This bill is designed to improve health services and provide financial compensation for 9/11 first responders who were exposed to dangerous toxins and are now sick as a result. It would establish a federal program to provide medical monitoring and treatment for first responders, provide initial health screenings for people who were in the area at the time of the attack and may be at risk, and reopen the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund to provide compensation for losses and harm as an alternative to the current litigation system.
The White House has relied on its Top Gun to get this bill passed. Who’s that, you ask? Joe Biden? Nancy Pelosi? Steny Hoyer? Michelle (ma belle)? Nope.
The WH has called on culturally hip comedian and host of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, John Stewart. You know, the guy who put together that failed rally that was supposed to be the answer to Glenn beck’s Restoring Honor Rally, held on the Washington Mall.
Stewart picked up the cause of the Zadroga Bill and snarkily attacked Republicans for days on his show. In fact, his whole season finale last week was devoted to the bill, which raised awareness of the Zadroga bill among the young socially hip Moderates and Liberals who watch Stewart’s program.
WH Press Secretary Baghdad Bob Gibbs lavished press on Stewart at Tuesday’s Daily press briefing for his efforts.
I think he has put the awareness around this legislation — he’s put that awareness into what you guys cover each day, and I think that’s good.
Gibbs danced around questions concerning whether President Barack Hussein Obama (peace be upon him) was making calls or doing anything at all, beyond releasing statements supporting the Zadroga Bill.
Gibbsby and his dear leader want the hipster to do more, though. Baghdad Bob added:
I hope he can convince two Republicans to support taking care of those that took care of so many on that awful day in our history.
One of the bill’s supporters, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan), was not pleased with this strategy:
Jon Stewart has done his part for the 9/11 health bill — now it’s the President’s turn to speak up and get personally involved in the effort to pass the legislation.
Time is running out on this bill and on our opportunity to help tens of thousands of Americans who are suffering because of 9/11. President Obama should use the bully pulpit of the presidency to urge the Senate Republican leadership not to try to run out the clock on this bill.
It’s the ninth inning and we need a good closer to win the game. Mr. President, please step up to the mound for those who worked on the Pile. We need to work together to rescue the 9/11 rescuers. Let’s do the right and patriotic thing and pass the Zadroga bill now.
This is not the first time that this Administration has relied on the political acumen of this marginal comedian.
Last April, Tim Geithner held a secret, never-before-disclosed meeting with TV host Jon Stewart, according to the Treasury Secretary’s calendar.
The reason, according to a Treasury spokesperson:
Jon Stewart is influential in America, so we took the opportunity for the two to meet and to discuss the economy.
At the time, the administration was in the middle of debates on Financial Regulation and China’s currency.
I can tell, just by the short, painful moments that I have tried to listen to this goof, that these are his areas of expertise. Although, this does help to explain the cluelessness of Obama’s economic policies.
On the day of April 2nd, when he met with Stewart, Geithner spoke by phone with Democratic lawmakers including Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, according to the appointments calendar.
Geithner also held phone conversations with House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Senators Charles Schumer of New York and Max Baucus of Montana, all Democrats.
Wow. That’s more clowns than come out of the little car at the Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey Circus.
Actually, when I think about the actions of this lame Duck Session of Congress and their blatant disregard for the wishes of the majority of Americans and their view of our Armed Forces as a bunch of lab rats to be socially experimented upon, I could use a good laugh.
The problem is, the actions of this clueless Administration and its minions are so harmful to our country, laughter is the last thing that I and other Americans who are getting beat down by Obama’s economic policies are thinking about.
All of my fellow internet news junkies need to perk up your ears, sit up, and take notice. The professional bozos (not just your average, amateur bozos) at the United Nations are deep into discussions about regulating the Worldwide Web. And ,our very own Government, under the leadership of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) has undertaken a holy jihad, err, I mean mission, to regulate online news and information content.
Welcome to the U.S.S.A., Komrades!
The official line from the UN is that they are:
…considering whether to set up an inter-governmental working group to harmonize global efforts by policy makers to regulate the Internet.
The U.N. is using the excuse of the WikiLeaks debacle to attempt to form a group among world governments that would “attempt to create global standards for policing the Internet.”
According to Australia’s iTnews, the meeting delegate from Brazil, which is pushing the proposal, the plan isn’t to take over the Web.
Uh huh. Remember, this is the same bunch who has North Korea on their Human Rights Committee.
