Gun Control Dictator?

January 17, 2013

So I woke up this morning to find a picture posted to Facebook, of a stylized US Constitution that asked me to share if I opposed Obama’s unilateral anti-gun executive action that would circumvent Congress and reminded me that the US was not a dictatorship and that we have Congress for a reason.  Now, normally, I would just ignore this, but the more and more I thought about it…well it really started to just piss me off.  So I decided that I would share my thoughts on the stupidity of this particular picture, (and that comment is directed at the picture and not the original poster).  I also chose not to share this picture so no one could be confused that I agreed with it.

1.  This picture is calling for us to trust a United States Congress that has a 14% approval rating.  Now this means that 86% of Americans just flat don’t like our Congress.  Why is that?  well mainly its because they’re bitterly partisan, so inefficient it borders on being just completely inept, and well to be honest, incapable of accomplishing anything.  Keep this in mind…I believe this applies to the whole of our Congress but primarily leadership in both the Republican and Democratic Caucuses.

2. The picture poses what OUR US President Barrack Obama did yesterday was completely unheard of, well thats not true.  Both Bush the first and Clinton issued executive orders placing restrictions on the importation of certain guns.  They used “unilateral executive action” to accomplish a needed task that Congress was unable to do.

3. So one might ask…what dictatorial moves did Obama make yesterday that harm the very fabric of our Constitution?  He instructed certain federal agencies to remind gun dealers and healthcare workers how to respond to currently written laws, instructed the Department of Justice to use a program currently in place that would make resources available to local school districts and law enforcement agencies to have a greater police presence in our school zones, and called for Congress to consider certain proposals going forward.

What!?!  Wait a minute…are you completely f–ing kidding me?  The President said we’re going to tell a bunch of people to do the job they’re already supposed to be doing….he said we’re going to send some letters, put cops in schools and Congress is going to consider legislation…thats it???  and that has all of these right wing gun nuts in an uproar?

Wow!  I mean seriously NRA…wow.

So I’ll ask anyone out there to kindly update me on how this was the move of a dictator? How was this so harmful?  Hell, to be honest with you, it didn’t do anything…nothing…not one damn thing to solve gun related violence.  If anything, liberals should be mad that he didn’t reach far enough.  We should be mad that he’s sending letters and then asking Congress (remember that group with the 14% approval rating thats incapable of doing anything right) to consider some of the most important gun control legislation of our generation.

So honestly…go suck a d–k NRA, you got what you wanted, the President is basically bowing out of the gun control debate and leaving it up to the Turtle.

The Top 10 Reasons Why Every Democrat and Independent Must Vote for Ben Chandler

October 22, 2012

An endorsement from the Editors of Barefoot & Progressive

Congressman Ben Chandler eked out a victory over Garland Barr IV in the 2010 election by just one vote per precinct.

Redistricting has made Kentucky’s 6th District bluer on paper and in theory. Still, as all the advertisements on television and the radio indicate, this is a close race and every vote counts.

Because Chandler is busy campaigning, he was unable to respond to a questionnaire from public interest group Kentuckians for the Commonwealth — and thus the importance of his positions may need some clarification.

Presented here are the 10 undeniable reasons why every single Democrat and Independent voter in Central Kentucky must turn out to vote for Ben Chandler to ensure his victory.


10. THE CONTEMPT OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER — The House GOP engineered a contempt vote on Eric Holder in relation to the ‘Fast & Furious’ mess. As the New York Times reported, “it was the first time in American history that Congress has imposed the sanction on a sitting member of a president’s cabinet.” [NYT]

Seventeen Democrats in Congress joined the Republican majority in voting for contempt. (Two Republicans voted against.) Ben Chandler was one of those seventeen [FOX News].

Over 100 Congressional Democrats walked off the House floor to boycott the vote, including Kentucky Congressman John Yarmuth. [WFPL]

But Ben Chandler stayed and Ben Chandler took a stand.


9. THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA — While some Democrats believe people have the right to marry each other, Ben Chandler does not.

When House Republicans added an amendment to the defense spending bill that reaffirms the Defense of Marriage Act, nineteen brave Democrats stood with the House GOP and voted for the amendment.

Ben Chandler was one of those brave Democrats willing to stand up to the homosexual agenda. [B&P]

Just last week, activist judges in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals became the second such court to rule DOMA a violation of equal protection by denying homosexuals the same rights as more capable of love Americans. [NYT]

The 2-to-1 ruling on Thursday came in the case of Edith Windsor, who married her partnerof more than 40 years, Thea Spyer, in Canada in 2007. Their marriage was recognized by New York State. Yet, when Mrs. Spyer died in 2009, Mrs. Windsor, now 83, was prevented by the act from claiming an exemption from the federal estate tax available for surviving spouses, and was required to pay $363,053 in estate taxes.

