The 2010 elections are right around the corner. Once again, I urge all conservatives to work tirelessly to nominate and elect candidates who will not only stop Obama’s socialist agenda, but who will also reverse course on the Republican ‘slow drift’ socialism it has embarked upon.
Though it seems too early to expend effort lobbying for the right 2012 Presidential candidates, one glance through the headlines will demonstrate that a gaggle of Republican politicians are already lining their coffers and elbowing for a place in the primary.
And we see another phenomena repeating, as predictable as the swallows returning to Capistrano: RINOs pretending to be conservatives when they are challenged in their primaries. Just the other day, we found out from John McCain that he was apparently bamboozled by former Treasury Secretary Paulson into supporting the “crap sandwich”, the rich-guy & foreign banker bailout known as TARP. Perhaps Hank, that old romantic, got down on bended knee and stroked McCain’s hand, much like he did to Speaker Pelosi. With pressure on his right flank from conservative stalwart JD Hayworth, Mr. McCain has resorted to ridiculous statements, unbelievable statements, to get the folks who are angry at Washington to re-elect His Maverickness. McCain isn’t the only one. His good pals in Florida and Texas, Charlie “bailout” Crist and Rick “vaccine” Perry, are suddenly claiming to be Reagan Republicans. Huh?
So what is the solution to this smoke and mirrors nonsense? The nonsense that has a lifelong liberal limp-wrist like Mitt Romney – who still believes that semi-automatic rifles with a bayonet mount are too scary for American citizens to possess, and that socialized medicine is desirable as long as his name is attached to it - being touted as the 2012 “frontrunner” by the same folks who sold us John McCain in 2008. The nonsense that has global warming alarmist, treehugger, and anti-smoke nazi Tim Pawlenty being feted as presidential timber. The nonsense of Newt Gingrich – who was leftwinger Dede Scozzafava’s biggest cheerleader - arrogantly thinking he can waltz into the nomination based on his schizophrenic ideas of his American Solutions racket. The nonsense that nanny-stater extraordinaire Mike Huckabee – who despite his apparent return to gobbling down Twinkies and fried gizzards is fawning over Michelle Obama’s new anti-fatso campaign – is remotely suitable for the task at hand. And the nonsense that McCain’s VP, Sarah Palin, by virtue of a pleasant personality and vague conservative credentials, is the only person who can beat back the pack of RINOs.
The Tea Party did not form based upon the Republicanism that these folks represent. The Tea Party was the direct reaction to these people, working hand in glove with the democrats, saddling America with debt, bureaucracy, nanny-statism, illegal aliens, and Political Correctness. Its genesis was a combination of Rick Santelli’s famous rant, the GOP and Democrats force feeding TARP to an angry public, the 2007 push for amnesty, and, more recently, the Obama Administration’s blatant attempts to consolidate government power and control. But these are just the straws that broke the camel’s back!
Real Americans do not want governors and bureaucrats telling them they can’t smoke here, or there, while taxing their tobacco and alcohol products sky high to further feed the nanny state. They do not want the government to spend one thin dime of their money telling them what and how the hell to eat. They loathe the notion of the government, be it state or federal, sticking their noses into healthcare - ObamaCare, RomneyCare, ArKids, Special Needs kids - it does not matter; unleash the free market then stay OUT of it, period.
Americans reject the entire notion of Amnesty, whether it is La Raza’s call for complete open borders or McCain’s and the GOP establishment’s “pathway to citizenship”. You sneak in, we catch you, goodbye!
Patriotic Americans overwhelmingly reject the whole notion of Algore’s phony, sovereignty usurping, wealth redistributing scheme called global warming. Yet, there the Republicans were in a 2008 primary debate, raising their hands like eager, brown-nosing schoolkids when the debate moderator asked who believed that “global warming was a serious problem”. And there was Governor Pawlenty on the sidelines telling the world to ignore those awful skeptics, and later VP candidate Palin telling us “we must do something about it.” When you have politicians vowing to fix the weather, you know that the shark has not only been jumped, but they used Evil Knievel’s rocket-bike to jump it.
And Political Correctness? If the current 2012 media-selected frontrunners became anymore politically correct, they could get jobs in the Chicago Public Schools as diversity coaches teaching tolerance and anti-bullying.
After Ann Coulter, one of the genuinely funny lights of unapologetic conservative punditry, cleverly skewered John “faggot” Edwards and Political Correctness in one brilliant sentence at the 2007 CPAC gathering, Romney, Rudy and McCain could not find microphones fast enough to reject her “insensitivity” and “divisiveness”. They also, however, proved her point. It was Pavlovian.
When presidential nominee John McCain was presented with glaring opportunities to take Barack Obama to the woodshed for his radicalism, he instead wilted like a PC wallflower. McCain actually said, regarding Obama’s 20 year relationship with anti-Semitic, anti-American preacher Jeremiah Wright: “Look, I do know Senator Obama and he does not share those (Wright’s) views.” Why on earth would he say such a thing?? (Hint: Obama’s half black).
After all the hard work that conservative journalists, bloggers, and talk radio did to illuminate Obama’s radical Marxist, anti-capitalist history, McCain responded by saying “He is a decent person, and a person that you do not have be scared of as President of the United States.”!!! Top that off with his pandering to the Hispanic community by promoting amnesty – stupidly thinking that most Hispanic-Americans want our laws violated – and you get the picture. He has no problem sliming his current 2010 primary opponent, a conservative, as if he were a menace to the Republic, but treat a black liberation theology radical as the anti-American he is? Never!
The problem is this: The other guys who are gearing up for a 2012 are as bad or worse. Either they are as politically correct as McCain, share his views on amnesty and global warming, and/or they have liberal streaks a mile wide in their records as politicians. This goes for T-Paw, Newt, Mitt, Huck as well as the ‘Charlie Crist in cowboy boots’ who just won re-election in Texas. Not a Reaganite amongst them.
Sarah Palin is a special case. With two years as Alaska’s governor under her belt before being plucked onto the national ticket by McCain, she has not had a chance to fully demonstrate what she believes. She may be supporting RINO McCain’s re-election out of a sense of duty, but she sure gushes on about him every time someone brings him up; including last night on Jay Leno’s program. And she may have been following the ‘company line’ during the 2008 campaign – despite her repeated statement that she was never asked “to check her views at the door” - but that just means she needs to enlighten us now with her ‘real’ thinking on critical issues such government bailouts, amnesty, and global warming, which she flunked miserably during the campaign.
The solution is Duncan Hunter. Hunter was non-committal about his future plans in politics when interviewed last March. He did specifically say he was not “closing any doors”. But since then, he has mostly focused on getting a batch of rock ribbed conservative candidates – mostly Iraq and Afghanistan veterans – to run in congressional seats in districts currently held by democrats for the 2010 elections. Hunter understands that America is in grave peril, and that more CONSERVATIVES in congress is the only way to stop the bleeding.
The guys that Hunter is busy campaigning for include ‘Gunny Pop’ Nick Popaditch (http://www.popaditchforcongress.com/) in California, Jesse Kelly (http://www.votejessekelly.com/) in Tucson, Arizona, and Vaughn Ward (http://www.vaughnward.com/home) up in Idaho. Look at the platforms of these three warriors and you will see they all stand for slashing (not slowing) the federal government, stopping the illegal alien invasion, genuine job spurring tax cuts, and a stronger military – just like the man who helped recruit them. Hunter also has several other candidates he will be helping as well.
