It seems clear that many in the GOP have taken to heart lessons that were learned from trying to become democrat light. Their out of control spending during the Bush years which was an attempt to transform their image from the "Gingrich that stole Christmas," Newsweek cover of 1994, to a kinder and gentler compassionate conservatism. It failed miserably, and took the Grand Old Party away from their roots of fiscal responsibility and limited government, and ultimately led to two electoral catastrophes. It's true that within the core of every man and woman is the desire to be liked. The Washington cabal with their never ending cocktail parties and shoulder rubbing with power brokers, news media moguls, and network personalities can take the core out of even the most rabid fiscal hawk. But, a lesson learned may set them again on solid ground. It was heartening to hear John Boehner and Mitch McConnell on the Sunday shows both insist that their resolve to cut spending is steadfast.
I'm sure newer versions of the "Gingrich that stole Christmas," will resurface shortly, but this time the American people will rebuff it. First of all, you now have a speaker that doesn't fit the mold. Instead, he sobs uncontrollably at the thought of our children losing their chance at the American dream. He even told Dianne Sawyer that he doesn't go to schools any more for fear of breaking down when he thinks about it. Mr. Boehner resembles the original Grinch in only one way. His heart has grown three times larger than the now reeling democrat party. Along with a larger heart, there's a renewed effort to shrink government and their heartless over regulation, taxation, and invasion into the private sector. The shift has begun and Americans are seeing those that coddle unions and transfer wealth from the private sector to a bloated bureaucracy, as the real villains of the American dream. They don't like the thought of rewarding failure and punishing success. The democrat's overreach in the last two years has shown them for who they really are. Power hungry control freaks. They passed legislation that rewarded unions and other allies in the stimulus bill. They passed Obama care with the intent to control one sixth of the economy and by extension every single American. Of course they've already given over 700 exemptions to friends and allies.They passed financial regulation that gives them greater control over Wall Street and the distribution of credit. They took over the student loan program. They took control of GM, and in so doing rewarded their union contributors. They want to tax our energy use to a ridiculous extent that would cripple the private sector.
Meanwhile the new republican majority with a Tea Party conscience is moving in the opposite direction. We now have members sleeping on cots in their offices, and probably not attending those elite cocktail parties. We now have talk of a balanced budget amendment, and cutting spending to 2008 levels. Along with this will come the media's refrain that the GOP is going to starve kids and punish the poor. The headlines are predictable. But just like the democrat party the media has lost most of it's luster. There are competing sources of information with a much different narrative. We must save our country for the sake of generations to come. The American dream must be left to our children and grand children. Government has become too intrusive, controlling, and far less efficient than the private sector. The new narrative now points to those that worship and promote government growth as the Grinches stealing our future. Stand firm new GOP members and keep the establishment in line.
Check out my other blog.....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
We all understand that during a time of national tragedy the American people tend to rally around the commander in chief. George W. Bush after 9/11.....George H.W. Bush during the Gulf war.....Bill Clinton after the Oklahoma City bombing....Reagan after the Challenger Accident. The Tucson shooting is no exception. The memorial service on Wednesday night made me a bit uneasy though. The raucous atmosphere and campaign like reception for the president made it feel like the kickoff to the 2012 presidential election. It's a bit unseemly, as Laura Ingraham said, to have news pundits and reporters grade the presidents performance and what this all means for his poll numbers after a memorial service speech. Was this about politics or the victims? It did appear that the president was a bit uncomfortable with the raucous nature of the service at first, but then in my opinion he seemed to play into it. The Blue tee shirts that awaited attendees on their chairs was somewhat odd. The University of Arizona said they paid for and had them made and did most of the memorial planning with some input from the White House. It's instructive that the Universities school colors are cardinal red and navy blue, and of course the democrat party is blue, and the tee shirts were also. Is this a coincidence or was this a political calculation. The words "Together We Thrive" appeared on the shirts and that same slogan appears on the Obama website, "Organizing For America."