When so few Democrats were willing to stand up to the radical homosexual agenda, Ben Chandler took a brave position and voted to reaffirm the importance of this Defense of Marriage.


8. THE DREAM ACT – The DREAM Act was crafted to give a pathway to citizenship to kids — a lot of them Hispanic — who were brought to this country and raised here, who went to school and did the Pledge of Allegience and who have only ever called America home.

Ben Chandler took a stand for America and voted against the bill. [B&PHouse Vote]


7. BIG OIL – When Big Oil dumped a couple milk gallons worth of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, a lot of weak-kneed Democrats and Independents and Environmentalists got scared and tried to shut down drilling.

But not Ben Chandler. He was one of a handful of Democrats willing to join the House GOP in a vote to open the gulfstream waters to more drilling. [B&P]

That vote might seem like an anomaly. But Ben Chandler also took a stand in defense of Big Oil as one of just 13 Democrats voting in favor of giving Big Oil $53 Billion in taxpayer subsidies. [B&P] Beacuse Big Oil needs it and Ben Chandler isn’t going to leave them behind.

Ben Chandler took a stand and now you must stand with Ben Chandler.


6. KING COAL – Andy Barr made big waves with his advertisement featuring a coal mine executive from outside the district dressed up as a coal miner and accusing Ben Chandler of trying to kill the coal industry.

Nothing could be further from the truth!

When King Coal wanted to defund the EPA’s coal ash regulations, Ben Chandler voted to defund. [B&P]

When House Republicans voted to “stop this out of control EPA,” Ben Chandler was one of just 19 Democrats who voted with the GOP on behalf of King Coal. [B&P]

When 169 members of Congress wrote to the EPA to oppose their efforts to enforce the Clean Water Act, Ben Chandler signed the letter. [B&P]

When House Republicans voted to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases from power plants and enforcing the Clean Air Act, Ben Chandler voted with them. [B&P]

Ben Chandler took a stand for the coal lobby and now you must stand with Ben Chandler.


5. BUSH TAX CUTS — This image should tell you all you need to know:

If that doesn’t make Ben Chandler’s stance on the issue clear, consider that he is one of just three Democrats who signed Grover Norquist’s pledge to never raise taxes on the rich. [B&P]

When the House of Representatives voted to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, only one Kentucky representative voted against it. That one was John Yarmuth. Ben Chandler voted again in favor of the Bush Tax Cuts. [CN|2]

Ben Chandler took a principled and not at all politically motivated stand for the super rich and now you must stand with Ben Chandler again.


4. OBAMACARE – Again, Andy Barr runs advertisements insinuating Ben Chandler supported the attempt to rein in health insurance companies — forcing them to provide coverage to kids, provide coverage to people with “pre-existing conditions,” provide preventative care and cancer screenings and all sorts of other maybe or maybe not unconstitutional inhumanities.

But the facts are not on Garland’s side. Ben Chandler broke with the Democratic Party and voted AGAINST health care reform. [TPM]

Let’s be clear: Ben Chandler does not support health care reform.

Ben Chandler took a stand. Won’t you stand with Ben Chandler?


3. STUPAK AND ABORTION — Not only did Ben Chandler not support Obamacare, he worked actively to water it down.

Put another way, Ben Chandler voted to weaken the health care bill… and then once weakened, he still voted against it.

That’s how against Obamacare Ben Chandler is.

Feminists and women’s organizations view the Stupak Amendment as “a monumental setback for abortion access.” [ThinkProgress]

Ben Chandler voted against abortion access not once but twice… and the second time was so extreme, even Stupak didn’t support it. [B&P, B&P]

Ben Chandler opposes a woman’s right to choose and he’s okay with that. That’s political conviction and it’s worth supporting.

Ben Chandler took a stand and he’s not worried if you stand with him. But you have to.


2. WALL STREET REFORM – Ben Chandler voted against it.

After the economic collapse of 2008, some people thought that Wall Street needed more oversight and everyday consumers needed better protections against aggressive lenders.

Ben Chandler wasn’t one of them.

In fact, Chandler was one of just 27 Democrats to join every single Republican in Congress in voting against the Dodd-Frank bill. [B&P]

Again, Ben Chandler took a stand. He voted for you. Now you must vote for Ben Chandler.