But once these and other conservatives are elected and we take back at least one house in the Congress (if not both), the party MUST select the right man at the right time to lead us in 2012. As Hunter succinctly stated, “I think a party is largely defined by it's president.” That was true during Nixon’s time, Reagan’s time, as well as during GWB’s tenure. So the choice is clear. We can select a presidential nominee who is a slick political animal without clear constitutional convictions similar to Nixon, a “big government” social ‘conservative’ like Bush turned out to be, or a principled constitutionalist and genuine Reaganite – like Duncan Hunter.
With Hunter, we will not get answers that cater to the crowd he happens to be speaking to. So there will be no democratic advertisements that can skewer him as a liar or a flip flopper. Hunter gives the exact same message on building the border fence and deporting illegal aliens to Hispanics as he does to every other group of Americans. And it just so happened that he received tremendous Hispanic support throughout his 28 years in Congress. Hard to imagine, but these Americans of Hispanic descent do not like being bullshitted anymore than other folks do. Maybe they appreciated the 90% drop in crime and border smuggling once the ‘Hunter Fence’ was erected in their communities; the same ‘Hunter Fence’ that was called “ridiculous” and “nonsense” by Rick Perry – doing his best Janet Napolitano impression.
And just as Hunter refrained from jumping on the politically correct, politically popular, anti-tobacco legislation bandwagon that Republicans and Democrats alike were championing not so long ago, so too will he veto any misguided future nanny-state garbage, such as John McCain’s idiotic attempt to put nutritional supplements under FDA control, Huckabee’s anti-fat crusade, Romney’s leftwing ‘gay tolerance’ infestation in America’s schoolrooms, Palin’s welfare spending on “special needs” kids, or Newt’s inexplicable ‘bi-partisan’ – with Nancy Pelosi on the couch no less – “we agree our country must take action to address climate change” nonsense.
When the going gets tough, we won’t find Hunter ducking for cover and parroting liberal talking points to get better media coverage. No squawking on about stopping fictional “torture” a la McCain, or repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell like the Flipper Romney, or pimping for automobile “mileage taxes” to curb those mysterious green house gasses like T-Paw, or offering up tuition breaks for illegal aliens like the Amnesty Princess in Texas
.
What you will find with Duncan Hunter is a hard nosed realism based on sound conservative and traditional American principles.
The hard nosed realism that says the federal government must be REDUCED in size and scope if we are to continue to exist as the country handed to us by our founders. Everything is on the table, including across the board, non-defense spending CUTS, the elimination of entire departments like Education, Arts, Energy, and Interior, and gutting the scope of the regulatory agencies such as the EPA, OSHA, and the FDA. Hunter is one of the very few men in congress to propose such genuine, “radical” reductions over his career.
The realism that says the tax system is in drastic need of an overhaul. As an original sponsor of the FairTax, Hunter wants to eliminate the IRS, by and large, and the billions it costs each year to run that bloated bureaucracy. He also is the only one to propose eliminating all taxes on US manufacturers, which would go a long, long way to restoring America’s high paying industrial jobs, and becoming competitive once again in the manufacturing sector.
The realism that says that enemies are to be treated as enemies, adversaries as adversaries, and allies as allies. Hunter’s no holds barred attitude towards Iran, and Islamic jihadists in general, will have Ahmadinejad handing over his nukes immediately. When Hunter declared in the debates and interviews that he has every intention of taking them out if they are not surrendered, he actually means it. Iran knows it too
.
Hunter is also one of the few anti-communists left from the Reagan Revolution and he has always treated and will continue to treat Red China as an adversary, not a “partner” (do you hear that Mitt?). Hunter vows to bring our trade with China back into balance, and prohibit any more American “dual use” technology from leaving our shores for theirs. He will harshly punish their continued malfeasance on software and intellectual piracy, devaluation of currency and dumping. And they know it. And unlike the other guys, Hunter will command the respect and solidarity with our traditional allies – as well as our newer allies in the former Soviet Bloc – by doing exactly what he says he will do without hidden agendas or triangulating to please Arab, Russian, or Chicom sensibilities. And the fact that Hunter will restore defense spending to Reagan era levels, as a percent of GDP, means no nation on the planet will contemplate the term “paper tiger” in relationship with the USA. Hunter’s vow to put America ahead to stay in space based weapons, Naval power, missile defenses, fighter and bomber capabilities, and defense technology will not be an unfulfilled campaign pledge.
Hunter’s American principles say we live in a country founded on certain ideals, ideals that were codified in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and that we cannot have a federal government that does not abide by the constraints of that Constitution. Hunter – a critic of McCain Feingold – is a champion of the 1st Amendment, stalwart on the 2nd and 10th Amendments, a ferocious defender of property rights, and a champion of US Sovereignty. He does not abide by the notion that supra-national or international entities can trump the God given sovereignty of the American people – whether it’s the UN, the WTO, the World Bank or any other boondoggle organization.
As for the poison of political correctness, Hunter’s record speaks for itself. Last year, when the Senate Armed Services Committee released its “bipartisan” report on ‘war crimes’ in the Iraq and Afghan theatres, implicating Don Rumsfeld and other officials, most Republicans went into hiding and avoided talking about it. Hunter went on national television and called it “leftwing rubbish”. When McCain and his sidekick Lindsey Graham joined the democrats in calling for Gitmo to be shuttered due to reports of “abuse”, Hunter went on to CSPAN and not only defended the facility and the soldiers who ran it, but even showed off the delicious meals and prayer rugs these dirtbags were being given. When the GOP was beginning to fold like a house of cards on global warming, Hunter was right there along with Jim Inhofe to callout Algore’s phony “alarmism”– long before the recent revelations that the global warming science wasn’t science at all. Now that it’s safe to deride the Algorian fantasy, Pawlenty, Huckabee, and Romney have emerged as critics. Imagine that.
Hunter has never budged from his position that illegal aliens must not only be prevented from entering the country, but that they all must be deported; the exact opposite of the “pathway to citizenship” crap being pushed by Democrats and Republicans alike.
When the Democrat party, the media, President Bush, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department, and the entire GOP leadership signed on to the TARP bailout as absolutely critical to the well being of the nation, Hunter did not just say no, he said “hell no”, and offered up a free market alternative that was utterly ignored by his own party bosses. Now we know that TARP was not only unnecessary, but was the beginning of a massive campaign of government interference in the free market, just as Hunter predicted.
When General Peter Pace was taking media and democratic fire for his beliefs that open homosexuality was incompatible with military service, George Bush and Robert Gates decided to not re-nominate the warrior for his Joint Chief’s position. Hunter, on the other hand, published a scathing piece in USA Today defending not only Peter Pace, but calling the whole idea a leftwing “social experiment” that had no place in our fighting forces.
When Romney, Guiliani, and McCain were talking up their “ability” to work in a bipartisan fashion, Hunter labeled them as members of “the Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party”; a label that remains to this day. And when Wolf Blitzer asked Hunter if “reaching across the aisle” as demonstrated by the moderate and popular (at the time) governor Schwarzenegger was the future of the GOP, Hunter’s unhesitatingly fast answer was an emphatic “NO!”
And though the entire GOP establishment has rushed out to Arizona to re-elect John McCain to his Senate seat, Hunter declined to endorse him – despite a 30 year friendship with the man.
