Braley Bytes: "Uh-Oh! I Just Stepped In Iowa" Edition

U.S. Rep turned Senate hopeful Bruce Braley is feeling embarrassed right now for being himself in a video, speaking candidly to some of his out-of-state lawyer buddies. While mooching around for money, Braley condescendingly calls Chuck Grassley “a farmer from Iowa who never went to law school.” He contrasts that description (which could also fit many of his constituents) with himself who shares the out-of-state ambulance chasers' "background," "experience," and "voice." Watch the video here:





While that crap might not play in Pella, it seems to do the trick on the out-of-state lawyer crowd. Attorneys and law firms have been Braley's biggest donors, pumping $1,122,748 into his Senate campaign so far and 82% of his contributions have come from outside the state. I guess we know who his "voice" will be representing if elected.

Iowa First District Election Update

Bruce Braley (D)

Ben Lange (R)

Lange Lunges Ahead

A late October poll shows challenger Ben Lange charging past incumbent "Borrowing Bruce" Braley to take a narrow 46.9% to 45.4% lead in Iowa's 1st congressional district. The poll shows 6.9% are still undecided and has a margin of error of 5.1%, so Lange, who has been burning shoe-leather all across the district, definitely can't coast to the finish line. In this race every vote is important.

Interlopers Support Braley

According to 3rd quarter financial records, 78% of the contributions to Bruce Braley's campaign came from out of state special interests. 92% of Ben Lange's donations came from Iowans. This seems to continue a trend since during the 2010 election cycle 71% of Braley's contributions came from out of state while 86% of Lange's came from in state.

Despite calling for a ban on lobbyist contributions to Congressmen, "lawyers & lobbyists" have given $718,216 to the Braley campaign during this election.

National Rifle Association Endorses Lange

In addition to being A-rated by Gun Owners of America, Ben Lange has been endorsed by the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF). In a statement the NRA-PVF explains:

"Ben Lange will protect our Second Amendment freedoms," said Chris W. Cox, chairman of NRA-PVF. "Because of his strong support of our rights, Ben Lange has earned an "AQ" rating and endorsement from the NRA-PVF."

Ben Lange supports the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, which held that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms for law-abiding citizens in Iowa and everywhere in America. Lange also supports “The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act,” which would ensure that law-abiding Americans with a valid concealed handgun permit would be able to carry a concealed handgun in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry. Additionally, Lange will pursue the truth in the deadly Operation Fast & Furious scandal and help deliver justice to the family of murdered Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

In contrast, Ben Lange's opponent, incumbent Representative Bruce Braley, has fought against our constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms and is "F" rated by the NRA-PVF.

Bruce Braley refused to join the historic District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court, making it clear that he does not believe the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Braley also supported reinstating the failed Clinton semi-auto gun ban and opposed an amendment that would prevent the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives from circumventing the will of Congress, and the American people, by centralizing records of American’s long gun purchases. In addition, he voted against H.R. 4089, “The Sportsmen’s Heritage Act,” which would promote America’s hunting heritage and positively impact sportsmen throughout the country.

"Ben Lange will defend our Second Amendment freedoms and hunting heritage, and the people of Iowa know that Bruce Braley has not," Cox continued. "We urge all NRA members and gun owners in Iowa’s 1^st District to vote Ben Lange for U.S. House of Representatives on November 6."


For more about Lange's view on the Second Amendment (and other issues) read my post "10 Questions with Ben Lange."

Braley Bytes: Crazy Train Edition

More Braley buffoonery. After (IA-01) Rep. "Borrowin' Bruce" Braley (D) got busted for using taxpayer funds to stage a campaign event (er, sorry, "deficit workshop") in the newly redistricted area he wants to represent, he wisely canceled the event since it was is clear violation of House ethics rules. According to those rules "[m]embers may not use official funds, including the use of staff resources, to conduct ‘town hall’ meetings or other official gatherings outside their districts."

Did Braley learn his lesson?  Apparently not. Braley then issued a press release that said he would  "jump aboard a Union Pacific Train on Friday in Fairfax headed to Marshalltown to promote and support enhancements to infrastructure in Iowa. Before the train leaves, Braley [would] hold a short press conference[.]" Neither Fairfax nor Marshalltown are in Braley's district.  Whoops!