1. HIV & 3rd World Humanitarian Aid – In 2011, a House Subcommittee voted to ban US aid to those working in third world nations to provide help to women infected with HIV and to their sick and starving children.

One Democrat voted for this ban. That Democrat was Ben Chandler. [LEO WeeklyB&P]

“The provision included in this bill is far more extreme than the Global Gag Rule policy that was implemented under Presidents Reagan, George Bush, or George W. Bush,” said Berman. “It bars ALL assistance to local health care providers in poor countries – including HIV/AIDS funding, water and sanitation, child survival, and education. In the name of ‘right to life,’ the majority is cutting off funds that are literally saving hundreds of thousands of lives.”

Ben Chandler took a stand. Now you must stand with Ben Chandler.



This is Ben Chandler’s record.

You must support it.

If you are a Democrat, you must vote for Ben Chandler.

If you are an Independent, you must vote for Ben Chandler.

If you are an environmentalist, if you are a feminist, if you support women’s rights, if you support health care reform or Wall Street reform… you must vote for Ben Chandler.

He needs every single vote.

Every single vote matters.

You vote for Ben Chandler because Ben Chandler votes for you.

He represents us and looking at Ben Chandler’s record, you can’t say he’s not doing a good job of it.

What is at stake here?

First and foremost, Ben Chandler’s place in Congress and history. Second of all, the balance of power in the House of Representatives.

If Ben Chandler loses, who will be there to cast the deciding vote on an issue that matters to the voters of Central Kentucky? He may never have done it in the past, but maybe he will in the future.

If Ben Chandler loses, then the Republicans will maintain control of the House. Sure, it may be the case that Republicans are pretty much guaranteed 226 seats and Democrats only have 183 and there are just 26 “toss-ups”… but one of those toss up seats is Chandler’s and if he loses then it will have no substantive affect on the balance of power especially since on some of the most important votes (see all 10 points above) Ben Chandler caucuses with the Republicans, but what if none of that were true and you accept the importance of Ben Chandler’s victory?

And that is why every single Democrat and every single Independent should vote for Ben Chandler.

Because what other choice do you have?


Ben Chandler drops his first Paul Ryan hammer

no comments
August 22, 2012

The first of many, Lexington TV viewers:

Actually, everything in this ad is true.

Though… he does tend to mislead viewers with that last line. Ben probably shouldn’t throw stones from his glass house, because it’s hard to argue that you’re for the working class and not the rich when you vote against Wall Street reform, health care, and raising the Bush tax rate for the rich.

Obama to honor UK basketball team on Friday; Louisville Cardinals fan Mitch McConnell refuses to attend

May 1, 2012

As is customary, the President of the United States of America will welcome the NCAA National Champions — in this case, the University of Kentucky Wildcats — to the White House to honor them for their success.

Coach Cal and the Cats — MKG, Mr. Anthony Davis, Darius Miller and the whole crew — will hang out with Barry Hussein in the late afternoon.

Mitch McConnell, ever spiteful and little-in-heart, is blowing off the President and the Kentucky Wildcats.

As The Hill reports, Mitch is choosing to stay in Louisville that day in preparation for the Derby… which of course doesn’t happen ’til the next day and he could easily enough get to DC and back to the Derby City for a long night of bourbon sipping.

Some pot-smoking Bluegrass GOP operatives have strummed up a conspiracy theory that the entire event was orchestrated to make the Minority Leader look like the little man that he is… but as The Hill goes on to note:

A source close to McConnell says he is more a fan of the Louisville Cardinals, who lost to Kentucky in the semifinals of the NCAA tournament.

McConnell declined to publicly express a preference for either team, however.


Seems like a dumb move to us, but what the hell do we know — maybe Mitch has a hot date at Porcini’s this coming Friday.

Coach Cal, for his part, ignored McConnell’s snub, and instead focused on what was important… the kids.

Apparently the team is really excited to meet President Obama:

“The amazing thing is the first thing that was said when the horn sounded in New Orleans was, ‘We’re going to the White House!’

“It’s one of those moments for these players that they have probably thought about without us even knowing that it was important to them. So I’m excited about the opportunity for them to meet the President of the United States, the Leader of the Free World and someone who is trying to make a difference in their lives.”

Barr Internal Poll Shows Him Trailing Chandler by 7 Points

one comment
May 1, 2012

The New York Times this morning looks at the dozen-or-so Congressional rematches across the country… and lo, there’s Ben Chandler and Garland H. Barr IV:

The pattern in New York can be seen elsewhere in the country. In the Sixth District in Kentucky, Andy Barr, a Republican, is again challenging Representative Ben Chandler, a four-term Democrat who defeated him by 647 votes in 2010.

