“Liberty is traditional and conservative; it remembers its legends and its heroes. But tyranny is always young and seemingly innocent, and asks us to forget the past.” — G. K. Chesterton.
A lot has been written about the aftermath of Saturday’s vote, including by my fellow blogger here and NRO-nik Yuval Levin, so I guess it’s time I added my own $0.02 worth.
I’d like to use Yuval’s post as a jumping-off point. He points out, I think correctly, that the House vote makes it even harder for the Senate to pass anything. However, it also makes more problems for the Democrats.
This was clearly an unpopular vote… that’s the clear meaning of all the rallies and town halls, including 9/12 and the rally on the steps of the Capitol last Thursday. Let’s also remember that not all voters read blogs or research things online. Top that with anger at the Democrat Party as a whole, and you’ve got the perfect set-up for large numbers of people saying, “To heck with the whole party. I don’t care if my Democrat Representative did vote against it, we need to take the majority away from them and the Speakership away from Pelosi, so I am voting against him/her.” Thus, it’s highly likely that Pelosi has won a battle, but in such a way that she’s set herself up to lose the overall war.
It was also unnecessary. Not only is it unlikely to pass in the Senate, even without the House vote (Reid had said before the vote that it was likely the vote in the Sente would be pushed back into 2010, where it will be even harder to get it passed because of the election that year), but if Pelosi had even the slightest concept of good politics, she could have gone about it completely differently and probably succeeded.
Consider: If Pelosi had backed off of this takeover of the health-care system by the government for just a little while, put her ideology in a desk drawer somewhere, and gone on to policies that actually encourage job creation, it would have changed the playing field drastically. People would have been reassured about the Democrats (falsely reassured, but remember most people don’t pay the kind of attention to politics that bloggers and blog-readers do), and feeling better about the economy, so they might not have been so scared about this massive government power-grab.
Now, I admit, it’s a small chance, but a small chance is better than what Pelosi has now, which is practically no chance of it getting through the Senate, and an equally minuscule chance of a Democrat majority surviving to try again after 2010. People have made much of the Democrats’ willingness to sacrifice their House seats to enact statist health-care, but what about sacrificing for a maneuver that makes it all but impossible for it to be passed?
By pushing too hard, Her Speakerness has essentially buried the prospects for socialized medicine in this nation for the near future.
The snag in the works was getting so-called “moderate” “Blue Dog” Democrats to vote for the “deficit neutral” bill. How did Pelosi get so-called “Blue Dog” Democrats to vote for passage of the bill? There was certainly some arm-twisting that was done by leftist Democrats and President Obama himself; however, by simply inserting a stipulation known as the “Stupak Amendment“, which limits, but does not eliminate coverage and funding for abortions, that’s all it took for so-called “moderate” Democrats to submit an “up” vote.
Never mind the insertion of items that don’t have anything to do with health care reform and that raise taxes on people whom President Obama promised would not be taxed. Never mind that over 50 percent of Americans do not want a public “option” or in other words, government-run health care [Rasmussen Report - Health Care Reform].
Self-serving, hyper-ambitious politicians on all levels of government do not care about the will of the American people. They do not genuinely care about the health and well-being of the American people. They have proven time and again that they are nothing but a group of haughty, arrogant, elitist power and money grabbers with an aristocratic sense of predestinate entitlement.
The next election cycle is only a year away. A lot can happen in a year and those who want to retain their positions of power will do their best (or worst) to pull the wool over their constituents’ eyes in an effort to get re-elected. They know that the memories of the people they claim to represent are short. They are banking on that knowledge because it is a successful time-tested strategy.
So-called health care reform is only one link in a longer chain of enslavement that leftist bosses are forging for America. They are only a couple of links away from completing that chain. After the chain is complete, it will be almost impossible to break it.
What will you do? Will you vote for or against the chain? The 2010 elections should give us an indication.
A Canadian cartoonist whose cartoon I read daily (if you’re a geek, you’ll probably enjoy it too) has come up with a great early memorial for Veterans’ Day (in Canada, Remembrance Day). Check it out.
Some of you may remember the chart that the GOP put together showing the mess of bureaucracy that HR 32oo would have created. That’s the chart that the Democrats wanted to prohibit Republican Members of Congress from sending to their constitutents.