Now as far as Obama's speech is concerned, it was well delivered. There were however some inconsistencies. He did chide those who were pointing fingers and trying to assign blame for the shooting, insinuating that those who were blaming right wing political discourse were wrong. Then he said we need more civility in our public discourse. My translation of that is, "we must put a stop to criticizing me." It's easy for a president who's just lost huge majorities in the house and much of his majority in the senate to now say "let's just all get along." That wasn't his narrative before the midterms. Of course he wants the GOP to now get along with him, they now have the teeth and the votes to stop what he's doing. This coming from the man who said republicans can come along for the ride but they have to sit in the back, and told an Hispanic audience that we have to punish our enemies. He's the one who during the 2008 campaign said, "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." He also told supporters, "I want you to get in their faces, and stay mad." Now his political fortunes have changed and suddenly he wants civility.
Also we have Mark Udall democrat of Colorado suggesting that democrats and republicans sit together during the State of The Union Address. Notice once again that this suggestion comes not just after a national tragedy but after the democrats were trounced during the midterms. Suddenly democrats don't want a divided audience. They don't want a distinction between the applause for the president and silence against his proposals. Sounds to me like they're trying to trick the country into believing that more people then not agree with his agenda. If the Republicans refuse they will be labeled as dividers, and have essentially already lost this issue, because after all it was a democrat suggesting it. I personally like divided government. I like a huge distinction between the parties. I don't want there to be any nuance, but bold differences. The American people can better decide who they support when the distinctions aren't blurred. I like strong and aggressive debate. It's fine to all hold hands and sing Kum Ba Ya after a national tragedy, but the idea that the lines and differences between the parties must now be erased will only benefit the president, his agenda, and the democrat party.
Republicans should be weary of the direction this is all headed and continue on their path to repeal and replace Obama care. They should use the debt ceiling vote as a means for enormous concessions from the democrats on spending cuts. They have a huge advantage right now on the generic polling between the two parties, and they shouldn't let this shooting deter then from doing what they were elected to do. The democrat party has always used victimization to try and sell their agenda to the American people. They now may have calculated that this last disaster is just what they need to paint the republicans as obstinate and not willing to join hands with them for what they consider is good for the country. There was no reason for them to engage in civility before the midterms. They had the majorities to jam whatever they wanted through and freeze out the opposition. Republicans, you must seize the agenda immediately and not allow the democrat party to define you, or 2012 could be a very bad year.
Check out my other blog.....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
The democrats and many media types are once again engaging in an attempt to blunt opposition to big government. Even though Rahm Emmanuel has left for the gang lands of Chicago, his favorite admonition to never let a good crisis go to waste is making the left giddy and superfluous in attacking conservatives, the Tea Party, Talk Radio and Sarah Palin in particular for contributing to the Tucson shooting. Sarah should take this latest attack and wear it as a badge of honor, for once again revealing whom the left really fears. Woops maybe I shouldn't use that reference because of course a badge of honor implies something won from battle which implies shooting a weapon, which of course could incite a lunatic to take action. That is just as insane as the lefts claims that a reference to targeting congressional districts and not retreating but reloading is giving license to mad men. Even though the left wing Daily Kos had targeted Gabby Giffords on their website for a primary challenge and Obama himself had said in a campaign stop in Philly that, "if they bring a knife to the fight we bring a gun," we are all suppose to believe it's only the right that uses this kind of hyperbole. The left's tactics will not work and there are plenty of new media that will point out their inconsistencies and their hypocrisy.
We all remember the media admonishing everyone not to jump to conclusion after Major Hasan's Fort Hood shooting incident. Even though Major Hasan was screaming Allahu Akbar during the attack, and had visited many pro terrorist websites we weren't suppose to imply that maybe this was a terrorist attack. Even Obama tried to indicate that the evidence pointed to the act of a lone individual. Apparently that was part of the White House's new Muslim outreach in action. We must not anger those in the Muslim community that could cause the Muslim street to boil over. Seems they don't care about angering the conservative community. If they feel that impugning leaders of the conservative and Tea Party movement will silence them and all Tea Party activists they are sadly mistaken. We will not retreat, we will simply reload. Oops, I did it again. There's more of that incendiary rhetoric that is bond to cause bloodshed. Could anything be more absurd then their assertions, especially in light of some of the incendiary statements they've made themselves.
