Senator Barbara “Ma’am” Boxer Announces Retirement
Senator Barbara “Ma’am” Boxer Announces Retirement
Yesterday US Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) announced via YouTube that she would not run for reelection in 2016.
Her interview rhyme has sent the pundits, DC wonks, and California politics into a tizzy. The outpouring of reaction from elected officials near and far has been interesting to say the least. None more so than Nancy “Botox” Pelosi getting caught off guard during a press conference she was holding:
While Nancy reels from the news, the political world has thrown themselves wholeheartedly into the betting game. At stake? Who will be THE crowned one to take over her seat? Already names are being thrown into the ring from both sides of the aisle. Lt. Governor Gavin Newsome, Tom Steyer (whom the guys at Powerline have written about), and Attorney General Kamala Harris are some of the contenders on the Democrat side. The Republicans have Carly Fiorina, US Rep Ed Royce, and even Condoleeza Rice. Needless to say, this particular show will be worth watching.
While many others are and will be looking at the field of candidates, why don’t we take a look back at a few of Senator Boxer’s greatest hits? How about carbon pollution? Yes, we can all agree that pollution is bad, but what is carbon pollution? Well, according to Senator Boxer it’s by far the biggest threat this country faces. And she’s actually referring to carbon dioxide, CO2. You know that really important greenhouse gas that is part of the Earth’s atmosphere and plants need it for photosynthesis. In fact, at one point she thought an amendment to prevent the EPA from taxing carbon dioxide emissions would repeal the Clean Air Act:
The first thing Senator Boxer said on the floor, immediately exposing her profound understanding of scientific knowledge:
“There has been an amendment that was attached to this bill on the very first day that would stop the Environmental Protection Agency forever from enforcing the Clean Air Act as it relates to carbon pollution. … It is essentially a repeal of the Clean Air Act as it involves a particular pollutant, carbon, which has been found to be an endangerment to our people.”
She is so very wrong, already. First, the amendment is not a repeal of the Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act is supposed to regulate pollution — this amendment is intended to stop the EPA from regulating a harmless and beneficial trace gas, carbon dioxide. Without carbon dioxide in the air, all life on Earth would die. It is essential for all plant life. Likely the senator does not know she was exhaling copious amounts of it during her rant.
How about her understanding of ACTUAL national security issues? Oh there are some doozys here as well!
• In 2007, Boxer was one of just 25 senators to vote against supplemental funding for US efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• In 2003, Boxer voted against $87 billion in supplemental funding for Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction. 87 senators voted for it.
Back in 1999, she also voted against funding for efforts in Kosovo.
And we can’t forget about the fact that she is an advocate for gun control. For example; it seems that those nasty ole guns are a very serious threat to campsites around the country. Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) proposed a bill in 2013 that would ease the firearms restrictions on campsites and land that the US Army Corps of Engineers manages. According to Fox News:
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said allowing more guns onto Corps property would increase danger to the dams, flood control systems and other crucial water projects.
“This critical infrastructure is a target for terrorists,” she said. Allowing more guns “sets up a national security threat. It endangers people.”
So, according to her brilliance, a gun is more dangerous to dams or water projects than the humans who wield them. Well alrighty then! Really, its nothing new here. Guns have always been bad in her estimation. She’s long been a proponent of the so-called assault weapons ban, attempted to close the gun show loopholes, wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill (but would leave the interpretation of what is mentally ill open for debate), and thought a bill allowing National Guard to keep schools safe was a grand idea. Richard Simon of the LA Times wrote:
Federal funds would be made available to deploy National Guard troops at schools under legislation introduced Wednesday by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in response to last week’s mass slaying at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.
The Save Our Schools Act would leave it to governors to decide whether to call out the National Guard and how to use troops around schools.
“Is it not part of the national defense to make sure that your children are safe?” Boxer said at Capitol Hill press conference.
I wonder if she gave a moment’s thought to the time, resources, and money available that would be needed to task National Guard to all the schools in the country? Yeah, I didn’t think so. In the meantime, I still think this incident is by far her greatest hit of all time:
My goodness, she certainly was a tad snippy. I mean seriously, a uniformed officer politely addressing an official as Ma’am?! Oh. The. Horror. Well Senator, while others spend the next two years jockeying for your US Senate seat, you have plenty of time to figure out what your new retirement title will be. Somehow I’m sure it won’t have the horrifying word “Ma’am” in it.