The Iowa Republican points out: "House ethics rules explicitly prohibit Members of Congress from using official House resources, paid for by taxpayers, for purposes outside of their current district. This prohibition extends to new geographical areas, like Fairfax and Marshalltown, that are being added to Members’ districts as a result of redistricting. Members may campaign in these new areas, but not at the taxpayers’ expense."

Let's hope the next time Braley rides the rails it will be as a hobo after he's defeated in November.

Braley Bytes: Tail Between His Legs Edition

After saying that the ethics complaint against his taxpayer-funded event had "no merit" Bruce Braley's campaign has cancelled the offending event.

According to the Cedar Rapids Gazette:

"In the wake of an ethics complaint filed by a Republican activist, U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley has dropped plans for a deficit reduction workshop in Cedar Rapids, which is outside of his current congressional district.

"The Waterloo Democrat’s chief of staff said the workshop was being cancelled to avoid the appearance of an ethics violation.[...]

"Although a spokesman for Braley’s Republican challenger, Ben Lange of Independence, last week called on Braley to cancel the workshop, Davis dismissed the allegation then as having 'no merit.'

"The Lange campaign was pleased by the cancellation, calling it another case of Lange 'holding Washington politicians like Bruce Braley accountable,' Lange campaign adviser Cody Brown said.

"'We remain deeply disturbed by the misrepresentations that originated from his Washington office last Friday,' Brown said. 'Iowans are tired of Washington politicians who won’t tell the truth.

“'An apology is entirely appropriate and would go a long way towards resolving this issue for Iowa taxpayers,' Brown said."

Cancelling the event and a puppy-dog eyed apology may resolve the issue with some Iowans (not this one), but Braley could still be in Dutch with the House Ethics Committee.  It remains to be seen whether the committee will flog him once with a wet noodle or just give him the stink eye.

Braley Bytes: LMFAO Edition

Is U.S. Rep. "Borrowin' Bruce" Braley campaigning on the taxpayers' dime? A complaint filed with the U.S. House Ethics Committee against Braley certainly makes the case that he is.

The complaint was filed by former Dubuque County GOP chairman Matt Giese. Giese takes issue with a public "deficit workshop" that Braley plans on hosting in Cedar Rapids on August 20th. Cedar Rapids is NOT in Iowa's 1st District, which Braley represents. However, due to redistricting, Cedar Rapids will be in the newly redrawn 1st district this fall and will therefore be voting for in that district in the coming election.

The complaint states: "Because Braley is in the midst of a tough reelection campaign in the new First Congressional District, and based on the fact that Braley does not represent the people of Cedar Rapids, the only conceivable reason that Braley would have in using official taxpayer-funded resources to communicate with the residents of Cedar Rapids is to support his reelection campaign in violation of House ethics rules and federal law."

Giese also points out: "On September 16, 2011, the Committee on Ethics and Committee on House Administration issued 'Joint Guidance Regarding Redistricting' as a supplement to the Ethics Manual in order to 'offer guidance on what Members may and may not do with official resources where redistricting is concerned.' The Joint Guidance made clear that '[m]embers may not use official funds, including the use of staff resources, to conduct ‘town hall’ meetings or other official gatherings outside their districts.' [Emphasis added.]

"In the case of Braley, he used official congressional office resources to organize an official gathering in Cedar Rapids, which is outside of Braley’s current congressional district, and is therefore in violation of the House ethics rules issued jointly by the Committees on Ethics and House Administration.

In addition, Giese alleges that Braley abused Congressional franking privileges when promoting his event: "[T]he Ethics Manual clearly states that '[e]-mails sent by a congressional office must likewise comply with the Franking Regulations' and the Joint Guidance states that '[u]nder the franking statute, a Member 'may not send any mass mailing outside the congressional district from which the Member was elected.'

"Braley is clearly using his email account to target non-constituents in Cedar Rapids and is therefore in violation of the House Ethics Manual and franking regulations."

In the end I'm sure nothing much will come from this ethics complaint. Whenever you have crooks policing crooks its always a joke. If Braley murdered fourteen Girl Scouts with a machete he might get a stern finger wag from the House Ethics Committee, if that. If anyone is going to hold Borrowin' Bruce accountable for anything it will have to be the voters back home in November.