They have falsely accused us of being racists and Nazis, but apparently those aren't fighting words, or incendiary. Is there a more despicable moniker you can put on anyone then racist? We know we're not racists and simply care about the direction of this country. We don't respond in kind, and when we label a self avowed socialist, a socialist, we are excoriated and lectured that that kind of rhetoric is unacceptable. The evidence of the shooters persona resembles more of a left wing bent, rather than a Tea Party activist like the Lame Stream media would have you believe. Norah O'Donnell on MSNBC said "there is no evidence now" that the shooter was a member of the Tea Party Movement. Rough translation is, we're hoping to find that he is. He was a flag burner, and apparently a reader of the Communist Manifesto, but you don't hear the media emphasizing that. There is far more evidence that he was an insane man, and wanted to attack the celebrity of this particular congress woman. This was a tragedy for Congress woman Giffords, her family, and all the victims including a budding politician, a nine year old girl who was just elected to her student council. It is sinful the left and the media are trying to impugn political foes, and by doing so silence dissent to ever increasing and irresponsible government because of this tragedy. Have they no shame?
Read: Sarah Again A Target Of The Left...........at my other blog....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
Democrats are making outlandish statements about their attitude to debt and deficits. These are more then head scratchers, they are over the top fantasy-land fables that bend the limits of credibility into a descending spiral falling down to the caverns of Hades. The idea these pronouncements would be met with anything less then bent from the waist guffaws shows their continued condescension to the sensibilities of all Americans. Lets start with the former speaker and current audition-er for her own late night HBO comedy special, "Nancy Pelosi's Fantasy Fables." She recently stated during a press conference that, "deficit reduction has been a high priority for us. It is our mantra, pay-as-you-go." During her tenure, $5.3 trillion was added to the national debt. That is $3.66 billion per day added to our children and grand childrens' credit card. She was speaker for 1,461 days. Her nearest competitor, Dennis Hastert was speaker for 2,920 days and ran the debt up $3.06 trillion. Pelosi added debt more then three times faster then Hastert. During her inaugural address in 2007 she stated, "After years of historic deficits, this 110th congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay as you go, no new deficit spending." It's instructive that her inaugural address and her statement just the other day were very comparable, the disconnect is the four years in between. This is akin to an alcoholic standing before his AA group and saying, "I've been sober for one day," and then going on a four year binge drunk that so disorients himself that he returns to his group to declare he's still sober.
Now Ms. Pelosi states, and other democrats are picking up the mantra that repeal of Obama Care would do "serious violence to the national debt and deficit." This appears to be the democrat strategic defense to the GOP house majority's intention of a repeal vote next week. Once again Credulity has been stretched beyond the breaking point. Obama Care was sold as a one trillion dollar bill that would actually decrease the deficit over $124 billion over the first ten years. Does anyone actually believe that? Of course the CBO did originally score it that way, but they can only give a score to numbers the majority gave them. Let's remember that $500 billion would be cut from Medicare to help pay for Obama Care, and as of yet no plan is in place how those cuts are going to materialize, unless of course it was the administrations intention to save by re-inserting death panels by regulation which once again blew up in their face and was withdrawn again. They also didn't include the $300 billion dollar doctor fix in the bill and passed that separately to deceptively manipulate the numbers. Of course ten years of tax increases were passed for only 6 years of benefits. How would the second ten years not blow an enormous hole in the budget, even though Anthony Weiner says repeal will add 1.2 trillion to the deficit over twenty years. Common sense alone dictates that when you add 32 million to health care, mostly to medicaid, that the numbers are going to become increasingly dire.
