With every Obama stink the coalitions multiply and continue to grow in numbers and strength. In order to kill the growing opposition Obama and the Dimocrats want to restrict the opposition to Republicans and ignore real Democrats like us. But now even elected Democrats are getting off the waterlogged Obama Dimocrat sinking ship.
The Obama thug machine, thinks that by targetting Rush Limbaugh we real Democrats will be distracted, again, and ignore Obama’s inability to get the job done. Rush Limbaugh is a distraction, a red flag to ward off Democrats from joining with Republicans in a NObama coalition. It is however already too late to stop the coalitions from multiplying and growing.
Obama should stop attacks on Rush Limbaugh and instead outline sensible programs that will work to keep afloat the sinking boat Obama, clad in HMS Pinafore fashion, imagines he captains.
Limbaugh of course is happy with all the attention and has now challenged Obama to debate. Word of warning to Barack: Limbaugh will fight back without fear, so don’t try to be manly in order to impress muscular arms
Mary Todd Michelle.
* * *
The foundational reason for the growing Stop Barack Obama coalitions is simple:
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
The multiplying and growing Republican/Democrat coalitions are uniting on the basis of issues. Yesterday, John McCain called out Obama on the massive waste of money Obama loves – the 2009 Omnibus Bill funding this year’s government operations through to October.
Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, a liberal Democrat, has joined McCain and demands Obama veto the 2009 Omnibus mess too:
Democratic Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin says his fellow Democrat – President Obama – should veto the $410 billion Omnibus bill:[snip]
Sen Russ Feingold, D-WS, says he will vote against the $410 billion omnibus which is currently on the Senate floor, joining Democratic Sen Evan Bayh of Illinois, in calling on President Obama to demand a rewrite from Congress.
Feingold 09:31:02 I’m not voting for this…The President should veto it….We should go back and clean it up…
Democratic Senator Evan Bayh thinks the Omnibus bill stinks and wrote about it in the Wall Street Journal:
This week, the United States Senate will vote on a spending package to fund the federal government for the remainder of this fiscal year. The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 is a sprawling, $410 billion compilation of nine spending measures that lacks the slightest hint of austerity from the federal government or the recipients of its largess.
The Senate should reject this bill. If we do not, President Barack Obama should veto it.
The omnibus increases discretionary spending by 8% over last fiscal year’s levels, dwarfing the rate of inflation across a broad swath of issues including agriculture, financial services, foreign relations, energy and water programs, and legislative branch operations. Such increases might be appropriate for a nation flush with cash or unconcerned with fiscal prudence, but America is neither.[snip]
Our nation’s current fiscal imbalance is unprecedented, unsustainable and, if unaddressed, a major threat to our currency and our economic vitality. The national debt now exceeds $10 trillion. This is almost double what it was just eight years ago, and the debt is growing at a rate of about $1 million a minute.
Washington borrows from foreign creditors to fund its profligacy. [snip]
This dependence raises the specter that other nations will be able to influence our policies in ways antithetical to American interests. The more of our debt that foreign governments control, the more leverage they have on issues like trade, currency and national security. Massive debts owed to foreign creditors weaken our global influence, and threaten high inflation and steep tax increases for our children and grandchildren.
The solution going forward is to stop wasteful spending before it starts. Families and businesses are tightening their belts to make ends meet — and Washington should too.
The NObama coalitions have spread to the U.S. House of Representatives too:
Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona have joined a quiet revolt in the House that could slow some of President Obama’s fast-moving priorities.
The two are among 49 Democrats from congressional districts that backed Republican Sen. John McCain ‘s 2008 presidential race and whose support for the Democratic majority’s progressive agenda is increasingly not assured.
A dozen of them were among 20 House Democrats who voted against the $410 billion discretionary fiscal 2009 spending package (HR 1105) on Feb. 25. Another group later forced House leaders to sideline a contentious bill (HR 1106) to allow bankruptcy judges to modify home loans.
Although only a handful of moderate and conservative Democrats abandoned their leaders during party-line votes on the economic stimulus law (PL 111-5), the group of vulnerable Democrats branded the omnibus spending bill as a budget buster and questioned whether the mortgage bill would raise interest rates on average home-owners and cause some struggling homeowners to rush to bankruptcy.[snip]
The president might also have trouble winning their votes for an anticipated second financial bailout package.