In closing, there are those who will say that Hunter had his chance, and couldn’t even get to the front tier of candidates in 2008. But is America the same country that voted for Mr. Obama in 2008? Are Americans in the mood to tolerate another “centrist” republican like McCain who could barely articulate the differences between conservative and liberal; who was afraid to label Obama for what he truly is? Are conservative Americans ready to be fed a stream of lies and flip flops again and put their faith in a politician whose tough talking, newly discovered rhetoric does not match his squishy record in office? Are we going to let the media dictate who should be frontrunners once more and who needs to be ignored?
I contend that America is experiencing a conservative re-awakening; a yearning for the years when the sure hand of Ronald Wilson Reagan was steering the ship. And this time, in 2012, the phonies and pretenders, those who helped run the ship off its proper and constitutional course, will be upended by a Reaganite. And that is the way it must be if we are to save this sacred Republic.
You arrogant, immature, self-centered dirt bag.
Does this photo of President Obama in the Oval Office convey anything about his attitude and arrogance?
Would you speak with the Chief of Staff, your Chief Economics Adviser, your Senior Adviser, or anyone, with your feet up on the Resolute Desk –
a gift from Queen Victoria to President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1880?
This arrogant, immature, self-centered man has no sense of honor, or simple decency.
While this posture is disrespectful in any culture, it is not appropriate in any executive setting. Further, in over half of the cultures of the world,
it is recognized not only as disrespectful, but as an extreme insult.
He thinks of himself as a king, not as a servant of the people, humbly occupying our White House for his term in office.
Electing him was an enormous mistake and will cost us in many ways, for generations.
To All Senators or Representatives
Dear Democrat Senator or Representative: On Tuesday, January 19th, 2010, the people of Massachusetts sent you a clear message. Vote NO on the current heath care bill before the Congress. Please understand this very clearly – Massachusetts speaks for We the People:
• This was a referendum on the health bill;
• This was a referendum on the bribery;
• This was a referendum on the back-room deal-making;
• This was a referendum on the out-of-control spending – YOUR pork-barrel special interest spending;
• This was a referendum on YOUR arrogance in calling us mobsters, Nazis, tea-baggers and terrorists;
• THIS WAS A REFERENDUM ON YOU! So let’s take a moment to discuss YOUR political future. Unless you change your current pattern of political behavior, YOU HAVE NO POLITICAL FUTURE! Now, we know you have already heard from your leadership. We strongly suspect they are telling you such things as “stay the course” and “even if you lose, you will go down in history by passing this health care bill.” AND NOW, YOUR LEADERSHIP IS WORKING, BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, ON PASSING THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL HEALTHCARE BILL THROUGH RECONCILIATION! You follow them at your own political peril:
• WE will vote YOU and every other progressive-voting Democrat from office;
• WE will see to it, with more than enough votes, that this current health bill (if passed) is repealed;
• WE will demand that all of the back-room deals and legislative bribery is thoroughly investigated for potential violations of federal law; And, if YOU have been a party to any of the illegal and unconstitutional behavior that has characterized this entire legislative process,
• WE will not rest until YOU are prosecuted and imprisoned for your crimes against the Constitution and the American People. Now WE are sure that some of you, particularly those of you who look down their noses at average Americans, are insulted by the effrontery of this letter. Be insulted. You deserve whatever insult you feel for the insults you have heaped upon We the People. Nevertheless, IF YOU possess the sagacity and wisdom to read the lessons of this second Boston Tea Party, we offer YOU a choice. If YOU:
• VOTE NO on any attempt (including reconciliation) to pass the current health bill;
• VOTE NO on any Cap and Trade bill that may come up for future vote;
• Call for hearings into the Attorney General’s decision to try terrorists in New York City;
• Call for hearings into the administration’s tyrannical system of Czars which threaten not only Congressional power but our rights as Americans;
• Call for a detailed Congressional investigation of ACORN;
• Call for a freeze on all increases in federal spending;
• Call for the removal of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader; WE may, just may not invest as much time and money into defeating YOU in November as we will your progressive colleagues who continue to ignore our voice. THE CHOICE IS YOURS. START LISTENING – OR FIND A NEW LINE OF WORK!! With commensurate respect for your office, but little respect for your arrogant abuse of that office, we remain, The American People
Obama Wants To Crucify Healthcare on Resurrection Sunday
Obama Wants To Crucify Healthcare on Resurrection Sunday
By Lisa Richards
March 9, 2009
The presidential Messiah has been an unsuccessful god: he can’t raise the dead or heal the sick he could care less about, except when it comes to vote-grabbing from poor minorities and the elderly he and House Democrats love to scare to death. His Holy Spirit-helper is a Teleprompter whose rhetoric is worse than a satanic desert temptation, and this Messiah has an obsession with force-fed pork.
Christians need not fear, Obama is not the anti-Christ. The devil is too intelligent to use a Teleprompter to speak his evil plans, and he would not use government-run healthcare and a face-lifted Congressional actress to take over the world.
If Obama’s moronic Messianic moves aren’t bad enough, he wants Obamacare, which, according to House Blue Dogs and Republicans contains tax-funded abortion, passed into law by Easter Sunday 2010.
Obama is attempting to use a tactic known as “Reconciliation” to force his bill through the House. “Reconciliation” is the method politicians use to ram legislation into law with 51 votes versus the usual 60 vote rule. This form of law is nothing more than phony appeasement. The reason for using the “Reconciliation” ploy is one side cannot force the other to give
into something dangerous to the American people, therefore, force the bill on the people by ramming it through to law.
Now Easter Sunday is being used to “Reconcile” laws Americans overwhelmingly say they do not want: a bill sneaking abortion into America’s taxes. Obama does not care, nor is he interested in listening to the people he refuses to serve. He prefers leading Americans to a crucifixion that won’t raise their quality of life. It will however raise America’s taxes and drive people into bankruptcy.
According to Barry O, “Every idea has been put on the table; every argument has been made, so now is the time to make a decision about how to finally reform health care so that it works, not just for the insurance companies, but for America’s families and businesses.”
Republican ideas have not been allowed to make it to the table, since Republicans are barred from the Roosevelt Room’s closed door sessions.
Senator Mitch said “They’re [Obama and the Democrats] making a vigorous effort to try to jam this down the throats of the American people, who don’t want it. We think that’s a policy mistake, and we think resorting to these kinds of tactics, to thumb your nose at the American people, is something that ought to be resisted.”
John Goodman states in his column for the Library of Economics and Liberty “The most serious defects of Obamacare were never discussed at the Health Care Summit or in the President’s speech [on healthcare]…I blame the Republicans…as a result, things have gotten worse for the GOP. President Obama is now offering to make minor concessions on the issues the Republicans did bring up and call the whole effort a ‘bipartisan compromise.’”
Obama however is not compromising, insisting American insurance companies cannot cover Americans, and Americans need the government to take care of them.
Is healthcare so damaged that it actually needs to be resurrected into a new life form? According to Mark V. Pauly, Bendheim member of the Hoover Institution’s Working Group on Health Care Policy and Professor for the Department of Health Care Systems at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, “While there surely are some serious deficiencies in today’s individual insurance market, the current criticisms are overly harsh, often based on anecdote and speculation, and ignore some important advantages in this market that should be preserved.”
Pauly’s latest book titled Health Reform Without Side Effects: Making Markets Work For Individual Health Insurance, states that the government plans for insurance attempt to make private insurance providers appear harmful. This, Pauly says, is the serious “side effect” of healthcare reform, because, although insurance companies do need improvement, they
can be repaired, and the government should not try to prevent enhancing private insurers. It’s best to fix them, upgrade them, and the system itself can turn around without government interference.
