So said Gene Kranz, NASA’s Mission Control lead flight director for Apollo 13. And so we are faced with a similar situation - a seemingly impossible task, but this time rather than saving the lives of astronauts, we are faced with stopping the drumbeat of socialism from the Left - our task is saving an entire country. The Democrats must not be allowed to succeed in passing healthcare rationing. For us, failure is not an option.  We cannot fail in stopping this disaster.

Earlier in the week, eburke posted a diary titled “We Will Never Surrender - We Will Never Yield”, after Winston Churchill’s famous inspirational speech. That excellent diary reminded me of this video, which I posted on his diary. I thought it worthy of a repeat.

Even if the Democrites manage to find a way to lie, cheat and bribe their way to passing this abomination, we will never surrender. It will be stopped. If not now, later.

Never surrender. We ARE as mad as hell, and we are not going to take it any more.

(consider this an open thread)

UPDATE:  Some Twitterers are stating that this is a “shell bill” that will provide a base for actual language later.  Rep. Paul Ryan alluded to this move last week.

And Michelle Malkin weighs in, as does Philip Klein.

* * * *

The Hill is reporting tonight that the Democrats have published a copy of the bill that they plan to use to update the original Senate healthcare socialization bill that Pelosi plans to bring to the floor this week.

And it appears they’ve decided to go all-in on this one.  Included in the bill appears to be the “public option” that was removed from the Senate bill.  From page 1167 of the bill:

Subtitle B—Public Health Insurance Option

SEC. 221. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF A PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION AS AN EXCHANGE-QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—For years beginning with Y1,  the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this subtitle referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall provide for the offering of an Exchange-participating health benefits plan (in this subdivision referred to as the ‘‘public health insurance option’’) that ensures choice, competition, and stability of affordable, high quality coverage throughout the United States in accordance with this subtitle. In designing the option, the Secretary’s primary responsibility is to create a low-cost plan without compromising quality or access to care.

I’m no legislator, but this sure sounds like a public option to me.

The logic escapes me.  If the Democrats didn’t write their own death warrant with the 12/24/09 Senate bill, this should pretty much seal it.

Let me add one other comment, based on a twitter msg from one of our colleagues:  when the Dems try to ram through legislation using an unconstitutional process like the “Slaughter Solution”, we should not trust them on anything.

Karl Marx famously stated that religion was the “opiate of the masses”.  But Marx (unsurprisingly) had it wrong:  the government nanny state is the real opiate of the masses.  It is injected into our lives by the Leftist drug pushers who wish to control us, hook us on their DC-manufactured “progressivism”, and depend upon them for all of our needs. They know that once we’re hooked, we like it.  We may not want to like it, because we know it’s really wrong to have such a dependency upon government.  But we can’t help ourselves.  There’s all that free stuff, just waiting for us to swallow it and make us feel good.

Today, many are rightfully up in arms about the looming disaster that is health care socialization.  During the run-up to this catastrophe, many focused on the so-called “public option” and how evil it would be to have a single-payer or government health care provider (a’la the British NHS) system. But the “public option” was not the real problem - it is a government takeover of a vast swath of the American economy and the theft of freedom to choose whether we wish to be under the thumb of Big Brother.  The Democrat drug lords are trying to get us to sample yet a stronger dope.  What happens if this legislation passes?  Will we have the will-power to resist?  Or will we take a hit and find that we like it…and beg for more and more?

This past week, Mark Steyn made a critical point about the motivation of the Democrats in passing this healthcare bill.  It has little to do with healthcare and much to do with government intrusion in our lives.  As Steyn states, the Democrats are out to establish a “permanent left-of-center political culture.”  Since 2008, we have made much of how the USA is still a “center-right” nation.  The Left knows that.  They don’t like it.  They know that we are not hooked enough on their political philosophy.  While entitlements drive over half of the United States budget, those entitlements are largely focused on senior citizens, with Social Security and Medicare.  That population, while hugely influential in elections, is not the majority.  Once health care is socialized, the rest of us very well could fall under the drug-induced intoxication of entitlement.

