Obama Sickens America: The Arrogance Of Palaver

It’s Friday news dump day – made especially dumpy by the bad-news-delayed-until-after-passage-of-the-Obama-health-scam disclosures. The latest disclosures emerge after Barack Obama on Thursday performed a John Kerry fake boast “bring it on!” We know how well Kerry’s boast went over – when the attacks came, Kerry folded.

The “bring it on” boast was also reminiscent of Gary Hart’s “follow me around” bravado which destroyed Hart. George W. Bush tried the same chest-thumping with “Mission Accomplished” and “you’re either with us or against us“.

Back in Iowa for a publicity stunt Obama said “Bring It On!” “Go for it” to Republicans who demand a repeal of his health scam:

“Obama says those who try to overturn the sweeping changes will have to face voters who see immediate benefits from the law. Speaking at the University of Iowa on Thursday, Obama cited changes including tax breaks for small businesses and a requirement that insurance companies allow young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26. Other reforms will take up to four years to implement.”

Obama boasted and primped at his publicity stunt and spewed his Jay-Z style bravado:

““My attitude is: Go for it,” Obama said. “If these congressmen in Washington want to come here in Iowa and tell small-business owners that they plan to take away their tax credits and essentially raise their taxes, be my guest.” [snip]

Obama said health care reform is the “law of the land,” and the crowd chanted “Yes we did” – a new take on the slogan from his presidential campaign.

Obama grinned and replied, “Yes we did. Yes we did.”

Obama tried to reignite the passion of those campaign glory days in a speech at the University of Iowa.[snip]

Despite the nostalgia, it was hard not to notice how much had changed in three years.

In May 2007, Obama told Iowans that “as president, I will sign a universal health care plan into law by the end of my first term in office.”

On Thursday, as Obama pitched a watered down version of his original proposal, he had to omit some of the key words in his original promise.

“Just a few months into our campaign, I stood at the University of Iowa hospital right around the corner and I promised that by the end of my first term in office, I would sign legislation to reform our health insurance system,” he said.

Much of Thursday’s speech read like an Obama ‘08 special.”

Did you “Spot The Bot” talking point? HCR is now become the HIR Obama scam.

Obama’s Arrogance Of Palaver, idle, ceaseless chatter, sickens America.

* * * * * *

Today the truth began to seep out in Big Media about the Obama health scam. Big Media will eventually claim, after the health scam is proven a failure, that news reports on the Obama’s health scam disclosed the information that was required to make an informed decision. But we know that was not the case. Very few Big Media outlets did the necessary dissemination of information about the Obama health scam needed by the American people in a timely manner. Now the truth seeps out.

One way to spot a BOT (Barack Obama Thug) is the quick switch made by Big Blog boys in the acronym used by them to describe the health scam. The acronym for Obama’s scam used to be HCR (“health care reform”), now the BOTs use HIR (“health insurance reform”). That’s an easy way to play “Spot A BOT”.

Barack Obama and his BOTs have destroyed the possibility of health care reform and now flog the scam which is the HIR scam – a transfer of taxpayer wealth to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma with the IRS playing the Frank Nitti enforcer role.

Must be defeated in 2012 BOT Claire McCaskill today is already running away from the Obama scam:

“The side on which I’m on, that voted for the bill, probably is overpromising, [has] not been clear enough about the fact that this is going to be an incremental approach over time, [and] the benefits aren’t going to be felt by most Americans immediately,” McCaskill told MSNBC’s Mornine Joe.

Too late McCaskill begins to squeal out the truth.

The Associated Press today also decided to begin to disclose the Obama scam reality. Only now we hear the impact of the Obama scam on the economy:

“The health care overhaul will cost U.S. companies billions and make them more likely to drop prescription drug coverage for retirees because of a change in how the government subsidizes those benefits.

In the first two days after the law was signed, three major companies — Deere & Co., Caterpillar Inc. and Valero Energy — said they expect to take a total hit of $265 million to account for smaller tax deductions in the future.

With more than 3,500 companies now getting the tax break as an incentive to keep providing coverage, others are almost certain to announce similar cost increases in the weeks ahead as they sort out the impact of the change.

Figuring out what it will mean for retirees will take longer, but analysts said as many as 2 million could lose the prescription drug coverage provided by their former employers, leaving them to enroll in Medicare’s program. [snip]

American industrial companies that are struggling to compete globally against companies with much lower labor costs are particularly likely to eventually drop retiree coverage, said Gene Imhoff, an accounting professor at the University of Michigan.[snip]

As many as 1.5 million to 2 million retirees could lose the drug benefits provided by their former employer because of the tax changes, according to a study by the Moran Company, a health care consulting firm.”

Obama and the Dimocrats were aware of these detrimental changes, but the American people were denied the information, until now that it is too late. Too late, unless November brings “change”. (There are also the bipartisan Attorneys General lawsuits with even more AGs wishing to join the battle against the Obama scam.)

While they were confessing, Associated Press also threw in a Friday news dump article about the 2009 “growth” numbers:

“Most of last quarter’s growth came from a large bump up in manufacturing — but not because consumer demand was especially strong. In fact, consumer spending weakened at the end of the year, even more than the government previously estimated, contributing to the slightly lower reading on overall economic growth.[snip]

Analysts predict the economy will expand at only between a 2.5 percent and 3 percent pace in the first quarter of this year. The next two quarters should log similar growth, they say.[snip]

Sizzling growth in the 5 percent range would be needed for an entire year to drive down the unemployment rate, now 9.7 percent, by just 1 percentage point.”

So much for all those “honest” numbers from the White House.

Oh, and the Congressional Budget Office had this to add:

“President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation’s economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.”

The attacks on the Obama health scam are not only coming from Republicans. The attacks are coming in from the Left of the political spectrum too:

“Now that we have an insurance bill, can we move on to healthcare reform?

As an organization of registered nurses, we have an obligation to provide an honest assessment, as nurses must do every hour of every day. The legislation fails to deliver on the promise of a single standard of excellence in care for all and instead makes piecemeal adjustments to the current privatized, for-profit healthcare behemoth.

When all the boasts fade, comparing the bill to Social Security and Medicare, probably intended to mollify liberal supporters following repeated concessions to the healthcare industry and conservative Democrats, a sobering reality will probably set in.

The nurses assess the sick joke which is the Obama health scam:

“Though the federal government will provide additional subsidies to states, those expire in 2016, leaving the program a top target to budget cutting governors and legislatures.[snip]

The mandate forcing people without coverage to buy insurance. Coupled with the subsidies for other moderate income working people not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid, the result is a gift worth hundreds of billions of dollars to reward the very insurance industry that created the present crisis through price gouging, care denials, and other abuses.[snip]

1. Insurance premiums will continue to climb. [snip]

2. There is no standard benefits package, only a circumspect reference that benefits should be “comparable to” current employer provided plans.
3. An illusory limit on out-of-pocket medical expenses. But even in the regulated state exchanges, insurers remain in control of what they offer and what will be a covered service. Insurers are likely to design plans to attract healthier customers, and many enrollees will likely find the federal guarantees do not protect them for medical treatments they actually need.

No meaningful restrictions on claims denials insurers don’t want to pay for.

1. Provisions permitting insurers and companies to more than double charges to employees who fail “wellness” programs because they have diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol readings, or other medical conditions.
2. Permitting insurers to sell policies “across state lines”, exempting patient protections passed in other states. [snip]
3. Allowing insurers to charge three times more based on age plus more for certain conditions, and continue to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.
4. Insurers may continue to rescind policies, drop coverage, for “fraud or intentional misrepresentation” – the main pretext insurance companies now use.
Taxing health benefits for the first time. [snip] With no real checks on premium hikes, many plans will reach that amount by the start date, 2018, rapidly. Erosion of women’s reproductive rights, with a new executive order from the President enshrining a deal to get the votes of anti-abortion Democrats and a burdensome segregation of funds, that in practice will likely mean few insurers will cover abortion and perhaps other reproductive medical services.
A windfall for pharmaceutical giants. Through a deal with the White House, the administration blocked provisions to give the government more power to negotiate drug prices and gave the name brand drug makers 12 years of marketing monopoly against competition from generic competition on biologic drugs, including cancer treatments.
Most critically, the bill strengthens the economic and political power of a private insurance-based system based on profit rather than patient need.[snip]
Unlike Social Security and Medicare which expanded a public safety net, this bill requires people – in the midst of the mass unemployment and the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression — to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket to big private companies for a product that may or may not provide health coverage in return.
Too many people will remain uninsured, individual and family healthcare costs will continue to rise largely unabated and private insurers will still be able to deny claims with little recourse for patients.”

Republicans, from the Right of the spectrum, continue the attack. Paul Ryan took to the New York Times for his attack and plans for action, not merely “repeal”:

“Costs will continue their ascent as the debt burden squeezes life out of our economy. We are unapologetic advocates for the repeal of this costly misstep. But Republicans must also make the case for a reform agenda to take its place, and get to work on that effort now. …

Health care experts across the political spectrum acknowledge that a fundamental driver of health inflation is the regressive tax preference for employer-based health insurance. This discriminatory tax treatment lavishes the greatest benefit on the most expensive plans while providing no support for the unemployed, the self-employed or those who don’t get coverage from their employer.

Reform-minded leaders like Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, and Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, pushed legislative proposals that would directly address this issue. I helped write a plan that would replace the bias in the tax code with universal tax credits so that all Americans have the resources to purchase portable, affordable coverage that best suits their needs, with additional support provided for those with lower incomes. All these ideas, though, were dismissed early on, as they didn’t fit with the government-driven plan favored by the majority. But going forward it’s important that we reconsider this regressive tax issue.

Then, when helping Americans with pre-existing conditions obtain coverage, we should focus on innovative state-based solutions, including robust high-risk pools, reinsurance markets and risk-adjustment mechanisms. I intend to continue advancing true patient-centered reforms like attaching tax benefits to the individual rather than the job, breaking down barriers to interstate competition, and promoting transparency and consumer-friendly coverage options.”

Republicans will fight for repeal along with many of the non-hypocrites on the Left. But the energy clearly will be with the Republicans. In July of 2009 we wrote that the advertisements for the 2009 election were easy to discern (“Tomorrow’s Anti-Obama Ads Today“:

“The future anti-Obama advertisements are already written. The ads will begin to air as soon as the 2010 election cycle begins in earnest. The ads will be deadly.

For those wishing to actually see what anti-Obama ads will look and sound like we already have samples. The samples are advertisements already airing in the New Jersey election for governor which will take place this November 2009.

The ads running against Jon Corzine are what we have been saying about Obama since 2007: “Watch what he does, not what he says.

Jay Cost does a follow-up today and by doing so mocks the Obama boast of “Go for it”:

“The Republican Message Writes Itself”

The talk among Republicans is that their November message should focus on repealing the new health care bill – or some version of repeal and replace. Meanwhile, other analysts have suggested that Republicans risk over-reaching and appearing too aggressive.

I think this debate is misframed. The Republican message is going to be put together by campaign strategists looking to maximize the number of votes won by their candidates. While there is something to be said for emphasizing repeal, I expect the Republican argument to focus on more visceral, immediate points. Here are the five big arguments we should expect the GOP to emphasize.

1. The Economy. This is the number one issue in every poll. If the labor market continues to be weak, expect Republican candidates to use that to great effect. [snip]

Remember, it’s not just that the unemployment rate is elevated. It’s that the Obama Administration – and by extension congressional Democrats – over-promised on what the stimulus package would do for it.

2. Medicare. Call it Bob Dole’s revenge. The 104th Congress tried to trim the sails of Medicare to preserve its long-run sustainability, and they were hammered by the Democrats for their efforts. This time, Republicans will return the favor – arguing against the hundreds of billions of cuts in Medicare that ObamaCare imposes to fund a new entitlement. Republican candidates will be sure to mention points like this, from CBO:

“Under the legislation, CBO expects that Medicare spending would increase significantly more slowly during the next two decades than it has increased during the past decades (per beneficiary, after adjusting for inflation). It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate of spending could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or through reductions in access to care or the quality of care.”

What effect will this have? Consider that in the 2008 presidential election in Virginia, senior citizens made up 11% of the electorate and went for John McCain, 53-46. In the 2009 gubernatorial election, they made up 18% of the electorate and gave Bob McDonnell 60% of the vote.

Gallup finds that seniors right now give Barack Obama just 40% job approval. That’s bad news for Democrats.”

Barack Obama does not include seniors in his “situation comedy” coalition. The Republicans in a head-turning, eye-popping, smart bit of judo will market themselves as friends of seniors in 2010. Republicans will prove that we are right about the “Mistake In ’08” and the chance for Republicans to pick up the groups Obama Dimocrats discarded.

Jay Cost continues with his analysis of the Republican message for November which Obama encourages with his “go for it” bravado:

“3. The Deficit. If anybody doubts whether deficits can influence votes, look no further than the case of H. Ross Perot. He made fiscal sustainability a chief plank in his 1992 presidential campaign, and he pulled in a whopping 19% of the vote. That included 30% of the Independent vote.

The deficit is one of those issues that everybody understands. Everybody has to keep some kind of budget, and everybody knows that they can’t get away with spending more than twice what they take in. The White House can call this a “new era of responsibility,” but it’s hard to square the claim with the numbers.

4. Taxes and spending. Combine the billions of new taxes in the health care bill with the $1 trillion from letting the Bush tax cuts expire, the $940 billion price tag of ObamaCare, and the $789 billion stimulus – and you have a simple GOP message: this is the biggest tax and spend government in American history.

Plus, expect Republicans to warn that the unsustainability of the deficit plus Obama’s social welfare ambitions can mean only one thing: massive new taxes on the middle class. We could see ads using this clip:

“Go for it” Republicans – face down the fake bravura of flim-flam Obama and his Dimocrats of Doom:

“5. Congress. This is one of the most unpopular Congresses in recent history, and Republicans will try to anchor incumbent Democrats to Nancy Pelosi, who is quite unpopular (the latest AP poll had her unfavorables at 51%).

We’re going to see a lot of ads like this:

We recall John Kerry’s brave “Bring It On” and then the “Swift Boat Veterans For Truth” and how Kerry fell apart and did not live up to his boasts. Now Obama has his “Go For It” boobery and we will see him fold as he has time and time again (the latest fold is the HCR=HIR rubbish). Cost informs us why this is so:

“These are the tried-and-true issues for Republicans to hit: jobs, Medicare, the deficit, taxes and spending, and Congress. There will be other messages out there, but individually each of these would be very potent. Running on them all in a single election is something else entirely.”

Will the Republicans air the ads that “write themselves” or fear Obama’s “Go For It”? The New York Times gives a clue:

“Polls Show Public Still Skeptical of Health Care Law

While President Obama promotes health care legislation in Iowa today, polls taken since the bill passed find somewhat more support for the measure, but also reveal a nation still skeptical of overhauling the health care system.[snip]

Both polls also find Mr. Obama receiving better marks for his handling of health care since the bill passed, but his rating on the issue is still below 50 percent.[snip]

The CBS News poll further underscores the notion that Mr. Obama has yet to make the case for his health care agenda to most Americans. A majority of those reinterviewed still say they do not have a clear understanding of how the bill will affect them.

Passage of the legislation made no difference in the public’s opinion of whether the changes would improve the health care system over the next few years; just 3 in 10 continue to believe the changes will make it better.”

Scott Brown of Massachusetts will be the face of reasonable Republican opposition to the Obama health scam:

Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., who took office as the 41st vote against health care reform in the Senate, said today it’s time to “collectively fix this bill” and that he’s prepared to lead the charge to do just that.

“We’re all in favor of the catastrophic care coverage and coverage for children,” Brown told “Good Morning America.” “But what about the backroom deals? What about all the bad things?” [snip]

At a rally in Iowa on Thursday, Obama dared Republicans to try to repeal the new health reform law. “If they want to have that fight, I welcome that fight,” Obama said. “My attitude? Go for it.”

Brown told “GMA” the president’s rhetoric is “inappropriate.”

Scott Brown is right, if restrained, about Obama’s words – “inappropriate”. We would add “foolish”.

The Republicans have provided a “Timeline” of provisions in the Obama health scam which detail when exactly the bills and ugly mechanisms of Obama’s scam will churn – which will prove Obama’s forced confidence unwarranted. Joe Biden will continue to blame George W. Bush (now, according to Biden, it is Bush’s fault that Americans are skeptical of Mess-iah) but Americans know Obama is the Problem.

Obama’s false flim-flam confidence palaver as always is flowery and misguided and untruthful.

Obama will continue to say that his health scam will heal America, if not the planet. But the truth is Obama sickens America. We are sick of his flowery palaver and change for the worse.


201 thoughts on “Obama Sickens America: The Arrogance Of Palaver

  1. ATT too:


    “AT&T Inc. will book $1 billion in first-quarter costs related to the health-care law signed this week by President Barack Obama, the most of any U.S. company so far.

    A change in the tax treatment of Medicare subsidies triggered the non-cash expense, and the company will consider changes to the benefits it offers current and retired workers, Dallas-based AT&T said today in a regulatory filing.

    AT&T, the biggest U.S. phone company, joins Caterpillar Inc., AK Steel Holding Corp. and 3M Co. in recording non-cash expenses against earnings as a result of the law. Health-care costs may shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate profits, according to an estimate by benefits consulting firm Towers Watson. AT&T employed about 281,000 people as of the end of January.

    “Companies like AT&T, that have large employee bases, are going to have higher health-care costs and, therefore, lower earnings unless they can negotiate something or offer less to their employees,” said Chris Larsen, an analyst at Piper Jaffray & Co. in New York, who rates AT&T shares “overweight” and doesn’t own any himself.[snip]

    “As a result of this legislation, including the additional tax burden, AT&T will be evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health-care benefits offered by the company,” the carrier said in the filing.

    AT&T’s announcement was followed about an hour later by 3M, the St. Paul, Minnesota-based maker of products ranging from Post-It Notes to respiratory masks. 3M said it expects a one-time expense of $85 million to $90 million after tax, or about 12 cents a share, in the first quarter because of the new law, according to a statement. 3M had about 75,000 employees as of Feb. 5.

  2. Admin – once again, just really excellent work. Your pretty amazing, actually. Bet Caterpillar really regrets being an Obama stage prop in ’08. What a bunch of clowns O and the Dems are.

  3. Agree with your points, however, don’t you think it is a big problem for Republicans that what they are left with in Congress is mostly a southern extremist fringe of what used to be the GOP? I think ultimately the teabaggers turn off independent voters. While I don’t bemoan the fall of the GOP, I’d rather Democrats have to act like Democrats to demonstrate the differences between the Parties, I’d argue that because so many right leaning voters and pols have joined the Dems because of the extremists that have taken over the Right, Obama and his faux progressives are implementing half baked proposals taken from the Right and therefore demonstrating their inability to govern.

    So one the one hand we have the Democrats implementing Romney Care and looking like they can’t get things right and can’t fix the economy. On the other hand, we have the extremist remnants of the GOP scaring the hell out of everyone. I understand your points, but don’t you think that the Republicans still have a lot of issues because their tent is so small.

  4. Hillary 24/7

    Daily Press Briefings : Daily Press Briefing – March 26
    Fri, 26 Mar 2010 20:38:37 -0500

    Philip J. Crowley

    Assistant Secretary
    Daily Press Briefing

    Washington, DC

    March 26, 2010


    START Treaty Agreement / Improving and Productive Nature of Relationship / Press Conference
    Secretary Clinton’s Bilateral Meeting with Cypriot Foreign Minister Kyprianou
    Secretary Clinton’s Discussion with Lebanese Foreign Minister Hariri
    Iraq’s Independent High Electoral Commission Provisional Results
    Passport Day
    Nuclear Posture Review


    START Treaty / Treaty Text in No Way Constrains Current or Ongoing Missile Defense Plans / Interrelationship between Offensive and Defensive Systems / Phased Adaptive Approach Program


    South Korean Ship Sinking / Concerns for Welfare of the Crew / Monitoring Closely / Possible North Korean Involvement


    Regime Change / Experiencing Stress / Economic Policies / Welfare of its People
    Nuclear Proliferation / Priority for the U.S. / Offered North Korea a Clear Choice / Sanctions / Changes in Behavior / Enforcing Sanctions


    Sanctions on Iran / Press on the Iranian Government / Consulting Stage / Appropriate Resolution / Ongoing Process / Strong, United Voice / Exploring Ways / Satisfied with Engagement across the Board / G-8 Meeting in Canada / Nonproliferation Treaty / Putting Together an Effective Sanctions Resolution / Resolving Through Diplomacy and Pressure


    Secretary Clinton’s Call to Hariri / Updating on Regional Issues / Renewed Commitment / Middle East Peace / Iran’s Role in the Region


    Iraqi Election / 10-Day Certification Period / No Evidence of Substantial Fraud / Want to See Emergence of Effective Iraqi Government


    Strategic Dialogue / Broader Relationship / Civilian Component / Increasing Sectors / Continuing Dialogue / Security and Counterterrorism Efforts / Deeper Relationship
    Satisfying Pakistan’s Energy Needs


    Prime Minister Netanyahu Visit / Extensive Conversations / Meeting with President Abbas / Continuing Contacts with the Parties


    Released Prisoners Returning to the Battlefield / Closing of Guantanamo / Continuing to Reduce the Population / Recidivism / Resettling Program


    Burmese Elections / U.S. Concern / Opening Up Political Process


    Crackdown on Critics and Media / Honoring Commitment Under Inter—American Democratic Charter / OAS Election


    Secretary Clinton and Japanese Foreign Minister Expected to Meet at G-8


    2:36 p.m. EST


  5. extremist fringe of what used to be the GOP? I think ultimately the teabaggers turn off independent voters.
    BS!I resent your term of “Teabagger”. It is the Tea Party and YOU know it. Interesting that teabagging is a term used freely by the Bots.Hmmm

    Clearly I am Indie, and clearly I and many other Indie’s, some here, support the Tea Party movement.

  6. I’m not a bot. Calling me such is silly and inconsequential to my argument. Tea Bag Party, then, whatever you want to call them. I’m not talking about the poeple on this site. I’m talking about the population at large. And, I am not the only one who has suggested the tea “party” set may turn independent voters off. There are lots of independent votes that know, for instance, that Medicare is a government program, and don’t want to assosiate with people who don’t know that. There are independents who don’t like the tenor of debate between Republicans and Democrats, much less the extreme tea partiers. Lot’s of voters won’t associate with groups that have been known to take a blind eye to racism among their own ranks.

    This isn’t a personal fight between you and I. I am arguing without passion that the extremism from the Right can be a turn off to the broader electorate. I’m asking admin about the risks for Republicans in that they have lost so many seats in Congress that they are left with largely the southern set, which is just different than the rest of the country.

  7. Whatever mj, but you are so wrong. It was the Tea party, IE indie’s, that elected Scott Brown and others. We are Indie’s, Repubs and ex Dems. We have had the largest and most peaceful political demonstrations in my lifetime.It is the Tea Party that will save this Country from the Fraud.
    The only people “scared’ of the Tea Party, are people that need to be scared… bots, Dems in congress, the media, the Chicago combine and the lunatic in our WH.

    We are fighting for this country with peaceful action in all manners. If this “frightens” you, get under the bus.

    Actually I forgot, I really have no intention of responding to your provoking comments. My bad…

  8. I’d like to see something definite from the Tea Party people, some kind of official site with their agreed ‘platform.’ I think the media is probably misrepresenting them.

    Unfortunately the terms ‘tea bagger’ or ‘tea bag party’ are offensive — because the Bots have made them so, associating those words with some slang obscenity.

  9. Oh my…lol…Anyway admin, could you at some point let us know what you think of the risks to the Republicans because their tent is so small now and they are so hamstrung by what is left of their base and the problems with courting the tea bag set, unless you agree that there is absolutely no danger there.

  10. Teabagger is clearly a term used in the gay community re a sex act…I would think most people would know that by now with all the hoopla.