Economist and Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute Thomas Sowell states in his latest column “Getting Out Of Medicine,” that today’s doctors are not excited about practicing and healing. Patients no longer visit doctors because they trust individual doctors, rather, because they are given a list of doctors by insurance companies from which to choose from.
Patients no longer decide which doctor they want treating them and doctors no longer are allowed to decide upon treatment; insurance companies make
the decisions about healthcare.
The L.A. Times reporter Peter Nicolas reported in his column “Obama Adds Fire To Healthcare Debate:” “Obama said that Washington pundits obsessed with analyzing the political repercussions of a yes or no vote on healthcare are distracting lawmakers from what’s fundamentally at stake: If Congress fails to act, the president said, premiums will rise, insurers
will deny coverage based on preexisting conditions and more people will be without insurance.”
Goodman says “In 2016, Obamacare will require almost everyone to have insurance that costs an estimated $15,000 for a family…Obamacare would create marginal tax rates in excess of 60% for workers earning as little as $25,000!”
Americans making $25,000 per year are low-income. This sounds more like an Easer egg hunt for rotten eggs.
The strong-arming was unleashed yesterday at Pennsylvania’s Arcadia University when Obama declared the time for talking was over. There has yet to be a time for discussions, Republicans have been banned from the secret backroom healthcare talks. As far as the Messiah is concerned, he’s not interested in discussions: “They [Republicans and Blue Dogs] will keep doing this for as long as they can get away with it. How many more Americans have to lose their health insurance? …. When is the right time for health insurance reform…I’ll be honest with you, I don’t know how passing health care will play politically, but I do know it’s the right thing to do! It’s right for our families, it’s right for our businesses,
it’s right for the United States of America, and if you share that belief, I want you to stand with me and fight!”
How can the lame stand when the Messiah has kicked their crutches out from under them and hurled them under the crucifixion bus?
Obama insists Americans [N]need to hear your [Arcadia University] voices because right now the Washington echo chamber is in full throttle. It is as deafening as it’s ever been. And as we come to that final vote, that echo chamber is telling members of Congress, wait, think about the politics, instead of thinking about doing the right thing.”
It is Americans who want to think, act, and do for themselves and Obama who wishes to destroy that Constitutional idea. If possible, he wantsResurrection Sunday to be Armageddon.
This Web Site Viewed at Screen Resolution 1280 X 1024
THIS SITE HAS BEEN DECLARED A TERRORIST WEBSITE
BY SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY JANET NAPOLITANO
Washington didn’t use his right to freedom of speech to defeat the British; HE SHOT THEM!!
ABOUT US:
The Conservative Side is an grassroots community of Americans who believe in conservative values, the free market and limited government as the best means to bring hope and ever-increasing opportunity to everyone, especially the poorest among us. We empower regular people to exercise their rights and fulfill their civic responsibilities, by organizing with them for effective action and the right information to promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.
Today I think, we have forgotten our beginnings. Instead of Americans having a shared vision for America, we have become a divided nation. A nation full of individuals and of groups, each of which has their own vision for their own individual futures, not this nation. We are, however, a nation that once had an immutable vision for us all. Americans had a vision that we all once shared together at one time, no more.
As conservatives, we believe the values and ideas that motivated our Founding Fathers are worth conserving. believe the values and ideas that motivated our Founding Fathers are worth conserving. I am a Ronald Reagan/Barry Goldwater-style conservative with the beliefs of James Madison's Constitutional Republican Republic ideals: Democracy is tyranny and America is not a democracy; it is a Constitutional Republic based on Republicanism.
: Democracy is tyranny and America is not a democracy; it is a Constitutional Republic based on Republicanism.
PLEASE COME AND JOIN US
One of our main goals is keeping a Conservative majority in Congress, and a Conservative President in the White House.
I won’t shy away from offering my opinions on the candidates and issues, but I do welcome all readers and encourage any and all political views on the topics I post about. Mostly, I hope to spur debate and exchange ideas so please take the time to register..
This web site is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated.You will be banned.
It is my hope that you will become part of this mission and join us here at RMS Consultants. There is much work to be done. Time is short. Let’s begin - in earnest - and may God Bless our efforts.
Thank you for your time RMS_941
Conservative View Point:
This may sound heartless and insensitive to the needs of those less fortunate individuals who are found in any society, no matter how affluent. "What about the lame, the sick, and the destitute?" is an often-voiced question. Most other countries have attempted to use the power of government to meet this need. Yet in every case, the improvement has been marginal at best and has, in the long run, created more misery, more poverty, and certainly less freedom than when government first stepped in.
As Henry Grady Weaver wrote: "Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own ... The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional 'do-gooders,' who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others—with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means." (The Mainspring of Human Progress.)
America was built on the principles of self-reliance, the profit motive, individual action, and voluntary charity. It was built by those who believed that the surest helping hand was at the end of their own sleeves. These forefathers of ours shared one thing in common—an unshakable faith in God and a faith in themselves.
I have great faith in America and its people. This is a choice land. If we live and work so as to enjoy the approval of a Divine Providence, we will endure as a nation. Without God's help, we cannot long endure.
Today we face a crisis situation in our beloved Republic. There is first of all a spiritual crisis among our people. In our quest for material things, we have forgotten God. There is a crisis for competent, honest, and moral leadership in government at all levels. There is an economic and political crisis, where our basic freedoms stand in jeopardy because of a departure from fundamental principles. We must return to these basic principles if our free Republic is to survive.
During the coming election years let's be reminded of these words:
You cannot help the poor, by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak, by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity, by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up, by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man, by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage, by taking away men's initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently, by doing for them what they could and should, do for themselves.
Do you recognize the author? It was Abraham Lincoln.
Very, very wise words, written years ago and we still don't get it...
Thanks RMS941 Owner and Admin
Conservatism
The definition of conservative can be divided into 6 key principles:
Belief in natural law
Belief in established institutions
Preference for liberty over equality
Suspicion of power - and of human nature
Belief in exceptionalism
Belief in the individual
Modern conservatism took form about the beginning of the French Revolution, when far-seeing men in England and America perceived that if humanity is to conserve the elements in civilization that make life worth living, some coherent body of ideas must resist the leveling and destructive impulse of fanatic revolutionaries. In England, the founder of true conservatism was Edmund Burke, whose Reflections on the Revolution in France turned the tide of British opinion and influenced incalculably the leaders of society in the Continent and in America.
In the newly established United States, the fathers of the Republic, conservative by training and by practical experience, were determined to shape constitutions which should guide their posterity in enduring ways of justice and freedom. Our American War of Independence had not been a real revolution, but rather a separation from England; statesmen of Massachusetts and Virginia had no desire to turn society upside down.
In their writings, especially in the works of John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, we find a sober and tested conservatism founded upon an understanding of history and human nature. The Constitution which the leaders of that generation drew up has proved to be the most successful conservative device in all history.
In England, the founder of true conservatism was Edmund Burke, whose Reflections on the Revolution in France turned the tide of British opinion and influenced incalculably the leaders of society in the Continent and in America. In the newly established United States, the fathers of the Republic, conservative by training and by practical experience, were determined to shape constitutions which should guide their posterity in enduring ways of justice and freedom.
Our American War of Independence had not been a real revolution, but rather a separation from England; statesmen of Massachusetts and Virginia had no desire to turn society upside down. In their writings, especially in the works of John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, we find a sober and tested conservatism founded upon an understanding of history and human nature. The Constitution which the leaders of that generation drew up has proved to be the most successful conservative device in all history. BY: Russell Kirk
Duncan L Hunter, U.S. Rep. (ret.) Chairman, Armed Services Committee, 2002-2006
For those who don't know or recall Duncan Hunter was the candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
Ann Coulter described as "magnificent" and who Michael Reagan said is "most like my father".
