Welcome To The Era Of Ignorant Arrogance

As the Senate winds down with their plan to further destroy our economy with healthcare reform, they have thrown away any semblance of transparency or desire to actually reform healthcare. The pressure is turned up for every day that we get closer to Christmas. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid desires to pass any bill, whatever the cost, before Christmas to present to President Obama. All of this maneuvering is to enable the President to point to at least one accomplishment when he delivers his State of the Union speech in late January. After all it isn’t exactly a great accomplishment for the President to point to 10% unemployment, his historic spending deficits, or even the newly increased debt ceiling.

With just a week before Christmas, the final version of the 2000+-page bill has not even been released to the full Senate for them to read. The majority has rushed this bill to try to get it passed for not only the President’s own selfish reasons, but also because the longer this monstrosity of a bill sits out there, the less the American public supports it. As a matter of fact, there is less support among the public for this reform bill, than there was for Hillary-care back in the early 1990’s. The severe lack of support for this reform bill is more than likely the catalyst for Reid’s desire to keep this bill hidden until it is passed.

Even the amendment process is too politically charged for the majority to allow an amendment to be read aloud on the Senate floor. The admitted socialist from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, proposed an amendment to the bill that would supersede the entire reform bill and replace it with a socialist health care system. When Senator Cobourn of Oklahoma asked that the clerk on the floor read the 767-page amendment, Sanders came down to the Senate to break Senate rules and end the reading and remove the amendment. The break in rules came when Sanders removed his amendment and ended the reading. The problem is that once the bill reading had started, only unanimous consent can end the reading.

It is a rare moment when I praise Senator Olympia Snowe, but I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with a recent statement that she made. “I don’t see anything magical about the Christmas deadline if this bill is going to become law in 2014.” Her words ring very true. What is the rush to pass this disastrous bill if none of the reforms actually take effect until 2014, conveniently after the 2012 elections? Of course the urgency of the matter has become the party line for all Congressman who have supported it. My own embarrassment of a Representative, Dutch Ruppersberger, explained in his form letter reply to my query about his vote that the urgency of the matter played a very large role in his decision to vote for it. I suppose that when a bureaucrat sees his political career coming to an end, his urgency may be a bit skewed. I believe it is time to end the era of ignorant arrogance.

If Democrats Would Put This Much Effort Into WINNING The War..

…we would have driven Al-Qaeda from Iraq long ago.

“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has threatened to keep the Senate awake all night Tuesday to protest GOP blocking tactics on moves to compel U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq.”

An all-nighter in the Senate? Reid prepares rollaway beds Update: GOP senators “happy to stay and debate”

From the mouth of Harry Reid, “If Republicans do not allow a vote on Levin/Reed today or tomorrow, we will work straight through the night on Tuesday. The American people deserve an open and honest debate on this war, and they deserve an up or down vote on this amendment to end it.”

Someone should tell this idiot that there was a debate. There was an up and down vote. This was done when you authorized the war. Now your duty is to help win.

If you spent more time encouraging our troops and helping the President and less time following the propaganda fed to you by Al-Qaeda, maybe we could get this thing won and our guys could come home to their families.

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi Can See the Future!!!!

Now I know why the democrats took back Congress. Their two brave leaders can see the future!!

This is great news.

I know you are confused, so I will explain.

June 13, 2007. Nancy and Harry sent a letter to President Bush explaining to him that the surge in Iraq was a failure.
"As many had forseen, the escalation has failed to produce the intended results," the two leaders wrote.
"The increase in US forces has had little impact in curbing the violence or fostering political reconciliation.
"It has not enhanced Americas national security. The unsettling reality is that instances of violence against Iraqis remain high and attacks on US forces have increased.
"In fact, the last two months of the war were the deadliest to date for US troops."

Somehow, these two great leaders managed to predict the outcome of a surge that HAD NOT EVEN BEGUN.