  11. I think Obama has a good reason to be arrogant: he knows the GOP won’t repeal this – it’s actually their law. The law that the Heritage Foundation came up with in the 90’s to oppose Hillarycare.
    The GOP is only opposing it for electoral reasons – to get the idiots incensed. Just like Obama gets his idiots happy about a GOP bill.

  12. I saw a video of tea Party people throwing dollar bills at a guy who couldn’t walk with MS, and telling him, we’ll decide if we want to help you, you don’t just deserve help, we decide. And, they sounded like a bunch of a^^holes. That kind of crap turns people off.

  13. NYS, I expect you’re right about the following. Likely the GOP pols are getting just as much money from the insurance/pharma industries as the Dems, and want this bill pretty much as it is — and are just playing “Please don’t throw us in the briar patch” for as you say ‘electoral reasons.’


    March 26th, 2010 at 11:10 pm
    I think Obama has a good reason to be arrogant: he knows the GOP won’t repeal this – it’s actually their law. The law that the Heritage Foundation came up with in the 90’s to oppose Hillarycare.
    The GOP is only opposing it for electoral reasons – to get the idiots incensed. Just like Obama gets his idiots happy about a GOP bill.

  14. Scott Brown is a multlimillonaire. He says ““We’re all in favor of the catastrophic care coverage and coverage for children.” Gosh, actually polls show most Americans are in favor of universal coverage for everyone even if they don’t like this bill. I hate this bill, but I think Brown sounds like a cold, heartless, jerk who has never even had to consider how he would pay for a doctor’s visit, much less had to forgo one. This is what I mean, I think they may pull off some electoral wins this cycle because the economy still sucks, but you simply can’t form a governing coalition when you have such little regard for the majority of Americans. It’s just not attractive. And, that’s where the base of this Party is right now, even though the living standards of average Americans have worsened. It’s tone deafness.

  15. Agree with your points, however, don’t you think it is a big problem for Republicans that what they are left with in Congress is mostly a southern extremist fringe of what used to be the GOP?
    mj: you are repeating the Obama talking points. You know that don’t you? Besides, it is reductio ad absurdum.

    Not all Republicans are the same. Philosophically, some are small government advocates. Some are libertarians. Some are religious types. And some alas are neocons. You find they predominate in small business, the military and in those professions where there is a score card, a bottom line, an empirical basis for accounting.

    Not all Democrats are the same. Some are rural democrats. Some are Roosevelt liberals. Some are netroods. Some are neo-libs. They tend to predominate in creative professions, blue collar trades, education health care and government.

    These disparate groups represent different parts of the nation. Each has an important role to play in the success or failure of this nation. The country is strongest when these groups operate in a bi partisan manner.

    That will never happen under Obama. By design, he divides the American People by race, gender, class, party, profession, and any other way he can to secure bitter partisan advantage. Like the Indian God (Vishuna?), he is the destroyer of worlds.

  16. MJ, quite the contrary. The Republicans were on their way to visit their own “death panel” until the Dimocratic leadership chose Barack Obama. Far from the Republicans “in Congress [is] mostly a southern extremist fringe of what used to be the GOP” what they find is a revival in their tent.

    Scott Brown is but a template for the GOP. What we are actually seeing (ignore the Big Media phantasm that there is a civil war within the GOP and the GOP are shrinking to a “fringe”, that is just a talking point that does not hold up to examination) is a revival of the GOP in the Northeast and in supposedly “liberal” areas, let alone conservative or middle areas.

    Massachusetts has a Republican senator and after November possibly a Republican governor. California is the same. New Jersey, has a Republican governor and Menendez will soon begin to feel the heat. The situation is replicated in states like Michigan and Ohio and just about everywhere else. The GOP governors too will increase after November and with that result fresh blood will flow into their party. The Republicans were dead after eight years of Bush, especially in places like the Northeast, but no longer. Republicans, even in the Northeast are poised for many victories.

    As to the Tea Party (“teabaggers” is offensive) activists, their issue is the economy (deficits, debt, etc.) not “social issues”. According to polls, Independents are supportive of the Tea Party activists because the economy, especially big spending, is their top concern too.

    And social issues? Obama is the one who has now accepted the Hyde Amendment and effectively codified it so the victory for the right on the issue is long term. And let’s not forget that it was Obama voters, particularly African-Americans, who helped repeal gay marriage in California.

    We would turn your premise around, the Dimocrats are the captives of a coastal clique that has contempt for small town America and that is a much bigger problem – and you will not hear that from Big Media because they are the coastal clique.

    The argument that “so many right leaning voters and pols have joined the Dems” is not supported by the evidence. True, many Republican voters stayed home in 2008 and the coastal elite Big Media Iron Triangle Republicans cheered on Obama, but that glow is mostly gone. Again, the myth which we have debunked with evidence time and again is that 2008 was a result of Republicans staying home (check out the Ohio results in particular where the number of all voters was down from 2004 because of lessened Republican support) because they were tired of Bush and because McCain was viewed with suspicion because of immigration and campaign finance.

    The Dimocratic “Mistake in ’08”, as we term it, is that we had in hand a coalition of all the Democratic coalition, plus a candidate in Hillary that would have also added the White Working Class. Instead Obama built a coalition on “urbans” (read “black”), young people (who grow older quickly once they get out of school and start to pay taxes), and urban and suburban white liberals (who are liberals until their own lifestyles are threatened, then it’s off to the accountant to look for those deductions).

    Even if your premise (and we understand that is the “conventional wisdom” of Big Media) was valid the logic is flawed. With your premise isn’t the logical conclusion that the Dimocrats are a big party of nothing and the Republicans are a party of something?

    We agree that “I’d rather Democrats have to act like Democrats”. But what is that, now? After the Democrats violated democratic principles in the primary elections there is not much left of “core Democratic principles. You can argue that the “Tea Party” activists are a problem for Republicans because they demand Republicans accept their principles and fight for those principles. But isn’t that a much better “problem” than the one Dimocrats have – a coalition of kooks and Big Blog boys who have no principles but to ensconce themselves in power with the establishment while decrying the establishment?

    What the country needs is a flinty Republican party that resists change and demands to see the bills before anything is done and a Democratic Party that fights for change and the American dream and ideals. The back and forth of two principled parties such as these would benefit the country.

    With Hillary we would have had it all – a fighter for change that understands the importance of paying the bills. Incidentally, that is what we think the Tea Partys are all about or are headed towards – the center – socially liberal, fiscally conservative. Obama is socially conservative and fiscally profligate.

  17. mj,

    I question just about everything I see on Big Media that is supposedly ‘about the Tea Party people’, just like I question things they said about Hillary supporters or about Palin.

    When they covered a Hillary or Palin rally, they sought out any trashy looking people they could find. From a hundred signs, they’d photograph only the bad-looking ones.

    I don’t know if all the people they talk to really are ‘Tea Party’ at all — much less typical. The only solid evidence I’ve heard of, is polls saying that c. 20% would prefer a generic TP candidate to a generic GOP or Dem. (I assume that’s 20% of everybody.) I don’t believe 20% of everyone is crazy or racist or whatever.

    My impression is that the TP issues are mostly pretty rightwing, but not necessarily crazy or nasty. I admire Palin though I prefer Leftist policies myself. She’s been much misrepresented, but imo she’s a very sensible person, and I think she would not be involved with the Tea Party if they were as bad as they’re portrayed.

    That said, I would probably agree with your post about the GOP, if I understood it. 😉

  18. wbboei, this is no talking point. It’s factual that the Republicans have minorities in Congress. Factual that those minorities are disproportionately southern. Thems the facts. They really are left with the more extremist elements of the Party. I don’t care if it make people uncomfortable or unhappy for me to state the obvious. There is nothing earth shattering in it. I do think when you alienate the gays, the women, all the non-whites, and the youth, you don’t have a very broad voting base. I hear what admin is saying. I agree with many of the points. I still see a GOP that has moved so far to the Rgith, it’s going to have trouble attracting voters. All the GOP has to go on is anger at Obama. They themselves offfer nothing that attracts a broad base of voters. That may be enough to win right now because the economy sucks, but there are still pitfalls precisely because they are so hamstrung by their base.

  19. Well, agree to disagree then. My opinions have nothing to do with “big media”.

    But, please, where is the revival? California has a Republican Governor. I wouldn’t count on MA having a Republican governor, and Scott Brown won in repsonse to the health care plan which was not popular here among liberals for hugely different reasons than Brown’s. They may pick up some seats here and there but they can’t expand their base because their base is anti everything. Again, the GOP has been reduced to a regional Party. They may pick up seats here and there put I would say the jury is decidedly out if anti-Obama voter attitudes are enough to grow such an extreme base.

    Yes, Hillary would have been better at crafting and implementing Democratic proposals. No kidding. But I don’t think either Party is adhering to any set of principles.

    Yeah, maybe their issue is the economy, I NEVER ARGUED IT WAS SOCIAL ISSUES, however, debt and deficit are not the number one economic issue, that would be JOBS. And, I think conservatives are going to have a hard time arguing what we need is a revival of Reaganomics.

    I didn’t say “Republican”, I said “right leaning” and that is supported by fact. Spector is a great example. Many think Crist will switch. And, certainly. Democrats won more right leaning independent voters in the last cycle than they previously have. There is no room for moderates in the Republican Party. Their base is kicking all moderates out. So unless you think Americans have become radicalized conservatives, I really don’t see how you can make such an argument. Yes, voter anger at Obama because of the economy may be enough. My point only is it may not be because the Republicans have a bunch of problems with their base and of their own.

  20. I mean, I sympathize with the anger out there. But I don’t think the answer is for the government to be passive in the economy. Indeed, Obama has acted as Hoover. His spening programs don’t do enough. Hillary wanted a HOLC. We are Never going to get one from Obama. The Republicans would have said she was nationalizing the mortgage industry.

  21. Op-Ed Contributor
    Fix Health Reform, Then Repeal It
    Published: March 25, 2010

    ON Thursday night, Congress sent to President Obama the reconciliation package to remove some of the embarrassing provisions in his signature legislative achievement, health care reform. But a serious fix for what ails health care in America will entail far more than merely tweaking the new law of the land; we will need to repeal the entire faulty architecture of the government behemoth and replace it with real reform.

    To be clear: it is not sufficient for those of us in the opposition to await a reversal of political fortune months or years from now before we advance action on health care reform. Costs will continue their ascent as the debt burden squeezes life out of our economy. We are unapologetic advocates for the repeal of this costly misstep. But Republicans must also make the case for a reform agenda to take its place, and get to work on that effort now.

    So what can we do?

    Health care experts across the political spectrum acknowledge that a fundamental driver of health inflation is the regressive tax preference for employer-based health insurance. This discriminatory tax treatment lavishes the greatest benefit on the most expensive plans while providing no support for the unemployed, the self-employed or those who don’t get coverage from their employer.

    Reform-minded leaders like Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, and Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, pushed legislative proposals that would directly address this issue. I helped write a plan that would replace the bias in the tax code with universal tax credits so that all Americans have the resources to purchase portable, affordable coverage that best suits their needs, with additional support provided for those with lower incomes. All these ideas, though, were dismissed early on, as they didn’t fit with the government-driven plan favored by the majority. But going forward it’s important that we reconsider this regressive tax issue.

    Then, when helping Americans with pre-existing conditions obtain coverage, we should focus on innovative state-based solutions, including robust high-risk pools, reinsurance markets and risk-adjustment mechanisms. I intend to continue advancing true patient-centered reforms like attaching tax benefits to the individual rather than the job, breaking down barriers to interstate competition, and promoting transparency and consumer-friendly coverage options.

    We should ensure that health care decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not by bureaucrats, whether at an insurance company or a government agency. By inviting market forces into health care, we can encourage a system where doctors, insurers and hospitals compete against one another for the business of informed consumers.

    We must also immediately begin dealing with our crushing debt burdens, which this legislation will worsen. The Democrats’ fiscal arguments never did add up: they claim that their program will reduce the deficit even though the federal government will pick up the tab for more than 30 million uninsured Americans and subsidize millions more. Even after accounting for the $569 billion in tax increases and $523 billion in Medicare cuts, the true costs of this legislation — concealed by timing gimmicks, hidden spending and double-counting — will make the deficit explode, plunging us deeper into debt.

    Washington already has no idea on how to pay for its current entitlement programs, as we find ourselves $76 trillion in the hole. Our country cannot afford to avoid a serious conversation on entitlement reform. By taking action now, we can make certain that our entitlement programs are kept whole for those in and near retirement, while devising sustainable health and retirement security for future generations.

    The case for attempting health care reform was not difficult to make. Skyrocketing health care costs are driving more and more families and businesses to the brink of bankruptcy, leaving affordable coverage out of reach for millions of Americans and accelerating our path to fiscal ruin. The challenge was how to deal with the seemingly inexorable increase in health care costs.

    Yet the Congressional majority went at this goal backward: with the force of the federal government, cover all Americans — then figure out which screws to twist to contain costs. Democrats opted for this approach because their concern was never about costs. It was about expanding coverage through an expansion of government.

    As the dust settles from this historic and fiscally calamitous week, we have to try to steer this country back in the right direction. The opposition must always speak with vigor and candor on the need for wholesale repeal and for real reform to fix what’s broken in health care.

    Paul Ryan, a Republican, is a representative from Wisconsin

  22. A few additional comments as we review the comments posted while we were typing.

    First, hooray for ABM90 who reminds us daily of Hillary saving the world and keeps the foundation of Big Pink glowing.

    Second, Mj, Big Media is pushing the narrative of the Tea Party activists as unpopular but the polls say otherwise, but we already wrote that in our response. We also responded to the “shrinking” GOP argument – weren’t they supposed to be dead after 2008 and now the prospect is that at best it will be a bad year for Dimocrats?

    GonzoTx, again, we agree. Bibi should employ, if not your language, your sentiment. He probably won’t because many Israelis want him to keep US-Israel ties close. The Israelis know they can wait Obama out, especially if November goes like everyone suspects.

    GonzoTx, again we agree. The Tea Partys are inchoate at the moment, but their big issue is the economy. We already discussed Scott Brown in our initial response.

    TurndownObama, “teabagger” is offensive and counterproductive as well. It makes not sense to denigrate them, we agree with you. As to an official site, that is probably not possible because they are a genuine expression of anger. It is true that Republicans like Armey want to absorb the movement, but that will be difficult. The Tea Party, like all third parties, will die after the anger goes away or they are successful and absorb the Republican party. The Republicans will not absorb the Tea Parties, the Tea Parties will absorb the Republicans. That’s the “sting and die” history of third parties in America.

    NotYourSweetie, love your website, and you deserve (but won’t get tonight) a much longer response. In brief, the Obama health scam battle is not really about health care. It was about Obama trying to absorb the money people from Big Insurance and Big Pharma (nuclear is next). This is where a lot of the “socialism” talk comes from with all the takeovers of companies and government diktats to private business. Notice from some of the quoted articles in our article that Big Business is getting ready to dump benefit programs and beneficiaries – that was the goal of the Business Roundtable and don’t think Obama’s thugs did not know it. As you write, Hillary could have gotten this “victory” too but she would not sell out (there’s an article that should be written in every Hillary supporter website, including this one). GOP opposition was smart for electoral reasons, but there are other reasons too – such as Obama poaching on their base of financial support and selling out to that base more than Republicans ever could have. And of course you are right about the astonishing stupidity of Obama Hopium guzzlers. –Told you this deserves a much longer response.

    Mj, we have not seen the video you describe, so we cannot comment. We will say that the Tea Party movement is inchoate and one video does not describe the movement. We do believe it is a genuine grass roots expression of anger even though there are (rightly) GOP attempts to co-opt the movement. Even if what you described happened, by genuine Tea Party members, not provocateurs (and we know about that not much discussed aspect of Obama’s goons), it is not particularly meaningful. There are plenty of idiots in all ranks of all human endeavor who do and say things that represent only themselves and others like them – the stupid.

    MJ, your comments on Scott Brown are at best uninformed. “Millionaire” is hardly an epithet when so many good Democrats are also millionaires. The comment about Scott Brown never having to worry about paying for a doctor’s visit is absolutely wrong. Read up on him. His life has not been so easy. Yes he is a millionaire now and undoubtedly he is better off than most even as a child, but his mother was on welfare for a while and those childhood memories do not fade as quickly as you imagine.

    Wbboei, your response pretty much matches our own as does TurndownObama’s latest.

    That is the response to the comments we saw. We imagine there are probably more already while we were typing this one. 🙂

    Second GonzoTx, as we wrote “teabaggers” is offensive.

  23. Admin, thanks for your comment concerning the word teabagger. I also
    find the term offensive because of it nasty sexual connotation. I’m
    surprised those who use it feel good about using the term. I’m sure that if I were to use the “c” word, these people would have a shit fit, not that I would ever do that. Teabagger offends me to the same degree. I’m proud to have attended two different tea partiesin Orlando, FL. I found the people who attended these events
    to be respectful Americans who are proud of the USA, and genuinely worried
    about our future. They don’t need to be disrespected like that.

  24. By the way, I’m a registered Democrat who has detoxed from Democrat party propaganda bullshit. I’m just about ready to leave the party for good.

  25. mj,

    I tend to agree with you here re RomneyCare:
    mj siad:
    March 26th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
    There was supposed to be a public a;lternative that the leg threw out days before it passed. Blue Cross wrote the plan. Health insurance reform is not left/right, it is corparate v. little guy, and the pols are with the corps.

  26. “Where is the revival?” How can you ask that question? Or do you think that November will be a triumph for Dimocrats? You might not count on a Republican governor in Massachusetts but the polls sure do. Only because of a third party candidate is it possible for Deval Patrick to eke out a “victory” and even then a majority of voters will vote against him – in Massachusetts which already has a Republican senator.

    “pick up some seats here and there” – you do understand they are going to win in just about every region of the country and have already won in blue New Jersey. And again Scott Brown is a template of a template (the original being McDonnell of Virginia). You keep repeating the talking point that the GOP has been “reduced to a regional Party” which is what was advertised after November 2008 but ignore the poll situation today and the election results of 2009. That is evidence, not speculation.

    As to your speculation about the relationship between debt, deficit, and jobs, look to the evidence. Last year, when Obama was popular and the economy was also bad and jobs were also scarce the polls explored the question of the economy and priorities. Many Democrats don’t understand the anxiety and anger about the debt and the deficit and we suggest examination of the polling data. In July 2009, the NYTimes and CBS poll found this:

    Most Americans continue to want the federal government to focus on reducing the budget deficit rather than spending money to stimulate the national economy, a new New York Times/CBS News poll finds. Yet at the same time, most oppose some proposed solution for decreasing it. [snip]

    Preference for deficit reduction ahead of spending to boost the economy peaks at 79 percent among Republicans, and also includes 60 percent of independents. It falls below half, to 43 percent, among Democrats.

    Views of some solutions to the high deficit reflect underlying political philosophies, the poll found. Democrats are the most opposed to having fewer government services – 62 percent are against it, compared with 50 percent of independents and 45 percent of Republicans. Republicans, for their part, are broadly opposed to paying more in taxes – 69 percent are, compared with 56 percent of independents and 48 percent of Democrats.

    These results came before the “stimulus” was judged a failure by the electorate. As you can see, even in a much more distressed atmosphere, Independents side with Republicans on these issues much more than with Democrats.

    We also don’t understand this theory “they can’t expand their base because their base is anti everything”. The evidence is in the expanded base in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts. To dismiss those victories and particularly the one in Massachusetts “as merely a response to the health care plan” is dismissive but not responsive.

    Why you cite Specter as an example of your thesis is a mystery. Specter left the Republican Party for his own personal survival not due to a principled shift and most polls show Specter losing. As to Crist, he has not shifted and the only ones who think that will happen are interested activists and the DailyKooks – but even the latest polls show that in a three way race with Crist as an Independent (Crist has stated flatly he will not become a Democrat nor an independent) Rubio wins.

    As to California, you dismiss the governorship race because it is already Republican (even though with Schwarzenegger having a 71% disapproval it appears possible that a Republican could win again) and completely ignore the latest polls with Boxer up by 1 point in the senate race.

    Where is the revival? Look just about anywhere and everywhere. The evidence is already in on New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Virginia. Colorado, Ohio, Arkansas, Indiana, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Nevada, Illinois, Delaware, North Dakota, Missouri, Pennslyvania, California have “revival” plastered on them in the Senate.

    The Governor races are looking good for the GOP too nationwide as are the many House races nationwide, which are generally acknowledged (Cook and Rothenberg also think the House will flip which would require a 40 race victory by the GOP) to be building into a wave.

    We expect you mistyped when you say “Democrats won more right leaning independent voters in the last cycle” because the last cycle was 2009, when the Republicans won big. If indeed you meant 2009, you miss the point. After 2008, the Republicans were proclaimed dead and in elections since they have proven to have a pulse and in 2010 the question will be if the Dims are dead.

    As to “their base is kicking all moderate out” that is Big Media talking. That is ignorance talking. Read this from right wing Newsmax:

    “Tea party” Republicans aren’t the only candidates poised to make inroads this year – moderate Republicans are surging from Illinois to California, and in several instances proving they can best tea-party-powered conservatives at the polls.

    Take the Illinois Republican Senate primary: Patrick Hughes, a developer and political newcomer, seemed to have the wind at his back as a staunch fiscal conservative and favorite of the tea party movement. His chief rival, Rep. Mark Kirk, was routinely blasted as a RINO – Republican in Name Only – for his more moderate record, which includes votes for cap-and-trade emissions legislation and the bank bailouts.

    But Mr. Kirk won the Feb. 2 primary easily, capturing 56 percent of the vote against Mr. Hughes, who took 19 percent. Three other challengers split the rest of the vote.

    It’s possible the stars may be aligning for moderate Republicans in 2010. With the nation focused on the economy and wars in the Middle East, moderate candidates may be able to tip-toe around the hot-button social issues that can trip them up in right-leaning primaries.

    “This really is a good time for moderate Republicans,” said Charles Moran, national spokesman for the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay Republican group. “We need to take this opportunity right now to elect candidates like Mark Kirk who are where they need to be on fiscal responsibility and national defense, and aren’t getting tripped up on social issues like they normally would be.”

    Other states also feature moderate Republicans running ahead of their conservative rivals. In the Colorado Senate primary contest, polls show former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton with a comfortable lead over her more conservative opponents, Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck and former state Sen. Tom Wiens.

    In California’s Senate primary race, conservative state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore trails both former Rep. Tom Campbell and former Hewlett-Packard chief Carly Fiorina. The gubernatorial primary, meanwhile, features moderate Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay, running well ahead of state insurance commissioner and tax-cut advocate Steve Poizner.

    Delaware Rep. Mike Castle, a longtime standard-bearer of eastern Republican moderates, is expected to coast to victory in the GOP Senate primary without serious conservative opposition.

    Big Media is trying to drive a wedge between moderates and Tea Party activists. And of course sources like Newsmax have their own interest in the outcome of the battle. But the Tea Party is much more concerned with holding Republicans to their promises.

    In early March btw, the NYTimes wrote an article you might want to read “Tea Party Avoids Divisive Social Issues“.

    This is a movement that rose largely because of the Republican Party failing to deliver on being representative of the economic conservative ideology. To include social issues would be beside the point.”

    As the Tea Party pushes to change the Republican Party, the purity they demand of candidates may have more to do with economic conservatism than social conservatism.

    The Republicans are in revival mode and it is the Obama Dimocrats who are in trouble this November. Why that is even a question is a surprise.

  27. Mj, we opposed the “stimulus” because it was not “smart”. We thought the few dollars we had left had to be spent wisely. The Republicans wanted big tax cuts, we opposed that because the last batch of tax cuts under Bush did not stimulate, and we explained that was because people were scared and therefore saving money instead of spending (which was the smart economic thing to do).

