“I’ve been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes. You would think they would be saying thank you,”

It’s not only what he said, it’s how he said it – with an arrogant and condescending tone that was un-Presidential at the very least.  Republican strategist Terry Holt put it this way.  “What the president said last night was arrogant and smug and a perfect example of why the Tea Party is so intense and so organized”.

Thank him!?!  We are supposed to thank him?  For what?  Thank him for deficit spending at levels never before seen in history.  Thank him for introducing yet another entitlement program when the ones that we have now are bankrupt.  Thank him for burdening our children and the children of generations to come with a tax burden that is simply unsustainable.  Thank him for weakening our national defense.  Thank him for gutting NASA.  Need I go on?  Oh, believe me Mr. President – your thanks are coming – all in good time.  We’re going to give you a “thanks giving feast” starting with an appetizer this November and culminating with desert in the Presidential Elections of 2012.   We are going to show you just how thankful we are.

This is not the first time this president has showed that you can “take the community organizer off the street, but you can’t take the street out of the community organizer.”  You may recall these remarks after he signed the Health Care Reform Legislation.

You would think that someone in his close circle would have told him, “Mr. President, you must know that by far most Americans oppose the legislation you signed.  I think it would be a good idea for you to show some humility on this one.”   Perhaps they did, and His-Arrogance just couldn’t help himself.

Likewise, perhaps someone close to him has told him that something historical is happening at the grassroots level across this nation through the Tea Party movement.  That there is genuine fear and concern by the majority of the people of this nation with regards to taxes, deficit spending, government intrusion into the private sector, and federal market manipulation.  Maybe someone did pull him aside and say, Mr. President – show a little class here.  But, maybe they didn’t.  Maybe his inner circle believes what they’ve been told – that this President is the smartest guy to every have occupied the Oval Office; after all – he’s a deep thinker and a Constitutional Scholar. 

I mean, after all – he demonstrated how much of a scholar he was when at the signing of the health care legislation he told the nation and the world that  -starting today, children who have been denied health care insurance will no longer be denied coverage.  The problem Mr. President is that bill you signed did not have that in it.  But, I’m sure that was just an oversight on your part when you read the 2000 page bill before you signed it… right?  Not to worry, the Congress had your back on that one and fixed it for you.  Good thing… otherwise you would have looked really foolish.

Of course, our Constitutional Scholar and Chief demonstrated a deep understanding and respect for the U.S. Constitution and the Separation of Powers when he overtly embarrassed the Justices of the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address this year.

In that environment, the Justices had to sit there while democrats from both chambers stood and applauded.  Never mind that fact that Obama was dead wrong in what he said.  The Supreme Court ruling specifically upheld the law with respect to foreign corporations being prohibited from donating money to political campaigns, PACs, or otherwise attempting to influence our elections.  But, I’m sure the Scholar-in-Chief just missed that part when he read the Supreme Court’s majority opinion before he commented on it before the nation.

I mean, you would think that, as constitutional scholar and the smartest guy to ever have occupied the oval office, he would know that as the head of the Executive Branch – you know, the branch of government that has the sole constitutional authority to enforce the laws – he should wait to have all the facts in a high-profile case before commenting on the case.  He demonstrated that insight with the Concord Police incident this past year.

Well, the President was right on a couple of point… not the least of which were he was not there and he did not have all the facts.  It turns out that the professor that was arrested did not show identification with his name and address on it proving he lived there, that he was being defiant and belligerent with police as they were simply doing their job.

Unfortunately, this president may be a smart guy and he may be a Constitutional Scholar, but he is demonstrating time and time again that he can’t shake the deep, ideological roots he has as a radical, left-wing, Chicago thug, community organizer.  He simply can’t pass on the opportunity to poke the hornet’s nest with a stick.

Mr. President – you temporarily occupy the Office of the President of the United States.  It’s time for you to start acting presidential.

America's Newest Addiction

America is about to take her first “hit” of a very dangerous, addictive, opiate drug called “socialized medicine”.   Our President and the liberal left Democrat majority have started this nation on a pathway to addiction and Obamacare is the gateway drug.  We are no longer “unique” as a nation.  Tomorrow, when President Obama signs the Health Insurance Reform legislation into law, we will join the likes of other addict nations such as Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, China, and Russia.  Instead of being a unique nation in world – a nation “Of the People, by the People, and for the People” -  we will join the ranks of the “governed nations”; a nation of lemmings looking to our government for answers that it simply cannot supply. 