HUNTER, Duncan Lee, (father of Duncan Duane Hunter), a Representative from California; born in Riverside, Riverside County, Calif., May 31, 1948; graduated from Rubidoux High School, Riverside, Calif., 1966; B.S., Western State University, San Diego, Calif., 1968; J.D., Western State University, San Diego, Calif., 1976; United States Army Airborne, 1969-1971; lawyer, private practice; elected as a Republican to the Ninety-seventh and to the thirteen succeeding Congresses (January 3, 1981-January 3, 2009); was not a candidate for reelection to the One Hundred Eleventh Congress in 2008; chair, Committee on Armed Services (One Hundred Eighth and One Hundred Ninth Congress); candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
Charles Krauthammer, winner of the 1987 Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary, writes a nationally syndicated column for The Washington Post Writers Group. Charles Krauthammer, also winner of the 1984 National Magazine Award for essays, began writing the weekly column for The Washington Post in January 1985. It now appears in more than 150 newspapers.
WASHINGTON -- So the yearlong production, set to close after Massachusetts' devastatingly negative Jan. 19 review, saw the curtain raised one last time. Obamacare...
WASHINGTON -- Amazingly, the congressional hearings on Toyota were relatively civilized. Apart from some inevitable theatrical hectoring, the questioning was generally...
WASHINGTON -- In the latter days of the Carter presidency, it became fashionable to say that the office had become unmanageable and was simply too big for one man. Some...
WASHINGTON -- "We have an agreement until 2012 that Russia will be responsible for this," says Anatoly Perminov, head of the Russian space agency, about ferrying...
WASHINGTON -- "I am not an ideologue," protested President Obama at a gathering with Republican House members last week. Perhaps, but he does have a tenacious commitment...
WASHINGTON -- The real scandal surrounding the failed Christmas Day airline bombing was not the fact that a terrorist got on a plane -- that can happen to any...
WASHINGTON -- On Jan. 14, five days before the Massachusetts special election, President Obama was in full bring-it-on mode as he rallied House Democrats behind his...
WASHINGTON -- What went wrong? A year ago, he was king of the world. Now President Obama's approval rating, according to CBS, has dropped to 46 percent -- and his...
White House gives Congress two weeks to pass health-care bill
The Democrat Party’s populist plans for the U.S. cannot possibly work, because government bankrupts everything it touches. History teaches us that ObamaCare and unfunded entitlement programs will be utter, complete disasters
The Democrat Party leaders of today are guilty of more than stupidity; they are enslaving future generations to poverty and misery. And they will be long gone when it all implodes. They will be as cold and dead as Juan Perón when the piper must ultimately be paid.
.White House press secretary Robert Gibbs is ratcheting up the pressure on Congress to complete health-care legislation, setting March 18 as the deadline by which a final bill should be passed.
Noting that President Obama leaves that day on a trip to Indonesia, Guam and Australia, Gibbs said on MSNBC's "Daily Rundown" with Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie that "we believe that we're on schedule, based on our conversations with the speaker and the majority leader, to get something done by then."
THE US DEBT CLOCK
US Unemployment
American Thinker
American Thinker
March 08, 2010 Keith Olbermann: As the Spittle Flies
Stuart Schwartz
Keith Olbermann continues this week to experience death by a thousand clicks, the sound of remotes switching from MS-NBC to...well, anywhere, but mostly FOX. More
March 08, 2010 Guess Who's Coming to Your House!
Ken Blackwell
Federal funding and supervision for a vast expansion of government intrusion into family life. This is the Nanny State on steroids. All buried in the Senate Obamacare bill being forced down out throats. More
March 08, 2010 Tell Us the Truth
Chuck Rogér
In America, we are beginning to sense a nasty reality that President Obama must acknowledge: Our worst economic problems lie ahead, and fixing those problems is going to hurt -- plenty. More
March 08, 2010 Health Care Is Heavily Taxed Now
John Donaldson, MD
Health care is already heavily taxed by government, ballooning the cost in many hidden ways. More
March 08, 2010 Maybe We Can Split a Beer?
Kevin Jackson
Historically recession-proof, even beer is feeling the effects of the Obama economy. More
March 07, 2010 What I Learned from Obama's Pop
Jack Cashill
Lessons from a poem that may be the Rosetta Stone of Barack Obama's life story. More
March 07, 2010 Obama's Fruitless Quest to Extradite Drug Thug
David Paulin
The Obama administration is vexed that "mutual respect" and "honest engagement" have failed to persuade Jamaica to extradite an alleged drug kingpin. More
March 07, 2010 The Keynesian Stimulus Dogma
Mark W. Hendrickson
Most Americans don't believe that the way for Washington to address its gargantuan debt is to increase deficit spending and go deeper into debt. Nobel laureates Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman disagree. More
March 07, 2010 'Give-'Em-Hell Barry' in 2012?
David Pietrusza
Another president suffered a precipitous decline in polling after taking office. Could Obama emulate Harry Truman's comeback? More
March 07, 2010 India's Strategic Role in Countering Jihadism
Walid Phares
Three democracies -- India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan -- confront jihadi terrorism. They can and must cooperate more. More
March 07, 2010 Top 100 Films of Obama Era
Big Fur Hat
From Ferris Buehler's Layoff to The Man Who Thought He Knew Too Much, a list of fan favorites. More
If the dems succeed in passing this Orwellian health care bill by reconciliation we are in deep trouble. Even if the next elections tip the scales back in favor of reason, we will be unable to undo the damages. The next few days are critical so get busy and tell all your liberal friends what the dems are doing and what it means to our future
Duncan Hunter Interview 3-5-2010:
Duncan Hunter Interview 3-5-2010: On Obama the Apostrate, The Reagan Doctrine, and Aging Hippies
Saturday, March 06, 2010
DH: Hey, Jim.
AJM: hey, that sounds a lot better. What are you doing back in DC? You finally got an appointment with your son?
DH: No. Next week, but I’m waiting for him (laughs). No , I’m back here, I’m heading up, kind of the chairman of the Armed Forces Foundation. We had a big fundraiser. That’s the group that helps a lot of our wounded guys.
AJM: That’s fantastic. What’s the name of the organization again?
DH: The Armed Forces Foundation.
AJM: The Armed Forces Foundation - So it’s like the Wounded Warrior Project?
DH: Exactly, they give help to military families and have all kinds of good projects. It’s a good deal.
AJM: That’s great. Since you are in your son’s office, is that the same office that you used to have?
DH: No. This is over in Longworth. But he’s got a great office here.
AJM: Oh, so you are over in California then? I thought you were in DC.
DH: No, I’m in DC. He’s in DC. He’s got an office DC, but obviously he’s got an office back in the district as well.
AJM: But it’s not the same spot that you had?
DH: No, mine was in one of the other buildings.
AJM: OK. Well, since we are talking about him, I see there has been some progress made on the efforts to get those three Marines, or excuse me, I mean 3 Navy SEALs exonerated for fattening the lip of that terrorist they caught in Iraq. Mr. Rohrbacher and Dan Burton put in some legislation to get them off the hook. I know that’s following on the heels of Duncan D’s letter that he wrote with a bunch of co-signers to Bob Gates.
DH: I think he (Duncan D) got 170 members of Congress to sign that thing.
AJM: Amazing. I just want to commend your son for doing that.