    We thought what would reassure Americans was to see responsible economic planning. We wanted a comprehensive plan and we posted video of Bill Clinton and FDR explaining their plans, in detail after detail in circumstance after circumstance, and we said Obama had to do the same.

    If there was a big spending plan of investment that made sense and was integrated with budgetary needs and with contingency plans we could have supported that plan. But all we heard was bamboozlement and no clear plan (it took months for those advocating for the “stimulus” to finally admit that indeed there was no plan at the time they were fully advocating for the “stimulus).

    Republicans could have been defeated by Hillary because she would have beaten them the way Bill Clinton beat them – with good policies that produce. The Republicans will beat Obama because he is flailing around and giving speeches, but not producing. Good policy that produces results is a winner.

    It’s not about Obama not spending enough, that is a Dimocratic shibboleth. It’s smart spending that matters. A trillion and a half dollar “stimulus” would not have helped because there was no intelligent coordinated plan to revive the economy just massive spending and the massive expenditures would have scared people even more. Krugman and those who advocated for bigger spending think Keynesian economics beats psychological reality. But when people are economically scared they hoard and don’t spend.

    What was needed was a comprehensive, coordinated plan that would restore confidence and the credit markets. Spending would have followed and then jobs.

  28. More from that good NYT article:

    Published: March 12, 2010
    Tea Party Avoids Divisive Social Issues
    For decades, faith and family have been at the center of the conservative movement. But as the Tea Party infuses conservatism with new energy, its leaders deliberately avoid discussion of issues like gay marriage or abortion.
    God, life and family get little if any mention in statements or manifestos. The motto of the Tea Party Patriots, a large coalition of groups, is “fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets.” The Independence Caucus questionnaire, which many Tea Party groups use to evaluate candidates, poses 80 questions, most on the proper role of government, tax policy and the federal budgeting process, and virtually none on social issues.
    Tea Party leaders argue that the country can ill afford the discussion about social issues when it is passing on enormous debts to future generations. But the focus is also strategic: leaders think they can attract independent voters if they stay away from divisive issues.
    “We should be creating the biggest tent possible around the economic conservative issue,” said Ryan Hecker, the organizer behind the Contract From America. “I think social issues may matter to particular individuals, but at the end of the day, the movement should be agnostic about it.

  29. Wbboei, the very knowledgeable and smart Linda Greenhouse, is absolutely sure the Supreme Court will not block the health care scam. We had a very good conversation with her years ago about the Lopez decision so we know she knows what she is talking about.

    Greenhouse makes a very strong and good case for her position. Indeed, her comments track what we have written in many respects. Greenhouse provides a good history of the federalism fight Rehnquist led and also provides good reasons why Roberts and Alito cannot be counted on to follow Rehnquist on the federalism battlefield.

    It’s a good read.

    Where we think Greenhouse fails utterly is not in her legal knowledge but her political knowledge. Greenhouse believes that the health scam will prove popular and she cites the one outlier article to support her contention and ignores the rest. Based on that, to us incorrect view, of what will happen in November, Greenhouse concludes that Roberts will not imperil the Court’s image by going against public opinion.

    Here is Linda’s concluding paragraph which (we should give her a call and ask her what she thinks will happen if her political judgment is wrong and the public opposes the health scam and wants it repealed) we disagree with:


    Midweek polls showed the public already rallying around the new health care law. That trend is likely to accelerate as people realize that the law’s benefits belie the scare stories — just around that time that the state challenges are likely to reach the Supreme Court. It won’t require a summa cum laude in history from Harvard to be able to tell history’s wrong side from its right.

  30. I have been reading this blog forever but have never been able to comment until now because word press did not accept my password. But now it worked.

    I have been a loyal democrat for over 40 years but couldn’t support BO and his administration. I supported Hillary, as you all, I even went to Denver to protest the nomination of Obama.

    I am also a tea party participant, have gone to most of them. I resent it when it is made out to be a republican or conservative movement. There are many, many democrats attending tea parties, as well as indies and libertarians. We want fiscal responsibility as well regaining the freedoms that our founding fathers gave us. We want to restore our Constitutional Republic which is being taken away from us.

    My party was ransacked by radicals and since I have always been more moderate and dislike the very liberal minded I feel like I have no party. I feel very misplaced. I definitely am not a republican and never will be. I am a supporter of the Continentil Congress 2009 and of their Articles of Freedom.

  31. TurnDownObama, It is a good article. It shows there are divergent viewpoints on social issues within the Tea Party movement. The Times probably wanted to showcase all the fighting within the movement but instead demonstrated the power of the message. The concluding paragraphs demonstrate there are some smart people involved in the movement, not the hick dummies Big Media touts. Obama Dimocrats refuse to understand:


    Raising social issues, the movement’s leaders say, risks fracturing the strength it has built. “Every social issue you bring in, you’re adding planks to your mission,” said Frank Anderson, a founder of the Independence Caucus, based in Utah. “And planks become splinters.”

    They also recognize that support for gay marriage has increased, particularly among the young, and so opposing it may alienate supporters.

    At a candidate forum sponsored by the Kitchen Table Patriots in suburban Philadelphia in January, nine candidates, mostly first-time politicians seeking office after getting involved in the Tea Party, were asked whether they believed that Roe v. Wade should be repealed. Only one said yes.

    “I think that it’s also going to get Democrats over, if you’re not so rigid,” said Anastasia Przybylski, the co-founder of the Patriots. “I have friends where that’s a big turnoff — they’re registered Democrats because of abortion but they’re totally freaking out about the debt.”

  32. Welcome NoNonsenseNancy.

    And, to our earlier exchanges about the Tea Party and Republicans and Women – Politico has this:


    When the tea party movement burst onto the scene last year to oppose President Barack Obama, the Democratic Congress, and the health care legislation they wanted to enact, some liberal critics were quick to label its activists as angry white men.

    As the populist conservative movement has gained a foothold over the past year, it’s become increasingly clear that the dismissive characterization was at least half wrong.

    Many of the tea party’s most influential grass-roots and national leaders are women, and a new poll released this week by Quinnipiac University suggests that women might make up a majority of the movement as well.

    Generalizations about such a decentralized assortment of local groups are difficult, and the poll’s assistant director, Peter A. Brown, cautioned that its finding that 55 percent of self-identified tea partiers are women has a relatively high margin of error.

    But tea party organizers and activists say they’ve seen the influence of women firsthand — personified by the politician most associated with the movement, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, the headline speaker Saturday when tea party activists hold a pair of rallies in Nevada, one of them in Searchlight, the home of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

    Celebrities such as Palin have had less influence shaping the movement, however, than an outburst of women’s activism unusual among conservatives.

    “For years, it has been the liberal women who have organized and been staunch grass-roots and policy advocates,” Rebecca Wales, a spokeswoman for Smart Girl Politics, a new group formed to train and mobilize women in the tea party movement. “No longer is it only the liberals. Conservative women have found their voices and are using them, actively and loudly.”

    There’s more at the link.

  33. In regards to other Hillary sites writing articles about Hillary would not have sold out, here is one I found. I am posting it in its entirety, as the website’s owner only allows guest partial access to the site.


    Why I as a Hillary Supporter Dissent from this Health Care Reform

    Over the last few days, the question has been raised to me — do you support this law? Is it really all just about Hillary, and you would have been happy with this bill if Hillary was the one to have done this? I have also asked myself this question….particularly in response to Hillary’s remarks on the passage of the health care bill, remarks btw which I found to be quite short and even somewhat faint in praise. I shall then, try and answer this question to the best of my ability.

    I have looked at what I think Hillary would have done and then compared it to this bill. One of the most basic differences, I have noticed, is that Hillary would never have done this without a public option. I know the public option was not very popular in some parts of the country, but if we were to have a mandate requiring insurance, then a mandate would also have needed the public option. Otherwise, we literally are being horded off to the insurance companies, paying for what is little more than just a bailout for the insurance companies.

    But to expand on this further, this difference is not only just because it is what Hillary campaigned on….I can also look to her history and reasonably say she would not have agreed to a mandate without a public option. Why? Here is where it gets interesting.

    I have thought a lot about this ‘health care reform’ in the context of Democrats previous efforts. (Whenever I am stuck in my analyses, I find that turning to the history of the matter provides some insight that can get me going again). To that end, this brought me to two major instances that Democrats have tried HCR previously. That would be Teddy Kennedy and Nixon in the 70’s, and of course Hillary in the 90s.

    Teddy Kennedy was offered a compromise by Nixon where he would have actually given Kennedy something approximating the public option. Kennedy declined, because he was for single-payer at the time and didn’t think it went far enough. Kennedy would later admit that this was one of the biggest political mistakes of his lifetime, turning down Nixon’s offer.

    Fast forward to Hillary in the 90s, we all know what happened there. But one thing I think people forget about the 90’s is that the Republicans offered Hillary a ‘deal’ back then, a deal which she declined on principle.

    That’s what so interesting about this current bill for me actually — because if I were to make a general statement on this bill, I would say that much of this bill is in fact what the Republicans offered Hillary back in 1993. It has many of the same hallmarks. For instance, the same guy (Chip Kahn) who ran the Harry and Louise ads against Hillary in 93/94…..was one of the FIRST guys to sign up in support of Obama’s health care reform bill. Chip used to be insurance guy early in his career, and though he works for the hospitals now, I would say his first priority, making sure the insurance companies are fed, hasn’t changed. Hence, why this bill is being seen as a bailout to the insurance industries….it was helped along by one of their biggest lobbyists! (Similar thing with the Pharma lobbyist, Billy Tauzin). The people that the Democrats used to fight against to get meaningful reform, instead, they made them strange bedfellows this time around.

    Anyhow, to get back to what I was saying, the only difference between then (the 70’s and 93/94) and now that I have noticed is that….while previously Democrats declined such changes on the basis of principle, this time, they not only accepted the corporatist welfare aspect of the bill, they made it their own and called it “progressive.” In essence, they disregarded everything that Democrats had fought for for decades, and with the sole motivation of just passing anything, they passed what they would have never passed previously. Teddy Kennedy was not ok with this bill, he turned down far more. Hillary also would have never been ok with this bill….why would she be? She was offered this back in 1994 and declined it.

    Other things to also remember about Hillary’s 2008 ideas for health care — 1) Hillary would not have attempted this in her first year of office. Don’t get me wrong, I know Health Care would have been a priority for her, but I remember a distinct shift in her platform when it came to health care in terms of timing. Up until about late summer 2007, she was advocating working on Health Care in her first term, maybe even her first year (I am remembering a vague, offhand remark to this effect in one of the early 2007 debates). But, she also observed how the economy was changing, and late in 2007, early 2008, she said she would approach the economy first, and major health care reform (immediate issues notwithstanding) would have to wait until the economy had been addressed. So, certainly to that end, she would not have done the same thing….she would have focused on the economy first.

    Another thing — Hillary’s plan, while it did include a mandate…..if I may distill it concisely…. would have worked far less atrociously. Health care coverage (as provided by your employer as part of your compensation) would remain the way that is, but should you lose your job, etc….you would have health care coverage in the same way that unemployment works…something to help you get by until you could get back on your feet. I personally thought it was a very smart way to handle the matter, especially given the complex political issues to consider. It was a way to get the job done (extend coverage), and yet, without the daunting, massive “overhaul” and unknowns of the current Health Care Bill.

    And don’t even get me started on my disgust with the Stupak executive order. Seems to me like STUPAK is KAPUTS, for he has made enemies of both pro-choice and pro-life advocates (for different reasons) at this point.

    I guess what I am trying to say is that…..when I look at all the different aspects of the bill, I find so much that is lacking, even from a progressive aspect. The fact of the matter is this bill has pissed off many people, for so many different reasons. As one of my favorite blogs wrote – “”Pro-Choice” people, “Pro-Life” people, Anti-Abortion, Women’s rights advocates, Free Market supporters, true Socialized Health Care advocates….we have all been betrayed.” The only people who are happy about it (if it can be called happy, I have seen very little actual elation) are the ones who are so invested in Obama as a religion that they don’t want to entertain the idea that he just sucks, because of what it may reflect on themselves. But as for the rest of us, “it no longer matters which label we put on ourselves”…..because whatever the individual reasons may be, there was a big letdown by our government for many of us last night.

    And while I will always maintain that I am for UHC because I want everyone to have health care coverage, for me, it has to be done right also. You can’t just take crap and call it UHC, despite whatever some Obamabots may think. It has to actually be UHC. And this bill does none of that. Heck, it still leaves a portion of the population uncovered. Not to mention that our premiums will still be more expensive than our “UHC neighbors” across the globe.

    When you add all that together then, for me personally (even without the Hillary element)….there are enough reasons for me to dissent on this bill.


  34. Admin: your analysis above is absolutely superb. It is a short valuable synopsis of where we are now. And the perfect counter point to the big media tripe which misleads the nation.

    Gonzo: thanks for posting the piece by Paul Ryan. He was the featured speaker in the Hillsdale College Imprimus Forum this week and had some interesting things to say about progressivism. In his self serving account of history, Glenn Beck is quick to equate progressive doctrine with Mao, and tries to tie Roosevelt and our Hillary to it as well for political advantage.

    But the fact is, true progressivism has nothing to do with Mao, and is more akin to the true reform movement we saw in this country at the turn of the nineteenth century. Far from being atheistic, it had its roots in Methodist and other religious theology. The Salvation Army is one such manifestation. And, as Ryan points out, its history is bi partisan:

    “Someone once said that before there was a New Deal, there was a Wisconsin Deal. In my home state, the University of Wisconsin was an early hotbed of progressivism, whose goal was to re order society along lines other than those in the Constitution. The best known Wisconsin Progressive in American Politics was Robert LaFollette. “Fighting Bob” as he was called, was a Republican–as was Theodore Roosevelt (whose Bull Moose Party Slogan was” “Ill fares the land, to hastening ills aprey. Where wealth accumulates and men decay”.) Today, we tend to associate progressivism with Democrats and trace it back to Woodrow Wilson. But it had its roots in both parties.”

  35. Paul Ryan goes on to say that Obama is a progressive. He cites the health care bill as an example. But I say that is wrong. I say, if you read the bill, it is clear, cogent and convincing proof that Obama is NOT a progressive. On the contrary, he is a big business give me a politician who stays bought kind of chap. And the bill itself is a sweetheart deal with big pharma, and health insurance interests. It will not lower premiums, drug costs, and it was written in secret with business lobbyists. To call Obama a progressive, and to cite this bill as an example is to turn reality on its head. Hillary was and is the progressive. She is a Roosevelt liberal, and had the power to unite the country during this difficult period. But the Kennedys, the Schumers, the corrupt Chicago interests and the global banking interests were opposed to true progressive reform so they hired a man who pretended to be a progressive and their media lackeys continue to promote that fiction.

  36. Nearly 100 years of effort, finally sending the Dimocrats with overwhelming majorities in Congress so that they could get the job done….and how does it culminate? We get a Republican bill from 20 years ago? YGTBKM. Only a complete idiot (Incompetence!) could screw this up.

    This is like sending someone to the market with $100 of grocery money, and they come back with only $20 worth of rotting vegetables. In any other situation, you would send him back to the store to get your money back. But here, pretend progressives gorge on the spoilage, like the coprophiliacs they are.

    Obama didn’t bring home the bacon, folks. Progressivism, true progressivism is dead. Out with these idiots.

  37. Fifth Dimension
    Thank you for the wonderful post above. It confirms what I suspected–that this plan originated with Republicans, that it was offered to three key democrats over a thirty year span, that two of them refused the deal since it was hostile to core democratic principles, but the third, Barack Husseing Obama, a man devoid of principles accepted that deal and sold out for a phony headline that he had achieved universal health care, where others had failed. But it is all just Rezko redux. You can take the man out of Chicago, but you cannot take Chicago out of the man. The corruption follows him wherever he goes.

  38. I can tell you exactly how big business interests see Obama: a cheap date. Give him lots of money and figure out a way to make him look good, and he will do anything you want. And by anything I mean just that–anything.

  39. On the Black Caucus’ charges of insults at the demonstration, here is a video but no insults on it. Near it at youtube are other videos of the demonstration, no insults on the ones I played. Lots of cameras and cell phones. Loud but not vulgar, mostly keeping their distance. Signs are civil.

  40. Awesome, most awesome post, admin.
    We knew we were being screwed; now America is finding out.
    wbboei – I know Teh Won divides and conquers; your explanation is very specific, and I appreciate it.
    It is a really ugly process.
    How do the lower Dimocrats sleep at night?
    Not very well, it seems. Maxine Waters early on, but ignored, Jason Altmire, McCaskill.

  41. more of the Friday news dump:

    3/26/10 6:47 PM EDT
    WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder is apologizing for failing to send the Senate Judiciary Committee Supreme Court briefs he signed regarding the case of convicted terrorism plotter Jose Padilla. In a letter to Republican Sens. Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Jon Kyl of Arizona, the attorney general said Friday that the omissions were inadvertent. The two senators say that as attorney general, Holder has minimized and understated risks of putting terrorism cases in the civilian criminal justice system, while Holder acknowledges the danger in the Padilla briefs. In his letter, Holder says that he focused at great length in the Padilla briefs on the broad power of the civilian system of justice in dealing with terrorist threats.

  42. Gonzo,
    I don’t know if mj is a bOT but(s)he is often obnoxious.

    Maybe (s)he doesn’t know that the acronym for TEA party stands for Taxed Enough Already and that is the basis for the group.

    As far as his/her comment; “Lot’s of voters won’t associate with groups that have been known to take a BLIND EYE TO RACISM among their own ranks.”

    FACTS, Please. If (s)he has none, then (s)he should stop spewing standard BOT talking points.

  43. 11;24

    Your bottiness is truly showing tonight, mj.

    Brown grew up with a single mom often on welfare so you obviously don’t know what you’re talking about.

    He also worked while putting himself through college.

  44. Admin —

    another fanastic article! Thank you. Emailed it to many many people, as I do with most of your articles.

    Just wanted to give you an update on my sister-in-law, a physician. Her office, which has 6 physicians total, 3 of them are going to be refusing all Medicare and Medicaid patients starting April 20th. And they will be accepting cash, more and more. THey are still trying to figure out the prices and their new business model. But 100% certain is that they will no longer be accepting any govt. money. I believe the letters to patients will be going out this comning week.

    If you think seniors are upset now, just wait in the comning months. If this one practice is doing this, I imagine this is pervasive over the country.

    the remaining 3 physicians, one of them being my SIL, is(are) retiring at the end of the year. Those letters are going out this week as well. And my SIL and the other 2 docs are being forced out, they do not want to be govt employees, because they will be told by a panel in DC what will be covered and what won’t be, and my SIL treats each patient as a unique case, if she and other docs no longer feel they cannot do that, they will leave the field.
    The doctor shortage will be obvious within the year.

    Also, not sure if any useless media source has reported this, I believe WSJ did, but the prescription plan in this bill, more will be shifted from private retirement plans to Medicare. This means, less will be reimbused and even less choices, because not many higher priced drugs will be covered. (and since lower priced drugs from Canada are not accepted, patients are essentially trapped into patient higher prices for lower choices and quality)

    THis is a disaster, and that is an understatement, and the crap is just unfolding.

    And BTW, I am a 40+ yr plus democrat, I left the party on May31, 2008 and have nothing but disgust at this socialist democrat party, I have attended many many Tea Party events, and 100% support them.
    Damn the media for being this embarassingly ignorant.

  45. A long grim reminder of what we as a nation are facing with the Fraud that now occupies the OO.


    Related Stories on Scoop
    The “Failed” Presidency of Barack Obama 25/11/2008
    Senator Barack Obama’s win 05/11/2008
    Final Chapter – Curtain Time for Barack Obama 24/05/2008
    Curtain Time for Barack Obama – Part V 19/05/2008
    Curtain Time for Barack Obama – Part IV 17/05/2008
    Results powered by search.scoop.co.nz More Related Stories >>>

    If he becomes the nominee, the web of corruption leading to Obama’s rise to power that this investigative journalist was able to untangle in less than three weeks, will be front page news right up until election day, handing the Republicans their only chance in hell of winning the White House.

    Instead of the leaders of the Democratic party doing their homework, a small group of investigative reporters in Chicago will be credited with exposing the corrupt backbone of Obama political career and the mainstream media need only follow their lead if the Democrats hold him out to be a viable candidate.

    The list of reporters deserving of credit for doing the investigative work that should have been done by the leaders of the Democratic party before they got behind Obama, includes, but is not limited to, Chicago Sun-Times reporters, Tim Novak, Dave McKinney, Fran Spielman, Chris Fusco, Natasha Korecki, Steve Warmbir and Lynn Sweet. Chicago Tribune reporters especially deserving of credit include Jeff Coen, Bob Secter, John Chase, Virginia Groark, Rick Pearson, David Jackson, John McCormick, Mickey Ciokajlo, Rudolph Bush and Dan Mihalopoulos.

    This article is the first in a series that will give the details of Obama’s rise to fame.

    As for the most recognized allegation against Obama, that helped slumlords operate in Chicago, while accepting their campaign contributions, its true. Obama was a member of the political machine that helped a whole gang of slumlords funnel local, state and federal tax dollars, over the backs of poor people in need of affordable housing, to line their own pockets and fund the campaigns of politicians in positions to recommend and award contracts.

    The Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland law firm, where Obama worked for nearly a decade, served as a hub for a slew of slumlord deals, many that benefited the firm’s founder, Allison Davis, and Obama’s claims that he knew nothing about the inner workings of this small firm, represent an insult to the intelligence of the American public.

    Tony Rezko was Obama political Godfather. Obama received his first contributions of $2,000, to launch his political career as a state senator on July 31, 1995, from Rezko. Obama started out saying that Rezko only raised $50,000 or $60,000 for his political career but after a year of lying his way through the primaries, the latest total he gave to the Sun-Times and Tribune during interviews on March 14, 2008, adds up to $250,000.

    For a year, he also minimized his relationship with Rezko by telling the media that he only had dinner or lunch with Rezko one or twice a year. But when confronted by Sun-Times reporters during the March 14 interview, with the allegation that an FBI mole saw him coming and going to Rezko’s office often and that three sources said he talked to Rezko on the phone daily, Obama changed his tune.

    Now the story is that he may have talked to Rezko daily at times during campaigns but sometimes he went for a whole month without talking to him. “I have to say we’re talking over the course of 10 years,” Obama said, “there might have been spurts where I talked to him daily.”

    But then he added: “There might have been stretches over a month where I wouldn’t have talked to him at all.”

    This story is a far cry from the picture Obama gave to the public of him and Rezko meeting once or twice a year, and he never did respond to the allegation by the Times reporter that an FBI mole “saw you coming and going from Rezko’s office a lot.“

    Without Rezko’s fundraising, Obama would not have been elected to the Illinois senate, or the US Senate, and he would not have sold the books he wrote about himself because like the Wizard of Oz, Obama is nobody special.

    Even with Rezko’s massive fund raising, Obama could not beat former Black Panther, Bobby Rush, in his 2000 bid for a seat in Congress. And the only reason he won the US Senate race was because his viable opponents had to drop out due to the public airing of personal scandals. Beating Alan Keyes is hardly a victory to brag about.

    The media needs to quit grouping all the Obama backers under the name Antoin “Tony” Resko because the list of contributors to his political campaigns includes the names of many individuals and entities with their own agendas.

    The trail of corruption involving the people raising money for Obama’s political career stretches from the city of Chicago to the Illinois tollway to the O’Hare airport all the way over to Iraq. And testimony in Rezko’s corruption trial reveals that an equal number of Democrat and Republican crooks benefited from all the moneymaking schemes.

    Rezko is not a Democrat; he’s an equal opportunity profiteer. He supported President George Bush and attended a Christmas party at the White House in December 2003, at the same time that he was a top fundraiser for Obama’s US Senate campaign.