Braley Bytes: Fast & Furious Edition

The recent vote to hold U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over subpoenaed documents in the investigation of the Department of Justice operation "Fast and Furious," which resulted in the deaths of over 300 Mexicans and an American border patrol agent, was "purely political theater" according to 1st District Rep. Bruce "Clunkers" Braley.  Braley voted against holding Eric Holder in contempt, both in committee and when the measure came before the full house.

If Braley thinks that the Fast and Furious investigation is merely "political theater," FoxNews.com contributor John R. Lott Jr. points out a salient fact that Braley should bare in mind: "People died. It is something to remember during today’s historic House vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt. Never before has a sitting attorney general been held in contempt.

Lott continued, "With all the hoopla over past scandals from Watergate to Filegate to Pardongate, the cover up was always worse than the crime. Yet, in 'Fast and Furious,' the guns that the US government supplied to Mexican drug gangs have been used to kill one American border agent and over 300 Mexican citizens  and commit numerous other crimes.

"To date, because of administration stonewalling, we don't have answers to the most basic questions. Why would the Obama administration give drug gangs guns without trying to trace them? Why not inform Mexican officials about the program so that the Mexicans could try tracing the guns on the Mexican side of the border? Why start pushing untraceable guns to Mexico at the same time that the Obama administration was making their wildly false claim that 90 percent of crime guns in Mexico were from the US?

"One hopes that it was sheer incompetence combined with a desire to stonewall any investigation, but the fact that people knew that the guns weren’t being traced raises questions even about this explanation. It raises the possibility that the guns were being sent to Mexico as part of a plan to push for more gun control."

Whether it was or wasn't part of a plan to push for more gun control as Dr. Lott suggests (and I agree), Holder has stonewalled the congressional investigation to the best of his ability.

Small town lawyer Ben Lange, who is challenging Braley for the 1st District seat, had this to say about Thursday's contempt vote:

"Border Agent Brian Terry died at the hands of weapons given to drug lords by a federal agency under the jurisdiction of Attorney General Eric Holder. The Attorney General subsequently admitted to misleading Congress and retracting a letter that contained false information about what officials in the administration knew about the 'Fast and Furious Operation.' The Attorney General then refused to turn over documents that would allow our elected representatives and the Terry family the ability to hold our government accountable and find out who knew what and when. Instead of holding the Attorney General accountable, however, Congressman Braley chose to play politics. The family of Brian Terry deserves better. Iowans deserve better.”

Braley Bytes: Ben Lange Back To Battle Braley Edition

According to Craig Robinson at The Iowa Republican:

On Wednesday, Ben Lange, the Republican nominee in the 1st Congressional District in 2010, will announce that he will begin to actively prepare for a rematch with Congressman Bruce Braley in the reconfigured 1st Congressional District. Lange narrowly lost to Braley in what was one of the closest races in the country in 2010. Lange lost to Braley by 4,209 votes, which was less than two percent of the vote.

A rematch between Lange and Braley would be interesting, but while the candidates will be familiar with one another, the reconfigured 1st District will make the 2012 campaign much different from the 2010 contest.

Other potential Republican challengers to Braley include Cedar Rapids businessman Steve Rathje and former C.R. mayor Paul Pate.  Robinson continues:

Not only is Bruce Braley is vulnerable, but it seems certain that Republicans will once again put up a tough candidate against him. Braley took less than 50 percent of the vote last cycle, a critical threshold for campaign odds-makers. Since the last election, his star has continued falling, including losing his choice seat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He has become marginalized in Washington and has continued casting votes (aside from government takeovers, bailouts, and Obamacare) that will put him at odds with the majority of voters in the new district.

Since he's a conservative and I'm a libertarian, Ben Lange and I don't agree on every political point.  But, I have to admit, I've got a soft spot for Lange, not just because of his noble sounding first name, but because we both grew up around the same unpronounceable small town of Quasqueton.  Besides, I wish luck to anyone who wants to add Bruce Braley to the ranks of the unemployed.

Braley Bytes: Knock Me Over With A Feather Edition

I've gone to great lengths on this blog to present my supposed U.S. representative, Bruce "Clunkers" Braley, as a big government liberal who's only interested in defecating on the Constitution and drowning my children and unborn grandchildren in red ink.  While I still think that's an apt description, there have been a couple of signs lately that Braley is, if not turning over a new leaf, at least running scared from the baying of the Tea Party hounds on his trail.

