/PRNewswire/ -- The Log Cabin Republicans are appalled by the overwrought political actions by Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) by merely allowing 3 Democrat-only amendments to the Defense Authorization Bill (FY2011 NDAA). Right now, Senator Harry Reid is not permitting any open debate or other amendments to this bill.
However, one of the 3 amendments that does have Senator Harry Reid's full support is the DREAM ACT. The DREAM ACT would offer paths to citizenship for undocumented students who came to the US as children, most likely illegally. Nevada has the largest percentage of illegal immigrants in the United States.
"Senator Harry Reid is treating the United States Senate like his own personal re-election campaign," says R. Clarke Cooper, Executive Director, Log Cabin Republicans. "We are simply asking the majority to play fair and not stack the bill with Democrat-only amendments that help Senator Reid's re-election bid and could potentially kill any Republican support."
Also appalled by the process, or lack thereof, are Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Susan Collins (R-ME). Senator Collins "would like the Senate to proceed to a full and open debate on the Defense Authorization bill, with members to offer other amendments on all relevant issues."
The Log Cabin Republicans met early today with Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) minority staff and were told, "the hay is in the barn." However, the LCR wants to know if that is the case "then why aren't the horses feeding?"
Showing posts with label democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democrats. Show all posts
Friday, September 17, 2010
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Ex-White House Spokesman Robert Weiner Asks, 'If There Were Reagan Democrats in the '80s, Why Can't There be Obama Republicans Now?' Roll Call Op-ed
/PRNewswire/ -- Ex-White House spokesman Robert Weiner, and policy analysts Jonathan Battaglia and Noah Merksamer, are asking, "If there were Reagan Democrats in the '80s, why can't there be Obama Republicans now?"
In an op-ed in today's Roll Call, they assert that "In today's politics, bipartisanship seems like a distant memory. It was not always like this.
"Until the 1990s, we had consensus by issue, not by party -- fierce opposition and strong support, but not based primarily on party lines." Weiner traces the history of large minority votes on historic issues as contentious as today's -- Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights, and show their contrast to almost no minority votes on recent budgets, tax cuts, health care, the economy, and financial reform.
"In 1935, 92 percent of Congress voted for the Social Security Act, including 81 Republicans in the House. There were dissenters -- Rep. Daniel Reed (R-N.Y.) said that with Social Security, Americans would 'feel the lash of a dictator.' Sen. Daniel Hastings (R-Del.) declared that Social Security would 'end progress.' Yet the measure passed 77-6 in the Senate, 382-33 in the House.
"The Civil Rights Act of 1964 did away with segregation. 70 percent voted 'aye,' including 136 Republicans in the House and 21 in the Senate. Republicans and Southern Democrats crossed party lines on both sides of the issue -- they were voting on the issue, not the party regimen.
"When Congress was debating Medicare in 1965, Sen. Carl Curtis (R-Neb.) called the program 'brazen socialism' -- sound familiar? Yet 72 percent of Congress supported Medicare's creation, including 70 Republicans in the House.
"Under former Speaker Tip O'Neill (D), the Reagan tax cuts passed in 1981 with 48 Democrats supporting it. In addition, O'Neill and Rep. Claude Pepper (D-Fla.) were able to keep Congress from slashing Social Security benefits amid President Reagan's cuts in domestic spending. Reagan and House Republicans were part of governing with bipartisanship.
"In contrast, last year's health care reform did not receive a single Republican vote in the House or Senate on final passage. Despite the bill's use of private insurance, no public option, no Medicare buy-in and 160 Republican amendments in the bill such as tax breaks for 95 percent of small businesses, the minority would not give the Democrats a vote. Democrats weren't flawless -- they let partisanship get in the way of including medical malpractice reform, despite Obama's public support for it. Regardless, in the past, a bill with such broad-based compromises would have received 30 to 100 Republican House votes on passage and 10 to 30 in the Senate.
"Only three Republicans in the Senate voted for Wall Street reform in July, despite the financial meltdown, and despite broad minority participation in the drafting.
"This recent unwillingness to compromise began in 1994, with the rise of former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and the Contract With America. Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) earned the nickname 'The Hammer' because he punished those who did not support George W. Bush. The leadership triumvirate of DeLay, Gingrich and Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) would not allow Republican Congressmen to vote against the party only on major issues -- exactly the time to express one's conscience."
Weiner, Battaglia, and Merksamer conclude by asking, "If there were Reagan Democrats in the '80s, why can't there be Obama Republicans now?"
In an op-ed in today's Roll Call, they assert that "In today's politics, bipartisanship seems like a distant memory. It was not always like this.
"Until the 1990s, we had consensus by issue, not by party -- fierce opposition and strong support, but not based primarily on party lines." Weiner traces the history of large minority votes on historic issues as contentious as today's -- Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights, and show their contrast to almost no minority votes on recent budgets, tax cuts, health care, the economy, and financial reform.
"In 1935, 92 percent of Congress voted for the Social Security Act, including 81 Republicans in the House. There were dissenters -- Rep. Daniel Reed (R-N.Y.) said that with Social Security, Americans would 'feel the lash of a dictator.' Sen. Daniel Hastings (R-Del.) declared that Social Security would 'end progress.' Yet the measure passed 77-6 in the Senate, 382-33 in the House.
"The Civil Rights Act of 1964 did away with segregation. 70 percent voted 'aye,' including 136 Republicans in the House and 21 in the Senate. Republicans and Southern Democrats crossed party lines on both sides of the issue -- they were voting on the issue, not the party regimen.
"When Congress was debating Medicare in 1965, Sen. Carl Curtis (R-Neb.) called the program 'brazen socialism' -- sound familiar? Yet 72 percent of Congress supported Medicare's creation, including 70 Republicans in the House.
"Under former Speaker Tip O'Neill (D), the Reagan tax cuts passed in 1981 with 48 Democrats supporting it. In addition, O'Neill and Rep. Claude Pepper (D-Fla.) were able to keep Congress from slashing Social Security benefits amid President Reagan's cuts in domestic spending. Reagan and House Republicans were part of governing with bipartisanship.
"In contrast, last year's health care reform did not receive a single Republican vote in the House or Senate on final passage. Despite the bill's use of private insurance, no public option, no Medicare buy-in and 160 Republican amendments in the bill such as tax breaks for 95 percent of small businesses, the minority would not give the Democrats a vote. Democrats weren't flawless -- they let partisanship get in the way of including medical malpractice reform, despite Obama's public support for it. Regardless, in the past, a bill with such broad-based compromises would have received 30 to 100 Republican House votes on passage and 10 to 30 in the Senate.
"Only three Republicans in the Senate voted for Wall Street reform in July, despite the financial meltdown, and despite broad minority participation in the drafting.
"This recent unwillingness to compromise began in 1994, with the rise of former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and the Contract With America. Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) earned the nickname 'The Hammer' because he punished those who did not support George W. Bush. The leadership triumvirate of DeLay, Gingrich and Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) would not allow Republican Congressmen to vote against the party only on major issues -- exactly the time to express one's conscience."
Weiner, Battaglia, and Merksamer conclude by asking, "If there were Reagan Democrats in the '80s, why can't there be Obama Republicans now?"
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Democrats' Attempt to 'Buy Off' NRA Shows Bankruptcy of 'Disclose Act,' says CCRKBA
/USNewswire/ -- This week's highly-publicized effort to exempt the National Rifle Association from the effects of the "Disclose Act," H.R. 5175 shows how fundamentally bankrupt the legislation and its underlying philosophy is, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.
"The attempt by Democrats to essentially buy off the NRA with a tailor-made exemption should be proof enough that the entire measure is morally, if not legally, repugnant and should be rejected by Congress," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. "The exemption clause, if it were to be formally adopted as an amendment to the bill, is probably unconstitutional. We think that is reason enough for Congress to stop H.R. 5175 in its tracks."
The proposed exemption would only apply to the NRA, while essentially sacrificing the First Amendment rights of other effective grassroots gun rights organizations due to their smaller membership numbers.
"This proposed exemption is unconscionable," Gottlieb said, "but it reveals the desperation of its sponsors to pass legislation that would still silence organizations critical of how the Democrat leadership has mismanaged things on Capitol Hill. We are today urging our 650,000 members and supporters to tell their congressional representatives to derail the Disclose Act altogether.
"Congressional anti-gunners like nothing better than to drive wedges between effective gun rights organizations," he continued, "and this week's events prove they can still accomplish that. We are astonished that anybody on Capitol Hill would imagine for a heartbeat that they could buy off one gun rights group at the expense of all the others. To think they could actually get away with such smarmy Chicago-style politics suggests that the Democrat leadership in Congress has not only lost its moral compass, they've lost their minds.
"While it is disappointing that the NRA might have accepted the exemption," Gottlieb said, "it is despicable that the offer was ever made in the first place. If pro-gun Democrats want to shield the NRA from the effects of H.R. 5175, they should simply vote against the entire bill instead of trying to carve out a special exemption. They have insulted and infuriated millions of gun owners who are represented by smaller grassroots organizations, and they need to hear that loud and clear."
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
"The attempt by Democrats to essentially buy off the NRA with a tailor-made exemption should be proof enough that the entire measure is morally, if not legally, repugnant and should be rejected by Congress," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. "The exemption clause, if it were to be formally adopted as an amendment to the bill, is probably unconstitutional. We think that is reason enough for Congress to stop H.R. 5175 in its tracks."
The proposed exemption would only apply to the NRA, while essentially sacrificing the First Amendment rights of other effective grassroots gun rights organizations due to their smaller membership numbers.
"This proposed exemption is unconscionable," Gottlieb said, "but it reveals the desperation of its sponsors to pass legislation that would still silence organizations critical of how the Democrat leadership has mismanaged things on Capitol Hill. We are today urging our 650,000 members and supporters to tell their congressional representatives to derail the Disclose Act altogether.
"Congressional anti-gunners like nothing better than to drive wedges between effective gun rights organizations," he continued, "and this week's events prove they can still accomplish that. We are astonished that anybody on Capitol Hill would imagine for a heartbeat that they could buy off one gun rights group at the expense of all the others. To think they could actually get away with such smarmy Chicago-style politics suggests that the Democrat leadership in Congress has not only lost its moral compass, they've lost their minds.
"While it is disappointing that the NRA might have accepted the exemption," Gottlieb said, "it is despicable that the offer was ever made in the first place. If pro-gun Democrats want to shield the NRA from the effects of H.R. 5175, they should simply vote against the entire bill instead of trying to carve out a special exemption. They have insulted and infuriated millions of gun owners who are represented by smaller grassroots organizations, and they need to hear that loud and clear."
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Perkins: Senate Would Rather Mandate Abortion Funding Than Enact 'Health Care Reform'
/PRNewswire/ -- This evening, the Nelson-Hatch abortion anti-funding amendment to the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" was "tabled" by a vote of 54-45, thus killing any hope to make the health care bill abortion neutral. The Nelson-Hatch amendment would have prevented government funding for elective abortion in the public option or subsidies for health plans in the government run exchange that cover elective abortion. Of all the concerns in the legislation, abortion is the one issue that the Democrats are afraid to have a straight up-or-down vote on.