Read More →

During the “health care summit,” we witnessed yet another Barack Obama Hypocrisy Moment, as he chastised Senator John McCain for “campaigning” during his summit comments and accused McCain of employing “talking points”

As one who has noted Obama’s non-stop campaigning, I found this bordering on hysterically funny.  He had to have OD’d on gall that morning to make such an assertion.  This is the President who has made over four hundred speeches in his first year in office.  Back in October, Toby Harnden of the London Telegraph observed:

Beyond the grand announcements, fine speeches and his eager acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr Obama has yet to achieve anything of substance. It is time for the campaign to end.

Indeed, it is time for the campaign to end.  But, as Harnden points out, Obama is “the campaigner-in-chief.”  It is What. He. Does.  Governing is too messy for the President.  He’d rather pass off responsibility to folks like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and let them do the heavy lifting … and then he can throw them under the bus later when they fail (God willing).

Read More →

It’s no secret that MO Sec’y of State Robin Carnahan, the likely Democrat challenger for U.S. Senator Kit Bond’s Missouri seat, has been MIA when it comes to stating her positions on key issues facing the country.  For months we were left wondering if she had fallen into some sort of black hole, as she was not to be seen or heard.

But now Politico correspondent Dave Catanese (formerly a reporter for Springfield, MO’s KY3 TV), is bathing Ms. Carnahan’s behavior with euphemistic glory.  In an article regarding the GOP’s strategy against the Dems in the forthcoming 2010 elections, he states:

The NRSC chairman also contended that Democratic candidates like Louisiana Rep. Charlie Melancon and Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan are either distancing themselves from the legislation or attempting to remain silent.

Melancon, who is challenging Sen. David Vitter, was one of 39 Democrats who voted against the original legislation and has said he will not reverse himself. Carnahan, who is looking to pick up retiring Sen. Kit Bond’s seat, has issued carefully crafted statements that have focused on general principles rather than specifics on key sticking points.

“Carefully crafted statements”?  Maybe he was referring to these “carefully crafted statements”:

• Attending a pro-abortion fundraiser in NYC with Planned Parenthood board members
• Attending a Seattle fundraiser held by the “League of Conservation Voters,” a group that has been sliming Rep. Roy Blunt about his vote against cap-and-trade. (Oh, and Rep. Blunt just happens to be running against Carnahan in the Senate race.  What a coincidence.)
• Avoiding direct questions from reporters about her position on the House health care legislation
• Dodging card check questions at an event where she was endorsed by Teamsters President Jim Hoffa?
• Conveniently missing President Obama’s appearance on Wednesday in St. Charles, MO.  Apparently, the statement she’s making here is “trying to get out of the way of the health care train wreck”

Read More →

So I meander out to my mailbox this afternoon, and what should I discover but a letter from the U.S. Census.  Hmm, feels mighty thin, I say to myself.  So I open up the envelope and out drops this letter:

The Census has sent me a letter telling me that they’re going to send me a letter.  Brilliant!

I’m having a difficult time deciding if this letter is:

1. Supposed to be helpful or informative in some way.
2. A joke.
3. Some sort of Obama stimulus plan for the postal workers
4. My imagination.

I’m betting on option 3.

Read More →

The story begins in April, 2009, when the “League of Conservation Voters” began a $750K campaign to slam Rep. Roy Blunt for his vote against the “Cap and Trade” (or “Cap and Tax”) bill, who repeatedly refers to it by its euphemistic official smokescreen/name: “American Clean Energy & Security Act,” in an attempt to convince Missourians that Blunt is somehow trying to deny jobs in Missouri.  The LCV claims that this vote is somehow a sign that Blunt is beholden to “Big Oil”.   But it is actually a sign that Rep. Blunt is closely aligned with Missourians who oppose big government schemes that raise our taxes.

What is curious about the LCV campaign is that it is being shown around the entire state, rather than just in Rep. Blunt’s district, despite claims from the LCV that this is simply an effort to inform Blunt’s constituents of his position and “hold him responsible”.  If that be the case, then why show the ad in St. Louis, which is many miles from Blunt’s district?  The truth is obvious - the LCV campaign and the subsequent hit campaign from the VoteVets group are anti-Blunt Senate campaign ads bankrolled by Robin Carnahan supporters. 24thState.com documents the situation quite nicely.

