OBAMANOIA

Americans have been ignoring the sovereignty of their country for the last 50 years, at least. It took the threat of fascism, Obama, and the loss of their country to wake them up, hopefully not too late and hopefully enough Americans. Long may she wave......

If we stay educated and informed [this piece is one], we can save her and bring back our freedom of speech, our schools, and our jobs. Where have they gone? Victor Davis Hanson pours out his heart in this fabulous piece in PajamasMedia:


Obamanoia
by Victor Davis Hanson, October 21, 2009

Little Hope, Less Change

Consider: The 120,000 troops in “the surge is not working” Iraq are now complaining of ennui —while the White House is paralyzed over whether to send more troops to the new escalating front in Afghanistan. How odd the present perceptions: Bush’s bad optional war became good in the public mind, and Obama’s necessary good war became bad. (Careful study of the history of both countries, the existing challenges, and the topography might have suggested to candidate Obama to be careful about demonizing the surge while chest-thumping a war he never wished to finish. Did Obama really think he would be elected, hailed as the anti-war laureate, simply summon home the troops from the “quagmire” in Iraq, and then fly over to Kabul to do a Victory Column speech?).

The Russian gambit failed; Putin humiliated the Eastern Europeans and then rubbed it in by lecturing us about “hands off Iran.” The July threat to Iran of comply—or “face consequences” by September—morphed into September’s comply—or “face consequences by the October head-to-head meetings—which, in turn, morphed into October’s comply—or some day soon face consequences.

Sorta, Kinda, Maybe Diplomacy

Soon we will get everything on the official transcripts and websites scrubbed down to read: Guantanamo really will close on March 1, 2010; Iran must comply this time by June 1, 2010; all combat brigades will be out by March 2008, 2009, 2010; health care must pass by August, September, October, November.

Oil is climbing back over $80 a barrel; the dollar is falling against the Euro to 1.50. The annual deficit is already over $1.6 trillion and may go well over that. The tab for health care will hit right under $1 trillion. Unemployment may be headed over 10%. The people who voted for Obama were mad over Bush’s bailouts, unemployment, deficits, and supposed divisiveness. And?

They got greater bailouts, higher unemployment, larger deficits, and Chicago politics.

Please, please

Right now to save America we need some steady leadership that reassures businesses of lower taxes, less government spending, no new regulations, educational reform to improve the work force, and confident expansionary energy exploration and development. Instead, we get a prescription to terrify private enterprise: Mr. President, every time you besmirch someone as greedy, lying, and unduly rich, some business, somewhere, pulls in its horns.

Uncertainty Everywhere

Full recovery is uncertain, given (1) oil prices have been low and are now climbing, boosting the import tab higher and higher (what happened to candidate Obama’s promises of more drilling?); (2) interest rates are historically low, meaning the price of servicing the mega-deficits hasn’t hit yet; but they too will climb, further taxing the hocus-pocus borrowing; (3) so far higher taxes are just talk; but soon the income rates will climb at a time when many of the states have already increased their sales and income rates. Remember the promised end to the FICA caps on higher incomes; note the promised health care surcharge taxes. And keep in mind that 55% of those in the cross-hairs who make over $200,000 voted for Obama.

And You Get in Return?

I believe that even the soon-to-be murderously taxed upper brackets would patriotically hand over their money to a grasping government—IF it went to debt reduction.

But it won’t. Far worse. Millions will work from January to September to pay for Acorn-like subsidies, more NEA politicized grants, nationalized health care, canceling mortgage, credit card, and student loan debt of those who may well have been less than careful with their expenditures. In short, consider: the more you will be taxed, the more you will be demonized as deserving it, the more your money will be wasted, the more your country will borrow, the greater you country will become the world’s laughing stock debtor.

And that depressing fact is beginning to infuriate millions. If Obama needs a mop to clean up after Bush, someone will need a fleet of street sweepers for his financial detritus.

So I expect Obama’s ratings to dip well below 50%, and that will be something to fear, given his unfamiliarity with the notion that over 1 out 2 Americans thinks he is failing.