DH: Oh yeah, no, it’s great stuff. He got that started and those other guys wanted to get in front of the TV cameras, and he said “that’s fine”.
AJM: (laughs) He was the first one that I’m aware of who…
DH: Yeah, he did. He started that thing.
AJM: So he’s following in your footsteps pretty well, wouldn’t you say?
DH: Yeah, he’s a good guy.
AJM: Yes. Speaking of foreign policy, today, Turkey came out and was complaining about the deteriorating atmosphere, the deteriorating relationship with the United States. That follows on the heels of France, and then Great Britain being mad at us for sending Hillary down to Argentina and saying that the British have to talk about this oil thing in the Falklands, and Poland with the Missile Defenses. So I just want you to comment on what you think the state of our foreign policy is, with regards to our “allies”, which Mr. Obama was claiming that he would improve and placate.
DH: Yeah. I think this is the 2nd phase of the Obama foreign policy philosophy or foreign policy operations which was to prostrate, in the first phase, to prostrate himself before the world and deliver a number of applause lines to the effect that the United States is not a very good country and is sorry for all of our ‘transgressions’.
That type of a prostration invites countries to despise us. In the end, countries don’t respect other nations that have no self respect, or appears to have a leader that does not respect his own country. The cheap applause that he got in his early trips has now evolved into resentment in some cases.
The United States – you know it’s often said that countries don’t have friends, they have interests. I think pulling back on the Missile Defense program was a manifestation that there is now a fracture in the position that we held ever since Ronald Reagan started Missile Defense. In the face of opposition from the Soviet Union, and then a lot of people in our own country, and from nervous allies, Ronald Reagan established the doctrine - which truly was a doctrine for American presidents - that we had right in our supreme interest of self-preservation, to defend against incoming missile attacks. And we never took a backwards step with respect to that. That’s why we have today the ability to defend against limited missile attacks against the continental US. And that’s why in the Iraq War, there was a 100% shootdown of the missiles that we felt we needed to take down that came out of Saddam Hussein’s defensive batteries when we launched the attack in March of 2003. We took down a handful of SCUD missiles that came in at the British and American forces in Kuwait when that attack was launched.
AJM: I heard that.
DH: So missile defense has always been non-negotiable. Our right to have it has always been non-negotiable. When Obama essentially retreated in meeting with Poland….you know that retreat was telegraphed when he said early on in his administration that he was “looking at” at that. That’s always a signal that it’s negotiable. And ultimately we backed down from that decision.
I don’t think that inspired respect for the United States. The problem with the United States with a leftwing policy like that is Obama’s always hoping that its going to be interpreted as being a signal of our compassion, humanity, understanding, and graciousness…
AJM: (laughing)
DH: …when in reality, it is interpreted as a sign of weakness. So I think that is now being reflected to some degree.
And I’ll tell you the real barometer for success with our allies is this: The real barometer is if he is able to persuade all those NATO allies, those 26 other countries in NATO, who right now are providing almost no combat forces for Afghanistan. They are ‘in’ Afghanistan, but they are doing things like patrolling gates inside secured facilities. The Germans have a rule that they will not leave the fort at night. The French have a rule that they will not go anywhere where there is real fighting. And we have not been able to induce those countries to get into the fight with us against the terrorists. That’s a real barometer for what the liberals have described as Mr. Obama’s great relationship with the rest of the world. That relationship has not translated into the commitment of combat forces into Afghanistan.
AJM: In fact, people are leaving, or planning on leaving. The Dutch, the Canadians are planning on….
DH: It’s a lot easier to tell the guys you can’t come to the fight on Monday because you got a note from your mom. In order for Germany and France and the others to opt out, once your forces are gone it’s REALLY easy to tell them you can’t come to the fight on Monday. It’s a little more difficult when your troops are poised only a few miles away, yet you will not come out to fight along side of the Americans.
But in fairness, that’s a problem that the Bush Administration had also.
AJM: It didn’t seem like the Bush Administration was trying to do what the Obama Administration is doing right now. Because of Iraq, and what was going on there, they weren’t ready to push the surge button in Afghanistan quite yet. But I think Obama’s lack of success of getting the allies to come along with the surge in Afghanistan is the lack of Realpolitik – that is the ability of the American President to get what he needs with our allies.
DH: Yeah.
AJM: Since you brought up missile defense, I wanted to mention something. General Bentley Rayburn, do you know him?
DH: What’s his name?
AJM: Bentley Rayburn?
DH: I don’t think so.
AJM: I think he’s retired, but he just had a piece in the Washington Times today. It was talking about the success of Airborn Laser missile defense system….
DH: Yeah.
AJM:….that’s been in development since you and Reagan pushed that thing through. I actually worked on it for a little while when I worked at the Boeing Company.
DH: Oh really.
AJM: Yeah. I think it’s the most amazing thing. And they found out through all the research on this particular type of technology that lasers are really coming into their own. Anyway, we had a successful test recently shooting down a missile, but Obama has more or less defunded the Airborn Laser system. I’d like to get your comment on that.
DH: I think that is a progression from his first backwards steps on missile defense, which we just discussed with respect to interceptors and radar systems which were to be installed in the Czech Republic and Poland.
I think it’s a manifestation of a ‘political’ position, not a security position. Because certainly this is the age of missiles, as they’ve demonstrated to us. We’ve had Americans killed by incoming ballistic missiles. And we now see deadly nations, with deadly intentions and instable governments – I’m thinking of Iran particularly – developing missiles and developing nuclear capability to ride the tips of those missiles.
So this is NOT an action being taken by the Obama Administration because the threat has evolved or is going away. It is being taken in the face of a growing threat. So it can only be interpreted as a political position. And that political position is that missile defense is a creature of the Republican Party. They’ve never liked it. And now’s there chance to defund a large part of it. And that is a tragedy, and perilous for the country for this socialist to be tossing the Reagan Doctrine aside.
AJM: There’s certainly a few of the old cold warrior democrats around. I know Ike Skelton was a supporter.
DH: Norm Dicks who is now chairman of the Defense Appropriations sub committee is a strong supporter of missile defense.
AJM: That’s my congressman down in Tacoma.
DH: Yeah. He’s always been a supporter of missile defense.
AJM: He’s also not been a raving leftwing lunatic either.
DH: Yeah. He should be taking the battle to, and I presume he is, taking the battle to the Obama Administration. Now remember, what you see in missile defense being “defunded” is the Administration’s position, but Congress has a say. Congress has the purse strings. And I think Norm Dicks and others on the Republican and the Democratic side will push….
AJM: I seem to remember, not only during the Clinton Administration, Congressman Hunter, but during the Bush Administration, that when they came with their budgets and their defunding requests that you managed to up the ante on them a few times and restore funding.
DH: Yeah, that’s right.
AJM: So I congratulate you for doing that and thank you for doing that.
DH: Yeah. Thanks. Well listen, as usual I’ve got to run out the door in a couple of minutes. I’m always a day late and dollar short.
AJM: Well that’s OK. I appreciate any time that you have for us!
DH: Oh no no. I’m not that special.
AJM: You don’t know, you just don’t know how…
DH: You’ve got to ‘trade up’, Jim (laughs)
AJM: (laughing)
DH: OK, what do you got?
AJM: OK. I wanted to get your comments on this. In the dead of night, this past weekend or it may have been the weekend before on a Saturday, with no fanfare whatsoever, Obama re-signed the Patriot Act with no reforms. Now what does this tell you? He and his wing of the democrat party crucified the Bush Administration for a good 8 years over the Patriot Act, yet here he goes and re-signs it for a year with no reforms. I’d just like you to comment on that.