Family Research Council Action President Tony Perkins responded with the following comments:
"In rejecting the Nelson-Hatch amendment, pro-abortion senators have broken the three decade-long truce over government funding of abortion and have demonstrated they would rather mandate federal funding for abortion than enact comprehensive 'health care reform.'
"With the defeat of the Nelson-Hatch amendment, pro-abortion groups have won an unfortunate victory in their quest for unhindered government funding for abortion-on-demand. Rather than maintain current policy to prevent government funding for abortions in this health care bill, senators voted to placate the abortion industry and, in some cases, a desperate allegiance to abortion as a central tenet of their public policy vision. The Senate health care bill would force American taxpayers to foot the bill for abortion-on-demand in both the public option and in private plans.
"We know that abortions increased when the government funded it in the 1970's before the Hyde amendment was passed. Even the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research arm, says that abortions would increase by 25 percent if the government funds it.
"FRC Action urges every Senator who supported the Nelson-Hatch amendment to now oppose any vote to end debate on this abortion expansion bill," Perkins concluded.
In response to today's Senate vote, FRC Action will expand its grassroots campaign in opposition to the health care overhaul bill. Over the next eight weeks, FRC Action will call all household phones in Arkansas, South Dakota, and Louisiana to survey each household on provisions of the Senate health care bill. These include abortion funding, rationing, higher taxes, and government-run health care, or the public option. Additionally, FRC Action will be calling pro-life households in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Survey participants who express opposition to the so-called health care reform will be given contact information for their senators.
FRC will also launch a TV ad in Arkansas that will again point out that abortion funding remains in the Senate health care bill.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Family Research Council Action President Tony Perkins responded with the following comments:
"In rejecting the Nelson-Hatch amendment, pro-abortion senators have broken the three decade-long truce over government funding of abortion and have demonstrated they would rather mandate federal funding for abortion than enact comprehensive 'health care reform.'
"With the defeat of the Nelson-Hatch amendment, pro-abortion groups have won an unfortunate victory in their quest for unhindered government funding for abortion-on-demand. Rather than maintain current policy to prevent government funding for abortions in this health care bill, senators voted to placate the abortion industry and, in some cases, a desperate allegiance to abortion as a central tenet of their public policy vision. The Senate health care bill would force American taxpayers to foot the bill for abortion-on-demand in both the public option and in private plans.
"We know that abortions increased when the government funded it in the 1970's before the Hyde amendment was passed. Even the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research arm, says that abortions would increase by 25 percent if the government funds it.
"FRC Action urges every Senator who supported the Nelson-Hatch amendment to now oppose any vote to end debate on this abortion expansion bill," Perkins concluded.
In response to today's Senate vote, FRC Action will expand its grassroots campaign in opposition to the health care overhaul bill. Over the next eight weeks, FRC Action will call all household phones in Arkansas, South Dakota, and Louisiana to survey each household on provisions of the Senate health care bill. These include abortion funding, rationing, higher taxes, and government-run health care, or the public option. Additionally, FRC Action will be calling pro-life households in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Survey participants who express opposition to the so-called health care reform will be given contact information for their senators.
FRC will also launch a TV ad in Arkansas that will again point out that abortion funding remains in the Senate health care bill.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Bauer Notes Obama's Coattails 'Were Cut Off,' Voters Return to the Right
/PRNewswire/ -- Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer on Wednesday said that it was clear that the pundits were wrong, rather than President Obama changing the nature of the electorate, "it's a center-right country, and Obama's coattails were cut off last night as his coalitions stayed home." The chairman of the Campaign for Working Families offered the following analysis of the evening's events:
NEW JERSEY LEADS THE WAY:
"New Jersey is a ground breaking story this morning as a hard-core blue state for the Democratic Party where they have institutional power and media support failed to deliver. And despite many campaign stops, Obama could not transfer his 15 point win from 2008 to his ticket's standard bearer barely a year later. The biggest shock at the White House today has to be the loss of independent voters in both New Jersey and Virginia.
"It's clear that voters, especially independent voters, do not like the change they have experienced since Obama's election ... changes like higher unemployment, strangled credit, and massive proposed tax increases on everything from health insurance to fuel and food. These results show that the voters are rejecting runaway deficit spending, higher taxes and bigger government. If the White House and Congressional liberals are listening, they will pull Obamacare off the agenda and stop the march to socialized medicine."
HOFFMAN'S CAMPAIGN SENDS A MESSAGE:
"The small showing of the independent in the New Jersey race reveals why Hoffman's near win is so significant. The Democratic National Committee even ran ads for New Jersey Independent Chris Daggett to draw away from Republican Chris Christie, but he made a feeble, single-digit showing. But in New York's 23rd, a district that went to Obama, Hoffman ran a simple campaign with a single message, 'I will not be a vote for Nancy Pelosi.' With the Republican establishment against him, with the media against him, with the Democratic establishment against him, Hoffman pulled in 46 percent of the vote on a confusing ballot on which he was not listed at the GOP's candidate. If Hoffman's performance is combined with the numbers of failed Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava, who was listed as the GOP's candidate, he would have carried the day.
"That simple Reaganite message that higher taxes and government take-over of industry must stop was powerful enough to create real drama all night. And in fact, when the Democratic Party winner Bill Owen gave his own victory speech, he was careful to reach out to the Republicans in his district ... something Obama might try.
"As one of the first conservative leaders to endorse Hoffman, I was moved to act by the fact that the long-term Republican was standing on the core Reaganesque principles - smaller government, lower taxes, a strong national defense, and support for life. And while some may mock these American ideals, they remain bedrock issues for most Americans. The fact that a district which went so solidly for Obama came so close to electing an unknown third party candidate shows the power of those ideas. "
A REPUDIATION OF SOCIAL ISSUES?:
"Some pundits today insinuate that Hoffman's loss was a repudiation of social issues. Nothing could be further from the truth. In Maine, where the governor and both chambers of their legislature tried to lead in the nation in radically redefining marriage, once again - for the 31st time - voters said no to gay marriage. Values issues have a place in the national discussion."
THE PICTURE BECOMES CLEAR:
"Obama came to office as the political equivalent of a Rorschach test. People could read into his message of 'change' anything they wished. But the picture is becoming clearer by the day. He embraces a socialist agenda through government-run businesses, from the auto industry to health care. He proposes a nanny state where taxes are used to punish politically incorrect behavior like drinking soda or turning on the heat in winter. He supports schemes for redistribution of hard earned money to those who did not earn it, through higher and higher taxes, and more and more give away programs. He expands government power through unelected 'czars' who use government power as a weapon against those they do not agree with, rather than building a consensus on how to go forward.
"But while it's clear that hard-core liberals are rallying to Obama's side and that he is uniting the Republican Party in new and energizing ways, the big news in the numbers is Obama's loss of support among independents. Independents are abandoning the Democrats and have been very sophisticated in cutting through the political noise. Calling a liberal a 'moderate' does not change political reality. Democrats have assumed that independents want more government and support higher taxes and ballooning deficits. But they are wrong.
"They are also wrong to claim that conservatives like me do not want the GOP to be a big tent or that the party is engaged in some kind of civil war. Nothing could be further from the truth. All people, regardless of race, creed or color, are welcome to join together in support of timeless, American values. The GOP is a party of principles and ideas, and a healthy party talks about how best to implement those ideas. The GOP desires to free Americans from the weight of government taxes and regulations so that they can build a better life for themselves and their families. Ideas such as smaller government, strong national defense, and respect for all people at all stages of life are the bedrock of a winning party. Tuesday those values won and with them so did the GOP."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
NEW JERSEY LEADS THE WAY:
"New Jersey is a ground breaking story this morning as a hard-core blue state for the Democratic Party where they have institutional power and media support failed to deliver. And despite many campaign stops, Obama could not transfer his 15 point win from 2008 to his ticket's standard bearer barely a year later. The biggest shock at the White House today has to be the loss of independent voters in both New Jersey and Virginia.
"It's clear that voters, especially independent voters, do not like the change they have experienced since Obama's election ... changes like higher unemployment, strangled credit, and massive proposed tax increases on everything from health insurance to fuel and food. These results show that the voters are rejecting runaway deficit spending, higher taxes and bigger government. If the White House and Congressional liberals are listening, they will pull Obamacare off the agenda and stop the march to socialized medicine."
HOFFMAN'S CAMPAIGN SENDS A MESSAGE:
"The small showing of the independent in the New Jersey race reveals why Hoffman's near win is so significant. The Democratic National Committee even ran ads for New Jersey Independent Chris Daggett to draw away from Republican Chris Christie, but he made a feeble, single-digit showing. But in New York's 23rd, a district that went to Obama, Hoffman ran a simple campaign with a single message, 'I will not be a vote for Nancy Pelosi.' With the Republican establishment against him, with the media against him, with the Democratic establishment against him, Hoffman pulled in 46 percent of the vote on a confusing ballot on which he was not listed at the GOP's candidate. If Hoffman's performance is combined with the numbers of failed Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava, who was listed as the GOP's candidate, he would have carried the day.
"That simple Reaganite message that higher taxes and government take-over of industry must stop was powerful enough to create real drama all night. And in fact, when the Democratic Party winner Bill Owen gave his own victory speech, he was careful to reach out to the Republicans in his district ... something Obama might try.
"As one of the first conservative leaders to endorse Hoffman, I was moved to act by the fact that the long-term Republican was standing on the core Reaganesque principles - smaller government, lower taxes, a strong national defense, and support for life. And while some may mock these American ideals, they remain bedrock issues for most Americans. The fact that a district which went so solidly for Obama came so close to electing an unknown third party candidate shows the power of those ideas. "
A REPUDIATION OF SOCIAL ISSUES?:
"Some pundits today insinuate that Hoffman's loss was a repudiation of social issues. Nothing could be further from the truth. In Maine, where the governor and both chambers of their legislature tried to lead in the nation in radically redefining marriage, once again - for the 31st time - voters said no to gay marriage. Values issues have a place in the national discussion."
THE PICTURE BECOMES CLEAR:
"Obama came to office as the political equivalent of a Rorschach test. People could read into his message of 'change' anything they wished. But the picture is becoming clearer by the day. He embraces a socialist agenda through government-run businesses, from the auto industry to health care. He proposes a nanny state where taxes are used to punish politically incorrect behavior like drinking soda or turning on the heat in winter. He supports schemes for redistribution of hard earned money to those who did not earn it, through higher and higher taxes, and more and more give away programs. He expands government power through unelected 'czars' who use government power as a weapon against those they do not agree with, rather than building a consensus on how to go forward.
"But while it's clear that hard-core liberals are rallying to Obama's side and that he is uniting the Republican Party in new and energizing ways, the big news in the numbers is Obama's loss of support among independents. Independents are abandoning the Democrats and have been very sophisticated in cutting through the political noise. Calling a liberal a 'moderate' does not change political reality. Democrats have assumed that independents want more government and support higher taxes and ballooning deficits. But they are wrong.