We have been told time and time again by Pres. Obama,  Sen. Reid, and Speaker Pelosi that this legislation is about insuring the 30-40 million uninsured Americans.  But, is that what this legislation is truly about?  To quote House Minority Leader John Boehner, “HELL NO!”   Really people, stop and think about it.  We could have done exactly that for a heck of a lot less than what this legislation is costing us and the generations to come.  Instead, we have legislation that, by this administration’s own estimates, will be just $60 billion short of $1 Trillion dollars; and that is with collecting taxes for 10 years but paying benefits for only 6 years.  Heck, we could have deposited $1 million dollars in a medical savings account for each of these 30-40 million so-called uninsured Americans at a total cost of $40 million dollars and saved ourselves $900 billion dollars as a result! (Of course I’m not advocating that, but I think you get my point)  So, how can anyone claim this is about insuring the uninsured? 

Well, you ask, if it’s not about insuring the uninsured then exactly what is this legislation all about?  Look no further than other countries with socialized medicine to find that out.  Socialized medicine has never delivered the health care utopia its proponents claim.  What it does deliver is an entire nation of people that are dependent on the government to meet their needs.  Once a government has its citizens dependent on it to deliver their basic needs, then the party that promises more and more benefits will get more and more power – no matter what the cost in terms of tax dollars or individual freedoms for future generations. 

No, this is not about the health care needs of the American people.  This is about the political power needs of this President and his Democrat party.  This legislation is the opiate that will lead to an addiction by the common citizen –  like that of a child born to a cocaine addicted mother; not addicted by choice, but addicted nonetheless.

However, it is not just the people that will be addicted.  The politicians will be addicted as well.  To stay in power they will have to give the appearance of giving more and more to the people.  Like an addict, they will know that what they are doing is destructive to the body of America.  But they will not be able to stop.  They will occasionally make an effort to curtail their addiction, they will make impassioned promises, they will plead for trust, and they may even kick-the-habit for a time.  But it won’t be long before they are back on the “stuff” again.

Some of you are reading this with disbelief – you are thinking to yourself that I must be wrong.  Well, I’m not wrong… and I can prove it.

I hold up to you as proof our Medicare system – the proverbial “third rail” of the federal political system.  Everyone knows it’s bankrupt.  Everyone knows the money is simply not there to sustain it.  Everyone knows… the people who currently receive its benefits, those who will one day receive its benefits, and the government that administrates it benefits.  Yet no one is willing to change it.  Why – because the beneficiaries NEED it and the politicians NEED it.  Is this not the behavior of an addict?   We can say same the same for Social Security.

This is not an American phenomenon either.  My wife and I had visitors from Canada this summer.  It was a great opportunity for me to ask them how they liked their socialized medicine.  I was particularly interested in speaking with them because I knew the wife needed gallbladder surgery, a routine surgery that is normally performed here on an outpatient basis and usually within a week of having a diagnosis.  As for her, she waited in agony for well over a year before the surgery was performed. 

So I asked her and her husband, “How do you like your Canadian Socialized Medicine.”   Their response stunned me, “We love it – we would not want to do without it.” 

So I dug deeper asking the woman, “Didn’t you have to wait a very long time for your gallbladder surgery?”  Her response, “Well, not so long really.”  Now, I know through family members that she waited nearly 18 months to have her operation and that she was in agony during that time. 

I pressed on, “What about doctors and nurses.  Are there enough to go around or are they leaving the field?”  Their reply, “More and more are leaving the field of medicine.  There is a real shortage of doctors and nurses in Canada.”

I could not believe it.  These were seemingly rational people giving me completely irrational responses:

• I had to wait 18 months for surgery to stop my pain and agony – but that was not too long
• There are not enough trained people in the field of medicine – and more and more doctors and nurses are leaving the profession
• I love the system and could not do without it.