So, while the UN is trying to figure out how to take over the Web, our own bunch of Marxists within Obama’s Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, will vote on net neutrality today, December 21. This will allow the Obama Administration to dictate how Internet service providers handle the traffic that flows over their infrastructure.
The fact that this policy would violate free speech and property rights does not seem to bother Obama and his minions at all.
After all, it’s for our own good.
According to Rep. Mike Rogers, a Republican from Michigan who is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet,FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s push for the passage of net neutrality gives “the federal government control over all aspects of the Internet.”
Gee, DiNozzo. Ya think?
Rogers has awakened to complains that today’s vote is poorly timed and gives “Congress and the public little time to review a regulation that will ultimately impact one-sixth of the nation’s economy.”
This is S.O.P. for the Obama Administration.
Another Michigan Republican and the incoming chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton, has written a letter to the FCC requesting asking it “to cease and desist” in its effort to regulate the Web, which it “does not have authority” to do.
He is a longtime Obama friend and a top 2008 campaign fundraiser.
He urged Obama to harness the power of the Internet in the 2008 presidential campaign, which the candidate did in unprecedented ways that will seriously affect future political campaigns. As head of the Obama campaign’s technology-policy advisers group, he supported an open Internet and the creation of a nationwide network of wireless emergency contacts.
During his first two years on the job, Genachowski has addressed the creation of a national broadband strategy and, now, net neutrality.
According to excerpts from his opening statement for Tuesday’s meeting, which were supplied by the chairman’s office Monday night to broadcastingcable.com, Genachowski said that the choice was between doing nothing and
…a set of detailed and rigid regulations….I reject both extremes in favor of a strong and sensible framework – one that protects Internet freedom and openness and promotes robust innovation and investment.
We’re adopting a framework that will increase certainty for businesses, investors, and entrepreneurs. We’re taking an approach that will help foster a cycle of massive investment, innovation and consumer demand both at the edge and in the core of our broadband networks.
[T]hese rules fulfill many promises, including a promise to the future. A promise to the companies that don’t yet exist, the entrepreneurs that haven’t yet started work in the dorm rooms or garages.
Genachowski is supposed to cite some of the net neutrality fans who support the move, including the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Communications Workers of America.
The Consumer Federation for America (CFA) was founded in 1968, based in Washington, DC. It describes itself as an “advocacy, research, education, and service organization” on issues affecting consumers and “looks out for those who have the greatest needs, especially the least affluent.” CFA’s membership comprises approximately 280 nonprofit consumer organizations from around the U.S. It receives its funding from unions and corporations, especially the Rockefeller Foundation. Per activistcash.com, in the year between 1999-2000, CFA received $266,700 From George Soros’ Open Society Institute.
The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) is a 501(c) “non-profit public policy organization dedicated to promoting the democratic potential of today’s open, decentralized global Internet,” per its website. CDT’s stated mission is “to conceptualize, develop, and implement public policies to preserve and enhance free expression, privacy, open access, and other democratic values in the new and increasingly integrated communications medium.” It was founded in 1994 by Jonah Seiger who also served as its Communications Director. Per Forbes.com, George Soros gave the Center $300,000 this year.
Communication Workers of America (CWA) is the largest telecommunications union in the world and represents over 700,000 men and women in both private and public sectors, including over half a million workers who are building the Information Highway.CWA was founded in 1938 at meetings in Chicago and New Orleans. First known as the National Federation of Telephone Workers, the union became the Communications Workers of America in 1947. The CWA is aligned with the Communist ideology-driven Working Families Party and the SEIU, who are in turn aligned with, you guessed it, George Soros.
You know, if I were the paranoid type, I would see some sort of conspiracy behind this push to control the Web.
Nah, couldn’t be. Hey, what’s that black helicopter doing hovering over my roof?
After witnessing this weekend’s assault by the cluelessly politically correct on America’s Armed Forces and the beliefs of Christian Conservative Americans, I began to do a little research concerning the War against Christianity.
Christmas has been banned by the Red Cross from its 430 fund-raising shops.
Red Cross staff members have received orders to remove decorations and any other signs of the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ.
Why? Because they do not want Muslims to be offended!
These idiots must be cousins of that bunch up in the Beltway and America’s Left Coast.
Brits, both Christian and Muslim, are outraged by this stupidity.
Christine Banks, a volunteer at a Red Cross shop in New Romney, Kent, said:
We put up a nativity scene in the window and were told to take it out. It seems we can’t have anything that means Christmas. We’re allowed to have some tinsel but that’s it.
