In 2005 Republicans oozed out their own version of this year’s “Slaughter Rule”. Nancy Pelousy, Henry Waxman, and Louise Slaughter herself went to court to oppose the ugly Republican contrivance utilized to pass a raise in the debt [...]]]> Corruption breeds corruption. After years of inbred corruption, Americans are witnessing the full flower of corruption.

In 2005 Republicans oozed out their own version of this year’s “Slaughter Rule”. Nancy Pelousy, Henry Waxman, and Louise Slaughter herself went to court to oppose the ugly Republican contrivance utilized to pass a raise in the debt ceiling. Pelousy, Waxman, and Slaughter argued in court that the Republican procedure was a violation of the Constitution, Article I, Section 7, and that an actual vote was required on an actual bill. Now, in March of 2010 Louise Slaughter, Nancy Pelousy, and Henry Waxman, bathe themselves in the same corrupt waters.

“The bad news for present purposes is that they lost the case. The D.C. Circuit in Public Citizen v. U.S. District Court upheld the procedure. Upheld in this case does not mean endorsed. The Court did not say the self-executing rule was constitutional. It said it could not reach the question due to the standards of deference that apply between departments of government: If the presiding officers of both houses of Congress attest that their respective chambers have passed a piece of legislation, the Court is required to accept those representations as conclusive.

That doesn’t mean it is proper for government officials to execute a procedure that violates the Constitution, nor does it mean that a presiding officer should attest something that is not true. It does, however, suggest that it may be an uphill battle to get a court to declare the process null and void.”

Eric Massa is right when he said “The leadership of the Democratic Party have become exactly what they said they were running against.”

* * * * *

Barack Obama is celebrating “Sunshine Week”:

“As Sunshine Week begins, I want to applaud everyone who has worked to increase transparency in government and recommit my administration to be the most open and transparent ever, an effort that will strengthen our democracy and ensure the public’s trust in their government. We came to Washington to change the way business was done, and part of that was making ourselves accountable to the American people by opening up our government.

Obama can’t be trusted by friend nor foe. When Obama says “sunshine” we look out the window and see clouds. Obama’s “sunshine” in this case, clouds over the Raw Story report that “Obama agencies invoking secrecy provision more often than under Bush”. So much for Sunshine.

From the Washington Post news section:

After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic — known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” — has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

“It’s more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know,” the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. “But I like it,” she said, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.”

The Washington Post Editorial Page:

“WE UNDERSTAND the administration’s sense of urgency on health-care reform. But what is intended as a final sprint threatens to turn into something unseemly and, more important, contrary to Democrats’ promises of transparency and time for deliberation.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Monday that she is leaning toward a parliamentary maneuver under which the House would vote on a package of changes to the Senate-approved reform bill, and the underlying Senate bill would then be “deemed” to have passed, even though the House had never voted on it. That may help some House members dodge a politically difficult decision, but it strikes us as a dodgy way to reform the health-care system. Democrats who vote for the package will be tagged with supporting the Senate bill in any event. Why not be straightforward about it?

Dodgy? Try calling it what it is: Corrupt! Arrogant! Incompetent!

“More worrying is that Congress and the country have yet to see the changes, for which Democrats hope to win quick House approval and which they then hope to speed through the Senate under a procedure that would bar filibusters. These changes — the so-called reconciliation bill — are not all minor “fixes”; some could have far-reaching consequences. Such changes deserve to be fully understood and debated before they are voted on. [snip]

The health-care debate has been going on longer than a year, and House members want to get it over with. They don’t want it hanging over them during the Easter recess. President Obama wants progress to have been made before he leaves for Indonesia on Sunday. These are understandable desires, but they don’t outweigh the need for a reasonable process on a matter of such importance.

It’s not the Lord that cometh. It’s a thief in the night. A murderer in the dark. Dirty business takes place in the dark of night, in the shadows of the day.

The conservative Cincinnati Enquirer uses the correct word “Arrogant”.

“Now, despite the deep reservations of a majority of Americans, congressional leaders plan to ram through their proposal this week – bypassing normal congressional procedures.

It is a distressing prospect. [snip]

Among themselves, Democrats cut a series of backroom deals that in any other context would be considered criminal payoffs and bribery.

Here’s how blatant it’s become: Last week, President Obama nominated for a federal appeals court the brother of a wavering Democratic House member from Utah.

This disgusting process, which Democrats brazenly wish to bring to conclusion this week, is being done with little regard for the opinions of a clear majority of Americans who, while they may believe health care reform is necessary, think this particular approach will take our nation down the wrong economic path. [snip]

Supporters of the Democratic plan can spin it any way they wish, but polls have consistently shown that a majority of Americans oppose their heavy-handed approach to reform. Americans may favor general principles such as universal coverage, but they are distrustful of the way this bill has been crafted and how it will change their relationship with their health care providers.[snip]

The legislation has major problems that have not even begun to be discussed in a serious way, and if Democrats have their way will not be debated at all. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, for example, calls the Senate bill “racially discriminatory” because of provisions that “in addition to being unconstitutional, will not improve health care outcomes for minority patients.”

And despite denials, the bill has worrisome implications for Medicare. According to an Associated Press news account, much of the reform bill is “financed with Medicare cuts the government’s own experts say could be unsustainable.”[snip]

Its blatant abuse is yet further damning evidence of congressional leaders’ arrogant, condescending attitude toward the people they ostensibly were elected to serve.”

Obama Hopium addicts, mostly boys on Big Blogs, believe the American people will not care about “process”. After all, they argue (and we agree with them on this point only) Americans have not cared about legislative “process” in earlier years. Let’s be the first to disabuse these Hopium addicts of their delusion. While we agree that Americans have never cared about legislative “process” in years past – Heath care is not just any ordinary chunk of legislation. Americans do and will care about their health care and Americans do and will care about the “process” Congress abuses to pass health care.

“Reconciliation” and other legislative tricks have been used many times before on budgetary matters. But never before have such legislative tricks been employed to change so much of the fabric of the country and on such a personal issue of such importance to each and every American. Because of the personal nature of the health care issue, “process” does indeed matter to Americans.

When John Kerry said “I voted for the bill, before I voted against it” – that was process too. Americans cared.

If the House Dimocrats “deem” the bill passed, Americans will “deem” House Dimocrats dead in November.

The liberal Seattle Times Editorial page is now a “NO” vote:

“THE health-care dance in Washington, D.C., has gone on long enough. Congress needs to focus on the economy and set health care aside.

This is a change of position for us. This page supported Barack Obama for president, enthusiastically. We have supported the health-care effort until now. We still support universal coverage as a social goal.

But the longer the fight goes on, the more it feels that the timing is all wrong. The economy is wounded. Employers are hurting. The time to think about loading employers with new burdens is when they are strong. Not now.

Right now, Congress needs to focus on the economy. [snip]

President Obama has promised that any health-care bill he signs will not add one dime to the deficit, which already has swelled beyond anything since World War II. The president has put himself in a position where he cannot keep that promise. He has let each house of Congress come up with its own health-care bills.

The result has been chaos: The public option is in then out; the Medicare buy-in for 55-year-olds is in, then out. When the congressional dance stops, the Senate may have 60 votes, but for what? It will satisfy neither Obama’s frugal promise nor progressives’ lavish hopes. Already the Democratic Party’s former chairman, Howard Dean, says the bill is not worth passing in this form.

You know he’s right when you hear statements that something has to be passed, for political reasons. This issue is too important for that. It should wait for a unified proposal and an economy on the mend.”

The Seattle Times is not a conservative newspaper or conservative mouthpiece. The Seattle Times is aware that today Obama incompetents acknowledge there won’t be much job creation for the rest of 2010 and indeed unemployment might grow. The public will continue to reject Barack Obama and his policies.

The Daily News is a lefty paper too, which supported Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton (to their never ending shame). The Daily News, like Mad Magazine, is bailing out on Obama’s health scam:

“Health reform: Down the stretch it comes. President Obama has gone so far as to postpone an overseas trip in a last-ditch push to get a comprehensive reform bill to his desk.

He shouldn’t waste his energy.

Not with unemployment justifiably the nation’s top concern and the possibility of a double-dip recession still looming. Remember how Obama said, in his State of the Union reboot, “Jobs must be our No. 1 focus in 2010“? Well, apparently he doesn’t.

Not with the American people abandoning the President’s prescription in huge numbers. Just one in four voters supports the reform bill as written; half want Congress to start over. Compare that with the popular support other major pieces of social legislation enjoyed before passage, like welfare reform (68%), Medicare (63%) and civil rights (60%).

Not with health care costs having risen 73% over the last decade – with Medicaid growing at 21% a year – and showing no signs of coming down to Earth. Controlling costs is the absolute, unconditional, a-blind-man-could-see-it prerequisite for expanding coverage.

Not with American health care quality actually quite impressive in many respects, including world-leading rates for patients surviving cancer and among the shortest wait times for hard-to-find treatments and surgeries.

Not with a half-dozen accounting gimmicks built into the legislation – including the fact that federal budget projections are based on 10 years worth of tax collections and just six years of spending increases.

Not with the Senate, lacking even a single Republican vote, having to resort to reconciliation, a little-used parliamentary maneuver, to get it through. Sure, it’s been used before – but not on anything that has such limited public support.

Not after all the cynical back room deals – deals Obama has committed to removing – having frayed the public trust. With legislation of this magnitude, that is not a renewable resource. [snip]

But reality has come a-knocking, quite persistently, and it’s saying: Enough already. Fix what’s broken, then move on.”

Whether or not there are constitutional questions left unresolved, the Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! is increasingly obvious:

“Many of our members would prefer not to have voted for the Senate bill,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson of Connecticut. Once the Senate legislation is “deemed” to have passed as part of the rule governing debate, the House would vote only on the follow-up health care measure, known as a budget “reconciliation” bill.

However, using such a dicey procedure to enact President Barack Obama’s biggest domestic initiative — the most far-reaching social policy change in decades — could inflame a public that’s already annoyed at the legislation’s tortured path and disgusted with Congress. [snip]

Michael McConnell, a professor of law at Stanford University, wrote Monday in The Wall Street Journal that such procedures are unconstitutional. He cited a 1998 Supreme Court ruling that once one house of Congress approves an “exact text,” the other house must pass “precisely the same text” before the president can sign it into law. That’s been the generally understood principle of how a bill becomes a law for centuries.

