Saturday, February 28, 2009

Want to Throw Nancy Pelosi Off the Big Plane? Drop $20 for 20 to Elect Jim Tadesco (R-NY)

Start the revolution to take back the House with the special election for New York's 20th Congressional District!

The congressional seat vacated by Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who New York Governor David Patterson (D)appointed to fill Hillary Clinton's Senate seat is up for grabs in a special election on March 31, 2009.

Favored is the Republican, Jim Tedisco, the Minority Leader in the NY State Assembly.

Winning this seat will send yet another message to Pelosi and Obama that the people are in revolt against the socialist makeover they are planning for America.

Can you help?

More Tedisco videos here.

Skye's Phones in CPAC 2009 Update

Our gal has been on the run... even in THESE shoes!


Skye's CPAC Party Shoes

Skye has been on the run since arriving at the Conservative Political Action Conference (agenda) in Washington, DC on Wednesday.

We're looking forward to a full report from Skye when she returns to Philadelphia on Sunday. Until then, she phoned in an update Saturday afternoon as the attendees were anxiously awaiting the keynote address by Rush Limbaugh at 5 PM EST. Live stream of the conference is at TownHall.com. Look for replays of Rush's speech as well as many of the other great speeches on C-Span (schedule).

Here are some observations:

  • There is real excitement at this year's conference. The overreach of Obama and the Democrats has provided some much needed stimulus to the conservative movement.
  • More people were registered for this year's CPAC than there were earmarks of wasteful spending in the bill just passed by Democrats in Congress.
  • The Conference is a delightful mix of young, old and in between.
  • Major emphasis has been on revitalizing grass roots and making better use of new media (like blogs).
  • Skye's personal best highlight was the video address given by Phyllis Schlafly founder of the Eagle Forum.

Friday, February 27, 2009

Obama's Iraq Speech: Never Used the Word VICTORY!

And he officially abandoned his campaign pledge to get combat troops out in 16 months!


President Obama went to Camp Lejeune, North Carolina to deliver his long awaited plan for withdrawal from Iraq. Text of the full address is here. Above is a Wordle of his speech. Speaking to U.S. Marines, many of whom fought in Iraq, he never used the word "VICTORY" and the only time he used the word "success" was when he said "The long-term success of the Iraqi nation will depend upon decisions made by Iraq’s leaders."

The closest Obama got to recognizing the extraordinary accomplishment of our military was when he said:
We sent our troops to Iraq to do away with Saddam Hussein’s regime – and you got the job done. We kept our troops in Iraq to help establish a sovereign government – and you got the job done. And we will leave the Iraqi people with a hard-earned opportunity to live a better life – that is your achievement; that is the prospect that you have made possible.

No thanks to President Bush for his leadership. Obama only mentions Bush when he needs a scapegoat for his own failures.

One wonders how the lefties who insisted Obama would get us out of Iraq in 16 months after taking office are feeling today?

Obama's Phony Budget Causes Further Wall Street Sell Off

Dow drops 119 points Friday. Over 1100 points down in the last 30 days.


Nearly 400 points lost this week alone!

In a week which saw Democrats pass another massive pork laden liberal spending bill and the unveiling of Obama's budget blueprint with a projected deficit of $1.75 TRILLION in the current fiscal year, Wall Street continued as they had the week before by voting NO CONFIDENCE in Obamanomics!

Millions of Americans have seen their retirement nest egg disappear before their eyes following the election of Obama.

Is Team Obama Cooking the Books on Budget Forecasts?

Is Rosy Scenario back in town?

Yesterday's bombshell revelation of an expected $1.75 TRILLION dollar expected deficit for fiscal year 2009 was paired with the promise from the Obama economic team that fiscal sanity would soon return (with Democrats in charge?) and deficits would start decreasing as the economy recovered.

From Obama's budget blueprint laughingly titled "New Era of Responsibility" [PDF page 114]:

Yet, these assumptions are based on the Obama economic team forecast which even they admit is decidedly more rosy than the Congressional Budget Office and the Blue Chip Economic Indicators [PDF page 132]:

When you are talking about a Gross Domestic Product that at a minimum is above $14 trillion, even a decimal place error in forecasting means huge sums that are not accounted for in the Obama budget. Few budget forecasts by any Administration, Republican or Democrat meet the optimistic targets that often accompany these plans.

Odd, that many of the same Democrats who once touted the authority of the Congressional Budget Office when it challenged President Bush's economic assumptions are eager to dismiss the CBO when it does the same to Obama.

The reality is that Obama's promises about controlling future deficits are about as phony as his promises to cut spending in agencies other than defense or not raise taxes on the Middle Class (cap and trade anyone?)

Economists question budget's economic assumptions
Martin Crutsinger
Associated Press
February 27, 2009

The administration insists it isn't so, but some private economists are wondering if the Obama administration has brought "Rosy Scenario" back to town.

In unveiling his budget, President Barack Obama pledged to bring "honesty and fairness" back to the budget process by getting rid of the gimmicks past administrations had used to hide the real costs of government programs and proposed tax cuts.

But many economists who examined the economic assumptions that undergird the spending plan believe that Obama may have resorted to one of the oldest gimmicks around — relying on overly optimistic economic assumptions to make it look like you are dealing with soaring budget deficits when in reality you are only closing the gap on paper.

"They used to joke during the Reagan years that the highest-ranking woman in the administration was Rosy Scenario," said Nariman Behravesh, the chief economist at IHS Global Insight, a major private forecasting firm.

Rosy may be back in town, said Behravesh, who called the Obama administration's forecasts "way too optimistic."

For its part, the administration insisted that it hadn't cooked the books to show greater growth, and thus more tax revenues, in coming years. But the administration forecast is far higher than the projections for growth in the overall economy, as measured by the gross domestic product, of many private analysts.

On Friday the government said the economy shrunk by a staggering 6.2 percent in the final quarter of last year, much faster than its earlier GDP estimates. And with layoffs piling up and spending drying up, economists expect rough months ahead.

GDP plays the biggest role in determining the accuracy of deficit forecasts because weaker-than-expected growth swells government payments for such things as unemployment benefits and food stamps and reduces tax receipts.

Read the rest here.

The recklessness with which Democrats are speeding towards the abyss of financial disaster is breathtaking. There is NO spending restraint. No concentrating scarce financial resources to spur economic growth. Instead we have a drunken orgy of liberalism and socialism running rampant with so little forethought or care as to be truly frightening.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Obama's Budget: $1.75 TRILLIONDeficit- 12% of Gross Domestic Product

Will those who accused Bush of being a big spender now apologize?


Obama's 2010 budget blueprint laughingly titled "A New Era of Responsibility" (PDF here) was released today. Contained therein was the expectation that the federal deficit for the current fiscal year 2009 would rise to an astounding $1.75 trillion.

That's a number so huge that few people can comprehend it. And as always, Obama is blaming the need for such massive government expansion on Bush.
From the Wall Street Journal: The president blamed the nation's economic travails on the administration that preceded him and on a nation that lost its bearings. His budget plan projects a federal deficit of $1.75 trillion for 2009, or 12.3% of the gross domestic product, a level not seen since 1942 as the U.S. plunged into World War II.

In a morning briefing Obama described the "hard choices that lie ahead." The only hard choices here will be how to pay for this monstrous, wasteful and economically risky government spending spree.