That chart has now been updated for Her Speakerness Pelosi’s latest monstrosity, HR 3962 (link in .pdf format). As one might expect, the new bill adds lots of new bureaucracies to what was already a horrible mess.
It’s not too late… call your Representatives and tell them that if they vote for this, you will not vote for them!
UPDATE: Courtesy of NRO’s Campaign Spot, here’s a handy-dandy list of 55 House Democrats who might be swayed. Give them a call (call the Capitol Switchboard at 202.224.3121 and ask for their office, since Her Speakerness is keeping them all in DC) and tell them a vote for this means you will donate to their opponent next year. Remember, Representatives are all elected every 2 years, so each and every one of those names on that list will be up for re-election or defeat next year.
Especially in the wake of today’s tragic Fort Hood shooting, it’s appropriate to think of ways we could support our troops, most importantly those wounded in battle.
So, let me suggest donating to Soldiers’ Angels Project Valour-IT. These folks provide technology to help wounded service members… their “flagship” item is a voice-controlled laptop for those with arm or hand wounds, but they also provide other items that you can read about here.
In memory of my late father, who was an enlisted man in the Navy and Naval Reserves, I’ve signed us up for the Navy team during their Veterans’ Day Fundraiser. It’s just a friendly competition, all donations are available to members of any service. But please, open your hearts and wallets to these brave people who gave of themselves to protect us. Just click the picture below to go to the donation page.
Despite a GOP boycott, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), chairwoman of the U.S. Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee and other Democrats on the committee approved a climate change bill that would require cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent over the next decade from 2005 levels [Article - Senate Panel Approves Climate Change Bill Despite GOP Boycott].
In typical overreaching fashion, leftist politicians are attempting to force unpopular economy-killing legislation through. However, there is a silver lining: The bill has passed committee, but it now goes to the Senate floor, where it is expected to die an ignominious death.
This goes along with a previously submitted ACW post, touching on how leftist politicians tirelessly and tenaciously try to further their destructive interests [Reference - German Chancellor Merkel And The Climate Change “Wall”].
To be sure, the battle to force through legislation based on junk science will continue. Without unwavering, steadfast opposition to leftist environmental lunacy, it is a guarantee that climate change legislation will be passed and the suffering of the American people will last for decades.
Yesterday marked the 20th anniversary of the pulling down of the wall separating East and West Berlin in Germany. For the first time, a German head of state spoke before U.S. Congress. German Chancellor Angela Merkel addressed members of U.S. Congress and one of the subjects Merkel spoke about was the need for a global deal on climate change [Article - Merkel meets with Obama, then talks to Congress]. Perhaps a symbolic appeal by Merkel to tear down the climate change “wall” [Article - The European Experience with Cap and Trade]?
With support for cap and trade legislation on the decline, President Obama vows that the United States will play a prominent role in decreasing global greenhouse gas emissions. Obama’s answer to the climate change question is cap and trade legislation.
The Waxman-Markey bill or rather, Taxman-Malarkey bill (H.R. 2998 – American Clean Energy And Security Act Of 2009) is currently in limbo, since health care reform legislation has taken center stage. Beltway politicians have certainly been working behind the scenes on slipping cap and trade legislation through, with very little public scrutiny…so they hope.
If the United States agrees to comply with some sort of global climate change contract in Copenhagen, Denmark, this will surely embolden leftist environut anti-capitalists in America to get climate change-related cap and trade legislation enacted.
Dierdre K. Scozzafava’s decision to suspend her campaign for the 23rd Congressional District seat is a shocking development in what had already been an extraordinary race.
In her statement Saturday morning, the assemblywoman explained the reasons behind her decision: “It is increasingly clear that pressure is mounting on many of my supporters to shift their support. Consequently, I hereby release those individuals who have endorsed and supported my campaign to transfer their support as they see fit to do so.”
During the day Saturday, she began to quietly and thoughtfully encourage her supporters to vote for Democrat William L. Owens.
(emphasis mine)
Now, this could be a reflection of her true political persuasion, or it could just be aimed at defeating the conservative who knocked her out of the race.
Either way, however, it’s hardly what I want to see in a Republican… candidate or elected official. I believe we need to have higher standards than that other party.
Update: More confirmation of Scozzafava endorsing the Democrat from The Hill.
