BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Tuesday, 7-10-18 with KAISER SHUFF

Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract — as well as appear on the Sack Heads: Against Tyranny Show every Wednesday night.

Tonight:

  • HOUR 1: Happy Stories include the rescue of the 13 people from the flooded caves in Thailand; Japan refuses to take Muslim “refugees,” HRC is going to seek the presidency in 2020; the DNC thinks Alexandria OC is the “future of the Demorat Party.” Wowzer. Couldn’t get any better than that! PLUS: Leftist skulls detonate over Trump’s nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to SCOTUS, creating a veritable Leftist “Kavalanche.”
  • HOUR 2: The inimitable KAISER SHUFF. ‘Nuff said.

For DISH subscribers: your Hopper has recently been wired to play YouTube videos. You can now toss ol’ BZ onto your massive flatscreen TV and watch him in all of his obese, biased and politically-execrable potty-mouthed goodness.

If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, click on the yellow button at the upper left.

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Tuesday, 7-10-18” on Spreaker.

If you care to watch the show on the SHR Media YouTube channel, click on the red start button below. Please SUBSCRIBE to the SHR Media channel!

Moreover, if you care to watch the show on the SHR Media Facebook page (in glorious color), click right here. Kindly LIKE us on Facebook. You can FOLLOW us on Twitter @SHRMediaGroup. Please FOLLOW ol’ BZ @BZep. Thanks so much.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep, Facebook as Biff Zeppe and the Bloviating Zeppelin, and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.

Please remember that BZ can only monitor the SHRMEDIA.COM chat — though there is chat available on both Facebook and YouTube. If you wish to interact with myself and the bulk of the chatters, I heartily recommend and invite you into the SHR Media page. My thanks to those chatters who have migrated over to the upgraded chat room, thanks for Shaun. Instead of a paltry limit of 10 chatters, we can take up to 100. A bit optimistic, perhaps, but BZ can dream, can’t he?

  • Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives in podcast? Go here.
  • You can listen to the show here on Dan Butcher’s High Plains Talk Radio page.
  • Want to watch the show live on Facebook? Go to the SHR Media page on Facebook here.
  • Want to watch past Berserk Bobcat Saloon shows on YouTube? Go here.
  • Want to watch the show on High Plains TV? Go here.

Thank you one and all for listening, watching and supporting the SHR Media Network: “Conservative Media Done Right.”

BZ

 

YOU are paying off DC sexual harassment suits

Just when you thought there might be some justice in terms of genuine sexual harassment, rape and assault incidents in DC — well, have I got a story for you.

Your American Taxpayer dollars are hard at work.

Against you, not for you.

From TheHill.com:

Congress owes taxpayers answers about its harassment ‘shush’ fund

by Jenny Beth Martin

Since when are members of Congress and their staffs accused of sexual harassment allowed to hush up and pay off their accusers from a secret “shush” fund full of taxpayer dollars? Since 1995, it turns out.

Congress, we all know, chooses to exempt itself from many of the same laws it foists on the rest of us. It’s a grievance I hear regularly during my travels around the country, as grassroots activists complain about this law or that regulation. “If only Congress had to live under the same laws we do, they’d get it, and they’d change it” is a common refrain.

For years, for instance, I’ve been speaking out about the illegal special exemption of Congress from ObamaCare, which allows members and staff to avoid the financial burdens they imposed on us when they passed that terrible law. If only they had to live under the law the same way the rest of us do, without benefit of taxpayer dollars to subsidize their premiums purchased fraudulently on the D.C. small business exchange, they might be more incentivized to repeal that law.

But until recently, I did not know about the “shush fund” of Congress, a fund managed by the “Office of Compliance,” which itself was created following the 1995 enactment of the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA), the first law enacted by the first Republican House in four decades.

Haven’t you ever asked yourself: just why do people spend thousands, hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars for a House or Senate seat?

Are they so devoted that they would place themselves into what normally would be considered as absolutely inextricable debt potentially in perpetuity?

The lowliest of Congressmen make $174,000 per year. Leaders make $200,000 per year or more, due to figures not up to date.

Did you ever think quid pro quo? Or ROI? You should have.

“It’s not the money, it’s the power.”
— Frank Underwood

What happened to transparency?

We, the taxpayers who have been paying for more than two decades to quietly settle literally hundreds of sexual harassment claims against members of Congress and their staffs, have a right to know which members and staffers have made use of the hush money over the years. Going forward, taxpayers should have knowledge about how that fund is used.