I know, you are still confused. I will now waste a huge amount of time by directing your attention to some Lt. General Raymond Odierno, Multi-National Forces, Iraq. Again, this is a huge waste because as we all know, the generals in Iraq have no freaking clue about what is going on in that country. Pat Dollard posted a video of an interview Lt. Gen. Odierno gave to CNN. Be warned, this idiot general tries to give the impression that US troops are actually winning in Iraq, so his word doesn't mean much. As we all know, the war is lost. Harry Reid predicted this loss long ago and he knows lots more about the Iraq war than those dumb people who are actually fighting in it.

This idiot tells us in the CNN interview that the surge really began June 15th. This means that Harry and Nancy were able to declare the new strategy to be a complete failure a full two days before it began. This is amazing. It is good to know that we have these two people running our country who can tell us that a strategy that has not yet been used is already failing.

I plan on contacting my own elected officials tomorrow to get some stock market predictions.

Harry Reid Tanks With Public- Approval Ratings In Teens!

"The War Is Lost... So is my approval rating."

Time for a Recall??????

Gateway Pundit: Harry Reid Tanks With Public- Approval Ratings In Teens!

And the Winner Is...

By The New Pundit
According to John Hawkins of rightwingnews.com, the phone calls and petitions against the shamnesty bill may be having an influence.

"I asked my source if his boss has been hearing from his constituents on this bill and what the for and against ratio was. He said that they have received thousands and thousands of calls and the ratio was something like 95%-98% against the bill."

According to the same article, it looks like part of the reason this bill wont make it is Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina. I am thinking of moving there just to vote for him next time he is due.

Apparently, DeMint led the charge to add amendments to the bill that would require border security be in place before shamnesty is allowed and would require illegal aliens to have private health insurance in place before they can receive a Z visa. These two amendments posed a problem for Reid and others, and for a very obvious reason. They make too much sense. These amendments would be completely unfair to the people who have broken the law by sneaking across the border and using fake identification to take low-skilled jobs away from our current welfare recipients. They would be really fair to the hard working people who are legal citizens of this country, but as we all know, these people and their opinions are being left out of the entire process by the shamnesty supporters.

Reid and company did not want these amendments to be discussed or voted upon because they would put a huge strain on the charge to destroy our country. They would basically make the heart of the bill completely worthless because the point of this bill is to allow shamnesty to a bunch of criminals without requiring them to do much of anything in return. All of this led to a whole mess of D.C. insanity and basically stalled the bill altogether and may actually kill it, God-willing.

In the meantime, Jim DeMint is the winner of a brand new award. He is the recipient of the "Coolest Person In Congress At The Moment" award.

Republican Backstabbing And Political Suicide

by Troy Stouffer

I am an opinionated conservative. Because I have strong opinions and I am not afraid to voice my opinion, I have developed a thick skin for name calling and personal attacks. I am not unique in that respect. Many of my friends on the opposite end of the political spectrum have become accustomed to the vitriolic attacks on their beliefs. Most of us that enjoy the political process realize that this is all part of the game, but normally the attacks come from the other party.

This latest feeble attempt at immigration reform has brought out some of the worst attacks from the leaders of the Republican party. In the past couple of weeks, anyone who is opposed to the bill has been called xenophobic, bigoted, racist, unpatriotic, and had our intelligence questioned. Linda Chavez wrote an article recently where she equated the opposition to the bill to racism and hatred for anyone from “south of the border”. When pressed on the issue, Chavez admitted that a minority of the opposition, roughly 10%, is made up of the xenophobes.

The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal recently released some audio of one of their editorial meetings. Their condescension for the conservatives that were opposed to the bill was loud and obnoxious. I am the first to admit that I am not a scholar or an intellectual. I do not have a Master’s degree or even a Bachelor’s degree. I think the only time I am the smartest person in the room, is when I am alone. Even though I am intellectually challenged, I can see that this is bad legislation. One aspect stands out though, the “Intellectuals” have been working on reforming immigration for over 40 years and not resolved the problem. Maybe it is time we listen to those of us who are the uninformed and less intelligent than the political elite.