Updates II and III: Even more confirmation (as if it were needed) from the NY Daily News.
Background on the Owens endorsement, and reaction from the Hoffman camp in the Watertown Daily Times.
Looking over the Big Three elections next week, a pattern is definitely emerging. Bob McDonnell is set to completely rout Creigh Deeds in Virginia, and liberal Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava has sunk so far in both polls and fundraising that she felt compelled to drop out and leave the battle between Pelosi’s hand picked Democrat Bill Owens and true Conservative (both in outlook and in party identification) Doug Hoffman in the NY-23 special election. Even in deep blue New Joisey, Democrat Jon Corzine can’t seem to get more than a point or two ahead of Republican Chris Christie, who is running on a clear Reaganite platform.
While it’s a bit early to start counting chickens, one thing is clear. The liberal wanna-be-Democrat so-called “moderate” Republicanism is failing to catch on with the public, just as it failed in 2008 with John McCain. Real Reaganite conservatism is winning even areas where Obama won handily… he won in NY-23 with 52%, and Virginia statewide with 53%.
This really should be common sense. Ford, after all, doesn’t advertise that it’s cars are just like GM’s, Geico doesn’t brag that their coverage is almost exactly like Progressive’s, and Coca-Cola doesn’t build a marketing strategy around being just like Pepsi… though they did once, and the results were so bad they reversed course in less than 90 days. In order for the Republican Party to succeed, they need to point out clearly the differences between their views and the Democrats–and, of course, they need to actually have policy differences before they can point them out! Following the Democrats’ policies just guarantees that many people will vote for the real Democrat rather than the pale imitator, and the rest will just sit home.
Of course, the lefties in the media would love to see the GOP embrace just such a “Democrat-lite” platform, because it would ensure the continuing march of what Mark Levin has aptly named Statism: the continual increase of government power over the lives of ordinary Americans. Those claiming to be conservatives who echo this call–you know who you are, and we know who you are as well–seek either the same government control or are simply too short-sighted to see beyond the next invitation to a Beltway cocktail party.
Rather than listen to such wishy-washy Republicans, let us listen instead to perhaps the greatest Republican President, Mr. Reagan, who laid out a program for victory way back in 1975:
The Obama administration is being accused of not being exactly honest about jobs “stimu-less” has saved or created:
You know it’s getting bad for the most highly esteemed potentate and savior of the world and his horde of Chicago-style thugonomists when state-controlled media can’t even say anything nice about Obamanomics.
I guess McCain-style liberal Republicanism doesn’t even sell in upstate New York:
Dede Scozzafava, the Republican and Independence parties candidate, announced Saturday that she is suspending her campaign for the 23rd Congressional District and releasing all her supporters.
The state Assemblywoman has not thrown her support to either Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate, or Bill Owens, the Democratic candidate.
One wonders if those that want the GOP to become just a watered-down version of the Democrats will learn the lesson.
Here is a copy of all 1990 pages of H.R. 3962 – Affordable Health Care for America Act for your reading pleasure, providing you want to read the whole thing, which I’m sure would be more than most members of the U.S. House of Representatives have done:
What I gather from all of the talk about the legislation, it is basically the H.R. 3200 – America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 on steroids, including more convoluted and vague legal speak in an effort to mask the establishment of a government-run health care system.
Again, cost estimates on the legislation are incomplete and contrary to what House Speaker Pelosi thinks, each present (and future) American citizen could be facing a bill that is worth over 1 trillion dollars (that’s $1,000,000,000,000.00), instead of the less than 900 billion dollars Speaker Pelosi would like us to believe the cost to be. This will hardly give a majority of Americans the “choice” on whether or not to pay for something they don’t want in the first place [Article - CBO: House Bill Costs $1.055 Trillion].
Such is the claim of two of the members of the board who recommended him:
City officials seeking a new police chief passed up the former director of the Florida Highway Patrol, who formerly was a top commander of the Illinois State Police, because he is white, two former members of a city board claim.
Wyatt Frazer and Della Murphy allege in a federal lawsuit that they were forced off the Police, Fire and Civil Service Board for their advocacy of a white candidate when the chief’s job was open in 2007.