And now it appears that Ms. Carnahan has decided to put it out in the open and forget about hiding her connections to the League of Conservation Voters.  Last Thursday night, Carnahan traveled to the Left Coast to attend a Seattle fundraiser sponsored by none other than the LCV.  (According to news accounts, a whopping fifty donors attended the event.)

Read More →

I must admit - this is sensory overload here. Many speakers, many bloggers, many speeches, many politician visits. I have been remiss in posting status. I think that Twitter has taken the place of most of the “quick hits” posts that we may have been putting up in previous years.

A few observations:

• This is obviously the place to make your mark as a potential candidate in the future. We’ve seen a number of men (no ladies, I’m afraid) who will undoubtedly proceed towards a Presidential candidacy at some point in the future. Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Pence (not 2012, most likely), and I wouldn’t be surprised to see DeMint, Michelle Bachman, or several others show up on the ballot some time.
• One of the highlights of today’s events (so far) was Rep. Newt Gingrich.  Newt entered the room to the sounds of “Eye of the Tiger” and was met by a SRO crowd. Even the cheap seats up here in the balcony were packed.
  • Newt stated that the subject of his talk would be “Principled Bipartisanship“. That elicited groans from several of us, anticipating a discussion of how we could cooperate with the Dems on health care reform…and he did focus on that to some degree. However, Newt’s strategy was for the GOP to insist on having equal representation and equal consideration of GOP ideas. He said that “bipartisan” would mean that WE also would be able to choose participants, and they would not have the luxury of being the only ones selecting.
  • He referred to Obama’s job creation program - “Obama has created at least 3 jobs: Bob McDonnell, Chris Christie, and Scott Brown
  • Newt also cracked wise about abolishing the 9th Circuit.  That’s change I can believe in!
  • At one point, he started a point with “Let me be clear“…  After that phrase, there was a considerable amount of laughter.  I don’t know that Newt realized what he had said, and if he did, he missed the irony of using an oft-mocked Obamaism.
  • Gingrich was another who predicted the defeat of Obama in 2012.  He said “I think we will elect a new POTUS in 2012“.  The response to his statement was chants of “NEWT NEWT NEWT!”  While Mr. Gingrich is superb at distilling ideas into terms that normal people will understand, I don’t relish the idea of him as POTUS, particularly after wandering off the ranch with stunts such as his endorsement of Dede Scozzafava in NY-23.
  • Newt’s argument for “Principled Bipartisanship” deserves a more thorough analysis, and I will need to review the video for details.

Read More →

RedState is the sponsor of the Bloggers Lounge here at CPAC 2010, and we do have our share of RS blogging occupants, with Moe, Aaron, Caleb, Leon, Erick, Kevin, Brian, Rob, Jeff, James, Soren … and me… making occasional appearances in the lounge. But we’re not alone - there are probably 100+ bloggers who have been working on and off in the lounge.  I myself have staked out a spot outside the room, out on the ballroom balcony, where it’s a little easier to hear the speakers and it’s a bit cooler!

One of the beautiful things about being a blogger at CPAC is the chance we have to meet our elected representatives, interview and just chat with them.  Today, so far, we’ve had the chance to visit in the lounge with Chuck DeVore, Steve Poizner, and Rep. Mike Pence.  In fact, Rep. Pence greeted several of us a while ago, and we shot a little group pic.

He was also kind enough to do a little Q&A for the Bloggers.

Note the strategically-placed RedState banner behind Rep. Pence.  :-)

The day is drawing to a close, but the best is yet to come tomorrow.  Some of tomorrow’s luminaries:  Rick Santorum, Andrew Breitbart, John Bolton, Ann Coulter, Newt Gingrich, and…. Glenn Beck.

Wish you were here!

The RedState contingent is alive and well at CPAC 2010, camping out in the (Redstate-sponsored) Blogger Lounge.  There are at least seven of us here so far, and more will float in and out during the day.

Note Moe Lane’s fingers on the keyboard in the foreground.