When we send cards they have to say season’s greetings or best wishes. They must not be linked directly to Christmas.
When we asked we were told it is because we must not upset Moslems.
We have been instructed that we can’t say anything about Christmas and we certainly can’t have a Christmas tree.
I think the policy is offensive to Moslems as well as to us. No reasonable person can object to Christians celebrating Christmas. But we are not supposed to show any sign of Christianity at all.
Labor peer Lord Ahmed, one of the UK’s most recognized Muslim politicians, said:
It is stupid to think Moslems would be offended.
The Moslem community has been talking to Christians for the past 1,400 years. The teachings from Islam are that you should respect other faiths.
In my business all my staff celebrate Christmas and I celebrate with them. It is absolutely not the case that Christmas could damage the Red Cross reputation for neutrality. I think their people have gone a little bit over the top.
Liberals stay over the top. That’s the way Alinsky taught them to achieve their goals.
Earlier this year, the British Red Cross announced its support for the French illegal (Muslim) immigrant camp at Sangatte and devoted itself to helping asylum seekers.
Recently, officials at the charity’s London HQ confirmed that Christmas is barred from the 430 shops which contributed more than £20 million to its income last year.
According to a spokesman:
The Red Cross is a neutral organisation and we don’t want to be aligned with any political party or particular philosophy.
We don’t want to be seen as a Christian or Islamic or Jewish organisation because that might compromise our ability to work in conflict situations around the world.
In shops people can put up decorations like tinsel or snow which are seasonal. But the guidance is that things representative of Christmas cannot be shown.
The charity’s base organization, the Swiss-based International Red Cross, has also had politically correct attacks on its famous symbol. But efforts to replace it were abandoned due to all the protests and ridicule they received five years ago.
But, hey, that’s just the UK, right? Nothing like that could happen here, could it? Au contraire, mon frere!
As told on washingtontimes.com, in June of this year, the Young Men’s Christian Association, or YMCA, announced that, from now on, it would simply be known as the “Y”.
Kate Coleman, senior vice president and chief marketing officer of the YMCA of the USA, in a press release for the brand change, said:
We are changing how we talk about ourselves so that people better understand the benefits of engaging with the Y. We are simplifying how we describe the programs we offer so that it is immediately apparent that everything we do is designed to nurture that potential of children and teens, improve health and well-being and support our neighbors and the large community.
Co-incidentally to my previous story, the YMCA was founded in 1844 in London. It was named the “Young Men’s Christian Association”. It’s founders wanted to create healthy social conditions for young men during the Industrial Revolution. The parallel YWCA for women also dates back to the 19th century, and the YMCA began admitting women in its programs at the end of World War II.
The organization grew during the 1990s, establishing programs and services specifically designed for “youth development, for healthy living and for social responsibility.” Today, there are 2,687 facilities in more than 10,000 communities, and it serves 21 million men, women and children.
According to Ms. Coleman, the decision to change the name took two years. What initially began as an awareness campaign eventually turned into a desire for a fresh look:
As we got into the process, we realized it was much bigger than what we thought. We did a ton of research and what we found was that people don’t realize or understand why we do what we do.
Ms. Coleman claims that the former logo did not create enough attention. So, she says, the new brand was created in order for people to better understand the organization’s mission and its history.
And, after all, that whole Christianity thing is sooo un-PC, isn’t it?
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.
I woke up this morning terribly depressed and disappointed. Not surprised. Just disappointed. Disappointed in a lot of Conservatives who seem to be more wrapped up in today’s Progressively driven culture of convenient morality and adjustable ethics, than the immovable Rock that this nation was founded upon.
By now, some of you so-called Fiscal Conservatives and Liberals that have stumbled upon this site are probably giggling at my displeasure. You may be saying , what do you mean this country was founded upon an immovable rock? The people who founded this country left England for freedom from religion, didn’t they?
That’s what the Progressives taught you, kids. Here’s how our Founding Fathers actually felt about their Creator and their Faith:
Benjamin Franklin – Signer of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence
[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
(Source: Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore and Mason, 1840), Vol. X, p. 297, April 17, 1787. )
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that “except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.
(Source: James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. I, pp. 450-452, June 28, 1787.)
Thomas Jefferson – Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Third President of the United States
Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains rather than do an immoral act. And never suppose that in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable thing, however slightly so it may appear to you. Whenever you are to do a thing, though it can never be known but to yourself, ask yourself how you would act were all the world looking at you, and act accordingly. Encourage all your virtuous dispositions, and exercise them whenever an opportunity arises, being assured that they will gain strength by exercise, as a limb of the body does, and that exercise will make them habitual. From the practice of the purest virtue, you may be assured you will derive the most sublime comforts in every moment of life, and in the moment of death.
(Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1903), Vol. 5, pp. 82-83, in a letter to his nephew Peter Carr on August 19, 1785.)
The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of mankind.
(Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XV, p. 383.)
I concur with the author in considering the moral precepts of Jesus as more pure, correct, and sublime than those of ancient philosophers.
(Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. X, pp. 376-377. In a letter to Edward Dowse on April 19, 1803.)
I chose these two Founding Fathers because they are the subject of a lot of Progressive lies. Lies that apparently a bunch of posters on Conservative websites have bought into. Lies that the Progressives have planted in our country’s classrooms for years, designed to corrupt young impressionable minds.
These lies have led to a tyranny of the minority. Average Americans’ lives are being affected, changed, and restricted by a minority in control of us who are making decisions based on a political/social/cutural ideology, embraced by a mere 18 % of America’s population, according to a gallup.com poll of likely voters released shortly before the transformative Midterm Elections.
The Midterms were indeed transformative. This Congress will soon be assigned to the dustbin of history. They’ve left behind a heritage of an arrogant tone-deafness which has produced nothing but unwanted legislation harmful to the future of America.
As disappointed as I was with the reactions of Conservative websites, their posters, and, even Fox News yesterday, I still have hope and strength, for I have staked my claim upon that same immovable Rock that America was founded upon.
Today, Dinghy Harry Reid plans to lead his Senatorial minions in a procedural vote on a bill which would end the Pentagon’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. If passed, it would be a huge victory for President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), the Far Left, and the strident Homosexual Activist Lobby.
If at least 60 senators vote to advance the bill, the repeal, which passed the House this week, could become a law by late afternoon.
This was one of Obama’s campaign promises that he made during his campaign in 2008. The Dems, the Nutroots, and the Homosexual Activists Lobby are pushing hard to get this done before the new Congress comes in and their chance for getting this social experiment passed diminishes to that of a snowball in July.
Advocates have been pushing hard to get this passed, even to the point of a Homosexual Activist Group vowing to sit in silent protest in the Senate gallery until the repeal is passed.
Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said:
We simply cannot let the clock run out and lose this historic opportunity.
If DADT is repealed, it would mean that gays could publicly acknowledge their sexual orientation in our Armed Forces without fear of being kicked out.
If the bill passes, and with this bunch it looks like it will, the president, the defense secretary, and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,are required to certify to Congress that lifting the ban won’t hurt troops’ ability to fight. Once they make the certification, 60 days must pass before any changes go into effect.
The House gave its approval to this social experiment earlier in the week by a 250-174 vote.
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), thinks that now is not the time to be experimenting with our Best and Brightest:
We send these young people into combat. We think they’re mature enough to fight and die. I think they’re mature enough to make a judgment on who they want to serve with and the impact on their battle effectiveness.
The administration’s push for the repeal of DADT was facilitated by a Pentagon study (Who runs the Pentagon?) that claimed that gays could serve openly without any effect on our troops in combat. The study by the Pentagon under the Obama Administration claims that two-thirds of troops predicted little impact if the law is repealed.
Of course, Obama’s employees,the Pentagon’s top leadership, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff backed the findings of the study.
Are the findings by this administration’s Pentagon politically manipulated? You betcha.
Nowhere in the Pentagon’s 103-question survey about gays in the military did troops get an opportunity to offer a direct opinion on the underlying issue: Do you want to see “don’t ask, don’t tell” repealed?
In the article, also posted at navytimes.com, it is reported that Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., asked a very good question at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing:
Were you troubled at the answer we might have received, if we had simply asked them, in addition to all the other questions. … ‘Do you think the law should be changed?’
The chiefs of the Army and Marine Corps told Congress that a repeal could seriously affect troops if the law is overturned when troops are still fighting in Afghanistan.
Gen. James Amos, the head of the Marine Corps, has become the most outspoken opponent and claims letting gay troops serve openly could cost lives.
We asked for their opinions, and they gave them to us. Their message to me is that the potential exists for disruption to the successful execution of our current combat mission should repeal be implemented at this time.
Obama’s employees, Gates and Mullen, dismissed the fears of Gen. Amos. They stand by the Obama Pentagon’s claim that 92 percent of troops who believe they have served with a gay person saw no impact on their units’ morale or effectiveness.