Where will the money come from? The rich? Do the math....
The 2% Illusion
Take everything [the rich] earn, and it still won't be enough.
The Wall Street Journal
February 26, 2009

President Obama has laid out the most ambitious and expensive domestic agenda since LBJ, and now all he has to do is figure out how to pay for it. On Tuesday, he left the impression that we need merely end "tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans," and he promised that households earning less than $250,000 won't see their taxes increased by "one single dime."

This is going to be some trick. Even the most basic inspection of the IRS income tax statistics shows that raising taxes on the salaries, dividends and capital gains of those making more than $250,000 can't possibly raise enough revenue to fund Mr. Obama's new spending ambitions.

Consider the IRS data for 2006, the most recent year that such tax data are available and a good year for the economy and "the wealthiest 2%." Roughly 3.8 million filers had adjusted gross incomes above $200,000 in 2006. (That's about 7% of all returns; the data aren't broken down at the $250,000 point.) These people paid about $522 billion in income taxes, or roughly 62% of all federal individual income receipts. The richest 1% -- about 1.65 million filers making above $388,806 -- paid some $408 billion, or 39.9% of all income tax revenues, while earning about 22% of all reported U.S. income.

Note that federal income taxes are already "progressive" with a 35% top marginal rate, and that Mr. Obama is (so far) proposing to raise it only to 39.6%, plus another two percentage points in hidden deduction phase-outs. He'd also raise capital gains and dividend rates, but those both yield far less revenue than the income tax. These combined increases won't come close to raising the hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue that Mr. Obama is going to need.

But let's not stop at a 42% top rate; as a thought experiment, let's go all the way. A tax policy that confiscated 100% of the taxable income of everyone in America earning over $500,000 in 2006 would only have given Congress an extra $1.3 trillion in revenue. That's less than half the 2006 federal budget of $2.7 trillion and looks tiny compared to the more than $4 trillion Congress will spend in fiscal 2010. Even taking every taxable "dime" of everyone earning more than $75,000 in 2006 would have barely yielded enough to cover that $4 trillion.
The bottom line is that Mr. Obama is selling the country on a 2% illusion. Unwinding the U.S. commitment in Iraq and allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire can't possibly pay for his agenda. Taxes on the not-so-rich will need to rise as well.

On that point, by the way, it's unclear why Mr. Obama thinks his climate-change scheme won't hit all Americans with higher taxes. Selling the right to emit greenhouse gases amounts to a steep new tax on most types of energy and, therefore, on all Americans who use energy. There's a reason that Charlie Rangel's Ways and Means panel, which writes tax law, is holding hearings this week on cap-and-trade regulation.

Mr. Obama is very good at portraying his agenda as nothing more than center-left pragmatism. But pragmatists don't ignore the data. And the reality is that the only way to pay for Mr. Obama's ambitions is to reach ever deeper into the pockets of the American middle class.
The week before the 2008 election I asked what happens when you kill the goose that lays the golden eggs? We may be about to find out. Obama and the Democrats are racing straight for the cliff on the most risky fiscal path ever taken in post World War II governing.

This could get ugly!

CPAC Live Video

Our gal Skye is on the ground for us at the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference. This year's crowd of 9,000 is evidence of the excitement conservatives are now feeling despite Obama and the Democrats taking us over the cliff of fiscal irresponsibility.

Skye will be reporting at Midnight Blue and Flopping Aces as well as twittering.

But if you want a seat at the conference without leaving your computer, tune in live:

Streaming .TV shows by Ustream

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Democrats Pass Massive Spending Bill w/ 9000 Earmarks

GOP House members call this "the cherry on top of the stimulus sundae."

Now, I'm proud that we passed a recovery plan free of earmarks and I want to pass a budget next year that ensures that each dollar we spend reflects only our most important national priorities. --President Obama, Tuesday, February 24, 2009

One day later The House of Representatives passed an omnibus spending bill (PDF here, roll call here) that completes the appropriation process for fiscal year 2009. In it there were 9000 earmarks for special projects, the vast majority of which were inserted by Democrats. Conveniently, Obama omitted this spending bill from his earmark free declaration.

Among the goodies being handed out were $100,000 for Maine loberstermen and $200,000 for tattoo removals in California.

But the earmark which best describes the greed and waste of Obama and the Democrats first weeks in power was the earmark requested by Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa: $1.8 million for "swine odor and manure management." You know you are dealing with an overloaded pork spending bill when Dems request millions to counter the smell and clean up the mess!

Earmarks and Prior Stimulus Increase Spending 80% Over FY 08!

House Republicans on the Appropriations Committee document the massive increase in government spending represented by the combined stimulus and omnibus spending bills (spending is in billions):

Democrats Defend Porkfest. Republicans Demand Funding Freeze!

"I'm proud of those earmarks, and everybody else who voted for them should be proud of them, too," --House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.)

"We cannot let spending be done by a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats"--Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, ignoring the fact that congress appropriated far more for agencies than even bureaucrats requested.

GOP House leaders signed a letter to Speaker Pelosi (PDF here) requesting a spending freeze:

"Democratic congressional leaders should abandon their plans to rush another giant spending increase through Congress without public scrutiny, and instead pass a clean bill that freezes spending at current levels. Republicans stand ready to work with our Democratic colleagues and the President to take this first step toward a new standard of fiscal discipline in Washington.." --House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH)

"We have been on an incredible spending spree, though. We've spent, in this new administration, 32 days, $36 billion a day. If you add all that up, that's as much as the previous administration spent over seven years on both the war on terror and the recovery from Katrina." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

Senate Republicans also held a press conference to demand an end to the Democrat spending spree (video).

The contrast between parties is clear: Democrats continue to outspend drunken sailors and GOP members of the House and Senate continue to stand up for fiscal responsibility. Anyone who says there is no difference between the two political parties when it comes to spending needs to buy a new calculator. One that can handle VERY large numbers!

Underwhelmed by Bobby Jindal

To be fair, giving the response to Obama's speech was a tough assignment... but...

Following any presidential speech with the opposition response is a tough act. Especially when the presidential address is the equivalent of a State of the Union address with the U.S. Capitol as the backdrop.

But Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal (R) accepted that challenge and stepped up to the plate last night in what was an introduction of himself to many Americans who may never have heard of him.

Before he spoke, Charles Mahtesian at the Politico warned that no matter how well Jindal did, critics were likely to pounce:

Note to Bobby Jindal: They’re going to hate you.

When you deliver the Republican response to President Barack Obama’s address Tuesday night, the critics will fault your style and delivery. Your rhetoric will be panned as empty and partisan. Some in your party inevitably will question whether you were up to the job.

Not to worry though. Just look at the experience of Democratic governors who delivered the response to the presidential address in recent years – they weathered the criticism and came out better positioned on the national scene than before.
And yes, Jindal's performance has been widely panned by people across the political spectrum. I'm not all that familiar with Bobby Jindal but I do agree he could have done better.

I did not watch Obama's speech. I channel flipped past it a few times staying long enough to ponder what kind of bathrobe House Speaker Nancy Pelsoi was wearing and always with the mute button on. But I was anxiously awaiting Jindal's response to see how well he would carry it off.