Estimates are at about 10K attendees for this year’s event.  So far we’ve had Marco Rubio and Jim DeMint addressing the crowd.  Both were fantastic, as expected, and got the audience fired up.  Rubio detailed several key ideas he has for how to turn the country back from the Obamination that we find ourselves experiencing today:

• Reform the tax code, reduce tax rates across the board
• Eliminate double taxation – abolish capital gains, dividends, interest, death taxes
• Lower the corporate tax rate so it is competitive with the rest of the world
• Stop big govt energy madates such as Cap & Trade
• Put the consumer in charge of healthcare spending in America
• Pass lawsuit abuse reform
• Undertake serious measures to get control of national debt
• Terrorists attack to impose their view of the world on as many as they can; America is standing in the way
  • We will do whatever it takes, as long as it takes, to defeat radical Islamic terrorism
  • We will stand with our allies like Israel
  • We will capture them (terrorists_, get useful info from them, bring them to justice in front of military tribunal at Gitmo, not a civilian courtroom in Manhattan (BIG APPLAUSE)

The agenda here is rich, and there will be more where that came from.  Watch the action on Twitter via hashtag #cpac10.  And watch the front page throughout the conference…we’re all working to bring the conference to you live!

Run, do not walk, to your computer (oh, right, you’re already there)… and read this article.  It is brilliant.  It captures the essence of leftist attitudes perfectly.   The author, Gerard Alexander (associate professor of politics at the University of Virginia) describes “four major narratives” that leftists (no, I won’t use “liberal”, just as I steadfastly refuse to use “progressives” – both terms are simply euphemisms for “leftist” … but, I digress) use in their arguments:

1. “The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy”
   

   a narrative made famous by Hillary Rodham Clinton but hardly limited to her. This vision maintains that conservatives win elections and policy debates not because they triumph in the open battle of ideas but because they deploy brilliant and sinister campaign tactics.

2. Conservatives are either manipulated or stupid:
   

   And speaking to a roomful of Democratic donors in 2008, then-presidential candidate Obama offered a similar (and infamous) analysis when he suggested that residents of Rust Belt towns “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations” about job losses. When his comments became public, Obama backed away from their tenor but insisted that “I said something that everybody knows is true.”

3. Conservatives are RACISTS!
   

   It is now an article of faith among many liberals that Republicans win elections because they tap into white prejudice against blacks and immigrants.

4. Conservatives are emotion-driven, liberals are logic- and evidence-driven.
   

   Former vice president Al Gore made this case in his 2007 book, “The Assault on Reason,” in which he expressed fear that American politics was under siege from a coalition of religious fundamentalists, foreign policy extremists and industry groups opposed to “any reasoning process that threatens their economic goals.” This right-wing politics involves a gradual “abandonment of concern for reason or evidence” and relies on propaganda to maintain public support, he wrote.

Alexander captures perfectly how Barack Obama exemplifies liberal condescension:

These four liberal narratives not only justify the dismissal of conservative thinking as biased or irrelevant — they insist on it. By no means do all liberals adhere to them, but they are mainstream in left-of-center thinking. Indeed, when the president met with House Republicans in Baltimore recently, he assured them that he considers their ideas, but he then rejected their motives in virtually the same breath.

“There may be other ideas that you guys have,” Obama said. “I am happy to look at them, and I’m happy to embrace them. . . . But the question I think we’re going to have to ask ourselves is, as we move forward, are we going to be examining each of these issues based on what’s good for the country, what the evidence tells us, or are we going to be trying to position ourselves so that come November, we’re able to say, ‘The other party, it’s their fault’?”

This article illustrates why the GOP has no business responding to Obama’s overtures to meet with him and the Dems to discuss healthcare socialization. Republican/conservative ideas will be ignored and condescended, just as every other Republican idea and thought has been since Obama’s coronation.  Just say NO, Republican leadership.

READ the article. Now.

From the Urban Dictionary:

pwned – A corruption of the word “Owned.” This originated in an online game called Warcraft, where a map designer misspelled “owned.” When the computer beat a player, it was supposed to say, so-and-so “has been owned.”

Instead, it said, so-and-so “has been pwned.”