But imagine that you are a small business owner, and just consider—why expand now or rehire? since (a) I have no idea what the new taxes will be; (b) I have no idea about what all these new regulations, cap and trade, card check; etc will cost me; (c) I am beginning to think all this trash talk about bad doctors, insurance companies, the Chamber of Commerce, CEOs, the wealthy, etc. suggests this administration does not like me or what I do; (d) the government is everywhere: Ford now must compete against Government Motors; Banks against government-affiliated Citibank; Blue Cross against the public option; and so on. If I have a business, somewhere down the line there is going to be a government-run rival, sort of like your local can’t go broke PBS station in every avenue of commerce. Why insist on ensuring hustling employees when the rival, overpaid DMV-like work force can’t go broke whatever they do?

Meanwhile…

YouTube videos play 24/7 of White House Communications Director Anita Dunn—now that Van Jones yielded center stage—either idolizing the greatest mass murderer in civilization’s history or boasting about how Team Obama took the obsequious media to the cleaners. Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod—apparently worried that the public thinks this two-headed Cerebus is too nice and meek—swarm the talk shows to blame Fox News. That’s the equivalent of a Bush around 2007 whining about MSNBC not being a news organization and the meanness of a Chris Matthews is hurting the war in Iraq. Sending creepy people out to say creepy things does not make sense, when a hit network loves showing Americans how these creepy people say creepy things.

And the Problem?

Obama’s agenda polls less than 50% on almost every element. What keeps him viable is that the public still likes him and his family personally, and takes him at his unity/no blue state-no red state/can’t we all get along? 2008 rhetoric.

Don’t they get the obvious: In reaction to that Olympian, above-the-fray brand, what does Obama do? He sends out two of the most unlikable, mean-spirited attack hounds to go after a news organization in Nixonian fashion, which only erodes the precious image of a kinder, gentler Obama—right now the administration’s only asset.

One almost gets the feeling that Time, Newsweek, the NY Times, the LA Times, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, CNN, the Huffington Post, etc. are all not quite enough to balance right-wing talk radio and Fox News.

The problem is that (1) it is always harder to defend a president than criticize him (as the liberals can attest from their 8 years of demonizing Bush); (2) those in the right-wing media are more populist and grass-roots than those in the staid left-wing elite media establishment. So Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck can caricature Obama far more effectively than can a Rachel Madow or Brian Williams bow to him; (3) the traditional left’s homage to dissent, protest, free-wheeling media outbursts, demonstrations, and over-the-top commentary is now, to use a Nixon term, “inoperative.”

Somehow we went from revolutionary fervor to the boring Ministry of Truth in nine months.

Personally I found the left far more interesting when they were suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome than Obamophilia.

Bottom Line: Code Pink and Moveon.org have been Gergenized.

REPUBLICANS: USEFUL IDIOTS FOR OBAMA'S AGENDA

On her Facebook, Sarah Palin endorses Doug Hoffman in the New York-23 race for the Republican Congress seat. Things are really heating up, and it looks like a good time for some serious House cleaning. The Republicans backing Dede Scozzafava should be on the list to replace, as she endorses the Stimulus, government run healthcare, and card check. Those alone eliminate her as a conservative.

Erick Erickson writes a great piece, including how Obama is attempting to use this to split the GOP, in RedState:

Doug Hoffman for Congress here.


Shut Up
by Erick Erickson, October 22, 2009

By the time you read this, a lot of ink and air time will have been spent on this Politico article suggesting that the Republicans tremble when conservatives like Rush, Hannity, Beck, or even me says something.

It is disappointing to see people like Eric Cantor go on the record saying, “We need more voices.” In fact, what the GOP needs right now is leadership. Talk radio and places like RedState are filling a void because the GOP is behaving spectacularly crapulently. Eric Cantor wants to play nice with Steny Hoyer and go over to his place for tea and crumpets to compromise on health care. Pete Sessions and the NRCC are throwing their money down the rat hole that is the Scozzafava campaign. John Cornyn tries to shut out conservative hispanics in favor of squishy, but well tanned governors. The strategy is to be more like the Democrats. It is disappointing.

A question for those who want more voices — what should they be saying?

It is true the Republican brand still sucks. But “conservative” is becoming quite popular. The message of freedom and liberty still resonates. What the Republicans really fear is loss of control. They do not like that conservatives from outside the Beltway are more and more in the drivers’ seat.

But there is more to this story. This is something ignored by most people today. This story is, whether intended or not, a coordinated hit out of the White House. We know the Politico does this. It runs as full stories the hit jobs of the various parties.

And not only do we see the Politico running this as a hit job for the Democrats, but we see a few Republicans willing to go on record as useful idiots.