I lost interest after the first few minutes. Check the video yourself if haven't seen it and you'll know why:

That forced cheeriness at the beginning left me flat and I tuned out the remainder of his message. By the time he got serious in the second half (video here) I was gone.

Matthew Gagnon who was twittering throughout the night wondered why Jindal choose folksiness over substance in a post titled "Strike One Bobby:"
Bobby Jindal is a Rhodes Scholar. Among the Republicans left in governmental leadership, he is unquestionably one of its more brilliant minds. He is a policy wonk, and seems extremely interested in policy details, often times rattling off his ideas so quickly his audience gets lost. Tonight was his chance to showcase that brainpower, and that factory of ideas.

What did we see instead? Jindal intentionally spoke with more simplistic, provocative language meant to appeal to rural (conservative) America. His accent seemed just a little bit thicker, and his rhetoric focused on what was upsetting voters, rather than why the Republican agenda is a better choice.
It's unlikely Jindal's performance last night hurt his presidential aspirations. But it didn't help either.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Play O-Bingo During Big Speech Tonight

I'll be watching reruns of Family Guy but this would be fun if I could stomach watching Obama read a teleprompter!


Just check off the George Soros approved phrases until you get a row or diagonal. Then shout O-Bingo! Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) has four more cards so the whole family can play along. Anything to keep you awake!

And don't worry if you have something better to do tonight (like clean the bathroom). These cards can be used with any Obama speech. They're the phrases most likely to appear on his teleprompter any time he opens his mouth.

Thanks Flag Gazer!

Freed to Kill

Obama Sets Loose Gitmo Terrorist!


Binyam Mohamed, second left, who has been held at Guantanamo Bay steps from a plane at Northolt military base in west London Monday Feb. 23, 2009.

Here's what Military Families United had to say about this outrage:

Military Families United Releases GITMO Ad and Petition on President’s Terrorist Release
Military Families United
Mon, 02/23/2009 - 15:50

Washington, DC – February 23, 2009 – Today, Military Families United released a national advertisement in response to the breaking news that Binyam Mohamed, an ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ was released from Guantanamo Bay and freed in England. This is an unprecedented release because it is the first time that a GITMO detainee, who is classified as an “Unlawful Enemy Combatant” has been released - meaning that he still poses a threat to our national security and the security of our allies. All of the previous released GITMO detainees were declassified and determined to no longer be of intelligence value or pose a threat to our country.

“Military Families United has issued this ad to bring attention to the dangerous decision the White House has made in releasing Binyam Mohamed, a known member of al-Qaeda and alleged collaborator with the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed. Under the dark of night the Administration chartered a plane from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Britain to release this known terrorist as a free man. Actions speak louder than words in the War on Terror, and releasing dangerous terrorists as free men isn’t a way to keep America safe and secure,” said MFU’s Executive Director Brian Wise

“It is important the American people know how dangerous this decision is and how it will affect the ability for our brave men and women in uniform to win the War on Terror. This ad is designed to mobilize the American people to voice their opinions to the President that they do not want these terrorists released back into society where they pose a threat to America and its allies,” continued Wise.

In addition to the new advertisement, Military Families United distributed a petition to its members to urge President Obama to not release dangerous detainees from Guantanamo Bay if they still pose a threat to the United States. Military Families United will present this petition to the President and urge him to stop freeing terrorists. To sign the petition visit http://www.dontfreeterrorists.org/

Terrorists Worldwide Rejoice!


Self loathing London liberals gather outside the U.S. Embassy in London on February 17th to demand the release of Binyam. Always so easy to manipulate with enemy propaganda, the lefties here who claim Binyam is "innocent" may want to go attend the trial of the eight terrorists whose plot to blow up jetliners going from England to the U.S. was thankfully foiled. Binyam, who took orders from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11 and now a Gitmo inmate, was arrested as he was on his way to the United States.

Would the liberal handwringers feel better if we had let Binyam carry out his terrorist intentions before we imprisoned him?

Monday, February 23, 2009

Obama's Energy Secretary Hasn't Got a Clue What Administration Energy Policy Is

But at least he paid his taxes!

As OPEC Prepares to Meet, Chu Focuses on U.S. Energy
Wall Street Journal
FEBRUARY 20, 2009

WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Steven Chu -- whose agency has long taken the lead on global oil-market policy -- said Thursday he doesn't know what the Obama administration would urge the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to do at its meeting next month.

"I'm not the administration," Mr. Chu said during a meeting with reporters Thursday. OPEC members are scheduled to meet March 15 to discuss the possibility of production cuts to respond to slumping prices. "I will be speaking and learning more about this in order to figure out what the U.S. position should be and what the president's position is," Mr. Chu said.
On Wednesday, when approached by reporters after a speech to a group of utility regulators, Mr. Chu declined to offer an opinion on whether OPEC should cut production, saying the issue was "not in my domain." He later told reporters on a conference call that his response to the question reflected "more of my naiveté than anything else."

Mr. Chu said Thursday he feels "like I've been dumped into the deep end of the pool" in confronting questions about oil policy, such as whether the administration would consider delaying scheduled deliveries of oil this spring to the nation's strategic petroleum reserves.

Mr. Chu is still without a deputy, and the administration has yet to nominate people to fill other high-level Energy Department posts, reflecting a broader challenge the administration faces staffing up cabinet departments to handle an array of initiatives called for by President Barack Obama.

Have you ever heard anything so absurd? This is the cabinet officer charged with implementing Obama's energy policy and the man is totally clueless as to what that policy is.

Besides, claiming that it's not in his domain to have an opinion on OPEC oil production is reminiscent of Obama suggesting an opinion on abortion was above his pay grade.

Why did the Senate confirm this clueless clown?

Obama's Administration may just make Jimmy Carter's seem competant by comparison!

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Are Conservatives Recovering Their Enthusiasm?

Do you feel a certain spring in your step these days?

Everyone who knows me well knows that I rarely pass up an opportunity to complain. I can spot the dark lining of a silver cloud from miles away.

So, it must give me a bit more credibility than the typical Pollyanna when I begin to sense a positive change in the air hinting at renewed enthusiasm for conservative ideas even as the aberration of Obama is still in it's infancy.

After all, we knew that sooner or later the mists of "hope and change" that obscured the reality of an Obama Administration coupled with Democrat control of congress would drift away and the disinfecting power of sunlight would shine in and reveal the truth to voters who are only now waking up from their hopey-changey hangover.

Are Four Years Up Yet?

On Tuesday, Obama signed the hogzilla "stimulus" bill into law saying that it was "the beginning of the end" of our economic troubles. The quote itself is odd because it's derivative of something Winston Churchill declared after the first big British victory over Rommel in North Africa. Churchill said "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

Interesting that Obama would rephrase Churchill after banishing the bust of the man many Britons consider the greatest Englishman who ever lived. That action alone signaled to conservatives in the U.S. and overseas the true nature of the man we are dealing with.

Obama's only been in office for one month and already there is handwriting on the wall which suggests there may only be 47 months of this aberration left to endure. To borrow Obama's own phrase, we may already be at the beginning of the end for Obama!

If the economy rebounds Obama will get the credit and we may be in for a longer wait. But if the hogzilla stimulus bill actually damages the economy and the massive debt incurred ushers in a new era of mass inflation the remaining 47 months will just fly by despite the economic pain. It's not that we want bad economic tidings, but it certainly makes it less painful to be proved right.