    Rezko co-hosted a $3.8 million Chicago fundraiser for Bush in 2003, and on December 9, 2003, he donated $4,000 to Bush, as a “self-employed businessman,” and gave another $2,000 on December 19, 2003, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

    Prior to backing Rod Blagojevich for governor of Illinois, Rezko threw his money behind Republican candidates for governor, including George Ryan, who was convicted of doling out leases and contracts to cronies and sentenced to prison for more than 6 years.

    Rezko then switched horses and chose Blagojevich in 2002 and Obama has supported Blagojevich, even when his administration was embroiled in corruption investigations.
    Recent testimony in the Rezko trial by his co-conspirator, Chicago businessman, Stuart Levine, explained that Rezko had plans for Blagojevich to be Presidential, not Obama. However, anybody following the trial knows that Blagojevich is more likely to be headed to the “Big House” rather than occupying the White House.

    Obama’s entering into real estate deals with Rezko, while it was public knowledge that he was under investigation for funneling illegal contributions to Illinois politicians, was not a “boneheaded” move, it was motivated by pure greed. While knowing that he would get caught up in a major scandal, Obama went ahead with the deal because he and his wife wanted that mansion, with four fireplaces, six bathrooms, and a wine cellar, period.

    On March 16, 2008, the Boston Globe added an interesting twist to the story when reporting that Donna Schwan, of MetroPro Realty, which listed the mansion and lot next door for the owners, “said it is her recollection that the Obamas may not have made the highest bid, and that other bidders may have matched Rezko’s bid,” but the willingness of both buyers to close in June 2005, “was decisive.”

    Which logically means had Rezko not been willing to buy the lot in June, the deal was off.

    According to an article by Edward McClelland in the February 1, 2008 Salon Magazine, when asked who approached her about the house, Donna Schwan told Salon, “I honestly don’t remember. Tony Rezko lived across the street, so he’d been interested in the lot.”

    Any claim that Obama was unaware of the investigations into the corrupt dealings of Rezko with Illinois politicians in June 2005 is ridiculous. On February 15, 2005, the Chicago Tribune reported:

    “Gov. Rod Blagojevich long has vowed to purge the Illinois tollway of cronyism, yet two of his closest friends and political advisers have links to food vendors awarded lucrative contracts to operate inside the toll road’s sleek new oases, government records show.”
    “The Subway sandwich shops and Panda Express Asian restaurants now being installed in the tollway’s seven revamped rest stops are controlled by firms with strong ties to the food-service empire of Antoin “Tony” Rezko, a Blagojevich confidant who has seeded the governor’s cabinet with former business underlings.”

    Christopher Kelly, Blagojevich’s chief fundraiser, “who also recommended the tollway’s executive director for his job, is an investor in at least one Rezko-controlled food firm,” the Tribune wrote. On March 16, 2005, the Tribune reported that:

    “City officials alleged Tuesday that a minority contractor at O’Hare International Airport acted as a front for a firm run by Antoin “Tony” Rezko, a top adviser and fundraiser for Gov. Rod Blagojevich….
    “Rezko, a member of Blagojevich’s kitchen cabinet of advisers, has come under increased scrutiny in recent weeks following questions about his links to operators of new tollway oasis franchises. The revamp of the oases is a showcase project for the Blagojevich administration.”

    On May 15, 2005, the Sun-Times reported that the accusations by his father-in-law that Blagojevich doled out jobs for campaign contributions had “resulted in dozens of grand jury subpoenas being sent to the governor’s office, his unpaid advisers, agency directors and his top fund-raisers”.
    Among those subpoenaed for documents, sources told the Times, were “Blagojevich’s biggest money men, Christopher Kelly and Antoin “Tony” Rezko.”

    On May 20, 2005, less than a month before Obama bought the mansion, the Tribune reported that Resko, “has had a business relationship with First Lady Patti Blagojevich for eight years, the governor’s office acknowledged Thursday.”
    Six month before Obama bought the strip of land from Rezko’s “wife” to enlarge his yard, on August 28, 2005, Natasha Korecki reported in the Sun-Times that, “there’s so much corruption to investigate in the Chicago area, the FBI is adding manpower.”

    Robert Grant, FBI Special Agent in Charge, told the Times that he had reorganized the bureau to add a third public corruption squad, giving Chicago the largest corruption unit in the country, even bigger than those in New York and Los Angeles.

    “It is the second time in two years the FBI in Chicago has expanded its public corruption force,” Korecki noted.

    On November 6, 2006, the Times asked Obama why he did not reveal the land deal with Rezko before it was reported by the Tribune stating: “Why did you not publicly disclose the transaction after Rezko got indicted?”

    “At the time, it didn’t strike me as relevant,” Obama answered. It seems like a lot of events were not relevant a couple months before he announced his candidacy for president.

    In the November 2007, Chicago Magazine, James Merriner described a “fashion show” that took place in the first week in November 2006, to benefit St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, which he said, “attracted little if any media coverage, which may have been exactly as its organizers and sponsors had hoped.”

    “The invitation to the affair,” he wrote, “offered a veritable guidebook to political influence in Illinois, much of it centered on one St. Jude benefactor, Antoin “Tony” Rezko.”

    “Just three weeks earlier,” Merriner pointed out, “Rezko had been indicted on charges of extorting kickbacks from businesses seeking contracts from the Blagojevich administration.”

    The “fashion show” was chaired by Rita Rezko, co-chaired by the Governor’s wife, Patti Blagojevich, and Michelle Obama was a special guest that day, according to Merriner.

    Two weeks after the “fashion show,” on November 17, 2006, the Sun-Times reported that Blagojevich’s wife Patti got nearly $50,000 from a real estate deal in late 2002 involving Rezko.

    In terms of dollar amounts of campaign contributions directly from Rezko in Illinois, the top four earners were, the now deceased President of the Cook County Board, John Stroger, Blagojevich, Chicago Mayor, Richard Daley, and Obama – in that order.

    Rezko was the head of Stroger’s campaign finance committee at the same time that he served on Obama US Senate finance committee.

    When it came time for Stroger’s reelection campaign, in the midst of the erupting Rezko scandals in the media, on April 8, 2005, the Tribune reported that Stroger “has selected beleaguered businessman and political powerbroker Antoin “Tony” Rezko as one of the honorary chairs of his campaign fundraiser next month.”
    Stroger appointed Rezko’s wife Rita to the Cook County Employee Appeals Board, which hears cases filed by fired or disciplined workers, at a part-time salary of $37,000 a year.

    According to documents filed in the Rezko corruption case, this was Rita’s sole income when she supposedly came up with a $125,000 down payment and secured a $500,000 mortgage to buy the $625,00 lot next to Obama. Less than a year after Obama bought his strip of land, Rita sold the rest of the lot to attorney Michael Sreenan, and made a profit of more than $50,000.

    On February 27, 2007, the Sun-Times pointed out that Obama’s “new neighbor, Michael Sreenan,” had contributed $5,000 to Obama’s campaigns. Less than a year after buying the lot, Sreenan put it up for sale for $1.5 million in October 2007.

    Of course John Stroger will not be answering any questions about corruption, or any other matter, because he died on January 18, 2008. His former chief of staff and godson, Orlando Jones, will not be talking either because he was found dead of self-inflicted gun wounds in September 2007, “just as a corruption inquiry targeting him was heating up,” according to a September 7, 2007 report by CBS News channel 2 Chicago.
    “Jones left his position in county government to create a lobbying firm in association with Tony Rezko, who has been indicted on fraud charges,” CBS reported.

    Cook County Commissioner Tony Peraica told CBS that Orlando Jones’ death raised many questions about the Cook County president’s office. “Some of these matters Jones was involved in that are currently being investigated by the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office are reaching to the highest level of county government,” Peraica said.

    Obama endorsed John Stroger’s son, Todd Stroger, in his bid for Cook County Board President after his father died. Todd was in the news as recently as March 24, 2008, when the Sun-Times published a front-page article reporting that his cousin Donna Dunnings, the county’s new chief financial officer, was receiving a 12% pay increase.

    Dunnings’ salary will be the largest increase of any county employee, with the average increase being around 5%. She will make nearly $160,000 with the pay increase, or roughly $5,000 more than her predecessor made at the job, according to the Times.

    Mayor Daley endorsed Obama immediately after he announced he was running for president and in return, Obama endorsed Daley’s reelection for Mayor right smack in the middle of major federal investigations of corruption in the Daley Administration.

    Obama’s ties to the corrupt Daley machine began when he was dating his wife Michelle and she brought him into the fold. Valerie Jarrett, the deputy chief of staff to Mayor Daley, hired Michelle as her assistant in 1991. Daley made Jarrett the chairman of the Chicago Department of Planning and Development and Michelle worked as her assistant in that Department during 1992-93.

    From there Michelle moved up the political tiers to the University of Chicago and ultimately got an overnight pay raise from about $121,000 to close to $317,000, after Obama became a US Senator, as a vice president at the University of Chicago.

    Susan Sher, was corporation counsel in the Daley Administration when Michelle was hired back in the early 1990s, and Sher is now Michelle’s boss at the University of Chicago, according to the April 22, 2007 Chicago Tribune.

    Shortly after Obama entered the US Senate, Michelle was also handed a position on the board of TreeHouse Foods. Wal-Mart is the largest customer of TreeHouse Foods. Factoring in stock options and other payments, the value of her compensation package for serving on the board in 2006 was $101,083, according to the Tribune report.
    On May 14, 2007, during a meeting with the AFL-CIO in New Jersey, Obama was asked about Wal-Mart and he said: “I won’t shop there.” Michelle resigned from the board of TreeHouse eight days after husband said he would not shop at Wal-Mart, CBS News reported on May 27, 2007.

    When it came time for Obama’s US Senate campaign, Valerie Jarrett became the campaign finance chairman and worked hand and hand with fellow finance committee members, Rita and Tony Rezko, and his former boss at the law firm, Allison Davis, in fundraising endeavors. The committee raised more than $14 million, according to Federal Election Commission records, Tim Novak reported in the Sun-Times on April 23, 2007.

    Jarrett is now the CEO of Habitat Co, a real estate development and management firm which manages the housing program for the Chicago Housing Authority, the entity mandated to administer public housing, and she serves as an unpaid advisor to Obama’s Presidential campaign.

    Mayor Daley’s brother Bill also became an Obama advisor. Mayor Daley’s chief image defender, David Axelrod, is a top strategist for Obama’s campaign and he was also the media consultant for Obama’s US Senate campaign.

    On April 1, 2007, Dick Simpson, a former Chicago alderman who is now chairman of the political science department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, told Ben Wallace-Wells in the New York Times: “David Axelrod’s mostly been visible in Chicago in the last decade as Daley’s public relations strategist and the guy who goes on television to defend Daley from charges of corruption”.

    The scandals involving the Daley administration have no beginning and no end. In January 2004, the Sun-Times published a three-part series exposing widespread corruption in the Hired Truck Program and revealed that some companies were being paid for doing little or no work and that some had mob connections or were tied to city employees.

    On January 25, 2005, the Associated Press reported that trucking company manager, John Cannatello, the 16th person charged in the scandal, was charged with getting $6.6 million in city hauling work “by giving campaign contributions and cash to officials and falsely claiming his firm was eligible for jobs set aside for women-owned businesses.”

    According to the article, city officials said the Hired Truck program, “which at its height doled out $38 million worth of work in one year to contractors without bids, was designed to save taxpayers money by outsourcing hauling jobs that otherwise would require the city to buy trucks and insurance.”

    On June 6, 2006, the Sun-Times reported that the brother-in-law of Cook County Commissioner, John Daley, was sentenced to 18 months in prison “for taking about $5,400 in bribes to steer city business to a Hired Truck company.”

    Of course John Daley is another brother of Mayor Daley.

    On January 6, 2006, the New York Times ran the headline, “Corruption Scandal Loosening Mayor Daley’s Grip on Chicago,” and reported that a “wide-ranging federal investigation into what prosecutors describe as “pervasive fraud” in hiring and contracts at City Hall has led to 30 indictments, including two senior administrators close to the mayor, and a dozen cabinet-level resignations. ”

    The Tribune broke the hiring scandal on April 29, 2005, after federal agents carried out an all-night raid of Daley’s patronage office at City Hall and less than three months later, Robert Sorich, the patronage chief in the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, and three former city officials, were arrested and charged with fraud to rig city hiring for 12 years.
    During the criminal trial, prosecutors produced a list of more than 5,700 politically connected job applicants, and Patricia Molloy, a longtime secretary in Mayor Daley’s office, testified that aides kept track of applicants and their political sponsors during much of Daley’s time in office, according to a July 7, 2006 report by Rudolph Bush and Dan Mihalopoulos in the Tribune.

    City officials testified that they “were heavily involved in politics and directed city workers and aspiring public employees to knock on doors and work the phones for political candidates endorsed by the mayor,” the July 7, 2006 Tribune report noted.

    “Witnesses who marshaled pro-Daley political groups testified that they took campaign orders from top Daley aides,” the Tribune wrote, “and later got jobs and promotions from the mayor’s office for loyal and effective political workers.”
    Sorich and three others were convicted on July 5, 2006, of carrying out what prosecutors described as fraud in hiring, “complete with sham interviews, rigged test scores and color-coded charts to track political sponsors,” according to the July 6, 2006 Sun-Times.

    Chicago attorney, Michael Shakman, whose federal lawsuit against the city led to anti-patronage decrees, told the Tribune on July 7, 2006, that Daley was to blame for the political hiring system. “You have to lay the responsibility squarely at the feet of Mayor Daley,” he said. “These [defendants] are his people, who never would have thought of doing this without his approval.”

    At the sentencing hearing in November 2006, US District Judge David Coar told Sorich: “If I thought that by sentencing you I could stop this type of hiring corruption in the city of Chicago, I would throw this building at you…. But it won’t,” the Tribune reported on November 21, 2006.

    Obama is a political psychopath. He exhibits no shame, no matter where his money comes from. On September 5, 2007, the New York Post reported that, “Alexi Giannoulias, who became Illinois state treasurer last year after Obama vouched for him, has pledged to raise $100,000 for the senator’s Oval Office bid.”

    “Giannoulias is so tainted by reputed mob links,” the Post noted, “that several top Illinois Dems, including the state’s speaker of the House and party chairman, refused to endorse him even after he won the Democratic nomination with Obama’s help.”

    If the Democratic party places Obama on the ballot against John McCain, Democratic voters will have no choice in this election. Once the whole truth becomes public, and it will the minute he becomes the nominee, no honest American could support sending Obama and his corrupt gang of cronies to the White House.

    (The second article in this series will be “Obama and the Slumlords”)

    Evelyn Pringle

    (Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for OpEd News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)

  46. In NM we have a populat LTG running for Gov to replace you know who. When he ran, the Reps ran a sacrifical lamb, as they knew they could not win. Already there are at least 4 Reps running against the Dem (a primary vote will narrow it to 1). One with name recognition. Even though this state continues to poll pro O, I think this early competition in the Rep ranks indicates that the Reps are alive and well in NM, and think they have a chance. The mud slinging has already begun, and the campaign ads will feature the scandals that have arisen in this state with Judas.

    I like the LTG and will vote for her, but it is obvious that, as stated before, the Reps are alive and well in NM.

  47. Had enough? Now try IMPEACHMENT to save us as a brutal future lies ahead for this great nation every day as sure as the sun rises.Hillary is the only person that can correct this great act of treason by a HOCUS POTUS.

  48. That mj almost got me, I read the comment and just wanted to turn away, but I kept reading and I am so glad. Thank all of you who sprung to the defense of regular Americans. Because that is what I believe the tea party patriots are, regular Americans. And regular Americans finding a voice and a political place, if not a home, is a powerful and for some a frightening thing. The Tea Party is a counter-balance to ACORN, and needs to be supported.

    It has been a very discouraging week or so for me, I truly believe we, the American people have no representation. What hurts the most is the realization that the stars we had thought were aligned for true health care reform where hijacked, early on, by corporate interests who captured and made fools of our representatives.

    Now, it is obvious and frightening that the people we elected are intent on delivering on the remaining agenda items of their corporate pay masters (soon to be our overlords), and quickly too. Considering that I wonder what Thomas Jefferson’s advice would be.

    But perhaps, if there is a God in heaven, they all, democrat and republican, will loose to honest tea party patriot candidates, who love this country and take a view that is longer then “how can I hide all the money I am raking in for selling out the future of our Republic”.

    The only way to save our republic is to remove money from campaigns. We have tried doing it with legislation and that did not work. We need to cast our lots together and pick a candidate for the house of representatives in the most random way possible from members of our own community and vote that person into office, warts and all. And then pledge to support and guide them while they hold the office.

    But how to get something like that going? I am trying to get my brother to attempt it with the tea party branch he started, but only one representative elected that way would be powerless. I there is going to be a sweeping change in the House of Representatives why can’t it be community patriots who are swept in?

    When you think of picking someone at random you may be tempted to think of it in terms of chaos or loosing control but I really believe it is the only way we, the people, can regain control of our republic short of armed rebellion.

  49. The comment about not expecting a Republican governor in Massachusetts flies
    against the fact that 1) the current very unpopular Democratic
    governor is cut from the same cloth as Obama, 2) the Senator elect was not expected to be a Republican, 3) it wasn’t that long ago that Mitt Romney was
    their Republican governor, and 4) the volatility in the current electorate
    means anything can happen.
    I wrote the above late last night, but couldn’t post it here because every time that I tried to do so, a message indicated that the server was down. Anyway, I’ve read similar thoughts above from the admin in response to mj’s comment about a Republican governor in Massachusetts.

    I won’t refer to mj as a bot, but I will write that it is evident tha h/she seems to see everything with democrat party glasses on. So while she obviously doesn’t prefer Obama to Hillary, h/she definitely prefers the democrat viewpoint even after being shown day in and day out how corrupt they have become which should give anyone pause with their knee jerk support.

    There are still some democrat values from times past that I still retain, but they seem to be from a bygone era as the Obamacrat party is a disgusting perversion.

  50. After my brief discussion in the Dentist Office on Wednesday, and other conversations, I see a lot of people not wanting to call themselves Dem or Rep. I am sure on Wednesday, one of the persons I was discuissing this with was a Dem, who now wants to agree that she has a conservative, as well as a liberal side, and always has.

    I don’t think that bodes well for the Dem Traditional thinking that people will fold in. In fact, they should have thought that, but not said it. It was like waving a red flag in front of a bull. People don’t like the perception of them that that indicates.

    Tea Party or Independant groups are benefiting because people no longer like their labels.

  51. Basically, Americans are now on the road to enslavement by a big government that has legalized [and encouraged] the rip off of it’s citizens.

  52. NewMexicoFan:

    Most people are conservative when it comes to fiscal and national security. They don’t want bailouts, they want biz who failed to fail, and those who worked hard who are succeeded to succeed, they want the govt to provide a fair playing field, they don’t want the govt to take over the playing field. They don’t want companies who are failing to bribe govt to favor them, if you fail, then fail, don’t penalize people who played fairly.

    On national security, people want a strong national defense, they want America to be continue to be allies with democracies like Israel, who have always been steadfast friends to our country, they support our courageuos troops but are wary of more wars, we cannot afford it.

    And the social issues, and this is where people, the undemocrats pounce, and conservatives fall for it. People want to be left alone to believe what they want, they don’t want people’s social views foisted on them via legislation.

    I am stunned the ignorant media keeps disparaging the Tea Party movement, after decades as a loyal registered democrat, I changed to Independent in 2008, I have met many many democrats and independents and ex-democrats like me at Tea Party events. We have all concluded the MSM is useless and best to be ignored.

    I have a friend who is a Russian immigrant, he was telling me that now I see his view from when he was living in the Soviet Union. The citizens of the Soviet Union knew they were being lied to by the Pravada, so they listened and ignored and sought out other avenues to get information. Now that has come to America, we listen to MSM, but with full knowledge that they serve the democrat’s party’s view not the American people’s interest, so we seek out other avenues for information.

    Most people want freedom and that is what this country was born out of, that is what true conservatism is, b/c they get to control their own lives, these Obots do not believe that. Bill Clinton understood this, so did Hillary, they wanted to give people a hand up not a hand out.
    I have many immigrant friends who openly say the man in the WH is a marxist, they should know, they fled their own socialist, marxist countris to come here.

  53. #
    March 26th, 2010 at 10:43 pm

    extremist fringe of what used to be the GOP? I think ultimately the teabaggers turn off independent voters.
    BS!I resent your term of “Teabagger”. It is the Tea Party and YOU know it. Interesting that teabagging is a term used freely by the Bots.Hmmm

    Clearly I am Indie, and clearly I and many other Indie’s, some here, support the Tea Party movement.

    March 26th, 2010 at 10:50 pm

    I’m not a bot. Calling me such is silly and inconsequential to my argument. Tea Bag Party, then, whatever you want to call them. I’m not talking about the poeple on this site. I’m talking about the population at large. And, I am not the only one who has suggested the tea “party” set may turn independent voters off. There are lots of independent votes that know, for instance, that Medicare is a government program, and don’t want to assosiate with people who don’t know that. There are independents who don’t like the tenor of debate between Republicans and Democrats, much less the extreme tea partiers. Lot’s of voters won’t associate with groups that have been known to take a blind eye to racism among their own ranks.

    This isn’t a personal fight between you and I. I am arguing without passion that the extremism from the Right can be a turn off to the broader electorate. I’m asking admin about the risks for Republicans in that they have lost so many seats in Congress that they are left with largely the southern set, which is just different than the rest of the country.
    MJ…exactly where is it you’re getting your information?? because i have to say I was a democrat who turned independant and i am a tea party patriot and support that effort 100% and then some… been to a few rallys and i can assure you not everyone was GOP, loads of democrats and even more independents than anything else make up the tea party. I resent the term “TEABAGGERS”.. really how dare you use that slang here.. . and then you even went to the depths in your comment to suggest tea partiers are “extreme” and “racist” IMHO your entire comment is disgusting and you sound like nasty pelosi and jim clyburn… disgusting disgusting disgusting!!!

  54. OMG!

    I am so pissed!

    These assholes in COngress write this shit in the bill that will hurt millions of people, and then when the companies have to enforce these shitty medicare cuts, like AT&T just announced on Friday, THEN THESE SAME DAMN DEMOCRATS THEN CALL THESE COMPANIES TO TESTIFY ON THIS?!?!?!

    So, let me get this straight, they write a bill that companies warned them if they pass, they will cause millions to lose medical choices, then the companies say they will have cut these medical choices after the bill is signed into law, and then congress says “why are you cutting these medical choices”!?!??!!?

    “AT&T said Friday it would record a $1 billion non-cash charge for the current quarter related to the new U.S. health care reform law, as lawmakers called on the company and three other large employers to testify about expected cost hikes. ”


  55. Tim @ 10:34

    I agree with you. I have not gone to a Tea Party event, but have been tempted to (and may go in the future), and view them as a group of people who don’t fit into the Reps and Dems, and maybe even Independents, so they are finding their own identity. I have stayed a registered Dem as I want to support the Women running for Gov (who whole heartedly supported HRC), and I enjoy telling the Dems off when they call. I think that is my vindictive side, but it really do enjoy it.

  56. Fifth Dimension
    March 27th, 2010 at 3:56 am

    For that post from another blog, what is its name?

  57. Where we think Greenhouse fails utterly is not in her legal knowledge but her political knowledge. Greenhouse believes that the health scam will prove popular and she cites the one outlier article to support her contention and ignores the rest. Based on that, to us incorrect view, of what will happen in November, Greenhouse concludes that Roberts will not imperil the Court’s image by going against public opinion.
    Admin: I remember the hoopla at NYT when Greenhouse came aboard. A Constitutional scholar they said, and they were right about that piece. But not the only constitutional scholar in the country. But schlarship aside the judgment she is making here is essentially a political one, namely that public opinion will support that bill by the time it hits the court docket. That judgment is based on a single poll which records a bounce which normally accompanies the passage of such a bill and will be transient. Also, her judgment cannot help but be affected by the degree to which her employer–the New York Times is invested in this legislation. For her to opine differently on this matter would be detrimental to her career.