For instance there is Braley's recent call to avoid raising the national debt ceiling.  He said, "[W]e have to be able to draw the line somewhere because if we don’t start addressing this spending problem now, when will we?”  Since he helped nearly double the national debt, hearing Braley preaching spending restraint is a little like hearing Homer Simpson preach temperance (not that the average elected Republican has much more credibility on the issue).  In Washington words are cheap, but votes are more concrete.

Recently Braley actually voted my way on a bill for once.  Braley voted to allow three onerous provisions of the misnamed Patriot Act to expire February 28.  According to the ACLU (conservatives, stop rolling your eyes, they're right on this one):

The overbroad provisions of the Patriot Act due to expire are the John Doe roving wiretap provision, which allows law enforcement to conduct surveillance without identifying the person or location to be wiretapped; Section 215, or the “library records” provision, which allows the government to gain access to “any tangible thing” during investigations; and the “lone wolf” provision, which permits surveillance of “non-US” persons who are not affiliated with a terrorist group. All three provisions lack proper and fundamental privacy safeguards.

Although my fingers are starting to itch and stiffen up as I attempt to type these words, I'll endeavour to write them anyway: Good job, Clunkers!

Braley Bytes: Pyrrhic Victory Edition

In the November elections incumbent U.S. Representative Bruce Braley won reelection despite the fact that the majority of voters in his district voted for one of his three opponents rather than him.  However Craig Robinson at The Iowa Republican says that Braley's victory may have come at a heavy cost.  Robinson analyses how all three of Iowa's Democrat members of Congress are now strapped for campaign cash while the two Republican reps, Steve King and Tom Latham, are doing well.  This will be important during the uncertainty of redistricting this year.

Bruce Braley has seen his cash-on-hand number plummet by 90 percent. Braley squeaked out a narrow victory in November over Republican Ben Lange. He won re-election by just two points, but only has $28,896 in the bank. The once rising Democrat star is now relegated to insignificant committees. With Democrats in the minority in the House for the first time since being elected, Braley is going to struggle at raising money.

The only fundraising advantage Braley still has is that he’s a trial lawyer. Braley is scheduled to travel to Miami later this week for a campaign fundraiser at the American Association for Justice’s Winter Convention.

I disagree with Robinson on one thing though.  He writes:

Braley and Loebsack [...] are not going to scare anybody. They [barely] won their 2010 campaigns, have little or no money in the bank, and their districts are going to get more rural, which is good news for their Republican challengers. [Emphasis added.] 

People who love and respect the U.S. Constitution should be scared to death of Clunkers Braley.

Braley Bytes: "Debt for Clunkers" Edition

Besides helping to nearly double the national debt, Iowa First District Representative Bruce Braley's biggest achievement in Congress is his co-sponsorship of the 2009 "Debt for Clunkers" program. (This program is sometimes erroneously called "Cash for Clunkers" under the mistaken assumption that an organization that's $13 trillion in debt and hemorrhaging $1 trillion more than it's taking in each year actually has "cash" to hand out.)

Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, a free market think tank, wrote a good summary of the program shortly after it ended in 2009. Forgoing the usual academic niceties, Edwards dubbed Debt for Clunkers as "the dumbest government program ever." Here's Edwards' rundown of the program's dubious achievements:

• "A few billion dollars worth of wealth was destroyed. About 750,000 cars, many of which could have provided consumer value for many years, were thrown in the trash. Suppose each clunker was worth $3,000 at a guess, that would mean that the government destroyed $2.25 billion of value.
• "Low-income families, who tend to buy used cars, were harmed because the clunkers program will push up used car prices.
• "Taxpayers were ripped off $3 billion. The government took my money to give to people who will buy new cars that are much nicer than mine!
• "The federal bureaucracy has added 1,100 people to handle all the clunker administration. Again, taxpayers are the losers.
• "The environment was not helped. See here and here.
• "The auto industry received a short-term “sugar high” at the expense of lower future sales when the program is over. The program apparently boosted sales by about 750,000 cars this year, but that probably means that sales over the next few years will be about 750,000 lower. The program probably further damaged the longer-term prospects of auto dealers and automakers by diverting their attention from market fundamentals in the scramble for federal cash." 