If Congress wants to get serious about its apparent culture of abuse, it will need to address its cover-up culture. Shush funds may serve the immediate purpose of getting alleged victims to go away, but they do little to stem the tide of sexual harassment. What Congress needs — and American taxpayers deserve — is more transparency.

And also at GatewayPundit.com:

SHOCK: $15 Million in TAXPAYER MONEY Has Been Paid Out to Settle Congressional Sexual Harassment Lawsuits

by Cristina Laila

As previously reported, Congress has a rampant sexual harassment problem. In fact the problem is so bad that female lawmakers and aides keep a ‘creep list’ of men who are notorious for lewd behavior.

As if this couldn’t get any worse, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd Tuesday that taxpayers have paid over $15 million to settle sexual harassment lawsuits against members of Congress!

Further, from ConservativeReview.com:

Levin: GOP leaders must resign over sexual harassment in Congress

by Chris Pandolfo

Tuesday on the radio, LevinTV host Mark Levin discussed the day’s reports and testimonies concerning the subject of sexual harassment in Congress.

He played a clip of Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., who testified there are at least two sitting members of Congress — one Republican, one Democrat —who have engaged in sexual harassment of their own staff members.

Levin wants these sitting Congress members to be identified. He wants names named.

He also wants Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to resign for their failure in leadership — keeping silent on known creeps and a known widespread problem in the institutions they lead.  

Can you imagine, folks, a job where you are treated like a king or a queen, provided with armed protection, chauffeured in cars and SUVs, provided an expense account, shown deference wherever you go and can decide which laws to obey or not because, after all, you make the law? Wouldn’t you like a job like that? One where internal review and investigations into your conduct are mostly toothless?

Wouldn’t you enjoy a job like that?

And finally: just how long must we slit our own wrists for the power mongers in DC before we rise up in righteous umbrage?

BZ 

 

Democrats confirm: they will filibuster Judge Gorsuch

From the WashingtonPost.com:

Schumer: Democrats will filibuster Gorsuch nomination

by Robert Barnes, Ed O’Keefe and Ann E. Marimow

Senate hearings on Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch ended Thursday on a confrontational note, with the body’s top Democrat vowing a filibuster that could complicate Gorsuch’s expected confirmation and ultimately upend the traditional approach to approving justices.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he will vote no on President Trump’s nominee and asked other Democrats to join him in blocking an up-or-down vote on Gorsuch.

In terms of the Senate, what does this mean for the nominee?

Under Senate rules, it requires 60 votes to overcome such an obstacle. Republicans eager to confirm Gorsuch before their Easter recess — and before the court concludes hearing the current term of cases next month — have only 52 senators.

As we well know, there are 100 members in the Senate, two from each state. Having 52 Senators is a technical majority and, of course, the vote is splitting entirely by party lines. You’ve of course heard of the term “nuclear option.” Here is its application.

Republicans have vowed Gorsuch will be confirmed even if it means overhauling the way justices have long been approved. Traditionally, senators can force the Senate to muster a supermajority just to bring up the nomination of a Supreme Court justice. If that is reached, the confirmation requires a simple majority.

It’s a strategic question for the Demorats. What tactics to use and, more importantly, when?

There are also competing views among Democrats about whether to filibuster Gorsuch’s nomination — which could provoke the Republican majority to rewrite the rules — or instead avoid confrontation and preserve the filibuster threat for the future. Retaining the filibuster could force Trump to select a relatively moderate nominee if in the coming years he gets a chance to replace a second Supreme Court justice.

Then comes the specious argument from the Washington Post, showing its bias by not telling the full truth.

Among recent Supreme Court nominees the 60-vote threshold has not caused a problem. President Barack Obama’s choices of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan each received more than 60 votes. Samuel A. Alito Jr., chosen by President George W. Bush, was confirmed 58-42 in 2006, but 72 senators voted to defeat a possible filibuster and allow his confirmation vote to go forward. Indeed, only Alito — among the last 16 Supreme Court nominees — was forced to clear the supermajority hurdle to break a filibuster.

Historically, the Republicans have proven they lack the balls, the testosterone, the cajones, to do what needs to be done. But, in truth, what are the overarching objections Demorats have to Judge Neil Gorsuch?

First and foremost, Demorats are butt-hurt that they lacked the power to ram through Obama SCOTUS nominee Merrick Garland last year, at the end of Obama’s second term. They wanted lame-duck input into a SCOTUS appointment. Apparently they forgot the Joe Biden Rule:

The downplaying of the significance of the Democratic obstructionism exposes just whose side the media are on. They previously flipped out when Republicans used the Joe Biden Rule to put off the hearing of Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. The Joe Biden Rule states that: If a vacancy opens up on the Supreme Court during a presidential election season, then the incoming President gets to fill the seat.