This lines up with the psychology of a drug addict:

• I know I’m in physical, psychological, and spiritual agony and I know this drug is causing it
• I know the cost of this drug is preventing me from caring properly for myself and my family
• I love this drug and could not do without it.

We look with compassion on the drug addict and try to find them help – and many do get help and learn to live a “clean” life.  But, where is the Twelve Step Program for a nation state?  Where is the Twelve Step Program for a people so addicted to their government entitlement programs that they are willing to say, “Oh, I only had to wait in pain and agony for 18 months before I got the surgery I needed, but that’s alright”?   Where’s the Twelve Step Program for the political party willing to sacrifice the future of our children for their “power fix” today.

America is about to takes her first “hit” of a very dangerous, addictive, opiate called “socialized medicine” – and the drug pushers reside in the Executive and Legislative Branches of our government.

Get ready for the Senate Healthcare Reform bill to become LAW!.  That’s right.  Regardless of what Pres. Obama and Speaker Pelosi and her minions, and the pendants in the main-stream media try to say, if the House passes the Slaughter Solution rule on Sunday the Senate Bill becomes law.  It will have become law without the House actually voting on it – a matter that will undoubtedly face constitutional challenges.  This graph is the reality and it is the truth!

Any member of the House of Representatives who votes for the Slaughter Solution is:

• Voting to ignore the will of the American people as pole after pole has demonstrated.
• Voting to ignore both the letter and the spirit of Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution of the United States.
• Voting to pass the Senate Bill that simply would not have passed on a straight up/down vote by the House.
• Voting to implement a totally new entitlement program at the expense of Medicare.
• Voting to usurp the rights and authority reserved for the States by Amendment 10 of the Constitution of the United States.
• Voting for “back-room deal” after “back-room deal” struck to buy votes in both the Senate and the House with our tax dollars.  By default, a vote to pass the Slaughter Bill is a vote to validate corruption.
• Voting for the eventual collapse of Medicare, Medicaid, and private medical insurance systems through cuts, overwhelming & underfunding, and placing mandates respectively; forcing single-payer, government-run healthcare on all of us.
• Voting for incentives for your employer to drop your health insurance coverage
• Voting for incentives for your doctor to quit practicing medicine.
• Voting for the reduction of specialists that make the U.S. healthcare system the finest in the world.
• Voting for Federally funded abortions
• Voting for ANOTHER doubling of the Federal deficit
• Voting for the eventual rationing of healthcare because there IS NO cost containment in this legislation and rationing will be the only way to manage costs going forward.
• Voting for an eventual government take-over of 1/6 of the U.S. Economy

I’m tired of the argument that the U.S. is the only industrialized country in the world that does not have socialized medicine.  NO KIDDING!  Did you ever stop to think that this IS the reason why we have the best medical care of any country in world, why leaders and others form countries with socialized medicine come here for medical treatment. 

I’m tired of the argument that those who can’t afford coverage are not getting coverage – those who truly can’t afford coverage can get coverage by Medicaid and SCHIP.  There are those who choose to spend their money on things other than healthcare insurance – but that is their choice; just like it is their choice to live outside their means. 

I’m tired of hearing about a healthcare crisis in the United States.  There is no healthcare crisis.  What we have is a lack of personal responsibility crisis and a victimization crisis.  Who the hell ever said this country owes you a living, a guarantee to a home mortgage, or insurance of any kind?

I’m tired of the Democrats parading “victim” after “victim” in front of us.  We all would like everyone to have access to good medical care… What we have issue with is how.  A vast majority of the American people know that government run health insurance is not the answer; we know that this legislation will lead to exactly that.  We are not stupid Mr. President!

So go ahead Democrats, place your yes vote.  Go ahead; poke the bear with a stick.  You are about to experience the wrath of the American voter in a way that you never dreamed possible.  Not only will you face Constitutional challenges by at least 34 state Attorney Generals, but this November - you will face unemployment.

• The American people have overwhelming rejected this legislation
• Speaker Palosi does not have the votes to pass the Senate version of Health Insurance Reform legislation.  If she did, there would have been a vote
• All the arm twisting, fist pounding, and cajoling have failed to turn a sufficient number of Democrat members of the House to vote against the will of their constituents

The handwriting is on the wall… with overwhelming majorities in the House and the Senate, as well as the Office of the President, the Democrats have failed to deliver on their far-left version of health insurance reform.  The people do not want, nor can we afford, another massive entitlement program.  This overwhelming failure has implications far beyond the 2010 elections – and they know it.