Early bets are running against Obama. The Dow Jones index is a predictor of future economic activity and the more Obama and the Dems talk and act on the economy the lower the Dow goes. Brush fires of populist dissent are springing up all over as people finally learn what kind of non-stimulative big government liberal nonsense was in this bill that was so urgent we were told there was no time to read it.

Obama Approval Drops

Another signal that all is not well in Obamaland is the first signs of downward trends in opinion polls. The latest Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll (summary, raw data-PDF) is especially troubling for Obamatons and heartening for conservatives.

A few highlights:
  • Obama's approval rating dropped 5 points to 60% and disapproval rating went up 10 points to 26% (mostly due to hoodwinked Republicans waking up which is more good news for conservatives).
  • Obama's personal approval ratings are also beginning to dip. Chris Anderson, Opinion Dynamics vice president said: "The 9-point decrease in Obama’s personal favorability rating actually masks a larger shift over the last month and that is a massive change of heart among Republicans towards the president personally."
  • The number of voters confident the Obama administration will be able to make "significant positive change for the country" has dropped 11 percentage points from 75 percent in mid-January.
  • About one in five Democrats (21 percent) thinks the Obama administration is bringing more of the same partisan politics.
  • 16 percent of those voting for Obama in the general election wish there were more Republicans in Congress.
  • Turning to Obama's cabinet, a 57 percent majority rates the quality of the people he selected as excellent or good, down from 60 percent in mid-January and 65 percent in early December.

If these present trends continue Obama's approval numbers will be below those of President Bush in a matter of months.

Conservatives Freed to Be Themselves!

All of this is occurring at at time when conservatives have finally been freed to be themselves. For many of us, John McCain was a 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice as our presidential standard bearer. And as much as we appreciated President Bush's strong stand on national security we weren't always comfortable with his compromises with Democrats on spending or immigration.

But now, we are no longer bound by party loyalty or electoral necessity. And our leaders on Capitol Hill are finally speaking in unison about the need to counteract big government and return to the practical solutions to economic problems that were so soundly proved during the Reagan era.

The icing on the cake is that we have a new chairman at the RNC. Michael Steele has the energy and the spirited enthusiasm so many of us felt was lacking in that job for the last number of years. He's the right man for the job at the right time and he's already signaled that a priority will be to modernize the GOP's technology of campaign communications which was something Obama mastered during his successful White House run.

The next big challenge will be for conservatives to recruit new candidates to run for office at every level from local party, city and county to the state and federal level. 2010 is not so far away and if Obama's promises continue to trail his performance we need to be ready to offer voters an attractive, practical alternative.

I'll be looking forward to next week's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington for more signs of growing conservative enthusiasm and hope that REAL change is not far away!

Quick Takes: A "Stimulating" Week's Worth of Blogging in One Post

Chicago Tea Party Taking on Steam Nationwide

After the famous Rick Santelli rant at the Chicago Board of Trade, efforts across the country to protest the Obama vote buying no-stimulus bill are increasingly being identified as "Tea Parties."

Michelle Malkin has been on the forefront of the revolution with a current wrap up here that includes videos, photos, songs and ideas for protests large and small. Earlier in the week she posted photos she took at one such event in Arizona.


I especially like the one behind the Pelosi Plane which says "I want a house, a car a President with ethics and honor."


Remaking the Children's Classic: "I'm Just a Bill"

You know you're part of a viral political movement sweeping the country when old classics are repackaged to serve the cause. The Classic School House Rock "How a Bill Becomes Law" has been rewritten.


Pennsylvania Conservatives Protest "Benedict Arlen" Specter


KDKA: U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter was greeted with jeers at a press conference in Cranberry Township.

Conservatives are fuming after Specter cast the deciding vote that led to the passage of President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan.

Six years ago, Specter barely won the Republican primary, but he says he's not afraid to fight for the job one more time.
Bring it on Benedict Arlen!

Six years ago Specter promised Pennsylvania voters he would do a better job of listening to them. He lied. It's time for him to go.

Obama Stimulus Saves Microsoft Billionaire Hundreds Of Millions

I thought Republicans were the party for the rich?

Billionaire Paul Allen is a Microsoft cofounder, the owner of the NFL's Seattle Seahawks and the owner of the NBA's Portland Trailblazers.

And, thanks to the stimulus bill President Obama signed this week, he's also about to be as much as a billion dollars richer.

Here's how:


One of two massive yachts owned by Paul Allen. Perhaps he can buy a third with the money taxpayers will be handing over.

Just the Facts: Obama's Promises vs. Obama's Performance

I'm glad to see that new RNC Chairman Michael Steele has retained the excellent research team at GOP headquarters. They've compiled this summary of news stories listing Obama's promises and compared them to news stories describing Obama's sorry performance his first month in office.

Topics include:

  • President Obama Promised To Slash Earmarks And Stop Wasteful Spending.
  • President Obama Campaigned On The Promise Of Bipartisanship And Said He Wanted Republicans To Vote For His Stimulus Package.
  • President Obama Pledged Transparency And Openness Before Signing Legislation.
  • Obama Said Lobbyists Wouldn't Dominate His White House Or Work For Agencies They Used To Lobby.

Not to mention the rundown of ethically challenged cabinet nominees. It's all there in black and white with full reference to news sources should any reality challenged Obamaton try and deny the truth.

When in Trouble, Drop the Race Card

Speaking of black and white, many of us warned that while Obama ran on a hopeful platform of post-racial politics we realized that the race card would be used repeatedly to dull criticism of Obama and the Democrats.

Though I doubt many thought the race card would be used so early and so often.

First it was Attorney General Eric Holder who marked Black History month with a speech to Justice Dept. employees where he said the U.S. is "essentially a nation of cowards" for being unwilling to engage in a frank discussion of race issues.

Coming from the first black Attorney General appointed by the first black President the statement struck some people as odd. Especially since discussions of race (fanned by the flaming rhetoric of Obama's Rev. Wright) were front and center during the campaign. Perhaps what Holder really means is that he wants Americans to discuss race only on the politically correct terms he and liberals demand. Sorry pal. That's hardly an honest discussion.

Next, we had House Democrat Whip Representative James Clyburn (D-SC) insist that he was "insulted" because conservative governors in the South with large black populations were considering turning down federal money in the stimulus bill. Clyburn said that the governors reluctance to accept the money "was a slap in the face of African-Americans." Is Clyburn admitting that the money in the bill was there specifically to benefit black people? My my... that would be racist wouldn't it?

Do Obama Supporters Think He is a Monkey?

The last item on our parade of race card shame is the brouhaha which erupted when the New York Post ran the following cartoon:


I admit the cartoon is rather tasteless considering it plays off the horrific attack on a Connecticut woman by a 200 pound pet Chimpanzee.

But why the instant outrage of persons who thought the cartoon was an attack on Obama? Even race baiters like Al Sharpton "went ape" over the cartoon by cranking up the usual race protests.
Are any of these people aware that Obama did NOT write the stimulus bill and in fact is being criticized for being so hands off on what he himself concedes is one of the most important legislative initiatives of his presidency? The bill was written in secret by House and Senate Democrats with a window dressing of support from turncoat GOP Senators Specter, Snowe and Collins. Like everyone else in Washington, Obama never read the bill let alone wrote it. Photobucket

The cartoon is closer to a play on that old saying: give a monkey a typewriter and sooner or later he'll write Hamlet. It sure seems like this "stimulus" bill was written by an ape with a typewriter and an adding machine that could only add and never subtract.