DH: I don’t know. Maybe it’s an understanding by Obama that the real world is much different than what the fringe left – who provided the energy in the national Democrat campaign in the last election – believes. Perhaps in the same sense he knows Afghanistan is an important theatre of war, and also understanding that we’ve won in Iraq, because his efforts to derail the Surge did not work. We won over his objections. So maybe it is an understanding now that we exist in a real world, not a world as viewed by the Marxists and the fringe left.
AJM: That’s a hopeful interpretation of it. I’m thinking because some of the tragedies, like the terrorist attack at Fort Hood and the airline panty bomber, and that terrorism is in the news big time, that it would have been politically dangerous for him to, uh….
DH: Yeah, to scuttle the Patriot Act. I wanted to attribute the best of motives to him on that. (laughs).
AJM: (laughing) That’s a very gracious stance you are taking.
DH: (laughs) Let’s hope he does have people that he relies on briefing him to the effect that the aging hippies who drove his campaign are not to be relied on with respect to painting a picture of the real world.
AJM: I sure hope you’re right because we’ve got three more years of this...
DH: (laughs) Me too!
AJM: Well, I’ll let you go since you’re in a rush…
DH: Well listen, thanks Jim. And my son Sam is coming home from his Stryker brigade.
AJM: Are you coming up to Tacoma to see him?
DH: No, he’s coming into San Diego to see his baby being born. He’s coming in on a 30 day leave, so it’s kind of neat.
AJM: I didn’t even know he was married. I had no idea.
DH: Yeah, yeah. He’s a great guy and she’s a wonderful girl, so this is a really great time of year for us.
AJM: Is he flying into Ft. Lewis and then heading down?
DH: I’m not sure if he’s coming into Lewis or how he’s coming in. But he’s coming to San Diego. I presume he’ll be coming into LA, then down to San Diego.
AJM: So he’s just on a leave. They’re not done with their tour? How much longer…
DH: They are coming out in August. Incidentally, one thing I’ve got if you want it – I’m back here in Dunc’s office right now – I’ve got the speech that I made in December of ’08 chronicling the Iraq war and the FACT that we’ve won. If you want a copy of that thing to send out, because I saw that “Victory at Last” on the cover of Newsweek Magazine, I think two days ago. And you had Biden claiming that this was his finest hour! (laughing).
AJM: (laughing) Did you just about fall out of your chair when you saw that?
DH: Yeah I did. But you know something? Some people will believe it. So if you want that thing, if you want me to email it to you, I can send that to you. We can set the record straight.
AJM: Yes, please do.
DH: It was the speech I made in the last few days of the Bush Administration, chronicling the war and stating up front, back then, that we won it and how casualties were down to basically nothing.
AJM: Yeah, I’d love to have it. Thanks. If you get Vicky to send that to me – is she still working for Duncan?
DH: Yeah, she is.
AJM: OK. Tell her I said hi. She was awfully nice to me during the campaign. How long are you in DC for?
DH: For a couple days here.
AJM: Excellent, I’ll catch up with next week. Oh, and I wanted to ask you how the Idaho function went?
DH: It was great. We got a great reception there, and Vaughn Ward is doing a wonderful job.
AJM: Yeah, I saw couple of Youtube cuts of him from a previous event. He looks like the real deal.
DH: Yes, he’s really good. He’s going to win that seat from the democrat!
AJM: Well, thank you. And I’ll appreciated getting that speech from you.
WASHINGTON -- So the yearlong production, set to close after Massachusetts' devastatingly negative Jan. 19 review, saw the curtain raised one last time. Obamacare lives.
After 34 speeches, three sharp electoral rebukes (Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts) and a seven-hour seminar, the president announced Wednesday his determination to make one last push to pass his health care reform.
The final act was carefully choreographed. The rollout began a week earlier with a couple of shows of bipartisanship: a Feb. 25 Blair House "summit" with Republicans, followed five days later with a few concessions tossed the Republicans' way.
Show is the operative noun. Among the few Republican suggestions President Obama pretended to incorporate was tort reform. What did he suggest to address the plague of defensive medicine that a Massachusetts Medical Society study showed leads to about 25 percent of doctor referrals, tests and procedures being done for no medical reason? A few ridiculously insignificant demonstration projects amounting to one-half of one-hundredth of 1 percent of the cost of Obama's health care bill.
As for the Blair House seminar, its theatrical quality was obvious even before it began. The Democrats had already decided to go for a purely partisan bill. Obama signaled precisely that intent at the end of the summit show -- then dramatically spelled it out just six days later in his 35th health care speech: He is going for the party-line vote.
Unfortunately for Democrats, that seven-hour televised exercise had the unintended consequence of showing the Republicans to be not only highly informed on the subject, but also, as even Obama was forced to admit, possessed of principled objections -- contradicting the ubiquitous Democratic/media meme that Republican opposition was nothing but nihilistic partisanship.
Republicans did so well, in fact, that in his summation, Obama was reduced to suggesting that his health care reform was indeed popular because when you ask people about individual items (for example, eliminating exclusions for pre-existing conditions or capping individual out-of-pocket payments) they are in favor.
Yet mystifyingly they oppose the whole package. How can that be?
Allow me to demystify. Imagine a bill granting every American a free federally delivered ice cream every Sunday morning. Provision 2: steak on Monday, also home delivered. Provision 3: A dozen red roses every Tuesday. You get the idea. Would each individual provision be popular in the polls? Of course.
However (life is a vale of howevers) suppose these provisions were bundled into a bill that also spelled out how the goodies are to be paid for and managed -- say, half a trillion dollars in new taxes, half a trillion in Medicare cuts (cuts not to keep Medicare solvent but to pay for the ice cream, steak and flowers), 118 new boards and commissions to administer the bounty-giving, and government regulation dictating, for example, how your steak was to be cooked. How do you think this would poll?
Perhaps something like 3-1 against, which is what the latest CNN poll shows is the citizenry's feeling about the current Democratic health care bills.
Late last year, Democrats were marveling at how close they were to historic health care reform, noting how much agreement had been achieved among so many factions. The only remaining detail was how to pay for it.
Well, yes. That has generally been the problem with democratic governance: cost. The disagreeable absence of a free lunch.
Which is what drove even strong Obama supporter Warren Buffett to go public with his judgment that the current Senate bill, while better than nothing, is a failure because the country desperately needs to bend the cost curve down and the bill doesn't do it. Buffett's advice would be to start over and get it right with a bill that says "we're just going to focus on costs and we're not going to dream up 2,000 pages of other things."
Obama has chosen differently, however. The time for debate is over, declared the nation's seminar leader in chief. The man who vowed to undo Washington's wicked ways has directed the Congress to ram Obamacare through, by one vote if necessary, under the parliamentary device of "budget reconciliation." The man who ran as a post-partisan is determined to remake a sixth of the U.S. economy despite the absence of support from a single Republican in either house, the first time anything of this size and scope has been enacted by pure party-line vote.
Surprised? You can only be disillusioned if you were once illusioned.
How big a deal was Marco Rubio’s speech to CPAC Thursday? If you are asking, as former president George W. Bush did jokingly the other day, “Who the hell is Marco Rubio?” you probably won’t be for long. Rubio is the 38-year-old former speaker of the Florida House and conservative challenger to the state’s Republican governor, Charlie Crist, in the GOP Senate primary. If you are asking, “What is CPAC?” you probably aren’t a conservative Republican. CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference, is, for several days every winter, the epicenter of the conservative movement; Ronald Reagan addressed the first CPAC gathering in 1973 and 12 times in all.