Edwards' last point is vividly illustrated in the following graph from John Stossel's website. Although there's a temporary "blip" when the $3 billion in borrowed money is injected into the automobile market, as soon as that is removed auto sales drop right back to where they were. The only lasting effect of "Debt for Clunkers" was to put America's children $3 billion further in debt to the Red Chinese.

If the "dumbest government program ever" is his crowning achievement, it's easy to see that Bruce Braley is a real lemon. If 1st District voters are willing to push, pull or drag Braley out of office in November, there are a couple of newer and better models just waiting to be driven off the lot.

How about a 1979 Republican Ben Lange?  The Lange features lower taxes, lower spending and higher integrity than our current clunker.  If you really want to save some bucks we also have the economy model, a vintage Libertarian Rob Petsche.  The Libertarian has many of the same fine features as the Republican model, but with much lower imperial maintenance costs.  Either one would be fine for us to park in DC for a few years.

So, now what can I do to set you up with a new representative today?

Braley Bytes

Here is another installment of my new series of articles dealing with Iowa's so-called "representative" of the First District in the U.S. House, Bruce Braley.  I've changed the title of the feature from "Braley Bites" to the less provocative sounding "Braley Bytes" because I'm still trying to get Braley to hand me a juicy federal grant so I can finally quit working for my money like a sucker.

Braley Continues Assault On Constitution & Our Children

James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution" wrote: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce[.] The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State." [Emphasis added.]

When Bruce Braley and his cohorts in Congress read words like those from the framers of the Constitution their brains must translate it into those squawking trombone sounds of the adult characters in the "Peanuts" cartoons.  From Braley's vote for Obamacare to his signature piece of legislation, the "Debt for Clunkers" program, just about everything that Braley has done since he was elected has been an affront to constitutionally defined federalism as spelled out in the enumerated powers and the 10th Amendment.  With his yes vote on the painstakingly named "XXXXXX Act of XXXXXX" (it was rushed through so hastily, that that is it's official name!) Braley keeps his Constitution-trashing streak going.

Not satisfied with the record amount of deficit spending that they had already inflicted on future generations of Americans (i.e. our children, who must pay the bill, plus interest) congress was rushed back to DC by the Democrat leaders for a special session in order to spend even more money.  The "no-name bill" they voted on (H.R. 1586, by number) was a $26.1 billion "bailout." 

$10 billion was to go to pay the salaries of teachers, long known as stalwart supporters of the Democrat Party.  (Since Braley voted to give them the money, I guess that the $7,500 that the American Federation of Teachers gave Braley this election cycle was a good investment.)  Another $16.1 billion went to the extension of Federal Medicaid matching rates.  Education and healthcare are duties that the Tenth Amendment reserves to the states and to the people and are definitely not any of those "few and defined" "external objects" that Madison referred to.  But I guess Braley knows what the Constitution means better than one of the guys who wrote it.

Lange Moving Into Striking Distance?

Although unseating an entrenched incumbent like Braley is a difficult task, in fighter-pilot terminology, Braley better "watch his six."  A new poll shows that upstart Republican challenger Ben Lange may be closing in on the big-spending politico.  The poll, commissioned by the American Future Fund, shows Lange trailing "Clunkers" Braley by only 4.4 points among those who identified themselves as "certain to vote."  While the poll did show Lange still trailing by 11 points among the entire sample in the Democrat-leaning district, it also showed that only 39% of those in the district thought Braley "deserved re-election." Apparently not listed as an option in the survey was Libertarian candidate Rob Petsche, so it's unsure how he'll affect the election.

A Dam Dilemma

Delhi Dam during July flood (Iowa State Patrol photo)

In my last post I mentioned the Delhi Dam which ruptured during recent flooding.  Whether or not to rebuild it (and how) has become somewhat of hot button issue here in Iowa.  The dam is owned and maintained by the Lake Delhi Recreation Association.  Homeowners on the lake paid dues to the association.   Since the dam was a privately owned structure, should taxpayer funds be used to rebuild it? 