Friday, February 20, 2009

American Issues Project Latest Ad

If you haven't seen it, it's a hit!

Learn more at the American Issues Project web site.

Good to see independent conservative groups taking the fight to the socialists!

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Russia's Putin Warns Against Socialist Solutions for Economic Trouble

Too bad Obama and the Democrats aren't listening...

Putin's speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland in January might have gone overlooked if it wasn't for our friend El Rushbo. No wonder the left wants to shut him down.

The following text is an excerpt of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

...Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state's omnipotence is another possible mistake.

True, the state's increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent.

The concentration of surplus assets in the hands of the state is a negative aspect of anti-crisis measures in virtually every nation.

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.

Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.

And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing.

What a shame the arrogant left in this country isn't listening. Even "Mr. KGB" Putin realizes that state control of the economy is a mistake. Rather than learn from Russia's example the left in the U.S. thinks it can succeed where every other nation has failed.

Stimulus Should: Reward People Who CARRY the Water instead of Those Who DRINK the Water!

The Chicago Tea Party: Rick Santelli Visits the Chicago Board of Trade. Near pandemonium breaks out:

"How many of you people want to pay your neigbor's mortgage? ...Obama are you listening?"

Obama's Governing Style May Spell T-R-O-U-B-L-E for Dems

What does it say about his character and his ability to succeed?

It was an old joke during the campaign that if Obama is elected, he'll just vote "present" in the Oval Office when it comes time for the heavy lifting as he often did in the Illinois State Senate. As we conclude the first month of the Obama presidency, it doesn't seem like such a joke anymore.

Obama basically voted "present" all throughout the process of creating and passing the monstrous hogzilla "stimulus" bill that may define whether his presidency succeeds or fails. Sure, he got out on the stump and mouthed dire warnings about crisis and catastrophe (which stand in stark contrast to his hopey-changey campaign rhetoric). But Obama basically left House and Senate Democrats to craft the bill themselves and lard it up to historic highs with spending that no reasonable person can conclude has anything to do with saving the economy from catastrophe.

I'm reminded of how hands on President Reagan was when his signature legislation of tax cuts was moving through congress. He worked the phones to drum up votes in the House and held numerous personal meetings with legislators who were on the fence. There's nothing to suggest Obama did any of this.

Two recent articles question just how serious Obama is about the job he has been elected to. First, Karl Rove warns that "Obama's reputation for competence is at risk." The second article by Tony Blankley is a must read:

The new president's governing style
Detachment and too many chefs could spoil the soup
By Tony Blankley
Washington Times
February 17, 2009

...Prior to the November election, the only evidence we had of Mr. Obama's managing style, and that evidence was indirect, was the management of his campaign - which was brilliant. But whether he was its active manager or merely took guidance from a shrewd Svengali remains to be known.

Since the election, we are beginning to get hints of his management style in four items Mr. Obama himself has described as of the highest priority to him - and thus, one presumes, items to which he would have given his personal attention: Cabinet selection, closing Gitmo, the stimulus package and bipartisanship.

Regarding the Cabinet selection, he famously said he "screwed up." But from a management perspective the unanswered question is how did he "screw up"? Did he actively design the failed vetting process and actively assess the various negative information and fail to see its significance? Or, did he "screw up" by letting others design the failed system and assess the data inflow? The former would show poor substantive judgment. The latter would show he wasn't paying sufficient attention to a presumably vital matter. We don't know yet which kind of "screw-up" it was.

The second item, President Obama's performance at the Gitmo executive order, provided a brief but revealing insight into the president's personal involvement in vital decision-making. He had campaigned hard on closing Gitmo. His first public signing as president was of that executive order to close it down. The central issue of the Gitmo closing was, and is - what do we do with the dangerous inmates? President Bush kept it open primarily because his administration couldn't figure out an answer to that question.

Thus it was breathtaking that at the signing ceremony, President Obama didn't know how - or even if - his executive order was dealing with this central quandary:

President Obama: "And we then, we will then, uh, provide the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed no later than, uh, one year from now. We will be... Uhhh ... Ummm. ... Is there a separate executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that it, eh, uh, what we're doing?"

White House Counsel Greg Craig: "We'll set up a process."

To be at the signing ceremony and not know what he was ordering done with the terrorist inmates is a level of ignorance about equivalent to being a groom at the altar in a wedding ceremony and asking who it is you are marrying.

Once again in the third item - the stimulus process - his lack of personal involvement in its design is curious. He has recently said (incorrectly, I believe) that his presidency will be judged only on whether he fixes the economy or not. Thus, as he has identified the stimulus as essential to the recovery process, his willingness to let House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid design a bill that even after it passed, Mr. Obama has continued to criticize as needing improvement (on bank executive compensation) leaves one puzzled as to why he didn't use his currently vast political clout with his own party allies to shape a bill more to his liking.

The final item to examine here is his repeated campaign and post campaign commitment to bipartisanship. While he was gracious in inviting leading Republicans to the White House for a Super Bowl party, he permitted his congressional allies to completely shut out (except for the three collaborators) all Senate Republicans and all House Republicans, including their leadership and the GOP's titular leader, Sen. John McCain, in the drafting of the bill and the final conference committee.

He says he wants bipartisanship. Why would he permit his congressional allies to kill any hope of bipartisanship by their egregious conduct?

I can think of four possible explanations for this almost unprecedented presidential detachment from the decision-making of policies the president publicly declared to be vital to the country and his presidency:

(1) He is a very, very big picture man and he delegates decisions even on the central points of vital issues.

(2) For tactical reasons, he has decided these matters were not worth using up political chits.

(3) He is either hesitant or unskilled at management and let matters drift until it seemed too late to personally intervene.

(4) Or his personality type leaves him surprisingly uninterested in things that aren't personally about him.
#4 seems to hit closest to the mark and fits the profile of an egotistical politician which we know Obama to be.

The question is: will Obama learn to overcome this personal defect or is it too ingrained in his character with the problem being compounded once he took the top job and is surrounded with the perks and pomp?

Have Democrats Forgotten About Katrina Victims?

Now that they're no longer useful as a political football?

Obama used the phrase "Hurricane Katrina" so often during the presidential campaign that some of his followers may be excused for thinking that was his pet name for his wife Michelle.

Even the first pages of his newly unveiled White House web site declared his commitment to Katrina victims in this partisan parting shot at President Bush:

"President Obama will keep the broken promises made by President Bush to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast."
So when the "stimulus" bill was passed with new spending for everything from the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse in Nancy Pelosi's district to a high speed rail line linking Harry Reid's Las Vegas and Disneyland victims of Hurricane Katrina, used to having their hands out, might be asking: where's my pork?

Democrats strike different tone on Katrina
Associated Press
February 19, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) — The economic stimulus signed by President Barack Obama will spread billions of dollars across the country to spruce up aging roads and bridges. But there's not a dime specifically dedicated to fixing leftover damage from Hurricane Katrina.