    In order to make an accurate prediction of the political prospects for this law, one must have read the bill. Thus, an interesting question for her initially would be has she actually read the bill herself and does she understand its meaning and application? Then, I would ask her to evaluate the importance of the Tenth Amendment in the establishment of the Constitution, as well as the legal ramifications of extending the Commerce Clause to cover not actions but inactions. Does she agree that this would open the door to the imposition of other affirmative duties on the citizenry by Government, where today people are free to do as they please. Finally, if her premise is that the Supreme Court follows elections and other manifestations of the public will, in deciding whether to accept cases, and even how to decide them, then by her logic, they would accept the case and strike down the law, one would assume.

    Bambi’s handlers know the public does not like this bill, it is subject to a Supreme Court challenge, and it is a death sentence for swing state dimocrats. That is why he is going around the country now trying to sell it, and fighting what is in effect a rear guard action. But every day he spends doing that is a day lost in his effort to reassure the public that he is addressing the jobs issue, which is of great electoral importance. So great is the opportunity cost of fighting this rear guard action on health care that the corrupt Newsweek cover headline reads “Where Are The Jobs?”

    If the Republicans were smart, they would get ahead of the power curve here and reiterate the fact that this fight was never about his false dichotomy of doing this vs doing nothing, but whether there were alternative ways to address the problem that did not take away our freedom, turn the IRS into a Gestapo, and in effect create a $10 broom to clean up $1 mess. This would force Obama and his big media shills to defend the indefensible as Weiner tried to do in the O”Reilly interview, and look like an evasive mean spirited jerk in the process. He was so bad he made O’Reilly look good, and that is a tall order.

  58. Say what you have to about mj, but his/her arrogance and ignorance proved to be of tremendous value last night! It prompted admin to clarify, correct, summarize and brilliantly light up the current political scene as only admin can do!!
    admin, I really love you.
    This is from Tea Party Express website:
    The Tea Party Express III: Just Vote Them Out! Tour
    Join us for the biggest Tea Party Express national tour to date. Starting March 27, 2010 with a Mega Rally in Searchlight, NV (hometown to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) we will take this message across the nation all the way to the White House in Washington, D.C. on April 15th:
    “You, the politicians in Washington, have failed We The People with your bailouts, out-of-control deficit spending, government takeovers of sectors of the economy, Cap & Trade, government-run health care, and higher taxes! If you thought we were just going to quietly go away, or that this tea party movement would be just a passing fad, you were mistaken. We’re taking our country back!”
    Join us from March 27th to April 15th, 2010
    as we tell Congress and the White House: “Enough!”
    This email sent out early this morning:
    MEDIA UPDATE – 2:59 AM: Crowds Arriving All Through the Night at “Showdown in Searchlight” Rally Location
    *Tea Party Express staff on scene throughout the night to guide supporters into event as hundreds of RV’s & Cars Stream in
    *Crowd Size Projections Rise to Well-Above 10,000+ Supporters
    Throughout the night the staff of the Tea Party Express has been on-location at the site of today’s “Showdown in Searchlight” mega tea party rally. The staff is dispatched in teams from the entrance point back through the giant 160-acre parcel of land the rally is being held on to guide supporters who have been arriving in RV’s and cars all throughout the night.
    With hundreds of RV’s and cars already arriving, organizers at the Tea Party Express are revising the projected crowd size for the rally higher – and expect more than 10,000 supporters to attend this historic event.
    Supporters are coming in from every county in Nevada and every state in the nation.
    “This event is exceeding even our own expectations. We’ve said it time-and-again, this has become a ‘Conservative Woodstock’ and tonight, this piece of land in the middle of the Nevada desert has a temporary population that has already surpassed that of the entire town of Searchlight, NV” said Joe Wierzbicki, Coordinator for the Tea Party Express.
    *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
    Media organizations wishing to embed a reporter on the Tea Party Express national tour, or those seeking more information about the “Tea Party Express” or to schedule an interview with a representative, should contact Levi Russell at (509) 979-6615 or via email at: Levi@FrontLineStrat.com

  59. Finally, if her premise is that the Supreme Court follows elections and other manifestations of the public will, in deciding whether to accept cases, and even how to decide them, then by her logic, IF HER POLITICAL JUDGMENT IS WRONG they would accept the case and strike down the law, one would assume.

  60. “really how dare you use that slang here.. . and then you even went to the depths in your comment to suggest tea partiers are “extreme” and “racist”

    Remember how mj was so quick to bristle at calling brazille bradzilla and implying that was racist?

    In fact, (s)he nearly got a lot of good posters thrown off the site because of the continuous nagging about poor my-mooma-told-me-about-the-rooooolz Donna.

    And NOW (s)he has the friggin GALL to use the term teabaggers, an obvious sexual slur, against a group which is fed up with being taxed too much?

    WTF is racist about that???????

    If “Brillohead” was banned from use at 44 then teabagging should be, too.

    Nothing like having a double standar!

  61. lil ole grape!


    ‘Say what you have to about mj, but his/her arrogance and ignorance proved to be of tremendous value last night! It prompted admin to clarify, correct, summarize and brilliantly light up the current political scene as only admin can do!!’

  62. a perfect quote from my Russian immigrant friend… another PUMA.. he was always a conservative, and deeply respected Hillary, now he is a huge Sarah supporter.

    “If you have to and forced to purchase a product you may not want in this country under the penalty of jail and fees with the IRS as bounty hunters, then you are no longer a free man or woman in the United States of America”

  63. tim
    March 27th, 2010 at 10:49 am

    I have a headache!

    My ex used to do that all the time – manipulative POS that he was. Circular arguement with never any end. Manipulative, narcissitic and downright evil.

    There’s a book called the People of the Lie. My ex was the poster boy for that particular personality type and this congress reminds me of him.

    It is a deliberate strategy, meant to conceal, distract and confuse.

    The goal is to get the other person to doubt their own convictions and even their sanity. You keep thinking, I CAN”T be seeing what I think I’m seeing. it just isn’t possible.

    It is possible and until we stand up to them, physically, if need be, they will not back down.

  64. Barack Really is Going to Pay Her Mortgage
    By Larry Doyle on March 26, 2010 at 7:42 PM in Banks, Economy, Housing & Housing Crisis, Mortgages, Sense on Cents (Larry Doyle blog)
    My blood is boiling. Why?

    The assault on the principles of free market capitalism is escalating with news that banks are poised to start reducing principal balances on certain mortgages.

    I empathize with those who are strapped, but I have never felt more strongly on a topic than this principal reduction. Despite any and all bulls*%# put forth by those in Washington, the principal reduction program is an enormous escalation of the violation of moral hazard which our country sadly continues to embrace. I have no doubt it will expedite the development of a socialized housing finance system.

    Do not think for a second that banks will take the hit on these principal reductions. Who will take the hit? Me and you. Those who have worked hard, saved, played by the rules, and taught our children to do the same. I have no intention of changing that approach and will work that much harder to instill these virtues in my children. That said, these virtues are under assault under this program. My children’s future is being negatively impacted as the costs of principal reduction will be pushed off on them.

    The Wall Street Journal addresses this topic this morning in writing, New Plan to Cut Some Mortgage Balances:

    The White House will announce Friday an expansion of its foreclosure-prevention efforts to include reducing mortgage loan balances for some borrowers, a controversial step that policy makers have long resisted, people familiar with the plans said.

    The revisions, which will also include temporary help for unemployed borrowers, serve as a recognition that the administration’s foreclosure rescue plan hasn’t kept pace with the rising number of souring loans.

    Under the plan, the Federal Housing Administration (LD’s edit: the FHA is you and me, boys and girls) will take on a much bigger role in government efforts to avert foreclosures by allowing some homeowners who owe more than their homes are worth to refinance into government-backed loans, according to people familiar with the plans. The FHA, which doesn’t make loans but insures lenders against losses, already faces rising losses on loans it has backed.

    Reduced balances, reduced rates, and taxpayers assuming the risk via FHA-insurance is socialized housing. Yes, socialized!!

    The WSJ continues:

    On Thursday, lawmakers and a government watchdog sharply criticized the administration’s effort to modify loans at a congressional hearing. Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the government’s $700 billion TARP, warned that the program risks helping few borrowers and could instead spread out the foreclosure crisis over several years.

    Kick the can down the road and have our kids pick up the tab. Screw that!!

    Herbert Allison, an assistant Treasury secretary, said that the administration didn’t “fully envision the challenges that we would encounter” but defended the program as the first wide-scale effort that had moved banks toward substantially reducing payments.

    Herb, stop the bulls*%#! If the government didn’t understand, then they were too stupid. More likely, the government, including you right here, has lied and continues to lie to the American public.

    So far, around 170,000 borrowers have received permanent modifications, while another 835,000 are in a trial stage.

    The administration also has struggled to launch a program designed to encourage banks to modify second-lien mortgages. The administration is expected to increase incentive payments under that program.

    Increase incentive payments? Read that as more taxpayer bailouts for a failed banking system. If you think you’re getting screwed. You’re right. You are. Your kids are getting screwed, as well.

    You can read a copy of what I call the “Socialized Housing Manifesto” here. Now, let’s revisit fall 2008 when one young woman was truly prescient:

  65. lil ole grape 11:28

    I agree. If no one ever challenges, or presents the other points of view, and you don’t have to explain your point of view, you fail to have a Democracy.

    I kind of jumped down someone’s throat on facebook. Today, I see that they have gotten new information on the gun shots at their reps office, and they have changed their point of view.

  66. the VA’s atty general lays out in 2 minutes why the indiv. mandate in unconstitutional and therefore illegal.

    Here is the site:
    Tim–thank you so much for posting this clear, concise exposition of the constitutional argument against this far reaching expansion of federal power under the Commerce Clause. The Article 10 argument, which protects rights reserved to the state and the people is of great importance as well.

    If the Supremes do not defend the Constitution in this instance for reasons such as those Greenhouse mentions, i.e. imperiling the courts image, then one can only wonder what they are there for.

    Obviously, if they do intervene, the Obamanazis will draw unsavory comparisons to the Roger Taney court and call this a second Dredd Scott decision. The comparison is ridiculous, but because they play the race card, I think it is inevitable.

    The rebuttal is simple enough. That case was a stain on the court because it involved a denial of liberty, whereas this case would involve an affirmation of liberty against a government action which aims to press American citizens into a limited form of indentured servitude toward government. Furthermore, Dred Scott was an escaped slave whereas Obama is president and a multi millionaire. Thus, the comparison is ridiculous.

    In sum, this is a difficult decision, but an unavoidable one, in my opinion.

    The Attorney General of my state who is a Republican, and a legal scholar agrees with me. The Governor who dissed Hillary and supported Obama does not. And she is trying to defund the lawsuit. The Governor was previously the Attorney General. She let a filing deadline slip one time and it cost the state $7.9 million dollars. Her fundraising activities have raised questions about a possible quid pro quo. She is not liked by the people who work for her, and bartenders who listen to those employees rant about her after hours confirm this. Finally, the Attorney General will be running against the Governor in the next election so there is a political dimension to all this as well as a legal one, which is hardly surprising.

  67. Tim, NJ for me.

    Central Jersey, near Great Adventure. Work in NYC. Love the northwestern mountainous areas the most, but the shore (LBI, North Wildwood, etc.) is wonderful too. Pinelands is a completely unique environment.

    Went to school at Rutgers.

    NJ, Okay!

  68. Hello rgb44hrc:

    The reason I asked is the NJ Supreme Ct has approved that Senator Mendenz can be recalled. You can find the form at http://www.recallnj.com

    they need 1.3 million registered voters to send in their forms and this man can be recalled and a new senator will take his place.

    I am not sure if you are a fan of Mendenz, I can’t stand the man or Corzine either, I will never forgive either of these jackasses for giving up their Hillary delegates when the state overwhelmingly went to Hillary.

    If you are interested, PLEASE PLEASE turn in a form and pass this information onto your other NJ friends.


  69. But what if I like my corrupt congressman?

    Actually, I don’t recall the exact reason, so I went to the web site, and it had a link to many media stories on the recall.

    The one by Fox news had this (rather large excerpt by me):

    A New Jersey state appellate court yesterday gave the green light for approval of the circulation of petitions in that state asking for a recall election to remove Democrat U.S. Senator Robert Menendez. State law in 9 states counting New Jersey specifically provides for the recall of members of Congress, just as former California Governor Gray Davis was recalled and replaced with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in a recall election in 2003. Those 9 states are represented by 12 incumbent Democratic Senators who are not otherwise up for reelection this year, potentially putting majority control of the Senate even more in play.

    The New Jersey Secretary of State originally refused to approve the circulation of recall petitions when the request for such approval was filed by the Committee to Recall Robert Menendez last September, arguing that such recall was not authorized under the U.S. Constitution. The Committee sued for a court order compelling the Secretary to grant such approval in accordance with the New Jersey state constitution and Uniform Recall Election Law. The Committee seeks to recall Menendez because he voted for an unconstitutional government takeover of health care, and for record shattering federal deficits and debt. I filed an amicus curiae brief in the case on behalf of the American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) supporting the recall effort (the brief and the opinion can be found at http://www.RecallCongressNow.org).

    The New Jersey Constitution specifically provides, “The people reserve unto themselves the power to recall, after at least one year of service, any elected official in this state or representing this state in the United States Congress.” That provision was added to the state constitution in 1993 in a referendum election, with an overwhelming, favorable vote of 76% to 24%.

    Attorneys for Menendez argued that such recall of a U.S. Senator is not permissible under the U.S. Constitution. But the Recall Committee argued that this constitutional question was not actually before the court at this time. The Committee was not asking the court for an order to remove Menendez pursuant to a recall election. It was asking for an order mandating the Secretary of State to approve the circulation of recall petitions as provided under the state Constitution and Uniform Recall Election Law. Rather than prohibiting the circulation and signature of such petitions, the U.S. Constitution protected such political expression and participation, the Recall Committee argued.

    If the Recall Committee was successful in obtaining the 1.3 million signatures necessary for a recall election, and if the majority of voters in such an election voted to remove Menendez, then the question of whether the U.S. Constitution allowed such a recall would be squarely presented to the court. But until that time, the Committee argued, the court should follow well established precedents providing that courts should not address constitutional questions until necessary.

  70. Democratic Senator: Health Care Law to Address ‘Mal-Distribution of Income’

    After the Senate passed a “fix-it” bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an “income shift” to help the poor.

    As Democrats tout the moral underpinnings of the federal health care system overhaul — ensuring health care coverage for nearly all Americans — one senator appeared to go off message when he said the legislation would address the “mal-distribution of income in America.”

    After the Senate passed a “fix-it” bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an “income shift” to help the poor.

    “Too often, much of late, the last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind,” he said. “Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

    That contrasted with the arguments Democrats have been making in the past year for reinventing the health care system: to expand health care coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans and tighten regulations on insurance companies while reducing the federal deficit.

    But some Republican critics have suggested the overhaul is taking the country down the path to socialism. The nearly $1 trillion legislation pays for itself in large part through new taxes on the wealthy — Americans who make $250,000 and more.

    A spokeswoman for Baucus did not respond to an e-mail seeking more information on the statement.

    Baucus’ statement could give Republicans ammunition as they seek to repeal the law and regain control of Congress in the November elections.

    Democrats have rejected Republican charges that they are trying to take over the health care system.

    In Iowa this week to trumpet the benefits of the legislation, President Obama said, “We made a promise. That promise has been kept.”

    “From this day forward, all of the cynics, all the naysayers — they’re going to have to confront the reality of what this reform is and what it isn’t,” the president said. “They’ll have to finally acknowledge this isn’t a government takeover of our health care system.”

    GOP strategist Matt Schlapp, the White House director to former President George. W. Bush, told FoxNews.com that Baucus’ statement reflected the “duality” of a responsible Democrat who understands the ramifications of tax policy on Americans but has a “foot in the camp of the most radical and rabid big government activists that are advocating for some breathtaking policies.”

    “It’s interesting,” he said. “He’s not the senator I would use as the poster boy for radical and misunderstanding of market dynamics.”

    But Schlapp said he’s not surprised by anything said by a member of a political party that, he said, seeks “to take money away from people who are achieving and give it those who aren’t.”

  71. mj,

    While I disagree with some of the minor details of your recent posts, overall I appreciate most of the things you’ve been saying for the past few days, supporting basement angel etc.

    It’s easy to fall from “The enemy of my enemy is (temporarily) my friend” to “The enemy of my enemy has been right about everything all along.”

    Progressive views sometimes get drowned out here, so I appreciate progressives hanging in — it encourages this progressive, me, also.

  72. Re the Tea Party people, the media has been trying to turn off Indies by painting the Tea Party people as trashy and crazy. Their recent protest was described as ‘racist.’

    But when you look at the videos, these are just normal people (chanting to be heard across a street).


    See upthread where we posted and quoted an NYT article showing them as sensible people focused on the economy.

  73. The New York Times has another article on the Tea Party movement today. The Times wants to attack the movement as stupid hypocrites (they are on Medicare but are against government run health care!) who face doom, but instead reinforces that the Tea Party movement is driven by economic factors. It’s an interesting read in that the article is an example of how to steer the reader into conclusions that are either irrelevant or denigrating.

    For example, the question the article raises is whether the Tea Party movement can survive if the economy improves. An honest examination would turn the conclusion on its head and simply point out that until economic conditions (justice?) improve, the Tea Party will not go away.

    The article is written by the same author as the one we posted last night:


    When Tom Grimes lost his job as a financial consultant 15 months ago, he called his congressman, a Democrat, for help getting government health care.

    Then he found a new full-time occupation: Tea Party activist.

    In the last year, he has organized a local group and a statewide coalition, and even started a “bus czar” Web site to marshal protesters to Washington on short notice. This month, he mobilized 200 other Tea Party activists to the local office of the same congressman to protest what he sees as the government’s takeover of health care.

    Mr. Grimes is one of many Tea Party members jolted into action by economic distress. At rallies, gatherings and training sessions in recent months, activists often tell a similar story in interviews: they had lost their jobs, or perhaps watched their homes plummet in value, and they found common cause in the Tea Party’s fight for lower taxes and smaller government.

    The Great Depression, too, mobilized many middle-class people who had fallen on hard times. Though, as Michael Kazin, the author of “The Populist Persuasion,” notes, they tended to push for more government involvement. The Tea Party vehemently wants less — though a number of its members acknowledge that they are relying on government programs for help.

    Mr. Grimes, who receives Social Security, has filled the back seat of his Mercury Grand Marquis with the literature of the movement, including Glenn Beck’s “Arguing With Idiots” and Frederic Bastiat’s “The Law,” which denounces public benefits as “false philanthropy.”

    “If you quit giving people that stuff, they would figure out how to do it on their own,” Mr. Grimes said.

    The fact that many of them joined the Tea Party after losing their jobs raises questions of whether the movement can survive an improvement in the economy, with people trading protest signs for paychecks.

    But for now, some are even putting their savings into work that they argue is more important than a job — planning candidate forums and get-out-the-vote operations, researching the constitutional limits on Congress and using Facebook to attract recruits.

    “Even if I wanted to stop, I just can’t,” said Diana Reimer, 67, who has become a star of the effort by FreedomWorks, a Tea Party group, to fight the health care overhaul. “I’m on a mission, and time is not on my side.”

    A year ago, Ms. Reimer’s husband had been given a choice — retire or be fired. The couple had been trying to sell their split-level home in suburban Philadelphia to pay off some debt and move to a small place in the city.

    But real estate agents told them the home would sell for about $40,000 less than they paid 19 years ago — not enough to pay off their mortgage.

    Then Ms. Reimer saw a story about the Tea Party on television. “I said, ‘That’s it,’ ” she recalled. “How can you get this frustration out, have your voices heard?”

    She liked that the Tea Party was patriotic, too. “They said the Pledge of Allegiance and sang the national anthem,” she said.[snip]

    A Tea Party member from North Carolina recognized Ms. Reimer from Massachusetts, where she led crews knocking on doors for Scott Brown, now the state’s Republican senator.

    Ms. Reimer often wells up talking about her work. “I’m respected,” she said, her voice breaking. [snip]

    She and others who receive government benefits see no contradiction in fighting against big government, which Tea Party activists describe as a sure path to socialism. They paid into Medicare and Social Security, they argue, so they are getting what they deserve.

    “All I know is government was put here for certain reasons,” Ms. Reimer said. “They were not put here to run banks, insurance companies, and health care and automobile companies. They were put here to keep us safe.”

    She has no patience for the Obama administration’s bailouts and its actions on health care. “I just don’t trust this government,” Ms. Reimer said.

    Jeff McQueen, 50, began organizing Tea Party groups in Michigan and Ohio after losing his job in auto parts sales. “Being unemployed and having some time, I realized I just couldn’t sit on the couch anymore,” he said. “I had the time to get involved.”

    He began producing what he calls the flag of the Second American Revolution, and drove 700 miles to campaign for Mr. Brown under its banner. [snip]

    He and others do not see any contradictions in their arguments for smaller government even as they argue that it should do more to prevent job loss or cuts to Medicare. After a year of angry debate, emotion outweighs fact.

    If you don’t trust the mindset or the value system of the people running the system, you can’t even look at the facts anymore,” Mr. Grimes said.

    The Tea Party movement is a very interesting movement and worthy of respect. The New York Times will try to paint them as stupid hypocrites but if the movement was organized by African-Americans (just to cite a group that the New York Times treats as dehumanized pets immune from criticism – and again we cite the many African-Americans who supported Hillary and were attacked for that strongest of the strong position) the New York Times would have an entirely different slant and narrative and it would be all positive, demonstrating how the government has failed them.

  74. TurnDownObama, we second your comment on letting voices be heard. We don’t want to run anyone off who supports Hillary Clinton and we don’t like “swarm” attacks on dissenting views.

    We wrote a while back that tough times were ahead for Hillary supporters because we were going to have to cheer for devastating defeats for Dimocrats in 2010. You supported Martha Coakley and it must have been difficult to see Democrats and fellow Hillary supporters essentially cheer for the Republican man in that race. The problem will be exponentially greater as the November elections approach. We hope that all voices will remain on board fully able to express themselves as those stormy days approach.

    As to the question of what is “progressive” let us say this has become increasingly a problem too. We view ourselves as progressives and indeed attack PINOs (progressives in name only). We do see it as a progressive value to look at evidence and current facts not at our prejudices in order to form opinions.

    When we defend the Tea Party movement what we are defending is their right to respect and the legitimacy of their views. Too often just because we have been fighting Republicans for so long the immediate reaction is to rely on our prejudices and join in with the Dimocratic conventional wisdom. Big Media also puts out a narrative and instead of questioning that narrative we fall back on old patterns of behavior.

    We think it is “progressive” to treat activists from the Tea Party movement with respect and not call them “teabaggers”. We think it is “progressive” to acknowledge grassroots economic anger and deal with that economic distress and anger rationally instead of dismissing the concerns with a contemptuous wave of the hand.

    We understand that some Hillary supporter websites do not like the Tea Party movement. They point out that the Tea Party movement is a Republican operation – which it is to a certain extent in that the Republicans want to take it over. But we believe that the people involved in the Tea Party are an expression of a genuine concern of ordinary Americans and that the Republicans want to take them over and that the Tea Party will benefit the Republicans electorally, but they are still a genuine expression of concern.

    We don’t think it is smart or “progressive” to attack people who have economic concerns and organize to express those concerns at a political level. Indeed those are the people that Hillary so galvanized in places like West Virginia and Kentucky – the White Working Class.

  75. rgb44hrc:

    my apologies, like I said I was not sure if you supported Mendenze or not.

    As you indicated you like him, so I will assume safely you are not in favor of recalling him.

    Just wanted to make sure people in NJ who are not happy with him and are in favor of recalling him knew about the latest going-ons in NJ with regards to this issue.