I have the hardest time believing this is anything less that a coordinated hit against the GOP in an effort to break their unity on health care.

Watch the time line.

It became obvious last week that despite Harry Reid’s story to the contrary, the Democrats did not have the votes for the doctors’ bailout. Conservative activists rallied and the GOP stayed united.

So yesterday, the Politico runs this first part of its two part series on how Obama intended to marginalize his critics.

Obama aides are using their powerful White House platform, combined with techniques honed in the 2008 campaign, to cast some of the most powerful adversaries as out of the mainstream and their criticism as unworthy of serious discussion.

Last night, playing right into this article, Obama takes the stage and says the GOP does as it is told and Democrats are independent operatives.

Then comes today and the second part, after Obama, via the Politico builds the initial ground work.

Some Republicans — the reasonable ones — think Rush, Hannity, Beck, etc. are not worth listening too. Cantor, who is having tea and crumpets with Hoyer is quoted. Sweet Lindsey who is snuggling up to the French Looking John Kerry. John McCain who is still bitter conservatives did not fall down and worship him like the Democrats did to Obama. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Also today, Harry Reid claims he has the votes for a public option.

This is all coordinated. Harry Reid does not have the votes. And Obama is now determined to split the GOP. The best way to do that is to play to their vanity — accuse the Republicans of being Rush Limbaugh’s boot lickers. How do they prove otherwise? They vote for the public option and prove they aren’t tools of tea party activists, talk radio guys, and RedState bloggers.

The added benefit here is that Obama distracts from the fact that he cannot hold Democrats together. They can be called “independent” while the GOP, with the Politico’s help, gets cast as trembling slaves afraid of their master.

I wonder how the Politico likes being used. More importantly, I wonder who the Republicans in today’s hit like being useful idiots for Obama’s agenda.

UPDATE: Todd Tiahrt Endorses Hoffman

SCOZZAFAVA CANDIDACY: NOT THE FAULT OF DC GOP

It's time to send a message to the Republican Party -- no more watered down conservative principles. What are they doing in New York nominating a left leaning faux Republican Scozzafava for Congress? And, yet she's been endorsed by the likes of Newt Gingrich and John Boehner, for their own shaky reasons.

Little known Doug Hoffman, a solid conservative, is running against her and he is gaining steam. The more known about Hoffman the better, because the vote is in only a couple of weeks. An excellent piece about this race in PajamasMedia:


Doug Hoffman for Congress here.


Scozzafava Candidacy: Not the Fault of DC GOP
If conservatives want good candidates to vote for, they must show up and do the work necessary to make a difference.
by Dan Riehl, October 22, 2009

I’ve taken some heat for posts I’ve written on Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava versus conservative Doug Hoffman in NY-23. My posts have been misinterpreted as supportive of Scozzafava, which they truly were not. Blame that on me, as the posts weren’t clear enough about the thought process going on behind the scenes. But that’s less important than the issue at hand. My conservative credentials are intact. But how conservatives win the current civil war within the GOP is important to me. We must build the party up and become strong, not simply tear things down because we disagree with them.

Scozzafava does not appear to be anyone for whom I would ever vote or actively support. Still, how the internal GOP battle plays out, including in NY-23, is very important to me. Call me an old Reagan man. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to defeat Scozzafava. But how we do it matters very much.

The GOP is not and has never been the conservative movement. The current battle should not be about decimation; it should be about control. Reagan, in his too often unheralded and underappreciated wisdom, knew that the key to victory was not in trying to leave or otherwise destroy the GOP, but in coming to dominate it democratically and with a reasonable hand. The Gipper’s wisdom may have been best evidenced in his promoting the “Eleventh Commandment” from the earliest days of his political campaigning:

The personal attacks against me during the primary finally became so heavy that the state Republican chairman, Gaylord Parkinson, postulated what he called the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. It’s a rule I followed during that campaign and have ever since.

Times may have changed, but smart tactics have not. Conservatives can, should, and will be elected for what they stand for and believe in. So long as they are elected for what they are not, the critical importance of conservative thought to continuing America’s wonderful existence will never become appreciated by the electorate at large. We must begin to trust and articulate our policies, beliefs, and ideas, more than we seek to diminish the other guy’s.

It needn’t be going soft. It’s simply good sales technique and is as simple as that.