What they didn’t talk about is the fact that, according to the study by Obama’s Pentagon, 23 percent of Marines said that they would quit if DADT is repealed and another 15 percent said that they would consider leaving the Corps sooner.
Why is it that Liberals view our Best and Brightest as nothing but a collection of lab rats, to be experimented on as the subjects of social engineering? It’s bad enough that politicians have subjected our nation’s warriors to the whims of political expediency in the past, or, simply used them as cannon fodder.
But, to possibly undermine the effectiveness of the world’s greatest fighting force, simply to appease the wishes of a small Activist group, consisting of a small percentage of a larger group of still only 5 % of the U.S. population, or to appease an uncertain percentage of the 18% of Americans who self-identify as Liberal, is an act of placing politics and ideology over the safety of Americans to fulfill a campaign promise.
Gay men and women are currently serving now, subject to the same rules and discipline, the same as any other member of our Armed Forces. And may God bless them for it.
This is not a “Civil Rights” issue. This is another “frog in the pot of boiling water” moment brought by those intent on rebuilding our nation’s foundation on shifting sands.
Last night at 11 p.m. Central, the House of Representatives passed the bill calling for the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts which would keep in place the tax cuts for families at every income level, renew jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed for 13 months, and enact a new one-year cut in Social Security taxes that would benefit nearly every worker who earns a wage.
An attempt by some of the Democrats to pass a higher Estate Tax went all for naught. The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
However, some of the Dems were still whining, like outgoing House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.):
There probably is nobody on this floor who likes this bill. The judgment is, is it better than doing nothing? Some of the business groups believe it will help. I hope they’re right.
Crybaby.
Some more good news this morning, is that Dinghy Harry Reid has given up on Porkulus II – The Omnibus Bill, a 1,924-page monstrosity saturated with homestate earmarks. Dinghy Harry and the Dems scrapped the $1.3 trillion bill Republicans who had been considering jumping on the gravy train, thought better of it.
Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell led the charge against the pork-laden bill, saying that it was “unbelievable” that the Dems would try to muscle through something like this in just a few days legislation that usually takes months to debate.
Not unbelievable at all, Mitch.
Instead, McConnell has offered a one-page bill to prevent a government shutdown on Saturday.
According to the Senate Minority Leader, Congress should wait and pass a less costly bill next year, after the Republicans elected during the Midterm Elections take their seats.
Dinghy Harry says that he will work with McConnell on McConnell’s proposed continuing resolution.
The one page resolution would fund the government until February 18th, 2011.
Give yourselves a round of applause, Americans. You caused this!
A mere 35 percent of American voters think that President Barack Hussein Obama (peace be upon him) Obama deserves to be re-elected. 53 percent of Americans believe that the country would be better off with someone else besides ol’ Scooter at the helm of the Ship of State.
67 percent of Dems want Obama to have a 2nd term. (God forbid.) 84 percent of Republicans and 50 percent of Independents want him to be one and done.
Surprisingly, 20 percent of his own political party think America would be better off with someone else besides Scooter as president.
Only 29 percent of voters think that Obama will be re-elected. This is down from 44 percent who thought that he would be, just a year ago. 64 percent don’t think Obama will win another term. That’s an increase from 46 percent in December 2009.
Only 40 percent of Americans approve of the job Obama is doing. 51 percent of us think he stinks on ice.
By the way, only 75 percent of Dems still approve of Obama, while only 70 person of Americans who identify themselves as Liberal, approve of him.
These new ratings are Obama’s lowest ever in a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll.
Evidently. in the case of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), familiarity breeds contempt.
The 2010 election was held on Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2010. After sweeping victories, Republicans will control 243 seats in the House of Representatives in the 112th Congress. In the Senate, the Democratic will barely retain their majority, 53-46.
The Democrats know this, all too well. Despite their public denials about what the outcome of the Midterms means, privately, they’re sweating worse than Kathy Griffin on a USO tour.
Their false bravado is turning out to be nothing but a bunch of hot air. (Not to be confused with my favorite Conservative website.) Their grand scheme for cramming a bunch of liberal, socialist, social-engineering, pork-laden, useless legislation that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not want, down our collective throats, is falling apart faster than a Charlie Sheen marriage.
You did it, Americans. You are responsible. The sleeping giant, also known as the average American, woke up and flexed his muscles.
Conservative Americans participating in the Tea Party movement, along with Americans speaking out at Townhalls, and on Conservative Talk Radio, led to a historic Midterm Election that has made this bunch of previously tone-deaf professional politicians up in the Beltway think twice before abusing the people than can fire them.