However, Pamela Karlan, a professor of public interest law at Stanford, wasn’t so sure. “It’s kind of complicated,” she said, because, she and others said, it’s not entirely clear what “same text” or “exact text” means.”

Time’s Karen Tumulty explains “bending the rules” further. Dimocrat Steny Hoyer in 2003 had this to say about bent rules such as the one he now supports:

“What kind of lack of confidence does that display? What kind of process in pursuit of effectiveness does that mean that we are adopting? What kind of demeaning of democracy is the objective of efficiency resulting in? [snip]

Mr. Chairman, clearly we can do better, and we owe the American people, this institution and ourselves. In these discussions on legislative process, I have always been forthright. When Democrats controlled the House, we did not always provide for fair debates.“

Not much has changed, Steny.

Jason Altimire today has condemned the “deem” cowardice strategy. Perhaps Altimire is waking up to the editorial board revolt. Perhaps Altimire will help to get C-SPAN cameras into the House Rules Committee hearing room which will debate the rules such as the “Slaughter Rule”. Whether Altimire “does” something is unknown, but Altimire is emitting words:

“Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), a member of the Blue Dog and New Democrat Coalitions, said that the plan to pass the plan using the so-called “deem and pass” procedure is “wrong” and unpopular among his constituents.

There’s a lot of discomfort with the reconciliation process, the self-implementing rule, where you wouldn’t have a formal vote on maybe the most important policy of the past 40 years,” he said on Fox Business Network. “I have a big issue with the way they’re doing the process. I think it’s wrong and my constituents don’t like it.”

Altmire, a no vote on the House’s healthcare bill in November who is now undecided, is seen by many as critical to passage.”

* * * * * *

Like thieves in the night, the Obama Dimocrats will attempt to pass Obama’s health scam. Obama Dimocrats will not vote on the Senate bill itself because they are afraid. [The same Dimocrats, like 2x4 Chuck Schumer, who made sure there was no convention vote in Denver.]

To Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! – add Cowardice!

The Cowards will shoot you in the back not face to face. It’s the Obama way. The Chicago Way – Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! Cowardice!

Before Hillary, let’s get some unpleasant Obamaish business out of the [...]]]> Americans really needed universal health care. Instead we got a Pelousy bill which transfers taxpayer wealth to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma. Things continue to fall apart. So, as a pick-me-up, it’s time for a little bit of Hillary in the night.

Before Hillary, let’s get some unpleasant Obamaish business out of the way first.

* * * * * *

As we’ve written before, there is a lot for Hillary supporters to be thankful for. Back in 2007 we here at Big Pink were alone but now there are wonderful Pink-kissed websites to frolic with. One smart website is Not Your Sweetie, which continues to document how the Dimocratic attacks on Eric Massa and David Paterson are drive-by revenge killings. Not to sweep away the current allegations, but if Paterson and Massa had done as they were told, the Obama thugs would not have ordered the hit.

Not Your Sweetie notes about the Paterson allegations that they are mostly “bogus”. As proof, a Daily News front page retraction is cited:

Investigators have found little direct evidence that Gov. Paterson tampered with a witness in a domestic abuse case against one of his top aides, the Daily News has learned.

While several key people have yet to be interviewed, the woman at the heart of the case, Sherr-una Booker, told probers she didn’t feel the governor threatened her in a phone conversation a day before a Feb. 8 hearing in the case.

Investigate Paterson and all the allegations thoroughly, but we suspect the perpetrators of the Paterson “hit” are at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It’s a hit job to benefit Andrew Cuomo, the former “racist” turned Obama hero. It’s a gang bang with Cuomo and Obama trying to wipe out David Paterson and the memory of Carl McCall. Charlie Rangel and Tim Geithner get away with tax evasion but Paterson is not so lucky:

Cuomo is also investigating charges that Paterson lied under oath about freebie Yankees tickets he got for Game 1 of the World Series. Kuby said Cuomo has a different problem there – the case “is total silliness,” he said. “We really will be laughed out of the Union if we prosecute our governor for cheering on the Yankees at a World Series game.”

And there is more Obama-Cuomo-Paterson, along with the reasons why. Cuomo is running away from the investigatory gun, and, Not Your Sweetie quotes the Wall Street Journal as to why Here’s the Wall Street Journal:

Since taking on the investigations of Mr. Paterson, the state’s first African-American governor, Mr. Cuomo has seen a slip in his popularity, particularly among minority voters.

A poll released on Tuesday found that Mr. Cuomo’s approval rating among New York voters had dropped 13 percentage points to 54% in a week.

Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, suffered a decline of 22 points among nonwhite voters in New York, according to the Marist Poll.

Watch out Andrew! Remember the old Al Capone warning: “If they do it for you, they’ll do it to you.”

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Poor New Yorkers. They’ll have two hapless candidates, Cuomo and Lazio running for governor in November. Both deserve retirement, not promotion.

* * * * * *

Health Care. Remember the “Obama Health Plan Obama Supporters Do Not Want To Discuss”? Basement Angel reminds us today of this:

James Roosevelt, who was chair of the Rules and Bylaws Committee that decided to dock Michigan and Florida half of their delegates and award 4 of the delegates Clinton won in Michigan to Obama, as well as all of the uncommitted delegates, is the CEO of a health insurance company – Tufts Healthcare. Okay? Got that? The guy who made sure that Obama had the necessary to delegates to win the nomination – even to the point of assigning delegates another candidate won to him arbitrarily – is the CEO of a health insurance firm.

And what Roosevelt wants in a health insurance reform, is a reform that relies entirely upon private insurers. He does not want a public option. He wants a plan like Massachusetts has: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/04/09/healthcare_lets_build_on_what_we_know/

I’m thinking he considers Barack Obama a man of his word.

James Roosevelt will learn soon enough:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * * * * *

Can’t trust him. That’s what Desirée Rogers, the Michelle Obama and Barack Obama Chicago pal, has learned. Sorry Desirée, no pity party here, you got what you deserved from some sleazy characters. Keep in mind the Big Pink catechism:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * * * * *

More to be thankful for: Add pink boots to match the Pink Grenades and the Pink cupcakes.

* * * * * *

More warnings to Barack Obama on his sinking, unqualified and inexperienced boobery and bumbling. Non-Republicans Stanley Greenberg, James Carville, Kate Monninger and Andrew Bauman of Democracy Corps are hoisting the red flag and desperately yelling to the boob-in-chief. In a PDF document on the latest polls on the economy the non-Republicans say this:

“The biggest challenge facing Democrats in 2010 after passing health care is getting the economy right – and this is even more important than health care.

While economic growth is better than contraction and stagnation, it poses immense problems for progressives wanting the support of voters – starting with the growing gap between improving macro-level indicators and lagging micro-level ones, like job and wage growth. There is reason to believe – confirmed by this survey – that progressives are losing many blue collar and non-college voters as elites focus on “economic success.”

We’ll translate, “Obama you boob, we know you don’t know what to do about the economy, but stop it with the heath care scam already, you are killing the Dimocratic Party. Your situation comedy coalition is a joke and that cannot be hidden anymore.”

Here’s some more C.Y.A. advice from the pollsters and strategists and more proof we have been right all along that Obama’s situation comedy coalition is a joke and a disaster and that the Democratic Party committed suicide with the massive Mistake In ‘08. The pollsters, politely warn Obama:

“The second big and growing challenge is the gap between the hopes of the new progressive base voters who created a progressive majority in the country in the last four years – African-Americans and Latinos, young voters and unmarried women – and their own experiences in this economic crisis – loss of employment, wages and health care and cutbacks in state services. These voters are dominantly the “drop-off” voters – those who voted in the 2008
election but are not likely to in 2010. [snip]

The key findings are summarized below:
1. View of the economy worsens after one-year anniversary of the ‘stimulus.’ [snip]
2. The real economic indicators – job loss, reduced wages, and cuts in state services and state assistance – could fuel the blue-collar protest and demoralize the new base.[snip]
3. Knowing how people experienced the economic crash will help us understand how to reach them during the recovery.
4. The real economic indicators do show some gains and progressives must figure out how to use them effectively.
5. But always remember, the most important groups for this election may be experiencing and viewing all this differently.
6. Lack of confidence in Democratic approaches to the economy.

Notice how it is the pollsters that put the word “stimulus” in quotes. We were right about the “stimulus” flim-flam.

* * * * * *

Other Democratic pollsters are sounding the same warnings. While Patrick Caddell has long since drifted away, Doug Schoen is still essentially a Democrat. Both note the same warnings as the Greenberg/Carville Democracy Corps. Caddell and Shoen:

In “The March of Folly,” Barbara Tuchman asked, “Why do holders of high office so often act contrary to the way reason points and enlightened self-interest suggests?” Her assessment of self-deception — “acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts” — captures the conditions that are gripping President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership as they renew their efforts to enact health-care reform.

Their blind persistence in the face of reality threatens to turn this political march of folly into an electoral rout in November.

We laughed as we read, “At stake is the kind of mainstream, common-sense Democratic Party that we believe is crucial to the success of the American enterprise.” That Democratic party committed suicide in Denver guys.

First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate’s reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Get the ShamWow! We’re laughing and the tears are flowing:

“Yes, most Americans believe, as we do, that real health-care reform is needed. [snip]

However, a solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan. Four-fifths of those who oppose the plan strongly oppose it… Never in our experience as pollsters can we recall such self-deluding misconstruction of survey data.”

Get the 2×4, it’s an election year. Time to beat the senseless out of ‘em.

This is the key point:

“Health care is no longer a debate about the merits of specific initiatives. Since the spectacle of Christmas dealmaking to ensure passage of the Senate bill, the issue, in voters’ minds, has become less about health care than about the government and a political majority that will neither hear nor heed the will of the people.”

You get it, you really get it. It’s the Arrogance!, stupid!

* * * * * *

Dee Dee Myers is also politely stroking while slapping Barack Obama. She writes: “Memo to President Obama: Get back in touch”

Ha!

Dee Dee cites a real president who was qualified and had the necessary experience and fortitude and work ethic:

“Almost anyone who ever traveled with President Bill Clinton can tell a similar tale. At the end of a long day, Clinton would unwind by working the rope line. He would shake hands, clasp shoulders — and listen. When there were no stories left to hear, he would bound up the steps onto the plane, stretch out his arms and declare, “That was great!”

For his staff, this routine eventually lost its charm. But Clinton never tired of it. For him, politics began in the stories of those ordinary Americans. His continuing dialogue with them — in classrooms and on factory floors, at rallies and on television and, yes, along the rope line — kept him connected.

