Morning Briefing: January 25th, 201


By Steve Deace

Creepiest Ad of the Year?

It’s only late January, but it’s going to be hard for another commercial to be creepier this year than this one from the Center for Reproductive Rights. The ad depicts a black man, whom abortion pioneer Margaret Sanger would’ve described as a “human weed” if she were alive today, holding a rose and speaking romantically into the camera to commemorate the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Apparently a little Barry White sets the mood when you’re celebrating the killing of your own children.

Bobby Jindal 2016?

The popular Louisiana governor is expected to vie for the Republican nomination for President of these United States in 2016, and he certainly gave what sounded like a presidential campaign speech at the Republican National Committee’s winter meeting Thursday night. If one summarizes what Jindal had to say it would be this: “America already has one liberal party, she doesn’t need another.” To read the entire text of Jindal’s speech you can click here.

Obamacare Sticks it to Smokers

Millions of smokers could be priced out of health insurance because of tobacco penalties in President Obama’s health-care law, according to experts who are teasing out the potential impact of a little-noted provision in the massive legislation. The Affordable Care Act — or “Obamacare” — allows health insurers to charge smokers buying individual policies up to 50 percent higher premiums starting next Jan. 1. For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year. A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums. Ironically, two groups that do much of the smoking in America are the Hollywood crowd and lower-income peoples — which are two of Obama’s most loyal blocs of support. I suppose they won’t look at it as a tax as much as they’ll look at it as a tithe.

You can friend “Steve Deace” on Facebook or follow him on Twitter @SteveDeaceShow. 




Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore via Compfight cc

  • Jeff Samelson

    Look, I know you are going to erase this message like the other one but that doesn’t change the fact that too many of our side will not vote for Jindal out of our understanding of the US Constitution.

    In the discussion about Obama’s qualifications it was brought out that the requirements for the US Presidency didn’t mean merely that one had to be born an US citizen. But there was an understanding among our framers that “Natural Born Citizen” meant that both parents of the individual had to be US citizens at the time of the birth of the individual for that person to meet this qualification.

    The fact that Obama “got away with it” doesn’t change the belief among a great many within the conservative movement that this indeed was the original intent of the framers. Saying, well, “we are playing by an post Obama interpretation” isn’t going to make them just abandon this interpretation.

    Piyush Jindal (Bobby is just his nick name) indeed was born on June 10th, 1971 in Baton Rouge Louisiana, there’s no debate on that fact. That made him a US citizen at the time of his birth. But indeed, many of us in the Obama Constitutional legitimacy debate took the position that the US Constitution by demanding an occupant of the White House to be a “Natural Born Citizen” demanded more than that. It demanded that the parents of said occupants to have been US citizens at the time of that occupant’s birth.

    So it is extremely relevant that Piyush’s father, Amar, didn’t become an US citizen until December 4th 1986 more than 15 years after Piyush’s birth. And that his mother Raj. became a US citizen September 21, 1976 when Piyush was five.

    Look, I like and respect Bobby Jindal, and indeed I would vote for him, if given an opportunity for most any position in this government. Except President and Vice President. For me doing so will have me doing the very thing I have criticized Obama, and indeed even Republican leaders for doing – which is ignoring the constitution when it is “convenient.”

    And again, sorry the fact that Obama never met that qualification (forget where he was born, the only way he could have made this qualification is if Frank Davis Marshall was indeed his father as many has speculated, for Barack Obama Sr. indeed never became an US citizen) isn’t going to assuage us who indeed feels the main problem with our government today is that it has swayed away from our founders intent. Indeed how can we return to the constitutional government most of us desire, through an act that we believe would be against the intent of that very constitution.

    Again, I like what Gov. Jindal has to say. I haven’t even mentioned that the darling of the Republican Establishment Sen. Marco Rubio, faces the same situation, because indeed, I wouldn’t even vote for him if he was constitutionally qualified, as I would with Jindal. But indeed while Rubio indeed was born in Miami, Florida the same year as Jindal was born, his parents didn’t become citizens until four and an half years later.

    Would we really have any credibility if we present to the public well it was wrong when Obama was allowed to break the constitution, but since he did we should be allowed to? What, to make us “even”? And then we will campaign on a return to constitutional principles?

    Sorry, such an effort would be doomed to failure anyway and would certainly not be undertaken by enough on our side at least to make it past a primary. In Jindal’s case. And in Rubios case, the number of people who will feel compelled not to vote for him because of their understanding of the constitution will surely cost him the election in the general even if these people just stayed home.

    • smrstrauss

      The meaning of Natural Born Citizen does not refer to the citizenship of the parents but only to the place of birth, and Jindal, Rubio, and, yes, Obama, were all born in the USA. Obama was born in Hawaii, and the evidence for it is overwhelming.

      “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]