Last night, after The Omnibus Bill failed, the ol’ Maverick, Sen. John McCain (R – AZ) and the newest Senator Mark Kirk, the Republican who won Obama’s seat in Illinois, thanked the American people and had a little fun at the Dems’ expense:
The Republicans were true to their word, this time. They stood against the earmark-laden bill. They know, as well as the Dems, that the American people are fed up. The results of the Midterm Elections and Congress’ 13 percent approval rate, as reported on gallup.com prove that.
These public servants now understand that they serve at the whim of the American public. And that’s a good thing.
Waiting until the ninth hour, before the guillotine known as the Midterm Elections severely cramps the plans of the New Aristocracy, Sir Harry Reid the Dinghy has scheduled a Senate vote for this Saturday on the 1.1 trillion dollar earmark-laden Omnibus Bill. Funding for the Federal Government and all of its bureaucracy will expire Saturday if nothing is done.
The Democrats have the overwhelming majority of earmarks within the bill. However, Republicans are not entirely blameless, as Cornyn and Thune, along with others, have contributed earmarks to this monstrosity. Even worse, outgoing RINOs such as Bob Bennett have said that they will vote for the Omnibus Bill.
Bitter, Bob?
Both House and Senate Republicans want Congress to extend last year’s budget only for a few months. That would allow them to try to enact the deep spending cuts they have promised.
While the Dems are trying to cram this spending bill down our throats, the deal allowing for an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts is still waiting for passage by the House. The Senate has already passed the $853 billion legislation by an overwhelming 81-19 margin.
Barack Hussein Obama the First has told members of Congress that failure to pass the tax-cut legislation could result in the end of his presidency, according to Rep. Peter DeFazio (Ore.).
God willing.
He told CNN’s Elliot Spitzer, otherwise know as Client #9:
The White House is putting on tremendous pressure, making phone calls, the president is making phone calls saying this is the end of his presidency if he doesn’t get this bad deal.
White House spokesman Tony Vietor said Unh-Unh. No, he di’nt:
The president hasn’t said anything remotely like that and has never spoken with Mr. DeFazio about the issue.
Obama reportedly told Democrats the very same thing last year in order to get them to pass Obamacare without the public option.
According to the experts, the likelihood of the deal failing is very low at this point.
DeFazio thinks Scooter’s wrong about the possibility of a second term:
I don’t feel that way — I think this is potentially the end of his possibility of being reelected if he gets this deal.
Also on the Democrats’ agenda between now and Saturday is the controversial Defense Bill, the START Treaty.
Sir Harry Reid the Dinghy of the fiefdom of Nevada said yesterday:
We’ll see how things go with this treaty, but it’s clear — I have spoken on many occasions with the Republican leader — we’re going to be in session this Sunday. There is work to do.
Translation: I made a lot of promises to the Labor Unions and others in order to get re-elected. I’m dead meat if I don’t get something done.
Reid also wants to try to hold a vote on the House-passed version of the DREAM Act, which is nothing more than an amnesty bill, designed to manufacture new Democrat voters.
We hope that we can complete what we have to do here a day or two after Saturday. When we complete the things that I have just mentioned, we’re going to have to have a vote on the DREAM Act.
Reid has also threatened to make the Senate return to Washington between Christmas and Jan. 4 to continue the Democrats unwanted and self-serving legislative agenda.
Is it any wonder that gallup.com has reported the following?
Americans’ assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.
From the beginning of the 2008 Presidential campaign when Democrat Candidate Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) said this:
…it has been quite apparent that he views himself as some sort of aristocrat. Along with his fellow aristocrats, Sir Harry Reid the Dinghy and Dame Nancy Pelosi the Ditzy, they have made a science of ignoring the wishes of the majority of the American people and passing unwanted self-serving legislation, designed to benefit no one but the special interest groups to whom they owe their present political positions.
The 2010 Midterm Elections was, in fact, a revolution. It was a groundswell effort that took the day. The Tea Party movement accomplished what the Beltway Elite Republicans could not. Average Americans, outraged by being treated like peasants by this imperious new aristocracy, rose up, not with pitchforks and torches, but with words and deeds. We voted the rascals out.
So, before this new aristocracy has to exist within the restraints put upon them by the people that they are supposed to be serving, they are trying to cram everything they can through the legislative pipeline, in a desperate attempt to usurp the will of the American people.