* * * * * *

Immigration reform? Ha! Whether you are “fer” or “agin” immigration reform, there is one thing you must remember:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

After promising the gullible (Gay-groups, black groups, women’s groups, Jewish groups, etc.) that in 2010 he would finally get around to their issues, Obama is running away. With a diaper full of excuses though:

“President Obama said Thursday that he would proceed with an overhaul of the immigration system this year if he could attract substantial Republican support. But a leading Republican who supports an overhaul said an immigration bill could not go forward if the president used a legislative shortcut sidestepping Republicans to pass his health care bill.

That’s some qualifier! Translation: Obama says “screw you” to the fools that thought immigration reform was going to happen. Obama has also given the Republicans an excuse (none was needed anyway) to continue to vote “NO” to his repulsive nonsense.

Hey! immigration groups:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

You’ll get words, flowery words, but it’s all a lie.

* * * * * *

No Quarter given:

* * * * * *

Barack Obama and Michelle Obama are having vacation problems.

“Democratic aides said House leaders wanted the vote to occur before a two-week spring break scheduled to start on March 26. Otherwise, they said, wavering lawmakers might buckle to pressure from critics of the bill, who plan to step up their campaign against it during the recess.

President Obama plans to leave Thursday on a trip to Indonesia and Australia. With his health care bill hanging in the balance, he faces intensifying questions about whether he should put off the trip, which was timed to coincide with his daughters’ spring break.

Heavens! It’s a family vacation in the middle of what is supposed to be a major fight. No one knows what’s in the bill they are supposed to be voting for, but it’s Obama vacation time. The eventual mess of a bill that emerges is in trouble as more and more Dimocrats say they won’t buy a pig in a poke.

Why travel on vacation when every day is vacation day? It’s party time at the White House.

“President Barack Obama hosted a movie night at the White House for Hollywood heavyweights Tom Hanks and director Steven Spielberg on Thursday – at which they watched a preview of the star duo’s new World War Two miniseries “The Pacific.”

The Hillbuzz boys are not alone in wondering why it is always party time as the Party dies.

As we wrote, why travel on vacation when every day is vacation day? Things are so bad even the New York Times thinks the vacation should be canceled.

But Obama won’t cancel a vacation. Obama can’t wait to get back to bowing and scraping before foreign potentates. But as it turns out, the pressure is such that he will have to wait. The girls and Michelle will have to stay and try on old Desiree Rogers’ dresses. Obama will hang out a few more days before his vacation trip to Guam, Australia and Indonesia.

What did we learn from vacation-gate? (1) There is no vacation Obama will cancel (unless it is someone else’s vacation); and, (2) the March 18 Obama deadline for his health scam vote will, as other deadlines, not be met.

* * * * * *

No one knows what is in the latest health scam legislation. Is there any wonder why Dimocrats are omerta?

“Hardly any Democrat running for Congress seems to want to talk about healthcare.

Of the 26 leading Democratic House candidates contacted by The Hill, only one would commit to voting for the Senate healthcare bill if and when it comes to the House floor.

Out of the more than two dozen Democratic challengers and open-seat House candidates, only 10 commented for this story. Eight outright declined to comment.

Eight more didn’t respond to several days’ worth of requests via phone and e-mail.”

Run, little Dimocrats, run – away from Barack Obama.

* * * * * *

At long last, Hillary.

The Confluence too is feeling the love, with a “focus on something that’s working.”

Not much is working, but Hillary is for sure working. She doesn’t stop. Hillary’s work ethic inspires.

In Shakespeare’s Henry V, the future king, Prince Harry, before a dangerous battle, vastly outnumbered by the foe, goes quietly among the troops. It’s the prologue to Act IV,

“With cheerful semblance and sweet majesty;
That every wretch, pining and pale before,
Beholding him, plucks comfort from his looks;
A largess universal, like the sun,
His liberal eye doth give to every one,
Thawing cold fear, that mean and gentle all
Behold, as may unworthiness define,
A little touch of Harry in the night.

Thus, with Hillary.

Yesterday, the Washington Post took notice of Hillary at the helm:

“We have had other secretaries of state who have cared deeply for the institution,” said Patrick F. Kennedy, undersecretary for management and a senior Foreign Service officer. “None who have done as much internal outreach.”

The foreign officers must be kept organized until such time as a real president is in charge.

“Those interviewed inside and outside the agency say Clinton has done a good job of heading off the historical tensions between career employees and quadrennial political newcomers by relying on the counsel of senior Foreign Service operatives and reaching out in general.

She has walked the halls and popped into offices unexpectedly, created an electronic “sounding board,” and held seven internal town hall meetings to listen to gripes about everything from policy to cafeteria food to bullying in the workplace. She installed six new showers that joggers requested, is taking steps to remedy overseas pay inequities and instituted a policy that allows partners of gay diplomats to receive benefits. She became a heroine to the Foreign Service when she went to bat to get funding for 3,000 new Foreign Service positions for State operations and the U.S. Agency for International Development — the first boost of this magnitude in two decades.

Jeffrey Feltman, assistant secretary for the Near East and a Foreign Service officer, is one of those whom Clinton surprised — and won over. He was already looking for a new job when she tracked him down at his barbershop 24 hours after she was sworn in to seek his advice. A few weeks later, she asked him to stay on.

“We’ve heard it before: Yes, diplomacy matters. Yawn. Sounds great, but we tend to be cynical about such language in comparison to the actual resources devoted to DOD versus State,” Feltman said. “She has tried to demonstrate that it’s more than lip service by fighting for resources . . . and listening to us.”

Added Kennedy: “She fully understands that when she came in there was a weak and degraded platform. You need it to be refreshed with new people and new blood, and that’s what we are getting in now.”

Wily Hillary outsmarted her opponents. Husband Bill keeps the political fires burning. Hillary runs an operation with global reach, while waiting:

“Clinton had one condition that eclipsed all others as she considered Obama’s offer to be secretary of state: She demanded hiring authority at the department. To Team Clinton, this meant every political job — about 200 — from the most senior level to the 20-something researchers. Historically, it is the president who fills these political positions, and no one can recall a Cabinet secretary in recent memory requesting and receiving this kind of hiring latitude.

So rare are Obama people at the agency that Alec Ross — an Obama campaign Internet star who aggressively sought to work for Clinton — is jokingly referred to as the “Obama guy.”

Guarding the door at Foggy Bottom last year was a trio from the top echelon of Hillaryland. Among them — Cheryl Mills, who was deputy counsel in the Clinton White House; Hillary Clinton’s White House chief of staff, Maggie Williams; and Tamara Luzzatto, her Senate chief of staff — they knew everyone who had ever worked for Clinton over the years and who hoped to join her at State. They also recruited high-profile experts who had not worked for Clinton — but neither were they associated with Obama.

Of the three, only Mills joined State, as Clinton’s chief of staff, along with other longtime confidants and charter members of Hillaryland: global women’s expert Melanne Verveer; protocol chief Capricia Marshall; her Senate spokesman, Philippe Reines; traveling aide Huma Abedin; speechwriter Lissa Muscatine; and Jacob Lew, Office of Management and Budget director under President Bill Clinton and a deputy secretary of state.”

Keep the Obama thugs and boobs out of foreign policy. They’ve caused enough trouble.

“According to three sources with knowledge of State personnel decisions who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the White House made one significant request last year: that Clinton tap as her deputy James Steinberg, a foreign policy expert who had worked for her husband but whom Obama passed over for White House national security adviser. There are differing views as to whether Clinton was enthusiastic about hiring Steinberg, but there appears to be a single view on whether he’s a good fit: Numerous sources inside and outside the department describe Steinberg as unhappy in the job. He did not respond to two requests for an interview.

After bringing on Steinberg, Clinton hired Lew for a second deputy’s slot — filling the job for the first time since it was created a decade ago. Those close to her insist that the intent was not to undercut Steinberg but to ramp up efforts to increase the agency’s budget and take back control of its ability to manage development programs. Lew has an office adjoining that of Mills, whose office connects to Clinton’s.”

Hillary and Hillaryland know how to deal with bureaucratic plants and oafs.

Hillary also knows how to get the information she needs.

“Several career employees said they were caught off guard initially by Clinton’s level of engagement in internal management, particularly coming on the heels of her more reserved predecessor, Condoleezza Rice. On her first tour of the building, before she was sworn in, Clinton requested a budget briefing. Kennedy said it soon became clear what she meant: not an overview, but a line-by-line review that took three sessions to complete.

Shamila Chaudary — a self-described “backbencher” — had toiled for years as a faceless expert on the Pakistan desk when one day she found herself invited to brief Clinton. Chaudary, 32, said the two sparred over whether it was prudent to engage non-governmental power centers in Pakistan, with Clinton expressing skepticism.

Chaudary held her ground, making the point that “we’ve been seen as not engaging with them, and it’s hurt us a lot.” She said that although she and Clinton “didn’t necessarily agree . . . she said that it’s very important for us to debate like this. . . . This is how she said she wants to do business.”

Within 48 hours of their meeting, Chaudary was promoted to a front-line job in the office of policy planning.”

Thanks Hillary for light in the darkness.

And Roseanne Barr, has a Big Pink smile and an “I told You so” about Hillary (which reads at times word-for-word like a certain Big Pink website).

when the dems screwed Hillary, they screwed america out of health care and out of jobs. I knew it. I [...]]]> Update: Read “Pink Grenades” at PUMA P.A.C.

And Roseanne Barr, has a Big Pink smile and an “I told You so” about Hillary (which reads at times word-for-word like a certain Big Pink website).

when the dems screwed Hillary, they screwed america out of health care and out of jobs. I knew it. I told you so. I got so sick to my stomach as I watched forty years of the work of women get washed down the drain by axelrod and emmanuel and dean, richardson kerry and kennedy.

When Oprah, who knows nothing about politics and who never in twenty years did one show on the subject, put the final nail in the coffin of the health care candidate, i was stunned. I lost my faith in everything, including God. I had seen the dismantling of the working class since 1980, and had fought against it so hard, doing everything i could, and using everything at my disposal. I thought, how can an entire generation of feminism die right when the hope for it was at its strongest. I pleaded with friends not to back Obama. I said, but you know Hillary is the health care candidate, and he has not even a plan for any kind of healthcare in his platform or in his campaign! I blogged every day on the subject for about a year.