"They are also wrong to claim that conservatives like me do not want the GOP to be a big tent or that the party is engaged in some kind of civil war. Nothing could be further from the truth. All people, regardless of race, creed or color, are welcome to join together in support of timeless, American values. The GOP is a party of principles and ideas, and a healthy party talks about how best to implement those ideas. The GOP desires to free Americans from the weight of government taxes and regulations so that they can build a better life for themselves and their families. Ideas such as smaller government, strong national defense, and respect for all people at all stages of life are the bedrock of a winning party. Tuesday those values won and with them so did the GOP."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Monday, November 2, 2009
FRC Action PAC's Early Support for Doug Hoffman Pays Dividends with Scozzafava's Exit
/PRNewswire/ -- Today, Connie Mackey, president of FRC Action PAC, the political action committee connected to Family Research Council, released the following statement in regards to the exit of Dede Scozzafava from New York's 23rd District race.
"I am delighted that the Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava, has bowed out of the special election. The attitude by some unnamed Republicans that conservatives just won't support a woman didn't help endear conservative women like myself to Ms. Scozzafava's candidacy. She was out of the mainstream on issues dear to the heart of most women like traditional family values and respect for innocent life. I can say unequivocally that when the Republicans and Democrats put forward candidates who have the basic, commonsense approach to issues, they will receive our support, whether male or female."
"The fact that she has finally taken off the Republican mask and endorsed a liberal Democrat should be a lesson learned for the Republican Party bosses who thought she was their winning ticket. If a primary had been held, Doug Hoffman would have won hands down and Ms. Scozzafava could have continued as a liberal Democrat with an R in front of her name."
FRC Action PAC continues to air radio ads throughout New York's 23rd district urging support for Doug Hoffman on Election Day. On Tuesday evening at 8:30 PM ET, FRC Action will host a special webcast to offer election night analysis and also the latest on the health care reform debate. Go to http://www.frcaction.org/webcast to register.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
"I am delighted that the Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava, has bowed out of the special election. The attitude by some unnamed Republicans that conservatives just won't support a woman didn't help endear conservative women like myself to Ms. Scozzafava's candidacy. She was out of the mainstream on issues dear to the heart of most women like traditional family values and respect for innocent life. I can say unequivocally that when the Republicans and Democrats put forward candidates who have the basic, commonsense approach to issues, they will receive our support, whether male or female."
"The fact that she has finally taken off the Republican mask and endorsed a liberal Democrat should be a lesson learned for the Republican Party bosses who thought she was their winning ticket. If a primary had been held, Doug Hoffman would have won hands down and Ms. Scozzafava could have continued as a liberal Democrat with an R in front of her name."
FRC Action PAC continues to air radio ads throughout New York's 23rd district urging support for Doug Hoffman on Election Day. On Tuesday evening at 8:30 PM ET, FRC Action will host a special webcast to offer election night analysis and also the latest on the health care reform debate. Go to http://www.frcaction.org/webcast to register.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Friday, September 11, 2009
Obama --- A Charming Liar?
President Barack Obama is a charming liar. That assertion was made by a liberal talk show host on Air America, a far left-wing radio station. Where is the caterwauling about racism or a lack of “civility” from Democrats and liberals in the mainstream media or else where? When ardent Obama supporters start calling him a liar, it’s a sure sign that the wool has been pulled off of the Obama wolf.
In a laughable attempt to keep the Obama fig leaf of truthfulness in place, Democrats and their media allies are now castigating Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina for spontaneously and truthfully calling Obama a liar during Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress. There was no such hand wringing when Democrats booed President George W. Bush when he addressed Congress. Ignored is the fact that Obama during his speech trashed as liars average Americans, Republican leaders and all who do not agree with Obama’s radical government-run, rationed health care agenda. Lost in the media coverage is the fact that laughter erupted in Congress during Obama’s speech when he readily admitted that details of his healthcare plan still need to be worked out. Sadly, Obama’s duplicitous speech was an insulting campaign ploy to further deceive Americans and divide our nation.
From the moment he stepped onto the national stage to campaign for the presidency, Obama has consistently lied to the American people in order to convince us to trust him with our economic and national security. Since becoming our president, he has betrayed that trust.
During his first eight months in office, Obama has exhibited his admiration for dictators and disdain for our allies. He offended the Queen of England and bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. He praised the Marxist Daniel Ortega, kissed Socialist Hugo Chavez on the cheek and endorsed the Socialist Evo Morales of Bolivia. He sided with Hugo Chavez and Communist Fidel Castro against Honduras, a country that followed its constitution and stopped its president from illegally turning himself into that country’s dictator. Obama announced that he would meet with Iranians with no pre-conditions, while they're building their nuclear weapons.
Obama displayed a blatant lack of concern for what is in the best interest of America when he circled the globe and publicly apologized for America's world leadership. He told the Mexican president that Americans are responsible for the violence in Mexico. He announced a cut in funding for our new missile defense system the day after an ICBM was launched by North Korea. He released information on U.S. intelligence gathering despite contrary urgings of his own CIA director and the four prior CIA directors. He ordered that the word "terrorism" be stricken from our discourse and replaced with the innocuous words "man made disasters." He appointed a Homeland Security Chief who identified military veterans and abortion opponents as "dangers to the nation." In a scary bid to increase the political power of the Democratic Party, Obama politicized the census by moving it out of the Department of Commerce and into the White House.
His dogged determination to turn our country into a failed socialist nation was in full evidence when Obama nationalized General Motors and Chrysler. He gave to the unions control over the two giant automobile manufacturers, while freezing out retired investors and allocating billions of taxpayer dollars to this socialist power grab. As a further slap in our economic face, he expanded the corporate bailouts, including giving billions to AIG without pre-conditions. Then, to add insult to injury, Obama doubled our national debt with his out-of-control spending.
Obama is spending so brazenly because he is counting on Americans being lulled into complacency by the time of the 2010 elections. By design, the bulk of the "stimulus" funds will be spent, just in time, to spur a false recovery. The "recovery" will be hailed as proof of Obama's wisdom by the liberal media. It will not matter that the so-called recovery will not be real, or that it won't last – as long as Obama and liberal Democrats stay in control of our government.
Demonstrating his willingness to operate without regard for our laws, Obama fired two inspector generals (IG’s) who were investigating illegal activities by Obama cronies. Obama fired the IG’s even though, by law, inspector generals are authorized to conduct investigations without interference from government officials. Blatantly, Obama refused to prosecute Black Panthers caught on video intimidating voters at a polling place in Philadelphia during the 2008 election. Further, Obama filled his cabinet with five people who have cheated on their taxes, and two of his other nominees withdrew after they were exposed as tax cheats.
The lack of any check on Obama’s power, due to a veto-proof Democrat-controlled Congress and a lap dog liberal media, has caused Obama to boldly assert his radical agenda and surround himself with a stable of over 30 advisors called “Czars”. These unaccountable Obama-appointees are beholden only to Obama. They are not unanswerable to Congress or the American people, as was intended by our Constitution which requires congressional confirmation hearings and oversight of political appointees. Among those Czars are Communists, Marxists and other characters with troubling backgrounds and questionable credentials who should not be allowed anywhere near the White House. Gone is media outrage over abuse of power or an imperial presidency, as well as any angst about the shredding of our Constitution.
Truly disturbing is White House advisor Mark Lloyd, the “Diversity” Czar at the FCC, who was inspired by Marxist Saul Alinsky. He is pushing a “confrontational movement” designed to give a dominant role to public broadcasting and silence voices in alternative and conservative media outlets.
Most troubling of Obama’s unaccountable appointees is the recently resigned “Green Job” Czar Van Jones, a self-described Communist. Van Jones indicated his belief that America deserved to be attacked on September 11th and signed a petition that claimed the attacks were orchestrated by our own government. He stated in a video that white environmentalists deliberately steer poisons into minority communities. Just as chilling is Jones’ desire to destroy our free enterprise system and replace it with Marxist-inspired socialism. Van Jones made it into the White House because Obama shares Jones’ radical views, as is demonstrated by Obama’s past associations with Marxists and anti-American characters, such as unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and black theologian Rev. Jeremiah Wright who spewed out anti-America rhetoric.
The Marxism embraced by Lloyd, Jones and Obama is anchored on the strong-armed tactics of tyrants. A prime ploy is scapegoating the rich and all “enemies” of the ruling regime. The latest Obama administration’s “enemy” is the insurance industry.
Other Marxist methods include controlling the media, exploiting ethnic hatreds and demonizing the opposition, as has been done to average Americans protesting Obama’s disastrous public option, rationed-health care scheme. Obama and his supporters scoffed at parents and called them racist for not wanting their children indoctrinated by Obama with his K-12 speech.
Obama’s talking about the value of education was not the problem. What rankled citizens was the lesson plan from the Department of Education – before it was changed under pressure from the public – that required children to write papers about how to help Obama achieve his radical agenda.
The article “Another Failed Presidency” by Geoffrey P. Hunt explains how and why Obama considers himself to be a Third World Socialist, like his Kenyan biological father, the inspiration for Obama’s book “Dreams From My Father”. Hunt opines that Obama’s determined adherence to failed socialism is why he is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
Charles Krauthammer in his article “Obama, the Mortal” recounts how Obama in his first address to Congress gave the boldest social democratic manifesto ever issued by a U.S. president. Krauthammer demonstrates how Obama is laboring under the mistaken belief that his election imbued him with the kind of “banana-republic plebiscite” to enlarge state power and increase our national debt with massive spending. Obama’s actions to implement his socialist vision for America inspired a powerful outburst of public outrage at tea parties and town hall meetings, legitimate anger that Obama and his minions derided as mob-like and “racist”. Krauthammer points out that while Obama was castigating protesting Americans, Obama’s administration was “cutting backroom deals with every manner of special interest – from drug companies to auto unions to doctors – in which favors worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged”.
“The Death Book for Veterans - Ex-soldiers don't need to be told they're a burden to society” by Jim Towey provides a chilling look into how government bureaucrats at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) are using cost containment analysis to systematically deny health care to our veterans. ObamaCare will put our entire nation on the slippery slope to the “death panel” end-of-life decisions being made now at the VA.Author Larry Elder wrote the following on Carl Polizzi’s Patriot Post blog.
"What does it take for some to wake up? When Obama publicly asserts that some corporations, including 'Big Oil' and medical insurance companies, make 'obscene profits' (they don't compared with many other industries) and that his 'compensation czar' will look into executive compensation, what does that tell you?
“When he argues that medical insurance companies need a 'public option' (before public opinion forced him to back away from it) to keep them 'honest,' what does that say?
“When he arrogantly claims that fighting 'global warming' and tackling the 'health care crisis' are not just moral imperatives but also necessary to keep our economy robust (?!), what does that show?
“Voters last year elected a left-wing former 'community organizer' with one of the Senate's most liberal voting records. He seeks to take the country -- over the growing resistance of even those who voted for him -- to an idealized world of government-guaranteed equality of outcomes.
“He wants a government-guaranteed 'level playing field' of wealth redistribution via taxing those deemed to have too much.