As a friend said to me last night, all this is accomplishing is to make the Democrats look foolish.
The problem for the Democrats and any Vichy Republicans that may aid them in their nefarious plans, is the fact that the sleeping giant that exercised his wrath on November 2nd is still awake…and November 2012 is looming.
Harry Reid and his collection of Daycare rejects, known as the Senate Democrats, yesterday released a 1,900 page, $1.1 trillion budget Omnibus bill proposal. Mitch McConnell and Republican leaders are opposed to the measure due to its size, cost and the nonexistent time for debate.
The Senate Minority Leader said he would rather pass a short-term spending patch to fund the government instead of jamming through the omnibus bill before Christmas. Although there had been some bi-partisan co-operation in drafting the bill, Tuesday was the first time that most policymakers saw the finished product.
Dinghy Leader Harry Reid said yesterday that he wants it passed before the next Congress begins on Jan. 5.
I’ll bet he does. Coward.
McConnell compared the effort by Senate Democrats to pass the bill over the next few weeks to the underhanded garbage used to get the health care bill on the Senate floor on Christmas Eve last year. He called for a Continuing Resolution that will fund the government until February in order to allow more time to actually find out what is in this enormous omnibus spending bill next year.
Anybody out there feeling a sense of Deja Vu? Who could forget Obamacare? Is under the cover of darkness the only way the Democrats can hope to complete their nefarious plans? You betcha.
The Senate Minority Leader feels the same way:
Where we are is eerily reminiscent of last year. It was December. There was either snow on the ground or snow was on the way. And all of a sudden we had, in that case a 2,700 page bill that no one had seen, and we were trying to jam it through the Senate. Fast forward a year. It’s cold outside. Snow is on the way. And we have another, in this case, almost 2,000 page bill that no one has seen, at least on my side of the aisle.
An OMNIBUS BILL packages together several measures into one or combines diverse subjects into a single bill. Examples are reconciliation bills, combined appropriations bills, and private relief and claims bills.
An annual event, the omnibus bill supposedly provides funding for all parts of the federal budget. If short-term measures to fund the government aren’t passed, the government could shutdown.
McConnell says so what?
This bill should not go forward. It’s completely and totally inappropriate to wrap all of this up into a 2,000 bill and try to pass this a week before Christmas.
The usual Senate RINOs are claiming to support the bill.
Incoming House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio wants the Senate Democrats to stand down:
This bill represents exactly what the American people have rejected: more spending, more earmarks, and more big government. Republicans strongly oppose this last-ditch spending spree, a smack in the face to taxpayers at a time when we’re borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend. Instead of making reckless spending decisions in the waning days of the lame-duck session, Senate Democrats should stand down so we can get to work on cleaning up Washington’s fiscal mess.
As reported on drudgereport.com, Sen. John McCain stood on the Senate floor and blew the whistle on the Dems . He said:
In the short time I’ve had to review this massive piece of legislation – I’ve identified approximately 6,488 earmarks totaling nearly $8.3 billion. Here is a small sample:
$277,000 for potato pest management in Wisconsin
$246,000 for bovine tuberculosis in Michigan and Minnesota
$522,000 for cranberry and blueberry disease and breeding in New Jersey
$500,000 for oyster safety in Florida
$349,000 for swine waste management in North Carolina
$413,000 for peanut research in Alabama
$247,000 for virus free wine grapes in Washington
$208,000 beaver management in North Carolina
$94,000 for blackbird management in Louisiana
$165,000 for maple syrup research in Vermont
$235,000 for noxious weed management in Nevada
$100,000 for the Edgar Allen Poe Cottage Visitor’s Center in New York
$300,000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society in Hawaii
$400,000 for solar parking canopies and plug-in electric stations in Kansas
Additionally, the bill earmarks $727,000 to compensate ranchers in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan whenever endangered wolves eat their cattle. As my colleagues know, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Gray Wolf program is under intense scrutiny for wasting millions of taxpayer dollars every year to ‘recover’ endangered wolves that are now overpopulating the West and Midwest. My State of Arizona has a similar wolf program but ranchers in my state aren’t getting $727,000 in this bill.
It’s nice to see ol’ Maverick man up and tell it like it is.
There needs to be more of this from the Republican Senators in regards to this Christmas president that the Cowardly Dems seem determined to give to themselves, regardless of how the country feels about it.