I knew the phony progressive left was just a trick of Soros and billionaire criminals to take down health care. I knew Obama got more wall street money than any other candidate, and I knew he was a phony too, all the way, as I watched him snicker about Hillary, the woman’s candidate being “likable enough”. I didn’t like her vote on Iraq, but she promised to end the war, and I believed that she would. I knew that she would listen to women, not completely abandon them as Obama has done. I knew that she would listen to working people, before bankers, unlike what Obama has done.

They set her up like they always set up women, and after we do all the groundwork, they take it away, and then they divide the spoils between themselves and their old boy network. Now, it is all coming clear to all the idiots that the wrong person is in the white house. Another George Bush. He has not saved one home from foreclosure nor created one job. He just wants to get down on his knees in front of those republicans and grovel, and HE DOESN’T EVEN HAVE TO!

They triangulated race and class AGAIN!! They may have token black people in congress and the senate and the supreme court, and elsewhere, but they have never ever in this history of this country had ONE token poor person in anything.

Class, not race is our real national nightmare. Race and gender are second and third. Damn, so close to single payer and real change, now so far. My God, India has had more women at the top of its government by about 5X than we have.

From Ecclesiastes 3:1-15 MV

A time to mourn, a time to gather stones together:

It’s a time to fight.

——————————————————————————————————-

Perhaps it is because we at Big Pink were alone for so long throughout all of 2007 that we see things today through Pink colored glasses. But what is it with all the stupid depression these days?

Perhaps it is because one month into our existence we were under direct attack from Peggy Noonan, and Tim Russert himself attacked us on his creepy Sunday show, and rigged emails were sent to us from Politico and TechPresident, and there was a ceaseless campaign to destroy this website with hacks and phony Patricia/Wonk websites dedicated solely to attack us and our commentors, and the creeps at DailyKooks demanded our destruction, and Donna Brazile was emailing Hillary to take us down – that we see things through Pink colored glasses.

As we approach yet another anniversary this April we see how much we have advanced. We have many Hillary websites with many viewpoints online now. Back in 2007 we were alone. Today, we have Republicans fighting sexism and misogyny even if it is in their own self-interest (the best politics). Back in 2007 we were alone, and Obama and his thugs, along with Republicans (exception from some like, oddly, Pat Buchanan) indulged in daily sexism and misogyny.

Today, an attack on Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin or women gets a quick response from Hillary sites. Back in 2007, Youtube was an Obama attack machine against Hillary Clinton. Today, Youtube is an arsenal of explosives documenting Obama lies.

Back in 2007 we were alone in describing Obama as a thug and boob and a corrupt circus clown from Corrupt Chicago surrounded by corrupt circus clowns from Chicago. Today, all the narratives we created are routinely repeated.

Back in 2007 some Republicans bought into the Obama lies. Today, these Republicans are embarrassed if not yet totally Hopium free. Back in 2007 Dimocrats waited for the comet to join the celestial choirs and sing praises to Mess-iah Obama. Today, these Dimocrats at least suspect they were duped by the Dimocratic establishment into support for a stooge who makes George W. Bush look good. So what’s with the depression these days?

We’re not referring to the departed or the departing. People like our commentors “S” and “JanH” have family heartbreaks to deal with and they rightly need to take a leave from the battlefield in order to tend to the family fields. Even the most intrepid soldiers deserve, and need, a little R&R. There is no shame to recharge. There is not even shame in retreat (ask George Washington and Winston Churchill).

We are in Winter quarters waiting for the political Spring and the “muster” command. Waiting can be difficult. But let’s remember the mission. Puma Eyes has the eyes on the prize and remembers the mission:

Remember the mission. So what, if the cleanup job requires us to sweep out Dimocrats along with Republicans. Good riddance to all. There’s a job to be done.

Today on the worthy Confluence we heard a cri de coeur:

We didn’t even get to enjoy the end of the Bush administration.

Another thing that has been bothering me is that I really wanted to be wrong about Obama but I wasn’t, and saying “I told you so” doesn’t make up for having my worst nightmares become true. If anything, he’s even worse than I feared.

But what really has me bummed out right now is the realization that there is no end in sight for the mess this country is in. The single biggest problem facing our nation is the illness in our political system. When I say “illness” I mean the equivalent of an inoperable cancer that has metastasized. If we fixed our political system then we would actually be able to do something about those other problems.

For most of my adult life I believed that the Democrats were the good guys so even when they were getting slapped around by the Republicans I could support them and hope that after the next election they would grow a pair and start standing up for the liberal ideals they campaigned on.

I finally realized that the majority of the Democrats who hold elected office are not only corrupt but they have the same agenda as the Republicans. Oh, the say they’re on our side, and when it’s time for them to represent us they might make some speeches andr play some parliamentary tricks but when the nitty meets the gritty they lose on purpose. Lots of times they don’t even bother to put on a dog and pony show anymore, they just vote to bail out Wall Street or take away our civil rights as if that’s what we wanted them to do.

Now as far back as I can remember the Republicans were corrupt and they tended to be pricks or assholes, and sometimes both, but they weren’t insane. Nowadays there’s a lot of GOPers that are crazy as shithouse rats. That not only includes the elected ones but the voters too. Then you got the tea baggers who don’t think the Republicans are crazy enough.

On the left side they’re getting just as bad, they’re just insane about different things. If you read both the left and right blogs on a regular basis you’d think think they inhabit completely different worlds. It’s almost like they don’t speak the same language.

Next fall we’re gonna have and election and right now it looks like the Republicans will gain seats in Congress, and maybe even get control of one or both houses. But no matter who wins, we lose. The same thing in November of 2012. – If either the Democrats or Republicans win, we’re screwed.

We’re not going to say “cheer up”. We are not even going to argue with the sentiments expressed even though we disagree with some of them and agree with some of them. What we will say is a Warholian “so what”? It’s a struggle, so what? It’s a mess, so what?

You think this little 7 year old boy and his 6 year old sister had an easy day?

The boy and his sister had a tough day. They waited, organized, called out. They fought back in the only way they could.

We’re strapping on our Pink grenades every morning and getting into the fight. If we get depressed amid the lunacy, we’ll say “so what?” We’re in the middle of a fight not at the end of one. The time for hammock swings and Pink lemonade is not yet here.

We might not like it but we realize that the Tea Party people for now are allies. So we will not disparage them as “teabaggers”. Politics makes strange bedfellows and these are strange times. We have learned that we do need two parties in opposition to each other, and other parties to live and die in order to keep those two parties in check and to let the major opposition parties know our votes cannot be taken for granted.

We might not like it but we realize that there are two choices: live or die. We’re not going to die and go away. We’ll live to fight another day.

We might not like it but we realize we are not alone in our opposition now and will not be alone in attaining our goals later. Our partners will change but we are not alone any more.

We might not like it but we realize that we were correct all along about Obama and his thug machine and his situation comedy demographics coalition. The ones who should be in deep depression and shame are Obama supporters who allowed themselves to be duped by the Dimocratic establishment and elect a stooge.

As the clinicians say, “depression is anger turned inwards“. By that definition Obama supporters should be suicidally depressed. Good riddance.

It is Obama supporters who deserve to be depressed. Obama should be suicidally depressed. Publicity stunts with children, dead mothers, “I love you” Mess-iah cult of personality worshipers, won’t save the nicotine addict’s ‘do what I say, not what I do’ mass transfer of wealth health scam. Obama publicity stunts are now countered with growing protests of thousands where it is “standing room only” in opposition to Obama.

Obama’s Michigan enablers are sent to jail (Monica Conyers sentenced to 37 months today) and more to go. Why should we be depressed? Let’s depress Obama supporters.

The Obama Dimocrats are forced to rabid tricks (such as the Slaughter Rule) to pass the Senate version of the Obama health scam, without a vote. It’s almost like the Democratic nomination – no vote is respected, mob rule Chicago rules.

We’ll depress Obama supporters with the truth about how health premiums will go up even with the Obama health scam. We’ll depress Obama supporters with the truth of Obama support at 43%. We’ll depress Obama supporters with the truth that all 41 Republican senators will uphold the “Byrd rule” in any reconciliation fight.

We intend to depress Obama supporters even more. Hillary supporters should strap something on, preferably a Pink grenade, and stay in the fight.

[We'll return to our regularly scheduled programming early tomorrow.]

As we noted yesterday, [...]]]> America is placing a 911 call to Hillary Clinton. We know it’s time to sober up. It’s time to put away the Hopium, the wine and the roses. It’s time for Americans to send Obama cartons of cigarettes – he’s fired up and ready to go – go away.

As we noted yesterday, Hillary Clinton understands the disaster of record U.S. budget deficits – which lead to bigger U.S. debt – which lead to bigger interest payments. To Hillary this deficit and debt are “a matter of national security” not just economics. To Hillary Clinton the financial irresponsibility and the increased reliance for Hopium dollars from nations like China are a danger and “The moment of reckoning cannot be put off forever.”

The Tea Party movement, once derided by Dimocrats, is now seen as a powerful force – even by delusional Dimocrats like Nancy Pelosi. What fuels the Tea Party movement, is what fueled the 1990s Ross Perot movement – fiscal irresponsibility by the U.S. government. Bill Clinton seized that moment (his last four budgets were in balance or in surplus) and made the Democratic Party the party of fiscal responsibility. Now Hillary Clinton is poised to do the exact same seize-fortune-by-the-forelock moment.

Republicans under George W. Bush were fiscal madmen. Barack Obama’s Dimocratic Party Obamination is likewise a party of crazed spenders. Hillary Clinton’s focus on the need to “turn the clock back” is the way to the future. Hillary Clinton, in last week’s critique of “this deficit and debt”, is saying “It’s The Economy, Stupid!”

In 2012 no political party will be able to run with the promise of new programs or new spending proposals. There is simply no money left. When interest rates begin to rise significantly, as they surely will having already started to slightly rise, interest payments on the debt will balloon and make that part of the budget a cancer that feeds on the nation. Dimocrats will not only be deprived of a promise based election but they will also be deprived of a “stay the course, we are competent” election run.

The fire next time will not be promises of new programs or new spending proposals but of change back to competence and experience and vision. The fire next time will be fiscal sanity, paying the bills, the American economy, and jobs, jobs, jobs.