Then there was this question from the AMM in reference to the above video, at the latter portion of Barack Hussein Obama’s imperial presidency with regard to SCOTUS appointments.

The American Media Maggots would have you believe that a situation such as that of Garland had never occurred before in history. Historical Alzheimers? Purposeful? Intentional? I say yes.

Historically, many Supreme Court nominations made in a president’s final year in office have been rejected by the Senate. That started with John Quincy Adams and last occurred to Lyndon B. Johnson.

Then there are the words of Barack Hussein Obama himself.

We now know that the Biden Rule is acceptable for Demorats, unacceptable for Republicans (as utilized by Mitch McConnell).

I repeat: what are the major objections by the Demorats of Neil Gorsuch?

Because the left sees its power ebbing. Former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, complained that “Judge Gorsuch’s record reveals [that] he holds radical views far outside the mainstream of American legal thought.” And ABC News reported that Obama’s former secretary of Labor, Tony Perez, said, “[s]imply put, a Justice Gorsuch on the Supreme Court is intolerable and it’s up to Democrats to block his nomination.”

Good to know. ABC = signing off on whatever Pelosi says. But again, specifically, what are the so-called “radical” views?

They state the obvious:

Trump’s nominee, despite a Columbia, Harvard Law and Oxford pedigree, is committed to deferring to the wisdom of our Constitution. That 1787 document clearly spells out a short list of what government may do, and concludes with a broad list of what government may not do. The original U.S. Constitution chains down and forbids governmental action not included in its list of 17 enumerated powers. If an action is not authorized by the original meaning of the Constitution’s text, then the government may not do it. Period. Such a view reflects deference to the accumulated wisdom of the founders of our republic.

Sounds bad to you? Sounds good to me. Like a feature, not a bug.

Judge Gorsuch’s view is that judges should only interpret law, not make it. Making law is reserved for elected officials, who can be held accountable. If politicians make a mistake, they can correct it by a later vote. Judicial self-restraint also vindicates the principle of prudence. A judge going rogue, ecstatically inventing a new “positive right,” causes societal upheaval. Conservatives view innovation with great skepticism.

Even worse, from the leftist view, Judge Gorsuch implicitly recognizes the natural law. The natural law says that some things are not up for deciding. Euthanasia, for example, is evil because of the intrinsic worth of each person. A positive law inventing a new right to euthanasia may not be made. This is a recognition that an objective right and wrong exists, and has existed, across all times and cultures. It was the basis for convicting Nazis after World War II, as their state-approved acts were inherently evil.

Judge Gorsuch’s views that judges should only judge, and Congress should legislate, is entirely mainstream despite what Demorats and Leftists say. Judicial restraint was followed in England and the United States for 700 years. The alternative view that whatever a judge thinks is best is no standard at all. It is the very definition of tyranny.

A far-sighted anti-federalist judge, writing under the pen name “Brutus,” noted: “there is no power above them that can control their decisions, or correct their errors.” Let that sink for a moment and rattle around your wheelhouse.

He correctly predicted in 1788 that we would gradually lose our liberties due to Supreme Court justices’ temptation to extend government power.

There are positive vs negative rights with regard to the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution. Please click on the link.

Our current Constitution frames government in terms of what it cannot do.

– The government cannot engage in unreasonable searches and seizures;
– The government cannot inflict cruel and unusual punishment

And therefore, the individual has a right to NOT be subject to various circumstances applied by the government.

Our current Constitution does not “guarantee” so-called “rights” to such things as housing, clothing, food, jobs — rights that place onus upon the federal government to obtain the resources from other citizens to pay for them.

Let me make this abundantly clear: “RIGHTS THAT PLACE ONUS UPON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO OBTAIN THE RESOURCES FROM OTHER CITIZENS TO PAY FOR THEM.”

Not by concession or acquiescence but by force.

Too many judges, federal and otherwise, believe it’s not about what the Constitution or various laws actually mean, it’s about what they mean.

The most recent egregious example is that of Hawaii’s Judge Watson who predicated his ruling on the Trump refugee stay not via the documents submitted and appearing before him, but instead upon words said outside the court by means of hearsay and of no pertinence at all to the very specific issue at hand before his court.

The documents. The words. The law.

Federal judges take and wield power not meant for them in order to impose their personal political views of how we all should conduct our lives. States cannot be independent or tailor their own changes. Oh no; one size must fit all and in all circumstances.