And there's no outrage about it.

Democrats who routinely criticized President George W. Bush for not sending more money to the Gulf Coast appear to be giving Obama the benefit of the doubt in his first major spending initiative. Even the Gulf's fiercest advocates say they're happy with the stimulus package, and their states have enough money for now to address their needs.

"I'm not saying there won't be a need in the future, but right now the focus is not on more money, it's on using what we have," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who has criticized Democrats and Republicans alike over Katrina funding.

It's a significant change in tone from the Bush years, when any perceived slight of Katrina victims was met with charges that the Republican president who bungled the initial response to the disaster continued to callously ignore the Gulf's needs years later.

Just last summer, Democrats accused Bush of putting Iraq before New Orleans when he sought to block Gulf Coast reconstruction money from a $162 billion war spending bill. Bush was pilloried for not mentioning the disaster in back-to-back State of the Union addresses.
There was hardly a complaint as Obama and other Democratic leaders pieced together the package. Members of the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus, who have called Bush's Katrina funding a moral failure, said they were thrilled with the stimulus. Landrieu won several provisions that do not allocate new money but are aimed at cutting through red tape to free up existing funds.

"I think people looked at how generous Congress has been in the past," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee. "(The states) have to demonstrate that they can be good custodians of the money."

Thompson and others say new funding wasn't necessary in the stimulus largely because billions of federal dollars remain bogged down in bureaucracy or tied up in planning. As a result, they said, Katrina funding doesn't fit with the quick-spending purpose of the stimulus bill, which is aimed at kick-starting the economy.

Ironically, Bush made similar arguments in recent years as Gulf advocates latched on to nearly any legislation they could find to pursue reconstruction money. For example, he routinely argued that Katrina funding didn't belong in war spending bills and that new funding wasn't urgent because unspent billions were already in the pipeline.
So, either Democrats don't care about black people and the other victims of Hurricane Katrina or President Bush was right in insisting on a more sensible approach to funding reconstruction projects.

Which is it?

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Wall Street Continues to Vote NO Confidence In Obama Economic Plan

Billions more lost as Dow drops over 700 points in the last 10 days!


First, it was one of the biggest post election stock market plunges in history the days after Obama was elected. Next, it was THE biggest drop to occur on a president's inauguration day.

Cooler heads might have held their fire and said: wait until Obama actually does something.

O.K. On Tuesday, February 10th Obama's tax cheating Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner unveiled Obama's plan for financial stabilization. The stock market took a nosedive. During the week Democrats in both the House and Senate gave final passage to a massive pork spending spree followed by Obama's bill signing ceremony in Denver this Tuesday.

All during that time the market sunk more than 700 points. Billions in wealth wiped out in a single week.

What's behind the market jitters? The same concerns that the Congressional Budget Office expressed of an economic program by Democrats that might actually prolong the agony:
New York PostFebruary 18, 2008

...In a recent note to its clients, Strategas Research Group underscored Wall Street's anxiety over the massive spending and borrowing that many believe will crowd out private investment with high interest rates - all without doing much to boost the economy.
In some ways, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner set the stage. After weeks of promising big things, the "plan" to fix the financial system that he unveiled last Tuesday wasn't a plan at all - just some thoughts and a plea for more time.

The market had expected more, and with good reason: Geithner's been working on the banking crisis for nearly a year now - so you'd think he'd have some clue how to fix the problem. But he struck out.

The markets started falling the moment Geithner began speaking; the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down 700-plus points since.

Geithner sounded almost as weak as the banking system he's trying to fix.

It didn't help that Obama's empty rhetoric about hope and change was replaced with talk of catastrophe and crisis if congress refused his wasteful, potentially damaging pork stimulus bill.

Wall Street is signaling we are in for a long downturn and one made longer and more painful because the adults are no longer in charge!

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Obama's State Dept. Praises Venezuela Vote Enabling Hugo Chavez to be Presidente for Life!

It's no secret Obama and friends wish to emulate the same one party state tactics Chavez has found so successful!

AFP, February 16, 2008: The United States Tuesday welcomed Venezuela's "civic" referendum lifting term limits for the president and all politicians, but urged support for democracy and tolerance in the country.

"We congratulate the civic and participatory spirit of the millions of Venezuelans who exercized their democratic right to vote," State Department spokesman Noel Clay told AFP.

Venezuelans on Sunday voted 54 percent in favor of constitutional reform sought by President Hugo Chavez to run for unlimited reelection, in his bid to consolidate his brand of socialism critics compare to Cuba's communism.
Just what brand of "socialism" is that? One where near total political and economic control of the state resides in the hands of the ruling elite with el Presidente Chavez the main man in charge.

Even the very liberal L.A. Times gets it:

Editorial:Venezuela just took a democratic step closer to dictatorship. On Sunday, President Hugo Chavez won the right to seek reelection ad infinitum, prevailing in a referendum that eliminated term limits for the presidency and other elected offices. Although the balloting was deemed valid by opposition leaders, who have said they will not contest the results, the victory came about because of Chavez's gross misuse of government funds, government workers and federal facilities for the campaign, and neighborhood enforcers to "persuade" voters to support him. He lost a similar vote 14 months ago, but was clearly determined to become president-in-perpetuity and to have Venezuelans vote until they voted his way.

Conservatives in this country are witnessing a similar power grab as we watch Obama's so-called "stimulus" plan hand out billions to reward liberals, including community organizers like ACORN (the equivalent of Venezuela's neighborhood enforcers). That was matched with calls for the Fairness Doctrine to shut down political opposition and moves for greater state control of the banking and automotive sectors. Last, but not least, are Dem efforts to corrupt the census and make Republicans a permanent minority.

Reward for Socialist "Democracy?" Food Shortages!

And just what has been the reward to the Venezuelan people for all that "democracy" Obama's State Dept. praised? Shortages of everyday staples like milk, eggs, sugar and cooking oil. Shortages we may add, brought about by socialist policies whose stated goal was to protect the poor from price gouging. Much better to starve than pay another bolivar so the kids can have milk.

With Obama's looming control over vast sectors of the U.S. economy (designed to protect the consumer don't you know?) how long will it be before the basics of American life are unavailable at any price?

Ah, but who cares as long as one party state socialism rules!

Monday, February 16, 2009

No Honeymoon for Obama/Hillary in Muslim World?

Muslim women protest against visit by Sec. State Hillary Clinton!


Muslim women hold placards during a protest outside the U.S. embassy in Jakarta February 16, 2009. A group of Muslim women protested against the upcoming visit by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
How can this be? Barack Obama promised in a speech last summer that he would "restor[e] our image as the last, best hope on earth." And in his Inaugural address he promised the Muslim world a "a new way forward" and made his first foreign television interview to Al Arabiya where he stressed his Muslim heritage and roots in Indonesia.

That leaves us pondering how to explain why Muslim women in Indonesia would protest Obama's personal diplomatic representative, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? Can it be that like growing numbers of Americans, people around the world have realized how empty slogans of "hope and change" are when matched with policies that are just more of the same failed liberal promises.

Blue Print for the Coming GOP Revolution

New media must be a central pillar in the victory strategy!