* * * * * *

Hillary Clinton The Fighter

Barack Obama savaged Hillary Clinton as a polarizing force who could not get the celestial choirs to sing. Hillary was likened to Karl Rove. Celestial Choirs Obama promised, promised, Americans he would be a “uniter not divider” and now he is caught in a trap of his own making and whose promises must be held to account:

Hillary Clinton is fiscally responsible but that does not mean what must be done won’t be done. Hillary fights. When the health care legislation failed to pass in the 1990s, Hillary Clinton did not give up. Hillary continued to work on health care issues and legislation was passed which provided health care to children. Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama attacked Hillary. In 2008 the Chappaquiddick Chauffeur tried to drive Hillary off the bridge with lies. Here’s Fact Check:

“One of Clinton’s signature claims has come under fire from political foes, quoted by the Boston Globe, who say she doesn’t deserve credit for expanding federal health insurance for millions of children.

We review the record and conclude that she deserves plenty of credit, both for the passage of the SCHIP legislation and for pushing outreach efforts to translate the law into reality. [snip]

The newspaper also said that “privately, some lawmakers and staff members are fuming” over Clinton’s claim but didn’t name any of them. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who cosponsored the 1997 legislation that eventually led to the creation of SCHIP, was asked whether Clinton was exaggerating her role. The Globe said he wouldn’t criticize Clinton “directly” but said: “Facts are stubborn things … I think we ought to stay with the facts.”

Kennedy, of course, is now backing Clinton’s rival, Barack Obama, for the nomination. But last year, before that endorsement, he was quoted by the Associated Press as saying something quite different, which the Globe did not note in its story:

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Oct. 6, 2007: The children’s health program wouldn’t be in existence today if we didn’t have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

In that same story, The AP’s Beth Fouhy concluded, “While Kennedy is widely viewed as the driving force behind the program, by all accounts the former first lady’s pressure was crucial.” She quoted Nick Littlefield, who had been a senior health adviser to Kennedy, as saying, “we relied on her, worked with her and she was pivotal in encouraging the White House to do it.”

The AP’s assessment is backed up by others we consulted. [snip]

One of the co-authors of the plan, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, credited Mrs. Clinton for her “invaluable help, both in the fashioning and the shaping of the program.”

Years later, when Clinton was first running for the Senate, Kennedy’s aide Littlefield was still giving her credit. The New York Times quoted him as saying, ”She was a one-woman army inside the White House to get this done.” [snip]

Moreover, Hillary Clinton took a major role in translating the new law into action. [snip]

Our conclusion: Clinton is right on this one.”

Hillary Clinton fights to do what is necessary. This does not mean Hillary will be fiscally irresponsible. Hillary will get the job done and the job is jobs. Hillary Clinton doesn’t get the job done with wistful wishing and dreaming. Barack Obama must go, and Hillary Clinton has to answer the 911 call from the American people.

It’s The Economy (and Jobs), Stupid!

Hillary has a history of fighting to invest precious taxpayer dollars wisely. Yet, Hillary Clinton knows the job of the president must be to create jobs and to get the engine of American power, the economy, back to sanity. Her non-candidate message is, “It breaks my heart that 10 years ago we had a balanced budget, that we were on the way of paying down the debt of the United States of America.”

Fiscal sanity versus fiscal madness will be what elections for the foreseeable future will be fought over. The pompous Obama endorser Dan Gerstein gets some things right today:

The Democrats considered the $787 billion recovery package not just an essential step for saving the economy from depression, but also a first strike in White House’s “big bang” strategy. It would, by their way of thinking, build political momentum for a range of other major Obama agenda items like climate change. But for much of the public, the poorly conceived and marketed stimulus plan was the last straw in the unsettling explosion of government and debt that began with the bipartisan bailout bonanza in the waning days of the Bush administration.

Ever since that dividing line was crossed, the Democrats have seemed to be operating in a hermetically sealed political vacuum, impervious to the public’s changing post-crash priorities and diminishing tolerance for big government solutions. The complex, sector-remaking cap-and-trade bill is a perfect example. That plan may have been a tough but closeable sell in a stable economy, given the short-term sacrifices we would have to make to secure the long-term rewards. But it was a dead letter in a near-depressed economy with a mistrustful electorate prone to believe the most damning attacks about higher taxes and lost jobs. Yet the Democrats plowed ahead with a bill in the House and only stopped when Senate moderates bolted.

That was nothing, though, compared to the multi-pronged Democratic disconnect on health care. It was clear early on that the public wanted the president and Congress to focus on the economy, especially after the evidence mounted that the stimulus, whatever its disaster-preventing benefits, was not going to spur job growth any time soon. Yet the Democrats went ahead and devoted most of the last year to health care reform, which only reinforced the growing perception that Washington was still as arrogant and unresponsive as ever and that the Democrats, like their predecessors, were still out for themselves and their political aims.

It’s the economy, but Obama and his Dimocrats think it’s about Mess-iah’s diminishing cult of personality and the acolyte Dimocrats. But it’s about the economy and the voters. The damage Obama and his Dimocrats do now will last for “years to come” if not generations to come.

Most voters are impressionistic, especially independents and moderates of both parties. They look at the whole of what you have done and the how of what you have done. If Democrats ram through an unpopular trillion-dollar health care bill in this climate, with Congress’ approval rating at 15%, they may well cement their image as the worst of Washington and sever their claim on the public’s trust for years to come. Even if ObamaCare delivers over time–and if it avoids the substantial premium increases that the Massachusetts universal care system has produced–it most likely will be too little too late.

Again, consider the context. Trust in government–which has been trending substantially downward since the crash of 2008–is in tipping-point territory right now. A recent New York Times poll showed that 70% of Americans are angry or dissatisfied with how Washington is handling the people’s business; 80% said that members of Congress are more interested in pandering to special interest groups than in serving the needs of people who elected them; and 81% said members of Congress across the board deserve to be thrown out. A new CNN poll out this week goes a step further and shows that 56% of Americans now think the federal government poses a threat to their rights, with even 37% of Democrats sharing that view.

Those numbers beg the question: Would the Democrats actually be better off if their comprehensive health care bill does not pass? I tend to think so, though as I argued last week, the best course for Democrats would be to skip the all-or-nothing trap and pass a center-out bill that contains the 80% of insurance reforms on which both sides already agree. But that’s a moot point: The Democrats are going for broke (in more ways than one). The more salient question is when will the Democrats start connecting the dots–and recognize that the American people are not going to accept a government that is not willing to heed their doubts.

What happened to “jobs, jobs, jobs”? The High Church of Barack Obama, the New York Times is scratching it’s head:

By the time March arrived, President Obama was supposed to be entering his third month of the year talking about three things: jobs, jobs, jobs.

That was the plan of the White House — and the plea from many Democrats — as the unemployment rate remained frozen near 10 percent and the economy showed only hints of brightening. The administration created a “White House to Main Street” tour, giving Mr. Obama a forum to see and feel America’s pain, and offer his plan for relief.

So whatever happened to that shift from health care to the economy?

Have a cigarette, Barack. Eat some greasy food, Barack.

Democrats on midterm election ballots feel a growing sense of worry that the year is quickly ticking away. If the next chapter of the health care debate consumes the month of March, will there be time to pursue other legislation before campaigning begins in earnest?

The trip was Mr. Obama’s first to Georgia since campaigning against Hillary Rodham Clinton nearly two years ago in the presidential race. He was greeted by an editorial in The Savannah Morning News, with a headline declaring: “Welcome Mr. President: It’s about jobs.”

With Barack Obama it’s always words, words, words and now the words are “jobs, jobs, jobs”. But Obama’s words do not match Obama’s actions.

“When it comes to domestic policy, I have no more important job as president than seeing to it that every American who wants to work, and is able to work, can find a job, and a job that pays a living wage,” Mr. Obama said. “That was my focus last year, and that is my focus this year.”

If we take Obama’s word that “jobs’ was last year’s “focus” and this years “focus”, the conclusion must be that a focused Obama is still not getting the “job” done. Where are the jobs? Today Obama will try again to force through the massive transfer of wealth from taxpayers to a system that is acknowledged by most to be broken. Obama says he is focused on “jobs” but in reality is focus is on bringing more people into a system that is broken and forcing taxpayers to pay for the punishment.

He intended to move forward whether they joined him or not, aides said, so the White House could return to its originally scheduled message of jobs, jobs, jobs.

Where are the jobs?

* * * * * *

Where’s the economy?

Judd Gregg, the Republican Barack Obama wanted for Commerce Secretary, was interviewed recently by Ed Luce (the reporter who recently rocked Washington with a “blame the staff” article on Barack Obama’s collapsing White House) believes the U.S. is near a “financial meltdown”:

“The US is heading for a debt-driven “financial meltdown” within five to seven years, according to Judd Gregg, the outgoing Republican senator for New Hampshire. [snip]

“We have had China say that they are looking for other places to put their reserves and that is probably a smart decision on their part,” said Mr Gregg, who will not seek re-election in November. “So the warning signs are pretty clear and the path is unsustainable and, at this point, unless we take different actions, unavoidable.”

But the senator, who was the most high-profile Repub­lican invited by Barack Obama, the president, to join his administration last year, an offer Mr Gregg accepted and then turned down, said he doubted that the two parties would get together to tackle it.”

Thus far, Gregg is right that the two parties are unable or unwilling to tackle the problems the American economy faces. The American economy has 8 million manufacturing jobs and an economy with 150 million workers. Jobs, jobs, jobs.

Americans strongly believe the country is on the wrong track and Obama’s approval is tracking down, down, down. It’s going to get worse. In a major article, the Atlantic magazine explores “How A New Jobless Era Will Transform America“.

“The Great Recession may be over, but this era of high joblessness is probably just beginning. Before it ends, it will likely change the life course and character of a generation of young adults. It will leave an indelible imprint on many blue-collar men. It could cripple marriage as an institution in many communities. It may already be plunging many inner cities into a despair not seen for decades. Ultimately, it is likely to warp our politics, our culture, and the character of our society for years to come.

In 2012, the Republicans will blame Barack Obama and his self-alleged “focus on jobs” failed policies for continued joblessness. At best Barack Obama will be able to respond “I am a boob” in his own defense. The defense will be valid, but the situation will be dire.

According to the liberal Atlantic magazine, even by 2014 unemployment will only decline “a little”; average duration of unemployment last year surpassed six months; the jobless and those that have given up looking for work reached 17.4% in October; teenager unemployment reached 27%; unemployment “may already be plunging many inner cities into a kind of despair and dysfunction not seen for decades.”