This week, Missouri’s Senator Kit Bond massively pwned Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Last week, Gibbs revealed in a press conference that the FBI had been receiving more cooperation from The Christmas Pantybomber (Umar Farouq) Abdulmutallab.  Senator Bond is the ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee and received this information from FBI leadership.  According to Bond, the FBI instructed the committee to not disclose Abulmutallab’s cooperation.  But Gibbs did just that.

Yesterday, Bond discussed his exchange with Gibbs on St. Louis radio station KMOX.

Bond, on the Mark Reardon Show on KMOX, called Gibbs a “clown” and said it’s the White House that should apologize because the F.B.I. told everyone to keep the information quiet.

“They said it is absolutely critical that this information not come out because it will hamper our ability to follow up on all the leads the underpants man (Umar Abdulmutallab) gave us on the terror activity being planned in Yemen.” said Bond.

When asked where Bond thought the information originated he told KMOX it had to have come from the White House.

Bond has sent a letter to the President outlining his concerns.  He has not received a reply from the president.

Press Secretary Gibbs has proposed a debate with Senator Bond.  Bond told KMOX “I don’t debate Press Secretaries.”

That’s gonna leave a mark.  Pwned.

Following now-Senator Scott Brown’s supermajority-busting win of TedKennedy’sSeat™ in Massachusetts, the Democrat rats are quickly leaping from the Obama sinking ship. The latest “run away” moment comes on the heels of the Obama FY2011 budget proposal. Unsurprisingly, the POTUS continues his trillion dollar deficit extravaganza, even after his laughable attempt to feign fiscal responsibility by recommending a so-called “spending freeze.” as part of his proposal.  This week, it was revealed that one of the rats abandoning the Good Ship Barry is none other than Missouri’s Democrat Secretary of State and presumptive Dem candidate for Kit Bond’s U.S. Senate seat, Robin Carnahan.

It’s been fun to watch the leftist bloggers lament about how their man-god has betrayed them.  Earlier this week, Robin Carnahan expressed her “disappointment” in Obama’s “lack of fiscal discipline”, and the Huffington Post was right there to document it.  HuffPo quotes Robin:

“From where I stand here in Missouri, I’m disappointed in the President’s budget recommendation. Budgets are about setting priorities and it’s time Washington started making fiscal discipline and tackling the long-term budget deficit higher priorities.

As you might expect, the HuffPo blogger was none too pleased with her newfound opposition to their Fearless Leader

But for an Obama White House that is touting the deficit reducing measures it has thrown into the budget (from spending caps, to prospective cuts in defense programs, to “restoring some balance to the tax code”) comments like Carnahan’s don’t help.

Read More →

Teh Twitter is abuzz with posts on the rumor that Barack Obama will be announcing a “spending freeze” on discretionary spending during the State of the Union address.  Pay close attention to the words:  discretionary spending.  The word on the street is that his request will exempt “the Pentagon, veterans programs, foreign aid and homeland security” from this so-called “freeze.”  There are a couple of key items to consider:

1. What exactly does he mean by “freeze?”  Does it mean “freeze the level of spending at the bloated 2009 numbers”?  Or does it mean “don’t increase these programs any more in 2010 than we did in 2009?  Or does it mean “stick to historic growth levels, rather than Obama-caliber spending increases”?  Inquiring minds want to know.
2. Discretionary spending means non-entitlement spending.  When you subtract out entitlements:  Medicare & Social Security, and then you subtract defense-related spending, there is precious little left.  In fact, it comes out to less than fifteen percent of the federal budget.*  Barack Obama’s so-called “stimulus” program totaled around $750B – that’s almost 50% greater than the entire non-defense discretionary budget for 2009. Freezing 15% of the federal budget is a drop in the bucket.  (see page 8 of this PDF)

Note one other key item in that Federal Budget PDF document.  As of the year 2017, “Net Interest” – the interest paid on the national debt – exceeds ALL non-military discretionary federal spending.  If Barack Obama wanted to have a real impact on the federal budget, both now and in the future, he would cease and desist from these so-called “stimuli” that are doing little or nothing to fix the Obama Recession.

To propose a spending freeze of any sort is good political theater for Obama, but it will have virtually no impact on the financial standing of the United States of America.