When I listen to radio host Mark Levin talk about his old Reagan days, he doesn’t talk about the evils of liberalism or the tyranny of the state. Mostly he talks about going to work for Reagan, getting off his butt, and going out the door to do the time-consuming and often hard work of genuinely effective political campaigning. He talks about getting involved.

If grassroots conservatives have dropped the ball in some way, especially in the Northeast, it is that we haven’t done the hard work to take back the Republican Party from the ground up. To truly prevail we must do that.

It disappointed me to hear the Club for Growth’s Andy Roth blame RNC Chairman Michael Steele and the D.C. Republicans for giving us a Dede Scozzafava. He knows better than that, and he shouldn’t play that game simply to get his message across. Scozzafava got the nod based upon a state and local decision. It’s important for conservatives to understand how that came about.

It is not the D.C. GOP’s job to stab a state or local organization in the back, no matter what you may think. Money and support flow up and flow back down. A national political organization capable of winning elections can not afford to function any other way. Let’s stop playing games.

Why is the state GOP chairman, at least potentially, an old Nader guy at heart? Why did the local county chairmen think that Scozzafava would be a better candidate than Doug Hoffman might be? Obviously, New York conservatives simply didn’t show up when it mattered most, and over a long period of time at that. If they had, the state chairman would be a rock-solid conservative. The same is true for the county chairmen.

And until conservatives around the country begin showing up when the media lights aren’t glaring or the final battle over a candidate is already underway, we’re going to continue to see a lot more candidates like Dede Scozzafava.

Show up and do the work if you really want to make a difference. Otherwise, you might just as well shut up for all the good effect you’ll have influencing the political future of this great land. Perhaps it’s time for more conservatives to start paying back in that sense, instead of whining and yelling about why the GOP is not paying off. What, besides maybe a small donation and a lot of criticism, have you given the GOP lately? Get involved. In politics, that and nothing else is the critical difference between victory and defeat.

Dan Riehl is a former marketing professional in the technology industry turned blogger/new media consultant. He's based in Virginia, just off the D.C. Beltway.

A WHOLE NEW HEALTH CARE BALL GAME

A big victory for conservatives yesterday, but you had to look long and hard to find it. The New York Times reported it on their page A-25. Are they confused why they are losing money and subscribers?

This is going to be a long, hard fight but, finally conservatives have been given a ray of much needed hope. All the more reason why we cannot give up the fight. This is still a democracy, and there is still a lot of fight left in us.

The Heritage Foundation reports:


A Whole New Health Care Ball Game
October 22, 2009

You have to read all the way to page A-25 in today’s New York Times to learn about it, but the Senate took its first floor vote on Obamacare yesterday and the White House lost. Big. The NYT reports: “Democrats lost a big test vote on health care legislation on Wednesday as the Senate blocked action on a bill to increase Medicare payments to doctors at a cost of $247 billion over 10 years. The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, needed 60 votes to proceed. He won only 47. And he could not blame Republicans. A dozen Democrats and one independent crossed party lines and voted with Republicans on the 53 to 47 roll call.”

As we reported on Monday and Tuesday, yesterday’s “doc fix” vote was part of a White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel strategy to smooth passage of President Barack Obama’s $1 trillion-plus health care overhaul by transferring a quarter of its cost into a separate, and completely unpaid for, bill. This transparently dishonest shell game was too much for honest Democratic Senators like Evan Bayh (D-IN), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Ron Wyden (D-OR). Wyden told the NYT: “On the eve of a historic debate on health care, it’s essential to show a commitment to real reform,” which includes fiscal responsibility.

Yesterday’s vote marks a significant failure of the Left’s special interest approach to passing Obamacare. From the beginning, the White House thought that if it bought off all of the business interests involved (the American Medical Association, the drug industry, health insurers, hospitals, etc.) opposition to the plan would whither. In one sense, the plan worked. USA Today reports PhRMA, Pfizer, America’s Health Insurance Plans, and the Federation of American Hospitals have all ponied up millions of dollars for lobbying and television ads in support of Obamacare.

But all these special interest television ads failed to rid Americans of their common sense objections to Obamacare’s government takeover of health care. Gallup reports today that Americans now more than ever believe the costs their family pays for health care will get worse if Obamacare passes. And more Americans now believe that Obamacare will lower the quality of care they receive, reduce their health care coverage, and complicate the insurance company requirements they have to meet to get certain treatments covered.