[snip]
The suit, filed Oct. 1 in U.S. District Court in East St. Louis, claims, “Shortly after Parks became Mayor in May 2007, Frazer became aware of Parks’ bias against hiring white persons.” It continues, “When the city was searching for a new Chief of Police, on or about August 2007, Frazer and Murphy felt that the most qualified candidate was a white male with extensive law enforcement experience and no criminal history. However, Parks told Frazer at that time that he would not recommend the Board’s candidate for the position because he was white. At Parks’ recommendation, the City then hired Michael Baxton, Sr., an African-American male, as Chief of Police, even though he was less qualified than the Board’s candidate … .”
I guess East St. Louis isn’t quite ready to follow the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
No word yet on whether President Obama will invite any of these people to the White House for a beer, either.
The House Dem leadership has conducted its preliminary whip count and has tallied up less than 200 likely Yes votes in support of a health care reform bill with a robust public option, well short of the 218 needed for passage, according to an internal whip count document I’ve obtained.
The document — compiled by the office of House leader James Clyburn — was distributed privately at a meeting between Clyburn and House progressives today where the fate of the public option was the subject of some contentious debate, with liberals demanding that House leaders push harder to win over votes.
Clyburn spokesperson Kristie Greco would only say: “We currently do not have the votes for a robust public option.”
Health care reformers are eagerly awaiting the House vote count numbers on the robust public option — which would reimburse providers at Medicare rates plus five percent — because a House bill with a strong public option would increase the of leverage House leaders in upcoming conference negotiations with Senate leaders over the final bill. The exact count has been hotly debated in political circles since last week.
The actual count?
The document shows that 47 House Dems are committed No votes, and eight are Leaning No, for a total of 55. That means of 256 House Dems, just under 200 remain, and a dozen of those are listed as undecided. The bill needs 218 votes for passage.
What this also means, ladies and gentlemen, is that your voices at town halls, tea parties, on the phones, in emails and snail mails are being heard!
However, even though we’re winning, it’s not time to let up and head back to the La-Z-Boy. We need to keep the pressure on until at least the 2010 elections when we can run enough Obamacrats (meaning those Democrats that reflexively side with Obama on everything) out of office to keep this thing in its grave.
So, I will reiterate a call I have made before… tell not only your Representative and Senators, but any that are wavering that if they vote for this, not only will you not support them (and will vote against them if you’re in their district), but that you’ll actively and financially support their opponent in the next election. Remember, always be polite when speaking to staffers, even if they’re rude to you… they are just doing their jobs, they’re getting lots of flak, and you need to be more reasonable than they are.
U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., said Tuesday she still can’t support a government-funded insurance option, a day after legislation was unveiled that would give states the choice of whether to participate in the program.
“Creating another government-funded option is not where we’re going. We don’t need to go there,” Lincoln told members of the Arkansas Farm Bureau during a video conference. “A government-funded option is something that I think is not the way to go.”
The catch here, and the reason she has to be listed as a tentative nay, is that she didn’t specifically say she’d vote against Reid’s bill or the “opt-out” provision.
Still, this can’t be good for Reid… he comes up with this Grand Opt-Out Plan to Save ObamaCare, and now not only has he lost the single Republican Senator that voted for it in committee, he’s now managed to lose one and maybe two of the Democrats.
These things do sometimes tend to turn into “bandwagon” affairs… once you get one or two saying no, it’s easier for others to say no. I’d not be at all surprised if we see more Dems pushing back on the Reid Opt-Out Plan.
It’s probably not a coincidence that Lincoln is up for re-election in 2010, either.
The “Little Buddy Child Tracker” retails for $100 (far less than other devices that sell for $200 to $500). It combines global satellite positioning and cellular technology to signal the child’s whereabouts to a computer or smartphone.
Parents can program the device to set up specific times and locations where the child is supposed to be — in school or at home, for example — and the device sends a text message if the child leaves the site in that time.
It seems a bit Big-Brother-ish to me, but then again, with all the stories of child abductions out there, something like this might be a very good tool in keeping kids safe.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said Tuesday that he’d back a GOP filibuster of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s health care reform bill.
Lieberman, who caucuses with Democrats and is positioning himself as a fiscal hawk on the issue, said he opposes any health care bill that includes a government-run insurance program — even if it includes a provision allowing states to opt out of the program, as Reid’s has said the Senate bill will.
“We’re trying to do too much at once,” Lieberman said. “To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now.”