“My job is not to be a rubber stamp for the president or Democratic leadership, but to be a voice for the people that elected me,” Giffords said. “I voted for the stimulus, but found I could not vote for the omnibus.”
It is not just “moderate” Democrats opposing Obama. We remember “liberal Peter A. DeFazio of Oregon voted Feb. 13 against Obama’s biggest early priority, the $787.2 billion economic stimulus“.
Another group of Democrats has started to oppose Obama:
But a day after the 20 Democrats voted against the omnibus spending bill including 12 from districts carried by McCain a larger group of conservative Democrats forced party leaders to pull the mortgage bankruptcy measure. In a symbolic protest, a group of 26 dissident Democrats including 18 from districts carried by McCain sided with Republicans when the House narrowly adopted, 224-198, a procedural motion (H Res 190) that had the effect of postponing action on the mortgage bankruptcy bill. A modified version of the legislation is likely to go to the House floor this week.
Obama won’t come up with a plan to stabilize the financial markets – the one thing that is essential to do. As mothers throughout history have said “eat your vegetables before dessert”:
It was left to a moderate Democrat, Rep. Allen Boyd of Florida, to state an even broader concern: that on the heels of $787 billion in economic stimulus and $700 billion in financial rescue funds already approved, Obama might be trying to do too much.
“You need to be careful about taking on too many issues,” Boyd warned Orszag at a House Budget Committee hearing, because it “might sink the whole ship.”
The NObama coaltions are not restricted to budgetary matters:
The patently unconstitutional bill to give the District of Columbia a voting representative in the House of Representatives was pulled off the House calendar because — according to one House Republican leadership source — they feared that the so-called Blue Dog Democrats would not support it.
“Cap and Trade” essentially a pollution tax, is coming in for examination and opposition too:
President Barack Obama’s call to raise taxes on high earners and greenhouse gas polluters met fierce opposition Tuesday from congressional Republicans and also a few Democrats. “I would never want to adversely affect anything that is charitable or good,” Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said of Obama’s call to limit high-income taxpayers’ itemized deductions for charitable donations and mortgage interest.
Republicans said the president’s plan to charge fees to industries that spew greenhouse gases amounts to a stealthy tax increase for all Americans that will far exceed the new $400 annual tax cut for workers that he wants to extend beyond 2010.
“The president’s budget increases taxes on every American, and does so during a recession,” said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee. [snip]
But the Treasury secretary acknowledged that consumers could face higher electric bills because Obama would impose fees on greenhouse gas producers, including power plants that burn fossil fuels, by auctioning off carbon pollution permits. The goal is to reduce the emissions blamed for global warming while raising a projected $646 billion over 10 years.
We discussed in Obama Budget: Sleeveless, Clueless, Truthless, Hopeless, Penniless the need to think about Obama’s “plans” because they will have unintended consequences. We noted how “regional wars” could erupt when Obama deliberately targets “bitter” Americans outside the coasts who burn coal to heat their homes.
The Michigan politicians who enabled Obama and unDemocratically attacked Hillary Clinton are getting the “under the bus” treatment. Unfortunately the people of Michigan are the ones who will be hurt.
The Gang of 16, a group of Rust Belt and industrial state Democrats, is reconvening to brainstorm ways to soften the blow of Obama’s proposed climate program on their states’ economies.
The group, honchoed by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), is best known for the pointed letter that 10 of its members sent to Senate leaders last year, citing potential economic damage as a key reason they could not support the Senate’s final cap-and-trade bill.
The legislation would have forced companies to pay increasing amounts for the carbon dioxide they emit, a process polluters say would significantly raise energy costs for consumers.
Last year’s climate bill included stepping stones for the industry, giving polluters a handful of free pollution credits and allowing them to auction the rest. But the cap-and-trade plan proposed in Obama’s fiscal year 2010 budget would make these companies pay for all their pollution from the beginning.
Now, the gang is trying to balance economic concerns with environmental ones, setting down markers for easing pollution payments for business while shielding working families from rising energy costs.