Next we see we're running up against the debt ceiling once again and should reach it in a few months.Of course the Obama administration is pleading to republicans that playing chicken with the debt ceiling could have apocalyptic ramifications. But, Obama himself voted against raising the ceiling in 2006, saying raising the ceiling was a, "sign of leadership failure. It's a sign that the US government can't pay it's own bills. It's a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies." When Robert Gibbs was asked about this during a recent press briefing he said, "senator Obama only voted against raising debt ceiling in 2006 because he knew it would pass anyway." Once again this goes beyond head scratching. Apparently only the messiah has the right to criticize an administration's fiscal policy when he's not in charge of it, and he's readying himself to use it's fiscal malfeasance to make a run for the government's top job. He has added more then $3.2 trillion to the national debt in two years, but obviously that's not a sign of leadership failure. Apparently it was a necessary expenditure to correct the leadership failure of the previous administration. I would think that the correction for over spending would be less spending, not hitting the gas pedal to three times the previous expenditures. Oh wait a minute, it must have been necessary to hit the gas harder to drive the republican driven car out of the ditch. Excuse me, I forgot we can't question the messiah's motives and methods. I'm once again bent at the waist in a huge guffaw. I think recent comments by leading democrats proves that they have zero credibility when it comes to deficit spending.
check out my other blog.....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
The 111th congress is now history and I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut they will go down in history as one of the worst. They misread the change election that gave us Barack Obama and over reached themselves into the history books as arrogant, self indulgent, and incapable of bipartisanship. In a center right country, they lurched far left on a massive progressive dream project, "Obama Care," which had to be brought across the finish line with parliamentary malfeasance against the will of a majority of the American people. Nancy Pelosi's infamous statement, "We must pass the bill to find out what is in it," is symbolic of their arrogant and irresponsible legislative attitude. Obama Care did not even address the real health care problem this country faces. Escalating costs continue unabated as the democrats rewarded trial lawyers by refusing to address tort reform and competition by keeping in place restrictions that don't allow purchasing insurance across state lines. We know that Obama Care was never about cutting costs, but about control and a huge expansion of the federal government. The mandate that all must purchase insurance is being challenged in 21 different states, and Virginia has already won a victory in 4th district court that the mandate is unconstitutional. There will be an obvious supreme court resolution to all these suits and the 112th congress will attempt repeal votes periodically, if for no other reason but to keep Obama Care front and center and a huge campaign issue for 2012.
The 111th congress began their deficit spending spree with an enormous and ineffective stimulus bill which has swelled to over $860 billion. That is more money spent then seven years of the Iraq war. The administration said it must be passed to keep unemployment under 8%. Unemployment has now been above 9.5% for 17 straight months. The stimulus was less a stimulus then a payback to democrat constituents like public employee and labor unions. Democrat districts got 81% more stimulus money then republican districts according to an op-ed by Kay Bailey Hutchison. We all remember Barack Obama's famous smack down, that those who won the election should write the bill. Well, they wrote it, and they gave most of the funds to their districts, and now they must take responsibility for it's failure and almost a one trillion dollar addition to the national debt. It's ironic that with all the pork and earmarks within the stimulus intended to help vulnerable democrats in the 2010 midterms, republicans still picked up an historic 63 seats in the house and six in the senate.
They followed the stimulus with an omnibus bill that increased discretionary spending by 8% and included more then 9,000 earmarks. This would follow an 8% increase in discretionary spending from the previous year. President Obama vowed to veto bills with earmarks during his campaign, but rushed to sign this monstrosity. It's instructive that once the public began to speak out against this huge overspending and the 2010 elections neared, the democrats decided to forgo their constitutional duties and failed to pass or even introduce a budget for fiscal 2011. Of course after the election, Harry Reid introduced a 1.1 trillion dollar omnibus in the recent lame duck that was immediately pulled because of public outcry, and many vulnerable 2012 democrats saying no.