  76. admin:

    March 27th, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    I cannot tell you how upset that makes me. This jerk is the most anti-Israel person ever to sit in the WH. And for Hillary to go along with this nonsense makes me very upset with her, since I know she does not feel this way. Principle has to trump over this disgusting policy!

    Bibi’s brother(or perhaps his cousin) was correct when he said very recently “Obama is the most anti-sematic American president, its to be expected when he sits in a anti-sematic church for over 20 years”

    I cannot remember where I saw the interview, it might have been a Israeli newspaper?

  77. Obama’s anti-Israel, pro-Muslim, pro-Arab policies are coming to light.


    President Barack Obama’s relations with the Israeli government have hit a new low, but the tensions on display this week between him and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be reviving another presidential project: Obama’s quest to improve America’s image in the Arab and Muslim world.[snip]

    Now, Obama’s return to the question of Israel’s continuing construction in East Jerusalem has signaled an acceptance of some Arab criticism of Israel. At the same time, Obama’s willingness to cross swords with the Israelis comes at a domestic political cost: The pro-Israel group AIPAC released a letter Friday with the signatures of three-quarters of the members of the House, pressing the administration to retreat from public confrontation.[snip]

    “The administration has used [the Jerusalem conflict] as an opportunity to bring back the settlement issue and to show that they’re willing to talk tough on settlements,” said Stephen Gordon, a Mideast scholar at the Brookings Institution. “I think that has sent the signal that, yes, we are committed to the peace process; yes, we are going to be evenhanded; and, yes, we recognize that this conflict is important to people in the Arab world.”

    Obama’s new focus, and the intense pressure his administration has placed on Netanyahu, have stirred deep concern among Israel’s allies on Capitol Hill, they say, because it represents an acceptance of the Arab narrative that Israeli intransigence lies at the heart of the Middle East conflict. And some observers see it in the context of a subtle, but major, shift in American strategy toward resolving it.

    “I think, inadvertently, Netanyahu enabled the White House to restore a little bit of momentum to the idea that they are going to approach the Middle East problem in a new way,” said David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration trade official.

    The new model drawing attention from Democratic foreign policy hands, he said, is to build support among Arab leaders for a U.S. plan and then present that to Israel — to serve as the Arabs’ lawyer, rather than as Israel’s, in one formulation used to describe the effort in the region.[snip]

    But the confrontation also comes in the context of a long, unprecedented attempt by Obama to reset relations with the Arab and Muslim worlds.[snip]

    Obama explained the logic of his actions in a private meeting with Jewish leaders that July, explaining the need to give Arab leaders “credibility” with their “street,” according to detailed notes taken by a participant in the meeting, “by creating space between us and Israel.

  78. Oh boy. Here’s a guy taking up where certain Congress people left off last Saturday.
    In the faces of Tea Party shouters, images of hate and history
    Colbert I. King, Op-Ed Columnist
    The angry faces at Tea Party rallies are eerily familiar. They resemble faces of protesters lining the street at the University of Alabama in 1956 as Autherine Lucy, the school’s first black student, bravely tried to walk to class. More at:

  79. I voted for Palin in Nov 2008 and will probably vote for her if it’s Obama vs Palin in 2012. I defend the Tea Party partly on principle of fairness.

    I prefer Hillary’s policies, but I’d like to see Palin and the Tea Party as “the new face of the GOP” — to see the GOP controlled by honest people like Palin and the Tea Party.

    Palin stuck to economic issues in Alaska (ie bi-partisan) and got good results. If we can’t have a good Clintonite as POTUS, then an honest GOP might be the next best.

  80. Netanyahu responds:


    Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu convened his senior ministers in Jerusalem on Friday afternoon to discuss the demands made by US President Barack Obama and his overall trip to Washington – a trip that, because of negative atmospherics and amid a paucity of hard information, has been widely characterized as among the most difficult in recent memory.

    Late Friday evening, Israel Radio reported that Netanyahu holds to the view that Israel must not change its policy in Jerusalem, despite the fact that this was the main point of contentions between Israel and the United States. [snip]

    Earlier, officials in the Prime Minister’s Office threw a complete blackout on the Netanyahu-Obama meeting, and also gave very sketchy information about the commitments that the US is demanding of Israel as a precursor to starting the proximity talks with the Palestinians. According to officials, the US wants these commitments by Saturday so it can take them to the Arab League meeting in Libya and receive that organization’s backing for starting proximity talks.

  81. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/richman/267016

    It was only two months ago that George Mitchell had the following colloquy with Charlie Rose about the demand for a settlement freeze in Jerusalem:

    GEORGE MITCHELL: … So what we got was a moratorium, ten months, far less than what was requested, but more significant than any action taken by any previous government of Israel for the 40 years that settlement enterprise has existed. …

    CHARLIE ROSE: And you and Secretary Clinton praised Prime Minister Netanyahu for agreeing to that.

    MITCHELL: Yes.

    ROSE: It does not include East Jerusalem. There’ve been announcement in the last 48 hours of new settlement construction in East Jerusalem where the Palestinians want to make their capital.

    MITCHELL: Yes.

    ROSE: And it’s in the midst of Palestinians.

    MITCHELL: … But for the Israelis, what they’re building in is in part of Israel.

    Now, the others don’t see it that way. So you have these widely divergent perspectives on the subject. Our view is let’s get into negotiations. Let’s deal with the issues and come up with the solution to all of them including Jerusalem which will be exceedingly difficult but, in my judgment, possible.

    The Israelis are not going to stop settlements in, or construction in East Jerusalem. They don’t regard that as a settlement because they think it’s part of Israel.

    ROSE: So you’re going to let them go ahead even though no one recognizes the annexation?

    MITCHELL: You say “Let them go ahead.” It’s what they regard as their country. They don’t say they’re letting us go ahead when we build in Manhattan.

  82. APOLOGIES foir thuis long post!

    I can count on one hand the number of long posts I have submitted over the past 2 years but this is one article I couldn’t resist posting.

    White men shun Democrats

    First published: Saturday, March 27, 2010
    Millions of white men who voted for Barack Obama are walking away from the Democratic Party, and it appears increasingly likely that they’ll take the midterms elections in November with them. Their departure could well lead to a GOP landslide on a scale not seen since 1994.

    For more than three decades before the 2008 election, no Democratic president had won a majority of the electorate. In part, that was because of low support — never more than 38 percent — among white male voters. Things changed with Obama, who not only won a majority of all people voting, but also pulled in 41 percent of white male voters.

    Polling suggests that the shift was not because of Obama but because of the financial meltdown that preceded the election. It was only after the economic collapse that Obama’s white male support climbed above the 38 percent ceiling. It was also at that point that Obama first sustained a clear majority among all registered voters, according to the Gallup tracking poll.

    It looked for a moment as though Democrats had finally reached the men of Bruce Springsteen’s music, bringing them around to the progressive values Springsteen himself has long endorsed. But liberal analysts failed to understand that these new Democrats were still firmly rooted in American moderation.

    Pollsters regularly ask voters whether they would rather see a Democrat or Republican win their district. By February, support for Democrats among white people (male and female) was three percentage points lower than in February 1994, the year of the last Republican landslide.

    Today, among whites, only 35 percent of men and 43 percent of women say they will back Democrats in the fall election. Women’s preferences have remained steady since July 2009. But white men’s support for a Democratic Congress has fallen eight percentage points, according to Gallup.

    White men have moved away from Obama as well. The same proportion of white women approve of him — 46 percent, according to Gallup — as voted for him in 2008. But only 38 percent of white men approve of the President, which means that millions of white men who voted for Obama have now lost faith in him.

    The migration of white men from the Democratic Party was evident in the election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts. His opponent, a white woman, won 52 percent of white women. But white men favored Brown by a 60 percent to 38 percent margin, according to Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates polling.

    It’s no accident that the flight of white males from the Democratic Party has come as the government has assumed a bigger role, including in banking and health care. Among whites, 71 percent of men and 56 percent of women favor a smaller government with fewer services over a larger government with more services, according to ABC/Washington Post polling.

    Obama’s brand of liberalism is exactly the sort likely to drive such voters away. More like LBJ’s than FDR’s, Obama-style liberalism favors benefits over relief, a safety net over direct job programs, health care and environmental reform over financial reform and a stimulus package that has focused more on social service jobs — health care work, teaching and the like — than on the areas where a majority of job losses occurred: construction, manufacturing and related sectors.

    This recession remains disproportionately a “he-cession.” Men account for at least seven of 10 workers who lost jobs, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Nearly half of the casualties are white men, who held 46 percent of all jobs lost.

    In 1994, liberals tried to explain their thinning ranks by casting aspersions on the white men who were fleeing, and the media took up the cry. The term “angry white male” or “angry white men” was mentioned 37 times in English-language news media contained in the Nexis database between 1980 and the 1994 election. In the following year, the phrases appear 2,306 times.
    Tarnishing their opponents as merely “angry” was poor politics for the Democrats. Liberals know what it’s like to have their views — most recently on the war in Iraq or George W. Bush — caricatured as merely irrational anger. Most voters vote their interests. And many white men by the 1980s had decided the Democrats were no longer interested in them.

    Think about the average working man. He has already seen financial bailouts for the rich folks above him. Now he sees a health care bailout for the poor folks below him. Big government represents lots of costs and little gain.

    Meanwhile, like many women, these men are simply trying to push ahead without being pushed under. Some once believed in Obama. Now they feel forgotten.
    Government can only do so much. But recall the Depression. FDR’s focus on the economy was single-minded and relentless. Hard times continued, but men never doubted that FDR was trying to do right by them. Democrats should think about why they aren’t given that same benefit of the doubt today.

    David Paul Kuhn is chief political correspondent for RealClearPolitics and the author of “The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma.” He wrote this for the Los Angeles Times.

  83. tim
    March 27th, 2010 at 3:22 pm


    my apologies, like I said I was not sure if you supported Mendenze or not.

    As you indicated you like him, so I will assume safely you are not in favor of recalling him

    Actually, I was being facetious when I wrote:

    “But what if I like my corrupt congressman?”

    I knew that he was appointed even though he had a checkered past where he was repeatedly under investigation for miraculously finding large sums of money in his pocket, or something to that effect. Of course, almost every pol is going to face accusations, whether baseless or valid. But Menendez is a magnet for that.

    And I don’t approve of anyone who could abide by the Democratic party’s actions in 2008 to select Obama (not elect).

  84. We now have a name for them which I believe is pejorative and descriptive enough to stick: Obama Zombies

    Q-1: if you voted for Obama in the primary, then what are you?

    A-1: someone who voted against your country, your party and yourself without realizing it.

    Q-2: if you voted for Obama in the general election, then what are you?

    A-2: politically naiive, and desperate.

    Q-3: if you still support Obama today after he has betrayed your values, then what are you?

    A-3: an Obama Zombie–see below

    Jason Mattera vs. the Obama Zombies
    By Robert Stacy McCain on 3.23.10 @ 1:33PM

    Today’s ObamaCare signing ceremony at the White House was made possible by the 66 percent of voters under 30 who believed the propaganda of Hope and Change, as Jason Mattera explains in his new book, Obama Zombies: How the Liberal Machine Brainwashed My Generation:

    Young people, in their heart of hearts, actually believed that a scrawny street-agitator-turned-presidential-candidate could save mankind, renew our faith in American politics, and restore our faith in government. It was a message that hoodwinked my generation. A message of false inspiration in bureaucracy — not in individual freedom and initiative — that churned out a generation of Zombies. And it was a message that was a heat-seeking missile aimed at otherwise clear-thinking individuals who come from the most coddled, overprotected, information-drenched generation in American history.

    “Mattera provides a stark, refreshing contrast to Obama’s worship troops of twentysomething moochers,” Michelle Malkin says of Mattera. I first met Mattera in 2006, not long after he graduated from Rogers Williams University and, as I’ve said, the Young America’s Foundation spokesman “seems to have been born with a special talent for driving Obama supporters nuts.”

    His CPAC speech this year prompted New York Times reporter Kate Zernike to accuse Mattera of racism for using a “Chris Rock voice,” evidently ignorant of the fact that she was actually hearing the normal accent of a Puerto Rican/Italian Brooklyn native.

    Expect to see lots more of Mattera — and lots more Obama supporters nuts — as he makes the rounds in coming days to expose the Obama Zombies.

  85. This poll article deserves a full article by us, but it’s Saturday night and we deserve a treat:


    A new CNN / Opinion Research Poll out this afternoon of 953 registered voters nationally finds Obama tied at 47% with any Republican candidate. Gee, if only Wendell Willkie was still around.

    The same poll also finds a clear majority of Americans now believe that Obama is a one-term president.

    Other than that things are looking great for the 14-month-old Democrat administration, which is still celebrating Sunday’s passage of a massive healtcare bill that most Americans don’t seem to like.

    And confronts crucial midterm elections come November when the White House party historically loses an average of 16 House seats.[snip]

    “Go for it!” he said.

    And Republicans appear to be positioning to do just that.[snip]

    Nevermind the Democrat’s opponent, do you think if Obama runs, he wins? 44% Yes. 54% Nope.

    As a sign of how effective Obama has been in reducing the harsh political tone of the nation’s capitol, only 2% have no opinion on that question.

    And here is the kick in the teeth to the Hillary haters at DailyKooks who think Obama gets 2 terms and want Hillary to stay where she is:

    Among Obama’s base of traditional Democrats, surprisingly one-in-five now thinks a different candidate might be a good idea in 2012. A large majority still want him renominated (76%). And, again, only 4% have no opinion. Watch that 20% number; also how long Hillary Clinton stays over at the State Department.

  86. I think that there is a large part of an entire generation of over-scheduled, over-driven, over-stimulated, over-achieving, over-reaching, over-controlled, over- expectent, over-privilaged, over-you-name-it twentysomethings that were just primed to become Bots. They came up brainwashed. What do they call it – stockholm syndrome -when you identify with your captors to the point of blind worship. No matter what is done to them, they defend it.

  87. Admin: we need a picture or a video of the arrogant Pelosi walking through the middle of the tea party group with an oversized gavel. Her purpose was to lord it over them and to provoke an incident. The caption would read “After November Pelosi will be reduced to minority status, and will be playing alot of croquet.

  88. Teabaggers, really, teabaggers? I am an Independent and I lean more Republican right now than Dimocratic, and no they are not right wing fringe. Really, mj, are you taking your medication regularly?

  89. Admin- I hope you are right about Obama being a one termer, but after watching him break every rule, pull endless dirty tricks and tell the most outrageous lies (and the “lame-stream” media just accept the rule breaking and lies and act like all that mattered was the “historic” outcome) to get the HC monstrosity through, I really fear that he will ‘citizenize’ all of the illegals so that they all have voting rights by 2012, regardless of what that takes, and then the rest of the country be damned. He has proven over the past 2 weeks that he is entirly capable of this and the press has proven that they will happily ride along. They will just push through another bill that will have to be passed quickly so that then ‘we can find out what is in it.’ I used to think it was a ridiculous idea that he would even try it, but now I’m not so sure. There was this Latino guy on the radio today saying that Obama owes the illegals and he has yet to make good. Owes them what?

  90. Larkspur,

    Poor people don’t vote. It’s one of the reasons their issues are so badly attended to in this nation. There is never any fall out from passing bills that hurt the poor. They’re totally disaffected and they don’t show up and vote. Ditto with immigrants. I live in LA and there’s all this rhetoric about illegal aliens voting – put it never really happens. The outcomes of elections are never impacted by them. In the case of illegal aliens, corporate America wants them to remain illegal so that they can pay them less, and not worry about OSHA and other violations. The money is on keeping them illegal and that’s where Obama wants to be – with the big money.

    Tone down the hysteria. He isn’t a miracle worker. The insurance industry wanted this bill and were prepared to spend $600 million dollars to defeat any health care proposal that cut into their profits. FYI, then spent $300 million back in 1993 to defeat Clinton’s original plan and considering how much they’ve made since then, they consider it money very well spent. No Democrats were willing to stand up against that tsunami of money. And Republicans, who have no intention of actually repealing it, aren’t going to stand up to it either. Like abortion, they’ll oppose it but never actually do anything about it.

    Obama has been brilliantly marketed and that’s why he won. The people who voted for him are almost identical to the people who voted for Bush. Bush pushed through the Iraq war and Obama pushed through healthcare reform. One serves the military industrial complex and the other, the health insurance industry. Both were initiatives to soak up tax dollars. Nothing more. Nothing less.

    He’s a corrupt guy out to make as much money for himself as he can. That’s all he is. He’s not a tyrant. He’s not a socialist. He doesn’t have big plans for the nation. I have no doubt that he’s seriously considering not running in 2012 because, I guarantee you, that this is a lot more work than he’s ever wanted to do. He’s a lot like Bush though I think Bush actually has more dictatorial inclinations that Obama does. We haven’t seen Obama initiating violations of civil rights in anywhere near the numbers that Bush did though he has certainly carried on with Bush’s programs.

  91. I have been reading this blog since the 2008 campaign and recognize the names and writing styles of most of the commenters. I am not sure what is the purpose of several comments here made by a poster that appear to not make sense to me.
    When you have a minute and care to do so, please visit Hillbuzz.com look at their posts related to “How to dissect a ‘concern troll’ and an eeyore”

  92. Amazonia,

    There are a few new names lately but they aren’t causing problems. Everyone else seems familiar and/or sincere, even though there are some healthy disagreements. It’s good to air these issues and make distinctions and make sure all opinions feel welcome.

    Thanks for your concern. 😉

  93. Basement Angel is correct. The Obama people ran a very effective campaign. But their techniques of mass hypnosis and hysteria are not without precedent. The following video compares Obama’s techniques to those of a prior dictator and in each case they worked–human nature being what it is. Furthermore, in each case, the media who was supposed to protect the country failed in its essential mission and became the devil’s advocate. I am not saying Obama is Hitler. I am merely suggesting that their marketing campaigns bear a striking resemblance to each other and the common goal of both men was/is to rule their own country and ultimately the entire world. Towit:



    Because in an ideal world a man would rather be *killed* or *die* than tolerate being called a would-be Communist apparatchik.

    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Saturday, March 27th at 5:58PM EDT

    [UPDATE] I’m fronting this because I just read the letter – also, did you know that the courts have just ruled that “the government has no anti-corruption interest in limiting contributions to an independent expenditure group”? Translation: a group that wants to simply let people know , say, that Henry Waxman and Bart Stupak aspire to the level of East German rubberstamp apparatchiks can now spend as much money as they like to do so.

    Hint, hint.

    It seems that Volkskammer Energy Chair Henry Waxman will be investigating various capitalist entities for right-deviationism, sabotage, creeping defeatism, and of course general counter-revolutionary behavior*:

    Perhaps that explains why the Administration is now so touchy. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke took to the White House blog to write that while ObamaCare is great for business, “In the last few days, though, we have seen a couple of companies imply that reform will raise costs for them.” In a Thursday interview on CNBC, Mr. Locke said “for them to come out, I think is premature and irresponsible.”

    Meanwhile, Henry Waxman and House Democrats announced yesterday that they will haul these companies in for an April 21 hearing because their judgment “appears to conflict with independent analyses, which show that the new law will expand coverage and bring down costs.”

    In other words, shoot the messenger. Black-letter financial accounting rules require that corporations immediately restate their earnings to reflect the present value of their long-term health liabilities, including a higher tax burden. Should these companies have played chicken with the Securities and Exchange Commission to avoid this politically inconvenient reality? Democrats don’t like what their bill is doing in the real world, so they now want to intimidate CEOs into keeping quiet.

    No doubt the crypto-fascist wreckers on the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board (and the capitalist running dogs of The National Review) will be the next brought in to answer to Parliamentarian Waxman, and his fellow-agents of the righteous anger of the People.

    Moe Lane

    PS: Hey, the Democrats can stop acting like this any time that they like. Then I can stop, too.

    *Otherwise known as ‘large companies required to announce large, immediate losses via increased taxation as a direct result of the new health care legislation.’ Why, the nerve of those… those… those capitalist stooges, and their primitive devotion to bourgeois truth and the technical letter of the law!

  95. I finally figured out why Frank Rich is so filled with left wing venom. He willed his brain to science and science refused to accept it. Worse, science told him they had little use for the last remains of Neanderthals and suggested that he donate his brain to the Fishkill Garbage Skow, where it really belongs. And the same goes for the corpus not so delicti of typhoid Modo, when she slips the mortal coil. God pity the seagulls.

  96. It would appear that Rupert Murdock–owner of FOX News, and Wall Street Journal does not much like young Sulzberger. If memory serves the Sulzberger family married into the Occhs family who were the original owners of NYT. This young punk is the owner of that corrupt newspaper now, by virtue of heredity as opposed to merit. He is also the reputed paramour of Caroline Kennedy if that rumor is true. The only thing I know for sure is Rupert thinks he is a wimp, and looking at what he has done or allowed to happen to that once fine newspaper it is hard to disagree. Naturally, Vanity Fair has the inside scoop. But as with everything else Vanity Fair prints, it is hard to know how much of it is true.


  97. Now that I think about it I may be wrong. If NYT is now a public entity then I seem to recall that the family retained preferred stock which gave them editorial control. Seems like the Chandler/Otis family at the Los Angeles Times and Katherine Graham at WashPo did the same thing. The Los Angeles Times was sold and the new owner I think is Zinn. He was the one who refused to produce sat on the tape of a private dinner where Obama spoke and allegedly praised an Arab terrorist. The McCain campaign tried desperately to obtain a copy of it but Zinn refused. I think Zinn also owns the Chicago Tribune and the largest Hispanic Newspaper. Hw used them to endorse Obama. I have no sympathy for him.

  98. In case that link does not work here is the text of that Vanity Fair Article:
    Murdoch to Sulzberger: You Are a Girly Man
    by Michael Wolff March 27, 2010, 10:50 AM

    It’s not just that Rupert Murdoch doesn’t like Arthur Sulzberger, or doesn’t think he’s a serious newspaper publisher. It’s that he thinks he’s weak—girly. Sulzberger—“young Arthur”—was a frequent subject during the many hours I talked to Murdoch when I was writing his biography. Sulzberger was always, for Murdoch, a punch line. Murdoch even mimicked him in a way to suggest … well … a certain lack of manhood.

    It is a joke that is shared by Murdoch and Robert Thomson, the former Australian-rules football player who is now the editor of Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal: Arthur is a sort of poofter.

    Well, on the front page of the Journal’s Weekend section this morning is a feature on how women from healthier populations prefer feminine-looking men. The piece is illustrated with a grid showing facial features of such feminine-looking men..

    There is, in the bottom image of the lower quadrant of a male face, an unmistakable—if you pay attention to such things—dimple and odd right ear.

    Without a doubt, the Wall Street Journal has selected Arthur Sulzberger as a prime example of its idea of a feminine-looking man.

    Pure coincidence?

    Murdoch often uses the editorial power of his papers to pursue his business goals. Foremost on his agenda is to maul The New York Times. Murdoch believes that one advantage he has in going after the Times is that Sulzberger is so easy to play and rile up—Murdoch once, with me, used puppet strings to refer to Sulzberger—and that Murdoch has a special understanding for how to get under Sulzberger’s skin. In the past, Murdoch has taken particular delight when the New York Post’s “Page Six” has ridiculed Sulzberger—with Sulzberger calling Murdoch personally to protest. “Whinging” is the word Murdoch uses for Sulzberger’s calls.

    So just imagine what Young Arthur felt this morning when he saw the lower quadrant of his face in the Journal representing the archetypal girly-man.

    This is a psychological warfare side of what’s going to be a very nasty newspaper war.

  99. Today’s Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll is minus 16; seems O’s hc bounce is sliding away rather quickly. Also,
    “While many if [sic]official Washington consider the Tea Party movement to be a fringe element of society, voters across the nation feel closer to the Tea Party than to Congress. Voters also tend to see the Tea Party Members as better informed and more ethical than Congress.”
    This info available today at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

  100. “It strikes me as unfair, and even in bad taste, to select a few individuals for boundless admiration, attributing superhuman powers of mind and character to them. This has been my fate, and the contrast between the popular assessment of my powers and achievements and the reality is simply grotesque.” Albert Einstein

    He was really a smart, but humble man.