Instead of the massive overhaul being pursued by the White House, a solid majority of Americans tell Gallup they want to see Congress move in the opposite direction. By 58% to 38%, Americans would generally prefer to see Congress deal with health care reform “on a gradual basis over several years” rather than “try to pass a comprehensive health care reform plan this year.” Bipartisan, fiscally responsible, reform such as equalizing the tax treatment of health insurance purchases, freeing customers to purchase health insurance across state lines, and allowing states more flexibility on Medicaid spending are readily doable. And that is what the people want.

LIBERTY MOVEMENT vs THE ESTABLISHMENT

It's difficult these days to weed out the left-leaning moderates in the Republican Party, but it has to be done. There are several November elections that will set the pace for the 2010 (re)elections, and cutting the fat off the bone is critical.

One key indication, take note of who is backing who. For instance, the 2010 senate race in Florida is Charlie Crist who supported the Stimulus and now government run healthcare, and Marco Rubio who stands for true conservative values. In Congress, the people backing Crist are John McCain, Connie Mack, Lindsey Graham, Lamar Alexander, John Cornyn, Mel Martinez, Vern Buchanan, and both Diaz-Balart. No surprise there.

A little known key November election is in New York's 23rd Congressional District with far left liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava, and a challenger, coming out of no where, Doug Hoffman. Like Rubio, Hoffman is a good old fashioned true conservative, and, as a rookie, needs every bit of our support. He is just the opposite of the elites in Washington DC, having never run for office in his life. He doesn't like what he sees happening, and like so many Americans, has committed his life to getting our country back on track.

And who's endorsing this faux Republican Scozzafava? Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, and the NRCC, for reasons you will see later. I would have expected it from Gingrich, but Boehner is alarming. Looks like the elites is a private club.

Doug Hoffman for Congress here.

Eric Odom from Tax Day Tea Party writes:


Liberty Movement vs The Establishment
by Eric Odom, October 22, 2009

EDIT: I’ll be covering the special election on a constant basis throughout the remainder of the race.

If you haven’t been watching the political brawl happening in New York’s 23rd Congressional District… you should be.

The race has all the qualities needed to make it highly entertaining to track as a political junkie. But more importantly, as so many others have mentioned, the race represents a clear message being sent to the RNC.

And the message is simple… the liberty movement is not going to tolerate liberal Republicans anymore.

So here’s the background on the race.

This is a special election in place for November of 2009 to replace former GOP Rep. John McHugh. The special congressional election is happening because McHugh accepted President Obama’s Army Secretary position.

My understanding is that the district was a safe bet for a fresh GOP win. Or, at least, it was until far left liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava got the nod over conservative Doug Hoffman. Add the fact that there is Democrat, Bill Owens, in the race (with a lot of outside help and influence) and you suddenly have a problem.

Michelle Malkin has a great rundown about Dede Scozzafava and her dirty political record.

Scozzafava is an abortion rights advocate who favors gay marriage. It would be one thing if Scozzafava balanced that social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. But as a state assemblywoman, she voted for massive tax increases, Democratic budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package — which every House Republican voted against.

More troubling, Scozzafava in past elections has embraced the ballot line of the Working Families Party — a socialist outfit whose political DNA is intertwined with scandal-ridden ACORN. ACORN and the WFP have shared office space in New York City, Arkansas and Illinois. ACORN head Bertha Lewis, a close Scozzafava friend and political supporter, wears a second hat as vice chairman of the WFP. The WFP has been listed in ACORN documents dating back to 2000 as an “affiliate.”

Not only did the beltway establishment ally itself with Scozzafava, they basically threw Hoffman under the bus. In fact, the NRCC began setting up an attack machine to combat Hoffman’s conservative credentials.

Many others have mentioned this, but as a national tea party organizer, I feel the need to stress the point even further. This special election in New York should be highlighted as one of the best examples to date of how the establishment doesn’t get the sentiment boiling thanks to the Tea Party Movement.

We’re now seeing some ugly true colors float to the top. Take Newt Gingrich, for example… remember when Newt Gingrich joined in with the Tea Party Movement and openly endorsed our website at TaxDayTeaParty.com?

Here’s the video.

How typical. So Newt Gingrich, a beltway politician who once championed the ideas that fueled the Tea party Movement, is now betraying the movement by endorsing liberal Republican Scozzafava as opposed to helping out the guy who stands for what is right.