But the rematch promises to be far different from the last race, when the two men largely battled below the national radar. This time, Republican and Democratic leaders in Washington have made the race a priority and are expected to pour huge amounts of money into it.

“This race is a rematch of the third-closest Congressional race in the country in 2010,” Mr. Barr, a lawyer, said. “We can finish the job this time.”

Okay, sure.


The Barr campaign just solicited, received and released an internal poll which spends most of its time saying how weak Ben Chandler is and how everything is stacked against him… except for the fact that Barr’s own commissioned poll found explicitly that he is trailing Ben Chandler by 7 points.

Let’s repeat that: The Barr campaign commissioned poll tries hard to paint a positive picture by downplaying its primary finding which is that Garland Hale Barr the Fourth trails Ben Chandler by 7 points.


In a rematch of the third-closest Congressional race in the country in 2010, being down 7 points isn’t exactly great news… especially when its coming from a poll your own campaign paid for.

[via DailyKos, you can see the campaign's full pdf here]

Also fun… recently came across a blog which is creating caricatures of every single member of Congress… it’s good fun and heeeeeeeere’s Ben:

Women Across America Aren’t Closing Their Eyes (and Mitt Romney’s startling pessimism)

no comments
April 28, 2012

The President of the United States of America spoke to the Women’s Leadership Forum last night — you can read about it at The Hill — but here’s the gist of it:

I probably don’t need to remind you that while our own Governor did not join those offensive assaults on women, the Republicans in our state legislature did try to force women under duress to have ultrasounds, telling them they could cover their eyes but attempting to legally bind them not to shut up their ears. They ultimately lost  in their mission to abuse women, but bless their hearts, they tried.

Meanwhile, Etch-a-Sketch Romney is busily trying to scrub his campaign of the conservative stances that tricked many Republicans into supporting him, which undoubtedly will anger and de-motivate the conservative pundits and the already angry yet active grassroots conservative volunteers who make up the heart of not just Freedom Works and the Tea Party but also the Republican Party. Romney will do anything and say anything and that’s going to resonate with his core and with independent voters he’s now seeking to dupe.

In addition to shifting his positions (he hasn’t gotten on board with Marco Rubio’s “amnesty” plan yet but he’s courting the Senator and toying with Hispanic voters, again enraging the racists at the base of his support), Romney is trying to reframe the Obama campaign’s message about “Fairness” — like millionaires who got a temporary tax cut ten years ago probably need to accept the “temporary”-ness of it in light of the fact that it contributes mightily to the nation’s debt crisis — by talking instead about “unfairness.”

Here’s Mittens trying his darndest:

“We will stop the unfairness of government workers getting better pay and benefits than the very taxpayers they serve,” the former Massachusetts governor said. “And we will stop the unfairness of one generation passing larger and larger debts on to the next.”

First of all, the government is (and has been for a long time, edging out the dead-end jobs of the “service industry”) the nation’s largest employer. So that’s a lot of families to threaten, and a lot of votes.

Secondly, Mitt Romney’s plan for America is apparently to fix the problems by creating even more people who don’t have health care or money for retirement. Even if you want to engage in the Republican Party’s class warfare here and resent people who work for the government the benefits they have, your predatory self-interest should probably leave you wanting a little more. Mitt Romeny apparently believes that if we all have nothing then everything will be more fair. While true, the plan does positively nothing to address how people who already have nothing — no retirement, exponentially escalating family health care bills — are going to be helped by dragging more people into their world of troubles.

Thirdly, this is a really pessimistic view of America. Mitt Romney has a vision, and it is dark.

Fourthly, further destroying the already broken tax structure which delivers temporary tax cuts for the wealthy in perpetuity by increasing the debt that’s already been created by those tax cuts and making more of them… doesn’t actually “stop the unfairness of one generation passing larger debts on to the next.” In fact, it — yes — perpetuates it.

But bless his heart, too.

Beat Your Wives! — Rand Paul, Mitch McConnell vote AGAINST the Violence Against Women Act

April 27, 2012

The Senate voted to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, a 20 year old law that makes it, you know, bad to beat the living shit out of some woman. Republicans hate the law because it’s mean to men. Poor men.

Used to be men could just beat the living shit out of some woman and you know what happened to them? Nothing. Ahh. Those were the days. What has happened to America?

Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, Kentucky’s two great Senators, stood up for men’s rights and voted against the Violence Against Women Act. Because they believe in freedom and you should be free to beat the living shit out of some woman. Any woman. All of ‘em, in fact. Beat ‘em all.