  101. The media is at it again, no surprise, as Congress recesses, he is making his appointments, just like Bush, rather than getting them approved. They title it a Bold move. Yes, sure, that is what they all do when they cannot gain bypartisen support, and approval. So what is so Bold about that, or even how does that show a strong leader.

    He cannot achieve anything unless it is by TRICK or FRAUD. Brave people walk into the lions den, look the lions in the eyes and gain their support.

    We have the same old Cores of Dims and Reps bullying this country like they have for years, and rolling over, even when the voters tell them not too.

    No wonder the tea party is gaining support.

  102. I get a kick out of the interviews today. They will like the HCR when they get to know it. So why was it not sold to people before the vote on these virtues, if it was so great?

  103. NMF,

    I am still unnerved and furious that the dims passed a bill they admitted they hadn’t read and then seemed so proud of that fact.

    It is unbelievable to me that even the delusional LSM, which prides itself on its intellectual elitism, didn’t question the lack of info and actually praised the bill.

    When a country has gotten to the point that the speaker can say “You’ll know what’s in the bill when we pass it,” we really have entered a horror film masquerading as a fairy tale world.

    It is terrifying.

  104. If you know anyone who still watches CNN, then by God show them this. It is uncontrovertable proof that CNN lies blatantly and denies its audience important feedback from reality. We saw this in the primary, and it was never our imagination. Under William Randolf Hearst (Citizen Kane) we had yellow journalism. But never anything like this. This kind of reporting in service of the state–in this case the corporate state hearkens back to Goebbels and the nameless writers for Pravda and Isvestia. If this were an isolated example we could let it pass. But it is not. No one in their right mind watches CNN.

  105. The posting by Fifth Dimension a couple nights ago proves what a poor negotiator Bambi is. The best way to rate a negotiator is by what he leaves on the table and could have gotten with greater energy, persistence and skill. That comment stressed the fact that the opposing party OFFERED Kennedy and then Hillary a PUBLIC OPTION in exchange for a deal on universal health care. Both REFUSED because they wanted SINGLE PAYER. In other words, when Bambi was asked why there was no public option and he responded that he could not get it through Congress, that was a lie. He could have had it and he left it on the table, and for what? For a headline. For a headline, Barack Hussein Obama got no single payer, no public option and still his supporters on the left (with a few exceptions like Jane Hampsher) call this a great Civil Rights victory and celebrate it all through the night until the cock crows. Such is the state of their delusion. This health care bill is Rezko Redux and nothing more.

  106. admin, can you weigh in on this? It perplexes me as much as it did Althouse ..

    Although they’ve made proof of insurance or payment of a penalty something you put on your income tax return, the usual enforcement mechanisms the IRS employs to collect taxes are not going to be available. So, no liens, no civil or criminal sanctions.

    Sheer, shocking incompetence by Congress? Could be. Or it could be the key to the plan to ruin insurance companies by forcing them to take any new customers who are currently inclined to pay, i.e., customers who now have conditions requiring treatment. [AND: Once the insurance companies are ruined, there will be nothing left but the long dreamed-of, single-payer government program.]

    What I don’t understand, then, is why insurance companies didn’t campaign against the reform. They must have understood what was in the offing. (Right?) There must be some explanation for how this thing is supposed to work, otherwise, we’d have been swamped in “Harry and Louise” ads, like last time. Or is there sheer incompetence in private business too? … in which case, what does it matter if the government takes over everything?

    All I can think is that the penalties were there, the insurance companies were lulled, and then the enforcement was yanked out at the last minute, blindsiding them. And yet, even with enforcement of the penalties, the insurance companies faced the obvious risk that people would opt for the penalty — which was comparatively cheap — instead of buying insurance, until they needed treatments that were more expensive than the insurance policy (minus the penalty). The silence of the insurance companies was already a mystery.

  107. In politics, you know the tide has turned when the late night comics begin to diss the Administration. It would appear that is now happening now. Put differently, many a truth is said in jest. Or maybe it is simply a case of not everyone agreeing with Ly’n Jim Clyburn who steers public projects toward his po relatives that this is a “great civil rights victory”.
    The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree . . . and think 25 to life would be appropriate. -Jay Leno

    America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask. -Jay Leno

    Q: Have you heard about McDonald’s’ new Obama Value Meal?
    A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it. -Conan O’Brien

    Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
    A: A fund raiser. -Jay Leno

    Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?
    A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. -David Letterman

    Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
    A: America ! -Jimmy Fallon

    Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
    A: Bo has papers. -Jimmy Kimmel

    Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for Clunkers” program?
    A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road. -David Letterman

  108. The tide has turned. Not everyone agrees this is a great civil rights victory.

    The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree . . . and think 25 to life would be appropriate. -Jay Leno

    America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask. -Jay Leno

    Q: Have you heard about McDonald’s’ new Obama Value Meal?
    A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it. -Conan O’Brien

    Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
    A: A fund raiser. -Jay Leno

    Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?
    A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. -David Letterman

    Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
    A: America ! -Jimmy Fallon

    Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
    A: Bo has papers. -Jimmy Kimmel

    Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for Clunkers” program?
    A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road. -David Letterman

  109. The LSM propaganda is so blatant, now.

    They are doubling down with renewed vigor after watching POTUS shred the constitution and shove the HIR bill through.

    They are shameless. I made the mistake of turning on the tube to see the weather channel and somehow clicked on CNN only to see the fothermucker leaping across a stage crammed with American sodiers in Afhanistan. What’s worse, they were cheering him on.

    LSM is corrupt. They know they can get away with anything, now. It truly is a 1984 world. I am sickened, disgusted, repulsed and furious all at the same time.

    It just never seems to end.

  110. I wrote this to express my feelings about the current state of affairs in America today, and I wanted to share this with you.

    Liberty, Independence , and Freedom For All are the major principles of our Country. But with each passing year, we are losing these rights. Democrats blame Republicans and Republicans blame Democrats. The blame game does not justify their actions nor provide solutions. The government has been restricting our social liberties and our economic freedoms. The middle class is getting squeezed more and more. The government is not working for the majority of the people. The government is spending our money and increasing the debt of every man, woman, and child in this country. They will raise taxes to pay for this. Do you want your taxes raised? Would you keep and pay a financial advisor that is spending your money recklessly without your consent? Until last year, we never dreamed we would get to a point of trillion dollar deficits for one year, let alone multiple years. Also, we are sadly losing our communities. Mom and Pop shops have closed in lieu of large corporations and families require 2 incomes to make ends meet. The federal government is getting too big and controlling us more with each new bill that is passed.

    Our democracy will only survive if we each work harder to secure our freedom. We need to salvage our liberties for our children, if not for ourselves. Everyone needs to vote. We must vote in an informed fashion, based on facts, not the rhetoric of a biased, propaganda-based media. We all must be independent thinkers. We need common sense solutions. We need to live as a community. We have a great country. We need to make sure that the government starts to work for the majority. Free-thinking politicians don’t have a chance to win if the extremists (on either end) are the only ones voting and the only ones funding politicians and the only ones controlling the media and the only ones screaming for action. We have to start speaking up and voting for checks and balances. This country was founded on freedom, which means free thought, free speech, and being free to make our own decisions. The more they tax us, the less freedom we have.

    We are at a critical intersection. We could lose our entire democracy if we don’t stop fighting over silly issues. Just think a few words: America , Country, Independent, Freedom, Liberty , Patriotism, and Inclusivity. We are close to losing it all. We need to find politicians who truly represent us, but that has been a hard task lately, especially with the lack of interest by neighbors, co-workers, family, and friends.

    Politics and Economics are controlling everything in people’s lives today, and it could actually get dramatically worse soon. Do you want a national sales tax and 200 additional taxes to pay for the exorbitant spending by the government? Do you want the end of liberty because politicians and the media are attempting to keep us afraid and in the dark? Do we want people coming across the border to take our jobs, sub-standard products made in China , American jobs outsourced to other countries, destruction of our manufacturing base, loss of privacy while talking on the phone or internet, continual wars that cost trillions, or full body scans at airports emitting radiation? The government always has excuses for their bills and the biggest bills have always been the worst for our country, with the exception of Social Security and Medicare – 2 bills that actually help average citizens, not the elite and not the fringes, but the majority.

    All of us right now are thinking the obvious – the government is stripping our freedoms everyday now with the claim that they are protecting us. They decide what Americans should sacrifice for their country. We are close to bankruptcy and becoming a 3rd world country. We have one chance, and this is our only chance. Let’s all become like Paul Revere and warn our compatriots while we still have the freedom to speak freely and openly. This is not about liberal or conservative beliefs. This is about defending our Great Nation that is composed of so many different types of people. We need to protect our rights equally for all (with the exception of criminals). We need to demand sensible inclusive policies that cherish Liberty and Freedom for All.

    There are a lot of people out there who are currently complaining about politics and economics. Very few people are singing and dancing about the current state of affairs. We need to start helping each other nourish the small-town communities that this country was founded upon. The majority of the people in this country do not want a King, a dictator, or an elitist who will work for extreme groups and lobbyists.

    We all need to start working to defend our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. Those in power are trying to destroy these principles, be it through ultra-conservative or ultra-liberal claims. We need brave, reasonable, bipartisan, independent, majority-driven, passionate, strong men and women in government to stand up for our rights.

    This endeavor is for the benefit of our parents, our children, and ourselves. We must win. We need to fight for government to serve us. We are fighting for the strength of this country. You have your chance right now to make this happen.

    We must protect the middle class. We must be inclusive. This will require open discussions of policies, voter participation, and political involvement. If everyone votes, we will have more independent thinkers in power. We deserve a government that spends our money wisely and honors the principles that the majority in this country holds dear.

    We all love independence and freedom and peace and fiscal prudence. We must fight for our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, children, and grandparents. WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR OUR DEMOCRACY. THIS IS OUR COUNTRY AND OUR FUTURE IS AT STAKE!

  111. Admin, please delete my previous comment that is in moderation. I responded to a previous comment that I believed directed at me. The way I responded was inappropriate. I believe criticism should be directed to the person being criticized, and not done in a cowardly way in which people are left to wonder to whom the writer’s comments were directed.

  112. Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for Clunkers” program?
    A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road. -David Letterman



    And a lot of them left on Priuses.

  113. Althouse was quoted:
    Although they’ve made proof of insurance or payment of a penalty something you put on your income tax return, the usual enforcement mechanisms the IRS employs to collect taxes are not going to be available. So, no liens, no civil or criminal sanctions.
    Sheer, shocking incompetence by Congress? Could be. Or it could be the key to the plan to ruin insurance companies by forcing them to take any new customers who are currently inclined to pay, i.e., customers who now have conditions requiring treatment. [AND: Once the insurance companies are ruined, there will be nothing left but the long dreamed-of, single-payer government program.]
    What I don’t understand, then, is why insurance companies didn’t campaign against the reform. They must have understood what was in the offing. (Right?) There must be some explanation for how this thing is supposed to work, otherwise, we’d have been swamped in “Harry and Louise” ads, like last time.


    At least he admits what he’s saying doesn’t make sense. 😉

    How about, the insurance companies wanted the bill for all the obvious reasons, and this IRS enforcement thing is a minor error that will be corrected if necessary (if not a misquote to begin with).

  114. turndown, I don’t understand your comment. The confusion here is that the insurance companies are not getting the captive audience they hoped for with the mandate (if people pay fine or if the IRS is incapable of enforcing it) but they will get the people with pre-conditions. So what is their incentive to go along with it and why are they not crying foul? It is not obvious.

  115. PM317, the commenter “hussein ham” has the answer at the Althouse site.

    Big Insurance was not about to quibble about enforcement when what they wanted was to keep out the public option and to get millions of customers. As to enforcement, the IRS and the bureaucracies created will take care of that (campaign donations will make sure the regulators are friendly to Big Insurance). The penalties are a side issue that will arise with a vengeance.

    Also in any “insurance” scam or business proposition what is sought is compliance not 100% compliance. If 98% of the Americans required to buy junk insurance buy that junk insurance, that is good enough. Auto insurance companies are well aware that some drivers do not comply with purchase of auto insurance and the companies do not sweat it out. With the health scam, what mattered for Big Insurance was forcing millions to buy their junk and having the IRS as enforcer.

    BTW, Althouse is wrong on when the enforcement provisions were “yanked”. It was not at the last minute.

  116. Rubio Devoured Christ

    If you have not seen the Rubio v. Crist debate on Fox News, you should check it out. A transcript is is here.

    Right from the start, Charlie Crist tried to put Marco Rubio on the defensive by hitting Rubio with the charge of a $600,000.00 “slush fund”, with which Crist accused Rubio of using for personal gain and family employ. Rubio denied it, but Crist kept using it repeatedly.

    Rubio, however, turned it on Crist.

    We are almost 15 minutes into this debate and we have yet to hear a single serious public policy proposal from my opponent. All he wants to talk about is tearing me down, personal attacks, et cetera.

    He talks about making sense. How does spending $787 billion of money we don’t have, money we’re borrowing from Chinese and Japanese investors, money that my children and their generation are going to have to work their whole life to pay the interest and the principal on — how does that in any way make sense for Florida or for our country?

    In fact, Crist working with ACORN, supporting the stimulus, appointing liberal judges to the Florida bench, etc. came up throughout the debate. Chris Wallace got Crist to admit his support of the stimulus and defend the position.

    Only three Republicans in the U.S. Senate voted for the Obama stimulus when it passed in 2009, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Arlen Specter. Are you saying that if you had been a senator, Republican senator, in the U.S. Senate in 2009 you would have voted for the stimulus?
    CRIST: Yeah, that’s pretty clear. I mean, you know, I think it was the right thing to do at the time. You have to go back and remember what was happening in our economy. It was literally falling off the cliff.

    I mean, some of these, you know, ideas to try to prop up our economy, frankly, began under the Bush administration, President Bush. It was the TARP. They wanted to make sure our financial institutions did not collapse, that people didn’t have to have fear and a run on the banks or something of that nature.

    And when it came to the stimulus, it was money to help our economy. Things have started to stabilize now and they’re getting better in Florida.

    Rubio countered that unemployment in Florida went up after the stimulus was passed and it is still at 10%.

    Rubio, of hispanic descent, even got to the right of Charlie Crist on immigration. Wallace pointed out that Crist wants illegal immigrants counted for the census and supported the McCain amnesty immigration plan. Rubio said

    the Republican Party, I think unfortunately, has been cast as the anti-illegal immigration party. It is not the anti-illegal immigration party. It is the pro-legal immigration party. And having a legal immigration system that works begins, as the governor says, with border security.

    By the way, it’s not enough. About a third of the folks in this country illegally enter legally and they overstay visas. And so we’ve got to deal with that issue as well.

    We’ve got to deal with the employment aspect of it, because the vast majority of people who enter this country illegally do so in search of jobs, and jobs are being provided to them. So we need some level of verification system so that employers are required to verify the employment status of their folks.

    As far as amnesty, that’s where the governor and I disagree. He would have voted for the McCain plan. I think that plan is wrong, and the reason why I think it’s wrong is that if you grant amnesty, as the governor proposes that we do, in any form, whether it’s back of the line or so forth, you will destroy any chance we will ever have of having a legal immigration system that works here in America.

    Throughout the debate, Rubio talked policy and hit Crist on his record. Crist kept trying to hit Rubio on the “slush fund,” but the hits were weak. Substantive differences came out. The race is no longer about personality. This is a race on real issues.

    Rubio is right on immigration, spending, balanced budgets, taxes, health care, and opposing Obama. Crist is wrong on all those things.

  117. I felt a little sorry for John Lewis but to lie about being called the N word to silence opposition to Obamacare is so disgusting. Black people have to stand up and say enough of this race baiting! I’ve lost all respect for this man who was a genuine civil rights icon. If something racist really does happen no one is going to believe it or even worse, no one is going to care!

  118. AdAmong Obama’s base of traditional Democrats, surprisingly one-in-five now thinks a different candidate might be a good idea in 2012. A large majority still want him renominated (76%). And, again, only 4% have no opinion. Watch that 20% number; also how long Hillary Clinton stays over at the State Department.

    I am stunned that the number is not higher and that 76% of dimocrats want him renominated. Half (or more) of dims were for Hillary during the primary. How can these Hillary supporters still support the Obamination.

    I have my Hillary 2012 bumber sticker on my car. I hope to give all dims something to think about and let them know the Nobama coalition is still active.

  119. warehouse553
    I felt a little sorry for John Lewis but to lie about being called the N word to silence opposition to Obamacare is so disgusting.


    I’m in a debate about this elsewhere and I’d like some evidence that they were lying. Someone is arguing that outdoor sound recording is difficult so we shouldn’t expect to hear it on any of the videos!

    So — how DO we prove a negative?

    I’m going to tell them that ghosts and UFOs don’t show up on camera either, but I’d like better ammunition if anyone has any.

    I’ve shown them the video of the ‘spitting’ incident.

  120. I am stunned that the number is not higher and that 76% of dimocrats want him renominated. Half (or more) of dims were for Hillary during the primary. How can these Hillary supporters still support the Obamination.
    I suspect that a 10-15% of those who supported Hillary have left the party over the way they were disenfranchised. Now they would identify themselves as an independent when asked by a pollster. The combined number is probably in the 35% range which very high for the first year in a presidency by historical standards, especially given the way the party has crushed dissent and the media has continued to worship him and cover for his mistakes. Normally those pressures would extract total conformity within an organization.

  121. Wishng all my fellow Jewish posters a happy Passover. We face , in Obama, a threat as dangerous as the ancient Hebrews faced from the Pharoh. Obama seeks the destruction of our beloved Israel and the rise of Muslim / Islamic rule. The fact Hillary has gone from the NY Senator, champion of Israeli rights, to his “henchwoman” on Israel, is truly disheartening. I have no doubt that she still supports Israel, but I am extremely surpriised at the words and actions she has dsplayed the past several weeks. I know Obama is directing her actions, but she could have taken a less abrasve approach .

  122. wbboei
    March 28th, 2010 at 2:25 pm


    wbboei —

    Where did you get these jokes — is there a link to document?? Pleeeezzz.

    Many thanks.

  123. Thanks, Admin. I guess I was too literal in accepting the premise. And of course Althouse is superficial as she is most of the times — to think the insurance companies went lull and got blindsided..heh?!

    And if anyone cares, here is the commenter admin was referring to and follow his other comments too. he makes a lot of sense.

    New “Hussein” Ham said…

    If you are a student of strategy, it makes perfect sense why Senate Democrats put restrictions on IRS enforcement of Obama’s health care tax increase

    First, most Americans pay their taxes honestly and will pay even if there was no enforcement.

    Secondly … HCR was about individual mandates, but equally was about cutting Medicare by $500 billion. You don’t read much about that, because the press thinks if they say nothing, seniors won’t know that Democrats are decimating the hard-won benefits they paid a lifetime of payments to get.

    Thirdly … there was nothing to gain by having strict IRS enforcement in the bill at this time. And there was a lot to lose by having it in there. Now that the bill is passed, the downside to enacting enforcement language has been removed (the downside was that the bill might not pass, but now that it has passed).

    The elite aren’t stupid, Ann. They know precisely what they are doing. They have a strategy. Just because you lack the strategic thinking skills necessary to discern what that strategy is doesn’t mean they didn’t go into this with a very well-thought out plan.

    They went to Harvard, you know. They anticipated this would not be popular. Tax hikes never are. They polled this. They know what is happening in the country. To suspect that this was not a deliberate means to an end is to fail to give your opponents credit for their intelligence and to underestimate them … always a fatal mistake.

    Finally, there is nothing in our jurisprudence to suggest that the House and Senate won’t amend this bill at some future date when the heat is off.

    As a law professor, you should be very familiar with snakes.

    And these are snakes, Ann.
    3/28/10 11:08 AM

  124. Sen. Graham: Obamacare Doomed Immigration Bill
    Friday, 26 Mar 2010 04:28 PM Article Font Size
    By: David A. Patten

    South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham says Democrats’ aggressive push for healthcare reform has “poisoned the well” for immigration reform, leaving it effectively “dead” in the Senate.

    “When I say immigration’s dead in the Senate, risk-aversion abounds,” Graham told the media during a Capitol Hill news conference, “Some of my colleagues will lose over healthcare. The consequences of this vote are going to be long-lasting politically.”

    Graham’s view that immigration reform had been torpedoed by healthcare reform should come as no surprise to leading Democrats.

    Lindsey has crossed party lines to work with Democrats several times, most recently to hammer out a bipartisan deal with Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., on creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Some 12 million illegal aliens are believed to reside illegally in the United States.

    According to Politico.com, Graham said that when he met with Schumer and the president to negotiate terms on immigration earlier this month, he expressed “In no uncertain terms, my belief that immigration reform could come to a halt for the year if health care reconciliation goes forward.”

    Pushing healthcare reform through via reconciliation is precisely what the White House opted to do, however. And now Graham tells TheHill.com that a deal on immigration reform is virtually impossible, given the backlash over the partisan healthcare reform debate.

    “If you think you’ve created a problem for yourself on healthcare, why would you move onto immigration?” Graham asked, indicating that centrist Democrats would shy away from working with Republicans on the controversial legislation.

    Perhaps anticipating that Obama will pressure Congress for an immigration bill, Graham said: “To the president: If you want to deliver on your unwavering commitment to immigration reform, write a bill. You write the bill, send it to the House. See what happens, because I don’t think you have much of a chance of getting it through the Senate.”

  125. It makes me sick to think how gullible the people are who listen to his lies about how he is fighting insurance companies. Obama is a fucking liar and a crook.

  126. Ani–I received them in an email entitled Political Satire, which was forwarded to me today by a friend. Unfortunately, there was no link attached. Nor could I find one for you on Google. Sorry.

  127. Wishng all my fellow Jewish posters a happy Passover. We face , in Obama, a threat as dangerous as the ancient Hebrews faced from the Pharoh. Obama seeks the destruction of our beloved Israel and the rise of Muslim / Islamic rule. The fact Hillary has gone from the NY Senator, champion of Israeli rights, to his “henchwoman” on Israel, is truly disheartening. I have no doubt that she still supports Israel, but I am extremely surpriised at the words and actions she has dsplayed the past several weeks. I know Obama is directing her actions, but she could have taken a less abrasve approach .
    Happy Passover jbstaonesfan. I see where Bibi today is assuring everyone that this is a disagreement among friends. My readis that he has been told not to let the sour relationship between him and Obama become an issue, as the press is trying to do. Instead, now is the time to let other people go to work on this. I am sure Hillary is still a friend to Israel.

    If it were my decision, I would let Perez go to work on this. I would appeal to friends on the Council of Foreign Relations, possibly Kissinger I am not sure. As you know, AIRPAC sent a letter with 75% signatures to the President. Members of Congress can apply additional pressure on the Administration.

    Obama has misplayed his hand terribly. He began by demanding preconditions to negotiation from Israel–abandonment of settlements, and no similar ones from the Palestinian Authority–like recognition. It is bad faith for a party to demand pre-conditions to negotiation from only one party. In labor law it is an unfair labor practice.

    But after taking that position, he backed away from it. There was a mixed message on that issue between what Hillary said and what he said which further compounded the problem. Then he reinstated the tough position and personally insulted Bibi. I read a good analysis of all this somewhere but there is no question Obama bungled it. That is why we are where we are.

  128. The concomitant problem, of course, is Bambi’s failure to secure support for international sanctions against Iran. There must be linkage between the Palestinian negotiations and the elimination of the threat to Israel from Iran. When I was at the Naval Academy, I took a course in Foreign Relations from a senior State Department official named Mangano who was an expert on the Middle East. He knew Ben Gurion, Moshe Dyan, Abba Eban (forgive my spelling) personally. And he knew the Arabs, including Nassar. He always used to say that in assessing a threat to security you must evaluate both the intentions and the capabilities of your adversary. But as between the two, capabilities are more important, because intentions can always change for better or for worse. In this case, if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon then it has the capability to destroy Israel and that is the problem that Obama fails to understand, much less appreciate.