This is the bottom line:

Make no mitsake; the Demorats’ decision to filibuster is nothing more than political payback or revenge for McConnell daring to have an actual memory. Further, Schumer — the new Harry Reid for the Demorats — has to put on his Game Face in every national event now whether he believes in it or not because failure to do so will result in his immediate excommunication and loss of power. The DC Triumvirate:

  • Power
  • Control
  • Money

Filibuster? Nuclear option?

BZ

 

Elizabeth Warren removed from Senate floor

From FoxNews.com:

Warren barred from speaking on Senate floor for rest of Sessions debate

by Samuel Chamberlain

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., was prohibited Tuesday night from speaking on the Senate floor for the rest of the debate over Sen. Jeff Sessions’ nomination to be attorney general.

The drama began when Warren, quoting a 30-year-old letter by civil rights leader Coretta Scott King, referred to the Alabama Republican as a “disgrace.” King’s letter was written in 1986, when Sessions was nominated to the federal bench but was never confirmed. 

King, the widow of Martin Luther King Jr., also wrote that when acting as a federal prosecutor, Sessions used his power to “chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens.”

Warren’s reference drew the ire of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who said that Warren had “impugned the motives of our colleague from Alabama.”

The truth? Senator Jeff Sessions has sponsored and supported legislation attacking racism. That matters not to Warren.

Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont. advised Warren that she was out of order under Rule XIX of the Senate, which states that “no Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.”

After a few parliamentary moves, McConnell called for a vote to affirm Daines’ ruling that Warren was out of order. The GOP-controlled Senate backed him up, 49-43, before defeating a Democratic effort to restore Warren’s speaking privileges, 50-43.

“She was warned, she was given an explanation,” McConnell said of Warren. “Nevertheless, she persisted.”

Senator Fauxcahontas said:

“To put Senator Sessions in charge of the Department of Justice is an insult to African-Americans.”

With no proof of his alleged “racism.” An accusation is as good as a nod to a blind horse.

The Senate backed its majority leader. By a party line vote of 49-43, it found Warren in violation of Senate rules. She is now barred from speaking on the subject of the Sessions nomination.

That is called “harnessing power,” Republicans, and actually learning how to wield it — something with which you are entirely unfamiliar.

What you won’t hear or see on other forms of media is this: Marco Rubio’s address with regard to Elizabeth Warren.

“Elections have consequences,” said Barack Hussein Obama. And with that he and other Demorats proceeded to rub the noses of DC Republicans into the political shite. You should expect no less in return, Demorats.

That said, some people suggest the GOP has made a martyr out of Fauxcahontas.

I say: she has been made to revisit her political vulnerability.

BZ

 

And you wonder why Conservatives HATE the GOP?

OBAMA RYAN McCONNELLWonder no more.  And NOT covered by the Drudge Report.

From DailySignal.com:

First Senate Appropriations Bill Passed Spends More Than Obama Requested

by Phillip Wegmann

The U.S. Senate’s first spending bill of 2016 spends more than President Barack Obama requested and lacks significant conservative amendments, but it still sailed to passage in the Republican-led Senate Thursday.

An overwhelming number of U.S. senators on both sides of the aisle approved the energy and water development appropriations bill by a vote of 90-8. Conservatives had objected to the higher spending levels and lack of policy riders in the weeks leading up to the vote.

In the end, it didn’t seem to matter.

Of course.  It never matters.  Not when consistent Republican jobs are on the line.  Jobs like those of, say, Mitch McConnell.  Paul Ryan.  Obama should get more cash than he originally requested because the GOP can’t wait to fellate His Imperial Member.

Leftists still mention the TEA Party.  The TEA Party died a few years ago.  It gets mentioned only by those who want to use it as a prop for power.  But the TEA Party has no power because it doesn’t exist as any form of cohesive unit today.  Leftists know this.  But they still utilize the phrase.  Because they have more balls than the GOP.

Moving legislation and avoiding fights has been a top election year priority for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. The Kentucky Republican wants the GOP Senate to prove that Republicans can govern by avoiding a one-and-done omnibus spending package at the end of the year.

GOP InvertebrateRight.  #BecauseSpineless

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Alexander were the only Republicans to vote against the amendment. Neither responded to multiple comment requests by The Daily Signal.

“McConnell said the ‘Senate is open for business’ and if you’re a K Street lobbyist of Democrat interest group that’s definitely true,” the aide said. “But Harry Reid and the Democrats have made it abundantly clear that conservatives policies will not be tolerated in the appropriations process.”

Good to know that the GOP in DC continue to give the Demorats everything they want and then some.

BZ