Some citizens and politicians, like Governor Culver and U.S. Representative Bruce Braley, say yes.  On the day after the dam failed, Governor Culver assured, "We're going to throw everything we have at it, in terms of federal and state resources."  Others disagree.  Ed Failor Jr. of Iowans For Tax Relief said, "It isn't the obligation of taxpayers to alleviate risk from our society.  By having private ownership of that dam, they assumed risk."  I'm inclined to agree with the second camp. 

That's not to say that I don't think that Lake Delhi should be rebuilt.  I love Lake Delhi.  For all the talk of this being a "private" lake, it was very much a public asset.  I didn't own a cabin on the lake, yet I spent many hours fishing and pleasure boating with friends there in my youth. I frolicked at Freddy's Beach.   I dined at the Pizza Place and Camp-O.  I camped along its shores at Turtle Creek County Park.  I hope to do so again someday with my kids.  I just hope that the dam will be rebuilt in a responsible manner.  (My friend strandediniowa over at Between Two Rivers blog stole some of my thunder on this, but I'll soldier on.  His post, too, is worth a read.)

There are plans for a new dam to produce hydroelectricity.  It should be possible to find investors (a power company perhaps) to help finance such a project.  Granted it would take longer to scrape the money together and the Lake Association would have to be more creative than if "rich" Uncle Culver or Braley just whip out the taxpayer's money, but in the long run it would be better for everyone.

The lake is important to Delaware County.  So, if local voters decided to throw their own local tax money at this with a bond issue or something (if that's even possible) I think that might not be too bad.  At least it would localize the cost to those who most benefit from it.  If the state DNR lent some expertise to the project, I probably wouldn't lose much sleep.  Even if the state and local government do get involved somehow, the project definitely doesn't require Bruce Braley's sack of borrowed Chinese blood money. 

Braley said, "My job is to help identify and secure all potential federal resources to assist those individuals and businesses in the 1st District who are eligible to help recover from the recent flooding."  Bull crap!  According to the oath he swore before God, his job is to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States [and] bear true faith and allegiance to the same."  The Constitution doesn't give Congress authority to rebuild a privately-owned dam on an intrastate lake.

Small-town lawyer Ben Lange, who is challenging Braley for the First District seat, seems to get this.  In a statement, the Republican Lange expressed sympathy for flood victims but explained: "Based on the facts as I now understand them, I believe the repairs will require the state and local governments, working in concert with the private sector, to fix the Delhi dam. Despite the political pressure to reach an alternative conclusion, I simply do not believe the federal government should be involved with this local issue because it is a privately-owned dam on a recreational lake."

Lange continued, speaking of the fiscal ramifications of this and similar usurpation by Congress: "I was disappointed, but not surprised, to read Rep. Braley’s statement yesterday, in which he said that we need to spend federal money to bailout a private entity now, and 'then tough choices are going to have to be made.' I respectfully disagree with the Congressman; our nation has reached a point where tough choices need to be made now. Rep. Braley’s 'spend first, think later' approach to this issue is exactly what is wrong with Congress as a whole, and the kind of thinking that has gotten this country into the fiscal mess we are in today." 

I couldn't have said it better myself.  Props to Lange for taking the constitutional high road rather than the pandering political easy road on this issue.

Let's rebuild Lake Delhi.  But let's do it right; let's do it local.

Welcome Representative Braley!

In the day and a half after I posted "Braley Bites" I had five views of my blog from Washington DC, including two from house.gov (U.S.  House of Representatives) domain names.  A similar phenomenon occurred when I posted "Bruce Braley Buffoonery" and "An Open Letter To Rep Bruce Braley."  I'm beginning to think I've got fans in high places.

Let me follow a hunch and extend a hearty welcome to Representative Braley or (more likely) a couple of his staffers.  I'm glad to have you here!  Anyone with an open mind is welcome.

Let me start off by saying I have nothing against Braley personally.  He may very well be a nice person in private.  I don't know; I've never met him.  It's his public policies that I don't like.  Unfortunately, the progressive policies that he promotes affect me quite intimately: taking the bread from my mouth through taxation, subverting the Constitution I swore to defend, and wrapping the noose of interminable debt around the necks of my children.  It's hard for me not to take umbrage at all that I'm afraid.