In my opinion, the question now facing this President and the Democrat leadership is:  Is it possible that there could be a scapegoat somewhere to pin this loss on?  It’s damage control time.

First, they tried to blame the Republicans saying they were the “Party of No”, but that didn’t fly did it?  After all, they had super-majorities in the House and Senate for the better part of a year and they could not get it done.

Next, they tried to paint the Republicans mean spirited, uninformed, insurance company champions at the Healthcare Sumit in Feb. 2010.  But that backfired as Republicans demonstrated time after time their commanding knowledge of the issues and why the Democrat version of the legislation would both fail to meet the goals of true reform and result in an explosion of the national debt.

Let’s see… is there someone else, besides the Republicans, has angered this President and the liberals in both the House and the Senate and could be a potential target of opportunity?  Hmmm…

One needs to look no further then the evening of January 27^th, 2010.  Who was it during the State of the Union Address President Obama chided and the Democrats rose to their feet hooting and hollering in approval of his chastisement?  Could it be that the U.S. Supreme Court is the ideal scapegoat for the abysmal failure of this President and Congress to pass their version of health insurance reform?

In my opinion, I think that is exactly what the so called “Slaughter Solution” is all about.  Under this rule, the House would vote on a “Rule Change”.  This rule change would contain a list proposed amendments to the Health Insurance Reform bill passed by the Senate.  Additionally, the Rule Change would stipulate that if the House passes the list of desired amendments, then it deems that the House has also passed the Senate bill itself.  In other words, the House can pass the Senate bill without ever having to vote specifically on it.

Already, constitutional law scholars from both the left and the right are lining up in opposition to such a tactic ^[1] saying that is violates Article 1 Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution; which states in part:

 Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States

So, why do it?  Why take an approach which seems to be doomed from the onset to be ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts.  In my view, it’s quite simple and quite cynical.  The President and the rest of the Democrats get to blame the U.S. Supreme Court, which would undoubtedly be the final arbiter on the constitutionality of such a tactic.  Look at the potential benefits:

• Senator Reid can say, “The Senate did its job and passed a bill”
• Speaker Palosi can say, “The House did its job and passed a bill”
• President Obama can say, “I did my job, I signed the bill into law”
• And they call all point to a conservative court and say in unison, “The Supreme Court has usurped the power of the Executive and Legislative branches of government and has imposed its will on the American people by legislating from the bench.  They did what the Republicans could not do.”

As an additional bonus, they can use such a ruling as campaign fodder in the 2010 mid-term elections as well as the 2012 Presidential election as a reason why a less conservative court is needed and the only way to insure that is to elect Democrats.  Furthermore, it would not be the first time in recent history that the Democrats have intentionally pulled the U.S. Supreme Court in to cover the loss – anyone remember the 2000 Presidential Election when Al Gore tried to use the courts to circumvent the results of the election.  Heck, they got 8 years of political cannon fodder out of that one.

It’s perfect cover for this President and the Democrats in both the House and the Senate.  If the Slaughter Solution is used and a constitutional challenge fails, they win.  If a constitutional challenge succeeds, they win.  Either way they win – and the American People loose.

[1]  ‘Slaughter Solution’ could face legal challenge, Fred Barbash, 3/16/2010 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34508.html

Look, I know there is a lot of passion on all sides of this Healthcare Reform debate that is currently gripping the nation.   You know, if we really take the effort to step back from the rhetoric and hysteria, it’s clear that we all agree on the goals of healthcare reform.  We all want to see those in need be able to get what they need.  We all agree that we need reform that will address the real concerns people have with powerful, corporate health insurance companies.  At the same time, we can all agree that we need to protect the insurance companies from people who are willing to game the system by not purchasing health insurance until they are really sick – after all, you and I will pay the price for that kind of irresponsibility. 