Whatever alleged benefits of the Obama stimulus scam, they have come and gone (according to Obama’s economic adviser chair Christina Romer, the Federal Reserve, and Goldman Sachs). “The economy now sits in a hole more than 10 million jobs deep—that’s the number required to get back to 5 percent unemployment, the rate we had before the recession started, and one that’s been more or less typical for a generation.” Due to population growth the economy must produce about 1.5 million new jobs a year “just to keep from sinking deeper.”

“Even if the economy were to immediately begin producing 600,000 jobs a month—more than double the pace of the mid-to-late 1990s, when job growth was strong—it would take roughly two years to dig ourselves out of the hole we’re in. [snip]

The construction and finance industries, bloated by a decade-long housing bubble, are unlikely to regain their former share of the economy, and as a result many out-of-work finance professionals and construction workers won’t be able to simply pick up where they left off when growth returns—they’ll need to retrain and find new careers. (For different reasons, the same might be said of many media professionals and auto workers.)”

The bad news is long and ugly. For the Barack Obama addled young, a large chunk of that demographic, the bad news is “fun”. Stories of “funemployment” abound among the Hopium guzzler Obama young.

Many of today’s young adults seem temperamentally unprepared for the circumstances in which they now find themselves. Jean Twenge, an associate professor of psychology at San Diego State University, has carefully compared the attitudes of today’s young adults to those of previous generations when they were the same age. Using national survey data, she’s found that to an unprecedented degree, people who graduated from high school in the 2000s dislike the idea of work for work’s sake, and expect jobs and career to be tailored to their interests and lifestyle. Yet they also have much higher material expectations than previous generations, and believe financial success is extremely important. “There’s this idea that, ‘Yeah, I don’t want to work, but I’m still going to get all the stuff I want,’” Twenge told me. “It’s a generation in which every kid has been told, ‘You can be anything you want. You’re special.’”

Barack youth will have a rude wake up call. Many African-Americans will have a tough time too. The Atlantic relates these facts:

“In June 1999, the journalist Ellis Cose wrote in Newsweek that it was then “the best time ever” to be black in America. He ticked through the reasons: employment was up, murders and out-of-wedlock births down; educational attainment was rising, and poverty less common than at any time since 1967. Middle-class black couples were slowly returning to gentrifying inner-city neighborhoods. “Even for some of the most persistently unfortunate—uneducated black men between 16 and 24—jobs are opening up,” Cose wrote.”

“The best time ever to be black in America” was when “racist” Bill Clinton was in the White House. Another tough wake up call. In the age of Mess-iah Obama the White House is a bleak house:

“But many of those gains are now imperiled. Late last year, unemployment among black teens ages 16 to 19 was nearly 50 percent, and the unemployment rate for black men age 20 or older was almost 17 percent. With so few jobs available, Wilson told me, “many black males will give up and drop out of the labor market, and turn more to the underground economy. And it will be very difficult for these people”—especially those who acquire criminal records—“to reenter the labor market in any significant way.” Glen Elder, the sociologist at the University of North Carolina, who’s done field work in Baltimore, said, “At a lower level of skill, if you lose a job and don’t have fathers or brothers with jobs—if you don’t have a good social network—you get drawn back into the street. There’s a sense in the kids I’ve studied that they lost everything they had, and can’t get it back.

In New York City, 18 percent of low-income blacks and 26 percent of low-income Hispanics reported having lost their job as a result of the recession in a July survey by the Community Service Society. More still had had their hours or wages reduced. About one in seven low-income New Yorkers often skipped meals in 2009 to save money, and one in five had had the gas, electricity, or telephone turned off. Wilson argues that once neighborhoods become socially dysfunctional, it takes a long period of unbroken good times to undo the damage—and they can backslide very quickly and steeply. “One problem that has plagued the black community over the years is resignation,” Wilson said—a self-defeating “set of beliefs about what to expect from life and how to respond,” passed from parent to child. “And I think there was sort of a feeling that norms of resignation would weaken somewhat with the Obama election. But these hard economic times could reinforce some of these norms.”

A year ago, in “Who Obama Hurts Most” we wrote Obama would most hurt those who voted for him – his own deluded supporters. Those deluded supporters are the one now most in need of – Hillary Clinton.

We never worshiped Hillary Clinton. We don’t drink Hopium, even if it is Pink. It was never about Hillary. It is about us, the American people.

The American people in 2012 will dial 911. Hillary Clinton must answer. She’s our only hope.

After George W. and Barack Obama, experience might finally come back in vogue on the presidential candidate resumé. Experience could be the Hillary Clinton 2012 campaign theme yet again. But there is a deadly Barack Obama caused problem, [...]]]> Elect a boob, expect boobery. This time, “Try Experience – For A Real Change.”

After George W. and Barack Obama, experience might finally come back in vogue on the presidential candidate resumé. Experience could be the Hillary Clinton 2012 campaign theme yet again. But there is a deadly Barack Obama caused problem, and opportunity.

* * * * * *

When President Bill Clinton left office, with approval ratings in the mid-60s, the economy was purring and the deficit lion tamed. The debt carnivore too was in retreat. Then… we’ll let Hillary Clinton explain:

“Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday said “outrageous” advice from former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan helped create record U.S. budget deficits that put national security at risk.

Appearing before congressional panels to defend the State Department’s $52.8 billion budget request for 2011, Clinton said the massive U.S. foreign debt had sapped U.S. strength around the world.

“It breaks my heart that 10 years ago we had a balanced budget, that we were on the way of paying down the debt of the United States of America,” Clinton said.

“I served on the budget committee in the Senate, and I remember as vividly as if it were yesterday when we had a hearing in which Alan Greenspan came and justified increasing spending and cutting taxes, saying that we didn’t really need to pay down the debt — outrageous in my view,” she said.”

George W. Bush signed into law “a massive tax cut while spending billions on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and sponsoring a major expansion of the Medicare health program for seniors.” Experienced Hillary “urged lawmakers to tackle the federal budget deficit, which reached a record $1.4 trillion for the fiscal year that ended last September.”

“We have to address this deficit and the debt of the United States as a matter of national security not only as a matter of economics,” Clinton said. “I do not like to be in a position where the United States is a debtor nation to the extent that we are.”

Having to rely on foreign creditors hit “our ability to protect our security, to manage difficult problems and to show the leadership that we deserve,” she said.

“The moment of reckoning cannot be put off forever,” she said. “I really honestly wish I could turn the clock back.”

Wistfulness over the past will not produce the needed change. Hillary Clinton is going to have to produce that change. And don’t think Hillary did not understand the meaning of her words. (Go to the head of the class “Antifish” for your comment on PumaPAC “Does anyone else see possible “campaign talk” in this testimony, or am I just wishfully thinking?“)

Unease and outright distrust of the Federal government by a furious public due to runaway debt and deficits are the Barack Obama caused problem and opportunity. For the foreseeable future candidates for president are not going to be able to run on campaign promises which require the expenditure of vast sums of money. Barack Obama drained what little was left in the Treasury. This campaign limitation will not particularly hurt Republicans. But for anyone running with a “D” after their name the problem will be insurmountable – but not for Hillary.

* * * * * *

This morning (8:45 a.m. EST) Lynn Forester de Rothschild will appear on Fox And Friends. The discussion will center on her latest published article which ends with the following:

“Our central problem is that the combination of his grandiloquence and the September 2008 financial crisis led to his election. Now, the only way to stop him in the next three years is through voter pressure on Congress. One course is to follow Massachusetts and just elect any Republican. But both parties lack courageous leaders who will fight for the values and policies of the middle. We need a movement of the militant middle; millions of voters who support the sensible policies from both parties. This would give Democrats political cover to stand up to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid and Republicans the backbone to acknowledge that the country must progress in order to be strong. Most Americans see a false choice between a smaller government and a progressive country. We must have both. It is our only hope.”

We at Big Pink believe that in November 2010 Dimocrats must suffer devastating defeat and doom – it is the only way to wake them up to the massive Mistake In ‘08 and the need to return to the FDR/Hillary Clinton Coalition. We agree with Lynn Forester that in 2012, once Obama is out of the picture, a reassertion of responsibility and fiscal common sense must be returned to the national government on a bipartisan basis.

American power, prestige, influence and our way of life are predicated on a strong economy. For a strong economy we need jobs for Americans in America. Barack Obama does not know what to do to strengthen the American economy. Barack Obama does not know what to do to help the private sector create jobs. That’s why Obama distracts with schemes which will reward his friends and donors with massive transfers of wealth from the American taxpayer pocket.

In 2012 the issue will be the economy. Other than President Bill Clinton himself, no one better understands “It’s the economy, stupid!” than Hillary Clinton.

The Republicans know the economy will be the issue in 2012. Mitch Daniels who won a big Indiana victory in 2008 when Democrats won big just about everywhere, is the latest favorite flavor of the day for Republicans. Mitch Daniels will run on the economy:

“If the country has soured on a charismatic orator who brought glamour but little executive experience to the presidency, the thinking goes, then Daniels could provide the antidote.

“Do we want a president that’s pretty, or do we want one who can get the job done?” is how Anne Hathaway, a former Republican National Committee chief of staff who is now back in her native Indiana, puts it.

At 60, Daniels’s résumé is exhaustive: He’s a Princeton-educated former Senate chief of staff-turned political operative-turned think tank chief-turned Fortune 500 executive-turned White House budget director-turned two-term governor. [snip]

He has cut spending, cut taxes, leased the state’s toll road to a private company for billions and expanded health insurance and prescription drug access in a market-friendly way. The result is an approval rating of 70 percent, according to one recent survey, placing him among the country’s most popular governors. [snip]

Top party strategists say that characteristic would enable Daniels to fill at least three spaces in the Republican primary.

First, there’s the obvious: He’s the charismatically challenged opposite of Obama. And recent presidential history reveals an electorate that tends to elect presidents with the traits contrary to the outgoing chief executive.

But because of his record and background, he would offer more substantive contrasts, too.

“He’s a budget deficit hawk, but he’s also the interesting reformer,” said one of the Republican Party’s most influential officials, who insisted on anonymity to avoid being seen as taking sides.

Supporters think Daniels can appeal to voters who are fed up with what they see as excessive government spending as well as those who want a candidate who has actually delivered policy results that extend beyond reducing red ink.”

Whether it is Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Mitch Daniels, or Mike Huckabee, in 2012 there is only one real and true Democrat who can win – Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama is poison already and after November Obama will be poison unbottled. Barack Obama must be driven out of the race so competence and experience can make a return and so that Democrats realize we must return to the winning FDR/Hillary Clinton coalition.