Fantastic.

I wonder what most of the hundreds of thousands of tea party activists who received Newt’s emails back in April would think if they knew he had joined Daily KOS, Nancy Pelosi and others on the left to try and help elect a big government thug get elected to Congress?

Let’s get back to the race for a moment…

It didn’t take more than a week or so for Scozzafava to begin spiraling out of control. Doug Hoffman penned a piece for Michelle Malkin that explains the events as they began to unfold.

It looks like Dede Scozzafava was feeling good about her chances in mid August. But then Hoffman ran on his conservative credentials and Dede was caught flat footed.

As the campaign rolled into October, Scozzafava began plummeting in polls and support was bailing at every corner. After that it jumped from failing to downright bizarre.

Micheal Patrick Leahy, an original founder and one of the key national organizers behind the Tax Day Tea Party, posted the details of the latest Dede campaign blunder on TCOT Report.

The campaign to win the special election for the 23rd Congressional District in upstate New York just got a little bit weirder this morning, if that’s possible. Liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava, feeling the heat from the surge in the polls of Conservative Doug Hoffman, held a press conference this morning outside his Watertown headquarters to challenge him to a debate.

This bizarre behavior came on a day when her highly controverisal campaign manager, Matt Burns, sent out a flurry of press releases on a wide range of topics. The entire country is focused on this election, and Burns appears to be a man completely undisciplined and out of control.

This incident follows an even more bizarre event where cops were called on a reporter who simply asked Scozzafava a couple of questions.

All of this madness even provoked the Washington Times to call out Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, and the NRCC over their pitiful endorsement of Scozzafava.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, House Minority Leader John Boehner and the National Republican Congressional Committee are now in the position of endorsing thugocracy. Unless they withdraw their endorsements and financial support for left-wing Republican Dede Scozzafava, they will effectively condone a blatant, unwarranted and somewhat frightening attack on a free press.

Oh… and have a listen to this… Newt Gingrich continues to defend his endorsement.

The problem with Newt’s statement is two fold.

1) He seems to have missed what the Tea Party Movement is all about
2) He doesn’t get that Dede might be worse than the Democrat in Congress

Why would he not just work with the Hoffman campaign to get a true conservative elected?

It’s simple. Newt Gingrich chose Party over principle. Which is exactly the kind of thinking that has the potential to destroy this country.

It’s time to draw the line in the sand. It’s time for tea party activists within the liberty movement to refuse to tolerate fakes within the movement.

And more importantly on the short term, I think it’s time we make our voices heard and show our support for Doug Hoffman.

UPDATE: According to Wikipedia, Dede Scozzafava was chosen by the eleven Republican Party county chairs of the 23rd congressional district. A reader pointed this out and suggested we might consider looking into these county chairs to find out who they are. The beltway heads certainly deserve criticism, but let’s not forget the gatekeepers who caused this problem to begin with.

UPDATE: Even Michigan “conservative” Rep Thaddeus McCotter has now endorsed the liberal candidate. This just keeps getting worse.

Additional Note: Several readers have brought to my attention a speech by John McManus of the John Birch Society. The half hour video puts forth some revealing arguments against Newt Gingrich and his conservative credentials. I’m not suggesting we go after Newt Gingrich, but I do think we need to take a new look at many of our self proclaimed “conservative leaders” and begin questioning their real motives.

Links:
-Failure of the local GOP base
-The GOP’s New York Fiasco
-Fred Thompson says vote for principles, not party

It looks like there will be constant coverage over at Dump Dede and The Other McCain.

THE GRATING COMMUNICATOR: Ann Coulter's View on Media Madness

Oh that pointed finger, that 'holier that thou' demeanor, that pot calling the kettle black. It's good to know that the Keith Olbermanns, Chris Matthews, Rachel Madcows, Andrea Mitchells, Janeane Garofalos of the news media are all fair and balanced.

Goodness knows, they treated President Bush with the respect he deserved, and gave him time to settle into his stately position.

In her oh-so razor sharp wit, Ann Coulter writes another brilliant piece on this matter at World Net Daily, backed up [as usual] with fact, not p(h)luff:


The Grating Communicator
by Ann Coulter, October 21, 2009

The Obama administration has attacked Fox News in order to prevent government corruption stories broken on Fox from bleeding into the other media, which are all-consumed with daily updates on Levi Johnston's Playgirl spread and Carrie Prejean's breast implants.