Nope, the goals are not the issue.  What is the issue though is how we achieve those goals and frankly, the American people have looked at the current legislation and the vast majority of us are saying that the ends do not justify the means.  We don’t agree with the approach being taken by the Democrats to both achieve the goals (which I don’t believe the legislation will do) nor the means by which they are legislating.   So, Sen. Reid, there is no need to trot out any more victims of tragic situations and tell us we are bad people if we don’t agree with your means of achieving laudable goals.  Come on, let’s be real here, do you really think that disagreeing with your methods is equivalent to disagreeing with the goals of reform?

As a reader, you may not agree with my point of view.  Nevertheless, I encourage you to stop for a moment and look at what is happening in Washington.  Something is going wrong… very, very wrong.  Ideology is on a collision course with the standards by which this nation’s legislative branch has conducted itself since its founding.  We are seeing leadership in both the Executive and Legislative branches of our government take on a “win at any cost” method of governing.  Is that really what we want from our government?  Is this the “change” so many American’s voted for… seriously?

Take a look at Venezuela and how Hugo Chavez operates.  He doesn’t like how the media treats him… he changes the rules.  He doesn’t like the way the election is shaping up… he changes the rules.  He doesn’t like the way businesses operate… he changes the rules.  Can you imagine how both dangerous and frustrating that is for the people of Venezuela?  Chavez is the living definition of a tyrant and his government is a tyrannical government.  There is no liberty for the people of Venezuela.  He talks like he is doing these things on behalf of the people… I don’t believe the people of Venezuela see it that way.

I’m willing to bet we all had an experience with a kid or two on the playground at school who had a win at all costs mentality.  You know the kid I’m talking about, the one who would change the rules during the game because things were not going his way.  Well, let’s scale that up a bit to our nation’s government.  Right now, Pres. Obama, Sen. Reid, and Speaker Pelosi don’t like the way things are going for them with the healthcare reform legislation.  So what are they plotting to do?  The exact same thing Chavez or the playground bully would do.  They are going to change the rules in the middle of the game. 

The rules of governance for both the Senate and the House serve several purposes; two of which are   to bring sanity to the process and prevent the ideology of the majority party from completely trampling the rights of the minority party.    If Nancy Pelosi has her way, she will have the rules of the U.S. House of Representatives changed so that the House can pass the Senate’s version of healthcare reform without voting on the bill.  That’s right, the same party that just one week ago demanded an up-or-down (simple majority) vote in the Senate on a conference committee bill that would not stand up to the Senates 60 vote rule is now willing to change the rules of the House so that it can pass legislation by simply declaring it as passed… without a vote!

Ideology has taken over common sense.   Tell me, how is this any different than the way Chavez governs his nation?   Do we want the steady hand of tradition, decorum, and established rules of governance at the helm of our Democratic Republic or do we want to trade in the 50 stars on our nations flag for 50 bananas and become a Banana Republic?

Some of us are old enough to remember Layaway programs.  They used to be all the rage before this country became addicted first to department store revolving charges and later to credit cards.  When you bought something on Layaway, you made a small deposit and the store kept the merchandise while you made a number of payments.  Once the item was paid for in full, you took it home.   I remember trying on winter coat after winter coat in the middle of the hot summer so my parents could retrieve it from layaway before the snow started to fall. 

Well, what the Senate healthcare legislation proposes is Healthcare Layaway.  We get to pay for this massive, multi-trillion dollar entitlement over a period of about four years; then we get to take it home.  As a bonus, we then get to continue to pay, and pay, and pay.  That’s the sliding-scale math the CBO had to use to in their analysis; ten years of payments for 5 years of expenses.  And that my friends is how Pres. Obama says we will reduce the deficit by $190B over ten years. 

Listen to what he is selling here.  Ten years of payments, the first four of which we will not receive the benefits we are paying for, and the deficit will be reduced by some fantasy number.  That begs the question:  Is the President telling us that those first fiveyears of payments are not being set aside for healthcare benefits and instead will be used to reduce the deficit?   What happens after that?  Well, the Republicans asked the CBO to score “the rest of the story” (wink and a nod to the late Paul Harvey).

When you score the legislation over fourteen years (first five years of taxes with no benefits, + 10 years of taxes with benefits) instead of reducing the deficit, we add close to $3 trillion dollars to it. In other words, this is a known deficit buster.  We know going in that the system they are proposing can not and will not be sustainable.  This is maddness.