The house of the 111th congress passed a cap and trade bill that would have drastically increased utility rates for average Americans, and caused huge job losses. The senate rejected the bill thanks to a threatened filibuster from the GOP. Once again the 111th congress showed their arrogance, especially in the house, by trying to push a bill that would have severely hurt Americans and their standard of living. Their insistence that carbons must be reduced even though the science is still unsettled in most Americans minds, and the whole global warming cabal seems to be falling apart, is wrong headed especially in an economic malaise that would exacerbate if Cap and Trade became law. This congress showed again their disconnect with the American people who are screaming for job creation and reduced government spending.
The financial reform legislation that this congress passed did nothing more then make borrowing harder which of course hurts job creation. As a small business owner I keep CDs in my local credit union. When I have a cash flow problem, I would simply call and borrow off the equity of these CDs. It usually would take a three minute call over the phone, and the interest rate was never more than 3% above what I was getting on the CDs. After the financial regulation bill was passed I found myself in a cash flow deficit and called to borrow off one of these CDs. I was told I now needed to come down to the bank and fill out loan applications because of the new law. I drove down and was there for almost an hour filling out paper work and and signing my name over and over again. I asked if this was a one time thing and we could now return to the phone transactions, and I was told no, your signature is now required each time. I suppose I could have simply cashed out the CD and taken the penalty for early withdrawal. At maturity I probably will. So besides having to spend the time and gas to go to the bank, there were two bank employees trying to make heads or tails of this huge new law. Of course the 111th congress didn't even address Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac in this new law which were the two greatest contributors to the financial meltdown. They continue to protect their interests and campaign contribution sources while piling regulation and burdens on every day Americans.
The 2010 Lame Duck session saw the democrats get DADT repealed and the new start treaty ratified. Both of these should have been delayed until a new congress convened, but the dems knew that would be a harder lift. The dream act died in the Lame Duck, but Harry still tried to get it through. The GOP capitulated on the tax cut extensions by giving away too much. and didn't do enough to stop the dems from their pet bills. The real evil of this 111th congress was their condescension to the American people. They tried to trivialize the Tea Party movement as racists and even contrived a scenario of racial slurs being hurled during the run up to the health care vote. It's obvious it was planned that while they walked to the vote that unfounded accusations of racial slurs and spitting would be made to discredit the protests against their crowning achievement. Their arrogance was finally confronted on November 2nd. The problem is, they still didn't get it as the Lame Duck proved. It would be hard to imagine a more disastrous congress then the just finished 111th, that succeeded running up more then $3 trillion in debt, by expanding government and assaulting our freedoms.
check out my other blog.....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
President Obama seems content to extend all the Bush tax cuts for two more years, but at what price to the GOP's credibility. Republicans had historic gains on November 2nd because the country as a whole was tired of tax and spend and an entitlement mentality that was robbing our childrens' future and plunging us into a permanent high unemployment rate that rivals Europe's socialistic Utopian debacle. Of course extending the tax cuts would be stimulative, but making them permanent would be more so. And the extension of unemployment benefits to three years without paying for them does two very un-stimulative things. It perpetuates the high unemployment rate by reducing the incentive to look for work and adds to the expanding deficit. This is exactly what the American people were voting against this election. Also the death tax compromise to 35% above five million is not a compromise, but a huge victory for the redistribution of wealth advocates.
Did the GOP get the message from the midterms? Apparently many of them did not. Obama is in no position to demand anything, and the GOP should realize that their victory in November was a mandate to stop the vicious cycle and neuter this president and the left from damaging our economy any further. If they were to compromise on the unemployment benefit extension, they should have demanded it be payed for with un-spent stimulus money, and also reduce the extension to six months. Unemployment benefits have in effect become a welfare program with a higher yield then welfare itself.
Now Obama is in a position to take credit for reducing unemployment and bringing the economy back if in fact it does improve by 2012. He also can now blame the republicans for demanding an extension of the tax cuts to the highest earners if it doesn't and the deficit keeps rising. He can now claim bipartisanship which will do much to heal the divide with independents who were the driving force for his election. Meanwhile the GOP has done nothing to placate Tea Party Americans and grass root conservatives by making this compromise. Jim Demint, a Tea Party leader has already come out in opposition to the proposal, reminding others this is not what America voted for in November.