Not all of the politicians in Washington D.C. have succumbed to the political pressure from their parties to back this bill. From the start of this debate over 2 weeks ago, the supporters of the bill warned that any changes to the bill would cause the legislation to be ineffective. Many proposals have been blocked by the once staunch supporters of the reform. One amendment that was defeated was to block the legal status of those illegal immigrants who have been ordered to be deported by a judge, but then failed to appear in court.

The Democrats are not without blame on this reform bill. Senator Edward Kennedy was a driving force in the writing of this bill. Kennedy has been a key player on every major immigration reform package since his political career began over 40 years ago. I have to ask the question, if Teddy has not been able to fix this problem in 40 years of trying the same tactics, why does he believe this will be any different? Can anyone tell me a simple definition of insanity? For my “intellectual” readers, doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently said that if this bill fails it will be seen as a failure for President Bush. I agree that it will be seen as a failure for Bush, but it should also be seen as a failure for Reid, McCain, Kennedy, and any other politician that backed this bill. They should also be held accountable if the bill passes as it is written now. Reid and the Democrats could not even muster the necessary 60 votes to end debate on Thursday and bring the measure to a full vote. They only managed to get 33 votes to end the debate. Hardly close to the slim majority that the Democrats hold in the Senate.

I am usually not prone to political predictions, but in this case I will go out on a limb and make a few predictions. If this bill passes as it is written now, the Republicans will lose more seats in both houses of Congress and have zero chance of a Republican candidate winning the White House in 2008. The conservatives will not suddenly vote for the Democrats. They will back challengers to the incumbents in the primaries and will stay home on election day rather than vote for any candidate that had a hand in passing this legislation into law. One other point that has conservatives up in arms is the wall to wall assault by the administration in support of this bill. Where has this energy been on other issues for which the conservative base was screaming?

Bush's Approval Rating at 33%, Congress 29%

For the past several months we have listened to the breathless reports of the news media of the President’s low approval ratings. Bush’s numbers as of Tuesday of this week are at a dismal 33% according to a recent Gallup poll. His numbers have hovered between the 30% to 40% range for the past year or so. Bush’s problem is obvious, the war in Iraq. One thing missing from the news reports about Bush’s approval numbers is the approval rating of the Congress.

In the same Gallup poll, the Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi run Congress have lower approval numbers than the President does. A staggering 29% of Americans believe that Congress is doing a good job. We have to look at the numbers a little differently than we look at the President’s. Control of both houses of Congress was handed over to the Democrats in January of this year. In January the numbers jumped from 21% before the takeover to 35% after Nancy Pelosi became the first woman Speaker of the House. In the four months that the Democrats have run the legislative branch of our government, the independent and Democratic voters have lost faith in the ability of the Democrats to get the job done.

I believe that many in the Democratic party are upset that their leaders have not ended all funding for the war, and they have not brought impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush. The independent voters are upset because they voted for a change in Washington, and they see that the Democrats are not fulfilling their promises of fiscal responsibility.

In the four months since the changeover, what major legislation has been passed? What has been accomplished? They passed a supplemental war funding bill that was laden with pork and a timetable for surrender in Iraq. They knew that the bill would never be signed by the President, but they passed it anyway to appease their far left wing supporters.

This week the House was working on another supplemental funding bill, also loaded with pork and a surrender date, and Speaker Pelosi made speeches about needing to work on a bipartisan resolution to the stalemate. I have noticed that whenever any politician speaks of bipartisanship, they really mean that the opposition needs to agree with all of my points. The Senate rejected their version of the bill with bipartisan support against the bill. I guess that isn’t the type of bipartisanship the Ms. Pelosi and Harry Reid were looking for.

The Congress and the administration were able to work on a bipartisan bill this week. The new and improved immigration bill that both the Congress and the administration worked on all week does have bipartisan support, but only when it comes to the politicians. Illegal immigration is one issue that the majority of the voting public agrees on. Most Americans want to see something significant done about the illegal immigration problem, but both political parties want some form of amnesty and are afraid to do anything about securing our borders.
I believe that both Congress and the administration would see a significant jump in their numbers if they stopped patronizing to a perceived voting block of people and actually accomplished something on illegal immigration and securing our borders. The Congress would see a change in their numbers if they stopped their sophomoric attempts at ending the war and just passed something definitive. If they believe that we have lost the war, as Harry Reid said a few weeks ago, then they should pull all funding for the war and take an actual stand for something. Congressmen are voted into office to do what is best for their constituents and for the country. I believe it would be the wrong thing to do, but if it is what they believe is best than go ahead and do it.