So Rubio’s keynote address served as his national coming out party -- an event so critical that not only did Rubio post a video preview on the importance of opposing the Obama agenda, but Crist issued a faux advance text of Rubio’s speech. Crist’s Rubio parody depicted him as a “cover boy” lobbyist who talks conservative but acts pragmatic -- my word, not Crist’s -- on issues from immigration to climate change to stimulus spending. Which is, apparently, bad, at least if you are trying to win a Republian primary.
Introduced by South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint (R), a man he has described as his favorite senator, Rubio made the most of his good opportunity. He made Sarah Palin look oratorically challenged. When some in the ecstatic crowd broke into a chant of “Marco, Marco,” Rubio flashed his winning smile and said, “I’m always afraid someone's going to start screaming ‘Polo’ and then it will ruin the speech."
He wove his only-in-America background -- son of Cuban immigrants who fled Castro, his father working 16-hour days, his mother a K-Mart stock clerk -- into a larger narrative of American exceptionalism. The 2010 election, he argued, is a “referendum on the very identity of our nation,” with the choice boiling down to this: “Do I want my children to grow up in the country that I grew up in or do I want them to grow up in a country like the one my parents grew up in?”
Rubio handed out more red meat than a butcher before a snowstorm. President Obama and the Democrats, he argued, are “using this downturn as a cover not to fix America but to try to change America,” implementing “statist policies” that would “fundamentally redefine the role of government in our lives and the role of America in the world.” Voters want political leaders to work together, he said, but only for the right results. “The U.S. Senate already has one Arlen Specter too many,” he said to cheers. “America already has a Democrat party. It doesn’t need two Democrat parties.”
If Evan Bayh was watching, the Indiana Democrat would have thought he made the right choice in deciding not to run again.
As Rubio was speaking, Obama was preparing to issue an executive order on what I worry may turn out to be the fiscal responsibility commission to nowhere: it will not work without good-faith Republican participation, and that does not seem to be forthcoming. Consider Rubio’s fiscal prescription: “Reduce tax rates across the board.” “Abolish taxes on capital gains, dividends, interest.” “While we’re at it, let’s eliminate the one on death, too.” “Significantly lower the corporate tax rate.”
“And, while we’re at it, undertake serious measures that show we’re serious about getting control of our national debt.” This is not a prescription for responsible governing.
Rubio more than fulfilled the expectations that he is a rising star of the Republican Party. He is young, attractive and appealing; his life story could not be more inspiring. From 30 points or more back in the polls, he has moved ahead of Crist: 46.9 percent to Crist’s 39.7 percent, according to the latest average from Pollster.com. Rubio’s message dovetails perfectly with the take-our-country-back fervor of the Tea Party movement, without some of the anger. He is someone to watch -- and, for those of us who still believe in the possibility of centrist, bipartisan solutions, to fear.
On Nov. 4th 2008. we gave you power, in the House in the Senate and in the Oval.
WHO, EXACTLY, IS A NATURAL-BORN CITIZEN
This is an urgent message from http://restoretheconstitutionalrepubl... concerning the fact that Barack Obama is NOT a natural born citizen, as required by our Constitution, and therefore, must step down. It is also a call to our members of Congress to demand an official investigation before they convene to verify the Electoral College vote on January 8.
This is great video Clear, Concise reasoning based on LAW! , at some point he is going to have to come clean. We then can throw him out of our White House!
The winds of change are blowing in America today. The storm is approaching a feverish pitch
and "We The People" are not going to stand idley by any longer you mutts.
On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of global warming. In this 4-minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009.
Based on this video, it sure looks like he is admitting being a Muslim. He said:
"John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith."
If Obama isn't a Muslim, he sure seems to hold the the religion of the 9-11 hijackers and Osama Bin Laden in high regard. He talks about Islam a lot more than Christianity.
Obama Admits He Is A Muslim (video)
Obama admits that he is a Muslim. Obama bowing before a Muslim king. Obama talking about his Muslim family. Obama quoting from the Koran. Obama defending Islam. Obama visiting a Mosque. And many more clips of Obama and his Muslim connections.
International treaty gives foreign troops identity of American gun owners
While Congressional leaders are feverishly plotting to jam the hugely unpopular Senate health bill through the House of Representatives the moment Speaker Pelosi thinks she has the votes, House liberals are also tinkering around with the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). This is the program that covers federal workers and retirees; it is a consumer-driven program of competing private health plans. Through more regulation, Congressional liberals would like to make it look a lot more like Obamacare.
Historically, the success of the FEHBP as a consumer-driven and competitive system of private health plans has been largely attributable to its wide range of personal choice, relatively light regulation, and the hands-off approach the Office of Personnel Management(OPM) in its administration. That can change, of course, depending upon who is running the White House.
Decorated Marine veteran Nick Popaditch on Tuesday announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination in the 51st Congressional District seat held by Democrat Bob Filner.
Nicknamed “Gunny Pop,” Popaditch served two separate stints in the Marines. He was a tank commander during the Persian Gulf war and honorably discharged in 1992 after six years.
Tiring of civilian life, he rejoined the Marines in 1995. A widely circulated photograph after the fall of Baghdad in 2003 shows the tank commander and platoon sergeant smoking a cigar in front of the statue of Saddam Hussein just before his unit helped tear it down.
Popaditch, 42, was awarded the Silver Star for combat actions during the battle for Fallujah. During that battle he was blinded in one eye by a rocket-propelled grenade to the head and given a medical retirement.
He announced his candidacy at events in Chula Vista and El Centro. He was introduced at both events by retired Rep. Duncan Hunter.
“Since returning home, I’ve seen our liberties under assault and our children’s future being sold away by an expanding government that limits individual freedom and responsibility,” Popaditch said in. his announcement.
Filner’s 51st District runs the length of the California-Mexico border and is 48 percent Democratic to 27 percent Republican. The Chula Vista Democrat was re-elected in 2008 with 73 percent of the vote.
Government Intervention, Regulatory Policy, and the Financial Crisis
The housing bubble is probably the biggest reason why America now faces a financial crisis. But what caused the bubble, and why are there now so many foreclosures causing so much damage in the rest of the financial sector? In this Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video, Peter J. Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute explains how government policy mistakes are responsible and he specifically highlights the destructive impact of two government-created entities known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The video concludes with four key lessons that explain how to avoid similar mistakes in the future.
When Limbaugh Speaks, ...Liberals Had Better Listen
No wonder Obama, Pelosi and Reid want to shut Rush Limbaugh up. He is dead-on accurate about Democrat(ic)s, liberals and reflects what conservatives believe and articulates the conservative movement accurately.
HOW ABOUT SOME COMMON SENSE
Al Gore sued by over 30.000 Scientists for fraud
LINK TO RMS
The Conservative Side
To display our Link on your website for linking back to us, highlite the above code, copy using CTRL+C and place it into your website
Freedom, in the political sense, means exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action and the condition of being free of restraints.
You are born free unless, and until, you choose not to be free by voluntarily accepting such restraints or by allowing such restraints to be imposed on you.
Whether you actually choose to accept the restraints, choose not to oppose such restraints, or choose to believe such restraints are not optional, you have given up your natural born freedom and consented to be bound by the rule of the government; i.e. bondage to a master; i.e. a slave. If you did not consent, you would be free (dead or alive)