* * * * * *

March is National Women’s History Month. “The overarching theme for March 2010 is Writing Women Back into History.” Barack Obama and the Democratic “leadership” along with a colluding Big Media tried to write Hillary Clinton out of history. Instead, Hillary Clinton supporters will write Obama, the Democratic “leadership”, and Big Media a ticket to oblivion.

[Part II tomorrow.]

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit five Latin [...]]]> The coastal South American country of Chile suffered an earthquake in the early morning hours today. As usual Hillary Clinton is on the job. Actually Hillary was on South American patrol way before the earthquake. Yesterday, before the quake struck this report appeared:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit five Latin American nations next week, seeking to foster relationships with some newly elected leaders and cement ties with others.

Hillary Clinton was scheduled to visit Uruguay, Argentina (they have a woman President), then Chile.

Clinton will bid farewell to President Michelle Bachelet, Chile’s popular leader who will be leaving with high approval ratings for steering her country through the global economic downturn and promoting progressive social reforms. Under Chile’s constitutional term limits, a president cannot run for a second consecutive term.

Oh right, Chile has a woman President too. After Chile, it’s on to Brazil, Costa Rica (”which elected its first female president this month”), and the final stop in Guatemala. South America, maligned as having a “macho culture”, elects women throughout the continent. What does the electoral history of South America say about the big neighbor to the North, us?

* * * * * *

Remember in early April 2007 when Don Imus on MSNBC attacked some young women basketball players with his “nappy headed hos” comment? The attack on women was quickly turned into a mostly racist remark. All the women on the basketball team were women. Not all the women on the basketball team were black. But it became a racial issue, not so much a sexist and misogyny issue.

That was back in the day when we seriously wrote compliments about Keith Olbermann. For those that have forgotten the “hos” incident, Don Imus made his disgusting statements and after many protests (many from hypocrites like Al Sharpton and Gwen Ifill, and “hymie town” Jesse Jackson), Don Imus was fired. In an interview with David Gregory, Jesse Jackson correctly said this in his own defense when David Gregory brought up Jackson’s “hymie town” comment as a counter to Imus’ “nappy” comment:

Jackson: “It’s not just Imus making a statement but when people like you appear on the show and Tim Russert and, and, and McCain and Harold Ford, you give, you’ve given credence to the show.“

Jackson then went in for the kill:

Gregory: “I’m sorry, Reverend Jackson, I just have to interrupt you here. I’m sorry, be very precise in what you are saying.”

Jackson: “All right.”

Gregory: “You are saying from, what, 3:00 to 12, because we do have African Americans who work at this company who are on MSNBC and NBC and I don’t want to detract from your point because you are entitled to make it, but I think you need to be accurate.”

Jackson: “All right. Name- Name- Name- Name- Name me a host of an MSNBC show.”

Gregory: “We’ve gone through this before. We did this a few days ago on the air. Alison Stewart is an African American host on MSNBC.”

Jackson: “So, does she host, does she host between 3:00 and 12?

Alison who?

After Imus was fired MSNBC promised reform. Joe Scarborough took over the time slot and for a short while there was a black sidekick by the name of John Ridley. Ridley has long been gone.

We mention this history because the Tea Party movement has long been under attack, just like Hillary supporters, as being racists. The Tea Party people hit back. They hit back with a video invitation to a meeting in Dallas today:

A tea party group is criticizing Keith Olbermann for suggesting the conservative grassroots organizations lack diversity, challenging the MSNBC host to attend an anti-tax rally on Saturday.

A 90-second web video posted on Monday by the Dallas Tea Party rebuts the liberal “Countdown” host’s attacks on the groups during his show.

“Let me ask all of you who attend these things, how many black faces do you see at these events?” Olbermann says during a clip highlighted in the video.

“Well, Keith, we see a whole lot more at our events than we see at MSNBC,” a narrator responds, as the video cuts to an image of the network’s mostly white lineup.

What happened to the black faces on MSNBC promise? It’s gone the way of all MSNBC apologies – like David Shuster’s Bald Spot.

Joe Scarborough is often praised as “Hillary friendly”. But woman friendly? Think again.

SCARBOROUGH: Have you seen Fred Thompson’s wife?
CRAWFORD: Oh, yeah.
SCARBOROUGH: You think she, you think she works the pole?

Not a good moment for the generally reliable good guy Craig Crawford either.

But in the annals of scum, Chris Matthews smiles bright.

MATTHEWS: But isn’t that a challenge, because when it comes down to that final decision to vote for president, a woman president, a woman commander in chief, will be an historic decision for people. Not just men, but women as well. Elisabeth, you’re always thinking about these things.

BUMILLER: It’s Golda Meir, it’s Margaret Thatcher. I mean, we all remember these women. I, you know, I think we can get there.

MATTHEWS: But we’ve got Patton and John Wayne on our side

And of course there was the day when old Imus met the the latest Imus and discussed the “horny monster”:

IMUS: Can she be elected president?

MATTHEWS: You know, somewhere out in the Atlantic Ocean, I think there might be a giant, green, ugly, horny monster. A gigantic, gigantic monster of anti-Hillary, an anti-woman Hillary, anti-liberal woman Hillary, some real ferocious beast out there that says no matter what happens between now and Election Day, they’re not going to let her win. There’s men, some women, are just not going to let this woman, this woman win the presidency. I don’t know whether that monster’s out there. All men I meet are afraid to talk like that. You only hear criticism of Hillary from smart, college-educated women. They’re the ones that always have a problem with her now.

But something tells me this country hasn’t changed that dramatically. You know, a friend of mine pointed out the other day that we let African-Americans vote starting in the 1860s, at least under the law. It took us until the 1920s to let women vote. It’s easier for men to accept a black guy as president than a woman president, I think, historically.

So why’s everybody so happy about Hillary? Have we changed overnight? And that’s what I can’t get in my head. If we have changed overnight, that’s a big development. If we haven’t, we haven’t talked about it yet. But there’s something out there about having a woman president – it’s huge — and nobody wants to talk about it. Just the idea of a woman president. And nobody’s argued it. It’s always — it’s all this politically correct, careful discussion. And yet it’s there, and nobody’s debating it.

MSNBC and NBC eventually went to war against Hillary Clinton and the very idea of a woman president. South America’s “macho” men have elected women and the “horny” monster tsunami did not appear. It is in America, at NBC and MSNBC that the horny monster reigns. The horny green monster is in technicolor. It is on MSNBC.

Hillary Clinton supporters know real health care died in Denver in August 2008. Hillary Clinton supporters also [...]]]> Unlike Obama, his health scam is not for sale – at any price. Americans do not want this clunker. This clunker is like an Edsel. Americans do not want to pay cash for this clunker.

Hillary Clinton supporters know real health care died in Denver in August 2008. Hillary Clinton supporters also know that, unlike his health scam, Obama is for sale to the highest bidder (read The Obama Health Plan Obama Supporters Do Not Want To Discuss).

Obama supporters desperate for a rationale to continue the Hopium guzzling note that some items in the Obama health scam are popular and therefore the Obama health scam should be made the law of the land. Today we will instruct these Hopium guzzlers on the Edsel.

The Edsel was a car Ford Motor Company did a great deal of polling on, asking consumers “What would you like in a car?” before designing it. The Edsel was a dream car full of items consumers wanted, but “the word “Edsel” has become synonymous with failure.” Wikipedia has some of the Edsel history:

“The Edsel was introduced amidst considerable publicity on “E Day”—September 4, 1957. It was promoted by a top-rated television special, The Edsel Show, on October 13, but it was not enough to counter the adverse public reaction to the car’s styling and conventional build. For months, Ford had been circulating rumours that led people to expect an entirely new kind of car, when in reality, the Edsel shared its bodywork with other Ford models.”

Obama himself is an Edsel – he is not who he said in his books, he is. The Obama health scam is an Edsel too:

There is no single reason why the Edsel failed, and failed so spectacularly. Popular culture often faults the car’s styling. Consumer Reports cited poor workmanship. Marketing experts hold the Edsel up as a supreme example of corporate America’s failure to understand American people. Business analysts cite the weak internal support for the product inside Ford’s executive offices. According to author and Edsel scholar Jan Deutsch, the Edsel was “the wrong car at the wrong time.“

Do we need to draw clearer similarities between the Edsel and Obama’s health scam? A spectacular failure, bad styling, poor workmanship, “failure to understand American people, weak internal support, the wrong car health plan at the wrong time. More similarities:

The prerelease advertising campaign touted the car as having “more YOU ideas“, and the teaser advertisements in magazines only revealed glimpses of the car through a highly blurred lens or wrapped in paper or under tarps. Edsels were shipped to the dealerships undercover and remained wrapped on the dealer lots.

But the public also had a hard time understanding what the Edsel was, mostly because Ford made the mistake of pricing the Edsel within Mercury’s market price segment. [snip]

Not only was the Edsel competing against its own sister divisions, but model for model, people did not understand what the car was supposed to be—a step up or a step below the Mercury.

After its introduction to the public, the Edsel did not live up to its overblown hype, even though it did have many new features, such as self-adjusting rear brakes and automatic lubrication. While consumer focus groups had said these and other features would make the “E” car attractive to them as car buyers, the cost of the cars outstripped what the public was willing to pay. When many potential buyers saw the base price tag, they simply left the dealership, and others were frightened by the price for a fully loaded top-of-the-line model.

We’ve made many comparisons of Obama as “New Coke”. As Dimocrats face disaster in November 2010 many begin to see we were right about the “New Coke” analogy. Edsel Obama and the Edsel which is the Obama health scam have not lived “up to its overblown hype.” The Edsel Obama Edsel plan also “outstripped what the public was willing to pay.” And there is this:

One of the external forces working against the Edsel was the onset of the recession in late 1957.

Reconciliation is Obama’s “An Edsel in every garage” demand. American consumers and voters do not want Edsel Obama or his Edsel scam.

* * * * * *

Before today’s publicity stunt the narrative was, “It’s a trap!” Turns out it is a Republican trap on a desperate, bumbling, Obama. The Republicans brought their “A” team to the summit publicity stunt and Obama brought his boobery. On premiums Obama proved a boob with his claim that premiums under his scam would not go up (we wrote about this last year in Who Do You Trust?). The Congressional Budget Office cannot even analyze the Obama Edsel plan. The old “cost control” argument was also jettisoned by credit card Obama in his eleven page “plan”. Harry Reid lied about “No one’s talking about reconciliation”.