  129. I agree with what you wrote Lisa100. I agree that more people need to vote and have their voices hears, but I pray that they are informed voters, not the totally clueless. I saw way too many clips this past election cycle that showed people voting for Obama for the most ridiculous reasons, while other clips showed people unkowingly admitting that they lacked even the most basic grasp of the issues. These people were voting as if taking part in a popularity contest, not as informed citizens which would obviously strengthen the democratic process.

  130. The elite aren’t stupid, Ann. They know precisely what they are doing. They have a strategy. Just because you lack the strategic thinking skills necessary to discern what that strategy is doesn’t mean they didn’t go into this with a very well-thought out plan.

    They went to Harvard, you know. They anticipated this would not be popular. Tax hikes never are. They polled this. They know what is happening in the country. To suspect that this was not a deliberate means to an end is to fail to give your opponents credit for their intelligence and to underestimate them … always a fatal mistake.
    They may not be stupid, they may have gone to Harvard, they may recognize this bill will not be popular. And, they may intend to wait until after the initial furor subsides before they put teeth into the IRS enforcement mechanism.

    In my view, that is too clever by the halves. This bill is not merely unpopular. It is fascism. It cuts a half trillion cut in medicare and will harm seniors. It forces citizens who do not want insurance to buy it and that will harm young people. It is causing major corporations to cut jobs, and to increase employee co-pay.

    The failure to flesh out the remedy for non-compliance is as nothing compared to all that. As long as the IRS is named as the enforcement agency the public will logically assume the worst, right down to stocks, and the iron maiden. They don’t teach you that part at Harvard I guess.

  131. turndownobama
    March 28th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
    Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for Clunkers” program?
    A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road. -David Letterman



    And a lot of them left on Priuses.
    I have two Priuses, and they have NEVER seen a Fraud sticker!So far I haven’t gone off a cliff either, but that’s another story.

    Also, that video of the so called spitting incident…the man had his hands cupped like a megaphone and did not spit on him, clearly, and was let go by the secret service, so obviously he was innocent.

    Nancy and her hit squad purposely went thru the crowd to try to intimidate and antagonize them. I don’t see how anyone can believe these fools about anything.

    In the end, we need term limits. It is the only thing that will put a dent into the influence money.

  132. MARCH 28, 2010

    POLITICAL WIRE: Where’s Obama’s Bump in the Polls?
    Last year, former President Clinton told Political Wire that “the minute health care reform passed, President Obama’s approval ratings would go up 10 points.”

    However, the Gallup daily tracking poll still shows Obama’s approval rate at 48%, essentially unchanged.

    Oops. Listening to Bill may have been a mistake . . . .

    UPDATE: Double-oops. That’s yesterday’s poll. Today he’s dropped two more points.

  133. Bambi’s original choice for Health Care Rationing Czar was Jack Kevorkian, but like so many of Bambi’s appointees, Cyanide Jack decided he did not want to become a distraction to the administration. Therefore, Jack withdrew his name from consideration. This is a perfect example of how difficult it is to attract idealistic and committed people to public service, especially when they are on probation. Still, we must endeavor to persevere–whatever the hell that means.

  134. On The Road Again.Meantime BO is fleeing the press and undoing all the good work that Hillary is doing with heads of state to promote peaceful relations solutions.He does not get it.They do not want him.They want Hillary but he wants the credit.


    Monday March 29th Schedule: Canada
    March 28, 2010Leave a comment
    tags: Canada, Daily Schedule, Diplomacy, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, Secretary of State Travelby stacyx
    .This is subject to change and if so, I’ll update it. Secretary Clinton departs for a two-day trip to Canada for the G8 Foreign Ministers Meeting and the Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Arctic Coastal States:

    AM Secretary Clinton departs for Foreign Travel in Ottawa, Canada.

    12:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with the Foreign Ministers of Arctic Coastal States, in Ottawa, Canada.

    2:45 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with the Staff and Families of Embassy Ottawa, in Ottawa, Canada.

    6:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends a Quint Meeting, in Ottawa, Canada.

    7:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada, in Ottawa, Canada.

    PM Secretary Clinton meets with the Foreign Ministers of the G8, in Ottawa, Canada.

  135. Israel survived the Carter era and will survive Barak Obama. Rest assured, Israel will be there when O is gone from the WH. What Israel will not do is be played by the whims of an accidental fraud POTUS.

    For those not familiar wiht the history, Jerusalem has never been the “capitol” of any Arab / muslim nation. It is not even prominently mentioned if my memory serves correct.

    When people start a war and lose…as the palestinians did after the UN partition….they suffer consequences. No one is suggesting turning Europe back to its pre WW1 boundaries nor is the US turning back it’s land to the Indians. Many Israeli’s died in hand to hand combat in the fight for the OLd City in Jerusalem. One thing that all Israelis are united in is that Jerusalem is part of Israel and is not up for grabs.

    Many Israeli arabs live in peace within Israel’s borders. Any real peace agreement should allow Jews to live in peace in what becomes “Palestine”. Or should Israel expel all the Arabs living there?

  136. Can you beleive the FBI raided so-called Christian militia groups while leaving muslim terrorst groups in the US alone?

    WTF are the priorities here?

    In the meantime, another suicide bombing episode, this time in Russia.

    I can count on one hand the number of Christian militia threats over the past 2 decades – Waco, Oklahoma City, but the number of Muslim attacks is in the thousands.

  137. I got this in an email and I could not resist posting it:

    Parallels of Abraham Lincoln and Barack Hussein Obama:

    1. Lincoln placed his hand on the Bible for his inauguration. Obama used the same Bible.

    2. Lincoln came from Illinois . Obama comes from Illinois .

    3. Lincoln served in the Illinois Legislature. Obama served in the Illinois Legislature.

    4. Lincoln had very little experience before becoming President. Obama had very little experience before becoming President.

    5. Lincoln rode the train from Philadelphia to Washington for his inauguration. Obama rode the train from Philadelphia to Washington for his inauguration.

    6. Lincoln was a skinny lawyer. Obama is a skinny lawyer.

    7. Lincoln was a Republican. Obama is a skinny lawyer.

    8. Lincoln was highly respected. Obama is a skinny lawyer.

    9. Lincoln was born in the United States . Obama is a skinny lawyer.

    10. Lincoln was honest, so honest he was called Honest Abe. Obama is a skinny lawyer.

    11. Lincoln saved the United States . Obama is a skinny lawyer.

    Uncanny, ain’t it !

  138. More evidence of their corruption. They must be stopped because if they are not stopped they will stop at nothing.
    Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)
    Monday, March 29th at 10:21AM EDT
    No Comments
    Our own Mark Impomeni has today’s top story at Human Events.

    Perhaps taking a cue from the hardball Chicago political tactics of President Obama and his cadre of Windy City advisers, state Senate Democrats in New York sent a fundraising letter to local union bosses last week that even Democratic activists described as, “pay-to-play run-amok.” The chairman of the New York Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, State Sen. Jeff Klein, told union leaders that they could secure seats on a soon-to-be-created “Labor Advisory Council” for donations of $50,000 to the Democratic campaign.

    “Advisory Council chairs,” said Klein, “will have the unique opportunity to advise the Senate [Democrats] on the structure and focus of the Labor Advisory Council. In addition to all meetings, conferences and events that are included with Advisory Council membership,” the letter continues, “the advisory chairs will be invited to an exclusive meeting with the Senate majority leaders [and] will actively participate in the essential policy conversations that help construct our 2010 campaign strategy.”

    Republicans charge that the letter is part of a two-step strategy to squeeze money out of the unions, usually a reliable source of campaign contributions for the Democratic Party at both the state and national levels. Republicans charged that majority Democrats first announced $180 million in budget cuts aimed at state workers’ unions, then sent the letter as a signal to the unions that the funding would be restored once contributions started flowing in.

  139. NewMexicoFan
    March 29th, 2010 at 10:12 am
    I got this in an email and I could not resist posting it:

    Parallels of Abraham Lincoln and Barack Hussein Obama:

    Good one!

    Let me add another:

    Lincoln stood strong for what he believed in, even if many loathed him for it…Obama is a skinny lawyer.


    Come to think about it, Obama ain’t much of a lawyer either.

    1. I do not believe he tried a single case, either as a prosecutor (a la Rudy Giuliani, Eliot Spitzer, or Andrew Cuomo, to cite three well known examples). He may have only seen a court house as a defendant.

    2. For all his “expertise” in constitutional law, he displayed extremely little effort or expertise as President of the Harvard Law Review. He was pretty much gifted this position too, to atone for HLR’s previous snubbings of eminently qualified African Americans. He didn’t write a single article, did not mix with the others, pretty much phoned it in. But it’s looks real purdy on his RESUME.

    3. Even as a legistlator, in the Illinois State Senate, then the US Senate, the word that keeps resounding is “unremarkable”. Real good at voting present, or missing votes while campaigning. Anything to avoid rolling up his sleeves and learning how to do his job.

  141. Until this weekend I had been fortunate enough to have never watched msnbc. Have seen many clips of the major players there, but never tuned into it. What is up with that station and its infatuation with people in prison? Very odd as the programs I was exposed to offered nothing in the way of education or rehabilitation. Bizarre. Seems odd that the elite few who actually watch the station would also view such sensationalized irresponsible pseudo-documentaries. And I am not talking about the catch a predator spiel it was the other shows.

  142. lisa100 at 3:17pm, I am in ABSOLUTE agreement with your post with one exception where you stated that “WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR OUR DEMOCRACY.” Please know that America is not a Democracy, it is a Republic form of government.
    The Founding Fathers’ put an enormous amount of thought, prayer, and effort in determining what form our government would take, and they understood that a Republic form of government was best.
    You will find Founding Fathers’s quotes here and on many other sites in comparing and contrasting democracy-vs-republic forms of government:


    Here is an excertp: Our Founding Fathers and others speak out

    Democracy: a government of the masses. Authority derived thru mass meeting or any other form of direct expression. Results in Mobacracy. Attitude toward property is communist – negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion. prejudice and impulse without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

    Republic: Authority is derived thru the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobacracy. Results in statemanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment and progress. Is the standard form of government throughout the world.

    Benjamin Franklin: When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.

  143. More quotes contrasting/comparing democracy-vs-republic form of government:
    Thomas Jefferson: A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%.

    James Madison: Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death.

    John Quincy Adams: The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.

    Thomas Jefferson: The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

    Benjamin Franklin (maybe): Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

    James Madison: Democracy was the right of the people to choose their own tyrant.

    John Adams: That the desires of the majority of the people are often for injustice and inhumanity against the minority, is demonstrated by every page of the history of the world.

    Thomas Jefferson: All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that through the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

    John Witherspoon: Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state – it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.

    James Madison: We may define a republic to be – a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it: otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic.

    John Marshall: Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.

    Oscar Wilde: Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.

    Winston Churchill: The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.

    Sydney J Harris: Democracy is the only system that persists in asking the powers that be whether they are the powers that ought to be.

    G. K., Chesterton: Democracy means government by the uneducated, while aristocracy means government by the badly educated.

    George Bernard Shaw: Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

    Dr Laurence J Peter: Democracy is a process by which the people are free to choose the man who will get the blame.

    Alan Coren: Democracy consists of choosing your dictators after they’ve told you what you think it is you want to hear.

    Karl Marx: Democracy is the road to socialism.

  144. Funny you hear all the cries of racism, but never cries of classism. A poor black kid defies the odds and makes it out of an oppressive background and is forgiven for a lack of sophistication and poor grammar. Poor white kid breaks out and makes it to a good school but the language of his/her youth is an impediment. What is considered ignorance on one hand is deemed cultural on the other.

  145. Come to think about it, Obama ain’t much of a lawyer either.

    1. I do not believe he tried a single case,
    Well . . . sort of. I spoke to people who tried cases against him, and they would agree with you. He made alot of opening statements, setting forth what he said he would prove, and sounded alot like Reverend Wright in the process. But after the opening statement hoopla was done, he was looking for any way he could find to settle the damned case, so he could get on to bigger and better things. To experienced trial lawyers he was an easy mark. So you are right. He never really tried a case–witnesses, cross examination, all that boring mundane sort of stuff. Just alot of hot air, and cave in to the opposing side as long as he can come out looking good. Come to think of it that is sort of like . . ah . . er . . . Rezko, Excelon, Health Insurance Deform. The Devil’s Advocate and now CIC.

  146. wbboei
    I think I heard on this blog or somewhere else that he was not involved in the negotiations for settlement. He turned that over to others.

  147. I wish I had saved screen shots from 2007/08 after reading the vile comments made on various websites about posters here. One site actually had filtered out obscenities and the “democrats” working for their party to elect icky substituted knife for penis. Where was the press when that was happening? Statements were made akin to raping a woman with a knife. I do not believe that those monsters represented the average democratic voter any more than I believe(if it even took place) that an obnoxious Tea party member represents the group.

  148. Funny you hear all the cries of racism, but never cries of classism. A poor black kid defies the odds and makes it out of an oppressive background and is forgiven for a lack of sophistication and poor grammar. Poor white kid breaks out and makes it to a good school but the language of his/her youth is an impediment. What is considered ignorance on one hand is deemed cultural on the other.
    And you never will because that is what the elites use to divide us. It is their line of defense against class centered attacks. It is why right out of the barrel they try to equate populism with racism. Populism is an attack on the elites, and they fear that if it ever gains steam they will lose what they have. So they try to dismiss it as racism. Look at the lengths to which CNN has gone, in slandering the tea party movement. They claim it is angry white men, when in fact a good percentage of the group is women. And there are minorities in it as well. But what does CNN do? They find the village idiot in the group who is holding an offensive sign and they turn their cameras on him and ask him alot of leading questions which he gives stupid answers to and then they say ah ha. And of course they report a tea party gathering of 10,000 people as dozens of people and they denigrate Sarah Palin. Class warfare Henry plain and simple.

  149. I sing along with lil ole grape, but I sing badly to the lyrics of “Try to Remember” [perhaps others can modify the words to better fit our currect situation] that I modified by changing the month from September to November as follows:

    Try to remember the kind of November
    When life was slow and oh, so mellow.
    Try to remember the kind of November
    When grass was green and grain was yellow.
    Try to remember the kind of November
    When you were a tender and callow fellow.
    Try to remember, and if you remember,
    Then follow.

    Follow, follow, follow, follow, follow,
    Follow, follow, follow, follow.

    Try to remember when life was so tender
    That no one wept except the willow.
    Try to remember when life was so tender
    That dreams were kept beside your pillow.
    Try to remember when life was so tender
    That love was an ember about to billow.
    Try to remember, and if you remember,
    Then follow.

    Follow, follow, follow, follow, follow,
    Follow, follow, follow, follow.

    Follow, follow, follow, follow, follow,
    Follow, follow, follow, follow.

    Follow, follow, follow, follow, follow,
    Follow, follow, follow, follow.

    Deep in December, it’s nice to remember,
    Although you know the snow will follow.
    Deep in December, it’s nice to remember,
    Without a hurt the heart is hollow.
    Deep in December, it’s nice to remember,
    The fire of November that made us mellow.
    Deep in December, our hearts should remember
    And follow. Follow. Follow, follow me…….

    To the voting booths and VOTE EM ALL OUT!!!!

  150. Sorry, lil ole grape, I did not access the video before I posted the above lyrics.

    What a wonderful video song; I am going to share it with all those that are trying to push me out of the lifeboat on this Titanic!

  151. ….and now they report the violence of the citizen militia that they will link to us Tea Party members.
    I am just going to LOVE those idiots to death!!!!! That is what I am going to do. I will tell each and every one of them that I am saving a seat on my lifeboat from the Titanic for them.

  152. This probably seems like a very silly question, but is there any way to see if my vote was registered as cast?

  153. Joe Biden had no reasonable expectation of privacy when he uttered the f bomb on national tv. So why is he not being fined. The FCC made its rules even more stringent after nipple gate. So why is he not paying the price for his actions. To say he whispered and didn’t mean it could be heard is moot as things picked up in a public forum have already been ruled admissable.

  154. Most, if not all law professors, suck as real life attys. I have found that they may be smarter or more elegant in their style than me, but they tend to be unable to relate to real life issues, and live in a world of theory and hypothesis.

  155. Has anyone else heard the news this morning that the Dimocratic Health Care Reform law will ‘automatically’ deduct from paychecks in an ongoing basis for long-term-care. Does anyone believe that any of that money will be in a lock box for the future?

  156. Henry, Shortermer

    The story I hear was it would automatically come out, unless you turn it off.

  157. Henry, Shortermer

    Here in NM both parties receive a data base on how people voted. It is historical also, so it goes back for a couple of elections. You should be able to go to your election board, and have them pull up your record from the data base and view it. If it is true here, I am sure it is true in other places. I use to use the data base, and I could pull by person, street, etc. Here it would even pull by wards and you could put areas together to walk and visit. I think it even printed a map.

  158. Henry, it might be interesting to go and do that. I see nothing wrong in doing a spot check on these data bases. I don’t trust them either.


    Now the fine print of the 2,400 page document will finally matter.
    Now legistlators might finally start reading it.
    Now they’ll find out what they voted on.
    Now they will find out that big states who will get the most aid will also have that more than offset by new obligations.

    “Oh…so THAT was in the bill? I did not know that.”


    Some States Find Burdens in Health Law

    Published: March 26, 2010

    Because of the new health care law, Arizona lawmakers must now find a way to maintain insurance coverage for 350,000 children and adults that they slashed just last week to help close a $2.6 billion budget deficit.

    Louisiana officials say a reduction in federal money to hospitals that treat the uninsured under the bill could be a death knell for their state-run charity hospital system.

    In California, policymakers estimate they will have to come up with an additional $500 million a year to make necessary increases in payments to Medicaid providers.

    Across the country, state officials are wading through the minutiae of the health care overhaul to understand just how their governments will be affected. Even with much still to be digested, it is clear the law may be as much of a burden to some state budgets as it is a boon to uninsured consumers.

    States with the largest uninsured populations, like Texas and California, might be considered by its backers the biggest winners to emerge from the law, because so many additional residents will have access to health insurance. But because those states are being required to significantly expand their Medicaid programs, they are precisely the ones that will face the biggest financial strains, in many cases magnified by existing budget shortfalls.

    “The federal government has to account for states’ inability to sustain our current programs, much less expand,” said Kim Belshé, secretary of California’s Health and Human Services Agency.

    In contrast, states like Massachusetts and Wisconsin, which already have extensive health care safety nets, do not expect to spend much more money, while still taking in billions in federal grants.

    In Massachusetts, for example, which already has a form of universal coverage, the federal government will wind up taking over from the state a significantly larger share of the costs of Medicaid coverage for adults without children, officials said.

    “On balance, it’s definitely a gain,” said JudyAnn Bigby, secretary of the Massachusetts Office of Health and Human Services.

    Supporters of the new law have argued that states will benefit from efforts to slow health care inflation and billions of dollars in new federal spending on subsidies for the uninsured and on an array of programs like community health centers.

    But even with more federal help, the challenge for states like Alabama, Arkansas and Texas that now offer only limited Medicaid coverage will be substantial. In these states, Medicaid has been mostly restricted to low-income families with children, pregnant women, certain people with disabilities and some elderly. The income cutoffs have also been extremely low.

    Beginning in 2014, however, anyone with an income of up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, or $29,300 for families of four, will be eligible for coverage under Medicaid. For the first three years, the federal government will pick up the entire cost of these new enrollees, but the state share then gradually increases until it reaches 10 percent in 2020.

    Texas, which has some of the most restrictive Medicaid eligibility rules in the country for adults, currently covers working parents only if they do not earn more than roughly 20 percent of the federal poverty level. The program does not cover childless adults.

    Anne Dunkelberg, associate director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a research group in Austin that strongly supported the health care law, estimated that if the legislation went into effect today, an additional one million adults would qualify for Medicaid, at a cost of $370 million a year if Texas were to pay its full 10 percent share.

    In addition, Ms. Dunkelberg said, many children who are currently eligible but are not enrolled in Medicaid and the state Children’s Health Insurance Program will emerge and want to join, potentially costing the state several hundred million dollars.

    Some states, like Arizona, face an immediate fiscal conundrum because of stipulations in the law that prohibit them from rolling back their existing Medicaid programs before the required expansion takes effect.

    About a decade ago, voters in Arizona approved a measure to expand Medicaid to include childless adults whose incomes were at or below the federal poverty limit. As part of an effort to close a $2.6 billion budget gap next year, state officials recently decided to end that program, along with the state’s Children’s Health Insurance Program. Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, signed the cuts into law last week.

    Now, however, the state must come up with the money to restore the programs, estimated at a billion dollars annually.

    “Any flexibility we used to have is gone with the new mandate,” said Tom Betlach, director of the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, which runs Medicaid.

    Because the circumstances of the states are so varied, the challenges facing them under the legislation diverge considerably. In Louisiana, there is particular concern about what the statute will mean for the future of the state’s charity hospital system, which has a long and storied history of treating the poor in the state. The state-run hospitals are heavily dependent on special federal payments to institutions that treat large numbers of the uninsured. The new health care legislation cuts those payments significantly, though some of that could be offset by in the increase in insured patients.

    California’s fiscal woes have been particularly devastating and unrelenting. The state is now facing a $20 billion shortfall. Besides the anticipated flood of new enrollees to Medicaid, an equally urgent concern there has to do with increases to the reimbursement rate for Medicaid providers, which are currently among the lowest in the country.

    Under the new health care legislation, states will have to raise the Medicaid rates paid to primary-care doctors to the same level the federal government sets under Medicare, the program for the elderly. For the first two years, the federal government will pay the difference. After that, it is left up to the states whether to continue paying the higher rates, which could mean an additional $500 million in costs a year for California, officials said.

    But California officials said they also believe they will have to significantly raise rates for other outpatient Medicaid providers to ensure an adequate supply of providers for all the newly insured. They believe this will cost an additional $2 billion a year.

    Supporters of the health care overhaul argue that states will wind up getting a huge economic injection from the billions of dollars in new federal money pouring into Medicaid. States could also save money as hospitals that treat the uninsured become less needy, although many of these institutions are also heavily supported by localities.

    In the end, supporters say, the ledger ends up in the black for states.

  160. wbboei
    I was reading about all of the silly lawsuits filed after the nipple gate fiasco.
    Biden committed an infraction of the FCC rules by dropping the f bomb. I am not an attorney but I don’t see how he can not be subjected to the same charges that were drummed up against Jackson and Timberlake. Whispers, that can be picked up by a traditional microphone have sent people to jail. There can be no expectation of privacy during a press confrence, He broke the law as it was known to him that he was being recorded and he was acting in an official capacity.

  161. In point of fact, Obama never led on a single law suit. He assisted but never led. When his law firm released the names of his clients, they masked his work by releasing the names of ÅLL of the law firm’s clients. So, Obama may have only represented ®ezko, for all we know. We have no idea if he had one client or twenty clients or a hundred and twenty clients.

  162. Thanks, wbboei, for pointing out that Obama did in fact spend time as a lawyer, in a courtroom

    Thanks, basement angel, for pointing out the hollowness of his alleged “experience”.

    Obama is like the “paper experts”, lots of certifications, lots of tests passed, but scary little amount of real world experience.

    Hillary did both, studying law, and practicing law, at many different levels.

  163. Support for HC reform is back to where it was before Obama signed it. No more bounce …


  164. Hey nomobama: I agree with you. But I do believe that if everyone voted in this country, we would have a better chance of hiring the right people. Right now, only half the people vote, and most of those people are in the extreme ends of the political spectrum.

    Hey ShortTermer: Thanks for the distinction, but I think that most people connect with the term Democracy, and I am trying to express it so that most people will feel what I am talking about.

Comments are closed.