Hmmm… so what we really have here is a Federal Healthcare Layaway Program where the payments go on and on, AND we continue to pile on more debt.  Don’t people in the private sector go to jail for these kind of ponzi schemes?

This was in response to a question about Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ remarks regarding Pres. Obama’s State of the Union comments pertaining to the recent Supreme Court Decision on campaign finance; comments that broke with both tradition and decorum.  During the Q&A session following a speech at the University of Alabama, Chief Justice Roberts said the following in response to a student’s question:

“So I have no problems with that,” he said. “On the other hand, there is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum. The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court — according the requirements of protocol — has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling.”

Of course, Gibbs completely ignored the part in Robert’s comments about the appropriateness of the time and place of Pres. Obama’s remarks on a decision made by one of the Constitutional Branches of our government.  Instead, he showed real concern about the voice of the little guy – you and me; how touching.

Hey, this might actually be a breakthrough for this administration.  I’m wondering if our President will start to pay attention to the voice of the people on the proposed healthcare legislation.  Maybe he will show genuine concern for the fact that the latest Rasmussen poll shows that:

• 81% of voters say the current healthcare reform legislation will cost more then the government projections.
• 57% say the legislation will hurt the economy while only 25% think the plan will help the economy
• 66% believe the legislation will add to the budget deficit
• 78% believe that taxes will go up on the middle-class as a result of this legislation

I guess I’m feeling a little bit like the people from Who-ville in the Dr. Seuss book “Horton Hears a Who”.  Could it be that Pres. Obama will perk-up his pachyderm-like ears and finally hear the faint voice of the American people exclaiming, “We’re here, and were not buying what you’re selling!”

Well, shame on us for not remember the “political word lesson” of the last Democrat to occupy The Oval Office; remember the “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”[2] vocabulary lesson of President Clinton. You see, I like most of you, probably thought that when President Obama promised Transparency he meant he would be above board with the American people, that there would be openness, real dialog, real leadership efforts in bipartisanship.

Silly us; We did not realize that the transparency he was referencing was his transparent effort to use the platform of a Health Care Summit as a launching pad for persuading Democrat members of the House of Representatives to jam this massive health care reform bill through on a reconciliation vote; a procedure put in place to aid the budgetary process. I watched all seven plus hours of the summit. It was transparently clear that the president and his fellow Democrats are more about marketing then substance.

Throughout the entire day, virtually every statement made by him or the Democrat participants included the verbiage “we are close to an agreement”. He repeatedly listed obvious “goals” that no-one would challenge as if there was agreement on how to achieve those goals:

• We agree that everyone should have access to healthcare
• We agree that there is waste in the system
• We agree that the sun will come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar on tomorrow (sorry, I digress)

In addition to stating these obvious lofty goals as though the means to reaching those goals were irrelevant, he transparently brushed aside Republican points of substance on the nation’s debt, on the role of Federal Government vs. a Market-Driven solution as mere talking points.

Then, there was this transparent, duplicitous, jab at Sen. John McCain as he dressed the senator down for his remarks on the process and the numerous “special interest” aspects of the legislation:

Notice how the President refers to Sen. McCain by his first name “John” instead of “Senator”.  This is an old trick used by lawyers, negotiators, interrogators, etc.  If you want to put a person of stature “in his place”, you call them by their first name.  That was just the glancing blow of this transparent “jab” at Sen. McCain.  He quickly followed that up with his duplicitous remark, “the election is over”; as if to say, “Sen. McCain, your concerns are irrelevant.  How we go about this is none of your concern.   You’re just mad that I won the election and you didn’t.  So why don’t you just sit there, keep your mouth shut, and act like a good little senator.  If I need your opinion, I’ll give it to you.”

Transparency Obama Style – I suspect it’s not quite the Hope and Change those who voted for President Obama had in mind.

