Two days after the Blair House summit and still no official CBO cost estimate [Article - CBO: Obama's Health Care Plan Too Sketchy to Score; UPDATE: Obama Punts on Public Option: "That's Up To Leader Reid"].
To be sure, the estimate will reveal the bloated cost of the 2700-page ObamaCare bill [Article - Obama Admits CBO Cost Estimates of ObamaCare Are Incomplete].
We should reform our health care system, but at what cost? At the cost of another one trillion dollars added to the burgeoning national debt? If ObamaCare passes, Americans will be paying for something that will not officially start until 2014 and will do nothing to reduce our budget deficit.
With all of the spending that Obama and tax-and-spend politicians have already added to our debt, how can we sustain the cost of ObamaCare? How much money will honest, hard-working Americans have in their pockets after paying for all of the spending Obama has racked up? One way or another, we will be paying for it in the form of higher taxes.
After the GOP clearly built a stronger case against ObamaCare at the health care summit (when state-run media calls it a “draw”, you know the Republicans got the upper hand), they need to form their own health care summit and create another one of their own comprehensive health care bill (previous bills were thrown out by congressional Democrats) [Article - ObamaCare' alienates most Americans].
The health care summit sponsored by Barack Obama took place today and there are mixed reactions across the political divide [Article - Reality TV or Healthcare Summit?].
If you watched or listened to the summit in whole or in part, what are your thoughts? What were the strong points and what were the weak points made on both sides? Do you think the whole thing was a colossal waste of time or did it make for entertaining TV?
Thousands gathered in Washington, D.C. to protest man-made global warming. Needless to say, they received a very cold reception from the Obama administration and leftist environut politicians.
Looks like a hostile crowd to me.
Note: This is for entertainment purposes. If the likeness of any of these figures resembles any person living, dead, or otherwise, it is purely coincidental. If any snow person (I want to be PC here) is offended by what is presented here, please melt as quickly as possible. If any leftist nut job in defense of defenseless snow people is offended—get a friggin’ life…or better yet, “chill out”!
Cook: “I think you could triple the Republican Party’s problems and I’d still rather have their problems than the problems facing Democrats.”
Charlie Cook writes from a somewhat lefty point of view–for instance, he thinks the problem with the porkulus wasn’t that government spending doesn’t work, but that it wasn’t big enough–but even he paints a very dismal picture for the Obamacrats in 2010:
Well when a Democratic Senate candidates loses Barney Frank’s district and loses Massachusetts, I think it raises a legitimate question of what is safe — not what’s in danger, but what is safe.
But if you were going to build a profile of where is it going to be absolutely the worst for Democrats, I would say the Deep South, Old South, the border south, states and districts with large small-town and rural populations, maybe lower percentages of college graduates — in other words, sort of yuppie types. I would say fewer transplants from the north. Places where Obama did worse than John Kerry did in the general election.
And there’s sort of like a Nike swoosh, eastern Ohio, West Virginia, western Pennsylvania, down and across Tennessee, across the south and all the way to Oklahoma that Obama — I mean, 70 percent of the counties in America, Barack Obama did much better than John Kerry, but there is a sort of a swoosh of counties where Obama underperformed John Kerry — and let’s face it, John Kerry wasn’t exactly a son of the South — so that was like particularly bad.
Or you could look at, where did Obama lose to Hillary Clinton. A lot of working class white areas, that sort of thing. I mean I think those are going to be sort of the ground zero states and districts where it’s going to be bad. But I don’t know that there are many places that aren’t going to be bad, I mean, that are going to be good….
The thing that I think a lot of Democratic strategists are really concerned about is that some of these districts are going to be gone for a generation or more. I mean, they’re not coming back. They’re ones that had somehow managed to hang on in Democratic hands even after the Democratic Party fell out of favor in a lot of the South. But once they slip away, I’m not sure they’re coming back.
Doesn’t look very good, does it?
Read the whole thing.
Now, this, I consider good news, and a good move by the Tea Party activists.
Conservative activists who once protested the political establishment are now flooding the lowest level of the Republican Party apparatus hoping to take over the party they once scorned — one precinct at a time.
Across the country, tea party groups that had focused on planning rallies are educating members on how to run for GOP precinct representative positions. The representatives help elect county party leaders, who write the platform and, in some places, determine endorsements.
As I said about 10 months ago, the next step for the Tea Partiers was to start making their voices heard at the local level… city councils, GOP precincts, etc. Looks like they’re doing it, which I think is good.