Lieberman added that he’d vote against a public option plan “even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line.”
His comments confirmed that Reid is short of the 60 votes needed to advance the bill out of the Senate, even after Reid included the opt-out provision. Several other moderate Democrats expressed skepticism at the proposal as well, but most of the wavering Democratic senators did not go as far as Lieberman Tuesday, saying they were waiting to see the details.
That means that, assuming Olympia Snowe and the rest of the lefty Republicans in the Senate stand firm, Reid does not–I say again, DOES NOT–have the votes to overcome a filibuster. Personally, I think on this one they will… they appear to have learned the lesson that being the lone Republican voting for something like this just makes them a nice target.
The Obamacrats in the House can complain all they want, and the Daily Kossacks can whine until 2012 and beyond, but any form of single-payer healthcare certainly looks like it won’t get through the Senate, no matter what focus-grouped term you choose to use as a label.
Gingrich called Scozzafava a “liberal Republican” for her support of gay marriage and abortion rights. But he defended those positions as in-step with her district and her predecessor, former Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.), who was tapped to be President Barack Obama’s Army Secretary.
Now, follow the logic here:
Scozzafava is, according to Gingrich, “in-step” with her predecessor.
Said predecessor was so liberal that he was hand-picked for an administration post by a man who is arguably the most liberal President in modern history.
Therefore, Scozzafava is also liberal enough to be adored by Barack.
And Gingrich wonders why conservatives not only aren’t rallying around her, but are actively lambasting him for his support of this Democrat-in-Republican-clothing?
One wonders if this isn’t primarily Newt’s ego talking, attacking rather than “lose face” by admitting he goofed when he first endorsed her. Memo to Mr. Gingrich: Admitting you’re wrong is the honorable thing to do; attacking the base isn’t gonna get you anywhere.
And, believe it or not, it’s the AP that explains it:
Quick quiz: What do these enterprises have in common? Farm and construction machinery, Tupperware, the railroads, Hershey sweets, Yum food brands and Yahoo? Answer: They’re all more profitable than the health insurance industry.
In the health care debate, Democrats and their allies have gone after insurance companies as rapacious profiteers making “immoral” and “obscene” returns while “the bodies pile up.”
Ledgers tell a different reality. Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That’s anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.
Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.
One thing to watch for is politicians and pundits talking about insurers’ profit in absolute dollars, not as a percentage of revenues. This is highly misleading, bordering on outright dishonesty, because in order to stay in business health insurers have to have extremely large cash reserves; these are required by most states, and even if not required, the money to pay for all those procedures have to come from somewhere. Since most states also have laws that require payment of medical insurance claims within a set time frame (30 days is usual), it’s not like the company can sit around and wait for next months’ premiums to roll in.
The more we learn about the Obamacrats and their push to take over the health care of all Americans, the more questionable claims and dishonest statements we find.
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Democrats’ control of a hefty majority in the Senate – plus the House – would suggest that President Barack Obama is within reach of overhauling the nation’s health care system this fall.
But the numbers mask a more complicated reality: Obama and Democratic leaders have modest leverage over several pivotal Senate Democrats who are more concerned about their next election or feel they have little to lose by opposing their party’s hierarchy.
One is still smarting from being forced to abandon next year’s election. Another had to leave the Democratic Party to stay in office. And some are from states that Obama lost badly last year.
These factors will limit the president’s ability to play his strongest card – an appeal for party loyalty and Democratic achievement – in trying to muster the 60 votes his allies will need this fall to overcome a Republican filibuster in the 100-member Senate.
When lawmakers face a tough vote, their uppermost thought is “survival,” said Alan Simpson, a Wyoming Republican who spent three terms in the Senate.
On a very few occasions, Simpson said, then-President George H.W. Bush asked him to cast a vote likely to cause him political problems back home. That was perhaps three times in 18 years, said Simpson, who held a GOP leadership post. “I swallowed hard and went over the cliff,” he said.
But it’s a sacrifice that presidents and party leaders should not count on, he said.
Another point that the AP fails to mention is the President’s quickly-evaporating political capital, as evidenced both by his sagging poll numbers and increasing attacks from the left (no, I am not a poll-watcher, but most elected Democrats are).
All told, the chances of a clear defeat for ObamaCare are looking better and better.