Especially these five women.

Sonka has more (featuring Rand Paul’s curbstomping woman abuser). But I don’t understand why you would want to continue staring at your computer screen when you could be beating a woman. Because that’s what Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell want you to do.

And after you’ve beaten the woman… the stupid federal government will still be there to “protect” her, and they’ll “assist” her, and they’ll give her “services” for “disabilities” you may have inflicted on her (and if you were a real man, like Mitch McConnell or Rand Paul, you would have inflicted disabilities), and those fascist government pinheads will even give her money for legal representation when she seeks protection from you. Because that’s the kind of terrible, offensive stuff the Violence Against Women Act allows for, and it must be stopped.

Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul failed to beat this law into whimpering submission this time around… but get out there and support the Republican Party — support Mitt Romney, support the GOP’s Senate candidates — and soon men everywhere in America will once again be able to beat women freely, as the Founding Fathers desired, without fear the government might hold them accountable, help their victims or treat women like equals.

Go. Now!

Cry Me a River: Two Blue Dogs go down…

one comment
April 26, 2012

Over in Pennsylvania, the primary saw two Blue Dog “Democrats” bite the dust… Reps. Tim Holden and Jason Altmire.

The Blue Dog “Democrat” caucus — conservative Dems who vote with Republicans as much as they do Dems, and rarely stand up on the important issues — already counted about two dozen after their numbers were slashed in the Midterms.

One of their lost members, Gabrielle Giffords, actually broke ranks with her fellow Blue Dogs, voting FOR Health Care Reform, FOR Wall Street Reform and FOR the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.

The same cannot be said of our own Blue Dog here in the 6th, Mr. Ben Chandler.

But getting back to Pennsylvania, Amande Terkel reports:

Holden lost to progressive candidate Matt Cartwright, an attorney who attacked the incumbent for voting against President Barack Obama’s health care reform. Holden is the second House member to lose to a newcomer in the 2012 primaries. The other lawmaker was Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio). Both were also targeted by the anti-incumbent super PAC, the Campaign for Primary Accountability.

….Altmire lost to Rep. Mark Critz (D-Pa.) in the state’s newly redrawn 12th Congressional District. Pennsylvania’s Republican-controlled legislature combined the seats of the two incumbents in redistricting, after the state lost a seat in the recent reapportionment.

Altmire was initially seen as the frontrunner in the race, but Critz received more than $83,000 in support from organized labor. Altmire also angered many progressives because he voted against Obama’s health care reform; Critz did not take office until after the Affordable Care Act passed.

Dream on, Kentucky…

Oh, also… Chandler threw his support behind Altimre in that race. Whoops.

Kentucky “Deficit Hawks” Pushing Questionable Energy Scheme

no comments
April 20, 2012

Politico takes a look at the “deficit hawks” who ignore their supposed positions when its in their own interests and they start the article by highlighting the fierce Kentucky threesome of Rand Paul, Mitch McConnell and Ed Whitfield (only one of whom could realilistically be called anything close to “a deficit hawk”):

he Kentucky Republican rode into the Senate last year as a libertarian standard-bearer, promising to shrink the government’s reach and spending power. But as a senator, he has championed the cause of USEC, a company that runs a uranium enrichment plant in Paducah that threatens to close in May, wiping out 1,200 jobs.

So along with fellow GOP lawmakers from Kentucky — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Rep. Ed Whitfield — Paul has spent much of the past year pressuring the Obama administration to extend new uranium re-enrichment contracts to help keep the plant afloat. Paul’s tactics have included blocking nominations of five Energy Department appointees, one of whom remains in limbo.

Skeptics have expressed doubts about whether a new enrichment contract would allow the plant to operate profitably — it also needs a new power agreement once its current deal with the Tennessee Valley Authority expires — and say it would commit taxpayer dollars in the short term. Still, Paul made his pitch for the enrichment work to Energy Secretary Steven Chu during a February committee hearing.

Read onward, nuclear soldier…

Sen. Rand Paul does Alex Jones (again): Imminent war, imminent revolution, imminent mass detentions

no comments
April 20, 2012

Alex Jones, the hilarious performance artist who was possibly the real culprit behind the 9/11 attacks, had his good buddy Rand Paul back on his radio/internet/television show to discuss the imminent unilateral all out war, the coming violent revolution against TSA screeners and the fact that every single one of us is going to be arrested tomorrow just because that’s how President Obama rolls.





Social Networking Crap

Shop at the Barefoot and Progressive Store!

Free Ad Space

Help support B&P! DONATE!

Free Ad Space

Share Barefoot & progressive