The Democratic Party, from Obama on down, seem to have embraced denial, as to what exactly happened on November 2nd, 2011. Somehow,using their own unique pretzel logic, they have intentionally misconstrued the Midterm results to mean that Americans want them to double down on their Progressive Schemes. What’s equally as bad, is the reaction of the Beltway Elite Republicans, who see the election as an affirmation to continue their backroom dealing.
To those in Washington who think that the results of the Midterms mean that you can continue ignoring the wishes of the American people, a word of warning: I hope y’all have a trade you can fall back on after November 2012. Politics as usual just ain’t gonna cut it.
On Thursday, October 21st, 2010, a reporter with CNS asked Nancy Pelosi about the Constitutionality of Obamacare’s individual mandate requiring all Americans to buy health insurance or face a modest fine. Here’s the audio of her reply:
Even if San Fran Nan thought that the question of the individual mandate’s constitutionality was a joke, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia, sure didn’t.
Judge Hudson ruled yesterday that the mandate requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance in President Barack Hussein Obama’s sweeping socialization of the American Healthcare System goes beyond Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce. Hudson took out the mandate from the rest of the legislation, which is set to become effective in 2014.
In his ruling, Hudson said:
At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance — or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage — it’s about an individual’s right to choose to participate.
The ruling is the first loss for the Obama adminstration in a series of challenges to the law scheduled for federal courts in Virginia, Michigan and Florida, where 20states have joined an effort to have the statute thrown out.
According to Constitutional scholars, unless Congress changes the law, its fate will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The suit against the Obama Administration was brought by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. His office has already talked to Justice Department attorneys about bypassing the appeals court and going straight to the SCOTUS. The Justice Department had no comment.
I’ll bet.
Cuccinelli said:
This is only round one. This lawsuit is not about health-care, it’s about liberty.
Incoming House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) agrees with Cucinelli:
Today’s ruling is a clear affirmation that President Obama’s health care law is unconstitutional. The efforts of Governor McDonnell and Attorney General Cuccinelli have raised legitimate concerns and ensured that the people of the Commonwealth will have their rights protected against this unconstitutional law. Ultimately, we must ensure that no American will be forced by the federal government to purchase health insurance they may not need, want, or be able to afford.
To ensure an expedited process moving forward, I call on President Obama and Attorney General Holder to join Attorney General Cuccinelli in requesting that this case be sent directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. In this challenging environment, we must not burden our states, employers, and families with the costs and uncertainty created by this unconstitutional law, and we must take all steps to resolve this issue immediately.
Cantor has also promised that the new House will pass “a clean repeal of ObamaCare” once the Republicans take over in January.
In a 42-page opinion, Hudson wrote that the
…unchecked expansion of congressional power represented by the insurance requirement would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers. No Supreme Court decision has authorized Congress to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market.
White House Press Secretary Baghdad Bob Gibbs said at the daily press briefing that the administration still believes the legislation is constitutional.
I’m shocked.
Gibbs said:
One hundred and fifteen miles away, a different judge in a different district rendered a different decision.
Gibbs was citing a Nov. 30 ruling by Clinton-appointed U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, in Lynchburg, Virginia. He sided with the Obama administration in a lawsuit brought by Liberty University and five individuals. U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh in Michigan, another Clinton appointee, also sided with the government.
According to Gibbs:
Our belief is that when all the legal wrangling is done, this is something that will be upheld.
…Regardless of how the majority of Americans feel about this horrible legislation.
According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released yesterday, the majority of Americans want nothing to do with Obamacare.
52 percent of those surveyed oppose Obamacare, 43 percent are for it. 86 percent of Republicans are against the legislation; 67 percent of Democrats support it. Independents divide down the middle, with 47 percent in favor and the same number opposed.
59 percent of those opposed to Obamacare want the law repealed. Only 38 percent want to “wait and see”. Additionally, those who want this Obamanation tossed out are split about evenly between putting the whole thing in the circular file (29 percent) and just tossing out parts of the law (30 percent).
We all remember when the soon-to-be former Speaker of the House laid this little gem on us:
Evidently, Judge Hudson and the American people have found out what’s in Obamacare…an attack on our Constitutional freedom. If you have any doubts, please reference November 2nd, 2010 for a clarification of America’s feelings on this issue.
‘Twas the day before the night before Christmas,
From Obamacare to Bailouts,
While we were sleeping,
The Sleeping Giant woke up,
The Midterms got here,
A strategy was formed,
Leave Grayson, Leave Harry,
But, with a New Year comes hope,
So, this Congress is over,
Kingsjester's Blog 