“Obama's goals are open, blatant and confidently asserted, backed by a filibuster-proof, supermajority, Democratic-controlled Congress.
“There is no Big Secret, no subterfuge, no bait-and-switch. This is who and what he is."
Larry Elder is correct. During the 2008 election the liberal media helped Obama hide who he really is from the voting public. Then, when Obama took the oath of office as president, he vowed to protect and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. We now find that Obama and his appointed Czars have formed a sinister, shadowy government of domestic enemies against whom we have no defense.
Obama’s ultimate insult is that he has no remorse.
By Frances Rice
Frances Rice, a retired lawyer and Army Lieutenant Colonel, is chairman of the National Black Republican Association and may be contacted at: www.NBRA.info
In a laughable attempt to keep the Obama fig leaf of truthfulness in place, Democrats and their media allies are now castigating Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina for spontaneously and truthfully calling Obama a liar during Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress. There was no such hand wringing when Democrats booed President George W. Bush when he addressed Congress. Ignored is the fact that Obama during his speech trashed as liars average Americans, Republican leaders and all who do not agree with Obama’s radical government-run, rationed health care agenda. Lost in the media coverage is the fact that laughter erupted in Congress during Obama’s speech when he readily admitted that details of his healthcare plan still need to be worked out. Sadly, Obama’s duplicitous speech was an insulting campaign ploy to further deceive Americans and divide our nation.
From the moment he stepped onto the national stage to campaign for the presidency, Obama has consistently lied to the American people in order to convince us to trust him with our economic and national security. Since becoming our president, he has betrayed that trust.
During his first eight months in office, Obama has exhibited his admiration for dictators and disdain for our allies. He offended the Queen of England and bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. He praised the Marxist Daniel Ortega, kissed Socialist Hugo Chavez on the cheek and endorsed the Socialist Evo Morales of Bolivia. He sided with Hugo Chavez and Communist Fidel Castro against Honduras, a country that followed its constitution and stopped its president from illegally turning himself into that country’s dictator. Obama announced that he would meet with Iranians with no pre-conditions, while they're building their nuclear weapons.
Obama displayed a blatant lack of concern for what is in the best interest of America when he circled the globe and publicly apologized for America's world leadership. He told the Mexican president that Americans are responsible for the violence in Mexico. He announced a cut in funding for our new missile defense system the day after an ICBM was launched by North Korea. He released information on U.S. intelligence gathering despite contrary urgings of his own CIA director and the four prior CIA directors. He ordered that the word "terrorism" be stricken from our discourse and replaced with the innocuous words "man made disasters." He appointed a Homeland Security Chief who identified military veterans and abortion opponents as "dangers to the nation." In a scary bid to increase the political power of the Democratic Party, Obama politicized the census by moving it out of the Department of Commerce and into the White House.
His dogged determination to turn our country into a failed socialist nation was in full evidence when Obama nationalized General Motors and Chrysler. He gave to the unions control over the two giant automobile manufacturers, while freezing out retired investors and allocating billions of taxpayer dollars to this socialist power grab. As a further slap in our economic face, he expanded the corporate bailouts, including giving billions to AIG without pre-conditions. Then, to add insult to injury, Obama doubled our national debt with his out-of-control spending.
Obama is spending so brazenly because he is counting on Americans being lulled into complacency by the time of the 2010 elections. By design, the bulk of the "stimulus" funds will be spent, just in time, to spur a false recovery. The "recovery" will be hailed as proof of Obama's wisdom by the liberal media. It will not matter that the so-called recovery will not be real, or that it won't last – as long as Obama and liberal Democrats stay in control of our government.
Demonstrating his willingness to operate without regard for our laws, Obama fired two inspector generals (IG’s) who were investigating illegal activities by Obama cronies. Obama fired the IG’s even though, by law, inspector generals are authorized to conduct investigations without interference from government officials. Blatantly, Obama refused to prosecute Black Panthers caught on video intimidating voters at a polling place in Philadelphia during the 2008 election. Further, Obama filled his cabinet with five people who have cheated on their taxes, and two of his other nominees withdrew after they were exposed as tax cheats.
The lack of any check on Obama’s power, due to a veto-proof Democrat-controlled Congress and a lap dog liberal media, has caused Obama to boldly assert his radical agenda and surround himself with a stable of over 30 advisors called “Czars”. These unaccountable Obama-appointees are beholden only to Obama. They are not unanswerable to Congress or the American people, as was intended by our Constitution which requires congressional confirmation hearings and oversight of political appointees. Among those Czars are Communists, Marxists and other characters with troubling backgrounds and questionable credentials who should not be allowed anywhere near the White House. Gone is media outrage over abuse of power or an imperial presidency, as well as any angst about the shredding of our Constitution.
Truly disturbing is White House advisor Mark Lloyd, the “Diversity” Czar at the FCC, who was inspired by Marxist Saul Alinsky. He is pushing a “confrontational movement” designed to give a dominant role to public broadcasting and silence voices in alternative and conservative media outlets.
Most troubling of Obama’s unaccountable appointees is the recently resigned “Green Job” Czar Van Jones, a self-described Communist. Van Jones indicated his belief that America deserved to be attacked on September 11th and signed a petition that claimed the attacks were orchestrated by our own government. He stated in a video that white environmentalists deliberately steer poisons into minority communities. Just as chilling is Jones’ desire to destroy our free enterprise system and replace it with Marxist-inspired socialism. Van Jones made it into the White House because Obama shares Jones’ radical views, as is demonstrated by Obama’s past associations with Marxists and anti-American characters, such as unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and black theologian Rev. Jeremiah Wright who spewed out anti-America rhetoric.
The Marxism embraced by Lloyd, Jones and Obama is anchored on the strong-armed tactics of tyrants. A prime ploy is scapegoating the rich and all “enemies” of the ruling regime. The latest Obama administration’s “enemy” is the insurance industry.
Other Marxist methods include controlling the media, exploiting ethnic hatreds and demonizing the opposition, as has been done to average Americans protesting Obama’s disastrous public option, rationed-health care scheme. Obama and his supporters scoffed at parents and called them racist for not wanting their children indoctrinated by Obama with his K-12 speech.
Obama’s talking about the value of education was not the problem. What rankled citizens was the lesson plan from the Department of Education – before it was changed under pressure from the public – that required children to write papers about how to help Obama achieve his radical agenda.
The article “Another Failed Presidency” by Geoffrey P. Hunt explains how and why Obama considers himself to be a Third World Socialist, like his Kenyan biological father, the inspiration for Obama’s book “Dreams From My Father”. Hunt opines that Obama’s determined adherence to failed socialism is why he is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
Charles Krauthammer in his article “Obama, the Mortal” recounts how Obama in his first address to Congress gave the boldest social democratic manifesto ever issued by a U.S. president. Krauthammer demonstrates how Obama is laboring under the mistaken belief that his election imbued him with the kind of “banana-republic plebiscite” to enlarge state power and increase our national debt with massive spending. Obama’s actions to implement his socialist vision for America inspired a powerful outburst of public outrage at tea parties and town hall meetings, legitimate anger that Obama and his minions derided as mob-like and “racist”. Krauthammer points out that while Obama was castigating protesting Americans, Obama’s administration was “cutting backroom deals with every manner of special interest – from drug companies to auto unions to doctors – in which favors worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged”.
“The Death Book for Veterans - Ex-soldiers don't need to be told they're a burden to society” by Jim Towey provides a chilling look into how government bureaucrats at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) are using cost containment analysis to systematically deny health care to our veterans. ObamaCare will put our entire nation on the slippery slope to the “death panel” end-of-life decisions being made now at the VA.Author Larry Elder wrote the following on Carl Polizzi’s Patriot Post blog.
"What does it take for some to wake up? When Obama publicly asserts that some corporations, including 'Big Oil' and medical insurance companies, make 'obscene profits' (they don't compared with many other industries) and that his 'compensation czar' will look into executive compensation, what does that tell you?
“When he argues that medical insurance companies need a 'public option' (before public opinion forced him to back away from it) to keep them 'honest,' what does that say?
“When he arrogantly claims that fighting 'global warming' and tackling the 'health care crisis' are not just moral imperatives but also necessary to keep our economy robust (?!), what does that show?
“Voters last year elected a left-wing former 'community organizer' with one of the Senate's most liberal voting records. He seeks to take the country -- over the growing resistance of even those who voted for him -- to an idealized world of government-guaranteed equality of outcomes.
“He wants a government-guaranteed 'level playing field' of wealth redistribution via taxing those deemed to have too much.
“Obama's goals are open, blatant and confidently asserted, backed by a filibuster-proof, supermajority, Democratic-controlled Congress.
“There is no Big Secret, no subterfuge, no bait-and-switch. This is who and what he is."
Larry Elder is correct. During the 2008 election the liberal media helped Obama hide who he really is from the voting public. Then, when Obama took the oath of office as president, he vowed to protect and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. We now find that Obama and his appointed Czars have formed a sinister, shadowy government of domestic enemies against whom we have no defense.
Obama’s ultimate insult is that he has no remorse.
By Frances Rice
Frances Rice, a retired lawyer and Army Lieutenant Colonel, is chairman of the National Black Republican Association and may be contacted at: www.NBRA.info
Friday, August 28, 2009
WhoWhatWhy: Behind Clinton Backer's Arrest: A Bipartisan, International Affair
/PRNewswire/ -- WhoWhatWhy.com reports exclusively today on the background of Hassan Nemazee, the top Hillary Clinton fundraiser who was arrested this week and charged with forging loan documents in order to borrow $74 million from Citibank. He could face up to 30 years in prison.
Early media accounts cast the event as an embarrassment for Ms. Clinton and the Democratic Party involving the financial misdoings of one prominent backer. Actually it is much more.
As WhoWhatWhy reports:
Behind the Nemazee arrest lies a sprawling cautionary tale of presidents, would-be presidents, and the shadow world of wealthy operators who cozy up to them for their own gain. It reaches into the Bush operation as well as that of the Clintons, and is a microcosm of an influence bazaar that has gone global along with the economy.
Hassan Nemazee, who served as a finance director for Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, began raising sizable sums for the Democratic National Committee in the mid-nineties. In 1998, in the midst of the Lewinsky affair, Nemazee collected $60,000 for Bill Clinton's legal defense fund in $10,000 increments from relatives and friends.
Through their Carret Asset Management, Nemazee and his business partner Alan Quasha gave a job to Clinton confidant and former Democratic Party chairman Terry MacAuliffe, providing him with a lucrative temporary perch until the Hillary Clinton campaign formally launched with McAuliffe as its chairman.
But Nemazee has historically donated money to both political parties. Meanwhile, Quasha's Harken Energy company helped engineer George W. Bush's rescue from financial disaster and propelled Bush on the path to elective office. Harken Energy drew intense scrutiny from investigators and the media in the early 90's and again during Bush's first term because of its dubious financial practices and board members connected to the corrupt Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). Nemazee's family is tied to the Shah of Iran, and others in their circle have connections to the Saudi royal family and the former Philippine leader Ferdinand Marcos.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Early media accounts cast the event as an embarrassment for Ms. Clinton and the Democratic Party involving the financial misdoings of one prominent backer. Actually it is much more.
As WhoWhatWhy reports:
Behind the Nemazee arrest lies a sprawling cautionary tale of presidents, would-be presidents, and the shadow world of wealthy operators who cozy up to them for their own gain. It reaches into the Bush operation as well as that of the Clintons, and is a microcosm of an influence bazaar that has gone global along with the economy.
Hassan Nemazee, who served as a finance director for Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, began raising sizable sums for the Democratic National Committee in the mid-nineties. In 1998, in the midst of the Lewinsky affair, Nemazee collected $60,000 for Bill Clinton's legal defense fund in $10,000 increments from relatives and friends.
Through their Carret Asset Management, Nemazee and his business partner Alan Quasha gave a job to Clinton confidant and former Democratic Party chairman Terry MacAuliffe, providing him with a lucrative temporary perch until the Hillary Clinton campaign formally launched with McAuliffe as its chairman.
But Nemazee has historically donated money to both political parties. Meanwhile, Quasha's Harken Energy company helped engineer George W. Bush's rescue from financial disaster and propelled Bush on the path to elective office. Harken Energy drew intense scrutiny from investigators and the media in the early 90's and again during Bush's first term because of its dubious financial practices and board members connected to the corrupt Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). Nemazee's family is tied to the Shah of Iran, and others in their circle have connections to the Saudi royal family and the former Philippine leader Ferdinand Marcos.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Detailed Analysis: House Democrats’ Government-Run Health Care Plan Breaks President Obama’s Promises
President Obama has repeatedly made promises throughout the health care debate that are broken by the House Democrats’ government takeover of health care bill. Despite what the President says, the bill put together by Speaker Pelosi and House Democratic leaders would force millions of Americans out of their current coverage, undermine Medicare for seniors, and raise taxes on families and small businesses. House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) responded today:
“The President has made a lot of promises to the American people about their health care, but the House Democrats’ bill breaks many of those pledges. It would force millions out of their current coverage, slash Medicare by billions, and increase taxes on the families and small businesses who can least afford it during this recession. Republicans have offered a better solution that makes health care more affordable and accessible for every American without raising taxes. It’s time for Democrats to shelve their government takeover of health care and work with us on a plan that delivers the reforms Americans expect.”
A detailed analysis of the Democrats’ government-run plan makes clear it breaks a number of President Obama’s promises. Here are just a few examples:
• Pages 116-128; Sections 221-225 – The House Democrats’ bill establishes a new government-run health plan that, according to nonpartisan actuaries at the Lewin Group, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage. Moving these Americans from their current plan into a government-run plan violates the President’s oft-stated promise that “if you like your current coverage, you can keep it.” Both the Associated Press and ABC News have already debunked this pledge, noting that White House officials have acknowledged the President’s rhetoric shouldn’t be taken “literally.”
• Pages 331-333; Section 1161 – President Obama has said repeatedly that nobody is talking about cutting Medicare when it comes to health care reform. But the fact is that nearly 11 million seniors who choose Medicare Advantage plans, will lose that coverage as a result of the $160 billion in cuts in the House Democrats’ bill. Moreover, an independent analysis of the House Democrats’ bill shows the legislation makes a total of $361.9 billion in Medicare cuts. That means fewer choices and lower health care quality for our nation’s seniors.
• Pages 167-179; Section 401 – President Obama repeatedly promised not to raise taxes on those who make less than $200,000 (singles) or $250,000 (married couples). The tax on Americans without government-approved health insurance in the House Democrats’ bill directly violates that promise.
• Pages 167-179; Section 401 – At least four of the President’s specific tax pledges would be broken by the House Democrats’ government takeover of health care. Specifically, the President pledged that (1) “no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase,” and that families making more than $250,000 will (2) “pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s,” (3) be subject to a “new [higher] top capital gains rate of 20 percent” and (4) have a dividends tax rate “set at 20 percent.” Yet, the Democrats’ bill imposes an individual mandate that would raise taxes on some American families earning less than $250,000, imposes a national small business tax (in conjunction with the President’s expiration of lower marginal rates) that will take the top federal tax rate well above where it was in the 1990s, and applies the national small business tax to capital gains and dividends sending those tax rates to 25.4 percent and 45 percent respectively.
• Pages 823-835; Section 1802 – The House Democrats’ bill would establish a new tax on every health insurance policy to fund a government board. This new tax will increase the cost of health insurance for every American not on Medicare or Medicaid, regardless of income.
Democrats appear poised to go it alone and pass a government takeover of health care that breaks many of the promises made by the President. Americans don’t want a government takeover of their health care; they want common sense reforms to lower health care costs and increase access for those who don’t currently have health care coverage. Shouldn’t Democrats work with Republicans on common sense solutions to deliver on the reforms the American people expect and deserve?
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“The President has made a lot of promises to the American people about their health care, but the House Democrats’ bill breaks many of those pledges. It would force millions out of their current coverage, slash Medicare by billions, and increase taxes on the families and small businesses who can least afford it during this recession. Republicans have offered a better solution that makes health care more affordable and accessible for every American without raising taxes. It’s time for Democrats to shelve their government takeover of health care and work with us on a plan that delivers the reforms Americans expect.”
A detailed analysis of the Democrats’ government-run plan makes clear it breaks a number of President Obama’s promises. Here are just a few examples:
• Pages 116-128; Sections 221-225 – The House Democrats’ bill establishes a new government-run health plan that, according to nonpartisan actuaries at the Lewin Group, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage. Moving these Americans from their current plan into a government-run plan violates the President’s oft-stated promise that “if you like your current coverage, you can keep it.” Both the Associated Press and ABC News have already debunked this pledge, noting that White House officials have acknowledged the President’s rhetoric shouldn’t be taken “literally.”
• Pages 331-333; Section 1161 – President Obama has said repeatedly that nobody is talking about cutting Medicare when it comes to health care reform. But the fact is that nearly 11 million seniors who choose Medicare Advantage plans, will lose that coverage as a result of the $160 billion in cuts in the House Democrats’ bill. Moreover, an independent analysis of the House Democrats’ bill shows the legislation makes a total of $361.9 billion in Medicare cuts. That means fewer choices and lower health care quality for our nation’s seniors.
• Pages 167-179; Section 401 – President Obama repeatedly promised not to raise taxes on those who make less than $200,000 (singles) or $250,000 (married couples). The tax on Americans without government-approved health insurance in the House Democrats’ bill directly violates that promise.
• Pages 167-179; Section 401 – At least four of the President’s specific tax pledges would be broken by the House Democrats’ government takeover of health care. Specifically, the President pledged that (1) “no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase,” and that families making more than $250,000 will (2) “pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s,” (3) be subject to a “new [higher] top capital gains rate of 20 percent” and (4) have a dividends tax rate “set at 20 percent.” Yet, the Democrats’ bill imposes an individual mandate that would raise taxes on some American families earning less than $250,000, imposes a national small business tax (in conjunction with the President’s expiration of lower marginal rates) that will take the top federal tax rate well above where it was in the 1990s, and applies the national small business tax to capital gains and dividends sending those tax rates to 25.4 percent and 45 percent respectively.
• Pages 823-835; Section 1802 – The House Democrats’ bill would establish a new tax on every health insurance policy to fund a government board. This new tax will increase the cost of health insurance for every American not on Medicare or Medicaid, regardless of income.
Democrats appear poised to go it alone and pass a government takeover of health care that breaks many of the promises made by the President. Americans don’t want a government takeover of their health care; they want common sense reforms to lower health care costs and increase access for those who don’t currently have health care coverage. Shouldn’t Democrats work with Republicans on common sense solutions to deliver on the reforms the American people expect and deserve?
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Opinion: Playing the Race Card
/Standard Newswire/ -- The following is submitted by Bishop E.W. Jackson Sr.:
As an American who happens to be black, I say to those who are playing the race card in the healthcare debate: Stop it! The very people who do all the hand ringing about racism are the first to use it to divide us, and we are tired of it. The racial denigration of those who show up at town meetings as "angry white folks" is disgusting. If anything is "un-American," as Nancy Pelosi has alleged, it is her describing citizens as Nazis because they do not agree with President Obama. Americans are angrily rejecting the democrat effort to jam government health care down their
throats, and it has nothing to do with race.
Liberals have a propensity toward intellectual arrogance. As such they view the American people as too stupid or disengaged to understand the complexities of health care reform. Because most of us are busy earning a living, we sometimes allow government to go awry for a while, but when it goes too far, the people awaken with a fury. That point has been reached. It may not be pretty or pleasant, but it is real and politicians dismiss it at their political peril.
The more Democrats attempt to marginalize the opposition, the more it grows and the angrier people get. The polls show that as the debate proceeds, notwithstanding some yelling, more people agree with the citizens expressing opposition to Obama-care. They are listening and deciding that something is very wrong. Its makes us angrier when the very people we pay with our hard earned tax dollars have the hubris to call us names because we do not agree with them.
To add insult to injury, the President who promised to unite us asks people to email the White House if they hear anything "fishy" about the health care plan. The President and the Democrats who control both Houses of Congress had better take a deep breath and stop overreaching. There are some things the American people are not going to take, and some lines that politicians dare not cross. Every time they accuse people of being racists and nazis they cross that line. If they force on the American people a health care program which they vehemently oppose, they will have crossed the point of no return.
King George imposed taxes on the American colonists for the benefit of England. Those who
opposed him were called traitors, and it sparked a revolution. If an imperious President and Democrat party attack those who oppose the new healthcare plan instead of listening and heeding them, there may well be a second -- albeit peaceful -- revolution. The effort to divide us along racial lines is a despicable tactic which will only bring a harsher backlash.
We have had enough of balkanizing us into enclaves of hyphenated Americans. This is what happens when we are led by those who believe in one nation under government, instead of one nation under God. The unity of our country lies in rejecting race as our primary identifier. We are Americans, and right now, we are angry. Our elected officials need to deal with it instead of trying to demonize those who dare question them. When they start categorizing citizens by skin color, they do so to de-legitimize those who disagree with them.
For fifty years now we have been told that we need an honest dialogue on race. The Attorney General condescendingly informed us that we are "cowards" when it comes to matters of race. When Jeremiah Wright's racist demagoguery was exposed, Candidate Obama lectured us about "typical white people" like his grandmother being inherently racist. Recently the President advised us that we had a "teachable moment" when in so many words he accused the Cambridge police of racism in the treatment of Professor Henry Gates. Of course, he did the teaching when he should have been apologizing and taking responsibility for his own gaffe.
The American people are tired of being called racist. We have had it with ivory tower liberals telling us we need to have a "dialogue" about race. We don't need any more sensitivity training. Here is my racial dialogue with the American people. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Dialogue over. Let's drop the race bating and get on with debating the matter of keeping our country prosperous and free.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
As an American who happens to be black, I say to those who are playing the race card in the healthcare debate: Stop it! The very people who do all the hand ringing about racism are the first to use it to divide us, and we are tired of it. The racial denigration of those who show up at town meetings as "angry white folks" is disgusting. If anything is "un-American," as Nancy Pelosi has alleged, it is her describing citizens as Nazis because they do not agree with President Obama. Americans are angrily rejecting the democrat effort to jam government health care down their
throats, and it has nothing to do with race.
Liberals have a propensity toward intellectual arrogance. As such they view the American people as too stupid or disengaged to understand the complexities of health care reform. Because most of us are busy earning a living, we sometimes allow government to go awry for a while, but when it goes too far, the people awaken with a fury. That point has been reached. It may not be pretty or pleasant, but it is real and politicians dismiss it at their political peril.
The more Democrats attempt to marginalize the opposition, the more it grows and the angrier people get. The polls show that as the debate proceeds, notwithstanding some yelling, more people agree with the citizens expressing opposition to Obama-care. They are listening and deciding that something is very wrong. Its makes us angrier when the very people we pay with our hard earned tax dollars have the hubris to call us names because we do not agree with them.
To add insult to injury, the President who promised to unite us asks people to email the White House if they hear anything "fishy" about the health care plan. The President and the Democrats who control both Houses of Congress had better take a deep breath and stop overreaching. There are some things the American people are not going to take, and some lines that politicians dare not cross. Every time they accuse people of being racists and nazis they cross that line. If they force on the American people a health care program which they vehemently oppose, they will have crossed the point of no return.
King George imposed taxes on the American colonists for the benefit of England. Those who
opposed him were called traitors, and it sparked a revolution. If an imperious President and Democrat party attack those who oppose the new healthcare plan instead of listening and heeding them, there may well be a second -- albeit peaceful -- revolution. The effort to divide us along racial lines is a despicable tactic which will only bring a harsher backlash.
We have had enough of balkanizing us into enclaves of hyphenated Americans. This is what happens when we are led by those who believe in one nation under government, instead of one nation under God. The unity of our country lies in rejecting race as our primary identifier. We are Americans, and right now, we are angry. Our elected officials need to deal with it instead of trying to demonize those who dare question them. When they start categorizing citizens by skin color, they do so to de-legitimize those who disagree with them.
For fifty years now we have been told that we need an honest dialogue on race. The Attorney General condescendingly informed us that we are "cowards" when it comes to matters of race. When Jeremiah Wright's racist demagoguery was exposed, Candidate Obama lectured us about "typical white people" like his grandmother being inherently racist. Recently the President advised us that we had a "teachable moment" when in so many words he accused the Cambridge police of racism in the treatment of Professor Henry Gates. Of course, he did the teaching when he should have been apologizing and taking responsibility for his own gaffe.
The American people are tired of being called racist. We have had it with ivory tower liberals telling us we need to have a "dialogue" about race. We don't need any more sensitivity training. Here is my racial dialogue with the American people. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Dialogue over. Let's drop the race bating and get on with debating the matter of keeping our country prosperous and free.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Non-Obama Youth Vote 2010 Wild Card: Bob Weiner & Zoe Pagonis Des Moines Register Op-Ed Asks, 'With Obama Off Ticket, Will Youth Vote Deliver In 2010?
/PRNewswire/ -- "The 2008 elections proved that teens and twenties can make a difference," say former Democratic National Youth Voter Registration Director, Robert Weiner and Policy Analyst Zoe Pagonis. "But whether this is a one-time phenomenon is an open question; the reality is that the non-Obama factor in the 2010 off-year elections is a wild card."
In an op-ed column in today's Des Moines Register, "Non-Obama Factor a Wild Card in 2010," Weiner, the Democratic Party's first youth voter registration director in 1971-72 after the 26th Amendment, and Pagonis contend, "In the 2008 election, many Democrats rode on Barack Obama's coattails to win the youth vote. A record 23 million young Americans swarmed polls, constituting the second highest percentage (52%) of eligible 17-29 year olds voting."
They add, "2010, like every other off-year election, will inevitably draw a smaller turnout, enabling youth to have an even bigger proportional impact. The 3% increase in the number of youths voting during the 2006 off-year compared to 2002 was significant in the Democrats' gain of 31 seats."
"Obama built his base around 17-29 year olds, meeting with high school student government leaders, speaking at colleges and choosing a hip-hop event sponsored by Usher over one by AARP."
"His personality and youthful habits (playing basketball) charmed young Americans Yet what won him the most was concentrating on issues important to young people. A poll conducted by the Center for Information on Civic Learning found that among young Obama voters, the top issues were the Iraq war, economy and health care."
Weiner and Pagonis say, "Thirty-nine election seats for Governor will be open in 2010 in addition to the 435 House seats and 36 Senate seats. Candidates can win the youth vote by concentrating on areas of interest to young people and by modeling their issues as well as campaign strategies after Obama."
Weiner and Pagonis conclude, "Pretending "I'm Obama," will only take a politician so far; it is going to have to be more, "I'm like Barack," and mean it."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
In an op-ed column in today's Des Moines Register, "Non-Obama Factor a Wild Card in 2010," Weiner, the Democratic Party's first youth voter registration director in 1971-72 after the 26th Amendment, and Pagonis contend, "In the 2008 election, many Democrats rode on Barack Obama's coattails to win the youth vote. A record 23 million young Americans swarmed polls, constituting the second highest percentage (52%) of eligible 17-29 year olds voting."
They add, "2010, like every other off-year election, will inevitably draw a smaller turnout, enabling youth to have an even bigger proportional impact. The 3% increase in the number of youths voting during the 2006 off-year compared to 2002 was significant in the Democrats' gain of 31 seats."
"Obama built his base around 17-29 year olds, meeting with high school student government leaders, speaking at colleges and choosing a hip-hop event sponsored by Usher over one by AARP."
"His personality and youthful habits (playing basketball) charmed young Americans Yet what won him the most was concentrating on issues important to young people. A poll conducted by the Center for Information on Civic Learning found that among young Obama voters, the top issues were the Iraq war, economy and health care."
Weiner and Pagonis say, "Thirty-nine election seats for Governor will be open in 2010 in addition to the 435 House seats and 36 Senate seats. Candidates can win the youth vote by concentrating on areas of interest to young people and by modeling their issues as well as campaign strategies after Obama."
Weiner and Pagonis conclude, "Pretending "I'm Obama," will only take a politician so far; it is going to have to be more, "I'm like Barack," and mean it."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Guess who’s funding ObamaCare advocates?
Facebook finding:
Greg Sargent notes that a familiar face will start showering cash on organizations trying to build support for ObamaCare. George Soros, who once pledged his entire fortune in an unsuccessful effort to unseat George Bush, has pledged another $5 million to overcome popular opposition to the government takeover of the health-care industry. Sargent rightly notes that this will become a flashpoint for both sides of the divide:
In another sign of the urgency gripping the pro-health care reform camp, billionaire George Soros has pledged to sink $5 million into the fight, the group getting the money confirmed.
Soros — whose operation carefully guards the privacy of such donations — made the pledge to Health Care For America Now, the leading coalition of pro-reform groups, unions and providers, HCAN chief Richard Kirsch confirmed in an email that was forwarded to me. …
The Soros pledge is noteworthy, because both sides will seize on it. The right will say it shows the real astroturfing is coming from the pro-reform side — billionaire bogeyman Soros is bankrolling this fight!
The left will cite the donation to demand that HCAN show real results. Some on the left, such as blogger Jane Hamsher, have been asking why heavily-bankrolled HCAN hasn’t been able to secure more commitments from Dem members of Congress to stand firm behind a public option.
However, that group may run afoul of Rahm Emanuel and the White House. Emanuel has demanded that HCAN and other advocacy groups focus their sights on Republicans and stop attacking vulnerable Democrats — which, in this case, would be those who have shown great reluctance to get on board with ObamaCare. If HCAN takes Emanuel’s advice, it’s hard to see what they’ll use the money to do, other than buy advertising that strictly focuses on the issue. That issue hasn’t played well thus far, and $5 million of advertising won’t make a dent in the opposition.
That’s where the pharmaceutical industry’s cash will come in handy:
The drug industry has authorized its lobbyists to spend as much as $150 million on television commercials supporting President Obama’s health care overhaul, beginning over the August Congressional recess, people briefed on the plans said Saturday.
The unusually large scale of the industry’s commitment to the cause helps explain some of a contentious back-and-forth playing out in recent days between the odd-couple allies over a deal that the White House struck with the industry in June to secure its support. The terms of the deal were not fully disclosed. Both sides had announced that the drug industry would contribute $80 billion over 10 years to the cost of the health care overhaul without spelling out the details.
With House Democrats moving to extract more than that just as the drug makers finalized their advertising plans, the industry lobbyists pressed the Obama administration for public reassurances that it had agreed to cap the industry’s additional costs at $80 billion. The White House, meanwhile, has struggled to mollify its most pivotal health industry ally without alienating Congressional Democrats who want to demand far more of the drug makers. White House officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
To give this some perspective, it helps to recall that John McCain spent $126 million on advertising for the entire general election campaign in 2008. Why have the pharmaceuticals gone for ObamaCare in a big way? Obama promised not to use Medicare’s market advantage to drive down prices any more than the $80 billion already pledged by the industry. That’s basically price-fixing of a kind that the Federal Trade Commission would investigate if it involved a private-sector insurance giant.
Remind me again which side is Astroturfing and getting big, powerful firms funding their operation, and which one represents the actual sense of Americans on government-controlled health care.
From:
from http://www.facebook.com/l/;Hotair.com
via Facebook group: Expose Soros & Other Far-Left Financiers
Greg Sargent notes that a familiar face will start showering cash on organizations trying to build support for ObamaCare. George Soros, who once pledged his entire fortune in an unsuccessful effort to unseat George Bush, has pledged another $5 million to overcome popular opposition to the government takeover of the health-care industry. Sargent rightly notes that this will become a flashpoint for both sides of the divide:
In another sign of the urgency gripping the pro-health care reform camp, billionaire George Soros has pledged to sink $5 million into the fight, the group getting the money confirmed.
Soros — whose operation carefully guards the privacy of such donations — made the pledge to Health Care For America Now, the leading coalition of pro-reform groups, unions and providers, HCAN chief Richard Kirsch confirmed in an email that was forwarded to me. …
The Soros pledge is noteworthy, because both sides will seize on it. The right will say it shows the real astroturfing is coming from the pro-reform side — billionaire bogeyman Soros is bankrolling this fight!
The left will cite the donation to demand that HCAN show real results. Some on the left, such as blogger Jane Hamsher, have been asking why heavily-bankrolled HCAN hasn’t been able to secure more commitments from Dem members of Congress to stand firm behind a public option.
However, that group may run afoul of Rahm Emanuel and the White House. Emanuel has demanded that HCAN and other advocacy groups focus their sights on Republicans and stop attacking vulnerable Democrats — which, in this case, would be those who have shown great reluctance to get on board with ObamaCare. If HCAN takes Emanuel’s advice, it’s hard to see what they’ll use the money to do, other than buy advertising that strictly focuses on the issue. That issue hasn’t played well thus far, and $5 million of advertising won’t make a dent in the opposition.
That’s where the pharmaceutical industry’s cash will come in handy:
The drug industry has authorized its lobbyists to spend as much as $150 million on television commercials supporting President Obama’s health care overhaul, beginning over the August Congressional recess, people briefed on the plans said Saturday.
The unusually large scale of the industry’s commitment to the cause helps explain some of a contentious back-and-forth playing out in recent days between the odd-couple allies over a deal that the White House struck with the industry in June to secure its support. The terms of the deal were not fully disclosed. Both sides had announced that the drug industry would contribute $80 billion over 10 years to the cost of the health care overhaul without spelling out the details.
With House Democrats moving to extract more than that just as the drug makers finalized their advertising plans, the industry lobbyists pressed the Obama administration for public reassurances that it had agreed to cap the industry’s additional costs at $80 billion. The White House, meanwhile, has struggled to mollify its most pivotal health industry ally without alienating Congressional Democrats who want to demand far more of the drug makers. White House officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
To give this some perspective, it helps to recall that John McCain spent $126 million on advertising for the entire general election campaign in 2008. Why have the pharmaceuticals gone for ObamaCare in a big way? Obama promised not to use Medicare’s market advantage to drive down prices any more than the $80 billion already pledged by the industry. That’s basically price-fixing of a kind that the Federal Trade Commission would investigate if it involved a private-sector insurance giant.
Remind me again which side is Astroturfing and getting big, powerful firms funding their operation, and which one represents the actual sense of Americans on government-controlled health care.
From:
from http://www.facebook.com/l/;Hotair.com
via Facebook group: Expose Soros & Other Far-Left Financiers
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Backlash: Dem ratings plunge as voters repel Big Government
The front page of Wednesday’s Politico was a sea of plummeting blue arrows as the paper reported on the slumping approval ratings of major Democrat officials across the nation. America’s third largest party notes the rapid decline in support for Democrats, with support for Republicans still at record lows, is more proof Americans are looking for Libertarian solutions to the nation’s problems.
“Voters want elected officials who will cut taxes and spending, eliminate the deficit, make health care affordable and accessible, restore America’s traditional non-interventionist foreign policy and respect personal liberties. Only Libertarians believe in all that. On the issues people care about, the Libertarian Party is America’s only mainstream political party,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman.
Libertarians were the only party to oppose both the Bush and Obama bailouts and the deficit spending of both the Republican and Democrat-controlled Congresses.
“Voters are rapidly turning on Democrats, but they still remember what happened under Republicans,” said Redpath. “They want elected officials at all levels of government to restrain spending and stay out of their lives. They know smaller government brings more prosperity and more personal freedom.”
Politico reports that many major Democratic officials once considered “safe,” such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, New Jersey Gov. John Corzine and North Carolina Gov. Bev Purdue now all face uncertain re-election with favorability or approval ratings of less than 37 percent. Many other major Democratic officials, including President Barack Obama, have seen a rapid collapse in public support.
Fueling the voter backlash is the Democrat’s $787 billion “stimulus” package that many see as wasteful spending, Democrat support for “bailout” interventions into the economy and news the Democrat health care reform bill will place the government in virtual control of their health care decisions.
But voters aren’t rushing to Republicans. “There’s been no surge in GOP voter registration and little evidence that the party brand is experiencing a recovery. Last month, a New York Times/CBS poll reported that the GOP’s favorability ratings remained at a record-breaking low — 28 percent, down from a high of 59 percent in November 1994,” Politico reports.
“Americans believe freedom works best when it comes to both the economy and their personal lives. The plummeting approval ratings of Democrats and the rock-bottom ratings of Republicans are a testament to that,” said Redpath. “The only way to break the cycle of government sprawl and restore long-term prosperity and personal freedom is to vote Libertarian.”
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“Voters want elected officials who will cut taxes and spending, eliminate the deficit, make health care affordable and accessible, restore America’s traditional non-interventionist foreign policy and respect personal liberties. Only Libertarians believe in all that. On the issues people care about, the Libertarian Party is America’s only mainstream political party,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman.
Libertarians were the only party to oppose both the Bush and Obama bailouts and the deficit spending of both the Republican and Democrat-controlled Congresses.
“Voters are rapidly turning on Democrats, but they still remember what happened under Republicans,” said Redpath. “They want elected officials at all levels of government to restrain spending and stay out of their lives. They know smaller government brings more prosperity and more personal freedom.”
Politico reports that many major Democratic officials once considered “safe,” such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, New Jersey Gov. John Corzine and North Carolina Gov. Bev Purdue now all face uncertain re-election with favorability or approval ratings of less than 37 percent. Many other major Democratic officials, including President Barack Obama, have seen a rapid collapse in public support.
Fueling the voter backlash is the Democrat’s $787 billion “stimulus” package that many see as wasteful spending, Democrat support for “bailout” interventions into the economy and news the Democrat health care reform bill will place the government in virtual control of their health care decisions.
But voters aren’t rushing to Republicans. “There’s been no surge in GOP voter registration and little evidence that the party brand is experiencing a recovery. Last month, a New York Times/CBS poll reported that the GOP’s favorability ratings remained at a record-breaking low — 28 percent, down from a high of 59 percent in November 1994,” Politico reports.
“Americans believe freedom works best when it comes to both the economy and their personal lives. The plummeting approval ratings of Democrats and the rock-bottom ratings of Republicans are a testament to that,” said Redpath. “The only way to break the cycle of government sprawl and restore long-term prosperity and personal freedom is to vote Libertarian.”
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Dems Shut Down The House --- Again
PP Note: Just another day in Washington where Nancy Pelosi conveniently forgets the rules put in place by Thomas Jefferson..
Pelosi Censors Republicans
by Rep. John Carter
07/16/2009
Monday night Democrats voted to shut down the U.S. House Representatives rather than allow a handful of Republican Congressmen to speak on the floor. What could have been so offensive or frightening about our discourse that Speaker Pelosi felt she had to protect her party by gagging free speech in the House? .....http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32718
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Pelosi Censors Republicans
by Rep. John Carter
07/16/2009
Monday night Democrats voted to shut down the U.S. House Representatives rather than allow a handful of Republican Congressmen to speak on the floor. What could have been so offensive or frightening about our discourse that Speaker Pelosi felt she had to protect her party by gagging free speech in the House? .....http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32718
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Democrats in Disarray on Trillion-Dollar "Stimulus" That Isn't Working
Millions of American jobs have been lost in 2009, even though the Administration promised unemployment would not rise past eight percent if the Democrats’ trillion-dollar “stimulus” spending bill became law. But unemployment is now a staggering 9.5 percent, and middle-class families and small businesses are asking: Where are the jobs?
Democrats are all over the map about why their vaunted “stimulus” is not creating the jobs the Administration promised. Vice President Joe Biden said they “misread the economy,” but President Obama said that wasn’t true. President Obama said “there’s nothing he would have done differently” on the “stimulus,” but the Vice President has already admitted that “Some people are being scammed already” by the legislation.
And what about the prospect of a second “stimulus”? Democrats are deeply divided on that question too, as Bloomberg News reports:
“Democrats who control the levers of power in Washington are divided over whether to push for more deficit spending to end the recession and stem job losses, complicating the possibility of a second stimulus bill.”
A story in this morning’s Politico further highlights the deepening Democratic divide on their trillion-dollar “stimulus”:
“President Barack Obama says there’s ‘nothing’ he ‘would have done differently’ about his economic stimulus plan, but one of his top outside economic advisers says the plan was ‘a bit too small.’”
“Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri says the idea of a second stimulus is a ‘non-starter,’ but Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island says it ‘should be on the table.’”
“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says there’s ‘no showing that a second stimulus is needed,’ but House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) says Congress needs to be ‘open to whether we need additional action.’”
“Democrats are all over the map on the stimulus and the possibility of a sequel, and it’s not hard to see why: When it comes to a second stimulus, they may be damned if they do and damned if they don’t.”
“‘Right now, every headline across the board is the stimulus isn’t enough, states are in bankruptcy, states aren’t paying their bills,’ says Wendy Schiller, a Brown University political scientist. ‘This is really deadly for the Democratic Party, because what it suggests is the Democratic Party cannot run the country.’”
The fact is government spending doesn’t create economic growth; small businesses create economic growth. And if the Democrats in charge of Washington want to take another shot at “stimulating” the economy, they should start by scrapping the job-killing health care and energy bills that are being rammed through Congress this summer, and work with House Republicans on better solutions that encourage investment, savings, and job creation. Instead, it appears that Democrats will continue to stubbornly push legislation to raise energy costs on every American, pave the way for a government takeover of health care, ship millions of jobs overseas, and drive our children and grandchildren into even deeper debt. All the while, the American people continue to ask, “Where are the jobs?” They deserve answers – and better solutions.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Democrats are all over the map about why their vaunted “stimulus” is not creating the jobs the Administration promised. Vice President Joe Biden said they “misread the economy,” but President Obama said that wasn’t true. President Obama said “there’s nothing he would have done differently” on the “stimulus,” but the Vice President has already admitted that “Some people are being scammed already” by the legislation.
And what about the prospect of a second “stimulus”? Democrats are deeply divided on that question too, as Bloomberg News reports:
“Democrats who control the levers of power in Washington are divided over whether to push for more deficit spending to end the recession and stem job losses, complicating the possibility of a second stimulus bill.”
A story in this morning’s Politico further highlights the deepening Democratic divide on their trillion-dollar “stimulus”:
“President Barack Obama says there’s ‘nothing’ he ‘would have done differently’ about his economic stimulus plan, but one of his top outside economic advisers says the plan was ‘a bit too small.’”
“Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri says the idea of a second stimulus is a ‘non-starter,’ but Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island says it ‘should be on the table.’”
“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says there’s ‘no showing that a second stimulus is needed,’ but House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) says Congress needs to be ‘open to whether we need additional action.’”
“Democrats are all over the map on the stimulus and the possibility of a sequel, and it’s not hard to see why: When it comes to a second stimulus, they may be damned if they do and damned if they don’t.”
“‘Right now, every headline across the board is the stimulus isn’t enough, states are in bankruptcy, states aren’t paying their bills,’ says Wendy Schiller, a Brown University political scientist. ‘This is really deadly for the Democratic Party, because what it suggests is the Democratic Party cannot run the country.’”
The fact is government spending doesn’t create economic growth; small businesses create economic growth. And if the Democrats in charge of Washington want to take another shot at “stimulating” the economy, they should start by scrapping the job-killing health care and energy bills that are being rammed through Congress this summer, and work with House Republicans on better solutions that encourage investment, savings, and job creation. Instead, it appears that Democrats will continue to stubbornly push legislation to raise energy costs on every American, pave the way for a government takeover of health care, ship millions of jobs overseas, and drive our children and grandchildren into even deeper debt. All the while, the American people continue to ask, “Where are the jobs?” They deserve answers – and better solutions.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Monday, June 1, 2009
Democrats Return to Washington Ready to Force Workers, Families, Small Businesses to Pay a National Energy Tax
Congress is returning to Washington after its Memorial Day recess, and among the top issues slated for House action in the coming weeks is the Democrats’ massive national energy tax to be paid by anyone who drives a car, buys a product made in America, or has the audacity to flip on a light switch. The tax could cost American families up to $3,100 per year and will send countless American jobs overseas to China and India at a time when U.S. workers can afford it least. With the Obama Administration taking responsibility for the future of General Motors today, how can Washington Democrats seriously claim they are looking out for the best interests of American workers at the same time that they’re advocating a significant new tax that will kill their jobs?
Republicans spent the Memorial Day recess sounding the alarm on the national energy tax – called “cap and trade” by the legislation’s supporters – in venues across the country, capped off with Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) delivering the weekly GOP address on Saturday to expose the Democrats’ scheme and highlight better solutions proposed by Republicans:
“The national energy tax imposed by Speaker Pelosi’s climate change bill would double electric bills here in Indiana, working a severe hardship on low-income families, but that’s only where the damage starts. In a state where we like to make things, like steel and autos and RVs, it would cost us countless jobs, many of them heading off-shore to China and India. Our farmers and livestock producers would see their costs skyrocket. And our coal miners would be looking for new work, while we leave affordable, homegrown energy idle in the ground.”
In summits held in Pittsburgh, PA, Indianapolis, IN, and San Luis Obispo, CA last week, the House GOP’s American Energy Solutions Group – led by Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN) – highlighted the devastating impact a national energy tax would have on jobs and local economies. An editorial in this morning’s Wheeling (WV) Intelligencer highlights one of the consequences the Democrats’ national energy tax could have on that community: the downfall of both the coal and steel industries and the families who depend on them:
“Measures such as the ‘cap and trade’ proposal to limit carbon dioxide emissions have been covered widely by the press, including this newspaper. Much of the focus has been on coal-fired power plants. That is appropriate because of the drastic effect ‘cap and trade’ would have on the coal industry and customers of coal-fired power plants.”
“Not much has been said about the effect ‘cap and trade’ would have on other industries, however. Clearly, certain facilities used in the steel industry could be affected dramatically if the legislation is enacted…”
“The domestic steel industry has been hurt badly by a combination of government failure to protect it from unfair foreign competition, and enforcement of air pollution rules. We hope members of Congress do not allow ‘cap and trade’ to become one of the final nails in the coffin of the steel industry. We urge Wilson and other lawmakers representing this area to refuse to allow that to happen.”
At a time when our nation is struggling to save American jobs, is a national energy tax really the kind of policy that Americans are expecting out of the leaders in Washington? Shouldn’t they expect Democrats and Republicans alike to work on an “all of the above” plan that creates jobs, lowers energy prices, and cleans up the environment at the same time? That’s what Rep. Pence’s American Energy Solutions Group supports – and that’s what it has been advocating around the nation and in the halls of Congress. Cornerstones of the House Republicans’ “all of the above” strategy are:
Increasing environmentally-safe energy production on remote lands and far off our shores;
Promoting the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions, such as nuclear, clean-coal, and renewable energy technologies; and
Encouraging increased efficiencies and cutting edge technologies to maximize America’s energy potential.
As Congress begins a four-week sprint toward the Independence Day recess, will Democrats stubbornly barrel ahead with their plan to saddle American workers, families, and small businesses with a national energy tax? Or will they work with Republicans to create jobs, protect the environment, and lower energy prices – all without raising taxes?
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Republicans spent the Memorial Day recess sounding the alarm on the national energy tax – called “cap and trade” by the legislation’s supporters – in venues across the country, capped off with Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) delivering the weekly GOP address on Saturday to expose the Democrats’ scheme and highlight better solutions proposed by Republicans:
“The national energy tax imposed by Speaker Pelosi’s climate change bill would double electric bills here in Indiana, working a severe hardship on low-income families, but that’s only where the damage starts. In a state where we like to make things, like steel and autos and RVs, it would cost us countless jobs, many of them heading off-shore to China and India. Our farmers and livestock producers would see their costs skyrocket. And our coal miners would be looking for new work, while we leave affordable, homegrown energy idle in the ground.”
In summits held in Pittsburgh, PA, Indianapolis, IN, and San Luis Obispo, CA last week, the House GOP’s American Energy Solutions Group – led by Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN) – highlighted the devastating impact a national energy tax would have on jobs and local economies. An editorial in this morning’s Wheeling (WV) Intelligencer highlights one of the consequences the Democrats’ national energy tax could have on that community: the downfall of both the coal and steel industries and the families who depend on them:
“Measures such as the ‘cap and trade’ proposal to limit carbon dioxide emissions have been covered widely by the press, including this newspaper. Much of the focus has been on coal-fired power plants. That is appropriate because of the drastic effect ‘cap and trade’ would have on the coal industry and customers of coal-fired power plants.”
“Not much has been said about the effect ‘cap and trade’ would have on other industries, however. Clearly, certain facilities used in the steel industry could be affected dramatically if the legislation is enacted…”
“The domestic steel industry has been hurt badly by a combination of government failure to protect it from unfair foreign competition, and enforcement of air pollution rules. We hope members of Congress do not allow ‘cap and trade’ to become one of the final nails in the coffin of the steel industry. We urge Wilson and other lawmakers representing this area to refuse to allow that to happen.”
At a time when our nation is struggling to save American jobs, is a national energy tax really the kind of policy that Americans are expecting out of the leaders in Washington? Shouldn’t they expect Democrats and Republicans alike to work on an “all of the above” plan that creates jobs, lowers energy prices, and cleans up the environment at the same time? That’s what Rep. Pence’s American Energy Solutions Group supports – and that’s what it has been advocating around the nation and in the halls of Congress. Cornerstones of the House Republicans’ “all of the above” strategy are:
Increasing environmentally-safe energy production on remote lands and far off our shores;
Promoting the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions, such as nuclear, clean-coal, and renewable energy technologies; and
Encouraging increased efficiencies and cutting edge technologies to maximize America’s energy potential.
As Congress begins a four-week sprint toward the Independence Day recess, will Democrats stubbornly barrel ahead with their plan to saddle American workers, families, and small businesses with a national energy tax? Or will they work with Republicans to create jobs, protect the environment, and lower energy prices – all without raising taxes?
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Democrats Vote for $5 Gas, 15 Percent Unemployment, and Shipping Jobs to China & India - All to Protect Their National Energy Tax
Just how committed are Democrats to establishing a national energy tax on anyone who drives a car, buys anything made in America, or has the audacity to flip on a light switch? So committed that they are willing to let families and small businesses deal with $5 gas prices, 15 percent unemployment, and skyrocketing electricity costs just to ensure that the national energy tax becomes the law of the land.
Republicans believe there's a better path to clean energy. Yesterday, during the House Energy & Commerce Committee’s consideration of the legislation, Republicans offered a series of amendments to protect Americans from paying the national energy tax – which would cost families up to $3,100 per year – if gasoline and electricity costs soared or if unemployment reached historic levels. But one by one, Democrats rejected these common sense amendments, barreling ahead with their plans to saddle Americans with a massive new tax when they can afford it the least. Here’s a quick review of some of the amendments Democrats voted against yesterday – reflecting just how committed they are to a national energy tax:
Democrats Vote for $5 Per Gallon Gasoline. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment designed to protect middle-class families by shelving the national energy tax if gasoline prices hit $5 per gallon.
Democrats Vote for 15 Percent Unemployment. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment that made clear that if the U.S. unemployment rate should exceed 15 percent, then the national energy tax would cease to be effective.
Democrats Vote for Skyrocketing Electricity Costs. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment that would have protected residential customers from higher electric utility rates. The amendment would shelve the national energy tax if electricity rates increase by more than 10 percent over 2009 rates.
Democrats Vote for Shipping American Jobs to China and India. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment designed to provide a level playing field for American industries. It simply made clear that China and India must adopt the same emissions standards that the United States will be forced to comply with under the Democrats’ national energy tax, and if they don’t then it will not go into effect in the United States.
Democrats Vote For Keeping Consumers in the Dark About Energy Price Spikes. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment to require that any price increase for consumers as a result of the national energy tax be fully disclosed on each utility bill, fuel pump, manufactured product label, or food label.
Republicans know that we can clean up our environment, create more jobs, and bring down energy prices at the same time – without raising taxes. Cornerstones of the House Republicans’ strategy are:
- Increasing environmentally-safe energy production on remote lands and far off our shores;
- Promoting the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions, such as nuclear, clean-coal, and renewable energy technologies; and
- Encouraging conservation to preserve and protect our natural resources.
While Democrats cling to their irresponsible plan for a national energy tax on families and small businesses – even if gas prices, electricity costs, and unemployment soar – Republicans will continue promoting their “all of the above” strategy. Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN) will host a series of forums next week in California, Pennsylvania, and Indiana to highlight the plan – and shine a spotlight on the devastating consequences of the Democrats’ national energy tax.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Republicans believe there's a better path to clean energy. Yesterday, during the House Energy & Commerce Committee’s consideration of the legislation, Republicans offered a series of amendments to protect Americans from paying the national energy tax – which would cost families up to $3,100 per year – if gasoline and electricity costs soared or if unemployment reached historic levels. But one by one, Democrats rejected these common sense amendments, barreling ahead with their plans to saddle Americans with a massive new tax when they can afford it the least. Here’s a quick review of some of the amendments Democrats voted against yesterday – reflecting just how committed they are to a national energy tax:
Democrats Vote for $5 Per Gallon Gasoline. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment designed to protect middle-class families by shelving the national energy tax if gasoline prices hit $5 per gallon.
Democrats Vote for 15 Percent Unemployment. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment that made clear that if the U.S. unemployment rate should exceed 15 percent, then the national energy tax would cease to be effective.
Democrats Vote for Skyrocketing Electricity Costs. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment that would have protected residential customers from higher electric utility rates. The amendment would shelve the national energy tax if electricity rates increase by more than 10 percent over 2009 rates.
Democrats Vote for Shipping American Jobs to China and India. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment designed to provide a level playing field for American industries. It simply made clear that China and India must adopt the same emissions standards that the United States will be forced to comply with under the Democrats’ national energy tax, and if they don’t then it will not go into effect in the United States.
Democrats Vote For Keeping Consumers in the Dark About Energy Price Spikes. Democrats rejected a GOP amendment to require that any price increase for consumers as a result of the national energy tax be fully disclosed on each utility bill, fuel pump, manufactured product label, or food label.
Republicans know that we can clean up our environment, create more jobs, and bring down energy prices at the same time – without raising taxes. Cornerstones of the House Republicans’ strategy are:
- Increasing environmentally-safe energy production on remote lands and far off our shores;
- Promoting the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions, such as nuclear, clean-coal, and renewable energy technologies; and
- Encouraging conservation to preserve and protect our natural resources.
While Democrats cling to their irresponsible plan for a national energy tax on families and small businesses – even if gas prices, electricity costs, and unemployment soar – Republicans will continue promoting their “all of the above” strategy. Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN) will host a series of forums next week in California, Pennsylvania, and Indiana to highlight the plan – and shine a spotlight on the devastating consequences of the Democrats’ national energy tax.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)