We Win They Lose

Ken Calvert and the War Against Earmarks

There is a difference between the shady land deals of Harry Reid and the shady land deals of Ken Calvert. The difference is that conservatives are fighting Calvert. Erick Erickson, editor in chief of redstate.com is calling upon conservatives to have Calvert removed from the Appropriations Committee.
"The House Republican Leadership just does not get it and they will not take us seriously until we flex our muscle against them. We must fight the House GOP and we must fight today. Today, I declare war on the Republican Leadership of the United States House of Representatives. We must scalp one member. That member's name is Ken Calvert," Erick declares on his redstate blog. Michelle Malkin has done a good job of covering this story.

Erick is encouraging members of his blog to flood their lawmakers with phone calls every day compiling a list of those who vote for Calvert. He is currently claiming that many Republicans on the Hill support his efforts.

By now you are wondering what this is all about. Well, remember that wide spread story that was front page news for all those months about Harry Reid buying land, and then selling it years later for a massive profit AFTER securing federal earmarks that may have helped the property value? You remember that don't you? Cunningham is in prison for pretty much the same thing. It was all over, no wait; it actually wasn't all over the place. No one really heard much about it. Oh well. The point is that it happened and nothing was done about it. The other point is that this is what Calvert is being accused of doing, and it really looks as though he is guilty. I don't know that what he did was technically wrong, but it doesn't look good and it brings up a bigger point that I will get to in a minute.

In September 2006, Calvert was named one of the "20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress" in a report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. He was given this award for his use of earmarks for personal gain. Calvert claims that the earmarks were all used for his district, but the land deals he has engaged in have all been in or near his district. This looks suspicious whether he is guilty or not. A list of his deals can be found at answers.com.

I don't know if he has done anything illegal or technically unethical. But I don't like the way it looks and I don't like the answers he has given. I think that Erickson is doing all Republicans a favor by bringing this out in the open and I hope that Calvert is replaced in the next election. Now if Calvert were a democrat who was caught with a hundred grand in his freezer and the FBI had people admitting to bribing him, that would be one thing. But the republicans are getting tired of their representatives taking advantage of tax dollars.

And that brings us to the root cause of this evil – earmarks. In the last SOTU address, President Bush spoke out against earmarks, calling on Congress to cut them in half. "In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of the earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and the Senate; they're dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk.
You didn't vote them into law. I didn't sign them into law. Yet they are treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice.
So let us work together to reform the budget process, expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress, and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session."

Does anyone see a problem with federal tax dollars being spent in this manner? Earmarks are treated as law, yet there is no vote. And this is what Calvert has done. He dropped millions of your dollars into land in his district. He then made personal profits selling the land.

If earmarks receive no vote whatsoever, how are we to trust Congress to use them wisely? Short answer, we can't trust them. Earmarks are the face of much corruption in D.C. The lobbyist drops ten grand into the politician’s campaign; the politician returns the favor with earmarks that benefit the lobbyist. Can you say Jack Abramoff? And beyond lobbyists, we see that politicians are using earmarks to raise the value of their own properties.

The President was almost right to ask for earmarks to be cut in half. He was almost right to have the OMB set up a database of all earmarks for us to see. He would have been completely right to tell Congress to cut earmarks off all together. The absolute best we can expect from them is the constant appearance of impropriety.

This is one more thing that gives Congress too much power, corrupting power. And to use Erickson's line, we must flex our muscle against them. "If they refuse to hear that change is needed, we will wipe them out and replace them with new blood that recognizes that a corrupt party rejected by the voters will not be embraced again by the voters until the corruption is purged."