Why is Claire McCaskill running away from Obama? She knows Missouri is a target state in the next several election cycles:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also is taking to the road with a tactic from the campaign season, scheduling dozens of town-hall-style meetings on climate change. The first is planned for this month in Missouri.
Why is Obama giving away so much tax-payer money? To kill opposition by attacking opponents with tax-payer dollars:
In a recent Pew Center poll, Americans ranked the environment as the 16th most important issue Obama should tackle; energy ranked sixth, and the economy was first.
But now parts of the battle could be easier for Obama. Some climate experts say automobile producers bailed out by the Obama administration might be less interested in challenging an aggressive global warming bill.
“Automakers may be much more amenable for going along, because they are dependent on the Obama administration,” Weiss said.
Money, Money, Money, Money, Money – Obama will use taxpayer money to attack his political enemies and intimidate those who think they are his allies.
Money matters and money issues are the chief problem and the source of the impetus for the multiplying and growing NObama coalitions:
Moderate and conservative Democrats in the Senate are starting to choke over the massive spending and tax increases in President Barack Obama’s budget plans and have begun plotting to increase their influence over the agenda of a president who is turning out to be much more liberal than they are.
A group of 14 Senate Democrats and one independent huddled behind closed doors on Tuesday, discussing how centrists in that chamber can assert more leverage on the major policy debates that will dominate this Congress.
Afterward, some in attendance made plain that they are getting jitters over the cost and expansive reach of Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget proposal.
Asked when he’d reach his breaking point, Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, said: “Right now. I’m concerned about the amount that’s being offered in [Obama’s] budget.”
Another attendee, Sen. Mary L. Landrieu (D-La.), said she expected the newly formed caucus to shape Obama’s budget proposal as it moves through Congress.
“We want to give the president a chance, but our concern is going to be on the budget, looking forward,” Landrieu said. She added that she agrees with Obama that there needs to be “fundamental change” in fiscal policy, but she said “we do have to keep our eye on the long term, on intermediate and long-term fiscal responsibility.”
Sen. Evan Bayh, the Indiana Democrat who assembled Tuesday’s skull session, added that he was “very concerned” about Washington’s level of spending, especially in a $410 billion “omnibus” spending bill to fund the government until the start of a new fiscal year in October.
As for the tax increases on high-income earners called for in Obama’s plan, Bayh said, “I do think that before we raise revenue, we first should look to see if there are ways we can cut back on spending.”
“The American people and businesses are tightening their belts,” Bayh added. “I think we need to show that the government can economize as well.”
The anxiety that moderate and conservative Democrats in the Senate are feeling about Obama’s agenda is potentially significant.
Why the attacks on Rush Limbaugh? Here’s the answer:
If the moderate Democrats in the Senate are willing to work with moderate Republicans — as Bayh said they are eager to do — they will negate the White House’s ability to portray opposition to Obama’s spending as partisan obstructionism.
Democratic Senator Ben Nelson attacks the ill-logic of the Obama proposals which so many PINOs have accepted without thought:
“I have major concerns about trying to raise taxes in the midst of a downturn of the economy,” said Nelson, the conservative Nebraska Democrat. “On the one hand, you’re trying to stimulate the economy. On the other hand, you’re trying to keep money from going into taxpayers’ pockets. It’s very difficult to make that logic work.”
The tiresome Dimocratic Senator from Missouri, Claire McCaskill, is running away from her Obama worship too and pretending to be part of the “moderate” group but we don’t believe anything she says.
Similarly, Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) said he wants to ensure that new spending in Obama’s budget remains funded for only one year. “If it’s coming and staying, then I have a problem,” Begich said just before he headed off to the meeting with the moderate Democrats.
Other Democrats in that group include Sens. Mark Warner of Virginia, Bill Nelson of Florida, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Robert P. Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania, and Blanche L. Lincoln of Arkansas, as well as Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.).
“At what point of time do you say enough is enough?” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), a centrist who is not part of the group. “I don’t know where that is at this point.”
“It’s a pig of a bill” says a Republican.
The Republican is right – “It’s a pig of a bill”.
Dean/Brazile/Pelosi/Kennedy/Kerry forced a “pig in a poke” on the Democratic Party during the primaries. Now the “pig in a poke” is spreading the stink.
Democrats and Republicans have to work together to stop the B.O. stink.