Footnotes:

[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/change_has_come_to_whitehouse-gov/

[2] http://www.rightgrrl.com/starr_report/6narrit.htm#L13

What is the Republican “Nuclear Option”?  That’s simple, – the “unlimited amendment” provision of the Reconciliation Process.  Use it to turn the Obamacare Bill into a real Budget Bill – you know, the kind of bill Reconciliation was really meant to be used for.  Let’s help them by turning this Health Care Bill into a true budget bill and take the opportunity to dismantle the tax-and-spend programs of this administration.  Put every aspect of current spending on display as an individual amendment – use the Cloward-Piven strategy against them.  Overwhelm the process and use this opportunity to expose this administration’s out-of-control spending for what it is.

What an opportunity for Republicans!   Take advantage of this wonderful opportunity to not only force the Democrats to “own” this massive new entitlement, but we can force them to “own” every single aspect of this administrations liberal agenda by fileing an individual amendment for every earmark currently in the budget and require an up-or-down vote on each and every one.  Attach an individual amendment for every single unspent provision of Stimulus and TARP and require an up-or-down vote on that as well.  Attack the funding of every Czar and require an up-or-down vote.  Put Speaker Pelosi’s federally funded family travel plan on display and require an up-or-down vote on that.  Make individual amendments regarding the funding of every expenditure of the National Endowment of the Arts.  Go through the entire budget of the EPA and require up-or-down votes on them.  Go after all the funding for ACORN and their affiliates as well as Planned Parenthood and their affiliates.   Let there be no “sacred cows” - go after it all, but do it with small, clearly worded, amendments – each requiring an up-or-down vote.  Attach so many budgetary amendments to this bill that it would be physically impossible to finish the debate and vote on them before the end of the decade.

Why wait for reconciliation, I’d start to put the list of amendments together now and put them up on a web site.  Let the Dems know  now that there is no way a Reconciliation process is gong to “fix” the Senate Bill they are about to accept on the pretense it will all be fixed with a Reconciliation process.  Show them we really want to help them make this a bipartisan budgetary bill worthy of the Reconcilliation Process and that no stone will be left unturned in making that a reality.  If the President wants to lead his party over a cliff on this, I say we help him out.

You seem Mr. President, we know how to read Saul Alinsky as well.  Let’s get it on!

Now that we have the attention of the main-stream media and have shaken the foundations of the socialist/status-quo agendas of the politically entrenched, many voting citizens are taking note and wondering – what exactly does a “Conservative Leader” look like.  For those of us who are old enough to have witnessed the leadership of President Ronald Reagan, we have the benefit of our witness.  However, many voters only know of President Reagan from news reports or perhaps text books.  More likely, they learned about him from a source with a liberal bias that paints a rather unflattering portrait.  Reagan was president over 20 years ago.  Since then, our youth have experienced the extreme-left (Pres. Obama) and the middle-left (Pres. Clinton), and the middle-right (Pres. George W Bush); all of which to some extent had domestic policies that increased the size of government and helped raise a generation of people that look to the government for their provision

Fortunately for those who are now asking the question, “What does a Conservative Leader look like?” we have a living example.  On February 11^th, recently elected New Jersey Governor Chris Christie called an emergency joint session of the New Jersey legislature to address the states $2.2B deficit – in a state where the constitution requires a balanced budget no less.  If you are wondering what a true “conservative” leads-like, have a listen to his speech.

Keep in mind that the relatively small state of New Jersey has a $2.2B deficit.  They got that deficit by playing “shell games” with the state budget – like forecasting state revenue increases when everyone knew that revenues would decrease.  The same kind of shell games our leaders in the U.S. Senate and House of Representative play when they send legislation off to the Congress Budget Office for scoring with a set of “assumptions” with which the CBO is required to constrain their analysis.  ”Assumptions” everyone knows have a near zero probability of coming to fruition. 

To further develop your understanding of how a “conservative” leads, I’m providing you with an example of how socialists and defenders of the status quoe lead for contrast.  Have a look at the response of democrats in New Jersey legislature as they try to defend spending money the citizens of New Jersey – one of the most heavily taxed states in the union – don’t have:

It’s time that our government officials, at all levels of government, come to terms with the same thing that every head-of-household knows – You need to live within your means.  And living within your means does not mean printing more money, borrowing more money, and spending your children’s money.   If you believe in these principles, if you believe in the power of the individual – not the provision of the government – then you are a Conservative.  Now, vote like one.