* - 15% = $586B non-military discretionary spending / $3801B total outlays in 2009.  I was right in the first place.

This past Thursday morning, St. Louis NPR station KWMU reported that Republican Scott Brown’s victory in the Massachusetts Senate race could be “a shot across the bow for Robin Carnahan”, the Democrat competing with Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt (MO-7) for retiring Senator Kit Bond’s seat.  The station said:

Speaking in St. Louis Republican Senator Kit Bond said Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts is further proof that voters do not support the President’s agenda, from bailouts, to cash-for clunkers and most of all the healthcare overhaul. “It should be a wake-up call,” said Bond. “People are tired of government takeover, government takeover, of government taxation. Anybody who is on the wrong side of this issue might want to consider it again.”

It now appears that the polls are agreeing with Senator Bond.  The Missouri Senate race is starting to move strongly in Roy Blunt’s favor, no doubt due in large part to a gradual increase in unease with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda.  Today’s numbers from Scott Rasmussen shows that Blunt has gained eight points on Carnahan, with Blunt leading 49%-43%. Last month, he trailed Carnahan by just two points.

Policy positions are critical in a campaign, and name recognition is a key component of success.  Both the Blunt and Carnahan names are well-known around Missouri. But there is one name that’s known more around Washington DC than the other, and you may be surprised to know whose name that is.  Let’s take a peek…

Read More →

So the Coakley vs. Brown MA SEN race is for Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, right?  Apparently Chris Van Hollen forgot this fact when he stated:

Why would you hand the keys to the car back to the same guys whose policies drove the economy into the ditch and then walked away from the scene of the accident?

…into a ditch and then walked away“?  A DITCH?  Really?  REALLY?

I’ve been accused of speaking without thinking before, but Van Hollen goes into the HOF for this one.

Ted Kennedy.  ”Into a ditch and walked away”.

Wow.

(PS: DOOOOOOOOOOOOM!)

News broke this weekend that a forthcoming book on the 2008 election will report Harry Reid making some incendiary remarks about Barack Obama. Specifically, Harry Reid said Obama has “no Negro dialect, unless he wants to have one.”

Let’s take the Wayback Machine to 2002, shall we?  We’ll take a look at the Democrats’ responses to Trent Lott’s statements (and subsequent apology) about Strom Thurmond, which were widely condemned as “racist.” Lott had said “we wouldn’t be in the mess we were in today” had Thurmond won the Presidency way back when Thurmond ran as a Dixiecrat.

• ‘His apology does not take away the sting of his divisive words…‘ - Barbara Boxer
• ‘I can tell you if a Democratic leader said such a thing, they would not be allowed to keep their position,’ - Mary Landrieu
• ‘What he said was insensitive as hell; it’s very offensive,’ … ‘Race is serious stuff. It’s not something you kid about.’ - Joe Biden
• ‘…the GOP must decide whether Lott ‘represents the views of the majority of Republicans in the Senate and in our country.‘ - Hillary Clinton
• ‘We need political leaders who are healers, not dividers,’ … ‘I hope that Senator Lott’s apology will translate into action and that he will advance policies that bring us together as a nation rather than pull us apart.‘ - Dick Durbin
• ‘When connected to past comments and votes, this statement casts a dark shadow over Sen. Lott’s ability to be a credible party leader‘ - Diane Feinstein
• ‘Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat, described Lott’s comments as ‘outrageous’ and ‘completely inexcusable.’ ‘Those kinds of comments have no place in our society and should be repudiated by every American,’ Stabenow said in a statement. ‘At this point, the Republican caucus in the U.S. Senate needs to think long and hard about the kind of values they want their leadership to represent.‘ - Debbie Stabenow

(and there are many other classics from Senate and House Democrites at “Blogs for Victory“)

Climate cultist Algore and (surprise, surprise ) Jesse Jackson demanded that Lott resign:

But some Democrats were angry. Civil rights activist Jesse Jackson called for Lott to resign, and former Vice President Al Gore told CNN that the comment was “racist.”

Funny, Jesse has been strangely silent the last couple of days.