That's understandable. But I think the administration should have picked someone other than David Axelrod to deliver the claim that Fox News is "not really news," inasmuch as Axelrod was behind the leak of scurrilous allegations in Jack Ryan's sealed divorce papers when he was running for a Senate seat against Obama. Talk about vicious personal gossip.

Now that Fox has been branded an untouchable, the teacher's-pet media are jubilant.

In Newsweek, Jacob Weisberg wrote a column saying liberals should refuse to appear on Fox News, pointedly concluding, "And no, I don't want to come on 'The O'Reilly Factor' to discuss it." Considering that Weisberg is a 107-pound weasel with a speech impediment, this is on the order of Weisberg's announcing that he's not interested in appearing in the next "Ocean's Eleven" movie with George Clooney.

The strangest thing about all the invective against Fox is that it is happening in a world that contains MSNBC. At least Fox News prime-time hosts, and many of their guests, know something about politics. MSNBC's prime-time lineup presents an array of people who sound like earnest college kids who just walked up to a Common Cause table, and the sum-total of what they know about politics is what they read in the brochures.

In the past week, both Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann have rolled out the Willie Horton ad, claiming that it marked the beginning of vicious personal attacks in politics, as opposed to what it was: The most devastatingly relevant campaign commercial in all of American history.

You can always astonish college kids by telling them the true story of Willie Horton. Among the jaw-dropping facts are:

• In the '80s, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that a prison furlough policy had to be extended to convicted murderers, who were ineligible for parole.
• Even the Massachusetts Legislature, which contained about three Republicans, realized this was insane, and quickly passed a bill excluding first-degree murderers from the weekend furlough program. But in a desperate bid for the ACLU's Brain-Dead Liberal of the Year Award, Gov. Michael Dukakis vetoed the bill.
• Horton, who was later released under this program, was in prison for carving up a teenager at a gas station and then stuffing his body into a garbage can. (He had already been convicted of attempted murder in South Carolina – through no fault of his own, the victim survived.)
• Even after Horton used his Dukakis-granted furlough to rape and torture a Maryland couple in their home for 12 straight hours, the Greek homunculus issued a statement reaffirming his strong support for furloughing murderers.
• The Bush campaign commercial about Dukakis' furlough program never showed a picture of Horton. In fact, the actors playing "criminals" passing through a revolving door in the ad were all white.
• Voters considered it relevant that a candidate for president was so beholden to the ACLU that he backed an idiotic furlough program that released first-degree murderers.

Every informed student of the 1988 campaign knows that the Bush ad didn't show Horton's picture. And yet in Keith's discussion of Bush's allegedly vile, racist use of Willie Horton, he used a phony version of the ad, doctored to include a photo of Horton.

I don't blame Keith personally for this blatant distortion: He gets all his research material from Markos Moulitsas and other left-wing bloggers, so he can't be held responsible for the content of his show. Keith's principle contribution to the program is his nightly display of self-congratulation and pompous douche-baggery.

Remember, Keith, like his MSNBC colleague Contessa Brewer, majored in "communications" in college, not a research-related field, such as political science. In his coursework, he learned such skills as: Dramatically Turning to Camera, Hysterical Self-Righteousness, Pausing Portentously and Gravely Demanding Apologies/Resignations From Various Public Figures.

Given this background, it's understandable that Keith will make errors. As viewers witnessed recently, he can't even pronounce the name of prominent American economist and philosopher Thomas Sowell. (Although he did spend three weeks at a Berlitz course in Arabic honing his pronunciation of "Abu Ghraib" to razor-sharp prissiness.)

The bloggers and Keith bring different skill sets to the game. They provide the tendentious half-truths, phony opinion polls and spurious social science, while Keith provides his booming baritone, gigantic "Guys and Dolls" suits and gift for ridiculous, fustian grandiloquence. Keith is far better equipped than, say, the pint-sized, girly-voiced, Frito Bandito-accented Markos Moulitsas to deliver the party line.

But here's the fly in the ointment: Keith has once again been victimized by left-wing blogs into thinking that the 1988 Bush ad showed Willie Horton's picture, when in fact, Horton's race was deliberately scrubbed from the ad.