Yesterday I asked whether conservatives have finally come to their census and gotten over the initial daze of defeat from last November? With our party speaking in a united voice of principled opposition to the liberal coup represented by the stimulus bill, likely manipulation of the census and looming re-emergence of the fairness doctrine we know we must fight hard to survive and ultimately regain power as the American voter realizes what a sham Obama's promises of hope and change really are (see Obama's seven broken promises in the stimulus bill).

Our GOP leaders in Congress have shown they have the right message by opposing big government boondoggles while offering common sense alternatives. The question is: do we have the right blueprint to translate that program into electoral victory in 2010 and 2012?

In 2006 we lost the House and Senate and we sat by in 2008 and watched again as the largest well funded political juggernaut of the 21st century swept away decades of GOP grass roots development. Are we prepared now to meet that challenge or will we fall back on the business as usual strategies which may have worked 20 years ago but failed utterly in the last two elections?

I'd like to think we have learned our lesson and I am encouraged by new GOP Chairman Michael Steele's efforts to invite new ideas for reaching voters and widening their participation; especially through the use of the same new media that Obama and friends used so effectively.

The Reagan revolution was fueled by new technology in direct mail fundraising. Patrick Ruffini, a leader in GOP new media, points out that in many ways, state and local campaign consultants are still doing business with that 20 year old method because they have built lucrative businesses based on commissions from offering those campaign methods.

Patrick goes on to suggest that a 21st Century plan with the simple goal of assembling 5,000 online activisits per targeted congressional district would create a foundation for eventual GOP takeover of the U.S. House. A similar plan could be used for targeted senate races.

Creating a stronger sense of GOP Community: A success story in Pennsylvania

Patrick's plan is fine as far as it goes. But many activists are already on GOP federal, state and county email lists. They already vote and many donate money and volunteer. But if we are going to counter the massive organizational and fundraising machine the Dems are now fielding we need to do much more than that.

Creating a sense of community and commitment is the best way to build on expressions of support from party members. Local area GOP clubs have been doing just that for years but there are other avenues to channel the efforts of inspired American patriots.

One such example comes from the American Sheepdogs; a group in Chester County Pennsylvania which spontaneously formed when one man stood on a street corner in the center of town holding up a sign showing support for our troops. Word got out that every Saturday he would be there and soon others joined him including Skye, our blogging friend from Philadelphia who had taken an interest in the VICTORY movement after attending a Gathering of Eagles event in Washington, DC.

Now, every Saturday this group attracts dozens of like minded people to stand with them for an hour, wave the flag and hold up a sign supporting our troops and our nation during a time of war. Videos and photographs of their events show a happy, motivated community of people who come together now as friends.

But Sheepdogs aren't content just to stand on street corners and wave flags. They are now moving to fill the vacuum in the local county GOP by offering their members for vacant precinct committee slots. And they have formed The Pennsylvania Conservative Council to advance their values throughout the local, state and federal political process.

None of this success would have been possible without new media reaching out to bring people together outside the nornal channels of communication.

GOP Leaders Must Strengthen New Media from the Top Down

Whether it's a group formed to support our troops or a handful of Young Republicans in a rural county, new media such as blogs provides the interactivity around which to catalyze a community of like minded souls who quickly become friends as they move on to greater activism and grass roots success.

The blogs that pop up are a hodgepodge of quality and content but are more likely to reflect the GOP's positive message and program if GOP leaders do their part of the job and make new media presentations more accessible and immediate.

I've been fairly pleased with efforts like those of House GOP Leader John Boehner. His director of new media not only keeps his blog up to date with a variety of content more appealing and useful to bloggers than the usual stale press release, but his staff has also responded in a timely manner to requests for videos and other presentations which make our job of communicating with our activist base that much more effective.

Throughout last summer's debate on energy Boehner's leadership blog was an invaluable resource and helped bloggers get out the message of the extraordinary efforts House GOP members were making to highlight this issue. There were multiple graphics, videos and news sources available at his page that we could use.

On the other hand, the new media efforts of Senator Jim DeMint(R-SC) present a mixed bag. He has an excellent blog but when the Senator recently made a visit to the Heritage Foundation where he gave a speech inviting bloggers to investigate pork in the still unread stimulus bill he failed to post any mention of that invitation on his blog. He missed an opportunity to toss the widest net of homestate bloggers and activists over that hogzilla porkfest.

For grades, I would give Leader Boehner an A. Sen. DeMint a B- and my Congressman Joe Wilson, whose web site is stale, a D.

As Chairman Steele revamps the GOP.Com web site let's hope he too concentrates on offering the widest possible set of resources and sense of community to like minded bloggers and activists. High quality embeddable video and audio players to present speeches, video clips and other presentations is a must.

But we must also count on Chairman Steele's leadership to drag the county, state and federal leaders who remain behind the times into the 21st century. There is just no excuse for every good speech given by elected leaders at every level not to be immediately available online in a format that is easily shareable across all platforms.

We can no longer sit by and watch the Dem juggernaut roll past!

UPDATE: Tuesday's Washington Post has an excellent link-laden article describing more detail on the coming GOP tech revolution. I suggest you click through many of the links but particularly The Tech Republican and view David All's presentation on Trickle Up Activism.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Have Conservatives Finally Come to Their Census?

The only way to survive Obama's goal of creating a one party state is to FIGHT!

Last week when it was announced to House Republicans that Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) had asked Obama to withdraw his nomination for Commerce Secretary citing "irresolvable conflicts" a loud cheer erupted throughout the room.

House Republicans, who have been totally united in their opposition to Obama's vote buying stimulus boondoggle, saw it as confirmation that they are not alone in their efforts to unmask the real goals of the Obama presidency and the Democrats who control both houses of congress.

For months now we have watched as the weakest links in the GOP chain dropped away. First it was pseudo-conservatives like Kathleen Parker and Peggy Noonan followed by RINO Colin Powell. More recently, the triad of Northeast turncoats: Senators Collins, Snowe and Specter who after years of bemoaning deficit spending signed on with the biggest deficit spending bill of all time.

But when Senator Judd Gregg said NO to collaboration with Obama's plan to use the U.S. Census to turn the GOP into a permanent minority party by statistical trickery that would create more seats for liberals in congress and enable billions more for socialist vote buying programs the tide had finally begun to turn.

One More Shoe Left to Drop: The Fairness Doctrine

There is one more shoe left to drop in Obama's big scheme and it may not be far off. Everyday the chorus of voices demanding a "fairness doctrine" that punishes conservative speech on talk radio while ignoring the liberal monopoly in academia, print media, Hollywood and the arts grows louder.

How long are we from that enabling act which will have the effect of legalizing a one party state run by Democrats no one knows. But it would be suicide for conservatives to sit and wait for the axe to fall.

Shortly after the election some Republicans suggested a return to the "go along to get along" approach favored by the GOP when it was in the minority for much of the later half of the 20th Century. But those with long memories recall that we only captured the majority in both houses of congress by following the Gingrich plan of a united opposition coupled with a common sense alternative to the big spending, big government boondoggles so favored by Democrats.

Rarely has there been a time when the ideological differences between the two parties are in starker contrast. That's an immense advantage to the GOP in terms of being able to mobilize the base, some of which had been dispirited by McCain's nomination and Bush's big spending (which now pales in comparison to Obama), and to attract new voters who share our belief in smaller, less intrusive government.