Then we have the pièce de résistance from The O himself:

Illinois Senator Barack Obama (D-13th), who hosted WVON’s Cliff Kelley Show, challenged the Republican Party to repudiate Lott’s remarks and to call for his resignation as senate leader.

“It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do,” said Obama.

He said: “The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party.”

If Democrat hypocrisy was jobs, the Obama economic mess would be over tomorrow.

President Obama, I’m waiting patiently for your demands that Harry Reid resign.  Something tells me that I have a long wait ahead of me.

(UPDATE:  As noted in the comments, this morning RNC Chair Michael Steele called upon Reid to resign.  Methinks the request will be met with :crickets:)

“Blame Bush” has been Obama’s favorite strategy for trying to deflect blame for his mishandling of virtually every challenge he’s faced since ascending to his throne almost one year ago.  But is this approach still resonating?  I think not.  Obama refuses to stop blaming his predecessor for his own shortcomings. The latest blame-fest came with the December 25th pantybomber incident.

Immediately following the Christmas terrorist attempt by Omar Abdulmutallab, the Obama administration sprung into action in an attempt to pass the buck to Bush.

“The idea was that we’d show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could,” says a staffer in the counsel’s office. “We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we’d declassify it if necessary.”

“This White House doesn’t view the Northwest [Airlines] failure as one of national security, it’s a political issue,” says the White House source. “That’s why Axelrod and Emanuel are driving the issue.”

The official White House blog reflects the Obama strategy to place the blame on Obama’s predecessor.  How ironic is it that an official WH blogpost with the title “The Same Old Washington Blame Game” would be so focused on blaming another POTUS for the shortcomings of their own administration?

Read More →

No other word can describe Harry Reid.

On the floor before the vote, Majority Leader Harry Reid said, “We’re going to hear an earful, but it’s going to be an earful of wonderment and happiness that people waited for for a long time.”

Could that be the sound of “wonderment and happiness” I hear?

No, I think it’s the sound of the American people:

The latest Rasmussen Reports weekly tracking update shows that 41% of voters nationwide favor the bill and 55% are opposed. Those figures are essentially unchanged from a week ago. This the fifth straight week with support for the legislation between 38% and 41%.

Among senior citizens, the group most likely to use the health care system, just 33% are in favor while 60% are opposed. Most adults under 30 favor the plan, but majorities of every other age group take the opposite view.

The intensity remains with those who oppose the legislation. Just 19% Strongly Favor the plan while 45% are Strongly Opposed.

Polling released last week showed that 57% of voters say passing nothing would be preferable to passing the current legislation. Most voters (54%) believe they personally will be worse off if the legislation passes.

Delusional is the only explanation.  Or senility.  Or just sheer stupidity.  Any of the above fit just fine.

A quick search of the Interwebs for the term “political suicide” will return a significant number of stories on the pending Democrat-pushed healthcare “reform” legislation and their seemingly inexplicable political death spiral. Virtually every poll says that the public rejects the bills in the Senate and House, Barack Obama’s popularity is tanking, and virtually no one on the Right OR the Left is happy with them. So the natural question is: Why are the Democrats pushing this?

The characterization of the Democrats’ actions as “political suicide” is somewhat inaccurate. It would be more apt to call it “political hari-kari”, as the Democrats believe that passing this legislation is the honorable thing to do. They believe that this is the political equivalent to Grandma’s spoonfull of castor oil - something that we don’t want but they’re doing because it’s good for us. This week, in an article titled “Why Democrats push health care, even if it kills them,” Byron York quoted a Democrat strategist:

“Because they think they know what’s best for the public,” the strategist said. “They think the facts are being distorted and the public’s being told a story that is not entirely true, and that they are in Congress to be leaders. And they are going to make the decision because Goddammit, it’s good for the public.”

Of course, going forward has turned out to be harder than many Democrats thought. And now, with various proposals lying wrecked along the road, the true believers are practicing what the strategist calls “principled damage control.”

The Dems believe that once healthcare fascism socialization rationing reform is passed, we’ll come to love it, just as we have with Social Security and Medicare. We’ll figure out that it really WAS good for us. And incredibly, they believe that not only will it be good for us, but it will win them seats in 2010.

Read More →