The Barack Obama publicity stunt today is meant to somehow counter the correct view of most Americans that Obama lied to us when he promised transparency and that negotiations on health care reform would “be on C-SPAN”. Barack Obama worked out his deals with the pharmaceutical lobbyists in private in January/February 2009 and now he wants to play dress up before the cameras, but it is too late.

Republicans were ready and Obama fell into the trap. Yesterday, before the publicity stunt, this video was released by Republican allies:

Republicans pretended to be afraid of Obama’s vaunted, but not deserved, masterful Mess-iah style abilities. But it was a trap. Why are Republicans wisely participating in these Obama scams? Because every day that Obama annoys the American public with this more than dead health scam is another day there is no focus (another recently broken Obama promise) on jobs and the economy. “Let’s keep on talking about something that is not going to happen and waste more time, Barack” say the Republicans. Dimocrats, ever willing to be bamboozled, continue to play Obama’s game. Dimocrats will pay in November.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama has a “Plan B”. That “Plan B” will fail too. The used car salesman tried to sell an Edsel and now he wants to try to sell another clunker – the consumer will walk out of the dealership.

The Obama health scam is dead. The Edsel ran out of gas.

Barack Obama will continue his publicity stunts to distract Americans from the fact that he has done nothing and will continue to do nothing – other than big Wednesday night lavish spending on parties, sleeve removers for Michelle, and vacations.

Barack Obama will continue to spend on lavish, overly produced publicity stunts which feature himself spewing a cascade of words and more words. Today is but the beginning of the even bigger, faster publicity stunt presidency.

Six hours of Obama. How much more must the nation be punished?

—————————————————————————————

Update: Good thing Hillary Clinton is far away from this Mess-iah mess: —————————————————————————————-

It’s days like today, that confirm how correct [...]]]> Update II: Exactly two years ago, today, a real leader spoke the truth and was attacked for telling the truth by Big Media and the Big Media darling and the Big Media darling’s Hopium guzzlers:

—————————————————————————————

Update: Good thing Hillary Clinton is far away from this Mess-iah mess:

It’s days like today, that confirm how correct our analysis has been and continues to be. We have written very little about “health care” strategy and issues after the primary elections because we know meaningful health care reform died in Denver in August 2008. We have instead focused on the ceaseless flim-flams and incompetence, and inexperience, and outright boobery of Barack Obama in order to force Barack Obama out of office and make room for a certain plucky blond lady who is ready on Day 1.

On a day like today the flim-flam is blatant, the boobery in flagrante delicto. The flim-flam confidence game is dependent on big promises (”Hope! Change!”) and rush rush talk. When a flim-flam confidence man inevitably gets in trouble the strategy is bigger promises, even faster rush-rush “buy it now in the next minute or the deal goes away”.

We are therefore not surprised that the Obama Chicago Thugs chose today to release an “Exclusive” to the always willing-to-be-used Politico. The “Exclusive” is a devoid-of-news flim-flam about how the “White House privately plots 2012 campaign run“. Don’t waste your time reading the full article, it has no news, and no insight. It does end with this hilarious paragraph:

The themes for Obama’s campaign are not yet chosen, but a top adviser said not to expect a radical surprise: “He knows who he is.“

We know who he is too: a flim-flam thug from Chicago who has never done anything for anyone other than himself his entire life.

While there is no news in the Politico stenography session, what is news is the appearance of such a story. As we wrote, it is no surprise to us because flim-flam confidence men when in trouble promise bigger and faster. The publication of the reelection article is the pimp exploiting his “ho” with promises of eventual marriage and children and a house with a white picket fence. There will be no marriage, but the wedding promise is bigger, faster, than the lucrative-for-the-pimp business relationship.

Our job for now is to continue to expose the pimp and educate the “ho”. In other words, our job for now is to get rid of Obama and make way for the plucky blond lady.

* * * * * *

Generally a reelection bid is a time to tout success in the first election term. But for Barack Obama, who ran for president with an utter lack of experience, the reelection bid will be a time to revel in the phenomenal failure of the first term. Elected with massive majorities not seen in generations by the Republicans in the House of Representatives and with a filibuster busting 60 vote super-majority in the U.S. Senate, Obama has produced little to nothing – other than massive transfers of wealth from the American taxpayers to irresponsible speculators and the wealthy. The Obama health scam too is a massive transfer of wealth to the Big Insurance and Big PhaRma companies. What to do? Promise bigger, faster.

The latest Obama scam is the publicity stunt summit scheduled for tomorrow along with a bigger faster corollary scam that somehow “reconciliation” is the answer to force through the scam. We wrote a rather definitive article about the “reconciliation” process back in July of 2009 called “Obama’s Bluff”. Think of today’s article as an update to reconfirm what we wrote in July 2009.

Since we wrote “Obama’s Bluff” there have been many articles written about the “reconciliation” rules. The Hill quoted the former Senate parliamentarian on why the process is not “suited” to healthcare reform.

Today we have the latest pronouncements from Senator Conrad which pretty much reconfirm what we wrote so long ago. Conrad is almost invoking last rites:

“The only way this works is for the House to pass the Senate bill and then, depending on what the package is, the reconciliation provision that moves first through the House and then comes here,” said Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) outside the upper chamber this morning. “That’s the only way that works.”

I pointed out that House leadership, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has repeatedly insisted they won’t take a flier on a reconciliation package–that they will only pass the Senate bill after the smaller side-car reconciliation bill has been all wrapped up.

“Fine, then it’s dead,” Conrad said.”

The Obama loving New Republic in January 2010 published another confirmation of what we wrote last year. It’s a comprehensive article which discusses the current ploys and plots and effectively comes to the same conclusions we did a year ago. The article discusses how “When it comes to enacting laws and then later amending those laws, it doesn’t matter in what order Congress passes bills. All that matters is the order in which the president signs those bills into law.” The article then discusses what we wrote about a year ago, in a New Republic fashion:

“But the problems with reconciliation are legion. [snip]

The process is not as quick as some have made it out to be. In order to qualify for reconciliation, three committees in the House and two committees in the Senate have to mark up provisions within their jurisdiction. Since there are no time limits on committee markups, these would last until recalcitrant Republicans drop from exhaustion and stop offering amendments. Then the committees in each chamber have to give their work product to the Budget Committees, which are then required to hold their own markups of the bill (amendment-free, this time) and report reconciliation bills to the chamber without substantive change (after waiting two extra calendar days in the House to allow Republicans to file minority views). Under the budget resolution, each committee’s portion of the bill must lead to a net reduction of the deficit of at least $1 billion over five years.[snip]

But in the Senate, once the bill gets reported, any grouping of 41 senators can knock out any provision in the reported bill that a) has no budgetary impact (or which has a budgetary impact that is only incidental to the policy provision), b) increases the deficit by any amount over a five-year or ten-year period, c) ups the deficit by more than $10 billion in any one year before 2014 unless fully offset over a five-year period, or d) makes any change to title II of the Social Security Act. And of particular importance to a massive and open-ended bill like health care, the Senate’s PAYGO rule requires 60 votes for any provision that would increase the deficit by more than $5 billion in any ten-year period going all the way out to the year 2059. (You read that correctly: 2059.) This is why so many provisions in reconciliation bills have to “sunset” and expire after ten years.”

It would be entirely irresponsible to create a health plan that would potentially collapse and end in ten years. The uncertainty alone would likely lead to increased health costs. There is also the problem of 41 Republican senators able to knock out non-germane provisions. There is also the amendment problem:

“But in the Senate, while the Budget Act caps the total debate time on a reconciliation bill and all related amendments and motions at 20 hours, the authors of the Budget Act who drafted this provision back in 1974 neglected to limit the number of amendments that can be offered.

This leads to perhaps the Senate’s most stupefying activity (in a chamber chock full of stupefying activity)–“vote-a-rama.” At the conclusion of the 20 hours of debate, senators can still offer an unlimited number of amendments, which must then be voted on immediately, without debate. And by “unlimited,” I mean it is never less than dozens but could easily stretch into the hundreds. The Senate usually gets unanimous consent to shorten the time for roll call votes from the usual 15-plus minutes down to two minutes each, but that requires unanimous consent, which has been lacking on anything having to do with health care. As political scientist (and my old college professor) Walter Oleszek says, the Senate basically only has two rules: unanimous consent and exhaustion. So Republicans can keep offering amendments and forcing roll call votes until they are physically no longer able to do so. (This is why the Majority Leader prefers to schedule a reconciliation bill or budget resolution right before the Senate is supposed to take a long vacation–to give the minority an incentive to cut the vote-a-rama short and go home. The next scheduled Senate recess is the week of President’s Day, so the most logical time to schedule the reconciliation bill for the Senate floor would be the few days leading up to Friday, February 12.)”

February 12 has already come and gone, so perhaps Obama will prove he is the Mess-iah by scheduling an Easter vote.

Other problems then loom large:

“Once the House and Senate pass a bill, it would have to go to House-Senate conference (the Budget Act appears to make no provision for ping-ponging a reconciliation bill). And under a new Senate rule, nothing can be added to that conference report that was not already in either the House or Senate bill, or such provision would require 60 votes in the Senate as well. But the debate on that conference report in the Senate is limited to ten hours, after which there is a final passage vote by a simple majority.

So reconciliation would give the minority party in the Senate a chance to force a separate roll call vote on every line of the bill. The requirement that every single provision in a reconciliation bill have budgetary impact means that the bill cannot address regulatory issues, consumer protection issues, or items like abortion. The open-ended limitations on deficit increases sharply curtail any additional spending in the bill and mean that most changes made by reconciliation that affect spending and revenues must expire in ten years. And the requirement that congressional committees hold a new two-stage markup process, combined with the usual (if time-limited) floor consideration and conference processes, means that using reconciliation would occupy all of Congress’s attention until late February, at a time when legislators are anxious to shift their public focus away from health care and back to the economy.”

It’s apparent that reconciliation is Obama’s Bluff, and not a very good bluff. The procedure is flawed, the legislation stinks, and the votes are not there. So why bother with the bluff? Because Obama wants someone else to take the blame. It’s what Obama always does. It’s Barack Obama’s flim-flam let someone else take the blame reelection publicity stunt.

Why are the Republicans going along with Obama’s Bluff? We’ll answer that tomorrow.