiscal conservative.” What exactly that means, of course, is anyone’s guess.

It’s no secret that her husband has been anything but a fiscal conservative after supporting government take overs of every industry you can think of, from the financial sector to automobiles to our health care system. In an article on PrimeBuzz of the Kansas City Star, Stephene stated that she basically agreed with her husband’s votes, noting only that she wanted more oversight (control) of the bank bailout bill, leaving the reader to postulate that she would have supported such a bailout if more oversight had been included. What exactly is “moderate” or “fiscally conservative” about more taxes and more bailouts isn’t explained in her letter.

In this year’s election there are numerous candidates calling themselves “moderate” and “fiscally conservative” when their record reflects something much different. The fact is if voters want the change they thought they were getting in 2008, they must look past the buzz words certain candidates love to throw around. And that includes “conservative” that apparently every Republican candidate liked to call themselves before August, again many times in spite of a very liberal record.

Now, as far as how one can be a “moderate” and “fiscal conservative,” I’m at a loss. It would seem the label machine at Moore’s campaign headquarters seems to be working overtime.

With stagnant poll numbers, Wasinger should bow out, endorse Huelskamp

Jul 28th, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

KWCH Channel 12 in Wichita today released a new poll of the First Congressional District showing a three-way tie for the lead between state Sens. Tim Huelskamp and Jim Barnett and businessman Tracey Mann.

Candidate Rob Wasinger of Cottonwood Falls polled at only 12%, which is still within the margin of error of his showing in previous polls. Today’s results show what previous polls have illustrated for some time now, that if Rob Wasinger continues to be a candidate in this race, he may single-handedly split the conservative vote and give a win to liberal Jim Barnett or Tracey Mann.

In any other election year, Rob would more than likely be a perfectly acceptable candidate. But in today’s political environment of candidates saying one thing and then once elected doing another, it’s vital that voters in the First District elect a candidate with a proven track record of conservative values. Tim Huelskamp has a 16 year record as a state Senator where he has consistently fought for conservative principles, whether they be popular or not.

In light of Sen. Huelskamp’s outstanding record and superior position in the polls, conservative voters should rally around his candidacy immediately.

With only a week until election day, it has become clear that Rob cannot win this election; all he can do is hand the seat to a liberal Republican for years to come.

Rob Wasinger is a good man and candidate, but in this particular race the choice just couldn’t be more clear. Trusting that Rob values the conservative movement more than his personal political career, it would be prudent for him to end his campaign and immediately support Tim Huelskamp.

Goyle forced to remind voters he’s a Democrat

Jul 26th, 2010
by admin.
1 comment

In what can only be interpreted as a sign that the Goyle campaign is seriously worried that he may not make it past the Democratic primary, Raj’s latest TV ad ends with a reminder to, “Vote for Goyle in the August 3rd Democratic Primary.”

In fact, the ad is so new the campaign hasn’t even uploaded it to its YouTube channel yet. I’ll add the link here when it is online.

Goyle’s previous ads make no mention of his party affiliation or previous ties to the ACLU or other liberal groups. In expected liberal Kansas style, Goyle attempts to portray himself with the usual buzz words “independent” and “Kansas values.” In a bit of irony, Goyle’s own campaign website header proclaims, “Good ideas don’t come with a party label. All that matters is whether it’s right for Kansas.”

That is, of course, as long as you make it past your primary. When that’s in doubt, then a party label comes in pretty handy.

It looks like his election year make-over was a little too effective. The latest poll in the fourth district had Goyle 3 points behind his Democratic challenger, Robert Tillman. Tillman claims to have spent less than $5,000 on the race while Goyle has collected over $1 million in campaign funds.

As Bob Weeks at Wichita Liberty noted previously, this year Raj Goyle voted more conservatively than Jean Schodorf, who is running for the same seat. What an example of things politicians will do to convince a voter they’re something they’ve never been in the past.

Could Kansas be the next South Carolina? It certainly looks like the Goyle campaign thinks it might.

KRA endorsed Mike Pompeo is the conservative candidate in the fourth district. Unlike Goyle or Schodorf, he’s run an issues oriented, hard hitting campaign that shows why his military and business experience is what’s needed in Washington.

← Earlier Posts