If the GOP would simply demand more, like a permanent extension of all the Bush tax cuts and paying for and reducing the time of unemployment benefits, Obama would be check mated. If he refused, then all the tax rates would increase in January, and the unemployed would be without benefits through the holidays and he would be blamed. The republicans could simply point to the election, and remind everyone of the message it sent. Then in January the house could pass a retroactive permanent extension of the tax cuts and allocate money from the un-spent stimulus to pay for unemployment benefit extensions. The senate would necessarily have to follow suit, especially when you consider how many democrats are up for reelection in 2012. Obama would have to sign it if he had any intention of positioning himself for reelection. If the GOP has goals of becoming a majority in both houses and winning back the White House, they should not compromise and listen to the lesson of the 2010 elections.
Check out my other blog......Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
The new TSA full body scans and enhanced pat downs are bordering on police state tactics, and the new congress should address this issue the moment they convene in January. One question I have that hasn't been answered yet, is why all of a sudden has the administration taken this tack? They say that the scanners are just now becoming available nation wide, but if you opt out of the scan then you're subjected to the enhanced pat downs. Why haven't they been doing the enhanced pat downs before the scanners were available if the threat is so real? Could it be that the pat downs are being used to condition the traveler to accept the voyeuristic scanners? I think so, and some in the TSA have admitted as much. The Christmas day pantie bomber tried to explode his groin almost a year ago, but they seem to just now be getting serious with these new methods. We know the scan manufacturers and investors have a huge lobbying presence in Washington. Could all this be another corrupting aspect of the federal government? Is there intelligence that raises the threat for the holidays? Or is this pay back from the administration for the Shellacking they took in the midterms? Are they trying to send a message to the traveling public, or has political correctness run a muck to the point of state sponsored voyeurism and molestation.
One thing is clear. I don't think the American people are going to allow this kind of personal embarrassment and humiliation from this administration. There will be a revolt. If you think the town hall meetings in the summer of 2009 were raucous, wait until the demonstrations begin in airports across the country. There will be chaos. America has learned through this last election cycle that they can fight back, and fight back they will. It's curious that some of the left leaning politicians and media types that went ballistic on George W. Bush for warrant less wire tapping and the Patriot Act seem fine with this. The hypocrisy is staggering. The unconstitutional elements of these procedure are much more evident. Are the Matt Lauers and others that have begun to accuse the GOP of stirring this up simply running cover for the messiah? The planned boycotts will cause delays and ultimately hurt the airline industry, but that may be what it takes to take back our traveling freedom.
Consider for a moment the disconnect this administration has with the American people. They filed a lawsuit against the state of Arizona for their new illegal immigration law. The crux of the law was to insure that if somebody was stopped for another violation the law enforcement officer could, if there was suspicion, ask the person of their immigration status. This in the administration's eyes, would lead to racial profiling and therefore is unconstitutional. Now they are requiring American citizens to not only show picture ID, but also pictures of their genitals or be sexually groped without any suspicion of wrong doing if we want to travel to Grandma's house for the holidays. They continue to say this is for our own safety. But apparently, God knows who, flooding across our southern border is not a big security threat. Their insistence on avoiding any type of profiling for airport security is taking away our constitutional rights, and not making us safer, while their false accusation that Arizona's new law will lead to racial profiling is giving constitutional protection to illegals and would be terrorists.
They say terrorist should be given Miranda rights and civilian trials, and shouldn't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. But, American citizens are now subjected to genital imagery and enhanced pat downs which seem to me a stark violation of the fourth amendment, which protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures and requires probable cause and warrants before such searches can take place. Whom do they fear. It appears they fear the American people and consider them their enemy more than they do terrorists and illegals. That to me, screams of a Marxist, police state mentality, which seeks to control the populous through intimidation and humiliation. There's only one problem with their plan. The American people will not allow the big boot of government on our necks. That's why we are America. That's why the rest of the world still envies us. And, that's why 2012 can come none too soon.
Check out my other blog....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link