But I hope that you find the blog enjoyable and enlightening.  So long as you're here though I would ask that you please patronize my advertisers, to generate revenue for my site.  You see, unlike you, I don't have swarms of armed thugs to take other people's money for me and I can't borrow money from the Chinese in my children's name.

Or maybe I could forgo all that ad revenue stuff and you guys could just hook me up with a big, fat federal grant.  Watch how fast I change my tune from "Braley Bites" to "Braley's Brilliant" then!

Braley Bites

I'd like to take this opportunity to introduce what will be a recurring feature on this blog titled "Braley Bites."  Each installment will deal with Bruce Braley, Iowa's so-called "representative" of the First District in the U.S. House.  The "bites" comes from each one being a small, "bite-sized" news snippet, but since I'm no big fan of Braley, you can take it a couple of different ways.  Here's the first installment:

Lange Outraises Braley In Second Quarter

According to financial disclosures released this month, challenger Ben Lange raised more money in the second quarter than the incumbent Braley.  Lange, a small-town lawyer from Independence, raised $108,587 while Braley only raised $106,678.

While those numbers are similar, where the money came from are polar opposites.  85% of Lange's donations came from constituents here inside Iowa's 1st District.  Compare that to Braley, who had 88% of his contributions come from out-of-state. Incredibly only six actual constituents donated to Braley this past quarter, according to the disclosures.  Braley relied heavily on political special interests for donations, whereas 96% of Lange's support came from individual contributors.

While Iowans are already voting for Lange over Braley with their wallets, that doesn't mean Lange can breathe easy.  Braley has $632,385 in his war chest, while Lange only has $110,296.  Braley helps wield the resources of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and will use them to fund his own campaign.  And since Braley is one of the most consistently liberal votes in Congress, unions and other liberal special interests from across the country will be dumping truckloads of money into the race to ensure Braley's victory.

Bruce Braley Buffoonery

Here U.S. Representative Bruce Braley gets schooled when he appears on Fox Business. The best line is when the host tells Braley that his voting record looks like "a porn site for liberalism." Thankfully, whoever put this montage together edited out all the double-talk and b.s. (i.e. Braley's responses).

An Open Letter To Rep. Bruce Braley

Dear Representative Braley:

The “Father of the Constitution,” James Madison, wrote in Federalist Paper No. 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined… [and they] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” Given your support for every federal intrusion into the private market and into the personal decisions of average Americans, from “Cash for Clunkers” to Obamacare, apparently you disagree with Madison on the role of the federal government.

Perhaps, like a generation of “progressives” in both parties, you believe that the Constitution’s “general welfare clause” gives Congress authority to meddle in every aspect of human existence. As Roger Pilon, founder and director of Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies, put it during testimony before Congress, “The general welfare clause [was intended] to ensure that Congress, in the exercise of any of its enumerated powers, would act for the general rather than for any particular welfare.” It was to ensure that any law would uniformly apply to all Americans rather than benefiting only politically-favored groups, as is now common practice.

Perhaps you believe that the Constitution’s “commerce clause” gives Congress such authority. But the commerce clause was to allow Congress to smooth out the hodgepodge of competing protectionist policies of the several states, making the United States into a free trade zone. Again, Pilon: “Not remotely did the Framers intend that the clause be converted from a shield against state abuse--its use in the first great commerce clause case, Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)--into a sword enabling Congress, through regulation, to try to bring about all manner of social and economic ends.”

Perhaps you can quote Supreme Court rulings that bolster your big-government contentions. But, decisions from an appendage of the federal government, ruling to expand the power of that same government are not surprising and not compelling.

More likely perhaps, like Congressman Phil Hare from Illinois admitted (and no doubt many of your other colleagues who won't admit it), you simply don’t “worry” or care about the Constitution that you swore an oath to support, defend, and “bear true faith and allegiance to.” Like you, I once took an oath to support and defend the Constitution “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike you, I take it seriously.

By your actions and the usurpation that you advance, you, Sir, have proven yourself to be a domestic enemy of the U.S. Constitution. The yoke of oppressive debt levels that you are placing on my children and unborn grandchildren proves that you are also an enemy of basic human decency. Therefore, be advised: I intend to use all peaceful and legal means at my disposal to see that you are unseated.

Sincerely,

Benjamin R. Cashner
[Address removed]

[Hat tip to Between Two Rivers blog for the Phil Hare link.]