Again, in fairness to Keith, he's never been a "content guy." He was a communications major. (The agriculture school Keith attended offered a degree in this field.) He lifts the material for his show from liberal blogs, overwrites it, and throws in his trademark smirking and snorts. But that's all he does because, again, he was a communications major.

Get Ann's new book "GUILTY: LIBERAL 'VICTIMS' AND THEIR ASSAULT ON AMERICA" here

Hoyer Says Constitution’s ‘General Welfare’ Clause Empowers Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance

This administration's constant attempt to overreach their boundaries is being put to the supreme test with their demand for government run healthcare. Congressman Hoyer seems to think it's like car insurance -- if you drive a car, you must have insurance.

Well, it's definitely not like car insurance. It's health insurance, and I cannot elect not to live, at least that was the case last time I checked, but I can elect to not drive a car. You are stepping on my constitutional rights, Mr. Hoyer - Back off!

Phone or fax Congress here with your opinions -- THEY MATTER

A super piece on this in CNS News:


Hoyer Says Constitution’s ‘General Welfare’ Clause Empowers Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance
by Matt Cover, October 21, 2009

(CNSNews.com) – House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said that the individual health insurance mandates included in every health reform bill, which require Americans to have insurance, were “like paying taxes.” He added that Congress has “broad authority” to force Americans to purchase other things as well, so long as it was trying to promote “the general welfare.”

The Congressional Budget Office, however, has stated in the past that a mandate forcing Americans to buy health insurance would be an “unprecedented form of federal action,” and that the “government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

Hoyer, speaking to reporters at his weekly press briefing on Tuesday, was asked by CNSNews.com where in the Constitution was Congress granted the power to mandate that a person must by a health insurance policy. Hoyer said that, in providing for the general welfare, Congress had “broad authority.”

“Well, in promoting the general welfare the Constitution obviously gives broad authority to Congress to effect that end,” Hoyer said. “The end that we’re trying to effect is to make health care affordable, so I think clearly this is within our constitutional responsibility.”

Hoyer compared a health insurance mandate to the government’s power to levy taxes, saying “we mandate other things as well, like paying taxes.”

The section of the Constitution Hoyer was referring to, Article I, Section 8, outlines the powers of Congress, including raising taxes, but not the purchasing any type of product or service. The opening paragraph of Section 8 grants Congress the power to raise taxes to, among other things, “provide for the … general welfare of the United States.”

Section 8 partly reads: “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

The Constitution then details the specific powers of Congress, including raising an Army and Navy, regulating commerce between states, and to “make all laws necessary and proper” for the carrying out of these enumerated powers.

“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof,” concludes Section 8.

CNSNews.com also asked Hoyer if there is a limit to what Congress can mandate that Americans purchase and whether there is anything that specifically could not be mandated to purchase. Hoyer said that eventually the Supreme Court would find a limit to Congress’ power, adding that mandates that unfairly favored one person or company over another would obviously be unconstitutional.

“I’m sure the [Supreme] Court will find a limit,” Hoyer said. “For instance, if we mandated that you buy General Motors’ automobiles, I believe that would be far beyond our constitutional responsibility and indeed would violate the Due Process Clause as well – in terms of equal treatment to automobile manufacturers.”

Hoyer said that the insurance mandate was constitutional because Congress is not forcing Americans to buy one particular policy, just any health insurance policy.

“We don’t mandate that they buy a particular insurance [policy] but what we do mandate is that like driving a car -- if you’re going to drive a car, to protect people on the roadway, and yourself, and the public for having to pay your expenses if you get hurt badly – that you need to have insurance,” said Hoyer.

In 1994, the Congressional Budget Office reported the following about health insurance mandates: “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

Under all five of the health care bills currently being considered in Congress, every American adult would have to have a policy that conformed to government standards for coverage and premiums. Each bill creates Bronze, Silver, and Gold health insurance plans and mandates that Americans buy one of them, either through their employer or through government-run exchanges.

David B. Rivkin, a constitutional lawyer with Baker & Hostetler, told CNSNews.com that Hoyer’s argument was “silly,” adding that if the general welfare clause was that elastic, then nothing would be outside of Congress’ powers.

“Congressman Hoyer is wrong,” Rivkin said. “The notion that the general welfare language is a basis for a specific legislative exercise is all silly because if that’s true, because general welfare language is inherently limitless, then the federal government can do anything.

“The arguments are, I believe, feeble,” he said.