It appears that our GOP team in the House, the Senate and the new national RNC team being fielded by Michael Steele understand that the best path forward to recapturing past glories is not to appease or collaborate with Democrats but to be ready with a positive program based on solid conservative principles.

One by one American voters lulled by the siren song of Obama's hope and change are waking up to the reality that the transformational politics he promised is nothing more than a scheme to control their lives and seize their wallets and freedoms. Let them find a home again in the new GOP as we work to restore America's sanity in 2010 and 2012.

Friday, February 13, 2009

Happy 200th Birthday Abraham Lincoln (R)

With Obama and Democrats trying their best to usurp the legacy of Lincoln, let's not forget that Honest Abe was a Republican and had Democrats been in power during that time the Union would likely not have been saved!


Wednesday, February 11, 2009

PA Conservatives: Send Sen. Specter Packing in 2010

No more looking the other way while GOP RINOs betray their party!

Dick Morris highlights how conservatives have been duped by RINOS. I say no more!

By Dick Morris
February 10, 2009

Because of the concentrated efforts of millions of Republicans all over America, Susan Collins (Maine) was reelected to the Senate, surviving a challenge once thought to be serious. She won, in large part, because she was able to drown her Democratic adversary in a sea of campaign spending made possible by donations from Republicans throughout the nation. As a result of their efforts, the GOP preserved its 40th vote in the Senate.
Now the actions of three people who told their voters that they were Republicans have eliminated any hope that the GOP has for influence during the next two years. By making their own deals with the Obama administration and settling for cosmetic improvements in the so-called stimulus package, Sens. Collins, Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) have sold out their party, their state and their supporters.
Collins, Snowe and Specter had a chance to send a message to Obama that he had to deal with the Republican Party to avert a filibuster. They could have made it clear that genuine bipartisan cooperation was necessary to pass legislation. These three senators, pledged to cut taxes and oppose massive growth in federal spending, could have demanded a 2-to-1 ratio for tax cuts over spending, rather than the reverse, as Obama is succeeding in getting.

Instead, the three wimped out and caved in for peanuts from Obama. In doing so, they completely stripped their party of any leverage. There was no point in having gotten 41 votes if the three weakest links could sell the party out.
Republicans in Maine and Pennsylvania need to learn their lesson and assure that these three senators face a primary. Real conservatives, who oppose larger government, must stand up to these three phony Republicans.

They’ll get their chance. Specter is up for reelection in 2010. He should have been defeated in 2006 when a real conservative, Pat Toomey, opposed him in a primary and only narrowly lost. Better luck next time.

The very concept of checks and balances evaporated last week on Capitol Hill when these three senators sold out their colleagues and stripped their conference of its power. Now Obama can buy off the GOP senator by senator without having to make genuine compromises with the other party to pass his agenda.

GOP Shut Out of Stimulus Conference Committee

Meanwhile, House and Senate GOP leaders have been shut out of the conference to craft the final version of the so-called stimulus bill.

Is this the transparency and new age of bipartisanship Obama hopes to build?

Collins, Snowe and Specter were used badly and they need to be held accountable by the voters in their states beginning in 2010!

Friday, February 06, 2009

Cat Fight on Senate Floor: Lindsey Graham Slaps Down Babs Boxer

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) may not be the best friend of SC conservatives, but I sure did cheer when he took on that nit wit senator from California!

Stimulating Thoughts: CBO Warns Dem Bill would damage economy

Plus: Someone ask Pelosi what the U.S. population is. Krauthammer and more....

The Senate is poised on Tuesday to pass the most monstrous hogzilla spending bill of all time despite overwhelming public disapproval of the bill in it's current form The latest Rasmussen Reports show 62% of respondents feel that the bill should include more tax cuts and less spending.

Unverified reports describe calls to Senate and House offices running 100 to 1 against the bill yet Obama and his House and Senate colleagues soldier on to ram this monster down the throats of the American people.

Reports like this don't seem to bother them at all:
CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul
Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times
February 4, 2009

President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.

But never mind, Dems have decided that the CBO, which serves the Congress which they control, is no longer the ultimate authority it was when it released information critical of President Bush's spending plans.

Just How Dumb is Nancy Pelosi?

Is it any wonder that Dems want to "fix" the upcoming 2010 Census to get a better count of Americans (but most especially those who vote Democrat)?

"Every month we don't have an economic recovery package 500 million Americans lose their jobs."

Did 200 million illegals slip under the border since Inauguration day or does Speaker dim bulb just like really big numbers?

President Hope and Change Becoming Prez. Fear and Catastrophe?

It isn't just Nancy Pelosi out there using the most virulent scaremongering rhetoric. Obama's done more than his share:
So Much For Hope Over Fear
By Charles Krauthammer
February 06, 2009

"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe."
-- President Obama, Feb. 4.

WASHINGTON -- Catastrophe, mind you. So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared "we have chosen hope over fear." Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.

And so much for the promise to banish the money changers and influence peddlers from the temple. An ostentatious executive order banning lobbyists was immediately followed by the nomination of at least a dozen current or former lobbyists to high position. Followed by a Treasury secretary who allegedly couldn't understand the payroll tax provisions in his 1040. Followed by Tom Daschle, who had to fall on his sword according to the new Washington rule that no Cabinet can have more than one tax delinquent.
And yet more damaging to Obama's image than all the hypocrisies in the appointment process is his signature bill: the stimulus package. He inexplicably delegated the writing to Nancy Pelosi and the barons of the House. The product, which inevitably carries Obama's name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination.
It's the essential fraud of rushing through a bill in which the normal rules (committee hearings, finding revenue to pay for the programs) are suspended on the grounds that a national emergency requires an immediate job-creating stimulus -- and then throwing into it hundreds of billions that have nothing to do with stimulus, that Congress' own budget office says won't be spent until 2011 and beyond, and that are little more than the back-scratching, special-interest, lobby-driven parochialism that Obama came to Washington to abolish. He said.

Not just to abolish but to create something new -- a new politics where the moneyed pork-barreling and corrupt logrolling of the past would give way to a bottom-up, grass-roots participatory democracy. That is what made Obama so dazzling and new. Turns out the "fierce urgency of now" includes $150 million for livestock insurance.

The Age of Obama begins with perhaps the greatest frenzy of old-politics influence peddling ever seen in Washington. By the time the stimulus bill reached the Senate, reports The Wall Street Journal, pharmaceutical and high-tech companies were lobbying furiously for a new plan to repatriate overseas profits that would yield major tax savings. California wine growers and Florida citrus producers were fighting to change a single phrase in one provision. Substituting "planted" for "ready to market" would mean a windfall garnered from a new "bonus depreciation" incentive.
It's amazing how quickly talk of hope and change have been replaced by fear and partisan political sniping of the kind George W. Bush would never have approved.

But perhaps Obama feels it is easier to attack and dismiss his GOP critics rather than accept their good ideas and have to listen to the shrill voice of Nancy "500 million Americans" Pelosi whose disgust for any bipartisan cooperation has been made quite clear (here and here)

Obama may also be counting on the economy to recover anyway, as recessions typically do, just in time for the 2010 election. But if that doesn't happen, Republicans will be in the cat bird seat by reminding voters that they raised their voice in unison against this abomination.
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator