Credit where credit is due

There hasn't been much that Obama has done that I've thought was good. Actually the one thing I can think of is when he killed that fly on national tv. Pretty sad huh? But if Obama follows through with his proposal to allow off shore drilling off the east coast.

In a reversal of a long-standing ban on most offshore drilling, President Barack Obama is allowing oil drilling 50 miles off Virginia's shorelines. At the same time, he is rejecting some new drilling sites that had been planned in Alaska.

Obama's plan offers few concessions to environmentalists, who have been strident in their opposition to more oil platforms off the nation's shores. Hinted at for months, the plan modifies a ban that for more than 20 years has limited drilling along coastal areas other than the Gulf of Mexico.

Obama was set to announce the new drilling policy Wednesday at Andrews air base in Maryland. White House officials pitched the changes as ways to reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil and create jobs - both politically popular ideas - but the president's decisions also could help secure support for a climate change bill languishing in Congress.

I'm sure this will piss off the majority of the environmental wackos who despise the oil companies but this will do a lot better job stimulating the economy. This will create more jobs than any of the billion dollar "jobs" bills that he has signed.

Drilling is good and the Republicans in the House and Senate should support drilling. But if this is going to be a compromise to get Cap and Trade passed then they better not compromise on that.

Obama getting more aggressive?

How much more aggressive can he get at tearing down the Constitution? He has already signed into law a bill that is blatantly Unconstitutional and he wants to get more aggressive? His disapproval number has hit 50% for the first time in his administration and he thinks this is going to energize people to vote for Democrats?

President Barack Obama, after a year of fitfully searching for compromise, is taking a more aggressive tack with his Republican adversaries, hoping to energize Democratic voters and possibly muscle in some Republican support in Congress.

On Thursday, the president challenged Republicans who planned to campaign on repealing his health-care bill with, "Go for it." Two days later, he made 15 senior appointments without Senate consent, including a union lawyer whose nomination had been blocked by a filibuster.

At a bill-signing event Tuesday, he is set to laud passage of higher-education legislation that was approved despite Republican objections through a parliamentary maneuver that neutralized the party's filibuster threat.

On Thursday, Mr. Obama will be in Maine, home state of two moderate Republican senators who opposed his health-care plan, to promote the health law.

This is just further proof to me at least that Obama hates this country and wants to change it into an European style socialist "utopia. "

The so called Supremacy Clause

All you need to know about the"Supremacy Clause"

In his words, “That language is clear that federal law is supreme over state law, so it really doesn’t matter what a state legislature says on this.” Now that Barack Obama has signed healthcare legislation into law, almost a dozen States have filed suit against the federal government, with Idaho in the lead. Battle lines have been drawn. Unfortunately, the question of State sovereignty and the true meaning of the “supremacy clause” may be swallowed up in the ensuing debate.

Engstrom’s opinion is held by a majority of constitutional law “scholars,” but he is far from correct, and Idaho and the thirty seven other States considering similar legislation have a strong case based on the original intent of the powers of the federal government vis-à-vis the States.

The so-called “supremacy clause” of the Constitution, found in Article 6, states, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding [emphasis added].”

The key, of course, is the italicized phrase. All laws made in pursuance of the Constitution, or those clearly enumerated in the document, were supreme, State laws notwithstanding. In other words, the federal government was supreme in all items clearly listed in the document.

A quick reading of the Constitution illustrates that national healthcare is not one of the enumerated powers of the federal government, so obviously Engstrom’s blanket and simplistic statement is blatantly incorrect, but his distortion of the supremacy clause goes further.

The inclusion of such a clause in the Constitution was first debated at the Constitutional Convention on 31 May 1787. In Edmund Randolph’s initial proposal, called the Virginia Plan, the “national” legislature had the ability to “legislate in all cases to which the separate states are incompetent…” and “to negative all laws passed by the sRandolph replied that he “disclaimed any intention to give indefinite powers to the national legislature, declaring that he was entirely opposed to such an inroad on the state jurisdictions, and that he did not think any considerations whatever could ever change his determination [emphasis added].” James Madison, the author of the Virginia Plan, was not as forthcoming as to his sentiment. Ultimately, Madison preferred a negative over State law and wished the national legislature to be supreme in call cases. But he was not in the majority.everal states contravening, in the opinion of the national legislature, the Articles of Union….” John Rutledge, Pierce Butler, and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina challenged the word “incompetent” and demanded that Randolph define the term. Butler thought that the delegates “were running into an extreme, in taking away the powers of the states…” through such language.

Read the whole article. It will blow most peoples minds.

This is just sickening

Israel is the only Democracy in the mid-east. They are our best ally in that area and our first line of defense if WW3 breaks out in that area. So why is Obama dead set on seeing the death of a great ally? How can an American President not veto any UN resolutions that is anti Israel?

The US is considering abstaining from a possible UN Security Council resolution against Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem, sources suggest to the BBC.

The possibility surfaced at talks in Paris last week between a senior US official and Qatar's foreign minister.

The official said the US would "seriously consider abstaining" if the issue of Israeli settlements was put to the vote, a diplomat told the BBC.

US officials in Washington have not confirmed the report

Hopefully the American Jews, who typically vote Democratic, will see their mistake finally. They should see Obama for what he is, anti Israel. Regardless of whether this particular story is true or not, since it is an "unnamed US official" which has the credibility of Michael Moore. This story would never even be a possibility under President Bush who was strongly pro Israel.

Tea Partiers smarter than Congress

Well no duh! Most members of Congress are blithering idiots who probably don't even know what the Preamble is. Obviously they don't even have a basic understanding of the Constitution either otherwise they wouldn't pass the majority of crap they do now including ObamaCare. So it's no surprise to me that the majority of the people think we Tea Partiers know more about the issues than Congress.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 52% of U.S. voters believe the average member of the Tea Party movement has a better understanding of the issues facing America today than the average member of Congress. Only 30% believe that those in Congress have a better understanding of the key issues facing the nation.

When it comes to those issues, 47% think that their own political views are closer to those of the average Tea Party member than to the views of the average member of Congress. On this point, 26% feel closer to Congress.

Finally, 46% of voters say that the average Tea Party member is more ethical than the average member of Congress. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say that the average member of Congress is more ethical.

You know a law is good

When Fidel Castro endorses it. That should make Democrats feel good at the Unconstitutional ObamaCare they just passed. It is so great even the communist dictator in Cuba loves it.

It perhaps was not the endorsement President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress were looking for.

Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro on Thursday declared passage of American health care reform "a miracle" and a major victory for Obama's presidency, but couldn't help chide the United States for taking so long to enact what communist Cuba achieved decades ago.

"We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his (Obama's) government," Castro wrote in an essay published in state media, adding that it would strengthen the president's hand against lobbyists and "mercenaries."

But the Cuban leader also used the lengthy piece to criticize the American president for his lack of leadership on climate change and immigration reform, and for his decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, among many other things.

And he said it was remarkable that the most powerful country on earth took more than two centuries from its founding to approve something as basic as health benefits for all.

"It is really incredible that 234 years after the Declaration of Independence ... the government of that country has approved medical attention for the majority of its citizens, something that Cuba was able to do half a century ago," Castro wrote.

I'm pretty sure if Castro was elected President he would be acting the same way as Obama.

By trying to defend the Constitution we are aiding terrorism?

This is exactly how the loony left thinks. They think we are the terrorists. They are more afraid of those who want to uphold and support our founding father than they are of those in the Mid East who would strap bombs onto themselves to kill innocent lives. This just plain sickens me.

We knew this was an absolute joke

I still don't understand how people actually believed anything Obama said during his campaign.

...What I want to emphasize, though, is that I have been a strong proponent of pay-as- you-go. Every dollar that I've proposed, I've proposed an additional cut so that it matches.

When do liberals actually propose and support spending cuts. Oh wait. Unless we are talking about military cuts. Then maybe I could believe him.

Most want the Republicans to keep on fighting ObamaCare

Of course they do. This is a center right country. We don't want it to turn into a socialist cesspool. The vast majority agree so. They want the Republicans to continue the fight.

That is actually bipartisanship. The media always cries about the lack of bipartisanship so now we have a demand by the party to actually do so.

I'd like to see a poll on an Article 5 Convention.

Need more proof this is about control?

Rep Dingel

I will not support any Republican

Who thinks we can fix ObamaCare rather than repeal it. This blows my fucking mind. This is why I hate most Republicans. They talk a big game, pretend to be conservatives, but legislate like pansies with no fricken balls. Grow a set Cornyn. Obamacare doesn't need to be fixed. It needs to be repealed.

In the wake of the passage of health care reform, nearly the entire slate of Republican senatorial candidates seems ready to run on a repeal of the bill. But now, the lawmaker overseeing their election strategy is softening the message. Rather than promising to scrap the bill in its entirety, the GOP will pledge to just get rid of the more controversial parts…

“There is non-controversial stuff here like the preexisting conditions exclusion and those sorts of things,” the Texas Republican said. “Now we are not interested in repealing that. And that is frankly a distraction.”

What the GOP will work to repeal, Cornyn explained, are provisions that result in “tax increases on middle class families,” language that forced “an increase in the premium costs for people who have insurance now” and the “cuts to Medicare” included in the legislation…

The senator’s comments on Tuesday also included a push to restore funds for Medicare Advantage — an odd political moment, considering the GOP’s self-promotion as the party that trims the fat off entitlement programs.

Cornyn isn't exactly a RINO either. Which pisses me off even more. But if he doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to repeal this Unconstitutional law than screw him. He no longer deserves any support from the conservative base. He is making his bed and he will have to sleep in it.

Pansies like him just makes the Article 5 Convention that much more important.

Article 5 Constitution Convention

I've said since ObamaCare was passed that this is our best chance of repealing it. State attorney generals have already promised to sue the federal government over the passage that might not be enough. If states are willing to sue over ObamaCare they should be willing to call for an Article 5 Constitutional Convention like Congressman Louie Gohmert is calling for.

Rep. Gohmert stated, “The usurpation of the rights of the states and of the people perpetrated by the U.S. House last night is blatant, arrogant, and cries out for action. A potentially bankrupting ‘mother of all unfunded mandates’ needs to be stopped. The courts may or may not do it, but the states are not helpless. Article V of our U.S. Constitution anticipates a time when states perceive a looming crisis and provides an avenue for amending the Constitution. It makes clear that if two-thirds of the states are fed up with the federal government’s abusive action, then they simply apply for a convention, and the Congress SHALL call such a convention for proposing an amendment.”

Ever since the safeguard of State legislatures electing U.S. Senators was removed by the 17th Amendment in 1913, there has been no check or balance on the Federal power grab for the last 97 years. Article V requires a minimum of 34 states to request a Convention which in this case, would be an Amendment Convention for only ONE amendment.

“That one amendment would put a check and balance back on Federal usurpation of rights reserved to the States and people under the 9th and 10th Amendments. When drafted, the amendment would require ratification by only 38 states. We already have 39 states and that number will, no doubt, grow as people become aware of the foundational damage being done to the country,” said Gohmert.

Now is the time to act. Now is the time to defend the Constitution.

More government control to come

Now that the Democrats have passed the Unconstitutional health care reform what's next?

Democrats are debating whether to spend political capital earned by passing healthcare reform or hoard it so it pays dividends in the midterm elections.

Liberals argue the new momentum offers a rare opportunity to pass top priorities, such as immigration reform and climate change legislation, and warn that the party is likely to see its large majorities in the Senate and House diminished next year.

The Democrats just want total government control of everything. They won't stop until we are a mirror image of a European Socialist country.

If the Republicans have any backbone they better show it now. They have 41 votes in the Senate and can block any proposed legislation. There better not be one Republican who sides with any proposed bill until November. If any Republican even considers it they should be voted out of office as soon as possible.

This should tell you all you need to know about ObamaCare

It's so great Congress exempted themselves and their staff.

What else do you need to know?

States to sue over ObamaCare

This is a good first sign that we can over turn ObamaCare. The more states that sue the better our chances will be. We, as American citizens who care about individual freedom, need to keep ObamaCare as the main issue going into the 2010 elections. I know it's hard to keep up the emotions we all have had over the last few months debating ObamaCare but that is our only hope.

Florida's attorney general will file a lawsuit with nine other state attorneys general opposing the healthcare legislation passed by Congress, a spokeswoman said on Monday.

"The health care reform legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last night clearly violates the U.S. Constitution and infringes on each state's sovereignty," Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, a Republican, said in a prepared statement announcing a news conference.

"On behalf of the State of Florida and of the Attorneys General from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Pennsylvania, Washington, North Dakota, South Dakota and Alabama if the President signs this bill into law, we will file a lawsuit to protect the rights and the interests of American citizens."

Virginia's attorney general said he plans to sue the federal government over the healthcare reform legislation, saying Congress lacks authority to force people to buy health insurance.

Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, a Republican, said on Monday that Congress lacks authority under its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to force people to buy insurance. He said the bill also conflicts with a state law that says Virginians cannot be required to buy insurance.

"If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce," Cuccinelli said in recorded comments. "If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?"

Well it happened

Congress passed ObamaCare last night 220-211. They are lying to us saying that this is now going to go back to the Senate for reconciliation. But that isn't going to happen. This bill is going straight to Obama's desk to get signed. Welcome to the United Socialists States of America.

As a country we only have 3 options. Firstly there are going to be lawsuits all over the place starting with Mark Levin and his Legal Landmark Foundation. I'm sure ObamaCare will be put in front of the Supreme Court. Since this bill is Unconstitutional it should be over turned. But I don't have much faith and I'm a little afraid of that option. The same Supreme Court upheld McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform which was also Unconstitutional.

Secondly there are going to be quite a few states protesting this new law starting with Idaho and Virginia. I'm sure Texas and other conservative leaning states will join in protesting against ObamaCare. According to the Constitution states are supposed to have the power to over turn the Federal Government if it becomes to intrusive. Which ObamaCare is. There are up to 38 states who have pledged to oppose this. That is enough to make a Constitutional Amendment to get rid of ObamaCare.

If those two options don't work. The only thing else we could hope for the Republicans to take over the House and Senate in 2010 and 2012 and repeal ObamaCare. I have the least amount of faith in this. The Republicans have proven over and over again they are spineless cowards. Maybe this will be the one time they prove me wrong. And I really hope they do. ObamaCare is going to bankrupt the country much like RomneyCare is bankrupting Massachusetts.

Well I guess there is always a 2nd revolution.

Wonder how many jobs this will save or create?

Caterpillar says if ObamaCare passes the house it will cost the company $100 million in the first year alone. This is exactly what Caterpillar needs in this booming economy. The only way Caterpillar can of set this cost is by laying off employees.

Caterpillar Inc. said the health-care overhaul legislation being considered by the U.S. House would increase the company's health-care costs by more than $100 million in the first year alone.

In a letter Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, Caterpillar urged lawmakers to vote against the plan "because of the substantial cost burdens it would place on our shareholders, employees and retirees." Caterpillar, the world's largest construction machinery manufacturer by sales, said it's particularly opposed to provisions in the bill that would expand Medicare taxes and mandate insurance coverage. The legislation would require nearly all companies to provide health insurance for their employees or face large fines.

The Peoria-based company said these provisions would increase its insurance costs by at least 20 percent, or more than $100 million, just in the first year of the health-care overhaul program.

"We can ill-afford cost increases that place us at a disadvantage versus our global competitors," said the letter signed by Gregory Folley, vice president and chief human resources officer of Caterpillar. "We are disappointed that efforts at reform have not addressed the cost concerns we've raised throughout the year."

I hope they are having all their employees call their Congressman to vote against this bill.

True Cost of ObamaCare

A lot more than the 940 billion Obama and Pelosi have been saying.

To see the bill’s true first-decade costs, we need to start the clock when the costs would actually start in any meaningful way: in 2014. The CBO says that Obamacare would cost $2.0 trillion in the bill’s real first decade (from 2014 to 2023) — and much more in the decades to come.

But $2.0 trillion wouldn’t be the total ten-year costs. Instead, that would merely be the “gross cost of coverage provisions.” Based on earlier incarnations of the proposed overhaul, the total costs would be about a third higher (the exact number can’t be gleaned from the CBO’s analysis, which is only preliminary and is not a full scoring) — making the total price-tag between $2.5 and $3 trillion over the bill’s real first decade.

How would we pay for all of this? According to the CBO, by diverting $1.1 trillion away from already barely-solvent Medicare and spending it on Obamacare, and by increasing taxes on the American people by over $1 trillion. Among the Medicare cuts would be cuts of $25,000 in Medicare Advantage benefits per enrollee — up from $21,000 in the previous scoring. To be clear, those living in South Florida wouldn’t have to worry about this, as the newly politicized nature of health care would cause them to be exempted. These cuts would affect only less-fortunate seniors, namely those living in just about any other part of the country.

They lie to us about everything else. Why would we expect any less from them now?

Idado ready to sue over ObamaCare

Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states. Maybe Congressman will take the hint. No one wants socialized health care. If the this does pass all the states can band together and basically say no. We don't want your socialism. Even if it became the law of the land. There would be no way for it to get enforced.

Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance.

Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states.

Constitutional law experts say the movement is mostly symbolic because federal laws supersede those of the states.

But the state measures reflect a growing frustration with President President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. The proposal would cover some 30 million uninsured people, end insurance practices such as denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, require almost all Americans to get coverage by law, and try to slow the cost of medical care nationwide.

Democratic leaders hope to vote on it this weekend.

The AP got one thing wrong. This isn't mostly symbolic. That's not how the founders set up this country. The founders set up this country so the states superseded the federal government. But reporters would actually have to read the Constitution to know that. I wouldn't expect anyone in the AP to be a Constitutional Scholar.

Government run pharmacies?

I guess that is what is coming next. No politician has talked about it. But if they get ObamaCare why wouldn't they try and get government run pharmacies? Walgreens just announced they aren't going to take any new Medicaid patients because they don't many any money filling their prescriptions.

Effective April 16, Walgreens drugstores across the state won't take any new Medicaid patients, saying that filling their prescriptions is a money-losing proposition — the latest development in an ongoing dispute over Medicaid reimbursement.

The company, which operates 121 stores in the state, will continue filling Medicaid prescriptions for current patients.

In a news release, Walgreens said its decision to not take new Medicaid patients stemmed from a "continued reduction in reimbursement" under the state's Medicaid program, which reimburses it at less than the break-even point for 95 percent of brand-name medications dispensed to Medicaid patents.

I'm not genius but if the government isn't going to pay pharmacies enough money to even make a small profit from filling prescriptions why would pharmacies do it? So if every pharmacy tells the government to go screw who is going to fill ObamaCare prescriptions? Government run pharmacies.

We are well on our way to socialism...

Imagine if a Republican...

Vice President blessed a foreign Prime Ministers dead mother only to find out she isn't quite dead yet in fact she is very much still alive.

Vice President Joe Biden asked for God's blessing for the late mother of Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen during a White House celebration of St. Patrick's Day — except the elderly lady is very much alive.

"God rest her soul," Biden said Wednesday night as he introduced Cowen and President Barack Obama. He quickly caught himself and noted that it's Cowen's father who is no longer living. Of the prime minister's mother, Biden said, "God bless her soul."

Biden then cited the Irish proverb that "a silent mouth is sweet to hear" and yielded the podium to the president.

Now this really isn't that big of a deal. But when it happens over and over again to Biden at some point enough is enough. Seems like every week Biden sticks his foot in his mouth. If Dick Cheney kept on screwing up like this the media would be talking about how stupid and not qualified he was. Just like they did to Dan Quayle.

Lawsuits to come if House tries to pass Health-Care

With the Slaughter-Rule. I'm sure Mark Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation won't be the only ones to files a lawsuit too.

Landmark Legal Foundation President Mark Levin, who served as chief of staff in the Reagan Justice Department, said he plans to file an immediate lawsuit if House Democratic leaders try to use an unconstitutional manuever to pass the Senate health care without actually having to vote on it.

“I cannot predict if we would win or lose--this is not as simple as some would have you believe--but I want to put the marker down right now and make it clear to members of the House of Representatives who think the quickest way to pass this is to adopt a rule that assumes that they voted on an underlying bill when they didn’t--that is going to be challenged if they do it,” Levin said on his nationally syndicated radio show Tuesday evening.

Mark Levin is a great American. This country could definitely use more people like him. People who actually know and understand the Constitution. Something the Democrats are Hell bent on destroying.

Exterminate the monkeys

First they learn how to throw snowballs next they will learn how to take over the world.

We must exterminate them before they enslave the human race.

Health Care is going to destroy our economy

Not only will this Health Care legislation raise the cost of premiums despite Obama's moronic claim it could lower companies premiums 3000% but it could also lead to almost 700,000 lost jobs.

The result is a loss of between 119,000 and 698,000 jobs between enactment of the bill this year and 2019. A breakdown is below:

Sector	ESI	Jobs
	%	Low	High
Agriculture, mining and construction
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting	20	-923	-5,441
Mining	68	-939	-5,478
Construction	37	-7,374	-43,316
Manufacturing	65	-18,022	-105,229
Trade
Wholesale trade	57	-8,149	-47,663
Retail trade	39	-14,364	-84,339
Transportation and communication
Transportation and warehousing	55	-6,290	-36,806
Utilities	80	-906	-5,271
Services
Information	63	-4,510	-26,342
Financial Activities	66	-13,236	-77,269
Professional and business services	44	-22,606	-132,596
Educational services	61	-5,493	-32,102
Leisure and hospitality	25	-8,436	-49,682
Other services	48	-7,946	-46,564
Totals		-119,194	-698,098

I'm starting to think more and more that the Democrats want to destroy this country. I don't think they can claim ignorance anymore. There ideas are going to destroy this country. I think it is safe to say Obama and his ilk hate the United States and everything it stands for.

That is the only logical conclusion I can come up with to why they still are pushing for a bill that is going to destroy the country.

This has been tried before

And it doesn't work. Liberals can talk about peace between Israel and Palestine all they want. But there is never going to be peace over there until one side is completely annihilated. Unfortunately for the Jews the American left has chosen sides and it isn't with Israel. Time after time they always blame Israel for the lack of peace over there.

The Obama administration's row with Israel over settlements has prompted some analysts to wonder whether it seeks "regime change," a new government that can make peace with the Palestinians.

However, the analysts doubt that President Barack Obama's administration, which has made Arab-Israeli peace a national security priority, will achieve anything if it has indeed adopted such a strategy.

In unusually harsh words, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday that his right-wing government's plans to build new settler homes in east Jerusalem sent a "deeply negative signal" about Israel's ties to its top ally.

"Is this about regime change, or is it about (Israeli) behavior modification?" asked Aaron David Miller, a Middle East peace negotiator in past Republican and Democratic administrations.

The Obama administration has taken this too far. Now they are talking about regime change? Really Hillary? You do know that Israel is the only Republic over there, right?

Green initiatives saving the day again

It pays to be green. Let this be a lesson to everyone. If your town, city, state or even if the federal government wants to go green it is going to raise the rates of the cost of energy.

Households that get their power from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power could see their electric bills go up between 8.8% and 28.4%, depending on where they live and how much energy they use, under a plan unveiled Monday by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Appearing with labor and environmental leaders, Villaraigosa said the proposed increases would ensure that the DWP meets his goal of securing 20% of its energy from renewable sources such as wind and solar by Dec. 31.

The increased revenue would help pay for new environmental initiatives, including more aggressive conservation programs and a solar initiative designed to create 16,000 jobs.

And if they are saying rates may go up between 8.8-28.4% it's probably closer to 20-40%.

Blackmail gone wrong

Obama is threatening to not support and campaign for any Democrat who votes against Health Care. If Obama was smart, and he isn't, he would tell Democrats he won't support them if they vote for it. His support didn't help in Mass, New Jersey, or Virginia. It didn't help Chicago get the Olympics. Everything he has supported has lost. So if I was an elected Democrat why would I want his support?

The president will refuse to make fund-raising visits during November elections to any district whose representative has not backed the bill.

A one-night presidential appearance can bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars in funds which would otherwise take months to accumulate through cold-calling by campaign volunteers.

Mr Obama's threat came as the year-long debate over his signature domestic policy entered its final week.

Mr Obama is personally telephoning congressmen who are still on the fence this week, in between several personal appearances devoted toward swinging public opinion.

Imagine if a Republican...

Said they were going to pass a bill, hated and despised by a majority of Americans, with out even voting on it. That is true Democracy right there. /sarcasm. The media would be blowing its lid if the Republicans tried to pull this crap. You'd be hearing how the Republicans are trying to kill democracy and the Constitution. It would be a media Hell storm.

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

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

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

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

Republicans quickly condemned the strategy, framing it as an effort to avoid responsibility for passing the legislation, and some suggested that Pelosi's plan would be unconstitutional.

Since Pelosi doesn't have the votes. This is the only way she thinks she can pass ObamaCare.

Of course I really don't think this has a prayer in Hell of happening. I think this is more scare tactics from Pelosi trying to strong arm her fellow Democrats to vote for this even though it is widely unpopular.

Health Care Votes

I'm getting so sick of reading and hearing about health care. I just want the House to vote on it and get this over with. But I think Pelosi is still trying to bribe, strong arm and beg for votes. Otherwise they would have voted for it weeks ago. But the WHIP count, per The Hill, is 216-215. If that's the case they would be voting on it today.

The Hill's survey/tracking of House Democrats' positions on healthcare reform legislation.
UPDATED: 3/15/10 at 12:19 a.m.

House Democrats not on this list are expected to vote yes. However, some members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who are not mentioned below have threatened to vote no unless the Senate's immigration-related provisions are changed.

All House Republicans are expected to vote no.

If every member votes and all GOP lawmakers vote no, the maximum amount of Democratic defections to pass a bill is 37, which would lead to a 216-215 tally.

House Minority leader John Boehner agrees with me, if the Democrats had the votes it would have been voted on long ago.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Sunday that Democrats don't have the House votes to pass the healthcare bill.

"If she had 216 votes this bill would be long gone," Boehner said of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on CNN's "State of the Union."

The Democrats "tried to pass it in September, October, November, December, January, February," Boehner said. "Guess what? They don't have the votes."

Boehner again panned the idea that President Barack Obama's healthcare summit had made the bill bipartisan, saying "he may have taken a couple of Republican ideas," but "this bill is nowhere near the middle."

Imagine if a Republican...

Said they supported taking a DNA sample when someone is arrested. Just imagine if a Republican President said he supported this. The outrage from the liberal politicians, the liberal media and every watch dog group would be unprecedented. All about how the Republicans want to take away our right to privacy. There would have been more outrage over this than the Patriot Act.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Now there’s DNA sampling. Obama told Walsh he supported the federal government, as well as the 18 states that have varying laws requiring compulsory DNA sampling of individuals upon an arrest for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies. The data is lodged in state and federal databases, and has fostered as many as 200 arrests nationwide, Walsh said.

The American Civil Liberties Union claims DNA sampling is different from mandatory, upon-arrest fingerprinting that has been standard practice in the United States for decades.

A fingerprint, the group says, reveals nothing more than a person’s identity. But much can be learned from a DNA sample, which codes a person’s family ties, some health risks, and, according to some, can predict a propensity for violence.

The ACLU is suing California to block its voter-approved measure requiring saliva sampling of people picked up on felony charges. Authorities in the Golden State are allowed to conduct so-called “familial searching” — when a genetic sample does not directly match another, authorities start investigating people with closely matched DNA in hopes of finding leads to the perpetrator.

Do you wonder whether DNA sampling is legal?

The courts have already upheld DNA sampling of convicted felons, based on the theory that the convicted have fewer privacy rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that when conducting intrusions of the body during an investigation, the police need so-called “exigent circumstances” or a warrant. That alcohol evaporates in the blood stream is the exigent circumstance to draw blood from a suspected drunk driver without a warrant.

Oh ya...Obama is President right now. So guess there won't be much outrage since Obama can do no wrong.

Colorado learned a valuable lesson today

If you raise taxes on companies you will lose revenue not gain revenue. Colorado has imposed a sales tax for online sales that would greatly effect Amazon. So how does Amazon react to this new tax? They pull out of Colorado and screw the state.

In response to recent legislation in Colorado (HB 10-1193), Amazon.com has sent a letter to its affiliates in Colorado informing them that the on-line sales giant will no longer be advertising through businesses in the state that that make money by referring buyers.

In order to close a $1.5 Billion budget gap, Colorado Democrats this session have passed a law that would make it possible to collect sales taxes on on-line purchases by creating an economic nexus between state residents and on-line retailers.

The bill, which was part of a package of tax measures aimed at increasing revenue, originally sought to create a nexus between the state and on-line retailers based on their ties to local affiliate websites, which link to products. The bill was ultimately altered due largely to fears that retailers like Amazon would simply cut ties to Colorado companies that make money by referring buyers.

The final bill, which was signed into law in February, instead required large online retailers to start collecting sales taxes or provide a summary of people's web purchases in the state, leaving affiliates out of the equation. This created an economic nexus without making local affiliates a scapegoat for paying local sales taxes.

Amazon has apparently elected to cut dies to its Colorado affiliates regardless. Colorado affiliate Nat Torkington wrote "So let me get this straight: I've done nothing, and Amazon just fired me?"

Nat, you can thank your legislators for getting fired. This is what happens when you over tax and over regulate business. They go where it is cheaper and easier to make a profit. That's called common sense. Something most politicians lack.

Good news on Health Care

If Pelosi actually had enough votes Obama wouldn't be delaying his trip to Indonesia.

President Barack Obama will delay his planned trip to southeast Asia to focus on healthcare.

Obama was set to leave March 18, and the White House hoped the House would approve the Senate's healthcare bill by that time.

But House leaders have pushed back at the deadline, criticizing Gibbs and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in the process.

House leaders also do not appear to have whipped the 216 votes they need from their caucus to win the vote either, and a Thursday decision by the Senate parliamentarian has made their task more difficult.

So Obama will give another worthless speech that won't change a thing. Health Care is officially dead.

Mike Pence for President

This is the kind of leadership and forward thinking the country needs.

"Federal spending is out of control and the American people know it. Earmarks have become emblematic of everything that is wrong with spending here in Washington D.C. Today, after a marathon debate within the House Republican Conference, House Republicans have determined to renounce earmark requests of all kinds in this Congress, and the American people won that debate.

"By standing in favor of a moratorium on earmarks in this Congress, House Republicans are making a clean break from the past. We are offering the American people a fresh start on spending in Washington, D.C. We are offering the American people a new way forward. With the health care reform bill being debated and haggled about in these very hallways, no doubt earmarks are being talked about in a different way by the Democrat Majority. After the ‘Cornhusker Kickback,' the ‘Gatorade Deal,' the ‘Second Louisiana Purchase,' the American people want us to change business as usual in Washington D.C.

"The contrast will be startling in the days ahead. No doubt as Democrats are making backroom deals, and offering earmarks to pass their government takeover of health care, today with one voice House Republicans have stepped forward and said, ‘The time has come to set aside earmarking as usual and begin the process of turning federal spending back over to the American people with a new course, new discipline, and new transparency.'"

Obama in a nut shell

Admitting he hates democracy.

"I would have loved nothing better than to simply come up with some very elegant, academically approved approach to health care, and didn't have any kinds of legislative fingerprints on it, and just go ahead and have that passed. But that's not how it works in our democracy. Unfortunately, what we end up having to do is to do a lot of negotiations with a lot of different people."

Does anything else really need to be said?

No Obama, Thankfully that's how it works.

Good thing the Republicans are doing all they can to stop Health Care

Oh wait...it's fellow Democrats holding the bill down in the House. Now the Hispanic Caucus says they won't vote for the bill unless immigration reform goes with the bill. But I'm sure some how the Republicans will get blamed for this too.

A group of Hispanic lawmakers on Thursday will tell President Barack Obama that they may not vote for healthcare reform unless changes are made to the bill’s immigration provisions.

The scheduled meeting comes as Democratic leaders and the White House are struggling to craft a final bill that will attract 216 votes in the lower chamber.

Unlike abortion, immigration has flown beneath the radar, and almost seemed to vanish altogether as House Democrats have wrestled with how to accept a Senate healthcare bill far different from the one they passed in November.
But immigration remains just as explosive an issue and carries the same potential to derail the entire healthcare endgame, a number of Democrats said.

So can someone please tell me how the Republicans, as the party of no, have been the ones holding this bill up?

Good thing for the country there has been a lot of in fighting in the Democratic Party over Health Care reform. If there hadn't been so much in fighting I'm sure this would have passed months ago.

The Senate has saved us all

They passed another "jobs" bill. Hurray to our saviors.

Give me a break. How many of these stupid wasteful bills do they have to pass until they realize they don't help? They actually hurt the economy. Bush's first jobs bill didn't help and neither has any of Obama's. All these politicians talk about fixing the deficit but yet they continue to waste and waste.

The Senate approved $140 billion in extended tax breaks and unemployment benefits on Wednesday in a largely partisan vote.

The bill was approved on a 62-36 vote, with six Republicans joining most Democrats in backing it.

Senate Democrats are calling the measure a jobs bill, though it includes tax breaks extended by Congress on a near-annual basis as well as a fix to Medicare payments for doctors that lawmakers also have previously extended.

It’s the second package of legislation that Senate Democrats have labeled as a jobs bill this year, joining a $15 billion measure approved by the Senate last week.

GOP Sens. Kit Bond (Mo.), Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), David Vitter (La.) and George Voinovich (Ohio) voted for the bill.

At least Scott Brown voted against this bill.

The most brilliant idea ever for politicians

When your state needs a $4.7 billion loan just to stay a float chances are you are spending WAY too much money. Those are words to live by. If a company ran a business like that they wouldn't be in business for very long. Government needs to learn to be run like a business.

Gov. Pat Quinn on Tuesday unveiled a caustic budget plan that would borrow billions of dollars to stay afloat and push even more debt down the road, hoping to persuade leery lawmakers to instead raise taxes in an election year.

Quinn aides warned the plan would cost some 13,000 teachers and staff their jobs, cut off poor seniors from help in paying for costly prescriptions and shut down some health care programs for the indigent. But even after about $2 billion in cuts, the state would still be $11 billion in the hole.

The administration's warnings served as the precursor for the Democratic governor's Wednesday budget address before a joint session of lawmakers who want to wrap up their business in two months so they can focus on their re-election.

Gov Quinn doesn't need a loan. He doesn't need to raise taxes. He needs to cut spending. There is no such thing as a revenue problem in our government only spending problems.

The problem is, once a Governor does propose an actually spending cut. Not just a cut in the rate of increase they get killed for it by the media.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie may propose a budget that is as much as 14 percent smaller than the current spending plan and includes cuts to property tax rebates and school aid, according to two people with knowledge of budget talks.

Christie, 47, will outline a budget that may range from $25 billion to $27 billion and contain a total of $10 billion in spending reductions that will also lower funding for the state’s 566 towns and cities as he seeks to close an $11 billion deficit, the people said. The governor told lawmakers in a conference call last week that the state anticipates $27 billion in revenue for the year starting July 1, one of the people said.

Gov Christie knows that the only way out of the financial mess in New Jersey is too cut spending. If he were to raise taxes it would only add to the mess. Cause more people to lose their jobs. Drive more businesses out of the state. And drive New Jersey into a financial bankruptcy.

Republicans will never learn

Especially the likes of John McCain. Democrats only care about having a "Gang of 14" to block legislation when it's Republican legislation. Now that Democrats have all the power the are saying no to forming a new gang.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wants to revive the bipartisan Gang of 14 — this time for health care reform, not judicial nominees.

But most of his moderate Democratic colleagues aren’t rushing to R.S.V.P.

Graham said Tuesday that a coalition of Republican and Democratic senators could rescue the Senate from an institutional disaster brought on by the use of the parliamentary maneuver known as reconciliation to finish the health care bill.

“Many Republicans who were ready to pull the trigger on the nuclear option on judges are now glad they didn’t,” Graham said. “This place would have ceased to function as we know it. If they do health care through reconciliation, it will be the same consequence. So if you are a moderate Democrat out there looking for a way to deliver health care reforms and not pull the nuclear trigger, there is a model to look at.”

Can't say I'm really shocked the Democrats said no to Lindsey Graham. I'm more shocked that Graham is shocked they said no. This is how the Democrats work. Bipartisonship means agreeing with them.

Here comes the false recovery

I can't wait to here Obama, the Democrats and the media saying how much the better the economy is after this. Even though these will be temporary government jobs. But that won't stop the Democrats and Obama from trying to say how wonderful he is.

The U.S. Census Bureau expects to add up to 750,000 workers to its payroll by May, a hiring binge that could knock the unemployment rate down by as much as a half-point.

The once-a-decade census is coming at the best possible time for President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats, who have taken political lumps for more than a year over a jobless rate that stands at 9.7 percent.

Of course unemployment is under reported now too. They aren't counting the people who have given up on finding a job or who are under employed. But I'm sure if a Republican was in office we'd be hearing the higher number. Got to love the liberal biased media.

Small government vs Big Government

Texas vs California

California	Texas
Population Rank:	#1	#2
Joined the Union:	1850, ceded by Mexico	1845, ceded by Mexico
Hispanic Population:	About one-third	About one-third
Leadership over last 20 years:	Democrat, large government	GOP, small government
State legislature meets:	Year-round	Meets 90 days every two years
Net population change:	Outflow of 1,509,000 from 2000-2009	Inflow of 1,600,000 from 2000-2009
Average teacher salary:	$60,000/yr.	$41,744/hr.
ACT score rank:	#44	#30
8th grade % proficient at writing rank:	#30	#16
4th grade % proficient at math rank:	#26	#16
Tax Policy	8.25% sales tax, up to 10.55% income tax	6.25% sales tax, no income tax
Public sector unions:	Powerful. Spent $100,000,000 (in funds levied from taxpayers) defeating legislation that would weaken the Democrat-union alliance in 2005.	"Weak or non-existent".
Bond Rating (an indicator of financial health)	S&P A-	S&P AA+

Any questions?

Imagine if a Republican...

Said Obama was so useless he couldn't sell watermelons. Imagine how the media would portray that Republican as an evil racist. How dare he say something like that. That's racist. They would try and portray all Republicans as evil bigots who hate blacks.

Of course Dan Rathers says that and no one cares. Not even Chris Matthews.

DAN RATHER: Part of the undertow in the coming election is going to be President Obama's leadership. And the Republicans will make a case and a lot of independents will buy this argument. "Listen he just hasn't been, look at the health care bill. It was his number one priority. It took him forever to get it through and he had to compromise it to death." And a version of, "Listen he's a nice person, he's very articulate" this is what's been used against him, "but he couldn't sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic."

I don't think Dan Rathers is a racist by any means. But like I said, if a Republican were to have said that, that's how they'd be portrayed.

I wouldn't put it past the Democrats

Rep Eric Massa is claiming he is being forced out of office by his party leadership because he was going to vote no on Health Care.

Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) says the House ethics committee is investigating him for inappropriate comments he made to a male staffer on New Year's Eve — and that he's the victim of a power play by Democratic leaders who want him out of Congress because he's a "no" vote on health care reform.

"Mine is now the deciding vote on the health care bill," Massa, who on Friday announced his intention to resign, said during a long monologue on radio station WKPQ. "And this administration and this House leadership have said, quote-unquote, they will stop at nothing to pass this health care bill. And now they've gotten rid of me and it will pass. You connect the dots."

Massa insisted that he did not know the basis of a House ethics committee investigation into his conduct until after he announced his retirement last Wednesday, and he took House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) to task for going public with information related to the probe before it is completed

People try and say it is the Republicans who aren't inclusive. When it is the complete different way. If you're a Democrat and you even think about voting against the leadership you will be forced out.

Hopefully more and more Democrats will learn from this. If they band together they won't have to be ruled by Nancy Pelosi in the House. If they want to save the once great Democratic party they should band together and take the party back over.

Obama finally smartening up about Khalid Sheik Mohammed

Instead of a civilian trial advisers to Obama are going to recommend a military tribunal.

President Obama's advisers are nearing a recommendation that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, be prosecuted in a military tribunal, administration officials said, a step that would reverse Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.'s plan to try him in civilian court in New York City.

The president's advisers feel increasingly hemmed in by bipartisan opposition to a federal trial in New York and demands, mainly from Republicans, that Mohammed and his accused co-conspirators remain under military jurisdiction, officials said. While Obama has favored trying some terrorism suspects in civilian courts as a symbol of U.S. commitment to the rule of law, critics have said military tribunals are the appropriate venue for those accused of attacking the United States.

If Obama accepts the likely recommendation of his advisers, the White House may be able to secure from Congress the funding and legal authority it needs to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and replace it with a facility within the United States. The administration has failed to meet a self-imposed one-year deadline to close Guantanamo.

This sounds great, but why the change? I for one don't exactly trust Obama.

I don't think this is a national security decision. If Obama actually cared about National Security he would have never let the idea of trying KSM as a civilian. It would have been a military tribunal from the word go. I think this is all political.

Obama knows the majority of the people care about America. They care about our national security. And they think that trying KSM as a civilian would make a spectacle of the Islamic terrorists.

It's a good thing Obama finally made the right decision regarding KSM. It just shouldn't have taken him this long.

Let this be a lesson to you Scott Brown

Bipartisanship only means agreeing with Democrats. It doesn't matter how much you "compromise" with them they will never go for anything you want.

Democrats voted Thursday to defeat the first piece of legislation offered by Sen. Scott Brown, despite a plea from the newly elected lawmaker for bipartisanship.

The Senate voted 56 to 44 to derail an amendment sponsored by Brown (R-Mass.) that would have allocated $80 billion in unobligated stimulus funds to pay for a tax cut for 130 million people in the workforce.
The amendment failed when senators voted to enforce a procedural objection Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) raised against the measure. A majority voted to sustain the motion.

In his first Senate floor speech, Brown asked Democrats to support his proposal, reminding them he was the first Republican to vote for a $15 billion jobs package offered by Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Brown and four other Republicans voted for the Reid jobs bill, giving Senate Democrats their biggest bipartisan legislative victory of the year.

Brown asked his colleagues to return the favor.

I don't understand how people like Scott Brown can actually think the Democrats will work together with him. Democrats believe compromise is agreeing with them and nothing less.

Why is the climate bill even on the table?

It really irritates me when a Republican talks like this. No Republican should be offering support for not even for something we all want, drilling for oil in Alaska. Man made global warming is a myth. The scientists lied and misled the public with faulty data.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) suggested Wednesday that the bar for her vote on climate legislation is high indeed: She wants oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on the table.

“To secure my vote on a climate bill, we have to develop a good policy. In my mind that good policy would include ANWR as part of a domestic production title,” she told reporters in the Capitol.

Murkowski is considered a potential swing vote in the climate debate.

She has spoken of the threat global warming poses to Alaska, and signed on to a moderate cap-and-trade bill sponsored by Sens. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and Arlen Specter (D-Penn.) several years ago (Specter was a Republican at the time).

Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) are trying to craft a compromise climate change and energy bill that would include emissions limits and expanded domestic energy production – including new oil-and-gas development.

“In my mind, if we are going to really talk about those things that will allow us a greater level of independence when it comes to our oil production, you have got to have ANWR on the table,” Murkowski said.

It really irks me that she can be bought off so easily too. These two things should have nothing to do with each other. They should be completely separate bills not put together for one. That's the problem with Washington.

In order to get support for unwanted and harmful bills they put in a bunch of crap to make everyone happy.

These the back door deals Obama promised

Wouldn't happen under his administration? Obama's newest judge appointment just happens to be the brother in law of a Democrat who voted against the Health Care bill.

Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he's obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson's brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

10 buck says he changes his vote this time.

Maybe the blue dogs are starting to get it

This is more of what the Democratic Party needs. Not the socialistic ideas the party leaders like Obama, Reid and Pelosi have now.

Blue Dog Democrats on Tuesday introduced legislation to add a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution.

The legislation would require the federal government to pay down the national debt — which is over $12 trillion — and balance the budget by 2020. This year’s budget deficit is projected to be $1.6 trillion.

“Talking about paying down the debt and balancing the budget is easy,” Blue Dog Co-Chairman Jim Matheson (D-Utah) said in a statement. “It’s where the rubber meets the road that Congress has fallen short.”

The amendment would require Congress to produce a balanced budget every fiscal year, and require the president to submit a balanced budget in an annual address to Congress.

They can propose a balanced budget amendment all they want but I seriously doubt the communists running their party will even broach the idea. This is something the Republicans should hook onto and support with the Blue Dog Democrats. There are more Blue Dogs and Republicans than there are wacko leftists in Congress.

I love Reagan more than most

But seriously?

A U.S. congressman from North Carolina wants the $50 bill redrawn to feature the face of former President Ronald Reagan.

Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry wants Congress to tell the U.S Treasury to replace former President Ulysses S. Grant on the bill. McHenry announced his bill Tuesday. He has 13 Republican co-sponsors.

Grant was a Union general during the Civil War who led the North to victory and later became the nation's 18th president.

McHenry said Reagan transformed the nation's political and economic thinking and argued that "every generation needs its own heroes."

There is far more important things to worry about like defeating health care, national security, lowering taxes and fiscal responsibility. Not wasting money putting Reagan on the 50 dollar bill.

I'm getting sick of talking about Health Care

But now it seems that Obama wants the Democrats to fall on their swords and push the bill through with reconciliation.

White House officials tell ABC News that in his remarks tomorrow President Obama will indicate a willingness to work with Republicans on some issue to get a health care reform bill passed but will suggest that if it is necessary, Democrats will use the controversial "reconciliation" rules requiring only 51 Senate votes to pass the "fix" to the Senate bill, as opposed to the 60 votes to stop a filibuster and proceed to a vote on a bill.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have been awaiting the president’s remarks direction on how health care reform will proceed.

In his remarks, scheduled to be at the White House, the president will paint a picture of what he will say will happen without a health care reform bill – skyrocketing premiums, everyone at the mercy of the insurance industry as recently seen with the 39% premium increases proposed by Anthem Blue Cross in California.

More of the same lies. I don't know how people can actually believe this guy?

What scares me the most is how can we really expect the Republicans to band together to stop this? They can't even follow the new PayGo rules. So if this does get passed through with Reconciliation the only hope is for the Surpreme Court to find it Unconstitutional. And the last thing I want to do is put something as important as this in the hands of a court.

For once, I just wish, the Republicans wouldn't be the spineless cowards they have showed time and time again to be...

Maybe President Obama should listen to Senator Obama too.

Lost a lot of faith in the Republicans

If the Republicans can't even stand together on fiscal responsibility. Even though Obama passed PayGo weeks prior and that means the Senate is already breaking the new rule. Not that I'm really shocked that no one there has any fiscal responsibility anyways.

Senators approved a bill extending unemployment benefits, highway funding and other federal programs Tuesday night after Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) dropped his days-long blockade of the bill.

The Senate approved the measure 78 to 19.

Bunning had held up the Senate's consideration of the package of 30-day extensions since Thursday, arguing that the measures were not paid for. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said they were, but Bunning stood firm until reaching accord on a deal Tuesday.

That agreement allowed a vote on the package and also gave Bunning a vote on his amendment forcing the $10 billion bill to be offset with the closing of a tax loophole that has benefited the paper industry. The amendment failed, with 43 senators voting for it.

Very disheartening that my new Senator, Scott Brown, who ran as a fiscal conservative, voted for this bill too.

So much for fiscal responsibility in the Senate. So much for PayGo.

The only Senators I have respect for at this very moment are:

The 19 ‘no’ votes included GOP Sens. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), John Barrasso (Wyo.), Robert Bennett (Utah), Bunning, Richard Burr (N.C.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), Bob Corker (Tenn.), John Cornyn (Texas), Mike Crapo (Idaho), Jim DeMint (S.C.), John Ensign (Nev.), Mike Enzi (Wyo.), Judd Gregg (N.H.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Mike Johanns (Neb.), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Jim Risch (Idaho), Jeff Sessions (Ala.) and John Thune (S.D.).

Sad to say, any Republican who didn't vote No on this should be challenged and voted out in the next primary.

Update: Found the letter Jim Bunning read to the Senate. Couldn't be more right.

Dear Senator Jim Bunning,

I haven’t worked a full 40 hour week in probably two years now, but I fully support your decision to stand up to those in Congress who want nothing more than to spend the tax payers money, even the money they do not have, on unemployment extension benefits.

So far this year I have worked a total of one week here in Louisville, Kentucky. My employer is a sheet metal fabrication plant with it’s main headquarters based in Cincinnati, Ohio. Normally the Louisville branch would employ upwards of fifty people on any given day if business were good. Recently that number has dwindled to about four.

This country is sooner or later going to implode because of the massive amounts of debt run up over the past 40 or 50 years. Selling the nation’s soul to countries like Communist China in order to finance our life style and allow the government to further debase the currency is shear lunacy. Throwing away hundreds of billions of dollar so executives on Wall Street can keep their multi-million dollar bonuses while others in society worry about keeping the electricity on and their children fed only helps to move this country closer to a long overdue revolution. The problem is by then we won’t even own it anymore.

Politicians, on both side, enjoy getting in front of the television cameras and talk about their support of the “pay as you go” plan, but when it comes down to actually doing what they say, they all run for cover and vote for anything that they think will win them another vote and another term. Your stance in holding them to their words and expecting them to actually do what they voted for is a refreshing concept in the otherwise corrupt and hypocritical power base known as Washington, D.C.

It’s too bad Senator Mitch McConnell and some of the other elected officials do not have your backbone or your sense of decency when it comes to keeping their promises to the American public.

Sincerely,

(Name & street address withheld)
Louisville, Kentucky

Imagine if a Republican...

Were to blame winter for a crumbling economy. Does anyone really think the media would report that with out questioning it?

White House economic adviser Larry Summers said on Monday winter blizzards were likely to distort U.S. February jobless figures, which are due to be released on Friday.

"The blizzards that affected much of the country during the last month are likely to distort the statistics. So it's going to be very important ... to look past whatever the next figures are to gauge the underlying trends," Summers said in an interview with CNBC, according to a transcript.

Construction activity was hit particularly hard by the storms, but many restaurants and stores also had to close, putting the brakes on hiring plans and temporarily throwing some employees out of work.

Summers, director of the White House's National Economic Council, also said the United States was closely monitoring Greece's debt problems and U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was encouraged by what he had heard from European officials about the issue.

Who comes up with this stuff? Is this how stupid the liberals in the White House think we are?

The problem isn't winter. The problem is over taxation, over spending and over regulating. Not all the global warming that has fallen from the sky this winter. But of course the media will report this with out one question.

Only if you are a Democrat

Can a bill be bi-partisan with no Republican support. If a Republican were to say this the media would go crazy over it.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Sunday that Republicans have left their mark on the healthcare bill and should accept that the bill will go forward.

"They've had plenty of opportunity to make their voices heard," she said on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday morning. "Bipartisanship is a two-way street. A bill can be bipartisan without bipartisan votes. Republicans have left their imprint."

The public option, for example, has been stripped from the bill because Republicans were so adamantly against it, she said.

The problem here is, the Democrats know this bill is unpopular. They know it is going to fail and bankrupt the country. Even knowing all that they still want to push it through. But they don't want to take 100% blame for it. So they are trying to lie to the media and say because they have talked about the bill it is bi-partisan even though no Republicans support it or will vote for it.